What would you like to see done differently for 2013· Page 3

play2win
Senior Member

12 years ago

Semantics. Whatever. Point is, nearly half of the rushing attempts were in the first half. You made it sound as if they didn't run at all in the first half:

" You don't need a power running game to run the ball when you have a huge lead built by passing. Don't be fooled by looking at stats. The passing game won the SB for the Ravens."

You are ignoring the contributions of a power running game to the Ravens' success in passing during the SB. Admit it. That lead was not built by passing alone.

The Packers offense is NOT just fine if they continue to fail to run the ball more... you admit as much in your own contradiction.

Funny example you point to, in GB's 13 carries against SF in our LOSS.

"But the design is just fine."

I'm not proposing we don't throw the football. That's insane. What I am hoping that they change is a shift in emphasis to more power running to open up our passing game more, and to give our D a blow. Really simple.

QCHuskerFan
Member

12 years ago

#22

Sorry. My bad. I didn't realize when you said "a complete shift to a run oriented power game on offense", you really meant just a shift in emphasis.

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

play2win
Senior Member

12 years ago

#23

Sorry. My bad. I didn't realize when you said "a complete shift to a run oriented power game on offense", you really meant just a shift in emphasis.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

Dude, we are on the same page.

I'm just hoping Ted can land all the players we will need to make the proper improvements in all of these areas. On the O side, I think we all agree the OL play was suspect, and that we have question marks at LT and C. We also lack that big power back that would help make all of this go.

BTW, I guess I was over emphasizing it a bit, since McCarthy is so emphatically against the need to run... as much as saying so in the press. Maybe he will change his tune a bit after two years of beatings suffered in the playoffs.

On D, we need big DL and S help. Maybe LB too, as Perry is a bit of a question mark, as is Bishop in their return from injury.

That is a lot of improvement to hope for with one draft.

Pack93z
Select Member

12 years ago

#24

Sorry. My bad. I didn't realize when you said "a complete shift to a run oriented power game on offense", you really meant just a shift in emphasis.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

This is the core element that drove lengthy threads.. those pushing for more balance are believed to be advocating a run heavy orientation.. when in reality both sides are very close to visualizing the same thing. Well maybe except for Zombieslayer . [grin1]

Speaking of which.. gets a job and loses a Niner bet.. then disappears. 😉

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

QCHuskerFan
Member

12 years ago

#25

That is a lot of improvement to hope for with one draft.

Originally Posted by: play2win

Cheer up! We could be the Bears and need 4 starting OL in this one draft! And a MLB, S, DT, RB and a QB that doesn't cry.

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

play2win
Senior Member

12 years ago

#26

Cheer up! We could be the Bears and need 4 starting OL in this one draft! And a MLB, S, DT, RB and a QB that doesn't cry.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

Yeah, no shit, eh?!!! 😆

Really, though, I'm a tad concerned about all these teams loading up for bear, with us re-signing Brad Jones...

Ted plays a tough FA game, and I question his being so rigid with it. But, I do trust the guy.

DoddPower
Veteran Member

12 years ago

#27

Originally Posted by: play2win

It's not like he's a tight-wad for fun, or for the benefit of himself. He's just doing what he thinks is best for the long-term health of the team. He will keep them competitive and well-managed financially year-after-year. I'm sure he would love to sign some big-time free agents, but if it's not in the numbers, it's just not in the numbers; and he would certainly be one to know. He visits/talks/offers several players contracts, but he has a budget to work under and he stands by it; hence the word budget. His top priority right now is to lock up the most important players on the Packers roster, and perhaps he will have more stability financially moving forward from there.

There are still some free agents available that I think could help the team, even if for only a season or two. Am I the only one that wouldn't mind seeing someone like James Harrison or a pass-rushing specialist brought in under a reasonable contract?

play2win
Senior Member

12 years ago

#28

Originally Posted by: doddpower

I was thinking the same thing. Harrison.

And I appreciate what you've said here and I agree. I just wonder sometimes.

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

dfosterf (43m) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo

Zero2Cool (2h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha

wpr (2h) : Tomorrow is almost here.

packerfanoutwest (2h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?

packerfanoutwest (2h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him

Zero2Cool (4h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.

packerfanoutwest (15h) : don't care

Zero2Cool (20h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22-Apr) : now 3

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

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

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24