It's all sitting right there on a silver platter

[Carl 2]

Hundley beat the bears, lets not get carried away. I do not want to make the playoffs unless we can get to the SB, and this team isn't going to do that. I lost confidence in this staff 3 years ago, and they have done nothing to change my mind. Would you really like to line up our staff against BB in the SB? Not me, not even AR can overcome our pad level, gotta run the ball X amount of times regardless of how it is working coaching.

Um...yeah, I'd like to line up against BB in the Superbowl.

I don't see how you could honestly not want a Superbowl chance, with Rodgers of course.

This thread just went off the deep end.

I could try to argue with the numerous Superbowl runs by teams who seemingly had no chance at the start of the playoffs (2 went through GB) or larger underdog winners than GB would be if they made it, but I know I'd be wasting my time.

Somehow, it's probably different and not possible since it's the Packers.

 

[Carl 2]

close wins only count when talking about other teams. Injuries are only valid if it involves another team. If one team loses a LT and gives up 6 sacks, well they lost their tackle. If GB is playing while missing 2 tackles and a guard with both back up tackles on IR and a back up QB, our GM sucks and the coaches can't get players ready to play LOL.

one day we can't beat a team, 2 seconds after we beat them, well it was only X team LOL.

I think it's as obvious as Martellus Bennett is a lying quitter and the day is long, there are more than a few fans that relish in every setback and loss. They love it, because nothing is more important than their doomsday scenario to get everyone replaced. Then it will all be better

Myself, I'd rather see every challenge overcome, even if it means another year of Dom Capers. Seriously. There are people on this thread right now that would rather our defense fall flat on their face every week, than see them succeed because they want Capers gone that badly. They'd rather Hundley look like crap, so they can feel validated about McCarthy and they'd be much happier if Clark and Martinez and Jones and Jones and King were busts, because it would really mean that Ted Thompson can't draft.

You forgot that the quality of our opponent doesn't matter and whatever went wrong is exponentially exaggerated.

Keenum has a worse day than his season average and had a 70 something passer rating....apparently, he lit us up.

Close loss to the a good Saints team....We are awful and won't win another game.

Hundley and the offense puts up 23 points against a very good Bears defense...Somehow new threads pop up immediately after (some during) about how terrible he is.

 

[Packer96]

Rodgers doesn't play defense, and they have been to 3 SB in the last 5 years, why didn't this staff get us there to play them? It was on a silver platter in Seattle, we couldn't play D in Arizona, had a Dallas miracle thanks to AR and we saw our D in Atlanta last year. Take the head coaches out of it, your SB has Dom Capers vs Matt Patricia, which one you betting on?

 

[Carl 2]

Rodgers doesn't play defense, and they have been to 3 SB in the last 5 years, why didn't this staff get us there to play them? It was on a silver platter in Seattle, we couldn't play D in Arizona, had a Dallas miracle thanks to AR and we saw our D in Atlanta last year. Take the head coaches out of it, your SB has Dom Capers vs Matt Patricia, which one you betting on?

Didn't even mention the last few years or who is a better d coordinator...

They point is to hope they don't make the Superbowl because they might lose is crazy talk.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Myself, I'd rather see every challenge overcome, even if it means another year of Dom Capers. Seriously. There are people on this thread right now that would rather our defense fall flat on their face every week, than see them succeed because they want Capers gone that badly.

I'll go one small step further. There are people on here who would rather us miss the playoffs completely and get rid of <insert name> than win the Super Bowl because it could mean <insert name> gets to stay. These are some spiteful people who hate <insert name> MORE than they love the Pack. They would scoff at winning the Super Bowl because winning it would short-circuit our chance to have the dynasty they perceive we would have if only we could get rid of <insert name>. At least, that would be the (flawed) logic. Crazy as it sounds, I fully believe this.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Hundley beat the bears, lets not get carried away. I do not want to make the playoffs unless we can get to the SB, and this team isn't going to do that. I lost confidence in this staff 3 years ago, and they have done nothing to change my mind. Would you really like to line up our staff against BB in the SB?

I assume by BB you mean Belicheat? So you think our defense is so horrible that we have no chance of getting to the playoffs, but you assume the Patriots are going to the SB despite their DEAD LAST defense? And when I say bad, their defense is BAD. The difference between them and the 31st defense isn't even close. No, the AFC champ as it stands now is probably going to be Pitt or KC, not NE.

 

[swhitset]

You forgot that the quality of our opponent doesn't matter and whatever went wrong is exponentially exaggerated.

Keenum has a worse day than his season average and had a 70 something passer rating....apparently, he lit us up.

Close loss to the a good Saints team....We are awful and won't win another game.

Hundley and the offense puts up 23 points against a very good Bears defense...Somehow new threads pop up immediately after (some during) about how terrible he is.

Lol... I posted mine in the first half... and he was still playing terrible.... I'm still not convinced that he can be any good.... but I'm hoping lol..... And I will NEVER root for the Pack to lose.

 

[Half Empty]

I never understand the "let's not win too much so someone gets fired."

First of all, as a fan I will never root for anything but a win.

Secondly, with Rodgers in the playoffs, anything can happen.

Finally, I highly doubt MM, TT, and company ever think, "We made the playoffs so free pass to all." Capers and staff should be and likely are evaluated every off-season.

I was fine until the last line. If that's the case, why are they all still here?

 

[PackerDNA]

I think that it was all sitting there. We were 4-1 despite a slew of injuries, Rodgers was playing at a high level, and there was no 'super ' teams in the conference. At that point, I was thinking,"Ya know this very well could be the year". Then Rodgers goes down.
Even with Rodgers, this team needed the #1 or 2 seed. That's gone now, so even if Rodgers does come back and we make it in, it's a near certainty we don't get past the second round.
I'm gonna look back on this season as a lost one due to injuries, like 2013. IMO, '13 and '14 were the zenith for this team. Injuries destroyed '13, and, well, we know about '14.

 

[Carl 2]

I think that it was all sitting there. We were 4-1 despite a slew of injuries, Rodgers was playing at a high level, and there was no 'super ' teams in the conference. At that point, I was thinking,"Ya know this very well could be the year". Then Rodgers goes down.
Even with Rodgers, this team needed the #1 or 2 seed. That's gone now, so even if Rodgers does come back and we make it in, it's a near certainty we don't get past the second round.
I'm gonna look back on this season as a lost one due to injuries, like 2013. IMO, '13 and '14 were the zenith for this team. Injuries destroyed '13, and, well, we know about '14.

It also seemed like a near certainty we wouldn't get passed Dallas last season.

 

[Carl 2]

I was fine until the last line. If that's the case, why are they all still here?

I can only speculate of course. Some possibilities I can think of:

1) The Packers have been one of the most successful teams in the league under their tenure. (I know cue "It's all due to Rodgers argument" but I'm just guessing possibilities).

2) Specifically with Capers, the defense has had multiple stretches of good play.

3) The organization believes that player meltdowns have been more of the issue preventing more Super Bowls. See 2011 when one of the best offenses of all time when to crap vs. the Giants and obviously the Seattle debacle.

4) The organization believes the formula for a winning a title is getting to the playoffs and hoping for the best from there. Nothing a GM or head coach can do guarantees a win.

5) They realize that simply firing fixes nothing. The forum seems to think firing and replacing will automatically produce better results, but many hires don't. Giants, Bears, Eagles, and 49ers are all teams who moved on from long-term head coaches in recent years have done worse. Maybe the Eagles will see benefit of letting of Reid now five seasons and two head coaches later.

Like I said though, these are all guesses and we have no way to know the real reason.

 

[Packer96]

I'll go one small step further. There are people on here who would rather us miss the playoffs completely and get rid <insert name> than win the Super Bowl because it could mean <insert name> gets to stay. These are some spiteful people who hate <insert name> MORE than they love the Pack. They would scoff at winning the Super Bowl because winning it would short-circuit our chance to have the dynasty they perceive we would have if only we could get rid of <insert name>. At least, that would be the (flawed) logic. Crazy as it sounds, I fully believe this.

Dynasty?? That ship has sailed, at this point I just want AR to get another SB, with better coaching and front office help he should have had it already. We will have had a 30 YEAR run with 2 of the TOP QB's IN HISTORY, and 3 SB's to show for it. Hell, put AR on Jacksonville they might be undefeated. Yes I would rather miss the playoffs THIS year, if it gets us the new management we need to get there in the future. Reid and the Eagles didn't have AR, and sure looks like its working out for the Rams with a new coach.

 

[PackAttack12]

I can only speculate of course. Some possibilities I can think of:

1) The Packers have been one of the most successful teams in the league under their tenure. (I know cue "It's all due to Rodgers argument" but I'm just guessing possibilities).

Not a bad argument given that the Packers haven't supported Rodgers with a single top 10 defense since 2010 and in Rodgers' 7 total playoff losses the defense is giving up an average of over 36 points per game.

2) Specifically with Capers, the defense has had multiple stretches of good play.

Again, not a single top 10 defense since 2010. How much good play have we actually seen? More than half the time? 40% of the time? 20%? Some of the worst teams in the NFL look good at times. What has been the most likely and consistent result? We all know the answer.

3) The organization believes that player meltdowns have been more of the issue preventing more Super Bowls. See 2011 when one of the best offenses of all time when to crap vs. the Giants

THE PACKERS HAD THE 32ND RANKED DEFENSE THAT YEAR! (there's only 32 teams in the league)

I get it. The Packers only scored 20 that game. The defense gave up 37. God forbid the offense have an extremely rare off game. God forbid we as fans should want to have a defense that's able to bail the offense out when they aren't firing on all cylinders.

and obviously the Seattle debacle.

We could go back and forth about this one, and even though the defense wet the bed late in that game, I'll concede this one to be kind.

4) The organization believes the formula for a winning a title is getting to the playoffs and hoping for the best from there. Nothing a GM or head coach can do guarantees a win.

No. The organization is content with an all time great quarterback dragging the organization to 10+ wins every year, super bowl or not.

5) They realize that simply firing fixes nothing. The forum seems to think firing and replacing will automatically produce better results, but many hires don't. Giants, Bears, Eagles, and 49ers are all teams who moved on from long-term head coaches in recent years have done worse. Maybe the Eagles will see benefit of letting of Reid now five seasons and two head coaches later.

But sticking to the current formula is much more sensible? lol. Not buying it.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Either the Packers are expecting different results every year, which is insane, or they are content with 10 win seasons and no Super Bowl. Either scenario is egregious when you have the best quarterback talent in the history of football.

 

[Raptorman]

Winning 2 of the next 4, and then letting Rodgers finish it off with the last 3 would get the team to 10-6 and at least have a shot. That's the best realistic record the Packers can hope for right now.

That'a assuming Rodgers can make it back.

 

[PackAttack12]

That'a assuming Rodgers can make it back.

Obviously.

 

[brandon2348]

Dynasty?? That ship has sailed, at this point I just want AR to get another SB, with better coaching and front office help he should have had it already. We will have had a 30 YEAR run with 2 of the TOP QB's IN HISTORY, and 3 SB's to show for it. Hell, put AR on Jacksonville they might be undefeated. Yes I would rather miss the playoffs THIS year, if it gets us the new management we need to get there in the future. Reid and the Eagles didn't have AR, and sure looks like its working out for the Rams with a new coach.

With the draft picks the Packers have built up along with there salary cap situation the Packers could still salvage a mini dynasty assuming they put the right people in place. However if they continue the same with the same people then shame on them.

 

[Mondio]

Not having a high ranking defense doesn't mean it's all Rodgers. I think we've had some good guards here, disagree? Some pretty good tackles? Disagree? Driver, Nelson, Jennings, Jones, Finley? Lacy? None qualify as good skill position players? Just Rodgers?

I know I know, what did jennings do in MN? And how good has Jordy been without Rodgers this year? And I laugh whenever anybody brings it up because they obviously don't watch the games to know just how much Rodgers benefits from having guys like that around him. Jennings was one of the smoothest WRs we've ever had here, and he turned a lot of passes into game breaking ones because of it. It's an equation where both benefit from each other.

When a WR has nobody that can throw him a ball it doesn't mean he's not good, and just because a QB has another group of quality pass catchers ready to step in after a departure doesn't mean he's the only part driving that equation either.

 

[Packer96]

So Mondio, IF we HAD all these great players, and 2 HOF back to back QB's, what is holding us back?

 

[Carl 2]

Not a bad argument given that the Packers haven't supported Rodgers with a single top 10 defense since 2010 and in Rodgers' 7 total playoff losses the defense is giving up an average of over 36 points per game.


Again, not a single top 10 defense since 2010. How much good play have we actually seen? More than half the time? 40% of the time? 20%? Some of the worst teams in the NFL look good at times. What has been the most likely and consistent result? We all know the answer.


THE PACKERS HAD THE 32ND RANKED DEFENSE THAT YEAR! (there's only 32 teams in the league)

I get it. The Packers only scored 20 that game. The defense gave up 37. God forbid the offense have an extremely rare off game. God forbid we as fans should want to have a defense that's able to bail the offense out when they aren't firing on all cylinders.


We could go back and forth about this one, and even though the defense wet the bed late in that game, I'll concede this one to be kind.


No. The organization is content with an all time great quarterback dragging the organization to 10+ wins every year, super bowl or not.


But sticking to the current formula is much more sensible? lol. Not buying it.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Either the Packers are expecting different results every year, which is insane, or they are content with 10 win seasons and no Super Bowl. Either scenario is egregious when you have the best quarterback talent in the history of football.

Not going to argue everything since I was just spitting out any possibility I could think of.

The only thing is the 2011 game vs the Giants wasn't a just an off game. It was atrocious. They had four turnovers and gave the ball away on 4 of 6 2nd half possessions. The score was a close 20-13 early in the fourth. It wasn't until after a turnover on downs and a fumble giving the Giants the ball at the 4 yard line that the game was out of reach.

If the offense was just average that day, the Packers could have won.

 

[PackAttack12]

Not having a high ranking defense doesn't mean it's all Rodgers. I think we've had some good guards here, disagree? Some pretty good tackles? Disagree? Driver, Nelson, Jennings, Jones, Finley? Lacy? None qualify as good skill position players? Just Rodgers?

I know I know, what did jennings do in MN? And how good has Jordy been without Rodgers this year? And I laugh whenever anybody brings it up because they obviously don't watch the games to know just how much Rodgers benefits from having guys like that around him. Jennings was one of the smoothest WRs we've ever had here, and he turned a lot of passes into game breaking ones because of it. It's an equation where both benefit from each other.

When a WR has nobody that can throw him a ball it doesn't mean he's not good, and just because a QB has another group of quality pass catchers ready to step in after a departure doesn't mean he's the only part driving that equation either.

Jennings was a fine player for us, but 2 pro bowls in a 10 year career, both with Rodgers throwing him the ball. Don't get me wrong, that's pretty good, but it's not elite by any means, and Jennings is probably the best receiver Rodgers has ever played with.

Look at Jordy. A fine player, 1 pro bowl.

No one wanted James Jones in 2015 prior to Jordy getting hurt. The Packers pick him up and suddenly he's our #1 wide receiver for the year. Never went to a pro bowl. I don't think Finley ever went to a pro bowl. Good player, though.

Driver. A nice player. Went to a few pro bowls. Rodgers got him on the back side of his career.

Lacy had two really good seasons for us, and then fell off the deep end. And that's the best back Rodgers has played with.

When I say that Rodgers doesn't have much to work with, it's not to say that there isn't a single player on the roster that has talent. At times I'll make the comment of something to this effect: "Rodgers has carried this collection of crap for too long". Obviously I'm not referring to every single player at every position on the field. Even though you're the king of hyperbole, I engage in a little bit of it from time to time. You wear off on us after a while.

This is what I've always said. The current version of the Packers at least of the last few seasons has been this: reasonably talented group of receivers, not elite, but a decent collection of receivers, inconsistency at tight end especially prior to the Cook signing, and zero running game minus the two good years from Lacy, and certain stretches of this season. The offensive line is a pretty good pass blocking unit, but in fairness I think even you would acknowledge that Rodgers' pocket awareness helps quite a bit in that area. But the unit is good at pass blocking nevertheless. Below average in run blocking.

No other quarterback in the NFL the past 10 years could have made the Packers a consistent top 5-10 offense year after year. I think there was one year outside of the top 10 which was obviously 2015. But seriously. Not Brady. Not Manning. Not Big Ben. None of them. With no running game, with no (or very few instances of) elite receivers, with a system that relies on players beating their man 1on1. Not many pick plays like the Patriots use. Nothing like that for the most part.

Rodgers doesn't have those luxuries. And then when you don't have a defense it makes things even worse.

 

[Mondio]

Come on, James jones had his best year practically with a rookie qb on a rebuilding team before he came back to GB.

Anyway, I can't argue that Rodgers isn't a huge reason for the success. Hard to make the case against a HOF qb and one of the best ever at the position not having a huge impact on the success of this team.

But since he is I guess it's easier to dismiss why everyone else does.

 

[swhitset]

So Mondio, IF we HAD all these great players, and 2 HOF back to back QB's, what is holding us back?

You all or nothing guys crack me up. Only by your definition have we been held back. I'd say the Packers record has been pretty damned good. Newsflash of the 32 teams in the NFL only one wins the Super Bowl each year. We have been a lot closer than most almost every year. Yes I wish we had more than 1 title with Rodgers, and yes mistakes have been made just like they are made with every other team in the league including the Pats.. (how is their defense looking this year? Yeah I know nothing counts unless you are number 1.. Grow up and join the real world.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Yes I would rather miss the playoffs THIS year, if it gets us the new management we need to get there in the future.

And what if this "new management" of which you speak takes us straight back to the Gory Years? Have you considered that? Or does that possibility not exist in your way of thinking?

 

[Packer96]

The Pats have been there 3 times in the last 5 years. All teams have Gory years, I lived through ours, and we'll have gory years again, goes in cycles. Why were we in the NFCCG last year, our superior coaching? Great Defense? Or was it our QB performing another miracle in the final minute, again? Yea the pats D is down this year, how's ours been the last 5? When it counted we couldn't stop SF, the Cards, Atlanta, or Seattle. Our ownership structure holds us back, a single owner would have made changes our management is content to make the playoffs and sell jerseys.

 

[Raptorman]

You all or nothing guys crack me up. Only by your definition have we been held back. I'd say the Packers record has been pretty damned good. Newsflash of the 32 teams in the NFL only one wins the Super Bowl each year. We have been a lot closer than most almost every year. Yes I wish we had more than 1 title with Rodgers, and yes mistakes have been made just like they are made with every other team in the league including the Pats.. (how is their defense looking this year? Yeah I know nothing counts unless you are number 1.. Grow up and join the real world.

Well their first 4 games they sucked. Giving up 32 points per game on average. The last 5, they have knocked that down to 13.4 points per game. My bet is this Sunday the Raiders score less than 21 points on them.