It was still very winnable. But no, run into a 9 man front with one wideout.Originally Posted by hoosier
Who needs a first down?!
It was still very winnable. But no, run into a 9 man front with one wideout.
Who needs a first down?!
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
I still get slightly sick when I think about that game. That was worse than the 4th-and-26 game, I think.
Not that it was an all-time great offense, but I enjoyed the '82 Packers' offense, with Dickey and Lofton and Ivery. They could score.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
The 2017 GB Packers!
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
Entirely possible.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
the dickey, lofton, jefferson, coffman, o was great to watch. the '89 majik, sharpe, o was fun too.
it's funny how we associate great o with passing. the ground and pound o's of the '60s don't even come to mind.
yup.
After further review, the Bears still suck.
Pretty much. Still, there are some great ground and pound games in living memory. The Tampa Bay 'Clifton payback game' of 2003 comes to mind
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
ahman green's game against sea, lacy against dal, too.
Lotta Ahman games looked like that. The modern version of ground and pound anyway.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
yeah, especially with U71. Helped compensate for Favre's broken thumb to be sure.
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
The GB/Sea snowglobe playoff game.
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
ya, but in that game the pass set up the run, particularly because the Grant fumbles delayed the gameplan (which I'm pretty sure was to run, run run).
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
No, Favre didn't even throw for 200 yards that game. Grant rushed for over 200 after the fumbles.
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
Just looked at the box score 35 runs to 23 passes.
408 total yards - 235 rushing - 173 passing
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're both wrong. It was Bigby's game of a lifetime that set the offense up repeatedly in the first half. The final stats were tilted toward the running game because the Packers were up the second half and were able to keep it on the ground, running it down the Seahawks thoats. In the first half they were much more balanced. But not to the extent that you could say they used the pass to set up the run. Bigby was the straw that stirred the drink that evening.
I don't see how what you write disagrees with my point. As I said the pass set up the run. Not that it was a huge passing game. I also pointed out that I was sure the game plan was run heavy. And that's how it went after they got back in the game. But when the pack got down early, passing got them back in the game and loosened everything up.
BIG HITS!!!
Who needs announcers and color commentators when you have Tony Siragusa. That aside, I am a bit mystified about how the new millennial Packer ground game made its way into a thread about GOAT offense. There is no association between the two, and if there ever was Shermy killed it in January 2004.
and sea had 8 in the box most of the time.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote