A blocked punt along with putrid QB play
What you said Michigan. The Niner game reminded me of the McCarthy debacle in Seattle. He was never the same after that.
@Blair Kiel posted:Your historic goodwill?
The orphans you routinely punch beg to differ.
He gives them the bag of nickels after he's done.
Leonard. Evero. Barry. MLFâs final three 2 years ago.
Leonard turned him down but is now available. No NFL Coordinator history.
Evero was a home run in Denver. Now available and Vikings interested.
Barry in 2 years. ðĐ
@Herschel posted:He gives them the bag of nickels after he's done.
Pennys. Heâs thrifty.
@PA green & gold posted:Evero was a home run in Denver.
How do you not make this happen today
Evero is Carolina DC now.
MLF is too much of a pusscake to fire anyone.
It has to get really, really bad and someone has to tell him to do so.
See Maurice Drayton.
Certainly does appear that MLF prioritized familiarity over competence when he made the hire.
@GreenBayLA posted:Evero is Carolina DC now.
There was a greater chance he'd end up in MIN than in GB. Glad he's in CAR instead!
From the comments on the article:
The Packers had the 2nd highest defensive payroll in the league and they were ranked 17th in points allowed and 28th against the run. The pass defense numbers are a mirage because teams didn't need to pass to move the ball against the Packers. They just handed the ball off or in the case of the Eagles let their QB run wild all over the field. When teams did pass, like the Titans did, Tannerhill, really Tennerhill!!!??? and Daniel Jones ??? WTF?? Cut them to pieces throwing in front of the DBs who are playing 8-10 yards off the LOS.
Why exactly are we keeping Barry??? For that matter why are we keeping MLF??? To put it simply because it's easier than actually doing the work and the due diligence required to vet their replacements and because it's cheaper than paying legitimate NFL coaches to fill their roles. But we don't need to change anything because
"We're not idiots and we have a big slide at "Titletown" and our football team is a nice hobby to have on the side. Thanks, Since '61
Quit going to games , buying season tickets and merchandise. It's the only way to make them change
@Packiderm posted:Quit going to games , buying season tickets and merchandise. It's the only way to make them change
In many ways, the Packers have the same situation as the Chicago Cubs. Lambeau is enough of a bucket list destination that they'll sell enough tickets and merchandise to be at least near the middle of the NFL in revenue as long as the team doesn't crater to a 3-4 win team.
Mark Murphy was set after they won the Super Bowl in 2011. They weren't going to do anything radical like going all in at any point to maximize a title any given year. Just like the Brewers they were satisfied to have a bite at the apple every year. They've had record profits, gotten the stadium renovated recently, and developed additional ways to generate revenue on non-game days. And, almost any time they want, they can sell "stock" that will generate tens of millions of dollars.
In general, it's great to root for a team that doesn't have an owner. But the downside of that is that Murphy isn't one to take big gambles that often get you over the hump. Rodgers has disappointed in the playoffs in the MLF era, but before that he's been more than good enough to win another title.
Murphy will think of his tenure as a success. If we had an owner like Jerry Jones, having a top 10 QB all-time win 4 MVPs in 12 years with no Super Bowl appearances would be considered one of the all-time disappointments in NFL history. Especially since they probably lost two appearances by trying to cheap out on special teams coaches.
The Packers aren't changing anything as long as Murphy is around.
Sad but true.
@MichiganPacker posted:In many ways, the Packers have the same situation as the Chicago Cubs. Lambeau is enough of a bucket list destination that they'll sell enough tickets and merchandise to be at least near the middle of the NFL in revenue as long as the team doesn't crater to a 3-4 win team.
Murphy will think of his tenure as a success. If we had an owner like Jerry Jones, having a top 10 QB all-time win 4 MVPs in 12 years with no Super Bowl appearances would be considered one of the all-time disappointments in NFL history. Especially since they probably lost two appearances by trying to cheap out on special teams coaches.
The Packers aren't changing anything as long as Murphy is around.
I said this exact thing last offseason when it was being discussed. Think I brought it up again when the issue of hearing opposing fans at Lambeau came around.
Doesn't matter if a noticeable slice of home fans stop buying tickets and stop coming to games. NFL fans travel better now than ever before and they'll gladly come to Lambeau to root for their team. And if the Packers enter an era of mediocrity or worse, driving away all but the die hard (whose numbers seem to dwindle by the year), we'll be hearing a lot more opposing fans on game day.
The Packers tickets are sold out every year and will continue to be. There are people like me who won't pay the exorbitant prices that they are sold for on the aftermarket
@MichiganPacker posted:Murphy will think of his tenure as a success.
The Packers aren't changing anything as long as Murphy is around.
Plenty of "loyal" Packer fans are adamant that the past 12 seasons without a single Super Bowl appearance have been a success.
The loyalists cite all the NFC North Titles and playoff appearances as evidence of the Pack's success since 2011. And then they go on and on about bad luck and how hard it is to win a Super Bowl, before playing the at least we are not the Vikings, Lions, Bears, Browns, etc. "loyalist" Packer fan trump card.
If so many good and loyal Packer fans are perfectly satisfied with the team's post-Super Bowl appearance "success," why would Murph consider his tenure to be anything other than a smashing success?
@MichiganPacker posted:And, almost any time they want, they can sell "stock" that will generate tens of millions of dollars.
.
This is not quite true. The NFL has to approve any additional stock sales. While I doubt the NFL would say no, it could happen. And I'm not sure they sold all the stock that was offered in the last sale.
160 pages (and counting) on a #12 contract...I just feel there hasn't been enough said about how much of a crap stain the guy referenced in this thread is.
Getting back to Barry, one of the features of the âTampa 2â and zone defenses has been that you donât need to spend premium picks on defensive backs because high-end man cover traits werenât needed, yet they bring in Barry who usually parks his DBs way back in the Joezone Layer when he has two #1s with high-end traits and bring in Rasul, whoâs made for press man.
Yeah, Barry does NOT adjust his scheme to the talent he has.
Moron.
@ammo posted:This is not quite true. The NFL has to approve any additional stock sales.
The other owners don't like it, so the league tightened things up on the stock sales going forward. The proceeds can only be used to enhance the fan experience ( scoreboards & more toilets) and not the player experience ( new locker rooms, better training facilities)
The other owners feared GB would have a competitive advantage in luring FAs to Green Bay ( LOL ) if they were allowed to spend stock cash on shit the players coveted. Meanwhile, the other owners are fine with forcing taxpayers to spend billions on a stadium for their teams.
The Packers model puts more of the financial burden on the fans who support the team and it doesn't take tax dollars away from roads/schools/parks budgets to pay for the billionaires new palaces
@YATittle posted:Moron.
" 'Tis better to leave your sign at home and be thought a fool than it is to take it and remove all doubt."
Or something like that...
Are we sure Barry is part of the trade for Aaron Rodgers?
@"We"-Ka-Bong posted:Are we sure Barry is part of the trade for Aaron Rodgers?
That's the hold up. The jets want 3 first round picks if they take Barry!
And a mule
Matt has allowed Barry to run his scheme for some time. MLF is partly to blame. Perhaps the lessons were learned when the DBâs seemed to be lining up closer by the end of the season. We have a new DB coach and all off season to review the tape.
I also had a wild thought. What if Rich B. has some input into that room now that he has the âAssistant Head Coachâ title?
@YooperPackfan posted:And a mule
Deal breaker. Best we can do is three chickens and a lifetime pass for the sledding hill.
@Herschel posted:Getting back to Barry, one of the features of the âTampa 2â and zone defenses has been that you donât need to spend premium picks on defensive backs because high-end man cover traits werenât needed, yet they bring in Barry who usually parks his DBs way back in the Joezone Layer when he has two #1s with high-end traits and bring in Rasul, whoâs made for press man.
Really frustrating.
@Goalline posted:Really frustrating.
Let's try to diffuse some of your frustration
If the Packers play tight man coverage, then the opponents will run at those CBs and make em tackle OR they will run man-beaters with picks & rubs to shake a guy free. It doesn't mean you can't play man - you just have to be strategic about when you use it. (Each DB is an island)
When DBs play off coverage - they aren't as susceptible to the picks & rubs AND they have vision to the ball and an angle to pick it off or knock it down.
In zones, they ALL have to see it the same or it falls apart real quick.
(No man is an island)
There are plusses & minuses to each and you need your DC to switch em up, disguise em to make the best use of talent vs each opponent. You're playing chess with some of the brightest offensive minds in the league. That may or may not be Barry's forte - but clearly he had philosophical differences with Jerry Gray
No matter what you do:
- there is always a way to beat it.
- Packer fans will always be frustrated
.
@GBFanForLife posted:
Thank you! YA is always misspelling shit.
@Satori posted:Let's try to diffuse some of your frustration
If the Packers play tight man coverage, then the opponents will run at those CBs and make em tackle OR they will run man-beaters with picks & rubs to shake a guy free. It doesn't mean you can't play man - you just have to be strategic about when you use it. (Each DB is an island)
When DBs play off coverage - they aren't as susceptible to the picks & rubs AND they have vision to the ball and an angle to pick it off or knock it down.
In zones, they ALL have to see it the same or it falls apart real quick.
(No man is an island)There are plusses & minuses to each and you need your DC to switch em up, disguise em to make the best use of talent vs each opponent. You're playing chess with some of the brightest offensive minds in the league. That may or may not be Barry's forte - but clearly he had philosophical differences with Jerry Gray
No matter what you do:
- there is always a way to beat it.
- Packer fans will always be frustrated.
I am more frustrated after reading your post.ð
Interesting article on the ascending value of TEs vs all the defensive changes across the league
https://www.foxsports.com/stor...s-can-take-advantage
"...In the 2014-2017 span, time to throw was in the 2.5 second range. Only 25% of attempts came after 3.0 seconds. Now, that has increased to 30% of attempts coming after 3.0 seconds.
This is in large part due to how defenses have adjusted to slow down quarterbacks and prevent big plays in the passing game.
The shift in defensive philosophy has been massive even over the last three years.
- Blitz rates, once up in the 29-30% range in 2013-2015, are down at 25-26% the last two years.
- In 2020, man coverage was used 31.1% of the time. That decreased to 27.5% in 2021 and 25.1% last year.
The rate of no-blitz zone coverage has increased dramatically the last couple of years.
- In 2020, it was used just 51.9% of the time. That increased to 55.2% in 2021 and 56.6% last year.
- Defenses are playing more two-high shells, up from 34.5% in 2020 to 36.6% in 2021 and 38.2% last year.
These highly correlated changes encourage quarterbacks to hold onto the ball, throw underneath more frequently and target holes in the zone. "
Article goes on to describe why TEs can be more valuable/efficient than WRs vs today's defenses .
I'm not sure many would argue the trend isn't towards containment, especially with the proliferation of more mobile QBs coming from the college ranks, as well as COVID messing up skill development time for a couple of years. That would-be blitzer now splits time with being a spy, which can account for the swing in blitz percentage, especially when you have the Lances, Z Wilsons, Fields who aren't adept at reading defenses when thrust into the starting role and rely a lot more on their athleticism to go along with the Allens, Jacksons, Mahomes, etc.
That doesn't change what I suspect is what opposing OC s imagine when facing the Packers.
