Is the Packer roster special?

[Harlan Huckleby]

I really don't think so. They are good. Rogers makes all the recievers better. There were plenty of pedestrian players in last year's super bowl.

Several NFL teams have as much talent.

I think the Packers have two edges:
1 Aaron Rodgers
2 great defensive and offensive coordinators

[hoosier]

On offense I don't disagree: take away Rodgers and you have a pretty ordinary group. There are some stars (Jennings, Sitton) and some potential stars (Finley) but who doesn't have those?

On defense I am less convinced by your argument. Matthews, Raji, Woodson and Williams are all at or near the top of the league at their respective positions. Collins is just short of that. In the cases of Matthews, Raji and Woodson, it is clearly superior talent/experience. With William and other emerging players (Shields) they seem to be doing an especially good job of player development. The days of Slowick and Shottenhemier are thankfully long gone! I will grant you one thing: take away Capers and the Packers aren't anywhere near the SB last year.

[sharpe1027]

There are plenty of pedestrian players on any team. Also, with all the injuries, some of those pedestrian players were 2nd, 3rd or even 4th stringers.

That being said, I have never done a side-by-side comparison to of rosters from other teams, so your premise still might be valid.

[Fritz]

Everybody's special! Didn't your first grade teacher tell you that???

[vince]

I really don't think so. They are good. Rogers makes all the recievers better. There were plenty of pedestrian players in last year's super bowl.

Several NFL teams have as much talent.

I think the Packers have two edges:
1 Aaron Rodgers
2 great defensive and offensive coordinators
I tend to agree with this, but when you look around the league, I'm not having a lot of luck finding those several teams, particularly when you look at the vital positions of QB, pass rusher, and defensive backfield. And now the o-line looks like it could be right up there pretty much across the line except obviously for LG at this point. Throw in Raji, Jennings, Finley, I'm at a loss trying to find those teams. I come up with the Pats and that's about it. If you want to look historically, the job obviously gets easier...

[sheepshead]

Special? What in the world does that mean?

[HarveyWallbangers]

It's not special but it is super. Well, it was last year and I think we should be better. That doesn't always translate to wins and losses. Need better health than last year though.

[vince]

Special? What in the world does that mean?
Look it up fer chrisssakes. Special as in distinguished, esteemed, unusual, extraordinary. In this case, top 2 or 3 in the league.

[sheepshead]

So probowlers?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I tend to agree with this, but when you look around the league, I'm not having a lot of luck finding those several teams, particularly when you look at the vital positions of QB, pass rusher, and defensive backfield. And now the o-line looks like it could be right up there pretty much across the line except obviously for LG at this point. Throw in Raji, Jennings, Finley, I'm at a loss trying to find those teams. I come up with the Pats and that's about it. If you want to look historically, the job obviously gets easier...

Agreed--although I think you could argue that the Eagles have similar playmakers on their team. I just trust Rodgers in a big game more than Vick.

Really. You could say similar things about the Steelers roster most years. They have some stars at key positons. Playmakers. Surrounded by guys that fill their roles well. You could say the same thing about the mid 90s Super Bowl teams. We were pretty pedestrian at OL, RB was okay, WR wasn't special, LBs weren't great. We had a great QB, great DL, and good secondary.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I come up with the Pats and that's about it. If you want to look historically, the job obviously gets easier...

pats, igles, saints, jets, steelers, others have as much talent

the packer secondary looks like all-world

the roster does look very strong, better than last year, but preseason often glows brightly before inevitable injuries roll in.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think MM and Capers keep opponents off-balance. therelies the biggie

[vince]

So probowlers?
Pro-bowlers wouldn't be a great measuring stick IMO, but it'd be interesting to look at for starters. I'd say the best measuring stick would use the 3irty1 double-secret formula rating system.

[MadScientist]

A special team doesn't mean a team filled with stars at every position. A special team has at least a couple of difference makers on both sides of the ball (QB is a must) surrounded by solid role players, not fuck-ups, and lead by excellent coaches. This Packers team has all the makings of a special team. Barring key injuries, the only way I see this team failing is if the OL doesn't gel, as it is the one area where I am dubious of the coaching.

[vince]

pats, igles, saints, jets, steelers, others have as much talent

the packer secondary looks like all-world

the roster does look very strong, better than last year, but preseason often glows brightly before inevitable injuries roll in.
Not one of those teams have a more talented roster than the Packers IMO. The saints defense looks like it's going to get lit up again this year. Someone in another thread said it better, but getting lit up by the Seahawks in the playoffs is not a good sign for your defense. They just can't hold the Packers jocks on that side of the ball. Same can be said about the Steelers.

Jets and Eagles - go position by position and I don't think they match up. The difference between Rodgers and Sanchez, by far the most important positon on the field, is significant.

Even the Pats roster is questionable on the defensive side of the ball in some areas.

The Falcons can't match the Packers across the board either.

When you add in Capers and McCarthy, that helps even more, but you can't take anything from the players and their execution on the field.

[Joemailman]

Apparently, the answer is yes.

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee267/Floatingaxe/Characters/DanaCarveyChurchLady.jpg

[sheepshead]

Its just a weird term to give an NFL player, but maybe that's just me. How about exceptional? As a side, between the nfc and afc rosters and the alternates, the top 2 players in the league usually make the pro bowl.

[Brandon494]

I really don't think so. They are good. Rogers makes all the recievers better. There were plenty of pedestrian players in last year's super bowl.

Several NFL teams have as much talent.

I think the Packers have two edges:
1 Aaron Rodgers
2 great defensive and offensive coordinators

Thankfully you can't evaluate talent for shit :)

[Lurker64]

I think Raji, Woodson, and Matthews are all "special" and that's one "special" player on each level of the defense. That's better than a lot of teams can claim.

[Guiness]

There's just not a lot of holes on the squad. That makes it pretty exceptional.

What's our weakest position?
DL? Two of the three DL starters are Raji and Pickett. I'll take it.
Safety? Well, we have Collins, and Peprah played well. Burnett is up and coming. Woodson fits in there somewhere.
Sure, we can complain a little about the OLB opposite Mathews.
TE and FB, I guess. If Finley comes back 100%, TE isn't much of a problem either!
Left Guard is a question. Well, the tackles look to be in place, center is a 6yr journeyman that doesn't make a lot of mistake, and our RG is Sitton. I'll take that.

We're just damn solid from one end to the other.

[Brandon494]

pats, igles, saints, jets, steelers, others have as much talent

the packer secondary looks like all-world

the roster does look very strong, better than last year, but preseason often glows brightly before inevitable injuries roll in.

All those teams have as much talent but none except for the Steelers have the chemistry this team has which makes them special.

[Lurker64]

I really don't think the Jets on defense are all that talented. They have tremendous talent at CB and ILB, but their safeties, OLBs, and DL aren't all that special. They're very talented on offense, except for the fact that their QB is Mark Sanchez.

The Eagles have a lot of individually talented players, but they have a few major holes on their roster, notably along the OL, the safeties, and the linebackers. That team also needs Vick to play out of his mind. If Vick is average or worse, they don't have a chance, since that defense can stop people in nickel, but not really in base so if the Iggles find themselves in a grinder, that's a problem for them if Vick can't outplay the other QB.

Saints, Pats, and Steelers are probably about on par overall with the Packers in terms of talent. With the Steelers you worry about their age on defense, and with the Saints you worry about their offensive tackles and their front 7 on defense. Pats are potentially fantastic on paper, though.

[Joemailman]

The Packers have Pro Bowl caliber players in every area of the roster. That makes them special.

QB Rodgers
RB Grant
WR Jennings
TE Finley
OL Sitton, Clifton
DL Raji
LB Matthews
CB Woodson, Williams
S Collins

[Pugger]

I suppose DL (Neal's health in particular), RG and LB opposite CM3 are the only real holes/concerns we have right now. I'm sure there isn't a team in the league that doesn't have holes like this somewhere on their roster. But I'm pretty sure most teams have more issues than we do!

[Guiness]

:cow:
I suppose DL (Neal's health in particular), RG and LB opposite CM3 are the only real holes/concerns we have right now. I'm sure there isn't a team in the league that doesn't have holes like this somewhere on their roster. But I'm pretty sure most teams have more issues than we do!

I'm SURE you mean LG. Sitton is the RG, far from a hole there

[bobblehead]

There's just not a lot of holes on the squad. That makes it pretty exceptional.

What's our weakest position?
DL? Two of the three DL starters are Raji and Pickett. I'll take it.
Safety? Well, we have Collins, and Peprah played well. Burnett is up and coming. Woodson fits in there somewhere.
Sure, we can complain a little about the OLB opposite Mathews.
TE and FB, I guess. If Finley comes back 100%, TE isn't much of a problem either!
Left Guard is a question. Well, the tackles look to be in place, center is a 6yr journeyman that doesn't make a lot of mistake, and our RG is Sitton. I'll take that.

We're just damn solid from one end to the other.

What you said. I don't subscribe to the "playmaker" theory, but I subscribe to the theory that says if you have no holes on the field, players start making plays all over the place. A normal probowler begins to look like a "playmaker" (all world type). A really good starter looks like a probowler. An average starter looks good. A below average starter looks serviceable.

Add to this that QB is by far the most important position in pro sports and we have a "special" roster for sure.

[mission]

This roster is special. We'll be able to look back at this era of Green Bay football, and some of the young players (present and future), and stack them up next to any team in the history of the NFL. Player-for-player. All great teams have made good players "great" from a historical perspective... that's part of being a component in the machine.

It's just too new and young to be able to quantify the talent on this team but time, I think, will ultimately do that.

[mission]

What you said. I don't subscribe to the "playmaker" theory, but I subscribe to the theory that says if you have no holes on the field, players start making plays all over the place. A normal probowler begins to look like a "playmaker" (all world type). A really good starter looks like a probowler. An average starter looks good. A below average starter looks serviceable.

Sorry I missed your post, but obviously I agree. Good players become beasts on teams where everyone else is at least holding their own.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We're just damn solid from one end to the other.

homer!

I'm sort-of kidding. I remember many years when I've looked at the Packers, and especially the Badgers, at the start of the team and thought, "no holes." Then the team goes .500

I just think fans can not be objective. We look at the potential of players, we hope, and always guess they are above average, like the children of Lake Wobagon.

[Harlan Huckleby]

All those teams have as much talent but none except for the Steelers have the chemistry this team has which makes them special.

I agree, and chemistry comes down to coaching.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Not one of those teams have a more talented roster than the Packers IMO.

homer


Somebody in this thread mentioned the Packer SB of 90's, or maybe I just imagined they did. That team was way more stacked than this one. The Ron Wolfe era was totally different. You had th Cowboys building a team of allstars with 2-deep talent.

psssst. Parity.

There is more parity now than even 5 years ago, not sure why, but its pretty obvious. We think of the Bears as being below the Packers talent wise, but they are just a hair worse.

Parity has made coaching nearly everything, well, along with QB play. Salary cap means they have to get young players on the field contributing immediately, and starting in one year. There is parity in talent, the difference is mostly in organization.

[Joemailman]

I agree, and chemistry comes down to coaching.

Not quite. I think chemistry comes down to the GM and HC having the same idea about the kind of players they want on the team. I get the sense that Thompson and McCarthy are in lockstep in this regard. I think that's a big part of the reason why TT hasn't done more in free agency. Talented players from other teams may not necessarily be a good fit chemistry wise.

[Upnorth]

On the o and d sides our only concern is depth, yet on a year we were decimated by injuries we win a superbowl. Our depth has talent. I think our hole is special teams, and the league helped us out in one phase of special teams. The saints front 7 are suspect, the pats secondary, the jets qb, the falcons d, the colts d, the steelers o, all the big teams have concerns on o or d, with us its special teams. I think that makes us special!

[King Friday]

In today's NFL, it is impossible to build a "special" team. The key is a "special" QB, and we clearly have one with Rodgers.

[Upnorth]

I think skinbaskets avatar is special.

[vince]

homer

Somebody in this thread mentioned the Packer SB of 90's, or maybe I just imagined they did. That team was way more stacked than this one. The Ron Wolfe era was totally different. You had th Cowboys building a team of allstars with 2-deep talent.

psssst. Parity.

There is more parity now than even 5 years ago, not sure why, but its pretty obvious. We think of the Bears as being below the Packers talent wise, but they are just a hair worse.

Parity has made coaching nearly everything, well, along with QB play. Salary cap means they have to get young players on the field contributing immediately, and starting in one year. There is parity in talent, the difference is mostly in organization.
Talking only about current teams, I think you can make arguments for those other teams being more or less on par with the Packers roster, but I don't think you can make a credible argument that any of them are clearly better. Look around. The Packers are the odds on favorite, along with the Pats, to go to the Super Bowl again this year. That's the top 2 teams in the league on paper. I agree with your argument about the team having great coaching, but there's no way to quantify the extent to which that results in special performance relative to the players' overall talent level. Guys like Tramon Williams and many others have become better by virtue of their time in Green Bay, but you just can't take performance on the field away from the players who are doing the peforming.

[Guiness]

Talking only about current teams, I think you can make arguments for those other teams being more or less on par with the Packers roster, but I don't think you can make a credible argument that any of them are clearly better. Look around. The Packers are the odds on favorite, along with the Pats, to go to the Super Bowl again this year. That's the top 2 teams in the league on paper. I agree with your argument about the team having great coaching, but there's no way to quantify the extent to which that results in special performance relative to the players' overall talent level. Guys like Tramon Williams and many others have become better by virtue of their time in Green Bay, but you just can't take performance on the field away from the players who are doing the peforming.

Did you just crown us paper champions???:shock: Shame on you!

Bad coaching can be obvious, good coaching is more of a hindsight think. We had front row seats to Rod Marinelli and Mike Tice for bad. On the other hand, our secondary, which is considered to be one of the best in the league, consists of 2 UDFAs and a 5th round pick who was a waiver claim after being released by the team that drafted him.

[Yoop]

there isn't a GM in the league that wouldn't trade rosters with us in a new york heartbeat, we have 3.5 blue players on offense counting Finley and if he stays healthy that turns into a 4, AR,Sitton, Jennings, and Finley,on defense we have 5 blues, Woody,Williams, CM3, Raji and Collins, thats loaded, no other team can claim that, and Philly has a bunch of talent thats never played together, couple that up with the rest of the roster filled with red players and backups, and this is a very well stocked team, on paper, no one matches up imo.

[Pugger]

QUOTE=Guiness;608223]:cow:

I'm SURE you mean LG. Sitton is the RG, far from a hole there[/QUOTE]

Whoops!!! Egad, of course LG. :oops:

[sheepshead]

This thread is special.

[pbmax]

Food for thought: The Eagles are now unofficially worried about their O line after a bad preseason performance. And it had some problems last year. I don't think they can be labeled a juggernaut yet. And that roster still has holes at WR (Jackson has been banged up and injured before, Maclin is still limited), LB and safety.

[mraynrand]

Food for thought: The Eagles are now unofficially worried about their O line after a bad preseason performance. And it had some problems last year. I don't think they can be labeled a juggernaut yet. And that roster still has holes at WR (Jackson has been banged up and injured before, Maclin is still limited), LB and safety.

But Vick and Vince can still run it!

[mraynrand]

Hey that would be a great nickname for Philly's QB's One is a convict "Con" and "Vince" Young - ConVince!

Well, maybe not so great...

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_y8SPNbAAKo8/SFdT156rGOI/AAAAAAAACSw/uG4_YEM-nDY/s400/totg-short-bus2.jpg

You can tell when a roster is special when the team bus pulls up.

[RashanGary]

I think we have a special roster. Stars on both sides of the ball. There are going to be young guys who step up this yer and become stars too. A star or two is born every year under Ted.

[Fritz]

I think we have a special roster. Stars on both sides of the ball. There are going to be young guys who step up this yer and become stars too. A star or two is born every year under Ted.

Ted=Barbra Streisand

[Zool]

Ted=Barbra Streisand

When he retires "you don't bring me pro-bowlers.......anymore"

[pbmax]

When he retires "you don't bring me pro-bowlers.......anymore"

That would make Mike Sherman Kris Kristofferson.

[3irty1]

Strange question, I'd argue that the Packers roster has 2 special aspects:

Depth, this remains to be seen this year and isn't even necessary if you are lucky. Last year the team had truly special depth across the Oline, LBers, Safeties, and throughout the offense. Even QB.

Teams like the Eagles might have as many pro bowlers as we do but when you compare those blue chippers, the Packers' are really a league better. The only really all world player is the newfangled corner they nabbed with the crazy name. By the time this current group of Packers is done it could be a who's who of hall of famers.

[sharpe1027]

There is a whole lot of optimism in this thread. I like it!!

I think the Packers have a really good thing going, BUT they might not be as good as the hype. Last year they did an amazing job with a ton of injuries, BUT the post season success makes it all too easy to forget that they were only 10-6 and a 6th seed. Great run through the playoffs though!

I think that the roster is one of the best, but stepping back and trying to be objective (difficult as a big fan), I doubt I would have the same opinion if they had missed the playoffs and the roster was only good enough for them to just get in.

I thought the roster was something special before the start of last year, but I wasn't certain. I still think it is one of the best, but I am still a bit uncertain just how good it is.

[swede]

I think the Packers have a really good thing going, BUT they might not be as good as the hype. Last year they did an amazing job with a ton of injuries, BUT the post season success makes it all too easy to forget that they were only 10-6 and a 6th seed. Great run through the playoffs though!

I think that the roster is one of the best, but stepping back and trying to be objective (difficult as a big fan), I doubt I would have the same opinion if they had missed the playoffs and the roster was only good enough for them to just get in...

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/27548_118208894862991_1983_n.jpg

[MadScientist]

I think that the roster is one of the best, but stepping back and trying to be objective (difficult as a big fan), I doubt I would have the same opinion if they had missed the playoffs and the roster was only good enough for them to just get in.
Maybe, but the rest of us Kool-aid drinkers would have just chalked it up to the ridiculous number of injuries. It took a bit of luck to get into the playoffs, but once there, this team showed a lot. The key this year will be the left side of the O-line. If Lang can pass block as well as Colledge and if Clifton can hold up (or have Newhouse fill in adequately) then this should be an elite team. If not, then it's trouble.

[bobblehead]

homer!

I'm sort-of kidding. I remember many years when I've looked at the Packers, and especially the Badgers, at the start of the team and thought, "no holes." Then the team goes .500

I just think fans can not be objective. We look at the potential of players, we hope, and always guess they are above average, like the children of Lake Wobagon.

This is fair, and I have been guilty of the same. Part of my optimism right now is that this team got stronger with injuries. That shows superior depth. They also never get blown out. When you are in every game, it speaks volumes. Position by position, we have a couple small weaknesses and a few question marks. I think our RB's are average. Our LG, FS, and LOLB are all unproven. Out of those contending for those positions, only Burnett looks like he could be an all pro.

BUT...to win in the NFL, you need certain things. A very good LT (check), a pass rush (check, but could be better), superior QB play (check), ability to adapt to your opponents weakness (check). You simply need to be average at the rest.

[bobblehead]

Food for thought: The Eagles are now unofficially worried about their O line after a bad preseason performance. And it had some problems last year. I don't think they can be labeled a juggernaut yet. And that roster still has holes at WR (Jackson has been banged up and injured before, Maclin is still limited), LB and safety.

I watched them against the Browns last night and the Eagles LB corps are shit. If any team can power run the ball, Vick can take a nap between possessions.

[HarveyWallbangers]

That could very likely be Philly's downfall. Their DL can rush the QB, but it's not a good run stopping unit on the whole. And they may have the worst starting LB corps in the NFL. Of course, they are talented enough on offense (provided Vick's stays healthy) to outscore people, and good luck falling behind them and having to pass your way back into the game.

[Lurker64]

That could very likely be Philly's downfall. Their DL can rush the QB, but it's not a good run stopping unit on the whole. And they may have the worst starting LB corps in the NFL. Of course, they are talented enough on offense (provided Vick's stays healthy) to outscore people, and good luck falling behind them and having to pass your way back into the game.

Well, the thesis for the Iggles defense this year is for Vick and the explosive offense to get the team to jump out to a lead, so the other team is coming from behind and the Eagles can just line up in nickel and rush the passer (which they're set up pretty well to do.) The problem is, of course, if Vick doesn't play lights out and the Eagles are playing from behind instead of ahead, they're kind of screwed against a team who can run the ball.

The Packers definitely made hay with the "we will play nickel as often as possible last year" but that's largely because the Packers were actually very successful at stopping the run when it mattered (stopping the run matters on 3rd and short, stopping the run does not really matter on first and 10 or second and 6.) You need to be able to do two things in the NFL to turn a good defense into a championship defense: stop the pass on third and medium-long, and stop the run on third and short. The Eagles defense is set up to do the former pretty well, but definitely not the latter.

[Brandon494]

Were we good at stopping the run last season? If their defense can create turnovers they will be fine.

[ThunderDan]

There is a whole lot of optimism in this thread. I like it!!

I think the Packers have a really good thing going, BUT they might not be as good as the hype. Last year they did an amazing job with a ton of injuries, BUT the post season success makes it all too easy to forget that they were only 10-6 and a 6th seed. Great run through the playoffs though!

I think that the roster is one of the best, but stepping back and trying to be objective (difficult as a big fan), I doubt I would have the same opinion if they had missed the playoffs and the roster was only good enough for them to just get in.

I thought the roster was something special before the start of last year, but I wasn't certain. I still think it is one of the best, but I am still a bit uncertain just how good it is.

If Finley stays healthy this year the Packers O will win 9-11 games on their own throw in our D and we are 13-3 with Superbowl aspirations.

[Lurker64]

Were we good at stopping the run last season? If their defense can create turnovers they will be fine.

When it mattered, yes, absolutely.

According to Football Outsiders, in terms of "Power Rank" in 2010 (defined as):


Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. Also includes runs on first-and-goal or second-and-goal from the two-yard line or closer. This is the only statistic on this page that includes quarterbacks. Teams are ranked from lowest power success percentage allowed (#1) to highest power success percentage allowed (#32).

We were ranked #2.

We were also 5th best in the league in terms of preventing open-field running yards.

[Scott Campbell]

Somebody in this thread mentioned the Packer SB of 90's, or maybe I just imagined they did. That team was way more stacked than this one. The Ron Wolfe era was totally different. You had th Cowboys building a team of allstars with 2-deep talent.


There wasn't 2-deep talent on that team. They don't win squat with Jason Garret under center.

[HarveyWallbangers]

When it mattered, yes, absolutely.

According to Football Outsiders, in terms of "Power Rank" in 2010 (defined as):

We were ranked #2.

We were also 5th best in the league in terms of preventing open-field running yards.

We could stop the run when we wanted to, but we played nickel 75% of the time. The Eagles may have to put 9 in the box to stop the run this year. Cole, Patterson, and Babin are all better pass rushers than run defenders. Same can be said for Jenkins when he's playing at DT. He's a good run stopping 3-4 DE, but put him at DT in a 4-3 and I'd say he's an ordinary run defender.

The Eagles starting LBs are Jamar Chaney, Casey Matthews, and Moise Fokou. Fokou is an ordinary third year player with 15 career starts. Matthews is a rookie mid round pick that hasn't looked good this preseason. Chaney was taken in the 7th round last year and has 2 career starts. Maybe these guys will surprise, but my guess is that teams will be able to run on the Eagles at will.

[KYPack]

We could stop the run when we wanted to, but we played nickel 75% of the time. The Eagles may have to put 9 in the box to stop the run this year. Cole, Patterson, and Babin are all better pass rushers than run defenders. Same can be said for Jenkins when he's playing at DT. He's a good run stopping 3-4 DE, but put him at DT in a 4-3 and I'd say he's an ordinary run defender.

The Eagles starting LBs are Jamar Chaney, Casey Matthews, and Moise Fokou. Fokou is an ordinary third year player with 15 career starts. Matthews is a rookie mid round pick that hasn't looked good this preseason. Chaney was taken in the 7th round last year and has 2 career starts. Maybe these guys will surprise, but my guess is that teams will be able to run on the Eagles at will.

That was my point in the "Hot seat" thread.

The Eagles have some talent, but they ain't deep and have big issues in both boiler rooms. If the Eagles only win 6 - 7 games, will the GM take the fall? He should, but they may pin things on Andy.
Philly could finish last in the NFC East. The Plowboys will be much improved on D with Rob Ryan. The Giants are badasses. If the Rat gets Washington going, it could be a long year in Philly.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Dallas still has major issues defensively, and I think the Giants lost two corners to injury already. Washington has no chance in that division. Not with Grossman or Beck at QB. It wouldn't surprise me if the Giants or Dallas win the division, but the Eagles should be the favorites. It's interesting that all three teams have issues defensively. Might be a different story in the NFC North. Green Bay and Chicago should be good defensively. Detroit is getting better and could have a dominant DL. I expect Minnesota's defense to bounce back.

[pbmax]

Eagles have moved Left Guard Herremanns to Right Tackle. Winston Justice still on PUP and the wonderfully named King Dunlap goes to the bench.

Remain calm. ALL IS WELL!

[Harlan Huckleby]

I watched some of MN-Dallas game. McNabb looked good, Peterson on fire, their offense might be ok. the o-line is improved.

[pbmax]

This is the reason you hang on to Finley, Twitter, mouth and all, even for a high price:


Tight end Jermichael Finley is such dynamic a receiver it’s easy to overlook his blocking. Early in his career he probably didn’t want to block, and I doubt it’s his favorite thing now, but he did well when they lined him tight to the formation or in the backfield as a lead blocker against the Colts. He got his hands on guys and kept them out of the pile. That’s Finley’s next step and will make him a better receiver because he can show block to a linebacker or safety then go downfield. The Packers will need him to block if they’re to have any success running the ball, especially with how poorly the offensive line played against the Colts.

He is not only good, but he seems to consistently want to be better. Its hard to ask for more.

[Smidgeon]

This is the reason you hang on to Finley, Twitter, mouth and all, even for a high price:



He is not only good, but he seems to consistently want to be better. Its hard to ask for more.

I loved that chip block where he put the defensive end on his back. I don't know if the defensive end is never expecting it, but Finley hits him so suddenly that he falls to the ground. Awesome.

[bobblehead]

This is the reason you hang on to Finley, Twitter, mouth and all, even for a high price:



He is not only good, but he seems to consistently want to be better. Its hard to ask for more.

This was the point I was making where JH misunderstood me. Finley is a willing blocker and keeps improving. He isn't TO bad with the mouth, but he is TO and then some in work ethic. TO worked hard, Finley harder. TO was a cancer, Finley is a very moderate distraction.

If he didn't block, he is just another reciever. Any TE has to block.

[sharpe1027]

Maybe, but the rest of us Kool-aid drinkers would have just chalked it up to the ridiculous number of injuries. It took a bit of luck to get into the playoffs, but once there, this team showed a lot. The key this year will be the left side of the O-line. If Lang can pass block as well as Colledge and if Clifton can hold up (or have Newhouse fill in adequately) then this should be an elite team. If not, then it's trouble.

Another key is that unless someone steps up, they are one problematic hamstring away from having no pass rush (outside of creative blitzes).

[sharpe1027]

If Finley stays healthy this year the Packers O will win 9-11 games on their own throw in our D and we are 13-3 with Superbowl aspirations.

That is the conventional wisdom. My worry is that the conventional wisdom is very often wrong. More often than not, the team with all the hype from one year of productivity or big off-season moves disappoints. It is the teams with a steady history of year after year success that seldom disappoint. The Packers could be one of those steady teams, but IMO they are still trying to establish themselves as one of those teams.

In the end, I cannot find any fault with your logic, but I perhaps I can still provide a bit of perspective to what has been a pretty one-sided thread.

[ThunderDan]

That is the conventional wisdom. My worry is that the conventional wisdom is very often wrong. More often than not, the team with all the hype from one year of productivity or big off-season moves disappoints. It is the teams with a steady history of year after year success that seldom disappoint. The Packers could be one of those steady teams, but IMO they are still trying to establish themselves as one of those teams.

In the end, I cannot find any fault with your logic, but I perhaps I can still provide a bit of perspective to what has been a pretty one-sided thread.

I agree but I would be a lot more worried if our average starter was age 30 and not 26. We are young and upcoming. I really like the mixute on this team.

With the salary cap in place you can't be deep at every position. Every team has warts. I think our warts will be easier to hide than other teams' warts. I hope!:tup:

[woodbuck27]

Dallas still has major issues defensively, and I think the Giants lost two corners to injury already. Washington has no chance in that division. Not with Grossman or Beck at QB. It wouldn't surprise me if the Giants or Dallas win the division, but the Eagles should be the favorites. It's interesting that all three teams have issues defensively. Might be a different story in the NFC North. Green Bay and Chicago should be good defensively. Detroit is getting better and could have a dominant DL. I expect Minnesota's defense to bounce back.

Yes the NFC 'Black and Blue Division' will be back in 2011 again finally. This is going to be an exciting season to see who is number two in our division. It's PACKERS all the way unless we suffer the adversity we saw in 2010. We cannot dodge that bullet again; realstically NOT going to happen! We have to remain healthy and keep our offense on the field as much as possible and rest the 'D' or take the heat off of the defense. That means we must run the pigskin and MM and Aaron Rodgers has to be patient with our running game. Get a 10-14 point lead and then relax into that game if at all possible that's 'the wining formula IMO. We have to win the battle of the clock. Old fashioned drag it out offense wins the long day. Hopefully our OL and running backs provide that realistic opportunity. PATIENCE wins the prize.

GO PACKERS!