beast
7 years ago

I expect context in your posts from now on.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



He calls it context when his favors his opinions and demands it, then it doesn't favor his opinion, he calls them excuses and homerism, wearing green and gold glasses... but really it's the same thing...
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
7 years ago

You can't stop everything... Capers just has to take the limited talent he has healthy and pick his poison...

He choose to try not to let the talented WR beat them deep, which opens up stuff underneath... congrats, Bucs took advantage of it. Packers defense gave up 20 points, but they also got 7, so a net of 13 points. That's not bad.

What's kind of scary is that that on the Packers touchdown drives, the WRs did NOT touch the ball even once... in fact only two passes were attempted, and the only one completed with to the RB.

It'll be interesting to see how Hundley does in Cleveland... if he does well in two road games, then maybe he just can't pass in Lambeau for some reason.

Originally Posted by: beast 



The Packers need him not to implode for one more game.
He is a game manager at best.

Anymore than that is a plus.

Mike got him into his comfort zone on the last drive of regular play into the overtime drive.

Hell if The Packers can control the clock by riding the backs of Williams and Jones Sunday, that would be perfect .

One more game!

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
uffda udfa
7 years ago

He calls it context when his favors his opinions and demands it, then it doesn't favor his opinion, he calls them excuses and homerism, wearing green and gold glasses... but really it's the same thing...

Originally Posted by: beast 



No. When someone goes on about the sacks we had yesterday doesn't that make you wonder...WHY? Perhaps, given we haven't gotten pressure all season, it might be a good idea to ask why all of a sudden we had all those sacks? Reminiscent of the Rams game at Lambeau a couple of years ago. We sacked Foles mercilessly. Meant nothing because their line was a sieve and we never saw anything like that again. Kind of like another team getting fired up beating us through the air, when we're among the dregs in the NFL at pass defense. You don't draw conclusions vs. OL's like Tampa's or secondaries like ours. The mirror is the BEST, not the bottom. That is why I talk about shoot low mentality here. Anyone excited about the sacks is using the wrong measuring stick...heck, they're not even using a stick...something else entirely.

My "context" is about best. It's what I want from this team and what I think is reasonable considering 12. He's not here right now, so expectations for O are down, but D is as bad as ever. Can't step up to help when 12 is gone...they're just a drain on this team UNLESS they're matched up with some horribly inferior grouping like our DL was vs. their OL. Yet, some want to get excited about that? Would you get excited if we threw for 400 yards on a secondary like ours with 12 back? I wouldn't...but you probably would because context is not a factor.

Had I not read the Vegas tweet, I would've used the context to say how remarkable it was to even hang with the Steelers. However, that tweet provided potential context to change things and I did so.
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."


beast
7 years ago

Had I not read the Vegas tweet, I would've used the context to say how remarkable it was to even hang with the Steelers. However, that tweet provided potential context to change things and I did so.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



These contexts are just excuses... as they're the same thing... the differences is if you're for them (then they're context) or against it (then they're excuses), but the reality is that they're the same thing.

And you often find excuses (err "context") to doubt the Packers any and every way you can.

UserPostedImage
beast
7 years ago

Eh, in the 3rd quarter the offense started with a 3 and out straight out of the half which didn't really hurt the defense because they hadn't been on the field since before the halftime break. Then the D gave up a 6 minute drive before the offense had one 3 and out then the defense gave up another 6 minute drive. That's 12 minutes TOP given up in 2 possessions, you can't blame the offense for that. The defense simply don't do a good enough job getting off the field regardless of what the offense does, they really don't deserve excuses.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



But they do deserve the truth instead of your misleading info trying to let the offense off the hook...

The offense had 6 straight freaking drives of 6 plays or less (7 if you count before the half)... if you don't think that wears a defense down, then you don't know football... the fact is the defense and Williams were the only reasons we were even in that game as the passing game was a horrible piece of shit...


Yet people want to always give the offense a pass and blame the defense... EVEN WHEN THEY WON THE FREAKING GAME... it's BULLSHIT!


The defense plays horrible, the defense gets most of the blame.
The offense plays horrible, the defense still gets most of the blame.
It makes no sense...
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
7 years ago
Ain't BS. EVERYONE was praying our D didn't have to take the field in OT. BS to say otherwise. I was worried after we won the toss that they'd only need a Figgy to win.

The toss win won the game stopping our sieve from losing the game. If our D had a record, it'd be 3-13.
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."


beast
7 years ago

Ain't BS. EVERYONE was praying our D didn't have to take the field in OT. BS to say otherwise. I was worried after we won the toss that they'd only need a Figgy to win.

The toss win won the game stopping our sieve from losing the game. If our D had a record, it'd be 3-13.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



SO you're actually rooting for the Packers to win now? ... that's a first, as you admitted to rooting for the other teams in the past trying to get a change in management.

You demanded context early when it fit your agenda, now you're rejecting it when it goes against your agenda.

The defense gave up a first scripted touchdown drive (like the always do)... but after that, they only gave up points after multiple failed Packers offensive drives that were keeping them on the field all damn game.

The Bucs 2nd quarter FG was after 3 Packers drives where they had 6 plays or less and after Lowry's return for a touchdown. The Bucs 2nd half points were during/after 3 Packers drives where they had 4 plays or less. The Bucs points came directly after the Packers offense screwed up on multiple (normally 3 straight) drives keeping the Packers defense on the damn field.

With the exception of the first drive, and after the 3 consecutive failed offensive drives of 6 plays or less, the defense played well... this game, there is a direct correlation to the failure of the offense. AND YET THE DEFENSE IS GETTING MORE OF THE BLAME!


Defense deserves a lot of the blame most games, but they sure don't blame all the blame, especially when they were CLEARLY the best unit on the field... with the exception of that first drive, the defense held up whenever the offense could not completely fail on multiple drives of quick 6 plays and out.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
7 years ago

I expect context in your posts from now on.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Damn, good to know after 10 years of posting, I have been doing it wrong
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

How in the hell did this forum ever survive?

Context:

Mike is the Head Coach-FACT
Dom is the Defensive Co-ordinator-FACT

Neither are going anywhere until after this season, if at all.-FACT

I would rather watch The Packers every week rooting for them to win so if the cards fall right, they will once again be playing in January.

Instead of hoping they fail.

Losing in the playoffs is tough.
But much better than not having a chance to lose in The playoffs.

Sorry got off topic.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
uffda udfa
7 years ago
beast... This D is terrible. Has been for many years. If you want to prop them up for some odd reason, go ahead. We all know they're detrimental to team success.

Context: D has been bad for years. Not all of a sudden better because they beat a downtrodden Bucs offense. Peyton Barber, the legend, went for over a 100. 4 bills on this game winning praise worthy D? No.

Wouldn't be sure no change is coming. Ted is in poor health and I doubt his return next season. That opens possibility to a new HC. If Dom returns there better be a riot.

More context: Management has held this team back for years and needs replaced but enabling fans too drunk on playoff success guaranteed by having GOAT at QB in weak division to notice or care.
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
7 years ago

SO you're actually rooting for the Packers to win now? ... that's a first, as you admitted to rooting for the other teams in the past trying to get a change in management.

You demanded context early when it fit your agenda, now you're rejecting it when it goes against your agenda.

The defense gave up a first scripted touchdown drive (like the always do)... but after that, they only gave up points after multiple failed Packers offensive drives that were keeping them on the field all damn game.

The Bucs 2nd quarter FG was after 3 Packers drives where they had 6 plays or less and after Lowry's return for a touchdown. The Bucs 2nd half points were during/after 3 Packers drives where they had 4 plays or less. The Bucs points came directly after the Packers offense screwed up on multiple (normally 3 straight) drives keeping the Packers defense on the damn field.

With the exception of the first drive, and after the 3 consecutive failed offensive drives of 6 plays or less, the defense played well... this game, there is a direct correlation to the failure of the offense. AND YET THE DEFENSE IS GETTING MORE OF THE BLAME!


Defense deserves a lot of the blame most games, but they sure don't blame all the blame, especially when they were CLEARLY the best unit on the field... with the exception of that first drive, the defense held up whenever the offense could not completely fail on multiple drives of quick 6 plays and out.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Meh, the D is more responsible for getting themselves off the field than the O is for them being on it so long. The 1st 3 and out came straight out of the half so that didn't effect how "tired" the D would be since after the punt it was their 1st time on the field since the halftime break.

So after the 1st time taking the field in the 2nd half the D started with a 10 play 6 minute drive then a 3 and out then they allowed a 13 play 6 minute drive for a FG then a 3 and out then the D gave up a 12 play 7 minute drive for a TD. I think with this information we can safely say the defense sucked at getting themselves off the field separate from any responsibility the offense had in "giving them a break".

This defense doesn't suck at stopping 1st downs because they get tired its because they just suck at it regardless of the situation.
Fan Shout
beast (5h) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
Zero2Cool (7h) : 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.
beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled
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
7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

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

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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