There’s a balance to be struck

Did you know that this was the first time the Packers beat both Super Bowl participants during the regular season? The 49ers also beat the Rams and Bengals this year. From what I’ve read, this feat has now been accomplished only 22 times, including by the 1981 Browns who finished 5-11. The problem with making this list is it means you didn’t get to the Super Bowl.

You can’t tell me that getting Beckham would not have made a difference for the Packers. If Aaron Rodgers comes back at 38 it is time to WIN NOW. Rams have been to two SBs in the last five years, Pack not since 2010. Which strategy is working?

Are you conveniently forgetting the Rams’ first recent Super Bowl trip was thanks to the most egregious no-call in the history of conference championship games? One that was so bad it prompted the league to experiment with rule changes for a whole year? Just checking.

Bruce from Arbor Vitae, WI

Coach Drayton seemed like a good person, but the special-teams unit he was in charge of underperformed most of the year. Seems to me the organization had little choice but to cut him loose. I wish him the best moving forward.

If the reports are accurate, well said. Mo Drayton is a very good man, and plenty of very good men have been let go in this bottom-line business. How much blame lies with any coach is always up for debate, but at the end of the day if the message isn’t getting through, a new messenger is required.

Giorgio from Monza, Italy

II, first of all thank you. Then, many, you included, said the better cure for the abysmal third phase is to play more starters. So you’d better have the best starters, to get a trickle-down effect. What if, instead, one would decide to invest DIRECTLY on the STs, getting players mainly for that? They should be comparably cheaper and allow to use LESS starters and prevent wearing them, in a sort of trickle-up effect, so to say. What do you think?

That’s a great theory, but you’ve only got 48 active players on game day, and you need depth at positions to account for injuries. So loading up on special-teamers is risky if they aren’t adequate backups on offense or defense. I think there’s a balance to be struck amongst it all – playing some starters/regulars, investing in special-teams standouts, and maintaining quality depth on both sides of the ball. That’s the balance Gutekunst, LaFleur, et al, need to arrive at with their offseason studies and maneuvers.

Shel from New York City, NY

I mean no disrespect to Stenavich but what does he know about a sophisticated passing attack and designing coordinated passing plays? Isn’t there any concern about that?

All these guys who have been with LaFleur the last three seasons know this offense inside and out. There’s also a ton of collaboration throughout the process, in-season and out-of-season. I have no fears about any shortage of knowledge.

How common or uncommon is it that an offensive line coach becomes OC? And who’s the most successful example you guys know of?

I wouldn’t say it’s overly common, nor is it rare. Vince Lombardi coached the offensive line at Army. Joe Gibbs also began his career coaching the offensive line in the college ranks.

With these coaches leaving GB do you think that will have any bearing on Aaron Rodgers’ decision on staying in GB?

A popular query, and my gut says no, though it’s not appropriate for me to try to speak for him or get inside his head.

Generally speaking, and with all things being equal, would it be easier for the Packers to keep the offense intact and load up in the draft for likely replacements on defense? Or would it be easier and more productive to keep the defense intact and focus on offensive replacements this April?

I can appreciate the question and others similarly phrased, but “all things being equal” just doesn’t apply when the statuses of the soon-to-be four-time MVP QB and two-time All-Pro WR are in doubt. Those have to get sorted out first before it’s even productive to ponder the offseason direction.

Steven from Silver Spring, MD

I know there were recent alterations to the CBA. Is it accurate that if the team franchise tags Davante Adams and he signs the tag, the salary is immediately guaranteed for the year? If so the WR tag is $20 million and the team is currently $46M over the cap. That means if they did tag him and he signed the tag then the team would have until March 16 to drop $66M from the roster. I am not sure the tag is such a certain bet.

I’m not sure what the ultimate resolution will be, but the strongest bet in my book (though gambling is illegal at Bushwood) is the Packers aren’t letting Adams get away in ’22 for nothing more than a third-round compensatory pick in ’23.