naughty & nice - Vikings game

[Harlan Huckleby]

naughty - Adams. You can't drop a touchdown in your bounce-back game.

nice - Geronimo, Jordy and Jared. Seems like forever ago when everybody thought the Packers had no receivers.

[Rutnstrut]

Clay should be on the nice list.

[texaspackerbacker]

Nice: AARON RODGERS, Jordy Nelson, Clay Matthews, Micah Hyde, Kenny Clark, Mike Daniels

Naughty: Mike Montgomery - today wasn't his day more for pass blocking than for running

Some of Each: Jared Cook - delinquent in pass blocking, Quinten Rollins - some good coverage, sometimes not

A special lump of coal for Cobb: his replacements as receiver and returner both looked better than he has looked for quite a while - Allison and Hyde. Am I imagining it, or is Jordy lining up a lot more in slot than out wide - and doing better there than Cobb ever did?

[Rutnstrut]

Cobb hasn't been anything special for a long time now.

[RashanGary]

Who's making what list here?

http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/e283925c516be9f4b2ce35115844a2b5e606e4c6/c=0-6-3250-2450&r=x483&c=640x480/local/-/media/2016/12/24/WIGroup/PackersNews/636181953423213893-MJS-APC-GBvsMN-122416-djp01332.jpg

[Iron Mike]

Stud: My Cousin, photographer for the Appleton Post-Crescent, who didn't fold up like a pussy when Jordy came right at him, but got the picture, instead:

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15697536_10154761451679014_3561449394156868237_n.j pg?oh=bcf4777691d3f9d72cd089cbb7e053c0&oe=58F2979D

[George Cumby]

Awesome, Mike!

Props to your cuz.

[Pugger]

Cobb hasn't been anything special for a long time now.

Cobb probably hasn't been healthy for a long time.

[King Friday]

Cobb probably hasn't been healthy for a long time.

He also hasn't been worth his contract value for a long time either.

[BZnDallas]

He also hasn't been worth his contract value for a long time either.

To be fair, most injured players aren't worth their contract. But when healthy he is a weapon. A weapon that is on the same page with our All World quarterback. That alone is worth 9 or 10 million or whatever his contract is. Geronimo is growing on me, but i'd prefer Cobb in there on those 3rd and mid to long range with the, if we make it, playoff game on the line.

[red]

To be fair, most injured players aren't worth their contract. But when healthy he is a weapon. A weapon that is on the same page with our All World quarterback. That alone is worth 9 or 10 million or whatever his contract is. Geronimo is growing on me, but i'd prefer Cobb in there on those 3rd and mid to long range with the, if we make it, playoff game on the line.

he was healthy last year, and was the #1 wr, and came no where near living up to his contract

he has been healthy for most of this year. but he's only on pace for 650 yards for the year and 4 td's (if he plays next week)

he might be the most overpaid player on the team imo

[Patler]

he was healthy last year, and was the #1 wr, and came no where near living up to his contract

he has been healthy for most of this year. but he's only on pace for 650 yards for the year and 4 td's (if he plays next week)

he might be the most overpaid player on the team imo

He wasn't healthy last year either, and that is part of the problem. Recall that he was hurt at the end of camp last year, and there was concern that he might not even play in week 1. He started the season unable to raise one arm above his head, and Rodgers even mentioned that for the first month he had to be careful where he put the ball when throwing to Cobb. I'm beginning to wonder if he will ever be "healthy".

[yetisnowman]

Packers players have it pretty sweet with a majority of the fan base. If they play poorly, they are injured. If they play well, they are finally healthy.

[red]

Packers players have it pretty sweet with a majority of the fan base. If they play poorly, they are injured. If they play well, they are finally healthy.

no packer player has ever under performed, they were just injured

TT has also never drafted a non-pro bowler, some guys just don't make it due to injuries

i really is amazing, whenever you question any player, someone on here(not just you patler), will blame injuries

secondary sucks- its because of injuries
guys get healthy and the secondary still sucks - its because they were hurt

wr's can't get open - because of injuries
a-rod throws 30 feet over guys heads often early in the season- its because the wr's were injured

eddy lacy is fat- because he's injured

fat mike designs terrible game plans earlier this year and for most of last year - all injury related

no pass rush- injuries

special teams suck- too many injured players

guys drop balls that hit them right in the hands- they must be injured

yeti is right, its the default excuse among packer fans when something doesn't go right

[channtheman]

no packer player has ever under performed, they were just injured

TT has also never drafted a non-pro bowler, some guys just don't make it due to injuries

i really is amazing, whenever you question any player, someone on here(not just you patler), will blame injuries

secondary sucks- its because of injuries
guys get healthy and the secondary still sucks - its because they were hurt

wr's can't get open - because of injuries
a-rod throws 30 feet over guys heads often early in the season- its because the wr's were injured

eddy lacy is fat- because he's injured

fat mike designs terrible game plans earlier this year and for most of last year - all injury related

no pass rush- injuries

special teams suck- too many injured players

guys drop balls that hit them right in the hands- they must be injured

yeti is right, its the default excuse among packer fans when something doesn't go right


Don't blame the fans, they were just injured. ;)

[red]

Don't blame the fans, they were just injured. ;)

yeah, in the head

[Patler]

i really is amazing, whenever you question any player, someone on here(not just you patler), will blame injuries

wr's can't get open - because of injuries
a-rod throws 30 feet over guys heads often early in the season- its because the wr's were injured

eddy lacy is fat- because he's injured

fat mike designs terrible game plans earlier this year and for most of last year - all injury related

no pass rush- injuries

special teams suck- too many injured players

guys drop balls that hit them right in the hands- they must be injured

yeti is right, its the default excuse among packer fans when something doesn't go right

How was I excusing Cobb due to injuries? I just pointed out that he seems to be injured all the time. As I said, that is part of the problem with him. The other problem with Cobb (which I didn't bother to delve into in my last post, but argued at length before he signed) is what the JSO article pointed out last year, he seems to be effective mostly only in extended/broken plays. I think WRs are grossly overpaid as a group, and Cobb more so than most.

Lacy? Frankly I don't know what the team expected for weight, if he hit or missed it. Mostly, I don't care. All I know is that he was very effective before he was injured, so why should I bitch about it and demean him? Based on what?

I complained about Rodgers' play last year already and most on here told me I was nuts. It wasn't until halfway through this year that it became "fashionable" to criticize AR. Heck, there is a thread on here in which I went play by play on the last drive in the playoff loss to Seattle, and pointed out that AR made several very poor decisions.

It amazes me how many think that unless you hitch CONSTANTLY, about absolutely EVERYTHING, you are making excuses for them.

It also amazes me how many seem to think players should be perfect in absolutely everything, and that any mistake is "inexcusable". Really?

It doesn't matter that the guy playing major snaps was the 4th or 5th in line to start the season, or is FA off the street. There is no excuse for him not being just as effective as the #1 guy.

[RashanGary]

The Packers are first in the NFC in total wins since 1990 or since 2000.

They've had more wins since 1990 than every team except pit. And they've had 6 more wins. Indy, NE and pit have had more wins since 2000.

Still, the Packers are the most successful NFC team of the last 25 years. And really any 10 year stretch in there including Thompson/MM's last 10.

Some fans do have a positive view of the Packers in recent years. I'd call it intelligent and realistic, definitely grounded in wins.

[bobblehead]

no packer player has ever under performed, they were just injured

TT has also never drafted a non-pro bowler, some guys just don't make it due to injuries

i really is amazing, whenever you question any player, someone on here(not just you patler), will blame injuries

secondary sucks- its because of injuries
guys get healthy and the secondary still sucks - its because they were hurt

wr's can't get open - because of injuries
a-rod throws 30 feet over guys heads often early in the season- its because the wr's were injured

eddy lacy is fat- because he's injured

fat mike designs terrible game plans earlier this year and for most of last year - all injury related

no pass rush- injuries

special teams suck- too many injured players

guys drop balls that hit them right in the hands- they must be injured

yeti is right, its the default excuse among packer fans when something doesn't go right

Team tears up a 5 game win streak and is poised to enter playoffs hottest team in entire NFL...lucky, and TT sucks.

[Rutnstrut]

Don't forget Red that if you are a realist and don't see EVERYTHING through green and gold glasses. You either aren't a true fan or are a troll.

[red]

How was I excusing Cobb due to injuries? I just pointed out that he seems to be injured all the time. As I said, that is part of the problem with him. The other problem with Cobb (which I didn't bother to delve into in my last post, but argued at length before he signed) is what the JSO article pointed out last year, he seems to be effective mostly only in extended/broken plays. I think WRs are grossly overpaid as a group, and Cobb more so than most.

Lacy? Frankly I don't know what the team expected for weight, if he hit or missed it. Mostly, I don't care. All I know is that he was very effective before he was injured, so why should I bitch about it and demean him? Based on what?

I complained about Rodgers' play last year already and most on here told me I was nuts. It wasn't until halfway through this year that it became "fashionable" to criticize AR. Heck, there is a thread on here in which I went play by play on the last drive in the playoff loss to Seattle, and pointed out that AR made several very poor decisions.

It amazes me how many think that unless you hitch CONSTANTLY, about absolutely EVERYTHING, you are making excuses for them.

It also amazes me how many seem to think players should be perfect in absolutely everything, and that any mistake is "inexcusable". Really?

It doesn't matter that the guy playing major snaps was the 4th or 5th in line to start the season, or is FA off the street. There is no excuse for him not being just as effective as the #1 guy.

i didn't read the last line of your original post. you take that away, and it seems like you were just using the injury excuse for cobb, like my list states. it really is amazing how one line can change the tone of a post

and the other list was more of a joke/ really what i've read/heard from other people over the last year or so

[red]

The Packers are first in the NFC in total wins since 1990 or since 2000.

They've had more wins since 1990 than every team except pit. And they've had 6 more wins. Indy, NE and pit have had more wins since 2000.

Still, the Packers are the most successful NFC team of the last 25 years. And really any 10 year stretch in there including Thompson/MM's last 10.

Some fans do have a positive view of the Packers in recent years. I'd call it intelligent and realistic, definitely grounded in wins.

and i would say the only number that anyone should really care about over those 25 years is 2

and is 2 really enough for one of the 2 best teams over the last 25 years

imo, no, its not. and thats where the team failed

in 25 years, no one is gonna give a shit who one the nfc north in 2016 but lost in the conference championship

[Patler]

Don't forget Red that if you are a realist and don't see EVERYTHING through green and gold glasses. You either aren't a true fan or are a troll.

...and unless you bitch and moan constantly, complain about everything, dismiss the positive as " accidental" or just "luck" and, most importantly, call players, coaches and administrators by derogatory names, you are an apologist who continuously makes excuses and sees everything through green and gold glasses.

[texaspackerbacker]

It's NOT merely about Super Bowl wins. It's about wins and losses in general - that's what will be remembered 25 years later or whatever. Of course, we as Packer fans remember the two SB wins, but do any or many of us remember who had how many wins, etc. among teams we basically don't care about? No - but if we're asked about who in general has been the best teams/has the most wins over that time period, that's an easy one - THAT is what people remember most.

That being said, though, there is nothing whatsoever wrong with "seeing everything through green and gold glasses". Realism and Homerism are NOT mutually exclusive, and if your team is good, which ours certainly has been, that Homerism comes a lot closer to Realism that being negative all the time and basically being too timid or whatever to come out and brag about how good our side is. In a lot of cases, maybe most, it really is "luck" or "accident" or whatever when things go wrong. That, of course, applies to a whole lot more than just the Packers.

[George Cumby]

The Apocalypse is nigh.

I actually like and agree with TPB's post.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Everyone is a realist, just on their own side of the fence.

[Zool]

...and unless you bitch and moan constantly, complain about everything, dismiss the positive as " accidental" or just "luck" and, most importantly, call players, coaches and administrators by derogatory names, you are an apologist who continuously makes excuses and sees everything through green and gold glasses.

Yup. There couldn't possibly be any sort of grey area. Either agree with me or you're a moron for I am a savant whose football acumen has yet to be discovered by any team at any level.

[Joemailman]

and i would say the only number that anyone should really care about over those 25 years is 2

and is 2 really enough for one of the 2 best teams over the last 25 years

imo, no, its not. and thats where the team failed

in 25 years, no one is gonna give a shit who one the nfc north in 2016 but lost in the conference championship

Please provide a list of the number of teams that have won more than 2 over the last 25 years. I'll even help you out. 1 is New England.

[King Friday]

Please provide a list of the number of teams that have won more than 2 over the last 25 years. I'll even help you out. 1 is New England.

2 Denver

[red]

Please provide a list of the number of teams that have won more than 2 over the last 25 years. I'll even help you out. 1 is New England.

the good old argument, as long as no other team has done it, then its ok that we don't

has any other team in the nfl had 2 HOF Qb's for 25 years straight?

[RashanGary]

2 Denver

NY Giants 3

[yetisnowman]

the good old argument, as long as no other team has done it, then its ok that we don't

has any other team in the nfl had 2 HOF Qb's for 25 years straight?

It will likely be 30 plus when Aaron is done. Great point. And this is why I hate the argument. How many teams have had HOF qbs for that stretch AND have had THAT many chances to make a run? We have made the playoffs virtually every year since Favre took over. So yes, when you look at context, two titles in 30+ years would be very disappointing.

[Pugger]

It will likely be 30 plus when Aaron is done. Great point. And this is why I hate the argument. How many teams have had HOF qbs for that stretch AND have had THAT many chances to make a run? We have made the playoffs virtually every year since Favre took over. So yes, when you look at context, two titles in 30+ years would be very disappointing.

This just shows how damn hard it is to win the whole thing. Only a small handful of teams right now are consistently in the playoffs every year so you really can't just dismiss making the postseason being no big deal. If AR plays as long as Brady, Brees and the Mannings we still have a good shot at another Lombardi before he retires.

[Zool]

Bart Starr 2
Johnny Unitas 1
George Blanda 0
Sonny Jurgensen 0
Roger Staubach 2
Joe Namath 1
Fran Tarkenton 0
Len Dawson 1
Terry Bradshaw 4
Bob Griese 2
Dan Fouts 0
Joe Montana 4
Jim Kelly 0
John Elway 2
Steve Young 1
Dan Marino 0
Warren Moon 0
Troy Aikman 3
Ken Stabler 1
Brett Favre 1

Bunch of 1 or 0 superbowl winning losers on this list. They should automatically win more. If they don't their lives are a failure.

[Fritz]

the good old argument, as long as no other team has done it, then its ok that we don't

has any other team in the nfl had 2 HOF Qb's for 25 years straight?

Ah, the good ol' bait and switch. Red, let me quote you exactly from your above post:

"and i would say the only number that anyone should really care about over those 25 years is 2

and is 2 really enough for one of the 2 best teams over the last 25 years

imo, no, its not. and thats where the team failed

in 25 years, no one is gonna give a shit who one the nfc north in 2016 but lost in the conference championship"

So people responded, listing the three teams of the past twenty-five years who've won more than two Super Bowls. That would put Green Bay in impressive company.

But then all of a sudden, wait, it's not about only winning two; it's because of the quarterbacks Green Bay has had. So now your argument isn't about "only" winning two; it's about having failed your HOF QB's by apparently not giving them the supporting cast or coaching necessary to win more than two?



If that is your new argument, then Zool's list is instructive. All those organizations whose HOF QB's won no or one SB have failed their fans and QB's, correct?

[hoosier]

Bart Starr 2
Johnny Unitas 1
George Blanda 0
Sonny Jurgensen 0
Roger Staubach 2
Joe Namath 1
Fran Tarkenton 0
Len Dawson 1
Terry Bradshaw 4
Bob Griese 2
Dan Fouts 0
Joe Montana 4
Jim Kelly 0
John Elway 2
Steve Young 1
Dan Marino 0
Warren Moon 0
Troy Aikman 3
Ken Stabler 1
Brett Favre 1

Bunch of 1 or 0 superbowl winning losers on this list. They should automatically win more. If they don't their livers are a failure.

FIFY

[Fritz]

How many SB's has Ben Roethlisberger won?

[Zool]

FIFY

Pills are a MFer on the old liver.

Someone should make an All Addicts QB list. (2 drink Tommy) Kramer needs some recognition.

[Fritz]

Well, Joe Namath has to be #1 on anyone's list; I saw him on MNF a few years back, and he was as drunk as a skunk. And looked like he'd lived a rough life.

[BZnDallas]

Ah, the good ol' bait and switch. Red, let me quote you exactly from your above post:

"and i would say the only number that anyone should really care about over those 25 years is 2

and is 2 really enough for one of the 2 best teams over the last 25 years

imo, no, its not. and thats where the team failed

in 25 years, no one is gonna give a shit who one the nfc north in 2016 but lost in the conference championship"

So people responded, listing the three teams of the past twenty-five years who've won more than two Super Bowls. That would put Green Bay in impressive company.

But then all of a sudden, wait, it's not about only winning two; it's because of the quarterbacks Green Bay has had. So now your argument isn't about "only" winning two; it's about having failed your HOF QB's by apparently not giving them the supporting cast or coaching necessary to win more than two?



If that is your new argument, then Zool's list is instructive. All those organizations whose HOF QB's won no or one SB have failed their fans and QB's, correct?

Damnit FRITZ!!! Why you gotta use so much damn common sense! Oh!!! Bc it ain't that common. Laughed my ass off when Red replied to my last post about Cobb not being hurt. Its only truth if it fits my narrative!!! I'll try to remember that nonsense.

[Fritz]

"It's only truth if it fits my narrative."

How true that is. Welcome to the world of Donald Trump.

[KYPack]

Well, Joe Namath has to be #1 on anyone's list; I saw him on MNF a few years back, and he was as drunk as a skunk. And looked like he'd lived a rough life.

Everybody is gettin' old, Fritz.

That was 2003 when Joe Willie was totally fucked up and famously hit on ESPN sideline reporter Suzy Kolber. Joe was drunker than Red on one of his benders and did a clean-up bc of his famous fuck-up.

That act became the name of a famous football blog, Kissing Suzy Kolber (now basically defunct).

The Kissing Suzy blog started in June 2006, a few months after the good ship Packerrats sailed

[RashanGary]

Everybody is gettin' old, Fritz.

That was 2003 when Joe Willie was totally fucked up and famously hit on ESPN sideline reporter Suzy Kolber. Joe was drunker than Red on one of his benders and did a clean-up bc of his famous fuck-up.

That act became the name of a famous football blog, Kissing Suzy Kolber (now basically defunct).

The Kissing Suzy blog started in June 2006, a few months after the good ship Packerrats sailed

I've known you guys for a long time!! I was 23 when I first started at the js forums. I'm 35 now. WOW!! An 8 year marriage, a divorce, three kids, a couple owis, a few jail stints, and now almost 4 years sobriety. wtf!!!

[Iron Mike]

Well, Joe Namath has to be #1 on anyone's list; I saw him on MNF a few years back, and he was as drunk as a skunk. And looked like he'd lived a rough life.

I'd still put him behind Kerry "Vodka" Collins....

[Iron Mike]

I've known you guys for a long time!! I was 23 when I first started at the js forums. I'm 35 now. WOW!! An 8 year marriage, a divorce, three kids, a couple owis, a few jail stints, and now almost 4 years sobriety. wtf!!!

Didn't you used to go to the wine store in De Pere that was about 4 blocks from where I grew up???

[RashanGary]

Didn't you used to go to the wine store in De Pere that was about 4 blocks from where I grew up???

Yeah, lol!!