That's a relative scale. Packers did as much if not more than the Vikes or Bengals.Originally Posted by Patler
That's a relative scale. Packers did as much if not more than the Vikes or Bengals.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
We wouldn't be the first perennial winning team that has a less than stellar season sprinkled in. And I don't know if we can really call a 10-6 season a poor one. We had our issues the last 10 games but did play pretty well in the post season. We put a beat down on the 'Skins and took the Cards into OT only to lose basically on one broken play. I suspect our lofty expectations going into the season are what is fueling this idea that 2015 was an unmitigated disaster and a sign the end is near.
Top Ten Teams 20016
1. Patriots
2. Carolina
3. Seattle
4. Green Bay
5. Pittsburgh
6. Arizona
7. Cincinnati
8. Denver
9. Kansas City
10. New York Jets
I can't comment on the Bengals, since I have not watched them at all.
However, the Vikings clearly looked like a team that was ascending, while the Packers looked like a team descending. If they were at the same relative spot (which I do not think they were the second half od this year), it was crossing paths while headed in opposite directions.
But, next year they start over. The Vikings have to prove thaat 2015 was legitimate, and the Packers have to prove that 2015 was an aberration.
The point is that the national media never gets behind the team that had an off year, they get behind the team that surprised or even rose expectedly. However, it won't take a lot for the Packers to gain back their respect, because they have a long history. All they need to do is win at the start of the season, and look good doing it.
That said, I can't see the 2015 team as a typical "10-6" team, not after finishing 4-6, which just as easily could have been 3-7. Not after losing at home to all teams in the division. It was a team that wasn't even in a lot of the games they lost. It simply was not a very good team at the end of the year, and neither playoff game changed that very much. It was closer to the 4-6 team of its finish than it was to the 6-0 team of its start.
I'm not throwing away 2016, however. We all talk about over achieving teams; typically they do not do as well the following season. I can't help but think the 2015 Packers were an extremely underachieving team, one that should rebound in 2016. It all hinges on AR. If he returns to form, things will be fine. If he is a QB that will be retired by age 35 as he fades away, next year may not be as pleasant as we have become accustomed to.
Yet despite the fact that the 2 teams were seemingly headed in opposite directions, the Packers soundly beat the Vikings once, and the Vikings had to hold on late to win the other game. I think the likelihood is that Rodgers rebounds from 2015, at least into the top 10 of QB's, if not the absolute top. The question is how much upside does Bridgewater have? Rodgers' worst year as a starter was still better than Bridgewater.
I suppose you could say barely missing the NFCC game with fat Lacy and receivers 5-8 was an 'aberration' and a 'descending team.' Kinda hope so, because it means next year, APRH, the Packers will be ascending into the Superbowl. But unless TT just starts totally missing on draft picks, it's hard to imagine the Packers being out of it.
Prediction: It will be amusing to see fans of other teams with marginal starting QBs getting pissed off next preseason when they see Hundley shred their defenses.
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
God, thanks for bring back the fat Lacy run memories. He was looking for someone to catch him at the 30 yard line on the long run.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
Odd season that we beat all 3 NFC North teams on the road and lost to all 3 NFC North teams at home.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
Its now the illustration in wikipedia for 'looking for a place to fall down'.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
It replaced the Strahan 'sack' of Favre
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
That's really advanced prognostication.
I wonder what the mascots will be in 18000 years...
No longer the member of any fan clubs. I'm tired of jinxing players out of the league and into obscurity.
Sure is, but the only road win that was encouraging was at MN. The Bears was the first game of the year, before the season turned for the worse. As exciting as the win against the Lions was, overall the game was not confidence building.
It even looked like a couple of the GB linemen slowed down so they didn't get too far ahead of him. The last 40 yards looked like it was in slow motion.
That alone should encourage Lacy to dedicate himself to conditioning in the off season. He had to be embarrassed when he watched it.
Which quarterback will win the most Super Bowls over the next 10 years?
Which team will make the most Super Bowl appearances in the next 10 years?
http://www.timetobreak.com/2224711/b...elina-jolie/8/
** Since 2006 3 X Pro Pickem' Champion; 4 X Runner-Up and 3 X 3rd place.
** To download Jesus Loves Me ring tones, you'll need a cell phone mame
** If God doesn't fish, play poker or pull for " the Packers ", exactly what does HE do with his buds?
** Rather than love, money or fame - give me TRUTH: Henry D. Thoreau
You're a peeping Tom!
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
As an pretty avid poker player it irks me when people use $ signs to describe tournament pots. You didn't drag a 250,000$ plus pot, you dragged a 250,000 plus CHIP pot. It's a huge and incredibly significant distinction. But any way , glad you got some tv time...carry on.
Yes, that pot was 250,000 Units. The payout was $95,000 at the end of the tournament when I busted out in 5th.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
You really have been commenting a lot about AR that he's losing it. Granted, he wasn't up to his standards this year but you seen to keep implying that he's on the down slide of his career and that he's gonna crash like it's the stock market of 1929
All hail the Ruler of the Meadow!
No, that is not at all what I have been saying.
I do firmly believe that in 2015, he did not play up to the standard we have come to expect. Not even close. I think that was a lot of the cause for the steep slide of the offensive performance. However, I do not know if that will continue into 2016 or not.
IF it does, the Packers will have to become a different team than they have been so far under Rodgers
IF he returns to form, or close to it, the offense will recover just fine.
However, there is no way to really know until we see him next year. He is at an age where his skills MIGHT begin to decline. Not all QBs can play effectively until 38-40. For some, it ends in their mid-30s.
The troubling thing to me is that there was talk during training camp that Rodgers was "off". Maybe his off season prep was different, and less effective. Maybe the calf was still an issue in his off season prep. Maybe the knee he had scoped was bothering from the start. Maybe, maybe, maybe.
There certainly is no guarantee. I think it was Boomer Esiason who said the off season does funny things to a player as they get older. Things were fine at the end of the season. They come back in August, and all of a sudden some things just aren't there. Maybe Rodgers had that this year, and he refused to acknowledge it, so did not adapt. Maybe even if "something" is gone, he can adapt this next season to compensate.
However, just as it has been for the last 25 years for the Packers, success next year will depend on the play of the QB. If Rodgers is no better or effective that he was this year, GB will not be a legitimate contender.
So yea, I think a lot hinges on Rodgers next year. But, at this point, I have no ide where it will go, up or down.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote