Not scheme or Talent, problem is Attitude.· Page 4

PackFanWithTwins
Veteran Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

Casey Hawyard had the third best season in the NFL, which is not saying he is the 3rd best CB in the NFL. Massive difference there, massive.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I guess that might be the difference, for me the 3rd best player at a position in a season, has the 3rd best season at the position.

The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

11 years ago

#32

I guess that might be the difference, for me the 3rd best player at a position in a season, has the 3rd best season at the position.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins

I fully see where you are coming from. However, would you rather Darrelle Revis or Casey Hayward? Hayward had a better season in 2012 than Revis, but I believe Revis is superior to Hayward.

I choose not to think of players being the best solely predicated on their ranking in a statistical category. If a guy gets 20 sacks against single team and another guy gets 13 sacks while being double teamed and chipped, I think the 13 sacks is more impressive than the 20 sacks. But, the guy who had 20 sacks had a 'better' season.

QCHuskerFan
Member

11 years ago

#33

If all of our receivers are healthy, Jennings best spot is in the slot. Does that mean he is the #3 receiver on the team? No. He is the best receiver and his best work is done in the slot.

Just because Hayward plays the slot, doesn't mean he is the #3 CB on the team. His best position and the place that allows him to be the most productive.

Statistically, 59 other CBs had more productive seasons than Tramon. I think it is fair to assume some of them had to play against #1 receivers. Tramon had another underwhelming year. Packer Nation needs to wake up to the fact that his time may have come and gone.

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

PackFanWithTwins
Veteran Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

#34

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

Jennings plays the slot, when we have 3 or more WR on the field. Normally, when healthy if we have 1 or 2 WR, Jennings is on the field. On the defense, when we have 2 CB, Hayward is not. He might grow into the position and become like Woodson who did play CB when we had 2 and moved to the slot when the 3rd CB was brought in, like Jennings.

Right now, If I had to give one of our CB no help in coverage, it would probably be Shields. Not because he can cover better, but because he has more ability to recover if he makes a mistake. Tramon has always been best when he has help over the top, so he can play tighter at the line, and trail technique and not have to worry about the deep routes. He has difficulty when he gives space at the line.

Hayward is still a question mark. Much like Tramon was in his early years before he grew into the spot. He showed promise as the NB.

The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!

QCHuskerFan
Member

11 years ago

#35

Right now, If I had to give one of our CB no help in coverage, it would probably be Shields. Not because he can cover better, but because he has more ability to recover if he makes a mistake. Tramon has always been best when he has help over the top, so he can play tighter at the line, and trail technique and not have to worry about the deep routes. He has difficulty when he gives space at the line.

Hayward is still a question mark. Much like Tramon was in his early years before he grew into the spot. He showed promise as the NB.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins

I agree so much with most of what you say here. I am not saying Heyward is the best we have. But I am saying Williams may be the worst. Or at least the most likely to decline further.

Williams has had 2 down years. Is it a coincidence that those 2 years have been without Collins? Maybe Nick allowed Tramon to be better than he really was?

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

doddpower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#36

Williams has had 2 down years. Is it a coincidence that those 2 years have been without Collins? Maybe Nick allowed Tramon to be better than he really was?

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

Of course he did. Great players make everyone around them much better. It still doesn't mean one isn't a good player, but playing with truly great players just makes everyone look better.

Packers_Finland
Registered

11 years ago

#37

Do you really need to watch every single snap to see that Hayward was not the 3rd best CB in the ENTIRE NFL? He was the 3rd best CB on this team. Thus being the NB. He had his shot while Shields was down and guess what. He didn't keep the #2 spot. Sammy took it back.

These guys, write trying to justify their site, yes they have interesting articles, but they are not the bible. If they knew that much, they would not be working on a website, they would have a job for a NFL team. Hayward, had the easiest job of our CB, he is surrounded by more help. I'll take the expertise of the coached of the Packers, over some geeks trying to make their site seem valid.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins

I don't know what games you were watching if you don't think Hayward had a better season than Tramon. The reason he didn't get the "#2 spot" is because we use nickel most of the time anyway and we get the most done with Hayward in the slot. Tramon and Sam may be better on the outside than Casey but that's just differing skill sets. It's why we put Clay Matthews at OLB and not ILB ya know?

So, because Hayward staying as the "#3 guy" does not mean our coaching staff believed he's inferior to Sam or Tramon, you don't have a single thing to support the opinion that Hayward wasn't our best CB this year.

I don't know if I needed to, but I did watch all of our snaps from all of our games this season. Hayward was our best CB. I don't know exactly how good he was compared to other CBs in the league though, but that's why I read that site. One of the things that make me trust them is that after watching games, and then looking at the grades they give our players, I agree with them.

This is a placeholder

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

#38

Nerve damage heals very slowly. Tramon should be back to 100% this coming year.

“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.”

blueleopard
Member

11 years ago

#39

The Dom Capers defense is known as an attacking 3-4, but I've never seen anybody but Clay Matthews and Charles Woodson attack anybody.

Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings

doddpower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#40

It's funny how talented teams seem to have more 'attitude'. The way I see it, bring in more talent and the attitude comes with it. The desired "attitude" is often a part of a great players game.

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

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (8h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (8h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (12h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (12h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (12h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (14h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (14h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (14h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (14h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (14h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (14h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (14h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (14h) : 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 (16h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (16h) : 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 (16h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (16h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (16h) : 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 (17h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (17h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (17h) : 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 (17h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (18h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (18h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (18h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (18h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (20h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (20h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (21h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (21h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (21h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (21h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (21h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (21h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (21h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (21h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (21h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (21h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (21h) : 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 (21h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (21h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (21h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (21h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (21h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (21h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

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