Packer 2021 Team Discussion (Rodgers Out Vs. Chiefs)

[CheezWizHed]

I don't get what the point is. Rodgers has had nothing like the injuries that plagued either Brees or Manning. That's what you objected to and claimed "Manning wasn't Manning until Manning was Manning," which just wasn't true. His back and neck problems were staggering and something people were very aware of.

 

If your point is that Manning's sudden, complete dropoff was more predictable due to his health history, that's a fair enough point. But my larger point is that guys like Manning, Brees, even Favre clip along at a high level, then suddenly the wheels fall off. Maybe it won't be as sudden for Rodgers. Or maybe it will be. The point is that the Packers are keeping a second option open in the event that he makes the choice easy for them, as I mentioned several posts ago.

 

Yes, even with Rodgers' revival in 2020, I think drafting Love was the right thing to do; even if he never amounts to anything but a backup QB. You still need options when things go poorly.

[PeaveyFury]

it was a ground and pound offense which was supported by one of the best defenses of that era.

 

..... or in other words, they build an extremely good team around him? That's literally the point I've been making this whole morning.

 

If we have the ability to suddenly surround Love with the Legion of Boom we should have done that sometime over the last 10 years.

 

It's much harder when your QB takes up 10-20% of your salary cap each year.

 

And to the apples-to-bananas Vikings comparison, you'd also be able to use whatever pick assets you acquire from moving Rodgers to try and do just that, in addition to not actually spending tens of millions on average QBs.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

My general complaint of the Packers FO is that until recently they seemed overly concerned with building a juggernaut offense and just slapping together a defense with 2-3 good players and 8 scrubs. I never would have signed Cobb for what we did, for example. Not that he was bad, but was that the best use of capital? Couldn't you have been good enough on offense with Jordy Nelson and Doug Baldwin or something? There was a period after the Super Bowl and before Gute where all they seemed to do was extend their own so-so players and do very little to help the defense outside of Julius Peppers.

[MrTPlush]

Yah, I never understood why Rodgers always got ripped on and somehow Wilson is a victim. His average defense ranking has been 7.5 in his career, Rodgers...15.5. Rodgers has had only had three Top 10 defenses, Wilson has had six. Additionally, Rodgers has had five years where the defense was #20 or worse versus Wilson who has only had one #20+ defense in his career.

 

I get Rodgers is a much better player, but Wilson really has not done much for what he has been given. He hasn't even seen a NFCCG since those two SB runs. Lets not forget the second SB run he was absolutely atrocious and needed a miracle of failures by the Packers to win. Overall he hasn't been that bad in the playoffs, but he really doesn't will them to victory either.

[PeaveyFury]

A team with an average QB rarely wins the SB. A team with an average QB on a rookie contract rarely, rarely wins the SB.

 

Sorry, I must disagree. Just since 2000, you've got guys like Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Joe Flacco, and Nick Foles as average guys. and Russell Wilson/Patrick Maholmes on rookie contracts. That's six super Bowls of the last 21 or 30%.

 

There'll be a lot of debate about the level of play out of guys like Eli Manning or Roethlisberger, but they're NOT elite-level QBs, so that's another 4. Basically, 48%, or half of the recent Super Bowls have been won by either young QB's or non-elite level guys. It's all about the team you put around the guy most of the time, and being on a rookie contract gives you a better chance to put a championship-caliber team on the field.

[PeaveyFury]

My general complaint of the Packers FO is that until recently they seemed overly concerned with building a juggernaut offense and just slapping together a defense with 2-3 good players and 8 scrubs. I never would have signed Cobb for what we did, for example. Not that he was bad, but was that the best use of capital? Couldn't you have been good enough on offense with Jordy Nelson and Doug Baldwin or something? There was a period after the Super Bowl and before Gute where all they seemed to do was extend their own so-so players and do very little to help the defense outside of Julius Peppers.

 

As I noted earlier, I think this is a little unfair. They drafted defense early and often throughout this period to try and fix the holes. We'll never know if it was incompetent coaching (Capers) or poor selection of those actual players (or both), but they DID try to fix the defense through the draft.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Foles probably never plays in a Super Bowl without Wentz having a great year, so I don't think he counts. I'm not a fan of Ben, think he's vastly overrated, but I don't think he can be lumped in with the others. Manning is more folklore than substance, but I can't count him with the first group of guys either. We're mixing "average" with "overrated probably not the HOF players they will become."

 

I think a great QB is more of a guarantee of being sustainably competitive than winning a Super Bowl, which is far more luck dependent and random than anyone likes to admit. It gives you more shots though.

[PeaveyFury]

Yah, I never understood why Rodgers always got ripped on and somehow Wilson is a victim. His average defense ranking has been 7.5 in his career, Rodgers...15.5. Rodgers has had only had three Top 10 defenses, Wilson has had six. Additionally, Rodgers has had five years where the defense was #20 or worse versus Wilson who has only had one #20+ defense in his career.

 

I do think we've forgotten how much Rodgers carried those teams early in his starting career. He was torched for his 'close game' record or something like that in his two starting seasons before the title, but there were a BUNCH of games where he had given us a lead late and the defense couldn't hold it on the last drive. Similarly, during the last few Capers seasons there were so many games were we just needed one defensive stop to get the ball back to Rodgers, and they simply couldn't do it, time after time. I think the Packers have made poor coaching decisions on the defensive side of the ball for years now. Hopefully Barry is the right guy to fix that....

[PeaveyFury]

Foles probably never plays in a Super Bowl without Wentz having a great year, so I don't think he counts. I'm not a fan of Ben, think he's vastly overrated, but I don't think he can be lumped in with the others. Manning is more folklore than substance, but I can't count him with the first group of guys either. We're mixing "average" with "overrated probably not the HOF players they will become."

 

I think a great QB is more of a guarantee of being sustainably competitive than winning a Super Bowl, which is far more luck dependent and random than anyone likes to admit. It gives you more shots though.

 

I certainly have to agree with the luck point. It really is more that than we'd like to acknowledge.

 

But, I think the point is that a really good team can win and make a average to maybe-above average ish QB like Eli or Big Ben or Foles or whoever look better than they are, and yield better results. If, and it's a bit if, that guy ends up being better than that, as Love COULD be, you're a legit contender over a longer period of time. That's the evaluation task that the Packers have to deal with over the next 11 1/2 months....

[MrTPlush]

Foles probably never plays in a Super Bowl without Wentz having a great year, so I don't think he counts.

 

Why? He still led them to a 2-1 record in the regular season and then played well the entire playoffs. I get he wasn't the starter the whole year, but an average QB lead them through the playoffs and I don't see any reason Foles couldn't have gotten them to the playoffs himself over 16 games. Somewhat of an asterisks, but I don't think it can be completely thrown out.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Packers are re-signing Kevin King. 1-year, $6 million deal. Chance for a little redemption for him, then hit the market again next year.

 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Foles probably never plays in a Super Bowl without Wentz having a great year, so I don't think he counts.

 

Why? He still led them to a 2-1 record in the regular season and then played well the entire playoffs. I get he wasn't the starter the whole year, but an average QB lead them through the playoffs and I don't see any reason Foles couldn't have gotten them to the playoffs himself over 16 games. Somewhat of an asterisks, but I don't think it can be completely thrown out.

 

I think it's a huge assumption that Foles plays the entire season and gets Philly to 13-3 and a #1 seed especially considering Wentz was an MVP candidate that season. Yes Foles had a nice run at the end, but to pretend like Wentz had little to do with them winning that title is more than a small stretch. He's done nothing in the league outside of that nice month and it's more than fair to question just assuming he'd have done it all season. I didn't completely throw it out either, I said he probably doesn't. If we let average QBs take over 11-2 teams every year, more of them would have rings.

 

I know you didn't say they'd go 13-3 with Foles, but if they don't, the path to the SB is completely different and it changes everything around. We don't know what he would have done, but I think "not win the Super Bowl" is a fairly safe bet.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Packers are re-signing Kevin King. 1-year, $6 million deal. Chance for a little redemption for him, then hit the market again next year.

 

 

Boring and mildly disappointing but as I said pages and pages ago, if you're not bringing in Fuller or some clear major upgrade, this was likely to happen. Just signing another middling guy because he's someone else is what fans like to see, but it rarely helps. Draft one early to take his job or someone who can play the slot better to make the overall defense better and negate King's weaknesses. I don't think there is any redemption coming. He's not a good player, but nobody has good players everywhere.

[PeaveyFury]

Meh. Basically a prove-it deal, but I'm a little surprised it's for more than I would have thought he'd get on a deal like that. As OSS said, make the secondary better around him and see if it plays better to his strengths. Plus, a new scheme may help. You know, one where the DC knows the situation in front of him, like how many timeouts the opponent has.

 

EDIT: I guess I'd still like a vet option like Poole to TRY and add to the secondary, rather than just add a young piece that may need some time.

[bjkrautk]

Didn't see that one coming, but it's not a terrible price for King & allows the Packers to go in another direction in the first round of the draft (WR? LB? OL?).

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Packers are re-signing Kevin King. 1-year, $6 million deal. Chance for a little redemption for him, then hit the market again next year.

 

 

Boring and mildly disappointing but as I said pages and pages ago, if you're not bringing in Fuller or some clear major upgrade, this was likely to happen. Just signing another middling guy because he's someone else is what fans like to see, but it rarely helps. Draft one early to take his job or someone who can play the slot better to make the overall defense better and negate King's weaknesses. I don't think there is any redemption coming. He's not a good player, but nobody has good players everywhere.

 

I generally agree with this. If he can just be league average, the secondary as a whole has a chance to be elite. I expect them to draft a DB early as well, as well as continue to develop Sullivan, who showed some great flashes in 2019 before falling off a bit last year.

 

Like you said, this is boring, but after the Packers sat out the bidding for the top CBs on the market last week, and didn't make a play for Fuller, this started to make a lot more sense. It'll be interesting to see how the contract is actually structured, and what the cap hit will be.

[PeaveyFury]

To RRB's point about the cap hit, it's likely that the cap number will be low, but he'll have incentives to push it to the $6 mil number. I'm betting the base is far closer to what (I at least) thought he'd get on a 1-year contract.

[adambr2]

This team is nothing if not predictable. I predict another 12-13 win team and another soul crushing NFC Championship loss.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

It's probably my fault that I let the idea that the Packers would make an external market splash this month creep into my head (Jones was a huge re-signing, but was internal). Instead they are playing this out with the belief that they have a Super Bowl-caliber team in place, and are going to run close to the same team back this year with the idea that hopeful improvements to the defense and special teams schemes will be enough to push them over the top. I think we'll see some small depth signings over the next couple weeks, but it appears that they simply don't have the financial flexibility to make large wholesale moves. Any big improvements are going to have to come internally or through the draft.

 

And that's fine. This is a legit team coming off a 13-3 year and a NFC Championship appearance, who has only lost one big-ticket piece to free agency. That is rare in the NFL.

[PeaveyFury]

The Packers quietly restructured Mason Crosby as well.

[PeaveyFury]

It's probably my fault that I let the idea that the Packers would make an external market splash this month creep into my head (Jones was a huge re-signing, but was internal). Instead they are playing this out with the belief that they have a Super Bowl-caliber team in place, and are going to run close to the same team back this year with the idea that hopeful improvements to the defense and special teams schemes will be enough to push them over the top. I think we'll see some small depth signings over the next couple weeks, but it appears that they simply don't have the financial flexibility to make large wholesale moves. Any big improvements are going to have to come internally or through the draft.

 

And that's fine. This is a legit team coming off a 13-3 year and a NFC Championship appearance, who has only lost one big-ticket piece to free agency. That is rare in the NFL.

 

I guess I see a couple too many holes to feel confident of where they're at. They'll fill some legitimately through the draft, but you've got two holes at DE (one literally, as your starter is gone despite being not very good) that seem unfillable in Cleveland in a few weeks. Add in OT/O-line depth, DB depth, and ILB depth, and that starts to become a list.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It's probably my fault that I let the idea that the Packers would make an external market splash this month creep into my head (Jones was a huge re-signing, but was internal). Instead they are playing this out with the belief that they have a Super Bowl-caliber team in place, and are going to run close to the same team back this year with the idea that hopeful improvements to the defense and special teams schemes will be enough to push them over the top. I think we'll see some small depth signings over the next couple weeks, but it appears that they simply don't have the financial flexibility to make large wholesale moves. Any big improvements are going to have to come internally or through the draft.

 

And that's fine. This is a legit team coming off a 13-3 year and a NFC Championship appearance, who has only lost one big-ticket piece to free agency. That is rare in the NFL.

 

They were pretty much the same team from 19 to 20 and were clearly a better one. Some of these holes will just be weaknesses. Nobody addresses everything.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

It's probably my fault that I let the idea that the Packers would make an external market splash this month creep into my head (Jones was a huge re-signing, but was internal). Instead they are playing this out with the belief that they have a Super Bowl-caliber team in place, and are going to run close to the same team back this year with the idea that hopeful improvements to the defense and special teams schemes will be enough to push them over the top. I think we'll see some small depth signings over the next couple weeks, but it appears that they simply don't have the financial flexibility to make large wholesale moves. Any big improvements are going to have to come internally or through the draft.

 

And that's fine. This is a legit team coming off a 13-3 year and a NFC Championship appearance, who has only lost one big-ticket piece to free agency. That is rare in the NFL.

 

I guess I see a couple too many holes to feel confident of where they're at. They'll fill some legitimately through the draft, but you've got two holes at DE (one literally, as your starter is gone despite being not very good) that seem unfillable in Cleveland in a few weeks. Add in OT/O-line depth, DB depth, and ILB depth, and that starts to become a list.

 

I would think they can find a way to replace the roughly 20-25 plays per game that Lancaster played, and the 15 per game that Adams played before getting hurt. I don't see those holes as huge detriments. They need Keke to step up. It probably means they are going to have to look closer at filling roster holes in the 2021 draft, rather than drafting luxury positions like they did last year.

 

I agree that right now, DL, OL, CB and ILB appear to be the biggest depth needs.

[MrTPlush]

Kevin King sucks...but we have definitely had worse in recent memory running around.

 

It also gives me someone to complain about on every drive.

[SeaBass]

I'm curious if there's a signing bonus and how much it is. While it's extremely likely King makes the team he does still have to actually make the team before the salary is guaranteed.