The Next Man Up is a Loser...

All I know is that it seems to work for the Packers.  They have been that way whenever they have had a lot of injuries.   The next man up often times does a great job.   Who am I or you to question whether the Packers are good at evaluating talent or not?   I trust that job to TT.    And to MM for getting the best out of what is available.

Ummmmmm.

 

Coaching?

2nd ummmmm.

 

Attitude?

Once or twice could be a fluke....not yr after yr.  scouting, drafting and coaching seems to be working.

 

Well sorry, history isn't on your side.

 

We'll just stick with your favorite position:

 

Jordy Nelson. Passed by all 32 teams. In a re-do draft, no way he lasts til the second round.

 

Randall Cobb. See Jordy.

 

James Jones. Same thing, although I will give you he took a little longer to mature and be more focused. But he's terrific value considering where he was chosen.

 

J. Boykin. While it's early, so far he's looking like yet another TT pick up that has more then adequately filled in for Jones. With no guarantee JJ will be able to be re-signed, Packers could do far worse at a replacement for JJ in 2014.

 

Not one of these WR's were some no brainer top 10 pick in the draft to help Rodgers. Not one 1st rounder. And at least 2 of them would be in a re-do draft.

 

But the Packers aren't better at evaluating talent. Got it.

It's relying on  the overall system from GM to scrub players instead of the idea of "superstar" players.  A solid base makes it easier to plug in those superstar players and get maximum performance instead of the other way around.  

 

As far as talent scouting, I do believe the Packers are ahead of the game because of TT's dedication to scouting.  With that said, every team seems to have its holes in draft/scouting.  The biggest difference is being able to admit failure and adjust.  

 

In short, it's the whole organization being on the same page.  Look to Tampa as the anti-thesis and bull**** power struggles between idiot coach and slackjaw GM with owners who don't give a flip.

Boykin, a player cut by another team now having success in GB, is an example of the Packers trifecta of scouting, system, and coaching. That's how you achieve development and ultimately a roster if 50/53 players that have never played a down for another team.

Yes, they are. Evaluating talent doesn't mean measuring their height, weight and 40 time. It means projecting a player's rate of progress given their physical, mental and motivational starting points. That's what McCarthy is alluding to when he speaks of the 2nd year jump. For the Packers,  BPA means best potential available.

 

You see plenty of GMs grabbing workout warriors or  college players who succeeded  because they were just bigger/stronger/faster than their opponents. The physical differences are much smaller at the pro level. Brains and ambition allow them to grasp the techniques and schemes that make the difference.

First off. Its pretty obvious there are a few positions GB scouts and evaluates better than most. WR, DB, and Possibly LB.

 

Here's where I think next man up works so well for GB. I believe GB spends a lot of time looking for a very defined skill set by position within their system based on minimum expectation for that position and then looks at players inside out from those parameters. They don't bring in a guy like Zombo because they see him as a 3 down starter. They see a guy that does a very few things well that match their expectation for that position. If he's able to extend past that expectation it's gravy. But it would certainly appear based on history no one is put in a spot that's too big for them (Walden aside). In short, next guy up isn't brought in with the hope he's good. He's brought in because he does something well that syncs up with their expectation.

Its Aaron Rodgers.

 

If you swap Ponder or some of the other crappy QBs we see for AR the Packers are 8-8 the past few years and missing the playoffs more often than not. And we are all screaming for Bill Cowher to save our team.

 

I watched a breakdown of the Packers- Vikes game that showed Greg Jennings wide open multiple times and his QB just couldn't get him the ball. It also showed perfect coverage by Viking defenders yet AR gets the ball in tight spaces for big gains and TDs.

 

Greg Jennings didn't suddenly become terrible and the Vikes are not fools for bringing him in. Their QB makes him look worse than he is. AR makes guys and teams look better than they are.

 

The same thing has been going on in New England for over a decade. Are all the Patriot WRs guys that all the other teams would be taking in the 1st round in they could do a draft do-over?

 

I will say that the Packers DBs are a great group of unknowns that TT has put together.

But even Rodgers' production is related to scouting, coaching, and the system.  Insert Rodgers into the Vikings' system as a rookie and I don't think we would see anything close to what we're seeing from him now.  His production and the team's production are not due to one indiviual factor but it's how all the parts fit together that makes the difference.  So an improved running game, for example, improves the whole team, including the defense, and those improvements help the running game in return. 

Yes, it obviously helps that GB has the best player in football.  Even better that they drafted him when they didn't technically need him, which only speaks to TT's approach. 

 

AR makes everyone on offense better, but he doesn't make Hyde, Shields, Hayward, Lattimore or any of the fill-ins better, and they've performed at a high level.

 

That's having a better eye for tallant than other teams.  All we need to do is compare recent drafts with GB's rivals.

Players that have personal issues rarely get to Green Bay.

Packers are better at evaluating talent.  Sorry!

...and attitudes.  

This.

 

It's probably not one thing, but a combination of things. 

 

TT has skill.  People with skill develop a method (sometimes called a craft), hone it, stick to it, and changeit only where needed as times change.  Perfect example:  why did TT send a rep to cover Aaron Rodgers work out when at the time he was the #1 pick they picked #24. They evaluate everything so that they are prepared in case something might go their way.  Everyone is evaluated with regard to the same philosophy.  They (TT's team) hone their craft to a sharp point and stick to it.  Some can say it better, but TT believes in football players,  talents that fit the offensive and defensive philosophies, and character--probably not in that order.  They have taken draft (and now don't draft) and develop to a new level.

 

MM has an offensive philosophy and a coaching philosophy he sticks with (and apparently a mission statement!)  While he may not have known completely what TT had in mind when he was hired, he buys into the process and works well TT.  Perfect example:  He got tired of the crap Brent pulled and wanted to replace an old vet QB that didn't want to adapt his game from a previous regime for a young gun that was killing it in practice and could grow into what he wanted the leader of his offense to do.  MM has assembled a staff that does this for every part of his game plans.

 

Wisconsin people drink too much, eat cheese and are fat-or so I'm told by Blair Kiel.  That must also fit into this but I don't know how.

 

Why are TT and MM unique?  They aren't completely if you compare to most successful organizations:  Patriots or Steelers (not this year).  It think they buy in more to draft, don't draft and develop than other organizations with discipline and additional caveat's listed above.

 

 

 

And the offense wins a lot of games. Without the wins we are all nitpicking every missed tackle and blown coverage even more and suddenly those defensive players aren't so good.

 

 

I do think TT is probably the best in the NFL at his job, I just think AR makes him look even better.

 

 

IMO JMO IMHO

I have eyes.

 

Hey....I'm on my 23rd Snickers fun size bar tonight---who am I to judge?

 

.....and my 4th Cabernet.

 

No cheese......yet

 

But the overall organization/coaching staff/supporting players created the environment for Rodgers to become the player he currently is.  There is no denying it.  

Combination of coaching and player.  Let's not forget that several of Rodgers first games were real bad before he was a starter.  He had a good game against Dallas but a horrible game against Baltimore.

 

And, there were plenty of people unhappy with him in 2009, for example after Tampa Bay when we lost to the winless Bucs and he threw 3 interceptions. 

 

It was a combination of his dedication to changing his throwing motion he brought from Cal, his study, and MM's QB school that made him the player he is today.

 

And, there is a saying that 95% of the players on each team are interchangeable, with only 4 or 5 being difference makers.  If that is true, then players stepping in for non-difference makers will perform about the same as the player the fill in for.

Agree. And the way TT and MM handled the exiting of Bert so they could keep AR was probably the biggest factor to getting this team to where it is today.

 

But the answer to JZ's question "So why does it work?" is Aaron Rodgers.

 

The real question is if AR had gotten hurt in 2009 and had to leave the game of football where would the Packers be today? Could MM have turned Matt Flynn into something that the Seahawks and Raiders could not? Would TT's system be as popular with the fans?

 

Does the system work without a Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers or a Ben Roethlisberger?

Or a Jay Cutler

 

Yet you can't have one without the other. 

I thought that was love and marriage.

 

LOVELY.

Lobbed that sucker.

Free Safety nailed this.

AR12, is the trump card.

So you dismiss the whole of the organization that didn't turn him into another David Carr?  It's a superstar nursery.

I can think of 4 exceptions.  The Halas, Mara, Rooney and Bidwill families.

Hell no. I get that the coaching staff has a ton to do with his development.

AR has been underrated his entire life & I love the fact he plays with a huge chip on his shoulder whenever he's dissed.

I delete my post because it just does not work here. But in a complete study of NFL organizational culture I would have argued that your 4 exceptions fit into my hypothecs.

But I still think the question why the draft and develop approach works so well for the Packers would be a neat research question into organizational effectiveness.

Sometimes it helps to have a little bit of good fortune as well.

 

What if Rodgers had landed with the 49ers?   Who's to say he would have amounted to what he has today?   The reality is that the Packers lucked out he was there late in the draft and the Packers might have been one of the best situations for him because of how they develop and coach players.  

 

I think we're seeing the same thing with Eddie Lacy.  Sure, there were rumors he is/was lazy and had injury issues, but did these scouts actually watch his games?    Very similar to Rodgers, there were situations where Lacy stepped up in the biggest situations.   The NC game (Lacy) and the USC game (Rodgers) were statement performances that show they can rise above the rest and play at a very high level despite their "flaws"

 

TT does take football players.   But he has a real knack for taking calculated risks as well and he's able to project where he thinks guys might fit.   Think CMIII (didn't play much at USC) or Nick Collins (small school) or Randall Cobb (not big enough) or even Finley (maturity).    At the time those were not slam dunk picks but TT had the vision and confidence to make the choices.  

 

Finally, there's the development part of this equation that needs to be given credit as well.   Brad Jones and Mike Neal.   Jordy and James Jones and Boykin.  Pretty much all of the OL.   We have good coaches and a good system and that helps these guys a lot.  

 

 

This is not true. This is from Wiki about Bill Bidwell's father:  Prior to his ownership of the Cardinals, Bidwill was a successful businessman and wealthy lawyer in Chicago, Illinois, with ties to organized crime boss Al Capone.  The Bidwells were rich long before they became NFL owners.

 

And while Art Rooney's family were never rich, they were café and saloon owners in Pittsburg. Art Rooney won $160,00 at the race track which he spent on the team in the late 1930s.

Wilde has done a rather lengthy series on the next man up philosophy, posted today.  Separate stories from the perspective of the GM, coaches, and players, with interviews featuring TT, Ron Wolf (!), MM and Rodgers.  Very well done and recommended.  (Look at the site menu on the upper right for the three-piece series).

 

http://www.espnwisconsin.com/c...=10891&is_corp=1

Happy Sunday Packer fans !

Perfect day to watch some non-Packer football and realize just how effing good we've got it

 

As far as this thread goes, I'll offer my two cents but I'll warn ya- some of you aren't going to like it

 

Putting it all on Rodgers is way too binary for this discussion, and honestly its a pretty simplistic cop out IMO. Rodgers isn't Rodgers without the Packers and he's said as much on several occasions

 

From  finding Rodgers to developing Rodgers we see evidence all along the way that the Packers are simply very good at everything they do; to suggest that Rodgers showed up one day and that explains all the success is one of the laziest memes I've read here.

 

Rodgers isn't Rodgers if he doesn't get the coaching and organizational support to allow him to mature. Many teams would have been forced to thrown him to the wolves and there's a fair chance they would have ruined him before he got the chance.

 

Rodgers isn't even a Packer if they don't have the incredibly thorough process in place to scout everybody, not just the likely guys at pick 25. The Packers weren't even looking for a QB in 2005, but their organizational excellence allowed them the chance to answer when opportunity knocked

 

The Packers are able to plug in the next man up because they have a philosophy, stick to it and that philosophy permeates the entire org. They also stick with the same GM/HC for a long time ( through thick and thin) and that stability means the front office always knows what types of players will succeed on offense and defense. The marriage between TT and MM is one of the best in the NFL and the results have been noted around the league

 

Next man up depends on the coaching and teaching- which turns these guys into NFL players- guys other teams passed on for various reasons. Sam Shields was available 260 times, no other teams saw his potential nor were able to turn a former WR into a number 1 CB.

 

The Packers did and his ascension has nothing to do with the MVP QB

 

I could go on and on about how the Packers have succeeded where others have failed. Look no further than the 4th round pick starting at LT and kicking ass. An entire offensive line filled with 4th rounders and undrafteds kicking ass in pass pro and running game ? Doing better than the vaunted SF OL filled with 1st rounders ?

That's pretty amazing

 

I'm not sorry to burst your bubble Packer-doubters, but indeed the Mighty Green Bay Packers are better at finding them, coaching them, paying them and winning with them than any other team in the League. Its a fact. You can look it up.

Did you sleep through 2010 Title run ? Jets cut Howard Green for being lazy, Packers turn him into a contributor in a couple weeks and he makes one of the biggest plays in the Super Bowl. That has nothing to do with Aaron Rodgers

 

A big part of the winning philosophy is indeed the "next man up" . However, the original poster started from a false premise - that because these players weren't high draft picks or highly sought after players...they must be losers.

 

Au contraire- they are winners that just needed a little development to bring out the inherent talents they have. They weren't the fastest guy at the combine or the most popular guy from the SEC- but they are football players and the Packers are pretty damn good at uncovering their below-the-surface talents.

 

Too many teams are like the cowboys, a mile wide and an inch deep. But for an organization willing to put in the work scouting and providing a fertile ground for development- the rewards are great. Do you think Jerry Jones is flying to NW South Dakota State this weekend to scout players ?

 

I could spend my day showing you in great detail just how wrong the " They have Aaron Rodgers" cop out is...but I've got better things to do on a glorious Sunday than refuting the Meme of the Day at X4.

 

The Packers organization is a model franchise from top to bottom and the next man up philosophy is just one part of the formula that makes them so damn successful despite having the deck stacked against the smallest outpost in professional sports.

 

 

Go Packers

 

 

 

 

 

 

That should be required reading for every Packer fan, outstanding job Satori.

 

Boris, you should find a way to front page that posting. 

This!  And I would suggest that the Packers storied history plays a part in all of this at every level.  There is no owner that says "this is my team".  The GM himself thinks of himself as "a steward" for the franchise but it isn't "his".  There is no sense of personal ownership, but rather a sense of duty.  The Packers are something bigger than themselves but it is their time to continue the tradition of excellence.  Why were we so angry at Favre...? He desired excellence as well!  But it is because he put himself ABOVE the organization... he made it about himself rather than the Packers.  It isn't that the Packers are naturally excellent, the best, etc.  That's what the fans of other teams hate, what Jennings complained about with his "brainwashing" comment.  No, the Packers have had their dark moments in its history.  What is different about the Packers are the ideals that are embraced by the fans and the team.  We WANT the Packers to be about excellence, we WANT the Packers to be about honor, sportsmanship, and teamwork.  And it is that ideal from everyone in the system that sustains it, that gives people the motivation and energy to keep striving for those ideals.  It is the ideals that raises this team above many others and allows that sense of "next man up"... the unnamed, undrafted player picks up the banner and marches forward and if he falls, the next player picks it up and continues the battle.  The higher ideal and that sense of history drives everything else.