Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
3 Pages<123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Formo  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, July 28, 2010 8:40:03 AM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

The thing that bugs the hell out of me is how they claim that the Saint FINALLY found the blueprint to beating the Vikings.. When the fact of the matter is.. The FACT of the matter is that the VIKINGS beat the Vikings. NOT the Saints. The Saints took great advantage of the eggs the Vikings laid.

The teams that, IMO, found the blueprint to beating the Vikings were the Cardinals and the Panthers.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Offline IronMan  
#17 Posted : Wednesday, July 28, 2010 9:02:20 AM(UTC)
IronMan

Rank: Pro Bowl

ESPN NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2010

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 74
Applause Received: 86

So the secret to beating Favre is to play really good pass coverage, and win the one on one battles up front? Yeah...a lot easier said than done. The Saints didn't unlock any secrets. They just executed very well.
Offline DakotaT  
#18 Posted : Wednesday, July 28, 2010 2:52:20 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 661
Applause Received: 1,360

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
So the secret to beating Favre is to play really good pass coverage, and win the one on one battles up front? Yeah...a lot easier said than done. The Saints didn't unlock any secrets. They just executed very well.


I thought the Vikings dominated that game on both sides of the ball; and it couldn't have provided more proof that they are a cursed team, even moreso than the Chicago Cubs, because they have had more opportunity for greatness.
UserPostedImage
Offline Zero2Cool  
#19 Posted : Wednesday, July 28, 2010 3:07:07 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,955
Applause Received: 2,186

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
The thing that bugs the hell out of me is how they claim that the Saint FINALLY found the blueprint to beating the Vikings.. When the fact of the matter is.. The FACT of the matter is that the VIKINGS beat the Vikings. NOT the Saints. The Saints took great advantage of the eggs the Vikings laid.

The teams that, IMO, found the blueprint to beating the Vikings were the Cardinals and the Panthers.


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
So the secret to beating Favre is to play really good pass coverage, and win the one on one battles up front? Yeah...a lot easier said than done. The Saints didn't unlock any secrets. They just executed very well.



Yes, the point of most defense is to get to the QB and disrupt his rhythm. No one's saying the Saints unlocked any trade secrets or anything of that nature. I'm saying they sacrificed men deep for men up front to apply pressure. They took a risk in hoping they could get to Favre before he released the ball to an open receiver.

I just think more teams will use an extra backer or lineman to apply pressure on Brett. I think also, he's going to scorch many teams on that with short dump offs. I think it'll be successful a game or two, but you can't stop Brett with one flavor, he'll find a way to beat you.

Don't mention Capers, he's Favre's bitch, there's no denying it.

I don't remember the Saints/Vikings game fully, but I didn't get the impression the Vikings were beating themselves more than the Saints were beating them. The Saints were forcing the Vikings into making mistakes, which is what good teams do. You rattle their cage and pounce on the miscues.

I don't think there's really a blueprint to beating Brett. If you throw heavy blitz, he'll kill you with short passes. You use coverage, be it zone or bump, he'll find away to zip the ball in there.

If there's a "blueprint" to beating Brett, I think it's getting his team down by a score or two, and hit him hard over and over again to wear him down into getting frustrated and forcing passes.
UserPostedImage
Offline dingus  
#20 Posted : Wednesday, July 28, 2010 6:45:31 PM(UTC)
dingus

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 27

Hell of a post Zero, well stated.

They Should be showing the championship games on NFLN this weekend or next though and it might be worth checking out again cuz Formo's right, the Vikes had a lot to do with beating themselves in that game.
blank
Offline Zero2Cool  
#21 Posted : Wednesday, July 28, 2010 7:34:46 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,955
Applause Received: 2,186

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Hell of a post Zero, well stated.

They Should be showing the championship games on NFLN this weekend or next though and it might be worth checking out again cuz Formo's right, the Vikes had a lot to do with beating themselves in that game.


Guess I seem to take the whole beating yourself more of an excuse than reason. I'm not saying the Saints were more talented, but when a team forces you to make mistakes, and then capitalize on them, I thought that was the point of being an aggressive defense. Force your opponent to buckle and screw up.

I don't really remember the game too much, so I could be wrong. Maybe the Vikings OL was sacking Brett and the WR switching uniforms in the middle of the routes. :P Nah seriously, I just don't buy it.

I can't say I understood it when a fan says we beat ourselves, hell, even I've said it in the past, but really, what does that mean? How does a team beat itself?

Certain things I could understand, say missing a 30 some yard FG with limited pressure on the kicker. QB with plenty of time, has an open WR and throws it into coverage and intercepted. Fumbling the ball without anyone touching you. Etc, things of that nature, sure I get that, but I didn't see too many mistakes that weren't attributed to the Saints whipping the shit out of the Vikings in a way the Packers could only dream of doing.

Or is saying your team beat itself a way of saying they choked?


:shrug:
UserPostedImage
Offline Formo  
#22 Posted : Thursday, July 29, 2010 4:09:51 AM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

Despite the many questionable calls (not using them as excuses because they shouldn't have even mattered if the Vikings did their job), the Vikings turned the ball over way too many times. I think 5. But put it on the ground 6 or 7 (my memory keeps telling me 7, but I'm not sure). The most they turned the ball over in any other game was 3. So judging from past recent performances, they beat themselves. They turned the ball over 2 more times than they had in their second most turnover prone game of that year.

The Saints had NOTHING to do with the botched handoff between Favre / AP. There wasn't a Saint close enough to touch either one of those guys. That's just ONE example of how the Vikings beat themselves that game. That was in the red zone too. That's a potential 7 point swing.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Offline zombieslayer  
#23 Posted : Thursday, July 29, 2010 4:34:31 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Despite the many questionable calls (not using them as excuses because they shouldn't have even mattered if the Vikings did their job), the Vikings turned the ball over way too many times. I think 5. But put it on the ground 6 or 7 (my memory keeps telling me 7, but I'm not sure). The most they turned the ball over in any other game was 3. So judging from past recent performances, they beat themselves. They turned the ball over 2 more times than they had in their second most turnover prone game of that year.

The Saints had NOTHING to do with the botched handoff between Favre / AP. There wasn't a Saint close enough to touch either one of those guys. That's just ONE example of how the Vikings beat themselves that game. That was in the red zone too. That's a potential 7 point swing.


I'm with Formo on this one. The Vikings should have won that game.

Teams can kill themselves. If you don't believe me, watch Wrecks Grossman single-handedly give the Super Bowl to the Colts. The Colts didn't win that game. Wrecks Grossman lost it.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline Gravedigga  
#24 Posted : Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:41:11 AM(UTC)
Gravedigga

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/16/2008(UTC)


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
So the secret to beating Favre is to play really good pass coverage, and win the one on one battles up front? Yeah...a lot easier said than done. The Saints didn't unlock any secrets. They just executed very well.


Yea man, the Saints are a pretty good team. They have a bunch of great players and the offense to force the Vikes to stay in predictable pass mode all game long. There might be only 2 or 3 teams with the weapons to be able to execute that gameplan and even still, the Vikings blew it big time in that game. That plus all the fumbles shooting themselves in the foot. Seriously, you're playing a dominant team like the Saints and you fumble the ball 6 times!!! 6 freaking fumbles and one interception going into that last drive!!! How they were even in that game at all is amazing.
--------------------------------------------
UserPostedImage


A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d
Offline Gravedigga  
#25 Posted : Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:48:52 AM(UTC)
Gravedigga

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/16/2008(UTC)


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
The thing that bugs the hell out of me is how they claim that the Saint FINALLY found the blueprint to beating the Vikings.. When the fact of the matter is.. The FACT of the matter is that the VIKINGS beat the Vikings. NOT the Saints. The Saints took great advantage of the eggs the Vikings laid.

The teams that, IMO, found the blueprint to beating the Vikings were the Cardinals and the Panthers.


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
So the secret to beating Favre is to play really good pass coverage, and win the one on one battles up front? Yeah...a lot easier said than done. The Saints didn't unlock any secrets. They just executed very well.



Yes, the point of most defense is to get to the QB and disrupt his rhythm. No one's saying the Saints unlocked any trade secrets or anything of that nature. I'm saying they sacrificed men deep for men up front to apply pressure. They took a risk in hoping they could get to Favre before he released the ball to an open receiver.

I just think more teams will use an extra backer or lineman to apply pressure on Brett. I think also, he's going to scorch many teams on that with short dump offs. I think it'll be successful a game or two, but you can't stop Brett with one flavor, he'll find a way to beat you.

Don't mention Capers, he's Favre's bitch, there's no denying it.

I don't remember the Saints/Vikings game fully, but I didn't get the impression the Vikings were beating themselves more than the Saints were beating them. The Saints were forcing the Vikings into making mistakes, which is what good teams do. You rattle their cage and pounce on the miscues.

I don't think there's really a blueprint to beating Brett. If you throw heavy blitz, he'll kill you with short passes. You use coverage, be it zone or bump, he'll find away to zip the ball in there.

If there's a "blueprint" to beating Brett, I think it's getting his team down by a score or two, and hit him hard over and over again to wear him down into getting frustrated and forcing passes.



Yea, it's not like finally after 18 or so seasons, the NFL finally found the blueprint to beating Brett. It's always been the same. Knock him on his ass and force him to come from behind. Thats why the Cowboys would beat him every time in early 90's. It's easy to say it on paper but not so easy to execute it unless you have a very talented and dynamic defense that's built around pressing the QB and you can get a lead on him.
--------------------------------------------
UserPostedImage


A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d
Offline dingus  
#26 Posted : Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:29:47 PM(UTC)
dingus

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 27

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Hell of a post Zero, well stated.

They Should be showing the championship games on NFLN this weekend or next though and it might be worth checking out again cuz Formo's right, the Vikes had a lot to do with beating themselves in that game.


Guess I seem to take the whole beating yourself more of an excuse than reason. I'm not saying the Saints were more talented, but when a team forces you to make mistakes, and then capitalize on them, I thought that was the point of being an aggressive defense. Force your opponent to buckle and screw up.

I don't really remember the game too much, so I could be wrong. Maybe the Vikings OL was sacking Brett and the WR switching uniforms in the middle of the routes. :P Nah seriously, I just don't buy it.

I can't say I understood it when a fan says we beat ourselves, hell, even I've said it in the past, but really, what does that mean? How does a team beat itself?

Certain things I could understand, say missing a 30 some yard FG with limited pressure on the kicker. QB with plenty of time, has an open WR and throws it into coverage and intercepted. Fumbling the ball without anyone touching you. Etc, things of that nature, sure I get that, but I didn't see too many mistakes that weren't attributed to the Saints whipping the shit out of the Vikings in a way the Packers could only dream of doing.

Or is saying your team beat itself a way of saying they choked?


:shrug:


Don't get me wrong, the Saints played well and yes, I suppose beating themselves could be replaced with choked.

The 12 man penalty was a serious choke, who's fault was it? Favre for not staying out of the huddle and counting or the coaching staff for lack of awareness?

I'd say the pick by Porter was a huge choke by #4, but we as Packer fans have grown accustomed to that type of play, Favres biggest weakness was not trusting his teammates when the game was on the line. Run a few yards and slide, give Longwell the chance to make a 52 yarder. Pretty simple.

All that being said, I agree that the Saints did not unlock the secret to beating Favre. They played a tough, physical game and wound up with more points at the end. (The Vikings just helped em a bit!)
blank
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#27 Posted : Saturday, July 31, 2010 4:18:14 AM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

I could believe the Vikings gave away that game if it was a fluke for NO to get a pile of TOs. But it wasn't a fluke, they made their living off turnovers all year. If you watch the highlights of the game, every one of the turnovers except the bad exchange and the final int were forced. The exchange may have been forced a little by the penetration altering APs path. I didn't see it from a decent angle.

Favre also had a crappy but gutsy game. A 70 rating is bad for an all star. 61% completions, 2 ints and a fumble. Fairly close to his typical post season loss for the last 12 years.

AP didn't lose any fumbles unless you hang the exchange on him, then he gets one. Still less than Favre's 2 ints.

The thing NO did differently was not focusing on AP to the point of letting Favre have his way. Everything was contested. They didn't go for his fakes, didn't try and jump up and knock down a pass and didn't go for the ball. Just drive through him. AP got got his yards but for the most part was contained and frustrated.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline Formo  
#28 Posted : Saturday, July 31, 2010 8:01:40 AM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
I could believe the Vikings gave away that game if it was a fluke for NO to get a pile of TOs. But it wasn't a fluke, they made their living off turnovers all year. If you watch the highlights of the game, every one of the turnovers except the bad exchange and the final int were forced. The exchange may have been forced a little by the penetration altering APs path. I didn't see it from a decent angle.

Favre also had a crappy but gutsy game. A 70 rating is bad for an all star. 61% completions, 2 ints and a fumble. Fairly close to his typical post season loss for the last 12 years.

AP didn't lose any fumbles unless you hang the exchange on him, then he gets one. Still less than Favre's 2 ints.

The thing NO did differently was not focusing on AP to the point of letting Favre have his way. Everything was contested. They didn't go for his fakes, didn't try and jump up and knock down a pass and didn't go for the ball. Just drive through him. AP got got his yards but for the most part was contained and frustrated.


AP lost 2 fumbles if I remember correctly. Also, personally, I feel they should have given him the rock more, despite the turnovers.. He was cutting through that defense like a hot knife through butter.

Yes, the Saints made a living last season by causing turnovers, but the Vikings still never turned the ball over more than 3 times ALL season long. and to have 5 in a game is bad.. even against an opportunistic defense.

Pop quiz: Which of these quarterbacks proved (or has proven) to be the toughest to intercept?

a) Johnny Unitas

b) Roger Staubach

c) Bart Starr

d) Bob Griese

e) Boomer Esiason

f) Brett Favre

HINT:
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Offline Rockmolder  
#29 Posted : Saturday, July 31, 2010 11:53:59 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 157
Applause Received: 259

That list is not selective, at all.

Unitas and Starr played in an era where you could pretty much club receivers to the ground without getting a flag.

Griese played in that same NFL for a short while and he might just be the worst played to enter the HoF.

I hardly think of Esiason as elite. I'd even take Ken Anderson over him.

Staubach played in a different time, as well, but at least he got the same level of publicity and love as Favre did and he was one hell of a player in his time.
UserPostedImage
Offline Formo  
#30 Posted : Saturday, July 31, 2010 2:16:44 PM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

The players picked were the ones I saw in an article. Apparently the only reason Boomer was added because he has been known to be almost anti-Favre when it comes to his INT stats.

You can look at a handful of other Pro Bowl / HoF QBs...

Troy Aikmen: 3% (4,715 attempts, 141 INTs)
Terry Bradshaw: 5.4% (3,901 attempts, 210 INTs)
John Elway: 3.1% (7,250 attempts, 226 INTs)
Dan Marino: 3% (8,358 attempts, 252 INTs)
Joe Montana: 2.6% (5,391 attempts, 139 INTs)**
Warren Moon: 3.4% (6,823 attempts, 233 INTs)
Steve Young: 2.6% (4,149 attempts, 107 INTs)

So really, in comparison to the greatest of the greats.. Favre still is in their league. Just get the average of those 7 QB's INT % and you get... -=drum roll=- 3.3% Which actually surprises me and should surprise some of you, too. I would have thought his % was WAY higher. Now, the question remains.. was last year lack of INTs a mirage or prove that he's one of the greatest within the right system?

**: My personal all time favorite QB
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123>
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

Tweeter

Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

24-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann