Aaronstory
Footballguy
Which is laughable. The Packers are struggling because of every OTHER decision Thompson made this offseason. The Favre call was the only one that he got right.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ozymandias
- Start date
They allowed 18 pts per game last year and allowing 24pts per game this year which is a 6 pt difference. Like I said it's not like they are Lions are some really bad team. I'm not the one that started they allowed 86 points in two games. The fact is other team give up points and win. Take for example the Cardinals who in the same 5 game stretch gave up 132 points are 7-5 and ranked 26th in the league.And I show the Defense to be ranked 22nd.
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
Misguided? The Favre detractors can't acknowledge that this is a different team without Favre and maybe, just maybe the Packers are missing his leadership on and off the field. I don't think anyone is misguided in thinking that not having Favre this year has impacted the Packers.
It was the wrong decision for a 1 year plan.It is debatable if it was the right decision on a 5 year plan. My thought is you could do a lot worse than Rodgers who should work out to be a consistent above average QB.
sho nuff
Footballguy
This just in, we knew the Cards defense would not be great and knew they would have a very explosive offense.Quit comparing teams like this...its not really relevant.Wow, 22nd...they were 6th last year.And 6.4 points per game is alot. Its the difference between the 23rd ranked defense (according to profootball reference) and the 6th ranked defense.You are still spinning to not be able to admit that this defense is far worse than last year.Last year's offense according to Yahoo...27.2 points per game. This year's 27.8. Though, I don't think they take out defensive TDs for that so that number will be off.zDragon said:
sho nuff
Footballguy
Almost all have acknowledged that there is a dropoff and it was expected.Though, without Favre, it does not explain why several guys on defense simply are not as good as they were last year.Off the field? Favre left the facility and was not seen by nearly every player.Sure it impacted them, nobody is saying it had no impact at all (this again is called spin people).The degree of that impact is where I have an issue.#4 would not have made someone make a tackle on kickoffs yesterday. It would not have made a bad snap not go over the QBs head. It would not have made Charless Woodson knock that ball down against Steve Smith.And before anyone says they would have gotten the TD in the short goalline situation...understand that this team, last year with Favre was one of the worst short yardage, if not they worst, in the league last year.And I love that anyone who thinks TT made the right move for the franchise is a Favre detractor.Ookie Pringle said:
sho nuff
Footballguy
And a GM's job is not just about a 1 year plan.Almost everyone agreed Favre would probably be better for one year. That has not even been debated by me other than earlier in the year when Favre was playing poorly I don't think him playing that way would have helped this team.zDragon said:
Why not compare teams. Everyone making it seem like the defense giving up points is the only reason they are losing. They use the last to games and 86 points as a reference. So other winning teams must not be giving up as many points. I went back to see how many games prior it took for them to get close to that magic 86 numbers then am comparing the same 5 game span with other teams.The 11-1 Giants gave up 107 points in the same 5 game period that the pack gave up 81.The fact is if 6 pts is the difference then is it all coming from the Defense. I can think of one game where the offense hurt the scoring stats by at least 14 points.
Why not the Jets are winning and the defense is giving up points just like the Packers. In fact in the same 5 game span they gave up 88 points and are only ranked 2 spots higher than the pack yet they are sporting an 8-4 record.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
So let me get this straight. Rodgers took the delay of game penalty, I get that. But then Silverstein somehow manages to turn this into Rodgers' fault when the team took the ball out of his hands?Ookie Pringle said:
Like the article stated. They had time to finish the game off and it didn't happen. Mark seems like a smart man. "We put ourselves in great position to win and we didn't find a way to finish it off. That's the reason we are 5-7.".So let me get this straight. Rodgers took the delay of game penalty, I get that. But then Silverstein somehow manages to turn this into Rodgers' fault when the team took the ball out of his hands?Ookie Pringle said:
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Wait, are we talking about the Packers as a 53 member team? Or are we talking about Rodgers' play at QB?Like the article stated. They had time to finish the game off and it didn't happen. Mark seems like a smart man. "We put ourselves in great position to win and we didn't find a way to finish it off. That's the reason we are 5-7.".So let me get this straight. Rodgers took the delay of game penalty, I get that. But then Silverstein somehow manages to turn this into Rodgers' fault when the team took the ball out of his hands?Ookie Pringle said:
The smart man does not blame his QB. He said it himself Rodgers played GOOD football. Not great and he did not make all the throws he needed in the end. The fact is the TEAM put themselves in a position to win.Wait, are we talking about the Packers as a 53 member team? Or are we talking about Rodgers' play at QB?Like the article stated. They had time to finish the game off and it didn't happen. Mark seems like a smart man. "We put ourselves in great position to win and we didn't find a way to finish it off. That's the reason we are 5-7.".So let me get this straight. Rodgers took the delay of game penalty, I get that. But then Silverstein somehow manages to turn this into Rodgers' fault when the team took the ball out of his hands?Ookie Pringle said:
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Ok, so which is it. Are we talking about the team not winning? But blaming Rodgers? I don't get it. Rodgers does not play safety. Rodgers doesn't play offensive tackle. If we are talking about Rodgers, I'd say he played well enough to win. The offense scored points, and they scored a lot of points. The defense's job is to prevent the other team from scoring, they've failed miserably at this all season.
I don't get how people win as a team but lose as individuals.
I don't get how people win as a team but lose as individuals.
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
I don't think I ever wrote that. There are several people in here that have been complimentary of Favre and support the decision TT made. Those people are not Favre detractors.You, however, are a Favre detractor.
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
I didn't get that impression from reading it.So let me get this straight. Rodgers took the delay of game penalty, I get that. But then Silverstein somehow manages to turn this into Rodgers' fault when the team took the ball out of his hands?Ookie Pringle said:
Ozymandias
Footballguy
I STARTED THIS DAM' THREAD!And, for what it's worth, I think the Packers made the right decision.springroll said:
Rodgers is a franchise QB. Whether the Packers would have won more or less this year with Favre is hypothetical, and cannot ever be known. But they made the right decision.
I never blamed Rodgers for the loses. I said the largest drop-off was at the QB position.The winning teams defense gave up 31 points. I don't recall Delhomme playing Safety or Offensive tackle. I do recall the Panther offense winning the field position battle in the first quarter. What gets me is the biggest drop-off in the Packers this season was QB. yet when the teams doesn't win people will give a little credit to the loses to everyone but Rodgers. Sure the Team is losing so why not give a little love in the losses to Mr. Rodgers.The NYG are 11-1. In the 5 game span that the packer defense gave up 81 points they gave up 107. Yet they are 11-1.The Cardinals gave up 132, the Steelers gave up 86, and the Jets 88. All more than the Packers defense gave up in the same 5 game span. In the same 5 game span the Packers held all but one team below thier season average in pts per game. Seems to me it's a little everything (coaching,line,defense,st,running game,etc) but Mr. Rodgers himself.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Nobody is saying the defense is the only reason the team is losing. We are saying its a big part of it and the biggest dropoff on the team. You continue to contend its the QB position and keep making excuses for the defense.Comparing teams is foolish because teams play different schedules in different places and such other factors you fail to recognize.6 points is the difference between being a top 10 defense and a bottom 10 defense. You can spin it how you want, but they have dropped significantly in the ranking there from last year to this year. You can try denying it now but it will still be true.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Why do you keep looking at only a 5 game span?And how many TDs has the Jets offense (re: Brett Favre) given up by way of INT?
packersfan
Footballguy
The Packers' regression without Favre and the Jets' improvement with him would strongly suggest otherwise.Aaronstory said:
Why did you just look at a first half and 2 games?I simply pointing at that over a 5 game stretch the defense did bettter than Ari, NYG, Pit, NYJ and probably others that have winning records. That in the 5 games prior they held teams below their yearly average pts per game. Should I point out that the Broncos, Cardinals and Saints have worse defenses but better records?
I also pointed out that the Panthers had a worse two halfs of football and the same bad two games and ended up going .500 and stead of o'fer.
I simply took a random bit of data from where you cherry picked data to make you point.
BTW Pit gave up 86 points or +5 in the same 5 game period.
If you want to make it about Favre then
the Jets offense went from 25th in pts per game to 2nd this year.
The Jets defense is giving up 22.3 pts per game this year to the packers 24.6.
The Jets are 8-4 with a similar defense.
Bretts completing 68.7% of his passes in a new offensive scheme Aaron is only completing 63.6 in a offense he has worked in.
Seems to me Favre has been a bigger positive for the Jets than Rodgers for the Packers but as you mentioned this was expected this year.
Makes you go Hmmmm.
munchkin
Footballguy
Really!?!?!?!?!I would say the decision to run Thomas Jones more along with the addition of Jenkins has had a greater effect on the team. What did Favre do against the Broncos anemic defensive backfield that makes you feel he is still a great playmaker?
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
Maybe having Favre under center has helped improve the running game.
Looked back at 2007 and the Jets attempts per game were 27.9 and 28.3 in 2008.Thomas Jones attempts per game was 19.4 (3.6ypc) and 19.4 (4.7ypc). Think the YPC could be because they have a legit QB you have to respect now?
What ever the case so far 2007 seems to be a lot like 2008.
packersfan
Footballguy
Without a doubt. This was something a few of us talked about in the summer. We liked Jones' potential to improve upon his 2007 numbers because Favre's presence would create more running lanes than he had with Pennington and Clemens. I think it's safe to say Jones is a happy camper these days with Favre at QB.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I am disappointed in the Packers seson.
I do not cast blame. It is very difficult to remain on top as long as the Packers have. When the current management got in place they had a number of great assets, but in many places the cupboard was bear and the assets were aging. Many of the holes have been plugged, but obviously not all. The Packer drafts have been on the whole productive during this management's tenure. Their trades and their non-renewals of conttracts have been mostly productive. Now it appears that to take a few steps forward they are taking one back. This happens. They seem to me unlikely, given their track record, to blow their chance at drafting in the first third of the draft. They have some extra picks on the first day, and I expect they will acquit themselves well. Minnesota and Chicago are not forces to be reckoned with in the long term as presently constituted. Detroit, who ought to have a dynasty based on the opportunity presented by their draft position over the last decade, is not a concern. This is a normal cycle in the NFL and nothing to get too concerned about.
Those questioning Thompson and or McCarthy might ask themselves who would have done better during this time, and whether those persons were available to the Packers. They might suggest who would be better next year if they are advocating change. They might suggest how regime change from this one will not be disruptive.
In short I do not judge everything by the transience of a single season's record which is subject to so many variables. I believe the team is posed for continued competitiveness. Having lived and suffered through the 70's and 80's with this team that is no small thing. Is the present management perfect or above reprach in all decisions made, no, and of course hindsight makes this fun. I just, however, cannot name 5 better programs right, now so I am pretty pleased.
I do not cast blame. It is very difficult to remain on top as long as the Packers have. When the current management got in place they had a number of great assets, but in many places the cupboard was bear and the assets were aging. Many of the holes have been plugged, but obviously not all. The Packer drafts have been on the whole productive during this management's tenure. Their trades and their non-renewals of conttracts have been mostly productive. Now it appears that to take a few steps forward they are taking one back. This happens. They seem to me unlikely, given their track record, to blow their chance at drafting in the first third of the draft. They have some extra picks on the first day, and I expect they will acquit themselves well. Minnesota and Chicago are not forces to be reckoned with in the long term as presently constituted. Detroit, who ought to have a dynasty based on the opportunity presented by their draft position over the last decade, is not a concern. This is a normal cycle in the NFL and nothing to get too concerned about.
Those questioning Thompson and or McCarthy might ask themselves who would have done better during this time, and whether those persons were available to the Packers. They might suggest who would be better next year if they are advocating change. They might suggest how regime change from this one will not be disruptive.
In short I do not judge everything by the transience of a single season's record which is subject to so many variables. I believe the team is posed for continued competitiveness. Having lived and suffered through the 70's and 80's with this team that is no small thing. Is the present management perfect or above reprach in all decisions made, no, and of course hindsight makes this fun. I just, however, cannot name 5 better programs right, now so I am pretty pleased.
phthalatemagic
Footballguy
This incorrect.
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
The Packers are 30-30 (.500) since his arrival. The Packers went to the playoffs for 4 years straight before he showed up and once since. The Packers were 44-20 the 4 seasons prior to TT. Are you satisfied with that?
Last edited by a moderator:
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/articl...0038/1058/PKR01
From Green Bay Press Gazette
Brad Zimanek column: McCarthy must shoulder blame
Head coaches make the difference in deciding close games.
Last year, the Packers had a good one.
On the way to a 13-3 record and NFC championship game appearance under Mike McCarthy, the Packers were 5-2 in games decided by seven or fewer points.
This year, on a 5-7 slide with a month left – including Sunday’s 35-31 loss to Carolina at Lambeau Field – the Packers are 1-4 in games under the same set of circumstances.
This year, McCarthy is not a good coach.
Last year, it seemed McCarthy and his staff outcoached the opposition – even when the Packers lost – in every game. They outschemed teams. They used the team’s available talent to the best of its ability. There was never a question of whether or not the Packers would be emotionally prepared for whatever challenge it would face each week.
This year, the only consistency is that the Packers are inconsistent.
“We have great weeks of practice and we are not doing a good job of transferring the good things we do to the field,” Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers said. “Inconsistency is the biggest disappointment.”
Items that were locked down last year are blowing in the wind this season.
When a finger plugs a hole in the dike one week, three more burst open the next.
“It’s a combination of not making enough plays and not doing some of the basic things we’ve been able to do in the past,” McCarthy said of not winning close games.
Like getting a shotgun center snap that cost the Packers a touchdown before halftime. But even that would be understandable after what McCarthy said he believes came after Scott Wells suffered a concussion on a previous play.
But what about the two delay of game penalties by Rodgers?
Or, allowing two big runs in the first half and clamping down against the run in the second half and then shutting down Steve Smith in the first half and giving up two back game-breaking plays to him in the second?
Then, there’s the back-to-back kickoff returns of 51 and 45 yards after the Packers took a 28-21 lead and later a 31-28 lead with less than two minutes remaining?
“We obviously didn’t correct it,” McCarthy said of the team’s kickoff coverage.
And, don’t forget failing to score a touchdown with two cracks from the one-yard line and having to settle for a 19-yard field goal rather than taking a seven-point lead late. It makes matters worse considering the Panthers scored on five one-yard touchdown runs.
When asked if this team has the talent of a 5-7 team, Charles Woodson hesitated. You could tell he almost didn’t want to admit that’s what this team has become.
“That’s what we are in reality,” Woodson said. “Last season, when games went down to the wire we made the plays. This year, down the stretch and we have opportunities we are not capitalizing on them for whatever reason.”
The Packers have too much talent to make such a drastic swing from a year ago. Each week, it’s a few plays here or there and the Packers could have won.
For as many times as he pushed the right buttons last season, he’s pushing a lot of the wrong ones this year.
“We are making common mistakes and we as a coaching staff need to get it corrected,” McCarthy said.
In McCarthy’s first season, the Packers rallied to win their final four games and enjoyed a sense of excitement for finishing 8-8.
This year, a 3-1 December for the same result doesn’t generate the same kind of a vibe coming off a 13-3 year when the Packers were an overtime from the Super Bowl.
For as much credit as McCarthy deserves for turning around the team from 4-12 to 13-3, he’s a major factor in this year’s collapse. Over the course of the next month we’ll find out if McCarthy’s capable of cleaning up the mess he’s created and instilling any confidence that there’ll be better days ahead in 2009.
From Green Bay Press Gazette
Brad Zimanek column: McCarthy must shoulder blame
Head coaches make the difference in deciding close games.
Last year, the Packers had a good one.
On the way to a 13-3 record and NFC championship game appearance under Mike McCarthy, the Packers were 5-2 in games decided by seven or fewer points.
This year, on a 5-7 slide with a month left – including Sunday’s 35-31 loss to Carolina at Lambeau Field – the Packers are 1-4 in games under the same set of circumstances.
This year, McCarthy is not a good coach.
Last year, it seemed McCarthy and his staff outcoached the opposition – even when the Packers lost – in every game. They outschemed teams. They used the team’s available talent to the best of its ability. There was never a question of whether or not the Packers would be emotionally prepared for whatever challenge it would face each week.
This year, the only consistency is that the Packers are inconsistent.
“We have great weeks of practice and we are not doing a good job of transferring the good things we do to the field,” Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers said. “Inconsistency is the biggest disappointment.”
Items that were locked down last year are blowing in the wind this season.
When a finger plugs a hole in the dike one week, three more burst open the next.
“It’s a combination of not making enough plays and not doing some of the basic things we’ve been able to do in the past,” McCarthy said of not winning close games.
Like getting a shotgun center snap that cost the Packers a touchdown before halftime. But even that would be understandable after what McCarthy said he believes came after Scott Wells suffered a concussion on a previous play.
But what about the two delay of game penalties by Rodgers?
Or, allowing two big runs in the first half and clamping down against the run in the second half and then shutting down Steve Smith in the first half and giving up two back game-breaking plays to him in the second?
Then, there’s the back-to-back kickoff returns of 51 and 45 yards after the Packers took a 28-21 lead and later a 31-28 lead with less than two minutes remaining?
“We obviously didn’t correct it,” McCarthy said of the team’s kickoff coverage.
And, don’t forget failing to score a touchdown with two cracks from the one-yard line and having to settle for a 19-yard field goal rather than taking a seven-point lead late. It makes matters worse considering the Panthers scored on five one-yard touchdown runs.
When asked if this team has the talent of a 5-7 team, Charles Woodson hesitated. You could tell he almost didn’t want to admit that’s what this team has become.
“That’s what we are in reality,” Woodson said. “Last season, when games went down to the wire we made the plays. This year, down the stretch and we have opportunities we are not capitalizing on them for whatever reason.”
The Packers have too much talent to make such a drastic swing from a year ago. Each week, it’s a few plays here or there and the Packers could have won.
For as many times as he pushed the right buttons last season, he’s pushing a lot of the wrong ones this year.
“We are making common mistakes and we as a coaching staff need to get it corrected,” McCarthy said.
In McCarthy’s first season, the Packers rallied to win their final four games and enjoyed a sense of excitement for finishing 8-8.
This year, a 3-1 December for the same result doesn’t generate the same kind of a vibe coming off a 13-3 year when the Packers were an overtime from the Super Bowl.
For as much credit as McCarthy deserves for turning around the team from 4-12 to 13-3, he’s a major factor in this year’s collapse. Over the course of the next month we’ll find out if McCarthy’s capable of cleaning up the mess he’s created and instilling any confidence that there’ll be better days ahead in 2009.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I am, as I posted, satisfied. My perception of the Packers is that they were getting worse and aging under Sherman. The club was in a downward trend staved off primarily by the excellence of Favre, Driver, Green, Flannagan and their two Tackles. I loved those players and still do, but the Tackles were at their height and everybody else was on the downside. Their window had passed and this was evident, at least I thought so. The Packers had much rebuilding to do. They still do, but they have found many pieces during the past few years. I love Jennings, Jones, Nelson, Hawk, Williams, Blackman and others. I love the Packers patience with Collins and Bigby. I think they have done alright at R.B. They need continued work on the D-Line but they have made some projects work. Their interior offensive line leaves much to be desired. My hope is that the Packers find an impact lineman on each side of the ball with their first two picks in the next draft. After that I hope they go BPA through the first round of day two and I hope that doing so lands them a D.B. as Woodson and Harris are getting long in the tooth, and then that they draft for camp competition and for upside potential. If they can hit on two out of their first three picks, and if they can find another three or four guys that make the roster I suspect the Packers will be right back atop the division next year. I do hope that of their first three picks they avoid an injured prospect unless they really work him out first and have zero concerns. Upside risks are for the latter rounds in my mind.You evidently disagree. No reason you shouldn't. Thompson has not been perfect. Lord knows I had trepidations with both Thompson and McCarthy when they arrived. Both have, however, shown me enough to earn support ,and I know that lack of support, vocal detraction, can be poison to a franchise so I would wish it could hold off for a few more years to see if things are working. Detractors often get their way but they do not nearly as often act as the catalyst for improvement. I guess I want to see an end game plan with the Packers getting a better management than they have right now before I tear down these guys. Are Parcels, Cowher, Bellichick et. al. looking to come to work in Green Bay? Is Ron Wolfe refreshed and ready to return bringing with him the greatest defensive tackle of this generation?
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
something about this post seems very familiar.Almost like I have seen a similar argument in other threads about a certain running back.
sho nuff
Footballguy
So Aaron Rodgers caused a 6+ point per game decline in the Packer defense?Are you kidding me?
sho nuff
Footballguy
I merely pointed out the last two games in which the offense scored a good amount of points...yet the defense was pitiful (yet you keep trying to defend this defense which has given up more than 6 points per game more than last year. And you still don't think thats the biggest dropoff on the team (which is ludicrous).Cherry picking data? Not at all...look at the whole year if you want to. I pointed out the last two games because they refute some of the crap people have been whining about the offense being the reason the defense was not doing well...time of posession and all of that. Now the offense is rolling and time of posession has been in gB's favor...yet the defense is still porous. Maybe...just maybe, its the defenses problem it gives up points and not Aaron Rodger's fault.You also realize the Jets played with Chad Pennington and Kellen Clemons last year right? And that of course Brett Favre playing even average would have been a huge improvement.Rodgers has more yards, the same # of TDs, fewer INTs than Brett Favre on the year. Yet his "team" is worse.Perhaps you will see its not just the QB that is the problem and its not even close to the biggest dropoff this year.When the defense is giving up 6+ points per game more than last year and almost 40 yards per game more on the ground. 17 rushing TDs allowed so far this year...only 6 all of last year.The defense is the biggest dropoff and that is painfully obvious to nearly everybody who watches football.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Maybe...did it help Brandon Jackson to start last year?I think it did help some...as did the addition of Alan Faneca.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Are you advocating bringing back Mike Sherman?Do you understand what state the team was in when Sherman was let go as GM?That the team had 0 depth, an old roster, and was well over the cap.
sho nuff
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Only you would be wrong.I have never said to just look at 5 games when it concerned Grant.In fact, I said that the season was not yet over after the first 4-5 games and lets see what happens when he and the line got healthy. They did...and they were running well...and those that were writing him off looked foolish for doing so.Those that wanted to just get rid of him after the Indy game missed out on some very productive games from their RB.But spin it how you want...I know you will.
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
This thread is off the first page and look who brings it back! Do you feel the need to reply to every post in here that says anything critical about the Packers?No, I am not advocating bringing back Mike Sherman. Yes I understand the state of the team when Sherman left. I also am not satisfied with 30-30, 5-7 this year and I think Mike McCarthy has done a terrible job coaching this year. I don't like how he avoids the media unlike Ron Wolf that would tell us how he feels especially if the Packers didn't play well. I don't like how "cold" the front office has become. I don't think they do enough to endure themselves to Packer fans. Bob Harlan would answer his own phone. Mark Murphy doesn't. The team took a major step backward this year despite being one of the youngest teams in the league. I hear about rebuilding but hasn't Thompson had 4 years to build? So...that didn't work and now he has to start again?Now you can get back to telling us why Thompson is doing so well at this point. I will sit back and watch your next 35 posts on the subject.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
I feel I can respond to any post I feel like.But when people start talking about the glory days right before Thompson took over...they forget what Mike Sherman did as GM (which was not good).I agree McCarthy has not done a good job coaching this year. I have had several beefs with how they have managed a few games.I don't care if he avoids the media at all. I don't give a flying you know what if the president of the team does not answer his phone.You realize as one of the youngest teams in the league, they will take steps back...that young players are not always consistent right? Am I happy or satisfied with their record? Of course not. But I realize what they are doing and I actually like how they go about it.Its not fantasy football. its not see a guy with great stats and just go sign him. Start again? Not at all. The core is there...but some of the core is also getting older and they have to start over there. That was inevitable unless Thompson had blown up the entire line and gotten rid of Tauscher and Clifton too.I have not been in this thread saying TT has just done so well.I have been in this thread talking about the topic and Aaron Rodgers and not just bashing the GM because of the overall record in his time in GB. Because I know what the makeup of the team was when he got here. And Im not saying he does not know what he is doing like a few (yes a few) others because I have seen how has drafted and built up some solid young talent on this team. Of course, he needs to do more. Wins have to come. And I think they will.
sho nuff
Footballguy
All I have heard is how Brett would make the run game great.Yet, last year, the run game stunk up the joint to start the year...with the great #4 at QB playing well.
Perhaps a solid Oline and a decent running back helps that huh?
Sure, Brett helps some...but the fact that the jets added a great guard and their younger Olineman have stepped up even more (Ferguson and Mangold). that those things have had a big part of that success as well.
Im not comparing the two RBs....just that Brett does not always make running games just click.
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
You clearly show how desperate you are to try and negate anything that Brett Favre will do for a football team. It is funny to watch.All I have heard is how Brett would make the run game great.Yet, last year, the run game stunk up the joint to start the year...with the great #4 at QB playing well.
Perhaps a solid Oline and a decent running back helps that huh?
Sure, Brett helps some...but the fact that the jets added a great guard and their younger Olineman have stepped up even more (Ferguson and Mangold). that those things have had a big part of that success as well.
Im not comparing the two RBs....just that Brett does not always make running games just click.
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
I assume you will tell us that Favre had nothing to do with Grant's success last year.Im not comparing the two RBs....just that Brett does not always make running games just click.
Phase of the Game
Footballguy
Someone check on sho because I don't think he took his meds today.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Im not trying to negate anything. I said he had an effect...obviously going from Pennington/Clemens to a HOFer will have an effect.Im simply pointing out the simple fact that they added a pro bowl guard and have 2 third year olinemen who have played quite well. The desperation is in you having to make things up about what I am doing in order to try bashing me.
sho nuff
Footballguy
And you all wonder why I claim you spin things.Don't assume...if I wanted to say that...I would have said it.I assume you will tell us that Favre had nothing to do with Grant's success last year.Im not comparing the two RBs....just that Brett does not always make running games just click.
Sure it helped...so did Grant being the right fit at the right time and line coming together and making a few more holes.
Jackson was not ready to start the year and Wynn had one good game and is a mediocre back.
The point is...the great Brett Favre could not make an Oline that was playing poorly, play better in the start of the year...it took a combo of things (of which he was a part of it) to get it going.
Ookie Pringle
Footballguy
No one needs to make things up to bash you......you are doing just fine by yourself. :(
