Aaron Rodgers is on the wrong side of 30 and there's been some chatter about replacing the coaching staff and even Ted Thompson. Why? How does this fix anything with Aaron Rodgers at QB?

Do we really think a new coaching staff or general manager can take this 53 man roster and turn it into a NFL Championship team? When I read about how we need a new regime, entirely from top to bottom, I think that means completely resetting everything. The team is so terrible (e.g. Browns) without Aaron Rodgers, what good would it do to have a new regime?

Fire the GM because the "cupboard is bare" as I've read, what would a new coaching staff be able to do? Or do you think a new GM is going to have a magical draft year or two and sign a slew of free agents to put us over the top?

The rationale behind FIRE EVERYONE just doesn't strike a logical cord with me and I have tried.

Cap Number for 2018 
Clay Matthews $11.4 million cap number. I wouldn't mind him traded before 4pm ET.
Martellus Bennett has $8.5 million cap number.
Randall Cobb has $12.7 million cap number.
Jordy Nelson has $12.5 million cap number.
Aaron Rodgers has $20.9 million cap number. Maybe a re-structure/extension gives us more space?


I guess what I'm getting at ... I think we're stuck with this regime for another season or two at least. I think one ring is all Aaron Rodgers is going to get with the Packers. Dom Capers is not changing his ways. We got smaller DL for his scheme. That didn't work. Now we got bigger DB's to fit the scheme, the jury is out. Why can't we just get best players and adapt the mother trucking scheme???

---

I think back to the Bears and various okay but not great QBs. Bears fans fed up with the Bears not getting to the super bowl and underperforming, constantly whining and wanting a new QB, a new coach. They had Shanahan and Grossman, they got to the super bowl but didn't win it, got rid of both and eventually ended up with Cutler and Smith. Constant complaining about Cutler (everything from performance to body language) and Smith, they got rid of them and they've been irrelevant ever since.

Fun fact - Generally if you're the one putting someone on the trading block, the other team is going to be in a position of power which means they're going to get the better deal. The Packers are going to get a bunch of draft picks and it's going to take a LONG TIME for that to pay off, if ever. If the Packers clean house, they'll be irrelevant for at least 6 years and will need to get lucky with a QB. It's also far harder to develop a top-tier QB if the rest of the team stinks and all the pressure is on said QB.

At some point we are going to need to change GM, Head Coach, DC

I would prefer a new staff come in while we have Rodgers rather than without him.

---

First, let me address the subject line... "Should the Packers clean house?"... This question does NOT get asked if there isn't reason to believe we should. IE: You don't ask...Should the Patriots get rid of Bill Belichick...Should the Texans trade DeShaun Watson...Should the Eagles deal Carson Wentz. Those kinds of questions don't get asked because there's no reason to be asking such things. Now, back to the subject...Should the Packers clean house? There is a lot of reason to ask this question.

This defense has been ridiculously wanton since the SB season. There was one other year in there where it was "good enough". This team has probably the GOAT at QB. It's been to the show ONCE with him, meanwhile, Tom Brady has been to the SB SEVEN times. SEVEN!

I read a Chicago comparison? The Bears had Cutler at QB and nearly beat us for the right to go to the show with Caleb Hanie at QB. Cutler was not a good QB. Had the Bears ever found their QB they would've been to and likely won multiple SB's. Bringing up the Bears shows just how important this issue is. WE HAVE THE QB. What we don't have is anywhere near the defense that the Bears assembled. The Bears also went to the show with Rex Grossman...imagine had they gone to the show with an actual QB?

Saying it would put this org back years is simply untrue and not based on anything other than the desire to keep the status quo. Expansion Carolina, remember them? Who did we face to get to the show under Brett for the first time? What year did Carolina begin play as a franchise in the NFL? Oh, that quick?! It will not take anywhere near 6 years to compete given we have AARON RODGERS. The Carolina Panthers made it to the chip with Kerry Collins running the show.

To accept that we have been to the show ONCE with 12 as our QB is completely unacceptable on every level. It's justified under regular season wins and playoff appearances. Yeah, that's what you play for...not to win? Remember the Eagles playoff game. 4th and 22? Why did it even get to that? If you don't have the balls to go for it you shouldn't be in the NFL. To justify not having balls year after year in the game of football because we make the playoffs? Really? Your objective is to WIN IT ALL. This regime staked to the greatest advantage of any franchise in the NFL has been there...ONCE.

Blow it up. It's been way past time for the Dungy to Gruden baton passing to happen in Green Bay. We do not have winners in Green Bay. We have rationalizers of being good and "highly successful". One SB with Aaron Rodgers is not "highly successful". It's an indictment.

Did this franchise fall apart when Sherman took over? How about when it blew it up and went with the coordinator of the 32nd offense who preferred Alex Smith to the QB he'd be inheriting?

We've gone from Wolf and Holmgren to a bunch of nothings and have maintained a nice winning record. Surely, the venerable Packers franchise can attract better candidates than Ted Thompson, Mike Sherman, Mike McCarthy? That's the BEST we could ever hope for? I don't understand most of you. Not winning it all isn't okay. It's something that should cause you to insist on the necessary changes to get there. What you're relying on is...L U C K and justifying that that's a good plan.

I want a WINNER as a HC in here. Give me Jim Harbaugh. Someone who is obsessed with winning. Not someone who would beat his chest when his team fails year after year saying...I'm a highly successful coach. That is EXACTLY what a LOSER would say. Justifying failure instead of being obsessed with not losing any longer. Keeping Dom Capers year after year? Surely, that's a winning move that's going to bring us more championships? Not ridding ourselves of Dom is on the exact same level of not blowing this thing up but you don't even recognize that caught up in playoff appearances which ANY team would have in this division with Aaron Rodgers at the helm.

If you're truly worried about not making the playoffs anymore if we blow it up...Don't. We have Aaron Rodgers. If that is your main goal and desire it won't change.

If you desire to see this organization capitalize on the gift of 12 there is NO OTHER CHOICE BUT TO BLOW IT UP. This is a losing regime that achieved it's one SB appearance by squeaking by Caleb Hanie and the Bears. How could we let a regime with this resume go?

BLOW IT UP, before it's too late.

---

Realistically, how many years is it going to take for the team to finish re-tooling to a new DC, new OC, new HC, and to a lesser extent, new GM? Rodgers is 33 right now. If it takes 3 years to get things together, you just wasted 3 years.

Also, kind of interesting you'd bring up our one SB appearance was by squeaking by Caleb Hanie and the Bears as if that somehow diminishes what we did, or for games like that to be extremely typical of basically every team (including Super Bowl winners) seasons.

We barely didn't squeak by Russell Wilson and an excellent Seahawks defense on the road - can we use that to diminish not reaching the Super Bowl? We barely didn't squeak by San Francisco the previous year. 2009, we barely didn't squeak by the Cardinals. 2008, we barely didn't squeak by the Giants.

Does this work both ways? Or only if it supports being extremely negative? No, I'm not saying we should be happy with how the Packers have done in the Postseason. I just think it's rather odd that you'd bring up the whole Caleb Hanie and the Bears thing.

Why would it take 3 years? The team is really not in cap hell where we would have to dump our roster. McCarthy had the team on the doorstep in his second season. Dom had the defense changed and in the SB in the second year.



Whether changing coaches, GM or neither. The team needs a commitment all around. If the goal is really the SB as the coaches, front office and players all claim. They all need to follow up on their talk. Matthews, Rodgers, Nelson, Cobb all need to renegotiate to make their contracts more cap friendly. The front office and coaches need to put that cap space into use and add players to upgrade where we need improvement.

---

Difference here being that you're changing both at the same time instead of making incremental changes to coaching staff. Plus making a lot of roster moves. At least as far as the original discussion goes.

Hook, line, and sinker!
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I love it .

I think with all the early injuries, then the final blow with Aaron going down the team has pretty much been blown up.

Still sitting at 4-3 as they start putting things back together.

The Packers organization is not going to make the same mistake it did when Ron Wolf retired.

They will have an exit plan in place when Ted decides to step down.
BTW, I believe that will be after this year.

The Dominos might start falling if he does step down.

Most new GM's want to bring in "their guys", but if The Packers hire from within those changes might be minimal.

Like Mike Holmgren was tied to Brett Favre, Mike McCarthy is tied to Aaron Rodgers.

The Packers fire Mike McCarthy, I wouldn't be surprised if Aaron Rodgers would retire.

I've said it before, I would love to see The Packers blow this whole thing up, just to watch the initial jubilation by some on this forum, then as reality sets in watch as the whining and crying would become even louder than it is now.

Still 9 games left in this regular season, those of you who have already given up please be courteous to those of us who still think The Packers have a chance.
Other words
Take all the negativity bullshit to FB.
Plenty of whiners there!
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

GO! PACK! GO!

---

I can't help but wonder if Rodgers wants to stick around, knowing that he most likely won't have a decent defense for the remainder of his career if he stays here.
If he had one, he would probably be wearing 2 or 3 more SB rings right now.
A lack of commitment by Ted to bring in top notch players has killed us several times, when we were oh so close to making it.
We got Woodson because nobody else wanted him, and that's the ONLY reason.

---

What message does it send to fall short year after year and do the same thing over and over. It says that losing IS acceptable. It's okay to hide behind the past and utter we'll get'em next year. We had a highly successful season. Just go back to MMs 3 minute plus answer on if last season was successful. No winner would ever say anything remotely like that.

Porforis... Sure, it can go both ways but only apple to apple comparison is Seattle game as it was an NFC Championship game. Losing squeakers in the WC or divisional rounds aren't comparable. We should've gone to the show that year. That was the one other year our D was good enough and it was because of Peppers just like Woodson in 2010. If you want to get down to brass tacks ONE appearance seems to be a balance between the Seattle and Chicago games. We were very fortunate to escape the mighty Caleb Hanie and very unfortunate to lose in one of the most epic choke jobs in NFL history.

Not sure where you're getting it will take 3 years? If O remains a similar system, the impact from blowing it up could be immediate. We made some big changes before 2010...those type of changes and more are exciting.

To me it's not about one bit whether it works out. It's about the mindset of striving to win Championships and taking the commensurate risks. You like kicking the FG on 4th and short. I like going for the TD. It's an aggressive game and our loser safe mindset is anti the spirit of sports and winning.

---