My goodness, the self-righteous, butthurt responses to the OP's screeds are far more obnoxious than the rants themselves. Is this really just some sort of echo chamber or safe space for you people? No wonder the volume of posts has declined so precipitously over the years. People get tired of the intolerance for dissent. Nerdmann is as far from Pollyanna positive as anyone is allowed to stray; anything more negative gets quickly shouted down, loyalty and fanhood get questioned, and buckets of tar and feathers gets brandished. It's boring and it's suffocating.

Maybe OP's tone was excessively strident, but his question strikes me as perfectly reasonable. He isn't peddling a conspiracy theory as you so uncharitably insist.

I swear, if I were an outsider, I'd say the trolls were the howling jackals ganging up on this dude in every thread to which he contributes.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 

Thank you. I don't wear a safety pin but it's pretty clear the majority here does. There is no reason to go off on me but I truly believe that I don't enable the mentality that looks for fun and feel good above everything else. I celebrate a TD like anyone else because that's something to celebrate. I criticize the D, because that's something to criticize. I question the moves of Ted Thompson in letting Hayward go in favor of failed high picks Randall and Rollins. There is nothing I've typed here in the last few days that isn't perfectly reasonable. However, it is dissent in the strongest form and the stalwarts are fighting vigorously for the status quo. Must be loving having Dakota's work schedule the way it is. The truth divides and it's not much more clear than it is right here. I have no doubt this forum has seen a decline like a lot of Packers forums because of this very thing. It rejects dissenters and becomes a calcified buddy club which emboldens further the rejection of different ideas. Strength in numbers.

Aaron knows he ain't facing cupcakes so there is no confidence to make any proclamations. Go look at the schedule following the R E L A X statement and we know the one that followed RUN THE TABLE. Easy peasy lemon squeezy. Hardly bold or Namath-esque. I would've liked to read...the table ain't ran yet, indicating that there was more work to do. He was asked specifically about his recent boldness and he offered a turtle in the shell response. There was no Mike McCarthy styled going to Seattle to kick ass. That truly leads me to believe he knows their odds are poor of doing much in the playoffs, but that's just me. No conspiracy just what I think.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

To be fair, you're usually pretty reasonable and you have accurate comments on the defense which is a huge concern. Still absolutely do not understand how some people define success in the long term.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 

Success in the long term? Oh, I think this franchise has been successful relative to the other 32 for sure. Wildly successful. However, my comparison or litmus test isn't comparing us to Cleveland or SF, or Buffalo, etc. We have Aaron Rodgers. New England has Tom Brady. The Pats are my comparison and my litmus due to both franchises having an extremely special QB. I don't consider Brees and a lot of the others in the category of Rodgers and Brady, perhaps, some do, and that's part of the issue.

At some point no matter your definition of success you have to look to a team similar to rival expectations. Why has New England been so much more successful than we have? That is a fair question. When it gets asked you see a lot of folks here start screaming about us not being Cleveland as if that means the question isn't relevant.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

A stir of activity on the board, not because the Packers secured the division.. a home game and a ticket to the playoffs.

Nope... because they are pathetic and dismal.

Only a Packer fan would do this to themselves... look at all the negatives without any balance of positives.

"DOH"




Oh... nice to see you back uffda udfa.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 

At some point no matter your definition of success you have to look to a team similar to rival expectations. Why has New England been so much more successful than we have? That is a fair question. When it gets asked you see a lot of folks here start screaming about us not being Cleveland as if that means the question isn't relevant.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa