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 macbob  
#51 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:27:41 AM(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: 304
Applause Received: 252

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon 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.
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
zombieslayer on 10/29/2012(UTC)
Offline Yerko  
#52 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:54:08 AM(UTC)
Yerko

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL

Applause Given: 160
Applause Received: 261

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...
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 2 applause.
Cheesey on 10/29/2012(UTC), dfosterf on 10/30/2012(UTC)
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#53 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 8:59:11 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: Yerko 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.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 2 applause.
yooperfan on 10/29/2012(UTC), dfosterf on 10/30/2012(UTC)
Offline Cheesey  
#54 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 9:05:01 AM(UTC)
Cheesey

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 7/28/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 200
Applause Received: 439

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.

UserPostedImage
Offline zombieslayer  
#55 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 9:50:37 AM(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
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.
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.
Gaycandybacon on 10/29/2012(UTC)
Offline Pack93z  
#56 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 10:01:21 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 399
Applause Received: 1,078

The evolution of Zombie... makes me smile.

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
zombieslayer on 10/29/2012(UTC)
Offline zombieslayer  
#57 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 11:05:07 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

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

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 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.
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 play2win  
#58 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 1:31:35 PM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

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!
Offline Yerko  
#59 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 2:00:45 PM(UTC)
Yerko

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL

Applause Given: 160
Applause Received: 261

Originally Posted by: play2win 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
UserPostedImage
Offline nerdmann  
#60 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 2:24:24 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,709
Applause Received: 664

Shoulda pulled the trigger on Marshawn.
“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 1 applause.
play2win on 10/30/2012(UTC)
Offline Gaycandybacon  
#61 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 2:43:31 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
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.


Very nice reasearch. I had a feeling that most of the SB winners were top 10 D's. Interesting. Think
Offline zombieslayer  
#62 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 3:08:41 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
Very nice reasearch. I had a feeling that most of the SB winners were top 10 D's. Interesting. Think


Just for you, my new friend. Unfortunately, most of my other research is still on that website that should not be named.

http://www.packershome.c...in-Packers--History.aspx

Funny before we won the SB in 2010, I wrote this article with the hope that since we had the #1 D (Pittsburgh ended up barely beating us by the end of the season), we had a pretty good chance to win the SB that year. Turned out of course, we did.

Enjoy.



(And just so you know, I'm a QB fan. I wish QB was > D, but my research showed it wasn't so).
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 wpr  
#63 Posted : Monday, October 29, 2012 5:38:14 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

Quote:
The NFL’s trade deadline is this week (it was moved back from Tuesday to Thursday because of Hurricane Sandy) and the Green Bay Packers are reportedly looking to make a move — for St. Louis Rams running back Steven Jackson.

This isn’t the first time the Packers have been connected to Jackson, who seems to be taking a back seat to rookie Daryl Richardson, but that doesn’t mean a move is imminent.

Dallas, Arizona and Pittsburgh are also reportedly interested in the 29-year-old. The one thing that is for sure is the Rams are looking to move on.

Both Jackson and the Rams have mutually agreed to let him opt out of his contract after the season.

We’re not really sure the move would make sense for the Packers, since no one can open a hole for Alex Green. Then again, Jackson is a bruiser who can break tackles and that’s obviously what you need when your back is always getting hit in the backfield. Cedric Benson, who also fits that mold, was effective before going down with a foot injury.

The question then turns to how much Jackson has left. He’s had more than 1,000 yards in seven straight seasons. He has 403 so far this season and is averaging 3.7 per carry. So the evidence suggests Jackson has some left in the tank.

It’s hard to see Ted Thompson paying much for a guy who might only be with the team for half a season though.


source
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline nyrpack  
#64 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:20:05 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 62

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post


and all you guys thought i was crazy, someone in packerland is listening to me !! lol
jimmy b.
Offline zombieslayer  
#65 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:34:56 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

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

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
and all you guys thought i was crazy, someone in packerland is listening to me !! lol


Well, you may be right, but that still doesn't mean you're not crazy. Big Grin

Hope you and yours are OK. I've seen pictures and video. Pretty scary to be in NY right now.
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 Pack93z  
#66 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:50:36 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 399
Applause Received: 1,078

So according to the St Louis rag.. Rams want a 3rd round pick for Jackson.

I believe that to be more than Ted would be willing to give up for a rental.


http://www.rotoworld.com.../nfl/1663/steven-jackson

Quote:
Steven Jackson - RB - Rams
According to ESPN's John Clayton, there's been "no action right now" on Steven Jackson in trade talks.
Reliable colleague Adam Schefter had previously reported that the Rams have already fielded not just phone calls but offers from several teams. "Don't expect a trade," says Clayton, however, citing the prohibitive $3.705 million remaining on Jackson's salary. DeAngelo Williams "probably is unlikely" to be dealt, says Clayton. It's hard to imagine Williams being amendable to adjusting his salary, which has $2.779 million remaining. Per Yahoo's Brian McIntyre, a Williams trade would also cost the Panthers $1.4 million more against the 2013 cap than an offseason release. Clayton believes LeGarrette Blount "may be the most tradeable" back on the market, as he's due less than $300,000 the rest of the way and may only cost a seventh-round pick.
Related: DeAngelo Williams, LeGarrette Blount




Quote:

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch believes it's become "painfully obvious" that the Steven Jackson era with the Rams is "drawing to a close."

The paper believes inquiring teams are only "window shopping" at the trade deadline because they're too smart to meet a third-round asking price, and it's not worth dealing Jackson for anything less than that. The reworking of Jackson's contract and the elevation of Daryl Richardson to a timeshare role, however, suggest the rebuilding Rams will move on from the 29-year-old team leader this offseason. Oct 30 - 2:19 PM
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#67 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:57:01 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 399
Applause Received: 1,078

If the Packers make a move to acquire a back.. this options seems more realistic in my mind.


Quote:
"Several" league executives tell CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora that they would not be surprised if LeGarrette Blount were shipped out of Tampa Bay prior to Tuesday's 4PM ET trade deadline.

The same execs named Rams WR Steve Smith, Browns QB Colt McCoy, and Dolphins QB Matt Moore as trade candidates, although the latter is much less likely with Ryan Tannehill coming off Week 8 knee and quad injuries. A Blount trade would probably the least surprising of the group. The Bucs can move forward with D.J. Ware and rookie Michael Smith behind featured workhorse Doug Martin. We suspect they couldn't get back more than a sixth- or seventh-round pick.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#68 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 1:21:36 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 399
Applause Received: 1,078

Now.. I have to go here with this topic.. just because it is me.

Here is the ranking of Free agent backs currently available... why trade anything with a couple of these options out there. Or at least bringing them in for workouts before trading value away to garner another back.

I think the Packers aren't that worried about the Back spot right now..


Quote:
Running Backs

1. Tim Hightower
2. Ryan Grant
3. Steve Slaton

4. Thomas Jones
5. Joseph Addai
6. Mewelde Moore
7. Kahlil Bell
8. Cadillac Williams
9. Tyrell Sutton - A fan favorite in GB a couple years ago.
10. Ryan Torain
11. Maurice Morris
12. Rock Cartwright
13. Dimitri Nance
14. Lonyae Miller
15. Jerious Norwood
16. Sammy Morris
17. Chester Taylor
18. Deji Karim
19. Kregg Lumpkin
20. Xavier Omon
21. Harvey Unga
22. Kareem Huggins
23. Davin Meggett
24. Herb Donaldson
25. Chad Spann

Message modified by user Tuesday, October 30, 2012 1:53:18 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline RajiRoar  
#69 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 1:34:27 PM(UTC)
Laser Gunns

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

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

Applause Given: 43
Applause Received: 256

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
If the Packers make a move to acquire a back.. this options seems more realistic in my mind.




I Really like Blount as a RB, I love bruiser type backs.

but as a person he is a PoS, and as a teammate also a PoS.


MintBaconDrivel

Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#70 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 1:54:06 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar Go to Quoted Post
I Really like Blount as a RB, I love bruiser type backs.

but as a person he is a PoS, and as a teammate also a PoS.


I don't know if I would go that far. He has had some well documented issues, but I can think of a few Packers who have thrown punches.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline beast  
#71 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:10:20 PM(UTC)
beast

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 10/5/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 259
Applause Received: 320

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
If the Packers make a move to acquire a back.. this options seems more realistic in my mind.



I don't think they would trade him with their starter injured nor would the Packers be interested in the middle of the season because he doesn't known the system and they got healthy QBs (so far), but I've always liked QB Matt Moore and wanted to sign him after the Panthers let him go. He seems to be a very good back-up.
America's team Of the people by the people for the people Packer People
UserPostedImage
~ madeby ~ pack93z ~
Offline Pack93z  
#72 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:16:13 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 399
Applause Received: 1,078

Originally Posted by: beast Go to Quoted Post
I don't think they would trade him with their starter injured nor would the Packers be interested in the middle of the season because he doesn't known the system and they got healthy QBs (so far), but I've always liked QB Matt Moore and wanted to sign him after the Panthers let him go. He seems to be a very good back-up.


?

I was exclusively talking about Blount as a back.. the Packers are not in the market for a QB. Nor should they be unless they have to acquire one. Even then.. the PS would be raided first.

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline nyrpack  
#73 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:44:30 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 62

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
Well, you may be right, but that still doesn't mean you're not crazy. Big Grin

Hope you and yours are OK. I've seen pictures and video. Pretty scary to be in NY right now.


ty zombie, it was pretty scary yesterday 75-80 miles a hr winds in my backyard, thankfully no real damage, but not the case for my surrounding neighborhoods, the damage was devastating to say the least !!
jimmy b.
Offline gbguy20  
#74 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 9:02:58 PM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 208
Applause Received: 285

not going to happen

any of it


not the reason i said the above but here:

Jeff Fisher says Steven Jackson staying put

Message modified by user Tuesday, October 30, 2012 9:13:15 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

call me Dan
Offline RajiRoar  
#75 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:03:33 AM(UTC)
Laser Gunns

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

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

Applause Given: 43
Applause Received: 256

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 Go to Quoted Post
not going to happen

any of it


not the reason i said the above but here:

Jeff Fisher says Steven Jackson staying put


While I don't totally believe Fisher, and as much as i like Stev Jackson.

IF we were to do a trade, Williams (CAR) I believe has alot less miles on him because he has split carries for a few years. And Blount is younger than both and has shown some flashes of impressive talent...

one of which we ALL remember...

Blount

that said, Mike McCarthy hasn't shown a willingness to make drastic changes to personell during the season, and has no history that I know of of teaching an offense mid-season.

possibly all 3 will be available AFTER the season, and although I fully expect a new RB next year, Ted Thompson will want one of his own.


MintBaconDrivel

Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
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
52m / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dyeah_gb

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / polargrizz

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rios39

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower