Cory's Corner: The Chiefs Proved It

You don't need a No. 1 wideout to win a championship. You just need plenty of leadership. 

Remember all the talk about not having a No. 1 wide receiver?

The Packers didn’t have a true No. 1 wideout all year after Davante Adams left for Las Vegas. And the Chiefs didn’t have a true No. 1 this season after Tyreek Hill left for Miami. 

Yet, the Packers failed to make the playoffs and the Chiefs beat the Eagles 38-35 in Super Bowl LVII.

It’s even more interesting because Mahomes won a ring without a dominant running game, with the unreliable hands of Marquez Valdes-Scantling and rookie receiver Skyy Moore, who caught his first touchdown as a pro in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl. 

I mean, Mahomes just climbed the mountain with a bunch of guys at wide receiver. There were many analysts that didn’t think Kansas City could even win the AFC West without the “Cheetah.” 

So what does this all mean? It means that you shouldn’t be so in love with the shiny object. You cannot spend over $20 million on a wideout, because receivers grow on trees in the college ranks.

Basically, what it means is that we didn’t hear about Mahomes not trusting his young and inexperienced receivers. That group had plenty of growing pains. The Chiefs had 29 drops this season, which is only four better than the Packers’ 33. Obviously, Mahomes knew that this year was going to be a tough season and he just put his head down and believed in that group. If Mahomes doesn’t, I don’t see how the Chiefs claim their second championship in four years. 

I did like the Christian Watson pick, but expecting him to play like a bona fide No. 1 right away was short sighted. And we all saw that Allen Lazard is probably a No. 3. 

But despite all of those offensive warts, I still think the Packers can turn the ship around quickly. And yes, they can do it with green receivers.

The reason why it worked in Kansas City was because coach Andy Reid and Mahomes allowed the receivers to fail. No matter if the receiver ran the wrong route, blew a block on a running play or just dropped a third down pass. The best way to learn is by making mistakes and then helping them through it — not barking at them through the media.

Mahomes was already a solid quarterback, but winning it this way really shows what kind of a leader he is. Mahomes had average wide receiver threats, but just tallied the second-most touchdowns of his five-year starting career.

The Chiefs proved that the Packers don’t need a high profile wide receiver. Green Bay just needs leadership at the most important position.  
 

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

__________________________

NFL Categories: 
8 points
 

Comments (166)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
NickPerry's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:14 am

"The Chiefs proved that the Packers don’t need a high profile wide receiver. Green Bay just needs leadership at the most important position. "

Well that and a TE like Travis Kelce, a head coach with some balls, and a DC who can actually come up with a game plain like Spagnola has shown he can do over and over again.

28 points
28
0
egbertsouse's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:06 am

And coaches who can make adjustments at halftime. Compare KC in the first half with KC in the second half and see the results of good coaching. Of course, Reid was so busy coaching he didn’t get to flap his arms at all. And Spagnola was fired up, I lip-read the “F” word coming out of his mouth a couple times. Doesn’t he know that the DC is supposed to stand there and bite his thumbnail the entire game?

15 points
15
0
LeotisHarris's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:54 am

I read the Chiefs' discussion at halftime focused on execution on offense. No changes in the what, just a fine-tuning of the how, and that they knew what they had to do. They also benefitted from the extended halftime break to fuel-up on chicken strips.

The two touchdown passes where the receivers started in motion, then broke back to the outside were called "corndog." Eric Bieniemy, the OC, said the name came from the fact that "we like to eat." Gotta love it!

I was impressed with the humility shown by Mahomes, his teammates, and the coaching staff; lots of giving credit to others. Fun team to watch.

8 points
8
0
dobber's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:07 am

Kelce caught 100+ passes this season. He's their #1 WR...he just happens to be listed as a TE.

...and he can block.

8 points
8
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:18 am

Call me crazy, but Allen Lazard caught 60 passes for 788 yards and 6 TDs, but, if our FHOF QB wasn't so adverse to throwing in the middle of the field (where Kelce catches 90 percent of his balls) Lazard might have caught 100 balls this year too... SMH

2 points
5
3
dobber's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:51 am

You're crazy. ;)

2 points
2
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:12 am

dobber, I know you appreciate facts, so I'll leave this here and people can draw their own conclusions.

The Packers finished 14th in scoring this year, KC finished first. Of the 13 teams ahead of the Packers, 12 of them made the playoffs. (Detroit, of course) Only the Giants and Tampa were a little worse.

The Packers were 17th in passing yards, 18th in attempts. That's average, and that's good, IMO, if you don't want to be a pass-happy team. 13 of the 14 teams with the most passing yards made the playoffs. (Detroit, of course).

In RUSHING attempts, we were 15th. Average. KC was 24th. They're a pass heavy team. They have Mahomes in his prime, and you'd want to throw a lot, just like we threw a lot when we had Rodgers in his prime. We loaded up on WRs. It didn't get us there.

The Chiefs threw 651 times for 41 TDs. The Packers threw 563 times for 27 TDs. If we had thrown it as many times as KC did, we might have had 35 TDs, along with Buffalo and Cincinnati.

The story is kind of clear to me: If you can throw, throw. If you've got a Top QB like Burrow or Mahomes or Allen, throw. Throw it a lot. Being a prolific passing team is a shortcut to the playoffs.

But if you don't have that guy.....and the Packers don't anymore, unless Love becomes that guy...then you maybe shouldn't throw it around that much. And that makes me question how many "targets" we really need.

As I've said....65 snaps, about 40 of them going to the RBs. That's 25 for everybody else.

Watson? You definitely want to run some plays for him. Let's say, 8. Now we're at 17. A top TE? Probably another 7. Now we're at 10 for everybody else. Doubs, Toure, Melton, Deguara.....

Tonyan got targeted 67 times...about 4/game.....and caught 53.

I'm just questioning all this. How much do we really want to throw? Who do we want to throw to? IMO, we've got some pretty decent targets. I'm not against getting another one, but as always, I think improvements in the line will help more than improvements in the receivers.

0 points
3
3
PhantomII's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:59 pm

IF: IN ALL PLAYOFFS 2019 and after.....NOT IF (WHEN) OUR OL IS BULLIED INTO STOPPING THE RUN GAME. The only thing left is the pass game. We have too small and weak OL. We have to use TE's to block, instead of going for a pass so the few WR's going out are easily covered. A big bad ass OL is the one thing that will make your statement accurate. We would not need TE's to block in the run game...but it wouldn't hurt and we wouldn't need our TE's to block in the pass game. This basic issue is the biggest problem GB has...ML's preferred style of running sideways instead of straight forward. If the OL is not upsized we need elite pass catchers that can get open often and QB1 needs to throw to them when they do..OOPS...We have 2-problems...

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:35 pm

And he carried them when they needed it most. Exactly what a TE can do, or used to for us a long long time ago.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Fan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:43 am

Nick, you hit it right on the head. Used your best offensive player alot. Designed plays that actually worked. Didn't have a big ego. And a DC that used rookies just enough to hold off the Eagles in the second half.

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:14 am

And who would our best offensive player be? Jones, IMO, followed by Watson and Tonyan.

I agree. There's no point in being too tricky. Shoot the big gun, reload, shoot it again.

1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:43 pm

Two of whom may not be here.

2 points
2
0
Heyward's picture

February 14, 2023 at 01:30 pm

Exactly. If the Packers had Kelce and KC's GM and coaching staff, they would've been just fine without Adams.

1 points
1
0
Savage57's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:58 am

It starts with the QB. Princess is on his annual journey of self-discovery while the guy who replaced him as the best QB in the game is 'all gas, no brakes' when it comes to chasing championships.

Try to imagine these words coming from Rodgers' mouth.

As for his offseason, Mahomes plans to take "a few weeks off" and said he believes the ankle shouldn't hold him back. He plans to be ready for April workouts in his home state of Texas and in OTAs with the Chiefs. The only thing that will take a hit this offseason, Mahomes joked, would be his golf game.

"I'll for sure be ready for OTAs and everything like that," he said. "Obviously we will to continue to rehab, continue the treatment that we were doing, just give it some rest. I mean, I think the best thing for it is going to be rest."

Meanwhile, someone else is going to be going on walkabout.

6 points
13
7
CheesedDeadHead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:07 pm

"best QB in the game is 'all gas, no brakes' when it comes to chasing championships."

Are you talking about Mahomes or Brady? Because that's exactly what I thought about Brady. He didn't ever want to lose. AR12? He sure does want to win an MVP, but what about those team goals? Not seeing it and I'm not in total darkness.

3 points
3
0
stockholder's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:14 am

Defense wins championships.
And that was why KC won.
You can point to Wr.
But I'll point to MOMENTUM.
Ball security is priority #1.
Turnovers lose Games.
Mahomes did his job this game.
Players want to play with a good QB.
But the truth is: Defense won this game.
And let's be honest. MVS was still a threat.
The pressure was on. They paid him.
So- the shiny object is still needed.
And you can't put pressure on a defense
unless you have the right tools in the tool box.

-3 points
9
12
Oppy's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:21 am

So many one-liners
just to say that
Rodgers is never culpable

9 points
13
4
Untylu1968's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:44 am

So all we need is a D that can hold its opponent to 35? Or a QB capable of putting up 38..

11 points
11
0
egbertsouse's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:46 am

Right, KC’s defense won that championship by allowing 35 points. Mahomes just did his job it by not throwing interceptions. All those TD passes had nothing to do with the outcome. Wow!

9 points
9
0
stockholder's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:52 am

7 points on a fumble and momentum shift.
A Qb that can run? Is nothing new.

-6 points
4
10
egbertsouse's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:22 am

Ok , allowed 35 and scored 7 for a net of 28. Still not outstanding, certainly not 85 Bears quality.

3 points
3
0
jurp's picture

February 14, 2023 at 03:01 pm

A QB that can run is exactly what we DON'T have in Rodgers. Love can run; Rodgers no longer can.

Once again you make the argument that the team is better with Love at QB, not Rodgers.

1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:26 am

Defense does win Chamionships, but that’s not why KC won. Great defenses don’t give up 35 points and Mahommes and Coach Reid is why KC won.

10 points
10
0
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:26 am

SH, they gave up 35 points and were down 10 at halftime. Defense did not win them this game.

6 points
6
0
LambeauPlain's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:17 am

Chiefs scored 14 points in the first half as their D gave up 24 and were not "winning a championship".

But the resilient Chiefs scored 14 points on two long drives to start the 2nd half. The Chiefs D tightened a bit but still gave up a tying TD late in the 4th.

But the Chiefs O took over and bled the clock and kicked the game winner.

Defense often decides Championships...but this game was won by Offense.

5 points
5
0
murf7777's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:03 am

Stockholder, how confident if the Eagle had a minute left to get a FG that the KC Defense would’ve stopped them? In there, lies your answer.

4 points
5
1
Tundraboy's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:36 pm

This was painful to read.

1 points
1
0
PatrickGB's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:25 am

Against a very tough defense, the goal for KC was to get the ball out quick (reportedly under two seconds) and complete short passes until things open up.

8 points
8
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:32 am

The Chiefs had a number 1 weapon in Kelce. A number 1 target doesn't always have to be a WR. Kelce had 110 receptions for 1338 yards and 12 TD's. Those are number 1 target numbers.

But what Kelce does is he opens things up for the WR's. While they didn't have a true number 1 WR this year they had plenty of options at WR. They found roles for each player. Smith-Schuster had 78 catches for 933 yards. MVS had 42 catches for 687 yards. McKinnon while a RB was used as a receiver had 56 catches for 512 yards.

What this says is they had a number 1 target in Kelce and worked around him. They found ways to use Toney, and Moore. They found ways to use the RB's. They do a really good job of scheming players.

For the Packers, they have a future number 1 WR in Watson. Now whether its this year or next year, we won't know that. But he has the skillset to be the number 1. To go with Watson they have Doubs. Who is a 1B or 2 WR. They have a great start at WR with Watson and Doubs.

7 points
8
1
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:30 am

RC lett me ask you this: if Rodgers was on the chiefs does that team still win the super bowl? We both know the answer is no. That team wouldnt even be in the super bowl.

3 points
7
4
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:39 am

What does Rodgers have to do with what I said?

3 points
6
3
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:47 am

Because ultimately your long essay is one big excuse for Rodgers. Mahomes has Kelce, Mahomes has Reid, blah blah blah. Nobody wants to admit that Mahomes is already waaaaaay better than Rodgers ever was, not just as a player, but as a leader and person too. So we'll just keep finding reasons to avoid admitting it to ourselves instead.

5 points
10
5
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:54 am

I literally said nothing about Rodgers or Mahommes. I don't know what the hell you are talking about with making excuses. 75% of what I was talking about was about the Chiefs.

I was purely talking about the weaponry. Which was basically about what was written in the article.

It has nothing to do with the QB. If anything it has more to do about the coaches and schemes they run.

1 points
5
4
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:09 am

You didnt have to.

1 points
5
4
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:37 am

yeah because I didn't say it, or imply it in anyway.

2 points
4
2
Packerpasty's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:24 am

some people are obsessed with Rodgers...thats apparent here on cheesehead...they have to bring AR into every single post...

0 points
5
5
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:50 am

No doubt!

1 points
4
3
MainePackFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:40 am

RTS. Everything RC wrote in the post you responded to was true. He addressed the article. His points are valid. Kelce is a number one receiver for them. He does open up the field and that does help the WR's. He went on to talk about the Packers WR's and the positives they bring to the Packers. Do you disagree with any of that?

You brought Rodgers into the conversation. Why?

"Because ultimately your long essay is one big excuse for Rodgers"

No disrespect my friend, but I think you are reading between the lines based on your disdain for AR. RC hasn't been bashful speaking his mind about Rodgers. If he wanted to make it about Rodgers he would have.

4 points
6
2
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:02 am

Thanks Maine!

I honestly am tired of talking about Rodgers every day. I was happy that we finally had an article that wasn't about Rodgers and the first response to my post is purely about Rodgers and someone trying to put words into my mouth.

2 points
6
4
MainePackFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:15 am

RC. I agree. We've all hashed out the AR story in here a million times. There's really not much left to say. It is now, and always has been, out of our control. I too welcomed this article as a way to talk about something else. Your post did exactly that. Well done!!

1 points
5
4
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:53 am

Exactly!

Thanks!

2 points
3
1
Since'61's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:59 am

Agree MPF - once again our CHTV record is skipping and needs to be flipped over or changed out. But clicks rule in this era. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
3
3
Since'61's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:55 am

RC and Maine Pack fan - unfortunately many posters need to make their points about Rodgers by inferring or putting words into your posts. It is and has been a problem with eCommunications. Especially when one party in the conversation doesn't have any facts or events to support their hypothesis or opinion (read as accusations in this case).

Regrettably we have reached the point where making a comment related to the article becomes a comment on a totally unrelated point and is used against one party to justify the usually non-factual and speculative opinion of another party who is often looking to argue for the sake of arguing.

I've seen it happen among professionals at every level of the corporate ladder during my career. Blogs and eCommunications are great and often efficient but in numerous cases nothing replaces personal contact either via the phone or preferably in person.

Keyboard warriors have earned that moniker for a reason. They hide behind their screens to create false narratives and arguments where none exists in an attempt to generate a response or to continue an argument over their specious comments. It is a price (necessary evil) that we pay for engaging in blogs, email, SMS, etc. Thanks, Since '61

3 points
6
3
MainePackFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 01:51 pm

Since'61. This is why you are one of the most respected commenters on this site. When you post your thoughts it's done with logic and facts not just your opinion. Even if I might have a different point of view at times, I am always left with pause to reconsider my views based on your post. That's something I really appreciate and I thank you for that.

1 points
2
1
Since'61's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:38 pm

MainePackFan - I appreciate your generous comment. For me that is what the blog should be about. The exchange of thoughts and facts in a collegial manner without trying to argue over opinions or trying to win arguments.

I've always tried to picture the blog as a virtual, on going discussion among 5 or 6 of us sitting around a table in a tavern enjoying our food and drinks as we discuss Packer football. As the discussion carries on participants come and go but the discussion carries on even among participants who only have Packer football in common with each other. I think that numerous misunderstandings would be at least mitigated if not eliminated entirely in that setting.

The blog is the best we have and I'm grateful that we have that at least. Being a life long, long distance fan I was usually the only Packer fan in an NFL discussion either in NYC or the surrounding area especially during the 70s and 80s. That's why I try to express my appreciation to Jersey Al, Nags, our contributors and most importantly my fellow bloggers in my closing salutation, Thanks, Since '61

1 points
1
0
MainePackFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 05:00 pm

"That's why I try to express my appreciation to Jersey Al, Nags, our contributors and most importantly my fellow bloggers in my closing salutation, Thanks, Since '61"

'61. As someone who has lived the majority of his life in Maine, you can imagine that I have a limited amount of Packer Backers so I too have much appreciation for Jersey Al, Nags, the contributors here as well as all the commenters.

0 points
0
0
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 05:18 pm

MPF....have an off topic question for you.

I was born and raised in WI but haven't lived there in years. In the ensuing years I've lived in different parts of the country. Almost, without fail, in a city of at least decent size, I've always found at least one Packer bar to go watch games with fellow Packer fans. I've always been surprised by that, considering how small and relatively remote Green Bay, WI is.

My question...have you encountered any Packer bars in Maine? I do long distance cycling in my retirement years and always wanted to bike the Maine/VT/NH area some day. It would be nice to stop in a friendly, local pub and share some Packers stories with the locals over a beer or two.

1 points
1
0
MainePackFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:55 pm

13. I live in a fairly rural area in central Maine. There aren't many bars period, let alone Packer bars. As you get closer to Portland there may be, but that's a pretty long drive to watch a game and have a beer. Maine Is an awesome place to visit. If you like to cycle you will find plenty of beautiful scenery that are cycle friendly, especially along the coast. You would love it.

I wear Packer attire all the time, even at work, and it amazes me the amount of people I run into that are Packer fans, even in a state that only has 1.3M people.

I recently had a house built and was checking out the progress. I was wearing a Packers pullover and met the guy (for the first time) that was doing my in floor heating system. He spotted my pullover and we spent the whole time talking about the Packers. it was pretty cool :) The Packer brand is alive and well all over the world.

0 points
0
0
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:37 pm

Awesome! Thank you, I grew up in a rural area as well. I would love to visit Maine, one of the few US states I haven't had the privilege. Someday soon I hope!

1 points
1
0
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:44 pm

MPF, first off, no offense taken. RC's points were true and relevant to the article. But what is the article really doing? Comparing the super bowl winning chiefs to the current Packers team and where it went wrong. And Rodgers was the qb for this team so how can we make any kind of comparisons or correlations without discussing him? I think we can all agree that we want championships right? Whether we agree or disagree on other things we really want the same thing. We see how special the trio of Veach/Reid/Mahomes is with the Chiefs and thats where that team's greatness begins. Thats what I want for this team and its never gonna happen with a qb who consisently puts himself above the other two, whom he is supposed to respect as his superiors in the chain of command. As for RC, sorry if some of my comments came off as snide. Im working on doing less of that. Not to make excuses for myself, but Ive been on the "trade Rodgers" train for a few years now since before it was acceptable and Ive taken a ton of heat for it which has made be somewhat hardened towards other fans. Im aware its not ok and Im taking steps to address it. So to you and any others I may have offended, I am sorry. As I mentioned, we all want the same thing. I just want to see the only sports team I still care about return to greatness. Nothing more, nothing less.

1 points
1
0
MainePackFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 04:48 pm

RTS. I appreciate the response. It's all good.

"Im aware its not ok and Im taking steps to address it."

Have you ever considered 4 days of total darkness as therapy : ) just kidding lol.

-1 points
0
1
murf7777's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:15 am

If Rodgers had Reid and Kelce and Co., yes, I believe he could’ve won the SB. He’s just recently had two MVP seasons, you need to return to sanity.

That’s not saying Rodgers is better than Mahommes, what it says, is Reid is equivalent to Belichick regarding in game management, play calling, building a coaching staff and managing his players. Rodgers is still one of the best QB’s in the game. Reid will go down as one of the best ever. Put them together and yes, I believe they win a SB.

2 points
5
3
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:33 am

All very nice, but we don’t and won’t have such players this year because we’ve run ourselves into a cap hole. We also have LaFleur and continuity. Rodgers might have a chance with the Jets or a similarly loaded roster, but that’s not here. It won’t be here while we have him due to his contract and the prior last dances as well.

It is over and we won’t return to relevance until we accept that and move on. Moving Rodgers is the first step in that for us in the situation this franchise has got itself into. It may be the best thing that could happen to him too.

We need to start looking at 2025 when guys like Watson hit their peak if we are lucky, and beyond, based upon what we do have and that won’t include Rodgers. No guarantees, but the current path is actively harmful to that window.

1 points
4
3
murf7777's picture

February 14, 2023 at 01:00 pm

CW….Funny you don’t talk about Doubs and Toure who you were acting like they were the next coming pre season and during the beginning stating they should be starting. I debated with you that Doubs had potential and might be a steal as a 4th rounder but don’t expect too much in year one. You found out as teams figured him out he wasn’t that effective the second half of the year. I think he will be pretty good over time and did and still do like the draft pick.
I also told you there are many like Toure, he’s a 7th rounder for a reason and might get ST playing time. You were basically calling MLF an idiot for not playing him. Every team has a Toure or two on their team or practice squad.

0 points
2
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 05:43 pm

I’m very optimistic about Doubs and Toure. I wasn’t really addressing individuals. It could be that Melton joins them too. They would fit in with Watson’s timeline as referenced. My point was about overall team timelines.

However, since you mention it, Doubs was looking good before his high ankle sprain, something that usually causes problems on return for some time. Toure never got a real chance. We instead went with Watson (rightly) Lazard and Cobb almost without exception. Not knocking Lazard but he’s a piece not an every down playmaker. With Cobb out there as well we were just slow and had only one playmaking threat (as a receiver).

In my view, as you know, a damning lack of invention and imagination by not Rodgers but LaFleur. Contrast that with how Reid shuffled his pieces. The offense we rolled out this year was both negative in terms of design and personnel usage. A dearth of motion and ridiculously heavily predicated on Watkins Cobb and Lazard and then the last two. Toothless, unambitious and predictable. We got less than we should have and tried for less than we should have.

I’m not optimistic about LaFleur’s ability to incorporate youth. He did not get as much from MVS as we should have, may not have got what we could from Amari or ESQ. His use of Watson seemed counter intuitive. Few deep crossers, very few routes to draw coverage, lots of go routes that weren’t his forte. Doubs was mostly thrown to within 5 yards of scrimmage despite being picked for excelling mid to long. Almost never used in the slot. Toure was never used at all. Watson was often hung out to dry and got pummeled.

I think all 3 picks last year could yet be good. I think they could have helped s lot more this year with a true coach. As could s guy like Goodson. I am very concerned at LaFkeur’s ability to properly integrate and develop their potential and incorporate it, indeed any player not already fully formed, be it WR, RB or TE. Look at Dillon’s usage.

So no change in my stance, in fact you underestimate the breadth and depth of my concerns and I’ve not even mentioned non skill players or beyond the offense. LaFleur in my view isn’t bad he’s catastrophic and the evidence has been accumulating on Tactical, strategic, developmental and man management fronts for years for any that look.

The man who couldn’t win with Rodgers, or perhaps better, the man who ensured Rodgers didn’t again. The sooner he’s gone the better. A good coach and Rodgers may well be a 2 ring QB happily retired. The worst possible pick in hindsight: I’d rather we’d reanimated Sherman.

I believe our D underperformed against potential, but I agree with Leatherhead that it was the O that was truly the real problem. I do not put all, even most of that on Rodgers. His being here may not make sense in my view, but if I had a choice I’d get rid of LaFleur first, were it not for the cap. Rodgers departure for me is a pragmatic acceptance of chances squandered and the price incurred. LaFleur is just a mistake at pretty much every level.

-1 points
1
2
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:20 pm

"I’m not optimistic about LaFleur’s ability to incorporate youth. He did not get as much from MVS as we should have, may not have got what we could from Amari or ESQ."

Interesting how Andy Reid, who is universally recognized as one of the top offensive minds, got a whopping 42 receptions and 2 TD's out of MVS, and EQ had 1 TD last year in Chi.

But Lafleur is catastrophically bad for not getting more out of them. Geezus.

2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:24 pm

MVS isnt stellar and that wasn’t my point (I did mention Amari and ESB who aren’t either). My sole reason for referencing him was to ask but could he have been better with another coach for his first contract? I think so. I know it’s a red rag issue for you, but that wasn’t where I was going at all.

0 points
2
2
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:33 pm

No the red rag, whatever the hell that is, issue is your nonstop obsession with ripping on GB's coaching staff. And I believe I addressed ESB in my response and his one TD in Chicago.

"but could he have been better with another coach for his first contract? "

Why wasn't he better with his first year in KC? Was that Lafleur's fault too?

1 points
3
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:50 pm

Why isn’t Trubisky better away from Chicago? Was he never going to be or was it a result of his time there? Same point

I rip on LaFleur because I believe it and I’m no apologizing to you for my beliefs or anything else. if you love LaFleur or feel I’m being over harsh, then feel free to lay out some reasons. Mostly you just like to berate others. Try expressing an original rationale or save your hot air to offset your heating bill.

And yes, you explode at any suggestion that MVS is an NFL player. Yet miss the more bizarre suggestion that ESB and Amari might have had that potential.

And no, I’m not going to debate this for 50 entries with you. Murf challenged me to respond. He and I disagree on it. However, his comments are thought provoking. Yours just provoking, intentionally I suspect.

0 points
3
3
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 06:59 pm

I'm not asking you to apologize. I'm asking why MLF is an idiot when MVS and ESB didn't flourish under his tenure, but their next stops weren't any better. Simple question that you seem to have no answer for.

You're the one who brought this up, not me.

0 points
2
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:38 pm

I thought I spelled that out at length in a response to Murpf’s challenge, in which I used MVS, ESB as a one example within one point. And I did in fact pose the question of why they weren’t/aren’t any better. The focus being on what we I’d with them possibly being a factor in that: not focused on what they are but what they might have been. It’s arguable that the Chiefs wouldn’t have been there without MVS during the Championship game, by the way. What the Chiefs/league think of that will no don’t be in clear over this off season.

-2 points
1
3
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:26 pm

Just to set the record straight, I've never questioned whether MVS is an NFL player. Just that he's a role player not worth a $30 million dollar contract. I think his performance over the past 5 years has borne that out with two different organizations. For an expert like yourself I would have thought you would have realized that by now. But, hey, I'm sure he'll bust out next year.

It's interesting it's ok to berate MLF non-stop multiple times a day from someone with zero coaching experience, but to disagree with one of your comments is off limits.

Personally, I think my posts are quite thought provoking. Enjoy your evening.

1 points
3
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:40 pm

Lol, you strike me as the type who would think that. Enjoy your moments of self-assigned congratulation.

-2 points
1
3
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:51 pm

I will, and thank you. And I'm sure you will go to bed tonight enjoying your "self-assigned" congrats on your belief you're actually an NFL head coach.

Pleasant dreams.

-1 points
1
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:09 pm

Well, if only NFL coaches, GMs and owners can post here then Al may as well turn out the lights. Certainly you won’t be back. A comment so bizarre on a blog like this that it actually garnered a laugh. A first for you I think. Not sure if it’s with you or at you though.

-2 points
1
3
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:26 pm

For someone who didn't want to debate this 50 times, you can't seem to stay away. I've tried to end this conversation multiple times, but to no avail.

I'll try once again. I'm about to curl up on the sofa with wifey and watch a movie. Enjoy your evening. I'm sure MLF will be just as incompetent tomorrow as he is tonight. Hope springs eternal.

2 points
2
0
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:52 pm

You think Andy Reid would put up with his antics? He wouldve traded Rodgers a decade ago. Reid's a guy who doesnt waste time on complacency. They had Alex Smith who was good enough to get them to the playoffs every year and they moved on from him real fast. And Smith was a class act for them. Theres zero chance Reid wouldve put up with Rodgers' big game failures AND the behavioral headaches too. Imagine Rodgers trying to tell Andy Reid what plays he can and cant call. That would last about 5 seconds and the front office wouldnt step on his toes either. Believing otherwise is silly. Also worth noting, Reid won exactly zero super bowls before Mahomes came around. Couldnt win with Mcnabb or Foles or Vick or Smith. Mahomes got him over the hump. Rodgers is not Mahomes. Mahomes has already surpassed Rodgers by a wide margain. Mahomes' average season is as good or better than Rodgers' best season.

4 points
6
2
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 03:00 pm

"Imagine Rodgers trying to tell Andy Reid what plays he can and cant call."

I would pay to watch that conversation...as short as it would be. Lol

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:16 am

RTS, let me ask you this: If the Packers had drafted Jalen Hurts instead of Love, and the Eagles had taken Love in the second round, would Jalen Hurts be sitting on the bench for three years behind Rodgers while Love went to the Super Bowl?

Some people here are going to be really surprised at what Love does next year.

2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:41 pm

Let’s hope so! It beats the alternative and it’s certainly not impossible.

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:57 pm

There are some other things here too. Of KC's young receivers, the one with the most targets checks in at a paltry 34. The top five guys as to number of targets on KC were all veterans. Not so with GB. Doubs checked with a substantial 67 targets for 3rd place on the Packers, and Watson was 5th with 66. They would have been 2nd and 3rd but for injuries.

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

February 15, 2023 at 06:47 am

TGR…I’ve contested that WR’s are a dime a dozen and not important to a great QB, they are to a non-great one. That is because I watched Brady do what he did for years without them. Now, I see it with KC to some extent, albeit he has Kelce, but not much else. On the flip side, the Eagles were potent because of two high end WR’s. So, I’m in a quandary. I’m starting to put the label more onto RB’s. What’s your thoughts
?

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:46 am

No #1 WR? How about #1 coaching?

11 points
11
0
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:41 am

Could you imagine Mahomes strongarming Andy Reid over control of the playbook? Could you imagine Mahomes trashing Reid publicly over and over again? Could you imagine Mahomes holding out for more control over everything? Yeah me neither. Mahomes shuts his mouth and does his job as it should be. Reid is able to do his job because he is empowered to do so by his boss and isnt being undercut by the $450 million dollar qb at every turn. You see that pre snap motion whip route the chiefs killed the eagles with repeatedly, including 2 touchdowns? Matt Lafleur was calling that play in Green Bay years ago. But hes not allowed to anymore cuz hes been neutered by Murphy who chose the druggy qb over his own hand picked head coach. Reid is great cuz he doesnt have anyone getting in his way. Lafleur has the equivalent of a chastity belt around his neck thanks to Rodgers. This team isnt winning anything until this completely insane way of running the team becomes a thing of the past.

-1 points
5
6
murf7777's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:25 am

You have some good points…….I think that says more about Reid vs Mlf, than Rodgers. If Reid is coaching Rodgers, I believe Rodgers is different and Reid wouldn’t put up with it. Same thing with Belichick. Maybe Mlf will be better with a young QB, but he certainly didn’t do a good job at managing Rodgers. Rodgers seemed to think he knew more than Mlf and that didn’t work.

4 points
5
1
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:38 am

I think it comes down to the front office structure. Andy Reid doesnt answer to the owner or the team president. He answers to the GM, Brett Veach, who leaves him alone to do his job. Lafleur answers directly to Murphy, who just loves telling us how he has the final say in everything. I think this arrangement worked ok until Rodgers held out. Then Murphy came in and started stepping on toes. Weve seen a change in the entire operation since then. All of a sudden were keeping all these old players to keep 12 happy and destroying the salary cap for years to come in the process. Weve also seen a completely different product on the field as it relates to scheme and philosophy since then. Long story short, Rodgers threw a temper tantrum, held out, and Murphy being the hack lawyer that he is forced Gute and Lafleur to grab their ankles in order to keep 12 happy. I think if Lafleur was allowed to run this offense like he did in 2019 and 2020, this team wouldve been in the playoffs last year and wouldve appeared a hell of a lot less dyfunctional. If Rodgers is gone, Murphy has no more reasons to step on toes. Ideally id like to see Murphy given his pink slip for trying to become Jerry Jones but I dont think thats going to happening.

Edit: there is no "managing" Aaron Rodgers.

1 points
5
4
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:43 am

I think a lot, perhaps the greatest part, is LaFleur not Rodgers, certainly those two have not proved beneficial to each other or the team as I see it. The sad fact is that we are stuck with LaFleur and only by moving on will we change that.

Either LaFleur will blossom post Rodgers or be shown as the pretender I personally think that he is and the reason we came up empty the last few years with Adams. As long as Rodgers stays we will not find out and there will be an excuse for continuity, indeed Rodgers is likely an active force perpetuating some of that.

7 points
7
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:03 am

"""Could you imagine Mahomes strongarming Andy Reid over control of the playbook"""

No. But then again, I couldn't imagine a 27 year old Rodgers strongarming a veteran coach. Do I think it's out of the question that a 38 year old Mahomes, who has won several MVPs and is on his way to the HOF might strongarm a rookie coach?

?????

4 points
4
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 04:35 pm

Guys, in this discussion it is very important to include personalities. I did not read much of scouting reports conected with Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Love, Hurts, Lawrence, Jackson etc. But I know for sure there were no underlined remark for important character problem - cockiness. That cockiness comes from important flow - arrogance.

Ted Thompson knew that but still draft him. He knew how to handle ACR. And ACR was pretty quiet while TT was in control. Why? Because of Brett Favre. ACR knew that TT will benched him immediately if he will start to show any kind of arrogance towards Packers organization. His antics when someone did not caught pass TT left to HC, who was responsible for team (not compisition of the team) and plays.

At the beginning of 2017 became clear that TT is shelf of himself. And that was moment when ACR started his manipulative games vs McCarthy, basically vs guy who made him that good QB as he was at that time. When nobody reacted ACR rise the bet. He understood that Mark Murphy is little freighten mouse. And after TT officialy retired, ACR run out of town, in the middle of the season, HC whom he should be thankful for all his development as young player.

When Mark Murphy established himself as de facto GM, ACR started to celebrating. He knew that he has Packers in his hand.

He hadn't show much disturbance by move from Brian Gutekunst - drafting Jordan Love. I remember well his statement: "No, I did not know they will draft QB. But, I understand why. They need to think about organization".

Everything was OK. There was no OTAs, Minicamp or TC in full extent. Jordan Love was so-so in preseason games. Nothing special. Season started and full practice started. At the beginning it was OK. Packers was winning and there was not much talk about Jordan Love, as he was listed as 3rd QB on the team. But, as practices continued through the season ACR recognized something. Jordan Love has a lot of talent, at the moment row talent, but he is dangerous for ACR future if he will continue to develop. After season finished how it was finished ACR started to consider his options. He knew that Jorsan Love is not ready, so he started another manipulation in the direction of Mark "we are not idiots" Murphy. He place the bomb that he is pissed off the Packers organization and behaviour of Brian Gutekunst towards him. And that he will never ever play for Packers. At the beginning of the draft! That afternoon. It was intentional by time and by date.

We all knows how trio was flying across the country to talk with ACR. It finished with that shameful press conference before start of training camp. He got what he asked to give him. Cobb, Mason Crosby, participation in constructing game plans, right to pick players he wants to be on the field (on offense, of course), and to change play calls by his will and how he scan the field pre snap. Also he insisted specific plays to be added to playbook. And to be consulted in players aquisitions. He got everything.

Result of that we saw this season. No, it is not OL, it is not ST, it is not #1WR, it is not bad D, it is not bad drafting. It is disfunctional organization in which every position of power has excuse for failures. There is nobody who will ask subordinant for accountability, because nobody is subordinant. There is no clear structure who is responsible for what.

That result is product of manipulation by one person, who I want to believe, thought all his ideas was good for him, and, consequently for Packers. Mark "we are not idiots" Murphy organized structure of football operation in the manner that he can be covered if anything would go wrong. Last month we heard from his mouth that he is not meddling in football operations, just receives reports. 2 times per month. He has no spine. He is like jelly. You can not catch him.

And, at rhe end we expect Mark Murphy to solve the siruation? No way. Packers are on the way to the bottom and Mark Murphy will be remembered as successful CEO of Packers organization.

Remember this, and I hope all of us will live enough to see that - MAHOMES, BURROW, LOVE are DIFFERENT KIND OF PERSONS AND WILL NEVER ACT LIKE SELFISH EGOISTIC NARCISSIST, or in short, like ACR.

If you think that this is some kind of conspiracy theory, I hope you'll live long enough to learn is this what I wrote truth or product of polluted mind.

1 points
1
0
Tundraboy's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:45 pm

Why the down votes ? Truth hurts I guess. A functioning Coach / QB dynamic was on full display and a stark contrast to our team.

1 points
1
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:23 am

You mean MaLF and Barry don't = Reid & Spags?

I'm shocked!

Shocked I tell you.

9 points
9
0
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:27 am

Packers defense didnt do much worse vs the Eagles than the Chiefs did.

5 points
5
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:48 am

The only difference is, we got beat and the Chiefs didn't.

Losing = Failure

Failure is not our goal.

4 points
5
1
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:50 am

My takeaway was thinking what would Reid have got out of our roster? His use of his cast of players around Kelce is just on a vastly different level, as is his flexibility in game. I think he’d have got a vast amount more out of Watson, Doubs, but also guys like Toure and Goodson as well as using Jones and Dillon better. Let alone the TEs. I think he’d also have varied it by opponent as well as during games.

7 points
7
0
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:16 am

How long do you think it would have taken him to find his O-line and return specialist? Andy Read is a build a front first coach.

3 points
3
0
Tundraboy's picture

February 16, 2023 at 01:43 pm

Me thinks you're right!. What a smart novel approach. Don't know what you have until you use it and Reid of course has the courage to make adjustments.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:18 am

And it was our worst game of the year on defense, and 14 of the points directly followed a turnover setting up the Eagles on a short field.

3 points
3
0
Cheezehead72's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:47 am

We have GM/HC/QB Rodgers. Oh that's right the article is about having leadership. We have little to no leadership. The GM caves to the QB to keep him happy. Our HC might be able to do the job if he was not calling plays. He needs to be a HC or an OC not both. Plus he cannot make the tough decisions like putting Rodgers in his place. Like making him play in preseason and benching him when he is not playing well. Then there is firing the DC when he has shown he is unwilling to do what he needs to. We have a QB that wants to be everything but a QB and he wants to see his name in the media. He thinks the name of the team is Arron Rodgers Packers. Now let's look at Mark Murphy the President of the organization. He denies that there is any problems. He thinks all is good and if he does not he is doing little to change it. That is why we will have another losing season next year.

6 points
9
3
mrtundra's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:04 am

I see more of the same, next season, especially if Rodgers comes back. I'd rather see Love struggle, but improve, as our QB, than to see Rodgers lead our team to the spectator seats, in the playoffs, once again. IMO, it is time to move on to Jordan Love. I think management needs to be free of the Rodgers effect, as well. How nice would it be, to see Love engaged in all the team's voluntary workouts, OFAs, and training camps earning the trust of the players and the coaches? You know; a leader and not a prima donna! Don't get me wrong, I love what Aaron Rodgers has done for our team and franchise, but it is time to move on.

8 points
9
1
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:08 am

You said you would rather see Love struggle but improve.

My question with this for you, is what do you do if he struggles but doesn't improve? What then?

-4 points
3
7
Cheezehead72's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:18 am

I will answer that. The same thing we will do if Rodgers plays one or two more seasons. look for a new QB. Rodgers has one or two seasons left. Love has a career if he does good.

9 points
10
1
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:21 am

I'm not talking about QB12 today. Just focusing on Love and the future.

So if Love is no good, the plan is to have high draft picks for a while and keep trying to find the right QB?

2 points
4
2
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:34 am

And what if Love is awesome? Why dont people ever consider that? Its only ever "what if he sucks?" And this is why this team currently sucks. The front office and many of its fans are operating from a place of fear. Fortune favors the bold, not the scared. You dont win super bowls by playing it safe. Rip the damn band aid off and lets get this ship headed in the right direction again.

8 points
9
1
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:43 am

I didn't say he won't be or can't be. None of us truly know. If anyone claims they know they are talking out of their ass because none of us know.

The truth for me is If they trade Rodgers and Love is the guy he has my full support. I will be rooting for Love as hard as I have any previous QB. I want my team to succeed and I don't wish bad on any player.

I'm simply asking a question to someone who said they wanted to trade Rodgers and was ready for Love to struggle but would get better. So i simply asked the question what happens if he doesn't get better?

Everyone on this page seems to think that getting rid of Rodgers is automatically making us better or automatically getting us to the Super Bowl.

-3 points
3
6
dobber's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:05 am

"Everyone on this page seems to think that getting rid of Rodgers is automatically making us better or automatically getting us to the Super Bowl."

I don't know about automatic SuperBowls, but I don't think that the current stew in GB is a winning recipe. I don't think the path to the fifth ring lies down the track this team aligned itself with...as such, there's an obligation on the part of management to reorient to try to find the better route. It's harder to see that coalescing around 12 than seeing it without him.

In the end, the next QB (or two or three) in GB will suffer by comparison to 4 and 12. There's going to be a lot of pressure on those guys--likely unfairly so. It's too unlikely that the next generational talent is already waiting in the wings. It puts more pressure on management and coaching to find ways to prop that guy up.

...but fear that 10 might not be a star is not a good reason to cling to 12 as his contract increases and his skills decline.

9 points
9
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:32 am

I have maintained that I believe Rodgers can win a superbowl here. This year was an anomaly compared to the previous 3. A lot went wrong, but because a lot went wrong, doesn't mean we have to blow the whole thing up and start over. Reading many posts on here I get 2 feelings.

1 - A Loud group of people on this page wants Rodgers gone. Some feel he is the reason why we haven't made it to the Super Bowl and getting rid of him, meaning we will be better. To that group I say be careful what you wish for. Remember when there were fans that were happy Adams left because now we can spread the ball around. How did that work out. I caution those people that think Rodgers is the issue, because there is a chance he isn't the issue. Maybe other circumstances were the reason for the down year.

2 - There is a group that want Rodgers gone, all the coaches gone and to start from scratch. They want to blow this thing up and start over. This group I question if they are really Packer fans, and if we maybe are being infiltrated from the trophy less team to our west. Because I don't know why you would want to blow the entire team up when we came off 3 - 13 win seasons.

"...but fear that 10 might not be a star is not a good reason to cling to 12 as his contract increases and his skills decline."

Management should have a pretty damn good feeling if 10 is ready or not. And that is basically what my main point is with Love. We as fans have no clue if he is good, can be good, or will be good. We simply haven't seen enough from him to make a determination. But the management has to know that he will be or can be if they move away from Rodgers. If they trade Rodgers, he goes on to win a super bowl and Love is really bad, how much longer will management have jobs? So for them, they have to be right in whatever decision they make.

If Love is not good that sets the franchise back. It maybe years before you make the playoffs again without a good QB. Look at the teams and what they give up to have a chance at a good QB. When you have one you don't let them go.

Now like you said Love could be good. He could be great. He could be the next Rodgers and maybe is better. We have no idea, and until he gets playing no one will know. That being all being said, management needs to know this based on the practice reps they have seen.

-4 points
3
7
dobber's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:01 am

"If Love is not good that sets the franchise back. It maybe years before you make the playoffs again without a good QB. "

It sets the franchise back if they're not honest with themselves in what they have and cling to him when he's a failure. It sets the franchise back if they burn up the cap building a roster and scheme that doesn't fit what he can do.

It also sets the team back if you cling to a QB--out of fear of what the next QB might not be able to do-- who regresses to the mean while eating up ridiculous cap space. Like it or not, 12's arrow is not pointing up (insert crude 'that's what she said' joke here).

The question is, "what will define 'good'?"--is it a guy throwing for a bunch of yards, and padding the stat sheet? Is it about winning football games? Are we all about only tolerating generational talents at QB (ahem, SH)? There are a lot of QBs out there that are only "decent" or "better than average", and some who were playing football in weeks 19-20.

7 points
7
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:26 am

For me I don't see a drop off in talent with Rodgers. No he isn't running around like he did when young. But he has the pocket awareness and ability to move around within the pocket. He can still gain 5-10 yards on the ground if needed though.

I see this year completely different then others apparently. There was too much that went against this offense this year out of the control of the QB in my eyes. The new coaches, the new WR's, the OL was a mess, the thumb injury. All of that lead to a down year. Also the early part of the year they were focused to much on the read option stuff in the offense. When they went back to more of a play action style of offense, they got better.

I believe I read that the Packers had either the most, tied for the most or 2nd most drops of catchable passes then any team in the league. There were many key plays this year where a dropped 3rd down pass stopped drives.

The difference with me is right now I believe Rodgers gives us the best chance to win the super bowl this coming year. I believe we will be a super bowl caliber team. Everyone will argue with me on that point, which is fine. I have no problem standing on that mountain alone.
I don't think we will be with Love, just because he will have growing pains to go through. The following year i think will be more ready for him.

But the reasons why I feel better going into next year is I feel like our offense learned a lot of things this year. It went through the growing pains. The rookie WR's will be looking to take a step next year. They figured out the OL, and I believe they are going to add talent to the roster, and not really lose a lot. Oh and if Rodgers is back he won't have the broken thumb.

-4 points
2
6
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:15 am

I said it this time last year. Rodgers plus our cap, LaFleur and this roster is a recipe for disappointment. It was by and will continue to be and in doing so only weaken our ability to recover in the post Rodgers era.

If Love doesn’t improve then at least our cap does and we might actually force the team to get a competent coach. Either way it’s more steps in the right direction, just partial ones.

If Love excels or grows into a true starter, then he either overcomes LaFleur or those who believe Rodgers is really the reason for LaFleur being awful will be proved right.

There’s no logic in mortgaging the future to run it back with less. The Rodgers era in Green Bay is over and is damaging the future. Love either fixes it or at least sets the process in motion.

Rodgers won’t be starting any where in a couple of years, and that’s when our talent that we are developing might start to peak. It’s that talent that should become our focus now: setting ourselves to capitalize on it and that starts with adding options to add talent through FA and/or high draft picks.

Love, good or bad, moves us on. In fact so would Etling. Love proving to be good would be the perfect outcome, but it’s not necessary now for the move on from Rodgers to require that to start the process of a return to contention, and that may be painful but it will be worse the longer we put it off.

6 points
9
3
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:16 am

Ive literally never said getting rid of Rodgers guarantees them a super bowl. But keeping him guarantees they wont win another super bowl. That much I can promise you. Sending him packing will be addition by subtraction because this team can begin operating like its supposed to. GM's pick players, coaches manage and develop those players, and players play. That chain of command is broken right now. Removing Rodgers' toxicity and stranglehold over this team will be a huge step in the right direction. Where they go from there is up to them.

7 points
10
3
dobber's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:22 am

" Removing Rodgers' toxicity and stranglehold over this team will be a huge step in the right direction."

This is a key piece, too, IMO. I can't believe that the locker room won't change dramatically when 12 leaves it.

7 points
9
2
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:50 am

Thank you RTS!

1 points
4
3
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:16 am

Hey Snot! Havent seen you in a minute. Hows life?

1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:06 am

RTS,
Thanks for asking! Life has been crazy stressful of late between work, flu, putting dog down, and in-law estate planning issues.

Combine all that with frustrations with the Packers/Rodgers mis-management crap the past couple years & I find it tough to contribute much lately. Being a fellow draft nerd I have been spending time researching possible draft prospects for the Packers. Most all the time I'm all for drafting big bodies on both sides of the line early. This year is different, as I am really hoping the Packers somehow end up with Quentin Johnston at WR (why hoping someone like Raiders trade for AR to ensure the Packers get him), along with two good TE's. Quentin would be a game changer really complimenting Watson. For many reasons, I firmly believe it is finally time to rebuild the offense & particularly at the skilled positions to benefit Love & offense. The offense needs to once again strike fear in opposing teams. To be able to pull out a come from behind 4th Qtr win. I am operating from perspective AR will be traded for minimally a 1st & 2nd in 2023, which allows the team to really fortify both the offense & defense with young talent. Be especially nice if another pick or two was included in 2024 to further escalate the Packers recovery as contenders. My mind cannot fathom the Packer front office once again screwing up this offseason regarding Rodgers.

5 points
5
0
jont's picture

February 14, 2023 at 03:41 pm

"Rip the damn band aid off and lets get this ship headed in the right direction again."

Now THIS is how you do metaphor. I am going to use this line until the guys at work are absolutely sick of it.

2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:00 am

I keep coming back to the point that the health of this team going forward is not based on 10 being a star. He's first in line for the QB gig, and it would be awesome if he is a star, but if he's not the guy, you be honest with yourself in that assessment and go looking for the guy.

6 points
7
1
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:28 am

He doesn't need to be a star. Just competent. If the roster and coaching around him are adequate that's all we'll need. I'm more worried about coaching than players at this point.

5 points
5
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:54 am

How many 'just competent' QB's have won super bowls lately?

-5 points
2
7
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:04 am

What about last year? I wonder how we will view the other QB in this year’s contest in 5 years. It’s not a certainty that he’s a Hall of Famer. What actual level was Brady as a QB when he won last? What actual level will Rodgers be at 40 or 41? If he’s just adequate, then presumably under your gist, we are nuts to pay him what we are.

8 points
9
1
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:30 am

Stafford was pretty good last year, wouldn't you agree?

0 points
2
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:02 am

Is he a hall of famer? You set the context. Over his career, he’s be competent in my opinion. I chose not to mention Fowles or others from a little further back, but to point out that recent QBs may not see Canton or will but not based upon their quality as of their last appearance.

6 points
6
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:14 am

With the Super Bowl win Stafford is in conversation for the HOF now. I don't know if he will be or not. I think down the road he will make it.

I feel he is better then Eli Manning, and would you put Eli in the HOF?

-2 points
1
3
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:48 pm

Probably not.

2 points
2
0
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:10 am

What do you mean by lately? Look at the year Philly won their only SB with a backup for a recent example. Do you realize that this year is the only recent SB won by an MVP QB? He won that by being competent in the O he used. Start with competent and that can lead to greatness. Have to be that first to have a chance to shine.

I'm with you RCP, I'd love to have a game changer at QB. I'll settle for a game manager to start with.

6 points
7
1
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:40 am

In the last 10 years we have Brady winning 4, Mahommes winning 2, Wilson, Foles, Manning and Stafford each winning one.

Brady and Mahommes are great. Brady was assisted by his defense in Tampa and the talent around him. Stafford had a great year. Wilson was good but that was mostly a defensive team. Manny was awful and was a complete defensive win. Foles played well enough, but the team around him was good.

So i would say in the last 10 years 8 of the wins were due to good/great QB play. Its hard to win without a very good QB.

0 points
2
2
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:21 am

So you were wrong by your own admission. 20 percent were merely competent, that goes to almost a third of one allows that Brady was not anywhere near his peak the last time.

You make statements that are rebutted and then try to nit pick little holes and recalibrate as if that supports your stance. The issue is you can’t let go of what Rodgers was even though you can’t find a watertight reason for supporting continuing her belief. The reason is that there isn’t one.

Maybe Rodgers stays and maybe he goes. But these houses you take us round each day are way too familiar. We will not win a Super Bowl with Rodgers now. We will only make it harder to do so for longer. Enjoy that futility if he stays. For me it’s a sad end to a career and potentially a waste of younger talent.

It’s done, it was done last year and so us this endless attempt to justify denial. I’m interested in the Packers, not one player. Moving on as we should.

5 points
7
2
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:10 pm

Holy shit. Can I make a statement without someone bringing it back to Rodgers? Not everything I talk about is about Rodgers.

I'm talking about super bowl QB's. The last 10 years Mahommes and Brady won 6 of the Super Bowls. They are Hall of Fame QB's. And Brady was still one of the best QB's playing when he won. Did he require help, yes, but he was still one of the top QB's in the league.

The other 4 super bowls were won by Manning, Wilson, Foles, Stafford.
-Wilson won 1 and he was a pretty good QB. Likely not a HOF QB, but he was pretty good when he won it. The year he won it he was one of the finalists for MVP that year. So he was one of the better QB's in the league that year.
-Stafford had a very good year. He was one of the finalists for MVP.
-Manning sucked that year and was carried by his defense.
-Foles was the super bowl MVP so he clearly more then just a competent QB.

So I would say 90% of the QB's that won the super bowl were more then just competent QB's. 10% was barely competent.

-3 points
1
4
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:52 pm

Keep on circling. As I said, I’ve come to the point where it’s past time to get off this topic entirely even if it means not pointing out obvious contradictions.

4 points
4
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 01:28 pm

And what contradictions are those?

I have said the same damn things all day. Between you and RTS, you keep trying to put words into what I'm saying.

-3 points
1
4
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 07:55 pm

RC, away from this issue I find your insights interesting. Here we just disagree. While I do not subscribe to the view that Rodgers is a primary cause of futility, I simply do not believe that our roster and cap are compatible with him at this point. I did not last year and his contract only amplified and confirmed that. I therefore conclude that we will win nothing as long as he stays. That therefore we have to change to start the process of returning to contention.

You clearly believe otherwise. I admit I see your posts as, as a body, trying to find a basis to support that belief: to justify continuing belief that Rodgers remaining can be justified. For me that’s not succeeding in the context of the cap/roster and contract and yes, the combination of him and LaFleur. I’ve just come to the view that our perceptions are incompatible. We don’t see the same thing.

So I think it’s just best to go back to exchanging views on other issues. We are going to find out what is happening soon-by default if necessary. At that point a welter of other things will happen around that decision. Maybe then there will be something more constructive to engage in this issue. At any rate everyone else knows our views in detail at this point.

2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:03 am

Even if he’s awful, we have started the process of self renewal. The fantasy underpinning a lot here is that Rodgers (a) carry an average roster to a Super Bowl and (b) that Rodgers is a logical option to harvest the upside of guys like Watson. Both are completely untrue.

Rodgers best hope now is a couple of years with a loaded roster. That’s not happening here with our cap. Watson needs to find a QB fit the next 6 years if he does indeed become what we hope. That is very definitely not Rodgers.

Therefore we’d better start looking now to maximize our chances of finding one at least good enough. That likely starts with Love. It definitely starts with getting the cap back under done control. The future will require FA help whomever is QB.

Time to move on.

3 points
5
2
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:52 am

Which if Love isn't the guy, we could be looking for a long time, like many teams have done.

Look at the desperation of teams trying to find the guy. Broncos, Browns, 49ers Bears.

49ers traded their 1st round pick, plus the next years 1st and 2nd round pick, plus the following years 1st round pick to move up and get Lance. They traded 3 1st round picks and a 2nd for 1 pick. That is a huge haul.

Bears traded their 1st round and 2nd round pick, and the next years 1st and 4th round picks to move up for Fields.

Browns traded their first round picks in '22, '23, '24, a 3rd in '23 and 4th in '24. Don't forget that Watson was suspended at the time too.

Broncos traded for Wilson and a 4th round pick, for Noah Fant, Drew Lock, Shelby Harris, '22 1st, 2nd, 5th round picks, '23 1st, and 2nd round picks. They gave up an insane amount for a 5-12 season.

Basically my point is that if you have a good QB you keep them. Hopefully Love will be a good one.

-5 points
2
7
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:14 am

We have a QB who has been great. Unfortunately he’s nearing 40 and it is increasingly questionable how good he is going to be. He is surrounded by questionable coaching and brings with him a total lack of cap. He’s got a short window that doesn’t fit our roster. Even younger and with more around him he couldn’t get it done. That’s why: past greatness doesn’t count much in sports and even great QBs don’t win without the right parts around them. It’s over, that’s why.

7 points
8
1
barutanseijin's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:35 pm

Rodgers is no longer a good quarterback.

1 points
1
0
Cheezehead72's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:16 am

Me too. I have purchased my ticket and am waiting to board "The Love Train"

4 points
6
2
croatpackfan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:42 am

Cory, this time I agree completely with your claim. To win SB you do not need HOFer or two. You need balanced and well rounded team. In 2020 and 2021 Packers had 2 HOFers on the team (ACR & DA). They were not enough to bring them to SB, not to win it. You need above average top 10 QB and very good players on almost every position on offense, defense and ST. Is that fisible. Well it can be.

Second they need top HC, who knows what he want from his OC, DC and STC. HC has to install the culture "everybody for one - one for everybody".

At moment Packers do not have that. So, with QB who cares only about self and small group of players and with existing roster and coaches Packers will not be able to win their division, and it will be very hard to go to play offs.

Taking ACR from the team can and will strength roster cohesion and make possible to show FO, coaches and us, fans, where is the bigest holes on team. Is that some positions, players, coaches or personnel departmen will be much clearer.

At the moment we already knows that the weakest link at Packers is Mark "we are not idiots" Murphy (I'm talking about football operations!).

4 points
7
3
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:14 am

"To win SB you do not need HOFer or two. You need balanced and well rounded team."

I completely agree with you on this. I think back to our last Super Bowl victory. We had the passing game and that was pretty damn good. But our offense didn't click until James Starks came on and gave us a running game. And the defense was really damn good. That was a very good balanced team with offense and defense. Having a complete team with few weaknesses makes it easier to win it all.

But also being able to minimize your weaknesses, is a big key too. Because with injuries and whatnot, there will always be some sort of weakness.

6 points
6
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:29 am

James Starks, while a great kid, was a barely serviceable 6th round pick RB too. Our RB situation in those years was almost a complete failure by TT. Remember when he had to go out and trade for Ryan Grant, because our RB room was total crap? As much credit as TT gets, he also had plenty of oversights and mistakes...

3 points
4
1
RCPackerFan's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:04 am

yeah he didn't become a star or anything. But he was the final piece that our offense needed that year.

Grant did play really well overall. But yeah our RB's for a long stretch there were not very good.

4 points
4
0
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:24 am

Whats crazy is that Chiefs' did it with 6 rookies playing regularly including 4 rookie starters. And whats even more crazy is they are scheduled to be roughly $80 million under the cap in 2023. That will come down cuz Chris Jones will get big money, but the Chiefs are gonna have some serious flexibility. The kind of flexibility the Packers wont have anytime soon. Smfh. I miss Ted.

8 points
8
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:39 am

While I gave you a Thumbs up, TT had plenty of failures of leadership, missed opportunities, and poor choices. Our RB situation for example was crap for years under TT. Paying AJ Hawk $10 million a year when he rode RBs for 6 yards a pop like a rodeo clown? I could go on and on about TTs failures, even before:

Damarius Randall
Quinten Rollins
Kevin King
Vince Biegel
Jason Spriggs

How many years were we millions under the cap but TT wouldn't go out and get Favre or AR12 a true #1 WR? How many more Super Bowls could the Packers have if TT would've went all-in just once?

3 points
5
2
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:49 am

Ted wasnt perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but he always kept things stable, at least till his health started failing him. Stability and continuity are the secrets to prolonged success in this league. Thats exactly what Ted gave us. Now we have a 3 ring circus where the elephant is leading the conductor.

Edit: Thompson was only GM witb Favre for 3 years. In that time they had Driver, Jennings, and he drafted Jordy/Jones so miss me with the lack of receivers excuse. Favre had everything he needed. Decided to throw it to the other team instead. And Rodgers had all the receivers during his time under Thompson. Driver Jennings, Jones, Jordy, Cobb.

5 points
5
0
Coldworld's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:26 am

Had we not extended Rodgers, even after a couple of last dances, our cap would have been heading in the right direction now. I think that those last dances were justified and the cap management with in bounds in that context. Then we inexplicably entered into that contract extension and the wheels came off. The current cap mess is really down to that move by Murphy and Ball when we should have been consolidating and beginning a new era.

6 points
7
1
The_Baloney_Stops_Here's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:14 am

And what if they went all in and the bottom fell out the very next year like we just saw with the Rams? What if they went all in and didnt even win a super bowl and still ended up like this year's rams? People would be cursing his name for eternity. Eagles went all in this year. Spent all the money, traded draft picks,etc. And did they win? Nope. And now half their roster are free agents. Gonna be a completely different team next year. Stability is king. Remember that.

2 points
3
1
Tundraboy's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:45 pm

Or a top flight TE.

-1 points
0
1
Since'61's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:46 pm

RTS good post. Doing it with 6 rookies is the result of sound management by the FO and excellent coaching starting with Reid and extending through his entire staff. Thanks, Since '61

3 points
3
0
LambeauPlain's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:30 am

If Acting GM Murphy was intending to move on with Love, Barry Ball would be gone next season.

Love would be expected to have his first year starter struggles so the call here would be to hire a top DC that can actually coach 7 #1 draft picks to their strengths. And help carry the team in close games.

Also draft an OL and TE during the first 2 days and lean on the run game and short passing attack.

Barry, like Capers before him, is a HC's death wish.

3 points
5
2
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:48 am

"Barry, like Capers before him, is a HC's death wish." I'm really wondering why MLF is sticking with this "wish"? Do you think there's outside pressure? Or is he thinking he doesn't want to fail at a hire again, even if sticking is a fail?

4 points
4
0
LambeauPlain's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:10 am

I read MLF, after Drayton's incompetence last year, was still intending to bring him back. It seems the other 3 guys at the "football committee" table overruled him on that. But keeping Barry speaks volumes.

It seems Murphy is expecting Rodgers returning as starter so status quo is the safe, "feet of clay" call. Starting a new QB AND a bringing in an effective DC is too risky for his legacy as he plods through his last two years hoping for a miracle.

4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:19 am

You keep disparaging Barry. We had an average defense. We gave up 2 more points this season than KC.

You should give it a rest.

1 points
5
4
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 01:08 pm

Here's this for you my friend LH. Got it off of SI Fan Nation's Bill Huber on Bold Predictions, "by finishing 17th in points allowed and 17th in total defense. Even those mediocre numbers were masked by a ball-control offense. On a per-play basis, the Packers were 28th against the run and 28th against the pass."

They were an average defense that under achieved. The average numbers "17th" masked the horrid numbers "28th". Taking the high and the low that averages out to 22.5. Hard to win consistently let alone carry a struggling team if you're between 22nd and 23rd in the league.

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 15, 2023 at 07:52 am

So how does a team that's 28th against the run, and 28th against the pass finish 17th in scoring and 17th in yards? How does it have one of the better 3rd down percentages?

I like Huber. You can massage stats in a lot of ways, but at the end of the day, it's points that matter. 17th. If you take away the 14 garbage points we gave to Minnesota, we're about 12th.

Whatever else you want to say about the Packer defense, they did an average job of keeping the score under control and giving the team a chance to win.

2 points
2
0
T7Steve's picture

February 15, 2023 at 08:05 am

I was hoping you'd understand that and explain it to me. They were good on third downs because the opposing teams got first downs on 1st or 2nd down. If for some reason they got them to third down they didn't scare teams into punting and allowed a 1st down on 4th down.

Actually, they D did better towards the end of the season (which saved Barry's job), just didn't come close to being the force they were expected to be. They couldn't carry a struggling O that couldn't even decide who or where to play on the line for the first 5 or 6 games. They were lucky to win the 3 games early, that they did.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 15, 2023 at 11:54 am

If it was so easy to get first downs against them, how come they gave up so few? (321, 11th fewest in the league. By comparison, #2 SF gave up 291, and people pretty much recognize SF as a good defense. I guess it's that extra 1.6 first downs per game.

Sarcasm aside, the explanation that teams converted on first and second downs so often that they didn't face third down is without merit.

Your last point, about the 4th down conversions, has problems too. First off, only 19 fourth down attempts were made on us. 22 teams had more 4th downs attempted on them. And only 11 were converted, which ranked 14th. Again, for comparison, 10 were converted against SF.

Abandon the narrative. The Packer defense was an AVERAGE defense. A little above in some things, a little below in others. AVERAGE. Plenty good enough to win with, as KC just proved.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

February 15, 2023 at 12:00 pm

Thanks LH. I guess it seemed worse because of those long clock eating drives.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:46 am

Let's just say this.

Everything the Chiefs have and do, the Packers don't and can't.

In fact, it can be said about Philly also.

Another fact, the Packers are now mired in with the part of the league that is more the weekly blah/boring, and certainly, (smacks face) behind Detroit, at the moment, but a couple of pieces ahead of Chicago, thankfully.

8 points
8
0
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:51 am

TE, that really hurts, " (smacks face) behind Detroit". Never thought I'd see the day, but it's true. At least last season.

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:07 am

People should stop talking about winning a Super Bowl, and start focusing on how we're going to score some points against Detroit (very bad defense).

We scored 9 and 16 against them, and if we'd scored another TD in either of those games, we'd have gone to the playoffs.

Win your division. Beat the teams in your division. Then you can start worrying about the rest of the stuff.

1 points
5
4
stockholder's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:19 am

They saw what happened with Walker out.
More speed outside is needed.

1 points
3
2
TarynsEyes's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:35 am

“Win your division. Beat the teams in your division. Then you can start worrying about the rest of the stuff.”

This is actually the problem with the Packers. They have been beating the teams in the Division. They've been winning the Division. It appears that seems to be the end of their plan, and why they haven't been to an SB for 12 years, and it appears the plan is to NOT be in another SB for quite a few more.

“We scored 9 and 16 against them, and if we'd scored another TD in either of those games, we'd have gone to the playoffs.”

Yeah, sure, because winning those two games against Detroit would have made the Packers a formidable opponent. It would only have ensured another ousting, and leaving many crying over the poor play and coaching, again, but allowing some to stick out the chest with indignation, while expelling unending excuses for the ousting. When the reasons were obvious all season long, in clear view.

7 points
8
1
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:54 am

"""This is actually the problem with the Packers. """

No, this is actually the problem with you. You don't see the merit in winning your division and making the playoffs. And no, winning those games against Detroit wouldn't have made us any more formidable, but it would have put us in the playoffs.

Let me share a stat with you: 100% of Super Bowl winners made the playoffs. It's the first step. You start the season as 1:16 to go to the Super Bowl. If you make the playoffs, you've improved by half to 1:7. If you win your division, you get that first playoff game at home against a Wildcard and if you win it, your chances are 1:4

You have to start somewhere. You can't just put a team on the field that you're certain can beat 31 other teams. There'll be injuries, there'll be bad calls, and there'll be times you don't play that well. So you focus on what you can control, and that is beating the teams in your division.

If you can do that, then you have a chance to do something in the playoffs. If you can't do that, you won't be in the playoffs.

-2 points
4
6
TarynsEyes's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:25 pm

“Let me share a stat with you: 100% of Super Bowl winners made the playoffs”

This made me know your reply was going to be a real pip.

A team's rise in playoff probability doesn't necessarily mean being worthy, as a possible opponent, to other playoff teams. The Packers have, more often than not, dominated their Division which increased their playoff and SB appearance probabilities, and yet, more often than not, they have fallen short, in disgrace of those probables. Even when the NFCCG had been reached, the performance dictated a high overrating of their probabilities based on Division win, playoff entrance. Every year they were 'expected' to be a playoff probable, mostly due to the weakness of the Division teams.

What this team has failed to do yearly, is to make a defining move that makes them an actual worthy opponent in reach an SB. What have they ever done to instill a fear of them upon the playoff and run to the SB? Who have they signed that did that? Peppers, Graham, Bennett, Cobb, Watson, etc. The plan is achieving what will satisfy fans of your ilk, playoff entrance, preferably by way of Division Title. But, rest assured, the plan does not, and has not, included doing things to make an SB run truly legit.

When we made the NFCCG, what happened? We lost to the team that made those moves because they looked ahead to that game, the Packers didn't. This is not meant to discount the poor coaching as a huge contributor to the failures, yes, failures.

5 points
7
2
Leatherhead's picture

February 14, 2023 at 08:41 pm

Worthy?

Seriously? What makes a team a "worthy" playoff opponent? Were we a worthy playoff opponent when we squeezed into the #6 seed in 2010? How about 2014? Or 2020, when we came within one play? Were they worthy?

Defining moves? Drafting a first round QB when your HOF starter is still playing well. After being SO close in 2020, we extended Jones, got guys like Douglas and Campbell......those aren't defining moves?

I sometimes wonder if you and I even see the same team.

2 points
2
0
PhantomII's picture

February 14, 2023 at 09:22 pm

We needed a super duper #2 WR AR would occasionally throw to.

1 points
1
0
jurp's picture

February 14, 2023 at 03:24 pm

All making the playoffs has done for the Packers the last three years is give us worse position in the draft.

Once again, you get a ring for winning your Conference or the Super Bowl. Champions get rings. Teams that shoot only to "make the playoffs because anything can happen" without trying to win it all are LOSERS.

2 points
5
3
jnaps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:03 am

While I don't totally disagree with the conclusion here, it is flat out wrong to act as if KC just had a bunch of guys when they have a future HOF receiving TE in his prime.

5 points
7
2
Packerpasty's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:26 am

and a HOF coach....MLF is a long way from HOF...

3 points
3
0
Packers1985's picture

February 14, 2023 at 11:54 am

Yes not only they have a Goat TE who is more like a no.1 receiver than a true TE. They have Juju who can easily be a wr2 in any team his numbers this yr were on par with his first 4yrs with Steelers and last 2 years the numbers dropped becoz of injury and uncertainity in terms of QB play. Next MVS can easily be a no.3 Wr on any team his numbers were similar to what he had in the 3rd yr with packers and expected to be a break out player last year which unfortunately didnt happen becoz of injuries last Yr. So with more experience now he can easily be a wr3 on any team and also they have hardman, Skymore the rookie and Mid season Acquisition Tooney.

3 points
4
1
NorCalPacker685's picture

February 14, 2023 at 10:31 am

As long as Rodgers is still here, the Packers will never have the level of chemistry or camaraderie that is needed to win it all. The only time they were able to get the job done, the team was full of veterans like Wood and Driver to step into those leadership roles. Aaron is not a leader of men. He's an extremely talented quarterback who is allergic to personal accountability. It's always someone else's fault. I'm over it... I want to see a team who is all out there for eachother. A quarterback who, when a yound receiver maybe runs the wrong route or drops a pass, goes up and puts his arm around them and pumps them up for the next play... Instead we get a blank stare and throwing his arms up in disgust... I just want to see Rodgers show some semblance of giving a sh*t about anyone other than himself.

2 points
5
3
Packers1985's picture

February 14, 2023 at 12:03 pm

I totally dont agree with Cory here and this is what has been haunting the packers for the last 3 seasons. Thinking that we dont need a proper wr2 to win the championship this thinking has been the demise for our team these last 3 yrs. Lets analyze the KC team as mentioned by the cory this team not without a Wr1. They have a wr1 in the name Of Kelce.
Yes he is a TE who is more like a no.1 receiver than a true TE and a goat in terms of pass catching TE's in receiving yards. Then they have Juju who can easily be a wr2 on any team his numbers this yr were on par with his first 4yrs(his second yr was an all pro season) with Steelers and last 2 years the numbers dropped becoz of injury and uncertainity in terms of QB play. Next MVS can easily be a no.3 Wr on any team his numbers were similar to what he had in the 3rd yr with packers and expected to be a break out player last year but unfortunately didnt happen becoz of injuries last Yr. So with more experience he can easily be a wr3 on any team and also they have hardman, Skymore the rookie and Mid season Acquisition Tooney. So dont tell me that we dont need a wr1 or 2.
Look at all the 4 teams that made it to championships this year baring 49ers every team has good wr2 and good TE. 49ers are completely different team they are very physical team their run blocking is excellent . Either we have to be like 49ers or KC first the team need to decide that untill they does it we'll have many seasons like the last 3 we'll remain dissapointed. I too want our team to move on from Rodgers but the team needs to find an identity and move forward with that to put Love in great position to win us a championship.

Go Pack Go

2 points
4
2
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:00 pm

"Next MVS can easily be a no.3 Wr on any team his numbers were similar to what he had in the 3rd yr with packers and expected to be a break out player last year but unfortunately didnt happen becoz of injuries last Yr."

First off, MVS played all 17 games last year, so I don't know what injuries you're referring to.

"So with more experience he can easily be a wr3 on any team."

He needs more experience? He's been in the league 5 years with 2 HOF QB's throwing him the ball, and has averaged around 35rec/3TD's a year.
I'll never understand the MVS love on this site. He's the definition of a role player. A fast guy with questionable (and that's being kind) hands and a very limited route tree. He seems like a nice guy who does pose a deep threat, but that's about it. With Rodgers and Mahomes as his QB's, there is no reason to not be posting at least 60 receptions a year. You should be glad GB isn't the one who overpaid him to the tune of $10 mil/year.

4 points
4
0
T7Steve's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:16 pm

I'm glad he got his 10 large a year. He might be worth that in a Chief's uniform. I think it was well he left for the "Jordy" factor that a year too early is good because they tend to lose a step or two after their first few years in the NFL. I was sad when they let Jordy go, but it proved true in his case.

0 points
1
1
Packers1985's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:39 pm

I am not saying or showing any love towards him. All i am saying is he can be a good wr3 in a team. Coming to us paying 10 million/yr and totally ok with packers not paying him that amount. My reference of MVS as a good wr3 as the author mentioned that we dont need a good wr1 or 2 to win in this league showing KC as an example.

"First off, MVS played all 17 games last year, so I don't know what injuries you're referring to." When i say last yr i am referring to his last year with packers 2021 season where he missed initial few games with packers and also missed the divisional rd."Sep 26, 2021 NFL Thigh Hamstring Strain Grade 2 Valdes-Scantling suffered a hamstring injury in the Packers' Week 3 win at San Francisco. He missed five games"

1 points
1
0
13TimeChamps's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:43 pm

"last year but unfortunately didnt happen becoz of injuries last Yr."

Your original statement made it seem like he missed games last year, which is what I responded to.

1 points
1
0
Packers1985's picture

February 14, 2023 at 02:46 pm

Ok ok got you. No i meant the 2021 packer's season he was expected to have a break out season after that good 2020 yr but unfortunately injuries plagued the season and didnt pan out like many expected him to have.

2 points
2
0
SinceLombardi's picture

February 17, 2023 at 06:29 am

Realistically, the best team in the final four( even with a patchwork o line ) has two #1 wideouts.
The best thing KC had in this run was a unbelievably poorly officiated game against Cincinnati.
It’s too bad that it will only be a footnote ( if that ) in history.
Mahomes, Read, Kelce and co had never beaten Joe Burrows Bengals, and it took a do over, some horrible calls, non calls, and a brain fart to put them in the SB.

1 points
1
0