Fire Capers

[Sunshinepacker]

An average or even 'good' season of performance doesn't count for anything when you fail the final exam year after year. THAT has been the point.

Ok, then by your definition the New York Giants defense was bad last season (I mean, despite being actually very good all season they gave up a bunch of points to the Packers) and, by the same logic, the Texans defense was bad last season too (again, really good all year but then gave up points to the Patriots).

If your point is that the Packers defense has historically given up points in the playoffs, I can only say that that's what happens in the playoffs! Last season the Panthers had a pretty good defense but they gave up 24 to a bad Broncos offense. Last season the Cardinals had a good defense all year but then they gave up 49 points to the Panthers in the playoffs, so their defense must have been awful too, huh? In 2014 the Ravens had a pretty good defense but they gave up 35 points to the Patriots in the playoffs, so they're bad too I guess.

My point is that when your team is playing in the playoffs, giving up large point totals isn't unusual. I'm sure most would say that the Ravens defense is perennially very good, yet when they won the Super Bowl in 2012 they gave up 35 points to the Broncos and 31 points to the 49ers. The only difference in this "final exam" logic between the Ravens and Packers is that the Ravens haven't made it to the playoffs consistently; in fact, they've only made the playoffs recently in 2012 and 2014 and they gave up large point totals in both years.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I fully anticipate we'll blame it on injuries and luck, retain Thompson and Capers both, and be back here again next year scratching our heads dissecting why we gave up another 40 burger in the playoffs.

I can tell you right now. It will most likely be because we overpay Perry, who ends up hurt most of the season, move Clay to ILB and don't bring in any free-agent pass rushers so the pass rush will be awful along with starting Gunter, Randall and Rollins at CB in the nickel; that's a recipe for success!

 

[C-Lee]

I can tell you right now. It will most likely be because we overpay Perry, who ends up hurt most of the season, move Clay to ILB and don't bring in any free-agent pass rushers so the pass rush will be awful along with starting Gunter, Randall and Rollins at CB in the nickel; that's a recipe for success!

This is my nightmare.

 

[PackerDNA]

This is my nightmare.

Probably to end up as reality.
Just read MM's presser comments. Apparently, neither he nor anyone else at 1265 Lombardi gets it; it's everythings wonderful, bring back everyone, stay the course!
Wash, rinse, repeat.....

 

[Mavster]

Ok, then by your definition the New York Giants defense was bad last season (I mean, despite being actually very good all season they gave up a bunch of points to the Packers) and, by the same logic, the Texans defense was bad last season too (again, really good all year but then gave up points to the Patriots).

If your point is that the Packers defense has historically given up points in the playoffs, I can only say that that's what happens in the playoffs! Last season the Panthers had a pretty good defense but they gave up 24 to a bad Broncos offense. Last season the Cardinals had a good defense all year but then they gave up 49 points to the Panthers in the playoffs, so their defense must have been awful too, huh? In 2014 the Ravens had a pretty good defense but they gave up 35 points to the Patriots in the playoffs, so they're bad too I guess.

My point is that when your team is playing in the playoffs, giving up large point totals isn't unusual. I'm sure most would say that the Ravens defense is perennially very good, yet when they won the Super Bowl in 2012 they gave up 35 points to the Broncos and 31 points to the 49ers. The only difference in this "final exam" logic between the Ravens and Packers is that the Ravens haven't made it to the playoffs consistently; in fact, they've only made the playoffs recently in 2012 and 2014 and they gave up large point totals in both years.

Half of your comparisons don't even make sense.

The Broncos scored a strip sack TD in that Super Bowl. The Broncos had less than 200 yards in that game and were 1-14 on 3rd downs. Yep Carolina's defense blew that one

The Cardinals had 7 turnovers in that game against the Panthers... Totally the defense's fault

 

[PackerDNA]

Ok, then by your definition the New York Giants defense was bad last season (I mean, despite being actually very good all season they gave up a bunch of points to the Packers) and, by the same logic, the Texans defense was bad last season too (again, really good all year but then gave up points to the Patriots).

If your point is that the Packers defense has historically given up points in the playoffs, I can only say that that's what happens in the playoffs! Last season the Panthers had a pretty good defense but they gave up 24 to a bad Broncos offense. Last season the Cardinals had a good defense all year but then they gave up 49 points to the Panthers in the playoffs, so their defense must have been awful too, huh? In 2014 the Ravens had a pretty good defense but they gave up 35 points to the Patriots in the playoffs, so they're bad too I guess.

My point is that when your team is playing in the playoffs, giving up large point totals isn't unusual. I'm sure most would say that the Ravens defense is perennially very good, yet when they won the Super Bowl in 2012 they gave up 35 points to the Broncos and 31 points to the 49ers. The only difference in this "final exam" logic between the Ravens and Packers is that the Ravens haven't made it to the playoffs consistently; in fact, they've only made the playoffs recently in 2012 and 2014 and they gave up large point totals in both years.

Actually, the Texans defense played very well vs the Pats. The Pats had a couple of very short scoring drives, and a kick return for a TD.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

I swear people that still defend this defense are just playing the devil's advocate for fun. Either that or they are practicing for their schools debate team.

 

[Bagadeez04]

I think the larger problem is systemic to this organization. At this point you have a mentality from the top down that seeks to maintain the status quo.

The defense not being a smashmouth, stifling, "oh crap we gotta play the Packers D" the last six years is mostly due to a lack of talent, injuries and relying too much on inexperienced players. I know it's hard to get that kind of D, but it should be the goal. I don't think it is in Green Bay.

I am totally in the "move on from Capers" camp, but i think if they were to do actually fire him and bring someone else in, the results on the field would still be similar to what we've seen the past several years. The Patriots are really the only team in the modern NFL that can consistently scheme their way to defensive dominance...most everyone else needs superior talent to do that.

What bothers me is the organization that accepts constantly having a mediocre defense as ok...that is to say, same GM, same coaches, same players...yet the result is supposed to change? It's not possible. I expect we'll see a defense in 2017 that is very similar to 2016. They may get slightly better play from Randall and Rollins because they're healthy, they may add a draft pick that can help a bit, but when it matters most against the good teams, they will fold. Those happen to be the teams you see in the playoffs.

In 2017 that is a recipe for failure, even with a HOF quarterback. What bothers me is that not a single person from the front office down to the coaches wants to change the way they go about business. It's becoming a serious problem, and something needs to change.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Good thing I changed the oil and checked the tires. Going to get a lot more miles on it before this baby is parked again.

Did you do a thorough inspection of the struts and suspension? It looks like the next year will be another bumpy ride.

It's no surprise McCarthy gave Capers a vote of confidence indicating his return. I held out hope, knowing hope is all it was. There's only one choice left:

Fire McCarthy! Just kidding. I like Mike.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Ok, then by your definition the New York Giants defense was bad last season (I mean, despite being actually very good all season they gave up a bunch of points to the Packers) and, by the same logic, the Texans defense was bad last season too (again, really good all year but then gave up points to the Patriots).

If your point is that the Packers defense has historically given up points in the playoffs, I can only say that that's what happens in the playoffs! Last season the Panthers had a pretty good defense but they gave up 24 to a bad Broncos offense. Last season the Cardinals had a good defense all year but then they gave up 49 points to the Panthers in the playoffs, so their defense must have been awful too, huh? In 2014 the Ravens had a pretty good defense but they gave up 35 points to the Patriots in the playoffs, so they're bad too I guess.

My point is that when your team is playing in the playoffs, giving up large point totals isn't unusual. I'm sure most would say that the Ravens defense is perennially very good, yet when they won the Super Bowl in 2012 they gave up 35 points to the Broncos and 31 points to the 49ers. The only difference in this "final exam" logic between the Ravens and Packers is that the Ravens haven't made it to the playoffs consistently; in fact, they've only made the playoffs recently in 2012 and 2014 and they gave up large point totals in both years.

Teams have scored an average of 23.8 points in the playoffs over the last six seasons which is slightly above the regular season average of 22.8 since 2011.

It doesn't make the Packers defense giving up 26.9 points per game any good though.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Captain, not sure if you can find this stat, but how do Capers defenses fare through the years when playing against a top 10 offense? I heard something on the radio about it the other day, but was driving and couldn't write it down. Thought I remember hearing that on average they have given up over 35 points against top 10 offenses. That is a number that is really hard to consistently ask your offense to overcome, especially in the playoffs when that other team probably has a decent defense as well.

The Packers have played 44 games against top 10 scoring offenses during Capers tenure so far. The defense has allowed an average 0f 27.5 points in those games. It´s interesting to mention that there´s a significant difference in games like that in 2009 and ´10 (21.4) compared to from 2011 on (29.3). In nine playoff games such opponents have scored an average of 26.9 points.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers have played 46 games against top 10 scoring offenses during Capers tenure so far. The defense has allowed an average 0f 27.2 points in those games. It´s interesting to mention that there´s a significant difference in games like that in 2009 and ´10 (21.4) compared to from 2011 on (28.8). In nine playoff games such opponents have scored an average of 26.9 points.

Thanks Captain. I have to wonder if the stats I heard on the radio (35+) were how many points the Packers defense has given up in losses to top 10 defenses. I am guessing those numbers are higher, but your numbers are a bigger picture and ones that don't paint quite as bad of a picture of the defense.

Thanks for finding them.

 

[brandon2348]

We can crunch numbers till the cows come home. The defense has never fully recovered from losing Collins, Woodson, Jenkins, Bishop and a younger Clay. The middle of the defense had playmakers that could make explosive plays.

All thats been added since is an "end of his career Julius Peppers" and a bunch of misfit draft picks that dont fit scheme all that well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Thanks Captain. I have to wonder if the stats I heard on the radio (35+) were how many points the Packers defense has given up in losses to top 10 teams. I am guessing those numbers are higher, but your numbers are a bigger picture and ones that don't paint quite as bad of a picture of the defense.

Thanks for finding them.

I´m sorry but I made a small mistake in my previous post and edited it by now, the numbers are pretty similar though. The Packers have given up 32.1 points on average in 20 losses against top 10 scoring offenses since 2009. Overall the team is 24-20 against those teams with the offense averaging 28.5 points in those games.

 

[Pkrjones]

The middle of the defense had playmakers that could make explosive plays...

Don't forget from 2009-2012 there was 337lb BJ Raji playing 80+% of the defensive snaps. Really hard to lose a huge man who could move. Mike Daniels has taken over but he's 300 lbs (officially 310 but doubt he plays that heavy after TC)... is more active/mobile but not quite as stout as Raji was.

Maybe this team needs that huge man in the middle with the pressure/movement from DE's & OLB's? Mid/late rounders: Toupu, Jones, Jarrett or Augusta?

 

[Dantés]

We can crunch numbers till the cows come home. The defense has never fully recovered from losing Collins, Woodson, Jenkins, Bishop and a younger Clay. The middle of the defense had playmakers that could make explosive plays.

All thats been added since is an "end of his career Julius Peppers" and a bunch of misfit draft picks that dont fit scheme all that well.

This is what I see as the key issue on defense-- the unit still has some good starters but lacks game breakers. Daniels, Perry, Clinton-Dix, Burnett... these are solid enough pieces. It would seem likely that Clark adds to that number. But who are the guys making major impact plays? They're gone. And the thing is, it's really freaking hard to consistently hit when you're always picking at the back of round 1, much less to find game breakers. But that means you have to use FA a little bit to supplement. They don't need to sign huge swathes of players, but one or two bigger acquisitions here or there could make a huge difference. That's my main criticism of Thompson.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I´m sorry but I made a small mistake in my previous post and edited it by now, the numbers are pretty similar though. The Packers have given up 32.1 points on average in 20 losses against top 10 scoring offenses since 2009. Overall the team is 24-20 against those teams with the offense averaging 28.5 points in those games.

While its "just a stat", I think it sheds some light as to why the Packers are not getting over that hump and beating playoff caliber teams which have a good offense. Now, how do you fix it?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While its "just a stat", I think it sheds some light as to why the Packers are not getting over that hump and beating playoff caliber teams which have a good offense. Now, how do you fix it?

The Packers will have to either use free agency or trades to upgrade the cornerback and outside linebacker positions. That would probably improve the defense enough for the offense to carry the team to a championship.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers will have to either use free agency or trades to upgrade the cornerback and outside linebacker positions. That would probably improve the defense enough for the offense to carry the team to a championship.

Agreed. We have seen what can happen when you use the draft on CB's with Randall and Rollins, especially picking from the #29 spot. This team is not in rebuild mode, but much like the TE position last year, need immediate help at those 2 positions if they want to beat teams like the Falcons. Draft and develop for immediate depth and future starters, but come on TT....those 2 positions can't wait a few years to develop.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Actually, the Texans defense played very well vs the Pats. The Pats had a couple of very short scoring drives, and a kick return for a TD.

Nope, they failed the "final exam"; circumstances don't matter, only points.

 

[brandon2348]

Don't forget from 2009-2012 there was 337lb BJ Raji playing 80+% of the defensive snaps. Really hard to lose a huge man who could move. Mike Daniels has taken over but he's 300 lbs (officially 310 but doubt he plays that heavy after TC)... is more active/mobile but not quite as stout as Raji was.

Maybe this team needs that huge man in the middle with the pressure/movement from DE's & OLB's? Mid/late rounders: Toupu, Jones, Jarrett or Augusta?

The D Line actually played surprisingly well for most of the season other then the continuing dissapointment of Datone Jones. They tried Jones everywhere and he sucked everywhere. Another big guy wouldnt hurt but they need a couple pass rushers and couple corners. An explosive ILB would be nice too.

I dont know what there gonna do with Randle. Maybe they put him at Free safety or maybe they hope he developes in his 3rd year like Adams did. He just always seems to be on the injury report too.

TT and his guys are gonna have to find some playmakers and not lead us back into a situation where were relying so heavily on UDFA's to make a Super Bowl run. I think weve milked that avenue as much as one could hope.

With no Shields or no Starks they have cap space to make some moves. Time to put on the "big boy pants" and make a "big boy move."

 

[brandon2348]

This is what I see as the key issue on defense-- the unit still has some good starters but lacks game breakers. Daniels, Perry, Clinton-Dix, Burnett... these are solid enough pieces. It would seem likely that Clark adds to that number. But who are the guys making major impact plays? They're gone. And the thing is, it's really freaking hard to consistently hit when you're always picking at the back of round 1, much less to find game breakers. But that means you have to use FA a little bit to supplement. They don't need to sign huge swathes of players, but one or two bigger acquisitions here or there could make a huge difference. That's my main criticism of Thompson.

Don't forget Perry isnt signed yet. That's 8-9 mill per year and thats if someone doesn't throw crazy money at him. He is valuable cause he can rush passer and also hold up against run. The only downside is he is one of those guys that hasnt always been able to stay healthy.

Combine that with the end of the Peppers era and Clay's hamstrings and it could get real scary. Havent seen really anything from Frackrell.

It all ends back on an UDFA "Jayrone Elliot"

 

[PackerDNA]

Nope, they failed the "final exam"; circumstances don't matter, only points.

I saw the game. They played well.

 

[Dantés]

Don't forget Perry isnt signed yet. That's 8-9 mill per year and thats if someone doesn't throw crazy money at him. He is valuable cause he can rush passer and also hold up against run. The only downside is he is one of those guys that hasnt always been able to stay healthy.

Combine that with the end of the Peppers era and Clay's hamstrings and it could get real scary. Havent seen really anything from Frackrell.

It all ends back on an UDFA "Jayrone Elliot"

Right, but I'm assuming that Perry is retained. In general, the Packers have kept their own good players.

But even if he is kept, I place pass rusher atop the list of priorities. It's above CB for me.

Ideally (meaning the right prospect is actually there at 29) the Packers send out Perry, Matthews (maybe with a pay cut?), a 1st round rookie, Fackrell, and Elliot at OLB in 2017.

 

[brandon2348]

Right, but I'm assuming that Perry is retained. In general, the Packers have kept their own good players.

But even if he is kept, I place pass rusher atop the list of priorities. It's above CB for me.

Ideally (meaning the right prospect is actually there at 29) the Packers send out Perry, Matthews (maybe with a pay cut?), a 1st round rookie, Fackrell, and Elliot at OLB in 2017.

Are we talking TJ Watt?