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!
Would be interesting to actually see data on the hit rate for FA vs draft to verify one way or another. But at least with FA, you have measurable and quantifiable performances at the NFL level to rely on. Not so with college players.
I try to remember that the coaching staff that knows them the best is letting them go. Sure, sometimes there are economic factors, but they are being allowed to walk by teams that have known them. is that measurable?
Your qualifier is un-needed. This team is never healthy. This team is a sub .500 team...full stop. End of story.
Agreed however a dip into the pool once in a while would be nice. Not the best way to build a team but a supplemental piece here and there could help. Denver signed Talib and a past his prime Ware to help make a very good defense with guys they drafted like Miller and Harris into a great one. Those were two big hits but a piece here and there would be great to give this team a boost.
I would be careful about that assumption. Other teams improve over the off-season, too. Green bay may not have been that much better then suffered critical injuries. Still close to .500 after that is good.
Lol but imagine if he was running behind the Packers awesome line who are all pro bowlers and great awesome players.
Yes...if only anyone else had gone over the top like that...you seem to be the only one ever doing so.
I'd hope he's seen the field already and not just sitting in the film room studying the playbook.
That's not arrogant or ignorant. What coach in his right mind would say anything else?Sabertooth said:
Serious question, how would you expect him to answer that question?Sabertooth said:
gives you an appreciation for Favre. He did it in a tougher era for Quarterbacks. Also I'd imagine he was quite a bit younger to reach 128 starts. Both awesome players. Rodgers is better I think. You'd think the turnover delta must be pretty heavily in Rodgers' favor and therefore also the wins, guess not.
Evidently not though. Turns out that you have to take a few risks to win games. Not just focus on your passer rating and interception %. I love Rodgers, but he needs just a small dose of Favre gunslinger.
That's kind of my point. It's kind of counter-intuitive as all you ever hear is that turnovers are most closely related to record. Favre turned it over all the time. Still won a ton of games. But he wasn't afraid to fire a shot either. Rodgers is much more cerebral than Favre, and that's a blessing and a curse. He won't fire as many low percentage shots as Favre did. I agree. Rodgers plays football like it's a math problem. Favre played like it was a bar room brawl.
If anything some rules helped him. Ridgers missing part of that Detroit game and then New England the next week with concussion. How many would Favre have missed had the protocol been like it is now?
Mike said he's going to focus on funda men als this week. So I guess we can expect a lot of something.
No problem...I just thought the whole thing was interesting how close they were in wins.
No doubt...Offense with Favre in prime MVP form, Defense that was just nasty good with Reggie and the Dline causing caos up front, an underrated at times secondary with Butler back there, and LBs that just flat out got the job done.
Can't like this post enough. Butler is my favorite Packer of all time...loved that dude and agree 100%. He and Atwater were the safeties on the team of the decade (1990's) to me that's a ticket to the Hall of Fame right there.
Didn't he move on to the Pats beat?CletiusMaximus said:
Sure...still seems odd that when it supposedly happened he still played at that high level for at least a year.
Scott Barrett
