Move CB up draft board

[rodell330]

Last time I checked the outcome of an NFL game is decided by points scored.

That's still the case but you know better. The offense has protected the defense for a looong time. Getting up early on people and forcing them to be one dimensional isn't included in those stats. Now I challenge you to find that same stat about points allowed?? But in the playoffs. I'll wait

 

[PackerDNA]

Not a big fan of 'total defense' as an indicator. Stats can be inflated, such as giving up 200 yards passing in the 4th qtr because you have a 35 point lead and are in prevent mode.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That's still the case but you know better. The offense has protected the defense for a looong time. Getting up early on people and forcing them to be one dimensional isn't included in those stats. Now I challenge you to find that same stat about points allowed?? But in the playoffs. I'll wait

There´s no denying the Packers have allowed too many points during several playoff games during Capers´ tenure.

 

[TJV]

Yea and it seems to be a trend. Just like having a defense ranked in the bottom half of the league every year. If you're going to hang on to Capers then you better surround him with adequate talent. Period.

The Packers defense has finished four times in the top half of the league in points allowed during Capers´ six year tenure as defensive coordinator.

I like how you just put points allowed. Now what about total defense? Hmmm?? You left that stat out.

Last time I checked the outcome of an NFL game is decided by points scored. And just in case you really care about it the Packers defense has finished four times in the top half of the league in yards allowed over the last six seasons as well.

rodell330 that looks like check and mate, doesn’t it? It’s one thing to advance legit criticisms of the Packers defense but you posted BS, got corrected and then posted more BS and got corrected again. And yet there’s no contrition on your part. Why is that? Why not at least acknowledge you were wrong instead of another, 'oh yea? what about this...' response?

As to the problems of the Packers’ D, check out a post on this thread that notes the pattern of the Packers’ defenses giving up more points in the third quarter than in the first and second quarter; and giving up more points in the fourth quarter than the third, since the Packers won it all in the 2010 season. There are some caveats with that trend, but it’s a trend we saw play out all too recently. And BTW if you want to thank a poster for pointing that out, thank captainWIMM.

 

[Half Empty]

I think any defensive coordinator needs adequate talent. Period.

The reason all DCs aren't rated the same is that what's adequate for one isn't necessary for another. It's the guy that can the most out of what he has to work with that stands out.

 

[rodell330]

Man throw out all the regular season stats !! The point im trying to make is the defense seems to find a way to play some of their worse ball in the PLAYOFFS! The Seattle game was the best I've seen them play on defense in a loooong time in the playoffs and then came the last 6 minutes if the game:/ what is it going to take for this team to be defensive minded? For Rodgers to get hurt? The excuses have reached the point of no more excuses.

 

[TJV]

Man throw out all the regular season stats !! The point im trying to make is the defense seems to find a way to play some of their worse ball in the PLAYOFFS!

More BS. That’s certainly not true of these two posts, was it?

Yea and it seems to be a trend. Just like having a defense ranked in the bottom half of the league every year. If you're going to hang on to Capers then you better surround him with adequate talent. Period.

I like how you just put points allowed. Now what about total defense? Hmmm?? You left that stat out.

There is no reference to the playoffs in these two posts. You are just full of **** with your most recent response.

Just so you can’t say no one told you: When you can’t admit you are wrong and after being proven so twice and respond with a smart-*** answer, you lose credibility with some of us.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

That's still the case but you know better. The offense has protected the defense for a looong time. Getting up early on people and forcing them to be one dimensional isn't included in those stats. Now I challenge you to find that same stat about points allowed?? But in the playoffs. I'll wait

I'm not sure I really believe the whole "score early and force 'em to pass" thing...if that was the case then every high powered offense in the NFL would sport a good defense. When you actually examine it, whether a team scores a lot running the ball or passing the ball, the points are still worth the same amount (in fact the running team should give up fewer because it takes longer to score so there's less time for the opponent to score). The only way a pass-heavy scoring offense would hold up would be if the team passed a ton in the beginning and scored a bunch and then, for some reason, decided to stop scoring in the second half (since if a run-heavy team and pass-heavy team score the same points at the end of the year then obviously the pass-heavy team wasn't as efficient on their drives). Last year the Steelers were the 7th highest scoring offense but their defense was 18th in scoring. The Colts were the sixth highest scoring offense but their defense was 19th. The Eagles were THIRD best offense at scoring but their defense was ranked 23rd in scoring. Saints were the 9th highest scoring offense but the 28th worst in preventing points.

In 2013 the Cowboys were the fifth highest scoring offense but their defense was 26th in points allowed. Packers were 8th in scoring but 25th in points allowed. This is the one that should really make people question the logic...in 2013, the Chicago Bears scored the second most points in the NFL but they had the 31st worst scoring defense.

I just don't see the proof that a high scoring offense helps the defense.

 

[rodell330]

Just so you can’t say no one told you: When you can’t admit you are wrong and after being proven so twice and respond with a smart-*** answer, you lose credibility with some of us.

I need you to understand that I don't care what you think...or about losing "credibility"with you or anyone else on here. You don't know me and I don't know you! We are all just giving our opinions back and forth! That's it sir . Good day !

 

[TJV]

I need you to understand that I don't care ... about losing "credibility"with you or anyone else on here.

Good to know because you have none. That must be why you post things that are factually wrong and you don't care.

 

[sschind]

I would blame TT not wanting to get into a bidding war more than guys just not wanting to come to Green Bay. You can't honestly tell me Wilfork would have rather gone to Houston vs Green Bay. The Haloti Nngata trade to Detroit was also something that TT could've easily pulled off if he was the type of aggressive GM like the Scheiders and Bellicecks of the world...I'd even throw John Elway into that category . Yes the Packers win the NFC North every year it seems but honestly?? This division isn't that great. A big signing or even trade wouldn't handicap the cap if TT really is the genius some of you claim him to be.

Not going to bash the guy but he needs to be more aggressive and stop putting so much stock in his "draft and develop" methods. I'm really anxious to see how he fills these holes. In willing to bet anyone that the defense finishes in the 20's next season.

Some people just can't understand that there are 31 other teams in the league and that some players might prefer playing for one of those teams over Green Bay. I think I can honestly say Wilfork would have rather gone to Houston than Green Bay because he ended up in Houston and not Green Bay. If Wilfork would have been interested in Green Bay I'm sure his agent would have called Ted. Who knows, maybe he did. Maybe he called and Ted said we aren't interested or we will only pay so much.

When you think about it, a player really does control where he plays. If he is a free agent he can sign with any team he wants. If he really wants to play for a certain team he can make his services available at a price attractive enough so that most teams would take him. If Wilfork would have gone to Ted and said "I really want to play for the Packers. I'll sign for 1 million a year" Ted probably would have fallen over backwards reaching for his pen. Since that didn't happen I would have to assume that he really would rather play for Houston.

 

[sschind]

I can't tell you with complete certainty that Vince Wilfork preferred Houston over us. Here's what I can tell you:

1) He obviously had interest in Houston, since he signed with them, while his interest in us is unknown.

2) The weather is much nicer in Texas than Wisconsin in the winter.

3) Wilfork already has multiple rings, so he isn't some aging vet at the end of his rope just desperate to get his first Lombardi.

4) He has 4 coaches in Houston (Crennel, Vrabel, O'Brien, Godsey) that he has either played with or been coached by before.

5) He said, "Me and my family, we're excited to be here in Houston"

So while I can't tell you with complete certainty that Wilfork preferred Houston, the facts I've presented above are pretty compelling evidence that he did. Despite all that, you say, "You can't honestly tell me Wilfork would have rather gone to Houston vs Green Bay"

The assumptions we make about these guys lives based on almost nothing just amazes me.

In most cases where it is known that the Packers were interested in a player who ended up signing elsewhere I think the assumption most people make is that "Tightwad Ted" tried to lowball him and he went with the higher offer. Like you said there is likely a lot more that goes into a decision than just money. In many cases that may the biggest factor but I'd guess that in very few cases is it the only factor.

I think most people will be surprised to hear that the Packers were interested in Revis because it goes against their perception that Ted is simply not interested in these types of guys. When faced with evidence to the contrary in order to keep their arguments against Ted going full strength they have to come up with some other reason why the player chose to sign elsewhere (since every player would rather to come to Green Bay.) The reason they come up with is that Ted must have lowballed them because, again, everyone knows that any player would prefer Green Bay over a team like the Jets.

 

[rodell330]

Good to know because you have none. That must be why you post things that are factually wrong and you don't care.

Factually wrong?? Examples please.

 

[PackerDNA]

Ted isn't 100% against going after outside FA's. I take Revis at his word that the Packers were one of the teams interested in him. There was Tony Gonzales, in which the word is the Packers had a deal with The Chiefs to trade for him- until Carl Peterson turned around and said he wanted a 2nd instead of a 3rd after a deal was agreed upon. There was Chris Canty, of whom it's said used the Packers as leverage to facilitate signing where he really wanted to be.
Like sschind says, there are a lot of reasons- most of which we'll never know about- why guys don't end up in Green Bay.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Can somebody please explain to me why Eric Rowe wouldn't be a great first round pick for the Packers? I see the guy ranked as like the 8th-10th best corner and yet he's the best athlete at the position in the entire draft and he's been great at both safety and corner for Utah. Why the love for Jalen Collins who is about the same size as Rowe (slightly smaller actually), has less experience, is slower (slightly) and less nimble (Collins ran the shuttle in 4.27 while Rowe ran it in 3.97)?

 

[TJV]

Factually wrong?? Examples please.

If you can't figure that out you've more than just lost credibility.

 

[adambr2]

It was also mentioned a couple years ago that the Packers were interested in Steven Jackson and he used them to leverage a better offer from Atlanta without him ever actually wanting to come here.

 

[Carl]

Can somebody please explain to me why Eric Rowe wouldn't be a great first round pick for the Packers? I see the guy ranked as like the 8th-10th best corner and yet he's the best athlete at the position in the entire draft and he's been great at both safety and corner for Utah. Why the love for Jalen Collins who is about the same size as Rowe (slightly smaller actually), has less experience, is slower (slightly) and less nimble (Collins ran the shuttle in 4.27 while Rowe ran it in 3.97)?

If he's the 8th-10th best corner, there's no reason to pick him so high when he could be taken later.

 

[Vrill]

It was also mentioned a couple years ago that the Packers were interested in Steven Jackson and he used them to leverage a better offer from Atlanta without him ever actually wanting to come here.

Thank god he didn't. Jackson looked like a washed up old war horse past two years.

 

[longtimefan]

I would blame TT not wanting to get into a bidding war more than guys just not wanting to come to Green Bay. You can't honestly tell me Wilfork would have rather gone to Houston vs Green Bay.

He got a chance to play with all his old coaches.

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fa...dt-vince-wilfork-says-hes-signing-with-texans

Wilfork is reuniting with Texans coach Bill O'Brien and defensive coordinator Romeo Crennel, who formerly coached in New England.

can you show us he WANTED to go to GB?

 

[rodell330]

If you can't figure that out you've more than just lost credibility.

Didn't think so..go to bed man haha

 

[longtimefan]

Factually wrong?? Examples please.

You said Packers wouldnt make playoffs

 

[rodell330]

He got a chance to play with all his old coaches.

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fa...dt-vince-wilfork-says-hes-signing-with-texans



can you show us he WANTED to go to GB?

So this automatically means he never wanted or wasn't interested in coming to GB?? I mean you said it yourself..TT doesn't get into bidding wars right?

 

[rodell330]

You said Packers wouldnt make playoffs

If they kept playing the way they played after some early loses yes, yes I did.. But you never mention that part tho right?

 

[longtimefan]

If they kept playing the way they played after some early loses yes, yes I did.. But you never mention that part tho right?

you said it after the 1st half of the 1st game lol

Another fact you got wrong