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.
4 Pages<1234>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:33:22 PM(UTC)

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,853
Applause Received: 911
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: Rookie
Joined: 8/10/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 44
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)

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

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,606
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)
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#19 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:05:23 AM(UTC)

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

Rank: Veteran Member
United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas
Applause Given: 608
Applause Received: 418
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: 179
Applause Received: 321
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]
Offline wpr  
#21 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:35:58 AM(UTC)

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

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,606
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
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.



That is because I am a reasonable man. [duh]

The mutual fund disclaimer did come to mind. I even considered going and getting one off the net but I figured I made my point with the abbreviated version.

As far as Wallace goes I don't hate him. I know he has skills and ability. Stick him out there with a fully functioning line 3 top flight WR the #1 TE and fully stocked backfield not to mention a fully functioning defense that will help get the ball for the offense and he could win a few games. Take away 1/3 of them I question his to win consistently. After all if he was really that great he would not be on his third team this year alone.
Offline warhawk  
#22 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 12:40:11 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 253
Teams would load up against the run and then unload on Wallace. It would not be pretty especially with all the guys that are out.
Arod is a special player who is managing an undermanned receiving group brilliantly. There is no throwing someone else in there and expecting the same results.

Because of how well Arod is handling the situation defenses cannot bring more players up in the box and shut down the run. His timing and accuracy is second to none but teams would alter their plan the very next play he isn't on the field.

There are some lousy teams out there and I suspect the Pack could limp into the playoffs but does anyone think there is an NFC playoff team we could beat without Arod?

Rodgers is getting the ball out quicker with superb pre-snap recognition. This takes ability, experience, confidence, and whatever else it takes. I highly doubt a guy sitting over on the sidelines not having seen a real game all year could come close to moving the team like Aaron Rodgers has.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Offline nerdmann  
#23 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 1:36:34 PM(UTC)

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,853
Applause Received: 911
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.


You're contradicting yourself.

We can take Seneca Wallace's past record and apply it to the future, but not take the historical records of teams in general? Remember, Wallace has been on some shit sucking teams. Take his record against the spread as a better indicator than his pure win/loss record.

And remember, in the playoffs, we'll have alot of these guys back. James Jones, Randall Cobb, Jermicheal Finley.

And no, the Packers DON'T run a pure WCO. They run a run and shoot vertical offense. WITH RODGERS. That's my point. We see what they're being forced to do now, with all these guys injured: adhere to fundamentals.

That's what they'd be doing with Seneca. They'd be helping him out with high percentage plays. They wouldn't be expecting him to hold the ball 8 seconds and take shots down the field.
Online sschind  
#24 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 3:52:58 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member
United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN
Applause Given: 227
Applause Received: 613
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.



Yeah, I know I was just trying to be diplomatic.

thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Offline nyrpack  
#25 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 4:21:07 PM(UTC)

Rank: Member
Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny
Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 75
who ever believes this threads title is clearly dilusional !!
Offline nerdmann  
#26 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 4:36:55 PM(UTC)

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,853
Applause Received: 911
It's a team sport, bitches! lol
Offline wpr  
#27 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 5:41:32 PM(UTC)

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

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,606
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
You're contradicting yourself.

We can take Seneca Wallace's past record and apply it to the future, but not take the historical records of teams in general? Remember, Wallace has been on some sh!t sucking teams. Take his record against the spread as a better indicator than his pure win/loss record.

And remember, in the playoffs, we'll have alot of these guys back. James Jones, Randall Cobb, Jermicheal Finley.

And no, the Packers DON'T run a pure WCO. They run a run and shoot vertical offense. WITH RODGERS. That's my point. We see what they're being forced to do now, with all these guys injured: adhere to fundamentals.

That's what they'd be doing with Seneca. They'd be helping him out with high percentage plays. They wouldn't be expecting him to hold the ball 8 seconds and take shots down the field.


Nerd it is not the same thing so I am not contradicting myself. I am saying it doesn't matter if Bart & co won two games. They are too old and can't help the team. GB could have won 50 championships in the past and if none of the players are on this team it doesn't mean squat.

All that matters is can this team, the current 2013 team, win without Aaron. And by win I don't mean 1 or 2 games in the regular season. I mean the championship. The answer is no. The current team doesn't have a number of key players. Some of them may come back. Some of them won't. Do you know how good they will be? Of course not.

On the other hand what Wallace did in the past does matter. He showed that he can not win when he didn't have an abundance of supporting help. The spread is what doesn't matter. It don't mean anything if a bunch of gamblers thought his team would lose by 20 and they only lost by 18. His 81% QB rating does matter. As I already said he is not a terrible QB. But to win he would need everyone. And everyone healthy.

In the long run none of this matters. Aaron is not going down.
Offline schroeder84  
#28 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 7:45:06 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Applause Given: 6
Applause Received: 8
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post

In the long run none of this matters. Aaron is not going down.


Just Ow. I hated to see this topic in the first place - I belong to the school of the unmentionable (it's a superstition). You never talk about a no-hitter until it's done. You never talk about a shutout until there are no goals scored. AND you sure as fark never talk about a possible injury situation that hasn't happened until it hasn't happened.

What a sad sinking feeling today. I am not sure Seneca Wallace is a long-term answer. Matt Flynn is available again, assuming losing his job 3 times in the last 14 months hasn't ruined his head. Just watching this year go down the crapper is painful.
Offline go.pack.go.  
#29 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 8:18:55 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 11/12/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 44
The writer of this article should be shot.
thanks Post received 2 applause.
schroeder84 on 11/4/2013(UTC), Zero2Cool on 11/4/2013(UTC)
Offline Bigbyfan  
#30 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:44:33 PM(UTC)

Rank: Member
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 59
Applause Received: 157
This thread needs to go to hell
thanks Post received 3 applause.
Zero2Cool on 11/4/2013(UTC), DoddPower on 11/5/2013(UTC), Mucky Tundra on 11/5/2013(UTC)
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 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
Zero2Cool (1h) : Doubt any QB is cut before Thursday. I want to see more of Matt and Brett.
uffda udfa (8h) : Mike Daniels knows: https://vine.co/v/eIneTaYPtj6
uffda udfa (11h) : Eagles fan on Packer ineptness with 4 and 12: It’s like getting handed keys to a Ferrari and constantly losing drag races to Civic’s. I don
uffda udfa (11h) : I can't. :)
Smokey (12h) : Why be a guest, come join us today !
Zero2Cool (12h) : Hyde is the injury I'm most concerned about. Cobby fine.
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 @ 12:00 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 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
31m / Green Bay Packers Talk / mikesecure

31m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Bigbyfan

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / SINCITYCHEEZE

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann


Tweeter