porky88
15 years ago

I think the Bears could win the division because of Cutler and Forte, but No. 4 is obsurb.

"porky88" wrote:



Quoting myself here because I re-read this.

I'd also add Lovie Smith to one of the reasons why Chicago could win the North this year.

Beyond that though not big on a team that overachieved a year ago.
http://www.row12.com/ 
UserPostedImage
Rockmolder
15 years ago

I agree with the article but I wouldn't expect it would go over well on a Packers site

"Cheesey" wrote:


"Negative Nelly" strikes again!!!

Just when we thought it was safe to enter a thread........."NEGATIVE NELLY is there to SAVE THE DAY! Peeing on our charcoal, so we NEVER have to worry about wild fires!
Raining on our parade, just to make SURE we don't get sun burned!!!

"Who WAS that masked man???? And WHY did he pee all over my charcoal???"

"Don't you KNOW!?!? That was "NEGATIVE NELLY!" He comes out to make SURE that NO positive thoughts might enter your Packer fan brain! THANK YOU NEGATIVE NELLY FOR MAKING US PROPERLY DREAD THE UPCOMING PACKER SEASON!!!"

(just messin' with ya DD80!!! All in jest!) :thumbleft:

"dd80forever" wrote:



This is one of the funnier things I've read since joining the forum. +1
Dulak
15 years ago
I agree with most rankings of the teams except for a few ... ravens I would of ranked higher ... chicago (obviously) was ranked too high.

They give too much weight to their previous SB run and the fact they got cutler. The bears is alot different then denver; receivers and Oline ... I think cutler is going to have a harder time there.

IMO GB's # is fine where it's at but I have a feeling that we will give the NFC a run for their money. With all the additions and changes.

oh I would of dropped dallas down a bit and houstan is up too high GB shoulder be higher then them. I also have a feeling well beat out atlanta this year. So GB shoulder of been rated 11 or 12 on this chart IMO.
Pack93z
  • Pack93z
  • Select Member Topic Starter
15 years ago
Check out page 7 of this thread...

Page 7 

You have to respect fans that can objectively look at a question, beyond the color of team shades and seek out the truth. Mr. Anderson argued the point to a tee on the Cutler vs Rodgers discussion, far better than I could have. Props.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
So, I can go to that website, but I can't download free fonts for our Zebra printer. Interesting.
UserPostedImage
Dulak
15 years ago

Check out page 7 of this thread...

Page 7 

You have to respect fans that can objectively look at a question, beyond the color of team shades and seek out the truth. Mr. Anderson argued the point to a tee on the Cutler vs Rodgers discussion, far better than I could have. Props.

"pack93z" wrote:



"Cutler out-threw Rodgers by 500 yards on 80 more attempts.
Rodgers yardage per completion was higher.
Rodgers completion percentage was higher.
Rodgers threw more touchdowns.
Rodgers threw less interceptions.
Rodgers had a higher passer rating.
Rodgers out-performed him in these ways all while being sacked three times as much, so presumably, he faced greater defensive pressure.

What exactly defines prolificacy?"

haha ya I remember seeing these #'s before ... I especially like the stat of how much more rodgers got sacked then cutler (well I dont like it for our QB) but it just shows you. I woudl really like our Oline to improve this year.

I can dream about much bigger #'s then 🙂
porky88
15 years ago
Cutler and Rodgers are actually back to back in my QB rankings.

I actually prefer Rodgers slightly more because I think he's got a better attitude and a "moxy" about him that a lot of the great ones have. A quiet cool so to speak.

I never saw that in Cutler.

I think people overestimate Chicago quite a bit.

For example, Matt Forte who has become a very big time back in many people's eyes put up basically the same numbers as Ryan Grant did last year. Both averaged about 3.9 yards a carry. Forte is a little more versatile, but when it came to running, both were about equal.

Yet Grant is viewed as a disappointment by many people including Packer fans and Forte is being touted as the next great Chicago back. The best one since arguably Walter Payton.

I don't get that and I bet if you look at a lot of rankings for backs in the game today, Forte is ahead of Grant by a lot. No way does catching the ball out of the backfield justify that in my view.

Much like some people put Cutler between 5 and 10 in the best QB's in the game today and Rodgers is quite away behind.

It makes little sense and it wreaks of big city bias if you ask me.
http://www.row12.com/ 
UserPostedImage
dd80forever
15 years ago

Cutler and Rodgers are actually back to back in my QB rankings.

I actually prefer Rodgers slightly more because I think he's got a better attitude and a "moxy" about him that a lot of the great ones have. A quiet cool so to speak.

I never saw that in Cutler.

I think people overestimate Chicago quite a bit.

For example, Matt Forte who has become a very big time back in many people's eyes put up basically the same numbers as Ryan Grant did last year. Both averaged about 3.9 yards a carry. Forte is a little more versatile, but when it came to running, both were about equal.

Yet Grant is viewed as a disappointment by many people including Packer fans and Forte is being touted as the next great Chicago back. The best one since arguably Walter Payton.

I don't get that and I bet if you look at a lot of rankings for backs in the game today, Forte is ahead of Grant by a lot. No way does catching the ball out of the backfield justify that in my view.

Much like some people put Cutler between 5 and 10 in the best QB's in the game today and Rodgers is quite away behind.

It makes little sense and it wreaks of big city bias if you ask me.

"porky88" wrote:



You also might want to factor in that Forte was basically placed in a one dimensional offense because of terrible QB play whereas GB has a good set of WR's. Grant should put Forte to shame in this scenario.
blank
ILikeThePackers39
15 years ago

Cutler and Rodgers are actually back to back in my QB rankings.

I actually prefer Rodgers slightly more because I think he's got a better attitude and a "moxy" about him that a lot of the great ones have. A quiet cool so to speak.

I never saw that in Cutler.

I think people overestimate Chicago quite a bit.

For example, Matt Forte who has become a very big time back in many people's eyes put up basically the same numbers as Ryan Grant did last year. Both averaged about 3.9 yards a carry. Forte is a little more versatile, but when it came to running, both were about equal.

Yet Grant is viewed as a disappointment by many people including Packer fans and Forte is being touted as the next great Chicago back. The best one since arguably Walter Payton.

I don't get that and I bet if you look at a lot of rankings for backs in the game today, Forte is ahead of Grant by a lot. No way does catching the ball out of the backfield justify that in my view.

Much like some people put Cutler between 5 and 10 in the best QB's in the game today and Rodgers is quite away behind.

It makes little sense and it wreaks of big city bias if you ask me.

"porky88" wrote:




Agreed 100% on Forte, at least to this point. Part of it is that Chicago fans are almost more hungry for the next Payton than they are for a real QB - they've gone through a LONG list of backs trying to find another Sweetness.

But while I do like the kid and his upside, I think it's interesting how much run he gets after one reasonably good year. If we were praising a similar player on the Pack's roster (perhaps the QB?), those same people would start with the "You can't say anything after only one year!" objections.

It would appear that those same folks who are so sour on our own roster are a bit overly-appreciative of the players on our competitors' squads. Interesting.
blank
ILikeThePackers39
15 years ago

Cutler and Rodgers are actually back to back in my QB rankings.

I actually prefer Rodgers slightly more because I think he's got a better attitude and a "moxy" about him that a lot of the great ones have. A quiet cool so to speak.

I never saw that in Cutler.

I think people overestimate Chicago quite a bit.

For example, Matt Forte who has become a very big time back in many people's eyes put up basically the same numbers as Ryan Grant did last year. Both averaged about 3.9 yards a carry. Forte is a little more versatile, but when it came to running, both were about equal.

Yet Grant is viewed as a disappointment by many people including Packer fans and Forte is being touted as the next great Chicago back. The best one since arguably Walter Payton.

I don't get that and I bet if you look at a lot of rankings for backs in the game today, Forte is ahead of Grant by a lot. No way does catching the ball out of the backfield justify that in my view.

Much like some people put Cutler between 5 and 10 in the best QB's in the game today and Rodgers is quite away behind.

It makes little sense and it wreaks of big city bias if you ask me.

"dd80forever" wrote:



You also might want to factor in that Forte was basically placed in a one dimensional offense because of terrible QB play whereas GB has a good set of WR's. Grant should put Forte to shame in this scenario.

"porky88" wrote:




Out of nothing but simple curiosity (stick a needle in my eye, honest), is there a reason you'll bend over backwards to defend a rookie RB for the Bears but don't seem nearly as inclined to give some players on the Packers' roster the same consideration?

You couldn't even give Rodgers a wee prop, up there - it's our "good set of WRs" that accounts for the balance that Grant should have been feasting on.
blank
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (6h) : 49ers might be down their QB, DL, TE and LT?
    packerfanoutwest (20h) : Jaire Alexander says he has a torn PCL
    Zero2Cool (20-Nov) : Even with the context it's ... what?
    Mucky Tundra (20-Nov) : Matt LaFleur without context: “I don’t wanna pat you on the butt and you poop in my hand.”
    beast (20-Nov) : We brought in a former Packers OL coach to help evaluate OL as a scout
    beast (20-Nov) : Jets have been pretty good at picking DL
    Zero2Cool (20-Nov) : He landed good players thanks to high draft slot. He isn't good.
    Zero2Cool (20-Nov) : He can shove his knowledge up his ass. He knows nothing.
    beast (20-Nov) : More knowledge, just like bring in the Jets head coach
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : What? Why? Huh?
    beast (19-Nov) : I wonder if the Packers might to try to bring Douglas in through Milt Hendrickson/Ravens connections
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : The Jets fired Joe Douglas, per sources
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : Jets are a mess......
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Pretty sure Jets fired their scouting staff and just pluck former Packers.
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Jets sign Anders Carlson to their 53.
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : When you cycle the weeks, the total over remains for season. But you get your W/L for that selected week. Confusing.
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : the total and percentage are the same as the previous weeks
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : the total and percentage are the same as the previous weeks
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : the totals are accurate..nrvrtmind
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : I don't follow what you are saying. The totals are not the same as last week.
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : ok so then wht are the totals the same as last week?
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : NFL Pick'em is auto updated when NFL Scores tab is clicked
    Martha Careful (19-Nov) : The offense was OK. Let's not forget the Bear defense is very very good.
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : Who updates the leaderboard on NFLPickem?
    beast (19-Nov) : Has the Packers offense been worse since the former Jets coach joined the Packers?
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Offense gets his ass in gear, this could be good.
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Backup QB helped with three wins. Special Teams contributed to three wins.
    bboystyle (18-Nov) : Lions played outside thats why. They scored 16 and 17 in the only 2 outside games this year
    Zero2Cool (18-Nov) : The rest of the NFL is catching up to Packers ... kicking is an issue throughout league
    packerfanoutwest (18-Nov) : Packers DL Kenny Clark: We knew 'we were going to block' Bears' game-winning field goal attempt
    Zero2Cool (18-Nov) : Lions seem to be throttling everyone, but only (only) got 24 lol maybe the rain is why
    Zero2Cool (18-Nov) : Packers vs Lions game doesn't seem so bad.
    beast (18-Nov) : Dennis Green "They are what we thought they were, and we let them off the hook!"
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : comment of the day Z2Cool "Bears better than we want to admit. Packers worse than we think. It's facts."
    Mucky Tundra (17-Nov) : my worst case scenario: Bears fix their oline and get a coach like Johnson from the Lions and his scheme
    Zero2Cool (17-Nov) : Bears get OL fixed amd we might have a problem
    buckeyepackfan (17-Nov) : Pretty sure they already have scouting reports on guys who aren't even starting for their college team. The future is now for me.
    buckeyepackfan (17-Nov) : I tend to let Gute and Co. Worry about the future.
    beast (17-Nov) : That's great news and Packers need to keep upgrading their OL, DL and DBs this off-season, so missing one guy doesn't kill them
    beast (17-Nov) : That's great news and Packers need to keep upgrading their OL, DL and DBs this off-season, so missing one guy doesn't kill them
    buckeyepackfan (17-Nov) : Jaire and Evans Williams are both ACTIVE! Good news.
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : The badgers really need to change the whole offensive scheme. No draws no screens plus the quarterback is marginal
    Cheesey (17-Nov) : If the Badgers had a decent QB, they would have won. The guy can't hit a wide open receiver
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : chop block
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : there was a very questionable job Block call that upon viewing replay was very borderline
    beast (17-Nov) : How so? (I didn't watch)
    Zero2Cool (17-Nov) : Badgers got hosed vs Oregon
    packerfanoutwest (16-Nov) : damn,he hasn't played since week 2
    Mucky Tundra (15-Nov) : poor guy can't catch a break
    wpr (15-Nov) : wow. That three different things for the kid.
    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
    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 @ 12:00 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    19-Nov / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

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