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
packerfanoutwest (2h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (2h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (5h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (5h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (5h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (5h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (5h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (5h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (5h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (5h) : 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 (6h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (7h) : 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 (7h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (7h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (7h) : 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 (7h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (8h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (8h) : 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 (8h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (9h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (9h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (9h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (10h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (10h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (11h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (11h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (11h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (12h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (12h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (12h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (12h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (12h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (12h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (12h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (12h) : 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 (12h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (12h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (12h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (12h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (12h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (12h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (12h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (12h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
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
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.