You just missed there at the end. You should have said "important to me". Other than that, well stated and very insightful.

I'm fine going week to week. It's what works for me. To each their own.

---

It would be so sweet if you had to eat a plate of crow; but, I tend to agree with you. I think this team has been soft for years, and is not capable of beating physical teams that play each down like its the last down of a tied game. And that is a reflection of the coaching and discipline.

---

Shoot...I posted a decent length response to this. I hit the wrong button as sometimes happens with me.

Would love a plate of crow. I know the homers/optimists whatever they like to be called will not eat anything if/when the same thing happens again this season as happened the last 3.

IMO, EVERYONE here KNOWS this team is NOT capabable of being part of any ring ceremony anytime soon. The pretense does it for some...the false hope...the wishing...the fantasy...must not be fooled with even though it is known this team isn't a championship caliber squad.

---

There is no ring picture without first getting into the playoffs...
and there is no getting into the playoffs without first getting enough wins...

In other words you got to first win... a win is just a step closer to being in the playoffs and you can't be in the ring picture without being in the playoffs. So if you want to be in the ring picture then wouldn't you be excited about wins?

How do you get a ring?
1) Get in the playoffs (by winning enough games)
2) Don't lose

So winning of course is the important step in that... so of course MOST people get excited by winning, as if you don't win you can't do the rest.

You claim you're not a pessimist but you're suggesting/assuming the Packers org doesn't want the fans you consider the best type... that's looking at things half empty.

And I admit I look at it as half full, as I suggest/assuming the Packers are doing the best they can do... if they knew of something better to do they're being trying to do that instead.


And no amount of us bitching is going to change that (especially not this year, as it's already started)... even if we rise up together... they can't only do the best they can do.

You want more aggressive positive action... but owners like Daniel Snyder and Jerry Jones have been more aggressive... and it often times hasn't been positive.

You seem to assume they're not aggressive enough because they don't care enough.

I seem to assume they're not as aggressive because they don't think it's what's best and they're doing what they think is best.


If you're pissing aim towards Chicago... it looks like they have a couple of toilets, so why not?
wait is it... Chicago or Shicago? ;)

---

Last time I checked, points allowed is what matters.... not yards allowed. As stated before we are ranked pretty well in that category.

No one here is arguing that the Packers have an elite defense or even a championship. The whole thread was that the defense has shown improvement.

---

Had to sift through all the same bullshit by the same people to find your post.

Pennel is already being worked into the rotation.

"When Pennel saw his first NFL game action in last Sunday's 38-17 win over Chicago, it was two bits of advice from Raji that stuck in his mind during his 22 defensive snaps: Don't think. Play ball."

"The Packers are confident they're close. In lieu of high-priced free agents, they're turning to undrafted linemen like Pennel and Miami alumnus Luther Robinson, who combined for 61 defensive snaps in Thursday's 42-10 win over Minnesota."

The plan was to bring these guys along slowly, but with the injuries to 1st Raji and then Boyd and now Jones, looks like the coaches are going to find out what they have in them sooner than expected.

---

What is the context of..."The Packers are confident they're close." ... I read the section of the article this quote appears in. Close to what? Not being the worst run D in the NFL?

Robinson and Pennel are nowhere close to what Sam Shields was in his rookie year as a UDFA. Both of them combined aren't close.

We're believing in these two guys as a SOLUTION to our run D woes?

---

This was not directed at you, beast was wondering when and how much Pennel had played.

Kindly keep your bullshit posts out of my conversations with another member who was looking for information.

Go back to the Ted Thompson thread and post your same crap that you have been posting since you arrived.

Quit spamming every damn thread.

---

"a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step".

This quotation should ever be in the mind of an NFL GM. The first step to building an NFL team is to get the biggest, baddest, most physical smart guys that you can find. Why ? Let's examine this first step.

If your O/D-lines dominate opposing O/D-lines , the other offensive /defensive players on your team are better protected, better blocked for, better able to stop the run, better able to defend against the pass as the line pressures their QB.
Great O/D-lines can make ordinary players Stars. However, ordinary O/D-lines can take a Star and place him on waivers.
Many great lines have been remembered for decades; The Fearsome Foursome of the Los Angeles Rams, Pittsburgh's Steel Curtain, Dallas's Doomsday Defence, Miami's No Name Defence, Winning Super Bowl Teams, Chicago's Monsters of the Midway, The "85" Bears, Denver's Orange Crush, and Lombardi's Packers. Teams that dominated in the trenches and went on to win championships.

The "he'll be good enough" philosophy just isn't good enough. Some say owners like Jerry Jones & Daniel Snyder try to buy good teams. They fail because they don't 1) hire good Head Coaches , then 2) they don't listen to them. GB has been blessed with the last two Head Coaches. Mike McCarthy must dream about what the Packers could do with great linemen.
Rodger's would get the protection and time to slice and dice opposing defences. Giant holes would open as E.Lacy breaks 100 yds. per game, routinely. The Defence would terrorize opposing QB's and shut down every run attack. Special Teams would rarely need to punt, and 4th qtr. comebacks would be unnecessary. Positive turnovers would naturally go up as we tear footballs from the arms of RB's, and passes are thrown before they should be, as GB's sack total rises.

I've watched every season since 1963, yet the fundamental building blocks of the best teams have their roots grounded in the biggest, smartest, meanest beast that can be hired. Think and you will remember an ordinary player/team that had great games/seasons due to the work of the men in the trenches.

---

All 32 teams are drafting and signing players that looked like Tarzan, and you cross your fingers they don't turn into Jane. If it was that easy to find the right coach, and draft/sign linemen on each side who wouldn't get hurt, and would play up to their affordable contract that allows you to manage the rest of your team, then all 32 teams would look great. As you'd put it, the Packers opted for "he'll be good enough" at C, TE, and WR depth this offseason. As I'd put it, they were trying to effectively manage an entire roster and take calculated risks at youth producing at some positions, which every team needs to do. With Adams and Linsley, it appears the gambles paid off. At TE, we're still struggling.

I don't see what's been so bad about the Packers' O-Line. Rodgers has generally had time, and sometimes the run game takes time to click, it certainly did vs. MN.

The D-line we've talked about many times in many ways. The team made a concerted effort to utilize more versatile and faster players like CM3. As has been mentioned, Perry, Neal, and Peppers are all hybrids that the Packers were undoubtedly factoring into an informal D-Line depth chart. I too have had my concerns, but at the same time I recognize September is basically the preseason thanks to the new CBA, and both of the Packers' lines have shown signs of improvement since the Jets game, so now seems like a curious time to be concerned about them.