Yup. At some point we have to start talking about the Packers as chokers. And the dogmatic aversion to free agency and trades seems to have contributed to them never quite having enough to get over the hump and not enough depth to survive injuries. I’d argue the continuity (and excellence) at QB has more to do with their entrenchment in the playoffs than this overhyped team building strategy.
When players with more than 4 years accrued experience are waived, they don’t go through waivers and become free agents immediately. Sitton’s an 8-year veteran.
You still might offer a trade, but only if (a) his current contract is something you can handle (not typically the case for veterans who are being released) and (b) you think he’d sign with someone else if he hit the open market. That last one is a sticking point, though. If he wouldn’t choose to sign with you as a free agent, how happy is he going to be if that choice is taken away from him? You don’t want to give up a draft pick - even a 6th or 7th rounder - for a guy who’s going to resent being part of your organization.
Also, one other team has had quality QB play for that long. The Patriots have been rocking Bledsoe-Brady since 1993 and have 4 Super Bowls wins and 3 losses and a more reliable hold on their division.
Even the Colts, with the Harbaugh-Manning-Luck troika going since 1994, have had comparable success (1 fewer SB appearance, 1 fewer division title while spending a lot of that time in the same division as the Pats and Kelly’s Bills teams) and pretty much everyone agrees that they’ve been massive underachievers and Manning was a choker in the playoffs.
Sitton visited one team and left with a contract equal annually to his previous one. He had a visit scheduled with the Saints and it’s highly likely the Giants and Pats had interest. I’m sure the Saints would have been very happy to part with a late round pick to get Sitton into the building, clearly the Patriots aren’t afraid of a end-of-camp deal based on the last days news.
Usually fans are unreasonable in thinking veterans on the bubble or those that are cap casualties merit trades, but in most cases those guys are wildly overpaid and declining quickly. Sitton is neither. And let’s face it, the Packers apparently new Sitton was going to be a cap casualty long before this week so they could have worked out a trade months ago, before the draft maybe.
They fucked up.
Spoken like a true Bears fan.
The ad hominem. Appropriate.
And don’t call me Francis.
They also have two trophies in the last 20 years. They have 7 in the last 55. Either of those is more accurate than your cherry-picking stat. In that time span, only the Broncos and Patriots have won more (3 and 4). The Giants, Steelers, and Ravens each have 2 wins.
About shit divisions…since 2002 (division realignment), the AFC East has had a team not owned by Robert Kraft make the playoffs 6 times. NFC North outside of Green Bay? 10. There’s a reason the North is referred to as the Black and Blue.
When the Packers take a big name in free agency, they get it right far above the league average. Don’t be mad Peppers is chasing a ring.
As for choking, who choked in the season finale, for the division championship, back in 2013? Three converted 4th downs, the last one going 48 yards past a defense looking completely lost, for a touchdown? I mean, shit, there were 3 teams vying for the division, and none were on their 4th quarterback of the season.
2014 in Seattle, though? Absolutely a choke job. I wish I hadn’t jinxed it by looking up Super Bowl tickets and airfare with 2 minutes left.
On a lighter note, don’t be a Vikings fan. Nobody likes a Vikings fan.
Well, let’s not go too far in the other direction either. I’m not saying the Packers are bad, or chokers, or even less than very good. They are absolutely very good. Just not quite in the rarified air of, say, the Patriots, who can legitimately manage their team outside the box (often having what experts consider bad drafts with huge reaches) and still show consistently more success than pretty much everyone. Their unusual management quirks can legitimately be ignored by invoking “but it clearly works.”
How is “the last 20 years” any less cherry-picked?
From here, we see that the NFC North was the second worst division in football from 2002 through 2014, only ahead of the NFC West:
1: AFC East 280-240 (53.8%)
2: NFC East 273-246-1 (52.6%)
2: AFC North 272-245-3 (52.6%)
4: NFC South 261-257-2 (50.4%)
5: AFC South 262-258 (50.4%)
6: AFC West 252-268 (48.5%)
7: NFC North 248-272 (47.7%)
8: NFC West 229-291 (44.0%)
I don’t think I did that. You can’t be a “choker” if you aren’t very good in the first place. No one ever accused the Browns, Lions or Jaguars of being chokers.
For a long time the Packers have been given a free pass by the media as basically the NFC version of the Patriots. Everyone just shrugs as says “they’re the NFC favorite” and “they always get it right”. The reality is they are the NFC version of the Colts. Rodgers has been 1 and done in the playoffs as many times as Peyton/Dungy were, and we remember how that narrative played out.
Never said they sucked, just that they get too much credit for this personnel strategy and that we should probably start asking if Rodgers is underachieving.
With Manning being widely considered one of the top 5, if not top 3, QB’s of all time? Yeah, that’s rough.
That’s the thing with making the playoffs a lot, you’re going to lose playoff games. And that allows people to somehow think you’re a choker, regardless of how or why you lost those games. Say like a dumbass dropping a onside kick he shouldn’t have ever attempted to catch or a defense missing 5 tackles in overtime. Why bother with things like that when you can try to boil down a team game to the play of one guy. It’s much easier, and less thinky, that way.
But, hey, if you like I’ll agree that Aaron Rodgers is as good as Peyton Manning. I’ll take that kind of “underacheivement” any day.
A more accurate statement on my part is that the Packers, like the Colts, have underachieved considering that they have all-time-great QB play. There’s a second layer to that debate of why those teams underachieved.
With the Colts is was probably their “stars and scrubs” strategy. With the Packers it’s probably their aversion to free agency and perennial lack of depth. In both cases it’s probably a lot of suspect coaching. And maybe it’s the fault of Manning or Rodgers to a degree, but I think Manning was probably more guilty more often there. Rodgers doesn’t throw 4th quarter pick sixes.
I’d really be interested in the evidence you have for this “probably”. I suppose you could say “well, if they had better depth, Brandon Bostwick wouldn’t have tried to catch that onside kick” or “if they had signed a free agent CB, Sam Shields wouldn’t have dropped that easy interception”, but I think you’ve already reached your conclusion, you’re just working backward from that.
That was Favre’s speciality.
I was thinking more along the lines of those years where you were trotting out Eric Walden, Frank Zombo or moving Clay Matthews to LB. When the DL fell apart when Raji and Jolly missed time. When MD Jennings and Davon House were critical pieces of the defense. When you had to sign James Jones off the street and rely on Jeff Janis and Jared Abbrederis when Nelson when down.
Injuries happen to every team, but when they happen to the Packers there’s an awful lot of groaning because the cupboard is bare behind them.
In 2010, when the Packers won the Super Bowl, they had the 3rd worst injury count (by Adjusted Games Lost from Football Outsiders) in the NFL. Last year, when they lost in the Divisional Round in overtime, they had the 9th best injury count. In 2014, when they lost in the Divisional Round in overtime, they had the 3rd best injury count. So, when they were hit really hard by injuries, they won the Super Bowl. And when they were relatively healthy, they still competed very well, but fell short in overtimes. How does that, in any way, indicate that they lack depth to deal with injuries.
Yes, oddly enough, when your starters get injured, there is a dropoff in play. That’s true for every team in the NFL. But even when the Packers were hit the hardest, they still went on to win the Super Bowl. And when they were relatively healthy, they still did very well, but fell short.
Fair enough.
Thompson’s biggest failing is the defensive line and inside linebackers. Even now, the Packers are short-handed on the defensive front until Pennel comes back from suspension, and there’s only 3 inside linebackers on the roster. He’s much more focused on keeping talent in the secondary, which makes some sense considering how pass-heavy the league is becoming, and you can only keep 53. When you’re running heavy on receivers and O-linemen because of last year and where your talent is, some group gets shorted.
And the Janis/Abbrederis situation was caused by losing Nelson. And Cobb. And Montgomery. And Adams. Losing your top 4 receivers is gonna kill just about any team.
To be honest, the only defense that one has is it encompasses only the free agency era. It’s truly just the opposite of yours.
And here’s proof that you can say anything with statistics. I use the best teams in the division, you use the worst, and we get completely different answers. On that note, does anyone know of a site that can filter out one team’s win/loss? I’m curious how divisions would look without Patriots/Packers/Colts/Broncos, etc. would look.
I’m pretty sure Rodgers is on pace for the record of “most times let down by defense in the fourth quarter or overtime” for a career. How many times has he had the ball at the very end with a chance to win, and failed? It’s non-zero, but pretty close.