RE: The Packers

RE: The Packers (Full Version)

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

Message

marty -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 8:13:56 AM)
That 3rd string QB made some VERY good plays. He MIGHT be a young Tom Brady, and Chicago might have a QB controversy next year. I was impressed with Caleb Hanie. He was really quick with the high snap, decisive and quick. But he did throw a bad pick at the end. I think the Packers probably would have won without enormous help from the officials, but we'll never know.

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 8:14:38 AM)
Cutler didn't want to play, GB took his heart away Collins couldn't play. He sucked in his prime. The 3rd stringer at least wanted to be out there and tried his best. But for the pass to Raji he might have pulled it off I don't know how Cutler bounces back from this. He pulled a Roberto Duran in the championship. Just like how the Titans had to cut Young after his stunt I would cut Cutler

Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 8:18:50 AM)
The one advantage a third string QB has is that the other team hasn't gameplanned for him. But when you throw a ball DIRECTLY to a guy on defense, you're giving away the game. I'm not buying that he helped the Bears.

marty -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 8:39:56 AM)
Yes the other team hasn't planned for the 3rd stringer, but I think it's easy, you blitz the crap out of them and they're unlikely to make a play. A 3rd stringer just hasn't worked with the starters very much, hasn't seen many defenses, and also hasn't seen much gametime - I think that more than offsets the other team not gameplanning for him. I think Capers WAS a little bit scared of Hanie and didn't bring as much pressure because the kid was making plays, and was quick. Hanie is likely to move up to 2nd string, and could well be the starter next year for the Bears. You're right Lynn. Hanie helped the Bears temporarily, but ultimately he did them in with the 2 picks.

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 10:42:44 AM)
The Bears can't roll Cutler out there next year and give the fans any faith

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 10:48:13 AM)
Lot of talk about that this morning; that there's going to be a massive MRI cover-up in Chicago. They'll come out and proclaim that his knee was as messed up as Theisman's or something. They almost have to.

Todd M -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 10:57:57 AM)
So messed up yet he was riding the bike, standing around on it for extended periods of time. No brace/ice.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 10:59:54 AM)
Yep. They "say" it's a torn MCL. Still not enough, IMO. Philip Rivers played with a torn ACL!

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:09:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynn G. quote: 1st part; People keep bringing this up as if it hurt Chicago. It probably helped them in this game. That third string QB threw two key interceptions that sealed the game for the Packers. How can you say it helped them? He did throw 2 TD passes (even if one was incorrectly ruled out at the 1 yard line). And he was moving them for the possible tieing score before throwing the final pick.

Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:11:33 AM)
But in the end, a third string quarterback is going to make bad decisions. Like throwing a ball directly into the arms of BJ Raji. The guy didn't even have to move - it was as if Hainie MEANT to throw it to him. That was a gift to the Packers from a rough-around-the-edges QB.

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:12:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: marty Hanie is likely to move up to 2nd string, and could well be the starter next year for the Bears. A better coach would have had him at 2nd string all year. Todd Collins has attempted less than 200 passes total the past 13 years.

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:14:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynn G. But in the end, a third string quarterback is going to make bad decisions. Like throwing a ball directly into the arms of BJ Raji. The guy didn't even have to move - it was as if Hainie MEANT to throw it to him. That was a gift to the Packers from a rough-around-the-edges QB. How is that different than Rodgers throwing a ball directly into the arms of Brian Urlacher? Jay Cutler and Todd Collins combined to lead the Bears to zero points. Hainie led them to 14. To me, it looks like Hanie was the only QB to give them a chance.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:19:13 AM)
Agreed. Jay Cutler isn't exactly known for his decision-making...

David Levine -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:19:55 AM)
Cutler: 6/14, 80 yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT. Collins: 0/4 Hanie: 13/20, 153 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs. (And Chester Taylor got credit for the 1 yard run after the officials ruled the WR out at the 1 yard line even though it was a clear TD).

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 11:51:08 AM)
THat is why I didn't get the jackass booth announcers after the game railing on Lovie Smith for putting Haine in in the 3rd quarter so he couldn't bring the other two stiffs back WHO CARES! If Hanie couldn't do it then try Hester and run the wildcat or something. You clearly were not winning stiffs 1 and 2

Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 1:10:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John Childress THat is why I didn't get the jackass booth announcers after the game railing on Lovie Smith for putting Haine in in the 3rd quarter so he couldn't bring the other two stiffs back WHO CARES! If Hanie couldn't do it then try Hester and run the wildcat or something. You clearly were not winning stiffs 1 and 2 Hanie did more in his limited time in the game than the other two stiffs did the rest of the game. It was a good decision...just not enough to win the game.

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/24/2011 3:14:37 PM)
Sadly, I must admit as a Cutler backer, if the Bears never made that trade and had Orton yesterday they might have won

marty -> RE: The Packers (1/25/2011 9:25:08 PM)
I think the Packers are likely to win this one, as from the Falcons' game, it seems they have lots of team speed, and do well on turf. However, like the Bears, the Steelers are a tough, physical team (except for Cutler), that COULD give the Packers trouble, like the Bears' defense did in the 4th quarter. I do NOT think Rodgers will come through if his team is behind in the 4th quarter, he usually doesn't. But I also think Big Ben will NOT come through either, because he did against them last year, so this time I think the Pack will stop him. I think whomever has the lead with about 5 minutes left in the game is likely to be the SB winner. I think the Packers COULD blow the Steelers out, but I do NOT think the Steelers will blowout the Pack (though I would LOVE to see that!).

jinxi -> RE: The Packers (1/27/2011 11:12:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: marty I think the Packers , as from the Falcons' game, it seems they have lots of team speed, and do well on turf. However, like the Bears, the Steelers are a tough, physical team (except for Cutler), that COULD give the Packers trouble, like the Bears' defense did in the 4th quarter. I do NOT think Rodgers will come through if his team is behind in the 4th quarter, he usually doesn't. But I also think Big Ben will NOT come through either, because he did against them last year, so this time I think the Pack will stop him. I think whomever has the lead with about 5 minutes left in the game is likely to be the SB winner. I think the Packers COULD blow the Steelers out, but I do NOT think the Steelers will blowout the Pack (though I would LOVE to see that!). arenot likely to win,Packers must win this game.go go go. ___________________________________________________________________ retail jerseys,nfl wholesale jersey

Lynn G. -> RE: The Packers (1/27/2011 11:15:56 AM)
Why MUST they win the game jinxi? Is someone's life on the line? Do you have a lot of money riding on the outcome? I say stop stop stop.

marty -> RE: The Packers (1/28/2011 8:21:33 AM)
Losing the Super Bowl seems to have an effect on teams, seems moreso recently. I can't recall offhand, a SB loser that came back to the SB in the last 15 years. What is the last team to have lost a SB, and then came back and won within 4 years of losing it ?

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/28/2011 8:32:05 AM)
Giants lost in 2000, won in 2007 Pats lost in 1996, won in 2001 But the last one to meet Marty's guideline is the Cowboys who lost in 75 to the Steelers and won in 77

marty -> RE: The Packers (1/28/2011 8:06:39 PM)
Thanks JC. Pretty close with the Pats. I don't why I picked 4 years, it could just as well have been 5. After so many years, it's almost a different group of guys. It does go to show that, perhaps, it is hard for teams that lost the SB, to come back and win one. I wonder if teams that lost in the NFC or AFC Championship games fare better than teams that lost in the SB, as far as winning it all in the next 5 years ???? I wonder how that has played out in, say, the last 15 years ?

Jon Thomas -> RE: The Packers (2/1/2011 12:46:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John Childress The Packers are the best in the NFC this year, possibly the NFL Then they get Barnett, Finley, and Grant back next year! Could be a long season for the purple Hello John... I enjoy your take on a lot of the teams (like above) because you're willing to be open minded even though it goes against your fandom. Did you see Peter King's MMQB today? He quoted an article by Bob McGinn from Milwaukee... here's that portion of the article... I think you were spot on above, regardless what we might like to think... * If Bob McGinn's high on the future of these Packers, then we all should be.** There is no local beat man I respect more than Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. He never falls in love with the Packers when the rest of the world does, and he's always suitably skeptical about the locals. Wish I could think of a few examples, but I'm always impressed with a local beat person who can be exhaustively good and thorough -- two traits McGinn shows consistently -- while resisting the temptation, even in the best of times, to pump up the team. But when he likes something, he won't hesitate to write it. And I don't recall him ever being as high on a Packers team as he is now, and I mean high about the long-term future. A few excerpts from a column he wrote for the Journal-Sentinel over the weekend: "One of the most annoying remarks in sports is when a coach or a player for some down-in-the-mouth team says his goal is to win championships. If any player, coach or scout for the current Packers failed to use the plural case to state his objective, he would be guilty of grossly underselling the capability of what has been built in Green Bay or not telling the truth. I'm spending my first non-football weekend in what seems like forever trying to make sense of a team whose future appears brighter than at any time since the Lombardi era. Get ready, Wisconsin. You ain't seen nothing yet. Think about the 68 players (69 with Johnny Jolly) under contract to the Packers. Consider the coaching, the personnel department, management, financial resources, facilities and fan support. In all areas, Green Bay basically is as good as it gets right now ... "Look at the overwhelming strengths of this team. The only thing that can stop [quarterback Aaron] Rodgers would be concussions or major injury. Jermichael Finley, 23, will be back wanting his piece of the action, and coupled with three ace wideouts in their mid-20s and perhaps venerable Donald Driver the Packers will have almost an embarrassment of receiving riches. "Bryan Bulaga, just 21, didn't play a terrible game all season and should do nothing but get better. Josh Sitton, 24, is a robust, high-caliber guard. Center Scott Wells does the job, too. The 24-year-old [Clay] Matthews played hurt most of the year yet still was exceptional. Desmond Bishop is entrenched inside, but either Nick Barnett or A.J. Hawk will have to go because neither deserves to sit and neither has the height or weight to play right outside in a 3-4. Tramon Williams ... played at a Pro Bowl level, and Sam Shields is able to outrun many of his mistakes and improve dramatically as the nickel back. Nick Collins plays safety as well as anyone in the NFC. Nick Barnett will return. Old pro Charles Woodson will fit somewhere. Tim Masthay has a chance to become the Packers' best punter since Craig Hentrich ... "They will average 26.2 years per man and 27.4 years per starter on Super Sunday ... Unless Thompson should retire prematurely, the Packers should have him finding the players, Mike McCarthy coaching them and Rodgers leading a formidable roster for years to come. Late last February, a personnel man for one of the four playoff semifinalists walked up to Thompson and told him that after careful study he had evaluated the Packers as the best team in the 2009 playoff field. Arizona and Kurt Warner extinguished the Packers' chances 12 months ago. The worthy Steelers could do the same thing next Sunday. No matter what happens, the Packers will not be going away ... "So think Super Bowls, and think championships ... Nothing should be beyond the realm of possibility for what the Packers have assembled.'' *** Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/01/30/super-bowl-week/index.html#ixzz1CfLEB5dx

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (2/1/2011 7:01:47 AM)
Hey Jon - THANKS That summed up just how I felt. I was just getting ready to write this also: "The only thing that can stop [quarterback Aaron] Rodgers would be concussions or major injury" That is it. Keep Rodgers away from concussions and this team will win multiple SBs Their team is most built from the draft with only a few key free agent acquisitions. That is also why I didn't like the Frazier hire. To me, that signaled that the team was going to try to reload and it really needs to rebuild. The Vikings are a much older, and less talented team than the Packers. Without a QB, reload didn't make sense. Look at how many starters we have on the wrong side of 30: Berrian Shiancoe Herrera Hutchinson McKinnie Williams Williams Henderson Leber Winfield This team needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up with 2 years before we can compete

Page: << < prev 92 93 [94] 95 96 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode