Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
The point is the collective weight of those points you mentioned doesn't warrant the level of vitriol you spew against him.

You rail against the offensive line situation, yet we were a top-5 offense last year. Either the offensive line isn't all that bad, or Rodgers is an incredible quarterback. You can't have it both ways.

Vonta Leach? What has he done since he was released? The guy has 3 rushing yards, 291 receiving yards, and 3 receiving TDs in 6 years. Sure, he may be a good run blocker, but it's not like he helped keep his QB in Houston from being one of the most sacked QBs in the league year in and year out.

The Williams situation has been debunked to death. He wasn't going to stay on the Packers and he's done nothing since he left.

Jon Ryan consistently ranks in the top 10 in yardage (though not in net yardage), yet he's also one of the most-blocked punters in the league. So it's a mixed bag.
UserPostedImage
porky88
14 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:



That would be correct if teams didn't stack the box against the Packers. The only team that didn't was Minnesota because they don't need to with the talent they have at stopping the run.

Both backs faced teams who stacked the box. Part of the reason why Rodgers did put up as good as numbers as he did was because teams put a bigger emphasis on stopping Grant.

Rodgers has a couple of games and specifically Tennessee where he benefited from the isolated defensive backs facing Green Bay's receivers. The Titans are one example of a team who focused on stopping the run.

Dallas is another. I was at that game and Dallas put a big emphasis on stopping Ryan Grant. They made sure he was not going to get going.

The week before the Lions did as well. Pretty much because they didn't want to get embarrassed again by another back due to Michael Turner putting up 200 on them in week one.

Atlanta and Tampa Bay are two more teams that did this.

Don't get me wrong, I'd take Forte over Grant mostly because Forte is an every down player, but I think putting Forte in the upper echelon of backs is a joke and some have gone out of there way to try and make that point.

3.9 yards per carry doesn't make you the next Walter Payton or an elite back at all. It doesn't for Grant, but then again nobody is making him out to be something that he's not.
dd80forever
14 years ago

The point is the collective weight of those points you mentioned doesn't warrant the level of vitriol you spew against him.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:




That is your opinion, sir. I was responding to your post about me having no reason to dislike him.

The problem is because you think these points are not valid, that I should just say "Nonstop is right. I like him now".

If those things don't bother you, fine. However, they bother me to a great degree. We were 6-10 last year. Whether out Offense was a top offense in the league means nothing. We had to keep extra guys in to help protect A-Rod last year, the O-line is far from fixed.

I've stated my opinion 100 times over on Williams thing you are so proudly stating you have Debunked. Before you start pounding your chest, realize my problem was not that we let Williams go, but the fact we tried to use Jamal Bustin Mandarich Harrell to replace him. Are you saying Ted did a good job handling the D-Line situation? Now get out the ........"Ted not perfect"..... "It's not his fault" ...... "Sanders is gone"...... line of garbage.

Ryan is better than Derrick Frost any day of the week and stating Ryan gets more punts blocked than Frost is a bogus argument and is grasping for straws.

You talk about Vonta Leach's stats but forgot to mention what the stats for Koren Robinson were. Vonta was a hell of a blocker. Pointing to a FB's stats as validation is laughable though, I must admit. Where's Koren these days? He was definitly "Packer People".

The point is because you give ted a mulligan for these things, I do not, and I haven't even touched the Favre fiasco, but don't run around here doing cartwheels repeating your worn-out rhetoric about me "having no reason to dislike him" thing, when I have laid out a list for you.

Wouldn't it be nice if Ted just won football games, so you could point to that as validation instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel for "Punts Blocked" stats. Your neverending defending of him could be easily back-up with a Super Bowl appearence if he had one. I think that would be great as well.
blank
TheEngineer
14 years ago


We were 6-10 last year. Whether out Offense was a top offense in the league means nothing. We had to keep extra guys in to help protect A-Rod last year, the O-line is far from fixed.

"dd80forever" wrote:



Well that's an interesting thing to say. If it is then the case that the performance of the offense is immaterial considering the record, how does one delineate the collective faults of the team that rendered us 6-10 for the season? If you can say, Jon Ryan's release and his replacement were clearly a mistake by Thompson which in turn was one reason among many which caused the Packers to fall to 6-10, then why is it not reasonable to say however that the offense of the Packers performed well for the season, and some aspect of the coaching team should be congratulated for that? Why is it that the negative means something but the positive does not?
blank
dd80forever
14 years ago


We were 6-10 last year. Whether out Offense was a top offense in the league means nothing. We had to keep extra guys in to help protect A-Rod last year, the O-line is far from fixed.

"TheEngineer" wrote:



Well that's an interesting thing to say. If it is then the case that the performance of the offense is immaterial considering the record, how does one delineate the collective faults of the team that rendered us 6-10 for the season? If you can say, Jon Ryan's release and his replacement were clearly a mistake by Thompson which in turn was one reason among many which caused the Packers to fall to 6-10, then why is it not reasonable to say however that the offense of the Packers performed well for the season, and some aspect of the coaching team should be congratulated for that? Why is it that the negative means something but the positive does not?

"dd80forever" wrote:




I'm trying to decipher this. You want me to congratulate the coaching staff on assembling an offense with good stats?

Ok, Good Job Staff!

And while I'm at it......

Good Job Ted Thompson for giving us alot of Cap Space!

and Good Job A-Rod for not throwing a pletora of INT'S!

and Good Job A-Rod for growing that ultra-hip stache

and Good Job to all the Packers for doing charity work!


.........................................................Now, can we PLEASE win some football games
blank
Orygunfan76
14 years ago

The problem with the Bears and how they're viewed is people actually think they still have a good defense.

That was soooooo 2005 and 2006.

The defense struggled in 07 and got even worse last season.

How is it going to get better?

They don't have many young pieces in place. The DE's are a mess with Kampman and yes Cullen Jenkins in four games having more sacks combined than the Bears trio.

Good linebackers even though Urlacher is declining.

Terrible secondary though. I mean awful in comparisons to Green Bay's and Minnesota's.

I think the Bears could win the division because of Cutler and Forte, but No. 4 is obsurb. I would take the Giants, Eagles, Cowboys, and Falcons ahead of Chicago for sure.

That's just in the NFC.

"porky88" wrote:



The Bears defense faultered in 2007 due mainly to injuries. They had lost 5 defensive starters by about the 4th week of that season(nearly half the starting defense!) that'll kill any teams defense as well as having the defense on the field the whole time because their offense was a joke in 07 and 08(other than Forte maybe). In 08 the defense was a top 5 unit against the run but the secondary got killed due to the fact that they didn't have any sort of pass rush so opposing QBs had all day to pick them apart (see Griese and his 67 pass attempts against them). I think the Bears defensive secondary and front four will be much improved from last season maybe not 05-06 form, but much improved. I think the Packers defense will suffer growing pains from the switchover to the 3-4 but will eventually be really good. Minny's defense will not be as good when the steroid brothers miss their 4 games. Detroit......can they get any worse?

Oh yeah, and yes, I think the Bears are ranked too high.
blank
Fan Shout
dhazer (6h) : wow the last 2 picks are really stupid and probably will be special teams players Top 10 draft pick next year book it
TheKanataThrilla (7h) : I think he ended up with a terrible RAS score
dhazer (7h) : 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 (23h) : Z, could you please combine my thread with yours please. I obviously did not see it when I Created it
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Re: 'Kool-Aid' McKinstry. Other than Icky Woods, has there ever been a good NFLer with a childish nickname?
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Packers looking to trade up
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Flag?
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Sag?
Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : 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.
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
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

27m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

43m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

26-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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