Best offseason in the NFC north

[JBlood]

I dont expect much immediately from this crop, except on special teams.

Exactly. Special teams have been by far the biggest weakness of the team, and I think the coaches and TT drafted with that in mind, while expecting big things from the top 3 or 4 picks in coming years.

 

[DaveRoller]

Makes me wonder, who won the off-season last year? The Bears? They got Lamar Houston.....that really worked out....

Some suggested that the Patriots "won" last offseason by "renting" a pair of high-profile and expensive CBs (Brandon Browner and Darrelle Revis) to fix a perennial problem. Others insisted that these signings reflected desperation on NE's part.

 

[Carl]

Some suggested that the Patriots "won" last offseason by "renting" a pair of high-profile and expensive CBs (Brandon Browner and Darrelle Revis) to fix a perennial problem. Others insisted that these signings reflected desperation on NE's part.

There wasn't one big problem that prevented the Packers from winning it all. It was 5 minutes of bad play from nearly everyone.

We could had better ILBs or addressed nother weak position and it wouldn't have changed all those mistakes.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

There wasn't one big problem that prevented the Packers from winning it all. It was 5 minutes of bad play from nearly everyone.

We could had better ILBs or addressed nother weak position and it wouldn't have changed all those mistakes.

Better ILB could have prevented Lynch from running for 6.3 yards per carry....

 

[DaveRoller]

There wasn't one big problem that prevented the Packers from winning it all. It was 5 minutes of bad play from nearly everyone.

We could had better ILBs or addressed nother weak position and it wouldn't have changed all those mistakes.

You may well be right that the Pack doing absolutely nothing to improve the ILB position last offseason was completely inconsequential.

It may also be true that the Patriots would have won the Super Bowl even if they had ignored the CB position last offseason instead of spending big on Browner or Revis to improve a perceived deficiency.

All we do know for certain is that, in the end, NE took home the Lombardi.

 

[AmishMafia]

All we do know for certain is that, in the end, NE took home the Lombardi.

And they cheated. Don't forget that.

 

[thisisnate]

And they cheated. Don't forget that.

I was gonna correct him with "Lombardi**" just to be a snot. I don't really care if they did or didn't take air out of balls, tbh.

 

[Carl]

Better ILB could have prevented Lynch from running for 6.3 yards per carry....

Lunch had one run that hurt the Packers, his TD run.

His running yards didn't matter when they point up zero points. For 56 minutes Lynch didn't do anything to hurt us. During the last five, it wasn't ILB that was killing us. Mistakes everywhere did.

One stat does not tell the whole story.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Some suggested that the Patriots "won" last offseason by "renting" a pair of high-profile and expensive CBs (Brandon Browner and Darrelle Revis) to fix a perennial problem. Others insisted that these signings reflected desperation on NE's part.

Like the nic. I remember that guy.....he was doing the sack dance before the world ever heard of Mark Gastineau.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Like a lot of Packers, once he was old and washed up, he signed with the Vikings. But he was great with Green Bay.

 

[ivo610]

I think people are confusing how good a team is and how much a team has improved. The Packers got worse in the offseason; offense is basically the same (read, REALLY good) and the defense lost a starting corner and nickel/dime corner. Even with those losses, the Packers are still the best team in the NFC North, perhaps the NFC or NFL. However, the issue is which team had the best offseason.

Now, the Packers were a close second in the offseason since they managed to keep Cobb and Bulaga. However, the Vikings added Mike Wallace (who, just a few years ago, was one of the best WRs in the NFL and he's still young), some defensive help and, oh yeah, the best RB in the NFL. The Vikings this year verse last should be a markedly better team while the Packers will most likely be a slightly worse team (to start the year, afterwards will depend on health and player development).

I don't agree the packers got worse. Losing players doesn't always mean worse.

Also another year together for the offense makes them better. Those young WRs from last year got a year in the system. The offense imo got better.

Jury still out on the defense as peppers is a year older and the D line concerns me but I'm excited about the secondary

 

[rodell330]

Queens had a stellar off season and AD being back with fresh legs won't hurt. I can see us splitting next years matches.

 

[rodell330]

I don't agree the packers got worse. Losing players doesn't always mean worse.

Also another year together for the offense makes them better. Those young WRs from last year got a year in the system. The offense imo got better.

Jury still out on the defense as peppers is a year older and the D line concerns me but I'm excited about the secondary

Won't matter how good the secondary is if we can't stop the run.

 

[ivo610]

Won't matter how good the secondary is if we can't stop the run.

http://thepowerrank.com/2014/01/10/which-nfl-teams-make-and-win-in-the-playoffs/

 

[rodell330]

Lunch had one run that hurt the Packers, his TD run.

His running yards didn't matter when they point up zero points. For 56 minutes Lynch didn't do anything to hurt us. During the last five, it wasn't ILB that was killing us. Mistakes everywhere did.

One stat does not tell the whole story.

Nope, just the fact that the big run hurt us and they ended up WINNING the game which is a stat that tells a story.

 

[OldSchool101]

I don't agree the packers got worse. Losing players doesn't always mean worse.

Also another year together for the offense makes them better. Those young WRs from last year got a year in the system. The offense imo got better.

Jury still out on the defense as peppers is a year older and the D line concerns me but I'm excited about the secondary

Good points. Im in agreement. If I may piggyback on those thoughts.
I think it's a safe bet we improve whenever we lose players that are notably declining in play (ILB) It could be argued that we just got better by default there. We just need 1 LB that can step up to the challenge of playing "lights out" inside and we could easily be a top 8-10 ranked Defense. We also have solid enough talent at OLB that it may be feasible to do the reciprocal of last year and to use Clay inside initially and fade his play back outside as the year progresses and we see who emerges inside with the newer talent.
We're adequate+ at NT and although BJ was waning in recent years it's a positive to see him back competing for the 2 stuffer role which should make both players better and he's a nice big body to add in the middle alongside Guion for those short yardage and goal line situations (not to mention I wouldn't mind seeing BJ score from the 1 yard line this year). Also, Having a guy with experience that can come in fresh for relief on a long drive is paramount.
We can limit the overall D experiments from early last years overhaul and we now know CM3 is formidable playing inside with our OLB depth being summoned.
I still think we're missing (or limiting) 2 key components from past years success.
#1 is to systematically interject an effective screen play for Eddie to get some momentum to steamroll. We flailed several times recently but the with the returning O line intact and cohesive now and a couple FB in house it's worth a shot to revisit this. Also, in 2014, Eddie has had a heavy dose of pass catching work and he had improved his skill set there. It's also a good way for AR to stay healthy via quick pass release, thus limiting time in the pocket.
#2 is the Safety Blitz that was so effective in our D schemes from our days of top 5 Defenses (the Leroy butler and Charles Woodson Symphony in D minor add A sharp and watch the flat)

 

[Carl]

Nope, just the fact that the big run hurt us and they ended up WINNING the game which is a stat that tells a story.

The entire side of the defense was dominated that play, not just an ILB. Mistake after mistake was the deciding factor in the game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

For the Vikings to improve, he only has to be better than what they had last year. Do you really think he's going to decline that much?

Peterson will for sure be better than Jerrick McKinnon and Matt Asiata.

TT drafted Aaron Rodgers. At the time we had a QB who had started 200+ games and was expected to plaay another 2 years. That is the exact method TT uses. Draft the best player whether you need him to play right away or not. Yet many posters for years wish the Pack had picked a mediocre WR in support of their win now mentality.

TT does use FA. He is just careful. For most FAs the team regrets the this HTML class. Value is Sorry the bakery is within a season or two. Suppose we ate up salary cap a few years ago surrounding BF with WRs? He was still BF and would have killed our season with a stupid pick. And we wouldnt have had the cap space to sign some of our greats we have now.

Packers were a bounce of the ball away from another SB last season. You can't control all the weird luck and injuries and circumstances that occur randomly in a season or a game.

Thompson deserves huge credit for drafting Rodgers back in 2005. That´s the main reason the Packers have been in contention to win a Super Bowl since 2009. But other than Matthews most first round picks by Thompson haven´t worked out preventing the Packers from going to more than one Super Bowl during his tenure.

He doesn´t use free agency or trades enough to selectively improve position of needs. I´m not talking about going after every high priced free agent out there but to sign some second- and third-tier players to improve some weaknesses on the team.

Obviously. What did you think of their 2014 draft?

Anthony Barr was a great pick, something you would expect with the ninth overall pick. I´m not sold on Bridgewater so far. Other than those two guys they didn´t get a lot of production out of the 2014 draft.

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet is being a young team, the Packers always have in house players improve year to year.

They've only got one guy in Peppers who is old enough to start declining in play. Everyone else should either improve or remain the same.

We hear McCarthy talk a lot about players improving for their first to second year but who actually made that big of a jump during his second season. Since 2010 only Randall Cobb and Mike Daniels come to mind.

Lunch had one run that hurt the Packers, his TD run.

His running yards didn't matter when they point up zero points. For 56 minutes Lynch didn't do anything to hurt us. During the last five, it wasn't ILB that was killing us. Mistakes everywhere did.

One stat does not tell the whole story.

Aside of the TD run??? I´m quite sure that play had something to do with the Packers losing the game. In addition his 26-yard reception on a pick play on which Barrington tried to go underneath played a huge role in the game. But aside of that he didn´t have any big receptions either.

http://thepowerrank.com/2014/01/10/which-nfl-teams-make-and-win-in-the-playoffs/

Interesting article, it doesn´t take the 2013 and 2014 seasons into consideration in which Seattle is #1 in rushing efficiency over that period.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Lunch had one run that hurt the Packers, his TD run.

His running yards didn't matter when they point up zero points. For 56 minutes Lynch didn't do anything to hurt us. During the last five, it wasn't ILB that was killing us. Mistakes everywhere did.

One stat does not tell the whole story.

One flashy play doesn't beat a team. Lynch ran for 157 yards and his longest run was 24 yards. Take out the 24 yard run and Lynch STILL averaged 5.5 yards per play. Or are you saying that only TD runs matter? Because if that's the case then Matt Asiata was as good as Eddie Lacy throughout the season. You don't think the Packers might have won the game if the best Seattle offensive player that day (BY FAR the best) wasn't running wherever he wanted to?

For 56 minutes he didn't hurt the team?!!?! If he had not been Seattle's ENTIRE offense for the first 56 minutes then all the errors wouldn't have mattered at the end!

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I don't agree the packers got worse. Losing players doesn't always mean worse.

Also another year together for the offense makes them better. Those young WRs from last year got a year in the system. The offense imo got better.

Jury still out on the defense as peppers is a year older and the D line concerns me but I'm excited about the secondary

I'm sorry, but there is no possible way that any sane person could say that a team that loses a quality starting corner, quality nickel corner and an adequate ILB didn't regress on defense when that team replaced those players with three rookies. You might HOPE that the team improves on defense but that hope is resting on the belief that two rookie corners will play as well as House and Hayward and that Hayward will play as well as Tramon. The offense will improve but that improvement hinges on oline health more than anything else.

 

[AmishMafia]

Thompson deserves huge credit for drafting Rodgers back in 2005. That´s the main reason the Packers have been in contention to win a Super Bowl since 2009. But other than Matthews most first round picks by Thompson haven´t worked out preventing the Packers from going to more than one Super Bowl during his tenure.

He doesn´t use free agency or trades enough to selectively improve position of needs. I´m not talking about going after every high priced free agent out there but to sign some second- and third-tier players to improve some weaknesses on the team.
.

The Packers are a very talented team. Only a higher $$ FA would represent an upgrade in talent. I dont think a great safety or mlb FA even existed to upgrade those positions. Roll the dice on Spikes? I would rather spend much less on a young player who will improve through playing time. Hindsight you can definitely see FA players that would have been worth it, but it is a big risk going into it.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packers are a very talented team. Only a higher $$ FA would represent an upgrade in talent. I dont think a great safety or mlb FA even existed to upgrade those positions. Roll the dice on Spikes? I would rather spend much less on a young player who will improve through playing time. Hindsight you can definitely see FA players that would have been worth it, but it is a big risk going into it.

I agree there weren´t any ILBs available in this year´s free agency fitting the Packers needs. Last season Karlos Dansby was a free agent though and he signed a four-year, $24 million contract with the Browns. The Packers could have get rid of both Hawk and Jones to create some cap space to sign him. IMO it was a greater risk to spend more cap space on Hawk and Jones than it would have been to sign Dansby.

 

[AmishMafia]

I agree there weren´t any ILBs available in this year´s free agency fitting the Packers needs. Last season Karlos Dansby was a free agent though and he signed a four-year, $24 million contract with the Browns. The Packers could have get rid of both Hawk and Jones to create some cap space to sign him. IMO it was a greater risk to spend more cap space on Hawk and Jones than it would have been to sign Dansby.

Even with the dead money from Hawk and Jones?

To be fair, many felt that safety was a bigger issue. There was no way to expect HHCD, a top 10 oick IMHO, to be available. Or that Burnett would come back as well as he did. Or that Hyde would transition. Safety went from poor to strong in 1 offseason without a single FA. Another scenario is that HHCD is picked by Steelers and that ILB drops to us. Barrington and he would make a very good combo i think.

You never know what the draft will bring nor which young pup will step up.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Even with the dead money from Hawk and Jones?

To be fair, many felt that safety was a bigger issue. There was no way to expect HHCD, a top 10 oick IMHO, to be available. Or that Burnett would come back as well as he did. Or that Hyde would transition. Safety went from poor to strong in 1 offseason without a single FA. Another scenario is that HHCD is picked by Steelers and that ILB drops to us. Barrington and he would make a very good combo i think.

You never know what the draft will bring nor which young pup will step up.

It's true that you neber know what is going to happen in the draft. That's why teams should selectively address position of needs in free agency, doing it in a smart way.

The Packers would have saved $3.825 million in cap space by releasing Hawk and Jones prior to the 2014 season.

 

[Carl]

One flashy play doesn't beat a team. Lynch ran for 157 yards and his longest run was 24 yards. Take out the 24 yard run and Lynch STILL averaged 5.5 yards per play. Or are you saying that only TD runs matter? Because if that's the case then Matt Asiata was as good as Eddie Lacy throughout the season. You don't think the Packers might have won the game if the best Seattle offensive player that day (BY FAR the best) wasn't running wherever he wanted to?

For 56 minutes he didn't hurt the team?!!?! If he had not been Seattle's ENTIRE offense for the first 56 minutes then all the errors wouldn't have mattered at the end!

For 56 minutes him being their entire offense lead to exactly 0 offensive points.

 

[Carl]

Peterson will for sure be better than Jerrick McKinnon and Matt Asiata.



Thompson deserves huge credit for drafting Rodgers back in 2005. That´s the main reason the Packers have been in contention to win a Super Bowl since 2009. But other than Matthews most first round picks by Thompson haven´t worked out preventing the Packers from going to more than one Super Bowl during his tenure.

He doesn´t use free agency or trades enough to selectively improve position of needs. I´m not talking about going after every high priced free agent out there but to sign some second- and third-tier players to improve some weaknesses on the team.



Anthony Barr was a great pick, something you would expect with the ninth overall pick. I´m not sold on Bridgewater so far. Other than those two guys they didn´t get a lot of production out of the 2014 draft.



We hear McCarthy talk a lot about players improving for their first to second year but who actually made that big of a jump during his second season. Since 2010 only Randall Cobb and Mike Daniels come to mind.



Aside of the TD run??? I´m quite sure that play had something to do with the Packers losing the game. In addition his 26-yard reception on a pick play on which Barrington tried to go underneath played a huge role in the game. But aside of that he didn´t have any big receptions either.



Interesting article, it doesn´t take the 2013 and 2014 seasons into consideration in which Seattle is #1 in rushing efficiency over that period.

On that TD run the entire side of the defense was beat, not just an ILB. That run cannot be pinned directly on one posiiton.

I'll give you that Barrington got burned. However, mistakes came from nearly everywhere the last five minutes of the game. The ILB position was not close to the main issue the last five minutes.

Besides, every single team in the league has a weak position or two. It seems like you want TT to fill every need and not have any.