Not scheme or Talent, problem is Attitude.· Page 5

play2win
Senior Member

11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: doddpower

Remember when we needed a RB and Ted decided not to bring in Marshawn Lynch? How dumb was that? Huge blow to the team from an attitude standpoint.

I know we won the SB with Starks coming in late in the year, but I recall Woodson being pretty disappointed. I am sure Rodgers was too. Just think how differently last season might have been. We may have won back to back SBs... and may have been vying for a 3-peat.

doddpower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#42

Originally Posted by: play2win

As long as the Packers would be willing to lose whatever player/players Lynch's long-term deal would inevitably cause. The net effect could easily do more harm than good in the long-term. Besides, Lynch's impact wouldn't have been nearly the same behind this offensive line and in this scheme. More importantly than anything else, this team needs a better offensive line and more disciplined coaching. The way things are now, a super star RB would only minimally improve the team, imo.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

11 years ago

#43

Originally Posted by: play2win

The Packers and Seahawks offered the same round pick, however, the Bills felt the Seahawks pick would be higher (the Packers were going to finish with a better record) so they took the Seahawks pick. Did they offer the Packers a chance to trump the 4th round with a 3rd? I can't remember, but even though I liked Lynch, I didn't think he was worth a 3rd.

The Bills got a 2011 fourth-round pick and a 2012 conditional pick. That means to trump the Bills, the Packers would have had to give up their 3rd round pick, Alex Green. Then you got the 2012 conditional pick, which I believe turned out to be a 5th round selection. I'm not going to go through all of those steps, because you should have the point by now, lol.

The Packers do not need an elite running back (Paul would be proud) to win games. They need a back who is pass protection sure, is average or above at receiving and can average 4 yards a carry without ever fumbling the ball. Does this sound like someone on the roster already? DuJuan Harris and he didn't cost the Packers a draft pick.

btw, that year you're talking about the Packers needing a running back ... who won the Super Bowl that year?

Rios39
Member

11 years ago

#44

Towards the end of our year the running game was fine. It was used less against the 49ers and Vikings in the metrodome cause our D could t make stops and we were in chase mode. We could have stuck with the running game more vs the 49ers. But when we had the lead or a close game we were running the ball just fine.

blank

PackFanWithTwins
Veteran Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

#45

Originally Posted by: Rios39

This is a McCarthy issue. We didn't run in these games not because we were in chase mode. We were never in a position where we had to throw until the very end. McCarthy just brain farts and quits running the ball.

SF, we came out of the 1/2 down by 3. had two series, both with 2 runs each and ended up with a tie after Crosby FG. SF came back and scored and we went into the McCarthy Zone. Not a single run after that, and all but two of the offensive snaps from the shotgun.

The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!

doddpower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#46

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins

Not only that, but the Packers hardly even had a RB on the freakin' field for the entire second half! Yes, I know Cobb was in the backfield sometimes and got a few carries, but I'm sure they 49'er's were willing to concede the limited production he offered. So not only did they not even try to run the ball despite decent success in the 1st quarter, McCarthy essentially removed any remote THREAT of a running game for an entire half. Incredible, and very bad coaching, imo.

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 (2h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (2h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (2h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (2h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (2h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (2h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (2h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (2h) : 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 (3h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (3h) : 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 (3h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (4h) : 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 (4h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (4h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (4h) : 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 (4h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (5h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (5h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (5h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (5h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (6h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (7h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (7h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (8h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (8h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (8h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (8h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (8h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (8h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (8h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (8h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (8h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (8h) : 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 (8h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (8h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (8h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (8h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (9h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (9h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (9h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (9h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (9h) : Packers will get in

beast (9h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

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