Aaron Rodgers vs. Brett Favre
by Brandon on Sep 30, 2009 8:00 AM CDT
in Green Bay Packers Analysis
Email
PrintI've never liked those articles that preview QB battles. They're not actually going head-to-head. It's QB Brett Favre against the Green Bay Packers defense, and QB Aaron Rodgers against the Vikings defense. Instead, this post is a head-to-head matchup of their stats through the first 3 games. It's surprising that they're so similar. From NFL.com, here are a selected few stats:
| Player | QB Rating | Comp. % | Yards | TD | INTs | Sacks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Rodgers | 97.2 | 56.7 | 714 | 4 | 0 | 12 |
| Brett Favre | 94.5 | 64.9 | 566 | 5 | 1 | 9 |
Rodgers's QB rating (7th best overall) gets a boost because he doesn't have a turnover so far this season. His completion percentage is way below last season's 63.6%, although he's been the victim of a lot of dropped passes. He does lead the league in one category; 12 sacks allowed.
Favre's 566 yards passing is 25th overall this season, right behind QB Byron Leftwich, because the Vikings offense has done a lot to reign him in. He's been throwing a lot of short passes this season, when he's not throwing a game winning bomb to WR Greg Lewis in the back of the end zone. So it's shocking to see he only has 1 INT so far, and is only on pace to throw about 5 or 6 INTs for the season. Another very un-Favre like stat are the 9 sacks. He's been exceptional at avoiding them throughout his career, he only had 15 sacks in his final season in Green Bay, but he's still on pace to blow past the 30 sacks he had with the Jets. Still, the QB rating doesn't care about sacks and his 94.5 rating is good for 8th best overall, just behind Rodgers.
Last week, Football Outsiders's Bill Barnwell had the following to say about both QBs.
Aaron Rodgers, ranked No. 5 last week:
A streaky day for Rodgers started off with two completions, followed by four consecutive plays ending in either a sack or an incompletion. He completed his next six attempts, including four straight first downs and a touchdown. That was answered by six straight incompletions, which was succeeded by three consecutive completions, two incompletions, and two more completions in the fourth quarter to end Rodgers' day. In the long run, you can just look at a day that had pass plays of 46, 50, and 53 yards and say that it was a good one.
Brett Favre, ranked No. 17 last week:
It's amazing what one pass can do, huh? It's reflexive to want to deflect praise away from Favre, who's received enough for several lifetimes (and dramatic comebacks), but the throw to Greg Lewis had to be perfect. Favre put it exactly where Lewis and only Lewis could get to it; it required a great catch, but a great throw put it there.
And a bonus Packer mention, WR Donald Driver. The video of his one-handed catch is here.
We don't give out bonus points for absolutely sick one-handed catches, and we'd probably owe Wayne a few for his performance if we did, but Driver deserves some for one of the catches of the year. If you haven't seen it, well, turn on ESPN and wait. You will soon enough.
137 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As a 49ers fan
I saw a slow Favre standing in the pocket last week. There were times he looked old and slow in the pocket and there were times when he moved in the pocket and threw a touchdown to Greg Lewis ;-(
"It ain't over till it's over." - Yogi Berra
I love how everyone forgets the dropped INT thrown right to Dre Bly
Not to take anything away from Favre’s TD, that was a great throw but all this praise gets thrown at him yet again when if Dre Bly can hold on to the ball, everyone would be singing a different tune.
Dude
You could play the what-if game all day long. Doesn’t matter, because it didn’t happen.
Wow.
You’re clever.
Do you sense that, it’s sarcasm?
That means I wrote one thing, but meant another.
Like, I wrote Clever, but what I meant was uninformed and idiotic.
Get it?
You're just bitter
And it’s cool, that’s fine. You should already know though, a W is a W, doesn’t matter how it happened. A lot of things could have been different that game that swung it either way. What I’m saying is, and I’ll repeat myself. IT DOESN’T MATTER! Get it?
Wow kid.
You’re almost as clever as the other clown up there. What is it with you and the caps lock button? And wow, it looks like you figured out how to use the bold text! Good for you. They made these nifty buttons for your kind of people, so you can (yell?) at people. Usually, a bold text is selected to emphasize something of importance, but it seems you have nothing of this nature to offer. I suggest using it for yelling! Did you see that little guy; you know (!) that one? That is how you correctly make an exclamation or emphasis.
But really, keep being you, keep writing things in all caps and with bold too! It’s pretty satisfying.
Did you really
Just write an entire reply on just my writing style? Really? I wonder how long it took you to come up with all that. Listen, when you are ready to talk football, I’ll be over at DN preparing for the Vikings 4-0 record.
Well
If you cannot express yourself in an intelligent manner, I suggest that you not express yourself at all.
Did you really think you would go onto another team’s blog and convince them that thier team is inferior to yours? Your team has nothing to convince anyone that they are worth anything, whatsoever. This game is about one thing: Winning Championships. Your team is a footnote in the record books at best:
It reads: Once there was a sports franchise so sorry, it couldn’t sell out a playoff game. They wore all purple, and their mascot was a man with long blond hair. Year after year this team has excelled at being mediocre, yet their fans would often speak poorly of greater franchises. (Even the greatest, most celebrated and decorated franchise of all)
Get some!
What you might ask?
Championships: you cockroach.
I'm would expect this
Especially this season. This is what happens when the Vikings are doing well. Haters always look to the past, because, you have nothing in the present that you can say about the Vikings — after all, they are undefeated. Again, you spent a great deal of time being insulting and belittling, without actually mentioning anything to do with this season. I hope your childlike behavior isn’t reflective of everyone else on this Packers blog.
Oh, and I’m not sure where you got this from?
Did you really think you would go onto another team’s blog and convince them that thier team is inferior to yours?
Not sure from what you could draw that conclusion. But hey, not sure where you’re getting most of your rambling from, so at least you are consistent.
You're undefeated after three weeks of football
Congratulations to you and the other six teams. Too bad they can’t play the Browns, Lions, and 49ers every week.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 3, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't care who we've played
We could have played the Browns three games in row. The fact is, we’re undefeated. And since the only thing that counts in this league is wins and losses — I could care less who it came against. What will you say if we beat you this week? That’s what I thought.
The Talking
Can start when were going into the final run of the season and it can end when everything is said and done on the season. Talking about being undefeated after 3 games is pretty ridiculous especially since they said the last season there were 6 or 7 3-0 teams (in 2002 maybe) only one of those teams actually made the playoffs. Let’s at least wait until like week 8.
Calm down with the internet tough guy act
it’s really not that serious. If the Vikings beat the Packers, I’ll asmit the Vikings are the better team but don’t forget who has won 5 out of the last six in this series. I know you guys got yourselves a shiny division title last year (And a first round playoff exit),a fancy new QB., and a 3-0 record against juggernauts like Detroit but if these things actually bring you confidence and complacency with your team, it only further proves why the Vikings are a joke team.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 3, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions
I like you Charlie Kelly
I will fully admit that if the Packers were 3-0 against any three teams in the league I would be happy and excited because 3-0 is 3-0, but there invincibility mindset is sickening. As weve already mentioned, they hated Favre for years and joked about all of his INT’s and now they think he has guaranteed them a championship.
Favre was the best player in the league in the 90’s and the Packers had the best defense in football for a couple of seasons, and they still only won one Super Bowl. Favre is not a top player in this league anymore and the Vikings defense is really good but not great and they think they have a Super Bowl wrapped up. Ridiculous.
Let's backtrack a little......
This all started because I simply said that a dropped ball that could have been brought back for a touchdown that would have ended the game simply doesn’t matter. Clearly that type of opinion is not welcome here, judging by the purely insulting comment that followed.
Bringing up the Vikings record was an attempt to bring the subject of football (go figure) into this thread because your boy StephenL can’t help but talk nothing of the subject of football. No wonder your lead writers had to put up a post specifically to keep you guys in check…. you can’t even have a good, civil conversation about football — everything ends in an insult.
Oh, an forgive me for ever bringing up in a conversation that we are undefeated. I’m sure that if you guys could’ve beaten the Bengals (at home), you would never say such things….
Chill out dude
You will cause another round of whining.
That said, the Packers will kick your
Viking @ss on Monday!
Here.
Let talk football.
In professional football a good quarterback will take what the defense gives him. If you choose to do stupid things like write in caps, or use bad grammar, than I will understand your poor communication skills as a reflection of your poor analytical skills. Here it is simple, if you write like an idiot, than you probably are not very bright and I’ll choose not to take anything you say seriously.
If you look back to the beginning of this mess, someone obviously wanted to discuss the interception that Dre Bly dropped. It’s worth discussing. Favre is famous for INTs, so it was encouraging to see the ol’ guy almost throw the game away…(which we can count on him doing several times this season)
Here was your response…
You could play the what-if game all day long. Doesn’t matter, because it didn’t happen.
So someone tried to discuss something, and you decided that you had the authority to say that it “doesn’t matter”, effectively ending the intended discussion. Why did you interject? Why do you feel like you can decide what matters, and what doesn’t matter? Obviously this mattered to someone, because they brought it here to discuss it.
I commented first: Lucky always seems to beat good. Then someone choose to bash our quarterback. Then you decided to give the ol’ “A W is a W” rant… No one argued that you lost, because you won, we were trying to discuss the manner in which you won. We were trying to discuss the game, because we can, and you keep getting all sensitive about the discussion ranting about how “it doesn’t matter” again. Then, you rant about being undefeated. Really?! It’s week 4. Congrats. In all seriousness, good job. The team won those games, but it should have. The Vikings are better than those teams. All three are in some phase of rebuilding. If the team had lost one of those games it should have been ashamed.
And come on, of course we look to the past, because it gives us the best indicator for the future. That is common sense. The Vikings have a history of being disappointments, underachievers, and choke artists. I’m not making this stuff up, just using the past as an indicator of what me might expect from the present. At the same time, I’m defending against your silly little comments. I have the trump card, so I played it. I apologize, I really should have put a little more thought and class into my response, but truthfully, you just annoyed me so I figured I’d put you in your place. I’m sorry, but in the larger context of things the Vikings have a lot to prove before their fans can honestly try to boast to a Packers fan. Our franchises are on different levels. The Vikings are operating under desperation and within a strict window. The team is in serious danger of being relocated. Where will they be in 3-5 years? The fans don’t believe in the team and won’t support it. The Packers are set to be competitive for many years to come (get it Thompson haters?).
But, whoa, back to business, sorry if I came across as childish, I usually just jump on here in a rush and reply without getting proper thought into things. It’s easier to make fun of you, than to break down exactly why you might be wrong. In the future I will be more to the point, but I expect you to also bring your A game and start expressing yourself a little more intelligently.
It’s going to be a great game tomorrow, and if you honestly think one team is hands down better than the other, you are mistaken.
Again -- Chill Out
Don’t let the trolls get under your skin. They (the people who are arguing with you) just want to hear their own opinions and then they whine when they get called out about them. As far as I’m concerned, Favre threw one pick last week. It probably wasn’t his fault, but it doesn’t matter. Similarly, the ‘9ers dropped a pick when the Vikings receivers ran the wrong route or Favre simply tried to force a pass where he shouldn’t; the reason doesn’t really matter.
Dropped Pick Haiku
The 49ers
Dropped more of Brett Favre’s passes
Than the Vikings did
http://FavreHaiku.com
Clark Osborn - PackerHaiku.com | FavreHaiku.com | BadgerHaiku.com
Tramon Williams Haiku
Young corner Tramon
Dropped two sure picks from Cutler…
Hands ready for Favre?
"Career highlights? I had two. I got an intentional walk from Sandy Koufax and I got out of a rundown against the Mets." - Bob Uecker
I hope they are
He will have his chances against Favre. I know Woodson won’t drop a pick but I don’t think thy’ll be going to his side much.
by packallday555 on Sep 30, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions
Not really an argument here
Everything Rodgers had done, it has been because he created it for the most part. He is eluding pressure nearly every play, and despite this pressure has yet to throw a pick. The pressure on Rodgers every play also is a big part of why his completion % is below 60%.
Favre has really only made 1-2 yard passes, with the exception of his last 2 drives against the 49ers. I don’t want to take anything away from the game he had against the 9ers but he really should have had 3-4 picks. Charlie Kelly pointed out the one Bly dropped, and Spencer dropped 2. Favre has looked solid so far. He can still make the throws but he can longer move the way he used to be able to, and it has shown when teams blitz him. And I don’t want to hear about how he was moving great on the last play against the 9ers, because he had 6 blockers who had to block 3 guys. I would hope he would be able to avoid the rush.
I think a lot of people feel that which ever team wins this game, will show who the better QB is but that’s really not the case. Even you Favre lovers have to be able to recognize that Rodgers has passed up Favre in this point in his career.
right...
the winner will be the better team… not the better QB.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Sep 30, 2009 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions
definitely
The better QB probably won’t win this battle because the Vikings are favorites at home. Unfortunately, that won’t stop the Favre lovers from spewing more Thompson and Rodgers hate. Rodgers could out play Favre in every statistic in the game, but if the Packers lose you know were gonna hear it.
If the Vikings lose...
…it shouldn’t be a surprise. Really, remember Favre is a desperation move. This team has a window, and it’s closing fast.
I wonder what colors AP will be wearing in two years?
Whatever colors they switch to after the move to LA.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 30, 2009 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions
low blow,
It will be purple , rest assured.
take a kid fishing, it's good for the soul. not only yours, but the child's as well !
No team is coming to LA.
Unlike a lot of other cities with not much else to do, the taxpayers aren’t going to open up their wallets just to get a football team here.
Unless it’s going to be completely privately funded and at the refurbished Coliseum, it’s not going to happen. Between the Dodgers, Angels, Kings, Ducks, Clippers, Lakers, Galaxy and Chivas USA, our sports dance card is pretty full.
We can cheer for the Chargers from afar.
"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 30, 2009 7:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Hmm
Obviously your not very well informed on this matter. Going on the DN and make a fan post about the possibilty of the Vikes moving. A guy by the name of Elgar will likely comment on your thread, and will fill you in on how you guys moving there is a real possibilty.
by packallday555 on Sep 30, 2009 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions
There was a guy who said he would privately fund a stadium if the NFL moved there.
Also, I’m pretty sure the NFL would take priority over all of those teams you listed except possibly the Lakers and the Dodgers. The Clippers are a bad team. I doubt too many Californians are crazy about Hockey (Unless the team is winning, which the Kings won’t be doing) As for the Galaxy and Chivas USA. Most people in the US don’t like soccer and my guess is that the the ones who do, prefer international soccer over that joke that is the MLS.
That being said, the NFL seems to want to move a team to LA, There is a huge market there so it would only make sense to take a team like the Vikings (Who had trouble selling out their first playoff game since 2004 and had trouble selling tickets this year) or the Jaguars who were set to have all home games blacked out.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 1, 2009 5:36 AM CDT up reply actions
yeah I agree
especially with a guy like AP AD whatever you want to call him. He is big $$$ when it comes to marketing.
Having watched the NFL and LA do the dance for a while now.......
………. fans just don’t see it happening. And to be perfectly honest with you, it’s just not that pressing of an issue. You don’t read about fans clamoring for a team in the papers, there’s never any sort of “protests” (I can’t think of a better word at the moment) demanding a team or continuous offers being brought to the table to get a team here.
You’ve got Hollywood Park and that’s pretty much it. Pasadena flatly refused the Rose Bowl and the planned “stadiums” in Irwindale and Industry were still requesting some public funding and were turned down by their respective councils. For whatever reason, our leaders in LA want the Coliseum used and if the NFL doesn’t want to, then it’s not going to get done.
For however it looks to people outside of LA, it’s just not a “hot button” issue here. At all really. I mean, we’re 3 weeks in to the season and there hasn’t been a peep about us not having a team anywhere.
"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 Oct 1, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Ha
Well again go on the Vikes blog and find a guy named Elgar. He’ll tell you otherwise.
by packallday555 on Oct 1, 2009 2:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't care what his opinion is.
I’m here in LA. I read the papers. I live in LA and if you pay any attention to any town concil meetings or local government you’ll see how little interest there is in a football team. We had the Raiders and it was a whole world of problems. If you were ever here around the Coliseum on a game day you could understand why the city isn’t begging for a franchise.
We have football. USC and UCLA. It’s easy for people on the outside to say which teams they think are coming here but until you see the lack of any genuine interest here yourself, you won’t understand. That’s why the city’s stance on wanting a team to play at the Coliseum hasn’t changed. No one really cares whether we have a team or not, so they’re sticking to their guns because that’s where they want a team if one were to come.
"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 Oct 1, 2009 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Hey Pack, just let it go man...
… this guy is just way more smarter than us wee midwesterners.
He’s impossible.
Puh…lease…
I feel gay-er already having said that.
:)
Haha I know
The guy thinks he is of brilliance and more intelligent than everyone else on here.
by packallday555 on Oct 1, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions
I'll tell you why you're going to hear it.
Because if we see Jared Allen flattening the LT followed in an instant by AR, the interior line doing nothing with the Williams Wall and Ryan Grant consistently running for -2 yds on first down, if we see Vikings #1 pick speeding by or running through Packers #1 LB picks, if Barbre needs 2 assistants leaving AR no safety valve, if we see Crosby missing FGs again, it means that TT has not put together a competetive team. That’s his job. Is he somehow above accountability.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 30, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Hasn't put together a competitive team?
I think you need to step back and re-evaluate what “competitive” means. The Chiefs, Buccaneers, Raiders, Rams, Redskins, and Browns do not have competitive teams. A non competitive team is bottom of the barrel. The Packers are very far away from that. Having an injured kicker, a tackle that is still learning, and an average RB that is made worse by a tackle that is still learning is very far from a non-competitive team.
I suppose you were calling for Zygi’s head after the 2006, 2007, and 2008 seasons too, huh?
You can tell when you've struck a nerve...
When Vikings fans show their true form… spewing unintelligent and ridiculous information all over the place.
You really need settle down and think before you throw out information. You’re ‘Williams Wall’ is lucky to be on the field. Not to mention one of them is little more than a giant sandbag. And if you recall, Grant has had pretty decent games against the Vikings. Last year he ran for almost 100 yards, at 7.7 per carry in week 1, and 75 yards and a TD @ 4.7 per carry in week 10.
And, only one of our #1 picks was a linebacker. Also, when you ask a question, you are supposed to use different punctuation than when you make a statement.
Get it?
If your typical homer had been born West of the St. Croix or south of Kenosha, he’d be a homer Viking or Bear fans. It’s an emotional attachment and that’s fine. Really ,it is, but don’t pretend it’s rational. Where were Grant and the mighty Packer running game last week, or the week before or the week before that?
p.s.,
Matthews, Hawk > 1
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 30, 2009 8:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Good enough.
I’m not a Vikings fan, friend. Maybe you are, because you seem to like a complacent Packer management.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 30, 2009 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Come on
First off we have a competetive team. We are no way near the caliber of the Rams, Chiefs, Bucs, Brown (who are the non-competetive teams).
Secondly I would hope a wr would speed by a linebacker. Receivers generally run 4.4-5’s and linebacks generally run 4.6-8’s. That’s a big difference.
Crosby actually made all 3 of his FG attempts which is promising, and shows he is probably doing something to compensate for his abdominal injury.
Barbre is pathetic to me. The guys has given up like 4-5 sacks already.
It will depend on who is playing LT. Clifton has done very well against Allen in the past, and is actually a pretty good pass blocker still. Also if he does play it will allow Spitz to move back to C, and Colledge to LG which would help our line a lot.
The Williams Wall isn’t what it was last year. Pat has started his decline. He used to consistently push G’s back but now he just takes up a lot of space (which is still effective). You would think Grant would play poorly against the Vikes but last year he averaged 5+ ypc on them, and was successful against them in 07’ as well.
Regardless the game will probably be close. Last year week 10 the Vikes were supposed to beat us handedly because they were so much better then us, and we lost by 1 point.
Are you a Packers fan or a Vikings fan? And if your one of those who just followed Favre don’t say your a Vikes fan because you are a Favre fan.. Yes there is a difference.
by packallday555 on Sep 30, 2009 11:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed
Rodgers is the better QB overall at the moment. I’d rather have him locked up in a contract with the Vikings, but Favre will be fun for this year.
Favre is slower than he used to be, but blitzing him isn’t a fantastic idea. His completion percentage and overall passer rating are significantly higher when he’s under pressure from a blitz than when he’s not.
And yes, the winner of this game doesn’t decide which QB is better. I’m guessing it will show who won the battle in the trenches.
by peterplaysbass on Sep 30, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions
+1 on the blitzing
If Minny has showed anything the first 3 games, it’s that they can throw a screen like nobody else. Gotta be VERY smart about blitzing.
Huh....packallday555
I must say, I do agree with you to a point. But to say Rodgers has passed up Favre this early in his career?? Ah, I havent been a pack fan that long, maybe since the Lynn Dickey/David Whitehurst days as a kid growing up in Green Bay….those were the days! Bart Starr as the coach, granted they would rough years as a packer fan but never the less, still a fan. But, AR has alot of potential and has a long way to go, but he was handed this team last summer when Brett rolled/was pushed out, whatever. I wasn’t there nor part of the situation and to trust the media and such?? I would like to think this team is better than the one Brett was handed back then. Plus AR was Brett’s back-up for 3 years….he started last year and now this year. With this much talent?? Come on…..how much more does he need?? The OL is hurting a bit right now, but it will get fixed. (I hope) I have hope in him, but it will take time to return to dominance. I dont in TT/MM as much. We need a couple of savvy vets out there in free agency, it took that to get our last Super Bowl….I’m just saying….
Now, the Favre thing, he doesnt need to throw as much, they have AP. The scheme doesnt require it or isnt designed like ours, and prob is a good thing?? Lots a of passes/ints?? They dont have the WR the pack does….I can only go with what I know, they dont have it like the Pack does. I still like Favre, for all the seasons and too only have 1 losing season?? If you remember the 70’s and 80’s, yeah that was some tough years! Just my opinion of course. Come playoff time, we will see who the real Field General will be.
IDK
I don’t think packallday meant that Rodgers is better than Favre was during his career, he meant that Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, at this point in time, and I think a great majority of people would agree with that. I know all of the former NFL players (current analysts) on ESPN or FoxSports or whatever have agreed with that assessment.
In regards to Rodgers having a better team around him, he’s already been sacked 12 times in 3 games and only 2 of those were his fault for holding the ball too long. Favre was sacked a total of 15 times the entire 07’ season I believe. If Rodgers had the protection that Favre had with Clifton and Tauscher at the tackles for how many years, the Packers would probably be second in the league in scoring. The Packers have basically the same team they had two years ago but the offensive line is a definite downgrade so I dont’ see how this team has more talent than the 13-3 team unless their offensive line does a dramatic turnaround and starts protecting Rodgers and run blocking for Grant.
Ok I can roll with that
GGGamer,
I agree with the OL needed some serious help. But thats why I dont have alot of faith in the current management. If they saw the “decline” in Brett or whatever in 05’, why would you have a back up plan on the OL?? You build around the OL….first. You can have the best QB in the NFL, but if he cant be protected, you are screwed. You know the deal on this, but I am hoping the Mngment with address it quickly. If we have a free agent or a trade…we need to get that OL hammered down. We cant afford to over look that, as far as everyone else on the offense, he has the weapons and potential to be great. But I see your point on the AR vs BF thing. I know if we end up like next year, there are some coaches looking for a job….Holmgren included. Wouldnt that be something to talk about??
Makes Sense
I’ve agreed with a lot of the things management has done and I’ve disagreed with some of the things they haven’t done, but I don’t know if I can blame the offensive line problems on the management. I could definitely be wrong, no question, but I personally think it starts and ends with James Campen, the offensive line coach. (Although not having a legit backup LT is definitely on TT).
They have an o-line made up of a bunch of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks and they haven’t developed fast enough. I think it starts with the coaching because they don’t have one single coach that comes from a zone blocking system. How do you teach your o-lineman how to do their jobs properly if you don’t know the ins and outs of the scheme. If they drafted all of these same players (Colledge, Spitz, Sitton, Barbre, etc,) but Alex Gibbs was the o-line coach, I think they would have a top run blocking unit. I mean scouts will tell you that Colledge is as solid as they come, Spitz is a tough player, Sitton is a powerful road grader, and Barbre is one of the most athletic lineman in the league, so how haven’t they developed into an outstanding group? That is why I don’t put the o-line troubles on management (except for a backup LT) I put it more on McCarthy and who he has coaching them.
I concur
I think MM is too blame also, but at the same time…if you were my boss and Im responsible to oversee that OL as a whole, coach wise. Then it has too fall on you if Im not doing my job, if Im not producing the results and you know this….well?? Im just saying as the GM, you would have that power to make changes, if it’s development in general or if you need go get some free agents, do it. I can understand long-term in a team environment, but at the same time, set the pride or whatever down and get what you need. I would rather spend some money on vets now then to chance it come playoff time. One has to have balance, upgrading the OL doesnt mean going to the draft all the time. If you have some young kid in the first round that you know can make a difference, well thats one thing, but when in question, offer some jack to a vet or 2, maybe a trade?? But I do see where your coming from. I guess seeing someone running the show for 5yrs, I expect more as a fan. Its take time for some players to develope..QB’s included. But yes, study the scheme, teach the scheme, follow up with the scheme. If they cant grasp it or dont perform well enough, move them/sit them/ hell tradre them. MM has some work of ahead of him. AR cant take all those sacks like he has. The season is too long for that…week 4 isnt even here yet.
TT hasn't been able to evaluate offenisve line talent
He focuses on drafting “athletes.” I would prefer he focus on drafting a “guard” or a “tackle.” As a former guard, I can tell you that the line positions are very different, particularly at the professional level. In the NFL, for most teams the right guard is supposed to be the beast — drive blocking is his forte. The left guard also is supposed to be a beast, but he needs a little more nimbleness because he tends to do more trap blocking. The center does not necessarily need to be agile (although it helps), but he is generally supposed to be strong and the most savvy guy because he is supposed to make the line calls (curiously, centers also tend to be closer on a personal level to quarterbacks). The right tackle is supposed to be a road grader, like the right guard, although he also is supposed to have enough quickness to handle a speed rushing DE. The left guard and the right tackle generally share similar characteristics. The left tackle, of course, is supposed to be your best offensive lineman, although most pro teams use their best pass blocker out there. It’s great if you can get somebody quick enough to handle Jared Allen AND strong enough to blow away Kevin Williams, but such guys are rare, and expensive.
The zone blocking scheme doesn’t follow my (admittedly over-generalized) theory. The idea in a zone blocking scheme is to create movement in the D-line to allow the RB to cut back against the flow of the movement (hence the term “one-cut runner”). It involves a lot of cut blocking, which is why so many defenses consider it a dirty scheme. I believe that a significant factor in MM’s decision to go with the zone blocking scheme is that the interior offensive linemen on the roster just didn’t and don’t have the strength to utilize a conventional blocking scheme. If you can’t move the DTs out of the way, you can’t run.
As for Monday — well, Clifton is out and there isn’t another LT on the roster, so we are reduced to using our second best LT, our second best LG, and our second best center. On passing downs, Colledge will need help with Allen, so the RB will either stay in or chip before heading off into the flats. That means Barbre will be on his own, unless MM keeps the TE in to help. On running downs, the focus will have to be on Sitton vs. Pat Williams, although I’d feel better is Spitz were at center.
Good Posts
I agree with what both of your posts igotit and ktenreb; there are good points made. Obviously ktenreb, we already know we disagree a little bit on TT but you are correct that he drafts more athletes than a guard or a tackle. Because of that you need a coach who can make these athletes great position players so I think it falls more on the coaching. I definitely agree TT could and should do more in regards to the o-line, but I truly believe that if the Packers had Alex Gibbs or another experienced o-line coach, they would be a really good unit.
Dam....
ktenreb, I learn something new everyday, nice breakdown. I never played line….WR for a short bit, QB mostly. Of course, never at College or Pro. I couldnt have been so lucky. But what you said made it understandable in that sense. I guess being prior Military for quite some years, I always go back to Leadership. The Management, needs some help too. But come game time we will see how our OL responds. I hope Management reads these threads…..
Thats about right
GGGamer, I agree with you on that, Talent is alot but not always the best solution sometimes. Getting the position players, somebody already trained is better. But yes Alex would have been a better fit.
Garcia...
Wouldn’t he be a GREAT pickup for the packers. I get so nervous about Rodgers going down with this awful line. We need someone that could be serviceable behind him!!!
Sacks...
Some analysts are pointing to #4s willingness to take the sack v. throwing up the rock.
I dunno… I think it’s a little of both (slow and willing), but mostly… a lack of time due to the high number of blitzes and a lack of ‘chemistry’ with his receivers.
- is but one part of our offensive weapons. see my response above. may the better TEAM win!
GO VIKES!!
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Sep 30, 2009 11:13 AM CDT reply actions
Teams
It’s hard to argue that the Packers do not have a more complete team with talent spread among all positions. The Vikings have extreme talent at running back and defensive line, but really that’s where it ends. The offensive line has been almost as questionable as the Packers offensive line this season allowing 9 sacks on the savior of Minnesota (#4). The defensive backfield of the Packers is much stronger than the Vikings, but the Vikings have two strong players (Winfield and Williams) that make their secondary still slightly above average. The Packers linebackers are a more talented and deep group than the Vikings linebackers, who are physical yet not dominant. The Vikings have made strides in their WR core and have the 2nd best set of receivers in the NFC north. The Packers certainly have the first.
Quarterbacks…
Rodgers has shown that he is not going to let Favre and his drama keep him from being his own player. Simply, he’s been very good. Despite being out of sync with the WRs early on, Rodgers is being decisive and leading his team… which brings me to Favre.
Favre has that… something: the intangible. He has that something that no other player does. When this guy plays, teams win. BUT, he is slowing down. He is getting older. His deep ball is not what it used to be. He is commanding his team and being a great leader, which is exactly what the Vikings need. If you take away some of the magicians tools (the long ball) do his tricks and show function the same or produce the same outcome? I don’t think so.
Part of Favre’s intangible knack for winning has to be accredited to his gunslingers long ball. (see GB at Denver 07)
It’s a tossup. It’s the Packers game to win or lose. We all know who the Vikings are, and what they can and will do… but do the Packers come to win? That is the real question.
I Don't Know
I disagree on some of your takes. One, I agree that the Packers do have talent spread out more evenly than the Vikings especially when some of the younger guys (Finley, Raji, Matthews, Sitton) start to gain experience but I think the Vikings have more impact players than the Packers.
Secondly, you think the Packers have better LB’s than the Vikings and I disagree. I agree that the Packers have more depth and Bishop could be a beast (but that is null because McCarthy won’t play him) but starters vs. starters, Greenway is a poor mans version of what Hawk was suppose to be and Henderson is a beast in the middle. I would say the LB’s are a push at best and I would give the edge to the Vikings starters unless Bishop starts getting some PT in place of Hawk.
Finally, Favre does have that intangible trait to win regular season games but that trait has disappeared in the playoffs over the last decade and at the end of regular seasons during the last five, six years. It’s been stated on this site many times, but Favre’s playoff resume is pretty bad over more than a decade now so I don’t know how much that says for his knack for winning.
Good response.
Hawk has been catching a lot of flak as of late, and to be honest, I don’t get it. He’s a strong tackler and a smart player. Did everyone forget he is making a position change as well? He had a hard time running down Benson (I think) around the corner, but he was coming from the inside! Not the outside. He was an OLB for most of last year, and now is an ILB. I don’t think he deserves to be thrown under the bus, and I believe he is a stronger linebacker than Greenway: the poor mans Hawk.
Now lets focus inside still… Barnett is a great linebacker. He’s quick, smart, and mostly strong. He’s a sure tackler also. Henderson is a beast; physically. But he is not any more physical than Barnett. Nick is also a great leader. He’s been limited so far this year by the coaching staff, but will return to full form. At full form, Barnett is a better all around linebacker than Henderson.
The Vikings have no equivalent to Brandon Chillar. Despite getting caught (drastically) out of position last week, Chillar is great in coverage and has shown serious blitzing ability. He is a gifted linebacker and will thrive in the new defensive system.
Oh yeah, and there is this other guy. Aaron Kampman’s name hasn’t been called too many times so far, but that is defiantly a good thing. The biggest concern for Kampman was his ability to drop into coverage. He has done his job, and done is well. He isn’t getting as many sacks, but other player are making the plays and getting the sacks (and that is the point!). Kampman is an elite pass rusher, and is making his position transition look easy (it’s NOT).
Clay Matthews. Watch this kid play; serious talent and smarts. I could go on for awhile about his guy. Needless to say, the Vikings do not have a Clay Matthews. (On one play this year, he recognized that Kampman was in man coverage over a WR. Matthews made his way across his zone and made a great play on the ball, knocking it incomplete)
You seem to understand the Bishop situation.
Are these the same amazing linebackers.............
That the supposedly “shot” and “washed up” RB Cedric Benson busted up for 141 yards on 29 carries in a Bengals win at Lambeau field?
Or the Linebacking corp and defense in general that last week allowed the Rams only threat on offense (Steven Jackson) to run for 117 yards on 29 carries and catch 5 passes for 46 yards? An offense so anemic that they were able to more than double their point total in 1 game from their previous 2? An offense working without it’s starting QB and WR? An 0-2 team that essentially played you even until the Packers were able to take the lead in the 4th quarter?
I get the “homer” thing. But your green and gold colored glasses opinion doesn’t make it fact. On this very sight I’ve read Packer fans expressing their displeasure at the way the LB play has been. Yet NOW they’re top notch and sooo much better than the Vikings LB corp?
Wait for it……
Here it comes…….
Puh-leeze.
"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 30, 2009 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions
In case you missed it...
Benson looks pretty good this year. (Even outside of the Packer game) He’s been talented for quite some time, just not motivated. And the game was hardly as even as The Vikings have played some of the worst teams in the league this season so far. Argue that. Down to the Lions, down to the Browns, outplayed by a team without its biggest threat (Gore). I mean really, you were 2 seconds from losing to a Frank Gore-less 49er team.
And Jackson, is an elite running back. If you put him in a good situation, he’d be one of the most productive players in the game. So 117 isn’t good, but it’s like playing AP, if you keep AP around 100 yards, you’ve had a good day.
Never said top notch, and never said “soooooooooo much better than the Vikings LB corp”.
The Packers have a deeper, more talented linebacking core. That’s what I said. That’s what I meant.
Yes, that's what you said, so I'm giving you actual facts to show you different.
The fact of the matter is that although Steven Jackson is an “elite running back” team defenses are smart enough to know that the way to stopping the Rams is keying on Jackson and stopping the run. Essentially he’s the only offense they have. Last season, because defenses (LB’s are part of defenses, right?) and coordinators were smart enough, Jackson was held to less than 80 yards in 6 of the 12 games he played. Your thinking is more “video game” than real life. Just because Jackson is a 99 in Madden ‘10 and “IF” he was in a good situation, blah, blah, blah….. He’s on an offensively terrible team that had it’s starting QB and #1 WR out for the game and the Packers were neither smart or good enough to stop the only player on the field who could present them with a problem. He was able to have his best game of the season and nearly helped a team in the bottom 1/3 of the league on offense to a win against the Pack.
As far as Benson goes, I was only bringing up the many comments of Packer Nation on this board who made many, many comments about a “washed up” RB who was going to get blasted by the likes of Hawk and Barnett only to find their LB corp being busted up on the pitch at Lambeau.
And yes, the Vikings ALMOST lost. They ALMOST lost to San Francisco, they ALMOST lost to the Browns. Does that hurt? When you’re desperate to see someone or something fail only to see it succeed? Would it have eased your pain at having watched the Pack get beat AT HOME by the Bengals? Would you have felt better? Ahh…………… another fan far, far too involved in a sport he neither plays nor has any effect in the outcome talking about something he only watches on tv and learns about from “The Sporting News 2009 NFL Double Issue”.
Look, it’s easy to say, what someone’s going to be, whose potential is limitless, your opinion of “deeper and more talented”, etc., etc., but facts are facts. They’re not subjective. And according to facts, the not-as-deep, less talented linebacking corp has stopped all three of it’s opponents to the tune of less than 90 yards per game.
The next logical argument we’ll meet is “but look at the Running Backs they’re playing against!”
P.S. Since I live in LA and I’m a Chargers fan I wouldn’t know what they’re putting in the water in MN. In LA we’ve got plenty of championships.
But really, you enjoy the snow.
"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 30, 2009 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Not as many Championships
as we do. Not even close to be correct. (football of course)
I’m glad to see the intelligence of your argument on such a steep decline. I think that your message is so much more intense when you write IN ALL CAPS. It gets your point across nicely.
Oh, and I’m not desperate to see the Vikings fail. They’ve been doing it for years. I really am not that big of a Viking Hater. I just dislike thier flimsy fans, and other people who pretend to be an expert in the area of football like you. In case you missed the game, at no point were the Packers even close to a loss. That’s what happens when you lead the entire game.
And you bring about a good point, The Vikings did play some pretty terrible offenses. They should be proud to have kept Jamal Lewis (who was injured entering the game and than left the game with and injury: still averaged 5.2 per carry) Kevin Smith, and Frank Gore, er, oh yeah, he was injured too.
Impressive. Those are some really, really impressive linebackers. The Packers linebackers are better. Deal with it.
Look at this guy, sitting on his cloud of judgement, handing down life lessons
Good thing you’re here, otherwise I’d never understand true fan etiquette.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 30, 2009 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions
didn't benson
gain most of his yards on like, one or two big carries? other than that he didn’t do much.
And really, you enjoy the daily swim in oceans of smog and garbage and lets not forget the cancer.
Benson averaged almost the same YPC on the Steelers
So maybe someone said he’s busted but he seems to be doing pretty well so far.
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 30, 2009 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Benson
Is not washed up. He ran for 70 yards on just 15 carries against the Steelers, who have the best run defense in the league. The guy was high 1st round pick with a lot of talent. He didn’t come into an ideal situation with the Bears (ask a Bears fan they’ll tell you) and has obviously had some motivation issues in the past.
But I disagree with StephanL that our LBs our better. I think they potentially could be once they learn the system but they have looked mediocore thus far (our ILBs that is).
by packallday555 on Sep 30, 2009 11:38 PM CDT up reply actions
LB depth
The Packers start 4 linebackers. The Vikings start 3. It’s an obvious point, but one you’ve overlooked. The Pack needs more linebacker depth simply because it relies more on its linebacking corps.
In comparison, the Pack’s really thin at d-line, where Jolly, Pickett and Jenkins are backed up by rookie B.J. Raji and Michael Montgomery. And one of the starters is battling injury, right? Who comes off the bench in relief for these guys?
In comparison, the Vikes have prepared for the potential absence of the Wall for the past year. It’s damn near impossible to actually replace All-Pro talent like Kevin and Pat Williams, but the DTs behind them on the depth chart could reasonably expect to start on a lot of NFL teams.
by virginia viking on Oct 1, 2009 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions
DT's
There is no way the Vikings backup DT’s start on most teams in the league, no way. Maybe the Rams but not many other teams. Plus the reason the Pack don’t have many official d-lineman is because they run a 3-4, make sense?
They have 6 official d-lineman and 3 outside LB’s who use to play defensive end, Aaron Kampman ring any bells, so they actually have 9 defensive lineman when it comes down to it where most 4-3 teams usually carry 8 d-lineman. Plus no one on the Packers d-line is hurt right now to answer your question.
Good comment
Obviously because of our system we need more depth in LBs like you pointed out. But your LBs are better then ours.
None of those starters are battling injury. Raji has been hampered by an ankle injury but is now near 100%. Jenkins has looked very, very good so far, and really Pickett and Jolly have too. Sullivan will struggle with Pickett. He is 330 lbs. and Sullivan has been consistently being pushed back by bigger DTs. Raji will play much more this game, and our dline will be much fresher because of it. Those 3 have basically had to play the whole game in the first 3 weeks and having Raji rotate in their will help.
Pat Williams has began his decline. But that’s not to say he still isn’t effective at DT because he is. I’m not sure if I would go as far to say your DTs behind the Williams could start on a lot of NFL teams but a couple of them are pretty good/
by packallday555 on Oct 1, 2009 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually they said Pickett is listed at 330 but he’s more like 350 and he only plays pretty much in the base, and he’s gonna be at about 35 snaps a game with Raji back. Plus Jolly, Pickett, and Jenkins don’t play the whole game either because there are a lot of sub packages where they come out plus Jarius Wynn and Montgomery both get a handful of plays here and there, and they’ll move Kampan in once in a while. And as you just stated, packallday, Raji will start taking probably a quarter of the snaps away from Jolly and Pickett so those guys should be fresh.
one more thing
If Matthews starts becoming dominant, like a lot of players and coaches think he will become, Kampman starts to get more comfortable, and Barnett gets over his acl and starts playing the entire game, I think the Packers LB’s will be better than the Vikings, they just aren’t right now.
Agreed
And all those things likely will happen. For Barnett he will get better with experience. The same goes for Kampman. Matthews has shown signs of brilliance. The guy can really rush the passer, and once he starts getting out there more he will only get better.
by packallday555 on Oct 1, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Um
I said Greenway is a poor mans version of what Hawk was suppose to become not what Hawk is. Any scout in the NFL will tell you that Greenway is better than Hawk right now. Plus after Barnett got put on IR last season, Hawk played inside for the rest of the year so he had some experience in the middle there. I’ve watched back all three games on dvr this season and Hawk is not an impactful player. I had high hopes for him to turn it around this season but he just doesn’t look good. I don’t know what game your watching if you think he does look good. Plus tackles arent a great statistic to go by if most of them come 6,8,10 yards downfield.
Barnett has never been a great linebacker but he has always been a good linebacker. The problem right now is his knee. It takes more than a year to fully come back and he doesn’t look good at all right now. I don’t blame him for how he’s playing cause he’s overcoming an injury but he is not good right now and there is no way he’s as physical as Henderson. Henderson is hands down more physical than Barnett. Barnett is good based on his athleticism not physicality.
Chillar is a great package linebacker, I’ll give you that and Matthews looks like he’s gonna be a beast but that all seems to be in the future not necessarily right now. Barnett has to get over the ACL and Matthews has to get some experience.
Oh Yeah
And Steven Jackson ran right around Hawk not Benson.
I personally you can't compare the two team's linebackers especially last year.
Last year, the Packers front four was horrendous after Cullen Jenkins got injured which meant a lot more lineman could get up field to block LBs. Now with the Williams wall and Allen in Minnesota, how many lineman do you think got past that front four?
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 30, 2009 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions
HEY!
STOP.
MAKING.
SENSE.
Seriously. I mean it.
"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 30, 2009 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions
All you have to do is bring out your argument ender
Puh-leeze!
No one can combat that logical argument
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
THERE'S PACKER MAN!!!!!!
Where have you been? You’re not still sulking after the loss to the Bengals, are you?
Come on, pick that Cheese Head up!
“Gray skies are gonna clear up, put on a happy face!”
"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 Oct 1, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions
yep
Good analysis GGGamer.
Hawk is NOT better than Greenway.
Barnett is not good right now.
Bishop is a beast and I think the only reason he is not playing is because there is some stupid clause in Hawks/Barnetts contract about the right to play because they were picked in 1st round. Would love some proof of this, but I don’t have it.
If we put Bishop and Hawk on the trading block right now, we would get a higher draft pick for Bishop.
Or imagine a Hawk for Greenway trade
You have to imagine it because it would never happen.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 30, 2009 9:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Its not Favre vs Rodgers
SportsMumboJumbo.com
It’s Favre vs the Pckers. Should be interesting. I think the Vikings will cruise for a win though as the Vikings fans will be loud for this one.
Everytime I've been to a Packers Vikings game at the dome
there have been almost an equal amount of Packers fans there, but it will help when the Vikings pump up artificial crowd noise.
Crowd Noise
Yeah I don’t know how the NFL hasn’t put a stop to the artificial crowd noise at the Metrodome. It is a huge advantage for the Vikings and it is about the clearest form of cheating there is in the NFL.
Wow.
That is truely amazing. I wonder if Favre asked them not to play it, because we all know how much he hated that place…
Wow What?
Are you saying you don’t believe they pump in artificial crowd noise or what? I happen to know for a fact that they do, number one because they caught them doing it on T.V. once after the crowd stopped making noise and secondly I’ve been to a Vikings game and it was as obvious as anything that they were pumping it in.
Wow.
Wow, as in, “Wow that is amazing”
I just had never heard of that before, and thought that it was pretty remarkable that anyone, anywhere would think that it’s ok to pump artificial noise out of a PA system.
Yes Sir
I don’t think they’re the only team that does it either but they definitely are the most obvious in doing it. I just honestly can’t believe the NFL hasn’t stopped it from happening. It is such a clear disadvantage that it is straight up cheating.
Favre is not afraid
As a Packers fan, this is what I’ve been dreading since the season began. That sad excuse for an o-line in GB will ruin what might have been an otherwise promising season. They also made a mistake in changing their defense. The only reason their defense struggled last year was because of injuries. They should have let the players heal and get back to work. Yet they wanted a fall guy, and they did not want it to publicly be blamed on the fact that Favre was not there.
The truth is that Packers GM Ted Thompson is a fool. He does not understand the most basic principle of football. You build a team around the line, not WRs, RBs and LBs and CBs. All those other positions are flashy and appeal to many people, but without an o-line, a RB cannot run and the QB will get sacked. It happened when Thompson first came to the Packers and broke up the best (arguably) o-line in the NFL. Favre did not like that. Not surprisingly, the following year the team suffered its worst string of injuries I have ever seen. Many people blamed Favre for being too old. That was when Favre started flirting with retirement. You can blame Ted Thompson. Of course, with the top pick, instead of getting some offensive help (or to shore up that line), Ted Thompson picks Aaron Rodgers. That pick was not necessarily a bad one since the QB fell so low it was like stealing him. My point in all of this is that to this day, Ted Thompson fails to address his offensive line. He knew the tackles were aging. He knew that he had to replace them. Yet he failed to do so. Now the Packers are struggling to protect that franchise QB they just had to dump Favre for.
The truth here is that Ted Thompson has to go in order for the Packers to win a championship. The Vikings success is due in large part to Ted Thompson’s failures as a GM. You Vikings fans often complain about Brad Childress as a coach. Believe me, it could be worse. Your team has arguably the most talent in the NFL. They have a shot to win the SB.
I’d like to see a little more out of Favre, personally. Yet if he continues to put up the numbers as he has, then he will throw for more than 25 TDs and around 5-6 INTs and more than 3000 yds. I would call that slightly better than just a game manager. If he increases his output, then word might spread of MVP just like last year when he was with the Jets during the first half of the season. I would be fine, however, if Favre simply took less sacks.
Question
This is a serious question and not intended to be sarcastic, but how many OL have been drafted by each team since TT came to Packers?
It “seems” like TT has drafted multiple OL per draft and I would GUESS that he has drafted more linemen than most GM’s.
NOW, he has not used high draft picks on OL, but I would wager that if you track the starting OL in the NFL most (50% or more) are 3rd round or lower.
BUT, I do agree, and have a running argument with my best friend for 20 years, that it doesn’t matter if you have Montana, Rice, and Jim Brown on your team – if your OL sucks they will be average at best and most likely your team will suck.
My thought is that shifting to the zone blocking scheme really screwed up this team.
Jagoff zinzsky experiment
What a miserable puke of an attempt at switching to a ZBS that was. Jeff Jagz couldn’t coach my fattest turd to swirl down the toilet.
by PackaCracka on Sep 30, 2009 10:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Getting rid of Wahle and Rivera needed to be done
They were both getting old and were set to be free agents, they would cost much more than they were worth and the Packers could afford as Sherman had put them in salary cap hell. Rivera played one very average year in Dallas then retired. Wahle went on to a pro bowl year with Carolina but has since disappeared. As for the Rodgers pick, when a QB who was widely considered either the first or second best QB in the draft (And it’s now evident he’s much better than Smith) at 24, any GM pulls the trigger especially when you have an aging QB who has flirted with retirement since 2003. The one thing I will say Thompson has failed at is drafting and developing offensive lineman. I think Spitz is decent and Colledge looks alright at times but most of the others have been pretty bad.
Also, if you think anyone on the Vikings whose Jersey doesn’t have the number 28 on it deserves MVP, you’re crazy. How can Favre be the MVP of the league when he isn’t even the MVP of his team?
by Charlie Kelly on Sep 30, 2009 9:31 PM CDT up reply actions
5-6
hahahahahahhaa. Sorry, I didn’t read all of your post. You turned crazy at the end there. I agree with your OL comments, but dude, 5-6 ints?!? Please tell me you are drunk right now, like really really drunk.
I will bet my left nut that if he plays 16 games he will have more than 6 ints.
Have you ever heard of Favre before? Do you have access to a computer with something on it called the internet where a person can look up answers to questions you may have about someones past (i.e. 17 years of experience in the NFL maybe).
hahahaha, that is awesome…
I've got a good song for you starmark
You ever hear of Crazy by KC & JoJo? I think the title fits perfectly.
I was gonna comment about your post but I’ve come to the realization that nothing I say, no matter how logical, will change your interesting opinion.
It happened when Thompson first came to the Packers and broke up the best (arguably) o-line in the NFL. Favre did not like that. Not surprisingly, the following year the team suffered its worst string of injuries I have ever seen.
Are you trying to say that the injuries that the Packers suffered was caused by Thompson not overpaying for two guards who were out the league in 2-3 years? Is that what has caused injuries to the defense?
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
That's not what he was saying
I think he was saying that the failure to REPLACE the two guards caused Favre to start to question his competence.
I hope
the Pack beat the tar out of Favre (very strange to type that). What an aging prima donna. After his amazing throw, he had a look on his face that read “guys, pick me up and hail me!”
"Repetition is only good when you've been winning." - Valet
I predict...
That although Adrian Peterson will get his 100+ yards against the Pack,he won’t break any long ones for TD’s,and the Packer defense will shut down the rest of the ViQueen offense INCLUDING #4 and the highly overrated Percy Harvin.It’s gonna be a war, but if A-Rod gets any semblance of protection,the Packers will pull away in the 4th quarter and will end up crowning the ViQueens, 34-21.
Sometimes you kick...sometimes you get kicked-INXS
Percy Harvin Overrated?
I haven’t heard much talk on him at all good or bad, I’d say hes not really rated.
Green and Gold / Black, and White
You must not talk to many Vikings fans...
Even before the season they declare the Favre-Harvin combo Farvin.
Amen.
From, literally, the moment they drafted this guy I’ve heard about how he is going to torch everyone. I don’t think that many Vikings fans understand how many ‘Percy Harvin’ type players there has been in the past. They have a low success rate. Just ask Oakland, they draft these speed demons every year.
Harvin
Has looked good thus far guys. He is fast, elusive, and deceptively strong. Berrian has been a disappointment thus far, and he won’t do anything against our secondary. Rice is showing that he can be a reliable #2 in this league but he is nothing spectacular. If any of their WRs hurt us it will be Harvin.
by packallday555 on Oct 1, 2009 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions
The number 7 rated quarterback in the NFL.
If you have a hard time finding him, find Favre, and look just towards the better quarterbacks (up).
by StephanL on Oct 1, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Percy Harvin, rated
He’s 1st in rookie WRs for receiving TDs with 2 (plus 1 returned kick for a TD); tied for 1st in receptions for a rookie WR with 12; and 5th in yards. He’s done this despite playing for an assuredly run-oriented offense. More than half the league has more passing attempts than the VIkes do. He leads Vikings receivers in receptions, receiving yards, and touchdown receptions.
I don’t care if Percy Harvin showed up Monday night in drag—like the “ViQueen” you claim he is—he wouldn’t be overrated.
by virginia viking on Oct 1, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree with vir. vik.
Harvin is a good player. The only reason he dropped to them (like Moss, not saying he’s gonna be Moss cause he won’t but I digress) was because he has behavior and drug problems in the past. They got a steal. I personally like the fact that TT stays away from players like Moss and Harvin coming out but the Vikings did get a steal by taking a risk on a problem and injury prone player.
34-21? Wow
I’m a Packer fan so I hope you’re right but I see no way on God’s green earth that the Packers win by 13. I say whoever wins does it by 7 or less.
I second that
Yeah, its going to be fun to watch, no matter who you root for…I doubt the only blow out would be tire on someone’s ride in the parking lot.
Aaron vs. Old Man River
There is no doubt that Aaron Rodgers is better then Favre at this point in there careers. Rodgers throws the ball harder with more accuracy, ESPN says he has the tightest spiral in the NFL. He is way more agile then Favre, the way he can pick up yards with his feet. The last time Favre Scrambled was when his Prostate flared up and he had to run to the bathroom so he didn’t piss his purple and yellow undies.
GO PACK GO
Why compare
What is the reason for comparing Aaron Rodgers to Brett Favre? There isnt any sense to it. You are taking 2 individuals and trying to justify the fact that Ted Thompson traded an indecisive Favre because he was tired of him holding the Green Bay Packers fans hostage so he wouldnt have to come into to training camp, Not to mention he was RETIRED. Now dont get me wrong I am not begudging the man the right to change his mind. But the fact of the matter is the team had been working out with Aaron Rodgers for the summer and had gotten used to the way he does things. Now enter Brett. I am going to play again. I cant blame Ted for trading him. I think everyone iwas getting tired of all of the nonsense year after year. Now we play a year with the Jets. Mediocre at best. Rodgers puts up fantastic numbers. What more could we ask for. Could Favre have done better. Not according to his numbers from last year.
End of the season, he retires again. Now enter Minnesota. They said he was playing he said he wasnt. now trining camp is over and once again he decides he is going to play. What is going to happen??? no one knows for sure. Will he win the Super Bowl he says he wants so bad. I do wish Brett the best of luck in his quest but he does have to face The Pack, can he beat them? Not on his own. He now is at the age where he cant be the gunslinger he once was. Now he has to play TEAM football. The big question is , Can he? I dont think so. He is too selfish to be able to do that. He will wan to beat them with his style and I know the Packers are ready for that. If anyone in all of this should have ill feelings it should be Rodgers. All of the I dont know if I am comning back or I am retiring cost him his chance and I think he is more of a man in how he has handled all of the media hype ove this whole fiasco. Brett Favre is going to be know by many as the greatest QB of all time. But it is Mr. Rodgers neighborhood now and I think he is doing very well in the neighborhood now and will for a long time to come. Comparison, there is none. I have been a Packer fan for 52 years now and have been trough thick and thin while cheering for them. Go Pack Show everyone that you are a TEAM not just the team that stood up to Brett Favre.
To Brandon and Mitchell_M
I don’t want to go through the hassle of emailing you (or flagging all of his posts) so if and hopefully when you read this I would like to forge a complaint against ktenreb. The guy harrasses me just about every single post and he always has to comment me and call me a Favre hater and this and that. He’s even stooped to calling my friend and I John Hinkley Jr., you know the Reagan and Jodie Foster nut case.
I’m here to talk to reasonable fans about the Packers and I’m absolutely done with being harrassed every time I come on here so could one of you please help me resolve this situation. If we could meet face to face this would be an entirely different situation but the guy sits back on his computer and talks nonsense because he can so I would like it resolved asap. Thank You
Farve and domes
It’s almost humorous to listen to the TV talking heads yap about how it will be such a big advantage for Brett to be playing for a team that has a domed stadium.
Obviously these rocket scientists were asleep during Brett’s time in Green Bay when the big knock on him was that he could NOT play well on fake grass in domes. And his record showed that to be mostly true.
I think that was more do to with being the opposing team in the dome
and all of the noise that comes with that.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 2, 2009 2:10 AM CDT up reply actions
go brett hope your tream wins over the packers they will now know what you can do with the team your in now can do i will be watching your team win the game
Apples and oranges ...
Comparing Favre and Rodgers are almost like comparing apples and oranges. They are different to begin with.
Favre is still the gunslinger and gamebreaker he’s always been. Rodgers is a more a game manager. However, Favre can manage a game or five if he’s strongly asked to.
Many of the replies here point out that Rodgers is faster and more agile than Favre… well, DUH ! Rodgers is 25, Favre is 40, enough said about that. Still, the old man has some nifty move for an old man.
Arm-wise, they’re pretty even, still Favre has to be more carefull because he’s more prone to injury and fatiuge at his age.
Stats, well, they’re depenent on a lot of other factors as well, like widerecievers! Favre has a lot better recievers this year than with the Jets last year, but still, the Packers are stil way superior to the Viqueens at wr.
The one stat that really counts are games won… Favre leads the leauge all-time in that one (yes, of course there are a lot of other factors like defense.)
Anyone who brings up passer rating are just being redicolous, because passer rating is not a very good messure. If you don’t agree, og to the pro football HOF page and check out the all time passer rating list, it will prove my point, that list has Rex Grossman way ahead of Johnny U (who is 50 something on that list..)
Some people here compare this years TD / INT ratio between Favre and Rodgers, well, I would much rather have the Packers 3 – 0 with Rogders having 4 TDs and 4 ints, than 2-1 with his current stats.
Games won is what matters. Rodgers proved his inexperience vs the Bengals, when they ran out of time, a more experinced QB would probably have been able to snap and spike legaly.
The better QB is the one who is able to come through for his team when he’s needed to.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Report: Tebow sends cease and desist letter to maker of Jesus-y Jets T-shirts
- Joe McKnight says too much McDonald’s helped him gain 16 pounds in offseason
- Nick Mangold says goodbye to some chest hair on ‘Late Night with Jimmy Fallon’
- Saints will honor suspended Sean Payton with empty chairs
- Junior Seau’s home burglarized just days after his death
