I caught ESPN's The Herd today, and Tedy Bruschi was talking about coming out of the bye week.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnradio/player?id=4586057 

I found it interesting, in that he was talking Atl vs Dal, with Dal coming out of the bye week. As I was listening, I couldn't help thinking of the similarities between what he was saying about the Cowgirls and my impression of the Packers this season.

The talk comes about the 7 minute part of the segment. Here's a summary:

As a fan/analyst/anyone watching the game, see what's different in what they do offensively, defensively, or special teams. Did they make adjustments, was the coaching staff good enough to use the two weeks to fix things.

Colin went on to ask Tedy if he thought the Cowgirls were in the upper quadrant of the league. Tedy said no: They aren't performing, the teams they've beat have a combined record of 3-14, they just don't look disciplined. They're not blocking well on the offensive front, they're not running the ball as well as you'd think they would, penalties, turnovers, mistakes...you either have players who aren't disciplined or coaches who are not emphasizing the right stuff.

I thought back to the issues the Packers were having going into the bye week (penalties, weak running game, too many sacks, etc) and it didnt appear to me that these problems had been addressed very well during the bye week.

I guess well see how things go as the season progresses, but Im concerned by the inability of the coaches to get the problems addressed (Im not saying its the coaches fault, could be the players or both, but the jobs not getting done very well) and the fact that we seem to have what Tedy would call an undisciplined team.

It does sound like he's talking about the Packers, with the poor blocking and the penalties, although one difference is that the Packers have had very few turnovers. And nothing changed after the bye week except the level of competition, which was rock bottom and will be close to rock bottom this Sunday in Cleveland. Hopefully things will get straightened out, though.

I keep thinking about that 13-3 season in '07 under McCarthy. I don't think it happened just because of Brett Favre and good luck. The coaches had to know what they were doing. Right?

---

Isn't it amazing how some players can make coaches look brilliant. That guy in MInny, Childress is undeafeated this year, probably on his way to coach of the year!!!

---

Patience, my very young Padawan. It is still a young season.

---

yea it did sound like the packers however they have Tony im so overrated Romo and the pack has Rodgers at the helm and better WR as well even though the cowgirls have the same record as the pack in NO WAY do i see them as better....

---

Your comment started me looking at our record under McCarthy. Looking at the 2007 season, I was struck by the number of teams that had losing records when we played them. Based on that, I looked at 2006-2009 to see our record against teams who had winning records at the time we played them, .500 records, or losing records. Here's what I found:

W=teams we played who had a winning record when we played them
E=teams who were .500 when we played them
L=teams with losing records when we played them

2006: 8-8
W: 1-6 (our one win came in the last game of the year, against Chi who was 13-2 and resting their guys for the playoffs)
E: 1-1
L: 6-1

2007: 13-3
W: 4-2 (includes 1-1 in playoffs) 2 of these wins were against teams who had winning records when we played them (Det, KC), but finished with losing records overall (7-9, 4-12)
E: 3-0
L: 7-2

2008: 6-10
W: 2-5
E: 1-3
L: 3-2

2009: 3-2
W: 0-1
E: 1-0
L: 2-1

Under McCarthy, were 31-24. Looking at the numbers, our 31-24 record appears to be largely due to the quality of the schedule/opponents. 34 out of 55 (62%) of the games have been against teams with .500 or losing records when we played them.

In 2006, we were 8-8, 1-6 against teams with winning records, 6-1 against teams with losing records. Even in 2007, when we went 14-4, 12 of our 14 wins came against teams with .500 or less records when we played them (or ended the season with losing records). Since 2007, were 2-6 against teams with a winning record when we played them.

Weve gone 7-14 when weve played teams who have had a winning record coming into the game, 6-4 against .500 teams, and 18-6 against teams with losing records. Were winning 1/3 of the time against good opponents, 3/4 of the time against bad opponents, and essentially splitting the games against mediocre opponents.

I have to disagree, as of right now there is no way Josh McDaniels in Denver doesn't get the nod. Again AS OF RIGHT NOW his team has a new defense(with 8 different/new from last year), a QB that had been struggling before a trade to McD's team, and just a team that hasn't played this well since #7 was behind center.

What does Childress have? Like you said he has talent. Let me rephrase that his PLAYERS have talent.

---

Orton was doing well last season until he was injured.

---

Macbob, just curious why did you choose to research records when the packers played them instead teams record at the end of the season?

---

And which coach was looking brilliant at this time last season? Oh yeah, Eric Mangini. But the Jets ended up 8-8, their QB led the league in interceptions, and Mangini got canned.

I think the Vikings will do better than that, but I have no faith in Brett Favre's ability to finish out a season, based on his final years in Green Bay, as well as his season with the Jets.

---