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
Offline 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: 3,422
Applause Received: 946
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: 388
Applause Received: 810
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.
Offline 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: 3,991
Applause Received: 2,043
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: 6,406
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)
Offline 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: 3,991
Applause Received: 2,043
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) : It's just fine.
musccy (3h) : 5 questionable Packers, none for Falcons. Not good.
uffda udfa (3h) : Jordy not listed as OUT or DOUBTFUL. Questionable on injury report.
uffda udfa (4h) : This is the 6th straight game we've faced someone for the 2nd time. We learn.
uffda udfa (4h) : Aaron: I like our role. I like our chances. (said he relishes being an underdog)
uffda udfa (4h) : Aaron alludes to fake crowd noise at Georgia Dome for Sunday.
uffda udfa (5h) : So, to recap. Losing streak "just the way it is", winning streak "astronomical feat". #Balanced
uffda udfa (5h) : Ironically, he called the turn around "astronomical" not just the way it is in the NFL. #Don'tMissTheIrony
uffda udfa (5h) : Ted tells Demovsky the Packers weren't underachieving when 4-6. Just the way it is in the NFL????
Zero2Cool (9h) : Only time I recall getting annoyed is when they beat a single topic over and over and over.
Pack93z (9h) : Most yes... Heller seems to get it more so... diversity in his coverage... but seemingly can highlight the pressing issues properly.
Zero2Cool (9h) : I'm kind of in the boat that they all are babblying boonies.
Pack93z (9h) : God bless it... Bill Michaels can be a stubborn SOB at times... love his Packers coverage, still think he is a buffoon at times.
Zero2Cool (10h) : Jordy Nelson Named PFWA Comeback Player of the Year
Zero2Cool (11h) : Carter is predicitng the end is in ATL for Packers.
Porforis (11h) : Or I could just completely miss the part where that was Cris Carter.
Porforis (11h) : Careful there. Don't you want to predict a Packers loss just in case?
Zero2Cool (12h) : @criscarter80 :Every fairy tale comes to an end, and this is where the magic carpet ride stops in the ATL.
Zero2Cool (12h) : McCarthy: "JC Tretter actually had surgery Tuesday. He won't be available this week"
Zero2Cool (13h) : Crosby is fine now. Full Participant in practice Thursday
Porforis (14h) : What I'm more worried about at this point is WR injuries and Crosby being sick. Who'd be the backup if Crosby can't go?
Zero2Cool (14h) : We do have hope. Our secondary has improved. Also, he had to throw 80% to get 1 point up. That won't happen again.
Zero2Cool (14h) : I like to tease sometimes.
uffda udfa (14h) : Only 80%? :). We lost by one given that stat? Wish we had hope of tightening up.
uffda udfa (14h) : Z, u should tell everyone who Quintorris is. Quintorris Lopez Jones, better known as Julio.
Zero2Cool (14h) : Matt Ryan completed 80% of his passes against Packers in October.
uffda udfa (14h) : McGinn goes full on attack mode dismissing the notion of "Packers people". Harsh.
uffda udfa (14h) : McGinn says John Dorsey likely to be next Packers GM.
Zero2Cool (17h) : Boom! Davante Adams says last year's ankle injury "more difficult to deal with'
uffda udfa (20h) : Packers brass potentially leaving? Not worthy of discussing. Pressure Cooker? Never enough talk about them.
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Put Quintorris in a pressure cooker.
uffda udfa (19-Jan) : Back to football: Julio says he's going to play Sunday. Did NOT say he wouldn't be limited in the game.
uffda udfa (19-Jan) : Anyone ever used their dishwasher to make their Thanksgiving turkey?
uffda udfa (19-Jan) : Favorite Ronnie Milsap song? Smokey Mountain Rain or Any Day Now?
uffda udfa (19-Jan) : Favorite GM candidate... Wolf or Gutekunst?
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
28m / Green Bay Packers Talk / macbob

45m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

46m / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / The_Green_Ninja

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules


Packers Headlines