Change is Coming PACKERSHOME is going to be 10 years old later this season and for us to have another 10 years, things will have to change. Read Change is Coming for current issues that will be resolved.
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: 405
Applause Received: 447
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 - Bronze: 2015

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA
Applause Given: 3,019
Applause Received: 798
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: 297
Applause Received: 690
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: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,607
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: 4,939
Applause Received: 1,168
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: 23
Applause Received: 52
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: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,607
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: 196
Applause Received: 346
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: Quinton Coples released by Dolphins. Would love to see him brought in for a looksee.
uffda udfa: Goodbye, BJ.
uffda udfa: Packers extend LeTroy Guion. 3 yr for 11.25 mil
uffda udfa: I guess you come back when you have nowhere else to go. :)
uffda udfa: TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE news. I hope that is inaccurate.
Zero2Cool: Dom Capers, full defensive staff expected to return to Packers
uffda udfa: Peyton Manning in the movies: https://vimeo.com/21710095
Zero2Cool: thank ya sir
uffda udfa: Best looking site out there!
Zero2Cool: You welcome!
Cheesey: THANK YOU again for all you do.
Cheesey: You do all the work, while some think they don't have to honor your few rules.
Cheesey: Kevin, you KNOW how much I appreciate this site.
uffda udfa: Nope. Too much pressure for them.
Zero2Cool: NFL MVP's don't seem to win the Super Bowl the same year, do they?
Zero2Cool: Panthers played uninspired and predictable, actually (and sadly) reminded me of the Packers. :(
Zero2Cool: Thanks 68md, good to know some notice and appreciate.
Zero2Cool: Holding a different or less than popular view is perfectly fine. You fail to understand this even though I repeatedly tell you. It's annoyin
uffda udfa: Good night, Smokey.
Smokey: good night uffda.
uffda udfa: Wonder how Colts fans feel, and Mr. Irsay?
uffda udfa: Today, anyway.
Smokey: DEFENSE DOES WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS TT !
uffda udfa: Carolina will never be back to a SB under Cam Newton.
uffda udfa: Denver D just dominated the current MVP and the former this year.
uffda udfa: Cam for LVP in the SB. No character.
uffda udfa: Newton is a wuss. MVP? LOL.
uffda udfa: #VonFire
uffda udfa: People who have passion and expectations aren't A words. Accepting less than the best doesn't make you not one either.
uffda udfa: Sorry, Kevin...maybe you called Dakota an A word and not me? Had to be one of us.
uffda udfa: Marshawn Lynch announced his retirement in a cool way via twitter. What could've been in Green Bay, Marshawn!
uffda udfa: It's okay... you called me the "A" word. All because I don't tickle the ears. I get it.
uffda udfa: So someone like Buck deserves privileges because he's a better fan than me due to his flattering opinions?
68md: wet blanket ? He works his ass off to keep the place going for you ?
Smokey: Zero, Why are you such a wet blanket host ? A real SB "Chat" should have been a priority for this site. Wet Blanket strikes again.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

Road To Super Bowl 50
Sunday, Sep 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Sep 20 @ 7:30 PM
SEAHAWKS
Monday, Sep 28 @ 7:30 PM
CHIEFS
Sunday, Oct 4 @ 3:25 PM
at 49ers
Sunday, Oct 11 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Oct 18 @ 3:25 PM
CHARGERS
Sunday, Oct 25 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Sunday, Nov 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Broncos
Sunday, Nov 8 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Sunday, Nov 15 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 22 @ 3:25 PM
at Vikings
Thursday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
BEARS
Thursday, Dec 3 @ 7:25 PM
at Lions
Sunday, Dec 13 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Sunday, Dec 20 @ 3:05 PM
at Raiders
Sunday, Dec 27 @ 3:25 PM
at Cardinals
Sunday, Jan 3 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
50m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

1h / Announcements / DakotaT

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wade

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

12-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wade

12-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

12-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

12-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackerTraxx

11-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

11-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

9-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

9-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / FLORIDA PACKER88

9-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa


Tweeter