RE: RE:The Packers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk



Message


Dave Odle -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 10:35:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

quote:

ORIGINAL: Danimal

yes, yes
There is nothing like watching Brett throw a pick in overtime that directly leads to a humilliating loss at Lambs bow toilet.

Perfect end to a Puker season....



Okay.  Isn't the classical music playing in the background taking itself a bit too seriously here?   They're making this out like a Greek tragedy.  But that can't be right because it would mean that Manning or Favre is Odysseus.  Nah.

Only thing better would have been for Webster to take that pick to the house.

Here is a nice video for everyone to enjoy.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=707492




Steve Lentz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 10:41:41 AM)

Pretty much sums it up. Brett degressed, they became one dimensional, and lost to a better team.




David Moufang -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 12:35:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz

Pretty much sums it up. Brett degressed, they became one dimensional, and lost to a better team.


Who actually thinks the Giants are better?  Practically no one picked the Giants to win the game.




David Moufang -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 12:38:52 PM)

quote:

One would have thought after the first quarter, they would have given Harris more help. That's the one thing MM has to learn is to not be so damn stubborn that if something is not working to change it.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

One would have thought after the first quarter, they would have given Harris more help.  That's the one thing MM has to learn is to not be so damn stubborn that if something is not working to change it.


You can bet your ass Bill Bellichick will be double-covering Burress.




Trekgeekscott -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 12:50:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Moufang

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz

Pretty much sums it up. Brett degressed, they became one dimensional, and lost to a better team.


Who actually thinks the Giants are better?  Practically no one picked the Giants to win the game.


The team that wins...at least on that given Sunday...is the better team.

I didn't think they Giants were the underdogs they were made out to be. 




Steve Lentz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:03:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Moufang

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz

Pretty much sums it up. Brett degressed, they became one dimensional, and lost to a better team.


Who actually thinks the Giants are better?  Practically no one picked the Giants to win the game.

I meant the better team that day David. I picked the Pack to win because they were so balanced and playing well. But Grant was hardly used and Brett played terrible in the 2nd half. That to me was the difference.




djskillz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:21:47 PM)

If it wasn't for the refs, the Giants win by 2 TD's yesterday.




David Moufang -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:34:15 PM)

I still think that part of the problem was that we scored too quickly on those big drives.  It's exciting as hell to watch Donald Driver get all 90 yards on one play, but it takes very little time off the clock.  Consequently, the defense has to go back on the field whilst the Giants slowly but surely march toward the end zone.

Time of possession was 2-to-1; that is unbelieveable.  Yet somehow we only lost by three points.  In fact, when you look at the stats, they were actually not that lopsided except for TOP and 3rd down efficiency.  Favre threw two INTs but was never sacked.  Packers never fumbled.




Lars -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:39:36 PM)

This last year was as good as it is going to get with the current GB roster.  None of the key players on that team will be as healthy or productive as they were this last year.  This was their chance and last chance for Favre.

Injuries, contracts, schedule, etc......will lead to a different outcome next year.  I predict they win less than 10 games.  Sorry Craig et al.....




David Moufang -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:40:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

This last year was as good as it is going to get with the current GB roster.  None of the key players on that team will be as healthy or productive as they were this last year.  This was their chance and last chance for Favre.

Injuries, contracts, schedule, etc......will lead to a different outcome next year.  I predict they win less than 10 games.  Sorry Craig et al.....


Yeah, well...Vikings fans predicted they'd go to the Super Bowl after winning the first game of the season.  I don't have to tell you how that turned out.




Lars -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:41:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Moufang

I still think that part of the problem was that we scored too quickly on those big drives.  It's exciting as hell to watch Donald Driver get all 90 yards on one play, but it takes very little time off the clock.  Consequently, the defense has to go back on the field whilst the Giants slowly but surely march toward the end zone.

Time of possession was 2-to-1; that is unbelieveable.  Yet somehow we only lost by three points.  In fact, when you look at the stats, they were actually not that lopsided except for TOP and 3rd down efficiency.  Favre threw two INTs but was never sacked.  Packers never fumbled.


I guess.  But GB had no rhythm.  There were not going to be any long drives for them.  10% on 3rd down says it all.  14 rushing attempts?  6 in the second half?  McCarthy looked weak in that game.

That game was not as close as the score showed, IMHO.




Lars -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:44:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Moufang

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

This last year was as good as it is going to get with the current GB roster.  None of the key players on that team will be as healthy or productive as they were this last year.  This was their chance and last chance for Favre.

Injuries, contracts, schedule, etc......will lead to a different outcome next year.  I predict they win less than 10 games.  Sorry Craig et al.....


Yeah, well...Vikings fans predicted they'd go to the Super Bowl after winning the first game of the season.  I don't have to tell you how that turned out.


I hear ya.

I'm just saying that there is not much room to go up from here.  What were they?  13-3?  They ain't going 15-1.  Heck, they got swept by Chicago.

Plus, a lot of things broke well for them this year - and I'm not just talking flukey stuff - the emergence of Jennings and Grant are examples.

I just don't see how this team can perform even better next year - a slight dropoff is more likely.  Then they will have to play of the road in the playoffs if they get there.

I personally think this was Favre's last chance - and unfortunately for him he couldn't get it done.




djskillz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 2:58:16 PM)

I agree with you Lars.  I definitely see a dropoff for the Pack next year.  The rest of the conference figures to be a little better than the crap it was this year too.

DM, I sure don't remember ANYONE saying the Vikes were going to the SuperBowl this year. 

The vast majority of posters had us going either 8-8 or 9-7. 




Cheesehead Craig -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 3:00:24 PM)

Lars,
I think the winning less than 10 games is more of a hopeful prediction on your part than an analytical one.
 
Will they repeat a 13-3 record?  Very doubtful, not many teams can win 13 games in back-to-back seasons.
 
Can they go at least 10-6?  Absolutely.
 
It's one thing if this was a bunch of aging vets but this is the youngest team in the league and they grew up a lot this season and began to believe in their potential and that potential showed in a big way.
 
Sure, injuries next year or Favre's decision could play into what's going to happen.  But that's next year.  I'll worry about what's going to happen when retirement decisions, draft and camps are done. 
 
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.  I know I'm not going to convince you or most of the posters here about that just as you have no chance of convincing me otherwise.
 
Oh well, Packer season is over and it's time to take a nice, long break.  Enjoy the offseason everyone!




Lars -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 3:18:58 PM)

Craig - I think you know me well enough to know that my opinion is not some venom/hatred based rant.  I just feel/think that 10 wins is a reasonable over/under for them.  Heck, that is likley good enough for playoffs.

I was just responding to some posts about how the future look even brighter.  Brighter than 13-3 and NFCCG at home?  Not likely, IMHO.

Anyhow, glad you had a great season and your teams made it as far as they did.  Classy fans like you deserve that.




djskillz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 3:25:41 PM)

Ditto Lars' thoughts.

By the way Lars, funny avatar. 

That woman to me always looked more freaky than Jack. 




Lars -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 3:32:50 PM)

Danny's not here Mrs. Torrence.




John Childress -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 4:10:47 PM)

I think the Packers will be good for several years as long as they

1. Turn the reigns over to the young QB - This was Favre's last ride and next year he won't be nearly as good as this year.

2. Draft some CBs

They have the youngest team in the NFL outside of those two positions.  You really have to put this loss squarely on Favre




Justin Sampson -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 5:14:03 PM)

The end result of last night's game was never really in doubt. Eddie "Nostradamus" Murphy knew it way back in the 80's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izArWUVtMC4&eurl=http://forums.operationsports.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=234612&page=30

[:-]




David Moufang -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 5:58:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I think the Packers will be good for several years as long as they

1. Turn the reigns over to the young QB - This was Favre's last ride and next year he won't be nearly as good as this year.


This is an exceedingly cliche and unfounded remark.  People have been saying it since at least 1999, the first "bad" season under Favre.  As we sit here today, NO ONE can say what will happen next year, just as, a year ago, no one could've predicted the Packers would be hosting the conference championship, and that Favre would have one of his best seasons on record.  Let's see what happens on the field before we judge what Favre is capable of.  He has certainly proved everyone (including myself) wrong on many occasions.

quote:


2. Draft some CBs

They have the youngest team in the NFL outside of those two positions.  You really have to put this loss squarely on Favre


Oh yeah, it's Favre's fault.  Nevermind the fact that the defense was eaten alive for 40 minutes, and committed some very costly penalties.  Or that our offensive line couldn't produce holes for Ryan Grant.  Or that our field position was lousy all night.  Or that Jon Ryan made some awful kicks. 

Nope, it's all Favre's fault.  The old man's washed up and should just retire.  (28 TDs, 95.7 QB rating, 4155 yds)




John Childress -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 6:11:00 PM)

You have an unhealthy obsession with Favre

Just kidding

Seriously, Favre was the problem for sure.  You can't throw rookie picks like that and escape blame.

If I was GB I would throw him a great retirement party and get ready for the youngster.  But as a Vikings fan it does me good to see him return with his playoff record over the last 10 years.

If you don't want to see Favre's decline that is on you.  He doesn't have enough left to win another ring so each year you delay with AR is another year it puts you back




djskillz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 6:14:32 PM)

JC, I'm with you.

As I've posted elsewhere, the Giants didn't do anything special offensively for the 4th quarter and OT at all.  They had GREAT field position, however, because Favre couldn't move the ball.

The Giants drove a TOTAL of 77 yards on their last 4 drives of the game COMBINED.  But they had 3 field goal attempts in those because of the great field position that Favre/the Packers' offense gave them.




djskillz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 6:15:22 PM)

Oh, P.S.  I too am happy to see Favre come back as a Vikings fan.  Good for us.

Though I'm not a believer in Rodgers at all, so either way I think I'll be happy in the next couple years.




John Childress -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 6:19:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

Oh, P.S.  I too am happy to see Favre come back as a Vikings fan.  Good for us.

Though I'm not a believer in Rodgers at all, so either way I think I'll be happy in the next couple years.

I like Rodgers but if he ISN'T the one then they are putting themselves back even further.

It is great to agree with you for a change!

quote:


Rich Hofmann: Ice aged: Favre looks old & cold
Philadelphia Daily News
GREEN BAY - Oh, to be the winner on a night like this: to stand on the great, frozen stage and to raise your arms in triumph, in overtime triumph, over your opponent and over nature at its most brutal; to be compared to the greatest because you conquered conditions there were as icily inhuman as they were unforgettable.

But the pain in the alternative is obvious enough. The defeated will tell tales of frostbitten fingertips that tingled for days, and other indignities. Make no mistake: No disappointment could be any colder or darker than last night's was for Brett Favre and the Green Bay Packers. When you lose, there is no majesty in the snot freezing on your face.

And Favre could only say, sadly, thoughtfully, "I didn't rise up to the occasion as I have in the past."
This was going to be his night. It was. In the second-coldest game ever played in Green Bay, second only to the NFL Championship Game in 1967, the famous Ice Bowl, Favre seemed destined to have another moment, another trip to the Super Bowl. Even as the New York Giants slugged and then slugged some more, it just seemed right. The fumbles and the field goals and the officials' flags and then the overtime coin toss all fell Green Bay's way, as the thermometer fell from 1 below zero at kickoff to 4 below at the end.

The end: when Favre threw the bad interception on the first drive of overtime, a sailing pass picked off by the Giants cornerback Corey Webster, setting up kicker Lawrence Tynes for the 47-yard field goal that won it.

The end: when experience, the greatest teacher, was mute.
And Favre said, "I expect more out of myself. I know it's part of the game, but it's very disappointing."
We spent the season in his thrall, again. It was as if the gray hair and the gray beard were meaningless, as if the 38 years were nothing. Backed by a potent running game in the second half of the season, Favre rode this incredible, out-of-nowhere wave. But last night, with the running game shockingly evaporated, with the conditions brutal, it was on him - and he looked his age.
And now, the annual game will begin. Will Favre be back for another season? And will this crushing disappointment have any effect on the decision?

"Had we won the game and gone to the Super Bowl, and whatever happens in that game, I was going to go home and just think about where I want to go from there," Favre said. "I don't think that's going to change because we didn't make it."

He said the decision would "probably be much quicker" this season than some of the past, prolonged struggles that he has had deciding. He said, "I'm not going to let this game sway my decision, one way or the other."

It had been such an awful night, with wind chills worse than 20 below zero throughout. It was terrible walking 5 minutes in the parking lot at 2 p.m. The idea of spending more than 3 1/2 hours playing a football game in it must have been beyond painful.

But there they all were. The assumption going in was that the conditions would favor the Packers. Few people here wanted to consider the possibility that these wretched conditions might take their toll on the 38-year-old quarterback most of all.

Favre would deny it, of course. He, too, talked about the running game, wondering at one point, "I just have to assume [the problem] was the lack of a running game . . . and maybe I missed on some passes, some reads."

But it is fair to wonder if the cold somehow cost Favre the focus that had ruled his season, causing him to make a couple of those throws - known worldwide by Green Bay fans as Those Throws. You know, those balls that are just too dangerous, just too predicated on hope over reason - especially in Ice Station Lambeau.

There was one early in the fourth quarter, one of those Favre Moments, one of those blots that speckle his Hall of Fame resumé. He threw up a ball downfield, threw it up for grabs, and one of the Giants grabbed it - R.W. McQuarters.

But, just as quickly, the Packers' Ryan Grant knocked the ball loose and teammate Mark Tauscher fell on it. Four plays later, Green Bay's Mason Crosby kicked a 37-yard field goal that tied the score at 20-20. That is when it seemed fated. If they could survive such a ridiculous throw, the Packers could survive anything.

After that, the Giants would have one touchdown called back on a bogus holding penalty and would see quarterback Eli Manning sacked on a key play despite Packers defensive end Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila clearly being offside. They would have Tynes miss two field goals, including a 36-yarder at the end of regulation. Then the coin toss went the Packers' way, too.

It was going to happen. Despite all of the frigid slapstick, it was going to happen for Brett Favre again. But . . . but . . .
And he said, "The last pass I threw in this game was intercepted and gave them a chance to win, so . . . "

But the thought remained unfinished, frozen in time. *
Send e-mail to hofmanr@phillynews.com






djskillz -> RE: RE:The Packers (1/21/2008 6:29:22 PM)

For what it's worth JC, I think we agree on a whole lot of things.  It's just that the few things we do disagree on, we REALLY disagree on.

No worries.




Page: <<   < prev  42 43 [44] 45 46   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode