Getting over the hump

[OldSchool101]

Huge caveat though considering we've been eliminated in the playoffs 7 out of the past 8 seasons due to the defense giving up nearly 37 points per game in 7 losses.

I'm sick and tired of praying for good health to take us to the promised land.

Amen. Except I will continue praying for the good health part

 

[HardRightEdge]

Is it preseason yet?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Huge caveat though considering we've been eliminated in the playoffs 7 out of the past 8 seasons due to the defense giving up nearly 37 points per game in 7 losses.

I'm sick and tired of praying for good health to take us to the promised land.

And yet good health is sort of a major factor in most Super Bowl champions. Only guys of note on the Pats that missed time were Gronk and Vollmer. Falcons only injury of note was Trufant. Packers missed Shields, Tretter and then had injuries to numerous backups in the secondary (though credit must be given to Gunter for playing well in playoffs all things considered). Just go to pro football reference and look at the injuries screen for those teams. The Pats and Falcons is pretty small and not a lot of red...the Packers looks like an ER board and is longer than those other two teams combined.

Fans and coaches love to talk about injuries not mattering but the reality is that healthy teams are generally the teams doing well at the end of the year. Injuries DO matter.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Question:
Obviously we're going to be contenders (barring an early AR injury), and be the favorite to win the NFC North.
But have the Packers done enough to get over the hump (be a legitimate threat to win the Super Bowl)? Can they actually get through a playoff run unscathed? Have they fixed the problems that held them back last year?

I would be curious to hear some opinions.

Yeah, the Falcons will be worse with the loss of Shanahan and the Packers shouldn't be starting their fifth corner lined up against Julio Jones. Hopefully McCarthy will learn from watching the Pats use a versatile RB to destroy a team like the Falcons (Ty is better than James White). Biggest issue with the Packers will probably be the health of Matthews and Perry; if those guys don't buck history and stay healthy all season, the pass rush is going to be non-existent.

 

[PackAttack12]

And yet good health is sort of a major factor in most Super Bowl champions. Only guys of note on the Pats that missed time were Gronk and Vollmer. Falcons only injury of note was Trufant. Packers missed Shields, Tretter and then had injuries to numerous backups in the secondary (though credit must be given to Gunter for playing well in playoffs all things considered). Just go to pro football reference and look at the injuries screen for those teams. The Pats and Falcons is pretty small and not a lot of red...the Packers looks like an ER board and is longer than those other two teams combined.

Fans and coaches love to talk about injuries not mattering but the reality is that healthy teams are generally the teams doing well at the end of the year. Injuries DO matter.

While you're at it, humor me with how many starters the team was missing on defense in the NFCCG shellacking by Atlanta.

 

[sschind]

If it's not me to whom you're replying, I apologize, but this came right after mine.

1. I didn't say there's not chance, I said a lot of stars have to line up for it to happen.

2. I watched during the Gory Years, when there really was no chance. Enjoyed that stretch because expectations were low, so producing upsets during the regular season was enough. Making the playoffs every year and then not winning the only prize is what's frustrating - it's just not our of reach.

Not you specifically Half, in fact I was formulating my post before I even opened the thread as I knew what the responses were going to be. I just don't see how someone can say "we didn't do enough to put us over the hump" and then say "there is a chance". Either we did do enough and there is a chance or we didn't do enough and there is no chance. In my mind you can't not do enough and still have a chance. Its like saying I don't have enough money to buy lunch but there is a chance I can buy lunch or I don't have enough gas in my tank to make it to the next gas station but there is a chance I might make it to the next gas station. I guess a lot of it depends on how much of a hump you felt we had to overcome. We were one game away last year so personally I don't think it was that big of a hump. We will be in contention again this year and I believe there is a chance we can win it all so I guess I do believe we did enough to get us over the hump. Will we? that's another question and we won't know the answer until much later in the season.


I hear you about the Gory Years. I was there as well. There is something to the expectation part of it but what I expect out of a football game and a season is entertainment and not specific results and I do expect to be entertained this year.

 

[brandon2348]

Not you specifically Half, in fact I was formulating my post before I even opened the thread as I knew what the responses were going to be. I just don't see how someone can say "we didn't do enough to put us over the hump" and then say "there is a chance". Either we did do enough and there is a chance or we didn't do enough and there is no chance. In my mind you can't not do enough and still have a chance. Its like saying I don't have enough money to buy lunch but there is a chance I can buy lunch or I don't have enough gas in my tank to make it to the next gas station but there is a chance I might make it to the next gas station.

We simply don't know how good these rookies are gonna be right now and I believe ultimately it's gonna come down to how well they play for at least 2-3 of them. So as far as the "lunch" analogy we simply haven't ever tasted the "lunch" that is being served. Maybe after a couple of gulps it will be like "this is pretty damn good" but then again maybe it will be so bad we never go back to that restaurant.

We just have a lot of unknowns right now and that's what makes it so difficult to predict.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

I would feel much more comfortable with a veteran #1 cornerback and quality depth at edge rusher on the roster.

What kind of depth or quality does NE or Atlanta have at edge rusher? Not much, but they were in the SB. The coach is a bigger issue than the players.

 

[Sky King]

How nice it would be if some young player or two emerged as genuine impact players, especially on defense. The team has more than enough players that are serviceable.

 

[rmontro]

Since I originally posed the question, I will give my opinion: I think we had two many holes to fill going into this offseason. I said before the draft it will likely take at least two years to fix the defensive problems. And that's assuming we're not pumping a dry well with Capers. I see no reason to change that now.

I'm not that concerned about Guard. I think with the new TEs we have, this offense is going to be fun to watch.
Defensively though, we still have no #1 corner, and the pass rush is still a question. Of course, we COULD always win the Super Bowl, but I think it would take a minor miracle. Doesn't mean I won't be watching. I'd be very happy to be proven wrong!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

We don't necessarily need to be a top 5 Defense to win a Championship. What we DO need is to stay relatively healthy and improve into at least a top 10-15 Defense going into the playoffs.
Aaron Rodgers will be himself and keep us in the game as long as the Defense doesn't give up 30+

I agree that the Packers don't need a top five defense to have a legitimate chance to win a Super Bowl. But the unit has to perform significantly better against elite offenses as consistently allowing more than 30 points won't cut it once again.

And yet good health is sort of a major factor in most Super Bowl champions.

Fans and coaches love to talk about injuries not mattering but the reality is that healthy teams are generally the teams doing well at the end of the year. Injuries DO matter.

Here's a list of where Super Bowl participants were ranked in Football Outsiders adjusted games lost metric in the respective season:

2010: GB 30th PIT 14th
2011: NYG 26th NE 30th
2012: BAL 13th SF 1st
2013: SEA 12th DEN 24th
2014: NE 12th SEA 18th
2015: DEN 10th CAR 4th
2016: NE 8th ATL 4th

Considering the Packers finished in 15th in AGL last season five teams made the Super Bowl while being hit harder by injuries over the past six years.

While you're at it, humor me with how many starters the team was missing on defense in the NFCCG shellacking by Atlanta.

What makes it even worse is that the Packers lost Shields in week 1, meaning they had 19 weeks to come up with a plan to somehow make up for it but weren't able to.

What kind of depth or quality does NE or Atlanta have at edge rusher? Not much, but they were in the SB. The coach is a bigger issue than the players.

While it's true that neither the Patriots nor the Falcons had a great pass rush both of those teams' secondaries were significantly better than the Packers'. It's a recipe for disaster struggling to put pressure on quarterbacks as well as to cover receivers.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think we had two many holes to fill going into this offseason. I said before the draft it will likely take at least two years to fix the defensive problems. And that's assuming we're not pumping a dry well with Capers. I see no reason to change that now.

The Packers shortcomings on defense could have been addressed in a single offseason if Thompson had signed a #1 cornerback as well as another veteran edge rusher.

 

[rmontro]

I agree that the Packers don't need a top five defense to have a legitimate chance to win a Super Bowl. But the unit has to perform significantly better against elite offenses as consistently allowing more than 30 points won't cut it once again.

There was that interesting fact going around at the time of the Super Bowl earlier in the year. The Packers with Rodgers have lost three playoff games where the opposing team has scored 40 or more points. The Patriots with Brady have NEVER given up 40 points in a game, not in the playoffs nor in the regular season. We're losing a lot of these opportunities because our defense is just getting smoked. Let's get this fixed!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There was that interesting fact going around at the time of the Super Bowl earlier in the year. The Packers with Rodgers have lost three playoff games where the opposing team has scored 40 or more points. The Patriots with Brady have NEVER given up 40 points in a game, not in the playoffs nor in the regular season. We're losing a lot of these opportunities because our defense is just getting smoked. Let's get this fixed!

While you're a bit inaccurate as the Patriots have allowed 40 or more points four times in the regular season over Brady's tenure as the team's starting quarterback there's no doubt he has benefitted from playing with better defenses than Rodgers.

In my opinion it's pretty interesting that Rodgers and the Packers (25.6) have nearly averaged as many points scored in playoff losses as Brady and the Patriots (26.4) in all of his 34 postseason games.

 

[rmontro]

While you're a bit inaccurate as the Patriots have allowed 40 or more points four times in the regular season over Brady's tenure as the team's starting quarterback there's no doubt he has benefitted from playing with better defenses than Rodgers.

The Packers with Rodgers have given up 44 or more points three times in playoff games. Maybe I didn't remember the stat correctly. Maybe it was the Patriots with Brady have never given up 44 points in his entire career, neither playoff nor regular season game.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Question:
Obviously we're going to be contenders (barring an early AR injury), and be the favorite to win the NFC North.
But have the Packers done enough to get over the hump (be a legitimate threat to win the Super Bowl)? Can they actually get through a playoff run unscathed? Have they fixed the problems that held them back last year?

I would be curious to hear some opinions.

At this point I couldn't say. Who knows how our draft picks / and new players are going to turn out? That holds true for all of the other teams. I like to say I feel they have a legitimate shot every year. They have filled some of the holes, but that doesn't mean those players are going to do anything. They have just put bodies at the positions that had glaring needs. Time will tell. I definitely like some of the free agent trades and draft choices, but who knows if they'll perform.

 

[Poppa San]

At this point I couldn't say. Who knows how our draft picks / and new players are going to turn out? That holds true for all of the other teams. I like to say I feel they have a legitimate shot every year. They have filled some of the holes, but that doesn't mean those players are going to do anything. They have just put bodies at the positions that had glaring needs. Time will tell. I definitely like some of the free agent trades and draft choices, but who knows if they'll perform.

And a big Packer Forum welcome to Mr Obvious.

 

[Ogsponge]

Unless Ted struck lightning in a bottle with multiple draft picks who will significantly contribute to the defense this year, no he has not done enough. Period. It is becoming an annual joke that TT will continually ignore all avenues of improving this team even when we have glaring and debilitating deficiencies on the team. It is honestly just becoming rather sad.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packers with Rodgers have given up 44 or more points three times in playoff games. Maybe I didn't remember the stat correctly. Maybe it was the Patriots with Brady have never given up 44 points in his entire career, neither playoff nor regular season game.

You're right about that, the Patriots haven't given up more than 41 points in any game Brady has played in.

On the other hand the Packers have allowed at least 42 points a total of seven times since Rodgers became the starter.

 

[Packerbacker222]

Just doing a little investigation since 2009 (For the fact it has been 8 years in a row to the playoffs)

2009: 6-2 at home: 11-5 total record (Lost Wild Card at home)
2010: 7-1 at home: 10-6 total record (Won Super Bowl)
2011: 8-0 at home: 15-1 total record (Lost Divisional)
2012: 7-1 at home: 11-5 total record (Lost Divisional)
2013: 4-3-1 at home: 8-7-1 total record (Lost Wild Card)
2014: 8-0 at home: 12-4 total record (Lost Conference Championship)
2015: 5-3 at home: 10-6 total record (Lost Divisional)
2016: 6-2 at home: 10-6 total record (Lost Conference Championship)

TOTAL since 2009:
51-12-1 at home
36-28 on the road

Some injuries have hurt the last couple years BUT other players have stepped up and did a nice job. I mean, I did not think we were going to make it to the Divisional in 2015 with all those and still had a great chance at winning. Seattle has hurt us in the playoffs. The defense has been the problem. The Super Bowl winning year we were 2nd in points allowed! Now, I do like the additions this season and the draft. We will see what the season holds this year but the NFC has some teams getting better in recent years (Panthers, Falcons, Lions, Giants, Cowboys).

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

And a big Packer Forum welcome to Mr Obvious.

Are we having an unhappy day Poppa San?

 

[PikeBadger]

Just doing a little investigation since 2009 (For the fact it has been 8 years in a row to the playoffs)

2009: 6-2 at home: 11-5 total record (Lost Wild Card at home)
2010: 7-1 at home: 10-6 total record (Won Super Bowl)
2011: 8-0 at home: 15-1 total record (Lost Divisional)
2012: 7-1 at home: 11-5 total record (Lost Divisional)
2013: 4-3-1 at home: 8-7-1 total record (Lost Wild Card)
2014: 8-0 at home: 12-4 total record (Lost Conference Championship)
2015: 5-3 at home: 10-6 total record (Lost Divisional)
2016: 6-2 at home: 10-6 total record (Lost Conference Championship)

TOTAL since 2009:
51-12-1 at home
36-28 on the road

Some injuries have hurt the last couple years BUT other players have stepped up and did a nice job. I mean, I did not think we were going to make it to the Divisional in 2015 with all those and still had a great chance at winning. Seattle has hurt us in the playoffs. The defense has been the problem. The Super Bowl winning year we were 2nd in points allowed! Now, I do like the additions this season and the draft. We will see what the season holds this year but the NFC has some teams getting better in recent years (Panthers, Falcons, Lions, Giants, Cowboys).

always the case. Some on the way up, some on the way down, some about the same. Work towards getting momentum and playing your best at the end of the season. We'll be in the hunt as usual.

 

[Half Empty]

Just doing a little investigation since 2009 (For the fact it has been 8 years in a row to the playoffs)

TOTAL since 2009:
51-12-1 at home
36-28 on the road

Couldn't see if this was strictly info or tied into previous posts, but FWIW over that same period, in the playoffs, they're

3-2 at home
5-5 on the road

 

[RRyder]

Couldn't see if this was strictly info or tied into previous posts, but FWIW over that same period, in the playoffs, they're

3-2 at home
5-5 on the road

That road record is pretty impressive actually. .500 on the road against PO teams isn't something to take lightly.

3-2 at home however is a little shameful

 

[armand34]

If I remember correctly, the offense couldn't do jack diddly to the Falcons either. We moved the balled successfully on maybe 2 or 3 drives, but when Rip fumbled at the goal line it all went down hill.

Yes, defense must improve(obviously). The offense isn't off the hook either based on the last game. That's why I love the TE additions and the added depth at RB.

Would it make us feel all warm and fuzzy inside if the Packers signed a veteran EDGE rusher...maybe maybe not. I actually think they will at some point. I just do not expect Clay & Nick to be 100% available.

Will the Packers add another veteran CB through FA or in a Trade? Unless the injuries in the secondary become a problem, I doubt it. I actually am optimistic that they can't play worse than they did last year so the arrow is pointing up for the secondary.