They beat the Super Bowl champs...they beat a once hot Eagles team by how many points? Didn't the Pats lose by 30 to the Chiefs, who didn't make the playoffs?

Who on here REALLY thought the Pack would beat the Seahawks before the game? Saying we played down to them is revisionist history.

Originally Posted by: musccy 

Am I the only one who thinks this? I read a LOT of negativity about McCarthy and hardly any regarding Thompson. Why?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

I view Lacy as a superior talent. Jordy and Cobb are pretty good too. But anyway, before we "move on," I would like to fix what it is that we continue to do wrong. Otherwise we're back where we started and are not truly "moving on."

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

I thought so - I'm pretty sure I'm on record somewhere in here saying that. I think some others also are.

My take on the TOPIC of the Thread is this:

It's TRUE, the Packers have had worse results than their talent would indicate they should have BUT ..... that talent level is NOT even across the board. Aaron Rodgers is the straw that stirs the drink. You get beyond him, and the talent is little if any above average.

Most of the criticism of McCarthy is very justified - hyper-cautious playcalling, etc. However, the TRUE fault lies with Ted Thompson for NOT maximizing the talent around Aaron Rodgers. If we just had a better O Line - Rodgers is head and shoulders better than Brady, but he virtually never has the time to throw that Brady has. Our Defense was better this year, but the fact is, it survives on Capers' scheming, trickery, and compensation - and a lot of times, the effectiveness of that wears off late in games.

So yeah, McCarthy has been deficient in producing results up to the standard of a team with Aaron Rodgers at QB, but the greater deficiency has been Ted Thompson failing to bring in a max supporting cast.

Am I the only one who thinks this? I read a LOT of negativity about McCarthy and hardly any regarding Thompson. Why?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

I thought so - I'm pretty sure I'm on record somewhere in here saying that. I think some others also are.

My take on the TOPIC of the Thread is this:

It's TRUE, the Packers have had worse results than their talent would indicate they should have BUT ..... that talent level is NOT even across the board. Aaron Rodgers is the straw that stirs the drink. You get beyond him, and the talent is little if any above average.

Most of the criticism of McCarthy is very justified - hyper-cautious playcalling, etc. However, the TRUE fault lies with Ted Thompson for NOT maximizing the talent around Aaron Rodgers. If we just had a better O Line - Rodgers is head and shoulders better than Brady, but he virtually never has the time to throw that Brady has. Our Defense was better this year, but the fact is, it survives on Capers' scheming, trickery, and compensation - and a lot of times, the effectiveness of that wears off late in games.

So yeah, McCarthy has been deficient in producing results up to the standard of a team with Aaron Rodgers at QB, but the greater deficiency has been Ted Thompson failing to bring in a max supporting cast.

Am I the only one who thinks this? I read a LOT of negativity about McCarthy and hardly any regarding Thompson. Why?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

NE talent isn't any greater than the Packers. Seattle probably has more talent than the packers do today, but that is a result of having just rebuilt and not having the veteran contracts. When we last won the SB, we also had more talent because we were not paying the big contracts we are today. We could probably have some more talent, but then again we could be in the boat of teams like the Ravens, sitting on 3 million cap space unless they get Flacco, Ngata and probably a couple others to restructure and than they are still just pushing the cost down the road.

there have been plenty of threads about Ted and the talent, recently the topic has just been more about coaching and play calling. That will all change as it always does.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

Yeah, most people aren't smart as I am.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Couldn't it be said that Seattle self shit for 55 minutes? I don't know that the Packers out played Seahawks. I think it is more that Seattle tried to give it away. We refused to take it. Just because Seattle sucked for 55 minutes doesn't mean we were more talented. Or less.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 

Oh no, not possible. We are the only team that self shits. When other teams play poorly against us it has nothing to do with how they are playing poorly and everything about how we are superior but when we are playing poorly its always our own fault and has nothing to do with what the other team is doing.

Originally Posted by: sschind