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.
4 Pages<1234>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#26 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 7:56:58 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,713
Applause Received: 665

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
With all due respect, you're thinking short term. Ted Thompson and The Zombieslayer are thinking long-term so it's not gonna happen.

JJ will be good for at least 3-4 years and more than likely 5-6. Driver is done after this season. Gregorious will probably follow the $$$. Then what? You expect Boykin to be as good as JJ or Driver? Fat chance.

Aaron Rodgers needs weapons. If anything, we need an improved OL. We absolutely positively do NOT need a 29-year-old RB.

When Jackson gets 450 yards on 150 carries next year, then 200 yards on 70 carries the year after that and JJ is getting 1000 yards on 80 receptions and 10 TDs on another team for 3 straight years, you'd be kicking yourself.


Agreed. Trading for Marshawn was a different scenario, because he had more years in front of him.

No way Ted pulls the trigger for a guy Jackson's age. Especially at that position.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
thanks Post received 2 applause.
DakotaT on 10/25/2012(UTC), TheKanataThrilla on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline DakotaT  
#27 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:21:37 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 669
Applause Received: 1,374

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
Agreed. Trading for Marshawn was a different scenario, because he had more years in front of him.

No way Ted pulls the trigger for a guy Jackson's age. Especially at that position.


If we would just invest a high draft pick in a center that can run block, then the backs we have would be more productive.

I'd rather see us use our running backs in screen passes anyway. Give me a Roger Craig over a Stephen Jackson anyway. Running backs like Jackson are for teams with shitty quarterback in which to play ugly, boring football. But since the Republican Party wants to drag this country back 50 years where women only cooked us supper and bore our children, might as well take football back there too.
UserPostedImage
Offline nerdmann  
#28 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:51:23 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,713
Applause Received: 665

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
If we would just invest a high draft pick in a center that can run block, then the backs we have would be more productive.

I'd rather see us use our running backs in screen passes anyway. Give me a Roger Craig over a Stephen Jackson anyway. Running backs like Jackson are for teams with shitty quarterback in which to play ugly, boring football. But since the Republican Party wants to drag this country back 50 years where women only cooked us supper and bore our children, might as well take football back there too.


lol

I'd love a Roger Craig. Thing is, Green's probably way more explosive than Craig.

I could definitely see Ted taking a C high this year.

Ted will take a WR in the 2nd or 3rd as well. A good one.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline wpr  
#29 Posted : Friday, October 26, 2012 5:37:16 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

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

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,152
Applause Received: 1,522

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
obviously im in the minority here, i have nothing but praise for jones but if want a guy like jackson it would take a guy like jones as tradebait. i truly think cobb, driver and boykin could pick up the slack if jones were not here. remember when the pack is on the road and in hostile stadiums and there pinned in and its 3 and 1 , having a guy like jackson is money, and when teams lineup to stack the line arod could go play action and hit wide open recievers if he so chooses. again its only my opinion and i respect all the counterpoints which do make lots of sense !!


I understand why you want him. Long run we all want the same thing. first downs, touch downs and victories. we just want to do it in different ways.

I would rather focus on the passing game with Rodgers. I don't want to tie a lot up into a rb.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
thanks Post received 1 applause.
zombieslayer on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline macbob  
#30 Posted : Friday, October 26, 2012 4:58:41 PM(UTC)
macbob

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Silver: 2012

Joined: 10/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 305
Applause Received: 252

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
people who want a stud rb are like nations who want a nuke or driving a Lamborghini in any American city. it looks real good sitting there but you can't use it. You only want one because someone else has one.
The stud rb will not get 25 carries and have a 100+ yard game. All you need is some schmoe who will get 15-20 carries and help move the chains. A 3 yard per carry avg is nice but not required.


I was going to applause until the yard per carry comment. On a single game basis 3 yard per carry may not be required, but over the course of a season I think it is. It wasn't required against St Louis, but would likely be required against a team like Houston (who, coincidentally, we averaged 3 yards per carry against).

Oh, and no, I wouldn't trade JJ for SJ.
UserPostedImage
Offline wpr  
#31 Posted : Friday, October 26, 2012 5:02:53 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

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

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,152
Applause Received: 1,522

Originally Posted by: macbob Go to Quoted Post
I was going to applause until the yard per carry comment. On a single game basis 3 yard per carry may not be required, but over the course of a season I think it is. It wasn't required against St Louis, but would likely be required against a team like Houston (who, coincidentally, we averaged 3 yards per carry against).


i guess you missed what I meant. a 3 yard avg is not required every single game. Some games you can get by with a 1.5 avg. sometimes 2 others 3 or 3.5.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline zombieslayer  
#32 Posted : Friday, October 26, 2012 7:21:16 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

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

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: macbob Go to Quoted Post
I was going to applause until the yard per carry comment. On a single game basis 3 yard per carry may not be required, but over the course of a season I think it is. It wasn't required against St Louis, but would likely be required against a team like Houston (who, coincidentally, we averaged 3 yards per carry against).

Oh, and no, I wouldn't trade JJ for SJ.


Just an FYI - we're averaging 3.9 ypc this year. In 2010, we averaged 3.8.

I'd guess Aaron Rodgers inflates those totals. Too lazy to take his stats out and see what our RBs are getting.

And yes, I wouldn't trade JJ for SJ either.
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 Porforis  
#33 Posted : Friday, October 26, 2012 8:06:40 PM(UTC)
Porforis

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Applause Given: 169
Applause Received: 333

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
Just an FYI - we're averaging 3.9 ypc this year. In 2010, we averaged 3.8.

I'd guess Aaron Rodgers inflates those totals. Too lazy to take his stats out and see what our RBs are getting.

And yes, I wouldn't trade JJ for SJ either.


169 rushes for 655 yards overall.

ARod: 24 for 125
Graham Harrell: 1 for 0

144 rushes by non-QBs, for 530 yards or 3.68 YPC.

Randall Cobb ran 3 times for 67 yards. If you're only counting Benson, Green, Kuhn, and Starks, 3.28 YPC.

Personal stats:

Code:

Player      	No	Yds	Avg
Cedric Benson	71	248	3.5
Alex Green      54	165	3.1
John Kuhn       11	39	3.5
James Starks    5	11	2.2
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 5 applause.
Zero2Cool on 10/26/2012(UTC), Packers_Finland on 10/27/2012(UTC), wpr on 10/27/2012(UTC), zombieslayer on 10/27/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/27/2012(UTC)
Offline zombieslayer  
#34 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 10:22:31 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

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

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: Porforis Go to Quoted Post
169 rushes for 655 yards overall.

ARod: 24 for 125
Graham Harrell: 1 for 0

144 rushes by non-QBs, for 530 yards or 3.68 YPC.

Randall Cobb ran 3 times for 67 yards. If you're only counting Benson, Green, Kuhn, and Starks, 3.28 YPC.

Personal stats:

Code:

Player      	No	Yds	Avg
Cedric Benson	71	248	3.5
Alex Green      54	165	3.1
John Kuhn       11	39	3.5
James Starks    5	11	2.2


Thank you.

Now I'm really hoping we win the SB this year to shut up the "we need an elite RB" crowd once and for all. Hell, when was the last time someone won a SB with an elite RB anyways?
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
thanks Post received 2 applause.
Gaycandybacon on 10/27/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/27/2012(UTC)
Offline Gaycandybacon  
#35 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 1:19:48 PM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/17/2012(UTC)
Location: Hanover Park, IL

Applause Given: 145
Applause Received: 178

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
Thank you.

Now I'm really hoping we win the SB this year to shut up the "we need an elite RB" crowd once and for all. Hell, when was the last time someone won a SB with an elite RB anyways?


Probably a dozen years ago Marshall Faulk Weeeee!!
thanks Post received 1 applause.
zombieslayer on 10/27/2012(UTC)
Offline zombieslayer  
#36 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 2:48:34 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

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

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon Go to Quoted Post
Probably a dozen years ago Marshall Faulk Weeeee!!


Thank you Gay.

Marshall Faulk was unarguably an elite RB. In that SB, he had 10 carries for 17 yards and the Rams won it. However, he did have 90 yards receiving. That's why I liked Faulk so much. He was a dang good receiver and if I remember correctly, not a bad blocker too.
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
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 10/27/2012(UTC)
Offline vikesrule  
#37 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 5:50:17 PM(UTC)
vikesrule

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/4/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 193

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
Thank you.

Now I'm really hoping we win the SB this year to shut up the "we need an elite RB" crowd once and for all. Hell, when was the last time someone won a SB with an elite RB anyways?


Last year it was "we don't need a good defense"....but I digress.


Faulk was in 1999

In addition......

2000 Ravens - Jamal Lewis - 1,364 yards
2001 Patriots - Antowain Smith - 1,157 yards
2004 Patriots - Corey Dillon - 1,635 yards
2005 Steelers - Willie Parker - 1,202 yards
2006 Colts - Joseph Addai - 1,081 yards
2007 Giants - Brandon Jacobs - 1,009 yards

Along with Faulk, I would consider Corey Dillon elite. The others are all very good.

If your team has a good to very good running back, it makes your offense that more viable and more difficult to defend against.

If "your" team doesn't have a running back that is even mediocre, well, you are one dimensional.

Hell, sometimes even an "elite" quarterback doesn't get you to the Super Bowl.....and sometimes even one and done...Whistle



thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 10/28/2012(UTC)
Offline beast  
#38 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 6:06:08 PM(UTC)
beast

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 10/5/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 259
Applause Received: 320



I think the question is weather or not you want to pay Jackson the big contract he wants or not... I rather save the money and try to resign Rodgers Jennings, Raji, Matthews, Burnett, Benson or Starks, and two of the three following Pickett, Wilson and/or Neal. That's a good number of contract coming up... the rookie deals ending will be the ones that go up a lot...

And if you want another RB then draft one... normally I don't prefer RBs in the 1st... just seem like too many of them turn out to be just average.
America's team Of the people by the people for the people Packer People
UserPostedImage
~ madeby ~ pack93z ~
thanks Post received 1 applause.
yooperfan on 10/28/2012(UTC)
Offline Gaycandybacon  
#39 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 6:18:03 PM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/17/2012(UTC)
Location: Hanover Park, IL

Applause Given: 145
Applause Received: 178

Originally Posted by: vikesrule Go to Quoted Post
Last year it was "we don't need a good defense"....but I digress.


Faulk was in 1999

In addition......

2000 Ravens - Jamal Lewis - 1,364 yards
2001 Patriots - Antowain Smith - 1,157 yards
2004 Patriots - Corey Dillon - 1,635 yards
2005 Steelers - Willie Parker - 1,202 yards
2006 Colts - Joseph Addai - 1,081 yards
2007 Giants - Brandon Jacobs - 1,009 yards

Along with Faulk, I would consider Corey Dillon elite. The others are all very good.

If your team has a good to very good running back, it makes your offense that more viable and more difficult to defend against.

If "your" team doesn't have a running back that is even mediocre, well, you are one dimensional.

Hell, sometimes even an "elite" quarterback doesn't get you to the Super Bowl.....and sometimes even one and done...Whistle







I'd rather have a QB in the postseason than a running back... you're gonna face more explosive teams and stouter defenses. You'll find yourself down if you rely on running the ball. You think your RB can bring yourself back down 20? I don't think so.. I'd say 2 teams won the SB without a great qb in the last decade, 3 if you count that horrid game by Big Ben in 05' I'll take those odds...
thanks Post received 1 applause.
zombieslayer on 10/28/2012(UTC)
Offline wrolly  
#40 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 7:37:17 AM(UTC)
wrolly

Rank: 7th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/20/2009(UTC)

Applause Received: 6

Can' do it. Especially with the injury issues for Jennings. Jones is the number one receiver this week with Nelson injured too. We are fine with sub-par running backs.
blank
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 10/28/2012(UTC)
Offline dhazer  
#41 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 8:25:54 AM(UTC)
dhazer

Rank: Pro Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2013Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2009PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2013

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 49
Applause Received: 203

I say we trade Jennings to KC for Bowe, granted Bowe wants a new contract but do we pay an older injury prone wr looking for the big bucks or do we sign a big wr that will want good money but is younger than Jennings. I know Ted Thompson wouldn't do anything like that but that would be so awesome having the big huge WR to go along with Jones, Cobb, and Nelson. Hell send KC Finley also lol
UserPostedImage

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be :)
Offline Porforis  
#42 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:24:22 AM(UTC)
Porforis

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Applause Given: 169
Applause Received: 333

Originally Posted by: wrolly Go to Quoted Post
Can' do it. Especially with the injury issues for Jennings. Jones is the number one receiver this week with Nelson injured too. We are fine with sub-par running backs.


The problem with our offensive line, not so much our RBs. Benson had (some) success because he was exceptional. A good or average RB won't have much of any success with the line consistently being pushed in his face.
UserPostedImage
Offline yooperfan  
#43 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 1:23:34 PM(UTC)
yooperfan

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Ishpeming Michigan

Applause Given: 637
Applause Received: 295

He would retire rather than try to run behind this offensive line.
Offline zombieslayer  
#44 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 1:44:01 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

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

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon Go to Quoted Post
I'd rather have a QB in the postseason than a running back... you're gonna face more explosive teams and stouter defenses. You'll find yourself down if you rely on running the ball. You think your RB can bring yourself back down 20? I don't think so.. I'd say 2 teams won the SB without a great qb in the last decade, 3 if you count that horrid game by Big Ben in 05' I'll take those odds...


History shows that in order, the most important things in the postseason are:
1) D
2) QB


RB isn't even on the list. But then again, Vikesrule is a Vikings fan and the Vikings are completely clueless to what it takes to win in the postseason. Whistle
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
thanks Post received 3 applause.
yooperfan on 10/28/2012(UTC), wpr on 10/28/2012(UTC), Gaycandybacon on 10/28/2012(UTC)
Offline Gaycandybacon  
#45 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 8:00:38 PM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/17/2012(UTC)
Location: Hanover Park, IL

Applause Given: 145
Applause Received: 178

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
History shows that in order, the most important things in the postseason are:
1) D
2) QB


RB isn't even on the list. But then again, Vikesrule is a Vikings fan and the Vikings are completely clueless to what it takes to win in the postseason. Whistle


FLIP FLOP THOSE! NOW! :)
Offline rabidgopher04  
#46 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 9:37:25 PM(UTC)
rabidgopher04

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 114
Applause Received: 127

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon Go to Quoted Post
FLIP FLOP THOSE! NOW! :)


2000 Baltimore Ravens. Outstanding D, Trent Dilfer as QB, Super Bowl champs. D is number one. QB was irrelevant in this case.
Do you like bacon?
Offline RajiRoar  
#47 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:38:07 PM(UTC)
Laser Gunns

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/30/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 43
Applause Received: 256

for the record, I am not part of the "we need an elite RB crowd".

would it be nice to steal one undrafted? OF COURSE!

but we need a PRODUCTIVE RB, Green is not getting it done.

IMO anyone who is not upset about our running production has gotten too used to the crap we've had for the last 6(?) years, (Grant's 8-game stretch in 07' excluded). or is starting to believe MM's spin doctoring on what a RB is for.

or maybe im just bitter because I hated Green as a draft prospect.

is Jackson a long term answer? no.

is Benson? no.

we will be dafting one anyway and if Brandon Jackson(2nd), Starks(6th), and Green(4th) are any indication, Ted Thompson doesnt have much of an eye for RBs.

why not just use the pick now instead of waiting for the draft?

Message modified by user Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:49:36 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified



MintBaconDrivel

Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
Offline nerdmann  
#48 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 12:34:14 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,713
Applause Received: 665

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar Go to Quoted Post
for the record, I am not part of the "we need an elite RB crowd".

would it be nice to steal one undrafted? OF COURSE!

but we need a PRODUCTIVE RB, Green is not getting it done.

IMO anyone who is not upset about our running production has gotten too used to the crap we've had for the last 6(?) years, (Grant's 8-game stretch in 07' excluded). or is starting to believe MM's spin doctoring on what a RB is for.

or maybe im just bitter because I hated Green as a draft prospect.

is Jackson a long term answer? no.

is Benson? no.

we will be dafting one anyway and if Brandon Jackson(2nd), Starks(6th), and Green(4th) are any indication, Ted Thompson doesnt have much of an eye for RBs.

why not just use the pick now instead of waiting for the draft?


My beef isn't that Green sucks. It's that we're not utilizing his skill set.

This is a dude who's Cobb-like in the open field, but all we wanna do is bam him into the pile.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline Gaycandybacon  
#49 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 1:04:05 AM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/17/2012(UTC)
Location: Hanover Park, IL

Applause Given: 145
Applause Received: 178

Originally Posted by: rabidgopher04 Go to Quoted Post
2000 Baltimore Ravens. Outstanding D, Trent Dilfer as QB, Super Bowl champs. D is number one. QB was irrelevant in this case.


Still QB>D

You'll rarely see soley a Defense win a Championship.

I don't understand the whole defense wins championships thing. Cause last time I checked your offense scores the most points not the defense. And if you don't have a QB it's gonna be tough. I still like the odds with a QB.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#50 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:14:48 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon Go to Quoted Post
Still QB>D

You'll rarely see soley a Defense win a Championship.

I don't understand the whole defense wins championships thing. Cause last time I checked your offense scores the most points not the defense. And if you don't have a QB it's gonna be tough. I still like the odds with a QB.


The reason for the saying is because when you get to the play offs you normally end up with good and closely matched offenses, and defense makes the difference.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
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

Tweeter

Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packman82

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / rabidgopher04

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rios39

25-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr