uffda udfa
10 years ago

So is it honestly your opinion that its better to have a defense ranked highly in yards allowed than one ranked highly in points allowed?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



Again, the NFL has determined that defenses are ranked by yards given up...not points allowed. My honest opinion is not an opinion but rather a fact that that is how NFL defenses are measured.

I was remiss in not addressing your other point. Resources dropped into the D. How many 1st rounders on D do we have? We just jettisoned one of our failed 1st rounders in AJ Hawk.

1st Rounders over the last few seasons:
AJ
Clay
BJ
Datone
HaHa
Nick Perry

2nd
Mike Neal
Casey Hayward

3rd
Morgan Burnett

Julius Peppers is a former 1st rounder...we could potentially have 6 or 7 defensive starters this season as 1st round picks. (would include Julius and a potential 1st round pick this year...and had we kept AJ could've been as high as EIGHT 1st rounders)

I looked at the salary cap disparity heading into last year. It was well in favor of cap dollars being spent on the defensive side of the ball. I believe I posted here about it...I know I posted it somewhere.

Those are some MAJOR resources pumped into our highly underperforming D. You honestly disagree with that?

EDIT: How many 1st rounders on O? Aaron Rodgers and Bryan Bulaga who was close to going elsewhere. TWO players. TWO. Why only TWO? We have Aaron Rodgers to mask the need for more stars on O. Ted Thompson keeps drafting 1st rounders on D and they mostly fail. He's not very good at putting together a defense. You honestly disagree with that? How many years do you get? Tell me.
Ted Thompson has drafted 6 D and 4 O in the first round and it would be 6-5 if you counted Jordy as a 1st selection. He simply isn't all that good drafting up high. Way too many misses. His charm is late rounds and UDFA's which really covers for his major failings in the draft and I mean major.
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."


steveishere
10 years ago

Again, the NFL has determined that defenses are ranked by yards given up...not points allowed. My honest opinion is not an opinion but rather a fact that that is how NFL defenses are measured.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



So you won't answer the question then?
uffda udfa
10 years ago

So you won't answer the question then?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



I never intimated that points were a better measure only that the NFL has developed a way to determine which defense is better than another and it isn't points.

Yards are more reflective of a defense's overall performance and that is why yards, not points are used. So, YES, I think yards are a much more accurate barometer of where your defense is at than points.
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 never intimated that points were a better measure only that the NFL has developed a way to determine which defense is better than another and it isn't points.

Yards are more reflective of a defense's overall performance and that is why yards, not points are used. So, YES, I think yards are a much more accurate barometer of where your defense is at than points.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I think the two rankings should be averaged and used a metric of overall defensive effectiveness. Both are important, but obviously points allowed is the most important statistic there is, regardless of what's official for the NFL defense rankings. The scoreboard outranks everything.
steveishere
10 years ago

I never intimated that points were a better measure only that the NFL has developed a way to determine which defense is better than another and it isn't points.

Yards are more reflective of a defense's overall performance and that is why yards, not points are used. So, YES, I think yards are a much more accurate barometer of where your defense is at than points.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



how so?
uffda udfa
10 years ago

how so?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



If we're playing Seattle and Russell Wilson fumbles twice inside their 20 yard line and we score 14 points on their D that is much more a function of having less than 20 yards to go than it is a reflection on how poor Seattle's D is for giving up 14 to us under those circumstances.

There are points and counterpoints to yards vs. points but overall averaged out over a season yards are a better reflection than points.

Our D might get driven on for 75 yard drives and give up FG's. Our D still isn't very good to give up long drives but in the points category giving up 3 doesn't look too bad. I can think of many times where I thought to myself... Gee, our D is freaking brutal but we end up giving up only 3 after being gashed up and down the field.

Obviously, points not yards determine wins and losses but it isn't fair to say points given up is a better indication of who has a better D.

EDIT: The Jets were a Top 10 defense based on yards and were over 3 points worse than us on the point scale. Jets are clearly a better D than ours but on points they would be well down the rankings.
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."


steveishere
10 years ago

If we're playing Seattle and Russell Wilson fumbles twice inside their 20 yard line and we score 14 points on their D that is much more a function of having less than 20 yards to go than it is a reflection on how poor Seattle's D is for giving up 14 to us under those circumstances.

There are points and counterpoints to yards vs. points but overall averaged out over a season yards are a better reflection than points.

Our D might get driven on for 75 yard drives and give up FG's. Our D still isn't very good to give up long drives but in the points category giving up 3 doesn't look too bad. I can think of many times where I thought to myself... Gee, our D is freaking brutal but we end up giving up only 3 after being gashed up and down the field.

Obviously, points not yards determine wins and losses but it isn't fair to say points given up is a better indication of who has a better D.

EDIT: The Jets were a Top 10 defense based on yards and were over 3 points worse than us on the point scale. Jets are clearly a better D than ours but on points they would be well down the rankings.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You could what if all day either way that doesn't really prove anything. Our D might also give up two 75 yard drives and allow 3 points on one and 0 on the other or give up 1 75 yard drive for a TD and 50 yards with a stop on the next but the team is still worse off after allowing 7.

Arizona were a clearly better D than ours yet are way down on yards rankings. I don't think using a single statistic is really proves much either way because of so many variables being involved but if I have to go by just 1 then I only care about points. The team with the most yards doesn't win the game if they give up more points but the team with the most points still wins if they give up more yards.

This defense specifically I think was a bottom half of the league defense the first half of the season and close to top 10 the 2nd half/playoffs. Which is why I wanted to ditch Dom. Obviously we had the players to field a competitive defense like we did the 2nd half of the year. I want a coach who is going to play the right players from the start.
uffda udfa
10 years ago

You could what if all day either way that doesn't really prove anything. Our D might also give up two 75 yard drives and allow 3 points on one and 0 on the other or give up 1 75 yard drive for a TD and 50 yards with a stop on the next but the team is still worse off after allowing 7.

Arizona were a clearly better D than ours yet are way down on yards rankings. I don't think using a single statistic is really proves much either way because of so many variables being involved but if I have to go by just 1 then I only care about points. The team with the most yards doesn't win the game if they give up more points but the team with the most points still wins if they give up more yards.

This defense specifically I think was a bottom half of the league defense the first half of the season and close to top 10 the 2nd half/playoffs. Which is why I wanted to ditch Dom. Obviously we had the players to field a competitive defense like we did the 2nd half of the year. I want a coach who is going to play the right players from the start.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



Yes, I know we could go back and forth all day and said as much. Funny you brought up Arizona. I had a similar first reaction when I saw where they were in the rankings. However, you must remember Arizona suffered multiple losses to that defense. They were not the same unit as they were after their losses. St. Louis was below us. I think I'd take the Rams D.

We didn't ditch Dom and I am with you that he should go. I do not believe he has the passion needed anymore at his age and where he is in his career. He seems like the kind of mail it in type I'm still getting a check I hope they don't find out I don't care guy.

To extend MM when he holds fast to Dom is something Ted Thompson could've remedied by moving on from MM. He didn't which is validation that he is fine with the direction of the defense.
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."


buckeyepackfan
10 years ago
I want to apologize to the long standing members of this forum.

It is the off season and there is mot much happening right now.

I needed a little laugh so I started this thread knowing uffda just wouldn't be able to resist another chance to hijack a thread and
Post his same old predictable thoughts on Ted Thompson.

Another chance to prove to us all just how much more intelligent he is.

Damn it worked even better than I thought it would.

The original article is based on the number of pro bowl players gm's have drafted.

NoTHING else.

I was betting uffda wouldn't read it and Damn I was right again.

Some people are just easy to fuck with.

Sorry again.

😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄

No I'm not.

That was fun.

It's good to be the puppet master!
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
DoddPower
10 years ago

I don't think using a single statistic is really proves much either way because of so many variables being involved but if I have to go by just 1 then I only care about points. The team with the most yards doesn't win the game if they give up more points but the team with the most points still wins if they give up more yards.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



That's why I think I'm coming to like averaging the two together for a single ranking. For example, if a team is 16th in yards but 10th in points then [(16+10)/2]=13th "overall" defense. Conversely, if one felt that one factor was more important than the other, they could weight the two metrics accordingly. Obviously they are both important, so they both should be considered. I would probably weight points at 60% importance and yards at 40%, give or take 5-10%. So if a team was 16th in yards and 10th in points that would be [ (16*0.4)+(10*0.6) ] ~=12th "overall" defense.

The Packers were 18th in yards allowed and tied for 13th in points allowed. Using my weighted metric, that would make them the 15th "overall" defense (or 16th if both metrics are weighted equally). An average unit, which is just what they are and likely will be under Dom Capers.

Minor differences, but still interesting to me. It's a summary metric that I would like to see when evaluating a defense relative to the rest of the league. It'd be easy to just add another column in Excel along with the yards and points rankings to calculate "overall" defensive rankings.
+1
uffda udfa
10 years ago

I want to apologize to the long standing members of this forum.

It is the off season and there is mot much happening right now.

I needed a little laugh so I started this thread knowing uffda just wouldn't be able to resist another chance to hijack a thread and
Post his same old predictable thoughts on Ted Thompson.

Another chance to prove to us all just how much more intelligent he is.

Damn it worked even better than I thought it would.

The original article is based on the number of pro bowl players gm's have drafted.

NoTHING else.

I was betting uffda wouldn't read it and Damn I was right again.

Some people are just easy to fuck with.

Sorry again.

😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄

No I'm not.

That was fun.

It's good to be the puppet master!

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



I honestly feel sorry for you, Buck. You do realize that JERRY FREAKING JONES is the #1 GM on this guy's list who put Ted Thompson at 7th. Based on pro bowl players selected? LMAO. Are you freaking kidding me? Do you realize how many Packers players have BACKDOORED the pro bowl...not initially selected but end up going as alternates? Wow, that is truly a measure of your prowess as a GM. Unfreakingreal how goofy you get over a completely INANE article written by someone NOBODY has ever heard of. Jerry Jones is the best GM in the league. I would hope there are hundreds of guys like me out on Cowboys forums just skewering guys like you who are claiming JJ is the best GM in the NFL because some nobody said he was.

Delusion is strong, Buck. Very strong.

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."


Zero2Cool
10 years ago
I see the topic is about Ted Thompson being one of the best General Managers in the NFL. That is true and if he weren't good at his job, he would not still be with the Packers with recently receiving a well deserved contract extension.

Someone else said it best. If you don't want Thompson, who would be better?
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
10 years ago

I see the topic is about Ted Thompson being one of the best General Managers in the NFL. That is true and if he weren't good at his job, he would not still be with the Packers with recently receiving a well deserved contract extension.

Someone else said it best. If you don't want Thompson, who would be better?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Receiving a contract extension doesn't mean you're good at your job. I would've been head over heels if we could've finagled Harbaugh from SF to be HC and GM. He is light years better than MM and Ted Thompson combined.

The central point will never change... minus Aaron Rodgers Ted Thompson is what exactly? How great is he then? You will never ever find out because he'll retire before he has to prove he's not what you think he is as Aaron will be here TT's entire tenure. This point will never ever go away and those who choose to ignore this baffle me.

Tom Brady in New England has been to the show SIX times because his org knows how to put a team around him. Steelers have been there multiple times under Big Ben because their org knows how to build a team. The NYG and Eli freaking Manning have been there more than Aaron Rodgers and the Packers. Tell me again how wonderful Ted Thompson is? It is the whole idea of being satisfied with being good. Judged in terms of greatness Ted Thompson is a total failure. Everyone's standards are different. Mine are just a tad bit higher than most of the crowd here. I find kinship with those who aim a little higher than winning the division every year and losing in the playoffs but that's just me. Squander Rodgers career. One SB appearance for possibly the greatest QB to ever play the game. Yup, total success there under TT.
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."


+1
Zero2Cool
10 years ago
That's right, teams extended general managers because they are not good at their job. Brilliant observation there. Just brilliant. (Lions anyone?)

I think it's extremely moronic for people to say things like "Well, what if you take that 76 yard run away, suddenly that 143 yards he gained isn't so special now is it?" ... Fact is, it did happen and when you start removing things, you lose ALL credibility because it shows you are failing to be objective and confirming you have an agenda.

UserPostedImage
+2
musccy
  • musccy
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
10 years ago



This defense specifically I think was a bottom half of the league defense the first half of the season and close to top 10 the 2nd half/playoffs. Which is why I wanted to ditch Dom. Obviously we had the players to field a competitive defense like we did the 2nd half of the year. I want a coach who is going to play the right players from the start.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



I'm sort of hijacking here, but this caught my eye.

This is not necessarily an endorsement for Dom, but isn't seeing improvement from players and units the goal? With the new CBA severely restricting practice times and so much turnover on rosters, even on the Packers, this is going to happen to GB or any team. The media asked about Tom Brady being benched in week 3. Seattle looked like shit through week 8.

You're not going to know as much about your players, their strengths, how they gel etc. on Sept 1 as you will on Dec 1. I'm stealing ideas from Ketchman, but September is evolving into the new preseason.

Sorry...back to the thread.






buckeyepackfan
10 years ago

I honestly feel sorry for you, Buck. You do realize that JERRY FREAKING JONES is the #1 GM on this guy's list who put Ted Thompson at 7th. Based on pro bowl players selected? LMAO. Are you freaking kidding me? Do you realize how many Packers players have BACKDOORED the pro bowl...not initially selected but end up going as alternates? Wow, that is truly a measure of your prowess as a GM. Unfreakingreal how goofy you get over a completely INANE article written by someone NOBODY has ever heard of. Jerry Jones is the best GM in the league. I would hope there are hundreds of guys like me out on Cowboys forums just skewering guys like you who are claiming JJ is the best GM in the NFL because some nobody said he was.

Delusion is strong, Buck. Very strong.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Damn I put it right out in front of you and You still don't get it.

The author says very clearly that he was only using the number of players elected to the pro-bowl.

YOU DIDN'T READ THE ARTICLE!

You saw your chance to spew the same old bullshit you have been posting since you joined.

So Damn predictable.

Don't feel sorry for me,

Just asTed has done so many Times this past year, I made you out to be the fool you are.
Please keep the laughs coming.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
uffda udfa
10 years ago
Yes, I read the article.

No, you didn't read my reply.

BASED ON PROBOWLERS is in my reply but in order for you to be you you must do these types of things and then insult me based on erroneous things such as contesting that I never read the article or understood it was based on probowlers. I got it.

Further, I mocked the idea of using probowlers as the Packers rarely have many guys go the legit way. We usually get guys to the PB the illegitimate way when other guys simply don't want to show up. It is you who doesn't can't and won't ever get it. I don't blame you...you're still reeling from the release of your idol, AJ Hawk. That has to be tough.

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."


Zero2Cool
10 years ago
Pro Bowl count is about as valuable as your membership fees paid to PackersHome. Exactly, it means NOTHING. (PS, you all still owe me your membership fees) 🙂
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
10 years ago

That's right, teams extended general managers because they are not good at their job. Brilliant observation there. Just brilliant. (Lions anyone?)

I think it's extremely moronic for people to say things like "Well, what if you take that 76 yard run away, suddenly that 143 yards he gained isn't so special now is it?" ... Fact is, it did happen and when you start removing things, you lose ALL credibility because it shows you are failing to be objective and confirming you have an agenda.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I understand and agree with most of the above. I think specifically to the AJ Hawk contract extension when he got it...undeserved. Brad Jones...undeserved. There are a lot of players Ted Thompson has given nice contract extensions to that didn't deserve them.

The point that you can't refute with anything is our defense and ST's. Why are they bad year after year? Ted Thompson has tried to build our D and has failed to do so. There is no Aaron Rodgers ...the D doesn't have a QB who is all world who can mask deficiencies. That is a fact. Ted Thompson is judged in a favorable light because we win regular season games pretty easily. That is NOT the measure of a true winner. Championships are...not divisional...not conference...WORLD. 13 time World Champion Green Bay Packers... ever heard that before? I don't EVER recall hearing x amount of times divisional champions, or x amount of times conference champions...it is about WORLD Championships. We have possibly the best ever to play the most critical position that helps you achieve WORLD Champion status and we've been to the ultimate game...ONCE? FAILURE, FAILURE, FAILURE. No other way about it. Our team is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Aaron Rodgers is plenty good enough...the cast is just too non-supportive and that falls squarely on TT's shoulders even though those happy with divisional championships are still drunk off them.

Please, please, please tell me how many years and 1st round picks does Ted Thompson need to build a quality defense? Answer that, please. How many years is acceptable? He was given a contract extension when our D was HORRIBLE so horrible MM is saying WRITE IT IN BIG LETTERS our D will be improved. Pitiful. Just pitiful. He gets an extension for a SB win YEARS ago after being embarrassed every single year since. The trend is not going the correct direction but we extended him. You don't give someone a contract extension for one year they had four years ago, you give them an extension based on how they're trending NOW.... and now the trend has been well established. He's just gonna ride a superstar QB to playoff losses because he is inept and incapable of fixing this D despite his numerous efforts. My goodness.
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."


buckeyepackfan
10 years ago

Yes, I read the article.

No, you didn't read my reply.

BASED ON PROBOWLERS is in my reply but in order for you to be you you must do these types of things and then insult me based on erroneous things such as contesting that I never read the article or understood it was based on probowlers. I got it.

Further, I mocked the idea of using probowlers as the Packers rarely have many guys go the legit way. We usually get guys to the PB the illegitimate way when other guys simply don't want to show up. It is you who doesn't can't and won't ever get it. I don't blame you...you're still reeling from the release of your idol, AJ Hawk. That has to be tough.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Dude quit trying to skin it

You NEVER read the article till yesterday.

You are what I said you were a year ago.

ONE TRICK PONY!

E end the most casual football fan knows pro bowl election has no relevance,
The author clearly stated he was just coming from a different perspective.

Stay with the agenda one trick, as the NFL goes, sooner or later everyone retires or gets fired.

Maybe you will be right in another 5 years.

Until then it Will be entertaining to see how many ways you can come up with to try and maker your mootless point..

Ted Thompson is one of the best.

If he wasn't he would have been ran out of Green Bay years ago.

Can't wait for Ted to make you look the fool during the draft.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : What the hell
beast (7h) : Packershome going to the Whiteout unis again
Zero2Cool (13h) : Oh wait, they got Cam Ward. 1st overall right? haha oops
Zero2Cool (13h) : They could send Packers a 1st for a QB they are familiar with
Zero2Cool (13h) : Titans QB Will Levis to have season-ending shoulder surgery
Zero2Cool (19-Jul) : Their season did kind of start there, so 🤷
dfosterf (19-Jul) : Eagles put an engraved Brazil flag on their super bowl rings
Zero2Cool (18-Jul) : Benton unsigned no more
Zero2Cool (17-Jul) : That's good analysis, yes you are getting old. It'd a blessing!
dfosterf (14-Jul) : *analysis* gettin' old
dfosterf (14-Jul) : One of the best analyisis I"ve ever watched at this time of an offseason
dfosterf (14-Jul) : Andy Herman interviewed Warren Sharp on his Pack a day podcast
packerfanoutwest (10-Jul) : Us Padres fans love it....But it'll be a Dodgers/Yankees World Series
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Brewers sweep Dodgers. Awesome
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : And James Flanigan is the grandson of Packers Super Bowl winner Jim Flanigan Sr.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : Jerome Bettis and Jim Flanigans sons as well!
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Thomas Davis Jr is OLB, not WR. Oops.
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Larry Fitzgeral and Thomas Davis sons too. WR's as well.
Mucky Tundra (5-Jul) : Kaydon Finley, son of Jermichael Finley, commits to Notre Dame
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

18-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

14-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

10-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10-Jul / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

6-Jul / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

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