Does Pro Bowl Prove Packers Lack Playmakers?
By jasonperone
As I sit here watching this year's Pro Bowl, I'm reminded of just how NFL-lite it is.
Players going half speed, whistles blowing before ball carriers are on the ground. None of those are new revelations but most of us are still in regular-season mode. We're used to seeing the game played at full tilt.
With the game so watered down, does it still illustrate who the game's best really are?
The voting process is a third player votes, a third fan votes and another third by coaches. Does that fact that no Packers players made the initial cut/vote mean the Packers are perceived as lacking playmakers?
Defensive tackle Mike Daniels and receiver Davante Adams got in as alternates and after other players bowed out of the game. That was it. Two total Packers representing the team.
Left tackle David Bakhtiari wasn't voted in despite being one of the best pass protectors in the NFL over the past two seasons (Pro Football Focus). Was the fact that Aaron Rodgers wasn't on the field much of this season a factor?
Either way, Bakhtiari was snubbed from the game. Other deserving players around the league such as Minnesota Vikings safety Harrison Smith were also left out. Smith ended up going as an alternate.
Many times a player gets voted to the Pro Bowl based on past reputation, even after a down season (BJ Raji in 2013, for example). Some players get in a year after they should, such as Daniels.
One thing Green Bay needs is more difference-makers on the field. Does the lack of yellow helmets on the NFC side remind us that the Packers need more guys who stand out?
The easy answer is yes since Green Bay hasn't been to a Super Bowl in nearly seven years, but I'm talking about All-Star-caliber players.
Or does it just mean that many Packers players had a down year, statistically? No Rodgers certainly hurt the team's offense and those individual players on it. Naturally, their numbers weren't what they would have been with #12 on the field.
How big of a gauge is the Pro Bowl in determining the teams that have the most playmakers?
-------------------
Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts. You can follow him on Twitter here
Comments (39)
Bure9620
January 29, 2018 at 06:12 am
No the Pro Bowl is a popularity contest. I just pay no attention.
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 07:33 am
As soon as fan ballots became part of the Pro Bowl any shred of credibility it might still have had went right out the window.
jeremyjjbrown
January 29, 2018 at 10:34 am
Yesterday I thought... "It would nice if football was on, hmm the ProBowl is on, yeah but it would be nice if football was on."
Turophile
January 29, 2018 at 06:48 am
Not so long ago Jeff Saturday came to the Packers for a season. He had fallen so far he was replaced (as starter) toward the end of the season.
He made the Pro Bowl that year. I rest my case. How can you use such a flawed system as a measuring stick ?
Remember, it's not Jeff's fault he was voted in, it's just an inherently bad system. All too often, very good up and coming young players are ignored, while veterans that were good in the past get in, even after a bad season.
NickPerry
January 29, 2018 at 06:58 am
Opps....Sorry bud, I used the Jeff Saturday example myself. Didn't see you had said the same thing. Great point!!!!
GBPDAN1
January 29, 2018 at 06:55 am
I agree with Bure9620, a big part of the Pro Bowl is popularity and there is some Bias with the voting. That being said, our team is lacking game changing players. We have a few, but drafting at the end of the round (or at least back third) every year has caught up along with some TT misses.
NickPerry
January 29, 2018 at 06:56 am
The game itself has become impossible to watch and rightfully so, a injury to one of the NFL's "Stars" in a game that means absolutely nothing would be a nightmare for some teams. Just look at the "Routine" play Jordy Nelson for example tore his ACL. Could you imagine if Adams or Daniels did something like that yesterday? As Alternate's???
I'd just soon the NFL did away with the game myself. I haven't watched it since 1983 I believe it was when JJ Jefferson, James Lofton, and Paul Coffman were tearing up the AFC.
I don't think the number of Pro-Bowlers is a very good gauge to say whether or not a team has "Playmakers", not really. Remember Jeff Saturday was a Pro-bowler in his only season in Green bay but was actually benched before the end of the season for EDS. It's a fricking popularity contest for the most part.
flackcatcher
January 29, 2018 at 08:24 am
Nick, I agree. The game is unwatchable, has been for over a decade. (if not longer) With the way the league is now structured, why would any player want to risk his ability to get a pay check. Problem is the nature of football itself. It is the closest we come to actual combat on the field, that limits what players and coaches will do for a meaningless one time performance. I don't think the NFL has any way around that.
Roadrunner23
January 29, 2018 at 07:06 am
Yes the Pro Bowl is a popularity contest and yes the Packers have a shortage of true playmakers.
Tier 1
*Daniels, Bakhtari, Adams are all excellent players
*Rodgers is coming back from injury at 35
After these top four, this team looks a bit like a rummage sale, a serious infusion of talent is needed.
Tier 2
*Nelson, Cobb,Mathews are no longer elite
*Dix was above average but lost his mojo
*Perry is slightly above average but injured too much
*Crosby is above average if you want to count a kicker
*D. Randall is average to slightly above average
Tier 3
*Clark, Martinez, J. Williams, A. Jones, Linsley, Taylor, King, Montgomery, Lowery, Jones, Davis are all promising young players but not the sum of all parts.
Again; this is a testament to how good Rodgers is and how good McCarthy is as a coach.
With a heathy Rogers the Packers most likely would have won 11-12 games and a team with a serious lack of elite talent.
Ok Gute; roll up your shirt sleeves and go get the Packers some guys so they can compete for a Super Bowl. The time is now!!
GO PACK!!
ScaryGary
January 29, 2018 at 01:05 pm
i think u have tier2 and tier3 mixed up.
4thand1
January 29, 2018 at 07:06 am
Was there a pro bowl yesterday? Who won?
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 07:30 am
I did. I took a nap.
TKWorldWide
January 29, 2018 at 07:23 am
Wait: you WATCHED the Pro Bowl? I didn’t realize that was still a thing.
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 07:32 am
What if they gave a Pro Bowl and nobody came?
TKWorldWide
January 29, 2018 at 10:06 am
If a Pro Bowl falls in an empty forest, does it make a sound?
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 10:11 am
Does a Pro Bowl rolling down a hill gather any moss?
Since'61
January 29, 2018 at 10:32 am
Does anybody really care?
TKWorldWide
January 29, 2018 at 08:55 pm
Does anybody really know what time it is?
TKWorldWide
January 29, 2018 at 07:55 pm
Randy?
John Ramble Kirk
January 29, 2018 at 07:41 am
The article correctly says no Packers made the initial roster, then incorrectly states Mike Daniels got in on the initial vote. Mike replaced Aaron Donald, so, to be clear we had two injury replacement attendees in Daniels and Adams, no originals.
While a joke and popularity contest it doesn't have anything to do with the reality the Packers don't have any star players outside of Aaron Rodgers.
Bakhtiari is a better LT than Davante is a WR. Oddly, Hundley helped Adams to his alternate appearance in the PB. As unpopular as this is, I don't think Adams will ever be voted to the PB. It'll be interesting to see how he does next season with Aaron back. I don't feel he's anywhere near star level.
The young Kenny Clark might be our best non 12 hope in 2018. Aaron Jones has the best chance from our rookie class to become a star.
The cupboard needs a restock of top shelf goods. We have one filet mignon in the freezer and a bunch of decent sides to go along with it.
jasonperone
January 29, 2018 at 11:40 am
I had to go back and double check on Daniels and updated the info. No originals, both alternates
stockholder
January 29, 2018 at 07:57 am
popularity? Who cares. The pageantry is leaving. It needs to change. First it should be the fans "CHOICE"! ( Ballots etc.) After that it should be the coaches that name, and fill out the roster. It really has worked for MLB. These guys will make more money if they put it in the fans hands. The TV revenue going to the players. And who won't bust their tale to make more money? And don't make people stay up to watch the game.
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 08:43 am
IMO, if the fans are voting and if that's going to be the only piece of the pie, there shouldn't be any clauses in contracts that award bonuses to players based on making the Pro Bowl.
stockholder
January 29, 2018 at 01:44 pm
There shouldn't. The tv Ratings will pay the shot. And the fans cannot vote after the playoffs start. How many players will push themselves to get in the money? How many players would make sure their conduct is cleaned up? I think this would be better for the pro Bowl and for football. EVEN the senior -bowl even had more in attendance.
Since'61
January 29, 2018 at 08:46 am
Non-event! Thanks, Since '61
TKWorldWide
January 29, 2018 at 10:08 am
I’d take fan votes out of it.
Then, I’d just name the team and not play the game.
Signed,
Commissioner TKstinator
NitschkeFan
January 29, 2018 at 08:50 am
Agree with all of the above, the Pro Bowl selection does not indicate players ability or performance.
A better measure, though not perfect, would be the much more exclusive "All Pro" selections. Various different sports writer association put out lists but I think the AP list goes back many decades.
This year the only Packer was Bakh (2nd team). Though I like to think if he hadn't been injured that #12 would have been worthy as well. If you look at the All Pro selection most years the list is usually a pretty reasonable look at the leagues best performers.
mrtundra
January 29, 2018 at 09:12 am
Even with all of those vikings' players, trying to show the world that they don't suck, the NFC still lost the Pro Bowl. Hard to believe.
The Pro Bowl is a lot like the MLB All Star Game. It's just a popularity contest that the fans have a say in. The most talented players sometimes get snubbed over a fan favorite from a bigger market. Why would any NFL player want to play in this meaningless game if there were any chance to get injured in it? It also did not help that the NHL All Star Game was being played at the same time as the Pro Bowl.
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 10:10 am
Except that MLB has done the dumbest thing ever and attached home-field advantage for its championship to a truly meaningless game where players are selected based on frivolous fan voting. It's only marginally dumber than assigning home-field on an alternating basis (which they used to do).
Imagine if the ProBowl decided whether the SB would be played in NE or in Philly? Holy shit...
Since'61
January 29, 2018 at 10:35 am
Dobber - MLB no longer uses their All-Star to determine home field for the World Series. They now use best record like the other pro leagues. Thanks, Since ‘61
dobber
January 29, 2018 at 01:51 pm
I humbly stand corrected...in my wimpy defense, that only just happened this year.
zoellner25
January 29, 2018 at 09:19 am
Our 7-9 record shows we lack playmakers
worztik
January 29, 2018 at 09:46 am
Maybe the players should be chosen based on how much money they’re paid by their respective teams... or maybe by the amount of gold they wear!!! That would be legit!!! Just sayin’...
al bundy
January 29, 2018 at 09:58 am
Does a bear shit in the woods? Hello, the pro s for the best players. If five packers had made it you would all be giddy. Be honest there are no pro bowlers onthis team, thank genius ted for it. He let your pro bowlers leave to save bucks.
zeke
January 29, 2018 at 10:41 am
Speaking of shitting in the woods: 38-7. All that talent, playing for the opportunity to be the home team at the Super Bowl, and they defecate that performance out in front of the whole world. How... typical.
Skol.
al bundy
January 29, 2018 at 10:36 am
Does a bear shit in the woods? Hello, the pro s for the best players. If five packers had made it you would all be giddy. Be honest there are no pro bowlers onthis team, thank genius ted for it. He let your pro bowlers leave to save bucks.
Mojo
January 29, 2018 at 11:29 am
It doesn't prove GB lacks playmakers, but it substantiates it. Subtle difference.
Bakh should have been a slam-dunk pick, with maybe Kenny Clark too. The two who made it - Daniels and Adams were borderline selections.
That leaves basically one no-brainer on the entire
roster. Yeeesh.
Plus, I'm guessing if you look at more objective criteria such as PFF, Football outsiders, scouts, GM's etc. they would confirm the lack of playmakers on both sides of the ball.
Finwiz
January 29, 2018 at 12:33 pm
No interest at all.
Actually forgot about it, and didn't see a second of it.
Thegreatreynoldo
January 30, 2018 at 02:23 am
No proof should be necessary.