Packers must find more playmakers

After a fifth consecutive season in which the Green Bay Packers reached the NFL playoffs only to fall tantalizingly short of the Super Bowl, the residents of Packers Nation are getting restless.

They’re asking why the Packers haven’t won a Super Bowl since the 2010 season despite having the game’s best quarterback in Aaron Rodgers. They’re wondering if the prime years of Rodgers’ career are being squandered by general manager Ted Thompson, coach Mike McCarthy or even Rodgers himself.

In the Packers’ defense, it’s hard to win Super Bowls. Really hard. New England won three in four years at the start of quarterback Tom Brady’s career and then, despite having Brady in his prime and Bill Belichick as its coach, went nine seasons without a title before breaking through again in 2014.Like the Patriots, the Packers have done a great job of putting themselves in position to compete for the title every year. Their roster is always deep and talented. They are well-coached. And they always have Rodgers, the NFL’s most valuable player in 2011 and 2014 and its all-time leader in passer rating.

Still, something has been missing and with each season-ending heartbreaker it is becoming more obvious what the Packers lack: Playmakers. Difference-makers. Impact players. Stars.
Call them what you will, but on a Packers team well-stocked with good to very good players, there are precious few great ones.

The Packers’ 2010 team was flush with difference-makers — Rodgers, wide receiver Greg Jennings and emerging wide receiver Jordy Nelson on offense; linebacker Clay Matthews, cornerback Charles Woodson and safety Nick Collins on defense. After Nelson went down with a knee injury in an exhibition game last August, only Rodgers and Matthews remained from that group, and the Packers have done a poor job since 2010 of acquiring and developing playmakers to pick up the slack.

Again this year, the Packers are considered one of the top half-dozen teams in the league. As usual, they have Rodgers and a roster with no major holes. Also as usual, they are short of proven playmakers.
In the NFL, the difference between good and bad teams often boils down to playmakers. There are hundreds of high-quality players in the league, but true difference-makers are hard to come by.

Playmakers consistently make game-turning plays despite receiving extra attention from opponents. And they draw so much attention that it elevates the play of their teammates, giving them opportunities to make big plays as well.
Many NFL scouts and coaches believe there are only 50 to 100 true difference-makers in the league at any given time. The best teams in the NFL have five or six of them. The bad teams have one or two.
A look at the Packers’ current roster reveals a dearth of playmakers. And don’t just take my word for it.
To determine which teams have the most star-caliber players, I looked at four reputable sources that recently published lists of the NFL’s top 100 players. I took the top 100s from ESPN.com,CBSSports.com, SI.com and NFL.com, averaged out the grades and came up with a composite top-100 list. As far as the Packers are concerned, my composite list was eye-opening.
Despite coming off a down (for him) year, Rodgers finished No. 2 overall behind Houston defensive end J.J. Watt. However, Rodgers is the lone Packers player in the top 50.
By comparison, Seattle has six players in the top 50, defending NFC champion Carolina has five and Arizona, which eliminated the Packers from the playoffs in January, has four. Perennial AFC powers New England and Pittsburgh have three each.

While Rodgers stands alone among the game’s best players for the Packers, the Patriots have two — Brady and tight end Rob Gronkowski — in the top five, the Panthers have two — quarterback Cam Newton and linebacker Luke Kuechly — in the top 10 and the Steelers have two — wide receiver Antonio Brown and quarterback Ben Roethlisberger — in the top 13.
Three additional Packers made my top 100 list. Matthews was 51st, guard Josh Sitton was 72nd and defensive end Mike Daniels was 74th.
Despite having four in the top 100, the Packers are behind most of the other top teams. Carolina has eight players in the top 100, Seattle has seven, defending Super Bowl champion Denver, New England, Arizona and Cincinnati have six apiece and Dallas and Kansas City have five each.

To be fair, Nelson would be on the list had he not missed all of last season. He was still named on two of the four lists. Other Packers named on at least one list were wide receiver Randall Cobb, guard T.J. Lang and safety Morgan Burnett.
The bottom line is the Packers haven’t been good enough to make a sustained postseason run. When push comes to shove in the playoffs, it is often playmakers who make the difference, and the Packers need to find a few more of those.

Maybe Nelson will be the same player he was before knee surgery. Maybe slimmed-down halfback Eddie Lacy or free agent tight end Jared Cook will become a difference-maker. Maybe the young defensive backs — Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, Damarious Randall and Quinten Rollins — will develop into change-the-game types.
Unless two or three of that group emerge as playmakers, however, this Packers season might well end up in the same place as the past five.

Click to expand...

Cheesedog said:

Great article.

Part of the reason we make the playoffs every year is our division is historically bad. Guaranteed wins and a good record because of it. Add some Arod in there and it will take you through the regular season. Until you run into a team with a better overall roster.

Click to expand...

Half Empty said:

I'd say it's Rodgers, and the lack of multiple rings is due to the quality of the rest of the team. Certainly true that the teams other than 2010 could easily have made greater strides, but they always seemed to come up with "huh?" endings. However, turning those results around may well be what's meant when addressing playmakers - the guys one needs to put the team over the top. I'd compare it to the Favre years - didn't Wolf once say he regretted not providing a better supporting case? The flip side, although a very sick, if not dead horse, is the Pats. Brady is a great QB, but they've won 4 SB and lost two more with a whole that's greater than the sum of the (often) anonymous parts. If Rodgers went down in the first week, how many here feel we'd go 11-5, whether or not that makes the playoffs (especially with a backup QB who, while very good that year, never showed he was a star in waiting).

Click to expand...

Packinatl said:

You can make the same argument with the AFC East and New England. Miami, Buffalo and NYJ have been down for the most part the last decade.

A couple things to look at. Yes we lack playmakers. The SB team was loaded on the defensive side. But we have also lacked quality depth. Much of that is we have missed on a few top picks in Rounds 1-3 the last few years. Just look at the draft history.

Second thing is luck and who gets hot late. Our last run was a perfect example of that.

Click to expand...

Pugger said:

Another heartbreaker was 2014. Unfortunately for us Rodgers never saw the ball in OT in Seattle. He never saw it in AZ either. sick(

Click to expand...