The Fate of Bob Sanders

I am not a "fire the coach" kind of guy.  I believe that most of the time the performance of teams is due to what the do players on the field.  I think pretty much any scheme or system can win games (whether that game be football, basketball or, well, just about anything).  What matters is having players good enough to execute and be difference makers.  This season, I don't think the Packers had enough of those players in their defensive front seven, and that, I believe, is why they failed so often down the stretch is losing seven games by less than four points.   Given the foregoing, it might surprise you to hear me come out in favor of terminating Defensive Coordinator Bob Sanders.

Heck, I have even surprised myself with this take.  But the reason for it is an acknowledgement that games are played by people, not mindless drones.  They aren't chess pieces on a board with no feelings, attitudes or memories. Considering the horrific collapses suffered by the Green Bay defense at critical times this year, I am not sure the defensive players can return under the same coach running the same system and believe the results will be better.  If they don't believe, the chances of improvement next year diminish.  Sometimes the best way to create such belief is through something symbolic -- even cosmetic -- and, to me, that is what firing a coach really is all about.

Therefore, I am not sure it is all that important who is brought in as Defensive Coordinator. The key thing is that it is someone new, a fresh face with a new approach and different attitude. That's not to say that someone like, for instance, Bob Slowik would suffice, but pretty much anyone with a proven track record might be enough to rekindle belief and spark the defense in 2009.

Well, that and an edge rusher who can put pressure on the QB and a interior lineman who can collapse the pocket. Players' confidence can be improved by not just switching out coaches, but by a demonstration from management that the team is serious about getting better, and bringing in a proven player or two can be a jolt of electricity for morale in addition to whatever that player brings on the field.

After all, it is still mainly about the players.  Always has been and, I think, always will be.

Brett Closes on a Clinker

After Aaron Rodgers completed a 21-31, 308 yard, three TD, no INT day in the Packers 31-21 dispatching of the now Historically Winless Detroit Lions, I flipped the TV over to see how Brett Favre would complete his season. In recent years some observers have noted that Favre no longer is the Master of the Cold, with his performance fading as the temperature dropped. There was certainly evidence of that this season, and today was no exception, as Brett completed half of his 40 passes and chalked up one TD and three INTs while amassing a passer closer to his age than his career average.

So what are we to make of Favre’s first (and only?) season at the Meadowlands?  I suppose Brett’s acolytes will claim that he never had a chance of winning much  this year as it was his first year in the Jets’  system. But I am not sure that explains how/why he was so much better the first half of the season (when he was less familiar with the offense) than he was later on in the year (when he was more familiar with it). To me, watching Brett today, he looked rather ordinary…and maybe not even that good. He made some plays, but far more ugly ones. His 45.1 passer rating kind of said it all in my judgment. After viewing today’s game nearly in its entirety, I couldn’t help but wonder if his staying retired would have been the best course for all parties involved.

Al Harris is Hard

It was incredibly stupid, but impressive at the same time.

On the last play of the first quarter of Sunday's Packers v. Lions game, Al Harris was fighting for an interception with Calvin Johnson.  Both went to the ground, trying to win possession.  Johnson won the battle, but Harris wasn't finished.  When OL Gosder Cherilus came over to intervene, Harris (6-1, 190) dumped him on his 6-7, 319 pound ass.  Awesome -- if impossibly dumb.

Harris was rightfully flagged for unnecessary roughness.  But it was hard for me not to be impressed by Harris' strength...and stones.

My New Band

From time to time things catch my attention and make me think:  If I ever form a band, I am going to call it that.

Well, thanks to Packers announcer Wayne Larrivee during the radio broadcast of today's Packers v. Lions game, I just came up with a new one.  Wayne was talking about how DeShaun Wynn's 73 yard TD run by far eclipsed the 57 yard "Ryan Grant explosion" from earlier the season opener v. MN.

So, there you have it.  My band will be known as The Ryan Grant Explosion. Now all I have to do is either learn to sing on key or how to play an instrument. But the name is set, so at least I have that going for me.

Let's Get It Straight, People

Today on the Packers pregame show on the Packers Radio Network a popular misconception about the roster inherited by Packers GM Ted Thompson was aired. One of the panelists in the 10am segment noted the “disaster” TT had to deal with upon replacing Mike Sherman as GM.

I just wanted to point out that the roster Thompson inherited was 10-6 and won the NFC North in 2004.  Sure, there were challenges to face:  Cap issues that resulted in TT shedding Ryan Longwell, Marco Rivera, Mike Wahle and Darren Sharper. But not all of those moves were inevitable, and even if one believes they were, it was Ted’s job to find a workable solution–the answers he found ended up in a 4-12 season. In any case, nearly every NFL roster is in something of a “crisis” each off-season with tough decisions to make about players based on performance or contract status. 

For the record, I like what Thompson has done with the team. I like the youth he has injected into the roster; I think he handled the Favre mess as well as he could have; he has made some nice picks in the draft; his team nearly missed reaching the Super Bowl last season.  But let’s stay in our shoes, members of the media: Ted Thompson inherited a playoff team, not a disaster.

Melting in Madison

It didn't even get below freezing last night and it has been raining most of the day.  The fog was thick--less than a quarter mile visibility.  My wife said she thought it was gloomy outside, but somehow I felt better today than I have in a while.

I get this way when the snow erodes and it is warm enough outside that I don't need to worry about slipping on a trip to the mailbox. That's why I like March. Yeah, I know--lots of people in this climate hate the month.  But the days are noticeably longer, the sun higher, the below zero days are over and any snow that falls is usually gone in a day or two.  April remains the cruelest month, teasing us with a warm day followed by blustery cold.  But March is honest--it's still winter, but there is no question that better days are coming.  March, to me, is hope.

So today I console myself with a day of melting snow and a few minutes of extra daylight.  A long January and a traditionally disappointing February lie ahead. But in just over six weeks pitchers and catchers will report for Spring Training, and two weeks after that March will be upon us.

Salary Cap in MLB?

So the Yankees have committed over $400 million to three players over the coming eight years, a number larger than the amount it cost to buy the entire Milwaukee franchise a few years ago. That inspired Brewers majority owner Mark Attanasio to question whether Major League Baseball needs a salary cap. To me, a cap coupled with increased revenue sharing sounds appealing. But others argue that it is unnecessary. They argue that what the lower revenue clubs need is not more money, but better management.

The value of astute management cannot and should not be overlooked for the tremendous factor and asset that it is. However, the MLB financial structure requires heightened precision from the management of the lower revenue clubs, and that leads me to believe the economic infrastructure is fundamentally less balanced than the other leagues. These clubs can and do put together winning seasons, but I believe they are laboring under a competitive handicap. I am not sure if a cap and deeper, NFL-style revenue sharing would make MLB better or more interesting, or if those things would produce different playoff teams on a more consistent basis. But it would certainly provide the perception of increased fairness, and that perception might be enough to engage more fans and give more hope to those who follow the KCs, PITs CINs and MKEs of the MLB world.

Snakebitten

It is getting to the point where I expect to see Rod Serling pop out from behind the goal post — clad in his black suit, skinny black tie, a heater buring in his hand — and look into the camera and explain that things aren’t the way they appear to be for the Green Bay Packers because they have stepped into…The Twilight Zone.

I mean, this is getting truly absurd.  Seven times this season the Packers have lost by four points or less.  They should contact the Patient Office because they have refined and perfected the art of the late loss.  So, given all of the experience Packers fans have had this season, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by the most recent heartbreaker, a 20-17 loss to the Chicago Bears…in Overtime, no less.  Like most of the other late losses, GB controlled the game, had more yards, dominated time of possession, and won the turnover battle.  But also like most of the other late losses, they found a way to lose and came up small at the worst possible time.

So, whose head should be hoisted on a pike for this?  No doubt the hacks will note again that Aaron Rodgers still has yet to lead his team…blah, blah, blah.  For the record, as he did in Minnesota earlier this year, Rodgers got his team into position for a winning field goal, this time a makeable, 38-yarder with a favorable wind.  But Mason Crosby’s kick was low, blocked and, well, pathetic; it was a nice bookend to the earlier FG that he pulled horrendously left.

GB lost the OT coin toss after it bouned off Brian Urlacher’s dome, and the defense displayed its special bend-before-breaking scheme, setting up Robbie Gould to send the Packers off to figure out a way to avoid the ultimate humiliation of losing to the heretofore winless Detroit Lions.

It would seem the Packers are simply snakebitten.  GB just can get out of its own way.  If it wasn’t so sad it would be funny.

Danger, Mike McCarthy, Danger

So, next Sunday’s game at Lambeau Field will mean something after all.  

What looked like a meaningless, play-out-the-string game for two teams going nowhere now is a match-up of historical significance.  The winner will not advance to the post-season, but the game is sure to attract national attention, because the Detroit Lions will come into Green Bay rocking an 0-15 record with a chance to become the first 0-16 team in NFL history.

The Packers should be afraid…very afraid.

DET might be hapless, but they won’t want to go down in league annals this way.  They will pull out all the stops, they will be the proverbial wounded annimal backed into a corner.  The Packers, on the other hand, will be putting the wraps on a devastatingly disappointing season.  I am sure they won’t want the distinction of being the team that got beat by this sad-sack Lions unit.  But I think there will be a good chance that Green Bay will come out flat and less than inspired given the way their season has decayed.

It will be a major test of Coach Mike McCarthy’s abilities as motivator to assure his team is ready to play and absorb DET’s best shot.  Of course, even if they are up for the game, weather could be a factor, allowing the Lions to stay in a game they probably will have no business being in.  There is plenty of danger waiting for the Packers next Sunday; that’s the bad news for Packers fans.  On the other hand it should make for a game worth watching, one certainly more intriguing than the typical late season match-up of two also-rans.

My Man Kyle

Kyle lives next door to me.  There is a lot to like about Kyle--an Iraq War vet who presently works for the TSA and is preparing to head overseas for another tour in the desert.   His wife, Lisa, is a biomedical researcher at the UW and a rising star in her field--one day the cancer therapy that extends my life might be due to the work being done on her bench.  They are also the epitome of solid, Midwestern people; just a couple of kids from Minnesota.

What kind of a guy is Kyle?  He's the kind of guy who snowblows the neighbor's driveway after a 10 inch snowfall.  In fact, he saved me with his big, honkin' two-stage machine twice this past week, going places and doing things that my little one-stage PowerLite could only dream about.

Well, last night we got more snow in Madison, probably three inches or so.  My sons, home for Christmas, saved their old man the work and shoveled our driveway and walks early this morning, so I had clear sailing to church.  But when I returned I saw that Kyle's snowblowing had yet to be done; clearly, it was time for some payback.  Just when I was finishing up his driveway, Kyle appeared.   With his work done, he proceeded to do the other neighbor's sidewalk and driveway.  So as I trundled down the block to get my other neighbor's sidewalk, it occurred to me how this "pay it forward" stuff works:  My boys did my work, so I could do Kyle's, and Kyle could do someone else's.

I know this sort of thing is played out in many places in many different ways in many diverse settings every day around the world.  But this idiom--the moving of snow from pavement--resonated with me as a someone from the upper Midwest, and I found a sort of divinity in these actions.  Perhaps it is just the residue of a church service a few days before the second most significant feast day in the Christian calendar.  Whatever the case, as I stripped off my snow-covered clothes, it seemed for just a minute that winter in Wisconsin might not be so bad after all.

Roll Off of Rodgers

I am tired of hearing Bob McGinn, Tom Silverstein and Bill Michaels ding Packers QB Aaron Rodgers for his late game performance, suggesting that Rodgers "failures" in the fourth quarter this year have been a reason for GB's sad 5-9 record. The implication of these takes seems to be that if ol' Number Four was still here, the team would have a better record. Personally, I think that is a hot, steaming load of crap. Rodgers has played well enough, even late in games, for GB to win at least half of the six close decisions they have lost. Case in point are the games v. CAR and HOU in which he lead them to the lead late in the fourth quarter only to suffer defensive collapses. Then there was the MN game in the dome when Rodgers got them into FG position, but Mason Crosby narrowly missed a 53 yarder.


But don't take my word for it. Let's hear it from Dan Pompei in the Chicago Tribune:

In the fourth quarter of games when the Packers are within seven points of their opponent, Rodgers has completed 46 of 72 passes for 583 yards, four touchdowns and four interceptions. He has completed 63.9 percent of his passes, averaged 8.10 yards per attempt and had a passer rating of 84.4, according to STATS.

Over the last two years, in the same situations, Favre has completed 75 of 126 passes for 793 yards, five touchdowns and five interceptions. He completed 59.5 percent of his passes, averaged 6.29 yards per attempt and had a passer rating of 74.6.

He goes on to note:

Even when comparing Rodgers this season to Favre over the last two seasons, Rodgers' numbers are more impressive.

Average per attempt: Favre is at 7.31, Rodgers 7.45.

Interception percentage: Favre is at 3.2, Rodgers 2.6.

Red zone passer rating: Favre is at 92.7, Rodgers 104.2.

Third-down passer rating: Favre is at 82.2, Rodgers 103.7.

And finally from Pompei:

Rodgers not only has been a better quarterback than Favre, he also has been a better quarterback than anyone in the NFC North—easily. If Rodgers had the support this year that Favre had last year in Green Bay, or this year in New York, the Packers would be in first place in the division.

Rodgers has not had as dependable and dynamic a running back to hand off to as Favre had down the stretch a year ago. Ryan Grant already has rushed for more yards this year than last, but his average per carry has gone from 5.1 to 3.9. He has not been the same player since skipping the off-season program, missing a week of training camp because of a contract impasse, and injuring his hamstring shortly after signing.

Defensively, the Packers already have given up 48 more points than they did all last season.

So would everyone kindly roll off of Aaron Rodgers and realize that, as Pompei suggests, he is the least of the Packers problems right now? GB should consider itself lucky to have a competent replacement for Brett Favre and work to make the other aspects of its team as good as Rodgers.

The Latest Packers Therapy Podcast...

...as been recorded and will be posted soon.  It is a whopper, weighing in at 100 minutes.  Props to anyone who dares to make it all the way though.

It's the Law

Why are we surprised by the collapse of the Green Bay Packers during the second half of this season? It was due to happen. No, not just because their 13-3 campaign in 2008 was a mirage built on an extraordinary intersection of good play and good fortune, spinning the karmic wheel just enough so that it was due to swing back this year. Rather, I have come to believe that the reason is more fundamental: The Brewers made the playoffs this past season so GB simply cannot; the team is not allowed to by order of the inalterable Laws of Nature.

It's this simple: Prior to 2007 the most recent winning season for the Brewers was 1992. The Packers posted a winning record that year, but failed to reach the post-season. That was followed by an extraordinary run of non-losing seasons through 2004. At the same time, the Brewers never had a winning season. Coincidence? I think not.

Then in 2005 the Brewers finally finished .500, but the Pack -- right on cue -- crashed to its first losing season since 1991. 2006 was a mediocre year both ways, but in 2007 the cosmic tilt was again in evidence. Some will say the Brewers choked down the stretch that season. But the real reason they faded to finish two games behind the Cubs was because the Packers were streaking to the NFC Championship Game. God will not allow them to make the playoffs in the same season. (Well, except for the strike shortened 1982 when the Crew made it to the World Series and GB ended up in the playoffs, but I chalk this up as evidence that even He can't control the NFLPA.)

Sorry, Wisconsin sports fans, the evidence is clear -- the state's two flagship franchises are the painful yin to the others excruciating yang.

Even Without CC, the Brewers Won't Save Much

Reading Tom Haudricourt's article today was sobering. While it seems shedding the big contracts of CC Sabathia, Ben Sheets and others should give the team significant room to go free agent shopping, the ledger tells a different story:

One of the primary aspects of trying to deal centerfielder Mike Cameron and his $10 million salary to the Yankees was to free up some money to pursue pitching. And, yes, it's true that dollars were saved by the losses of Sabathia ($5 million from the Brewers in '08), Sheets ($12 million), Gagné, Guillermo Mota ($3.2 million), Derrick Turnbow ($3.2 million), Torres ($3.75 million), Craig Counsell ($2.8 million) and Brian Shouse ($2 million). Chris Capuano, who made $3.75 million, was non-tendered and given a lesser deal.

But Jeff Suppan's salary jumps from $8 million to $12.5 million next season, and Bill Hall's from $4.8 million to $6.8 million. In his first year of arbitration, Prince Fielder probably will increase his $670,000 salary ten-fold, and Corey Hart ($444,000) will take a quantum leap as a first-time eligible as well.

Dave Bush ($2.55 million), J.J. Hardy ($2.65 million) and Rickie Weeks ($1.065 million) will get big bumps in pay through arbitration, with others receiving nice raises, too.

By my calculations, that means the Brewers dump around $30MM in salary, but are likely going to increase their payroll by over $20MM due to contractual obligations and arbitration decisions. That is not going to leave too much room to land significant pitching help, which means shopping from the bargain bin or trading a piece of their offense to acquire pitching (preferably young and at least somewhat major league tested).

The job ahead for GM Doug Melvin during the next two months is daunting. I wonder if he now wishes he hadn't thrown away Will Inman, Joe Thrasher and Steve Garrison for 25 mediocre innings of Scott Linebrink in 2007. And if he doesn't, I sure do.

CC Takes The Yankee's Cash

I am not too broken up about CC Sabathia's decision to take a seven year deal with the Yankee's that will pay him $160MM. The crew on the Dan Patrick radio show says that will amount to $800,000 per start. Hey, who wouldn't grab that if they could?

Perhaps I am being a polly anna here, but this signing might be an opportunity for MKE. Now they won't be saddled with the baggage of CC's huge deal, freeing resources for other needs and other possibilities. CC was tremendous for the Crew, but having him at such a huge salary was a limiting factor and could have been crippling if he sustained an injury or if his performance sagged. I think the Brewers are best served in locking up their young talent at reasonable rates (e.g. Braun) and acquiring young pitching before it gets to a salary level where keeping it is not sustainable. Not having CC certainly closes a door, but it also opens a window.