Packers ranked 10th best roster in the NFL

It's one of the ways stats can lie.  People forget what they've seen after several months.  This team did not look like it had the 10th best roster in 2018 - if that's what they're basing it on.

I think he's also taking into consideration additions from FA. He just wrote the article a couple days ago. From his twitter:

Updated NFL Unit Grades#clayprojections pic.twitter.com/W3bkHhcnAl

— Mike Clay (@MikeClayNFL) March 22, 2019

I know I'm a broken record but fix the OL, keep #12 upright and healthy, and this team will win the North by a wide margin. 

I don't think anything is going to win the N by a wide margin, OL or not.

I don't care to read his methodology to his rankings but the first thing I looked up was OLB (EDGE).  I can't tell if he included the Smiths in his analysis.  He also has IND at 9.0 and CHI at 8.2.  So WTF knows?

I'm a bit confused how GB got a 9.0 for OL when we know there's work to be done there.  

Because Buck Cherry is an 11.0 😆

Their roster, while needing improvements, isn't as bad as last year's record.

Christ they probably should've beat the Rams last year & definitely at least 1 win vs. the Vikings

Chongo posted:

I know I'm a broken record but fix the OL, keep #12 upright and healthy, and this team will win the North by a wide margin. 

Years and years under McStubborn of designing ridiculously slow plays to develop which then required Rodgers to stand there forever AND encouraged this "sandlot" style of football where it would take him 7-9 seconds (an eternity) for his OL to block sure as hell didn't help him stay vertical or healthy. 

I am very hopeful that under LaFleur most  of those days are over. I am fine with allowing Rodgers to improvise or change plays here and there but that was much of MM's issues with stale play calling. No defensive coordinator stayed up nights worrying about what innovative plays MM would call. NO ONE. 

We have a ton of speed at WR now. There should be no reason to not scheme WR's open in under 2.5 seconds which then gets the ball out of AR's hands and keeps him standing. 

Oh. 

And let's RTFB!!!!

Vikings QB rating at 5.1!! But, But, But!!!!!

Don't be messin' with KARK!!!

DH13 posted:

It's one of the ways stats can lie.  People forget what they've seen after several months.  This team did not look like it had the 10th best roster in 2018 - if that's what they're basing it on.

I saw "Pro Football Focus" and immediately dismissed it. 

Packiderm posted:

Vikings QB rating at 5.1!! But, But, But!!!!!

About half of ARod's rating... that's about right for Cuz.

Pakrz posted:

I'm a bit confused how GB got a 9.0 for OL when we know there's work to be done there.  

Yeah, that jumped out at me. I'd say it's more like a 6.0 to 6.5 if New Orleans is a 7.2. 

This is such a homeristic thread with a green and gold title.  The Packers have the 23rd worst roster.  C’mon guys (and Goldie).

Please explain how you come up with 23rd. 

Just trying to understand your reasoning. 

Personally, I believe that they are easily top 15, and quit on a stagnant coach. 

They have, hopefully, upgraded during FA. 

Now, there are a lot of early draft picks and I am hoping that they can hit on a few. 

23rd? No way unless you’re using only W/L rankings, which is fundamentally ignorant. 

Hard to rank a roster that quit on their coach very high. 

Packers were weak at TE, WR, OG, ILB, OLB and S last season. You could also add K and P to the list.

Grainbelt

Clearly you missed my sarcasm/(un)humor.  If a team has the 32nd "best roster", then they also would have the 1st "worst roster".  I stated the Packers have the 23rd "worst roster" which is equivalent to the 10th "best".

Pikes Peak posted:

Hard to rank a roster that quit on their coach very high. 

I believe the coach quit on them. 

"Just keep doing what we do boys! You're doing great!"

Boris posted:

Pikes Peak posted:

Hard to rank a roster that quit on their coach very high. 

I believe the coach quit on them. 

"Just keep doing what we do boys! You're doing great!"

I was responding to the post above mine, stating that the team quit on a stagnant coach.  My belief is there was no quitting by the team or the coach.  After 2 years they were what they were, an aging, subpar roster, that was poorly coached.

Hopefully the poorly coached part has been amended and the roster will continue to be strengthened.   

I definitely don’t buy the grade of the OL. The interior has been weaker each season since Lang/Sitton we’re the starters. RT has been problematic with Bulaga unable to play about half the games. 

They addressed the OT depth but still need more. They addressed OLB depth with (hopefully) upgrades but still need more. 

To be fair to the OL, 2 things:

1) Rodgers had the 5th most time to throw (2.95 seconds) of any QB in the NFL in 2018. When you give up the amount of sacks we did, but there is still a significant amount of time to throw I think there's cause to think perhaps the OL wasn't the biggest problem. Individual pieces at times, like Spriggs and McCray, were problems, but as whole the OL did some very positive things.

2) This list assumes everyone is healthy, which everyone is right now. When you look at a healthy OL you have two lock down Tackles, a quality starting C, a LG who is good enough, and now that they've added Turner you have a quality RG. That doesn't account for depth (or lack thereof) or likelihood of injuries, its a rating of the starting 5. On paper our starting 5 really aren't that bad, it's when you look deeper than those 5 and further into the future that things look shaky. 

I agree with the ranking, this is a good roster when you look at the starting 22. Every roster has 1 or 2 holes that need to be addressed, there are no teams that are perfect. Gute has shored up weaknesses at S, RG and OLB, there will be a fresh evaluation and potential for improvement at every position, and draft capital to address long term needs at S, OL, CB, etc. We're better now than we were in 2018 and we still went 6-10 with Rodgers not looking like himself (also nicked up), a 4 game stretch with an interim, and a new defensive system players will still learning. It's not unreasonable to think this team could go 10-6 or better, which would have put them in the top 12 of the NFL last year. 

My thoughts on the roster is that I think there is more talent on it than we think but what caused it to under achieve is the stale coaching and injuries.

My hope is that a new coaching staff will bring a breath of fresh air to the team, Gute's moves pay off to restock the roster, and one of these seasons this team will make it though the year without having half the players out each week.   I honestly don not think they are that far off from being really good again.

Sometimes players/units don't have a particularly great season, for a variety of reasons.  Doesn't mean the players/units will be poor the  following season.

As GD said, there's talent in the starting 5 of the OL.  Get a draftee or two, maybe a UDFA, and then have improvement maybe from better scheme and coaching.

I think this the most talented starting 11 defense we’ve had since 2010. It’s honestly amazing and refreshing to see how Gute has maneuvered this roster so quickly to make this team a viable contender without handicapping the cap like some GMs have down. He’s taken care of Rodgers AND improved the talent level within a year, I thought we were looking at a multi-year rebuild to build things up around that huge contract. 

As for the OL : Bell and McCray were so bad, the play was often busted from the start with middle penetration. Same when Spriggs' horrifying presence was needed.  Just cause Rodgers ran around for 2.95 seconds to buy time doesn't hide the fact of how bad those guys were, and how much they railroaded the offense. 

New blood at Guard, and a more timing based offense should be a breathe of fresh air. 

Packdog posted:

As for the OL : Bell and McCray were so bad, the play was often busted from the start with middle penetration. Same when Spriggs' horrifying presence was needed.  Just cause Rodgers ran around for 2.95 seconds to buy time doesn't hide the fact of how bad those guys were, and how much they railroaded the offense. 

New blood at Guard, and a more timing based offense should be a breathe of fresh air. 

I don't think they'r measuring Time to Throw to include running around, I think the clock stops as soon as pressure starts. Rodgers legitimately had time to throw more often than not, I think the story when it comes to the high sack total is about depth behind the starting 5 OL, Rodgers pulling the trigger, and WRs not open. I don't think, when healthy, the starting 5 OL were the cause of the high sack total. 

Balance in the pass/run ratio will go a long way too. Too many time under MM's offense, opposing defenses simply pinned their ears back and tore after Rodgers because the Packers had very little real intention of running the football (see Aaron Jones pathetic attempts per game again and again). 

I really believe LaFleur plans to balance this thing out. That should slow down the rush and stop allowing pass rushers to fly off the LOS every time. 

OL like Bakh and Taylor have also said they'd love to run block more then they do. Blocking a dude 6-9 seconds play after play gets very old, not to mention very tiring, very quickly

Difficult as it is but seems all the more so with an almost complete overhaul in the coaching staff. Expect the new staff to do a better job of adjusting to the strengths and weakness of the personnel than the previous one did.

PackerHawk posted:

Pakrz posted:

I'm a bit confused how GB got a 9.0 for OL when we know there's work to be done there.  

Yeah, that jumped out at me. I'd say it's more like a 6.0 to 6.5 if New Orleans is a 7.2. 

New Orleans is a good benchmark. They were 32nd(best) in allowing QB hits(52). Plus a very strong rushing attack.

Packers were 10th worst(bottom third of NFL) at allowing QB hits(102). Improving the RG position along with better scheme should help immensely. We already know the Pack can run the ball successfully if someone calls it !!!  

Our new coaches may have Rodgers get rid of the ball quicker than he normally does. Hitting an open receiver, underneath the coverage, is as good as completing a deep pass if the underneath reception moves the chains. It also allows Rodgers to get into a rhythm with his passing game and it keeps the O Line fresher if they don't have to block for an eternity while Rodgers hunts for an open receiver downfield. Now the question is: Can Rodgers be coached? I say yes.

packerboi posted:

Balance in the pass/run ratio will go a long way too. Too many time under MM's offense, opposing defenses simply pinned their ears back and tore after Rodgers because the Packers had very little real intention of running the football (see Aaron Jones pathetic attempts per game again and again). 

I really believe LaFleur plans to balance this thing out. That should slow down the rush and stop allowing pass rushers to fly off the LOS every time. 

OL like Bakh and Taylor have also said they'd love to run block more then they do. Blocking a dude 6-9 seconds play after play gets very old, not to mention very tiring, very quickly

Balance to me is THE key thing the Packers need to achieve this coming season.   By all accounts is sounds like MLF is determined to run the ball and I think he proved that last year in TN.  I think during MM's tenure they would start running the ball and then mysteriously they would just abandon the run.  

If that can happen I really look forward to see what angry bald man can do with the D.  That is if the D can stay healthy.

I'm sure every team wants to have balance on offense.  But few have the coaches and players to make that happen on a regular basis.

Our new OL and hopefully a better blocking TE will be VITAL.

I know it's old news, but....last years game planning decisions are still stunning to me. You have the leagues best YPC running game, so what do you do ? Throw the ball or put in the backup RB !!!??? Agggh

Packdog posted:

I know it's old news, but....last years game planning decisions are still stunning to me. You have the leagues best YPC running game, so what do you do ? Throw the ball or put in the backup RB !!!??? Agggh

Makes me wonder if subconsciously he was sabotaging himself....

The Heckler posted:

packerboi posted:

Balance in the pass/run ratio will go a long way too. Too many time under MM's offense, opposing defenses simply pinned their ears back and tore after Rodgers because the Packers had very little real intention of running the football (see Aaron Jones pathetic attempts per game again and again). 

I really believe LaFleur plans to balance this thing out. That should slow down the rush and stop allowing pass rushers to fly off the LOS every time. 

OL like Bakh and Taylor have also said they'd love to run block more then they do. Blocking a dude 6-9 seconds play after play gets very old, not to mention very tiring, very quickly

Balance to me is THE key thing the Packers need to achieve this coming season.   By all accounts is sounds like MLF is determined to run the ball and I think he proved that last year in TN.  I think during MM's tenure they would start running the ball and then mysteriously they would just abandon the run.  

If that can happen I really look forward to see what angry bald man can do with the D.  That is if the D can stay healthy.

 

Who were the Qb's in Tennessee?

Packdog posted:

I know it's old news, but....last years game planning decisions are still stunning to me. You have the leagues best YPC running game, so what do you do ? Throw the ball or put in the backup RB !!!??? Agggh

We do what we do....

The new offense and all that will get Rodgers interested again. He will be coachable for MLF. If the results are good early on it should continue along that line. If things fall apart, look for old habits to show up again.