On the first Saturday of every month, Mark will write about a topic of interest to Packers fans and the organization, and then answer five fan questions. Fans are encouraged to email Mark with their name and hometown at:
Through the first part of the season, the NFC North has been historically strong. As we head into the second half of the season, every team in the division has a winning record and the four teams have only lost a combined eight games. Interestingly, there have been only two division games thus far – both 31-29 games, Minnesota beating us and the Lions over the Vikings. The overall division record through seven weeks was the best since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970.
It will be very exciting to see how the division plays out over the rest of the season as we start to play each other more often. Although it might be good to be the best team in a weak division, I prefer being in a strong division. Our goal is to win the Super Bowl, and the best way to do that is to be battle tested during the regular season and to be playing your best as you head into the playoffs. (In 2010, the NFC North was strong, and games against the Bears particularly got us ready for the playoffs.) Momentum is crucial, and it is difficult for teams to keep momentum when they clinch the division title with several weeks left in the season.
Sunday's game against the Lions will be a good test for both teams. Over the last month, the Lions have been the best team in the league with dominating wins. Jared Goff is playing at an MVP level, and the Lions are averaging 43 points a game in their last four games. We've won four games in a row, albeit close games. It will be exciting to see how things play out on Sunday.
Now, on to your questions.
Peder from Greenville, WI
First, I think your idea of taking a variety of questions on a regular basis is a great idea. My question: Your predecessor, Bob Harlan, was a Packers CEO during crucial times including the stadium remodel. Would he be a good candidate for the Packers Hall of Fame?
Thanks, Peter. Bob would be such a good candidate for the Packers Hall of Fame, that he is already in the Hall. He was the only person inducted in 2004. As you note, he was very deserving of this honor, not only for the renovation of Lambeau Field, but for turning around the fortunes of the team in the 1990s. On a personal note, I owe a lot to Bob. He was instrumental in helping me transition to my current position many years ago.
Chad from Summerville, SC
I was thinking, how bad are throwing interceptions by a quarterback, really? When I was growing up, Brett threw the most ever. Besides at the last second of games, I think it had a positive externality because Green Bay was such a small, quiet place that it needed extra "energy" and helped make it more clutch and quiet, the jitters that playing in it with two Super Bowls in 1996-1997 did to it.
Amphitheater is a word. It is akin to the Roman Colosseum. Other words are "amphitheatric, amphitheatrical, and amphitheatrically." In the movie (my favorite of all time) that came out in 2000, Maximus the gladiator is told that if he wins the crowd, he'll win his freedom. I think that there are psychological reverberations to this theory that apply to sports, politics, business, war...
The point is, Aaron knows how to be famous enough without needing to throw interceptions and there is a positive externality to Jordan and Brett throwing interceptions in a teensy weensy placed called Green Bay where everyone is winsome and never boos. We should be louder as fans.
Why do we call our quarterbacks by first name? Are Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes really the GOATs? Or would being drafted by a crappy team result in them winning more Super Bowls?
My "Mt. Rushmore of athletes" involves drawing from the pool of Michael Jordan, Jackie Robinson, Muhammad Ali, Secretariat, Jesse Owens, Ted Williams (because I love him and he's the GOAT of baseball), and a football athlete or two. Football is weird because it has this "Lombardian" spirit of "shut up and do what you're told" that we all remember from middle and high school football that monikers the sport that takes away identities from great players. That's why it is America's sport.
I believe Brett and Jordan throwing extra interceptions has a positive externality in Green Bay. Does Cliff have any opinions on that? He always has weird opinions on football matters, going against what you see on television or the numbers. Green Bay required Brett Favre and a Super Bowl to get a vote of 53-47 to pass a tax sale in 2001 to revitalize the atrium! We are the Green Bay Packers!
Green Bay is not meant to handle large media crowds nor is Wisconsin. When a franchise loses for 10 years in a row, the energy leaves the building. Amphitheatrically, Green Bay is colored by her quarterback rather than an intimidating place to play ... unless we have a defense.
Every place has pros and cons that help her win or lose. We are structured long term, historically, to win consistently over time. It works. But just remember, win the crowd, win your freedom. Sports and society play out in professional sports, which took me 20 years of watching sports on television starring as a high schooler, earnestly, to figure out, realistically.
You were a player in the NFL, Mr. Murphy? Do you have any opinions on this?
Chad, thanks for a very interesting and long question (as an aside, I do question whether Secretariat is an athlete). I agree with your premise – not all interceptions are the same. For instance, an interception on a pass on third down from the 50-yard line that is caught on the 5-yard line and downed, is really not much different than a great coffin corner punt on the next down. Also, interceptions that bounce off the receiver's hands are really not the quarterback's fault. One of the concerns in this regard is that if a quarterback is so worried about throwing interceptions that he will be reluctant to throw into tight windows and will miss opportunities for big plays. For these reasons, I think the quarterback rating can often be misleading. I think most people would say that Patrick Mahomes is the best quarterback in the league (and the Chiefs are undefeated this year), yet his quarterback rating is below average.
Bob from Orland Park, IL
I think that a Super Bowl overseas is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard of. As it is, it is nearly impossible for the average fan to afford to go to the game. Throw in international travel and all you will have there will be Taylor Swift and all her buddies.
I don't like the idea of international regular-season games. If the NFL wants a franchise out of the country, Canada is far enough. What is your thought on this?
My thoughts are aligned with yours on this, Bob. Growing the game internationally makes sense and is great for the league, but I do not think an international Super Bowl would be good for the league or our fans. The travel for fans of the participating teams would be expensive and challenging, and the time of the game could impact ratings. The NFL used to play Super Bowls in non-NFL stadiums (i.e., the Rose Bowl, Rice Stadium). In recent years, the league has played Super Bowls only in NFL stadiums to reward the cities that have supported and funded the stadiums. It may be more realistic, though, to have an international Super Bowl many years down the road if the league has expanded and has international teams.
A question from mkuske mkuske.
If everybody was open to it, would you consider adding a well-respected, highly experienced mind like Robert Saleh as a consultant for Matt and staff to bounce their ideas and game plans off of?
Thanks for the suggestion, mkuske mkuske. Actually, as you may have already heard, we recently hired Robert as a consultant. I was very supportive of Matt hiring him. They have a long history together and I think it will be good for Robert and us. He will work primarily with our offense. Given his background as a defensive coach, he will be very helpful in terms of how teams will try to stop our offense.
George from North Mankato, MN
What was it about the change in the kickoff rule that led you to be one of the few to vote against it? Sure seems like most are willing to take/give the ball from/to the opponents at the 30. Do you think the league may make additional changes to the kickoff?
Good question, George. We voted against the proposed change because we did not know enough about the new rule and how it might impact the game. In the past, we have had trials in the preseason before voting on a proposed change. Now that we are about halfway through the season, I do have some thoughts about the dynamic kickoff (I do get a kick out of that name). First, it is safer (which was a main objective), but we have not had as many returns as I would have hoped. That may change as the weather turns colder, though. I think there would be more returns if the return team got the ball on the 35 on touchbacks rather than the 30. This would incentivize kicking teams to kick high kicks into the landing zone. Now, the average return gets to the 29-yard line. Most teams choose to kick it out of the end zone since the receiving team is getting the ball only one yard past the average return, and you eliminate the possibility of a long return. Another possible change would be to have the kickoff and kickoff return teams 10 yards apart rather than 5. The players are so close to each other that the coverage team gets on the return team's blockers so quickly that there are often holding calls. Because of this, many teams are reluctant to return kicks out of the end zone for fear of starting drives on the 10-yard line.
