DoddPower
7 years ago

The Green Bay Packers have no Pro Bowlers. Two guys they let walk are in the Pro Bowl. Casey Hayward and Micah Hyde are two guys the Packers could've kept.

Continue Reading @ TotalPackers 

TotalPackers wrote:

DoddPower
7 years ago
I'm happy these guys have found success elsewhere.
Smokey
7 years ago
Nasty fowl language, posted for any reason, is not a welcome sight. It may be a report of what someone said, but IMO, it is not that important that it needs to be publicly posted. Vulgar words only identify the user as too ignorant to use better language.

[cheers]
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
7 years ago
Merry Christmas to you, too, Smokey, you crusty old codger.
UserPostedImage
+1
PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago
Just like any business. If they wanted to stay with the packers they should have proved themselves more valuable to the organization. Neither performed at a level enough where they would have been expected to become starters on the roster. The packers taught them enough and helped them mature in the position where other teams were willing to pay them over the talent they had. If that isn't enough for them. Then Flock them.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Zero2Cool
7 years ago

Just like any business. If they wanted to stay with the packers they should have proved themselves more valuable to the organization. Neither performed at a level enough where they would have been expected to become starters on the roster. The packers taught them enough and helped them mature in the position where other teams were willing to pay them over the talent they had. If that isn't enough for them. Then Flock them.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



That happen when you have an awful Defensive Coordinator that has lost his players. Scheme FOR your players, brilliant concept! Dom should practice it sometime.
UserPostedImage
+1
PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago

That happen when you have an awful Defensive Coordinator that has lost his players. Scheme FOR your players, brilliant concept! Dom should practice it sometime.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I can't stand the Lost the players crap. That tells me more about the lack of character of players than anything else.

scheme for players, another pretty cliché media term. Players play where their abilities best help the team. You start changing the scheme for one or two players, you end up weakening the entire team.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
+1
Cheesey
7 years ago
Well Packfan.......how has NOT making the scheme fit the guys you have worked out for the Packers SO far?
I have seen year after year of an awful defense, that got us knocked out of the playoffs. So if what you have done doesn't work, how many more years do you keep doing it?
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result.

ONE player leaving and doing well, you could say was dumb luck. But TWO??? BOTH making the pro bowl??? Something is seriously wrong here.
If they don't change it, the result will never change.
UserPostedImage
beast
7 years ago

Nasty fowl language, posted for any reason, is not a welcome sight. It may be a report of what someone said, but IMO, it is not that important that it needs to be publicly posted. Vulgar words only identify the user as too ignorant to use better language.

[cheers]

Originally Posted by: Smokey 



Yeah, it seems like click baiting to me... here is what Hayward said... and he didn't even mention the Packers... to suggest Hayward snubbed or took a semi-shot at the Packers is one thing is more realist... to suggest this is the F word is WAY over blowing it...

UserPostedImage
+1
beast
7 years ago

scheme for players, another pretty cliché media term. Players play where their abilities best help the team. You start changing the scheme for one or two players, you end up weakening the entire team.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



Yes, I agree... it's pretty hard to scheme to a single player, because changing one thing for him, changing something for another... you would have to scheme for the entire group... and when you do that (like scheming to play man coverage with Shields and Randall), you might hurt your zone coverage guys (Haywards, Hyde). But I also think Hyde's zone SS role might be less complex than the slot man role he had.

So when you scheme for one player, you might be scheming against another if they're different type of players.

UserPostedImage
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    beast (6m) : 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 (18m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
    Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky
    Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm
    Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
    Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
    Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!
    Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
    Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
    beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
    Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
    Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
    beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
    beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
    Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
    beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
    beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
    beast (4h) : 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 (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
    Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division
    beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us
    beast (4h) : Packers will get in
    beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
    Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
    buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
    Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
    beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
    bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
    buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
    Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    29 - 34
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    16 - 10
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    30 - 14
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    29 - 31
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    24 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    34 - 13
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    24 - 22
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    30 - 27
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    14 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    20 - 19
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    38 - 10
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    30 - 17
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    31 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    30 - 13
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / 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

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