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 81 82 [83] 84 85 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Packers - 10/15/2010 3:45:38 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

Sold on him or not, who do you have to run the ball?

To me, it's not so much that we don't have someone to run the ball, it the lack of commitment to it. Our backs averaged over 5.6 ypc last game vs Washington (that's not including the 71 yd run). The week before that they avg 4 ypc against Detroit. If MM would call the run more often, the Packers running game would certainly look better. Jackson and Kuhn can do it.

I also think that they are waiting after this game when Starks is able to come off the PUP list. He's very similar to Grant in how he runs. I think he's been their plan ever since Grant went down. Just tough it out and wait for him.

Post #: 2051

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 4:30:59 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

I agree with Craig on this, the Pack CAN run the ball, they (just like the Bears) just don't stay committed to it.

And I also think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Seeing Lynch running well on the Bears defense, in Chicago, I'd have to agree with JC that GB would have had an upgrade at RB if they had gotten Lynch.

The Pack also look like they have trouble STOPPING the run. Miami was having an easy time on them most of the day, and surprisingly, Miami backed off from the run. Miami looked to take control of the game mid 4th quarter, but got screwed on a bad spot on 4th down. Then Miami got what was probably a makeup call on their next drive, as the Packers had a rookie lineup over the center on a punt, which is now a penalty.

Post #: 2052

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 6:26:04 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

Packers 20 - Miami - 23 OT
Soooo, how 'bout them Badgers?

Offense

No flow and Rodgers still has happy feet. He ran into 2 sacks when all he had to do was step up in the pocket

Once again, the running game was given up on.

Great call on the 4th and goal to tie it up. Caught the Dolphins with their pants down.

Good to see Jennings step up today.

Defense

No pass rush without Matthews. I mean none.

Hard to judge the pass coverage given Henne had all frickin' day to throw.

Couldn't stop the run. Missing Pickett hurts.

Special teams

Our P sucks.

Crosby is very good.

Something that I realized was that this was the 2nd team in a row that had the bye before facing us. Until we get a pass rush, we are going to get carved up. Matthews makes so much happen by himself and also with that added attention he demands he frees up others. Never thought I would say this, but I hope Poppinga isn't too hurt. We simply can't have a practice squad guy out there. Miami is a good running team, but it was still disappointing seeing them run on us with such ease in the 2nd half much how Washington did last week.

We're just about done for the season. There's just too much going against us, injuries, momentum, MM's playcalling for us to do anything this season. Unless somehow the guys that come off the PUP list - Bigby, Harris and Starks provide some major playmaking abilities we're looking at an 8-8 season at best.

Post #: 2053

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 6:29:54 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77939
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

Great call on the 4th and goal to tie it up. Caught the Dolphins with their pants down.

I'm not sure I've ever seen a team defend a play that poorly. There was 1 Lineman within 5 yards of the ball and the LBers weren't even looking at the offense.

Was it actually a called play? Because it looked the Center saw the confusion and very smartly improvised.

Post #: 2054

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 6:48:51 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77939
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online

Adam Schefter
We have a trade: Jacksonville traded safety Anthony Smith to Green Bay. Smith was scheduled to start Monday night.

Post #: 2055

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 7:08:40 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

Getting Anthony Smith back means Bigby isn't ready to go. Wonder what we ended up giving up for him?

Post #: 2056

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 7:14:45 PM

John Childress

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

I thought your coach really coached a bad game

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2057

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 7:17:20 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77939
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Childress

I thought your coach really coached a bad game

That's NFC North coaching!

All the cool coaches do it...

Post #: 2058

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 8:00:29 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig

Great call on the 4th and goal to tie it up. Caught the Dolphins with their pants down.

I'm not sure I've ever seen a team defend a play that poorly. There was 1 Lineman within 5 yards of the ball and the LBers weren't even looking at the offense.

Was it actually a called play? Because it looked the Center saw the confusion and very smartly improvised.

I believe it was a called play. Rodgers went up like he was changing protection and quickly went under center and off they went. The OL all blocked it like a run, he was escorted into the endzone by all the interior OL, plus the TE was behind Rodgers ready to push him into the endzone.

Post #: 2059

RE: The Packers - 10/17/2010 11:45:25 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

Smith worked VERY well in the Packers system, I was surprised they let him go. He was a playmaker that had a nose for INTs and great plays, REALLY tore it up in the preseason, and then they cut him. A few weeks into the season, and McCarthy was talking about how it was a mistake to let him go.

I thought Smith was with Pittsburgh, did they let him go in the offseason. They must not need him, and Jax must be thinking about next year already. It's a nice pickup for the Pack, hopefully he makes MISTAKES and NOT big plays when they play the Vikes.

Post #: 2060

RE: The Packers - 10/18/2010 9:14:45 AM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

Guess it's a conditional 7th round pick is the rumor for Smith.

Post #: 2061

RE: The Packers - 10/18/2010 12:52:47 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

It's official, Finley on IR. There was a chance he would have been ready come playoff time, but the Packers are simply too banged up to hold a roster spot for him.

Post #: 2062

RE: The Packers - 10/18/2010 12:58:27 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39282
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

That's too bad. Guy was on his way to a major break out season.

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 2063

RE: The Packers - 10/18/2010 1:53:07 PM

SoMnFan

Posts: 94902
Status: offline

Yep. Helluva threat. Scary dude to play against. Bummer Craig.

< Message edited by SoMnFan -- 10/18/2010 1:54:16 PM >

_____________________________

Work like a Captain.
Play like a Pirate.

Post #: 2064

RE: The Packers - 10/18/2010 2:52:48 PM

TheGonz

Posts: 4353
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Smith worked VERY well in the Packers system, I was surprised they let him go. He was a playmaker that had a nose for INTs and great plays, REALLY tore it up in the preseason, and then they cut him. A few weeks into the season, and McCarthy was talking about how it was a mistake to let him go.

I thought Smith was with Pittsburgh, did they let him go in the offseason. They must not need him, and Jax must be thinking about next year already. It's a nice pickup for the Pack, hopefully he makes MISTAKES and NOT big plays when they play the Vikes.

Smith is also the guy that, back in 2007, ran off at the mouth about how the Steelers were going to knock off a Patriots team that was in the process of going 16-0 in the regular season.

Result? Patriots 34, Steelers 13. If you look at the highlights, you can see Smith on the wrong end of a couple of Randy Moss touchdown catches.

_____________________________

The question is not "Who will let me?" Rather, the question is "Who will stop me?"

Post #: 2065

RE: The Packers - 10/19/2010 8:52:47 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

Thanks Gonz, that gives me positive vibes.

I do NOT want to see Smith picking off Brint, nor do I want to see him knocking the ball loose from Son of Peter.

Post #: 2066

RE: The Packers - 10/19/2010 9:57:29 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 33037
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

Brint? You've been living among Packer fans way too long Marty.

_____________________________

Put our country back in the hands of people who actually want to do things to help everyday citizens. Elect Democrats.

Post #: 2067

RE: The Packers - 10/24/2010 11:26:24 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

Packers 28 - Vikings 24
Huge win for the Packers. Being on the winning end of a close game is a novel idea.

Offense

Outstanding pass protection all night long. Big turnaround from the last few weeks.

Jackson did a good job running. Felt they should have went to him more often.

The return of the screen! Granted one went to Jared Allen, but it was great to see it used and done very effectively.

I really f*cking hate the 30+ yard passes on 3rd and 2 or 3. Get the damn first down!

Defense

Not really shocked that Peterson pretty much had his way with us.

Great job limiting Moss.

3 INTs. Collins' pick was a fantastic effort play.

Liked that we didn't overly-blitz Favre. Seemed when we stayed back in coverage he had problems.

Special Teams

The fake FG was almost a huge play. The TE doesn't trip over his own feet that's a first and goal.

Kickoffs were hot and cold.

Our KO returns were terrible. I hate when a return is called to one side or the other because too often the ball is kicked to the other side and the returner feels he has to run the ball all the way over to the side the return was called on. Totally pointless to call these. Make your blocks and let the returner find a lane.

After the last 2 weeks, this win was desperately needed. I didn't think the Pack had much of a chance given how things had gone, but they pulled it out. Favre appears to be done. He's too banged up and simply doesn't have the tools anymore to do what he's been used to doing all these years. The defense took advantage of Favre's miscues which they needed to do.

Post #: 2068

RE: The Packers - 10/25/2010 11:50:06 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

I think this was the game the Packers were looking forward to all offseason, and Rodgers played about as well as he could play, but DID falter at the end. I think IF the Vikes had scored when Harvin didn't quite get his feet down in bounds, the Packers would NOT have gotten a FG with 30 seconds left on the clock.

The Packers had GREAT effort, OL played VERY well, playcalling was even better than Dallas', running the screens away from Winfield. I was also glad to see the Vikes have Harvin in the backfield, and the dumpoff to Peterson was also awesome. It's as though the Vikes have been reading our posts, but maybe the Packers were spying in there also ?

But despite all this great effort, homefield, lots of help from the officials, and everything else, the Packers EASILY could have lost this game. Last season, the Vikes fate turned positive on a last second catch against SF, this season it went the other way with the miss to Harvin.

I felt like the Vikes were the superior team, but the inept HC of the Vikings would have them find a way to lose. The game was in the VIKINGS' hands. GB had to feel like they really didn't control their own destiny, they're just lucky the Vikes didn't pull it out.

Was the game a 'sway' for the Packers ? IF one ref were in on the 'sway' and he overturned the Shiancoe TD, he probably should have done MORE as the Vikes still had a chance to win it at the end. When I saw the Vikes driving, I was starting to think that if there is a 'sway' going on, they better do something really soon. Then, all of a sudden it was 1st and THIRTY. So maybe they were trying. The penalty on Loadholt was legitimate, but in most cases could have been easily MISSED. But, if there is a 'sway' going on, you can bet they are alert to ANYTHING like that, and will be quick with the flag.

I doubt there was a 'sway' going on, as the Vikes still had a very good chance of winning -- but the preferred team DID win. You know, the team that was all banged up, the team that was swept by the Vikes last year, the team missing their starting RB, the team that had lost their last 2 games, the team that was FAVORED (?) by 3 points. Yeah, THAT team won. I'm sure there were A LOT of bettors that were thinking GB would EASILY win by 4 or more

. I'm sure there were FAR fewer bettors on Minnesota

Matthews taking his helmet off. I didn't see him adjusting the helmet, it looked to me like he was making a statement, making his presence known, as sort of an intimidation. He knew the game was now at crunchtime, that he was coming, and as the leagues' sack leader, was coming to rush the QB. "This is who I am, I am Clay Matthews, and if anyone holds me, you BETTER call it !". That got the refs attention, and the refs did NOT miss the hands to the face by Loadholt. It was legitimate, but before that, they SHOULD have flagged Matthews for taking his helmet off on the field of play.

I would be VERY surprised to see the Packers beat the Jets, but you never know, the Vikes almost did it, and that was with some pretty poor QBing for almost 3 quarters.

< Message edited by marty -- 10/25/2010 11:52:59 PM >

Post #: 2069

RE: The Packers - 10/27/2010 4:19:27 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

This is just ridiculous. We have to put our other starting OLB Brad Jones on the IR today.

That puts us at 3 defensive starters on the IR. 2 of our starting DL are injured with no timetable for them to come back. One of our backup LBs is on IR. One of our backup DL is on IR. Our other starting/nickel ILB is hurt and may or may not play this week. Add in that Harris and Bigby have only started practicing and there's no stated timeframe when they will actually be playing.

Capers is doing a hell of a job with this defense given all the injuries we've had.

The Pack went on a shopping spree on street FAs and PS guys lately so we can have bodies on the field.

Post #: 2070

RE: The Packers - 10/27/2010 4:28:50 PM

Todd M

Posts: 40683
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: online

Pack going down...down I tells ya...

Post #: 2071

RE: The Packers - 10/27/2010 10:14:26 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

IF Harvin had gotten his feet down in bounds, I think that would have been the start of a major collapse for the Pack.

Initially, I was thinking the Pack would go into NY and have their most lopsided lost of the season, as the Jets were coming off a bye. But what COULD happen, is beating Minnesota could be a shot in the arm, and give the Pack some confidence, even a false sense of confidence which could help carry them to an improbable upset over the Jets. Also, a team that is all banged up is the PERFECT team for the refs to help 'sway' to an upset win, as you know the betting likely to be on the other team.

If Minnesota can come back on the Jets with 3 quick TDs, I don't know why GB won't do the same thing. I think this is going to be a close game, and the Packers might win. But the Jets should have a BIG day running the ball with all the injuries on Packer LBers.

Post #: 2072

RE: The Packers - 10/28/2010 5:18:28 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty
It was legitimate, but before that, they SHOULD have flagged Matthews for taking his helmet off on the field of play.

Actually, I'd like to address this seeing how it's gotten a lot of attention here. It's only a penalty to remove your helmet in celebration of a play or in a confrontation with a game offical or another player. During the play it's allowed if they are in the process of the play. It's stupid to do, but in the context that Clay did it. It's not a penalty. This is per Mike Pereira, the former offical and current ref for FOX.

Post #: 2073

RE: The Packers - 10/28/2010 5:45:34 PM

Lynn G.

Posts: 33037
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

It must have changed then because when they originally made that a penalty 6 or 7 years ago, it was to be flagged any time a player takes his helmet off on the field.

_____________________________

Put our country back in the hands of people who actually want to do things to help everyday citizens. Elect Democrats.

Post #: 2074

RE: The Packers - 10/28/2010 6:44:08 PM

marty

Posts: 13049
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: online

But Clay took his helmet off AFTER a play, not DURING the play.

I believe THAT is a penalty.

Matthews didn't look to be making any adjustments to the helmet, although he looked down at the helmet. It appeared that he was doing it draw attention to himself.

Post #: 2075