Bad Bob strikes again: Pack needs to be like Donkeys

typical McGinn nonsense 

 

what free agents could have offset the loss of our All Pro QB?  

 

The Packers will be fine.  They have some holes to fill but then again so do most other teams in the league and we have TT 

 

Not concerned 

The Broncos were average at best for a lot of years before they went on their free agent tour.  I think the Denver fans will have fond memories of this season even if they don't win the Superbowl. Everyone knew they were making a run with a  QB in the sunset of his career and they ended up with the highest scoring offense in the history of the game and an entertaining season.  All this after suffering through Tim Tebow.   

 

 

 

Fire Thompson and hire Elway.

The Broncos are not in the SB because the signed a bunch of FAs.

 

They are in the SB because they signed Manning.

 

We keep calling these coaches and GMs geniuses because they happened to have a HOF type QB on their team, and try to replicate their strategies, but their success starts with the HOF QB.

 

Billy B included.

Whoa WHOA WHOA!!!

 

Let's not get crazy now

El:

they aren't.  I think that is the point

No, that is not the point at all.  If that was the point, the predominant GM-strategy is not signing more FA's, it is whether or not to sign a QB nearing the end of his career so as to hopefully acquire a SB thereby.

 

The Broncos signed Manning and so are going for all the marbles and after he is gone, the .500 season that is predicted is primarily due to the loss of Manning and not to a GM strategy more active with the FA market.

 

My point of support is that here is Green Bay with a different GM model and should they lose Rodgers, they are easily 500 as well.

 

And so what drives the 500 record is much less the GM approach as stipulated in this topic (emphasis on FA signings) and much more driven by losing a franchise QB.

 

After all, to repeat, we saw quite well the Packer's win loss record without Rodgers - much less than 500 against mediocrity.

One superstar QB is likely to retire soon, the other is not likely to retire soon. 

 

GM's (likely) will approach team building very differently.  If (Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady) goes down, clearly the team will suffer.  But the GM's with the young superstars should build the team around them with a different design in mind that with the guy who is just about done. 

Sign free agents? O.K., which free agents?

All of them.

I'd try to get Jeff Saturday to come out of retirement

Thompson will sign FA's, of course signing some of their own doesn't count.

A lot of the shiny free agents out there will re-sign with their current teams or get franchised, etc.  So while the list looks long, it's a bit misleading.

You make it sound as if Denver hasn't used their picks to get players also. Thomas, Thomas, Decker, Ball and Moreno were all drafted by Denver, for example, while Tamme, Dreesen and Welker were value signings.

 

Sure, you may take an extra chance or two with and older QB and no clear line of succession but it's not like Denver spent a load to bring in the supporting players. They were value veterans. 

Anyone agree or disagree with this statement from Bob in Feb 2012:

 

Q:John S., Shorewood, WI- Hi Bob. {snip} is Collins the best Packer safety since Willie Wood or am I overstating his case?

 

A: Bob McGinn - John: I think you're overstating it. Collins didn't have one of his best seasons in 2010 and he didn't play well at all in the first game and a half this year. Safety is not that important in Capers' scheme.

Julius Thomas, Demaryius Thomas, Eric Decker and Knowshon Moreno were all Josh McDaniels picks, weren't they?

 

Take Tebow off his resume, and that's a pretty impressive list of players.

I fixed my post. Sorry about that

He becomes increasingly irrelevant by the sentence. He had a hell of a career, but I think he's just out of touch with things at this point.

 

Safety is not that important? Alright then.

That's why average talent like Collins and Polamalu excelled in this scheme.

Collins is (was) light years better than Polamalu. 

 

Before Super Bowl 45, Omar Epps said, "I see you back there Nick Collins."

 

Or words to that effect

 

(scroll to the bottom)

 

Bob has no clue what he's talking about

Rereading the context of his answer in that chat, I'm left with the impression that McGinn was disagreeing with the guy who asked the question just for the sake of argument, in an attempt to seem like the smartest guy in the room. I can't believe McGinn honestly thought losing Collins wasn't that big of a deal.

Boy, I don't know if I can agree with you on that statement.  I thought Polamalu was just a tremendous Hall of Fame level player that could do it all.  He was a great blitzer and absolutely great at run support.  Maybe as a pure coverage guy, Collins may have had a slight edge in his later years.  I thought Polamalu was one of the main reasons the Steelers were a top 5 type defense year after year. 

 

Collins to me was more of a pure centerfielder type who wasn't bad at blitzing or run support but those weren't his strengths.  Collins did play extremely well in 2009 and 2010, but before that I thought he was pretty up and down.  I thought in 2007 he was actually the weakness of the secondary.

 

Collins was a very good free safety, particularly once Dom Capers took over.  Polamalu was a Hall-of-Fame special type player, his physical style of play made him stand out among safeties. 

Polamalu > Collins

Projecting out his career, I think Collins would be considered better than Polamalu.

 

 

In case anyone was unsure, that was  in my previous post.

I find it hard to compare the two. Both were extremely good in their respective roles. I imagine Polamalu will be a hall of fame inductee, and I think Collins would have been as well if his career hadn't been cut short.

 

Capers used Woodson more like Polamalu, moving him all over , while Collins speed was more of an asset on the back-end.

Nick was just entering his prime, while Troy has had his prime and then some

 

When the docs came back and told the Packers that Collins career was over, Ted cried

Is there a cure for Hawkaphobia?  Just wonderin'.

 

To me there is a big hole in McGinns argument, in the last 5 or so years, no matter who wins the Super Bowl, the Packers have out performed both the Bronco's and the Seahawks. As of Monday I like the Packers future prospects better then either team, they are both hard against the cap with very little room to resign their own free agents and not enough cap space to sign this year’s crop of draft choices.

 

Any of the three might be a good start.

If safety isn't important then why the hell has this team given up so many big plays downfield since Collins departed?  

Look at any good defense and you won't find one without good safety play.   Maybe before passing offenses became in vogue 15 years ago you could get away with shoddy safety play or safeties that only played the run but not anymore. 

Take Earl Thomas off the Seahawks and tell me how good that D is.   Collins was just as impactful back then before he got hurt.

The only one I can think of is him not sucking.  I'm still surprised people think otherwise. 

 

Inside linebacker A.J. Hawk had perhaps his best season. The ultra-reliable veteran led the Packers in tackles and posted a career-high five sacks.  Whoop-de-**** I say.  Leading the Pack in tackles is pretty awesome, til you see that puts him 23rd in the NFL.  That number drops to 40th if you take out his pile jumping on habit.  But he's reliable (still love the "She's got a great personality" comparison someone else made).  AJ built his entire reputation this year on 5 of the first 6 games.  He managed to be effective for exactly 2 more games after that.  He essentially disappeared in December. 

 

Thompson also made major investments in two players -- inside linebacker Brad Jones and outside linebacker Nick Perry -- and neither one paid off.  Brad Jones missed 4 games, so he's not ultra reliable.  Tackles per game?  AJ had 7.37 tpg, Brad had 7.  AJ managed 1 more tackle every three games than Brad.  Brad isn't calling the plays on the worst defense we've seen in GB in a long, long time, so that's another black mark.  I think. 

 

The Packers have more salary-cap space committed to linebacker ($18.7 million so far) than any other position for 2014. Matthews, who signed a five-year, $66 million contract extension last offseason, accounts for $6.71 million of that followed by Hawk ($5.2 million) and Jones ($2.5 million). Wait.  What?  I thought the major investment was in Jones, but Hawk is getting paid twice as much?  For slightly better production, but consistent.   Same number of stuffs, AJ had two more sacks, same number of forced fumbles, same number or recovered fumbles, and AJ had 100% more INT's. 

 

The sooner this team gets stronger up the middle, the better. 

 

 

Not really.

 

The argument is made each season and each season its a different flavor that the Packers should follow. We should be more like the Patriots err, I mean we should be more like the Giants and put more resources into the DL, err we should be more like the Ravens and sign FAs, or the 9ers or whoever the flavor of the month is this time.

 

None of those other teams has built a dynasty, so why bother emulating them ?

 

Packers have a philosophy and it works for them. I don't want to be like the Giants or the Ravens or anybody else.

 

Let's just be the ****ing Green Bay Packers; winners of more Titles than any other franchise in league history.

 

The rest of them can kiss my ample ass

Brad Jones was actually the defensive playcaller early on in 2013, not AJ Hawk. You know, when the defense was actually playing solidly early.

 

Hawk only resumed the role after Jones was injured and thehdefense never looked......back? Down?

 

http://www.jrn.com/wi-sports/W...-most-227460011.html

 

Yah, give the playcalling duties to the astrophysicist, not the guy who went to tO$U.

Is the guy who calls out the defensive playcalls really that important? There must be more to it than simply repeating the play that's called into the player's helmet, but I admit I have the impression that anybody with a commanding enough voice could do a fairly decent job at it.

 

There must be adjustments the designated playcaller makes based on what he sees on the field, right?

that would be even more damning for AJ's case

Since they make a pretty big deal of how good AJ is at it, that implies it's much more than just parroting the calls from the booth.

 

That being said...for a defense that too often seems to have a guy or two doing something wrong or completely out of position, that could be an indictment on the guy calling the play on the field I suppose.

If AJ was so good at it, why did they replace him, only giving it back after injury to the guy they gave it to?

 

I also think the plan was for Jones to be the 4-down LB with Neal replacing Hawk on some passing downs (had Perry, et. al. stayed healthy/been effective) which could be part of the reason, but still.....

the packers were a play away from beating san fran.  san fran was a play away from being in the super bowl.  i don't think the packers are that far behind those two teams right now.  and that includes all the injuries and youth mistakes they've been dealing with.  this packer team is very good and will only get better.  if they can add some vet help to speed it up, great.  if not, i still like our chances to win the division again next year.  at that point anything can happen.  just need to get hot at the right time.  this is the first super bowl in years where the favorites throughout the season are in it.

 

keep on keeping on teddy.  we're built to be a great team for many years to come. 

 

The Packers probably preferred Jones on the field more than AJ

It wasn't the play calling duties that made the initial decision, it was AJ being a liability, especially on 3rd down. So if he isn't your preferred 3 down LB, then it makes more sense to have Jones or other as the defensive caller/adjuster

 

And yes Fondu, its way more than just parroting the calls.

They have to adjust to all the shifts, motions and movements that the offense does at the LOS in an attempt to decipher the defensive calls and mess them up

 

 

"You have the TE unless this guy moves there, then your responsibility changes to the RB, except if he flairs out wide. Then you have that guy over there"

Multiply that by 11 players and you can see how communication breakdowns can and do happen to all teams

 

You'd be amazed at all the stuff that goes into a single defensive snap - and that's why offensive coaches love the up-tempo. It keeps the defense from making all those changes on the fly and they default to a basic defense ...which is what the offense wanted in the first place.

 

Up- tempo handcuffs the defense and that's a big part of why they do it

Its a game of cat & mouse played at light speed before the snap...