Why I am Not Buying the Injury "Excuse"· Page 2

RedSoxExcel
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

What do the Vikings have to do with anything?

"Stevetarded" wrote:

The reason why I brought up the Vikings is that would people say that the Vikings record of 2-3 should be excused somewhat because of injuries?

Also, we're playing the Vikings AT home next week. The Vikings have significant injuries as well, Lito Sheppard is playing. Cedric Griffen is a big loss, so is their safety issues. Same with Rice and Sullivan. Plus Shanicoe is clearly hurt and if Favre's injury is real, so is he.

My point was simply that can we once again point at injuries if we lose to another fairly injured team at home?

Also I find it ironic that a lot of us hated on Grant and Barnett all these years and now we miss them, lol. Be careful what you wish for I guess.

blank

RedSoxExcel
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

#12

An excuse would be "If we didn't have all the injuries we'd be 6 - 0!". Or "If the officials would stop bagging on the Packers, we'd have won!".

I don't think many, if any, are saying that. I think what we're saying is, with all the injuries, we're still in the game, but just not getting it done with what we have. Which is very transparent.

And others are saying we need better coaching and smarter players who don't commit as many boneheaded penalties.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

I guess I shouldn't have used the word "excuse", I forgot how technical it gets on here sometimes (ala the word "peaked" in that other thread), lol.

I just mean that the injuries have masked fatal flaws in the Packers (such as the need for better coaching or smarter players). If the end of the year, we finish like 6-10 do we let go of Mike McCarthy or do we say "naw, it was the injuries". I am of the view, that we looked like crap even before the injuries, so I hope these injuries don't blind judgments about MM's performance.

IMO, regardless, I'd give him one more year because I believe he still has a winning record?

Also, Zero change your avatar thing, Driver sucks - Nm, I'm an idiot, its Jennings, well... j/k

blank

hardrocker950
Member

14 years ago

#13

I agree that injuries have made it tough on this team, but I also agree that there are other factors to figure. I won't list them since most of them that I saw are listed above.
I think even with our current roster we should be 5-1 or better. There are still guys on the field that can make things happen, but coaching staff needs to work with the current players strengths rather than the starters. The gameplan has to adjust depending on your opponent, and I have not seen this all year. I know its easy to coach from the couch, but to be fair - we see the weaknesses in the other team so why doesn't the coaching staff?

warhawk
Senior Member

14 years ago

#14

Well, injuries aside, our D held the Dolphins to 20 points in regulation. You said nearly every key position is being played by 2nd-to-3rd string players on D. Yet the D did an outstanding job, especially considering the time Henne had to throw the ball. Wish Rodgers had that much time.

Injuries are an explanation. I'm not arguing that.

What I'm not buying is injuries are the reason we lost in Miami. I think the reason is simply our O failed to put up more than 20 points in regulation at home against an average team. That's not acceptable, even with the future perennial Pro Bowler Finley out and our #1 RB out.

We still have playmakers in Greg Jennings and Donald Driver. Jackson has progressed a lot. While he's still no Ryan Grant, I still wonder why we don't utilize Jackson in screens more. I still don't get why we don't try to setup more YAC opportunities more. And lastly, I don't understand why Mike McCarthy hasn't changed the gameplan to get passes off faster as it's obvious our OL sucks and Aaron is taking too many hits.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

So how many points do the Dolphins score if our guys were in there? With Barnett, Burnett, Chillar, Picket, Neal, and, Mathews I say their lucky to hit 10.

"The train is leaving the station."

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#15

So how many points do the Dolphins score if our guys were in there? With Barnett, Burnett, Chillar, Picket, Neal, and, Mathews I say their lucky to hit 10.

"warhawk" wrote:

I'm not impressed with Henne. Had we had CM3 in there, we could have had a drive killing sack. Had Nick Barnett and Ryan Pickett been in there, they wouldn't have been running 39 times on us.

10 may be realistic. Yet still, not the problem. We gotta be able to score more than 20 points at home against average teams.

My man Donald Driver

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

4PackGirl
Registered

14 years ago

#16

our D played good? wait...our D...played...good?? they made henne look like a future HOF'er out there. not a bit of pressure. i'd love to know how much time woodson spent on his ass during that game. williams had an int but the rest of the game we had NO answer to the pass OR run.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#17

"4PackGirl" wrote:

Considering we didn't have soon-to-be perennial Pro Bowler CM3 playing as well as our starting MLB (now ILB) since 2003, our Pro Bowl CB on the PUP list, and our starting SS out, we played pretty well. We only allowed 20 points in regulation and stopped them in one drive (to which our O responded by going 3 and out) in OT.

We gotta score more than 20 points at home.

And no, Henne still wasn't that impressive. If the Dolphins had a real QB, we would have been in trouble.

My man Donald Driver

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

4PackGirl
Registered

14 years ago

#18

i know we missed CM3 ALOT! but the other players have got to step it up. like i said, woodson spent most of his day on his ass, sliding here & there. he's supposed to be one of our 'premiere' players, right? good teams overcome adversity & pull themselves together. that's what i'm hoping for against the queens. i know we've got injured players but if you're playing in the NFL - even 3rd string - you should have the ability to step in & do the f'in job.

porky88
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#19

Football is a situational sport and injuries do matter during certain circumstances.

Plug in Ryan Pickett and tell me the Dolphins beat the Packers. I don't see it. They ran right at Green Bay's front all game long to control the clock and kept Aaron Rodgers off the field. They were able to double team B.J. Raji or Cullen Jenkins as a result of Pickett not playing. They were able to get their lineman to the second level and on a LB like Hawk or Bishop.

Someone brought up no Clay Matthews in a different thread. You think Chad Henne isn't sacked once without Clay Matthews? Even if Matthews doesn't get the sack, he needs to be accounted for. Therefor, he can open things up for someone else. It isn't a coincidence that Cullen Jenkins and B.J. Raji play better when Matthews is on the field.

Furthermore, the Packers have not played the Vikings. The comparison is not valid until Sunday night. The Packers played the Dolphins and the Dolphins game planned accordingly. We'll see what Minnesota does, but what people are saying about Minnesota's injuries is irrelevant to the Packers.

Yes, there are times when people oversell the injuries. Injuries didn't cost the Packers the games against Chicago or Washington. Coaching, execution and penalties did.

However, I did not see a problem with the coaching, execution or penalties against Miami. I did, however, see a team completely undermanned.

http://www.row12.com/

British
Registered

14 years ago

#20

What is the difference between an excuse and an explanation? Sounds like semantical hairsplitting to me.

Are the having an effect or are they not? If they are, does it really matter if it's an excuse or an explanation?

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:

To me, it comes down to who's talking. One could argue that the folks running the team saying "but look at the injuries!" would be trying to excuse the losses and general messy play - I wouldn't make that argument, but it could be made. At least it's their job to explain these things and try to make improvements.

I, on the other hand, am just a fan. It's not my job to explain what's going on; I have only to try to make some sense of it, and that's if I choose to do so. So when I use my eyes and my brain and conclude that it's kind of hard to play winning football with nearly every key position being played by 2nd-to-3rd string players (certainly this is the case on the defense), I think that's an explanation.

Personally, those throwing the "excuse" mantra around have their own agendas - they're also the ones who least like the current regime. "Other teams have injuries!" Yes, they do - how many, and at what positions? Are they winning despite those injuries? These questions aren't asked, because the answers would weaken the position that Thompson and McCarthy are truly to blame for a slow start.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Two great posts.

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

Zero2Cool (26m) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (26m) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (41m) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (43m) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (43m) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (44m) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (44m) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (48m) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (48m) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (49m) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (49m) : 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 (51m) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (53m) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (57m) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (59m) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (59m) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (1h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (1h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (1h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (1h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (1h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (1h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (1h) : Packers will get in

beast (1h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (1h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (1h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (3h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (4h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (4h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (4h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (5h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (14h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (14h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (18h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs

packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.

beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating

Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!

wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.

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

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS