Matt extended

[GBkrzygrl]

The ending of the last two seasons sucked.
As for fans, if the team isn't there, are we supposed to pretend it is? I get the impression some people think so.

I don't have a problem with being disappointed and frustrated. But I have a problem when people verbally attacking a player or coach.

 

[rmontro]

But I don't think we can fairly say, at the start of every season, that every team has an exactly 1/32 chance to win the SB. There are other variables that skew this

Of course not, which is why whenever I bring it up, I always try to add in "if all teams were equal" or something like that. I didn't originally bring up the 1/32 concept, by the way, I just agree with it. It's not a practical number, more of a hypothetical one.

I don't have a problem with being disappointed and frustrated. But I have a problem when people verbally attacking a player or coach.

I think we should have moved on from MLF. I still hope he proves me wrong, since we're keeping him. But I don't think he's a bad coach, and I've never called him a name. When I watched the Packers in the '70s and '80s, I wasn't expecting them to win a Super Bowl (or even get there). But that didn't mean i hated the team - sure I wished they were better - I was just being realistic. It wasn't until Holmgren arrived that I really started getting my hopes up again.

 

[Magooch]

Packers president Ed Policy, speaking for the first time this offseason, discussed why he extended Matt LaFleur.“I always believed you don’t make football decisions out of emotion.“Policy mentioned 7 years of data on LaFleur and not making a Super Bowl is “on all of us.”

Smart.

Policy's reasoning is fine, and I'd agree that you don't want someone (especially guiding your franchise) to be making decisions based on spur-of-the-moment emotions.

At the same time though one could just as easily point to "7 years of data" as a reason to move on, too. We can look at all of that data and reasonably conclude that Matt has been a very good coach, arguably even a great or elite one at times. But the question is not whether or not Matt has been a good coach for us in his seven years in GB. The question is whether or not we believe he can be *better* - if he can elevate above his previous level to push us to a Super Bowl.

Of course this is not necessarily all on Matt. We as a franchise have been blessed to generally be exceptionally stable and to have a degree of continuity between staff/management/leadership that few teams have. There are certainly some positives to this, but one could also look at it and say to some extent "if you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always got."

So IMO Policy is correct to say that Matt's body of work *can* support continuing on with him, but I would disagree with the notion (and I am not saying Policy nor any here are necessarily saying this) that upon looking at Matt's "resume" that the only reasonable or "non-emotional" decision would be to extend his contract. There is a perfectly rational and reasonable case to be made for moving a different direction too. It would not have to be an "emotional decision" for one to choose to move on from Matt.

Similarly I would agree that Policy is correct in saying that "it's on all of us," that's true enough, but if that's the case then it's tough for me to say we should just continue on with largely the same structure and direction (see above regarding continuity) as we have for the last 7+ years and assume outcomes will change.

 

[Magooch]

LOL That 1/32 claim is hilarious and if it were that easy we'd not have teams in the league without them. There are a handful of teams every year that legit everyone knows have like a 1 out of 1,000,000 chance of it.

Not a betting man but look no further than the odds on this. The bookies and betting houses who stand to make (or lose) a LOT of money have a seriously vested interest in trying to set as accurate of odds as they can. And of course we understand that not every team starts the season with level betting odds lol

 

[rmontro]

At the same time though one could just as easily point to "7 years of data" as a reason to move on, too. We can look at all of that data and reasonably conclude that Matt has been a very good coach, arguably even a great or elite one at times. But the question is not whether or not Matt has been a good coach for us in his seven years in GB. The question is whether or not we believe he can be *better* - if he can elevate above his previous level to push us to a Super Bowl.

As I keep saying, my reason to support moving on is the downward direction of the team since Rodgers has left. You would think that with Love gaining more experience, and also all the other youngsters, that they would be getting better, but their record doesn't support that. That and the increasing inability to finish games or seasons. Of course injuries play into it too, so hope springs eternal...

 

[gopkrs]

We were awfully close to head to Seattle. Those 3, 3 and outs changed the game and we were still in it to the end. Tough to get to much closer when with a win we play the eventual Superbowl winner. Well, that's the way I look at it

 

[milani]

As I keep saying, my reason to support moving on is the downward direction of the team since Rodgers has left. You would think that with Love gaining more experience, and also all the other youngsters, that they would be getting better, but their record doesn't support that. That and the increasing inability to finish games or seasons. Of course injuries play into it too, so hope springs eternal...

Now that Love will be a father you will definitely see maturity. Rodgers never quite got there.

 

[OldSchool101]

5 things learned from Matt LaFleur at the 2026 NFL Annual Meeting

Packers head coach excited for future, addresses staff changes

www.packers.com

Interesting read. I find the quote about "some players not being happy in their roles" intriguing.

Yes
I’m not even happy with Matt’s Role some days

 

[rmontro]

Now that Love will be a father you will definitely see maturity. Rodgers never quite got there.

I wasn't trying to criticize Love, just to be clear. I was just saying the team's performance as a whole hasn't improved under MLF, since Rodgers left. A LOT of people had pretty much had it with Rodgers by the time he left, and there was some excitement about MLF being able to run the offense he wanted with Love. It just hasn't turned out as well as had been hoped, although that can always change.

 

[tynimiller]

I wasn't trying to criticize Love, just to be clear. I was just saying the team's performance as a whole hasn't improved under MLF, since Rodgers left. A LOT of people had pretty much had it with Rodgers by the time he left, and there was some excitement about MLF being able to run the offense he wanted with Love. It just hasn't turned out as well as had been hoped, although that can always change.

I disagree tha we haven’t improved. Rodgers last couple years were no better than what we’ve managed the last two/three considering all things.

IMO of course.

 

[rmontro]

I disagree tha we haven’t improved. Rodgers last couple years were no better than what we’ve managed the last two/three considering all things.

Rodgers last season here wasn't good. His first three seasons under MLF the team won 13 games every year.

We've had three seasons under Love, the team has finished worse each consecutive year. In the first year we won a playoff game, things looked promising. Then the next year we lost our last three games. Then this past year we lost our last five games. That's why I'm saying there hasn't been improvement, even though you would expect a young team to get better with time.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Rodgers last season here wasn't good. His first three seasons under MLF the team won 13 games every year.

We've had three seasons under Love, the team has finished worse each consecutive year. In the first year we won a playoff game, things looked promising. Then the next year we lost our last three games. Then this past year we lost our last five games. That's why I'm saying there hasn't been improvement, even though you would expect a young team to get better with time.

You and Ty are both right. The team has improved its talent level over the last three years. Due to injury and other factors, the increased talent hasn't translated into more wins or deeper playoff runs - and that makes it seem as if the team hasn't improved. Last year ended with more impact players on IR than I can count. So the talent is there and will be improved again this offseason.

Hate using injuries as an excuse but I gotta believe that healthy seasons from Parsons and Kraft, to name just two guys, translates to 2 or 3 more wins than last year, and no five-game losing streaks.

I don't think this team is capable of making a solid run for the SB, even with everyone healthy. It certainly could happen. Injuries are unpredictable, Kraft and Parsons will be back. IMO, Love has certainly improved his level of play. Gluten will likely have a solid draft, and trades are always possible.

It's the D that will keep this team from being a legit SB contender. I'm not trying to diss the team here. It's just how I see things. The CB group is a huge liability, and there is no easy way to fix it right now. I think that's why Gluten has been relatively subdued in FA, and at the same time stockpiling picks for the 2027 draft and by staying well under the cap.

 

[rmontro]

It's the D that will keep this team from being a legit SB contender. I'm not trying to diss the team here. It's just how I see things. The CB group is a huge liability, and there is no easy way to fix it right now.

I agree with you mostly, but there's a problem with the offense too, it goes stagnant too often, it's lacking a spark. The run blocking hasn't been up to snuff, for one thing.

 

[tynimiller]

Rodgers last season here wasn't good. His first three seasons under MLF the team won 13 games every year.

We've had three seasons under Love, the team has finished worse each consecutive year. In the first year we won a playoff game, things looked promising. Then the next year we lost our last three games. Then this past year we lost our last five games. That's why I'm saying there hasn't been improvement, even though you would expect a young team to get better with time.

So we hold these three seasons at the beginning of an era NOT to the last two or three seasons with Rodgers but the first three. I wasn't tracking that, if that is what we're doing then of course we haven't improved.

But this team the last two and half seasons have been a team I have a TON more confidence in on any given Sunday than I ever did Rodgers last two seasons - even the 13 win team in 2021 I did not feel as confident in personally, but wouldn't argue with someone too much on.

I'm still not tracking however personally because I still know and sat through that last season with Rodgers shocked we won 8....and we've won 9, 11, 9....with the youngest NFL rosters each of those seasons...and some massive catastrophic injuries. For my two cents (worth a penny) we are unequivacally a better team now than we were with Rodgers at the end, but that isn't what we were comparing it seems which makes sense why I missed the mark with my claim/comment.

 

[rmontro]

So we hold these three seasons at the beginning of an era NOT to the last two or three seasons with Rodgers but the first three. I wasn't tracking that, if that is what we're doing then of course we haven't improved.

Yeah, I wasn't really comparing the team with the Rodgers version, I was seeing the Love era as a fresh start. Other than to say that the feeling was when Love took over that Love would follow MLF's script better - MLF had his guy in there, who would run HIS offense, and there was some optimism about this at the time, which hasn't really fully paid off.

 

[milani]

You and Ty are both right. The team has improved its talent level over the last three years. Due to injury and other factors, the increased talent hasn't translated into more wins or deeper playoff runs - and that makes it seem as if the team hasn't improved. Last year ended with more impact players on IR than I can count. So the talent is there and will be improved again this offseason.

Hate using injuries as an excuse but I gotta believe that healthy seasons from Parsons and Kraft, to name just two guys, translates to 2 or 3 more wins than last year, and no five-game losing streaks.

I don't think this team is capable of making a solid run for the SB, even with everyone healthy. It certainly could happen. Injuries are unpredictable, Kraft and Parsons will be back. IMO, Love has certainly improved his level of play. Gluten will likely have a solid draft, and trades are always possible.

It's the D that will keep this team from being a legit SB contender. I'm not trying to diss the team here. It's just how I see things. The CB group is a huge liability, and there is no easy way to fix it right now. I think that's why Gluten has been relatively subdued in FA, and at the same time stockpiling picks for the 2027 draft and by staying well under the cap.

But one area we certainly have not improved is special teams. And that has nothing to do with either Love or Rodgers. The 2021 season went down the tubes due to ST. A tiny advance in 2022, but 23-25 just did not get it done. The one bright spot was Luke kicking a very crucial 61 yard FG. And maybe not seeing Amari Rodgers flub punt returns.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I agree with you mostly, but there's a problem with the offense too, it goes stagnant too often, it's lacking a spark. The run blocking hasn't been up to snuff, for one thing.

All true. The offense needs more talent and better execution on the OL. And I'm underwhelmed by Love's leadership, on and off the field.

It became apparent in the playoff loss to Chicago. Down by three possessions, Caleb Williams was on his feet and active on the bench, visibly exhorting and encouraging his teammates that this game was far from over. For a second year QB, he displays amazing leadership qualities and clearly has the respect of his coach and teammates.

And that's a shame because Love is a much better QB than CW (for now). But Love's demeanor is quiet and passive. Hey nothing can replace talent, but Williams does a much better job of ensuring everyone is on their game and in the game. Down by three possessions, he won't quit and won't let his teammates quit. Bears or not, I admire that quality.

I don't expect this to change. Love seems to be, by nature, a reserved guy. That's not a bad thing. He keeps his cool now under pressure and this has improved since he became a starter. I would not trade Love for CW.

But compared to Favre and Rodgers, Love is a wallflower. But ya can't change a zebra's stripes.

 

[Firethorn1001]

Maybe I missed this, but were details about the contract MLF signed ever released? I know it was a multi-year commitment (etc, etc), but devil in the details and just have never seen what the contract was exactly. I guess a 2 year contract would be a multi year commitment, but not enough for the Packers not to rethink at the end of the year. Now 4 year extension? Ya.. don't see them moving on.

 

[tynimiller]

All true. The offense needs more talent and better execution on the OL. And I'm underwhelmed by Love's leadership, on and off the field.

It became apparent in the playoff loss to Chicago. Down by three possessions, Caleb Williams was on his feet and active on the bench, visibly exhorting and encouraging his teammates that this game was far from over. For a second year QB, he displays amazing leadership qualities and clearly has the respect of his coach and teammates.

And that's a shame because Love is a much better QB than CW (for now). But Love's demeanor is quiet and passive. Hey nothing can replace talent, but Williams does a much better job of ensuring everyone is on their game and in the game. Down by three possessions, he won't quit and won't let his teammates quit. Bears or not, I admire that quality.

I don't expect this to change. Love seems to be, by nature, a reserved guy. That's not a bad thing. He keeps his cool now under pressure and this has improved since he became a starter. I would not trade Love for CW.

But compared to Favre and Rodgers, Love is a wallflower. But ya can't change a zebra's stripes.

I've expressed it before, it is purely a preferential leadership type. Love is active, is talking just not in face or boisterous...he is very unflappable and stoic.

 

[OldSchool101]

I disagree tha we haven’t improved. Rodgers last couple years were no better than what we’ve managed the last two/three considering all things.

IMO of course.

Sure. Added to that we had to eat a big chunk of Cap when Rodgers left. That means we could’ve had that $$ to add other talent. We were paying for a player (Rodgers) who wasn’t even in town. Thus we were relying on 2nd year Starters without being able to add as many quality Veteran players.

Then when Rodgers left we really went into a mini rebuild. We drafted large groups of young prospects.. When players are in year 1 or 2 we wouldn’t expect them to match the peak performance of a Rodgers WR like Davante in year 6,7,8 etc.

So I’m just offering some posters want to judge a QB with 12-14 years of experience against a QB with 1,2,3 years of experience. Good thing we didn’t judge Sam Darnold after 1,2,3 seasons. He should’ve been run out of the league a long time ago! (Comedy)
In Darnold 1st 4 seasons he had
54 TD’s
52 INT
76.6% Passer rating (Yuck!)
Broke 3,000 yards 1 time (barely)
can you imagine Love doing that? He’d have torches and a mob outside his home.

The good news is we know we’ve got our QB, who’s a good starter. He’s also steadily improved in each season and it’s highly likely we have not seen his best season yet. I think if we can keep Love a little cleaner we could see him get in that 4,000–4300 yards and 30TD—35 TD area.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I've expressed it before, it is purely a preferential leadership type. Love is active, is talking just not in face or boisterous...he is very unflappable and stoic.

Yeah and there are advantages to being unflappable and stoic. He has become much cooler under pressure the last two years, and he always conveys a silent-sense that the team will do what it needs to win. So he quietly projects strength and confidence in his team, and in himself. Nothing wrong with that. He has to be true to himself.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Maybe I missed this, but were details about the contract MLF signed ever released? I know it was a multi-year commitment (etc, etc), but devil in the details and just have never seen what the contract was exactly. I guess a 2 year contract would be a multi year commitment, but not enough for the Packers not to rethink at the end of the year. Now 4 year extension? Ya.. don't see them moving on.

Good point Fire. I don't recall seeing any specifics on MLF's deal. My guess is that it's a 3 year deal, but have no idea about the comp. Same for Gluten.

Anyone out there have more info? Thanks all.

 

[Heyjoe4]

But one area we certainly have not improved is special teams. And that has nothing to do with either Love or Rodgers. The 2021 season went down the tubes due to ST. A tiny advance in 2022, but 23-25 just did not get it done. The one bright spot was Luke kicking a very crucial 61 yard FG. And maybe not seeing Amari Rodgers flub punt returns.

Packer fans should know better than most how important STs can be in winning a championship. Return specialist Desmond Howard (is that the right name?) won SB MVP in the 1996-1997 season - I think.....

That 2021 loss to the 9ers was pure torture. The D didn't allow a TD, but a blocked punt was returned for a TD. 9ers 13, Packers 7. STs are very important, and I can't remember the last time the Packers had a top 10 unit. That sucks.

 

[rmontro]

Packer fans should know better than most how important STs can be in winning a championship. Return specialist Desmond Howard (is that the right name?) won SB MVP in the 1996-1997 season - I think.....

Strangely, there doesn't seem to be a great deal of concern about fixing them either. Strange because of Packer history in the last couple of decades.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Strangely, there doesn't seem to be a great deal of concern about fixing them either. Strange because of Packer history in the last couple of decades.

That's a good point. There is no clamor for fixing a disfunctional STs unit as there is for offense and defense. And yet STs can and does make the difference between a W and a L on a number of occasions.

It's even more baffling with the Packers. They made Bisaccia the highest paid STC a few years ago, but got nothing from the investment.

And while a lot of focus goes to the kickers and kick returners, it's the guys in the trenches who really make a difference, especially on kickoffs and punt returns. I think one thing Gluten liked about recently acquired LB Zaire Franklin is his work on STs.