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 PackFanWithTwins  
#31 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 7:56:41 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 371

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
Casey Hawyard had the third best season in the NFL, which is not saying he is the 3rd best CB in the NFL. Massive difference there, massive.


I guess that might be the difference, for me the 3rd best player at a position in a season, has the 3rd best season at the position.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline Zero2Cool  
#32 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 8:06:08 AM(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: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
I guess that might be the difference, for me the 3rd best player at a position in a season, has the 3rd best season at the position.

I fully see where you are coming from. However, would you rather Darrelle Revis or Casey Hayward? Hayward had a better season in 2012 than Revis, but I believe Revis is superior to Hayward.

I choose not to think of players being the best solely predicated on their ranking in a statistical category. If a guy gets 20 sacks against single team and another guy gets 13 sacks while being double teamed and chipped, I think the 13 sacks is more impressive than the 20 sacks. But, the guy who had 20 sacks had a 'better' season.
UserPostedImage
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#33 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 8:36:38 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 85
Applause Received: 149

If all of our receivers are healthy, Jennings best spot is in the slot. Does that mean he is the #3 receiver on the team? No. He is the best receiver and his best work is done in the slot.

Just because Hayward plays the slot, doesn't mean he is the #3 CB on the team. His best position and the place that allows him to be the most productive.

Statistically, 59 other CBs had more productive seasons than Tramon. I think it is fair to assume some of them had to play against #1 receivers. Tramon had another underwhelming year. Packer Nation needs to wake up to the fact that his time may have come and gone.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#34 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 8:49:27 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 371

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
If all of our receivers are healthy, Jennings best spot is in the slot. Does that mean he is the #3 receiver on the team? No. He is the best receiver and his best work is done in the slot.

Just because Hayward plays the slot, doesn't mean he is the #3 CB on the team. His best position and the place that allows him to be the most productive.

Statistically, 59 other CBs had more productive seasons than Tramon. I think it is fair to assume some of them had to play against #1 receivers. Tramon had another underwhelming year. Packer Nation needs to wake up to the fact that his time may have come and gone.


Jennings plays the slot, when we have 3 or more WR on the field. Normally, when healthy if we have 1 or 2 WR, Jennings is on the field. On the defense, when we have 2 CB, Hayward is not. He might grow into the position and become like Woodson who did play CB when we had 2 and moved to the slot when the 3rd CB was brought in, like Jennings.

Right now, If I had to give one of our CB no help in coverage, it would probably be Shields. Not because he can cover better, but because he has more ability to recover if he makes a mistake. Tramon has always been best when he has help over the top, so he can play tighter at the line, and trail technique and not have to worry about the deep routes. He has difficulty when he gives space at the line.

Hayward is still a question mark. Much like Tramon was in his early years before he grew into the spot. He showed promise as the NB.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#35 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 12:10:58 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 85
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post

Right now, If I had to give one of our CB no help in coverage, it would probably be Shields. Not because he can cover better, but because he has more ability to recover if he makes a mistake. Tramon has always been best when he has help over the top, so he can play tighter at the line, and trail technique and not have to worry about the deep routes. He has difficulty when he gives space at the line.

Hayward is still a question mark. Much like Tramon was in his early years before he grew into the spot. He showed promise as the NB.


I agree so much with most of what you say here. I am not saying Heyward is the best we have. But I am saying Williams may be the worst. Or at least the most likely to decline further.

Williams has had 2 down years. Is it a coincidence that those 2 years have been without Collins? Maybe Nick allowed Tramon to be better than he really was?
Offline doddpower  
#36 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 12:34:50 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,045
Applause Received: 514

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Williams has had 2 down years. Is it a coincidence that those 2 years have been without Collins? Maybe Nick allowed Tramon to be better than he really was?


Of course he did. Great players make everyone around them much better. It still doesn't mean one isn't a good player, but playing with truly great players just makes everyone look better.

Offline Packers_Finland  
#37 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 3:06:13 PM(UTC)
Packers_Finland

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 88
Applause Received: 45

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
Do you really need to watch every single snap to see that Hayward was not the 3rd best CB in the ENTIRE NFL? He was the 3rd best CB on this team. Thus being the NB. He had his shot while Shields was down and guess what. He didn't keep the #2 spot. Sammy took it back.

These guys, write trying to justify their site, yes they have interesting articles, but they are not the bible. If they knew that much, they would not be working on a website, they would have a job for a NFL team. Hayward, had the easiest job of our CB, he is surrounded by more help. I'll take the expertise of the coached of the Packers, over some geeks trying to make their site seem valid.


I don't know what games you were watching if you don't think Hayward had a better season than Tramon. The reason he didn't get the "#2 spot" is because we use nickel most of the time anyway and we get the most done with Hayward in the slot. Tramon and Sam may be better on the outside than Casey but that's just differing skill sets. It's why we put Clay Matthews at OLB and not ILB ya know?

So, because Hayward staying as the "#3 guy" does not mean our coaching staff believed he's inferior to Sam or Tramon, you don't have a single thing to support the opinion that Hayward wasn't our best CB this year.

I don't know if I needed to, but I did watch all of our snaps from all of our games this season. Hayward was our best CB. I don't know exactly how good he was compared to other CBs in the league though, but that's why I read that site. One of the things that make me trust them is that after watching games, and then looking at the grades they give our players, I agree with them.
This is a placeholder
Offline nerdmann  
#38 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 3:13:22 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,629
Applause Received: 654

Nerve damage heals very slowly. Tramon should be back to 100% this coming year.
“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 blueleopard  
#39 Posted : Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:23:31 PM(UTC)
blueleopard

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/22/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 70

The Dom Capers defense is known as an attacking 3-4, but I've never seen anybody but Clay Matthews and Charles Woodson attack anybody.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 1/21/2013(UTC)
Offline doddpower  
#40 Posted : Sunday, January 20, 2013 10:27:45 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,045
Applause Received: 514

It's funny how talented teams seem to have more 'attitude'. The way I see it, bring in more talent and the attitude comes with it. The desired "attitude" is often a part of a great players game.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Cheesey on 1/22/2013(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#41 Posted : Monday, January 21, 2013 1:54:42 PM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

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

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: doddpower Go to Quoted Post
It's funny how talented teams seem to have more 'attitude'. The way I see it, bring in more talent and the attitude comes with it. The desired "attitude" is often a part of a great players game.


Remember when we needed a RB and Ted decided not to bring in Marshawn Lynch? How dumb was that? Huge blow to the team from an attitude standpoint.

I know we won the SB with Starks coming in late in the year, but I recall Woodson being pretty disappointed. I am sure Rodgers was too. Just think how differently last season might have been. We may have won back to back SBs... and may have been vying for a 3-peat.
Offline doddpower  
#42 Posted : Monday, January 21, 2013 8:09:56 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,045
Applause Received: 514

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
Remember when we needed a RB and Ted decided not to bring in Marshawn Lynch? How dumb was that? Huge blow to the team from an attitude standpoint.

I know we won the SB with Starks coming in late in the year, but I recall Woodson being pretty disappointed. I am sure Rodgers was too. Just think how differently last season might have been. We may have won back to back SBs... and may have been vying for a 3-peat.


As long as the Packers would be willing to lose whatever player/players Lynch's long-term deal would inevitably cause. The net effect could easily do more harm than good in the long-term. Besides, Lynch's impact wouldn't have been nearly the same behind this offensive line and in this scheme. More importantly than anything else, this team needs a better offensive line and more disciplined coaching. The way things are now, a super star RB would only minimally improve the team, imo.

Offline Zero2Cool  
#43 Posted : Tuesday, January 22, 2013 6:24:51 AM(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: play2win Go to Quoted Post
Remember when we needed a RB and Ted decided not to bring in Marshawn Lynch? How dumb was that? Huge blow to the team from an attitude standpoint.

I know we won the SB with Starks coming in late in the year, but I recall Woodson being pretty disappointed. I am sure Rodgers was too. Just think how differently last season might have been. We may have won back to back SBs... and may have been vying for a 3-peat.


The Packers and Seahawks offered the same round pick, however, the Bills felt the Seahawks pick would be higher (the Packers were going to finish with a better record) so they took the Seahawks pick. Did they offer the Packers a chance to trump the 4th round with a 3rd? I can't remember, but even though I liked Lynch, I didn't think he was worth a 3rd.

The Bills got a 2011 fourth-round pick and a 2012 conditional pick. That means to trump the Bills, the Packers would have had to give up their 3rd round pick, Alex Green. Then you got the 2012 conditional pick, which I believe turned out to be a 5th round selection. I'm not going to go through all of those steps, because you should have the point by now, lol.


The Packers do not need an elite running back (Paul would be proud) to win games. They need a back who is pass protection sure, is average or above at receiving and can average 4 yards a carry without ever fumbling the ball. Does this sound like someone on the roster already? DuJuan Harris and he didn't cost the Packers a draft pick.


btw, that year you're talking about the Packers needing a running back ... who won the Super Bowl that year?
UserPostedImage
Offline Rios39  
#44 Posted : Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:20:34 AM(UTC)
Rios39

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 30

Towards the end of our year the running game was fine. It was used less against the 49ers and Vikings in the metrodome cause our D could t make stops and we were in chase mode. We could have stuck with the running game more vs the 49ers. But when we had the lead or a close game we were running the ball just fine.
blank
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#45 Posted : Tuesday, January 22, 2013 1:51:05 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 371

Originally Posted by: Rios39 Go to Quoted Post
Towards the end of our year the running game was fine. It was used less against the 49ers and Vikings in the metrodome cause our D could t make stops and we were in chase mode. We could have stuck with the running game more vs the 49ers. But when we had the lead or a close game we were running the ball just fine.


This is a McCarthy issue. We didn't run in these games not because we were in chase mode. We were never in a position where we had to throw until the very end. McCarthy just brain farts and quits running the ball.

SF, we came out of the 1/2 down by 3. had two series, both with 2 runs each and ended up with a tie after Crosby FG. SF came back and scored and we went into the McCarthy Zone. Not a single run after that, and all but two of the offensive snaps from the shotgun.
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
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / RaiderPride

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

24-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann