Packers 2025 regular season

[igor67]

I double checked and yep Terry Bradshaw only had 2 more TDs in his career than INTs

[JosephC]

I don't understand why the NFL puts any effort at all into the Pro Bowl these days.  Back in the 70s/80s, there at least seemed to be some lukewarm interest in the game from the public.  These days, I just don't get the impression that there is any interest in the game at all.  They keep moving it around, changing the format, adding sideshows...I can only assume that's because they are trying to generate interest because nobody is watching it.

If I was an owner, I would just say that this type of game makes sense for other sports, but it just does not work for football.  Do we need to keep dumping money into this turd, or is it just time to get rid of the entire thing and move on?

[homer]

20 minutes ago, igor67 said:

I double checked and yep Terry Bradshaw only had 2 more TDs in his career than INTs

Now check out Joe Namath's stats.

[sveumrules]

In 1984 when Marino had his crazy season there were 615 TD to 584 INT over the entire NFL. Dan was +31 himself (48 TD | 17 INT) so the rest of the league was literally even up one to one on TD/INT ratio.

In 1989 when Montana had his pinnacle West Coast Offense season the league was still at 582 TD to 559 INT with Joe Cool accounting for +18 of the differential personally at 26 TD | 8 INT.

The next year in 1990 there is finally a little bit of separation beyond just one guy at 575 TD to 480 INT. In Favre's third MVP season (1997) it was a little better at 617 TD to 479 INT.

By Manning's third MVP season (2005) the totals were a little higher at 644 TD to 506 INT but the ratio was actually down fractionally from 1997.

Rodgers nutso 2011 (45 TD | 6 INT) sees the league add just over 100 touchdowns up to 745 TD while the interceptions remain static at 506.

By the time Aaron wins his fourth MVP in 2021 the league has transformed to the tune of 840 TD versus 440 INT, with this past season seeing over twice as many TD (811) as INT (380).

This bit of forward pass history from the NFL HOF website is kind of funny...

"Many tweaks to the passing rules occurred over the years since the practice was legalized. The biggest may have been in 1933...That year the league made provisions to allow a forward pass from anywhere behind the line of scrimmage as opposed to the 5-yard buffer requisite...This change grew out of a controversial touchdown pass thrown by Chicago Bears fullback Bronko Nagurski in the 1932 indoor playoff game that decided the ’32 league title...Nagurski faked a run toward the line and then quickly threw a TD pass to Red Grange. The Spartans contested that Nagurski was not 5 yards behind the line when he fired the pass. The play stood, and the Bears later added a safety to put the final touches on a 9-0 victory...At the league meetings the next offseason, Spartans coach George “Potsy” Clark lobbied for a change in the rules to allow passes anywhere behind the line of scrimmage as he argued “because Nagurski will do it anyway!!”

 

[LouisEly]

On 1/26/2026 at 9:53 PM, JosephC said:

If they had hired a defensive coordinator that had been a head coach with a good win/loss record, then they would like the hire. 

If he had a good win/loss record as a head coach, he would still be a head coach.

 

[LouisEly]

On 1/25/2026 at 9:03 AM, JosephC said:

Fumbling not allowed!

 

So... he holds players accountable?

[rickmanningfan]

It looks like he hit him.  Do you really think assaulting people is a useful way of "holding them accountable"?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

23 hours ago, JosephC said:

I don't understand why the NFL puts any effort at all into the Pro Bowl these days.  Back in the 70s/80s, there at least seemed to be some lukewarm interest in the game from the public.  These days, I just don't get the impression that there is any interest in the game at all.  They keep moving it around, changing the format, adding sideshows...I can only assume that's because they are trying to generate interest because nobody is watching it.

If I was an owner, I would just say that this type of game makes sense for other sports, but it just does not work for football.  Do we need to keep dumping money into this turd, or is it just time to get rid of the entire thing and move on?

It's been the case for years that they should just name the team and move on. 

The last time I remember it being fun to watch was around the time Favre was winning MVPs. The game wasn't much even then, but the skills competitions with the actual best players were fun to see, at least when I was 10.

[JosephC]

13 hours ago, LouisEly said:

If he had a good win/loss record as a head coach, he would still be a head coach.

 

Not if his name is McDermott.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

2 hours ago, JosephC said:

Not if his name is McDermott.

or Schottenheimer or McCarthy or Harbaugh any of the long list of guys who "parted ways" with a winning record.

[nate82]

On 1/27/2026 at 4:42 PM, nate82 said:

Maybe the NFL finally wised up and decided to put in requirements for the hall of very good?

Nope the NFL nor the voters put in requirements for the Hall of Good.  One voter didn’t vote for Belichick because they didn’t want Ken Anderson (QB), Roger Craig (RB) and L.C. Greenwood (LB) to fall off the list.  Umm what???

None of these players are HoF worthy let alone Hall of Very Good worthy.  The NFL HoF continues to be a joke.  Just put everyone in who retires from the NFL if you are going to put in average players.  These voters are going  to put some career backup QB into the HoF at some point.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

4 minutes ago, nate82 said:

Nope the NFL nor the voters put in requirements for the Hall of Good.  One voter didn’t vote for Belichick because they didn’t want Ken Anderson (QB), Roger Craig (RB) and L.C. Greenwood (LB) to fall off the list.  Umm what???

None of these players are HoF worthy let alone Hall of Very Good worthy.  The NFL HoF continues to be a joke.  Just put everyone in who retires from the NFL if you are going to put in average players.  These voters are going  to put some career backup QB into the HoF at some point.

I think Bill was a jerk to a bunch of people and probably a bunch thought "He'll make it anyway but I won't vote for him." I think it's very funny he didn't make it.

[nate82]

23 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I think it's very funny he didn't make it.

Oh I find it even more funnier a voter chose Ken Anderson over Belichick.  

[Mark6887]

 

[yourout]

4 hours ago, Mark6887 said:

 

We love mediocrity don't we.

[Joseph Zarr]

First Babich and his wealth of experience. Now quite a bit more DB room experience added. Say what we want, but these are good hires in a vacuum:

 

[Jopal78]

On 1/26/2026 at 2:45 PM, SeaBass said:

Honestly I'd feel a lot more concerned if it is Gute just doing it in a room by himself. I can't speculate how much input is asked specifically from the coaching staff if any but they're the ones you're trusting to do the actual coaching of the players they're being given. It feels like maybe they'd have some thoughts. Unless I'm misremembering I seem to recall Keisean Nixon being a Rich Bisaccia guy when he was hired as ST Coordinator.

There is a position that’s tasked with knowing the scouting report reports and other pro players in the league. It’s called the Director of pro personnel. For the Packers, it is Richmond Williams. I doubt any coaches know every player on all the teams in the NFL, but they probably would watch film  if asked on certain players 

[Joseph Zarr]

I didn't notice this until yesterday, but apparently the Packers have already hired their new LB coach after Hafley took his own down to Miami for a D-Coordinator role. Oconomowoc native, and last year's Virginia Tech D-Coordinator, Sam Siefkes:

Also, I should add, it appears DeMarcus Covington has been retained and will remain the D-Line coach. So, it appears most of (if not all?) the defensive staff is indeed set as of today.

[Sixtolezcano]

On 1/29/2026 at 9:56 AM, JosephC said:

I don't understand why the NFL puts any effort at all into the Pro Bowl these days.  Back in the 70s/80s, there at least seemed to be some lukewarm interest in the game from the public.  These days, I just don't get the impression that there is any interest in the game at all.  They keep moving it around, changing the format, adding sideshows...I can only assume that's because they are trying to generate interest because nobody is watching it.

If I was an owner, I would just say that this type of game makes sense for other sports, but it just does not work for football.  Do we need to keep dumping money into this turd, or is it just time to get rid of the entire thing and move on?

There is only one reason…$$$$$$$

[SeaBass]

21 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

There is a position that’s tasked with knowing the scouting report reports and other pro players in the league. It’s called the Director of pro personnel. For the Packers, it is Richmond Williams. I doubt any coaches know every player on all the teams in the NFL, but they probably would watch film  if asked on certain players 

Right, in no way was I suggesting that coaches are or should be the driving factor in player acquisition but in my mind it would make sense there might be meetings about guys they're looking at in free agency. It's not out of the ordinary for coaches to become GM down the line, it doesn't feel like their input would be of zero use. Coaches watch film, they're (hopefully) not stupid.

[HarryDoyle]

We're running it back, boys.

 

 

 

[igor67]

I really need a Brewers World Series appearance this year...

[SeaBass]

17 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

We're running it back, boys.

 

 

 

A lot of this can just be chalked up to "pay attention to what I do, not what I say."

They retained Bisaccia, he's not going to say, "We decided not to fire him, I don't really understand why because I think he's terrible."

"Do we need wholesale changes (at the CB position)? No."

There's an ocean's worth of semantics in that statement that leaves a lot of room for changes to be made.

[LouisEly]

Exactly.  "Wholesale changes" is not the same as "some changes".

Keisan Nixon's overall PFF grade was 41st out of 114 CBs.  Not Pro Bowl worthy, but close to the top 1/3rd of the league.  You don't dump any player who is near the top 1/3rd of players at their position.

Carrington Valentine's overall PFF grade was 43rd out of 114 CBs.  Would we like someone better?  Of course.  But it's the NFL - nobody has top 20 players at every position.

News flash - the list of CBs who like to tackle Derrick Henry (or any big RB) is a very, very short list.

[CheezWizHed]

Regarding CB, I wonder what people expect exactly.  

Nixon's performance dipped this year, but still was rated as a starting CB. Saying he is league average is a fair assessment. He is on a decent contract for his performance, so not much to gain by releasing him either. 

Valentine is on a rookie contract which basically is enough to say he stays.  Performance wise, I'd rate him about the same capability as Nixon, but worse on instincts.  There were several coverage blunders where he looked like he was guessing and got burnt.  

The chances of both of them coming back are very high. 

Hobbs' return could be debated.  I'm about 50/50 if I think they will give him a second try or not.  Mainly because there isn't a lot of cap savings to be had (although there is cash savings).  

But either way:

• Nixon, Valentine, (development CB holdovers from last year) + draft pick(s) + a FA

or

• Nixon, Valentine, (development CB holdovers from last year) + draft pick(s) + Hobbs

neither would constitute wholesale changes... Doesn't sound like there is much available for FA signing either.