RE:The Packers

RE:The Packers (Full Version)

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

Message

John Childress -> RE:The Packers (9/28/2007 6:03:52 PM)
Also chalk me up in the category that thinks he's smarter than the "good old boy" act he puts on. MUCH He plays the media like a violin

Todd M -> RE:The Packers (9/28/2007 8:07:33 PM)
With 420 touchdown passes, Favre is even with Dan Marino. With 275 interceptions, Favre is near the 277 throws George Blanda had picked off over his 26 seasons. I don't think there's enough talk about how fast Brett has been able to accomplish this. I want Favre to play 9 more years and really put this record away at over 400. What a great QB. :clap:

Toby Stumbo -> RE:The Packers (9/28/2007 8:10:09 PM)
Go Vikes Go!!!

Cheesehead Craig -> RE:The Packers (9/28/2007 10:59:42 PM)
[quote="Todd Mallett"]With 420 touchdown passes, Favre is even with Dan Marino. With 275 interceptions, Favre is near the 277 throws George Blanda had picked off over his 26 seasons. I don't think there's enough talk about how fast Brett has been able to accomplish this. I want Favre to play 9 more years and really put this record away at over 400. What a great QB. :clap:[/quote] It's not like Blanda played a significant amount over those 26 seasons, for about 1/2 of them he hardly played. Let's look at some numbers here: Blanda threw 277 picks in 4007 career attempts Favre threw 275 picks in 8349 career attempts

Todd M -> RE:The Packers (9/28/2007 11:49:43 PM)
Sure, ruin it for me why don't ya. :x :)

David Moufang -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 10:48:06 PM)
HA-ha! [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v56/ottoautopilot/nelson-muntz.gif[/img]

Toby Stumbo -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 10:49:48 PM)
Better thank the football gods that Childress is an idiot. :angry:

David Moufang -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 10:51:08 PM)
[img]http://www.lakeland.edu/UserFiles/Image/Alumni/green-bay-packers.jpg[/img][img]http://www.lakeland.edu/UserFiles/Image/Alumni/green-bay-packers.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lakeland.edu/UserFiles/Image/Alumni/green-bay-packers.jpg[/img][img]http://www.lakeland.edu/UserFiles/Image/Alumni/green-bay-packers.jpg[/img]

David Moufang -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 10:52:09 PM)
[quote="Toby Stumbo"]Better thank the football gods that Childress is an idiot. :angry:[/quote] I gotta ask, what was Adrian Peterson doing on the sidelines for most of the game? The commentators were wondering the same thing.

David Levine -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:00:49 PM)
[quote="David Moufang"][quote="Toby Stumbo"]Better thank the football gods that Childress is an idiot. :angry:[/quote] I gotta ask, what was Adrian Peterson doing on the sidelines for most of the game? The commentators were wondering the same thing.[/quote] I guess after getting over 100 yards and 10 YPC in the first half, Childress didn't think he played well enough to warrant more than 2 2nd half carries. I'd rather have Mike Sherman than Childress...

Cheesehead Craig -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:04:26 PM)
GG Vikes. That one got real interesting at the end. The prevent defense almost prevented the Packers from winning. That was the first time I've been able to see a lot of Peterson and man is he good. Wow. It is beyond me why Childress is unable to see that if he ran the ball more today they could have likely won this. They were able to just gash the Packers with the run. Childress is terrible. Real good day by Favre. Once again, it wasn't pretty but it was a win. A typical close battle between these teams.

David Moufang -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:05:17 PM)
I think the fact that Favre threw zero INTs is a big positive.

John Childress -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:06:44 PM)
Favre is having possibly the best season of his career so far. People don't realize it but he is duplicating 1996 with half the talent around him. Only Tony Romo playing out of his mind could stop him from being NFC MVP and Pro Bowl starter

Cheesehead Craig -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:10:09 PM)
[quote="John Childress"]Favre is having possibly the best season of his career so far. People don't realize it but he is duplicating 1996 with half the talent around him. Only Tony Romo playing out of his mind could stop him from being NFC MVP and Pro Bowl starter[/quote] True that. Plus, given that he has absolutely no running game to help him out just confirms the type of season he's having. He's got what, a 96-97 QB rating? Best in a long time.

Easy E -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:32:53 PM)
[quote="Cheesehead Craig"]GG Vikes. That one got real interesting at the end. The prevent defense almost prevented the Packers from winning. That was the first time I've been able to see a lot of Peterson and man is he good. Wow. It is beyond me why Childress is unable to see that if he ran the ball more today they could have likely won this. They were able to just gash the Packers with the run. Childress is terrible. Real good day by Favre. Once again, it wasn't pretty but it was a win. A typical close battle between these teams.[/quote] It must feel good to be 4-0 and in the playoffs. Heck, you've about got the division wrapped up. I do think that any other coach plays Peterson in the second half, and it's a much more interesting game. How do fans feel about AJ Hawk now? Are they still wishing for Vernon Davis?

Easy E -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:34:42 PM)
[quote="Cheesehead Craig"][quote="John Childress"]Favre is having possibly the best season of his career so far. People don't realize it but he is duplicating 1996 with half the talent around him. Only Tony Romo playing out of his mind could stop him from being NFC MVP and Pro Bowl starter[/quote] True that. Plus, given that he has absolutely no running game to help him out just confirms the type of season he's having. He's got what, a 96-97 QB rating? Best in a long time.[/quote] I almost think Favre is better without a running game. I think it keeps him more focused, and they have to use short passes as a running substitute. I think when he's throwing more, like all the time, he gets in a better groove and doesn't force things as much. Just a theory.

David Moufang -> RE:The Packers (9/30/2007 11:57:18 PM)
Packers offensive line is looking better and better, and their defense wasn't bad either. #24 Jarrett Bush needs real help though. Too many blown plays.

djskillz -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 12:13:09 AM)
[quote="Easy E"][quote="Cheesehead Craig"][quote="John Childress"]Favre is having possibly the best season of his career so far. People don't realize it but he is duplicating 1996 with half the talent around him. Only Tony Romo playing out of his mind could stop him from being NFC MVP and Pro Bowl starter[/quote] True that. Plus, given that he has absolutely no running game to help him out just confirms the type of season he's having. He's got what, a 96-97 QB rating? Best in a long time.[/quote] I almost think Favre is better without a running game. I think it keeps him more focused, and they have to use short passes as a running substitute. I think when he's throwing more, like all the time, he gets in a better groove and doesn't force things as much. Just a theory.[/quote] I completely agree with that. I still don't think the Packers are very good, and we should have won this one, but such is life in the weak NFC North. The Packers are a team like the Bears of last season; LOTS of luck, and not very good, but they continue to win ugly games.

John Childress -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 12:17:05 AM)
I don't know if we should have won. Yes, we should have scored a lot more points but Favre also looked like he could have thrown another TD or two today

Cheesehead Craig -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 3:35:02 AM)
[quote="djskilbr"] [quote="Easy E"][quote="Cheesehead Craig"][quote="John Childress"]Favre is having possibly the best season of his career so far. People don't realize it but he is duplicating 1996 with half the talent around him. Only Tony Romo playing out of his mind could stop him from being NFC MVP and Pro Bowl starter[/quote] True that. Plus, given that he has absolutely no running game to help him out just confirms the type of season he's having. He's got what, a 96-97 QB rating? Best in a long time.[/quote] I almost think Favre is better without a running game. I think it keeps him more focused, and they have to use short passes as a running substitute. I think when he's throwing more, like all the time, he gets in a better groove and doesn't force things as much. Just a theory.[/quote] I completely agree with that. I still don't think the Packers are very good, and we should have won this one, but such is life in the weak NFC North. The Packers are a team like the Bears of last season; LOTS of luck, and not very good, but they continue to win ugly games.[/quote] The offenses between the Bears and Packers are light years different. You cannot call their offense luck, everyone knows what's coming and they haven't been able to stop it very well. The defense is playing good, today they got gashed on the ground by a very good running team, but made the big plays when they needed to. Comparing the two teams is silly.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 3:38:29 AM)
[quote="Easy E"][quote="Cheesehead Craig"]GG Vikes. That one got real interesting at the end. The prevent defense almost prevented the Packers from winning. That was the first time I've been able to see a lot of Peterson and man is he good. Wow. It is beyond me why Childress is unable to see that if he ran the ball more today they could have likely won this. They were able to just gash the Packers with the run. Childress is terrible. Real good day by Favre. Once again, it wasn't pretty but it was a win. A typical close battle between these teams.[/quote] It must feel good to be 4-0 and in the playoffs. Heck, you've about got the division wrapped up. I do think that any other coach plays Peterson in the second half, and it's a much more interesting game. How do fans feel about AJ Hawk now? Are they still wishing for Vernon Davis?[/quote] Long season to go still, but things are looking good. I totally agree on Peterson. We rarely stopped him. There were some Davis supporters, but most were behind Hawk. Hawk had a real good second half of the season last year. This year he really hasn't done much. He's solid, but not spectacular. Not sure what's up, but he needs to step it up more. Don't know if he's just in the sophmore slump or what. He'll break out of it.

djskillz -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 4:46:57 AM)
[quote="Cheesehead Craig"][quote="djskilbr"] [quote="Easy E"][quote="Cheesehead Craig"][quote="John Childress"]Favre is having possibly the best season of his career so far. People don't realize it but he is duplicating 1996 with half the talent around him. Only Tony Romo playing out of his mind could stop him from being NFC MVP and Pro Bowl starter[/quote] True that. Plus, given that he has absolutely no running game to help him out just confirms the type of season he's having. He's got what, a 96-97 QB rating? Best in a long time.[/quote] I almost think Favre is better without a running game. I think it keeps him more focused, and they have to use short passes as a running substitute. I think when he's throwing more, like all the time, he gets in a better groove and doesn't force things as much. Just a theory.[/quote] I completely agree with that. I still don't think the Packers are very good, and we should have won this one, but such is life in the weak NFC North. The Packers are a team like the Bears of last season; LOTS of luck, and not very good, but they continue to win ugly games.[/quote] The offenses between the Bears and Packers are light years different. You cannot call their offense luck, everyone knows what's coming and they haven't been able to stop it very well. The defense is playing good, today they got gashed on the ground by a very good running team, but made the big plays when they needed to. Comparing the two teams is silly.[/quote] Yes, the offense is better, but the defense is certainly not as good as the Bears' last year. I don't think it's ridiculous at all? How can you honestly say you haven't had some real gift wins this year? Philly GAVE you the first game. You played a weak Giants team with a banged up Eli, and no Jacobs. I'll give you the Chargers but the Chargers are obviously playing HORRIBLE football. And now the Vikes gave you this one by stupid stupid calls on who gets the rock. I'm sorry Craig, this honestly is not an "anti-Packers" thing, but I just don't think you guys are all that good. I don't. The fact that the Vikings almost beat you, as bad as we played and have been, is just further proof of that.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 5:12:54 AM)
Thing is, we're winning games that we used to lose in the past. This team last year or 2 years ago, likely loses the Philly, SD and MN games. But they've come a long way and now are closing out those games or finding a way to win. I'd argue that good teams do that, find a way to win. The Philly game was the only game that we stole. Special teams won a game for us for the first time in several years. The rest of them, we won. The Vikings/Packers games have historically been close, regardless of the team's records. Division games usually work out that way in the NFC North. I fail to see how another close game between these 2 teams diminishes either team.

djskillz -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 5:32:10 AM)
[quote="Cheesehead Craig"]Thing is, we're winning games that we used to lose in the past. This team last year or 2 years ago, likely loses the Philly, SD and MN games. But they've come a long way and now are closing out those games or finding a way to win. I'd argue that good teams do that, find a way to win. The Philly game was the only game that we stole. Special teams won a game for us for the first time in several years. The rest of them, we won. The Vikings/Packers games have historically been close, regardless of the team's records. Division games usually work out that way in the NFC North. I fail to see how another close game between these 2 teams diminishes either team.[/quote] I'm not saying you guys are horrible or anything Craig. You are certainly better than I thought you'd be, and Favre is actually looking better than he has in a while (not that that's saying a lot) but I just don't think your exactly "title" caliber or anything like that. We'll put it this way; you're not a "4-0" team in my view. That's all.

John Childress -> RE:The Packers (10/1/2007 5:56:04 AM)
The only NFC team playing better than GB is Dallas. Seattle MAY get good enough to beat GB - but they are a soft team. TB is still an unknown.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode