Packers Game Ball: Packers Hold On Against Lions, 28-26
by Brandon on Oct 3, 2010 3:31 PM CDT
in Green Bay Packers Games
Email
PrintIt wasn't pretty, but it still counts as a win. Some player on the Green Bay Packers deserves a game ball.
111 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No
Hawk should not be on this list. I’m not normally one to tear into a player, but I saw a solid 7-8 instances today where instead of leading into a tackle, Hawk simply backed up and let someone else make the play. One gift wrapped interception should not get him on this list. His play is unacceptable right now.
Same. Our play from our linebacker’s is just brutal in general.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions
I thought Kuhn should've been on the list
but I had to go with Woodson. He (seemingly) rescued a gassed and on-its-heels defense with all the momentum with the Lions totally on his own.
"Hawk Harrelson: Annoying even the hearing impaired": Teahenny Penny paraphrasing Chisoxfan1473
by NorthSidePaulie on Oct 3, 2010 8:25 PM CDT up reply actions
yup. the pick 6 plus three stops in the fourth by himself gets him the gameball
Thome Walks-Off Sox, Twists Knife, Continues To Make Sox Brass Look REALLY Stupid - White Sox Season Recap
You know what...
Lions fans should be proud as hell of their team. They really hung in there.
I think the unsung on this list are the front three and Tramon Williams. They got to Hill a few times and Williams defended a couple of passes that were the difference in this game.
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi
Williams definitely deserves credit
Tramon Williams has looked sharp. I’m happily surprised at how effective he’s been. He looks like one of the most disciplined players on the entire team right now.
I’d go as far as saying he’s been the best cornerback we’ve had. I honestly can’t remember him getting beat this season. Though I’m sure it’s happened a time or two, and it’s just slipped my memory.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 7:57 PM CDT up reply actions
I am totally with you
Every time I see him, he’s making a nice play. He’s been the most pleasant surprise this year on defense!!
Tramon Williams, Charles Woodson
and the refs. They taketh and they giveth
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 3, 2010 7:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Sloppy, but I'll take it.
The Lions WILL surprise someone this year and beat them, lets hope it’s not us. Also, my neighbours may think I’m crazy, during the last drive I was almost certainly heard yelling KUHHHHNNNNNNNN!!!
Chuck
Everyone else can run bleachers. Tramon and Kuhn get to stop earlier than everyone else.
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
Can't argue with a pick six...
Nice STANZIBALL by Shaun Hill.
I'm just glad Scott Tolzien didn't go all Drew Tate on Nick Toon and whack him upside the head...
"I looked at BN once. I got banned." -the immortal words of JShufelt
No longer using Yahoo! Sports for anything besides stat checking since 9/29/2010...
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Oct 3, 2010 3:50 PM CDT reply actions
This team stinks right now
Is it the lack of a running game? The lack of a defense? Ineffective playcalling? Really, it’s all of the above.
I don’t care that we’re 3-1. This team is not going anywhere looking like this. The offense looks suspect, the defense looks REALLY bad, and it’s a different ST problem every week we play a half decent team.
by Danwood on Oct 3, 2010 4:09 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
Or maybe I should say -1 because our team sucking isn’t a good thing. Either way, we’re going to be in trouble against better teams if we don’t pick things up.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions
spot on…but what is great is that we aren’t playing well right now and we are still 3-1. This is a team that should get it going and when we do I think its going to be tough to stop us. We’ve done everything in our power to lose 3 of the 4 games so far and yet we are 3-1.
I hope they can get things clicking in the next few weeks!!
They are LEARNING to win when they aren't playing their best football
Thats what is exciting to me. Sure I would love to see the offense humming and the D turning the ball over like last season. But the Packers WILL be a contender becuz of games like this… Games they haven’t played well, but are learning to win!!! Last year or the year before we wouldn’t have won a game like this. Be happy… IMO, this is a very important aspect to being a great team!!!
yeah kinda my take too. They are playing poorly and winning. They are sustaining drives at the end of games to hold on for tough victories. These are character builders but I hope they get things clicking soon. We won’t be able to eek out wins against some of our upcoming opponents!
Ebbs and flows...
We are in a down stage at this point and still winning. We started the preseason clicking. Hopefully if we can get a RB that will just run to start a run game and get the OL going, we will find ourselves trending toward better things.
by Bush League All Star on Oct 4, 2010 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Can you say, "midseason form?"
Are you so upset that this 3-1 team hasn’t hit it yet,
in the first quarter of the season?
Remember last year?
Remember when we were 4-4 with a two-game losing streak,
after losing to previously winless (0-8) Tampa Bay?
-
The glass is way, way, way more than half-full.
Hope it's still early
I don’t get why this offense came out in the second half, up by two TDs, playing “catch-up.” I don’t buy the no-running-game story. McCarthy just flat out gave up on the run too soon. Great 4Q clock-killer drive, but we needed that kind of balance in the 3rd.
Completely wrong.
I’m sorry, but that analysis is just totally wrong. Check the box score. Rodgers only threw the ball 17 times, while Kuhn and Jackson combined for 18 carries. Even if you count in Rodgers’ 3 rushes and getting sacked twice, we kept a pretty nice balance and all it did was show the running game as totally ineffective. Loved the clock-killer drive at the end of the game as well, but we were horrible on third down for a reason; we just didn’t have the guys in the backfield who are able to do it right now, particularly on 3rd and short. That needs to be fixed but until then, the substitution for a running game is to spread out the defense and let Rodgers do his thing. The game plan today was not a very sound one.
Lay off Hawk
I would say he is our 2nd best lb behind Clay. Did Barnett, Zombo, Jones or Poppinga do anything? People complain it’s downfield but a tackle is a tackle and he was around the ball on every play.
I agree
Hawk is getting back to his old self! Sure, he held of a few times and let other make the tackle, that is sometimes a very smart thing to do, you make the ballcarrier make a decission, and you give up a few yds to avoid a big play against you. It is also called playing his responsibilty.
Other, I think the defense did very well in not giving up a lot of TDs they kept the Lions to FGs, and when they spent almost two thirds of the game on the field, that’s one hell of an effort.
Problems today, other than two costly fumbles on kick returns are on the offensive side of the ball.
There was no rythm in the play, they converted on a couple of good fieldpossisions given to them by the Defense.
Stating the obvious, Mike McCarthy is still a horrible playcaller ! And I don’t know why Rodgers didn’t take advantage of the Lions giveing away the quickslants most of the day, Rodgers need to change plays more often.
Rodgers also looked very off in the second half today, not very like what we know he can do, and I do think he will say he’s not very happy with his own performance in postgame interviews too.
It would of course help to have a big, fast RB ….. Ask TT why we don’t have one ! Kuhn can pound the ball, but he’s to slow to be a big threaht
Yeah, McCarthy has to be one of the worst play callers in the league. He’s just so damn stupid. He basically killed our 2nd drive of the game. A run too Jackson on 2nd and 2 is understandable but not surprisingly he didn’t get (our run game is terrible in short yardage situations). And then on 3rd and 1 he run a draw play out of the shotgun to Kuhn! Seriously?
Rodgers blew our first possession of the 2nd half with that terrible pick that was intended for Jennings. Maybe he wanted a back shoulder throw or something? I really don’t know what the hell that was.
Then we get the ball after that Nelson fumble, and McCarthy calls a deep pass on the first play of the drive? I get what he was going for with that but no, that’s just not a smart call. We had no rhythm the entire 2nd half. How bout’ we try and establish some instead of just going for it all on the first play.
And yeah, we need a running back bad. Why wasn’t Nance used at all? Why not use him against a weaker team to see if he can turn into anything? I think we just need to trade for a guy who we know can get it done.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree MM is a horrible play caller, where were the Kuhn dives up the middle earlier in the game, if it works when they know it is coming it should work earlier. Why pick up Nance if you aren’t going to see what he can do, he didn’t get a single carry today.
Yeah, exactly it just doesn’t make any sense. And why would we do that little toss play to Kuhn instead of Jackson? We should be doing those stretch and dive plays to Kuhn, and doing the tosses to Jackson. Again, it just makes no sense.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You can't fault McCarthy
If two consecutive run plays from second and short don’t work out, it’s not the play-calling. The draw play isn’t the worst call, we just don’t have a running back with enough burst to execute it. Kuhn was the best option, not because he’s necessarily quick, but Jackson has proven that he consistently can’t get up to the line quick enough. If Nance isn’t in there it’s because he’s shown even less than those two in practice. Bottom line is Thompson needs to give up something for a real running back and soon. McCarthy has nothing to work with.
As far as “calling a deep pass,” there are different receivers running different routes one deep route can open up another underneath one. If you noticed during the game the Lions consistently called a number of deep routes to stretch the defense while throwing a bunch of short passes. It’s on Rodgers for throwing to the wrong receiver on that play. McCarthy’s one of the smartest coaches / offensive coordinators in the league. Sometimes he’s a little too smart for his own good, but one thing he’s not is stupid.
Thompson gets him a real running back, he’ll look really smart.
by Mr. Saturn on Oct 3, 2010 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I like you.
Thome Walks-Off Sox, Twists Knife, Continues To Make Sox Brass Look REALLY Stupid - White Sox Season Recap
“The draw play isn’t the worst call, we just don’t have a running back with enough burst to execute it.”
Gotta disagree with you on that one.
If you don’t have the player(s) needed to execute a play, then the coach shouldn’t call that play.
I suppose you're right on that
McCarthy shows a little too much faith in some of his less skilled players. The bottom line is you’ll always find a play or two to bitch about no matter who’s calling the plays, but all in all he has pretty good game plans.
no that IS his fault
He has to know what the team is capable of and call plays that they can execute. Different play calls are right for different teams in different situations…its HIS job to know what plays are the right plays in each situation (and WHO should be out there to execute it). I think McCarthy is starting to get exposed lately…
+1
That was exactly what I was trying to prove or show with what I said. Thank you for wording it so perfectly haha :).
by packallday555 on Oct 4, 2010 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions
The draw play isn’t the worst call, we just don’t have a running back with enough burst to execute it.
This is exactly my point. You run these draw plays to quick, elusive backs. Neither Kuhn or Jackson are even close to being either of those things. So why run the play at all?
I realize there are other routes but I can promise you Jennings was the primary route. And I’m sure that if Jennings was in single coverage (which he was), Rodgers has been trained to throw it too him. Again, I can understand why we’d go for a big play there but I just don’t agree. I think too often McCarthy tries to use the deep ball to open up the short passing game instead of the other way around.
I couldn’t agree more with you that we need a running back. But I also don’t think not having one is an excuse for McCarthy to call a game like we do have one.
by packallday555 on Oct 4, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I’m sure Rodgers is not trained to throw the deep pass when the defender is in front of Jennings. The receiver needs to have a step on the defender, not the other way around. McCarthy calls the play feeling that Rodgers won’t make the throw if it isn’t there because most of the time, he won’t.
As far as overall game planning, I want McCarthy to do his best to get the running game going; whether or not we get a quality back we need some kind of a running game.
Rodgers is trained to take his shots down field when he has a matchup w/ Jennings or Finley!
Almost all of the offensive plays have players running deep! Its up to Rodgers to throw to whichever has the best matchup or is open! If Jennings or Finley have single coverage on a deep route, Rodgers IS trained to throw to them! Everyone thinks the WCO is only a short – mid range pass game and it is, but McCarthy’s version has a deep route to stretch the field or at least threaten it… Almost all of the times Rodgers throws deep its a route that player is supposed to run AND has a favorable matchup/coverage! Let the playmakers make plays on the ball…
Anytime he sees Jennings or Finley in single coverage deep, he’s throwing it.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions
playcalling
Yeah, its all McCarthy’s fault the Packer have one of the most innovative and most productive offenses in the NFL. Seems every time I’m hearing about McCarhty’s playcalling its one of you guys biotching, while the analysts think that McCarthy is an innovative and top offensive game managers… Who to believe, you the hacks or the paid analysts??? Just don’t know, it such a tough choice…
Think I’ll have to go w/ the paid analysts who have more knowledge of the game than you and I put together!!! LOL
So now everything analysts say is right huh?
I don’t think McCarthy should be fired, I am not a big fan of him but we’re not gonna do any better…especially right now. That said, innovative? What is he doing that is innovative? The plays I see called are pretty NFL standard.
I don’t hear analysts saying the things you are hearing them say. NOt sure what game you heard taht in but just cause its their opinion doesn’t make it fact. I hear a LOT of stupid things come out of the mouths of analysts too. Plus, these guys don’t sit there watching every game of every team. A lot of what they say is recycled crap they heard from another person! :-)
NOw if they said Capers was innovative, yeah I can buy that. He’s coming up with really interesting and unique ways to use the talent we have.
Heard it from Dilfer and Steve Young... Not Berman...
Dilfer and Young are amont the best offensive analysts on pregame shows or anlayzing offensive football around! So yeah, I’ll take it from them!!! Not like it was Berman or stu scott!!!
in my opinion analyts are ANALysts
but I agree with them on McCarthy, although there is a good point that if he doesnt have the person for the play, he shouldnt call it
Thome Walks-Off Sox, Twists Knife, Continues To Make Sox Brass Look REALLY Stupid - White Sox Season Recap
I think its time to make Kuhn the #1 back and give him 15 carries or so. Jackson is who I thought he was…an adequate 3rd down back who can catch and get a few nice runs here and there when teams are looking for the pass. Kuhn doesn’t do anything too special but he gets a head of steam and can get those tough yards when we need it.
I still want us to get SOMEONE in here but if not, its time for Kuhn to be THE guy until someone better is in camp.
Maybe
the reason they were on the field 2/3 of the game was because they couldn’t stop on 3rd down. And, the 2nd half they didn’t get close to Hill. But, there’s enuf blame to go around for this game. Thank God the Lions played just good enuf to lose.
by bigbill992001 on Oct 3, 2010 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Hawk is definitely not our second best backer
Barnett, Chillar, Bishop, and Jones are all better than Hawk.
"Tragedy is what happens to me. Comedy is what happens to you." -Mel Brooks
Agreed. I don’t understand how people can’t see that Hawk is virtually worthless. He can’t come up and make a hit in the open field, and he can’t cover a lick. We might need to draft an inside linebacker just as badly as we need another outside linebacker. Our guys are too soft, and weak in coverage.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
I don’t care if he can occasionally run up the seam with a tight end. Anytime he has to cover a slant, out, or in he gets burned to a crisp. And more so, he can’t even come up and make a big hit in the open field. How many times did the Lions just dump it off to Best who ended up making Hawk and others miss to turn what should have been a two-three yard gain into a 5+ yard gain?
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions
ILB
Arent supposed to be in man coverage! THey are in zone coverage most of the time. So “ins”, “outs” and slants aren’t plays he is singled up in man… He’s playing in a zone drop!
I kind of doubt that this was the case in the instances I’m thinking of. And even if he is in a zone drop, it’s still his responsibility to run with that guy while he’s in his zone, and often times he can’t. He’s weak in coverage.
by packallday555 on Oct 4, 2010 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Look at the stats
You can argue Barnett and Chillar but Bishop and Jones are you kidding?
Not Bishop, he’s basically the same player as Hawk just even worse in coverage. Jones is though.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions
he is hurt
not much he can do when he is not activated…
Jones is doing this year exactly what he did all last year!
Almost NOTHING… But in the offseason everyone was soo happy w/ Jones’ play! Jones is never involved in plays that matter. He’s a bystander at best and a nice ST player and backup OLB. WHat I’ve been saying for the past 6 months or more!
JONES, better than Hawk?
Really? I mean, REALLY?
And, if Hawk wasn’t more solid, more assignment sure and more true to his responisibilities than Bishop and Chillar, then they would be on the field and he wouldn’t!
-
The glass is way, way, way more than half-full.
I don't know who gets the game ball.
But I know one thing. The Packers can’t expect to win many games playing the way they did today. I’m watching Redskins-Eagles right now, and Washington looks pretty good even though the Eagles are driving (Vick is out).
I didn't believe it last August, but it turns out that love survives.
Mount Washington conquered July 5, 2010! State high point count: 3/50
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Oct 3, 2010 4:21 PM CDT reply actions
LT
Anybody see what he did today, he would have been a great offseason signing.
Yeah but LT really did fit the Jets O-scheme
it would be like signing someone who does what Brandon Jackson does best, better. Anyway, who knew Grant would get hurt?
I know everyone’s unhappy with the play today, but check out who sat out today’s game vs. where the Lions picked up yards. Not rocket science. The Pack will be fine; the first half of this year is just gonna be rough.
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi
by AdamA on Oct 3, 2010 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
i appreciate the rosy outlook (i share it with you)
however, even if grant hadn’t gotten hurt, he isn’t the long-term answer at rb. i’m not into the whole chicken little sky falling bit by any stretch, but i do agree with those that say we need a difference maker lining up behind rodgers. when was the last time we spent a first-rounder on a rb (not that you can’t get a quality rb in later rounds, just pointing out that it doesn’t seem to be a high priority)?
My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things.
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
Thank god someone else sees it. Grant really is not the answer. He’s nothing more then an average back.
Jackson was a 2nd round pick in 2007, which is the highest pick TT has ever used on a running back I believe (with GB). He also picked Wynn in the 7th that year I believe. Most recently he took Starks in the 6th round, which told me he didn’t think Grant was the answer either. Considering, he doesn’t seem to use pick’s on running back’s unless we’re in great need of one.
If he needs to give up a 2nd round pick to get a back then do it. Having a running back who could actually make defenses pay could be what puts our offense over the top. It’d also help Rodgers out a tremendous amount too.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions
That’s the problem with the “take the best player available” strategy in the draft it leaves you with a roster that is loaded in some areas and weak in others. It is ok when you first take over a team but not when you are a few key players away from being really good.
Agreed. Though I do think he’s been picking more for need lately. Either way, I don’t think he’s much of a running back evaluator. All the guys he brings in seem to be carbon copies of each other. Too me, he’d be better off just trading a 2nd or 3rd and getting a proven running back in return for it.
If we could develop some sort of a running game, it would help every faucet of the team. Things would be easier on Rodgers. We could run more play-action, and would probably get many more big bombs. It’d also help keep the defense off the field a bit to get some sort of rest.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 5:22 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree the run Kuhn had late in the game where he broke outside left and was taken down by a shoestring tackle is the play where a quality rb would make the difference. Yes Kuhn got about 8 yards but a game changing rb would have gotten a lot more and maybe would have gone all the way.
P.S. faucet is what water comes out of facet is a part of something
Sorry I just couldn’t help myself.
Haha yeah, I realized after I submitted my post that I botched that.
But yes, I think we need to make a play for another running back.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions
your first sentence in your post here is of the run on variety.
as long as we’re playing gary grammar. ;-) and, i know, i don’t capitalize letters when they need it. i’m not going to start anytime soon. i want lynch badly. this NEEDS to happen.
My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things.
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
i wonder who else we'd have to ship to buffalo besides hawk
to get marshawn lynch in the green and gold. i’d read they wouldn’t do the deal straight up. lynch is dumber than a bag of hammers, but runs mean. i like his running style. hits the hole with authority.
My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things.
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
I don't think the Bills want anything to do w/ Hawk!
He would play Puzlusny’s position and Hawk is due 10M next year! Why would they want him… Just for a couple more games? Don’t think so…
They want a high draft pick and an OL of starter quality! Thats why its not happening!!!
Hawk was always an OLB and Posluszny is an ILB. I believe the Bills are a 4-3 D, right? So wouldn’t Hawk be a natural to maybe fill in at ILB right now and then move over to OLB position when he’s back?
Right. Transitioning.
It is the Bills’ first year in the 3-4, and the Bills fans I have communicated with told me at the start of the year that it is really a hybrid 4-3/3-4 that they are using.
Don’t really know about that, though.
Just have a few of their fans’ word for it, and we’ve all seen, on every teams site, how their are some knowledgeable fans posting, along with a few not-so-knowledgeable ones. :)
-
The glass is way, way, way more than half-full.
Okay…I guess I am not up to date on my Bills knowledge (and I didn’t get to watch that game…frickin MN) but either way, Hawk could also easily replace the other ILB (currently a couple mediocre 31 year old LBs). I guess I still dont know why they wouldn’t be interested. He’s and experienced 34 LB which would give them some more experience in their LB group.
My vote is for Kuhn.
He didn’t play much, but his rushing on that last drive was critical to the Packers’ success, and I don’t think Jackson could have done it.
I have a feeling that if Jackson was playing on that drive, the Lions would have gotten the ball back with quite a bit of time on the clock.
Not a bad choice, he probably plays up to his potential as well as anyone on the team. His limitations were shown late in the game on a carry which he broke outside to the left and got an 8 yard gain. He was taken down on a shoestring tackle, a true playmaking rb takes that for a huge gain and maybe to the house.
Yeah
He has zero breakaway speed. Maybe negative breakaway speed, if that’s possible. But he’s a perfect grind-it-out/wear-down-the-clock back, which is exactly how the Packers used him today.
by Cheeseandcorn on Oct 3, 2010 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions
That is also
exactly what the Packers will need in order to close out games after Halloween (November and beyond).
-
The glass is way, way, way more than half-full.
Tramon Williams
Tramon Williams had a nice game. I think he was the best Packer last week, too.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Oct 3, 2010 6:36 PM CDT reply actions
Quite possibly in week 1 too. He shut down DeSean Jackson. That’s pretty impressive. Though he was probably second best because Matthews had a monster game.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 7:59 PM CDT up reply actions
jackson had a subpar game today agains the redskins today, too.
the redskins. he should have had a field day today against their thus far woeful pass defense. but i do agree that williams has been our best secondary defense player thus far. such as it is.
My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things.
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
I think that had a lot to do with Vick going down. Kolb looked lost out there when he came in.
by packallday555 on Oct 3, 2010 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Yup…he’s finally looking like the guy most of us thought he could be. Last year he was really disappointing but this year he’s looking like a very solid starting corner! YES!
Maybe it is time for the transition
from Harris to Williams, with Harris playing nickel, when Big Al returns.
-
The glass is way, way, way more than half-full.
I seem to remember Williams playing especially well whenever Harris isn't on the field!
Seems like he steps up his play as a CB when the Packers call on him as a true starter… Just My opinion!
Agree. I don’t think a lot of people appreciate how good he’s been for us.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Can't vote for the refs?
Williams and Woodson. Our coverage in the middle of the field is atrocious. Sideline coverage is okay, though. Or maybe Hill just wouldn’t throw it to the sidelines because he can’t throw it that far.
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 3, 2010 8:12 PM CDT reply actions
Can we please have a thread for the second half of the Bears-Giants game?
I can make it if necessary…
I'm just glad Scott Tolzien didn't go all Drew Tate on Nick Toon and whack him upside the head...
"I looked at BN once. I got banned." -the immortal words of JShufelt
No longer using Yahoo! Sports for anything besides stat checking since 9/29/2010...
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Oct 3, 2010 8:21 PM CDT reply actions
ha I hope so
the Bears are looking terrible. The Giants just haven’t choked like we did yet.
"But we all know that games aren't played on paper...they are played by little men inside our TV sets." --Kenny Mayne
by dishingoutdimes on Oct 3, 2010 8:39 PM CDT up reply actions
then do it.
7 sacks for ny against buttler in less than 1 half. i likey. maybe next time we send c-w on more corner blitzes against the gayers o-line and backs.
My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things.
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
And I thought the Packers Oline last year sucked
9 sacks in the first half? wolf whistle
Thome Walks-Off Sox, Twists Knife, Continues To Make Sox Brass Look REALLY Stupid - White Sox Season Recap
That protection
made Allen Barbre look like an All-Pro. Oh my goodness, that was worse than awful…
I'm just glad Scott Tolzien didn't go all Drew Tate on Nick Toon and whack him upside the head...
"I looked at BN once. I got banned." -the immortal words of JShufelt
No longer using Yahoo! Sports for anything besides stat checking since 9/29/2010...
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Oct 3, 2010 11:10 PM CDT up reply actions
too bad we still dont have him, coulda traded him to the bears haha
Thome Walks-Off Sox, Twists Knife, Continues To Make Sox Brass Look REALLY Stupid - White Sox Season Recap
Kuhn to start and no rotation.
After watching Kuhn these first 4 games I think that he has more desire than Jackson and gives the extra effort to make something out of nothing and hit the holes quicker than Jackson does. That last drive was what I think the Packers want from there rushing attack. Good ball control, 4 to 5 yards a rush which sets up the pass. Granted this was against the Lions, but most of the game I heard Brian Billick and Thom Brennaman speak positively about the Lions front 7. Their offense (Lions) was on the field most of the 2nd half (time of possesion was I think twice as much as Green Bay, so there defense was relatively fresh but Kuhn was up to the task. I think that Kuhn will give you the consistency that you need in the game on a full-time basis. 9 rushes for I believe 38 yards. Thats over 4 yards a carry. Let Jackson go back to being the very good 3rd down back he was and still is.
by Bleedinggreenandgold on Oct 4, 2010 6:15 AM CDT reply actions
Kuhn could be the next Hillis
Same body type, same ypc this year, same running style, the only difference is that Peyton Hillis this year has been finally given the chance to carry the rock in Cleveland and he’s doing amazing things. If TT is not going to trade for a RB, it’s time to make Kuhn the featured back. He’s got the size and especially the willingness to hit someone in the mouth and plough thru. I was a believer in Bjax but he’s shown that he’s another Matt Forte.
by Rodgers_for_MVP on Oct 4, 2010 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions
Im down w/ that...
Lets give Kuhn a real chance at running the ball 15 – 20 times a game, like Grant had… At least until Starks is ready to come off PUP and be a heavy contributor! He is the one guy w/ a chance to be a difference maker in the run game. Until then use Kuhn and punish the D w/ his power running!
Hell even Samkon Gado got 20+ attempts back when we lost Green and Davenport.
I don’t really fault the RB’s (well Jackson has been bad in the attempts he has had), but it is more of a commitment thing that is lacking. If MM can commit himself to a running game early with whoever is showing promise at running the ball, then go for it. It will open up the pass game.
Hell even running a few screens, passes to the flats, or backs over the middle can act almost as if they were running the ball. Get Finley involved in the screen game to slow the rush. MM has to realize that committing to these principles will allow his OL to have some help as the other team will not have their front 7 pin their ears back and go nuts.
by Bush League All Star on Oct 4, 2010 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions
true…though he was also getting 4 yards a clip too and we didn’t really have ANY other options. I think MM wants Jackson to work out so much he just doesn’t want to take away his chances.
And that is not the way it should be coached at this point.
We need to go with what appears to be working. Kuhn hasn’t been bad in his chances nor has he been OMG EXCELLENT! But I think MM just doesn’t want to commit to a run game at all. Hell I almost believe if Grant was healthy, we would still be passing too much.
by Bush League All Star on Oct 5, 2010 8:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah I just got done posting something about that too on one of these stories. I am ready to see what he can do. Jackson is worthless as a between the tackles runner. He doesn’t have the toughness and he’s not seeing the holes well enough. Kuhn lacks the speed to stretch the D to the sides but he can easily be a between the tackles runner for us. I wish we could get someone else in here, but if we can’t, its time for Kuhn to get his shot! He really proved himself at the end of the game yesterday against a pretty huge, stout Detroit D line.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Deep Posts: Winslow not wanted in Tampa Bay?
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Juron Criner, WR, Oakland Raiders
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Gino Gradkowski, C/G, Baltimore Ravens
- Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring sold for $230K; Osi Umenyiora was not the buyer
- Tanier’s Team Reviews: The Kansas City Chiefs, via Todd Haley
