Hot Take Thread

[Sunshinepacker]

Did you see who was coaching the Packers defense the last 2 years? The same guy who got little from Hayward and Hyde who later became probowlers. The same guy who has a history of DBs playing well early and then not improving. You dont see the trend? Seems pretty obvious to me.

At some point your analysis has to be deeper than, did they win? No? Then the players suck.

Got little from Hayward and Hyde?!? Hayward, should have been Defensive Rookie of the Year and was then injured for the entirety of his second season. Hyde, excelled in his role at safety once he left but the Packers weren't going to bench HaHa or Burnett to start Hyde at safety! Capers wasn't great but to ignore the sub-par players the Packers have fielded at corner the past two years is just plain ridiculous! The ONLY Super Bowl the Packers have been in and won during Rodgers tenure was entirely on Capers' defense. McCarthy gets far more slack and credit for doing far less with more talent and yet Capers gets all the blame. I'm willing to cut Capers some slack for his time here. Plus, if you actually look at opponent adjusted defensive rankings on Football Outsiders, you'd see that Capers' defenses were not really that terrible until the past two years (but that would mean having to ignore the easy, lazy narrative and that's no fun).

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I admit that Clinton-Dix didn't have a great season by any means in 2017 but in my opinion it's close to impossible to evaluate if he quit sitting in front of a TV.

WHAT!?!?! A HDTV is all any fan needs to make informed, valid evaluations on any player! Depending on the camera, I get to see HaHa play at least 25-30 snaps a week, certainly that is a valid sample size! (Disclosure: the previous post was purely saracasm. 25-30 snaps a week is about as far from a valid sample size as possible.)

 

[Mondio]

I admit that Clinton-Dix didn't have a great season by any means in 2017 but in my opinion it's close to impossible to evaluate if he quit sitting in front of a TV.

well he certainly didn't look to be trying very ******* some of them. and if that is the effort he's going to put forth, I have no problems letting him walk without any offer at all. That's all i'm getting at. I feel he quit, packed it in, was thinking only of himself, went thru the motions etc by year's end. Other people don't. That's fine. I expect him to rebound as I think he's a decent guy with more ability than we've seen. But, if he looks like end of year guy last year, whether he "quit" or that's just the level of effort we can expect going forward, i'm fine letting him go.

 

[Mondio]

WHAT!?!?! A HDTV is all any fan needs to make informed, valid evaluations on any player! Depending on the camera, I get to see HaHa play at least 25-30 snaps a week, certainly that is a valid sample size! (Disclosure: the previous post was purely saracasm. 25-30 snaps a week is about as far from a valid sample size as possible.)

and yet it doesn't stop any of us from having and sharing opinions on coaches and players on a daily basis

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The ONLY Super Bowl the Packers have been in and won during Rodgers tenure was entirely on Capers' defense. McCarthy gets far more slack and credit for doing far less with more talent and yet Capers gets all the blame.

Capers defense definitely deserves credit for their performance during the 2010 season but it's not true that the unit was entirely responsible for winning the Super Bowl.

In addition the offense has been the far superior unit over the past few seasons although it's true that have had way more talent to work with.

But, if he looks like end of year guy last year, whether he "quit" or that's just the level of effort we can expect going forward, i'm fine letting him go.

In my opinion safety would once again become a top priority next offseason if the Packers decide to let Clinton-Dix walk away in free agency next offseason. While the team has some talent at the position all of the players currently on the roster lack experience.

 

[gbgary]

King weighs 200 pounds while Jackson is listed at 196 on the Packers website.

i googled him and this came up so i went with it...https://g.co/kgs/36hzBr (see the box on the right)
i see other links that say 200 so my link must be in error.

 

[AmishMafia]

Got little from Hayward and Hyde?!? Hayward, should have been Defensive Rookie of the Year and was then injured for the entirety of his second season. Hyde, excelled in his role at safety once he left but the Packers weren't going to bench HaHa or Burnett to start Hyde at safety! Capers wasn't great but to ignore the sub-par players the Packers have fielded at corner the past two years is just plain ridiculous! The ONLY Super Bowl the Packers have been in and won during Rodgers tenure was entirely on Capers' defense. McCarthy gets far more slack and credit for doing far less with more talent and yet Capers gets all the blame. I'm willing to cut Capers some slack for his time here. Plus, if you actually look at opponent adjusted defensive rankings on Football Outsiders, you'd see that Capers' defenses were not really that terrible until the past two years (but that would mean having to ignore the easy, lazy narrative and that's no fun).

I dont seem to recall the Hyde or Hayward making the probowl their last year or two. I dont even recall them standing out at all.

Good to know that some website has stats to show our defense was actually good. I would have thought giving up lots of points and all those breakdowns in the secondary was an indication that there is something wrong defensively. Who would have thought?!?!

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I dont seem to recall the Hyde or Hayward making the probowl their last year or two. I dont even recall them standing out at all.

Good to know that some website has stats to show our defense was actually good. I would have thought giving up lots of points and all those breakdowns in the secondary was an indication that there is something wrong defensively. Who would have thought?!?!

I'll simply put some facts out there and you can go from there. Here are the league rankings for points allowed by the Packers' defense the past 10 years (I'm not bothering with the last two seasons, they were awful for many reasons):
2015: 12th in points allowed (not too bad)
2014: 13th (again, not so bad)
2013: 25th (REALLY bad)
2014: 14th (average)
2013: 25th (again, BAD)
2012: 12th (not so bad)
2011: 19th (bad, but not awful)

So, that's not adjusted by opponent or interpreted in any way. That's just a straight up list of how many points the defense gave up each season. Certainly not an elite defense but the defense was not consistently terrible until the team got stuck starting guys like Gunter at corner.

 

[Poppa San]

I'll simply put some facts out there and you can go from there. Here are the league rankings for points allowed by the Packers' defense the past 10 years (I'm not bothering with the last two seasons, they were awful for many reasons):
2015: 12th in points allowed (not too bad)
2014: 13th (again, not so bad)
2013: 25th (REALLY bad)
2014: 14th (average)
2013: 25th (again, BAD)
2012: 12th (not so bad)
2011: 19th (bad, but not awful)

So, that's not adjusted by opponent or interpreted in any way. That's just a straight up list of how many points the defense gave up each season. Certainly not an elite defense but the defense was not consistently terrible until the team got stuck starting guys like Gunter at corner.

You want to explain this or try again??

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'll simply put some facts out there and you can go from there. Here are the league rankings for points allowed by the Packers' defense the past 10 years (I'm not bothering with the last two seasons, they were awful for many reasons):
2015: 12th in points allowed (not too bad)
2014: 13th (again, not so bad)
2013: 25th (REALLY bad)
2014: 14th (average)
2013: 25th (again, BAD)
2012: 12th (not so bad)
2011: 19th (bad, but not awful)

So, that's not adjusted by opponent or interpreted in any way. That's just a straight up list of how many points the defense gave up each season. Certainly not an elite defense but the defense was not consistently terrible until the team got stuck starting guys like Gunter at corner.

I agree that the numbers for points allowed might indicate the Packers defense wasn't consistently terrible but the unit wasn't good enough to win a Super Bowl, especially as it struggled mightily against elite offenses the team had to face during the playoffs.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

I'll simply put some facts out there and you can go from there. Here are the league rankings for points allowed by the Packers' defense the past 10 years (I'm not bothering with the last two seasons, they were awful for many reasons):
2015: 12th in points allowed (not too bad)
2014: 13th (again, not so bad)
2013: 25th (REALLY bad)
2014: 14th (average)
2013: 25th (again, BAD)
2012: 12th (not so bad)
2011: 19th (bad, but not awful)

So, that's not adjusted by opponent or interpreted in any way. That's just a straight up list of how many points the defense gave up each season. Certainly not an elite defense but the defense was not consistently terrible until the team got stuck starting guys like Gunter at corner.

The unit on the other side of the ball makes a big difference. Rodgers is that he's the most efficient QB in NFL history; he puts up points, sets the pace of the game, and doesn't give the ball to the other team. Our 2 worst defensive rankings have been when Rodgers missed significant time, in 2013 and 2017. Was the defense actually worse in 2017 than they were in 2016? I don't believe so.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

You want to explain this or try again??

What exactly do I need to explain? I went season by season. I ranked defenses by points allowed. That list shows where the Packers ranked by points allowed. What else needs to be explained??!?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The unit on the other side of the ball makes a big difference. Rodgers is that he's the most efficient QB in NFL history; he puts up points, sets the pace of the game, and doesn't give the ball to the other team. Our 2 worst defensive rankings have been when Rodgers missed significant time, in 2013 and 2017. Was the defense actually worse in 2017 than they were in 2016? I don't believe so.

And these are the excuses we use to prove what we believe rather than what stats actually show.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I agree that the numbers for points allowed might indicate the Packers defense wasn't consistently terrible but the unit wasn't good enough to win a Super Bowl, especially as it struggled mightily against elite offenses the team had to face during the playoffs.

The offense was just as culpable in some losses (I'm looking at Seahawks and Falcons). Go look at points allowed in Super Bowl wins/losses recently. Once you get to a certain level, the offense needs to score more (unless you're the Seahawks and have a historic defense).

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The offense was just as culpable in some losses (I'm looking at Seahawks and Falcons). Go look at points allowed in Super Bowl wins/losses recently. Once you get to a certain level, the offense needs to score more (unless you're the Seahawks and have a historic defense).

The Packers have allowed an average of 26.9 points in 11 playoff games over the past seven seasons which is three points above the league average. It's getting even worsen when solely considering losses in which the team gave up 33.8 points.

It's true the offense has struggled in some of those games as well but it would have been nice for the defense to pick up the slack at least once.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Packers have allowed an average of 26.9 points in 11 playoff games over the past seven seasons which is three points above the league average. It's getting even worsen when solely considering losses in which the team gave up 33.8 points.

It's true the offense has struggled in some of those games as well but it would have been nice for the defense to pick up the slack at least once.

Yes, it would have been. However, the Pats just lost 41-33 against the Eagles. The Falcons lost 34-28 the year before. The Packers defense, as I've mentioned, was terrible the past two years due to awful injury luck and, eventually, Capers just needed to go to give everyone else a chance to start over. But the narrative about the Packers' defense being "average or worse" every year under Capers is just plain wrong. They've had some spectacular failures, yes, but so do most teams that lose in the playoffs, that's why they lose. Every year there is only one fanbase that's happy with their team's offense and defense. As great as the Packers offense is, how come they can't score more than 20 points against the Cardinals in 2015 but the freaking Panthers can put up 49!!!! I know, you're gonna point out that the Cards turned the ball over 7 times in that game (and that's huge) but the Packers' defense got two turnovers against the Cards and the Packers' offense is (supposedly) much better than the Panthers'. The 2014 Packers lost to Seattle because MM cost his team home field advantage and coached scared (the Packers defense gave up exactly TWO more points than the Patriots gave up against the Seahawks in the Super Bowl).

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Yes, it would have been. However, the Pats just lost 41-33 against the Eagles. The Falcons lost 34-28 the year before. The Packers defense, as I've mentioned, was terrible the past two years due to awful injury luck and, eventually, Capers just needed to go to give everyone else a chance to start over. But the narrative about the Packers' defense being "average or worse" every year under Capers is just plain wrong. They've had some spectacular failures, yes, but so do most teams that lose in the playoffs, that's why they lose. Every year there is only one fanbase that's happy with their team's offense and defense. As great as the Packers offense is, how come they can't score more than 20 points against the Cardinals in 2015 but the freaking Panthers can put up 49!!!! I know, you're gonna point out that the Cards turned the ball over 7 times in that game (and that's huge) but the Packers' defense got two turnovers against the Cards and the Packers' offense is (supposedly) much better than the Panthers'. The 2014 Packers lost to Seattle because MM cost his team home field advantage and coached scared (the Packers defense gave up exactly TWO more points than the Patriots gave up against the Seahawks in the Super Bowl).

I think it's best not to dwell on the past. There is a very good reason as to why they struggled against Arizona, and I think Seattle just realized what the rest of the league would find out the following year- Jordy was the only good receiver on the team. The winning strategy is to field a quality team each year to have the most opportunities to make it to the SB, and there have been far too many holes to give credit to the FO for doing that.

 

[Poppa San]

What exactly do I need to explain? I went season by season. I ranked defenses by points allowed. That list shows where the Packers ranked by points allowed. What else needs to be explained??!?

It may be my system but I see two entries each for 2014 and 2013 with different rankings for 2014.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It may be my system but I see two entries each for 2014 and 2013 with different rankings for 2014.

Huh, that would be confusing. Apparently I just really liked the 2013/2014 lines and repeated them. So ignore whichever one of those sets you don't like and just go with the one that's left over.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes, it would have been. However, the Pats just lost 41-33 against the Eagles. The Falcons lost 34-28 the year before. The Packers defense, as I've mentioned, was terrible the past two years due to awful injury luck and, eventually, Capers just needed to go to give everyone else a chance to start over. But the narrative about the Packers' defense being "average or worse" every year under Capers is just plain wrong. They've had some spectacular failures, yes, but so do most teams that lose in the playoffs, that's why they lose. Every year there is only one fanbase that's happy with their team's offense and defense. As great as the Packers offense is, how come they can't score more than 20 points against the Cardinals in 2015 but the freaking Panthers can put up 49!!!! I know, you're gonna point out that the Cards turned the ball over 7 times in that game (and that's huge) but the Packers' defense got two turnovers against the Cards and the Packers' offense is (supposedly) much better than the Panthers'. The 2014 Packers lost to Seattle because MM cost his team home field advantage and coached scared (the Packers defense gave up exactly TWO more points than the Patriots gave up against the Seahawks in the Super Bowl).

The Packers offense has definitely struggled during some playoff losses as well but even most elite offensive teams need their defense to win a game at some point during the playoffs to win the Super Bowl. Just take a look at Eagles last season vs. Atlanta or the Packers in 2010.

 

[GleefulGary]

It's the off-season, I'm in a tractor going 4.1 mph, and I'm bored as all get out...so it's HOT TAKE TIME! Fight me if you don't want this thread mods.


#1. Reggie Gilbert is our #3 Edge and gets 5+ sacks.

#2. Jaire Alexander is our #1 CB by the end of the year (not a fiery super hot take)

#3. McCray is our starting RG and performs well.

#4. Herb Waters makes the roster over either Rollins or House.

#5. We end the year with a top 15 defense.

#6. Aaron Jones is RB1 and has over 1000 yards rushing.

Yooooooo.

#1 is right so far, #3 is right so far, and how BOUT DAT HERB WATERS?!?!