RE: The Packers

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: The Packers

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk >> RE: The Packers

Page: << < prev 114 115 [116] 117 118 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Packers - 8/20/2013 9:19:17 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

Anyone spot a Packers' SB jersey anywhere ? :

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/23236920/desmond-bishops-house-broken-into-super-bowl-jersey-stolen

Post #: 2876

RE: The Packers - 8/23/2013 11:17:33 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

I'm starting to lean towards picking the Packers to win the division, but have to see a little from the Vikes preseason game 3, 1st half, to finalize my decision.

Why would I pick the Packers ?

The Packers played a tough Seattle team, and the Packers without their best WR (Nelson) played Seattle tough. I thought the refs were doing quite a bit to help the Packers, calling holding penalties on Seattle's offensive drives, and the refs unfairly gave the Pack a 1st down where there was clearly a fumble (that they thankfully changed after a replay challenge), and incorrectly gave the Packers a TD (Finley) where the ball hit the ground (thankfully, also that was turned over after replay).

The Packers played physical, they have some good size. I think their LT is likely to be an improvement over Newberry (who appears to have now lost the starting RT spot). Johnny Jolly also gives them size on defense, but I'm hoping he becomes a cancer. Nick Perry also gives them some size, and their 2ndary looks pretty good. Jolly AND Perry should help the run defense, but I suspect there are still holes with regards to run defense in the 2ndary, along with Hawk, who's a liability at times against thh run. Eddie Lacy gives them a good physical presence with the running game, but I question if they'll open up enough holes for him. Hopefully, he flounders.

On the negative side, I think playing Arrogant Rodgers one series could hurt them in the opener against SF, they could come out rusty on offense in a game I expected them to get help from officiating (assuming the betting is mostly on SF) and pull the upset. Nelson not playing could mean his timing with Rodgers might be off, and he might not even play the 1st game (perhaps he doesn't want to play the game, allowing himself to be hurt, figuring GB is likely to lose that game). Harris getting hurt tonight could also hurt their depth a bit.

I still think the Vikes have a shot at the division, but want to see more out of Ponder and Patterson, and Jennings, etc...., and some proof that the defense won't miss Winfield. And after an impressive performance from the Bears at Oakland, I think that means something. They could be the team that wins the division if their offense clicks early in the year, and their defense gels quickly.

< Message edited by marty -- 8/23/2013 11:44:32 PM >

Post #: 2877

RE: The Packers - 8/23/2013 11:54:54 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

OTOH, the Packers might just be pretenders, clinging to their reputation and getting biased officiating because they are expected to be so good.

Should the injuries start to mount, Rodgers takes a beating, Finley drops key passes, Lacy gets continuously stuffed in backfield, and the defense still struggles stopping the run, Minnesota and Chicago might both have a shot of finishing ahead of the Pack.

I don't expect a lot of the Lions, but you never know. The fear I have in the 1st game, is with no tape on Reggie Bush, he has a big game against the Vikes defense, enough to put the Lions in a position to win that game.

Post #: 2878

RE: The Packers - 8/30/2013 1:02:15 AM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

It's good to see the Packers go 1-3 in the preseason and struggle, they look vulnerable. They might still struggle stopping the run, and in establishing a run game. While I think their OL is bound to be better with Newhouse not at LT, they might struggle early with cohesion.

After last nights' game, one Packer fan on FB stated: "Thanks to Teddy putting his eggs all in one basket the Packer's don't look like they are in for much of a season. Yes it's pre season but!!!!!????? "

The Packers should be better against the run with Jolly, Jones and Perry, but maybe Jolly will be a cancer ? Jolly has trouble with his temper, and he picked up a personal foul in the last pre-season game. Maybe Vince Young can be a cancer to their offense, and hopefully GJ has gotten inside Rodgers head a little bit, and Rodgers will start questioning himself and making mistakes.

The Packers' offense never got going much in the pre-season, so I'm hoping they get off to a slow start, and a loss at SF. Nelson might not even play that game (maybe he thinks they are bound to lose that one, doesn't want to be part of that ?). The Packers then play Washington at home, then Cincy on the road. Crossing my fingers, maybe they'll start out 0-3 ? I think they'll be 1-3 at worst, but they'll probably start out 3-0 if they win the SF game.

Post #: 2879

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 4:25:12 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

Packers had no luck at all running the ball early on the 49ers. Then they went to purely passing and got a TD, with the help of a few really good holds. On the next drive, Lacy had a very nice run on a screen pass. He is going to give the Vikes Reggie Bush like trouble.

Packer defense playing well, but I still think Johnny Jolly is a cancer, they play like thugs with hits after the whistle. Matthews got flag for late hit out of bounds, an unnecessary hit leaving his feet as he's going out of bounds. 49er made the mistake of retaliating, but there was also a punch thrown by a Packer in the mess.

Post #: 2880

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 4:29:05 PM

David Levine

Posts: 76802
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Packers had no luck at all running the ball early on the 49ers. Then they went to purely passing and got a TD, with the help of a few really good holds. On the next drive, Lacy had a very nice run on a screen pass. He is going to give the Vikes Reggie Bush like trouble.

Only if he loses 20 pounds and discovers some previously unknown elusiveness.

He looks like crap so far - one play running through a huge hole notwithstanding.

Post #: 2881

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 5:12:35 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

49ers tough to run on, especially in SF.

Did you see a Packer defender committing obvious PI, and holding on a replay ? The announcers comment on it briefly, and then comment about the Packers missing some players in the 2ndary. It makes me wonder how much the Packers' 2ndary is getting away on plays where we don't see the action.

Post #: 2882

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 5:35:46 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 32362
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Packer fans will once again prove the name "Entitlement Town" when they whine about the refs making a mistake on the replay after the penalties down by the 49er goal line. The refs DID make a mistake, which meant a difference in 4 points for the 49ers, but you can bet they'll be whining for months about that call, as if they are the only ones who get jobbed by the refs.

Post #: 2883

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 6:00:11 PM

drviking

Posts: 36160
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Dakota
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

Packer fans will once again prove the name "Entitlement Town" when they whine about the refs making a mistake on the replay after the penalties down by the 49er goal line. The refs DID make a mistake, which meant a difference in 4 points for the 49ers, but you can bet they'll be whining for months about that call, as if they are the only ones who get jobbed by the refs.

Bring back the replacement refs

_____________________________

"Only one thing left to do..."

Post #: 2884

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 7:15:37 PM

Prescott

Posts: 15395
Joined: 10/3/2010
Status: offline

They might have gotten the technical ruling wrong. But how does Staley running over after Classless Mathews neck tackles his QB, and then get punched by the dick a couple times in the head, end up being a personal foul on him? They got the spirit of that play right at least, that was two wrong on Clay. If the hairboy didn't have the rep he did, he could have gotten tossed.

_____________________________

If I had a perfect day
I would have it start this way
Open up the fridge and have a tall boy
Yeah

Post #: 2885

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 7:17:39 PM

David Levine

Posts: 76802
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prescott

They might have gotten the technical ruling wrong. But how does Staley running over after Classless Mathews neck tackles his QB, and then get punched by the dick a couple times in the head, end up being a personal foul on him? They got the spirit of that play right at least, that was two wrong on Clay. If the hairboy didn't have the rep he did, he could have gotten tossed.

The biggest problem is the NFL rule.

A late hit at the end of a play should not be considered a "dead ball" foul.

Post #: 2886

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 7:31:00 PM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prescott

They might have gotten the technical ruling wrong. But how does Staley running over after Classless Mathews neck tackles his QB, and then get punched by the dick a couple times in the head, end up being a personal foul on him? They got the spirit of that play right at least, that was two wrong on Clay. If the hairboy didn't have the rep he did, he could have gotten tossed.

BINGO

Clay should have been ejected

He threw 3 punches and that was on top of the personal foul on Kaepernick

Staley got a 15 yarder for GETTING punched!

Ridiculous ruling

Should have been a 1st down for SF and Matthews ejected

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2887

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 7:48:15 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

I really didn't understand Aikman saying GB and SF were CLEARLY the top 2 teams in the NFC going into the season. GB had lost by a wide margin to SF in the playoffs, and lost by a wide margin to the Giants in the playoffs the year before. What about Atlanta and Seattle ? I just don't like GB getting all the favorable officiating, but I do think they've closed the gap a bit on SF, and right now these 2 teams probably ARE the top 2 teams in the NFC.

The Packers are a better team than they were last year, and went into this game trying to prove they are physical and can stop the run. They also went about doing it by a lot of cheap shots after the whistle that weren't called. The Packers also got away with a lot of holds with their OL early in the game, but SF players must have complained as they did get several holding calls later.

I think the Packers rookie LT is going to be solid, much better than Newberry. I think it's hard to block for Arrogant Rodgers as he likes to throw deep a lot, and they didn't have a good back to take pressure off the last few years. But they might have just that with Lacy. The Packers' run defense will be better with the addition of Jolly, but I also think he's a thug and a cancer, and the whole defense starts to play like him, making hits after the whistle. They did it in pre-season, and continued in this game.

A little too early to tell, but the Packers are likely to win the division. They have a better QB than anyone else in the division. However, A LOT could happen in the next few weeks. You never quite know what's going to happen in the NFL.

Post #: 2888

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 7:56:50 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

GB definitely got favorable officiating in the game, all throughout, with the exception of the play you guys were talking about where Matthews probably should have been ejected.

It's quite possible the refs WANTED the Pack to win, so they couldn't eject Matthews. Most of the calls (and non-calls) in the 2nd half were in favor of the Pack, some might say it was to make up for the 'incorrect' call that gave the 49ers an extra 4 points. But if a 'sway' were in place, and they wanted the Pack to win, the Pack didn't do enough, and the 49ers played everything almost perfectly. A LOT of good calls made by the 49ers, on defense and offense.

I liked the 49ers trying to draw the Packers offsides, AND still going for it. That is EXACTLY what I was hoping they would do. I didn't think they'd get an offsides call, even if GB WAS offsides, but it was worth a shot, and would probably win the game if they got it. I also liked NOT running Gore on 4th and 2, passing, and hitting Bolduan was probably the BEST call they could make.

I hope this puts to rest the idea that Kap is just a gimmick QB that when teams see more film they'll shut he and the read option down. The truth is, he is a great QB, that might have won the SB last year, if the officiating had been neutral in that game.

Post #: 2889

RE: The Packers - 9/8/2013 9:17:58 PM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Atlanta is not that great

SF will be better when they get Crabtree back

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2890

RE: The Packers - 9/9/2013 9:14:53 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

When the 'sway' is on, this is what they do to cover there tracks the next day:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000241366/article/joe-staley-shouldnt-have-been-penalized-nfl-says

It's quite possible the GB-SF was a 'sway' for the Packers to cover the spread that failed. The play where Staley shouldn't have been penalized, should have given the 49ers 1st and goal. If there were a 'sway' going on that ref couldn't give the 49ers 1st and goal, so he called a personal foul on Staley, when it really should have been on MATTHEWS.

I stand by my statement that Johnny Jolly is a thug, and a cancer that will spread to the rest of the Packers' defense. He now has Matthews acting like a thug, and the Packers were also getting away with plenty of hits after the whistle BEFORE the play where Matthews collared Kap, that was why some of the skirmishes were breaking out. Those skirmishes didn't appear to be started by the 49ers, they were the Packers probably trying to show they are not a 'soft' team.

The Packers benefit from favorable media coverage:

Had it been Jared Allen doing the hit on Kap, I imagine it would have played out quite differently. I think Joe Buck would have been irate, and would have said 'there is NO place for a hit like that, he knew Kap was going out of bounds, and Allen looked down and knew he was delivering the hit out of bounds. Not only that, he could have given Kap a concussion, or could have ended Kap's season twisting up his legs as he took him to the ground. This kind of hit, especially after all the talk all week about the Vikings getting hits on Kap, was totally uncalled for, and was an obvious disregard for the rules."

I think Allen would have been also given the penalty for grabbing Staley's helmet, and that talk today on sports shows would have been about how long they think Allen should be suspended. I think most people would have pegged it for a 6 to 8 game suspension, and would have been disappointed when later in the week, the league only gave Allen a 2 game suspension.

< Message edited by marty -- 9/9/2013 9:17:35 PM >

Post #: 2891

RE: The Packers - 9/10/2013 3:30:23 PM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings/_/year/2013/week/2

Aaron Rodgers was 1-of-6 for 3 yards and an interception when the Niners blitzed. Last year, Rodgers' plus-11 TD-INT differential against added pressure was second best in the league.

7. Packers 0-1

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2892

RE: The Packers - 9/10/2013 8:19:42 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

GJ is a good weapon when beating the blitz as his quickness gets him open. JN is good to beat blitzes, because he simply times his push off well, and then is open.

Rodgers also threw plenty to James Jones to beat blitzes, even when Jones was covered, and Jones many times came up with the ball with a fantastic catch.

Rodgers was also successful against blitzes, sometimes throwing a pass behind a WR, and the WR would come back and get the ball. He tried that Sunday on one play, but the defender covered it well. If teams start taking that away, Rodgers might be a bit less successful. Let's hope that happens.

Post #: 2893

RE: The Packers - 9/10/2013 8:34:27 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 32362
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

No word about a fine for Matthews I guess. Since the league announced one for Suh they appear to already be dealing them out. No word means no fines. Poop.

Post #: 2894

RE: The Packers - 9/10/2013 9:52:10 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

I have a hunch the Packers are either going to knock RGIII out of the game, or LOSE to the Redskins.

Even those it's much less likely, I have a feeling the Packers WILL be successful in knocking RGIII out of the game.

Also, the Redskins couldn't stop the run at home, they are going to be in for a long day on the road against the Pack. I think Lacy will run for 150 with 2 TDs. I think the Pack will stick with the run, in part because their passing game isn't clicking on all cylinders yet.

Post #: 2895

RE: The Packers - 9/10/2013 10:29:55 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

Lynn, nothing about a fine, but now they've come out and admitted Staley shouldn't have been penalized, it should have been Matthews:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/23574145/nfl-49ers-ol-joe-staley-mistakenly-penalized-against-packers

49ers should have received a 1st down and goal at the 3.

JC was saying this yesterday, wondering why Staley was flagged when the personal foul (suspension, and possible fine) should have been on Matthews.

What some people don't realize is, if there was a 'sway' going on, that explains why they might have incorrectly flagged Staley, hoping GB then gets the stop on the next play. It could have been an attempted 'sway' that didn't work, as the 49ers played too well, and GB not well enough. Had the 'sway' worked, and GB covered the spread or won the game, then the 'mistakes' or incorrect calls are magnified or more noticeable.

Post #: 2896

RE: The Packers - 9/10/2013 10:41:47 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

To someone who questions that if there were a 'sway' going on, how did the 49ers get the benefit of several holding calls on GBs OL ? My answer is that the ref making the holding calls wasn't in on the 'sway'. IF a 'sway' were going on, I don't think every ref is in on it, I think it's only 1 or 2 refs, and they only HOPE for a certain outcome with their calls and non-calls, and cannot really guarantee a certain outcome.

A 'sway' ref or 2, can only do so much, and don't want to be discovered. Maybe they didn't want to throw the flag on Matthews hitting Kap out of bounds, but realized it was too obvious, too controversial of a hit, one that would likely be played over and over on sports center, especially after the talk from Matthews during the week leading up to the game. But once a skirmish broke out, they had an out to call a penalty on SF to get offsetting penalties. I wonder if it was one official that made the 'mistaken' personal foul call on Staley, and another that botched the call on the result of the combined dead ball penalties. Perhaps, then, the official that made the call on the 'mistaken' personal foul call on Staley knew it should have been 4th down, but didn't want any more attention paid (at the time, OR later) to his 'mistaken' call on Staley, and NON call on Matthews.

Also, in regards to the holding penalties, the Packers OL was getting away with some pretty good holds early on, so the 49er DL were probably complaining, so there were a few makeup calls. The ref that made the holding calls on GBs OL, obviously was not in on the 'sway'.

< Message edited by marty -- 9/10/2013 10:45:06 PM >

Post #: 2897

RE: The Packers - 9/11/2013 7:25:18 AM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 38431
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Lynn, nothing about a fine, but now they've come out and admitted Staley shouldn't have been penalized, it should have been Matthews:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/23574145/nfl-49ers-ol-joe-staley-mistakenly-penalized-against-packers

49ers should have received a 1st down and goal at the 3.

JC was saying this yesterday, wondering why Staley was flagged when the personal foul (suspension, and possible fine) should have been on Matthews.

What some people don't realize is, if there was a 'sway' going on, that explains why they might have incorrectly flagged Staley, hoping GB then gets the stop on the next play. It could have been an attempted 'sway' that didn't work, as the 49ers played too well, and GB not well enough. Had the 'sway' worked, and GB covered the spread or won the game, then the 'mistakes' or incorrect calls are magnified or more noticeable.

I'm not buying that sway theory on this one.

if they were out for the sway, they wouldn't have bungled the call on the field like they did. The big controversy before they switched on Monday was that the refs blew the call on the field. By rules they were both dead ball fouls and should have put the 49ers in 4th down, which they probably would have kicked a fg. Instead it was third down and the 49ers scored a td, that's a 4 point differential.

After the game they reviewed it and found that Staley shouldn't have been flagged at all. It should have been Matthews flagged for both penalties and the 49ers should have had 1st and goal from the 3

_____________________________

I don't want to go through things that don't kill me and make me stronger anymore.

Post #: 2898

RE: The Packers - 9/11/2013 10:22:50 AM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

I reviewed the Packers game again last night, and there is very little evidence of 'sway'. In fact, it was a VERY well officiated game. It's too bad they want to downgrade a ref on the mistake with the down, because other than that, it was quite well officiated.

The point you missed Scott, is I'm saying a 'sway' would NOT likely involve the whole crew, it would probably just be 1 or 2 officials that are hoping for a certain outcome. They don't want to be detected, and they just hope for a certain outcome, they aren't fixing the game. In this case, the ref that incorrectly flagged Staley, could have been the same ref that earlier let a Packer get away with PI and holding on a pass play earlier, and maybe has a few other calls and non-calls to get the hoped for result. But as I stated on review in the 1st paragraph, this was NOT a game that appeared to have a lot of 'sway'.

BuckCherry, the Packers new LT did quite well. His 1st start, on the road against a good DE, he did VERY well. A couple of the plays where I thought he got away with holds early on, were actually pretty good blocks, a hold would have been a ticky tacky call. Only one was a pretty good hold, it was the other side of their line that got away with blocking in the back on one play.

I still think Lacy is a good RB, and might will put up 150 on the Redskins next week. Lacy showed on the screen play, he sees things well, and can make sharp turns while only slowing down a little bit.

Post #: 2899

RE: The Packers - 9/22/2013 9:35:14 PM

marty

Posts: 12680
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

Packers RB Franklin looked quite impressive today, showed more than Lacy, although his fumble lost them the game. Franklin has a really good burst, tough runner.

I think the Packers made the mistake of going conservative and more short passes, playing into Cincys' front 7 on defense, instead of attacking the back 4 with deep balls, which the Packers do well. Rodgers did make some nice throws, but not enough of them.

The Packers tried to intimidate Cincy a little bit, getting physical with some cheap shots early on, some which were penalized. This also played into Cincys' hands as they just came back at the Packers matching the physical style. Cincy was penalized a few times, with some shots on Rodgers, some which maybe shouldn't have been penalties, but it was good to see them get some shots on Arrogant Rodgers.

I think causing Franklin to fumble at the end, was sort of Cincys' trying to make up for giving the game away to Chicago at home a few weeks ago, with a few fumbles.

The RB Bernard, for Cincy, was also quite impressive.

Post #: 2900