I found a kindered spirit! Everything Brian offers as evidence is undeniable. If his position is accepted, it goes a long way to explain why we haven't fixed the "pad levels" in four years.
_____
But, as with most things Packer, the loyal/non-critical Packer fan will default to the "Pack Will Be Back" attitude. Excuse after excuse will be offered and things will remain the same.

You can be critical but still optimistic. You paint with broad strokes, my friend.

Bishop, Finley, Chillar, Matthews

BC is on the money once again. It's quite depressing, actually, when he details the similarities between 2006 and 2009. One of my favorite gripes with this team is about the guys who, in my opinion, have hit their peak, and it's still not good...so why keep them? I use Poppinga, Montgomery, Bush, and formerly Tony Moll as the prime examples. After 4 games this year, I'm about ready to throw in the entire interior O line. I mean, at what point in the last 2 or 3 years have ANY of those guys been consistent? And if they're great in practice, but lousy in games, they all need to go.
------------
And I'm here to admit my stupidity right away about Tauscher being done. I never thought a 30+ year old dude who blew out the same knee twice would ever see the field again. Please place me firmly on the "bring his ass back YESTERDAY" bandwagon.

I think a rookie LB is changing all that.

One more thing...it seems that, although the starters get to keep their jobs no matter how stupid they are, the same doesn't apply for up and coming guys who might actually take their jobs. Example: Jermichael Finley couldn't crack the lineup last year, even though it's pretty damn apparent now he's a player. Every "mental error" would get him back on the bench. And how about Bishop? He couldn't hit the field for the last 2 years, period. The only way a guy can get into the lineup past one of the anointed starters is to go NUTS like Bishop did in the preseason...and that ain't no guarantee.

Poppinga keeping a starting job is like Obama winning the Nobel. Neither has done anything to deserve it.

The only plausible reason I can see is that coaches form personal "likes and dislikes" for players, quite separate from abilities. It's not hard to understand. We've all formed friendships with people that were not well thought of by others. A coach can always find some small reason to not use a player not on his favorite list. After all, no player is perfect in every respect. The shame of it all is that this player (e.g. Bishop) could change the play of others positively by his extra efforts. Frankly, I'm weary of Hawk and Barnett making a tackle occasionally, not regularly. Try as they might, they'll never make a game-changing play. Matthews will do so from time to time but he can't do it alone. Parhaps a bad season will force changes but not always in a positive way, and for the right players.

Sorry to ofend you Nick and Aaron. Tell me where I have been wrong about anything.

Exactly. Ron, (to me) you implied that if one felt that "The Pack will be Back" you were a blind/loyal fan who was not critical. I disagreed...I wasnt offended. I personally believe that the offensive line is an absolute mess and its struggles so far is worth Campen's job and the cast of doubt that's been placed over TT's and MM's. BUT, at the same time I believe that this team overall is headed in the right direction and that we will have a successful year.
.
The offense, with any semblance of a decent OLine, can be an absolute powerhouse. The defense was able to contain the biggest playmaker in the NFL to less than 100 yards. At the same time, that defense has failed to get pressure on the QB consistently which was the reason we switched to it, so it still has a ways to go.
.
I believe that I'm sufficiently critical of the team. But at the same time, I'm optimistic that the issues we have can be addressed. Doesn't make me a blind loyal fan.

Pretty sure middle linebacker is the only sustainable example here, where Bishop is looking for more reps. Finley needed to work on blocking, Matthews is four games into his career, and Chillar needed to sit a few to show whether or not Barnett can still play (not touching this one). I'm sure there's a strategy in TT's pocket to maintain trade potential amongst the linebackers, I'm just not sure it's working.

I think that sitting Barnett could be the best thing for the defense AND Barnett right now. I have always said that he is the emotional leader of the defense and that his solid play, coverage, and fire were more valuable than bishops big playmaking ability and ''disability''. While I still believe that, Barnett is a player who feeds off emotion and is clearly not playing up to the level we have become accustomed to. He is someone who plays better ''pissed off''. He has always had to get riled up over something in order to play at his best. I remember him having a big game a few years ago and saying it was something silly that spited him, like the way the runningback was walking during warmups being disrepectful to him, and made him play so well to prove him wrong. Nothing would piss him off more than losing his starting job and that could be the impetus to get that fire back. Barnett hasn't been covering well or playing with fire. Those two things were the reasons IMO Barnett should be playing over Bishop and they just aren't there this year and I have now come around to the thinking that Bishop starting could help not only the team in general but even Barnett himself.

Poppinga shouldn't be on the field at linebacker period unless there is an injury. Good person and great lockerroom guy from what I hear but there isn't anything he does on the field better than CMIII (or probably thompson and jones for that matter).Unless consistently being the fourth guy on the pile after someone else makes a tackle is an important skill that I'm seriously underrating I have no idea why he is still playing as much as he is.

All I'm saying is the O line is a problem that will not be solved this year. At best, it will require two impact players to change the direction. That is at least a year if not more away. The only hope is that MM can change his game planning to accomodate the weaknesses. It should be brutally obvious they can't be taught to accomodate his current system by now. 20 sacks in 4 games and it's Rodgers holding the ball that's the problem? No, it's the damn line (a comment which drew ire when I said the O line would be the obsticle to a good year).
______
Why has the defense changed so dramatically from pre-season and who is responsible for that change? Can't blitz because the Safeties suck! Rouse is now a Giant and GB has Bush/Martin and we drop Kampman into coverage and say it's his fault. No, it's TT's fault and MM for letting him do it.
_____

I saw GB football before Lombardi and after. The Post Lombardi era (actually almost 3 decades) was not fun. I see too many similarities to not be questioning the direction. Call me a pesimist if you will. I'll keep at it until I see a measurable change taking place.

Come on Ron:
______________________
" I saw GB football before Lombardi and after. The Post Lombardi era (actually almost 3 decades) was not fun. I see too many similarities to not be questioning the direction. "
______________________
The Pack's 2-2 record & its obvious weaknesses leading to 3 more decades of oblivion ??????
Could you could anymore dramatic?

2-2 is not the issue, of course not. What is behind the 2-2 record? 20 sacks, no pressure defense, Bowler doing his imitation of Joe Montana, and a trend going down not up. That is the similarity.

Ron asked:
"Why has the defense changed so dramatically from pre-season and who is responsible for that change?"

Because preseason is MEANINGLESS. Who is responsible for the change? Reality.

You do have a good point IM. I'm assuming you are referring to the talent on the field?

Thats why singletary is the man. You don't think Bishop would be starting if he was the coach here? I am sure he wouldn't let Smith or Sutton go either...

ron-
you are absolutely right as to why we can't blitz. the two most important things you need from your safeties if you are going to blitz a lot is for them to be where they are supposed to be at all times and to take good angles when passes are completed. If you don't have safeties who can do that you have to ''hide'' them and play an almost bend don't break type of coverage. The knock against Smith seemed to be that he freelanced too much and wasn't where he was supposed to be too often in order to make a big play. The knock on Rouse was he took TERRIBLE angles in pursuit (and was out of position a lot, terrible in coverage,never wrapped up,etc. etc. and generally all around sucked). As of right now our backup safeties aren't doing either of those any better so we can't blitz as much as I'm sure capers would like at the risk of giving up big plays. IMO we would still be having the same exact situation we are in with those two still here because their weaknesses are the same as the one's we are trying to cover up. Something must be done to address the safeties question (and perry is a good enough coach to do just that IMO) but I REALLY don't believe those guys would have been able to answer them.

I have question(s) -

Why is it that Rodgers doesn't get the luxury of the 5-wideout set on almost every play, like Favre did in '07 ?
Would PopPinga be better as a Safety, maybe? He certainly has the moxie. Over-shooting plays is the issue, I believe and that can be coached. Anyone?
Why is it not possible for Spitz to stay at Center and have WELLS go play Guard for awhile? What's up with that?
I did see Sitton show some stuff against the Vikings D - would HE be better slated to play LG? Just askin'...

Nice article, analysis.
Counterintuitive for a coach to continue to play a less effective "favorite" if it affects the W-L record and therefore his job? Could it be the staff sees things in practice and otherwise we don't? Maybe MM doesn't want to throw young players in until they prove themselves in practice. It's a complicated system that takes time to learn.
Also, doesn't Capers make or at least have a large say about the defense?

I think Ron is spot on about the O-Line. This repair needed to happen between January and July of last year. For whatever reasons, management didn't take it seriously. This doesn't mean that we do worse than last year. The defense is better, so hopefully we do better. My bet is that we beat medicore teams that we would have lost to last year, but the good ones still hand us our ass.
***
Saying that doesn't make me a bad fan. It's not like I'm going to stop watching, cheering, rooting, celebrating and, sadly, when things go wrong, dying inside with the team. That will never, ever change. Loyalty doesn't have a damned thing to do with optimism. If it did, no sports fan would ever suffer.
***
But whatever your view of the proper attitude of a fan, anyone with the slightest realistic grasp of the game has to admit that this failure to reform the offensive line is going to cost us dearly this season. Saying so in no way means that I don't bleed nacho sauce. Liquid cheese is all that flows through my veins.