Cory's Corner: The Packers are living in denial

When things start to go wrong in any walk of life, the hardest thing for people to do is admit failure.

The reason that the Packers’ season is such an eyesore is because of the Super Bowl expectations. If people expected the Packers to look like the Rams this season, this trip back to the 1970s wouldn’t be that big of a deal.

But this is a huge deal.

Initially we all thought that the Packers were just playing bad. Now, they look like they have punched out. Sunday’s 47-25 loss to the Titans was the second-worst defensive effort of the Mike McCarthy era, next to giving up 51 points to a 6-5 Saints team in 2008.

The questions have been rolling in about job security. Even Aaron Rodgers addressed it.

“There has to be that healthy fear as a player that if you don’t do your job they’ll get rid of you,” said Rodgers, who is having his worst season since his first season as a starter in 2008. “I think we’ve all got to go back and the urgency’s got to pick up, the focus has got to pick up … we’ve all got to play better, and that starts with me.”

Problem is, I don’t see any drastic changes. Green Bay has been basking in seven straight playoff appearances since 2009 and will consider this only a small bump in the road. Even if the Packers finish out the season 6-10, which is a distinct possibility, they could easily justify this nightmare by saying key injuries were the reason for the anomaly.

The team has been lost since the 2014 NFC Championship Game debacle. Players have openly questioned coach’s decisions and now the team cannot get up to play each week.

But the problem isn’t just on the field. General manager Ted Thompson has assembled a roster that has only one current Pro Bowler on it in Mike Daniels. The secondary has been too reliant on unproven youngsters and the receivers lack explosiveness.

The Packers have been consistently good for a long time. You could count on them to be playing in January when most of the league was sitting home.

McCarthy owns a 108-60 regular season record, so letting him go will be tough. Trouble is, what coach can you get to replicate that kind of production?  The moment another coach struggles, how much of a leash will he get before he gets the boot as well?

The Packers don’t look like a team right now. They are a bunch of individuals playing for themselves. They don’t have sights set on postseason football; instead they have become fixated on things like incentives and bonuses.

Packers president Mark Murphy has a very tough decision. The longer he lets this situation go, the more likely the Packers will turn into an apathetic failure. Just good enough to compete for the playoffs, just bad enough to miss them — which is a memory back to the awful years that many fans don’t want to remember.

Can the Packers still turn it around and go on a run? Sure, anything is possible. But when the defense doesn’t show any heart and there isn’t any accountability from the players after getting humiliated two weeks in a row, the season is lost.

The worst part of it all is that the Packers still can’t see it. 

-------------------

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: 
0 points

Comments (92)

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

November 15, 2016 at 07:01 am

This post. Yes.

(6-10? I'm having trouble finding 2 more wins. MIN and CHI? OK, but I refer you to the past 2 weeks. Are the Packers actually a better team than anyone right now?)

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:04 am

There are a lot of concerns regarding this team and the direction its going. No question about that.

I have a few thoughts on this.

First:
The basis of the problem with this team right now is that they haven't been able to overcome the rash of injuries to starters. Not just starters, key players.

Their best and only shutdown CB has basically been out the whole season. And have been without the other 2 top CB's most of the year. Arguably their best defensive player and best pass rusher has missed the last 3 games (their record is 0-3 in those games). Their RB which they have built the offense around has been out 1/2 of their season already, as well as their only other RB on the roster.
Those injuries have changed this team.
I don't blame Thompson for not having more depth at CB. He actually had really good depth at CB. Not many teams expect to lose their top 3 CB's for most of their season.
I do blame him for the mess that has happened at RB. Going into the season with only 2 RB's is just dumb. They kept a 3rd that was with them all season, then they dropped him after claiming another RB. Which they kept for a week and let go. Sorry but you have to have more then 2 RB's on the roster.

Second:
Thompson has done a poor job of putting enough quality players on the roster. He has put to many developmental types of players and not enough developed players on the roster.

Third:
McCarthy hasn't done enough with the players he does have. He is to stubborn with his schemes and reluctant to change even though since week 6 last year it has been proven how to be beat.

Against the Titans, he said that they had to scrap what they had planned on doing due to the score of the game. Ok, fine I get that. But that means to use 11 personnel with essentially the same players for every play on offense? He can't rotate players in and change up the looks? I just don't like how he keeps using the same players, the whole game. And why in hell does Richard Rodgers continue to play over the other WR's, and Ripkowksi? I heard a guy on a radio show that said that Rodgers is a good number 3 TE. He would be a good number 3 on most teams in the league. He is NOT a number 1, and does not deserve to play 83% of the offensive snaps.

I do think there will be changes made in the offseason. What those changes are, we will see.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:20 am

Number two: Said it All! Couldn't agree more.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:24 am

Unfortunately I think it is too late to fix this many problems this season.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:34 am

Well, getting back Mathews, Randall, Cook will go a long ways to help fixing the issues.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:57 am

I didn't see anything from Randall or Cook this season that gives me confidence in that.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:14 am

Randall has the ability to make interceptions. We haven't had that since he has been out.

Cook was finally getting involved in the offense the game he got hurt in. They were moving him around and finding his role.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:47 am

We need TGR or someone with a subscription to PFF and those ratings but Randall was ranked like 110th I believe someone said before he was injured. Hopefully he's back soon and can help but if he plays like he did in the first few games there's not going to be a difference. In other words the results remain the same, the number on the Jersey just changes.

Shields is/was what makes the whole secondary work. In last years playoff the Defense played a great game. Having Shields back allowed them to play man to man and get after the QB. Right now if we play man it seems it ends in a long TD pass or a long completion to set up goal to goal.

I doubt Sam Shields plays football again. Hell I wouldn't if I was him. The Packers have to eat $3.125 Million next year which isn't that much. I haven't looked at who's a FA but maybe the Packers can sign a FA CB to replace Shields and hope Randall, Rollins, and Gunter all improve.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:02 pm

"maybe the Packers can sign a FA CB to replace Shields"

Your expecting a wholesale Front Office replacement are you? :)

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:14 pm

That's s what I was thinking and what has to happen. Whether by trade or FA we have to have some experienced players to add to young roster No more only relying on draft. So that means no TT.

0 points
0
0
Christopher Gennaro's picture

November 15, 2016 at 03:07 pm

to be fair to randall, i dont know if they ever gave him help, especially against diggs in minny. i think they expected him to make another jump, and be the next shields. what puzzled me was when it wasnt the case, why continue? it was clear to me, he still was doing some things, ie looking into the back field way too much, or jumping routes.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:18 am

Both are 2nd year players, Randall a 1st round pick, Diggs a 5th round pick. As we know the draft is a Crap Shoot past the first few picks, but considering some of the players Thompson passed on to draft Randall, I'd expect at least a little more. Besides, Randall was getting torched by everybody pretty much. Hopefully he's closer to last year than the 2nd year jump that never came, at least not yet.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:18 am

Both are 2nd year players, Randall a 1st round pick, Diggs a 5th round pick. As we know the draft is a Crap Shoot past the first few picks, but considering some of the players Thompson passed on to draft Randall, I'd expect at least a little more. Besides, Randall was getting torched by everybody pretty much. Hopefully he's closer to last year than the 2nd year jump that never came, at least not yet.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:43 am

All good points RC and that is hard to do with everyone screaming for blood. Your number 3 about MM is spot on and the ultimate failure. We could be more effective on offense but not with McCarthy lost in his play sheet and personnel groups. And, I agree - I don't know why we have a TE on the field. We are like the guy who brought the Clydesdale to the race track.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:19 am

Thanks.
My biggest problem with McCarthy is just how predictable his offense is, and that he doesn't use everyone like he should or get the most out of what he has.
One of the best thing that could have happened for the offense was when they lost both Lacy and Starks because it forced McCarthy to change. He put Montgomery in the backfield and we saw them spread teams out and become unpredictable. For a game and a half it worked. Rodgers really got on fire in that stretch because he was finding open WR's regularly.
Since then, we have seen them shift back to their old ways. As Richard Rodgers playing time has went up the offensive productivity has gone down. At least that's what my eyes have told me. Richard Rodgers is not so much better then Montgomery, Davis, Janis, Allison and Ripkowski that he deserves to be on the field for 83% of the offensive plays.

Richard Rodgers killed 2 drives for them against the Titans in which ended any chance of a come back. First one he drops a 4th down pass which would have been a first down. Then he cuts his route off which leads to an interception.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

November 15, 2016 at 03:29 pm

I have a problem with giving up on the WRs. Even RR. These guys are more than capable if they played for a different team. I still say it's A-Rod. Not MM. Somethings got to give with the defense and these guys. You waited 3 years just for Adams to catch a ball. But everyone thought Ky Thornton was a bust too. He's playing his ass off for detroit. So do we have the wrong defense set -up. I believe so. If we lose perry. Peppers should be gone. I'd switch back to the 4-3-4. We have to start fresh. Thornton, and others that are successful in the NFL, suggest somebody is not making the right choice. (meaning TT) You Know TT, or even any of the packer brass are not going to sign a FA. If you want success, it's time to get TT to retire. The choice to bring in a new punter , guard, the injuries, Thornton and others, suggests the players want out. Their like fragile babies now. And thats on TT too.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:17 pm

Clydesdale. Lol. Great one. And while we are on the subject of RRod, what the hell is MMs logic in that anyway? Element of surprise?

0 points
0
0
Gforcetrivers's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:17 am

This team has been circling the drain for a long time. Rodgers is seemingly past his prime. The injuries are staggering but even when healthy we haven't played Packer football for over a year. Perhaps this is the new version of the Packers. That is a difficult pill to swallow. I can see us going 0-4 in this next stretch and losing one of the last three. I guess that would make us 6-10 on the season. It getting difficult to watch I'll tell you that.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:33 am

I don't think Rodgers is past his prime, I think like the entire organization he needs change. That's why there are very few examples of successful coaches who have been on the job 10 plus years.

I'b bet with a guy like josh McDaniels for example and ANY DC not named Dom Capers would have this team at 7-2. Cobb would be relevant, Montgomery would actually be used and talked about as a weapon, and the Packers wouldn't have had to wait several weeks for James Starks to come back. They'd have a RB in place in case the TWO you had were injured!!

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:40 am

NP, you and I see many things similarly, but I don't want Josh McDaniels anywhere near the Packers. He single-handedly destroyed the Broncos as their HC (which makes their recent rebuild even more interesting).

A fun read...
http://www.milehighreport.com/2016/1/20/10793696/josh-mcdaniels-head-coa...

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:47 am

Josh McDaniels is a decent OC mostly because of Tom Brady. Beyond that even the big skys of Colorado weren't big enough for his ego. Best he stay with Belichek and we can dislike the two of them as a package.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:03 am

He seems to do just fine when Brady was out too. Also, the Pats got better when McDaniels came back. Denver was a disaster, no doubt. But sometimes a guy has to learn lessons, and Elliott Wolf is not going to hand over personnel decisions to McDaniels in Green Bay. I think it would work out very well.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:32 am

I understand your feelings about McDaniels and trust me, I thought of Denver too. I mean he IS the man who drafted Tim Tebow in the first round. I'll have to give the link a read but my thoughts on McDaniels when I made my comments (Not the 1st mention of McDaniels) were perhaps he learned and grew from it. He turned down interview requests last season if I remember correctly which says something to me, like I want to learn as much from Belichek before taking on a head coaching position again.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:28 pm

Agree NP. I know a lot of people will call me crazy or say that Gruden would never come back as a coach, would never give up TV, but what I always hear in his voice is desire and passion, and great appreciation for football and the Packers. Anyway I'd take my chances that he would inspire and motivate this team. Underperforming would not be an issue. Do not see him declining the opportunity and challenge at all if offered

0 points
0
0
Icebowler's picture

November 15, 2016 at 04:21 pm

Last night, when Gruden interviewed Coughlin, he said something to the effect that if Coughlin had success coaching again, he hoped it wouldn't be against him.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 15, 2016 at 06:44 pm

Good choice TB, Gruden would make an excellent HC for the Packers and especially Rodgers . My only concern is he's been out of coaching for a long, long time. I'm pretty sure he's been asked to coach before, but maybe a chance to coach GB and Rodgers would be to much to pass up for him.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:31 pm

I get the feeling he would jump at it. Being out to me is a plus. He would benefit from greater perspective, and a hunger to succeed that could be infectious, and an appreciation for what this team could achieve.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:25 am

One thing is certain, he'd have his team ready to play and a team who WANTS to play. That old saying "Going through the motions" might be even to generous for the team that's took the field the last few weeks. McCarthy always has that same look on his face, confused, dumbfounded, emotionless.

0 points
0
0
John30856's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:18 am

I see the Pack going 6-1 the rest of the season and all you will be silent :)

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:22 am

We won't be silent. We will be vocally amazed.

0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:05 pm

...... or dead!!

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:37 am

No lies, this would not surprise me... I could see that happening.

That being said I could see them going 1-6 also...

I just have no clue what to expect from this team this year.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:44 am

A Packers team that goes 6-1 the rest of the way would almost automatically become a SB contender in this watered-down NFC. It would be hard to not include a team that finishes on that kind of roll in the SB conversation...especially since that 6-1 would include wins over other playoff contenders: Washington, Philly, Houston, Minny, Detroit, Seattle...only one of those could be a loss. This schedule that looked so weak before the season doesn't look that way now.

I just don't see it happening, but get #52 and #23 back, and get the offense playing to its strengths and things could evolve.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:25 am

Also add in #89.
And when it gets closer to the playoffs, if (BIG if) they were able to add either Shields or Lacy from IR that would be a huge boost to the team.

This is such a week to week league, you just never know what is going to happen. Vikings started out 5-0 and are now 5-4. Eagles started out 3-0 and have been 2-4 since. Falcons started 4-1 and have been 2-3 since. Steelers were 4-1 to start the year and have been 0-4 since. Ravens started out 3-0 and have been 2-4 since.

There is a lot of parity in the league. And teams that may look great now may not 4 weeks from now and vice versa.

0 points
0
0
GVPacker's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:55 am

Highly doubtful but I like your optimism John!

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:27 am

I love his optimism. As a natural optimist I'm happy to see it here. I would love to see more of it to be honest.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:52 pm

I will now say no way in hell and because I said that maybe it will. I would gladly eat crow. Superstition aside and instinctively never saying never, I can not possibly imagine going 6 - 1 because that alone would mean that MM could go 7 games without going away from what is working.

0 points
0
0
Icebowler's picture

November 15, 2016 at 04:28 pm

I can't look that far ahead. I just want to see some Packer Pride Sunday night, staying in the game throughout, and possibly squeaking out a W.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:25 am

As a President/CEO I think Murphy has been excellent for the Packers. His stamp on on the Organization will be here long after he's gone with "Titletown". But right now he's also in danger of leaving another stamp if he doesn't make some changes after this season and make them quick.
The Packers aren't making the playoffs unless the Vikings continue to lose (Probable) and the Lions start to lose MORE than the Packers (Doubtful). Murphy needs to have his ducks in a row bright and early the morning of January 2nd, 2017. He should have his next GM already selected and ready to be put in place. The new GM's first duty will be to fire McCarthy if McCarthy hasn't resigned, and the entire GB Coaching Staff. Have a short list of coaches you want to interview (McDaniels Please) and get it done. Be the first to take action, I'd imagine Rodgers would still have a lot of appeal to most coaching candidates.

I've said 100 times TT is the "Best Cap Manager" in the NFL. Where he lacks is using all the different ways one can better his team. You can't build JUST through the Draft and expect to win the SB. You put yourself in the position of constantly waiting for players to develop. Seems to me to ALWAYS be counting on Rookies and hoping for 2nd & 3rd year jumps from those developing players is just as risky if not more so than signing a FA here and there. It might be cheaper, but Ted hasn't really hit on an UDFA since Sam Shields. Lane Taylor HAS been a pleasant surprise, but when you look at the number of UDFA who have made this team the last 5 years, you'd hope for more than just Lane Taylor.

Thompson has rode the coattails of Rodgers for years. A few years ago I suggested if Thompson hadn't drafted Rodgers where would he be? FIRED, at least more than likely and I was met with a chorus of "In Ted We Trust". It's time for change and it's not something the Packers can't afford to put off. It's clearly getting worse, not better!

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:09 am

I do agree that Thompson has relied to heavily on the UDFA's to be key contributors. Exchange 1 or 2 of them for a veteran player and this would likely be a different team.

These are all the UDFA's the Packers currently have on their roster.

Geronimo Allison
Don Barclay
Kentrell Brice
Jayrone Elliott
Marwin Evans
Brett Goode
Ladarius Gunter
Josh Hawkins
Don Jackson
Joe Kerridge
Mike Pennel
Justin Perillo
Jacob Schum (signed from another team)
Lane Taylor
Joe Thomas

15 players out of 53 currently on the roster are UDFA's.
There are some good players here and worth developing. But can't he do better then Kerridge, and Perillo?

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:58 am

While I always thought that we did a good job of finding talent in the UDFA pool, I do wonder if we are covering for an average job in our drafting. The first and second round misses have left us almost void of game changing talent. Guys like Datone Jones, Nick Perry and Clark are suppose to be our stars.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:54 am

I like many of our UDFA's. Guys like Shields, Elliott, Brice, Thomas have all found really good roles and have been very good players for us.

Just saying that we need to upgrade from guys like Perillo. Whether its the draft or free agency, there are better players out there.

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:42 am

Be careful what you wish for. Look around the league. Show me the % of teams that switched GM and HC in the last decade or so and got immediately better. A new GM and new HC bring upheaval and unpredictable results. In GB's case Eliot Wolf would be a smoother transition, but that's in the works anyway. This team has made it to postseason every year after 2008. The only other team that's done that is the Pats. I don't think Belichick is available.

RCPackerFan's thoughts about the injuries this season are spot on. Bloggers and fans who think more big buck FAs would prevent that or that a new GM/HC would turn third stringers into All Pros are looking for unicorns and magic.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:47 am

Amen, brother.

Not saying that change isn't going to be necessary, but that change isn't always going to bring the results you hope for. If they did, we'd have 16 new playoff teams every year.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:38 am

'Be careful what you wish for.'
Exactly... Remember when Philly fans were in such a hurry to get rid of Andy Reid. So they let him go to bring in Chip Kelly? Look at how well that turned out.

I'm moving closer to the regime change, but is that going to be a change for the better or the worst?

Just saying that injuries do change teams. Take away Seattle's top 2 RB's, Jimmy Graham, Michael Bennett or Cliff Avril, Richard Sherman, Desawhn Shead and Jeremy Lane for a big portion of their season and how much does that change them? It changes them a lot.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:55 am

Completely agree what you wrote about new regime, but I wonder one thing - are you all sure that young WOlf can be in TT shoes? Where he proved himself that he is able to do that job, at least do that job now? As I understood, his father is not sitting behind him. TT is one who teach young Wolf the job. Maybe that is the reason why TT is still around. Maybe he wants to left young Wolf in his shoes when Wolf Jr will be ready?

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:47 am

I just seen a piece where MM stated that he isn't worried about the football team. And after the game for some reason he had to tell us what a successful coach he is ,if that alone doesn't sound like denial.... It's become increasingly difficult to say anything about this team and it's coach and GM that hasn't been said hundreds of times, it is what it is, all that's left to do as fans is to watch the last 7 games and see what happens after that.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:40 am

I heard the press conference yesterday. Yeah if you take his headline of him being a successful head coach it doesn't sound great. But if you listen to the whole thing he is right in what he said. Not really denial with what he said.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:02 am

Yeah, I agree. You knew as soon as he said it that it would be taken out of context and used as a headline. Unfortunate.

Still, the reporters aren't asking him the tough questions and he isn't giving anything other than same old process nonsense.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:22 am

Oh definitely. I expected to hear a lot of it and people taking it the wrong way.

I thought yesterday's conference was pretty good. He was a bit more definitive, but isn't that what you want from your coach?

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:52 am

Or when reporters did ask him tough questions like "what is wrong with the offense?"he became defensive (No pun intended)

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

November 15, 2016 at 03:46 pm

I watched Pro Football Talk today and Mike Florio even mentioned that he thought it was odd for MM to say that after such a terrible game, it reminded him of that character Stuart Smalley from Saturday Night Live, Daily Affirmation, I'm a highly successful coach and people like me! And went on to say "If I had Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers I'd be successful too."seems that MM may be worried about his job to feel compelled to tell us what a successful coach he is.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

November 16, 2016 at 05:58 am

When a comment begins with "I just seen" it might be a clue that the poster has difficulty understanding the context of a statement.

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:46 am

Or you don't know how to read or have a reading comprehension problem.

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

November 15, 2016 at 07:50 am

I'm sorry, but I don't buy the injury excuse. Yes, we've had some significant injuries but every other team in the NFL has significant injuries too.

And what do injuries have to do with a team that shows up unprepared and plays heartless football? Nothing.

For whatever reason, Mike McCarthy lost the respect and trust of Aaron Rodgers. Ever since, AR's play has declined and with it so has our record.

How Aaron goes, so this team goes. Next season get a new HC who Aaron Rodgers respects and trusts and this team will turn it around. That is what I believe.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:46 am

Yes other teams have had injuries. The Vikings have had significant injuries. Other teams have injuries too...

The fact remains though that the Packers are a different team with the injured players playing.

Is that the whole reason why they haven't played well, no. But that is where the problems with this team has started. There is a significant drop off from the players that have been out to their backups.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:35 pm

I believe that as well. Once trust is lost there's no getting it back. So if it is true with Rodgers and other teammates, a change is a must. I could be wrong and nobody is really privy to the lockerroom, but what I see in Rodgers eyes, attitude, behavior and aloofness is in sharp contrast to years ago. His sideline comraderie with MM seems very different. As we all know coaches get fired not players.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:09 am

Why are so many thinking that injuries are the cause of this teams demise to its state at this point. When, before injuries this season or last season did this team play well. Even when they were 6-0 last year we all knew this team won because of the lesser and injury hurt teams early. Stop placating yourselves as the Packers are now doing.

0 points
0
0
scullyitsme's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:40 am

Wait, Injuries don't matter when the Packers are losing but they do on other teams when the Packers are winning? Methinks you tripped and fell down.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:18 am

No, I'm saying this team wasn't playing that good when healthy early last season and the Jordy injury didn't come into play/excuse till after the Denver collapse.

You can't claim injury as excuse when your wins come from other teams injuries, missing players also.

Let's be honest...even when all is well , everyone is biting nails whether this team can win much less dominate as has been the mantra or imo, false belief.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:28 am

Last year wasn't just about Jordy's injury. Cobb and Adams both played injured which really hurt the offense.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:45 am

Let's not forget fat Eddie who wasn't an issue until the Denver game.
Again , stop looking at the win or wins a the lone indicator to offset the losses and whys. This team has been getting more and more off kilter for awhile in regard to performance overall and for some individually more so.
The issues for this team is more than injuries by a long shot.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:46 pm

i don't get what your saying?

Adams and Cobb were injured, therefore their abilities were limited. Thats all that I said.

I didn't say anything about win/loss.

0 points
0
0
scullyitsme's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:15 am

So, exactly when do you, or do you not claim injury? I would of quit while behind, but please continue.....

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:30 am

Claim an injury as a factor when factually appropriate whether for a loss or a win against a team in same situation. Most here are using injury in every manner with total disregard for true apportion to facts or reality.
Again, this teams issues are for more than the injury sedative most self prescribe as the cure for the teams ailments.
Can I say it any plainer.

0 points
0
0
NMPF's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:40 am

Injuries TRULY ARE a factor when the GM relies on under performing drafts and a roster consisting of 25% UDFA.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:28 pm

My point....an injury just enhances the real issue that was before the injury. Which is why injuries is a reason to open one's eyes to the deeper problems that have been obvious.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:37 pm

I totally agree with you on this one. This team's problems go beyond injuries. We have all talked about MM's stubborness, tendencies, bizarre roster use, etc. And I am definitely in the school of thought that Rodgers, and others as well Im sure, have tuned MM out and don't fully believe in his approach. It happens.

0 points
0
0
scullyitsme's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:42 am

So to clarify, you'll decide, and let us know?
These are the facts, 3-1 before a rash injuries to this team, what 7 starters? 1-4 after the injuries. With starters they found ways to win, without starters they found ways to lose. Seems pretty obvious to me but as we've seen lately, facts don't matter.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 15, 2016 at 12:25 pm

Let's make sure we're talking about true starters and not what is assumed as starter quality gets injured because of a true lack of talent.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:32 am

All of these players missed at least one start this season and was out for at least one of the losses the Packers had. Though I think the Packers problems are more than just injuries, the list is getting pretty long and these ARE starters. Well Cook I guess wasn't but common man!

Tretter/Lindsey
Shields
Randall
Rollins
Ryan
Lang
Cook
Matthews
Cobb
Monty
Lacy AND Starks.. That's like kick in the jewels to have both hurt

I'm sure I've missed some others.

0 points
0
0
GVPacker's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:11 am

I can see the following scenario play out after the season ends. Mark Murphy and Ted Thompson use the injury excuse as a way to rationalize the teams poor performance. Mike McCarthy is called in for a meeting in which he is put on Double Secret Probation and told if the team doesn't make the playoffs next year he resigns. Mike McCarthy then fires a bunch of coach's( Dom Capers retires) The new DC brings in a 4-3 defensive scheme and the new OC will be the play caller.

0 points
0
0
GVPacker's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:17 am

If Mike McCarthy is shown the door does Ted Thompson ask John Schneider for permission to talk to Darrell Bevell?

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:34 am

I floated his name as a possible successor a week or two ago, but mostly because I think he fits the bill for what they'd be looking for: an offensive-minded HC with a track record of working with good QBs. Bevell never worked with Rodgers in his stint in GB, so I don't know that would build any instant credibility for him with #12. The offense in Seattle is college-gimmicky, but it makes it hard to defend...part of that is a function of Russell Wilson's unique skill set, too.

In edit: my mistake. Rodgers and Bevell did overlap during Rodgers's rookie season. Maybe there would be some connection there. Still, I think he's the "type" of HC the Packers might be looking for. I think that if he really were a hot HC commodity that someone would have scooped him up by now.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:35 pm

Makes sense to me.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

November 15, 2016 at 08:34 am

Nice article Cory!
I think you are right. Mike McCarthyx might not lost his team immediatelly after NFCCG, but I think he lost them at the beggining of the 2015 season. I can imagine that Mike McCarthy left that game behinfd him, after he made some (cosmetic?) changes, but that not means necessarily that all the other players from the team was able to put it behind themselves...
I'm affraid that Packers problems are more mental and emotional than physical and that would be much harder to deal with.
It does not matter wether I like Mike McCarthy or Dom Capers, if they fail to bring new enthusiasm in this team they have to go, and I think they need to take with them Tom Clements, Bennett & Zook.
That team has to leave Packers together because they were and are, as the team, part of the problem. They share common philosophy and they are what they are.
I would hate to see Mike McCarthy as some others team HC , but I think he would get the immediate job with several NFL franchizes - namely Browns, Jaguars, Bucs, maybe Bengals, Jets, Rams or even SF. But if that needs to be done to heal the team, I'm all for it. And, also, I think that suggestion to hire Josh McDaniels, Patriots OC are good idea, and I'm also not so hesitant to accept as good hire David Shaw from Stanford...
I would like some comments on this?

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:43 pm

Trust lost is never regained. I agree with you as well on the cosmetic changes made. I think that made things worse by complicating the situation, and in minimizing what happened in that game. It was a team and organizational failure where everyone looked for an easy scapegoat and a committee was formed to make some minor changes to save face. I think it impacts the team to this day, we havent had any swagger since.

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 15, 2016 at 09:09 am

...The Packers don’t look like a team right now. They are a bunch of individuals playing for themselves. They don’t have sights set on postseason football; instead they have become fixated on things like incentives and bonuses...

I expect these kind of wild leaps by us crazy fans but really Cory. I would stop watching the team if this type of play was so evident. You should probably stop writing about the Packers if you feel this is the case.

The team is playing poorly, confused, miscast but they have not quit. Thankfully, there are enough commenters who are giving the subject some critical thought.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:38 am

Razer I 100% agree... he has no basis for this claim and I would expect the writer's on here to be a bit more measured than that. Like you said I would expect the comments section to rifle off a litany of emotional generalizations but not the contributors

0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:19 pm

It's just my humble opinion, but after coaching football and hockey at the Collegiate level for almost 20 years, I agree with Cory. It really really seemed like many didn't have the "burn in the belly".

0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

November 16, 2016 at 08:09 am

Sorry I just don't see how the scattered play by the defense can be so definitely interpreted as playing for bonuses and incentives. The first leap I would make is that these rookies and special teamers don't know the assignment or coverage they need to play. After that I might go to a mismatched lack of skill on our part. To make the motivational determination that a guy was playing for his bonus against the Titans is an insight born from frustration and anger.

0 points
0
0
NMPF's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:42 am

The comments on showing TT/MM the door are comical. Take your delusional selves, grab a beer and wait for 2018. Mark(what me worry?) Murphy is doing nada until Titletown, razing neighborhoods and expanding their footprint is complete. Making the Packers financially viable for the future obviously takes precedent over the quality of football we are subjected to on the field.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 10:43 am

My wfe an in laws big pack fans, im just an observer. From my perspective I put all the blame on the GM.
Draft and develop is a cover up for playing cheap money ball. Ask yourself, of the 15 ufa's, would any of them make another team or be playing now.
Ths is a team lacking skill players on both sides the ball. Pass rush, ho hum, run game nothing, pass d horrid. Many of these isxuez would be non dxiatant if Ted would have spent some bucks a long the way with free agents.
Ted has to go. Change starts at ths top

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 16, 2016 at 07:34 am

Starting by signing Casey Hayward.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:35 am

Mailing in the season before it's over

0 points
0
0
Gary Fritzmeier's picture

November 15, 2016 at 11:50 am

I like TT's draft and develop but at the same time a couple successful experience players could make all the difference in this team. I noticed watching the Mon. game the coordinators where on the sidelines and I'd like to see ours there to get the players charged. MM has enough to do trying to manage the flow of the game. IMO he doesn't have enuf experienced horses and that's on TT. We have opinions on this team and probably all right and all wrong. Might not make sense to you but does to me so 'what the hell'. If I remember correctly last year we moved the ball without Nelson. One of players that helped that was Montgomery until he go hurt.
Well he ain't hurt no more and we have moved the ball when he's used. So not being used is on MM or Bennett, who I think might be above his head. I would think there are good OC's out there that would move to GB as there is a good chance for changes in near future. As much as it hurts to watch them play like this I will root for them every play just like I did during 70's and 90's.
Made me sick at Colts game to see how MANY so called fans sold their tickets to opponents fans. As season ticket holder I realize we can't go every game but I would like to think we are better fans than other organizations.
Wew, I better stop now.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:48 pm

"I noticed watching the Mon. game the coordinators where on the sidelines and I'd like to see ours there too"

I have been saying that for years. Especially with the DC. Have never understood that part of "modern" football. Assistants in the box, Leaders on the field.

0 points
0
0
Dr.Rodgers's picture

November 15, 2016 at 01:44 pm

So Cory floats the idea that the the team leadership is in denial, and the team has punched out. It sure looked that way to me except for a couple of rah-rah moments from Cobb, Adams, and Daniels. Yet almost all posts here are stuck on TT, MM, AR, and injuries.

I guess you guys aren't seeing an unfocused, assignment unsure bunch of millionaires phoning it in like I do. Where's the pride in these guys who have the good fortune and talent to play for the NFL in front of millions of fans around the world? Grown men playing a boys game getting paid in 6 months what most of us won't make in a lifetime. Bitch at the players not Cory.

0 points
0
0
Packmaniac's picture

November 15, 2016 at 02:21 pm

My issue with Ted Thompson is that he's actually a scout masquerading as a GM. I've long felt that way. He's almost exclusively into the draft and UDFA signings, is essentially a non-factor in the world of trades and veteran pick ups in-season when injuries hit, plus in free agency behaves like losing a compensatory 4th round pick by signing a vet is an awful trade off. See a pattern? Ted gets his buzz from the draft and the subsequent undrafted free agency free for all, and that's pretty much it. Exactly what you would expect from a scout. He's into combines and talent evaluation -- good qualities for a GM to have, but not to the virtual exclusion of other common ways of trying to improve a roster.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

November 15, 2016 at 03:03 pm

Cory - there is no better evidence that the Packers are living in denial than MM declaring that he "is a highly successful NFL coach and that he is happy with his team." Now I understand that he is trying to put up a brave face to the public and maintain whatever shred of confidence his team still has but he would have been better advised to say that "I have been a highly successful NFL coach and therefore I realize that I have not been getting the job done for last 4-5 games. I'm responsible for the results here and I'm going to get it fixed." I have been and remain a huge supporter of MM, particularly for his resiliency and his integrity. I still see his resilience but I can't say that I saw his integrity in his Monday comments. If he can say that he is happy with his team rather than that he's embarrassed by the effort and results then I lose some of my respect for him. I'll continue to support him but I'll be questioning his judgement much more along the way. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

November 16, 2016 at 02:06 am

Since, I was waiting for your comment. Hangover regarding time change is over, I hope.
I would like to hear your suggestion, if MM will leave Packers, who you think should be candidates for his position?

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

November 16, 2016 at 09:59 am

Croat - I have not really thought about replacing MM since I do not expect it to happen. However, I generally prefer solid football people for the HC position. For example, I like Andy Reid, Bruce Ariens and Mike Zimmer. Of course they are unavailable. As for assistant coaches, I can't say that I know enough about most of them to make a confident recommendation. When the Packers hired Mike Sherman and then MM I didn't know much about either of them except that MM had been with the Packers in 1999. Mike Sherman did not work out and MM has worked out exceptionally well. Now Head Coaches are hired without having been OCs or DCs. The Packers Ben MacAdoo went from a position coach in GB to HC with the Giants and he's doing OK so far. Of course the Giants spent $200 million on FAs to bolster their defense. I'm sure that the Packers have a short list but it is also a matter of who is available at the end of the season. The other issue is aligning the HC and the GM. Some candidates for HC may not come to GB because they know that TT does not spend $ on FAs. Now if TT is replaced that may change and that would impact the HC decision as well. I will be in a better position to answer your question after the season and I have some idea who is available for consideration. I have not had the time to follow college football closely for over 25 years so I have no idea about candidates from the college ranks. The big name coaches from big programs like Alabama, Michigan and Ohio State have no reason to leave their jobs because they are basically kings and are paid at least as well as NFL HCs. Let's see how the season plays out but if any moves are made post-season I'm expecting TT to retire before MM leaves GB. I think MM is good until his contract expires in 2018. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0