Recap: Bengals Defeat Green Bay Packers 31-24
Oh, for one more time out as the game ends on the Bengals 10 yard line...Stats from NFL.com.
Although it was a close loss, it sure felt like the team was outmatched. A major disappointment. To keep the positive going first, there was some good news:
- Two INTs by CB Charles Woodson, one returned for a TD, in the first half. The 1st INT led to a TD too. Although RB Ryan Grant had a fumble, it was in Cincinnati territory, so they had to go the length of the field for their TD off a turnover. The Packers got two TDs on 14 offensive yards, and it kept the game close.
- QB Aaron Rodgers completed 21 passes for 261 yards to seven different receivers. With the run offense stalled for most of the game, he was their offense. His 43 yards rushing were late in the game, but key to setting up the final FG drive which kept the rally alive.
- The return of the 2008 run defense. This might have not seemed like their biggest sin, but 141 yards rushing for RB Cedric Benson, with no run greater than 14 yards, is a major step back. They always got a nice gain on 1st down and it was unexpected after a physical, dominant performance last week against the Bears. Why wasn't NT B.J. Raji in their at all?
- The pass blocking. Last week, it was RT Allen Barbre who had an awful game. This week it was LT Chad Clifton, and backup LT Daryn Colledge, who turned DE Antwan Odom into the new Reggie White. In their defense, Rodgers was holding the ball too long as the Bengals pass coverage was good. He isn't feeling the rush, and reacting to it, as well as he did last season. Still, the pass protection has been unacceptable after two games and has become a major problem.
- Special teams gave them a chance when CB Tramon Williams recovered the onside kick, but the two great returns by WR Quan Cosby were horrible. The special teams has been inconsistent to say the least.
- Converting on 3rd and 34. That probably deserves it's own post.
- Injuries, injuries, injuries, from the Press-Gazette. TE Donald Lee walked off on his own power after a shot to the ribs, but Clifton was carted off and S Nick Collins had a shoulder injury. Collins's shoulder looked dislocated, but I don't really know. Clifton might have a serious ankle injury. We won't probably know until late tonight, early tomorrow.
148 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
3rd and 34
that was horrid, but a fluke also. I think you got it right. I would add that the team in general, with the exception of Woodson, looked out of synch and somehow flat. there was an X factor that I saw in Rodgers last year that I have not seen in him yet this season.
agreed, the O line needs work
I was trying to say that Rodgers seemed to have something to prove last year, understandably. but the O line and lack of running game are the most glaring deficiency I can detect.
The O line has needed work for 3 years.
It took Ted 3 years to get competent guards, just in time for the tackles to fall apart.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 20, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Where are the competent guards???
Um, the Packers do not have competent guards. Competent guards would allow for a running back to average more than 4 yards per carry. We don’t have that. Now, the tackles that Ted inherited are past their prime, and there aren’t any competent replacements on the roster. Instead, we have to take a below-average left guard and turn him into a lousy left tackle, move our so-so center to left guard, and re-insert our old center who couldn’t beat out the so-so guy. Of course, while this is going on we have to deal with a game-altering lack of talent at the right tackle position. Ted is a bajillion dollars under the salary cap; I say, you get what you pay for.
now that was a well laid out argument there. This team needs a veteran lineman to anchor that offense and one who is still near his prime (lets not pretend Clifton is anywhere near what he once was). TT needs to spend some money next offseason on this line. More rookies aren’t going to help at THAT position right now.
I'm still curious...
…how the offense was able to gain field position on a fumble, especially by the same guy
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
The offense can advance a fumble
The caveat is that only the player that fumbled can advance it during the last two minutes of a game (half?)
I agree!!!
I thought this was the turning point of the game. There were miss cues before, but after this, it just got bad FAST!
I think you missed...
“The Bengals are not tobe taken lightly right now. This team is like a baby raccoon caught in a live trap. "Oh, look at the cute widdle fuzzy racoon". Go ahead and try to pick it up…..grrrrrrrrrrrrrr..bite…ahhhhhhhhhhhh. Followed by rabies and a full cycles of shots in the ass to get rid of the rabies.”
That guy may be crazy… But he did predict it. Just… Hope those shots go over well guys.
Regardless, you guys did manage to keep the game close, when you really didn’t deserve it. I was rooting for a late Rodgers TD, would’ve really helped my fantasy team. But alas, we were all 10 yards short. :(
by Eric The Viking on Sep 20, 2009 4:23 PM CDT reply actions
I’ll say the same to you as I did to my best friend sitting next to me.
“The first rule of fantasy is that it shall not come before loyalty to your team or hatred for your division rivals. Now shut up and root for rodgers to throw an int.”
We are the vikings.......resistance is futile.
by Hoss-Drone on Sep 20, 2009 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I gotta agree with this.
When you go to somebody's house, you don't crap on their floor. Being a fan of one team does NOT give you license to be a dick to fans of another.
Corollary: When people are visiting your house and behaving themselves, them being a fan of a different team is NOT a reason for you to piss in their beer.
by Robert Rence on Sep 20, 2009 9:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Thank you
for being the only other guy to heed that warning besides myself.
Also, eff the Vikings.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell Maurer on Sep 20, 2009 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Huh....
I don’t remember writing “when you really didn’t deserve it.”
That sounds really bad, and not at all how I meant for that post to sound…
As for Hoss, I’ll root for my fantasy team as long as it doesn’t hurt my favorite team, especially when there’s money on the line! If the Packers had won today, it wouldn’t have hurt the Vikings much at all.
by Eric The Viking on Sep 20, 2009 8:06 PM CDT up reply actions
I thought I saw Giacomini
get some time at LT, and I also noticed Wells in the game as well. It was a completel clusterf*ck on the offensive line today, although Barbre didn’t look anywhere near as bad as he did last week, which is one good thing.
I wonder why Sitton is still starting. Doesn’t it just make more sense to have gone with Wells at C and Spitz at RG like the preseason seemed to be?
Sitton
Has actually looked really good thus far. And I thought Giacomini was inactive?
by packallday555 on Sep 20, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Sitton, much like Barbre
are really good at run blocking, not so much at pass blocking.
And I think Giacomini was only inactive last week. After the Barbre disaster against the Bears, it’d be foolish of the coaches not to have Giacomini active.
run defense
the d-line held up the bengals line which is their job, the backers didn’t make any tackles. how many times did woodson or rouse end up tackling benson instead of hawk/barnett/kampman? same idea on the huge screen pass, where were any of the LB’s??? they didn’t show up.
run offense
that’s the other huge problem. GB plays outside in the cold (most of the season). building your team around throwing the ball, settling on one of the worst starting RB’s in league, no road grading o-linemen…just makes no sense. today was another sad example of it, not being able to run the ball AT ALL and getting Rodgers killed by droping back time after time.
I disagree
The commitment to the run is sorely lacking from the offensive playcalling, and they sometimes run on downs that make absolutely no sense ( for example, being down by 7 at home in the 4th quarter on 2nd and 10) unless it’s to set up the pass. The linemen have all done great at run blocking, but are horrible at pass blocking and Clifton’s injury threw everyone off today. Grant doesn’t pick the right hole sometimes, but if there’s one thing that’s proven with him, it’s that he always starts slow and gets much, much better as the game goes on.
Grant is what he is:
a serviceable back if you’ve got an above average O line, which we don’t. He’s also got stone hands, which is a significant liability in this offense. His ineffectiveness as a receiver (and the lack of a decent backup) deprives Rodgers of the natural RB checkdown he needs with the kind of pressure he’s getting.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 20, 2009 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions
What games are you watching??
The offensive linemen have NOT “all done great at run blocking.” If they had, our running backs wouldn’t be averaging less than 3 yards per carry.
Something I was also thinking about..
The 3-4 defense as a good run defense obviously failed us today, but I was thinking about something here.. the Bengals play a 3-4 defense four times a year with the Ravens and Steelers in their division and they seemed to be much more prepared for the defense than the Bears, who aren’t really used to it.
I wonder if the 3-4 has a certain element of surprise to it to teams that aren’t as used to it, but now that the 3-4 is starting to become the trend and not the minority, if that means eventually offensive coordinators will figure it out like perhaps the Bengals were able to today. I think there’s no question that the Packers had a tremendous amount of difficulty figuring out who to sub in and rotate with the linebacking corps after Collins went out (and thus compromising our deep pass protection and neutralizing our ability to blitz more effectively) and how to use these guys, whereas the Bengals looked like they knew exactly who and how to block this defense.
Now with the Rams and Vikings, these are two more teams that aren’t used to the 3-4 so I guess my question will be answered then… particularly the latter, who looked horrible against the Chiefs’ 3-4 defense in the preseason. But maybe this is something that should’ve been taken into account when we switched from the 4-3 to the 3-4? Do we just not have the right personnel for it, or is this game going to be one of those “learning curve” types that we’ll just have to dismiss and move on from?
It makes sense (in retrospect) that the Bengals are more equipped to deal with the 3-4...
… and that if we aren’t as practiced at execution as the Steelers and Ravens, it might show.
But it’s still Cedric Benson. And gangstaff is right: the DL did a decent job of holding the line in quarters 2 and 3, yet Benson was constantly falling forward and getting 1-3 or more yards after contact on every play. The LB play today was simply not good enough.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 20, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, the problem with that theory
Is that an average 3-4 defense won’t beat any team which either employes said defense or teams who see it alot. Such as a majority of the AFC teams that made the playoffs last year, meaning if you get one of those in a Superbowl (I know, I know, hypothetically speaking), you’re screwed, so to speak. So, I hope your theory is wrong, because if it isn’t, the defense doesn’t have a chance in the playoffs.
3-4 strengths and weaknesses
I read an article recently that statistically compared the results of teams using 3-4 and those using 4-3. Statistically there really isn’t an advantage either way in terms of passing and rushing yards per play.
But one thing that is different is that in the 3-4 teams give up less long runs but still give up the same average yards per carry. So you give a lot of 5 and 6 yard runs where as with the 4-3 you might get more stuffs but also you get burned long more often. This makes sense if you think about it. Today’s stats followed this to a T as the Bengals ran up and down the field without busting any long ones.
The biggest advantage of the 3-4 used to be that it was easier to find players to fit the scheme because less teams used the formation so the demand for big linebackers and true nose tackles was lower. Now the main advantage is flexibility and being able to confuse your opponents and cover up lack of talent at a position or two better than you can in the 4-3. But I think you also sometimes confuse yourself with all those guys flying around.
The Vikings looked fine against the Browns week 1 and they use a 3-4 but also play it a lot different. Preseason has always and will always be meaningless so looking at the Chiefs game is probably wrong to do.
You Look at the Stat Sheet
Aaron Rouse was the second leading tackler, following Woodson. I thought he was the only Packer who played better than expected (I’m starting to expect great plays from Woodson every week). I watched the linebackers, and they were consistently being pushed backwards because the Dline was being pushed backwards 3 yards on each run play. Pickett was a rag doll and his name wasn’t even mentioned once. Jolly was a fart in the wind and Jenkins didn’t cause any havoc on running or passing plays.
There’s plenty of blame to go around. The Oline stunk. Rodgers definitely held the ball too long. Grant played poorly and didn’t touch the ball much. Jennings might as well have been in the stands. McCarthy obviously didn’t make the necessary tactical adjustments at halftime needed to win.
I have friends that are pissed off the entire day if the Packers lose. Normally, it takes me ten minutes and I let it go. This one was different—The BENGALS came into LAMBEAU and—despite double digit penalties and two turnovers—were more PHYSICAL and more INTENSE than Green Bay. I wanted to puke throughout the entire second half.
Kind of like Atlanta in the '01 playoffs
Actually, that one made me more sick because there were, IMHO, more reasons to win that game (initially) than this one. We had no business even being competitive in this game, and that’s a disturbing trend this (regular) season.
I had a hangover and four 1/2 hours of sleep
at the sports bar I was at (damn West Coast and 10am starting times) so I was ready to puke all game.
The beer I drank to calm the hangover down just totally numbed me in the second half, I have to say. Which is a marked improvement from years past where I would have been furious. But you’re right, it wasn’t that kind of game. It was that sort of game where you feel like, “Oh shit are we that bad or are they that good? What happened?” The walk of shame home was a long one.
The photo above is well timed.
About 2 seconds after it was taken, the guy in the Packers jersey and the backwards black hat started flipping off the camera. If you look closely, I’m pretty sure you can see his middle finger beginning to slide past the others for full deployment.
But maybe that’s just my imagination.
I am glad that no one tossed a beer or tried to hit Mr. Johnson though. That humiliation combined with the loss would have made today a rough day to be a Packer fan.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 20, 2009 7:31 PM CDT reply actions
Yeah!
I remember that. What a phony photo. Ha ha!
by Eric The Viking on Sep 20, 2009 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions
I flipped to the Vikings game when Fox was doing the update on that score
They jokingly said that they wouldn’t show the leap since they didn’t want the FCC to come down on them.
I don't blame them.
The guy was pretty much dead center in the screen when he did it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 20, 2009 8:27 PM CDT up reply actions
I love Mike McCarthy
but he really needs to get an offensive coordinator to make the offensive calls, he can take over for a couple if he wants, but he needs to concentrate on the whole game and not call for Wynn to run on third downs or for screen passes at all (which are a part of a different era of packers football now)
On that fly to right-center
I kinda expected JD to plow into Rios with an ATV.
EVERYBODY PICK US FOR 3RD OR 4TH SO I DINK WE DOIN POOTY GOO
Sox Machine
by Sox Machine on Aug 17, 2009 7:35 PM PDT reply recommended Unrec 3
by blackoutsox on Sep 20, 2009 10:25 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
New Coordinator
I think it’s high time we consider a new head coach. I was behind this guy his first year, but the last two have left me with doubt. I’m not one of those I’m pissed because Favre gone. I just don’t think he motivates his guys enough, and he dosen’t seem to have an killers instinct. Every time we see a little progress, he goes conservitive instead of putting the game away!!!
retarded penalties, and retarded dropped passes.
where the hell was jennings? why didnt grant run more? that was just a clusterfuck of suckery of a game from the packers over all. props to the bengals for taking advantage of our mistakes, and attacking our weaknesses. i sure hope we step it up next week, and for that matter the rest of the season.
Because I still draw breath, and will be a sox fan for as long as I do. - larry
Why didn't Grant run more?
Because you need 10, not 3, yards for a first down.
He actually
Was running the ball pretty good in the 1st half. He had a couple 8 yard runs, and at one point had 9 carries for 37 yards, which is about 4 ypc. MM just decided to go away from the run like he always does.
He has no idea when to run and when to pass, and it really hurts our run game. So many times he’ll go PA on 1st, and then we have a 2nd and 10, and he calls a run, and Grant gets 2-3 yards, leaving a 3rd and 7-8. I’m not saying PA on first is a bad call, but when your actually running the ball well (averaged 4 ypc like Grant was) why not primarily run 1st down and give yourself a 2nd and 5-7, and then go PA.
I really want to see more of the 5 WRs set as well. I get that our oline sucks and that’s probably why we don’t run it much but that set is designed to get the ball quick, and every time we ran it yesterday and against the Bears, it seemed like we got at least 5+ yards. That set was why we were so dominate in 07’ on offense. We ran that a ton, and then would line 2 FBs up in the backfield with Grant and pound it because they had to respect the PA. Rodgers is the perfect QB for the 5 WR set, he is smart, accurate, and really doesn’t try and force things to much. He also reads defenses very, very well and is great at making progressions. In the 5 WR set there is always someone open, if not 2-3 people open, and Rodgers seems to find someone everytime.
by packallday555 on Sep 21, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
5 receiver
I don’t think they have the pass protection to make it credible. RT needs too much help and the other guys don’t scare anyone.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 21, 2009 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Pass Protection
Doesn’t matter a whole lot in this formation. Like I said above, the plays are designed so the ball comes out practically right away. When we go 5 WR teams will either blitz the hell out of us, and I am VERY confident in Rodgers abilities to read defenses, or they’ll only rush 4 and Rodgers will be able to step up in the pocket. It’s really our bread and butter offense. I’ve seen way too much of Grant in the shotgun, with Lee lined up directly in front of Grant. The only thing we ever get out of it is a dump off for 4 yards to Lee or Grant. It makes me want to puke honestly.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 12:07 AM CDT up reply actions
Bengals had good coverage. And when your running game is averaging 3 yds per carry, you need to throw. Of course, when your OL can’t pass block, then you need to run. The crappy OL puts the team between a rock and a hard place. Could be a long year.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 21, 2009 2:25 AM CDT reply actions
The Packers biggest problem is...
Ted Thompson ! the sooner more people start to realize that fact, the sooner we can get rid of him! In his years in GB he has taken a very good offensive line and completly destroyed it, yes thoose players all got older and injured. First of all TT has been horrible at picking new linemen, he tried rebuilding in chuncks not posission by posission, which did not turn out very good. His picks on the defensive line has not shown up yet either, Bustin Harrell has spent most of his time in the training room. B.J Raji has had a few minor injuries, and has yet to play regular season football, I’ll give him benefit of doubht for now, hopefully he’ll earn his pay. Then ofcourse TT was responsible for nudging Favre out the door, and thereby creating the biggest soap opera in team history! The only good thing TT has done, was to sign Charles Woodson.
I wonder how much the Wylfs are paying TT ???
Problem #2 is Mike McCarthy as HC and playcalling, he’s not very good at running an offense, we knew that before he got here, just look at what he did in New Orleans and SF (they got better when he left …) He was fine as long as he had Brett Favre to run the offfense on the field, and change a lot of those calls. But with Rodgers inexperience, McCarthy has no one to rescue his ass.
They also have several other issues. The Defensive line are to “thin” there’s no rotation so the guys get gassed, and then they play bad, also causing the LB’s to look worse than they are. the 3-4 defense is not good for anything unless you have some rotation and fresh legs on the down linemen.
Passprotection, has been very bad this year, and when Clifton went down yesterday, it was non-existing.
The running game is stalling, Ryan Grant can not create his own holes … Neither is he an every down back. The most effective running game, is to have one power back and one fast one, like the combo we had with Green/ Davenport (and a great O-line..) that will be even more evident once it gets colder, need I remind you this was the missing piece in the NFC Championship game vs the Giants??
And why the H*** does TT have 3 FBs on the roster ???? They could sure use another Safety right now….
Another problem right now, is Rodgers inexperience. NO !!! This is not a stab at Rodgers, a lot of great things can be said about him, he has a great arm, accuracy, he can run, something Favre couldn’t in later years. And hopefully, Rodgers has a great career ahead of him, unless he gets killed by lack of proteciton and bad playcalling.
But his lack of experience is a liability right now. First of all, I doubth other teams would bring that much heat against a more experienced QB, one who knows how to read a defense pre-snap, figuring out where the weakness is and change the play when he sees a missmatch, either in coverage or his own protection. Or just change the play when the call is really bad. Rodgers also holds the ball to long sometimes, he needs to know and anticipate when his guys will be open, this also comes with experience.
I know Rodgers had good stats yesterday, but most of his passing yds came late in the game, when the Bengals were sitting back in coverage and protecting their lead.
And the final problem … Brett Favre in purple ! Unless a complete turnaround happens over the next two weeks, he’ll humiliate the Packers twice this year !
by Jarlsberg on Sep 21, 2009 4:08 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Ah, a TT hater
“Another problem right now, is Rodgers inexperience.”
And your true colors come out. How exactly is Rodgers supposed to get that experience? Starting for Brett Favre at the end of the 2005 season when there was no chance in hell of doing anything? Oh yeah, I’m sure the Diva would’ve liked that. Or maybe getting experience with Tampa Bay, Chicago, the Jets, or anyone else who would’ve needed a starting QB at the end of last season when Rodgers became a FA?
Yes, he needs to throw away the ball sometimes. But the “weakness” you speak of has been his front five. If they hold up, the play calls are fine, he knows where the open receivers are (they choose to not catch the ball or he’s rushed on the throw and it’s a little wide).
Fact: With quite possibly one of the worst O-Lines in the NFL Rodgers has given up a safety. That’s it. No “throw the ball into a crowd because someone is at my ankles” INTs, no lost fumbles due to blindside hits. For this lack of “experience” that you claim, he sure isn’t making any mistakes for someone who lacks experience.
Feel free to crawl back into the woodwork.
by Danwood on Sep 21, 2009 6:34 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
+100
What is Rodgers supposed to do? He has 3 seconds to throw, sometimes even less. It takes WRs time to run down field and run there routes, especially because our offense is a VERTICAL attack. He has one safety this year. He doesn’t ever just throw the ball up and hope someone catches it. (That Favre guy didn’t ever do that right?) He has only fumbled once (and we recovered), and that’s pretty impressive considering he has already been sacked 10+ times in only 2 games! He also has 0 INTs, and as you probably know INTs usually result from the QB having to make a rushed throw, which he does practically every play.
I agree TT has ruined the oline and keeping 3 FBs was retarded but don’t bring Rodgers into it. With how bad our defense was last year we’re lucky we even won 6 games, and really Rodgers is the reason we won when we did.
by packallday555 on Sep 21, 2009 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
Sacks
When he takes a sack, he gives up yardage, and the point of the game is to move the ball forward! So, Rodgers has given up more than a safety (which by the way, is worse than a turnover because you give up points at the same time.) Also, Rodgers did fumble yesterday but was lucky enough that it bounced toward Barbre.
Moreover, if you want to blame the line, then you effectively concede the argument on TT.
TT & Rodgers should not get free passes.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 21, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Huh? the point is to move the ball forward? Sacks give up yards? huh…I guess we have a lot to learn.
Safeties can be better or worse…remember turnovers can be returned for TDs or give teams really good field position. Sure it gives them points and the ball but they still have to drive down the field…an INT instead of the safety would have been a sure TD. That said, safeties SUCK and hopefully that is his only one of the year.
No one gets free passes for the Packers start…if you think that is what we are all saying you are SORELY mistaken. NO ONE (except maybe woodson) has played to their level in both games. ITs been a very underwhelming two weeks, but heck we survived it at 1-1 so that is good. WE could easily be 0-2 and then the sky would really be falling. ITs a young team, hopefully these guys can whip them into shape and if they can’t I hope they bring in someone who can (while retaining Capers of course)
I think Kapinos gets a pass
For not having any inkling of a punting solution in the preseason I’d say Kapinos has done a fairly good job. He had to punt from the end zone on several possessions yesterday and got it past midfield (before the punt coverage let the return man fly by)
Haha what?
“When he takes a sack, he gives up yardage, and the point of the game is to move the ball forward!”
You do realize 80% of the sacks he’s taken are because the other teams DEs are there within 2 seconds right? He is mobile and can avoid it about half of the time but the guy is no Vick back there. He needs time in the pocket. After all he is a pocket passer. And when a pocket passer can’t ever establish a “pocket” things aren’t going to go great.
I just can’t see how anyone can blame Rodgers for ANY of our troubles. The guy can’t catch a break. Our WRs have dropped at least 8+ of his passes so far this year, and many of those drops would have been significant downfield plays had they been caught. Then you throw in the fact that Barbe practically let Ogunleye walk right by him in week 1, and the fact that our LT allowed Cincys RE to have 5 sacks (though one was Rodgers fault), and honestly how could expect him to succeed. Probably the most important thing for a QB is to establish a rhythm and a pocket (if their a pocket passer), and Rodgers hasn’t been able to do either of those things.
I agree with TT, though he did take us from a 4-12 season in 05’ to NFC Championship in 07’. He has messed our oline up pretty bad.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 12:16 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not blaming him
He obviously has more talent than his line, which is the biggest problem with the team. And you’re right that he probably won’t succeed under these circumstances.
That said, Rodgers is not perfect. There are things he could improve and quickness is one of them.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 22, 2009 1:00 AM CDT up reply actions
Quickness in terms of getting the ball out? Or quickness in terms of eluding the pass rush? Hopefully getting rid of the ball. Another thing that will help him getting rid of the ball is establishing a rhythm. We need to something help Rodgers out. Whether it’s bringing in some FAs or leaving 6-7 guys back to block, I don’t know but we need to do something. We go as Rodgers goes, and he goes as the oline goes.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions
“Also, Rodgers did fumble yesterday but was lucky enough that it bounced toward Barbre.”
Yep, that was the play where Malaluga came untouched off the edge, and blindsided Rodgers no more then 2 seconds after he hiked the ball right? Wait let me answer that for you. Yes, yes it was. Wasn’t really much he could do on the play.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 12:17 AM CDT up reply actions
go away...
Those were TERRIBLE arguments. You countered YOURSELF in your own argument repeatedly because most of your arguments had nothing behind them. Just go away unless you come with something legitimate.
You guys may not like it
but Jarlsberg raises a LOT of good points. Yes, he’s a historic Thompson hater, but he’s spot on from drafting O-linemen to Rodgers’ inexperience to keeping 3 FBs to poor playcalling.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell Maurer on Sep 21, 2009 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions
...if he wants people to listen...
he needs to stop with the Favre talk and stop with the blatent TT hating. Honestly all you hear is BLAH BLAH BLAH when its opened with I hate TT and closed with Favre in purple. Its getting ridiculous.
Regarding his points:
1. TT destroyed the line…no us not getting young guys backing up our Oline earlier in the decade has lead to us being behind. We had a great line that was quickly aging and getting REALLY expensive. Behind them we had NOTHING. Thompson came in and made some tough decisions on expiring contracts and they were the right decisions. those guys signed HUGE contracts and went on to both get CUT by the teams that signed them away from us. The problem is that we had no one training in behind them. You could push that on TT saying he should have brought in a vet or you could say Sherman and the others should have had better people training in behind them. He’s had ONE terrible D line pick in Harrell. It was an awful pick and we all know it. How can you say he made a good argument when he throw RAJI into the mix. Raji was supposed to be a top 5 pick and fell to us and we are all GIDDY with the potential…ridiculous argument. Good things TT has done: Signed Woodson, drafted Rodgers, kept Jennings around, kept DD around, signed Jenkins to a four year deal, gave up on KGB when he stopped producing, didn’t give Corey Williams the big bucks (hows he turning out for the Browns), got Capers to come here, etc. To say the only good thing he’s done is signing woodson is ridiculous and stupid.
He is right about the 3 fullback…we all acknoledge that. Keeping smith for a safety obviously would have been the right call there…stupid decision in my book.
McCarthy isn’t a great playcaller and they probably need to address that. I don’t think he’s a terrible head coach though. I’d like to see us get a better offensive coordinator in the house who can spice things up. That said, Childress over in MN has shown that you don’t have to be innovative as a playcaller to win in this league.
I don’t buy his arguments about Rodgers…I do accept that he is holding the ball too long but his comments about his inexperience and teams playing to that are unfounded and a HUGE reach.
tl;dr
I wondered how long before Jarls appeared following a bad loss. The Packers didn’t lose this game because TT hasn’t stocked the team with enough talent. They lost the game because they didn’t execute. That’s it.
That means the problem yesterday was the players failing to perform to their talent level and the coaches failing to prepare and inspire the team to perform well.
That’s it. Really.
Jarlsberg, you’re pathetic. You must subconsciously root against the Packers in order to exploit the opportunity to furiously type out your all-consuming rage at everything Ted-related.
Here’s some pearls of reality I would ask you to consider the next time you consider coming here to puke your bile all over the rest of us: Ted’s the GM; Brett’s gone because he was an ass in his off-field dealings with the Packers; the Packers will lose games they shouldn’t lose.
by 400metres on Sep 21, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Farve in Purple???
Get over it, he’s gone! If he was kicked ot the door or left, it dosn’t matter, he’s gone! My God the man went to the biggest rival, he spat in the face of packer fans that cheered him for years, stood up for him, and ate at his resturaunt (in downtown Green Bay). The sad fact is all the people still moaning that he’s not here anymore. I could see the facts when he was in New York, or even if he went some where else.
by ShawnH on Sep 21, 2009 5:00 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Who cares about Favre
Favre wouldn’t be doing anything better than Rodgers right now. Favre has been reduced to a checkdown QB in Minny. Have you watched him (not directed toward you Shawn…but enforcing your argument). Have any of you actually watched him? I don’t think he’s completed a pass over 10 yards yet.
The Favre lovers think that we don’t still long for the old Favre days, he was great and we loved him…HE ISN’T THAT FAVRE ANYMORE!! Favre himself says this all the time, why can’t you all realize it?? He doesn’t have to show us loyalty, its a job for him that is fine…but why are we expected then to show it to him? He’s the enemy now. He chose to join the enemy…you reap what you sow!
“Favre wouldn’t be doing anything better than Rodgers right now.”
He would be doing a lot worse then Rodgers. In case some of you Favre lovers haven’t noticed he is no longer capable of moving around in the pocket and buying time. Anytime a defender comes near him he falls and that is really not an exaggeration. We’re lucky Rodgers has some pretty good mobility and can elude defenders otherwise he would have already been sacked 20+ times.
“Favre has been reduced to a checkdown QB in Minny. Have you watched him (not directed toward you Shawn…but enforcing your argument). Have any of you actually watched him? I don’t think he’s completed a pass over 10 yards yet.”
Thank god someone else pointed this out. Comparing how Favre is playing in the Vikes system is no where near comparable to how Rodgers is doing in our system. Our offense are completely different. Trust me Rodgers could throw it to AP in the backfield and have him make a defender fall and gain 10 yards.
And I’m not trying to rip on the Vikes in any way with that or Favre for that matter, just trying to point out that the QB position in our system is MUCH more difficult then the QB situation for the Vikes.
by packallday555 on Sep 21, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Checkdown
You know, it’d be nice if Rodgers did use the checkdown more often. It’s better than a sack.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 21, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Really?
I actually remember a check down throw to Grant yesterday. Yep, we had 1st and 10 on the Cincy 35, and were driving as Rodgers had just hooked up with Driver for 20+ yards, and Rodgers checks down to Grant, who gained 7 yards on the play but fumbled the ball away. And by the way, the score was 14-14, we were marching the ball downfield with ease, and after that Cincy went down and took a 21-14 lead. Now come up with a way to pin that Rodgers.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Shawn
the same fans who “spat” at Favre last july/august when he wanted to come back to the Packers ?? The way a lot of fans attacked him then, I don’t see why he ows them anymore loyalty than they shoved him. He gave us 16 great years, it should have been 17 !
PS… His Steak House is about a Favre throw away from Lambeau Field, not downtown Green Bay.
Shoved him out?
Maybe you buy Brett’s whole “I’m just a good ol’ southern boy who doesn’t know anything other than tossin’ a pigskin” spiel. But I think his retirement – unretirement bit over the last two years has been more planned out than he would like you to believe. Remember, he asked for a trade after the Packers failed to acquire Randy Moss, then after we didn’t get him the second time before he resigned in New England, Favre retired hoping he could play with his buddy Childress after he was released and unretired. But hey don’t worry, there is still time for you to hop on that purple bandwagon with your guy Favre.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 21, 2009 7:21 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Reasoning with a Favre fanatic is a dead end street my friend. My favorite quote ever is, you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.
These Favre fanatics are seriously in blind love with the man. No joke, I personally think it’s kind of weird, like the gay guy on youtube who was screaming at people and crying to leave Britney Spears alone. They are truly obsessed. They honestly think the Packers would be better off with an over the hill Favre.
The other thing, when they talk about guaranteed Super Bowl is they can’t see that Favre has absolutely killed the Packers in just about every playoff loss since 1997. They really do have this blind faith and obsessed obedience to the man.
by FavreSucks on Sep 21, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Dear Charlie and Favre Sucks,
Thank you both for so expeditiously scrubbing the irrational ravings of Jarlsberg from my mind with calm, commonsense reasoning.
That’s a double rec.
by 400metres on Sep 21, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Heres where you're wrong.........
I don’t think “Favre lovers” are making the argument that the Packers would be better off with BF running the current Packer’s offense. He wouldn’t and everyone knows that. I think what it really is is a more roundabout way of saying that the Pack are getting their “just desserts” for the treatment of a player who was crapped on by the organization he represented for so many years. Maybe that’s not the way YOU see it, but it works according to the way THEY see it.
I look at it like this. I’m a big believer in Karma. Everyone who doesn’t “like” Favre and the way he “spat in the Packer’s collective faces” when he left/was pushed out was solidly behind TT and the Green Bay management on their decision. So last season’s 6-10 finish and this year’s defeat to the Bengals in LAMBEAU could easily be seen as a Karmic “kick in the ass” by the people who feel like Favre was “spat on” by the organization.
Karma has a way of setting things right. I read A LOT of trash talking about how Cedric Benson is a “washed-up never was” and how the Bengals couldn’t run and how much this game was a sure win for the Pack. Ochocinco wasn’t going to do the "Lambeau leap and the Bengals had no shot. Should the fans of a team who finished up 6-10 last season be doing so much barking so early and not temper their enthusiasm with some common sense? Probably.
Like I said. Karma has a way of setting things right.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 21, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Then I guess Favre's injury last year
Was karma for the way Favre spat on the Packers management faces with his retirement scheme
by Danwood on Sep 21, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely.....
I could definitely see that.
I’m wondering if now after that if the Packers aren’t still getting it because Favre seems to have let it go but Packer fans can’t. Think about how much vitriol comes down on anyone even MENTIONING something pro-Favre or anti Ted Thompson. All you have to do is look at the posts above and read how quickly and harshly replies started coming.
It’s just that person’s opinion.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 21, 2009 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Hey troll
it’s not vitriol, it’s the truth. Show me one example of someone reacting to the pro-Favre/anti-Ted brigade with anything but a fact-based counter-perspective. Sometimes the counter-opinions get harsh, but intelligent people are under no moral or constitutional mandate to suffer fools gladly either.
I’m not the least bit surprised that someone who believes in fairy tales like “poor Brett got treated so unfairly by those mean, mean Packers” would not only believe in superstitious garbage like Karma, but twist the latter as some sort of credible basis for the rest of us to respect your half-baked insights.
It’s always nice when my theories are proven without me having to do anything.
Thank you!
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 21, 2009 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions
So the karma went both ways huh? I don’t think that is how karma works…maybe it was just the way things happened.
No....
Karma works for each person. Two seasons ago it was BOTH the fault of the Packers and Brett Favre. They were both deserving of the Karma they received the following season and the reason (in my opinion) why they both suffered accordingly.
This year, however, I think that the Packers and their fans are still suffering from a Karmic “kick to the groin” because of their inability to let go of their venom and unwarranted hatred over the situation. On this very site when an entire post right before the season starts degenerates into a mob scene wishing pain, injury and failure on another person even though that person has clearly moved on to “greener pastures” should understand that they have it coming.
Then to add even MORE bad ju-ju, you’ve got fans of a team that went 6-10 last season barking about stomping a team with a “washed-up” running back, no way to stop the Packers “unstoppable offense” or defense and a WR who was going to get beaten to a pulp for daring to leap into the stands as a joke.
Karma.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 21, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, now I get it. My apologies.
You actually are employing logical, fact-based analysis; i.e., the Packers played horribly yesterday because some loudmouths on the internet were overconfident about their favorite team, and the Jets missed the playoffs last year because Brett was mean to the Packers.
Logically then, if everyone here keeps their cool and doesn’t get too excited about the Pack’s chances of winning down in St. Louis, we should pretty much be guaranteed a victory.
I hope everyone considers this wise man’s words carefully. Don’t dare slag any of the Rams players or express any pride in the Packer’s offensive or defensive prowess if you don’t want to anger the Karma gods and ruin the season!
I think the mods ought to lock this thread, because I can’t see any flaws in this theory and it pretty much explains everything.
GOZER: Subcreatures! Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, the Traveler, has come! Choose and perish!
RAY: What do you mean, choose? We don’t understand!
GOZER: Choose! Choose the form of the Destructor!
PETER: Whoa! I get it, I get it. Very cute! Whatever we think of – if we think of J. Edgar Hoover, J. Edgar Hoover will appear and destroy us, okay? So empty your heads. Empty your heads. Don’t think of anything. We’ve only got one shot at this.
GOZER: The choice is made! The Traveler has come!
PETER: Whoa! Whoa! Nobody choosed anything! Did you choose anything?
EGON: No!
PETER: Did you?
WINSTON: My mind’s totally blank!
PETER: I didn’t choose anything!
PETER, EGON and WINSTON stare at RAY
RAY: trembling I couldn’t help it. It just popped in there!
PETER: What? What just popped in there?
RAY: I – I tried to think -
EGON: Look!
RAY: No! It can’t be!
WINSTON: What is it?
RAY: It can’t be!
WINSTON: What did you do, Ray?
RAY: It can’t be!
WINSTON: Aw, shit!
RAY: solemnly The Packers are going to lose to the Rams
Well....
The sarcasm isn’t exactly hurting feelings on this side.
I actually think it interesting that anything that doesn’t follow a fanatic’s blind thought process about a sports team is ridiculed and attacked. I understand it hurts and frustrates when your team loses. As I stated when I wrote… I BELIEVE. I never said that it was truth or fact. It is just my thinking.
I guess this qualifies as fact:
2007: 13-3, Favre as QB, NFC Championship game
2008: 6-10, Rodgers as QB, home for the playoffs
2009: 1-1, Rodgers as QB, loss to Bengals at Lambeau
The fact is that you won with an aging, veteran Favre and the following season you lost without him. You can say that it was the rest of the team that carried him, that he cost you the chance to go to the Super Bowl, etc. but the fact is that with him YOU WON and after all the dirt that went down, YOU LOST.
Karma?
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 21, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions
And the true feelings come out
If you knew anything about our 08’ team or 08’ season you would indeed know that we had Collins, Jenkins, Harris, Barnett, and Bigby miss a considerable amount of games. And wouldn’t you know it 7 of our losses were by 4 or less points. We averaged 27 on offense (just like in 07’ with Favre as our QB), but guess how our defense was…23rd in scoring..
Favre definitely carried us in 07’ but it definitely helped that our defense was 6th in scoring. Dropping from 6th to 23rd is going to cause any teams some problems even if they did/do have a top 10 offense in the league.
Get out of here with that “karma” crap. This is football. Our oline has been horrible and have pretty much carried our offensive woes on their back thus far.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 12:28 AM CDT up reply actions
If I cared enough…I am sure I could find a million situations where karma would have destroyed a team but yet somehow their talent prevailed. Shouldn’t ALL Boston teams have collapsed by now under the pure cocky overconfidence of their fanbase based on your arguments? OH an probably Dallas too since there is no cockier fanbase in the game of football.
Ahh and Minnesota is in some trouble. They asked Bobby Wade to renegotiate his contract, let him make cuts and then cut him anyway a week later.
hmm…I guess when SF screwed over Montana and forced him out that would explain their horrible seasons that followed with that terrible QB behind him…what was his name again? He was BAD.
Karma.
Wow.
That’s a LOT of frustration coming out.
Feel better?
It’s amazing that people would put soooo much frustration and sarcasm down on a computer screen because someone (me) gave an opinion that doesn’t toe the Packer line.
It’s only one loss, after all. If I’m wrong, you’ll go on to have a great season and reach all the hopes and dreams you have for your beloved Packers.
Or………….
You could end up 6-10 again and you get to rant, rail and sarcasm your way through another one of my posts about Karma as the season wears on!
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions
So instead of arguing your ridculous statement
you go on about sarcasm and frustration? If you want to believe that the overconfidence of a team’s fans over a message board can cause said team to perform poorly, that’s fine but put something behind it besides “Lol it’s karma guyz, like that Earl show”.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Bad Karma
How about that 2007 over performed and we’re seeing what the Packers really look like. Leave the talk of karma and curses amongst Cubs and Red Sox fans. The simple fact of the matter is, with or without Favre, the Packers aren’t a very solid team.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 22, 2009 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Coaching to blame
I beleive you have to chalk this loss up to the coaching staff. The team looked like they were unprepared, unenthused, and basiccaly seemed like they did not have to give their best effort in order to win. That to me is the coaching staff. They are too soft on these guys. Also Barbre is a lost cause at tackle. He has no footwork at all. Basically the worst loss in Lambeau Field. Embarassing
Barbre has only had one bad game
By that definition, the entire left side of the must be a lost cause too, no?
Barbre still sucks!
He didn’t look as bad because they had ends & backs helping him out. That’s what the team needs to do to keep Rodgers in one piece, but it means the back and the end aren’t available for other passes. That’s one reason Rodgers was hanging on to the ball. I’d say Barbre needs to go, but Giacomini is even worse.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 21, 2009 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions
partially at least
They certainly don’t leave without blame. I think the only person that doesn’t have to hang their head low is Woodson. He was all over the place, everyone else was TERRIBLE!
Ever Optimistic
The Pack will be fine. Just a case of bad prep coming off an intense win resulting in a weak performance against an underrated Bengal team.
False.
I have serious doubts in this team after watching this pathetic performance this week. Cedric Benson doesnt run over a title contender.
Green and Gold / Black, and White
They'll be fine.
Run defense in any scheme is a function of experience and discipline within the scheme. It’s the hardest thing for a defense to do. The Packers have only 2 games of experience in the 3-4 scheme against real competition. There are lots of things that you just can’t simulate in practice. They will learn from it, and move on.
Give some credit to the Bengals, also. They figured out ways to neutralize our DE’s and get their O-linemen on our LB’s. At the second level, that’s always going to be a mismatch in the 3-4. The Bengals had a good plan to attack the D, and it worked. I’m sure Capers saw it, but the Packers defense was a little too inexperienced to actually follow through on the adjustments. They’ll get there.
by RobertArthur on Sep 21, 2009 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions
Not so much worried over the D line, as much as I am the safties.
Collins and Bigby likely out for a while now..I would guess. Not a good ting!
Green and Gold / Black, and White
Darren Perry is an outstanding coach
He’ll get the most out the backups at Safety. Expect to see Martin instead of Bush this week in practice. Bush thinks like a corner. A 3-4 Safety needs a certain attitude, and Bush doesn’t have it. Rouse is close, but he’s not quite there. He needs to return to the swagger he had coming out of college.
by RobertArthur on Sep 21, 2009 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Good points
I was thinking yesterday that we could have struggled against the Bengals a bit because they play in a division where every team runs the 3-4 defense. I think our inexperience will show up more against teams who accustomed to play against it, and I think we’ll look better against the teams who aren’t so accustomed to playing against it (the Bears for example). Hopefully as the year goes on we will improve in it.
I think the biggest thing is having Collins and Bigby back ASAP. Without them in there Capers got VERY conservative, and honestly it looked like our defense from last year, sending 4 guys to rush Palmer, and dropping 7 back in coverage. We need to bring pressure and try and rush QB’s because it plays to our secondaries strengths. I know bringing the pressure will give up the big play every once in a while but it was also likely result in 1-3 INTs. Getting Raji in there will be big for us, as we can get more of a rotation, and keep our guys fresher.
by packallday555 on Sep 21, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
Doubts
I have doubts too. At this rate, the team is headed for another 6-10 season, or worse. How long will McCarthy last at that rate? I had little faith in the guy from day one, and without Bret to carry him, he hasn’t shown us much. When a team loses a home game against a mediocre opponent, it does not bode well for the season.
The offense was flat, the o-line horrible and even the defense was playing at 2008 levels against the gound game and an average running back. After this perfromance I see little reason to expect a much better record than last years below .500 flop. If they drop the game at St. Louis, it’s time to start thinking ahead to the draft – and a coaching change.
Anyone else disappointed when they saw Blackmon returning kicks instead of Jordy Nelson?
after the real solid game Jordy had last week, I thought he really deserved the nod out there over Blackmon.
Green and Gold / Black, and White
I was and wasnt
I like Jordy back there to return, BUT during the Bear game he made me nervous quite a bit. He was catching the ball way to high on his shoulder. Catching a punt or kick off is not like catching a pas, you need to catch it down by your gut and Jordy many times looked like he was underestimating the kicks and was catching them high on his shoulder which can lead to drops and fumbles.
by bizzle4 on Sep 21, 2009 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Really? Sucks?
That’s a little strong. Barbre had a decent game. Offensive line is graded pass/fail as a unit, and of course this week was a fail. But Barbre wasn’t the main point of failure. The game was up when Clifton left, because Colledge looked like he’d never played LT in his life. Plus, the QB was holding the ball a very long time in some of those sacks.
by RobertArthur on Sep 21, 2009 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions
You didn't miss it
but I think the biggest issue of the game was the terrible Linebacker play. Barnett and Hawk were such non-factors in stopping Benson from running all over us. I had too much blood rushing to my eyes to really see what happened after the 3rd and 34, but it remains to be seen how well this defense will function with this personel.
"That's not a weird stat. Rickie is a run-scorer," Yost said. "It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter," Yost told reporters. "See, you guys have no concept. He's a run-scorer. So there's nothing weird about it. That's what he does."
Packer Blue Haiku
The offensive line
Green & Gold embarrassment
Not sure there’s a fix
www.PackerHaiku.com
Clark Osborn - PackerHaiku.com | FavreHaiku.com | BadgerHaiku.com
And your true colors come out. How exactly is Rodgers supposed to get that experience? Starting for Brett Favre at the end of the 2005 season when there was no chance in hell of doing anything?
I know Rodgers has to gain experience by playing, and I’m not ripping him for not having experience, I’m just stating a fact. Why does people here get so upset when someone makes comments that goes a little againt A.R ?? I’ve never blamed Rodgers for what happened last summer (I blame TT and a little on Favres indecissions)
Rodgers has a lot of tallent, but there are things he needs to learn by playing, like pre-snap reads, getting rid of the ball quicker, thrusting his arm a little more sometimes maybe. and that will take time, I accept that, why others don’t, I don’t know.
Another thing, most people here seem to believe that the Packers would not miss Favre on the field, even though Rodgers had very nice stats his first year, he still has a lot to learn. (please do not bring on the BS about his passer rating, ‘cause passer rating is a system made by some statistician, and is really a bunch of crap)
Why would one believe that someone who never started a game in the NFL would instantly fill the shoes of a ledgend?? that’s hopeing for way too much. I knew all along it would be a difficult transition when Favre left, I’ve said it for years!
And there’s one thing Favre still has, that you can’t coach, were Rodgers just is a bit behind Favre, that’s a very quick release, it definatly benefits a QB when the rush is comeing. + Favre didn’t mind getting hit by whoever, just as long as he compleded the pass.
Yes I know Favre hasn’t gone on a rampage tearing up defenses in with the Viqueens yet, there are probably several reasons.
He doesn’t have too, they can gash away with A.P, and are rarely stuck in 3rd and long.
He needs a few more games to get in sync with his new wr’s.
As far as I know, the Viqueens wr’s does not include a serious deep treath like Jennings.
He and his coaches want to be cautious about his arm, which still may be less than 100%, they obviously don’t want him to re-injure it.
The West coast offense is based on short, safe passes, and takeing an ocational shot down field when opportunity knocks. Maybe the safeties are sitting very deep just to be sure to not get killed.
Yes, I know he’s 40 years old, and not the same Superhuman (on the field) he used to be, but he still got some savy moves for a 40-year old ! and he’s still better than at least half the starting QBs in the league.
and to the smartass who called me patetic, well, I do not secretly root against the Packers, all I want is to see TT fired for doing a lousy job (and kicking Favre out the door) so that the team can move on and be great again.
If that makes me patetic in your eyes, well, so be it, I will not change my mind just because someone calls me patetic (that would be really patetic)
Oh, and I watched the game again, paying closer attention to the O-line, overall they failed, but not half as much as I thoght before, they were only half bad until Clifton went down, and Odon had his way with Colledge. Some of thoose sacks can be put on Rodgers holding the ball for 5+ seconds, that may be his inexperience, or the Bengals could be better at coverage than we gave them credit for.
hey mista,
GO HOME! We dont want your kind here, Screw you Viking Fan!!
Green and Gold / Black, and White
Really not better then your first post
“Rodgers has a lot of tallent, but there are things he needs to learn by playing, like pre-snap reads, getting rid of the ball quicker, thrusting his arm a little more sometimes maybe. and that will take time, I accept that, why others don’t, I don’t know.”
Pre-snap reads? Like when he audibled on 3rd and 1 against the Bears to PA, and hooked up with Jennings for a 60 yard game winning TD? He is a very smart QB. Many times week 1 Cris Collinsworth pointed out that Rodgers had pointed to who was blitzing and shouted out there number to the oline. (But the oline is so bad they can’t even stop people even when they know where their coming from)
“Another thing, most people here seem to believe that the Packers would not miss Favre on the field, even though Rodgers had very nice stats his first year, he still has a lot to learn. (please do not bring on the BS about his passer rating, ‘cause passer rating is a system made by some statistician, and is really a bunch of crap)
Why would one believe that someone who never started a game in the NFL would instantly fill the shoes of a ledgend?? that’s hopeing for way too much. I knew all along it would be a difficult transition when Favre left, I’ve said it for years!”
Probably because he was a 1st round draft choice and a possible #1 overall draft choice. (We got lucky and the 49ers picked the wrong guy) He got to sit 3 years and watch Favre direct the offense, and despite my dislike from Favre there is really no one better to learn it from then him. He also came against Dallas in a game where Favre looked terrible, and actually kept us in it, throwing for 200+ yards, completing 60%+ of his passes, and scrambling for some key 3rd downs. In his 1st year in playing, again let me emphasize first, he threw for 4,000+ yards, 28 TDs compared to 13 INTs, completed 63% of his passes, and had a QB rating of 94 (not sure about that but it was somewhere around there). We saw virtually no drop in our offensive stats with him as QB, and virtually no drop in PPG. He came in and basically performed just as well as Favre did.
“And there’s one thing Favre still has, that you can’t coach, were Rodgers just is a bit behind Favre, that’s a very quick release, it definatly benefits a QB when the rush is comeing. + Favre didn’t mind getting hit by whoever, just as long as he compleded the pass.”
Rodgers actually does have a pretty quick release but he does hold on too the ball too long sometimes. But like some people have pointed out the guy has only started 19 games that will change. In 07’ it also helped Favre that both Clifton and Tauscher had Pro Bowl type years, and Wells was very good as well.
I know Rodgers has some things he needs to work on but there really isn’t all that much. They guy is excellent as far as physical ability goes (has strong arm, quick release, plus he has good mobility) and mental abiltiy (doesn’t make a whole lot of mistakes). If he could get ANY time in the pocket he would be shredding opposing defenses up. The thing about your posts are is in your first post you blatantly blamed Rodgers for our troubles the past year and this year, which is way off base. Then in this one you say you don’t blame Rodgers, but your post goes on too only point out the things he needs to work on or hasn’t done well, followed by why Favre is still a great QB. We’re not dumb, we get that you love Favre and wish he was still our QB and had he not acted like a 16 year old girl in the 07’ offseason maybe he still would be.
Of course some of my opinion is biased as I absolutely love Rodgers. I don’t think he could have handled the Favre situation with anymore class then he did. Despite being booed by our OWN fans at training camp, and despite being asked about the Favre situation constantly he never broke down, and always stayed classy and respectful to Favre. That would have been a damn hard thing to do, and honestly it impressed me a ton and I commend him for it. He entered the 08’ season under the most pressure any QB has ever been under, and really played like a seasoned vet. He put up big numbers and got our team the lead in the 4th in each of the 7 games we lost by 4 or less points (only to have our defense give up a TD with about 2:00 minutes left pretty much every game). I guess I just don’t see how people couldn’t like the guy. The only real reason people don’t like him is because they had/have a man crush on Favre, and are probably a little secretly upset with how good Rodgers has looked thus far in his career.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 12:59 AM CDT up reply actions
But here is where you are mistaken. The reason people jump to Rodgers defense is because the Favre lovers attack him left and right. Either way though, we all know Rodgers still has a lot to learn. I didn’t expect the Packers to repeat at the top…I expected a learning curve. I didn’t expect 6-10 but I also didn’t expect half our defense to be in IR or playing injured.
There were times where Rodgers held onto the ball too long, but it was usually after he was forced out of the pocket by the pass rush. That makes him take away his focus on passing and turn it toward elluding. If he can get a pocket, he won’t be holding the ball that long. I don’t see him as a Big Ben type QB…at least not so far. Who knows though, he’s young and still getting the hang of things I think.
well ...
I don’t think he could have handled the Favre situation with anymore class then he did
packallday, could not agree more with you than that statment, Rodgers was the only one who handled the soapopera in a good way !
Now, you say it in your post, you disliked Favre to begin with, and you love Rodgers.
So yes, your biased. My criticism of Rodgers does not make me a Rodgers-hater, it doesn’t make me less of a Packer fan. I’m just stating some facts.
Rodgers has an ok release time, nothing exceptional, but the old man still has a quicker release. Yes, Rodgers is more mobile than Favre is at age 40, but Favre also knows how to buy time in other ways, like his patented pump-fakes, compensating for his lack of mobility compared to younger guys.
the 3rd &1, not so sure that was an audible, I think that was a called play, but if he did audible, why doesn’t he do it more often ? yes he called out some blitzes in both games (that’s his job you know ..) but still he’s standing there holding the ball and getting killed. His lack of pre-snaps reads are mostly in coverage, finding the missmatch, and if there’s no obvious missmatch, create one with shifts or motion !
We’ll never agree on this anyway, so I’m not going to waste much more time in this tread, but how Rodgers turns out in the long run, only time will tell, unfortuneatly I don’t think he’ll be in the league when he’s 40 …..
PS… only 4 more years (+ some months) untill we can draft Dylan Favre ;-)
PS… only 4 more years (+ some months) untill we can draft Dylan Favre ;-)
I thought I was the only one who remembered him!
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell Maurer on Sep 22, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions
“Now, you say it in your post, you disliked Favre to begin with, and you love Rodgers.”
I loved Favre in his tenure here, I idolized him growing up, and playing the QB position mainly because of him. My dislike for him began after he handled the “soap opera” the way he did. You might have assumed that already but I just wanted to be clear.
“the 3rd &1, not so sure that was an audible, I think that was a called play, but if he did audible, why doesn’t he do it more often ? yes he called out some blitzes in both games (that’s his job you know ..) but still he’s standing there holding the ball and getting killed. His lack of pre-snaps reads are mostly in coverage, finding the missmatch, and if there’s no obvious missmatch, create one with shifts or motion !”
I’m pretty positive he did audible but I guess I don’t know for sure. A lot of the time he actually reads the other teams CB, and throw a quick slant or a quick pass out to our WR if he sees the offense back, even though the called play is a designed run. As for him audibling, last year he was pretty limited by MM. I would expect Rodgers to audible a bit more this year as it has be said he will have much more freedom in our offense. As for his lack of ability in reading coverage (though I wouldn’t word it like that) that comes with experience and playing games. Favre was so good at that because has been in the league for 20 years. Rodgers has only played 1 year, and with time he will develop that same ability Favre had/has.
“We’ll never agree on this anyway, so I’m not going to waste much more time in this tread, but how Rodgers turns out in the long run, only time will tell, unfortuneatly I don’t think he’ll be in the league when he’s 40 …..”
Well most players don’t play in the league when their 40 unless their punters or kickers, so ya maybe he won’t play until he is 40. I think he’ll be our QB for the next 10+ years though, and in 2-3 years will probably be the best QB in the league. I see where your coming from with the things your saying, and I understand and agree with some of them. My only thing is the only two people I would put the blame on so far this year is TT and MM, not Rodgers.
by packallday555 on Sep 22, 2009 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I'll be darned ...
we acutally agree then !
. My only thing is the only two people I would put the blame on so far this year is TT and MM, not Rodgers.
I also blame TT and MM for most of this mess. (that’s why I want to see them fired)
I do not blame Rodgers (he’s doing his best) unfortuneatly, his inexperience is still a bit of a problem, I just don’t think it’s fair to point fingers at only the O-line or defense and blindly say Rodgers plays perfect (like someone here does…)
HOW DARE YOU................
…………. put any blame on Aaron Rodgers!!! Can’t you see he’s doing great?! It’s the Offensive lines fault! It’s the horrible play-calling from the sidelines!! It’s the receivers breaking off routes and short-arming catches!! IT’S OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!
Why, if Brett Favre were here instead, he’d have thrown 15 interceptions already and we’d be 0-5!!!!!!
Yes, yes, I know we’ve only played 2 games so far this season but dammit, Brett Favre would have figured out a way to lose us 3 more games in there somehow!!!!!!!
Don’t you blaspheme in here!!!! Aaron Rodgers!!!!!
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 3:12 PM CDT reply actions
Oh No, why are you using sarcasm?
Rodgers deserves plenty of blame here, he spends way too much time pussy footing around and holding onto the ball. But the line play has been atrocious and the Packers normally sure handed receivers have dropped some catchable passes. By the way, why haven’t you still posted on the Chargers site Kermit? You are a fan aren’t you?
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions
I feel so special! You’ve even looked up my bio?
I’ve gotten so deep under your skin from just a few posts that you needed to know more about me?
Uh-oh! Someone needs a hug!
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
You are special, but I've talked to you on here before and I remember you being a Chargers fan.
and you’ve gotten under my skin enough for me to take a whole ten to fifteen seconds to click on your bio. Now about that hug…..
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions
By the way.......
Why would it matter whether I post on my favorite teams site or not?
I know my teams shortcomings. I know where we’re good and I know what needs to be fixed for us to get to the next level. I’m a fan.
But what does it prove if I’ve got 100 posts on my team’s site? That I’m a “real fan”? Would that prove something to you? Or are you looking for a way to jab at someone because you’re feelings are hurt by someone saying anything even remotely against the Packers when they’re so obviously not a “true” Green Bay fan?
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions
No..
I am glad you can be a “real fan” for your Chargers, but would rather spend your time trolling on other team’s sites. It makes perfect sense to me! We (packer fans) know our team has holes but we also know we have talent. I don’t believe any of us here are TT or MM that can make any moves. We come here to post opinions on the moves that should or shouldn’t be made. We come to these opinions by bringing stats not some rubbish like karma.
If you were here from the beginning and my presence bothered you then as opposed to now after a loss........
You’d know that I initially joined the site because I was so fascinated with the Brett Favre situation and the way that Packer fans were unable to get over a person and situation that had clearly moved past them.
Beyond that, I think Brandon and Mitchell run a really the site extremely well and don’t seem to be the type of weak-minded and homeristic types who ban at the first sign of someone with a different opinion that doesn’t bleed Green and Yellow.
That’s why I’m here and here’s where I’ll stay until one of them feel otherwise and I’m not.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions
I know, I know you're hear to get rid of the Favre talk and to teach everyone here how to behave as a fan.
And it’s a very noble cause, however if you could do it without sounding as pretentious or condescending, that would be great.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions
NO! I enjoy all the Favre talk!
Like I said, I’m completely fascinated by a fan base who can’t let go of misguided feelings of betrayal and hatred for a man who has so clearly moved on from them.
There’s a lot of misplaced emotion there. I love seeing the “human condition” laid out so bare for all the world to see.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 5:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Nice try but no
My feelings aren’t hurt by anything you say. I too, know my team’s shortcomings and I know the Packers aren’t very good this year. But why so defensive? I never implied you needed to post 100 times to be considered a fan. I’m just saying that as a fan you would think you would want to discuss your team, hell why even join if you weren’t planning on talking? But hey, why post at your site when you can troll another teams right?
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Ah................................. "trolling".
I love when arguments degenerate to name calling. That’s all you’ve got? I’m a troll because I post on another team’s site? Because my opinion’s are different than yours? Should i have lied and put “Packers” in my favorite teams slot? Then would I have been a “misguided, frustrated homer” with what I write as opposed to a “troll”?
You really, REALLY shouldn’t take an online team fan site this seriously.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions
No, you're a troll because you haven't said anything of value.
I couldn’t care less about your opinion being different than mine. I’ve already said, I’m not a homer, I can admit when my team isn’t very good and the Packers aren’t very good but that is because they lack talent at certain areas and coaching, not because of some karmic curse set upon them due to Favre and fan overconfidence. So that is why I called you a troll, because rather than having a discussion based on actual well thought arguments you revert to childish attempts at sarcasm and logic.
But hey, why use any of that stuff when I can just make claims that people are taking things too seriously right?
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm sorry..........
So it’s not childish and petty to call someone else’s thoughts and beliefs…..
“childish attempts at sarcasm and logic.”?
Because my logic is different than yours it’s childish and sarcastic?
Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions
No, your logic is childish because there is no reason to it.
We both seem to share the same belief here, that the Packers aren’t a very good team. However, we both have different views on why that is. I think it’s because they are lacking skilled players at important positions and are poorly coached. You think they are cursed due to some fans being over confident. I’m sorry if I came off as insulting or petty but I don’t believe in karma or curses. If the Packers suck this year, it isn’t because of some curse Favre put on them after being traded, it will because they suck.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, and don't forget to mention something about "Favre fan facsination"
Because we’re all the ones obsessed with him.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 23, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Lack of self-awareness theatre presents one-act play entitled "The Passion of Themanthemyththetroll":
“Wow
That’s a LOT of frustration coming out.
Feel better?
It’s amazing that people actual fans of the Packers would put soooo much frustration and sarcasm down on a computer screen because someone me other than me gave an opinion that doesn’t toe the Packer Kermit-the-troll line."
Can someone attempt a scathing play on self-awareness when they can’t even see themselves?
Yes. Yes they can.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions
What, pray tell, Kermit-troll, am I not seeing?
Considering the “serious analysis” you’ve dropped on us Packer fans amounts to:
- The Vikings won the division last year;
- The Packers finished 6-10 last year; and
- Bad Karma is the cause of all the woes experienced by the Packers, derived mainly from being mean to Brett Favre, but also from the occasionally obnoxious overconfidence of anonymous posters on this very blog.
In other words, you have posted nothing of substance anywhere on this site. When actual fans of the Packers took umbrage with your idiotic ramblings, you don’t defend anything you’ve posted, instead you accuse everyone else of being overly sensitive and frustrated with the Packers. As if no one can sensibly disagree or take a counter-perspective to your viewpoints because those viewpoints are just so darned irrefutable.
Even when you accidentally stumble upon a compelling argument, you almost immediately counter it, revealing that you lack even the most basic self-awareness required for anyone to take you or your opinions seriously.
You’re a sad, sad dude who needs to get a life. Or at least go somewhere else and share an opinion about a team you might actually know something about, like, oh, I don’t know, the San Diego Chargers.
by 400metres on Sep 23, 2009 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, because by writing this you're upping the substance quotient?
…………… "Lack of self-awareness theatre presents one-act play entitled “The Passion of Themanthemyththetroll”:
"Wow
That’s a LOT of frustration coming out.
Feel better?
It’s amazing that people actual fans of the Packers would put soooo much frustration and sarcasm down on a computer screen because someone me other than me gave an opinion that doesn’t toe the Packer Kermit-the-troll line."……………
All filler and no meat to back up your argument.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions
There ya go bringing it back to Favre. He’s gone. We don’t care about him anymore. Lets leave him out of discussions. Its a different team and they both play different games right now. LEAVE BRETT OUT OF PACKER DISCUSSIONS!
You're absolutely right, Trevor.
Favre SHOULD be left out of the discussion. Unfortunately Packer fans can’t seem to do that. If you could read the sarcasm in what I wrote, you’d see that it was a thinly-veiled jab at the fact that sprinkled throughout the many, many posts written after the loss on Sunday there were numerous shots taken BY PACKER FANS at their former QB. Packer fans simply can’t let it go and as someone completely fascinated with the situation, I’ll comment on it until it goes away.
"Remember kids......... petty and cheap shot-ish doesn't make you a true fan, it just makes you petty and cheap shot-ish."
by Themanthemyththelegend on Sep 23, 2009 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Favre SHOULD be left out of the discussion. ??
How many people does it take to change a lightbulb at Lambeau Field ??
- Three … one to actually change the bulb, and two to talk about how great the old one was!
Aaron Rodgers has said he will always be compared to Favre, and he has no problem with that. Neither should the fans.
To say we should live a living ledgend out of the discussion is redicoulous. Especially considering how he left the team.

by 




















