What happen to.........

[HardRightEdge]

Yeah, I mean we don't know that Capers wanted to get rid of Hayward and Hyde. That's just speculation, isn't it? For all we know, he would have liked to have kept them. I don't know why he wouldn't. The only reason I can see to let them go is financial considerations - TT thought he could get the same or more for less money with younger players.

Of course letting those players go were cap decisions. Same with Williams and House before them.

There's a point in every offseason where there's a slug of cap avialable that fans are inclined to spend a couple of times over. Here's the bottom line:

Cap carryover has been in place since the 2011 carryover to 2012 under the new CBA. That's 7 years of carryover allowed to accumulate if one sees fit. There was $3.9 mil in carryover from 2017-2018.

So, that's the amount that could have been spent at some point in the last 7 years that wasn't. That's peanuts. In the multi-year view, Thompson spent up to the cap.

So, the question about not signing Hayward and Hyde is one of who would not have been signed in their places. To do that, you have to put your 20-20 hindsight glasses in the bottom drawer. One cannot, for example, forget ones enthusiam for the Bennett signing and say now it was a waste of money.

Taking a big picture perspective, "draft and develop" and piling up draft picks in the Thompson approach is a cap philosophy. It requires stacking a couple of drafts with good players under cheap rookie deals, while avoiding the pitfalls of FA where ill-fitting and/or take-the-money-and-tank players are a risk. The FA risk is mitigated by resigning your own core players at or near the top of their auction value where the fit is already established.

It comes to down to using 20-20 hindsight in thinking Hayward or Hyde should have been deemed those kinds of core players, but if you're going to do that you have to identify the players that would not have been signed in their places, another hindsight exercise.

In the final analysis, Thompson did not stack those drafts and Capers did not maximize what he was given. If Thompson ever acted on Capers' input as to what he needed, that only compounded the problem.

In noting both are "gone" with Thompson' consigned to a consultancy and not decision making, one might contemplate that the problem was both, not an either-or.

 

[PikeBadger]

And I'll ask again, who were you a fan of sitting on the bench while Hyde was playing? Burnett or HaHa? Hayward was a very good player while here. THOMPSON chose not to sign him, not Capers.

I think your overstating Hayward’s performance in Green Bay. Imo, for the most part he was average but sometimes showed signs that he could become a good player. Imo, Thompson’s mistake was allowing McCarthy to keep Capers as the DC.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

so sam Shields was never an all pro, point being if he is not lost for good in GB and Randall and Rollins aren't a walking mash team and pick up where they left of their rookie seasons, NOBODY is saying this team didn't have talent, because at the end of 2014, PLENTY of people were saying they had quite a bit of it with the same people.

Well, relying on Shields after him having suffered at least four concussions was risky in the first place. Randall and Rollins didn't have impressive rookie seasons either. While cornerback was a perceived strength entering the 2016 season it became obvious within the first few weeks that wasn't the case. While injuries definitely played a role in it Thompson's decision to stick with undrafted and inexperienced backups that had to play a significant amount of snaps contributed to the unit struggling as well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I find that either-or proposition to be a little bizarre.

Well, Hayward and Hyde didn't perform at the same level under Capers, therefore it might have been smart for Thompson to force McCarthy to change the defensive coordinator.

 

[Mondio]

Well, relying on Shields after him having suffered at least four concussions was risky in the first place. Randall and Rollins didn't have impressive rookie seasons either. While cornerback was a perceived strength entering the 2016 season it became obvious within the first few weeks that wasn't the case. While injuries definitely played a role in it Thompson's decision to stick with undrafted and inexperienced backups that had to play a significant amount of snaps contributed to the unit struggling as well.

********. It's funny, you say it was a perceived strength but nobody was worth keeping around LOL. Do you even listen to youreself sometimes? Why was it a perceived strength? Why? Why did fans, coaches, beat writers and national pundits think this? Even your beloved PFF had nothing but glowing remarks for the Packers secondary heading into that season. I don't need you to fill me in on what happened. I saw it.

But of course it's thompsons fault, losing Shileds, and having your #4 DB starting had nothing to do it. LOL

 

[Deleted member 6794]

********. It's funny, you say it was a perceived strength but nobody was worth keeping around LOL. Do you even listen to youreself sometimes? Why was it a perceived strength? Why? Why did fans, coaches, beat writers and national pundits think this? Even your beloved PFF had nothing but glowing remarks for the Packers secondary heading into that season. I don't need you to fill me in on what happened. I saw it.

But of course it's thompsons fault, losing Shileds, and having your #4 DB starting had nothing to do it. LOL

You might want to look up the meaning of the word perceived to understand what we're talking about here. Teams, experts and fans often err on the strengths of a team entering a season.

The Packers secondary struggled over the past two seasons because the unit lost Shields to injury, Randall and Rollins didn't develop like anticipated and the backups had no talent at all. The last one is definitely on Thompson.

FWIW PFF had the Packers re-signing Hayward as the team's top priority entering the 2016 offseason.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Well, Hayward and Hyde didn't perform at the same level under Capers, therefore it might have been smart for Thompson to force McCarthy to change the defensive coordinator.

That still does not demonstrate an either-or. Those players would have had cap cost that got spent elsewhere. Replacing Capers is no guarantee, and I'd say unlikely, that those players would have been re-signed. Thompson was looking to replace those guys with cheaper options on rookie contracts.

Hayward out, committment to Randall, Rollins a potential turn-around; Hyde out, King drafted, UDFA bench guys backing up at safety.

Now, had Thompson been fired along with Capers, with San Diego's or Buffalo's GMs/DCs being hired, perhaps one player or the other might still be around. Evidently they perceived the cost-benefit value.

Right now, nobody is bemoaning Randall's departure. I have not seen a single post that questioned that move. Dorsey thinks enough of Randall to have exercised the $9 mil 5th. year option putting him at his natural FS position. I wouldn't be so sure that Randall will not have a fine season and C-D another mediocre one, with this same conversation taking place next off-season. Of course, with stories of vet players voting he be cut in-season kinda sealed the deal, but that will be forgotten if Randall has a good year.

I see no evidence that Thompson would not have moved on from Hayward and Hyde regardless of who was the DC.

 

[Mondio]

You might want to look up the meaning of the word perceived to understand what we're talking about here. Teams, experts and fans often err on the strengths of a team entering a season.

The Packers secondary struggled over the past two seasons because the unit lost Shields to injury, Randall and Rollins didn't develop like anticipated and the backups had no talent at all. The last one is definitely on Thompson.

FWIW PFF had the Packers re-signing Hayward as the team's top priority entering the 2016 offseason.

and really fwiw go read what they said about them not re-signing him. I'll leave you hint, they thought GB was well set up and one of the only teams in the league that could withstand a departure of a guy like him.

I'm guessing most GMs are going to look poor having to start #4 DBs and lower much of the year. It's not a revelation. Randall isnt some scrub. Saying he has no talent would be like the short sighted fools saying Adams needed to be cut too.

Anyway, like I said, If shields was playing and the other 2 top DBs aren't hobbled all year, nobodynis saying this team didn't have talent in defense. Nothing you have said disputes that

 

[PackAttack12]

Is it really that hard for everyone to acknowledge that Capers misused players and in some cases failed to develop them while using an extinct defensive scheme, while also acknowledging that Thompson failed to adequately support the depth chart with quality players in certain positions? There's plenty of blame to go around, here.

Both of them failed in certain aspects which led to the demise of the Packers defense. They are both gone or in different positions for a reason. They were a perfect storm of inadequacy over the past few seasons as a coordinator/GM duo.

The Packers have not had a single top 10 defense since 2010. That's not all on one individual.

 

[AmishMafia]

********. It's funny, you say it was a perceived strength but nobody was worth keeping around LOL. Do you even listen to youreself sometimes? Why was it a perceived strength? Why? Why did fans, coaches, beat writers and national pundits think this? Even your beloved PFF had nothing but glowing remarks for the Packers secondary heading into that season. I don't need you to fill me in on what happened. I saw it.

But of course it's thompsons fault, losing Shileds, and having your #4 DB starting had nothing to do it. LOL

Its generally perceived that some studies seem to indicate that if you make your posts vague, use ambiguous terms, and allude to nonspecific sources, you can advance your agenda given any situation/topic. Or so the latest clinical evidence infers that leading experts seem to indicate.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think your overstating Hayward’s performance in Green Bay. Imo, for the most part he was average but sometimes showed signs that he could become a good player. Imo, Thompson’s mistake was allowing McCarthy to keep Capers as the DC.

I think you are forgetting how great he was as a rookie and then not giving him any leeway for coming back from a series of leg injuries that cost him an entire season.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That still does not demonstrate an either-or. Those players would have had cap cost that got spent elsewhere. Replacing Capers is no guarantee, and I'd say unlikely, that those players would have been re-signed. Thompson was looking to replace those guys with cheaper options on rookie contracts.

Hayward out, committment to Randall, Rollins a potential turn-around; Hyde out, King drafted, UDFA bench guys backing up at safety.

Now, had Thompson been fired along with Capers, with San Diego's or Buffalo's GMs/DCs being hired, perhaps one player or the other might still be around. Evidently they perceived the cost-benefit value.

Right now, nobody is bemoaning Randall's departure. I have not seen a single post that questioned that move. Dorsey thinks enough of Randall to have exercised the $9 mil 5th. year option putting him at his natural FS position. I wouldn't be so sure that Randall will not have a fine season and C-D another mediocre one, with this same conversation taking place next off-season. Of course, with stories of vet players voting he be cut in-season kinda sealed the deal, but that will be forgotten if Randall has a good year.

I see no evidence that Thompson would not have moved on from Hayward and Hyde regardless of who was the DC.

It's definitely possible Thompson would have moved on from Hayward and Hyde even with a different defensive coordinator in charge. There's a chance the new DC would have seen both as core players in the secondary advocating for TT to re-sign them as well though.

I'm guessing most GMs are going to look poor having to start #4 DBs and lower much of the year. It's not a revelation. Randall isnt some scrub. Saying he has no talent would be like the short sighted fools saying Adams needed to be cut too.

Anyway, like I said, If shields was playing and the other 2 top DBs aren't hobbled all year, nobodynis saying this team didn't have talent in defense. Nothing you have said disputes that

Once again, I'm not saying Randall doesn't have any talent but he definitely didn't perform at a high level for most of his tenure in Green Bay.

It seems you like to speculate about what ifs way too much instead of assessing what actually happened. It's a fact that Thompson and Capers weren't able to improve an abysmal secondary for nearly two full seasons and therefore both of them have been replaced.

 

[AmishMafia]

It's definitely possible Thompson would have moved on from Hayward and Hyde even with a different defensive coordinator in charge. There's a chance the new DC would have seen both as core players in the secondary advocating for TT to re-sign them as well though.

Once again, I'm not saying Randall doesn't have any talent but he definitely didn't perform at a high level for most of his tenure in Green Bay.

It seems you like to speculate about what ifs way too much instead of assessing what actually happened. It's a fact that Thompson and Capers weren't able to improve an abysmal secondary for nearly two full seasons and therefore both of them have been replaced.

Dont you see how you are speculating as well? You are implying that TT was let go because of the performance of the secondary.

You have no idea why TT is no longer the GM but the whole incompetence thing matches your agenda.

Too me the most likely scenario is that Capers was fired because of the poor performance of the defense. If TT was incompetant and at blame they wouldn't have kept him on as a consultant.

 

[Mondio]

i'm not speculating on what if's. You said it yourself Randall has talent. Rollins DID have a good rookie year. Sam Shields was a very, very good DB. Hyde was pretty good. Problem was, Gunter was pushed to a starting role and he should have been #4 or 5 and 2nd or 3rd guy off the bench. You can't argue we had no talent in post, then say we had talent, but I don't know what production is. I do, and i'm not arguing they produced at a high level. They didn't. It was obvious and there were reasons for it other than GB not having talent on the roster. The sentiment from YOU was that GB had no talent. or isn't that your argument anymore? If Shields isn't lost and Randall and Rollins aren't hampered with injuries all of year 2 nobody is saying the defense didn't have talent to put on the field. I know you keep making a habit of moving goalposts and I don't need you to give me your revisionist when it suits cherry picking recaps.

 

[rmontro]

If Shields isn't lost and Randall and Rollins aren't hampered with injuries all of year 2 nobody is saying the defense didn't have talent to put on the field.

Talent or no talent:
I think the problem in 2016 was that there wasn't much experience at CB other than Shields, and once he went down that weakness was really exposed.

 

[Mondio]

Talent or no talent:
I think the problem in 2016 was that there wasn't much experience at CB other than Shields, and once he went down that weakness was really exposed.

And I'd argue that any team forced to have 4th or 5 th DB presses into a starting role will have a "weakness" exposed. You think it's normal for what GB went thru that season, particularly with the defensive backs and not have problems?

And again, I don't need a rehash of what happened. I saw it. The statement was made that GB during have talented players to play defense with. I think we did, they just weren't always available or healthy enough to contribute much.

 

[rmontro]

And again, I don't need a rehash of what happened. I saw it. The statement was made that GB during have talented players to play defense with. I think we did, they just weren't always available or healthy enough to contribute much.

I just think that given Shields concussion history, it was somewhat predictable what happened, so it would have been nice to have a little more experience at the position. Leaving it as it was a bit of a roll of the dice on TT's part. 2016 wasn't much better so maybe there is some validity to thinking there was a talent shortage there.
However:

I fully expected them to get rid of Capers, and then see what kind of effect that had on the defense before proceeding. I didn't expect them to fire (well, demote) TT as well, although I can see why they did it.

 

[Mondio]

I want to see the posts predicting Shields being lost for the season. I remember reading and seeing what was said about the defensive backs heading into that season, I don't remember anybody predicting that. So I'd say "predictable" is a statement made with hindsight.

Should we move on from Rodgers this year? He's had 2 broken collar bones and at least 2concussions. Should we predict he's done?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Dont you see how you are speculating as well? You are implying that TT was let go because of the performance of the secondary.

You have no idea why TT is no longer the GM but the whole incompetence thing matches your agenda.

Too me the most likely scenario is that Capers was fired because of the poor performance of the defense. If TT was incompetant and at blame they wouldn't have kept him on as a consultant.

Well, Thompson being replaced after Rodgers' injury revealed the rest of the roster isn't that talented after all strongly indicates Murphy wasn't satisfied with his work though.

i'm not speculating on what if's. You said it yourself Randall has talent. Rollins DID have a good rookie year. Sam Shields was a very, very good DB. Hyde was pretty good. Problem was, Gunter was pushed to a starting role and he should have been #4 or 5 and 2nd or 3rd guy off the bench. You can't argue we had no talent in post, then say we had talent, but I don't know what production is. I do, and i'm not arguing they produced at a high level. They didn't. It was obvious and there were reasons for it other than GB not having talent on the roster. The sentiment from YOU was that GB had no talent. or isn't that your argument anymore? If Shields isn't lost and Randall and Rollins aren't hampered with injuries all of year 2 nobody is saying the defense didn't have talent to put on the field. I know you keep making a habit of moving goalposts and I don't need you to give me your revisionist when it suits cherry picking recaps.

I'm not arguing the Packers had no talent in the secondary entering the 2016 season (although I have no idea why we're talking about two years ago at this point go back and read my posts). It was pretty obvious that for whatever reason the unit didn't perform up to expectations over the past two seasons by any means and yet Thompson and Capers weren't able to improve the play at the position. That's what I'm criticizing.

And again, I don't need a rehash of what happened. I saw it. The statement was made that GB during have talented players to play defense with. I think we did, they just weren't always available or healthy enough to contribute much.

Injuries are part of the game, it's getting tired you using them as the only excuse for the secondary struggling over the past two seasons.

I want to see the posts predicting Shields being lost for the season. I remember reading and seeing what was said about the defensive backs heading into that season, I don't remember anybody predicting that. So I'd say "predictable" is a statement made with hindsight.

It's true there weren't any posters being concerned about Shields concussion history entering the 2016 season. But as you have often alluded to in the past Thompson and the front office have way more knowledge and inside information than any of us around here, so they shouldn't have been aware of it.

 

[Poppa San]

go back and read my posts

OK
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/packers-cornerback-group.67301/

 

[Mondio]

why are we talking about it? because I made a comment about their being a difference between having no talent on the roster and not being able to put that talent on the field on game day. I think Capers was far to slow to match style with players available, while also considering, he was dealt some raw hands in terms of depth of injuries at positions. Thompson could have made some better picks at times, but this roster wasn't void of talent like some would have you believe. Not even on defense. There were reasons other than not having a talented roster at play. Nobody thought a healthy Shields, and 2nd year Randall and Rollins lacked talent in the defensive backfield. Until everyone was hurt and underperformed. That's like saying Adams didn't have talent either. but in year 3 he just found some, or something?

and injury isn't the only excuse, miscommunications in the 2ndary were obvious and consistent. Which is why at the beginning of last season I said numerous times that judging Capers after the previous season would be a bit unfair considering the constant rotation at injury and that last season would be his chance to rectify it. He didn't. They had the same problems they always had. They'd look like a really good defense on 2 plays, then have 3 guys standing in one area while the middle of the field sat wide open again.

 

[Mondio]

OK
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/packers-cornerback-group.67301/

some pretty interesting comments in there

 

[AmishMafia]

why are we talking about it? because I made a comment about their being a difference between having no talent on the roster and not being able to put that talent on the field on game day. I think Capers was far to slow to match style with players available, while also considering, he was dealt some raw hands in terms of depth of injuries at positions. Thompson could have made some better picks at times, but this roster wasn't void of talent like some would have you believe. Not even on defense. There were reasons other than not having a talented roster at play. Nobody thought a healthy Shields, and 2nd year Randall and Rollins lacked talent in the defensive backfield. Until everyone was hurt and underperformed. That's like saying Adams didn't have talent either. but in year 3 he just found some, or something?

and injury isn't the only excuse, miscommunications in the 2ndary were obvious and consistent. Which is why at the beginning of last season I said numerous times that judging Capers after the previous season would be a bit unfair considering the constant rotation at injury and that last season would be his chance to rectify it. He didn't. They had the same problems they always had. They'd look like a really good defense on 2 plays, then have 3 guys standing in one area while the middle of the field sat wide open again.

Agree with most of this except giving Capers a pass because of injuries. One of his issues as a coach is not developing players. Even though not a starter, a DB should still understand the defensive scheme and be able to step in. I dont expect all pro level play, but they should be able to hold their own and understand their responsibilities on any given play.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

why are we talking about it? because I made a comment about their being a difference between having no talent on the roster and not being able to put that talent on the field on game day. I think Capers was far to slow to match style with players available, while also considering, he was dealt some raw hands in terms of depth of injuries at positions. Thompson could have made some better picks at times, but this roster wasn't void of talent like some would have you believe. Not even on defense. There were reasons other than not having a talented roster at play. Nobody thought a healthy Shields, and 2nd year Randall and Rollins lacked talent in the defensive backfield. Until everyone was hurt and underperformed. That's like saying Adams didn't have talent either. but in year 3 he just found some, or something?

and injury isn't the only excuse, miscommunications in the 2ndary were obvious and consistent. Which is why at the beginning of last season I said numerous times that judging Capers after the previous season would be a bit unfair considering the constant rotation at injury and that last season would be his chance to rectify it. He didn't. They had the same problems they always had. They'd look like a really good defense on 2 plays, then have 3 guys standing in one area while the middle of the field sat wide open again.

Capers definitely deserves some blame for the defensive struggles over the past few seasons but as I've mentioned on several occasions it's close to impossible to fairly evaluate if the talent level wasn't good enough or the coaching staff struggled to come up with decent game plans as well as develop the players being given to work with.

Agree with most of this except giving Capers a pass because of injuries. One of his issues as a coach is not developing players. Even though not a starter, a DB should still understand the defensive scheme and be able to step in. I dont expect all pro level play, but they should be able to hold their own and understand their responsibilities on any given play.

The backups definitely didn't perform up to expectations but it's possible they weren't talented enough to play any better.

 

[AmishMafia]

The backups definitely didn't perform up to expectations but it's possible they weren't talented enough to play any better.

Of course it is possible. It's just that there is a lot more evidence that points to a coaching issue than a talent issue.