earthquake
10 years ago
Sorry, you didn't predict 8-8 yourself, just "whole heartedly agreed" with an article painting the Packers as an 8-8 team. Massive difference there.

http://www.packershome.com/forum/posts/m284817-lastmessage#post284817 


blank
uffda udfa
10 years ago

Sorry, you didn't predict 8-8 yourself, just "whole heartedly agreed" with an article painting the Packers as an 8-8 team. Massive difference there.

http://www.packershome.com/forum/posts/m284817-lastmessage#post284817 

Originally Posted by: earthquake 



I agreed with the article then and I agree with it today. We have the TALENT of an 8-8 team. Aaron Rodgers being the guy who elevates us well beyond the rest of the roster's limitations.

UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


macbob
10 years ago

I agreed with the article then and I agree with it today. We have the TALENT of an 8-8 team. Aaron Rodgers being the guy who elevates us well beyond the rest of the roster's limitations.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You're full of c-r-a-p. We have the talent of a 9-3 team.

Last time I looked Aaron Rodgers was part of the team. Sorry, but you can't subtract out our best players and then say our team stinks.
buckeyepackfan
10 years ago

To offend a few you alienate the many? Not cool.


Anyhow. I haven't been able to find many videos on the experts talking about the Packers and Patriots game. I was thinking with all the hype the videos would be falling all over. All I've been seeing is articles.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I apologize if I offended anyone(not sure how).

Not my intent.


I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
Zero2Cool
10 years ago

I agreed with the article then and I agree with it today. We have the TALENT of an 8-8 team. Aaron Rodgers being the guy who elevates us well beyond the rest of the roster's limitations.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but can you elaborate? Basically, I'm trying to figure out how you're rating the teams talent. Nearly every expert is saying the Packers are one of the most talented teams in the NFL. They are basing their opinion on watching coaches tapes and TV broadcasts. I'm just curious what you're seeing differently.
UserPostedImage
macbob
10 years ago

You could've told me how we were going to beat NE before we actually did.

BTW... I'm not all that impressed with this win because we put up 131 yards in 2nd half and only 86 through the air. How we got outcoached that badly in 2nd half is a mystery. Just look at these Mike McCarthy greatness articles...the great coach almost blew the game for us. A sickening 2nd half lacking all the creativity of the 1st.

Do I think the Packers stink? No. I think they are SB favorites now and it would be a shame if they blew it. I don't know that I trust our D... Blount averaged close to 6 yards a carry... I shouldn't have to tell you that is terrible anymore than I should that our 2nd half offense was HORRIBLE.

Thrilled with the win...just not pleased with what I saw in a 2nd half that should've cost us the W. Extremely fortunate to walk out of a home game with a win with that 2nd half offensive performance.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



We played one of the best teams in the NFL--the team currently leading the AFC--and they made it difficult for us in the second half??? I'd be shocked if they DIDN'T make it difficult for us.

It's not just coaching, it's executing on the field, and the Patriots are a very, very good team.

I highly recommend Tedy Bruschi's Monday Chat. I thought it was a excellent read.

Unless you have a pre-conceived notion about how McCarthy was outcoached, etc. and don't want to let reality get in the way of your perception.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/page/bruschiontap-1201/bruschi-tap-patriots-packers-clinic-intellectual-football 


Packers best Patriots in this chess match, but Round 2 not out of the question

...This was intellectual football on both sides. You could see the adjustments Mike McCarthy made. In the first half, one of them was coming out in "01" personnel (no backs, one tight end). You see one of your main weapons, receiver Randall Cobb, getting handled at the line of scrimmage. So let's take our running back off the field and put Cobb in the backfield. So now it's Kyle Arrington on Cobb out of the backfield.

Linebacker Rob Ninkovich trying to cover receiver Randall Cobb out of the backfield? That matchup on one well-designed play had to make Mike McCarthy smile.

They're also using bunch formations to create traffic problems. I'm shaking my head rewatching the film, as there are brilliant adjustments on each side of the ball.

The wheel route to Cobb, when Rob Ninkovich was on him, I don't think Ninkovich had him man-to-man. I just think he's doing what he's taught -- to peel off when that threat is presented to him. If you watch, Arrington has Cobb in man coverage from the LB level, and he's aligned at the LB level because Cobb is in the backfield, and that's where he should be aligned. Arrington gets caught up in a traffic situation from the bunch and he can't make it through to get his coverage. Ninkovich is doing the best he can to hold him off. But come on -- Ninkovich running with Cobb? There you have McCarthy telling Bill Belichick, "I have a bag of tricks, too."

ESPNBoston wrote:



earthquake
10 years ago

You're full of c-r-a-p. We have the talent of a 9-3 team.

Last time I looked Aaron Rodgers was part of the team. Sorry, but you can't subtract out our best players and then say our team stinks.

Originally Posted by: macbob 



Right, and if you actually read the original article, it paints the Packers as an 8-8 team WITH Rodgers. So its BS no matter how you look at it, Uffda backtracking so he doesn't look as foolish as his statements in that thread while simultaneously trying to pretend like he's still somehow correct. Just classic stuff here, you can't make this up.

Additionally, if you take away the best player from any team, that team will look significantly less talented. Rodgers is arguably the best player in the entire league, so taking him away has a pretty remarkable effect, but the same applies equally to the Patriots, Broncos, etc. You take away Brady or Manning, and those teams will look a lot worse than they do with their star QBs. This is simply pointing out the obvious, not some brilliant observation.
blank
sschind
10 years ago

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but can you elaborate? Basically, I'm trying to figure out how you're rating the teams talent. Nearly every expert is saying the Packers are one of the most talented teams in the NFL. They are basing their opinion on watching coaches tapes and TV broadcasts. I'm just curious what you're seeing differently.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



There is where you are making your mistake Zero. These so called experts are watching games and film and tape and talking to players and coaches and insignificant stuff like that there. They are not listening to Ufda which is all they would have to do to know the truth apparently.

In ufda's defense there is a grain of truth to what he is saying. I think starting out this people may have been a bit more optimistic about this team than perhaps was warranted based on past performance and key additions. I don't think many people were concerned about the offense outside the TE position and maybe #3 WR but I think those questions were addressed more than adequately (I'd like to see a stronger showing from our TEs but Rodgers is still young, I'm willing to give him a chance) There defense was highly suspect and I guess in some ways they still may be suspect but I think they have shown that they may not be as bad as some people thought. Over all as a team I think they have proven they were worthy of the optimism so many people showed in them.

Like I said, I had some of the same misgivings he did early on but I can see areas where they have either improved to be or simply proved that they are one of the best teams in the league. Are they the best? I don't think there is a best team. Every team has weaknesses and every team can be beat. I think they are one of the top 5, (Packers, Patriots, Broncos, Seahawks and maybe the Eagles) heck I'll even say top 6 and throw in the Lions. I think you can make a strong argument for any one of them being the best and on any given Sunday or stretch of two or three Sundays any one of them can be the best but chances are they will stumble eventually and prove that they are mortals. How far they stumble and for how long is what will determine if they are truly one of the best teams. If one of those top 5 teams doesn't win the SB I will be very very surprised.

Bottom line for me is the Packers are 9-3. They lost 3 games to tough opponents on the road the last one 5 games ago. More recently they beat 2 of the best teams at home and toughed out a few gritty wins along the way. That's pretty much what the rest of the best teams have done. I am a Packer fan and I think they are good enough to win the SB so I am going to say they will win it. If I were a fan of the Lions or the Eagles or any one of the other teams I mentioned and maybe even a few others I would believe my team is going to win it. I do not think that is unreasonable and I don't think it is blind homerism especially when A LOT of other non fans are predicting the same thing.

I'm not doubting that Ufda is a huge fan. I think he pays much closer attention than many of us do and I will say even me. I just wonder if he wants so badly for this team to be Aaron Rodgers and 52 other guys for whatever reason that he either overlooks the improvements or simply denies them. You can't start the season by saying it is all Aaron Rodgers, admit they have improved and still maintain that its all Aaron Rodgers.
uffda udfa
10 years ago

We played one of the best teams in the NFL--the team currently leading the AFC--and they made it difficult for us in the second half??? I'd be shocked if they DIDN'T make it difficult for us.

It's not just coaching, it's executing on the field, and the Patriots are a very, very good team.

I highly recommend Tedy Bruschi's Monday Chat. I thought it was a excellent read.

Unless you have a pre-conceived notion about how McCarthy was outcoached, etc. and don't want to let reality get in the way of your perception.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/page/bruschiontap-1201/bruschi-tap-patriots-packers-clinic-intellectual-football 

Originally Posted by: macbob 



You do realize the things Bruschi is praising happened in the 1st half and not the 2nd, right? That is my issue...what happened in the 2nd on O. This backs that up and then some...

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/152192/inside-slant-nfl-week-13-qb-report 

Rodgers focused his efforts downfield during the first half of Sunday's matchup before pulling back after halftime. His average throw distance in the first half was 12.2 yards past the line of scrimmage. He threw nine passes that traveled at least 15 yards downfield, completing five for 171 yards and a touchdown. Downfield passes are lower-percentage throws, of course, and Rodgers overthrew four of his first eight attempts based on ESPN video analysis. In the second half, Rodgers didn't throw a single pass that traveled more than 10 yards downfield and his average throw traveled 5.3 yards. Not surprisingly, he was off target -- based on ESPN video analysis -- on only two of his final 30 throws. The Packers' pass protection also was exceptional, as Rodgers was pressured (sacked or put under duress) on only six of his 43 dropbacks (14 percent). For the season, Rodgers' pressure rate is 23 percent. (On those six pressured dropbacks, Rodgers was sacked three times and threw three incompletions.) The pass protection allowed Rodgers to set season highs in the average time he spent in the pocket (2.82 seconds) and time spent before throwing (3.11 seconds). His season averages had been 2.34 seconds and 2.57 seconds, respectively.

FINAL ANALYSIS
Considered through this lens, Rodgers aggressively helped the Packers build their lead in the first half and then protected it with higher-percentage throws in the second. The Patriots' decision to sit back in coverage -- they blitzed just 14 percent of the time -- helps explain the time he spent in the pocket and the strategy of throwing short. In the end, it gave the Packers a victory over one of the NFL's hottest teams.

I loved the 1st half minus all the FG's. The 2nd half was dreadful...all that creativity and "bag of tricks" GONE when the 2nd half kicked. I don't have any pre conceived notion but I feel you do. To not admit we were BRUTAL on O in the 2nd half is inaccurate at best. Night and day halves. 2nd half failings almost cost us and likely should've. We got away with one.

BTW...I'm not a huge Aaron Rodgers fanatic. I do think he's a sure HOF'er and the best to ever throw it. I'm not a sycophant for him, though. He has failings he shouldn't for as good as he is.

I'm a RC18 fan love that guy... like Jordy... Lacy is good... Clay and Daniels are good players. Shields and Hayward are good. See some talent in a guy like Janis, Jayrone, Ha Ha. You win as a team but we all know the reason we're competitive is Aaron Rodgers.


UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


DoddPower
10 years ago

I'm a RC18 fan love that guy... like Jordy... Lacy is good... Clay and Daniels are good players. Shields and Hayward are good. See some talent in a guy like Janis, Jayrone, Ha Ha. You win as a team but we all know the reason we're competitive is Aaron Rodgers.


Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



What NFL team would be serious Super Bowl contenders without their superstar QB? The 10-6 Patriots the one season without Tom Brady are more of an exception, not an indication of the norm. The vast majority of elite teams are elite because of their QB. At least in today's NFL. There are exceptions to anything and everything, and always will be. But the norm is elite quarterback = contending team. The Seahawks or 49'ers could be an exception recently, but Russell Wilson is pretty damn good. The 49'ers I could buy to some extent. I've never thought Kaepernick was that good, but the coaching is often great and puts him in a position to succeed. Of course, he also usually has a great defense. Where would the Patriots, Broncos, Chargers, Lions, Saints, Dallas, Colts, Steelers, et al. be without their starting QBs? A couple of those teams may still make the playoffs, but it would be very unlikely they would go far. It's just how today's NFL is.

Could the Packers have better talent? Absolutely. Every team could. But they could also have a much worse team. Ted Thompson has done a good to very good job of assembling a contending team, but not necessarily a great job. It could always be better. But the undeniable fact is that it's still pretty damn good. Just like most contending teams, it likely wouldn't be nearly as good without its starting QB. So? Thankfully the Packers have their starting QB at the moment.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (21m) : deleted all my browser history and autofill and passwords. gonna be fun!
packerfanoutwest (13h) : too funny
packerfanoutwest (13h) : Lions QB Jared Goff was the offensive MVP
packerfanoutwest (13h) : for the Pro Bowl, which is flag football
Zero2Cool (14h) : Rather, the murder WAS covered up to prevent ...
Zero2Cool (14h) : JFK murder was a cover-up to prevent war with Cuba/Russia.
Martha Careful (1-Feb) : I have always admired the pluck of the man
Zero2Cool (1-Feb) : I remember thinking he was going to be something good.
Mucky Tundra (1-Feb) : The Dualing Banjo!
Zero2Cool (31-Jan) : Jets have named Chris Banjo as their special teams coordinator, Former Packers player
Zero2Cool (31-Jan) : Jaguars have hired Anthony Campanile as their DC. We lose coach
Zero2Cool (30-Jan) : QB coach Sean Mannion
Zero2Cool (30-Jan) : DL Coach DeMarcus Covington
dfosterf (30-Jan) : from ft Belvoir, Quantico and points south. Somber reminder of this tragedy at Reagan Nat Airport
dfosterf (30-Jan) : So eerily quiet here in Alexandria. I live in the flight path of commercial craft coming from the south and west, plus the military craft
dfosterf (30-Jan) : So eeri
Mucky Tundra (30-Jan) : Now that's a thought, maybe they're looking at the college ranks? Maybe not head coaches but DC/assistant DCs with league experience?
beast (30-Jan) : College Coaches wouldn't want that publicly, as it would hurt recruiting and they might not get the job.
beast (30-Jan) : I thought they were supposed to publicly announce them, at least the NFL ones. Hafley was from college, so I believe different rules.
Mucky Tundra (30-Jan) : Who knows who they're interviewing? I mean, nobody knew about Hafley and then out of nowhere he was hired
beast (30-Jan) : I wonder what's taking so long with hiring a DL coach, 2 of the 3 known to interview have already been hired elsewhere.
Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Packers coach Matt LaFleur hires Luke Getsy as senior assistant, extends Rich Bisaccia's deal
Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.
Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh
dfosterf (27-Jan) : Happy Birthday Dave!
Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : happy birthday dhazer
TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later
buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!
buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.
buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : well, he was
TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Eagles down by contact on the fumble....fuck you NFL
Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : I think this games over
beast (26-Jan) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs
Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : This game looks too big for Washington
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,
beast (26-Jan) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
beast (26-Jan) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
Zero2Cool (25-Jan) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

1-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.