Why are the Packers special teams so bad every year? Because they are an afterthought, at best. The team just doesn't doesn't place much value on someone who can be a ST's stud. Instead, they'll give a roster spot to someone who has potential to help the offense in the future. Add to this that the team has a habit of getting second or third rate ST coaches (sorry, Mr. Drayton, but this has been true for years on end), rather than paying for top notch coaching talent in that area, and you have this perennial problem. Until the team commits to improving ST's and treating it less like that red headed step child, this will continue.

The Packers have paid as much attention to the special-teams units as they have to their inside linebackers. Hopefully this is the year that changes in certain players are kept specifically for the role on special teams. Guys like Dominique Daffney, Ty Summers, Will Redmond, J. Degura, J. Winfree, Orin Burks, S. Jean Charles, C. Sullivan, K. Martin should all play big roles.
Bottom line, if you are not a starting pro bowl level guy, then you’d better damn well be ready to strap it on and earn your keep on Special Teams!
MLF isn’t F’ING around, he wants production in all three phases of this team and he’s going to get it done!
Go Pack!

Got my proxy in the mail. Thinking of how Darren Rizi would have helped the Packers ST, and what might have been? Add in all the other garbage, and it will affect my vote. Murphy’s meddling hasn’t helped with Rizzi, Pettine, nor Rodgers situations. Fact.

Glad we added good ST players this year, and Maurice Drayton was tapped by LaFleur here. Wishing them the best. This group of players is loaded with good returners, gunners & tacklers:

Amari Rodgers
Shemar Jean-Charles
Isaiah McDuffie
Bailey Gaither
Ray Wilborn
Christian Uphoff
Innes Gaines

I anticipate all of them making this 53, and having a very positive effect on improving our STs. Might even see Eric Stokes coming off the edge on kick block attempts. Willington Previlon is another player to add help as a kick blocker with his 84” wingspan.

I’m excited to see good STs play again in Green Bay. Been waiting for that since Nolan Cromwell.

Remember (you other old guys...) when Holmgren stated that they were going to base the bottom of the roster on players' skill at ST? I think it was his second or third year as the Packers head coach, after the previous year's ST play had cost them in games. They went on to build one of the better ST units in the NFL and soon won a Super Bowl.
I remember that statement of his vividly, because I always rooted for the UDFAs and underdogs, and that decision really impacted their gateway to the roster.

All of these players are athletes. They may not be great NFLers, but they do not need to be to play STs well, or at least averagely. That’s been true for years. The exceptions are (specialists P, K, LS aside) the gunners and the returner.

Jannis was a good gunner for several years, but with his departure we seem not only not to have replaced him, but also to have had only maybe one player performing well at any time—the support level behind him went down. Why? Looking at the roster, there have been plenty of athletes who should have been capable of being at least decent. To me it had to be coaching.

The coaching aspect only gets more salient when a return commences. Time and again we leave lanes open or are out thought by opponents. That is not primarily player capability but coaching and discipline.

On returns, we just haven’t had a good one in several years, a few brief flashes like 2019 Ervin aside. That’s a roster decision. Maybe Rodgers is that, but I’d prefer that the last man on the roster be the man to take the pounding now most returns are from punts. That’s on the team to decide. This area is perhaps the only one I can’t fully ascribe to coaching.

As to who, if you can’t find a developing player who can play gunner or be coached to, there is something wrong. I really do not subscribe to the view that teams should need to keep players without offensive or defensive upside just to gun.

We do need to have players who can catch, make good decisions and run effectively enough to deter the short kicking we saw last year. There are a handful of candidates with experience on the 90. Personally, I hope we keep one. Ideally that player could be an option at gunner as well.

That is the only player that should be kept on the roster solely for STs other than the 3 specialists. To be clear, that player needs to be good not just not a liability. Taylor was not good last year. We need to improve (or he does).

As to the EQS, Jacksons and Hollmans of this world ( as cited). Regardless of how acquired, any player not running with at least the second group by the end of camp should be not only be practicing hard on STs, but told very clearly that their opportunity and potentially career depends on it.

For players like these to be such liabilities that they are inactive for ST reasons after 2 or 3 years as back ups should be an indictment of both the players and coaches. I hope we no longer tolerate that. I think it’s time a cold wind blew through the depth players with respect to the importance of STs to staying in the league. If that takes cutting a few who haven’t, so be it.

If Drayton is to make a difference, that alone would be a big step. LaFleur needs to take a leading role in helping to drive that cultural change. Gute needs to ensure he keeps a true returner on the roster. The rest is on the ST coaches and also the other senior coaching personnel to bring home the reality to players and set some examples: deliver a cultural change with respect to expectations of non starters and the role of STs.

If that leads to a player like EQ (Jackson, etc) being cut in a marginal decision in offensive terms where he’d likely win otherwise, good. Send a message.

Finally, if we are keeping a player purely on ST merit, that player needs to be consistently good. For too long we’ve justified keeping players like Burks because they are decent ST players. Decent isn’t enough. To survive as a primary STer, you need to be consistently a plus factor. Jannis was, and his predecessor as a standout helped us to our last Super Bowl with an interception. Yes, it’s been that sparse.

St is 1/4 of the team. You need parts to run well to be successful!

You keep including Stokes on the list, but I would not be in favor of the Packers using him extensively in a ST role. We need his speed and depth in the defensive secondary. Only if he struggles there should we be giving him lots of ST snaps. I'm more looking forward to see what Jean-Charles can contribute here instead.

We also should have healthy competition at P from Ryan Winslow. Maybe this isn't the most glamorous position on the team, but it makes all the difference in the world for our defense to start the opponent off in the least favorable field position, especially in close games. The punter also has to be trained to tackle (or at least deliver a solid blow) if the returner breaks containment.

Personally I would like to see this unit become more aggressive when it comes to blocking punts and employing occasional trickery. I think one way to keep these guys enthusiastic about their roles is to challenge them with fresh and exciting assignments once in a while. Give them a chance to make a big impact!!

Overall, special teams are less important than they used to be. The field goal unit is still very important, and the Packers are in good shape there with Mason Crosby. Aside from that, the differences in field position between the best return units and the worst ones is, on average, not huge. Yes, those differences accumulate during the course of a game and especially during the course of a season, but they are dwarfed by the play of the offensive and defensive units, which spend much more time on the field. Quite often a big special teams play is wiped out almost immediately by the first few plays from scrimmage afterward.

Here is last year's top ten in special teams rankings: New England, Seattle, Detroit, Indianapolis, New Orleans, Baltimore, Miami, Buffalo, Chicago, Arizona. Five of those teams made the playoffs, so there is some correlation with winning, but on the other hand, four of the bottom ten teams made the playoffs. And those rankings include the field goal units, where the Packers are doing fine.

Having said that, you don't want to suck at anything, and the Packers have clearly sucked at special teams for a long time. J.K. Scott has been a disappointment, and it often seems like the organization is not even trying to find a good return man. This year there does appear to be some potential for improvement. I would be very happy if the Packers finish in the middle of the pack in special teams rankings. That's all I ask.

Why all the STs futility?

Mennenga, Zook, Slocum, Novak. Packers have not been ranked above #20 in 6 of the last 8 years. Instead of flipping the field, they often put the O or D in a hole.

I recall during the 2018 season, Zook was asked "why all the ST holding calls?" He said "last year the officials weren't calling those!" Good grief.

Rizzi is example 1 of how impactful a top coach can be...especially on STs where there is constant churn with new rookies and FAs joining the group.

Matt wanted Rizzi in the worst way and Gutey supported the choice. But MM didn't like the salary demands and hem and hawed for a few days. Finally Matt and Gutey convinced MM let them pay the man. Matt called Rizzi back to offer him the job but Rizzi had already moved on...to the Saints.

I hope Mo can greatly improve the STs...but he was Mennenga and Zook's top assistant. Matt seems to like him a lot...so good luck Mo!

SMH.

I don't mean to burst your bubble. But this isn't news! ST always decides the last 5-10 roster spots! SMH...