Joe Barry is our new DC

[lambeaulambo]

GGGGRRRRRR !

OUCH....

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Ok, real quick though.

Do you like the hire?

NOPE.

If LaFleur wanted someone from that system then he should have snagged Evero or Renaldo Hill before he went to the Chargers to become their DC. DeMeco Ryans probably would have stayed in San Francisco but it wouldn't have hurt to interview him either; Kris Kocurek was there for the taking as well.

 

[Dantés]

NOPE.

If LaFleur wanted someone from that system then he should have snagged Evero or Renaldo Hill before he went to the Chargers to become their DC. DeMeco Ryans probably would have stayed in San Francisco but it wouldn't have hurt to interview him either; Kris Kocurek was there for the taking as well.

They should have hired guys who received other DC jobs 2+ weeks ago? Do you even think about what you’re saying?

I also preferred Evero with my limited knowledge because it seemed like he had more direct experience in that defense.

But LaFleur knows both of them, has coached with them, knows guys that they’ve coached under, and interviewed them. On what planet does it make sense for me to say he chose wrong based on me looking up Evero’s coaching history? That’s absurd.

 

[GleefulGary]

Maybe I’m crazy, but I think there’s a chance the person interviewing the candidates might know more than me.

Or it’s racism and nepotism.

Hmmm...tough one.

 

[Dantés]

They should have just hired Vic Fangio! What are they doing?!

 

[Sanguine camper]

I was convinced LaFleur would go with somebody that he knows after he was turned down by Jimmy Leonard. Joe Barry didn't exactly work wonders in his past DC tenures. I hope the third time is a charm. Knowing that LaFleur wanted Leonard and struck out, I hope that the relationship between the two Isn't too awkward since Barry knows he wasn't the man that LaFleur really wanted. I hope that neither Barry nor or LaFleur have an outsized ego that would cause a second fiddle hire to be a problem.

 

[Dblbogey]

Probably the most attractive DC opening in the NFL in the last 2 years and Lefleur managed to fill it with a twice failed DC retread.

Cool.

Oh well, after how well Shawn Mennenga worked out I suppose I should err on the side of blind faith in his handpicked guys.

LaFleur is only 26-6. Time to fire him.

 

[Dblbogey]

I'm curious as to why Washington fired Barry after just 2 seasons if he just made that defense so much better.

Are you familiar with the Redskins owner?

 

[Heyjoe4]

No matter it is a top 5 defense and the offense was decimated by injuries?

Offense "decimated" by injuries? Packers?

 

[GBkrzygrl]

The way I look at it is, Capers would good initially then tanked. Pettine was reportedly very good with defenses in the top 10. Well, not so much. Barry doesn't appear to have been very successful at previous DC positions. Maybe he'll be terrific in GB.

 

[PackAttack12]

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

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

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

Well, the Bears Defense shouldn't give the Packers any problems in the last ......60 minutes of a game.

 

[lambeaulambo]

oh...lets sit back and play zone against rodgers...see where that gets them....LOL

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Did you give MLF one season for the offense? People have such unrealistic expectations I wonder if they’re really fans of football and how they became one with such little understanding for what it takes to be successful

It's possibly unrealistic to expect the Packers defense to improve in Barry's first season but with Rodgers' championship window closing fast there's no time to waste.

Blaming it on youth isn't the right way to go either, since the Packers had mostly seasoned guys playing on defense last year.

The Packers didn't have a single starter older than 28 years on defense last season.

That's the point I was making. They traded up for a qb..when they could have drafted Queen..who would have filled a huge hole..and had a solid rookie season.

Patrick Queen struggled mightily during his rookie season.

Smith might be worth it but cutting Smith and being able to spend that money on a position of greater need (ahem, CORNERBACK!) would appear to be the better move.

The Packers won't have any money to spend in free agency by solely releasing Preston.

Chandon Sullivan is a free agent. Sure, I expect the Packers to re-sign him but a secondary with a top-3 cornerback group of Alexander, Sullivan, and Greene isn't putting up any resistance against a top-shelf offense.

Greene isn't a cornerback to begin with.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Packers won't have any money to spend in free agency by solely releasing Preston.

I'm aware. I assumed others reading that would realize that other moves would be necessary to free up the $5-$7 million a year a decent corner will cost.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers didn't have a single starter older than 28 years on defense last season.

I never mentioned age, I mentioned experience.

I was responding to a poster that seemed to imply that maybe part of the problem was a young and inexperienced group. He stated:

"It very well could be the players just not figuring it out. To be fair a majority of the defensive players are pretty young so there may be more of a learning curve with them as opposed to veteran guys. But that's still something we'd need to figure out is making sure we aren't throwing too much on the table for these guys under 25 years old."

I'm not going to do the math, but if you look at the average amount of NFL experience of our starters on Defense, I would hardly think one could view that group as too young and inexperienced to lean on as being an issue.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm aware. I assumed others reading that would realize that other moves would be necessary to free up the $5-$7 million a year a decent corner will cost.

Ok, what moves do you suggest on top of releasing Preston to create enough cap space to a sign a veteran corner?

I never mentioned age, I mentioned experience.

I was responding to a poster that seemed to imply that maybe part of the problem was a young and inexperienced group. He stated:

"It very well could be the players just not figuring it out. To be fair a majority of the defensive players are pretty young so there may be more of a learning curve with them as opposed to veteran guys. But that's still something we'd need to figure out is making sure we aren't throwing too much on the table for these guys under 25 years old."

I'm not going to do the math, but if you look at the average amount of NFL experience of our starters on Defense, I would hardly think one could view that group as too young and inexperienced to lean on as being an issue.

Give or take one year, age and experience go hand in hand though.

I don't have any numbers to support my claim but expect that there weren't a lot of teams not featuring a single starter older than 28 years on defense last season.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Ok, what moves do you suggest on top of releasing Preston to create enough cap space to a sign a veteran corner?

Not sure, I'm assuming Gute has a plan though because he was fully aware of the corner situation last year when he did nothing about it. If he doesn't have a plan to fix that position this year then he has a pretty major flaw as a GM.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Give or take one year, age and experience go hand in hand though.

I don't have any numbers to support my claim but expect that there weren't a lot of teams not featuring a single starter older than 28 years on defense last season.

I dont think you are getting my point.

Individual Age doesn't necessarily equate to show collective experience. The notion that none of the starters were over the age of 28 does not necessarily make the entire group inexperienced. You could have a team with two 35 year old vets and nine 21-22 year old rookies, is that an experienced defense?

Again, I'm not going to take the time to do it, but if you can find out what the average number of games started/player is for all 32 teams, that might tell us more. I would wager to guess that the Packers defense wasnt as inexperienced as some of the others in the NFL.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Not sure, I'm assuming Gute has a plan though because he was fully aware of the corner situation last year when he did nothing about it. If he doesn't have a plan to fix that position this year then he has a pretty major flaw as a GM.

I definitely expect Gutekunst to address the cornerback position this offseason but rather via the draft and not free agency.

I dont think you are getting my point.

Individual Age doesn't necessarily equate to show collective experience. The notion that none of the starters were over the age of 28 does not necessarily make the entire group inexperienced. You could have a team with two 35 year old vets and nine 21-22 year old rookies, is that an experienced defense?

Again, I'm not going to take the time to do it, but if you can find out what the average number of games started/player is for all 32 teams, that might tell us more. I would wager to guess that the Packers defense wasnt as inexperienced as some of the others in the NFL.

I understand your point but don't agree with it.

While I won't put in the effort to compare the experience of the Packers' defense with every other team their starters have an average of 47.1 starts during their careers compared to the Super Bowl champions Bucs at 64.5.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I definitely expect Gutekunst to address the cornerback position this offseason but rather via the draft and not free agency.

.

Hope free agency is involved because finding 2 reliable rookies at corner is gonna be tough.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Maybe I’m crazy, but I think there’s a chance the person interviewing the candidates might know more than me.

Or it’s racism and nepotism.

Hmmm...tough one.

Nepotism is one of the primary drivers of nfl coaching hires, that's been known for decades.

 

[Dantés]

Nepotism is one of the primary drivers of nfl coaching hires, that's been known for decades.

What the journalism majors breathlessly describe as "rampant nepotism" is typical of virtually all industries. Relationships get people hired. It just so happens that the market of NFL coaching jobs is tiny and in a fish bowl.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

What the journalism majors breathlessly describe as "rampant nepotism" is typical of virtually all industries. Relationships get people hired. It just so happens that the market of NFL coaching jobs is tiny and in a fish bowl.

No, that's a false parallel. Most industries have to produce something. Nepotism exists to some extent but too much will catch up to a company and, if the person hired obviously isn't qualified, it will normally show up because performance reviews in most industries are pretty obvious. NFL coaches get to hide behind a whole lot of stuff to disguise the fact that nepotism is oftentimes a primary driver.

Just look at our new DC. His first job as a DC was given to him by his father-in-law. I don't know what companies you pay attention to but I haven't heard of any firms like JPMorgan or Johnson & Johnson having CEOs that hired their in-laws as CFO.

You also need to hold NFL teams to a higher standard than some mom-and-pop company; NFL teams *should* be run with world class management practices. Unfortunately, most NFL teams are run by billionaires who treat the teams like toys or, even worse, by GMs and coaches who are too scared to take a risk and settle for known mediocrity.

 

[Dantés]

No, that's a false parallel. Most industries have to produce something. Nepotism exists to some extent but too much will catch up to a company and, if the person hired obviously isn't qualified, it will normally show up because performance reviews in most industries are pretty obvious. NFL coaches get to hide behind a whole lot of stuff to disguise the fact that nepotism is oftentimes a primary driver.

Just look at our new DC. His first job as a DC was given to him by his father-in-law. I don't know what companies you pay attention to but I haven't heard of any firms like JPMorgan or Johnson & Johnson having CEOs that hired their in-laws as CFO.

You also need to hold NFL teams to a higher standard than some mom-and-pop company; NFL teams *should* be run with world class management practices. Unfortunately, most NFL teams are run by billionaires who treat the teams like toys or, even worse, by GMs and coaches who are too scared to take a risk and settle for known mediocrity.

No, it's absolutely an accurate parallel. Relationships get people hired in every industry. Performance keeps them employed once they're hired. That last part is WAY more true of the NFL than most other industries. If Barry is horrible in Green Bay, he will be fired. It will not matter that he and LaFleur know each other from one year together in LA.

This flailing is absurd. Literally no one would be talking about this if LaFleur had hired a guy he knows who fans/media happened to like as a candidate.

People are pulling the race card or the nepotism card because they're pissed off that they didn't get their way. They can't accept that the powers that be at 1265 Lombardi thought Barry was their 2nd best option because of their in-depth research on the internet and what they read on Twitter. So that have to pull together conspiracy theories about secret racism and/or willful incompetency.

It's a temper tantrum.

Here's the reality. The Packers looked at what the Rams did last year on defense and saw that they were able to recreate the success of Vic Fangio to excellent results. So they targeted three guys: one college coach who may just be plain special, and two guys who LaFleur knows and potentially have the ability to do something like what Staley did in LA.

Leonhard turned them down (if this is all driven by nepotism-- why did he get the first offer?). So they went with the guy they had the most confidence would be able to bring that defensive scheme to the Packers. And they believe it's Barry.

Sounds crazy right? Much more likely that LaFleur sat Barry down and said, "Hey, I know you suck, but I owe you from that time you picked up the bar tab in Culver City, so let's do this thing."