Semantics? Get in get lucky? We wouldn't have to "get lucky" (Mike Reno is smiling somewhere) if we had a real team and not just a superstar QB carrying us.

The best way to win a SuperBowl is to try and actually win a SB not just hope to get lucky because you have the best QB in the league.

Las Vegas was built on the mentality expressed in your post.

Not sure how you justify the fact that playing the game of football is about going all out. Being sold out to win...but off the field we're just supposed to play it safe. Where is the passion for greatness from this organization? Where is it from the fans? The mentality expressed here has little to do with what sports are all about. Let's be good because going for great might set us back? I can't relate to you.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

Agree,

Playoff contenders every year, and just like 2010, you get in and anything can happen.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 

Que me turning off the filter:

Just who the hell has decided that we are not going for greatness? Perhaps you are confusing this staff with that of the Dallas Cowboys. Is it because the team doesn't make decisions you approve of? What the hell is going on with these arguments? They are mind numbing thought-vomit. Yes please have opinions but for the love of GOD stop with circular argument crap. It's exhausting.

And don't tell any of us that we are speaking as if we don't know what sports are about. That's a shitty opinion man. It shows lack of respect for your fellow Packer brethren.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 

Que me turning off the filter:

Just who the hell has decided that we are not going for greatness? Perhaps you are confusing this staff with that of the Dallas Cowboys. Is it because the team doesn't make decisions you approve of? What the hell is going on with these arguments? They are mind numbing thought-vomit. Yes please have opinions but for the love of GOD stop with circular argument crap. It's exhausting.

And don't tell any of us that we are speaking as if we don't know what sports are about. That's a shitty opinion man. It shows lack of respect for your fellow Packer brethren.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 

Strive not for success, but for dominance.

Getting to the playoffs regularly to me IMO is a finesse, beancounter approach. I want a take-no-prisoners approach.

I don't expect superbowl victory every year. Sometimes you lose games, that's the way of life. But, and people have heard me say this before, I want a team that strives to and has the capacity to dominate every game. A team whose B- game requires the other team to play an A+ game to beat them. And a team whose A- game cannot be stayed in the game with.

IMO what separated the great teams from the merely successful was the will to dominate.

IMO for the last half of 2010 and most of 2011, the Packers had that will. IMO I haven't seen it since. THey are good, but aside from a few like Rodgers, they haven't had that extra oomph.

It's not about whether they "go for greatness" or not. It is about the strength of their will, about their refusal to NOT be great.

I don't claim to know what it takes. I'm honest to admit that I've not got *it*, whatever it is.

But I haven't seen it recently from the Packers. Lombardi and the Starr/Nitschke/Robinson/Davis/Gregg Packers had it. Holmgren IMO never had it, though the White/Favre/Butler Packers managed to have it for awhile despite that partly because Wolf had it. As, I said, the Packers had it for awhile under McCarthy and THompson with Rodgers/Woodson leading the way.

But I haven't seen it since.

Playoff contenders. Best team in division. Yes, both of those.

But dominance and will. No.

Dominant. Will.

Originally Posted by: Wade 

Well, show me where going all in works before calling it an option. I haven't seen it work. Wasn't it Philly a couple of years ago that supposedly built this dream team that turned into a nightmare?
The Bears went large bringing in Cutler, Marshall, Peppers, etc., in an obvious effort to save Lovie's ass and they can't even beat us and win the division let alone get near a SB.

Now I know I'm going to hear Denver's name pop up. The Denver model. Denver needed a QB. BADLY. Wonder boy from Florida didn't work and the stars lined up to bring in Manning. They got a very good player at the most impactful position a team has to have to win. The Packers don't need a QB. We have a better one.

So we already went all in there and pay the guy like a rock star. Money well spent no doubt. Put them up against each other right now. I'm good with that.

Originally Posted by: warhawk 

Post like these just... ??????????????

Are you joking? How long have you been a Packers fan? Do you remember Ron Wolf? Does signing Reggie White, Santana Dotson, Sean Jones, Eugene Robinson, etc. ring any bells for you? Minus the above actions we have ZERO rings in the Favre era. Draft and develop was NOT enough in the Favre era to get us to a SB. It took TRADES (Brett Favre ring a bell?), FA (Reggie White Ding Dong Ding Dong), Sean Jones, Santana Dotson, Andre Rison, etc. We needed guys like those to rival the 49'ers and the fading Cowboys.

Today, it's okay to try and live off of finding UDFA's while we continue failing up high especially on defense.

Ron Wolf went for it...we got to back to back SB's...that is an an accomplishment...only accomplished because we went for it. What we do now is NOTHING like what we do today. To add Julius Peppers at age 34 and position switch him is NOT adding Reggie White, Sean Jones, Santana Dotson, Eugene Robinson, etc...

You can call it insulting my "Packer brethren" but I truly don't recognize the mentality a lot of you have about what constitutes going for it or having the will and passion to be great. We don't have it. I doubt we'll have it again in the Rodgers era...and even if that is the case and we never sniff another SB you will STILL be hailing Ted Thompson and his approach. I don't get you my "Packer brethren".

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa