Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
4 Pages<1234>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Online nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:33:22 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,478
Applause Received: 620

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
I applauded wpr's post because I thought it was nice sarcasm. It's a big duh that WE won Super Bowls before Aaron Rodgers - before he was born. Oops, I said WE, and none of us were there blocking for or catching passes from Bart or Brett. At least I don't think so hahahaha.

To me, there's nothing sacred about the WCO. The scheme didn't make the personnel; The personnel made the scheme successful.


HISTORICAL FACT: Only ONE Superbowl winning team in the history of the league, had Aaron Rodgers on it.

It CAN be done.

Here's another fact: The WCO is a system that is based on the "modern football era" rules protecting the passing game. When the rules changed in 1970, teams began to experiment with the passing game, chiefly among them "Air Coryell." Well the WCO was derivative of that, and is based upon the fundamentals of high percentage passing, ball control and hogging time of possession.

High percentage is high percentage. Let's say you have shitty players. Well, high percentage plays with those shitty players are more likely to be successful than low percentage plays with those same players, no? Now let's say you have great players. Still, high percentage plays are more likely to be successful.

Before the rules were changed to protect the passing game, it was more advantageous to run the ball. You might have heard of the guy who mastered that. The Superbowl trophy was named after him.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline olds70supreme  
#17 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 6:22:20 AM(UTC)
olds70supreme

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/10/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 16
Applause Received: 35

I'm guessing that Wallace might be able to split the final games, +/- 1. I don't think that would be good enough for the playoffs this year.

As for McGinn, I have to echo the question about him earlier in the thread. I've heard he is very well regarded among his peers, but I have trouble seeing it. I expect better than a complete homer for a beat writer, but he seems to either actively resent the team's success or is overcompensating in an effort to appear objective. The end result often is an article with really questionable logic.
blank
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 11/5/2013(UTC)
Offline wpr  
#18 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 6:36:46 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,877
Applause Received: 1,391

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
HISTORICAL FACT: Only ONE Superbowl winning team in the history of the league, had Aaron Rodgers on it.

It CAN be done.

Here's another fact: The WCO is a system that is based on the "modern football era" rules protecting the passing game. When the rules changed in 1970, teams began to experiment with the passing game, chiefly among them "Air Coryell." Well the WCO was derivative of that, and is based upon the fundamentals of high percentage passing, ball control and hogging time of possession.

High percentage is high percentage. Let's say you have sh!tty players. Well, high percentage plays with those sh!tty players are more likely to be successful than low percentage plays with those same players, no? Now let's say you have great players. Still, high percentage plays are more likely to be successful.

Before the rules were changed to protect the passing game, it was more advantageous to run the ball. You might have heard of the guy who mastered that. The Superbowl trophy was named after him.


Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

thanks Post received 1 applause.
texaspackerbacker on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Online texaspackerbacker  
#19 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:05:23 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 416
Applause Received: 245

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.


Seems like I've been applauding you a lot lately.

You must have borrowed that past results/future success line from mutual funds disclaimers hahahaha.

I could learn to like Seneca Wallace real quick if he ever had to get on the field and did a decent job.

My Point in this whole thing is that the PROBLEM is Packer weakness in the O Line, as well as RB until this season, and to a great extent, our D also. Aaron Rodgers is like an addiction. He is so damn good that we have been able to win big time even with all those other weaknesses. Losing him would be like getting off of whatever meds somebody is taking - suddenly all those aches and pains and weaknesses would really come to the surface and we'd be in a world of hurt.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline Yerko  
#20 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:26:52 AM(UTC)
Yerko

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL

Applause Given: 142
Applause Received: 238

Didn't even read the article because the title alone is dumb...just dumb.


Reading the article is probably like being inside one of nerdmann's dreams.

I'll pass. Laughing
UserPostedImage
Offline wpr  
#21 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:35:58 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,877
Applause Received: 1,391

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
Seems like I've been applauding you a lot lately.

You must have borrowed that past results/future success line from mutual funds disclaimers hahahaha.

I could learn to like Seneca Wallace real quick if he ever had to get on the field and did a decent job.

My Point in this whole thing is that the PROBLEM is Packer weakness in the O Line, as well as RB until this season, and to a great extent, our D also. Aaron Rodgers is like an addiction. He is so damn good that we have been able to win big time even with all those other weaknesses. Losing him would be like getting off of whatever meds somebody is taking - suddenly all those aches and pains and weaknesses would really come to the surface and we'd be in a world of hurt.



That is because I am a reasonable man. Duh!

The mutual fund disclaimer did come to mind. I even considered going and getting one off the net but I figured I made my point with the abbreviated version.

As far as Wallace goes I don't hate him. I know he has skills and ability. Stick him out there with a fully functioning line 3 top flight WR the #1 TE and fully stocked backfield not to mention a fully functioning defense that will help get the ball for the offense and he could win a few games. Take away 1/3 of them I question his to win consistently. After all if he was really that great he would not be on his third team this year alone.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Offline warhawk  
#22 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 12:40:11 PM(UTC)
warhawk

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 215

Teams would load up against the run and then unload on Wallace. It would not be pretty especially with all the guys that are out.
Arod is a special player who is managing an undermanned receiving group brilliantly. There is no throwing someone else in there and expecting the same results.

Because of how well Arod is handling the situation defenses cannot bring more players up in the box and shut down the run. His timing and accuracy is second to none but teams would alter their plan the very next play he isn't on the field.

There are some lousy teams out there and I suspect the Pack could limp into the playoffs but does anyone think there is an NFC playoff team we could beat without Arod?

Rodgers is getting the ball out quicker with superb pre-snap recognition. This takes ability, experience, confidence, and whatever else it takes. I highly doubt a guy sitting over on the sidelines not having seen a real game all year could come close to moving the team like Aaron Rodgers has.
"The train is leaving the station."
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Online nerdmann  
#23 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 1:36:34 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,478
Applause Received: 620

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.


You're contradicting yourself.

We can take Seneca Wallace's past record and apply it to the future, but not take the historical records of teams in general? Remember, Wallace has been on some shit sucking teams. Take his record against the spread as a better indicator than his pure win/loss record.

And remember, in the playoffs, we'll have alot of these guys back. James Jones, Randall Cobb, Jermicheal Finley.

And no, the Packers DON'T run a pure WCO. They run a run and shoot vertical offense. WITH RODGERS. That's my point. We see what they're being forced to do now, with all these guys injured: adhere to fundamentals.

That's what they'd be doing with Seneca. They'd be helping him out with high percentage plays. They wouldn't be expecting him to hold the ball 8 seconds and take shots down the field.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline sschind  
#24 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 3:52:58 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 116
Applause Received: 412

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
Of course nerd meant the Packers organization as a whole which is a little silly. It doesn't matter what any other team did. Not even 2012 team which had so many of the current players on it. The team can only deal with the next game on their schedule not look backwards t years gone by in order to predict future victories.



Yeah, I know I was just trying to be diplomatic.

I respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Offline nyrpack  
#25 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 4:21:07 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 4
Applause Received: 50

who ever believes this threads title is clearly dilusional !!
jimmy b.
Online nerdmann  
#26 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 4:36:55 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,478
Applause Received: 620

It's a team sport, bitches! lol
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline wpr  
#27 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 5:41:32 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,877
Applause Received: 1,391

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
You're contradicting yourself.

We can take Seneca Wallace's past record and apply it to the future, but not take the historical records of teams in general? Remember, Wallace has been on some sh!t sucking teams. Take his record against the spread as a better indicator than his pure win/loss record.

And remember, in the playoffs, we'll have alot of these guys back. James Jones, Randall Cobb, Jermicheal Finley.

And no, the Packers DON'T run a pure WCO. They run a run and shoot vertical offense. WITH RODGERS. That's my point. We see what they're being forced to do now, with all these guys injured: adhere to fundamentals.

That's what they'd be doing with Seneca. They'd be helping him out with high percentage plays. They wouldn't be expecting him to hold the ball 8 seconds and take shots down the field.


Nerd it is not the same thing so I am not contradicting myself. I am saying it doesn't matter if Bart & co won two games. They are too old and can't help the team. GB could have won 50 championships in the past and if none of the players are on this team it doesn't mean squat.

All that matters is can this team, the current 2013 team, win without Aaron. And by win I don't mean 1 or 2 games in the regular season. I mean the championship. The answer is no. The current team doesn't have a number of key players. Some of them may come back. Some of them won't. Do you know how good they will be? Of course not.

On the other hand what Wallace did in the past does matter. He showed that he can not win when he didn't have an abundance of supporting help. The spread is what doesn't matter. It don't mean anything if a bunch of gamblers thought his team would lose by 20 and they only lost by 18. His 81% QB rating does matter. As I already said he is not a terrible QB. But to win he would need everyone. And everyone healthy.

In the long run none of this matters. Aaron is not going down.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Offline schroeder84  
#28 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 7:45:06 PM(UTC)
schroeder84

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Applause Given: 6
Applause Received: 8

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post

In the long run none of this matters. Aaron is not going down.


Just Ow. I hated to see this topic in the first place - I belong to the school of the unmentionable (it's a superstition). You never talk about a no-hitter until it's done. You never talk about a shutout until there are no goals scored. AND you sure as fark never talk about a possible injury situation that hasn't happened until it hasn't happened.

What a sad sinking feeling today. I am not sure Seneca Wallace is a long-term answer. Matt Flynn is available again, assuming losing his job 3 times in the last 14 months hasn't ruined his head. Just watching this year go down the crapper is painful.
Offline go.pack.go.  
#29 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 8:18:55 PM(UTC)
go.pack.go.

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 11/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 44

The writer of this article should be shot.
Signature made by me
UserPostedImage
SUPERBOWL XLV CHAMPS!!!!
thanks Post received 2 applause.
schroeder84 on 11/4/2013(UTC), Zero2Cool on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Offline Bigbyfan  
#30 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:44:33 PM(UTC)
Bigbyfan

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 21
Applause Received: 71

This thread needs to go to hell
blank
thanks Post received 3 applause.
Zero2Cool on 11/4/2013(UTC), DoddPower on 11/5/2013(UTC), Mucky Tundra on 11/5/2013(UTC)
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
1m / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

17m / Around The NFL / DakotaT

27m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

28m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

49m / Green Bay Packers Talk / cheeseheads123

52m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

55m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

58m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules


Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.