Sponsored by CyberSportsbook.com
Last Year
After coming within a fourth-down stop from the NFC Championship game, the Green Bay Packers declined somewhat in 2004. In the first five weeks, it looked more like a nose-dive with a 1-4 start, but the Packers righted the ship only losing two more games the rest of the way. Brett Favre is a year older, the offensive line in front of him is deteriorating, and the defense has been stripped — looks like the wave peaked in 2003 and is now rolling back into the sea.
What We Learned From Last Year
If you don’t believe that the tide is changing, the Packers' 4-4 home record should give you some indication.
That is not including their home playoff loss to the Minnesota Vikings, dropping the Packers to 1-2 in their last three playoffs games at Lambeau Field — a stadium that traditionally symbolizes homefield advantage.
Sure, the flip side of it is that the Packers were 6-2 on the road, but they didn’t defeat a single opponent with a winning record last season (not even at home).
Brett Favre was much-maligned and although his statistics may look like the typical Favre numbers, there were times where you would see an aberration or a lapse in judgment — something we are not accustomed to seeing from Favre.
Running back Ahman Green endured a stiff drop-off after a career year in 2003. The buzzword is that he simply broke down after 461 touches in 2003, but that is questionable — particularly for a running back who is 28 and has only five seasons of tread on his odometer.
The Packers led the league in passing attempts in 2004, averaging 37.4 per game compared to the 29.4 in 2003, making it pretty obvious that they were consistently playing from behind. That meant less touches, less rhythm, and less emphasis for Green.
More passing translated into career-years for wide receivers Javon Walker and Donald Driver. Walker pulled in 89 catches for nearly 1,400 yards and 12 touchdowns while Driver was caught 1,208 yards and 9 touchdowns. Injuries hindered Robert Ferguson’s development.
The main dilemma for Green Bay was the defense. They were ranked 25th overall and accounted for a league-low 15 takeaways.
With only eight interceptions, its clear the pass defense lacked playmakers. Cornerback Mike McKenzie held out until he was traded, which bumped up Al Harris, rookie Ahmad Carroll, and Michael Hawthorne on the depth chart.
Al Harris is a physical corner, but he’s not good enough to take on the opponent’s top wide receiver consistently, Hawthorne is useless, and Carroll looked extremely raw last year.
At safety, Mark Roman was a bust, leaving Darren Sharper as the only reliable player in the Packers' secondary.
The front seven generated a decent amount of sacks (40), but outside of Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila, the Packers had no one to apply consistent pressure. They were abused by many running backs, surrendering a lofty 4.6 yards-per-carry (fourth worst in the league).
To be blunt, the cheeseheads simply couldn’t contain anyone. They allowed 60 passing plays of 20+ yards (30th in NFL), 12 passing plays of 40+ or more (28th in NFL), and 14 rushing plays of 20+ yards (25th in NFL).
Poor coverage, shoddy tackling, and missed assignments forced the hand of the offense and dictated how they were going to play. 10-6 looks nice, but this team was much worse than the record indicates.
This Year
Ideally, the plan is to run the ball and keep the spotlight off of an aging Brett Favre, but considering that strategy was warped out of shape by a permeable defense last year, how do you think it will function with an even worse squad this year?
The Packers are a strong candidate to undergo a steep regression.
The defensive line returns the same suspects and outside of tackle Grady Jackson and Gbaja-Biamila, the Packers are very average with little depth. Jackson is unhappy with his contract — although he has showed up for training camp — and will cut into the team’s morale. Aaron Kampman will start at the other end position while Cletidus Hunt is set at tackle. New defensive coordinator Jim Bates prefers to get pressure from the front four opposed to blitzing, so the line will be critical.
The only real additions to the front seven are linebackers Raynoch Thompson (free agent) and Brady Poppinga (fourth-round selection), neither of which will start.
The trio of starting linebackers, Nick Barnett, Hannibal Navies, and Na’il Diggs are adequate, but are still easily the worst grouping in the NFC North. Barnett is a strong tackler and is very good in pass coverage, but he’s not an imposing player.
The secondary will return the same faces minus standout safety Darren Sharper, who accounted for half of the team’s interceptions last year. Even without Randy Moss in the division, you can expect this set of defensive backs to be exploited by virtually every opponent. Al Harris is the only experienced back while Joey Thomas and Ahmad Carroll are unproven. Also, there is no guarantee that either will develop into a viable starter.
The safety position has been revamped as the Packers brought in Arturo Freeman and Earl Little as free agents and Nick Collins and Michael Hawkins through the draft.
Collins is a raw prospect with playmaking potential, but he is still a rookie. The signings of Little and Freeman emphasizes how cash-strapped the Packers really are.
On offense, here’s a revelation that you probably haven’t heard: the loss of Pro Bowl guards Mike Wahle and Marco Rivera is potentially crippling.
The Packers still have tackles Mark Tauscher and Chad Clifton, as well as center Mike Flanagan, but losing their best two linemen causes a chink in the armor.
Favre has been accustomed to having arguably the best offensive line in the league and now his entourage goes from "great" just to "good." That is a big deal especially with Minnesota’s signing of Pat Williams, the emergence of Shaun Rogers in Detroit, and Chicago boasting a strong defensive line to deal with.
It’s impossible to believe that the defense will be any better off this year, which means we can expect to see the same amount of passing. That is not good news for Ahman Green.
Playing from behind means Green becomes less of an option, which was obviously a problem for him last year.
That also means the Packers will be relying heavily on Favre’s arm once again. Although they are equipped to play in shootouts, it’s not Mike Sherman’s ideal style.
Placing the burden on an aging quarterback without a secure offensive line in front of him and without a decent defense to back him up is a recipe for disaster.
The cheese is starting to mold in Green Bay.
Over/Under: 7.5
With three teams in the division on the way up, this total might be too high for Green Bay to cover. Best-case scenario: Chicago and Detroit flop again and the Pack is still in contention come December. Worst-case scenario: 5-11. I’ll go with the latter. Outside of their division, they play: CLE, TB, @ CAR, NO, @CIN, PIT, @ATL, @PHI, @BAL, and SEA.
Fantasy Sleeper
Robert Ferguson has had a subtle impact during his four-year career, but he has the tools to start opposite of Javon Walker or Donald Driver. Considering this team led the league in pass attempts last year and might match that feat this year, Ferguson is a sleeper to keep an eye on.
Stay tuned as Dave Golokhov brings you previews for all 32 NFL teams! Sponsored by CyberSportsbook.com, a great casino for horse racing and sportsbook action.
August 6, 2005
Dave:
Favre has never had a losing season and you pick the Packers for 5-11? I don’t expect much but that ain’t happening. You must be a Vikings fan, and all your hype of the Bears is laughable.
August 6, 2005
Kevin:
Every Year hacks like you say the Packers will have a bad year and the “aging” Favre should retire. Yet every year they prove you guys wrong. Brett is still one of the best quarterbacks in the league and he has the stats to prove it. So until someone can take the NFC North title from them I would bet on the Packers.
August 6, 2005
NFC North Fan:
Wow gotta love that objectivity, Dave *cough* You sound like the typical jaded Queenie fan we’ve come to know and love. Envious of the fact that the rest of the teams in the division have your pathetic team outclassed in every imaginable way, obviously envious of Brett Favre and can’t stand the fact that your overrated team collapses every year.
5-11? Have you looked at their schedule Dave? They could easily be 5-0 after their first 5 games for christ’s sake. I’m sorry you felt it necessary to write this piece of shit. I know it was a waste of 5 minutes for me to read it.
August 6, 2005
Dave:
I might be a Favre backer myself but you guys would be lying if you didn’t admit that at times he didn’t look like the same Favre we know.
At least this guy is going out on a limb instead of the generic stuff you see everywhere else. If you don’t like it, don’t read it.
August 7, 2005
The World Is Flat:
To the contrary, everyone is picking the Packers to fail. Aint’t going to happen. Favre wills the Packers to win, and they do. That’s the way it is, and until someone knocks him out of the game, that’s the way it’s going to be. Favre has rarely been surrounded by talent, and yet the Packers are always one of the league’s best teams. If some of the rookie’s and guys going into contract years overperform, look out….
August 8, 2005
Matt Thomas:
I wonder how well Favre’s “willing” the Packers to win worked out for them last season in the playoffs. Should I recite the stats for you? 4 INTs, 1 fumble against a not-so-good Minnesota defense. Not too much ammo for all you who argue that Favre could never let his team lose. Look, the man is a stud of a QB, one of the all-timers at his position and at any position, for that matter. But he’s showing signs of age…period. Yes, he’ll still put up some TDs, but his INTs are rising precipitously, his “Favre-plays” are dropping and he’s making more mistakes as his physical abilities trail off. Add this to one of the most brutal schedules in football, and you have the makings for an off season in a much-improved NFC North division.
All you haters who have nothing better to do but slander those who actually write statements and then, heaven forbid, back up those statements with reasoning, you should try putting an ounce of thought into your comments rather than just spewing your hate all over the internet. Not everyone is a Packers fan, so some of us see things realisitically.
August 8, 2005
Marc James:
The stats tell a different story, though, Matt. According to them, Favre bottomed out in ‘99-‘00 and has been above his career average since. Last year, he had a QB rating of 92.4, five above his career average. He threw for over 4,000 yards, his fifth-highest total, and his 30 TDs and TD-INT ratio was about 2-1. His INTs are NOT “rising precipitously,” as they have actually declined since he threw 23 in ‘98-‘99. It’s actually quite surprising to see how average he looked statistically during the middle of his career. He peaked in ‘95-‘97, but is not dramatically worse now.
Further, he completion percentage was right on par at over 60%. His numbers don’t show that he is declining. However, he does seem to have lost some of his magical ability to put a team on his shoulders and carry them in clutch situations. All that said, I still think he is a top-10 QB and just needs to rely a little more on the team around him.
August 8, 2005
Will:
Thank you Marc. Matt made a big long speech and he doesn’t know what the hell he is talking about. Matt, maybe you should do a little research before you spout-off. This writer is also an idiot. I say let them pick the Packers to finish dead last, it will just be sweeter when the pick finishes with a winning record and these morons are silenced!!
August 8, 2005
Dazed and Confused:
I don’t get it. Everyone is attacking the writer and going on about how good Favre is when he really didn’t even say anything about Favre except that he got a year older. Favre is still Favre, maybe declining a bit but he can still do what he does, and I don’t see the article writer disputing that. Rather, he points out how the talent around Favre has eroded, with the line getting weaker losing two Pro Bowl players and the defense still being full of holes and losing Darren Sharper creating an even bigger one. He uses these reasons, and, I would assert, very valid reasons, to back up his argument for the Pack not finishing well in 05. It was a well thought-out article, and the fact that some of these people seem to look at it and see nothing but “Favre sucks” written all over it is, frankly, laughable.