How many wins without Rodgers?

[TW]

I get your point but its such a QB driven league that 95% of teams losing their QB spells doom. NE, Pitt, NO, LA, ATL. Philly is an somewhat of an anomly with Foles. And it speaks to how bad Hundley is and Kizer is really not a major upgrade. But then again the QB pool is so bad whats the alternative?

You're right that a lot of teams are QB driven. Yet, the depth of their supporting talent appears to be a lot stronger than that which the Packers have. They will stumble, but I believe their fall won't be as great as it is with the Packers, in most cases. Of course there are exceptions to that rule. I'd say that both Atlanta and New Orleans could - I say could - have an even bigger problem.

I believe a head coach who realizes that he can use a moderately decent QB if he insures his defense is top 5 has a much better chance of winning the whole show than a team with a lights out QB and a weaker surrounding cast of players. Maybe we've spent too much time cultivating Rodgers as the answer, and the Packers have totally failed to address their primary needs which is the surrounding cast?

 

[FlaPack]

You're right that a lot of teams are QB driven. Yet, the depth of their supporting talent appears to be a lot stronger than that which the Packers have. They will stumble, but I believe their fall won't be as great as it is with the Packers, in most cases. Of course there are exceptions to that rule. I'd say that both Atlanta and New Orleans could - I say could - have an even bigger problem.

I believe a head coach who realizes that he can use a moderately decent QB if he insures his defense is top 5 has a much better chance of winning the whole show than a team with a lights out QB and a weaker surrounding cast of players. Maybe we've spent too much time cultivating Rodgers as the answer, and the Packers have totally failed to address their primary needs which is the surrounding cast?

To me that more on the GM than the HC, which we have debated here before. Lot of misses on picks trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Also when you have an elite QB it impacts the cap which impacts depth unless you get creative with the cap and spend in FA and that is really my beef with this organization which is another point to debate (cap management). And if you don't play the FA game you better hit on draft picks better than we have over the last 4-7 years.

Now replace Hundley with say Brissette or Siemian or even Savage then this team has a chance to win 8 games.

 

[TW]

I think we were spoiled with the Rodgers & Matthews picks. Add in signing Woodson. We had three great players there. We began thinking that everything they did on draft day was golden. Like you said, for the last 4-7years, it was horrible. One whiff after another. I haven't watched enough of the three guys you mentioned to determine if they could win 8 games with the roster we have, but I do agree that even sight unseen, they're better than Hundley. I just hope we don't get caught in a down year with QBs when we go after Rodgers' replacement. I'd hate to see us fall on a decade of bad news.

 

[Crease Creature]

This may be tangentially related, but I heard Charles Woodson give an interview yesterday or day before, but my gosh, his playoff/Super Bowl stories are amazing, and the huge collapse in the defense has to be partially related to the loss of leaders like him.

I am excited for the upcoming season and the play we can reasonably expect from the d-line.

 

[realitybytes]

i voted four, but i truly hope we don't find out.