Fire Maurice Drayton And Give MLF, Gute and Murphy The Ultimatum

[MantyWrestler]

I always felt like speed was a strong component to special teams and I feel like we greatly lack it at LB, TE, WR and backup RB. The only position we have speed is DB. 

We don’t have great speed to cover kicks or anyone explosive to return them. That falls on the GM and we just don’t put high emphasis on those positions. 

Edited January 25, 2022 by MantyWrestler

[Isherwood]

5 hours ago, Rainmaker90 said:

I’ve alreaady said more than once he hasn’t been what we need him to be in the playoffs many times. 
 

This is a lot more than just yesterday. You can’t tell me that people have been objective towards him. 

90% of the time he plays great. When he doesn’t, it always looks the same and it is downright pathetic. Not sure why any fan would care if it’s too harsh or not when it keeps costing us playoff games. 

[StatKing]

7 hours ago, incognito_man said:

yep

someone is lost in the sauce and thinking too highlight of themselves by spouting "situational football".

There were literally a dozen offensive/defensive plays that, had they gone differently, would have made the 1 or 2 bad special teams plays irrelevant.

I was nervous about ST costing us vs a team like...the Chiefs or Bills, where the margin of error is 10x less.

Horrifically, Rodgers decided to turtle it and it resulted in a game that probably would have been won by Love+healthy Dillon into a loss.

Lol. Says the guys using garbage third level analytics that are entirely irrelevant to the way games are won and lost. We would have lost that game in the first two quarters with Jordan Love starting. Very similar game against the Chiefs and he couldn't even muster a third down conversion until the 4th quarter at which point the game was basically over.

[pgwingman]

12 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

The executives care about the football team holistically. The decision has long been made to focus on the primary units rather than the special teams when it comes to roster construction. 

I don't even think that's necessary the wrong philosophy. There are pros and cons to every decision that's made. 

That said, it still took a phenomenally terrible ST performance for this to happen. If we had even been within two standard deviations of our median ST performance, this is a two score win. 

It just so happened that we had two horrendous out of character games on the same Sunday with both the offense and ST performing far below their season averages. 

I wish more people understood this. Everything, everything in football comes with a tradeoff. Every team gets 7 draft picks and $200m to spend. Every time focus on one thing, you ignore another.

To the people who want to turn us into a top 5 special teams unit, what are you willing to ignore?

To the people who want to draft the best WR in the draft, what do you want to ignore?

To the people who are focused on keeping Rodgers, how much are you willing to pay him? What part of the roster (present or future) are you willing to ignore?

Yes, I think the special teams will need to be emphasized this offseason. But drafting those players will cost us depth elsewhere.

Yes, I think we need to draft more WRs. But I'm not willing to ignore the losses of Z, Keke, Mercilus, etc to draft WR ahead of DE.

Yes, Rodgers played pretty poorly. That doesn't mean I don't want him back for the right price.

I might be pandering to some of the older posters in this forum, but the moment you understand this distinction you move into truly understanding football.

[squire12]

Did Cobb play on special teams?

 

[pgwingman]

10 hours ago, StatKing said:

Context matters. The average NFL team doesn't go into the offseason with 1 WR under contract, that is the situation we are in. Something you are conveniently ignoring because it doesn't fit your narrative.

The Packers draft strategy is not the end all be all. Just because we haven't drafted a WR in the first round in nearly 20 years doesn't mean we never should. Thinking like this is why we only have 2 rings in the last 30 years. You spend premium picks to get premium players. If Davante leaves we need a premium WR, especially in this day and age where every team that is contending has loaded up on weapons.

I know I'm stirring the pot, but I find it worth noting that we would probably have the money to extent MVS or Tonyan if we hadn't spent it this year on Randall Cobb's 375 yards and 5TDs, which could have been replaced by Amari/ESB/Winfree.

[coachbuns]

19 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

I wish more people understood this. Everything, everything in football comes with a tradeoff. Every team gets 7 draft picks and $200m to spend. Every time focus on one thing, you ignore another.

To the people who want to turn us into a top 5 special teams unit, what are you willing to ignore?

To the people who want to draft the best WR in the draft, what do you want to ignore?

To the people who are focused on keeping Rodgers, how much are you willing to pay him? What part of the roster (present or future) are you willing to ignore?

Yes, I think the special teams will need to be emphasized this offseason. But drafting those players will cost us depth elsewhere.

Yes, I think we need to draft more WRs. But I'm not willing to ignore the losses of Z, Keke, Mercilus, etc to draft WR ahead of DE.

Yes, Rodgers played pretty poorly. That doesn't mean I don't want him back for the right price.

I might be pandering to some of the older posters in this forum, but the moment you understand this distinction you move into truly understanding football.

I'm probably one of the older posters in this forum and I agree and do understand what you're saying.  Gute has done a pretty darn good job putting together a roster since being named GM.   There's been some misses but in looking at his overall work .. good job.  Only thing IMO is special teams thinking/thoughts have to be addressed .. period.  Whether is philosophy, players, coaching or any combination; it must be revised for this team to improve.  It's going to be a fascinating off season .. in Gute/Packer brass I trust. 

[StatKing]

3 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

I know I'm stirring the pot, but I find it worth noting that we would probably have the money to extent MVS or Tonyan if we hadn't spent it this year on Randall Cobb's 375 yards and 5TDs, which could have been replaced by Amari/ESB/Winfree.

Probably true, but Rodgers is a massive crybaby with a huge ego. He wanted some form of public concession to make it look like he won the battle against Gute. Also it's not like MVS's production was much better. I wouldn't mind keeping MVS, I just wouldn't even know where to begin with a contract for him. Out of those trio of players I feel Winfree might actually be somewhat decent. Not a legit number 2 but a good 3rd/4th guy.

Edited January 25, 2022 by StatKing

[pgwingman]

2 minutes ago, StatKing said:

Probably true, but Rodgers is a massive crybaby with a huge ego. He wanted some form of public concession to make it look like he won the battle against Gute. Also it's not like MVS's production was much better. I wouldn't mind keeping MVS, I just wouldn't even know where to begin with a contract for him.

Yeah I guess that's kinda my point. If Rodgers wants to be a cry baby about it, don't be surprised when the criticism comes back to you. If he's going to demand his WR buddy be signed, throw to him more often. But we could have replace Cobb's production for 1/5 the cost and used that money to extend whatever receiving option you wanted for cheaper. Could that $5m have been used to sign a street free agent who specializes in special teams? I don't know, but it strikes at the heart of my point: Rodgers wants a say in personnel, but is he going to stand at the podium and answer for his busted free agent signings?

[StatKing]

5 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

Yeah I guess that's kinda my point. If Rodgers wants to be a cry baby about it, don't be surprised when the criticism comes back to you. If he's going to demand his WR buddy be signed, throw to him more often. But we could have replace Cobb's production for 1/5 the cost and used that money to extend whatever receiving option you wanted for cheaper. Could that $5m have been used to sign a street free agent who specializes in special teams? I don't know, but it strikes at the heart of my point: Rodgers wants a say in personnel, but is he going to stand at the podium and answer for his busted free agent signings?

This is who the guy has been for 15 years. You deal with the good and bad when it comes to a player of his caliber. You know damn well he's going to put it off on the front office, but I'm willing to bet they'll take the heat 9/10 if it means he keeps playing at the level he is playing at. If Rodgers decides to stay, which I think he will, I would not be suprised in the least if he has significant impact on the draft day decision making.

[AlexGreen#20]

10 minutes ago, StatKing said:

This is who the guy has been for 15 years. You deal with the good and bad when it comes to a player of his caliber. You know damn well he's going to put it off on the front office, but I'm willing to bet they'll take the heat 9/10 if it means he keeps playing at the level he is playing at. If Rodgers decides to stay, which I think he will, I would not be suprised in the least if he has significant impact on the draft day decision making.

Why? Why would the Front Office allow that? They let him have his boy on a 1 year deal. It blew up. We know he's a ****ty personnel evaluator. He's not even a good personnel evaluator with the benefit of hindsight

Even if you think he's going to play 2+ years, that draft pick will be around for 4+. 

He might get some say on the resigning, but he shouldn't have anything to do with the draft.

[pgwingman]

2 minutes ago, StatKing said:

This is who the guy has been for 15 years. You deal with the good and bad when it comes to a player of his caliber. You know damn well he's going to put it off on the front office, but I'm willing to bet they'll take the heat 9/10 if it means he keeps playing at the level he is playing at. If Rodgers decides to stay, which I think he will, I would not be suprised in the least if he has significant impact on the draft day decision making.

But this is part of what has us Rodgers "haters" frustrated. We haters (if I can speak for the group) have noticed that he gets credit for his highs, but someone else deserves blame for his lows.

When he checks out of the runs, MLF takes the blame.

When he wants a say in personnel, It's Gute's fault for not drafting WRs

When we have no young WRs to extend, Rodgers receives no criticism for not developing a relationship with them.

When the special teams gives up 10 points, it's their fault for the loss, even if Rodgers would acknowledge that a 13 point offensive performance would not get the job done.

We "haters" aren't trying to run him out of town, we just acknowledge that his quirks are starting to spill over into problems.

[StatKing]

3 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

But this is part of what has us Rodgers "haters" frustrated. We haters (if I can speak for the group) have noticed that he gets credit for his highs, but someone else deserves blame for his lows.

When he checks out of the runs, MLF takes the blame.

When he wants a say in personnel, It's Gute's fault for not drafting WRs

When we have no young WRs to extend, Rodgers receives no criticism for not developing a relationship with them.

When the special teams gives up 10 points, it's their fault for the loss, even if Rodgers would acknowledge that a 13 point offensive performance would not get the job done.

We "haters" aren't trying to run him out of town, we just acknowledge that his quirks are starting to spill over into problems.

He's masked far more problems over the last 15 years than he has created. Rodgers definitely needs to play better in the post season, but atleast with him we consistently make the post-season and in a league with this much parity all you need is a spot in the dance and to get hot at the right time.

[pgwingman]

3 minutes ago, StatKing said:

He's masked far more problems over the last 15 years than he has created. Rodgers definitely needs to play better in the post season, but atleast with him we consistently make the post-season and in a league with this much parity all you need is a spot in the dance and to get hot at the right time.

I totally agree, but I would add that this team would have a much better chance at getting hot at the right time if Rodgers would focus on his job and not everyone else's. 

[StatKing]

6 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

I totally agree, but I would add that this team would have a much better chance at getting hot at the right time if Rodgers would focus on his job and not everyone else's. 

I think they figured it all out last year. Gute has a plan. As much as I like to rip on the guys moves as a GM he doesn't strike me as a type who would go into this off-season with question marks at so many positions. Are we going to lose some players like one of the Smiths? Sure, but I dont think we ever planned on keeping them both to begin with. I never fell for the mass talent exodus fear mongering.