Game 1 - Packers @ Vikings - Sunday, Sept. 13th @ 3:25 PM

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Despite Jopal doing his schtick, the Packers were very clearly a contender, and many pegged them as the top contender, until Micah Parsons got hurt. Cherry-picking random bad games that every single team in the league has, doesn't change what the facts were. It was week 14 and they were positioning as a 1 seed. If that's not contending then nobody is contending. They were dominating Denver on the road with a multi-possession lead and the ball in 2nd half. Sound familiar?

The NFL is a fickle league though.  Running back the same roster in no way means you're good again. This is exactly why I argued they were really not the same old 7 seed, I thought they'd be worse. You get figured out, systems get stale, players regress. 

But the worst part is that even if Parsons had stayed healthy, Matt absolutely would have messed it up eventually with another one of these.  

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The first real sign of who MLF is, was kicking a FG down by 8 points with in the NFC Championship, with the league MVP at the helm who'd lit the league on fire that season. It disgusted me at that time but he hadn't pissed everyone off enough yet and I had to listen to 2/3 of the fans argue it was the right call. 

[adambr2]

Not really related to any of this, but I also think it really bothers him that Ben Johnson doesn’t want to be his buddy. I think if it were up to Matt, they’d attend sporting events together like him and Eberflus did.

Matt should actually have the same attitude: “you suck, I don’t like you, and I’m going to beat you.”

But he’s soft, and his team is always a reflection of that. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Just now, adambr2 said:

Not really related to any of this, but I also think it really bothers him that Ben Johnson doesn’t want to be his buddy. I think if it were up to Matt, they’d attend sporting events together like him and Eberflus did.

Matt should actually have the same attitude: “you suck, I don’t like you, and I’m going to beat you.”

But he’s soft, and his team is always a reflection of that. 

I don't know if I'd say it bothers him that he doesn't want to be his friend, but I think he knows he's a weaker personality and that deep down he's Johnson's whipping post. Maybe that's the same thing. I think Matt's buddy-buddy crap is a defense mechanism of sorts.

Johnson will approach both of those games like they're trying to score 70 points. With the way this wreck is unraveling, those games have Refrigerator Perry rushing touchdowns written all over them. He will be trying to humiliate the Packers and they are ripe for it.

[adambr2]

7 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I don't know if I'd say it bothers him that he doesn't want to be his friend, but I think he knows he's a weaker personality and that deep down he's Johnson's whipping post. Maybe that's the same thing. I think Matt's buddy-buddy crap is a defense mechanism of sorts.

Johnson will approach both of those games like they're trying to score 70 points. With the way this wreck is unraveling, those games have Refrigerator Perry rushing touchdowns written all over them. He will be trying to humiliate the Packers and they are ripe for it.

It’s pretty clear that Johnson doesn’t respect LaFleur, and LaFleur certainly hasn’t done anything to command either his respect or respect from the rest of the division. 

I’m not really sure around the league that anyone outside of the Sean McVay coaching tree respects LaFleur much. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Oh are you sure? Because I keep hearing that if MLF is fired he'll be a HC somewhere "in about 10 seconds." I call BS. Nobody is going to hire this loser to be a HC after Green Bay. Nobody. I have no doubt someone will bring him in to be assistant of QB development, but who in the world would take this feeble dope at HC?

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

12 hours ago, adambr2 said:

than

he’ll move down to college and coach the Tulane Green Wave or something like that.

[Fear The Chorizo]

3 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

Nah. Their offense last year had an alarmingly low floor. (10 points against Cleveland, 13 against Carolina, 7 against Philadelphia). Some wins concealed how little separation they created beating the Giants by 7 and Arizona by 4 (both awful teams). A 21-3 lead against the Bears at half time and they needed a Nixon interception at the final seconds to hang on to beat the Bears. A mediocre Dallas team drops 50 on them. And the defense last season was Parsons with a complete collapse of the unit after his injury despite being stocked with high draft picks and free agents. 

They added even more draft picks to the defense to begin this year and Minnesota’s backup quarterback drops 39 points on them. 
 

 

I get that you've never posted any take on this board without using your 20/20 hindsight approach...doesn't really change anyone else's opinion that any team with the best record in its conference in mid-December should be considered one of the favorites to get to and win a Super Bowl at that point in time.

Anyways, Policy's decision to not move on from MLF looked bad from the moment he made it, and it's much worse now.  If somehow the Packers right the ship and wind up back in the playoff picture later this year, I'll give some props but the truth is unless the team hoists a Lombardi trophy in the next season or two it was a mistake.  I think we all can agree after MLF's teams' track records of playoff goose eggs and in-game collapses - which have only gotten more routine as time has gone by - we would be shocked if they win a Super Bowl anytime soon.

[Jopal78]

3 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Despite Jopal doing his schtick, the Packers were very clearly a contender, and many pegged them as the top contender, until Micah Parsons got hurt. Cherry-picking random bad games that every single team in the league has, doesn't change what the facts were. It was week 14 and they were positioning as a 1 seed. If that's not contending then nobody is contending. They were dominating Denver on the road with a multi-possession lead and the ball in 2nd half. Sound familiar?

The NFL is a fickle league though.  Running back the same roster in no way means you're good again. This is exactly why I argued they were really not the same old 7 seed, I thought they'd be worse. You get figured out, systems get stale, players regress. 

But the worst part is that even if Parsons had stayed healthy, Matt absolutely would have messed it up eventually with another one of these.  

Calling criticism “schtick” is easier than answering it. It lets you dismiss the person pointing out the problems without confronting the problems themselves. 

“Many pegged them as a top contender” tells us you bought the sales pitch, not that the roster justified it. They were in contention. That doesn’t make them loaded, and citing a second half lead in Denver while waiving away their bad performances is precisely the cherry picking you’re complaining about. 
 

Before Parsons was injured, this  offense scored 10 against Cleveland, 13 against Carolina and seven against the Eagles. A contender can have a bad Sunday. Repeatedly failing to produce enough offense to beat beatable opponents is a serious red flag, not something you dismiss as “random bad games.” You can’t count their best performances as proof of greatness and exclude their worst from the evaluation. 

The roster is much closer to middle of the league than the Packers hype machine wants you to believe, elevated by a couple of exceptional players.

Since Rodgers was traded, their entire ALl-Pro output has been Nixon as KR, McKinney and Parsons. Nobody on offense, nobody Gutekunst drafted. In 8 years, Gutekunst has only drafted a single player who was even second team All Pro (Jaire). Of course, awards are not a complete roster evaluation but that’s awfully thin support for the annual “look at all this talent” routine. 

Parson’s injury mattered enormously, and  their dependence on him tells you something about everyone around him. 

Trading for Parson’s was a move built on the premise they were one player away from a championship roster. They were not. They paid for the finishing piece before establishing the rest was good enough. Now they risk being stuck in an expensive middle: not good enough to win a championship, but too much money committed, and draft capital spent to make a re-tool painless.

And “Matt would’ve screwed it up anyway” is a convenient escape hatch: every failure becomes proof of bad coaching (or even untimely injuries), and the supposedly championship caliber roster is permanently exempt from scrutiny. 

[trwi7]

I actually liked that we took the points off the board.  A 5 point game to an 8 point game is still a one possession game.  Take the points off, score a TD and you're at a two possession game with some more time going off the clock and you're very, very likely to win that game.  The problem is LaFleur treated that 4th down call like it was WIsconsin vs Western Illinois in the 2nd quarter when you're up 21-3.  That is such a critical play that it requires your best short yardage call.  He ran a QB sneak where he needed at least a full yard, with no push from behind with his ****** offensive line expected to create a push for Love to get that yard.  How can a supposed offensive genius think that is the call to make there?

[Joseph Zarr]

21 minutes ago, trwi7 said:

I actually liked that we took the points off the board.  A 5 point game to an 8 point game is still a one possession game.  Take the points off, score a TD and you're at a two possession game with some more time going off the clock and you're very, very likely to win that game.  The problem is LaFleur treated that 4th down call like it was WIsconsin vs Western Illinois in the 2nd quarter when you're up 21-3.  That is such a critical play that it requires your best short yardage call.  He ran a QB sneak where he needed at least a full yard, with no push from behind with his ****** offensive line expected to create a push for Love to get that yard.  How can a supposed offensive genius think that is the call to make there?

Well, there were two more aggressive canned plays given. J-Love audibled into the Sneak. Per LaFleur. Per Love. Just failed execution across the board...a Matt LaFleur led specialty.

[kestrel79]

22 minutes ago, trwi7 said:

I actually liked that we took the points off the board.  A 5 point game to an 8 point game is still a one possession game.  Take the points off, score a TD and you're at a two possession game with some more time going off the clock and you're very, very likely to win that game.  The problem is LaFleur treated that 4th down call like it was WIsconsin vs Western Illinois in the 2nd quarter when you're up 21-3.  That is such a critical play that it requires your best short yardage call.  He ran a QB sneak where he needed at least a full yard, with no push from behind with his ****** offensive line expected to create a push for Love to get that yard.  How can a supposed offensive genius think that is the call to make there?

This is where I'm at. I kinda liked the call. But you have to dial up your BEST play there. As soon as they lined up I was like "whoa that is a long 1 yard no way they sneak or run here" and then saw the sneak called yikes. Needed a short pass there. I remember them doing this last year and being pretty successful at dialing up 4th down short yardage pass plays that were very effective.

[homer]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Zarr said:

Well, there were two more aggressive canned plays given. J-Love audibled into the Sneak. Per LaFleur. Per Love. Just failed execution across the board...a Matt LaFleur led specialty.

I was wondering if Love took that himself. 

[homer]

I realize people like to vent and I am not defending the collapse or anything but if any one of those three horse hooey calls had not been called on the Packers D after the failed 4th down attempt, I bet they win. Now, you still have to man up and overcome that but if the opponent knows you have to throw that O Line is not going to hold up against Sisters of the Poor much less the Vikings.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The decision to go for it on 4th and 1 was completely fine and if everyone wasn't emotional about the game and already hated MLF, it would be seen as such. The 8-point lead really changes nothing about the approach Minnesota takes going forward. They wound up scoring a TD and converting a 2-pt anyway. Yes it's true you can't just assume outcomes based on a different chain of events, but the point is that the FG makes it one possession and they are in the same circumstance, with the ball and needing to go get a TD.

The TD on that drive was vastly superior than taking those 3 pts, no matter how catchy a slogan it is to say "never take points off the board." And again, it was a rare moment where MLF did the thing everyone says he never does. 

The QB sneak was terrible, whether Love optioned into that or not. The offensive line is awful, there was no pusher on the sneak, and worst of all IMO that was a long yard to get. They weren't inches away. Just bad. On a play like that you put the ball in the hands of your best player, which is Jordan Love's arm, you spread the defense out, put him in the shotgun and throw a quick 2- or 3-yard gainer.

No way to know this, but I believe pretty strongly that if MLF had declined that penalty, there would have immediately been a post about how he was too timid to go for the throat and gain a yard and was a big sissy kicking a FG.

[JosephC]

The Vikings had a pass rush win rate of 90.6%, the highest by any team in a game since 2022, according to ESPN Analytics/NFL Next Gen Stats.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/49936352/packers-searching-answers-blowing-another-lead-late

The OLine sucks.  How many people out there think (1) a returning Aaron Banks will fix it OR (2) the Vikings have the best pass-rushing defense in the NFL?  It could be a real long season for the offense.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

57 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

“Many pegged them as a top contender” tells us you bought the sales pitch, not that the roster justified it. 

 

You definitely have a schtick, but the results justified it, it wasn't a "sales pitch" whatever the hell that means. They had played 13 games and were in the pole position. They had beaten or competed closely with the top teams they had played. I get that your bar to clear is winning every game 35-0, but you're the only guy in the world claiming they weren't a contender at that point in the year. 

Were they the best team? No, I don't think they were. The cracks were there, and Seattle was statistically a better team, that had better signature wins throughout the season, and was more consistent on both sides.

But anyone can do this silly exercise you're doing. 

"Seattle a contender? No they were not. Their offensive floor was way too low. They scored 13 points against the 49ers  twice, and only 18 against the Colts. And my gosh, they gave up 37 points at home late in the year and 38 in a home loss to Tampa."

See, it's an easy thing to do.

Matt sucks. Badly. Last year they wouldn't have won it with any coach once Parsons was hurt. Odds are not with him either, but they were absolutely contending by the definition of contending, and my confidence that Matt would have choked is due to his long-storied history of doing just that, dating all the way back to his role in a 28-3 disaster in the Super Bowl and his multiple wilting moments in the playoffs with Aaron Rodgers.

There is always a good chance you won't win the Super Bowl. I also haven't seen anyone say they were "loaded." But they certainly had a shot in last year's NFC, and it shouldn't really shock anyone that once they lost their best player they really didn't have one. You pay someone like Parsons to be a difference maker, he was an enormous one that lifted them from 7th seed purgatory to having a chance - key word a CHANCE - when he was healthy.

 

 

[Jopal78]

46 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

I get that you've never posted any take on this board without using your 20/20 hindsight approach...doesn't really change anyone else's opinion that any team with the best record in its conference in mid-December should be considered one of the favorites to get to and win a Super Bowl at that point in time.

Anyways, Policy's decision to not move on from MLF looked bad from the moment he made it, and it's much worse now.  If somehow the Packers right the ship and wind up back in the playoff picture later this year, I'll give some props but the truth is unless the team hoists a Lombardi trophy in the next season or two it was a mistake.  I think we all can agree after MLF's teams' track records of playoff goose eggs and in-game collapses - which have only gotten more routine as time has gone by - we would be shocked if they win a Super Bowl anytime soon.

Yet somehow it’s seemingly not the players who are collapsing or laying a goose egg in big moments. Sheesh, you’d think maybe once a player or two would rise to the occasion despite the system or call, especially a Super Bowl favorite 🤣.

There’s Reid, Shanahan, McVey and Sean Payton who are a clear cut above then everyone else. Is there really a difference between LaFleur and Liam Coen,  DeMeco Ryans, Kevin O’Connell, Zak Taylor, Todd Bowles, Brian Schottenheimer etc etc? 

 

[homer]

30 minutes ago, JosephC said:

The Vikings had a pass rush win rate of 90.6%, the highest by any team in a game since 2022, according to ESPN Analytics/NFL Next Gen Stats.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/49936352/packers-searching-answers-blowing-another-lead-late

The OLine sucks.  How many people out there think (1) a returning Aaron Banks will fix it OR (2) the Vikings have the best pass-rushing defense in the NFL?  It could be a real long season for the offense.

 

 

[JosephC]

3 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Oh are you sure? Because I keep hearing that if MLF is fired he'll be a HC somewhere "in about 10 seconds." I call BS. Nobody is going to hire this loser to be a HC after Green Bay. Nobody. I have no doubt someone will bring him in to be assistant of QB development, but who in the world would take this feeble dope at HC?

It wouldn't surprise me if he got hired in 10 seconds.  Two reasons.  #1 - He gets credit for developing Jordan Love, and while I'm still not convinced that Jordan Love is top-shelf, I'd guess that the 10-12 NFL teams that have garbage at the position thinks he looks like a 220 pound statue of 4-9's gold.  #2 - ESPN would like to remind you once again that he has a 76-41-1 record.  Personally, I'd like to point out that the record over the last 4 seasons plus one game (including playoffs) is 38-34-1 (for some reason, ESPN never seems to mention that).  But that might actually work in his favor, because a new team might look at those first three seasons and just say, "the guy is good for 13 wins a season with good players."

 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 minute ago, JosephC said:

It wouldn't surprise me if he got hired in 10 seconds.  Two reasons.  #1 - He gets credit for developing Jordan Love, and while I'm still not convinced that Jordan Love is top-shelf, I'd guess that the 10-12 NFL teams that have garbage at the position thinks he looks like a 220 pound statue of 4-9's gold.  #2 - ESPN would like to remind you once again that he has a 76-41-1 record.  Personally, I'd like to point out that the record over the last 4 seasons plus one game (including playoffs) is 38-34-1 (for some reason, ESPN never seems to mention that).  But that might actually work in his favor, because a new team might look at those first three seasons and just say, "the guy is good for 13 wins a season with good players."

 

So they would hire him to coach QBs or be an OC who doesn't call plays. They wouldn't hire him to HC. The book is out on the guy. I think 2 years ago, you'd be right, not anymore. His own peers (Saleh, Johnson) know exactly what he is.

Everyone on the planet knows that record is the work of Aaron Rodgers.

[homer]

Robert Saleh got a second head coaching gig after a stellar 20 - 36 record leading the Jets

Kevin Stefanski got a second head coaching gig after going 45 - 57 in Cleveland 

[Brewin]

I get people are emotional, but the irrational takes regarding MLF on here are really out of touch IMO. There is next to little doubt, he would be the top, or one on the top, candidates for a HC position if he was on the market. He has an excellent reputation as a playcaller and developer of QB's (Willis, Love). I understand why so many are frustrated with the extension, but the viewpoint many GB fans have versus the rest of the NFL decision makers are clearly not in line with each other.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

8 minutes ago, homer said:

Robert Saleh got a second head coaching gig after a stellar 20 - 36 record leading the Jets

Kevin Stefanski got a second head coaching gig after going 45 - 57 in Cleveland 

I don't think that's a great argument for MLF. So someone felt they deserved second chances after working with arguably the two most dysfunctional franchises in the league with maybe the Raiders arguing they belong in that group. I mean going 45-57 in Cleveland does sound like an achievement.

The current 3 musketeers we have, have left this franchise worse than they found it.

 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

5 minutes ago, Brewin said:

I get people are emotional, but the irrational takes regarding MLF on here are really out of touch IMO. There is next to little doubt, he would be the top, or one on the top, candidates for a HC position if he was on the market. He has an excellent reputation as a playcaller and developer of QB's (Willis, Love). I understand why so many are frustrated with the extension, but the viewpoint many GB fans have versus the rest of the NFL decision makers are clearly not in line with each other.

Well I hope you're proven right very soon.