Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
5 Pages<12345>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
dhazer  
#41 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 8:25:54 AM(UTC)
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
Porforis  
#42 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:24:22 AM(UTC)
wrolly said: 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.
yooperfan  
#43 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 1:23:34 PM(UTC)
He would retire rather than try to run behind this offensive line.
zombieslayer  
#44 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 1:44:01 PM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: 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. :-"
Gaycandybacon  
#45 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 8:00:38 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: 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. :-"


FLIP FLOP THOSE! NOW! :)
rabidgopher04  
#46 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 9:37:25 PM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: 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.
RajiRoar  
#47 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:38:07 PM(UTC)
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?
nerdmann  
#48 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 12:34:14 AM(UTC)
RajiRoar said: 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.
Gaycandybacon  
#49 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 1:04:05 AM(UTC)
rabidgopher04 said: 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.
PackFanWithTwins  
#50 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:14:48 AM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: 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.
macbob  
#51 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:27:41 AM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


Those saying D > QB aren't saying that QB isn't important, just that D is more important.

There were a number of statistical analyses done in previous threads looking at past SB winners. The #1 correlator was Def, the #2 correlator was QB. Hence the argument that QB is extremely important but not as important as D.
Yerko  
#52 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:54:08 AM(UTC)
It just doesn't matter what RB you have in the backfield when the offense line cannot run block. Sitton and Bulaga give us the best run block combo and that is all. TJ Lang and Jeff Saturday either stall at the line or get pushed backwards on run blocking assignments.

RB is not the only problem to the Packers run game...
PackFanWithTwins  
#53 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:59:11 AM(UTC)
Yerko said: Go to Quoted Post
It just doesn't matter what RB you have in the backfield when the offense line cannot run block. Sitton and Bulaga give us the best run block combo and that is all. TJ Lang and Jeff Saturday either stall at the line or get pushed backwards on run blocking assignments.

RB is not the only problem to the Packers run game...


Agree it is the line not blocking, but not that the lineman are bad at it. More of a scheme issue. When we run from the shotgun, it is either a stretch run, and the defense knows exaclty what they need to do, get to the edge before the oline. Or it is a draw, and the oline is trying to sell pass blocking so they are not pushing as much as holding ground.

The couple times we actually line up in a run formation, and let the Oline come off the ball forward, we have success.
Cheesey  
#54 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 9:05:01 AM(UTC)
Yerko said it.
I don't care who is running the ball.....if your O-line can't open any holes, you won't gain yards.

I think Starks will be OK, if he can stay healthy. He's a bigger guy who can get a few yards on his own. Again though, ONLY if he can remain healthy. That's a HUGE "if" of course.

zombieslayer  
#55 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 9:50:37 AM(UTC)
macbob said: Go to Quoted Post
Those saying D > QB aren't saying that QB isn't important, just that D is more important.

There were a number of statistical analyses done in previous threads looking at past SB winners. The #1 correlator was Def, the #2 correlator was QB. Hence the argument that QB is extremely important but not as important as D.


Thanks Macbob.

I was one of the people who did the research and concluded that D is #1 and QB is #2 (and RB is irrelevant).

Gay is new to the site so probably hasn't seen that stuff. Long story short, Gay. I had an argument with RaiderPride awhile back. He said "Defense wins championships" and I said he was full of it. So I did research to prove him wrong and ended up proving him right.

If you look at all the SB winners, they generally are in the top 5 in Defense (counted by Points Allowed, the most important defensive stat). Our 4 SB winners were #1,#3,#1, and #2 respectively. No coincidence. Of course, having an elite QB is the #2 factor. In all four of those games, we had elite QBs - Bart Starr, Bart Starr, Brett Favre, and Aaron Rodgers respectively.

The one SB we lost, our D was #5. We didn't get the sacks we did the year before when we were #1. Which of course brings us to 2010 vs 2011. 2010, we had the #2 D and high 40s in sacks. 2011, we had the #19 D and high 20s in sacks. Our 2011 QB was better than our 2010 QB, but there is no doubt in my mind that the 2010 team would have slaughtered the 2011 team if they met in the Playoffs.

So yes, QB is the most important position. No argument there. But as a unit, D is more important than the QB position when it comes to winning Championships.
Pack93z  
#56 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 10:01:21 AM(UTC)
The evolution of Zombie... makes me smile.

zombieslayer  
#57 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 11:05:07 AM(UTC)
Pack93z said: Go to Quoted Post
The evolution of Zombie... makes me smile.



Got a degree in History. You have to refute your thesis with fact after fact and if your thesis ends up being factually incorrect, you have to change your thesis.

This degree translated to real life very well. Simply applied it to football.
play2win  
#58 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 1:31:35 PM(UTC)
I would trade Finley for jackson and a pick or other players. Not jones. No way. James Jones has become too valuable. Before the start of the season, I thought he would give us the most value in trade, because of his talent and relatively low salary cap #. I don't thinks we can afford to part with a player so valuable to Rodgers as is Jones.

I question whether we need Jackson. ??? If we trade, I might rather add DL depth into our rotation.

Anybody else amazed at the numbers? Thompson keeps a dearth of WRs and RBs, unprecedented numbers on the final 53 to start the season. We look to be needing every last one of them!
Yerko  
#59 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 2:00:45 PM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
I would trade Finley for jackson and a pick or other players. Not jones. No way. James Jones has become too valuable. Before the start of the season, I thought he would give us the most value in trade, because of his talent and relatively low salary cap #. I don't thinks we can afford to part with a player so valuable to Rodgers as is Jones.

I question whether we need Jackson. ??? If we trade, I might rather add DL depth into our rotation.

Anybody else amazed at the numbers? Thompson keeps a dearth of WRs and RBs, unprecedented numbers on the final 53 to start the season. We look to be needing every last one of them!


Packers are still supposedly eyeing Jackson with the trade deadline being pushed to Thursday now...

LINK- ESPN
nerdmann  
#60 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 2:24:24 PM(UTC)
Shoulda pulled the trigger on Marshawn.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<12345>
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
Smokey (3h) : Peters to the Rams
Smokey (3h) : and another player is lost to another team. Deja Vu again !
Nonstopdrivel (22-Feb) : should have done*
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Hi 😊😉
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : I guess I should have did a refresh when I walked away from the computer.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : Peters is 25 with one year left on his contract at just over $3M
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Mel Kiper sticks with Marcus Davenport to GB in 2nd mock
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : As for Marcus Peters, how old is he an what's his contract years left?
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Packers got tired of Sitton's antics.
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Sitton was released not because of play or salary, but personality. He will not be re-signed.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : If we are planning on possibly cutting Cobb I can see the 2nd round pick. A second round pick for Peters is a pretty good deal.
Smokey (21-Feb) : I'd offer Cobb + a 3rd round pick + a 6th round pick in 2019 for the CB Peters from KC.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : I guess that is a highter round pick
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : Suggestion was a 2nd round pick. I would want a lower round pick. I think that is too much. A 3rd or 4th seems about right.
Smokey (21-Feb) : Cobb and WHAT PICK ?
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : A suggestion I saw was a trade of Cobb and a Pick for Peters. I think that would be a great move.
Smokey (21-Feb) : Sitton was drafted be GB in 2008, not a young man at this point, but still is a "bear" of a man.
Cheesey (21-Feb) : Sitton? Maybe if the price is right.
Cheesey (21-Feb) : I doubt the Packers would try to resign Sutton. But who knows? If the price is right?
Zero2Cool (20-Feb) : Bears declining option on Josh Sitton. He'll be Free Agent.
Zero2Cool (20-Feb) : Chiefs CB Marcus Peters trade rumors -- come to Packers!
Smokey (20-Feb) : Join us in Packershome and be part of the discussion today .
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Elizabeeth ... good bye
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Saturday, August 19, 2017
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : That's dedicated spammng!
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : For some reason, I had to flush my DNS cache to access this site from my laptop today.
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : I prefer toads to frogs, Smokey, thank you very much.
Rockmolder (19-Feb) : My girlfriends says thanks, Rourke.
Smokey (19-Feb) : Nonstopdrivel that you most likely say to all the frogs you meet .
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : Rockmolder's avatar is so fucking sexy.
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : never seen the interview before. tough to listen to. can't believe it was 7 years ago
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : just watched a nick Collins tribute on yourube. the end featured an interview with nick reflecting on his injury
buckeyepackfan (17-Feb) : Saints De'Vante Harris nothing but a POS!!!!! Look up his tweetes on Florida killings!!
Nonstopdrivel (17-Feb) : They're laying new gas line near my house. The trucks are all from a company in Madison.
Smokey (14-Feb) : 2018 Hall o Fame Game/Aug.2,2018/Ravens vs Bears
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
34m / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

5h / Random Babble / Smokey

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

21-Feb / Random Babble / Smokey

21-Feb / Random Babble / Pack93z

21-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

Headlines