Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
6 Pages<1234>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Online gbguy20  
#11 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 9:20:06 AM(UTC)
Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 462
Applause Received: 497
terrible article idea, i hope the writer knocked on wood.
Offline DoddPower  
#12 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:05:14 AM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2016FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2015

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA
Applause Given: 3,420
Applause Received: 943
Nerdmann so dumb. But we all knew that, anyway. Lets Box! Lets Box!
Offline sschind  
#13 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 4:01:15 PM(UTC)
Rank: Senior Member

United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN
Applause Given: 386
Applause Received: 809
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
This makes absolutely no sense, and Texas liking it proves the theorem. I know you guys are old, but Alzheimer's already?


I guess it depends on what Nerd meant by "this team" If he meant the Green Bay Packers then yes, he is right If he meant the current team then no, they have not won anything besides 5 games this season. All of them with Aaron Rodgers.

If Rodgers were to go down against the Bears I think Wallace could easily manage 4-5 even 5-4 against the remainder of the schedule. 4-5 might get a WC 5-4 would probably get a WC and might even get the division depending on the wins.

Could he win vs playoff caliber opponents? I think he could. Could he win the SB, again I think he could but I wouldn't bet on it.
Online wpr  
#14 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 4:30:40 PM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2014FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,984
Applause Received: 2,041
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
I guess it depends on what Nerd meant by "this team" If he meant the Green Bay Packers then yes, he is right If he meant the current team then no, they have not won anything besides 5 games this season. All of them with Aaron Rodgers.

If Rodgers were to go down against the Bears I think Wallace could easily manage 4-5 even 5-4 against the remainder of the schedule. 4-5 might get a WC 5-4 would probably get a WC and might even get the division depending on the wins.

Could he win vs playoff caliber opponents? I think he could. Could he win the SB, again I think he could but I wouldn't bet on it.


Of course nerd meant the Packers organization as a whole which is a little silly. It doesn't matter what any other team did. Not even 2012 team which had so many of the current players on it. The team can only deal with the next game on their schedule not look backwards t years gone by in order to predict future victories.

If Wallace the full complement of starters he would have some chance of success but stripped as they are he will struggle because one thing is certain try as he might Wallace is no Rodgers and can not expect to have the same success Rodgers achieves.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#15 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:24:43 PM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2015

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas
Applause Given: 670
Applause Received: 489
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Of course nerd meant the Packers organization as a whole which is a little silly. It doesn't matter what any other team did. Not even 2012 team which had so many of the current players on it. The team can only deal with the next game on their schedule not look backwards t years gone by in order to predict future victories.

If Wallace the full complement of starters he would have some chance of success but stripped as they are he will struggle because one thing is certain try as he might Wallace is no Rodgers and can not expect to have the same success Rodgers achieves.


I applauded wpr's post because I thought it was nice sarcasm. It's a big duh that WE won Super Bowls before Aaron Rodgers - before he was born. Oops, I said WE, and none of us were there blocking for or catching passes from Bart or Brett. At least I don't think so hahahaha.

To me, there's nothing sacred about the WCO. The scheme didn't make the personnel; The personnel made the scheme successful.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Offline nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:33:22 PM(UTC)
Rank: Preferred Member

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 6,404
Applause Received: 1,419
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
I applauded wpr's post because I thought it was nice sarcasm. It's a big duh that WE won Super Bowls before Aaron Rodgers - before he was born. Oops, I said WE, and none of us were there blocking for or catching passes from Bart or Brett. At least I don't think so hahahaha.

To me, there's nothing sacred about the WCO. The scheme didn't make the personnel; The personnel made the scheme successful.


HISTORICAL FACT: Only ONE Superbowl winning team in the history of the league, had Aaron Rodgers on it.

It CAN be done.

Here's another fact: The WCO is a system that is based on the "modern football era" rules protecting the passing game. When the rules changed in 1970, teams began to experiment with the passing game, chiefly among them "Air Coryell." Well the WCO was derivative of that, and is based upon the fundamentals of high percentage passing, ball control and hogging time of possession.

High percentage is high percentage. Let's say you have shitty players. Well, high percentage plays with those shitty players are more likely to be successful than low percentage plays with those same players, no? Now let's say you have great players. Still, high percentage plays are more likely to be successful.

Before the rules were changed to protect the passing game, it was more advantageous to run the ball. You might have heard of the guy who mastered that. The Superbowl trophy was named after him.
Offline olds70supreme  
#17 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 6:22:20 AM(UTC)
Rank: Member

Joined: 8/10/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 24
Applause Received: 61
I'm guessing that Wallace might be able to split the final games, +/- 1. I don't think that would be good enough for the playoffs this year.

As for McGinn, I have to echo the question about him earlier in the thread. I've heard he is very well regarded among his peers, but I have trouble seeing it. I expect better than a complete homer for a beat writer, but he seems to either actively resent the team's success or is overcompensating in an effort to appear objective. The end result often is an article with really questionable logic.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 11/5/2013(UTC)
Online wpr  
#18 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 6:36:46 AM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2014FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,984
Applause Received: 2,041
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
HISTORICAL FACT: Only ONE Superbowl winning team in the history of the league, had Aaron Rodgers on it.

It CAN be done.

Here's another fact: The WCO is a system that is based on the "modern football era" rules protecting the passing game. When the rules changed in 1970, teams began to experiment with the passing game, chiefly among them "Air Coryell." Well the WCO was derivative of that, and is based upon the fundamentals of high percentage passing, ball control and hogging time of possession.

High percentage is high percentage. Let's say you have sh!tty players. Well, high percentage plays with those sh!tty players are more likely to be successful than low percentage plays with those same players, no? Now let's say you have great players. Still, high percentage plays are more likely to be successful.

Before the rules were changed to protect the passing game, it was more advantageous to run the ball. You might have heard of the guy who mastered that. The Superbowl trophy was named after him.


Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
texaspackerbacker on 11/4/2013(UTC)
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#19 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:05:23 AM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2015

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas
Applause Given: 670
Applause Received: 489
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.


Seems like I've been applauding you a lot lately.

You must have borrowed that past results/future success line from mutual funds disclaimers hahahaha.

I could learn to like Seneca Wallace real quick if he ever had to get on the field and did a decent job.

My Point in this whole thing is that the PROBLEM is Packer weakness in the O Line, as well as RB until this season, and to a great extent, our D also. Aaron Rodgers is like an addiction. He is so damn good that we have been able to win big time even with all those other weaknesses. Losing him would be like getting off of whatever meds somebody is taking - suddenly all those aches and pains and weaknesses would really come to the surface and we'd be in a world of hurt.

Offline Yerko  
#20 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:26:52 AM(UTC)
Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL
Applause Given: 212
Applause Received: 381
Didn't even read the article because the title alone is dumb...just dumb.


Reading the article is probably like being inside one of nerdmann's dreams.

I'll pass. [laughing]
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages<1234>»
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Fan Shout
uffda udfa (2h) : Favorite GM candidate... Wolf or Gutekunst?
uffda udfa (3h) : I'd rather sit them than play them too compromised.
uffda udfa (3h) : Yeah, Z. More pressure cooker talk and smoked turkeys.
Zero2Cool (3h) : If this were a regular-season game, Nelson, Adams and Allison probably would not play, MM says.
Smokey (4h) : Mason Crosby is ill, hope it's not the Flu.
Smokey (4h) : Great, can we move past that story and get back to the Atlanta game ?
Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers exec Eliot Wolf has withdrawn his name for 49ers' GM job, as @TomPelissero reported. He didn't feel it was the right time.
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : We'll just have to score TDs then.
Zero2Cool (5h) : That's what we know.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Crosby, Mason K Illness
Smokey (5h) : Is He ill or not ?
Smokey (5h) : Raiderpride asked, "Anyone know what Crosby's illness is?"
Zero2Cool (6h) : Davante Adams expected to play- KFFL
Porforis (6h) : Alright, my opinion on Jordy has changed. If he's medically cleared to play, play him.
hardrocker950 (8h) : By Sunday we won't have any WRs
Zero2Cool (9h) : Geronimo hamstring, Janis quad. BEAUTIFUL.
Smokey (9h) : Mason Crosby, is his health OK ?
Smokey (9h) : Hello
FLORIDA PACKER88 (9h) : Davis, G-Mo, and Janis will need to step up, but all three did score last time we played ATL!
FLORIDA PACKER88 (9h) : Does Janis become a playoff hero second year in a row? Looks we're gonna have to find out either way regardless. Thank God for a healthy Cob
Smokey (9h) : Is Mason Crosby's health OK ?
Smokey (10h) : What's in your Coffee ?
uffda udfa (22h) : Sit Davante if he has a bad ankle. We remember 2015.
uffda udfa (22h) : Davante is not going to practice until SAT at earliest.
uffda udfa (22h) : Davante and Jordy may be inactive at ATL.
Smokey (23h) : ROFL !!
Cheesey (23h) : The Packers SMOKED the COWBOYS!!!LOL!
Smokey (23h) : Ever Smoke a Turkey, it takes lots of rolling papers. LOL
Smokey (23h) : Thanks Cheesey. LOL
Cheesey (23h) : Smokey, it was chicken gizzards (and hearts)!
Cheesey (23h) : So let's just start by saying, I love you!
Zero2Cool (18-Jan) : Great, Geronimo Allison is on the injury report.
Zero2Cool (18-Jan) : Most irritating tweets/tweet starters: 1) This >>> 2) Yep, ...3) There it is.... 4) Not good 5) XX doing XX things 6) Because xxx
Zero2Cool (18-Jan) : Belichick when asked to discuss the importance of having the home crowd behind them: “I don’t know. Go ask Dallas and Kansas City.” …Oof.
Smokey (18-Jan) : BRAVO, ZERO !
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
6m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

14m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

32m / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

2h / Around The NFL / wpr

2h / Around The NFL / wpr

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

4h / Around The NFL / Smokey

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa


Packers Headlines