RE: The Packers (Full Version)

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



Message

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (9/28/2010 10:53:03 AM)

moved.



Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/3/2010 3:30:41 PM)

Packers 28 Lions 26

We didn't deserve to win this game. Period.

Offense
  • No flow at all, and no running game until the very end.
  • Kudos to the OL and Kuhn on that last drive. Excellent execution.
  • Rodgers had some ridiculously good throws but some stupid INTs also.

    Defense
  • Got dominated at home. The middle of the field was open all game and the Lions took huge advantage of it.
  • Pass rush was sporadic at best.
  • On a positive note, they at least held Detroit to FGs at the end to keep the Pack on top.
  • I hate to say this, but we really need Harris and Bigby back. I'll take them at 75% right now. I don't like wishing that injured guys come back but our secondary really needs the help.

    Special Teams
  • 12 yard punt
  • 2 fumbled kickoff returns by Jordy Nelson

    Like I said before, we had no business winning this game, none. Detroit outplayed us but thanks to their turnovers and stupid penalties, they kept us in the game.

    A win is a win, even if it's a gift. I'd rather be 3-1 than 2-2.



    • marty -> RE: The Packers (10/3/2010 11:23:39 PM)

    Maybe the Vikes DO have a chance of winning at Lambau again ?

    I think the Vikes will win there ONLY if the Vikes LOSE at home the week before to the Cowboys.

    What most impressed me with GB was its' playcalling on offense. I was just surprised the Lions didn't look like they expected a run on that last 3rd down. Like the Lions, I was thinking GB is probably stupid enough to pass on that 3rd down and give the Lions a chance to win the game with about a minute left. After seeing how pass happy the Packers and Bears were the week before, that would not have surprised me.

    But it the turns out the Packer OC probably learns from the past (unlike the Vikings' OC), and also played the %s with a run. It was also well executed, and Kuhn runs hard, good for short yardage.



    John Childress -> RE: The Packers (10/4/2010 5:42:49 AM)

    I think the green bay team that shows up to play the Vikings will be a much better one than the one that faced the Bears and Lions



    Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 8:39:28 AM)

    Injuries are really concerning right now for the Packers.

    Starting RT Mark Taucher is out and nobody knows for how long, he can barely lift his shoulder. Looks like 1st rd draft pick Bulaga is going to get his first NFL start this week.

    ILBs Brandon Chillar and Nick Barnett are out for this week and possibly both could be gone for the season. Chillar was the nickel LB and has played a lot (more than Hawk) and Barnett was our everydown ILB. The Packers now have 2 healthy ILBs and have brought in a PS guy who is very likely going to see some playing time this Sunday.

    Starting SS Morgan Burnett is likely out for the season with a knee injury.

    Really hoping that Bigby, Harris and Starks can contribute when they come off the PUP list.



    Todd M -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 9:05:47 AM)

    DONE!



    Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 9:34:54 AM)

    I agree, Craig, that the Packers have had a barrage of injuries, and that has to be worrisome. But really, until the Packers experience what every other team in the NFL have experienced (having to start a 2nd or even 3rd string QB), they don't really know injuries. Your team continues to have the luckiest streak in the league.



    Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 11:54:10 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

    I agree, Craig, that the Packers have had a barrage of injuries, and that has to be worrisome. But really, until the Packers experience what every other team in the NFL have experienced (having to start a 2nd or even 3rd string QB), they don't really know injuries. Your team continues to have the luckiest streak in the league.


    It's not so much an injury-plagued situation with QBs as much as crummy play at the position that most teams have.

    The Packers know injuries, Lynn. To limit it only to the QB position as far as that goes is foolish thinking.



    Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 11:54:51 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Todd Mallett

    DONE!


    You should post more in green Todd, it suits you. [;)]



    Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 12:16:17 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

    I agree, Craig, that the Packers have had a barrage of injuries, and that has to be worrisome. But really, until the Packers experience what every other team in the NFL have experienced (having to start a 2nd or even 3rd string QB), they don't really know injuries. Your team continues to have the luckiest streak in the league.


    It's not so much an injury-plagued situation with QBs as much as crummy play at the position that most teams have.

    The Packers know injuries, Lynn. To limit it only to the QB position as far as that goes is foolish thinking.


    You're right - the QB isn't the only position of importance. But when you have gone 19 years without ever having to start a 2nd or 3rd string QB, you have to admit you've got a lucky rabbit's foot hidden somewhere. And over those 19 years, I would challenge you to name one other team that hasn't had injuries at the QB position, most of them numerous times. Crummy play occasionally comes in too, but they've ALL had injuries there.



    Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/8/2010 3:25:25 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

    I agree, Craig, that the Packers have had a barrage of injuries, and that has to be worrisome. But really, until the Packers experience what every other team in the NFL have experienced (having to start a 2nd or even 3rd string QB), they don't really know injuries. Your team continues to have the luckiest streak in the league.


    It's not so much an injury-plagued situation with QBs as much as crummy play at the position that most teams have.

    The Packers know injuries, Lynn. To limit it only to the QB position as far as that goes is foolish thinking.


    You're right - the QB isn't the only position of importance. But when you have gone 19 years without ever having to start a 2nd or 3rd string QB, you have to admit you've got a lucky rabbit's foot hidden somewhere. And over those 19 years, I would challenge you to name one other team that hasn't had injuries at the QB position, most of them numerous times. Crummy play occasionally comes in too, but they've ALL had injuries there.

    True. The Packers have been very blessed to have had that.

    My only point was that one can't just point to the QB position and say we haven't known injuries. 2005 isn't too far from my memory. That was a season where we had the same QB all season, but lost our #1, 3 and 4 WR and our #1 and 2 RB. I daresay that was knowing injuries.



    thebigo -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 9:39:04 AM)

    The Packers need any other breaks?

    Albert Haynesworth won't play Sunday

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5668413



    Jeff Allen -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 12:06:49 PM)

    Go Skins! Good start.



    David Levine -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 12:14:48 PM)

    And something called 'Brandon Jackson' just takes off for 71 yards...



    marty -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 2:00:40 PM)

    Watching the Packers/Redskins game.

    About 11 minutes left in the 3rd quarter, Packers up 10-3. On a 3rd and 11 play, Charles Woodson just ran into Sanatan Moss well before the ball was there, and guess what, no flag.

    Moss and McNabb both had their arms up in the air complaining. Woodson ran into Moss's back well before the ball was there, NO regard for the PI rules. They came back from the break, and Aikman talked about it being a signficant non-call as it was on third down. "Woodson just got away with one there."

    It's funny that before this play, I was thinking how clean a game the Packers were playing, and was also surprised on how there were so many Packers fans there in DC, it sounds like a home game for the Pack.

    The fact that the Packers get away with so many obvious, major non-calls on pass defense is disturbing to me. They have no regard for the PI rules (and holding by the 2ndary), and seem like they feel an entitlement to commit PI and not get called (favored franchise status?), especially Woodson.



    marty -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 2:23:58 PM)

    Pretty funny, the Packers just converted a 3rd down play, and they start talking about a guy quietly having a great day is Bryan Baluga of the Packers. Then they show a clip of him on the 3rd down play, and I was expecting to see a good block, as he looked REALLY good on clips from his college days.

    On the 3rd down play, at first it looks like a slight hold, but then Baluga grabs on and holds on for quite some time. He is beaten and is holding on with one hand stopping the defender's progress. Aikman comments, "Baluga sort of got away with a little hold there [it wasn't so little], but he is having a great day".

    So the Packers got away with another non-call, on 3rd down, and it was a pretty good offense, not something ticky tacky. So, what's new ?



    marty -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 2:31:23 PM)

    Wow! Another 3rd play where the Redskins didn't convert, usually the announcers are biased for the Packers, but they reviewed the play and see Packer LBer Desmond Bishop getting away with quite a hold on TE Chris Cooley. I was surprised they were talking about it, but it, like Baluga's play (except this was on defense) was a VERY good hold, and it didn't get called.

    Maybe the announcers are see SO MUCH disregard for the rules from the Pack, it's starts to become more than just a little bit noticeable ?

    Redskins now making a game of it, getting a long TD, still trailing the Pack 10-13. But you can't forget that those 3 non-calls, ALL on 3rd down, ALL flagrant, and how they are important to the game.



    David Levine -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 2:38:48 PM)

    Packers were the most penalized team in football last year. And they are on their same pace this year.



    marty -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 2:48:06 PM)

    They were the most penalized team last year, but I would also say they also got away with more NON-calls than any other team in the league. The current team has NO regard for the rules.

    Washington just got a makeup call, as they flag Woodson for a ticky tack PI, on 2nd down, about 8 minutes left in the game. An announcer said that that is Woodson's game, and he probably could get called a lot more for it, but he is just known as a physical player.

    Bishop is flagged for PI (6:50 in the game), the officials met and decided it was NOT a penalty. The replay showed, and Aikman commented that Bishop made contact with Cooley's back, and then held his arm BEFORE the ball was there, and you can see that on the replay. I'm not sure why the officials overturned it. Maybe they thought Bishop was looking forward and was going to the ball, and hitting Cooley's back and holding his arm was all incidental.

    On the next play, on 3rd down, the Redskins did a long pass where if they HAD called PI on Nick Collins, it would have been ticky tack, but the crowd was yelling for it. I don't think THAT should have been called.

    It's funny, because it's led to a discussion with the commentators about all the contact by the Packer 2ndary. They're going through the film saying, 'I think THIS one was PI, but this one WASN'T, but this one should have been, this other one was real close .... ' [&:]



    Todd M -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 2:54:04 PM)

    That was disgusting that the one ref talked the other out of that PI. Ref's should be fined for that kind of crap.



    Ian Joseph -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 3:35:41 PM)

    Packers just coughed up a lung. A bunch of injuries and this impending bad loss to the Redskins? Ouch, babe.



    marty -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 3:41:41 PM)

    Packers flagged for 2 PI calls in OT. The first one seemed ticky tack, it was a hold away from the WR being thrown to. The 2nd one was on Woodson, and the only thing surprising was Woodson arguing about it, he caught the guy from behind and pulled him, BEFORE the ball was there.

    So, just like last year, you have the most penalized team in the league getting a large amount of penalties, but also getting away with an incredible number of non-calls, 3 on crucial 3rd downs.

    If I were a Packer fan, I would send McCarthy a league rule book.



    Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 3:59:28 PM)

    Packers 13 - Redskins 16

    Crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, crap and crap.

    Offense
  • Where was the running game? It produced (even taking away the 71 yd run by Jackson) and MM simply abandoned it.
  • No pass protection in the 2nd half.
  • Rodgers was poor overall. He was too busy looking around at the protection. This was when he even had time.
  • Just a poor, poor offensive gameplan. MM abandoning the run for no good reason and just throws, throws and throws. Even on 3rd and short he throws it, consistently.
  • Didn't like the call to go for it on 4th and goal. To me, take the points.

    Defense
  • Great pass rush.
  • Great run defense.
  • Absolutely poor pass coverage and just stupid penalties. Guys were open all 4th Q and OT long.

    Special Teams
  • Other than Williams punt return, they were their usual crud.

    I said it before that our injuries were concerning and now they get even worse. Finley, Lee, Pickett, Matthews, Shields. This is getting ridiculous. Hopefully Finley's isn't too serious and that he can still come back soon. It's Hawk and 3 backup LBs. We got a dime back at nickel and a special teams' guys at dime and starting S. Our defense is just shredded. I'm frankly surprised that they stopped Washington from scoring more than they did.

    This season has a good chance of going downhill very quickly.



    • Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 4:20:21 PM)

    I'm going to concede Craig - you guys have been killed with injuries. The defense was completely different when Clay Mathews was out of the game.

    But the Packers are also one of the most penalized teams in the league, and it's hard to keep winning when you shoot yourself in the foot.



    Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (10/10/2010 4:44:16 PM)

    Wait, it gets even better. Apparently Rodgers is going to get checked for a concussion after the helmet to helmet hit he got when he threw the INT in OT.

    When it rains it pours.



    Page: <<   < prev  78 79 [80] 81 82   next >   >>



    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode