Good start out of the gate

[Badgepack]

The 2006 Packers need to learn/feel how to win games right from pre-season on. I know it doesn't make a shit who wins in the pre-season, but the last few years our 1st and 2nd strings looked like they don't belong in the NFL.

This then carries over to a slow start to regular season, and we have to catch up with the rest of the conference. I hope the new coach will have these guys ready to play from the 1st scrimmages on. Get all these young kids used to winning, get Favre excited, and get on a roll.

2003
pre-season 2-3
reg seasn 1-2

2004
pre-season 1-3
reg season 1-4

2005
pre-season 2-2
reg season 0-4

[BlueBrewer]

I agree that preseason tempo is needed to start the season right. SHerman didn't really seam to give a shit.

[MadtownPacker]

I always feel that the team that is hot at the end of the year is the most likely to win it all. Steelers did it last year, Pats did it, Ravens too. I think a .500 start is fine for the first 6-8 games.

[Tarlam!]

I always feel that the team that is hot at the end of the year is the most likely to win it all. Steelers did it last year, Pats did it, Ravens too. I think a .500 start is fine for the first 6-8 games.

This is an astute observation. Most teams that start 6-0 get squashed.

[Badgepack]

I agree with that, however after last years fiasco, the youngsters on the team, and Favre getting that glazed over look in his eyes when things don't go well, it is important for this team to start fast.

[MadtownPacker]

As long as they beat the bears week 1 they will be fine. At least i will feel better! :razz:

But if they do confidence will be high. I say wildcard team for the 2006 Packers.

[Deputy Nutz]

A week one victory would be awesome. Rarely you look at the first game as the biggest game of the year. The fact is the Bears are a very beatable team. They have injuries on the defensive line, their offense has yet to be improved, and their draft surely didn't help them on paper.

[MadtownPacker]

The bears are about as good as they where last season. Very likely Pack will be better. Enough to beat them? A a few less Favre INTs and those two 2005 losses would have been Ws. They went toe to toe with the FiBs. Favre took a massive beating but he kept getting up. Dont think too many of the other 31 starters would have lasted. But if the OL can just make sure he isnt getting blasted every couple of plays the few points needed for winning are very possible.

Like I said, the bears are about as good as last year, including the offense. So they better hope the D holds up for them again. IMO the disgusting purple freaks the other the team playing for the division late in the season. The December NFL network game will decide it. It just makes the most money. :wink:

[BlueBrewer]

I always feel that the team that is hot at the end of the year is the most likely to win it all. Steelers did it last year, Pats did it, Ravens too. I think a .500 start is fine for the first 6-8 games.

Good point Mad, the colts have their hot runs squandered regularly. A dog that shits fast doesn't shit long.

[No Mo Moss]

The bears are about as good as they where last season. Very likely Pack will be better. Enough to beat them? A a few less Favre INTs and those two 2005 losses would have been Ws. They went toe to toe with the FiBs. Favre took a massive beating but he kept getting up. Dont think too many of the other 31 starters would have lasted. But if the OL can just make sure he isnt getting blasted every couple of plays the few points needed for winning are very possible.

Like I said, the bears are about as good as last year, including the offense. So they better hope the D holds up for them again. IMO the disgusting purple freaks the other the team playing for the division late in the season. The December NFL network game will decide it. It just makes the most money. :wink:

Plus we didn't even play the Bears until relatively late in the year. We had already been hobbled to pieces.

As far as the fast start is concerned I think the table is set for us. I think the greatest thing for a young team and a new coach is confidence and the ability to say "hey, we can compete for this thing."

There is nothing that would do that faster than beating the reigning division champions on opening day. If that happens its all systems go to everyone in that organization.

You have to think Chicago will be a little confident coming into that game as well. Hopefully they write us off.

[Harlan Huckleby]

A dog that shits fast doesn't shit long.

Oh, I can reassure you from my recent illness that it is definitely not an either/or proposition.

[swede]

A dog that shits fast doesn't shit long.

Oh, I can reassure you from my recent illness that it is definitely not an either/or proposition.

True dat.

Diarrhea, by the way, is thought to be hereditary since it runs in the jeans.

Beating the Bears and New Orleans would be a lovely start in '06. Just play .500 after that and we'll have an outside shot at the playoffs.

[Rastak]

I agree that preseason tempo is needed to start the season right. SHerman didn't really seam to give a shit.

I totally agree. With a new coaching staff preseason is probably a little more important than it normally would be. Really for any team with a new staff. I'm of the school that preseason builds confidence and allows your starters to get some work. I know Sherman sat the starters longer than most coaches and I really didn't agree with it. It will be intereresting to see what McCarthy's philosophy will be.

[wist43]

I fully expect the Packers to struggle mightily early in the season - mainly b/c McCarthy is going to have to learn OJT and the OL will take time to gel.

Beyond that, even though the talent level has generally been improved, they still aren't a very talented team. They don't have a single pro-bowl calibur player on the team.

[BlueBrewer]

I fully expect the Packers to struggle mightily early in the season - mainly b/c McCarthy is going to have to learn OJT and the OL will take time to gel.

Beyond that, even though the talent level has generally been improved, they still aren't a very talented team. They don't have a single pro-bowl calibur player on the team.


I think you will be proven wrong this year.

[Bretsky]

I fully expect the Packers to struggle mightily early in the season - mainly b/c McCarthy is going to have to learn OJT and the OL will take time to gel.

Beyond that, even though the talent level has generally been improved, they still aren't a very talented team. They don't have a single pro-bowl calibur player on the team.

Chad Clifton is Pro Bowl Caliber
Donald Driver (who we agree to disagree on as a #1) has made the Pro Bowl a couple times

[MadtownPacker]

I know Sherman sat the starters longer than most coaches and I really didn't agree with it.

From what I recall reading, tice use to work his team extra hard to start the season. Could that have helped lead to all those late season collapses?

[Rastak]

I know Sherman sat the starters longer than most coaches and I really didn't agree with it.

From what I recall reading, tice use to work his team extra hard to start the season. Could that have helped lead to all those late season collapses?

Don't know what the heck led to those. It could be the guys were worn down. Well, let him screw up Jacksonville with his pal Del Rio.....

[wist43]

I fully expect the Packers to struggle mightily early in the season - mainly b/c McCarthy is going to have to learn OJT and the OL will take time to gel.

Beyond that, even though the talent level has generally been improved, they still aren't a very talented team. They don't have a single pro-bowl calibur player on the team.


I think you will be proven wrong this year.

BB, I hope you're right, and I hope I'm wrong... when it comes to the Packers, however, I'm usually right. I just don't see them getting off to a fast start, and I don't see them any better than .500. 6-10 wouldn't surprise me one bit.

Bretsky... Clifton and Tauscher are both close to being pro bowl calibur; but, bookend Tackles, and nothing else, isn't going to put W's in the win column. No pass rush on defense, no playmakers on offense, two rookie coordinators, and a rookie HC - who was nobody's pick but TT's - and you have the makings of a 6-10 team.

[retailguy]

BB, I hope you're right, and I hope I'm wrong... when it comes to the Packers, however, I'm usually right. I just don't see them getting off to a fast start, and I don't see them any better than .500. 6-10 wouldn't surprise me one bit.

Bretsky... Clifton and Tauscher are both close to being pro bowl calibur; but, bookend Tackles, and nothing else, isn't going to put W's in the win column. No pass rush on defense, no playmakers on offense, two rookie coordinators, and a rookie HC - who was nobody's pick but TT's - and you have the makings of a 6-10 team.


No playmakers on offense? You must be kidding. While I admit that losing two guards was a disaster, it didn't devoid the team of offensive talent. If you look at the skill positions overall, I'll take the packers players as a group over all the rest of the division for sure, and probably half of the rest of the league.

I don't expect both Davenport and Green to rebound, but odds are pretty good one of them will. Driver will be fine and someone will step up for #2. Exactly, what is wrong with Bubba Franks?

I don't expect them to rank #3 again, but 12 or 13 is almost a no-brainer with Favre upright. Yeah, back to the OL again....

I wonder if it is possible to finish 6-10 and rank in the top half of the league on offense and defense? Strange, but this wouldn't surprise me either...

[packrulz]

It will take time to install the new offense but it may actually work in their favor since teams won't know what to expect to see from them. If they can avoid injuries the schedule really isn't that tough, especially the first half of the season. NE & Seattle will be tough. If they do well against division opponents I don't think a wildcard spot is out of the question.

Date Opponent Time/Result
Sep 10 Chicago 4:15pm
Sep 17 New Orleans 1:00pm
Sep 24 @Detroit 1:00pm
Oct 2 @Philadelphia 8:30pm
Oct 8 St. Louis 1:00pm
Week 6 BYE
Oct 22 @Miami 1:00pm
Oct 29 Arizona 1:00pm
Nov 5 @Buffalo 1:00pm
Nov 12 @Minnesota 1:00pm
Nov 19 New England 1:00pm
Nov 27 @Seattle 8:30pm
Dec 3 N.Y. Jets 1:00pm
Dec 10 @San Francisco 4:05pm
Dec 17 Detroit 1:00pm
Dec 21 Minnesota 8:00pm
Dec 31 @Chicago 1:00pm

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

More important then winning early this year, is to regain home field advantage. I hate seeing the packers go anything less then 7-1 at home.

[Noodle]

I just don't see us coming out strong right out of the gate this year. As much as I like Green, I don't see him getting on track until after the bye, and I think the pooper and Sam will have their issues as well (pooper with his injury, Samkon with the new system). And, like some other posters noted, I think it will take some time for the O-line to come together.

So that means relying on the passing attack, which I think will be a little raggy at the start. Why? Because Favre missed the minicamp in May, that's why. :wink:

So I'm fully prepared for a 2-3 start. But, if the losses are close, I think we'll be set for a solid run the rest of the year.

One side note -- I don't see Clifton as a pro bowl caliber tackle until he reduces those god-awful false starts. He has been brutal on those, and they seem to come at crappy times.

[GBRulz]

More important then winning early this year, is to regain home field advantage. I hate seeing the packers go anything less then 7-1 at home.

Totally agree. I want the days back where playing at home was almost a guaranteed win. THANK YOU SHERMAN :mad:

[wist43]

Of those first 5 games before the bye, you've got to figure that the Packers will be underdogs in every game except against New Orleans.

For the first 4 games after the bye, they've got a pretty good shot at going 0-4 in that stretch. Arizona should be much better, Buffalo is a tough place to play on the road, and Minnesota and Miami are clearly much better teams than the Packers.

Never minding the schedule, there is the small reality of a coaching staff that has to learn on the job... Despite the relatively easy schedule, the Packers could very well find themselves 1-8 after nine games.

[cpk1994]

Of those first 5 games before the bye, you've got to figure that the Packers will be underdogs in every game except against New Orleans.

For the first 4 games after the bye, they've got a pretty good shot at going 0-4 in that stretch. Arizona should be much better, Buffalo is a tough place to play on the road, and Minnesota and Miami are clearly much better teams than the Packers.

Never minding the schedule, there is the small reality of a coaching staff that has to learn on the job... Despite the relatively easy schedule, the Packers could very well find themselves 1-8 after nine games.

Vikins clearly better? I don't think so. They have a good OL but they have no RB or WR plus their QB is one hit from retirement. Their defnese still sucks and they have the same situation at HC with the added in headache of learning a COMPLETELY new system. Remember, the Packers arre still running the WCO. The Vikings clearly better? Not by a long shot! Arizona is still Arizona(Denny Green is the coach, so that means no D). I think your 1-8 is laughable.

[SD GB fan]

ya i agree with wist. our schedule isnt exactly as easy as some think. arizona improved a lot and philly shud be bak to playoff form. AFC east teams will be tough. and we probably wont sweep our NFC north teams.

any upgrade over 4-12 will be great. worst case scenario, at least another top 10 pick next year will definitely get us bak in 2007. :roll:

but im still excited about this season and i think a lot of players will do well.

predicition: 7-9 or 8-8

[wist43]

I don't think the Packers will be 1-8 after 9 games... but, it's certainly possible.

Arizona has the best WR tandem in the league, throw in Edgerrin James, and if Warner is playing - they are very tough on offense. I think they're defense will be better this year as well.

As for Minnesota, I think their defense is pretty good - Green Bay doesn't have a single player on their roster as good as Kevin Williams - and while their offense may struggle a bit, they do have a solid line, and Johnson isn't going to lose games the way Favre has done the past few years. As much as I hate the Vikings, I think they're better than Green Bay. Childress and McCarthy are total wildcards.

3-6 is probably a realistic record after 9 games... and, as long as they play relatively well, are reasonably competitive, and are showing improvement... I'd be okay with that.

[b bulldog]

7-9 with a 2-0 start

[SD GB fan]

3-6 wud be good. that means they only need to win 1 game out of 7 to meet this years record :mrgreen:

but i think we are all shooting for something a lil higher

[b bulldog]

Adrian Peterson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MadtownPacker]

I don't think the Packers will be 1-8 after 9 games... but, it's certainly possible.

Arizona has the best WR tandem in the league, throw in Edgerrin James, and if Warner is playing - they are very tough on offense. I think they're defense will be better this year as well.

As for Minnesota, I think their defense is pretty good - Green Bay doesn't have a single player on their roster as good as Kevin Williams - and while their offense may struggle a bit, they do have a solid line, and Johnson isn't going to lose games the way Favre has done the past few years. As much as I hate the Vikings, I think they're better than Green Bay. Childress and McCarthy are total wildcards.

3-6 is probably a realistic record after 9 games... and, as long as they play relatively well, are reasonably competitive, and are showing improvement... I'd be okay with that.AZ is just one game. I bet it will be a good one. I think the Packers D will be better this year and they where better then AZs D last year.

Favre doesnt have to reign himself in, he can't, M3 has to. If he does Favre is going put a big fat sock in the mouthes of those who doubted him. The O M3 is setting up is nearly taylored to fit the aging gunslinger. If the Oline can come through the new WRs WILL GET THE BALL.

I say 8-8 maybe 9-7 and that might get them the division. Winning in week 1 against the bears makes or breaks the season IMO.

[chain_gang]

I feel Arizona might be a little bit dare I say overrated. James was a good pickup name wise, but how many backs make an impact later in their career that change teams. Plus he's carried the rock a lot of times over the course of his career. Their wideouts are top notch, however, their line reminds me a lot of the Packers. Young and inexperienced, both have to prove themselves. I remember Warner being beat up pretty bad(when hasn't he), which leads me to their QBs. Warner while servicable will not be great, he gets injured every year now, and I think if he stumbles a bit, they'll give into the pressure to put in Leinart. I think that could prove to be a big mistake. Their defense is close to the same Defense that gave up 28+ pts 7 times last year. They needed to go for some defensive players this past offseason and seemed to have dropped the ball there.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The 2006 Packers need to learn/feel how to win games right from pre-season on. I know it doesn't make a shit who wins in the pre-season, but the last few years our 1st and 2nd strings looked like they don't belong in the NFL.

I agree with this. Normally, preseason doesn't matter, but you could just see our softness and appalling lack of depth come through in the last few preseasons. I want to see a deep team, punching teams in the mouth this preseason.