Perspective, Concerns, our Line, & Choking

[Mondio]

...in Manhattan, Kansas.

To the parents of Alan and Kim Nelson...

 

[PackerDNA]

I understand Packers fans being disappointed with the team winning "only" two Super Bowls since 1996. Green Bay is the only team that has had two Hall of Fame quarterbacks starting over the last 25 years yet there are three franchises having won more Lombardi Trophies as well as another three that have the same amount of titles.

I agree that it's tough to win a Super Bowl but the Packers have had the most important piece in place for 25 years running yet only two titles to show for.

Since 1967. Fixed that for ya.

 

[Poppa San]

To the parents of Alan and Kim Nelson...

To the parents of Alan and Kim Nelson.... He was born to the parents of his siblings, Kelsey and Mike.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I think it's just a natural reaction to start calling for bigger and better results sometimes. While I consider it privilege to be playing in a lot of these big playoff games, losing those big games sometimes can seem more frustrating at times than not being in them. And yeah, I know that loss in Seattle 2 years ago is still pretty fresh and therefore goes into some of our more aggravating "choke" labeled games, and yeah no excuses we should have won it. I know though we're far from the only team's fans having to witness anything on that latitude, as I remember back in 2012 when Flacco launched that 70 yard mile high miracle bomb, and man you shoulda seen my bronco fan friends on social media just totally lose it. Yeah life's all good now for them, but they like the Cowboys fans, Vikes fans, and just about every other fan have had to witness the day sure victory got robbed from them.

Where the mistake gets made often is the assumption that firing the front office or coaches is an automatic fix to that problem. I can guarantee you it's not.

Is the clock ticking on Rodgers's time here? Absolutely, and as 2013 showed you never know if a QB's season could get cut short by injury or not. But is there still enough time to rally back the troops and get the stars to align in our favor to win another superbowl? Absolutely yes.

Now I will say this, I do want to see McCarthy deliver another Superbowl title to us. And yes it has been 6 years since the last trip, so yeah if you're in the younger U-25 generation that can seem like ages ago. And yes when you have a star QB, you naturally want more championships for him to write home about I get that. But a big part of the head coach's job is to make sure that the team is maximizing the talent it has and getting the best results it can. Has McCarthy done that? I'd say for the most part yes.

Nobody wants the team to just be happy with making the playoffs, not at all. But I can tell you there's really only 2 other alternatives, one of which is make the playoffs 1 or maybe 2 years, maybe make or win the superbowl but then follow that up with losing seasons of doing nothing, aka the Rams, Raiders, Falcons, and to lesser degrees the Giants and Ravens. Or don't make the playoffs at all for many years as has happened in Miami a lot. Yeah I know McCarthy's teams out of the 8 times he made the playoffs only made the NFCCG 3x, and only 1x have taken home the Lombardi. But I'd rather stick with that than the other alternatives mentioned, or taking a silly Ray Rhodes-like gamble under the assumption that a coach candidate's tough talk translates into winning seasons. MM has built up enough good will towards me that unless this team starts having multiple losing seasons in a row, firing him or Ted Thompson would just be outright foolish.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Maybe it's a better option to use a first round draft pick in four or five years on Rodgers successor and let him develop on the bench for several years.

Maybe 4 years, not 5. The option year is quite expensive for a guy to be sitting on the bench.

Even still, at the end of year 4 he'd be a free agent at which point a difficult choice would need to be made if Rodgers is still playing at a high level and would prefer to soldier on. And what guarantee would there be the guy can actually play, presumably having warmed the bench for 4 years?

Crash, burn, and a little Luck would be my hope.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think it's just a natural reaction to start calling for bigger and better results sometimes.

You bet. This team has been knocking on the door so long their knuckles are bloody.

 

[Poppa San]

Maybe 4 years, not 5. The option year is quite expensive for a guy to be sitting on the bench.

I think you misunderstood something. In 4 or 5 years would be 2-3 years before AR would hang it up if is 6-8 years left is correct.

 

[Mondio]

To the parents of Alan and Kim Nelson.... He was born to the parents of his siblings, Kelsey and Mike.

I screwed that up didn't I

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Since 1967. Fixed that for ya.

True, but I was talking about the Packers lack of championships while having Hall of Fame quarterbacks over the last 25 seasons.

Nobody wants the team to just be happy with making the playoffs, not at all. But I can tell you there's really only 2 other alternatives, one of which is make the playoffs 1 or maybe 2 years, maybe make or win the superbowl but then follow that up with losing seasons of doing nothing, aka the Rams, Raiders, Falcons, and to lesser degrees the Giants and Ravens. Or don't make the playoffs at all for many years as has happened in Miami a lot. Yeah I know McCarthy's teams out of the 8 times he made the playoffs only made the NFCCG 3x, and only 1x have taken home the Lombardi. But I'd rather stick with that than the other alternatives mentioned, or taking a silly Ray Rhodes-like gamble under the assumption that a coach candidate's tough talk translates into winning seasons. MM has built up enough good will towards me that unless this team starts having multiple losing seasons in a row, firing him or Ted Thompson would just be outright foolish.

Don't get me wrong, it's great that the Packers have made the playoffs 13 out of the last 18 seasons (ranked 3rd in the league) but there's no denying that having only been to a single Super Bowl since 1998 while having two Hall of Fame quarterbacks is disappointing.

 

[PikeBadger]

...in Manhattan, Kansas.

....On a rainy and stormy night

 

[PikeBadger]

When Rodgers hits the end of road some 7 or 8 years down the line (that's his projection from the Hawk podcast), the best bet would be to crash and burn in a year where there's a top drawer QB prospect (which don't come along every year). Wentz, for example, struggles to throw a tight spiral for gosh sakes. Then wait and see.

Imo, the best bet is to have a top drawer QB coach to get the next guy ready. Your way requires a lot of luck and perfect timing. Having an excellent coach and a good prospect is a much better plan imo.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Imo, the best bet is to have a top drawer QB coach to get the next guy ready. Your way requires a lot of luck and perfect timing. Having an excellent coach and a good prospect is a much better plan imo.

There's no denying a great position coach is extremely helpful developing a quarterback but it takes a lot of luck drafting a quarterback capable of turning into a Hall of Famer when not having one of the top picks.

 

[Half Empty]

Yup, requires that the top 23 picks aren't your guy.

 

[HardRightEdge]

There's no denying a great position coach is extremely helpful developing a quarterback but it takes a lot of luck drafting a quarterback capable of turning into a Hall of Famer when not having one of the top picks.

You don't need a Hall of Fame QB, but you do need a good one.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Don't get me wrong, it's great that the Packers have made the playoffs 13 out of the last 18 seasons (ranked 3rd in the league) but there's no denying that having only been to a single Super Bowl since 1998 while having two Hall of Fame quarterbacks is disappointing.

Fair enough but of course when one of them tosses 6 picks against the Rams, 5 against the Falcons, 4 against the Vikings, and one big doodoo of a pick against the Eagles in OT in the playoffs ...... well you get the picture.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Fair enough but of course when one of them tosses 6 picks against the Rams, 5 against the Falcons, 4 against the Vikings, and one big doodoo of a pick against the Eagles in OT in the playoffs ...... well you get the picture.

There´s no denying Favre was responsible for some of the Packers playoff losses but he has a similar postseason passer rating (86.3) compared to some other still active quarterbacks who have won multiple Super Bowls (Eli 89.3, Flacco 88.6, Brady 88.0, Peyton 87.4, Roethlisberger 84.6).

 

[tynimiller]

Maybe it's a better option to use a first round draft pick in four or five years on Rodgers successor and let him develop on the bench for several years.

I wouldn't mind we start considering a 2nd/3rd rounder in a year or two either. That's if Hundley doesn't look like he'll pan out into at worst case a solid back up option. To me you don't wait till AR is on his last leg, you do it about 2 or 3 years before that. Which to me means I'm willing to grab what our internal scouts thinks is a potential starter that falls to 2nd or even 3rd like a Russel Wilson or the likes.

As an example...I honestly wouldn't have argued against drafting Connor Cook this year or a similar type pick next couple drafts. We have the luxury of scratching the dirt for that rough diamond for a few years, let's attempt to take it.

Then again who knows, maybe Hundley now comfortable with book and such will start showing us something...his raw skills and size intrigued us enough to want him albeit late...I don't foresee him being the savior though, if for no reason other than he'll be in his own year 8 or 9 by the time AR is done.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I wouldn't mind we start considering a 2nd/3rd rounder in a year or two either. That's if Hundley doesn't look like he'll pan out into at worst case a solid back up option. To me you don't wait till AR is on his last leg, you do it about 2 or 3 years before that. Which to me means I'm willing to grab what our internal scouts thinks is a potential starter that falls to 2nd or even 3rd like a Russel Wilson or the likes.

As an example...I honestly wouldn't have argued against drafting Connor Cook this year or a similar type pick next couple drafts. We have the luxury of scratching the dirt for that rough diamond for a few years, let's attempt to take it.

Then again who knows, maybe Hundley now comfortable with book and such will start showing us something...his raw skills and size intrigued us enough to want him albeit late...I don't foresee him being the savior though, if for no reason other than he'll be in his own year 8 or 9 by the time AR is done.

With Rodgers having said that he wants to play another six to eight seasons there´s no reason to draft his potential successor for several years. Currently rookies agree to a four year deal once drafted which would result in a decent quarterback leaving in free agency as long as #12 is the starter. Hundley might end up going that route.

The team had more pressing needs during this year´s draft to spend a pick on a QB most likely never playing a significant down for the Packers.

 

[tynimiller]

With Rodgers having said that he wants to play another six to eight seasons there´s no reason to draft his potential successor for several years. Currently rookies agree to a four year deal once drafted which would result in a decent quarterback leaving in free agency as long as #12 is the starter. Hundley might end up going that route.

The team had more pressing needs during this year´s draft to spend a pick on a QB most likely never playing a significant down for the Packers.

Completely agree, we had to go Blake when we did, and really after the 4th closed there were no QBs that I looked at and thought, yeah definitely worth "wasting" a pick on.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Completely agree, we had to go Blake when we did, and really after the 4th closed there were no QBs that I looked at and thought, yeah definitely worth "wasting" a pick on.

Don´t forget that the Packers used two picks to trade up for Hundley last offseason. There wasn´t any reason to use another selection on a quarterback in this year´s draft.

 

[tynimiller]

I was more or less utilizing Cook in the 4th as an example of what I'd suspect we consider in the next 3 year window...before we consider a 2nd/1st as we near AR's closed window.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I was more or less utilizing Cook in the 4th as an example of what I'd suspect we consider in the next 3 year window...before we consider a 2nd/1st as we near AR's closed window.

The discussion revolved around replacing Rodgers as a starter down the road though. The Packers will most likely spend a first round pick on his successor as it´s extremely unlikely to find a decent starter in the middle of the draft. I agree that if Hundley plans on leaving after the 2018 season once his rookie contract expires it would be smart to address the position with another day 3 pick.

 

[tynimiller]

I still feel you see out a 2nd/3rd rounder before wasting a 1st which seems more likely than not these days with QBs. Alas though we are a few years off from being in that situation...thankfully.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I still feel you see out a 2nd/3rd rounder before wasting a 1st which seems more likely than not these days with QBs.

The chances are way better getting a decent starting quarterback in the first round than later in the draft. There´s no need to reach for a player because of need though, that´s why thinking about selecting a successor early is a smart move.

 

[El Guapo]

You draft a QB at the top of the first round if you need an immediate starter. If you have the luxury of drafting a solid QB at a lower spot a few years ahead of time, you may get the same end results.