Why I am Not Buying the Injury "Excuse"· Page 2

RedSoxExcel
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

What do the Vikings have to do with anything?

"Stevetarded" wrote:

The reason why I brought up the Vikings is that would people say that the Vikings record of 2-3 should be excused somewhat because of injuries?

Also, we're playing the Vikings AT home next week. The Vikings have significant injuries as well, Lito Sheppard is playing. Cedric Griffen is a big loss, so is their safety issues. Same with Rice and Sullivan. Plus Shanicoe is clearly hurt and if Favre's injury is real, so is he.

My point was simply that can we once again point at injuries if we lose to another fairly injured team at home?

Also I find it ironic that a lot of us hated on Grant and Barnett all these years and now we miss them, lol. Be careful what you wish for I guess.

blank

RedSoxExcel
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

#12

An excuse would be "If we didn't have all the injuries we'd be 6 - 0!". Or "If the officials would stop bagging on the Packers, we'd have won!".

I don't think many, if any, are saying that. I think what we're saying is, with all the injuries, we're still in the game, but just not getting it done with what we have. Which is very transparent.

And others are saying we need better coaching and smarter players who don't commit as many boneheaded penalties.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

I guess I shouldn't have used the word "excuse", I forgot how technical it gets on here sometimes (ala the word "peaked" in that other thread), lol.

I just mean that the injuries have masked fatal flaws in the Packers (such as the need for better coaching or smarter players). If the end of the year, we finish like 6-10 do we let go of MM or do we say "naw, it was the injuries". I am of the view, that we looked like crap even before the injuries, so I hope these injuries don't blind judgments about MM's performance.

IMO, regardless, I'd give him one more year because I believe he still has a winning record?

Also, Zero change your avatar thing, Driver sucks - Nm, I'm an idiot, its Jennings, well... j/k

blank

hardrocker950
Member

14 years ago

#13

I agree that injuries have made it tough on this team, but I also agree that there are other factors to figure. I won't list them since most of them that I saw are listed above.
I think even with our current roster we should be 5-1 or better. There are still guys on the field that can make things happen, but coaching staff needs to work with the current players strengths rather than the starters. The gameplan has to adjust depending on your opponent, and I have not seen this all year. I know its easy to coach from the couch, but to be fair - we see the weaknesses in the other team so why doesn't the coaching staff?

warhawk
Senior Member

14 years ago

#14

Well, injuries aside, our D held the Dolphins to 20 points in regulation. You said nearly every key position is being played by 2nd-to-3rd string players on D. Yet the D did an outstanding job, especially considering the time Henne had to throw the ball. Wish Rodgers had that much time.

Injuries are an explanation. I'm not arguing that.

What I'm not buying is injuries are the reason we lost in Miami. I think the reason is simply our O failed to put up more than 20 points in regulation at home against an average team. That's not acceptable, even with the future perennial Pro Bowler Finley out and our #1 RB out.

We still have playmakers in Greg Jennings and Donald Driver. Jackson has progressed a lot. While he's still no Ryan Grant, I still wonder why we don't utilize Jackson in screens more. I still don't get why we don't try to setup more YAC opportunities more. And lastly, I don't understand why Mike McCarthy hasn't changed the gameplan to get passes off faster as it's obvious our OL sucks and Aaron is taking too many hits.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

So how many points do the Dolphins score if our guys were in there? With Barnett, Burnett, Chillar, Picket, Neal, and, Mathews I say their lucky to hit 10.

"The train is leaving the station."

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#15

So how many points do the Dolphins score if our guys were in there? With Barnett, Burnett, Chillar, Picket, Neal, and, Mathews I say their lucky to hit 10.

"warhawk" wrote:

I'm not impressed with Henne. Had we had CM3 in there, we could have had a drive killing sack. Had Nick Barnett and Ryan Pickett been in there, they wouldn't have been running 39 times on us.

10 may be realistic. Yet still, not the problem. We gotta be able to score more than 20 points at home against average teams.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

4PackGirl
Registered

14 years ago

#16

our D played good? wait...our D...played...good?? they made henne look like a future HOF'er out there. not a bit of pressure. i'd love to know how much time woodson spent on his ass during that game. williams had an int but the rest of the game we had NO answer to the pass OR run.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#17

"4PackGirl" wrote:

Considering we didn't have soon-to-be perennial Pro Bowler CM3 playing as well as our starting MLB (now ILB) since 2003, our Pro Bowl CB on the PUP list, and our starting SS out, we played pretty well. We only allowed 20 points in regulation and stopped them in one drive (to which our O responded by going 3 and out) in OT.

We gotta score more than 20 points at home.

And no, Henne still wasn't that impressive. If the Dolphins had a real QB, we would have been in trouble.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

4PackGirl
Registered

14 years ago

#18

i know we missed CM3 ALOT! but the other players have got to step it up. like i said, woodson spent most of his day on his ass, sliding here & there. he's supposed to be one of our 'premiere' players, right? good teams overcome adversity & pull themselves together. that's what i'm hoping for against the queens. i know we've got injured players but if you're playing in the NFL - even 3rd string - you should have the ability to step in & do the f'in job.

porky88
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#19

Football is a situational sport and injuries do matter during certain circumstances.

Plug in Ryan Pickett and tell me the Dolphins beat the Packers. I don't see it. They ran right at Green Bay's front all game long to control the clock and kept Aaron Rodgers off the field. They were able to double team B.J. Raji or Cullen Jenkins as a result of Pickett not playing. They were able to get their lineman to the second level and on a LB like Hawk or Bishop.

Someone brought up no Clay Matthews in a different thread. You think Chad Henne isn't sacked once without Clay Matthews? Even if Matthews doesn't get the sack, he needs to be accounted for. Therefor, he can open things up for someone else. It isn't a coincidence that Cullen Jenkins and B.J. Raji play better when Matthews is on the field.

Furthermore, the Packers have not played the Vikings. The comparison is not valid until Sunday night. The Packers played the Dolphins and the Dolphins game planned accordingly. We'll see what Minnesota does, but what people are saying about Minnesota's injuries is irrelevant to the Packers.

Yes, there are times when people oversell the injuries. Injuries didn't cost the Packers the games against Chicago or Washington. Coaching, execution and penalties did.

However, I did not see a problem with the coaching, execution or penalties against Miami. I did, however, see a team completely undermanned.

http://www.row12.com/

British
Registered

14 years ago

#20

What is the difference between an excuse and an explanation? Sounds like semantical hairsplitting to me.

Are the having an effect or are they not? If they are, does it really matter if it's an excuse or an explanation?

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:

To me, it comes down to who's talking. One could argue that the folks running the team saying "but look at the injuries!" would be trying to excuse the losses and general messy play - I wouldn't make that argument, but it could be made. At least it's their job to explain these things and try to make improvements.

I, on the other hand, am just a fan. It's not my job to explain what's going on; I have only to try to make some sense of it, and that's if I choose to do so. So when I use my eyes and my brain and conclude that it's kind of hard to play winning football with nearly every key position being played by 2nd-to-3rd string players (certainly this is the case on the defense), I think that's an explanation.

Personally, those throwing the "excuse" mantra around have their own agendas - they're also the ones who least like the current regime. "Other teams have injuries!" Yes, they do - how many, and at what positions? Are they winning despite those injuries? These questions aren't asked, because the answers would weaken the position that Thompson and McCarthy are truly to blame for a slow start.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Two great posts.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

dfosterf (26m) : Mackelvie

dfosterf (28m) : Michael Macelvie- NFL teams know how to draft- Why don"t they?

dfosterf (30m) : Youtube

Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.

dfosterf (7h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo

Zero2Cool (9h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha

wpr (9h) : Tomorrow is almost here.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?

packerfanoutwest (9h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him

Zero2Cool (11h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.

packerfanoutwest (22h) : don't care

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22-Apr) : now 3

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

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

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24