RE: The Packers

RE: The Packers (Full Version)

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

Message

Tim Cady -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 2:34:50 PM)
Depending on what you believe Harvin is 5'11" 185lbs, I have also seen his listed as 6'0, I think he is more like 5'10" 200lbs, dude is solid. He has been hampered with the shoulder thing, but he has also been hit hard and he usually breaks the first tackle. I don't mind Berrian being gone, because he is just not consistent enough for my taste. More balls for Shiancoe, Rice and Harvin. Greg Lewis can handle a couple we will be fine, at least we know going in Berrian won't show up[;)].

Tim Cady -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 2:35:48 PM)
Oh yeah, Craig, I hate Al Harris for all the reasons you mentioned, plus his damn hairdo![8D]

Jeff Jesser -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 2:56:14 PM)
Harvin has to be bigger than 185. He's way too thick for that weight. I would agree Tim, he's right around 200.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 3:30:51 PM)
GB has some good things going on defense coming into this game that they didn't have in the previous matchup: - Clay Matthews is now the starting OLB instead of Poppinga. Matthews is insanely fast and does a great job of shutting down runs to his side of the field by simply beating tackles with speed and agility. It's looking like a great move by TT in trading up to get him. - Bigby back at S. He's a much better run stopper than pass defender but he's light years better than the humps we had back there while he was out. Coverage will be much better overall as now we don't have some new guy back there who doesn't know jack. - More looks with Kampman with his hands down. Last week they threw in some looks with Kampy playing DE and boy did he respond. Had 2-3 hurries and looked like the pass rushing demon of the past few years. The defense is more comfortable with the system so they are playing vs thinking. I think the defense looks better this game vs the pass than they did in the first game.

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 3:54:39 PM)
If I was GB, I would rush/blitz Kampman at least 2 of every 3 passing downs.

marty -> RE: The Packers (10/29/2009 9:24:47 PM)
Size doesn't matter unless the refs let Harris MUG Harvin Harris might get flagged in the 1st 3 quarters for that, maybe more than once. But they will NOT flag him in the 4th quarter, that is when they just let guys play, well at least guys on the home team. There are posters claiming the Vikings are vastly superior to the Packers and that is simply not the case. The Packers have better safeties, CBs and LBers. The Vikes have a better front line. But if you put Kampmann as a down line man, the Packers will get plenty of pass rush from him, just like the Vikes get from other side with Allen. The Vikes have a better OL, but it is NOT vastly superior, especially since Hutch is playing with a bad back. Kampmann might just well school Loadholt all day in this one. The QBs are about equal and the Packers have better WR corps, without Berrian the Packers have a good edge. I think the Pack will focus on stopping Rice and Harvin will give Harris little trouble if Harris just mugs him, especially in the 4th quarter. The Vikes will miss the experience of Berrian in this one. RBs and TE goes to the Vikes, but the home RB will usually outperform the away RB in most games, unless the away team finishes 4 or more games ahead of the home team at the end of the year. The Vikes need to stop WR Greg JENNINGS in this one, or they are in trouble! I think they won't, especially not in the 1st half, so the Vikes will be playing a lot of ketchup in the 2nd half. The Vikes are trying to get too cute with their passing game, and that will lead to TURNOVERS and a nice halftime lead for the Pack. The Packers are going to blitz A LOT more, and I suspect the Vikes will NOT have screens ready. I think Favre will play his WORST 1st half of the entire year. I think he'll play better in the 2nd half, but it won't be enough as the Pack will NOT take their feet off the pedal in the 2nd half. The Vikes COULD win the game if Allen is dominant, but I would have to think the Packers will make adjustments on offense. They will chip him with TEs and RBs to help block, then launch deep passes to JENNINGS, Driver and Jones. The Vikings' safeties will be exploited in this one. The Packers will probably also have some nice run plays set up for Grant, similarly with what the Ravens did with Rice. This is also the time of year where McCarthy sometimes gets creative on offense. You might see some 4 WR sets, and some surprises that Frazier hasn't seen. They'll be effective in the 1st half. Frazier will probably adjust for the 2nd half, but GB will have a sizeable lead and be able to run the ball more the 2nd half, and keep the Vikes off balance. The tables will have turned in this one.

Tim Cady -> RE: The Packers (10/30/2009 8:36:53 AM)
[&:]

GopherFan34 -> RE: The Packers (10/30/2009 11:10:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: marty Size doesn't matter unless the refs let Harris MUG Harvin Harris might get flagged in the 1st 3 quarters for that, maybe more than once. But they will NOT flag him in the 4th quarter, that is when they just let guys play, well at least guys on the home team. There are posters claiming the Vikings are vastly superior to the Packers and that is simply not the case. The Packers have better safeties, CBs and LBers. The Vikes have a better front line. But if you put Kampmann as a down line man, the Packers will get plenty of pass rush from him, just like the Vikes get from other side with Allen. The Vikes have a better OL, but it is NOT vastly superior, especially since Hutch is playing with a bad back. Kampmann might just well school Loadholt all day in this one. The QBs are about equal and the Packers have better WR corps, without Berrian the Packers have a good edge. I think the Pack will focus on stopping Rice and Harvin will give Harris little trouble if Harris just mugs him, especially in the 4th quarter. The Vikes will miss the experience of Berrian in this one. RBs and TE goes to the Vikes, but the home RB will usually outperform the away RB in most games, unless the away team finishes 4 or more games ahead of the home team at the end of the year. The Vikes need to stop WR Greg JENNINGS in this one, or they are in trouble! I think they won't, especially not in the 1st half, so the Vikes will be playing a lot of ketchup in the 2nd half. The Vikes are trying to get too cute with their passing game, and that will lead to TURNOVERS and a nice halftime lead for the Pack. The Packers are going to blitz A LOT more, and I suspect the Vikes will NOT have screens ready. I think Favre will play his WORST 1st half of the entire year. I think he'll play better in the 2nd half, but it won't be enough as the Pack will NOT take their feet off the pedal in the 2nd half. The Vikes COULD win the game if Allen is dominant, but I would have to think the Packers will make adjustments on offense. They will chip him with TEs and RBs to help block, then launch deep passes to JENNINGS, Driver and Jones. The Vikings' safeties will be exploited in this one. The Packers will probably also have some nice run plays set up for Grant, similarly with what the Ravens did with Rice. This is also the time of year where McCarthy sometimes gets creative on offense. You might see some 4 WR sets, and some surprises that Frazier hasn't seen. They'll be effective in the 1st half. Frazier will probably adjust for the 2nd half, but GB will have a sizeable lead and be able to run the ball more the 2nd half, and keep the Vikes off balance. The tables will have turned in this one. Lets face it Marty, you're just a huge Puker fan posting on a Viking board. Lets just crown their ass.

marty -> RE: The Packers (10/30/2009 9:58:44 PM)
Do NOT underestimate the opponent ! I don't know if it's because I feel I understand the enemy better, or that I'm being misled into thinking the Packers are better than they are by my local (Wisconsin) media. While I'm now wavering on picking the Pack, Winfield missing the game is going to make it that much harder. I REALLY want to hit the correct score (with the correct team winning) on this game, to make it 2 weeks in a row. It would really be neat. But I'm now having trouble just picking a winner. There are A LOT of factors, variables. -------- Kind of amusing: I was listening to the radio tonight, a station near Madison was asking people (first he stated "of course NOBODY is cheering for the Vikings), "are you going to be cheering for Brett Favre or for the Packers ?" The callers were about evenly split. It was amusing. I don't know if that means the Vikes will be helped by people cheering for Favre, or will it be like a few years back when the Vikings got upset at all the Packers fans in the stands and stated that they wanted to make a statement that, "this is OUR house!".

thebigo -> RE: The Packers (10/31/2009 11:08:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig quote: ORIGINAL: marty I cringe when I hear about GBs 2 outstanding CBs, they have ONE, and that is Woodson. Woodson is regarded as a stud corner but to say Harris isn't outstanding is plain delusional. Is it really that hard to give credit where credit is due regardless of what team a player is on? I don't mind when people say negative stuff about the Packers so long as it has some basis in fact or reality (or is at least humorous). I get that many don't like Harris here because he hurt AP. Fine, hate him for that. But to dismiss his abilities in coverage on the field is silly. Teams around the league consistently say how tough it is to go against BOTH our CBs. I don't know what you mean. Marty said Woodson is an outstanding corner. Woodson is a Packer. In his opinion, Harris is not an outstanding corner. What's the big whoop?

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (11/1/2009 5:47:49 AM)
Harris and Woodson get their chance to prove how good they are in a few hours.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (11/1/2009 9:11:32 PM)
Vikes sweep the Pack 38-26 Well, that didn't quite go as I hoped. A very poor first half was too much to overcome although there was a fine comeback effort made. Rodgers started too slow but got on track as the game went on. It would be nice if he could put together a solid 3 quarter performance. Not asking for the whole game yet, but 3 good quarters would do wonders as he seems to have only put together 2 quarter performances too often. He still has to learn when to not take a sack and throw the ball away. No running game to speak of. Grant just bulls ahead and doesn't think that maybe there's a hole someplace else besides where he's already decided to go. There's been a lot of forum chatter about that the Packers have to draft a new RB as Jackson can't stay healthy and obviously the signing of Green and moving him to #2 status right away says the coaching staff doesn't think highly of Jackson. Speaking of Green, he's terrible at returning kicks. No speed and the same running style as Grant of just bulling ahead instead of seeing the field. We really missed Nelson returning kicks these past few weeks. Defense overall did a good job of containing AP, however a few breakdowns is all he needed to torch the D. That 44 yd screen pass was the game's back breaker. Penalties really hurt us early on. Jolly's penalty was the depths of stupidity head butting Taylor. No call for that at all and hope he gets punished by the team and possibly the league. Tramon Williams got picked on a lot in this game. Favre found a weakness and exploited the hell out of it. He was playing too soft and was what, 2-3 yds away on a guy running a 12 yd hook? That's easy pitch and catch there. Well, we played one of the best teams in the league and lost, again. We sit at 4-3 and still have a good shot at making the playoffs if we can go 6-3 the rest of the way. Looking at the schedule, I think that's possible.

GopherFan34 -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 7:15:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig Vikes sweep the Pack 38-26 Well, that didn't quite go as I hoped. A very poor first half was too much to overcome although there was a fine comeback effort made. Rodgers started too slow but got on track as the game went on. It would be nice if he could put together a solid 3 quarter performance. Not asking for the whole game yet, but 3 good quarters would do wonders as he seems to have only put together 2 quarter performances too often. He still has to learn when to not take a sack and throw the ball away. No running game to speak of. Grant just bulls ahead and doesn't think that maybe there's a hole someplace else besides where he's already decided to go. There's been a lot of forum chatter about that the Packers have to draft a new RB as Jackson can't stay healthy and obviously the signing of Green and moving him to #2 status right away says the coaching staff doesn't think highly of Jackson. Speaking of Green, he's terrible at returning kicks. No speed and the same running style as Grant of just bulling ahead instead of seeing the field. We really missed Nelson returning kicks these past few weeks. Defense overall did a good job of containing AP, however a few breakdowns is all he needed to torch the D. That 44 yd screen pass was the game's back breaker. Penalties really hurt us early on. Jolly's penalty was the depths of stupidity head butting Taylor. No call for that at all and hope he gets punished by the team and possibly the league. Tramon Williams got picked on a lot in this game. Favre found a weakness and exploited the hell out of it. He was playing too soft and was what, 2-3 yds away on a guy running a 12 yd hook? That's easy pitch and catch there. Well, we played one of the best teams in the league and lost, again. We sit at 4-3 and still have a good shot at making the playoffs if we can go 6-3 the rest of the way. Looking at the schedule, I think that's possible. Apparently McCarthy feels no need to clean up his teams undisciplined play. Stupid penalties will kill you and they killed GB. Without Farve, McCarthy looks like a very average coach, and his QB keeps getting praised for being this great young QB, yet he can't beat good teams. He holds the ball to long and sooner or later he's going to suffer a major injury.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 9:11:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GopherFan34 Apparently McCarthy feels no need to clean up his teams undisciplined play. Stupid penalties will kill you and they killed GB. Without Farve, McCarthy looks like a very average coach, and his QB keeps getting praised for being this great young QB, yet he can't beat good teams. He holds the ball to long and sooner or later he's going to suffer a major injury. The penalties are a major source of problem with GB. I know McCarthy rails on the team in practice about them. I think it goes to that the team has been so young for so long. Yeah, it's all on the QB if the team loses. [&o] Let's just ignore any defensive or special teams performances. Rodgers does hold onto the ball too long, but that should get better as he plays more, as it's only his 2nd season starting. If you can't see Rodgers is a great, young QB, then I question your football acumen.

Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 9:16:11 AM)
heh heh ... ... he said "acumen."

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 11:24:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig Yeah, it's all on the QB if the team loses. [&o] Let's just ignore any defensive or special teams performances. Rodgers does hold onto the ball too long, but that should get better as he plays more, as it's only his 2nd season starting. If you can't see Rodgers is a great, young QB, then I question your football acumen. I'm not ready for great yet. I posted in the Game Day thread that right now Rodgers reminds me of a talented version of Rex Grossman. He's almost totally unwilling to take the easy play and would rather hold out for the spectacular one. He can get away with it against the Detroits and Clevelands of the world (where he averages like 20 yards per attempt), but decent defenses will make him pay for that. Maybe he'll outgrow that, but right now I put him in the same group as Cutler. Incredibly physically talented, but maybe not the head to be great.

Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 11:51:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: David Levine quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig Yeah, it's all on the QB if the team loses. [&o] Let's just ignore any defensive or special teams performances. Rodgers does hold onto the ball too long, but that should get better as he plays more, as it's only his 2nd season starting. If you can't see Rodgers is a great, young QB, then I question your football acumen. I'm not ready for great yet. I posted in the Game Day thread that right now Rodgers reminds me of a talented version of Rex Grossman. He's almost totally unwilling to take the easy play and would rather hold out for the spectacular one. He can get away with it against the Detroits and Clevelands of the world (where he averages like 20 yards per attempt), but decent defenses will make him pay for that. Maybe he'll outgrow that, but right now I put him in the same group as Cutler. Incredibly physically talented, but maybe not the head to be great. Experience will fix that. He'll be a damn good QB for GB, provided he can survive with the protections he's (not) getting.

Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 11:55:56 AM)
Rodgers was limping pretty badly at the end of the game. Has anyone heard any injury update on him?

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 11:58:39 AM)
I'm with DL. He's got skills, but he's not there yet.

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (11/2/2009 12:09:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott quote: ORIGINAL: David Levine quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig Yeah, it's all on the QB if the team loses. [&o] Let's just ignore any defensive or special teams performances. Rodgers does hold onto the ball too long, but that should get better as he plays more, as it's only his 2nd season starting. If you can't see Rodgers is a great, young QB, then I question your football acumen. I'm not ready for great yet. I posted in the Game Day thread that right now Rodgers reminds me of a talented version of Rex Grossman. He's almost totally unwilling to take the easy play and would rather hold out for the spectacular one. He can get away with it against the Detroits and Clevelands of the world (where he averages like 20 yards per attempt), but decent defenses will make him pay for that. Maybe he'll outgrow that, but right now I put him in the same group as Cutler. Incredibly physically talented, but maybe not the head to be great. Experience will fix that. He'll be a damn good QB for GB, provided he can survive with the protections he's (not) getting. Experience may or may not. Many fantastic athletes never scrape their potential because they don't have the mental make-up for it. Rodgers seems like a really hard worker and a gamer, so the odds are probably in his favor, but it remains to be seen. Some guys just never "get it".

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (11/3/2009 9:16:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: David Levine quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig Yeah, it's all on the QB if the team loses. [&o] Let's just ignore any defensive or special teams performances. Rodgers does hold onto the ball too long, but that should get better as he plays more, as it's only his 2nd season starting. If you can't see Rodgers is a great, young QB, then I question your football acumen. I'm not ready for great yet. I posted in the Game Day thread that right now Rodgers reminds me of a talented version of Rex Grossman. He's almost totally unwilling to take the easy play and would rather hold out for the spectacular one. He can get away with it against the Detroits and Clevelands of the world (where he averages like 20 yards per attempt), but decent defenses will make him pay for that. Maybe he'll outgrow that, but right now I put him in the same group as Cutler. Incredibly physically talented, but maybe not the head to be great. Don't even bring Grossman into this discussion, the difference between the two is so massive it's not even funny. Rodgers biggest problem is his vision. He's simply not seeing the entire field and missing open recievers because of it. I think it has to do partially with that he has no confidence in his pass blocking so he gets too tunnel focused to a part of the field to make things easier. He tends to hold on to the ball too long also. I don't think he's looking for the spectacular play, I think he's looking for the safest "right" play but for some reason he doesn't do the check downs. A lot of teams would sacrifice a virgin to have a QB with a 110 rating with 14 TDs and 2 INTs this season. I fully concede that Rodgers' holding onto the ball too long hurts the team when it comes to field position and the sacks and I'd say about 33% of the sacks are on him because of it. I guess that for a 2nd yr starter, I'm willing to take that in exchange for the low INT total. He'll get better and to me, that's a very exciting prospect. If he's putting up the numbers he is now and it's known he can improve even more, that's a great situation for the Packers to be in.

Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (11/3/2009 9:22:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig quote: ORIGINAL: David Levine quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig Yeah, it's all on the QB if the team loses. [&o] Let's just ignore any defensive or special teams performances. Rodgers does hold onto the ball too long, but that should get better as he plays more, as it's only his 2nd season starting. If you can't see Rodgers is a great, young QB, then I question your football acumen. I'm not ready for great yet. I posted in the Game Day thread that right now Rodgers reminds me of a talented version of Rex Grossman. He's almost totally unwilling to take the easy play and would rather hold out for the spectacular one. He can get away with it against the Detroits and Clevelands of the world (where he averages like 20 yards per attempt), but decent defenses will make him pay for that. Maybe he'll outgrow that, but right now I put him in the same group as Cutler. Incredibly physically talented, but maybe not the head to be great. Don't even bring Grossman into this discussion, the difference between the two is so massive it's not even funny. Rodgers biggest problem is his vision. He's simply not seeing the entire field and missing open recievers because of it. I think it has to do partially with that he has no confidence in his pass blocking so he gets too tunnel focused to a part of the field to make things easier. He tends to hold on to the ball too long also. I don't think he's looking for the spectacular play, I think he's looking for the safest "right" play but for some reason he doesn't do the check downs. A lot of teams would sacrifice a virgin to have a QB with a 110 rating with 14 TDs and 2 INTs this season. I fully concede that Rodgers' holding onto the ball too long hurts the team when it comes to field position and the sacks and I'd say about 33% of the sacks are on him because of it. I guess that for a 2nd yr starter, I'm willing to take that in exchange for the low INT total. He'll get better and to me, that's a very exciting prospect. If he's putting up the numbers he is now and it's known he can improve even more, that's a great situation for the Packers to be in. His reads of the field will get better with experience. As his confidence grows he wont hold onto the ball for too long anymore. I think he's a little afraid to throw INTs right now...unlike the guy he replaced...and hasn't figured out the art of throwing the ball away yet. Rodger's problems are all things that can be fixed. The Vikings have a good QB right now...but he wont be here for long. Rodgers' future is bright IMHO, if he doesn't get himself killed taking sacks.

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (11/3/2009 9:34:16 AM)
A lot of teams would sacrifice a virgin Didn't know that there were any left

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (11/3/2009 10:01:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John Childress A lot of teams would sacrifice a virgin Didn't know that there were any left Reportedly, there are a good number in Utah and NM.

So.Mn.Fan -> RE: The Packers (11/3/2009 8:46:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynn G. Rodgers was limping pretty badly at the end of the game. Has anyone heard any injury update on him? GREEN BAY, Wis. -- The hits just keep on coming for Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, who has experienced a season's worth of sacks in seven games. All that punishment is beginning to take its toll. Rodgers limped away from Sunday's loss to the Minnesota Vikings with a sprained toe on one foot and a nagging sprain on the other. Packers coach Mike McCarthy said Rodgers could miss time in practice this week but is expected to play Sunday at Tampa Bay without losing mobility. Rodgers has been sacked a league-worst 31 times this season, including six by Minnesota on Sunday.

Page: << < prev 67 68 [69] 70 71 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode