Inbox: It's about righting the ship in some fashion

Marty from Galena, IL

Score: Wes 6, Theal 0. Spoff for the extra point?

No way. I'm lettin' Wes go for 2 tomorrow.

Jim from Monroe, WI

The only thing Wes missed in the last submission on his rant was, "Holy S$&!* Where's the Tylenol?"

I think he got hit with that on Twitter within moments of the column being posted.

Tom from Santa Paula, CA

Wonderful response to the floundering Theal! I find it funny that he downplays the "anything is possible" line. Has he ever watched the playoffs? He talks as if the only teams that ever win the SB were somehow epically dominant during their regular season, which is hogwash. Get in, play your best, and, yes, anything can happen. That's why we watch. Thanks for all you do throughout the season!

For the record, Theal/Flounder was almost certainly a fake name/location, Wes and I have a pretty good idea who it was, and that deserved response had been building for a while. Anyway, the other thing that's conveniently forgotten is even if it is one of the NFC's top three teams the Packers haven't beaten that goes to the Super Bowl, it means two of them won't. That fact gets lost on the immature rage-a-holics.

Jeff from Hickory, NC

Thanks for your one-word response to describe our Packer performance in Minnesota. "Lacking" says it all! Reminds me of that Lombardi quote. Teams don't go physically flat, they mentally stall! I think these things happen to young teams especially this late in the season when individual performance has to step up and be seen. Are the Packers perhaps a little too young? "Lacking" is feels much worse than losing. GPG

Not to single you out, but I'm growing tired of the "youngest team" stuff. While by no means do I think this group of up-and-coming players has reached its developmental peak, many of them have 25-30 NFL games under their belts now, including several big ones. That's a lot of pro football, enough to have a firmer grasp on many of those "little things." That's why Sunday's performance bothered me so much.

Robert from Verona, WI

I don't understand passing up the onside kick opportunity at the end of Sunday's game, particularly since we were only down two points. Trying an onside kick would give us another chance to get the ball back (albeit a slim one), and if even if we didn't get it, we'd still have the same opportunity to force a three-and-out/punt as if we had kicked it deep. Yes, our starting field position would be worse in this scenario, but when you only need a field goal, it would seem to be worth a shot.

The field position after a failed onside kick can lend itself to the opponent going for it on fourth-and-short, which can change its thinking on third down and make it tougher to get the stop. Four plays vs. three. If you have all three timeouts, kicking deep is the higher-percentage call.

Joe from Sarasota, FL

I have to disagree with Mike about resting players vs. Chicago. I don't think it matters who we play in the playoffs. So to me being seeded 6th or 7th is moot. Losing a Jacobs, a Kraft, Doubs, or any of our impact players in an essentially meaningless game would almost certainly be a death knell for the playoffs, especially if Alexander and Watson are still out.

I'll grant there's risk. Plenty of it, and I'd probably sit anyone on the injury report. I understand your viewpoint, and if Sunday's loss at Minnesota had resembled the one at Detroit, I might be inclined to agree. But it didn't, at least not to me. I know I said Monday there's not much mojo to be gained against a team on a 10-game losing streak, but it's about righting the ship in some fashion. I don't think the Packers can play as poorly as they did against the Vikings, rest healthy guys, and then hope to flip a switch when it's all on the line.

Austin from Manassas, VA

So, hear me out … I think the phantom pre-snap penalties are our own fault. The first 3/4 of the season, we had tons. Refs prepare for the teams they officiate, then the opposing coach is in their ear at the beginning of the game telling them to look out for pre-snap issues (at least any worth their title). Heck, the league probably uses GB film as examples of these penalties. So there, we're paying for how sloppy we were. Am I crazy?

Not at all. Your suggestion is not one to dismiss.

Luke from Holcombe, WI

If replay assist is supposed to correct obvious mistakes, why wasn't the offsides on the missed field goal corrected?

Procedure penalties are not under the purview of replay. If so, the Vikings probably would've lost to the Cardinals.

George from North Mankato, MN

Didn't MLF mean he "strenuously" objected to the penalties? Just beat Da Bears!

Thanks for that.

Shilo from Wildomar, CA

Coaches all over the league are saving timeouts to their detriment. It cost Eberflus his job. I think that our 2021 win in San Francisco (Rodgers to Adams, last-second FG), combined with the 2022 Chiefs-Bills divisional game (Chiefs FG to force OT after getting the ball with only13 seconds left) may have made teams paranoid about leaving ANY time on the clock.

You're definitely onto something, and I referred to this post on our latest unexpectedly expanded "Unscripted" while discussing how the Falcons blew it.

Tim from Greensboro, NC

Reading the quotes after this game is eerily familiar to our other four losses. Common denominator, according to our website, only seven of our total of 44 sacks, and only four of those by our "vaunted" DL happened against those five opponents. 20 of our team sacks and over half of our DL sacks were recorded in three games. Not sure it matters who is available in the secondary when our overrated DL plays this poorly. However, this team never quits. May be our saving grace.

I need to say this about the pass rush (which I also detailed on "Unscripted") – after watching the defensive film, it became apparent how often the Vikings were keeping a running back or tight end, or both, in to pass protect. Many plays (not all), the Packers had a decided edge downfield in coverage vs. fewer route runners, and still didn't get the job done. And when those extra protectors leaked out, they were left open, and Darnold found them. Also, when someone did win up front, it was often just one guy, leaving Darnold plenty of room to step up or sideways and deliver. For those saying Hafley should've blitzed more, he often would've only been blitzing into max protections and depleting a back end that already wasn't winning when it should've had the advantage. The rush and coverage go hand in hand and neither was helping the other.

Chris from Ontario, CA

Are we now accepting this level of play as the standard when facing top-tier competition?

Who said anything about acceptable? I know I didn't, and LaFleur certainly didn't.

Dave from Arlington Heights, IL

I'm a longtime reader of Inbox. To paraphrase Vic, I'm always trying to look on the bright side of life. We have a good chance to advance in the playoffs this year with the youngest team in the league and a top 5-10 quarterback, we have currently top 10 in the league in cap space for next year, the fan base can sense where we need to improve, experience will help, and there's rumors next year's game against Pittsburgh will be in Ireland. Road Trip!

Just to be clear, those are only rumors about Ireland.

Bobby from Parkland, FL

It seems obvious, that for whatever reason, Jaire has decided not to play for the Pack anymore. Matt and the Packers are sure to be aware by now. Why haven't they just put him on IR by now and fill the spot with a vet?

The team has felt there's still a chance he could play, and putting him on IR wouldn't allow him to practice to see if he can play.

Zach from Virginia Beach, VA

Guess everyone's in a chippy mood. On a more positive note, this young team has developed into a force in the NFL. Cut down on the mental mistakes and I think it matches up well against anyone. Two more weeks (at least) left. I hope they find their rhythm, but either way the game is still fun to watch. Which rookie do you think will be most impactful for the postseason? I'd say Evan Williams.

I'll say Edgerrin Cooper.

Donald from Big Flats, WI

Mike, when Walker is healthy, will Cooper stay in? 7+56+? Do we need to have Alexander and Valentine in together? It just seems to me we would be stronger if they're playing alongside each other instead of in place of each other. I know shutouts don't happen in playoff games but it wouldn't hurt to try. GPG

Cooper played 71 of 72 defensive snaps against the Vikings, his largest workload so far, by far. No disrespect to Wilson or McDuffie, but I suspect when Walker's fully healthy the Packers would like to have him and Cooper playing alongside one another as much as possible.

Charlie from Morgan Hill, CA

Do you have any thoughts or insight regarding MLF's comment about Cooper making some splash plays but then tempered by mistakes? Did you notice on film what he was referring to? Are mistakes offsetting all those TFLs?

I wouldn't say offsetting, but film study tells me he was referring to some pass-coverage assignments.

Kurt from Long Lake, WI

Tom Brady indicated our receivers needed to be more precise/disciplined on their intermediate routes. Do you agree? Do you see a weakness?

I'm no expert on route running, but the way LaFleur talked Monday about needing to win against man coverage, and the slow adjustment from attacking zone vs. man, speaks to that.

Adrian from Oregon City, OR

Reaction to Monday night: The Lions offense under Campbell/Johnson made fourth-down conversions routine. Do they always succeed? Of course not. But their superpower is players and coaches know the drill, a good play gets dialed up, and confidence leads to good execution. I don't think the Packers or other teams can match the Lions' aggressiveness without their preparation and repetition. Trying to be like the Lions might backfire. Thoughts?

I agree. Buck and Aikman (I was listening to the announcers, barely) repeatedly mentioned fourth downs as part of Detroit's DNA, and it's been built over multiple years now. I also agree with Terry here.

Terry from Green Bay, WI

Good morning Mike. The Lions go for it on fourth down more than any other team. Do you think that puts opposing defenses at a psychological disadvantage? Normally, a defense goes out onto the field thinking, "Stop these guys on the next three plays and we'll get the ball back." Against the Lions, they are thinking, "We probably need to stop these guys on the next four plays." Thanks.

They keep the pressure on, and because it's what they do all the time, the pressure's on the opponent, not them. They eschewed a field goal, failed on a fourth-and-goal, and still scored 40 points in that game.

Tom from Raleigh, NC

I am watching the Lions game on Monday night wondering in this "copycat league," do you think other teams will put in trick plays every week ala Ben Johnson in the future. I hate to say it but it looks fun and not really super risky – at least how the Lions execute them. Probably that's the key.

Bingo.

Nicholas from Washington, DC

Despite the disappointment, there is a benefit to the loss, which is that both the Vikings and Lions will have to play in a gut-wrenching, emotionally draining contest for the NFC North crown. While I hated to type those words, there is a possibility that both teams will be stretched and mentally drained from it, and could overexert themselves ahead of the playoffs. Could this be a blessing headed into the games that actually do matter next month?

I'm not thinking about it as it relates to the Packers necessarily, but the loser of that game having to hit the road and possibly deal right away with a hot QB in Baker Mayfield (last 3 games: 80-102, 950 yards, 11 TDs, 2 INTs, 133.3 rating) will be no picnic.

Erik from Anchorage, AK

Playoffs!? Playoffs?! Can we put that talk away for now? We have a wounded animal coming to Lambeau next Sunday. A team GB beat by blocking a field goal in the closing seconds. A team that would love to start 2025 and their rebuild with a W. It's Bears week, can we start acting like it?

Being totally honest, this game is about the rivalry only to some fans, and to the Bears.

Al from Green Bay, WI

Yes, the Bears have lost 10 straight. But a closer look reveals that half of those losses have been by three points or fewer. And some they should have one. Blocked FG, terrible clock management, etc. In an alternative universe, it could be the 9-7 Bears playing the 10-6 Packers. Yet Packers fans will be disappointed with anything less than a blowout win. What are your expectations?

Cleaner football from the home team.

Jerry from Bonnerville, CT

Lol! You say I have a defeatist attitude, others claim you guys are homers. Who's more accurate? I'll put my assessment of this team up against yours every day of the week. 0-5 is all I need to convince me we can't beat the NFC elite three, and if you think we can turn it around in the playoffs and win four straight, you're delusional. I'll enjoy the ride knowing we'll get eliminated while you agonize the crash. That's YOUR prerogative. Sometimes leaning on hope means you can't do the job.

OK.

Darryl from Glen Carbon, IL

Good morning, II. I'd like to thank you for the roasting that closed out Tuesday's inbox. I needed to hear that as much as anyone. For all the sour grapes I've hurled in both the Inbox and the live blog, I'm going to move forward in 2025 by respecting the process, have more faith in the leadership and focus on the things I control in my life and enjoy the games for what they are. Thanks for the spankin'.

Happy New Year.