Not Ready To Pack It In

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'll stay optimistic. The sky hasn't fallen. We seem to hit this point every year--even in our Super Bowl winning years (Freeman, Brooks, Chmura injuries in 1996 and the loss at Dallas + 8-6 with a bunch of injuries in 2010). Seattle is tough. In the last two years they have blown out Dallas (27-7), Arizona (58-0), San Francisco (42-13), New Orleans (34-7), and San Francisco again (29-3)--not to mention throttling some lesser teams at home. It's a place where you can get beat handily if you aren't at the top of your game. Last year, both New Orleans and San Fran were throttled at Seattle in the regular season before losing in tight games in the playoffs. I'm going to wait a few weeks before I let panic set in. That is all.

[Joemailman]

I'm not in panic mode either. But that was pretty bad last night. There are a lot of teams the Packers wouldn't have beaten last night. I still think they're the favorite to win the NFCN. The question is whether they're anything more than that.

[MadScientist]

Slow start is typical, and the Packers tend to improve even with mounting injuries. Still at the moment, it looks like the only thing that could beat the Seahawks in Seattle is Mount Rainier.

[Striker]

I'm not in panic mode either. But that was pretty bad last night. There are a lot of teams the Packers wouldn't have beaten last night. I still think they're the favorite to win the NFCN. The question is whether they're anything more than that.

They can contend if they play a near flawless game.

But they need to not get in their own way against an elite team, it'll just lead to a debacle.

[oldbutnotdeadyet]

I'm not in panic mode either. But that was pretty bad last night. There are a lot of teams the Packers wouldn't have beaten last night. I still think they're the favorite to win the NFCN. The question is whether they're anything more than that.

Not sure Im in panic mode either, but what would help a lot is if they took Sherrod and Jones out and gave somebody else a chance. Those two really stood out as worthless pieces of shit...

[OS PA]

Going into last nights game, I kept thinking that this years team was going to be something special. I still think that, even with the Bulaga injury, I just think we're going to take a little time to gel. Our protections looked a bit off, Rodgers looked hesitant to throw to anyone but Quarless and Jordy, and our defense looked a bit too eager to make the big play. Matthews looked onstopable at times, the secondary showed glimpes of good coverage, and I think McCarthy is going to figure out how to call a game for THIS team sooner or later. I think we just ran into a great team that's even better at home, and once we get clicking, we'll be a contender.

A team with Rodgers at the head of it isn't going to look this bad all year. Even as one of the more sacked quarterbacks over the past three years, he still has top QB rating in NFL history. He'll come around.

We're going to throttle the Jets at home. Don't worry.

[Willard]

Slow start is typical, and the Packers tend to improve even with mounting injuries. Still at the moment, it looks like the only thing that could beat the Seahawks in Seattle is Mount Rainier.

Mt. Ranier could never catch Percy Harvin! All kidding aside, I agree with you. I felt similar after last year's opener against the niners. Then in the weeks just before the Collarbone Incident I felt the Pack looked almost unbeatable. They will find their groove (at least on offense) soon enough. They don't have much time though. If Detroit and Chicago (or god forbid - the Jets) beat the Pack then I will start to worry. And if they play like they did last night I think they could easily lose these upcoming games! still -- have -- faith --

[Harlan Huckleby]

pack it in

http://static.flickr.com/94/242672062_1f5241de54_m.jpg

[Freak Out]

I'll stay optimistic. The sky hasn't fallen. We seem to hit this point every year--even in our Super Bowl winning years (Freeman, Brooks, Chmura injuries in 1996 and the loss at Dallas + 8-6 with a bunch of injuries in 2010). Seattle is tough. In the last two years they have blown out Dallas (27-7), Arizona (58-0), San Francisco (42-13), New Orleans (34-7), and San Francisco again (29-3)--not to mention throttling some lesser teams at home. It's a place where you can get beat handily if you aren't at the top of your game. Last year, both New Orleans and San Fran were throttled at Seattle in the regular season before losing in tight games in the playoffs. I'm going to wait a few weeks before I let panic set in. That is all.

Seattle is a very good team and VERY tough at home....and it showed last night. Make a few mistakes and things get out of hand fast. They proved they are the team to beat....it will be tough but it's not impossible. GB has some work to do though.... :)

[Bretsky]

it is what is is; we are a 10-6 to 11-5 team

we are very good and the hawks are elite

[Teamcheez1]

I'm glad to see things calming down a bit today. It's a long season and beating the Seahawks in week one was not a reality.

This forum went all the way to Defcon 2 in the last 24 hours.

[Bretsky]

so many were intoxicated on kool aide with their predictions it was good to bring them back to reality.....lol

[George Cumby]

so many were intoxicated on kool aide with their predictions it was good to bring them back to reality.....lol

I thought it was super tasty and then realized it was goat piss............