earthquake
9 years ago
Sorry, you didn't predict 8-8 yourself, just "whole heartedly agreed" with an article painting the Packers as an 8-8 team. Massive difference there.

http://www.packershome.com/forum/posts/m284817-lastmessage#post284817 


blank
uffda udfa
9 years ago

Sorry, you didn't predict 8-8 yourself, just "whole heartedly agreed" with an article painting the Packers as an 8-8 team. Massive difference there.

http://www.packershome.com/forum/posts/m284817-lastmessage#post284817 

Originally Posted by: earthquake 



I agreed with the article then and I agree with it today. We have the TALENT of an 8-8 team. Aaron Rodgers being the guy who elevates us well beyond the rest of the roster's limitations.

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."


macbob
9 years ago

I agreed with the article then and I agree with it today. We have the TALENT of an 8-8 team. Aaron Rodgers being the guy who elevates us well beyond the rest of the roster's limitations.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You're full of c-r-a-p. We have the talent of a 9-3 team.

Last time I looked Aaron Rodgers was part of the team. Sorry, but you can't subtract out our best players and then say our team stinks.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
9 years ago

To offend a few you alienate the many? Not cool.


Anyhow. I haven't been able to find many videos on the experts talking about the Packers and Patriots game. I was thinking with all the hype the videos would be falling all over. All I've been seeing is articles.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I apologize if I offended anyone(not sure how).

Not my intent.


I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
Zero2Cool
9 years ago

I agreed with the article then and I agree with it today. We have the TALENT of an 8-8 team. Aaron Rodgers being the guy who elevates us well beyond the rest of the roster's limitations.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but can you elaborate? Basically, I'm trying to figure out how you're rating the teams talent. Nearly every expert is saying the Packers are one of the most talented teams in the NFL. They are basing their opinion on watching coaches tapes and TV broadcasts. I'm just curious what you're seeing differently.
UserPostedImage
macbob
9 years ago

You could've told me how we were going to beat NE before we actually did.

BTW... I'm not all that impressed with this win because we put up 131 yards in 2nd half and only 86 through the air. How we got outcoached that badly in 2nd half is a mystery. Just look at these Mike McCarthy greatness articles...the great coach almost blew the game for us. A sickening 2nd half lacking all the creativity of the 1st.

Do I think the Packers stink? No. I think they are SB favorites now and it would be a shame if they blew it. I don't know that I trust our D... Blount averaged close to 6 yards a carry... I shouldn't have to tell you that is terrible anymore than I should that our 2nd half offense was HORRIBLE.

Thrilled with the win...just not pleased with what I saw in a 2nd half that should've cost us the W. Extremely fortunate to walk out of a home game with a win with that 2nd half offensive performance.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



We played one of the best teams in the NFL--the team currently leading the AFC--and they made it difficult for us in the second half??? I'd be shocked if they DIDN'T make it difficult for us.

It's not just coaching, it's executing on the field, and the Patriots are a very, very good team.

I highly recommend Tedy Bruschi's Monday Chat. I thought it was a excellent read.

Unless you have a pre-conceived notion about how McCarthy was outcoached, etc. and don't want to let reality get in the way of your perception.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/page/bruschiontap-1201/bruschi-tap-patriots-packers-clinic-intellectual-football 


Packers best Patriots in this chess match, but Round 2 not out of the question

...This was intellectual football on both sides. You could see the adjustments Mike McCarthy made. In the first half, one of them was coming out in "01" personnel (no backs, one tight end). You see one of your main weapons, receiver Randall Cobb, getting handled at the line of scrimmage. So let's take our running back off the field and put Cobb in the backfield. So now it's Kyle Arrington on Cobb out of the backfield.

Linebacker Rob Ninkovich trying to cover receiver Randall Cobb out of the backfield? That matchup on one well-designed play had to make Mike McCarthy smile.

They're also using bunch formations to create traffic problems. I'm shaking my head rewatching the film, as there are brilliant adjustments on each side of the ball.

The wheel route to Cobb, when Rob Ninkovich was on him, I don't think Ninkovich had him man-to-man. I just think he's doing what he's taught -- to peel off when that threat is presented to him. If you watch, Arrington has Cobb in man coverage from the LB level, and he's aligned at the LB level because Cobb is in the backfield, and that's where he should be aligned. Arrington gets caught up in a traffic situation from the bunch and he can't make it through to get his coverage. Ninkovich is doing the best he can to hold him off. But come on -- Ninkovich running with Cobb? There you have McCarthy telling Bill Belichick, "I have a bag of tricks, too."

ESPNBoston wrote:




UserPostedImage
earthquake
9 years ago

You're full of c-r-a-p. We have the talent of a 9-3 team.

Last time I looked Aaron Rodgers was part of the team. Sorry, but you can't subtract out our best players and then say our team stinks.

Originally Posted by: macbob 



Right, and if you actually read the original article, it paints the Packers as an 8-8 team WITH Rodgers. So its BS no matter how you look at it, Uffda backtracking so he doesn't look as foolish as his statements in that thread while simultaneously trying to pretend like he's still somehow correct. Just classic stuff here, you can't make this up.

Additionally, if you take away the best player from any team, that team will look significantly less talented. Rodgers is arguably the best player in the entire league, so taking him away has a pretty remarkable effect, but the same applies equally to the Patriots, Broncos, etc. You take away Brady or Manning, and those teams will look a lot worse than they do with their star QBs. This is simply pointing out the obvious, not some brilliant observation.
blank
sschind
9 years ago

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but can you elaborate? Basically, I'm trying to figure out how you're rating the teams talent. Nearly every expert is saying the Packers are one of the most talented teams in the NFL. They are basing their opinion on watching coaches tapes and TV broadcasts. I'm just curious what you're seeing differently.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



There is where you are making your mistake Zero. These so called experts are watching games and film and tape and talking to players and coaches and insignificant stuff like that there. They are not listening to Ufda which is all they would have to do to know the truth apparently.

In ufda's defense there is a grain of truth to what he is saying. I think starting out this people may have been a bit more optimistic about this team than perhaps was warranted based on past performance and key additions. I don't think many people were concerned about the offense outside the TE position and maybe #3 WR but I think those questions were addressed more than adequately (I'd like to see a stronger showing from our TEs but Rodgers is still young, I'm willing to give him a chance) There defense was highly suspect and I guess in some ways they still may be suspect but I think they have shown that they may not be as bad as some people thought. Over all as a team I think they have proven they were worthy of the optimism so many people showed in them.

Like I said, I had some of the same misgivings he did early on but I can see areas where they have either improved to be or simply proved that they are one of the best teams in the league. Are they the best? I don't think there is a best team. Every team has weaknesses and every team can be beat. I think they are one of the top 5, (Packers, Patriots, Broncos, Seahawks and maybe the Eagles) heck I'll even say top 6 and throw in the Lions. I think you can make a strong argument for any one of them being the best and on any given Sunday or stretch of two or three Sundays any one of them can be the best but chances are they will stumble eventually and prove that they are mortals. How far they stumble and for how long is what will determine if they are truly one of the best teams. If one of those top 5 teams doesn't win the SB I will be very very surprised.

Bottom line for me is the Packers are 9-3. They lost 3 games to tough opponents on the road the last one 5 games ago. More recently they beat 2 of the best teams at home and toughed out a few gritty wins along the way. That's pretty much what the rest of the best teams have done. I am a Packer fan and I think they are good enough to win the SB so I am going to say they will win it. If I were a fan of the Lions or the Eagles or any one of the other teams I mentioned and maybe even a few others I would believe my team is going to win it. I do not think that is unreasonable and I don't think it is blind homerism especially when A LOT of other non fans are predicting the same thing.

I'm not doubting that Ufda is a huge fan. I think he pays much closer attention than many of us do and I will say even me. I just wonder if he wants so badly for this team to be Aaron Rodgers and 52 other guys for whatever reason that he either overlooks the improvements or simply denies them. You can't start the season by saying it is all Aaron Rodgers, admit they have improved and still maintain that its all Aaron Rodgers.
uffda udfa
9 years ago

We played one of the best teams in the NFL--the team currently leading the AFC--and they made it difficult for us in the second half??? I'd be shocked if they DIDN'T make it difficult for us.

It's not just coaching, it's executing on the field, and the Patriots are a very, very good team.

I highly recommend Tedy Bruschi's Monday Chat. I thought it was a excellent read.

Unless you have a pre-conceived notion about how McCarthy was outcoached, etc. and don't want to let reality get in the way of your perception.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/page/bruschiontap-1201/bruschi-tap-patriots-packers-clinic-intellectual-football 

Originally Posted by: macbob 



You do realize the things Bruschi is praising happened in the 1st half and not the 2nd, right? That is my issue...what happened in the 2nd on O. This backs that up and then some...

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/152192/inside-slant-nfl-week-13-qb-report 

Rodgers focused his efforts downfield during the first half of Sunday's matchup before pulling back after halftime. His average throw distance in the first half was 12.2 yards past the line of scrimmage. He threw nine passes that traveled at least 15 yards downfield, completing five for 171 yards and a touchdown. Downfield passes are lower-percentage throws, of course, and Rodgers overthrew four of his first eight attempts based on ESPN video analysis. In the second half, Rodgers didn't throw a single pass that traveled more than 10 yards downfield and his average throw traveled 5.3 yards. Not surprisingly, he was off target -- based on ESPN video analysis -- on only two of his final 30 throws. The Packers' pass protection also was exceptional, as Rodgers was pressured (sacked or put under duress) on only six of his 43 dropbacks (14 percent). For the season, Rodgers' pressure rate is 23 percent. (On those six pressured dropbacks, Rodgers was sacked three times and threw three incompletions.) The pass protection allowed Rodgers to set season highs in the average time he spent in the pocket (2.82 seconds) and time spent before throwing (3.11 seconds). His season averages had been 2.34 seconds and 2.57 seconds, respectively.

FINAL ANALYSIS
Considered through this lens, Rodgers aggressively helped the Packers build their lead in the first half and then protected it with higher-percentage throws in the second. The Patriots' decision to sit back in coverage -- they blitzed just 14 percent of the time -- helps explain the time he spent in the pocket and the strategy of throwing short. In the end, it gave the Packers a victory over one of the NFL's hottest teams.

I loved the 1st half minus all the FG's. The 2nd half was dreadful...all that creativity and "bag of tricks" GONE when the 2nd half kicked. I don't have any pre conceived notion but I feel you do. To not admit we were BRUTAL on O in the 2nd half is inaccurate at best. Night and day halves. 2nd half failings almost cost us and likely should've. We got away with one.

BTW...I'm not a huge Aaron Rodgers fanatic. I do think he's a sure HOF'er and the best to ever throw it. I'm not a sycophant for him, though. He has failings he shouldn't for as good as he is.

I'm a RC18 fan love that guy... like Jordy... Lacy is good... Clay and Daniels are good players. Shields and Hayward are good. See some talent in a guy like Janis, Jayrone, Ha Ha. You win as a team but we all know the reason we're competitive is Aaron Rodgers.


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."


DoddPower
9 years ago

I'm a RC18 fan love that guy... like Jordy... Lacy is good... Clay and Daniels are good players. Shields and Hayward are good. See some talent in a guy like Janis, Jayrone, Ha Ha. You win as a team but we all know the reason we're competitive is Aaron Rodgers.


Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



What NFL team would be serious Super Bowl contenders without their superstar QB? The 10-6 Patriots the one season without Tom Brady are more of an exception, not an indication of the norm. The vast majority of elite teams are elite because of their QB. At least in today's NFL. There are exceptions to anything and everything, and always will be. But the norm is elite quarterback = contending team. The Seahawks or 49'ers could be an exception recently, but Russell Wilson is pretty damn good. The 49'ers I could buy to some extent. I've never thought Kaepernick was that good, but the coaching is often great and puts him in a position to succeed. Of course, he also usually has a great defense. Where would the Patriots, Broncos, Chargers, Lions, Saints, Dallas, Colts, Steelers, et al. be without their starting QBs? A couple of those teams may still make the playoffs, but it would be very unlikely they would go far. It's just how today's NFL is.

Could the Packers have better talent? Absolutely. Every team could. But they could also have a much worse team. Ted Thompson has done a good to very good job of assembling a contending team, but not necessarily a great job. It could always be better. But the undeniable fact is that it's still pretty damn good. Just like most contending teams, it likely wouldn't be nearly as good without its starting QB. So? Thankfully the Packers have their starting QB at the moment.
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    TheKanataThrilla (30m) : I think he ended up with a terrible RAS score
    dhazer (32m) : Anyone know what went on with Kitchens from Florida? At 1 point he was to be the Packers 1st round and he is way down the board now
    Martha Careful (16h) : Z, could you please combine my thread with yours please. I obviously did not see it when I Created it
    Martha Careful (19h) : Re: 'Kool-Aid' McKinstry. Other than Icky Woods, has there ever been a good NFLer with a childish nickname?
    Martha Careful (20h) : Packers looking to trade up
    Martha Careful (23h) : Flag?
    Martha Careful (23h) : Sag?
    Nonstopdrivel (23h) : It rhymes with "bag."
    beast (26-Apr) : Family? That's Deadpool's F word
    Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : Not THAT f-word.
    Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : fuck
    beast (25-Apr) : 49ers are Cap Tight
    beast (25-Apr) : Fuck
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Kanata, I will be when I'm on my lunch later
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Love you NSD
    Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Huh. I guess the F-word is censored in this fan shout.
    Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Anyone who doesn't hang out in the chat probably smokes pole.
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : GoPackGo Thinking CB is the pick tonight
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Anyone hanging out in the chat tonight?
    Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : whoa...49ers have had trade conversations about both Deebo Samuel and Brandon Aiyuk
    Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : I hope they take a Punter at 9th overall. Be bold!
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : I may end up eating those words but I think they need a lot more talent then their 4 picks can provide
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : I really hope they stand pat and Draft a WR
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : @DMRussini
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : The Chicago Bears are very open for business at 9 and telling teams they are ready to move for the right price, per source
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : Lions extend Penei Soul 4yrs - 112mil
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : Lions extend St. Brown 4 years 120mil and
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : Now look, trading up to 13 to take a TE might not seem like a good idea later but it will be later!
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : (Your trade up mock post)
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : Mucky- The only thing fun to watch would be me flipping the f out if Gute goes up to 13 and grabs Brock Bowers, lol
    beast (24-Apr) : DT Byron Murphy II, Texas... whom some believe is the next Aaron Donald (or the closest thing to Donald)
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : What? And who?
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : *sad Mucky noises*
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : @JoeJHoyt Murphy said he’s been told he won’t slide past pick No. 16.
    wpr (23-Apr) : Just about time to watch Sonny Weaver stick it to the seahags. I never get tired of it.
    Martha Careful (23-Apr) : *game plan
    Martha Careful (23-Apr) : IMHO, not even close. He is not a guy you game play around.
    Mucky Tundra (23-Apr) : is Aiyuk worth a 1st rounder?
    Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : 49ers are seeking a 1st round pick in exchange for WR Brandon Aiyuk
    Mucky Tundra (22-Apr) : Based on Gutes comments, now I don't feel as silly having 13 picks in my mock the other day
    Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Zach Wilson to Broncos.
    Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Gutekunst says he'd love to have 13 or 14 picks. He's trading back huh lol
    beast (22-Apr) : Someday we'll have a draft betting scandal
    beast (21-Apr) : Sometimes looking extremely amazing, sometimes looking extremely lost
    beast (21-Apr) : I haven't looked into the QBs, but some have suggested Maye has some of the most extremely inconsistent tape they've seen
    beast (21-Apr) : Well it also sounds like Patriots are listening to trade offers, not that seriously considering any, but listening means they aren't locked
    Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Maye needs to be AFC
    Mucky Tundra (21-Apr) : Not liking the idea of the Vikings getting Maye
    Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Vikings HC joked that he may or may not have sent flowers to Bob Kraft. That's where rumor came from.
    beast (21-Apr) : Can't tell if this is real or BS, but some rumors about a possible Patriots/Vikings trade for #3 overall
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    21m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    26-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

    25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    24-Apr / Random Babble / beast

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