FIRE SLOCUM NOW!!!!!· Page 2

TwinkieGorilla
Member

13 years ago

#11

Ok then, why don't you answer my question. Go on...give it a shot.

I agree with Twinkiegorilla.

bozz_2006 wrote:

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

13 years ago

#12

Ok then, why don't you answer my question. Go on...give it a shot.

Originally Posted by: TwinkieGorilla

Ask me a question and I'll do my best to answer.

TwinkieGorilla
Member

13 years ago

#13

It's already been asked, sonny.

I agree with Twinkiegorilla.

bozz_2006 wrote:

evad04
Member

13 years ago

#14

It's already been asked, sonny.

Originally Posted by: TwinkieGorilla

Likewise, how is Slocum responsible for the innate talent of Darren Sproles?

This isn't complicated people (and the whole discussion is a bit premature considering we are one game in). Slocum shouldn't be given credit for Cobb's amazing play -- one that should not have even been made since he took it out 8 yards deep. Similarly, it's not fair to blame Slocum for Darren Sproles making a great play.

It seemed to me that Masthay outkicked the coverage by just enough that the little midget was most likely gonna be gone if he made the first few guys miss.

In general, I find a hard time understanding the logic that good things that happen in special teams give nods to the players but bad plays are squarely put on the coaches shoulders.

William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

13 years ago

#15

It's already been asked, sonny.

Originally Posted by: TwinkieGorilla

I'm not sure if you're talking to me, but my name is Kevin, not Sonny. And I did not see a question in there.

If you want me to answer a question, I'd be glad to, however, I'll need you to ask me a question first. I'm not a mind reader, hell I'm not much of a text reader either. Sometimes, I need pictures!

DakotaT
Select Member

13 years ago

#16

I'm not sure if you're talking to me, but my name is Kevin, not Sonny. And I did not see a question in there.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Your French name is Dumas'. And I have a question, did you miss me in the chat last night?

Slocum sucks and reaps the benefits of having a high scoring offense. You could have driven a bus through those holes Sproles returned the punt for a TD and the subsequent kickoff to answer Cobb's TD.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

13 years ago

#17

Originally Posted by: DakotaT

You weren't in the GameDay Chat last night??

I agree, Shawn Slocum is terrible. Although, even if a broke clock shows the right time, I feel it should be acknowledged the same as when it's wrong.

I was hoping that new guy the Packers signed to be an assistant would take over. I can't think of his name.

Chad Morton ... that guy.

TwinkieGorilla
Member

13 years ago

#18

Post #3, there is a sentence which reads as follows: How would Slocum have anything to do with the innate natural talent of Cobb?

I agree with Twinkiegorilla.

bozz_2006 wrote:

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

13 years ago

#19

Post #3, there is a sentence which reads as follows: How would Slocum have anything to do with the innate natural talent of Cobb?

Originally Posted by: TwinkieGorilla

Thank ya sir.

If the players are not blocking properly, he could be Barry Sanders and still not be able to burn 108 yards. Same goes with defending a return, if the players do not execute the play adequately the play will fail.

Special teams coverage basically comes down to staying disciplined and in your lane. Do not let the blocker force you out of your lane, rather force the runner to cross into another lane if you can not make the play.

Tezzy
Senior Member

13 years ago

#20

Um, yes, that TD was totally the fault of scheme. Not the players messing up.

Similarly, Cobbs return for a TD was not, even in any sort of miniscule way, the result of Slocum. Let's give full credit to the players there.

Really? I mean I can understand being mad at another ST error... but jumping the gun with assumptions on the reason? Have you even seen a replay of that punt return TD?

Originally Posted by: all_about_da_packers

It was not an issue of scheme. Watch as one of our players runs wide into another lane, and then upon realizing it, slips and falls to ground trying to recover. I am sure that Slocum did not design his return team to leave a 10 yard gap in the middle of the return. There was one good block on the other side of that gap, but when you see two coverage men right next to each other that means someone screwed up. I am not going into defending Slocum overall, though I like what he has done with Masthay. But come on, that TD was not because of scheme.

On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."

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 (27m) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (27m) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (28m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (35m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (36m) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (56m) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (3h) : 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 (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (3h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (3h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (16h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (17h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : 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

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 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS