The Official Pack-Queens Discussion Thread

[Anti-Polar Bear]

It's Thursday already. The Mailman and pbmax are too lazy to start this thread, so allow me - Tank Elf Duke, stoic, father of dragons and legitimate king of the Utopia of Earth - to do so.

Keys to victory:

Behead the Switch Hitter - Pretty obvious. Cut off the head of AP and Vikes offense will shut down like Darren Charles on that fateful day yours truly shut him down.

Get off the fuckin' field! - D couldn't get off the field last week. Consequently, Rodgers, Cobb, Nelson, Lacy, Cook fantasy owners suffered.

Gunsling It- If the Great Arm of Butte dances around behind the LOS all day, as he did last week, Vikes' fearsome foursome will eat him out alive. Gunsling' it like Favre!

Score STDs- Standardized touchdowns. Finish drives. Get the rock in.

Catch the Damn Ball - Adams would not be able to catch a cold if he was standing coatless on Antarctica with the mighty Emperor Penguins. Bleep him. Monty, Janis, Abby and Cook need to step up...and catch the damn ball.

Side notes: Thompson should've drafted Harrison Smith, the hip-hop saftey from Notre Dame, instead of Perry...Greenway is older than dirt, but he's still playing while draft-mate Hawk is already out of the league...Bradford will start this game.

Packers 34

Vikings 17

[Harlan Huckleby]

the Great Arm of Butte

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Pd9ESWsd9J4/hqdefault.jpg

[yetisnowman]

Well it's hard to catch the ball when you aren't on the field. Not so much a stepping up issue. Cook, yes can do some more. Aaron missed him get free, I think a couple of plays before the Adams touchdown. Kind of a busted coverage and Cook was wide open on the sideline, Aaron stalled for a few seconds and sailed the ball out of bounds, probably should have been a td. I'm assuming Abby and Monty will see some more snaps this week.

[esoxx]

It's Thursday already. The Mailman and pbmax are too lazy to start this thread, so allow me - Tank Elf Duke, stoic, father of dragons and legitimate king of the Utopia of Earth - to do so.

Keys to victory:

Behead the Switch Hitter - Pretty obvious. Cut off the head of AP and Vikes offense will shut down like Darren Charles on that fateful day yours truly shut him down. :beat:

[Joemailman]

It's Thursday already. The Mailman and pbmax are too lazy to start this thread, so allow me - Tank Elf Duke, stoic, father of dragons and legitimate king of the Utopia of Earth - to do so.

I'm 4-0 in Official Game Day Threads this year. Do I have to do everything around here? :razz:

[pbmax]

According to practice observers, its going to be Bradford, going by rep count.

Janis caught two balls in practice WITH his club. Maybe like Antonio, he will become more reliable with a cast on. I hope he wears that cast versus the Lions and punches Golden Tate on a punt return. I might even pay the fine.*


*offer not valid in WI or MI

[Upnorth]

If we play a turn over free game I can't see us lose.

[esoxx]

I find it humorous the Vikings don't just name Bradford. Pretty sure everyone knows he'll be starting. You can bet the Packers are preparing accordingly.

Note to Vikings: give it up already.

[run pMc]

According to practice observers, its going to be Bradford, going by rep count.

Janis caught two balls in practice WITH his club. Maybe like Antonio, he will become more reliable with a cast on. I hope he wears that cast versus the Lions and punches Golden Tate on a punt return. I might even pay the fine.*


*offer not valid in WI or MI

I think if Janis socked Tate in the nuts the Packer Nation might name him their deity.

[vince]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftxXeX2m8Zg

[Radagast]

Green Bay - 24
Minnesota - 20

:glug:

[gbgary]

three words...8 in the box!

[Cheesehead Craig]

Vikes fans here in the Twin Cities are really amped for this game. Lots of comments wishing injury to Nelson and Rodgers. I dare say it's rather hostile. The most hostile environment I've felt from living here for the past 19 yrs. Lots of predictions of the Vikes blowing out the Packers.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I listened to McGinn's scouting report of Minnesota on the podcast. No weak link in that defense, they are going to be a challenge. They are missing their #1 CB like the Pack.

[George Cumby]

Vikes 24
Pack 17

[ThunderDan]

In a crushing home defeat:

Packers 27
Vikings 9

[Guiness]

This is their home opener at the new field, right? Any word on their starting QB?

[pbmax]

This is their home opener at the new field, right? Any word on their starting QB?

Rumors are Bradford getting the most reps.

[wist43]

Minnesota 27
Green Bay 24

[Tony Oday]

Green Bay wins in a rout. 35-17. Vikes have no QB, AP has a new Line to Adjust too, their DBs are terrible and 4 WR will eat them alive!

[Maxie the Taxi]

I defer to Rastak. He knows both teams.

[gbgary]

Rumors are Bradford getting the most reps.

yeah...all of them yesterday.

[gbgary]

the difference is qb. i like our qb better than theirs. it's as simple as that.

[Guiness]

Who practiced to the Pack this week? I don't think Shields an Elliot did? Hope Elliot gets over his Packer Hammy soon.

Looking forward to seeing Charles Johnson.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I listened to McGinn's scouting report of Minnesota on the podcast. No weak link in that defense, they are going to be a challenge. They are missing their #1 CB like the Pack.

Griffen, Barr and hip-hop S H-Smith are the studs of that defense. Kendrick, not sure whether he's black, white or yellow, is a solid MLB - reminds me of former Pack great Nick Barnett.

I'd say the weakest part of that D is CB, especially with Rhodes likely to miss this game. Waynes is as raw as sushi; Newman is old enough to qualify for social security. Munnerlyn is a JAG. As I wrote in the original post, Rodgers should gunsling the rock.

The Packers are gonna need the Great Arm of Butte to show up with his A-game and put up great fantasy numbers.

When's the last time Rodgers had a great game statistically? The loss at Carolina? It's been so long since Rodgers put up pretty stats that I am a bit worried he's a-losing a step.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'd say the weakest part of that D is CB, especially with Rhodes likely to miss this game. Waynes is as raw as sushi; Newman is old enough to qualify for social security. Munnerlyn is a JAG. As I wrote in the original post, Rodgers should gunsling the rock.

This is sort-of what McGinn had to say, corner is the weakest part. But he still thought the starting corners were decent. In particular, Newman is cagey enough to make-up for declining speed. But that's who you attack - Newman!

http://cbsnews3.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2013/05/14/d47592d1-c3c9-11e2-a43e-02911869d855/resize/620x465/8f1e1aeb9bd7a994fdbfb86557a7b233/010_Newman_old.png


Their safeties and front seven are championship solid.

[Upnorth]

If our oline can consistently keep Aron clean for 2.5 seconds we win. Unless Aron has lost a step

[Patler]

Minnesota 27
Green Bay 24

I sort of agree, but don't see it being that high scoring

MN 17
GB 13

I saw nothing on Sunday that made me think the Packer's offensive problems from last year have been solved. Against a good defense, they will struggle as badly as last year. MN isn't likely to have a lot going on offense yet either.

[denverYooper]

Bah. The Packers are going to drop a 40-burger. Vikes not so much.

[RashanGary]

three words...8 in the box!

That's four word ;)

[RashanGary]

I sort of agree, but don't see it being that high scoring

MN 17
GB 13

I saw nothing on Sunday that made me think the Packer's offensive problems from last year have been solved. Against a good defense, they will struggle as badly as last year. MN isn't likely to have a lot going on offense yet either.

Lacy looked pretty good to me. Rodgers looked to be throwing well unlike last year. WRs didn't seem much different, but let's wait and see. I have a feeling Cobb will have a big year. He's better than the injured version we saw last year.

[Upnorth]

three words...8 in the box!

Three words, memories of ex girlfriend

[wist43]

I sort of agree, but don't see it being that high scoring

MN 17
GB 13

I saw nothing on Sunday that made me think the Packer's offensive problems from last year have been solved. Against a good defense, they will struggle as badly as last year. MN isn't likely to have a lot going on offense yet either.

I arrived at 27-24 by thinking that Dom won't be able to help himself, and he will run a nickel and dime way too much - AP will have room to run. Throw in a turnover or two by GB, and I think Minnesota can get to 27.

As for Green Bay's 24, I'm throwing in a late 'trying to catch up' score.

I don't think it will be a 3 point game on the field... I think the Vikings will control the game throughout.

That said, I can easily see a 17-13 game as well.

[texaspackerbacker]

Here we go again, the usual suspects predicting bad things for the Packers.

I can't see the Vikings doing much against the Packers D. We load up to stop Peterson and let our DBs beat their receivers. If Aaron Rodgers is on his game, we score big against pretty much any D. Kick it out of the end zone, as Cordarelle Patterson is downright scary.

Packers 34 Vikings 20

[HarveyWallbangers]

Our CBs aren't that good without Shields. Randall is good. Rollins is okay. Gunter is below average.

[Patler]

Here we go again, the usual suspects predicting bad things for the Packers.

I can't see the Vikings doing much against the Packers D. We load up to stop Peterson and let our DBs beat their receivers. If Aaron Rodgers is on his game, we score big against pretty much any D. Kick it out of the end zone, as Cordarelle Patterson is downright scary.

Packers 34 Vikings 20

I don't usually find reasons to "bet" against the Packers, but I don't have a good feeling about this game, so I went with my gut. My biggest concerns are:

- success passing last week was on extended/broken plays, not the offense clicking.
- lots of miscommunications
- new stadium is said to be even louder than the old one, and specifically designed to be so
- fans will be rabid in the opening game of the new stadium.
- MN defense is solid front to back, with 1 or 2 really good ones at each level.

None of this bodes well for Packer's offense.

Packers will be quite inexperienced on defense, Ringo, Clark, Lowry, Martinez, Evans and Brice could all play significant rolls and have one game of experience. Thomas, Ryan, Rollins and Gunter could as well and have limited experience less than a year. Could be a difficult game for them.

[Smidgeon]

Lacy looked pretty good to me. Rodgers looked to be throwing well unlike last year. WRs didn't seem much different, but let's wait and see. I have a feeling Cobb will have a big year. He's better than the injured version we saw last year.

We need a WR again. Jordy may come back, but he isn't the future. They need another outside guy.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We need a WR again. Jordy may come back, but he isn't the future. They need another outside guy.

They lack a stud, and I doubt Jordy can make a full comeback. The pleasant surprise has been Adams flashing big play ability.

[King Friday]

I saw nothing on Sunday that made me think the Packer's offensive problems from last year have been solved.

Well, that was actually a preseason game for our offense...since they hardly played at all in the true preseason. I thought Rodgers threw the ball more consistently than he did much of last year. The Jags have a very good defense too...and we hung 27 on them.

Somehow, against this massive brick wall that apparently is the greatest defense ever known to man...the Packers hung 30 on them at their place last season...coming off 3 losses and their offense looking like poo. Basically, Rodgers has mostly OWNED the Vikings. There is no reason to think that is suddenly going to stop simply because the Vikings built a huge bird-killing stadium. Rodgers isn't a bird, so he'll do just fine.

GB 23
MN 13

[Willard]

Here we go again, the usual suspects predicting bad things for the Packers.

I can't see the Vikings doing much against the Packers D. We load up to stop Peterson and let our DBs beat their receivers. If Aaron Rodgers is on his game, we score big against pretty much any D. Kick it out of the end zone, as Cordarelle Patterson is downright scary.

Packers 34 Vikings 20
I agree on Patterson. Don't let him break one. Contain AD, and blitz Sam. That dude is a statue in the pocket. I can easily see a Matthews/Perry strip/sack/score against Bradford. The Pack may need the turnovers to win because the Minny D is solid. But I think it is likely we pick one or strip one from Sammy boy. GB 26 (they tackle Sam for a safety too); MN 20.

[Patler]

Well, that was actually a preseason game for our offense...since they hardly played at all in the true preseason. I thought Rodgers threw the ball more consistently than he did much of last year. The Jags have a very good defense too...and we hung 27 on them.

On the other hand, Rodgers threw well short of his receiver a couple times again, just as we saw often in 2015; he completed less than 60% of his passes, gained a mediocre 199 yards passing and averaged less than 6 yards per attempt. He extended his string of games with a QB rating less than 100 to 13 consecutive games, and 15 of his last 16 games. Prior to the current string, he had never gone more than 4 games without achieving a QBR greater than 100, and that happened only once, I think. For perspective, his career QBR is 104.1. He has been less than his career average for 13 consecutive games.

Cobb and Nelson had six receptions each, but gained just 57 and 32 yards, respectively.

I think this is an indication that the Packers passing games is not fixed yet.

[Patler]

Somehow, against this massive brick wall that apparently is the greatest defense ever known to man...the Packers hung 30 on them at their place last season...coming off 3 losses and their offense looking like poo. Basically, Rodgers has mostly OWNED the Vikings. There is no reason to think that is suddenly going to stop simply because the Vikings built a huge bird-killing stadium. Rodgers isn't a bird, so he'll do just fine.

Who has suggested anything like that about the Vikings defense? I said they were "solid front to back", nothing more than that.

Are you forgetting that 15 of the 30 points GB scored in the Vikings temporary rental home came by way of 5 Crosby field goals, each 40 yards or longer? Not exactly an indication of a dominating offense. Of course, with the NFC North title on the line, the Vikings returned the favor by beating GB in their real home, the hallowed grounds of Lambeau field where GB should have a distinct advantage.

[Pugger]

Check out the last post on this page and take a look at the clips linked. :-)

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=581168&start=120

[Guiness]

Three words, memories of ex girlfriend

JHC

[King Friday]

Of course, with the NFC North title on the line, the Vikings returned the favor by beating GB in their real home, the hallowed grounds of Lambeau field where GB should have a distinct advantage.

Well, to be honest, I'm never going to take that last week in 2015 into consideration. The Packers, like anyone else with a brain, realized that Washington was a far easier opponent than Seattle. There is no way a competent individual would go BALLS OUT to beat the Vikings and earn the more difficult playoff game. As such, I think using that game as a true measuring stick is flawed. There were other factors involved.

[Pugger]

Well, to be honest, I'm never going to take that last week in 2015 into consideration. The Packers, like anyone else with a brain, realized that Washington was a far easier opponent than Seattle. There is no way a competent individual would go BALLS OUT to beat the Vikings and earn the more difficult playoff game. As such, I think using that game as a true measuring stick is flawed. There were other factors involved.

But had we won the division was it a foregone conclusion we would have faced Seattle?

[gbgary]

That's four word ;)

no...it's one number and three words. ha!

[King Friday]

But had we won the division was it a foregone conclusion we would have faced Seattle?

Yes, because the Cardinals had nothing to play for that week. They had already locked up a first round bye and weren't going to catch Carolina for #1 overall. Which is precisely why Seattle rolled over them by like 30 points. It was a rather obvious outcome.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I played exactly one semester of competitive football, so I'll defer to the guys on the board who know, like Vince, kypack, harv, pb etc. But how does a football player -- especially a pro football player of any quality -- play less than balls out? I'd always heard that's an invitation to injury.

[King Friday]

But how does a football player -- especially a pro football player of any quality -- play less than balls out? I'd always heard that's an invitation to injury.

I don't think it was the players...they should always be going all out because their paycheck depends on it.

It would be the coaches...in terms of play-calling, making substitutions, etc. I'm not saying that the Packers threw the game...but if it starts not looking like your day, are you really going to go all William Wallace to inspire the troops knowing it very, very likely means you'll be playing Seattle instead of Washington?

I remember saying before the game that week that I would rather lose and play Washington...it was BETTER for the Packers in terms of their chances to reach and win the Super Bowl. That is the ultimate decision maker IMO. You can't tell me that bit of knowledge was missing in the back of the minds of the coaches, and that it would not influence their decisions to SOME extent.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I don't think it was the players...they should always be going all out because their paycheck depends on it.

It would be the coaches...in terms of play-calling, making substitutions, etc. I'm not saying that the Packers threw the game...but if it starts not looking like your day, are you really going to go all William Wallace to inspire the troops knowing it very, very likely means you'll be playing Seattle instead of Washington?

I remember saying before the game that week that I would rather lose and play Washington...it was BETTER for the Packers in terms of their chances to reach and win the Super Bowl. That is the ultimate decision maker IMO. You can't tell me that bit of knowledge was missing in the back of the minds of the coaches, and that it would not influence their decisions to SOME extent.I'm not discounting what you say. I'm just wondering if such a thing happens. I know there can be unintentional let downs, like when you're 40 points down with 10 minutes to go.

Knowing McCarthy, it just doesn't seem like something he's capable of doing. I could be wrong. Playing 2nd and 3rd string players in a "doesn't matter" game at the end of the season, for instance, we know happens.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Yes, because the Cardinals had nothing to play for that week. They had already locked up a first round bye and weren't going to catch Carolina for #1 overall. Which is precisely why Seattle rolled over them by like 30 points. It was a rather obvious outcome.

Had Pack not laid an egg and won the North, and with that game being the last game of the 2015 regular season, they would've faced Minnesota again at Lambeau the following week, not Seattle.

Patler will confirm that as a fact. :)

[Anti-Polar Bear]

On the other hand, Rodgers threw well short of his receiver a couple times again, just as we saw often in 2015; he completed less than 60% of his passes, gained a mediocre 199 yards passing and averaged less than 6 yards per attempt. He extended his string of games with a QB rating less than 100 to 13 consecutive games, and 15 of his last 16 games. Prior to the current string, he had never gone more than 4 games without achieving a QBR greater than 100, and that happened only once, I think. For perspective, his career QBR is 104.1. He has been less than his career average for 13 consecutive games.

Cobb and Nelson had six receptions each, but gained just 57 and 32 yards, respectively.

I think this is an indication that the Packers passing games is not fixed yet.

Good post. Might be time to bench Rodgers in fantasy.

Offensive staff needs to get Cook involved more in the game plan. Gotta find a way to isolate Cook against LBers and safeties.

[Upnorth]

Good post. Might be time to bench Rodgers in fantasy.

Offensive staff needs to get Cook involved more in the game plan. Gotta find a way to isolate Cook against LBers and safeties.

Dust off the jmike plays. Jennings, Nelson Jones have some similarities to Nelson Cobb adams. I think our oline is better, so why not dance with the one that brought you to the show.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Kendricks is listed at 232 lbs. He looks way more than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUcgaVUR2e8

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Dust off the jmike plays. Jennings, Nelson Jones have some similarities to Nelson Cobb adams. I think our oline is better, so why not dance with the one that brought you to the show.

Agree.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Kendricks is listed at 232 lbs. He looks way more than that.


Kendricks looks like a Nick Barnett clone to me.

Many folks seek to discredit Barnett cos he was a Sherman pick, but Barnett was a pretty good ILB/MIB for the Pack. Loved the vampire mouth guard and samurai celebration.

[Fritz]

I don't usually find reasons to "bet" against the Packers, but I don't have a good feeling about this game, so I went with my gut. My biggest concerns are:

- success passing last week was on extended/broken plays, not the offense clicking.
- lots of miscommunications
- new stadium is said to be even louder than the old one, and specifically designed to be so
- fans will be rabid in the opening game of the new stadium.
- MN defense is solid front to back, with 1 or 2 really good ones at each level.

None of this bodes well for Packer's offense.

Packers will be quite inexperienced on defense, Ringo, Clark, Lowry, Martinez, Evans and Brice could all play significant rolls and have one game of experience. Thomas, Ryan, Rollins and Gunter could as well and have limited experience less than a year. Could be a difficult game for them.


To me, this is one of those typical early-season Packer losses. Offense doesn't have it's poop in a group, team not really cohesive yet. Plus Minny will sky-high in their new stadium, and Rodgers will not be able to pick apart that D. Later in the seaso n, if the team gels, this loss will be but a distant memory.

[Smidgeon]

They lack a stud, and I doubt Jordy can make a full comeback. The pleasant surprise has been Adams flashing big play ability.

Yep. I want Rodgers to have one with oozing talent at least once. Favre had Sterling and for a year Walker (I'm too young to remember how good Brooks was). Rodgers has had several that have maxed out their abilities, but no absolute talents.

I know a lot of people love Driver, but I always thought he was the quintessential "get the most out of your abilities" kind of guy.

[run pMc]

Kendricks is 6'0" so he's on the short side. That's why he looks bigger. Greenway is 6'4" and looks lankier.

[run pMc]

Yep. I want Rodgers to have one with oozing talent at least once. Favre had Sterling and for a year Walker (I'm too young to remember how good Brooks was). Rodgers has had several that have maxed out their abilities, but no absolute talents.

I know a lot of people love Driver, but I always thought he was the quintessential "get the most out of your abilities" kind of guy.

I dunno. Jordy and Cobb are pretty talented. I do think Jordy is on the downside and they need someone else to step up. Adams needs to really show a lot of improvement, and Davis needs to develop. I'm not sure Janis will ever be more than what he is. Abbrederis is a "maxed out ability guy". Brooks was sneaky good, Sharpe was a beast...Freeman was pretty good too.

[King Friday]

I dunno. Jordy and Cobb are pretty talented. I do think Jordy is on the downside and they need someone else to step up. Adams needs to really show a lot of improvement, and Davis needs to develop. I'm not sure Janis will ever be more than what he is. Abbrederis is a "maxed out ability guy". Brooks was sneaky good, Sharpe was a beast...Freeman was pretty good too.

Freeman was average at best. He left Green Bay and VANISHED. His career (and also Bill Schroeder's) were entirely because Brett Favre was throwing them the ball. That is what makes Favre's 3 MVP streak stretch so amazing...because he had very little to work with at receiver compared to guys like Marino, Manning, Montana, etc. He's getting a nearly washed up guy like Don Beebe or Andre Rison thrown into the mix and still wasn't missing a beat.

Rodgers at least has had strong enough depth at WR, which Favre often did not have. Honestly, I think the Packers have plenty of talent at WR...they need a true receiver specific coach IMO. I was never a fan of putting Edgar Bennett in charge of the WRs, and I think our receivers have declined in their technique and discipline ever since...especially the young kids. Now we have a QB in charge of the WRs. I just don't get it.

[King Friday]

Offensive staff needs to get Cook involved more in the game plan. Gotta find a way to isolate Cook against LBers and safeties.

This I agree with completely. An athletic guy running up the seam makes life easier for everyone on offense. You have to get Cook involved this week.

[Patler]

I don't think it was the players...they should always be going all out because their paycheck depends on it.

It would be the coaches...in terms of play-calling, making substitutions, etc. I'm not saying that the Packers threw the game...but if it starts not looking like your day, are you really going to go all William Wallace to inspire the troops knowing it very, very likely means you'll be playing Seattle instead of Washington?

I remember saying before the game that week that I would rather lose and play Washington...it was BETTER for the Packers in terms of their chances to reach and win the Super Bowl. That is the ultimate decision maker IMO. You can't tell me that bit of knowledge was missing in the back of the minds of the coaches, and that it would not influence their decisions to SOME extent.

Maybe you wanted to lose the game, I can not believe any coach or player on the Packers felt that way.

Winning the division again would have been meaningful. Any momentum gained from a win would have been extremely valuable, especially in view of the way the season had gone for the Packers. Having lost at home already to Chicago and Detroit, losing to MN was also meaningful to the Packers in a very negative way. I can not believe that any GB coach or player wanted to do anything but win that game, and hopefully in a convincing way. There was nothing positive for the Packers from losing that game. Losing the division at home reinforced a lot of negative things surrounding the team last year. Winning would have given the coaches positive things to build on. Losing gave them nothing.

Besides, there was no reason to fear Seattle. Somehow you go through them or teams that beat them anyway. I think the Packers have Seattle figured out and they know that based on the last two times they have played them. Not that they will win every time, but they will should have opportunities to.

[Packgator]

I do think Jordy is on the downside

No way to know if Jordy is on the downside. Before this past game.....the last time Jordy was on the field playing he was a top 5 WR (in the league). Who knows if he's fully recovered, but if he is there is no reason to think he's on the downside (based on his play during his last full season).

[pbmax]

I played exactly one semester of competitive football, so I'll defer to the guys on the board who know, like Vince, kypack, harv, pb etc. But how does a football player -- especially a pro football player of any quality -- play less than balls out? I'd always heard that's an invitation to injury.

I played NO college ball, but going slower than normal can get you in trouble from unexpected places if everyone else is moving at 100%. Same as not keeping head on swivel.

But you can half ass it and still be where you were supposed to be. You can also not chase after play moves away from (or past) you. Lots of ways to save energy for later if you are not going all out.

[pbmax]

I think his weight changes daily. Maybe he is screwing with us by wearing padding. He looks in fighting trim here.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CslUDOJVIAAg4yP.jpg:large

[pbmax]

Shields is out. Young guys get their chance. Across the board.

BTW, Ha Ha dominates, Packers win 24-12.

[RashanGary]

Lacy is a big guy. He reminded me of Bettis on Sunday. Big, but can change direction really well for his size and had good burst. That's a football player right there.

[RashanGary]

No way to know if Jordy is on the downside. Before this past game.....the last time Jordy was on the field playing he was a top 5 WR (in the league). Who knows if he's fully recovered, but if he is there is no reason to think he's on the downside (based on his play during his last full season).

Well, except that he was 29 then and he's 31 now. Also, he's coming off a major knee reconstruction that most players don't recover from fully until the 2nd year.

There is no way Jordy will be as good as he was. No way. Now Cobb, if healthy, he could bounce back all the way. He's our #1. I'd bet on it.

[Rutnstrut]

Well, except that he was 29 then and he's 31 now. Also, he's coming off a major knee reconstruction that most players don't recover from fully until the 2nd year.

There is no way Jordy will be as good as he was. No way. Now Cobb, if healthy, he could bounce back all the way. He's our #1. I'd bet on it.

Cobb MAY be a #1 in GB, but he's not good enough for that designation on most teams.

[RashanGary]

Cobb MAY be a #1 in GB, but he's not good enough for that designation on most teams.

The packers don't have a legit #1 outside receiver right now. But they have the QB, RB, OL and a lot of solid young guys with experience And if healrhy, they do have a top notch slot WR.

[Pugger]

No way to know if Jordy is on the downside. Before this past game.....the last time Jordy was on the field playing he was a top 5 WR (in the league). Who knows if he's fully recovered, but if he is there is no reason to think he's on the downside (based on his play during his last full season).

Jordy didn't play a single snap in the preseason so for all we know he could just be rusty and nothing more.

[MadScientist]

Must win game. Do it!
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/crunch-time-of-the-nfl-season-is-right-now/

[MadtownPacker]

What would you mofos say if it was Rodgers that got his leg jacked and Teddy B was playing in Lambeau on Sunday night?

So how the hell can you say the Vikings will win when they are missing their QB???

No fucking way, Packers take by 10+ points.

[Patler]

What would you mofos say if it was Rodgers that got his leg jacked and Teddy B was playing in Lambeau on Sunday night?

So how the hell can you say the Vikings will win when they are missing their QB???

No fucking way, Packers take by 10+ points.

Why? Because the reasons for considering MN a contender did not include that Bridgewater was their QB. He was just their QB, not a difference maker on their team. As one of the analysts said two weeks ago, some figured they were a contender even though they didn't have a difference maker at QB. That's not a slam against Bridgewater, just recognition that he isn't there yet. Not saying he can't become a key to their success.

[smuggler]

While that's true, their starting QB today will have been with the team for less than two weeks. While it doesn't preclude the offense from working, it does make it less likely for the offense to be successful than if they had Bridgewater (and a consistent starter all offseason) under center.

[Upnorth]

Why? Because the reasons for considering MN a contender did not include that Bridgewater was their QB. He was just their QB, not a difference maker on their team. As one of the analysts said two weeks ago, some figured they were a contender even though they didn't have a difference maker at QB. That's not a slam against Bridgewater, just recognition that he isn't there yet. Not saying he can't become a key to their success.

That assumes Bridgewater was a bottom teir qb. He wasn't. While not elite he was middle of the pack, with decent mobility. Bradford doesn't have the ability to escape so I think it limits one important element of the game.

I recognize you are not slamming him, nor limiting his growth, but he was better than Bradford.

[Carolina_Packer]

Good post. Might be time to bench Rodgers in fantasy.

Offensive staff needs to get Cook involved more in the game plan. Gotta find a way to isolate Cook against LBers and safeties.

The Packers must establish respect for their run game. I'm not sure how often they received a single high safety look, but if teams are playing two high safety, the Packers must make them pay by running the ball effectively. That will draw an extra defender to the LOS and get the defense thinking run instead of coverage and then Cook can exploit the area between the safeties and the LB's.

Running the ball effectively also helps win the down and distance battle, makes third down more manageable and keeps the defense guessing, instead of it being an obvious passing play. Of course, moving the sticks greatly helps the defense, too. MM, you know what you have to do, you just seem conflicted on whether you want the run to set up the pass or vice versa. I would go with the run to setup the pass. You have the hoss, now ride him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I see a defensive struggle. Flip a coin.

[esoxx]

As usual, it will come down to who wins the turnover battle.

[pbmax]

Packers need to get better at comitting penalties while not looking like they are committing penalties.


The competition committee used to regulate the number of complaints a team could make to the NFL, asking teams to keep it at 10 per game. But the Jaguars questioned significantly more, and the NFL agreed there were 16 calls that could have gone the other way.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17576262/nfl-acknowledged-missed-calls-jacksonville-jaguars-week-1-loss-green-bay-packers

This is an odd article because unless I am missing something, the League has not said it blew any of the calls. Which makes this complaint interesting, because the NFL did not acknowledge that even this one was blown.


Of the 16 calls that the league recognized as going against the Jaguars, a key one was a missed defensive holding by Packers defensive back Micah Hyde against wide receiver Rashad Greene that would have given Jacksonville a first-and-goal from the Green Bay 9-yard line with under a minute left and a chance to win the game, the sources said. The Jaguars instead failed on the ensuing fourth-and-1 and lost 27-23.

[Guiness]

Packers need to get better at comitting penalties while not looking like they are committing penalties.


On the contrary, I think they're doing quite well...they don't look to the referees like they are committing penalties. If super slo-mo in a darkened room with Zapruder film experts shows things differently on Tueday, :sad::huh:

What is Woodson doing these days? Maybe he's the double-secret 'getting away with it' consultant for the Packers DBs?

[Patler]

I sort of agree, but don't see it being that high scoring

MN 17
GB 13

I saw nothing on Sunday that made me think the Packer's offensive problems from last year have been solved. Against a good defense, they will struggle as badly as last year. MN isn't likely to have a lot going on offense yet either.


I don't usually find reasons to "bet" against the Packers, but I don't have a good feeling about this game, so I went with my gut. My biggest concerns are:

- success passing last week was on extended/broken plays, not the offense clicking.
- lots of miscommunications
- new stadium is said to be even louder than the old one, and specifically designed to be so
- fans will be rabid in the opening game of the new stadium.
- MN defense is solid front to back, with 1 or 2 really good ones at each level.

None of this bodes well for Packer's offense.

Packers will be quite inexperienced on defense, Ringo, Clark, Lowry, Martinez, Evans and Brice could all play significant rolls and have one game of experience. Thomas, Ryan, Rollins and Gunter could as well and have limited experience less than a year. Could be a difficult game for them.


On the other hand, Rodgers threw well short of his receiver a couple times again, just as we saw often in 2015; he completed less than 60% of his passes, gained a mediocre 199 yards passing and averaged less than 6 yards per attempt. He extended his string of games with a QB rating less than 100 to 13 consecutive games, and 15 of his last 16 games. Prior to the current string, he had never gone more than 4 games without achieving a QBR greater than 100, and that happened only once, I think. For perspective, his career QBR is 104.1. He has been less than his career average for 13 consecutive games.

Cobb and Nelson had six receptions each, but gained just 57 and 32 yards, respectively.

I think this is an indication that the Packers passing games is not fixed yet.


Why? Because the reasons for considering MN a contender did not include that Bridgewater was their QB. He was just their QB, not a difference maker on their team. As one of the analysts said two weeks ago, some figured they were a contender even though they didn't have a difference maker at QB. That's not a slam against Bridgewater, just recognition that he isn't there yet. Not saying he can't become a key to their success.

The game played out pretty much the way I expected it to.

That said, I think there were some encouraging signs as well. Apart from a rough night for Randall, the defense wasn't too bad, and each of the ILBs was noticed for positive reasons.

The early bye week this year could play into the Packers advantage