IF you were the Coach...· Page 3

WhiskeySam
Registered

16 years ago

What? Rodgers holds onto the ball too long? GOSH, who said that weeks ago and was blasted off his own forum for it? lol 😛 (ok thats being dramatic)

I'd use a 3 - 3 - 5 defensive scheme with a blitzing safety... if we have a healthy one.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Pats on the back are for women Zero. You get enough accolades with your technology.

How about a 4 - 2 - 5 when Harris and Bigby are back. Tramon has earned a right to be on the field. Poppinga can play DE on passing downs. KGB can just collect his retirement checks.

"DakotaT" wrote:

Agreed, Zero. You got 123 applause points. What more do you want? ;)

Now back on topic. The problem isn't Aaron Rodgers , it's the OL. Holding the ball too long is a young QB mistake that gets corrected with TIME. It will be corrected.

Our OL on the other hand is not run blocking. It's not pass blocking either. Mike McCarthy needs to start punishing. Another bad performance earns the bench. Players hate the bench. It's time to start using the bench and following through with threats.

Meanwhile, Ted Thompson needs to make OL his #1 focus. Since Ted Thompson has been here, our OL hasn't been that good. Brett Favre did a wonderful job at covering it up, but now you're seeing just how bad it really is.

Forgive the comparison, this is more something a Veteran can do that a young one can't and not at all a hit on Aaron Rodgers .

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

Who do you bench and who do you bring in on the O-line? When they're all underperforming there's only so much changing around you can do every week or you kill any chance at continuity. That was one of the interesting stats Monday Night: the Giants have started the same five offensive linemen for the last 21 games. That kind of consistency is the hallmark of a good football team.

Nemo me impune lacessit

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

16 years ago

#22

Our OL on the other hand is not run blocking. It's not pass blocking either. Mike McCarthy needs to start punishing. Another bad performance earns the bench. Players hate the bench. It's time to start using the bench and following through with threats.

Meanwhile, Ted Thompson needs to make OL his #1 focus. Since Ted Thompson has been here, our OL hasn't been that good. Brett Favre did a wonderful job at covering it up, but now you're seeing just how bad it really is.

Forgive the comparison, this is more something a Veteran can do that a young one can't and not at all a hit on Aaron Rodgers .

"zombieslayer" wrote:

You already know I agree w/ you on the benching angle -- it's getting to the point in the season that if guys aren't getting it done it's time to let someone else give it a go. If the guys we have in there can't get it done, we're not going anywhere this season, so we might as well see what our young depth is capable of.

And while I've been supportive of Thompson to this point, one thing he has yet to show me he can do something about is the OL. I expect that to change, stat. This team is a couple pieces away from being dominant, but we won't be forever -- we've got some important guys who're getting up there (Tausch, Cliffy, Chuck, Al, DD), and none of this is going to be any good if our young talented QB gets killed. I get that the man knows how to draft, but this "nothing but the draft" crap needs to go -- we all see the effect that bringing Chuck and Pickett had on our D, and I would very much like to see him do something similar for the O-Line. We've got plenty of young depth.

Lastly, I don't have a problem with anyone pointing out a fact, and I think it's a fact that most young QBs don't have the pocket and field sense to cover up O-Line weaknesses. So I don't see it as a comparison to Brett that isn't fair to Aaron; it's just true, and that kind of ability only comes from playing w/ real bullets. If we want a comparison, look at Matt Ryan -- he may turn out to be better than Aaron in the long run, but he's certainly not at this point. The difference is that his O-Line is doing a great job of keeping him clean and giving him more time to do his job.

And all of that crap I wrote above is just a really long way to say that I agree with you on this one. :thumbright:

blank

Pack93z
Select Member

16 years ago

#23

[quote="zombieslayer"][quote="DakotaT"]

Who do you bench and who do you bring in on the O-line? When they're all underperforming there's only so much changing around you can do every week or you kill any chance at continuity. That was one of the interesting stats Monday Night: the Giants have started the same five offensive linemen for the last 21 games. That kind of consistency is the hallmark of a good football team.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:

Easy one.. I would bring in a "true" guard to play the left side, start working Colledge at Tackle exclusively and rotate him and Cliffy at times.. giving Clifton a break during game and ensuring that we have the next left tackle on the roster.

Spitz is the most consistent player along with Tauscher.. then followed but average Wells.

The move above makes sense, because Clifton still plays well for the most part but is slowing.. we need to know whether Colledge is the man next in line at Left Tackle.. Barbre has shown little to date at tackle.. and Moll isn't a starter in the next couple years, let alone a left tackle starter.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

zombieslayer
Registered

16 years ago

#24

Whiskey - I was going to respond, but ILikeThePackers39 said it better than I could. So...

What he said.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

WhiskeySam
Registered

16 years ago

#25

Whiskey - I was going to respond, but ILikeThePackers39 said it better than I could. So...

What he said.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

I guess my question was when everyone's underperforming who do you bench? You can't bench them all.

Nemo me impune lacessit

Bigbyfan
Member

16 years ago

#26

Give him solid o-line play.

My ideal O-line =

Clifton
Sitton
Wells
Spitz
Tauscher

Reason: These are our biggest and strongest linemen. I'm sick of the finesse o-line scheme and watching undersized guards dive at the ankles and knees of opposing d-linemen instead of outright blocking them. As the crazy old lady used to say... Where's the beef?!

"millertime" wrote:

Agreed,

Is it just coincidence that the NFC East (strongest division in NFL) have the biggest lines in football?

Me thinks not.

blank

WhiskeySam
Registered

16 years ago

#27

"Bigbyfan" wrote:

Agreed,

Is it just coincidence that the NFC East (strongest division in NFL) have the biggest lines in football?

Me thinks not.

"millertime" wrote:

That's old school NFC East football. Mark May tells a story about playing the Cowboys where the Skins ran the same play about a dozen times in a row (Riggins running between the guard and tackle) right down the field, and it got to the point where he was openly telling the Boys' Randy White, "We're running the same play right at you again" until Donnie Warren complained in the huddle that White was beating him up after every play out of frustration at May's mouth.

Nemo me impune lacessit

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

16 years ago

#28

Whiskey - I was going to respond, but ILikeThePackers39 said it better than I could. So...

What he said.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:

I guess my question was when everyone's underperforming who do you bench? You can't bench them all.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Well, we don't know about Sitton yet. Aside from that, though, if our starters don't perform the season's not going to go well -- and given that, we might as well get some other guys out there to at least see what we've got. At worst some other team might see something in one of them they like and will trade us something for them.

blank

zombieslayer
Registered

16 years ago

#29

Exactly.

So the answer Whiskey - you bench one. If it's a T, you start Colledge in his place. If it's a G, you start Sitton in his place. If it's Wells, you start Spitz in his place and put in Sitton in Spitz's place.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

WhiskeySam
Registered

16 years ago

#30

"zombieslayer" wrote:

I don't disagree with you. I think people should be benched. I just don't see where we have another five guys waiting in the wings. We pretty much are stuck playing some of these guys.

Nemo me impune lacessit

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (4h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (9h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (10h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (20h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (21h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (21h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS