Packers 2024 Off-Season Thread

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Is that a real question? I think his current position, and anyone's current position, is valid to a potential job offer.

In most instances, but not this.  He took the role on Bielema's staff because he knew Bielema and thus would have the flexibility to get the hip surgery he needed without having to deal with the rigors of being a DC.  He didn't interview for any other DC roles; it was either UW HC position or get surgery.

FWIW, Leonhard didn't interview well with Mac.  Spent too much time talking about what he would keep the same, not enough time talking about what he would (and needed to) change.

[LouisEly]

3 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

Staley, in my opinion, would be yet another example of scenario B. His only claim to fame was a single year as DC of the Rams (2020) when he had peak cheat-code Donald and Ramsey headlining a defense that was so deep in the front that he never had to blitz and looked like a genius. That ain’t going to be the 2024 Packers, so I would expect another Fangio/Barry retread performance.

It was only one year, but Staley’s defense was the best in the league in both points and yards allowed, featuring the top pass defense by net yards per attempt and the third-best in yards per rush.  Both pass defense and rush defense.

The Packers have a front four of Clark, Wyatt, Gary, and Van Ness... that's kind of deep in the front, isn't it?  Plus they have Alexander, who can't be much of a step down from Ramsey, and Walker at ILB.  What did that get them?  The reason Barry was fired was because the Packers have all that talent and underperformed.  Staley had talent on his defense, but they didn't underperform - they were literally the best in the league.  They literally couldn't be any better.  That's what you want in a coach.

[homer]

I like all the names attached to the Packers so far - young, no re-treads, no old dusty dudes. Good crop to pick from. 

[areacodes]

1 hour ago, HarveysWBs said:

Maybe so. But considering what we know about LaFleur, namely, he likes the Fangio system, he likes people he knows, and he likes people who have ties to the Rams when he was there, I’d say Staley looks like the leader in the clubhouse.

Maybe?  You can no longer be optimistic about the Packers as a franchise based on the first name the media listed as getting an interview?

Wasn’t Jim Leonhard his first choice last go round?  Did he meet any of your criteria above that makes you doubt the entire franchise?

What about the others that have been listed as getting an interview or request to be interviewed?  Where do they fall on your list of requirements to be LaFleur’s DC?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

44 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

In most instances, but not this.  He took the role on Bielema's staff because he knew Bielema and thus would have the flexibility to get the hip surgery he needed without having to deal with the rigors of being a DC.  He didn't interview for any other DC roles; it was either UW HC position or get surgery.

Yeah I'm still not seeing how this relates to the fact that right now, today, his job is what it is, and we're talking about potentially being an NFL DC. 

My sole point is that if he had some highly desired position right now, it stands to reason that he would have an incentive to stay where he is. That is why his current position is relevant. If he were the Badgers HC, he's not even in the conversation.  I'm confused as to why this is a controversial point.

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

My sole point is that if he had some highly desired position right now, it stands to reason that he would have an incentive to stay where he is. That is why his current position is relevant. If he were the Badgers HC, he's not even in the conversation.  I'm confused as to why this is a controversial point.

Personally when I read it the first time, I thought you were knocking him for only being a U-ILL video analyst scout (or whever oddball title he holds). It wasn't clear you were thinking he was more available...sounded like you were downgrading him for it. 

[HarveysWBs]

2 hours ago, areacodes said:

Maybe?  You can no longer be optimistic about the Packers as a franchise based on the first name the media listed as getting an interview?

Wasn’t Jim Leonhard his first choice last go round?  Did he meet any of your criteria above that makes you doubt the entire franchise?

What about the others that have been listed as getting an interview or request to be interviewed?  Where do they fall on your list of requirements to be LaFleur’s DC?

What follows is a general response to others’ response to my original post about the Staley rumor, not all directed at @areacodes. Specifically to his points, the Leonhard choice, if reports about it are to be believed, would be encouraging,  But when that didn’t work, LaFleur fell back into his old habits.

And what worries me about Staley is just this continuation of a trend, which is that LaFleur targets people he knows, which is fine so far as it goes (even understandable), but the problem is he seems to then stick with his guys long after it should be apparent they aren’t making the grade. Staley, based on the connections I listed above, seems to be another one of his guys. If we get even more of a defense ranked in the 20s in the leading metrics, how long is he going to stick with him? How many early postseason exits would it take?

And look, I’m not making any grand predictions here. What the heck do I know about any of this? All these guys have forgotten more than I’ll ever know. The Fangio system has been around long enough to gather some pelts for the wall. But how’s it doing lately? Staley couldn’t get it done in LA. Desai got canned in Philly. Barry seemed to do less with more than any DC in recent memory. And the patriarch himself was shown the door in Miami. If the brain trust figures it is best to keep the same system in place, I get the logic. But we say we shouldn’t discount Staley’s only good year coming with otherworldly talent (to @LouisEly’s point)? He had Bosa and Mack and watched helplessly while his unit gave up 63 to the Raiders of all teams. I don’t have any detailed film analysis for you, but yeah, I’m worried.

I see I’m in the minority, so I don’t want to belabor the point. All I’m offering here is a personal vibe check. I want to be the first to admit I was way wrong if he delivers a top ten defense in Green Bay. Nothing would make me happier, in fact. I like LaFleur, and I want him to succeed here, and I think finding a great D coordinator would at last shore up what has been probably the gravest weakness of his tenure. But my point is, I’ve seen enough self-sabotage in the last twenty-five seasons to stop expecting good things, especially on defense, and especially when it matters most. For my own sanity, if nothing else, I have to expect present trends to continue.

But it slightly heartens me to see so many others see it so differently. May it be so.

[SeaBass]

3 hours ago, LouisEly said:

In most instances, but not this.  He took the role on Bielema's staff because he knew Bielema and thus would have the flexibility to get the hip surgery he needed without having to deal with the rigors of being a DC.  He didn't interview for any other DC roles; it was either UW HC position or get surgery.

FWIW, Leonhard didn't interview well with Mac.  Spent too much time talking about what he would keep the same, not enough time talking about what he would (and needed to) change.

I read that part of his deal when he parted ways with Wisconsin was he would be paid $1M for 2023 as long as he didn't take a DC or HC job which I'm sure it's a pretty big factor why he has the job title he has. It will be interesting to see what his next move is and what he has his sights on. He may not want to jump to the NFL, he might want to see if he gets offers to head coach at the college level.

[Team Canada]

7 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Personally when I read it the first time, I thought you were knocking him for only being a U-ILL video analyst scout (or whatever oddball title he holds). It wasn't clear you were thinking he was more available...sounded like you were downgrading him for it. 

Agreed, I definitely (mis)read it as that.

[BrewerFan]

9 hours ago, SeaBass said:

What's wrong with Fangio? Just because Joe Barry was a failure doesn't mean the system is flawed. I don't think, or I would hope not at least, that guys that run defenses just install a system and forget about it and refuse to innovate or pay attention to what offenses around the league are doing to counter defenses. Fangio reportedly is going right to Philly from his last job, tells me he's still highly respected. It's an offense first league and for the most part it's the players that matter which of course doesn't absolve DCs from the responsibility of getting the most out of those players.

I've pretty much said Leonhard isn't my choice but end of the day what do I know? Not much. I don't dislike him even if I think he's got a slightly overinflated popularity among the Packers fanbase. If Leonhard is ultimately hired I trust the process. My comments about him are more a criticism of the fanbase wearing blinders. I'm prepared to be wrong, I've been wrong about countless things in my life, I'll be wrong countless times more.

Go look at the rankings this year for Fangio style defenses? 

What's to like about his system? It wasn't just Joe Barry who struggled, it was across the league. 8 of the 10 worst or 8 of the 12(I don't remember at this point) were all Fangio style defenses and were among the worst in the league. 

The system is flawed. It's rush 4, soft coverage, keep the ball in front of you, hope the 4 get home and force a bad throw. 

[BrewerFan]

10 hours ago, homer said:

We really don't know if that's true or not. Chryst was 56 when he was fired. He could have coached another 8 - 10 years.

We don't, but there was a lot of talk that Leonhard was going to be the next HC at Wisconsin and that it was going to be sooner than later. 

And for the record, I don't know McIntosh, but I do know people in that Athletic Department...people who work closely with him. I never heard he had a bad interview or that his interview was in any way responsible for him not getting the job.

They took a big swing, kept it a state secret, had NDAs signed so it wouldn't leak as they wanted Leonhard in the event that they couldn't get Fickell.

Not that it really matters. I don't know how Leonhard would do as a HC. I thought Fickell was a good decision. JUST as a DC though...you really can't do much better.

 

10 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

Maybe so. But considering what we know about LaFleur, namely, he likes the Fangio system, he likes people he knows, and he likes people who have ties to the Rams when he was there, I’d say Staley looks like the leader in the clubhouse.

Definitely so. I don't know that MLF likes the Fangio system. I know that he publicly called out Barry each year and repeatedly said he wanted the DBs to be "stickier." I don't think he does want the Fangio system. At least not the version that NEARLY all of the DCs who coached under him run. First of all, Fangio wasn't nearly as rigid in his scheme as the people running his system are. I know when he played the Rams and they were dominating with their outside zone or wide zone. He ran a 6 man front with 1 LBer to try and shut off every cut back lane and rely on the LB and Safeties. He would give you different looks.

His main idea was good. Facing QBs like Mahomes and Herbert and these young, dynamic athletes who extend players(Rodgers) he wanted to take away the big play, try and disguise the coverages with his safeties and then ultimately make them march down the field.

The problems;

1-He had a TON of talent when he was successful. In SF they had Willis, Bowman, Justin Smith, Aldon, he had stars on the front and at LBer. Same in Chicago. Mack was elite, Hicks was a stud, Roquan Smith is a beast, they had other stars. 

2-The people who implemented his defenses aren't as original. Just as Buddy Ryan and Red Ryan's coaching tree didn't produce all stars(or Belichick).

3-Part of #2, but NFL offenses are smart. If you're going to play split safeties and Quarters or Cover 6 with 4 DBs taking away your best player(think Hill in KC or Adams in GB) those offenses are going to just keep running mech concepts and combo routes and pick you apart...especially if you don't have an elite front with pass rushers and the original Vic Fangio to run that defense. 

Fangio should do fine in Philly. They have outstanding pass rushers and they get after the QB to go with very good safety play(though even that wasn't good enough with THEIR Fangio style defense last year). 

 

As for Staley, I don't think you should use Staley's results as an HC as an end-all for his ability to run a defense. I know people in the NFL still think he's a "brilliant defensive mind," according to some former executives who've talked about him. 

Staley made....comically bad decisions with time management, going for it on 4th down, things like that. But he was also focused on the entire team. It's a very different job just worrying about the defense. I'm also not sure the talent was as good as the big names would suggest. Mack is older and his 7 sack game may skew the perception of how great he was. Bosa played just a handful of games the last couple years. 

And their LBers were not great.

 

Staley wouldn't excite me, but even looking at what he did with the Rams. They were #1 and dominant. You're not dominant because of two players. And then the following years, they fell to 15th despite adding talent when they went all in. Von with Donald and Floyd, pretty good pass-rushing DTs like Brockers, and then Ramsey, and Williams, that was a more talented team than Staley had. Of course when you have a great offense you are also giving the other teams more chances for possessions.

 

I'd like to watch some breakdowns of his scheme and his play calling before deciding one way or the other what he is as a DC.

I know the Chargers were in the top ~10 in blitz rate when he was there...that's not very Fangio-esque. 

[Samurai Bucky]

22 hours ago, Joseph Zarr said:

Two Packer Report items have me fairly pumped:

One of the articles under the DC tracker is the grading article.  Since their highest graded linebacker is McDuffie with a -1.25, I would think they would focus in improving that position.

[HarveysWBs]

14 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Definitely so. I don't know that MLF likes the Fangio system. I know that he publicly called out Barry each year and repeatedly said he wanted the DBs to be "stickier." I don't think he does want the Fangio system. At least not the version that NEARLY all of the DCs who coached under him run. First of all, Fangio wasn't nearly as rigid in his scheme as the people running his system are. I know when he played the Rams and they were dominating with their outside zone or wide zone. He ran a 6 man front with 1 LBer to try and shut off every cut back lane and rely on the LB and Safeties. He would give you different looks.

From an Athletic article that is of course paywalled:

Quote

In an interview with ESPN prior to the 2019 season, Sean McVay, Kyle Shanahan and Matt LaFleur were all asked which coach’s defense is the most difficult to read and attack. All three highly successful play callers answered: Vic Fangio, the defensive coordinator of the Bears from 2015-18, and first-year coach with the Broncos in 2019.

That does not discount your other points. You may be right that what LaFleur has been looking for all this time is someone to run Fangio’s system like Vic himself, and not a lesser imitation. But he, and the rest of the Shanahan tree, has apparently viewed the Fangio defense as something of a form of cryptonite, and thus wants it on their team. It is not a coincidence that Staley was his first interview.

[BrewerFan]

2 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

From an Athletic article that is of course paywalled:

That does not discount your other points. You may be right that what LaFleur has been looking for all this time is someone to run Fangio’s system like Vic himself, and not a lesser imitation. But he, and the rest of the Shanahan tree, has apparently viewed the Fangio defense as something of a form of cryptonite, and thus wants it on their team. It is not a coincidence that Staley was his first interview.

In an interview in 2019.

They do not view Fangio nor his defense as "kryptonite" in 2024. They're the worst defenses in the game. Look up the coaches who come from Fangio's schemes and then tell me that they're still the kryptonite of the best teams in the NFL?

Also, I feel like this article just hammers homes most of the points I was making...it's just not a finished product;

Starts out with Fangio playing the Rams;

Quote

"Fangio used a 6-1 tilt front with soft zone coverage to counter the Rams’ outside-zone runs, boots and play-action shot plays."

That's exactly what I was talking about and what you don't see Barry or anyone else do.

But again, it's also from before 2019.

Explain the MAIN concepts in the Pakers passing offense? They absolutely destroy Fangio schemes. Those Mesh routes, the WRer screens, the pre-snap movement, the combo routes that ate up that Cover 2 side of the Cover 6 where you run a deep route and then a corner or simple out route.

 

Quote

What makes Fangio’s defense the best response to modern offenses? Its two-high (two deep safeties) structure limits explosive plays and forces offenses to stay patient and throw short.

17 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

His main idea was good. Facing QBs like Mahomes and Herbert and these young, dynamic athletes who extend players(Rodgers) he wanted to take away the big play, try and disguise the coverages with his safeties and then ultimately make them march down the field.

 

-Part of #2, but NFL offenses are smart. If you're going to play split safeties and Quarters or Cover 6 with 4 DBs taking away your best player(think Hill in KC or Adams in GB) those offenses are going to just keep running mech concepts and combo routes and pick you apart...especially if you don't have an elite front with pass rushers and the original Vic Fangio to run that defense. 

 

If you're listening to Matt LaFleur, the "definition of insanity," the "we need to play stickier out there," over and over(probably said that...15 times under Barry...I'm not sure how you'd come away in 2024 thinking he wants to sit back in Cover 6 and Watch teams march up and down the field in 2024. 

I don't think he wanted to in 2021...which AGAIN is why he offered the job to Jim Leonhard.

 

A couple coaches praising him going into the 2019 season tells me nothing about where he is right now.

 

Also, this is was a interesting video. Sounds pretty accurate to me. 

(Edit, just gotta click on it and go watch it). 

 

[CheeseheadInQC]

The bizarre exception to the talk about teams eating up the softer zone schemes are the Cowboys. I saw one writer point out early the week of the Wild Card round that the Cowboys feasted against every defense except the zone alignments that Barry favored, that for all the mismatch talk, this was a bad draw for the Cowboys offense. Then I didn’t see anyone mention it again until after the Packers won.

[Fear The Chorizo]

20 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

We don't, but there was a lot of talk that Leonhard was going to be the next HC at Wisconsin and that it was going to be sooner than later. 

And for the record, I don't know McIntosh, but I do know people in that Athletic Department...people who work closely with him. I never heard he had a bad interview or that his interview was in any way responsible for him not getting the job.

They took a big swing, kept it a state secret, had NDAs signed so it wouldn't leak as they wanted Leonhard in the event that they couldn't get Fickell.

Not that it really matters. I don't know how Leonhard would do as a HC. I thought Fickell was a good decision. JUST as a DC though...you really can't do much better.

 

Definitely so. I don't know that MLF likes the Fangio system. I know that he publicly called out Barry each year and repeatedly said he wanted the DBs to be "stickier." I don't think he does want the Fangio system. At least not the version that NEARLY all of the DCs who coached under him run. First of all, Fangio wasn't nearly as rigid in his scheme as the people running his system are. I know when he played the Rams and they were dominating with their outside zone or wide zone. He ran a 6 man front with 1 LBer to try and shut off every cut back lane and rely on the LB and Safeties. He would give you different looks.

His main idea was good. Facing QBs like Mahomes and Herbert and these young, dynamic athletes who extend players(Rodgers) he wanted to take away the big play, try and disguise the coverages with his safeties and then ultimately make them march down the field.

The problems;

1-He had a TON of talent when he was successful. In SF they had Willis, Bowman, Justin Smith, Aldon, he had stars on the front and at LBer. Same in Chicago. Mack was elite, Hicks was a stud, Roquan Smith is a beast, they had other stars. 

2-The people who implemented his defenses aren't as original. Just as Buddy Ryan and Red Ryan's coaching tree didn't produce all stars(or Belichick).

....

 

onfield talent tends to play a bigger role in how good an NFL defense is, probably moreso than a D Coordinator with a unique/gimmicky scheme - I think the conflict happens when players' strengths don't fit a DC's preferred scheme well enough, and then the defensive performance disappoints.  That may very well be the case with Barry and this defense that has been loaded up with 1st round draft picks - but part of that is many of them were still developmental projects who had to be worked into the rotation in years 1-2 of their careers.  It was definitely time for Barry to move on, but I also think not looking at veteran "fossil" DCs to bring in and trying to find the next great defensive mind is probably missing the boat on who the best option might be.  People slammed McCarthy for bringing in Dom Capers for these same reasons and then they won the Super Bowl in large part due to their defense, which sealed multiple playoff wins for that team.

Actually, a similar type of move now that the Capers hire was would be Ron Rivera - recently fired head coach with varied periods of success early in his career as a head coach and DC, happens to prefer/run a base scheme opposite of what the Packers have been doing (Rivera is a 4-3 guy), but frankly the current defensive roster has some tweener OLBs who could slide into 4-3 DEs and I think Quay Walker would be an absolute monster as a Will LB.

And I'd also say that a DC's shelf life in the NFL for one team seems to be limited to just a few seasons, anyway - get a good young one that seem to know what he's doing in there and he'll leave for a HC gig elsewhere in a year or two, bring in an established fossil and after the first couple seasons his approach tends to get stale and he's either canned by the HC or leaves after the whole staff and GM get fired.  Really difficult to bring in a solid DC and have him stay in that role longterm successfully, unless that's the only role he wants after a previous failed HC gig...Spagnuolo with the Chiefs is that guy, IMO - and even he's had defenses who have struggled with that team due to limited defensive talent.

 

 

[nate82]

Staley would be a Berry clone.  Their defensive scheme are exactly the same.  It would be extremely funny to see the Packers go from Berry to Staley.  

[Joseph Zarr]

There are a few whispers from Green Bay tonight that Christian Parker has been offered the position. Nothing confirmed as of yet and there was no word on whether he said 'Yes'. But there are substantiated 'rumors' at this point. FWIW. This could, of course, be premature unvetted speculation but, if this is the case, I'm pretty excited about it.

 

[CheezWizHed]

On 1/27/2024 at 11:08 PM, nate82 said:

Staley would be a Berry clone.  Their defensive scheme are exactly the same.  It would be extremely funny to see the Packers go from Berry to Staley.  

Or for the Bears to pick up Joe himself...

[Team Canada]

5 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Or for the Bears to pick up Joe himself...

They already hired Washington.

[CheezWizHed]

22 minutes ago, Team Canada said:

They already hired Washington.

Yes, but it still would've been funny. 

Just reminding nate82 that interviewing someone doesn't mean we hire them.  Staley might be Barry 2.0, but at least Staley actually has had a defense in the top half of the league.. The Bears decided to interview the original...

[Strike4]

On 1/28/2024 at 12:07 AM, Joseph Zarr said:

There are a few whispers from Green Bay tonight that Christian Parker has been offered the position. Nothing confirmed as of yet and there was no word on whether he said 'Yes'. But there are substantiated 'rumors' at this point. FWIW. This could, of course, be premature unvetted speculation but, if this is the case, I'm pretty excited about it.

 

https://wisportsheroics.com/green-bay-packers-christian-parker-nfl-broncos/

 

seems like quite a bit of smoke....

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

3 minutes ago, Strike4 said:

https://wisportsheroics.com/green-bay-packers-christian-parker-nfl-broncos/

 

seems like quite a bit of smoke....

Take anything from "Wisconsin Sports Heroics" with an enormous grain of salt. Far, far from a legit news source. 

[nate82]

2 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Just reminding nate82 that interviewing someone doesn't mean we hire them.

But it would still be funny if they do.  Also I am just poking the foam cheese heads.

[SeaBass]

7 hours ago, Ron Robinsons Beard said:

Take anything from "Wisconsin Sports Heroics" with an enormous grain of salt. Far, far from a legit news source. 

Yeah they're just a website that regurgitates what other news sources have already reported. Living the click-bait life. I prefer to source an actual news site (but that still doesn't mean the report isn't regurgitated).