motife
10-23-2006, 05:02 PM
Q: Stinky Pete of Badgerland - for all the criticism Favre got for the fumble against St Louis, I thought today there was a play that showed how it was unwarranted. Against the Rams Favre faced a free pass rusher and didn't really have much room to step up because of the pocket being squeezed from other areas. Today against the Dolphins Jason Taylor came free off the edge multiple times, and on the one occasion where Favre had room to maneuver he simply sidestepped one of the elite pass rushers in the game today. My point is that when given wiggle room Favre can still do things that a lot of other QBs can't, even given the erosion that has come with his aging process. On the play where Favre eluded Taylor, if Bledsoe, Leftwich, Brad Johnson, Pennington, etc had been at QB it probably would've been another sack, maybe a fumble.
A: Cliff Christl - Stinky Pete, it's my pleasure to start with you. Favre is no statue. He still throws well on the move. He might be as good as any QB in the league on that keep pass. He can sidestep a rush. So your point is well taken. He rarely makes a big play with his feet anymore, although he did today on that scramble. But he still makes a lot of little plays with them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ron of Grafton - Woodson looked like he had a good game today - an impact game. If he can continue he will justify what the Packers paid for him. They finally have a kicker who can make touchbacks. Somehow, I still believe Longwell was better.
A: Cliff Christl - Woodson had his first big game. I don't know if he'll ever justify that contract. But it was up-front money, so it's not going to strap the Packers in the future. That's why I wouldn't criticize the deal, although the Packers are overpaying him. Today, Woodson played like he did in training camp. There, too, he'd get beat, look like he was giving a half-hearted effort at times, etc. But he also made a lot of plays. Remember, he had nine interceptions in training camp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: C'Bear of Oviedo, FLA - Cliff, Well the PAckers proved they could take the heat in the kitchen of south Florida. In years past, this team would wilt and be out of gas. What was the difference today in these conditions from other "better" teams?
A: Cliff Christl - Probably that they played a struggling team with a quarterback who couldn't make a play if his life depended on it. They weren't playing Tampa Bay's defense of the past decade or so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom Lynum of Stillwater, MN - This is the type of game an improving, young, 1 & 4 team wins. Agree??
A: Cliff Christl - True. But the Packers have been competitive all season or at least since the opener. I don't think they've underachieved. I thought the same thing last year. But keep in mind that they beat a 1-6 team.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John of Columbia City, In - Hi Cliff. Lets focus on the positives today. Rayner seems to be a good choice for kicker and Ryan is holding his own. The O line still has a long way to go but they have spunk and are probably better players than Wahle and Rivera were early on. The D still gives up too amny passes but they seem to be making more plays. And Driver is a player every week while Ahman seems to have a little more in the tank than I thought. Clearly this is not the bottom that Green Bay sunk to in the 70s. Anyway would you agree with those positive assessments and is Jennings ankle going to be OK?
A: Cliff Christl - As I wrote before the season started, the Packers had three players with a track record of being playmakers: Favre, Green and Woodson. Today, they made the plays that made the difference. Favre teamed with Driver on that 34-yard strike, which was both an outstanding throw and catch; and also managed the game extremely well in a difficult situation without his left tackle. Woodson returned the interception 23 yards for a TD. He also had a sack on a blitz and broke up a handful of passes, or so it seemed. Green broke the 70-yard TD run. As I said, their plays essentially won the game. And now that's what you have to ask yourself. Will they continue to make plays on a regular basis? Or is there just enough left in the tank for them to have days like this, but no more than two, three or four a year? Jennings suffered an ankle injury. Coach Mike McCarthy said it didn't appear serious.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: JP of Orlando - Cliff, What was the call on Hawk in the 3rd Qtr? IT seemed like a bad call and gave Dolphins life.
A: Cliff Christl - Illegal contact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Eric Nordskog of Germantown - Just like to make a few points/observations. Toward te end of the 2nd quarter I saw Kampmann and KGB rush on the same side did you happen to see who rushed on the other end? The Packers must have little or no faith in their 2 minute offense as shown by letting Miami run the clock down before its field goal. If the O-line continues to develop into next year a young talented running back could completely vitalize the Packers offense/team.
A: Cliff Christl - I didn't see Kampman and KGB on the same side. But the Packers used their 3-3-5 scheme more today than in the past and usually had Poppinga rushing the passer from it. Maybe I missed it. But might that have been what you saw? I don't think most coaches, if any, would hace called a timeout late in the first half. As for a running back, there's no better way to get better faster in the NFL than to draft a special back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jordan of Milwaukee, WI - Good thing that Koren Robinson signing really helped with our depth at WR. If Jennings is out any extended period of time, teams would be foolish not to just triple-cover Driver. Honestly, as a GM, how do you put yourself in a position where an injury to one rookie leaves you with the receiving corp that the Packers are currenty using?
A: Cliff Christl - You're right. The Packers are one injury away from a disaster at wide receiver. On one hand, you can't fill every hole. Give Thompson credit for drafting Jennings. You can't expect to do much better than that in any one year. And I'm not so sure that Francies maybe couldn't be a solid third or fourth receiver at some point in the right situation. That was a nice play that he made today. He was being jostled pretty good when he caught that slant. I liked him in camp. But, you're right, the Packers also wasted their time with Robinson.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: James of Elk Grove - Cliff, it looked as though after the two huge early plays by Taylor of the Dolphins, the Packers effectively minimzed his impact for the rest of the game. The young Packer line is doing an adequate job in pass protection; however the run game is below par. Besides Green's seventy yard run (who proved he still has a burst), we were running at a 2.5 yard clip at that point in the game. Cliff, are the Dolphins front seven that much better than our young line and backs? And, based on the game today, are you seeing a slight improvement in cohesivness and effectiveness with the O-Line.
A: Cliff Christl - I think it was scheme and Favre more than the o-line that neutralized Taylor after the early going. If Colledge had been left to block Taylor one-on-one all day, the carnage might have been more than any grounds crew could handle. As for the running game, everybody has struggled against the Dolphins. Miami ranked third in the league entering the game in rushing average per attempt. Teams had been averaging only 3 yards per carry against them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Travis of Rollingstone, MN - Hi Cliff, You wrote that "I don't think most coaches, if any, would hace (sic) called a timeout late in the first half." Is that a good idea or is that coach-think fearing how to lose instead of playing to win? Also, with Jennings injured will that open the door at all for Woodson to play at WR? Perhaps as an emergency WR? The way the receivers are falling, they just might want to get Woodson some snaps on offense in practice ASAP!
A: Cliff Christl - I don't know why you'd stop the clock when the other team has the ball. What sense does that make? From what I can tell watching other games, coaches pick their spots at the end of the first half. I think it depends more on the situation than the coach as to whether they're aggressive or not. As for Woodson getting a look at wide receiver, I suppose it might be a possibility. But I don't see him helping there. Woodson isn't Deion Sanders in his prime.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike in HAyfield of Hayfield MN - Didn't see the game I am at work today, but did I see correctly that Harrington had 401 yards passing? What could a good team and QB do to this Defense?
A: Cliff Christl - Statistics can be misleading. Football isn't baseball. Harrington passed for 131 yards on the last two series when the Packers were wisely protecting a lead and keeping things in front of them. What could a good qb do the Packers' defense? Think back to McNabb, Brees, Bulger.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: STEVE B of IRMO - Everyone seems to be really critical of the Koren Robinson signing, but who else was there to sign? Alot of teams, including New Enland, Detroit, MN, etc are short wide receivers but none of them have signed any street free agents. The Packers took a chance with Koren Robinson because he was the only one out there worth taking a flyer on. Even all the wide receivers that Green Bay cut are still on the street. I understand your early comments about not worth signing him because of his character, but his talent was better then anyone else out there, and so the Packers took a chance. So again for all those who want to critize the signing of Koren Robinson name someone else they could have signed? Or could sign now?
A: Cliff Christl - That may be true about veteran receivers. But was somebody available who might blossom into a good receiver some day? That we won't know for awhile. And Willie Ponder was available as a kick returner. He ranked 11th in the league entering this weekend. Seeing the Packers have yet to find a kick returner to replace Allen Rossum (who has been gone almost five years now), they might have considered that to be an even higher priority.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: David H of Denver - With Harrington picking apart the Packers for 400+ yards, something tells me this is the theortical equivalent of "if you want to look fit, hang out with fat people."
A: Cliff Christl - I like the line, but Harrington didn't exactly pick the Packers apart.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Travis of Rollingstone, MN - Hi again, Cliff. Miami was facing 4th down and going to attempt a FG. There was 1:45 left in the 2nd quarter after Harrington was tackled on third down. While Miami had the ball at that moment, the Packers were going to get it back after the FG attempt. Miami had at least one timeout as they stopped the clock prior to attempting the FG, and Green Bay had all three timeouts. I agree that in most cases taking timeouts when the opponent has the ball isn't the thing to do, but I wonder if this situation would be an exception to the rule.
A: Cliff Christl - And what if the Packers had committed a penalty on the field goal attempt? No, when the other team has the ball at the 14-yard line, I wouldn't give them more time to operate at the end of the first half except maybe in a few rare situations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: The Grape Ape of Hanna-Barbara - I read Sports Illustrated this week on the Saints and they mentioned that they refer to their own new & improved defense as the Oreo's because all 3 of LBers are white, and their whole DL and DB is black. I know you and most of the media are taught to ignore color as if we are all the same, but do you know of any other team in the NFL, CFL, Arena League, or NFL Europe who empoy a total white starting offensive line? I'm sure that's just an accident.
A: Cliff Christl - I can't answer your question off the top of my head, but I don't want to give you the impression that I'm unwilling to address the subject. My guess would be that there are others. I'm also guessing that it is the one area other than qbs and kickers and punters where there are still more white players than black players in the league. But all that is quesswork.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: roger federer of geneva - why does it seem like punt returner charles woodson makes 2-3 guys miss every time only to squeeze out only 5 yards? doesn't anyone block on our special teams?
A: Cliff Christl - I don't see much burst from Woodson. I don't look at him as a threat to take it all the way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: JIm Scott of Rosemount, MN - Any word on Jennings's injury? Did Colledge play better after the first quarter or was he getting more help? How many rookies played today for Green Bay? I count 6 on offense alone (Jennings, Martin, Francies, Moll, Colledge, and Spitz).
A: Cliff Christl - Johnny Jolly got his first action on defense and made at least one tackle. Tory Humphrey is a first-year player. He also counts. Blackmon, Culver, Bush and Hunter also got in the game. And, of course, Hawk went the distance on defense. Tony Palmer was listed as playing too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Hal Malchow of Washington, DC - Cliff, I love your work. You may be the best. But I am a little confused. If there are no playmakers on the Packers, who were those imposters wearing numbers 80, 30, 21, 50 and 74?
A: Cliff Christl - Almost anybody in the NFL is capable of making a big play. Most players do at some point, even the Antonio Chatmans of the world. When I'm talking about playmakers, I'm talking about the players who do it almost every week, the ones who elevate their teams into the playoffs and then make plays in the playoffs. Those are the players who make the difference in the NFL. As I noted earlier, let's see how many of today's playmakers make plays over the rest of the season. I thought the Packers played well today. I thought they looked like a well coached. They didn't face much of an offense, but they faced a good defense. So that deserves plaudits. But they beat a 1-6 team. They have two wins this year, both against 1-6 teams, or two of the worst four or five teams in the league. I wouldn't anoint Nos. 80, 30, 21, 50 and 74 as superstars quite yet. They're good players. They'll be superior to their opponents on some Sundays. But they're not Urlacher or Tomlinson or Merriman, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. etc., etc.......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Steve O of Scranton, PA - Cliff- I thought McCarthy's call on 4th and 1( Driver end around) was on the money, and showed his development as a head coach/ play-caller. Doubtful that he makes that same call 3 or 4 weeks ago. Your thoughts on McCarthy's performance thus far?
A: Cliff Christl - For what little I know, McCarthy's game plans have seemed fine since week one. As for the Driver call, it worked, so it was a good play. But if Vonnie Holliday had the athletic ability to make the tackle on Driver, I doubt if you would have submitted your question. Again, plays look good when they work. When they don't, they don't look good. And unless we're football coaches or maybe a former player or a real expert who studies game films, none of us knows anything about play-calling anyway. And that certainly includes me. So I don't know if McCarthy would have called it three weeks ago. And I don't know if it was a good call. All I know was that it worked because the defender missed the tackle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael Mullendore of Ellicott City, Md - I don't understand why the Pack couldn't have taken the first kick of 55 yds that Rayner made on Miami's penalty. Any insight? Also, Woodson had a good game today for a change.
A: Cliff Christl - The penalty was called before the snap. No play.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Greg Bissy of Long Island - Cliff, I was surprised by the play of R. Martin, Francies, and Dendy today. Not they are or will be world-beaters, but they appeared to be in the right spots today to make the play, and then actually made the play. Martin's catch and run, Francies catch in traffic, and Dendy's pass defended down the sideline seemed to offer a bit of hope for the back end of the roster, even if it was against the an awful Dolphins team.
A: Cliff Christl - Francies made a nice catch. Dendy got beat on the pass to Booker for 40 yards, but it was a blitz and the safety appeared to be late coming over the top. Other than that, I thought he was solid. And Ruvell Martin has some real speed limitations, but he has been productive when given a chance. So you make a good point. Things look better at the back end of the roster. I wrote a column about the receivers in spring, where I noted that Ted Thompson seemed to be upgrading the competition for roster spots after Mike Sherman's string of lean drafts and how that's a small sign of improvement. But, also, keep in mind that the front part of the roster is what matters most.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Biker Blues of Bremerton, WA - Cliff, I'm stuck at work while Direct TV DVR's the game for me. Following the game via blog helps, but what I'm interested in is how did the O-Line do? Is the zone blocking scheme working and do you think McCarthy stick with it? How did Colledge, Stitz and Moll hold up? P.S. It's 70 degrees and sunny out here. U got yours parked for the winter yet? (smile)
A: Cliff Christl - I don't think anybody is qualified to grade the play of indiviudal offensive linemen after a game. Even the coaches want to wait until they've seen the film. All I saw were flashes, just as some of you did. Other than the one run, there weren't a lot of big holes. The pass protection was ok after they started giving Colledge help on Taylor. I think the line is improving, but I don't think it's any better than adequate at this point, if that. Don't underestimate how much it helps to have a veteran quarterback with a strong arm to ease much of the pressure on that line. As for the weather in Green Bay, it has been a cold, short fall. Didn't even get to ride during the bye week. So you've got me eating my heart out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Sidney Moncrief of Little Rock - Why are the Vikings and Bears DL all 1st round draft picks, but the Packers have all meat & potato mid round guys? How much can you expect from DL like this game in, game out? A great DL makes a defense. Look at Denver with all those former high pick flops they have they got from Cleveland. Sometimes I wonder if players taken high to crappy teams intentionally tank it so they can be released sooner than later and sign with a team they want, and of course they keep their signing bonus money and big rookie money.
A: Cliff Christl - The Vikings took Kevin Williams, one of their two best linemen, with the ninth pick in the draft. The Bears took Tommie Harris, 14th. The two Willaimses for the Vikings and Harris for the Bears are the key players for those lines. In fact, isn't Harris the only No. 1 pick starting on the Bears' line? Put Harris or Kevin Williams on the Packers' line and it probably would be as good as the Bears or the Vikings. All the rest of the linemen, other than maybe Pat Williams, fall into the category of good players. There isn't much difference between the other starters for the Bears and Vikings, and the Packers' D-linemen. In fact, Kampman and KGB might be just as good a defensive end combination as any in the division; and Pickett probably is a better player than the Bears' starter opposite Harris. Again, it's the special players -- the defensive playmakers -- who make the difference. As for the Broncos, those linemen are playing better than they did in Cleveland. But that might be only because they're playing in front of maybe the best linebacker trio in the league and the best cornerback. That's just another case of good players looking better because of their supporting cast. That's how it was with the '96 Packers. Their good players played better than they did elsewhere because they were playing with White and Butler.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jamie E. of Milwaukee of thee Wisconsin - Cliff, I read your blog post the other day where you posted a clip of the article from another reporter who basically said Hawk has largely been unimpressive in terms of blowing up the offensive players though he consistently makes tackles. And I also know you place a lot of stock in Hawk being the 5th pick. Exactly what type of player must Hawk develop into not to be considered a waste at the 5th pick? Yeah he was the 5th pick, but that also means he wasn't so great or a "game changer" in college that four other teams would pass on him. I think statiscally, he's living up to expectations and at times he has shown his explosiveness. And today, we seen his hard hitting ability on at least two occasions (though I thought I seen some helmet-to-helmet contact both times he "stunned" a player though he doesn't necessarily lead with it). The only complaint I have at this point is that he's still a second late at this point as I seen at least two plays (could've been more as I couldn't watch every single play) where he could have deflected the ball before the WR/TE caught it. And in every game this year I've seen him around the ball even when he wasn't the guy to make the tackle or assist in it. I think once he gets a better feel for the game and his reaction time improves, he will more than live up to expectation. I think anyone who implies that he's not living up to expectations either set the bar too high (L.T. / Ray Lewis playmaking) or are making a very premature argument.
A: Cliff Christl - It was a longtime scout that I quoted. Hawk was certainly active today and made some good plays again. He does every week. He has been a solid addition to that team. But I think there was at least one play, maybe two, today where he could have blown someone up in the backfield and didn't. And he got a sack today, but I think there also were some plays he didn't get much pressure blitzing. I think it's almost a given that if he stays healthy, he is going to a be a good, productive player for a long time. But for him to be one of the keys to the Packers winning a Super Bowl, he'll have to be in Urlacher's class, Merriman's class, a player of that caliber. And that kind of ability he hasn't shown yet. At this point, I think Hawk and Barnett are very similar. Barnett played well today. He missed a tackle on the play where Morris gained all those yards after the catch, but my impression from watching the game was that Barnett played as well as Hawk, if not better. Barnett is a good player, probably better than the majority of 29th picks. But if Hawk doesn't turn out any better, will he live up to his draft position?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Granger of Simsbury, CT - Cliff I've read you write what seems like hundreds of times that the Packers lack playmakers...But are they getting better? Are they better now than they were at the same point last year? I know you may say it doesn't matter if they don't have playmakers, but are they moving in the right direction?
A: Cliff Christl - When the Packers last had a legitimate shot at winning the Super Bowl, Favre was playing well, Green was one of the premier backs in the game and Javon Walker was emerging as one of the top young receivers. That was two, three years ago. Favre is slipping. Green is slipping. Walker is gone. And I don't see anybody in the class of those players coming up. So the answer on that front is no. Where I see the Packers getting better is that they're playing with fewer bad players compared to last year. I think the young guards are much better than Klemm and Whitticker and win some battles, although not nearly enough yet. Jennings is a big improvement over Ferguson. Hawk is a big improvement over last year's linebackers. Poppinga certainly has more potential than they did and seems to be playing better. I think Pickett has been a good addition. But the key here is finding young players as good as Favre and Green when they were in their primes, and Walker.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tim of Batavia - Cliff, your point about playmakers is valid. The thing is there appear to be few are far between cases of true playmakers becoming available in normal trading within the NFL. Antonio Gates (street free agent I believe) Ahman Green (traded for Fred Vinson), perhaps Marc Bulger going from New Orleans to St. Louis, heck even Hasslebeck and a future hall of famer (Hutchinson) for Jamal Reynolds and that LB from Oklahoma. My point is simple; draft the best players available ( I believe TT has done that) manage the salary cap intelligently ( ie no Cletidus Hunt or Joe Johnson long term damage signings - even if Woodson bust's out completely it will not kill their cap in future years ) and hope like heck that you find a LT in round one, or a Chad Johnson in round two or a Rudi Johnson in round 4. I think without question the core of the team has improved - tho we will not know how good the 3 young linemen are going to be in the future until the future gets here, same thing with the young LB's. Building a team is competitive just like any other business - the guys on the other teams are trying their hardest to win as well and are not going to lay down for the most GBP's. The biggest reason for optimism for us fans is simply TT's proven record of success in Seattle. Just because we are rebuilding does not make current Mngt. incompetent, we all just need to be patient.
A: Cliff Christl - I agree with you. I don't consider Rudi Johnson or even Hasselbeck to be playmakers. I think the Seahawks were unique in that they had a trio of players -- Walter Jones at left tackle, Hutchinson at guard and Shaun Alexander -- who complemented one another and were like one great playmaker combined, although two of the three were linemen. Together, they were like a Michael Jordan, although maybe only Jones was a great player. Alexander and Hutchinson were probably another notch down, but playing with Jones also made them better. In other words, the three combined were to the Seahawks was Manning is to the Colts and Brady to the Patriots.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Roger Federer of Geneva - The Vikings DL also has 1st round picks KENECHE UDEZE from USC and ERASMUS JAMES from Wisconsin, although he is hurt. Pat Williams was a hihg priced FA signing last year for the Vikings, but their other 3 starters were 1st round picks.
A: Cliff Christl - I realize that. But they're not winning because of those ends. I'm guessing that Kampman and KGB are playing better. It's the tackles who make the difference for the Vikings. And Pat Williams is a rarity in that he's that good and entered the league as a non-drafted free agent. But that happens sometimes with those big beats in the middle of the line. It almost never happens at end.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Hughston Caldwell of Indian Trail, NC - Cliff, The game today was decided by three of the Packers' "playmakers"...Woodson, Driver and Green. Finally, these guys made some plays. This is a league where games are decided by playmakers, and if Taylor had not had to leave the game, he may have decided the game himself.
A: Cliff Christl - True. Taylor returned. But the Packers nullified him by blocking him sometimes with three guys. Again, I'm not a coach, but it stands to reason that the Packers could get away with keeping a back and/or a tight end in to help on Taylor because they have Favre at quarterback. Put Joey Harrington on the Packers or put Aaron Rodgers in the lineup and try sending three receivers out in a pattern against seven defenders and see what happens. I'm guessing the offense would come to a standstill. That's part of Favre's value that I don't think people understand or appreciate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jordan of Milwaukee, WI - A poster asked who would have been a better WR option to sign or trade for than Koren Robinson. How about anybody who is actually eligible to practice or play in a game during the next 365 days?
A: Cliff Christl - Great point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jeff of Tampa - Cliff, simple question: what can we take away from this game? (Is Miami any good? Being in Florida, we hear that they are a lot better than their record.)
A: Cliff Christl - I don't think Miami is any better than it's record. I don't think it would be a whole lot better with a healthy Culpepper. That some people picked the Dolphins to win the Super Bowl, just goes to show what some so-called experts know.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark Lukens of Melbourne, FL - Is there any rule against "foreign" players being inducted into the Ring of Honor? I nominate Joey Harrington, who has contributed to dozens of Packers victories.
A: Cliff Christl - That's a worthy nomination. Isn't it painful to watch him? Watching that game -- I'm talking when the Dolphins were on offense -- was like sitting in a dentist's chair for however long.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Craig of Milwaukee - How much practice time has Colledge had at tackle? It seems like OL is one of the harder positions for rookies to learn and it is probably hard enough for him to learn guard. Is he really the best backup option at tackle or is the OL just that thin?
A: Cliff Christl - We aren't allowed to watch the team portion of practice, but I'm assuming that he doesn't get a lot of reps. And that was a thankless challenge today. But Tony Moll is listed third at left tackle on the depth chart and he had to play right guard. There probably isn't a team in the league that could lose its left tackle and not suffer immeasurably. Hardly anybody has that kind of depth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom J of DC - Well, Francies can practice 365 days a year. Maybe the Packers should have elevated him back in September? Give it a rest on the Robinson thing. You are starting to embarass yourself. It wasn't a big deal. Either way. He just isn't that good of a player. Nor is he the boogyman that you try to make him out to be. Let it go, Cliff. You are starting you embarass yourself.
A: Cliff Christl - I'm just answering the questions. There were times in the 1970s and '80s, I belabored certain points perhaps hundreds of times. I can't tell you how often I wrote back then that the Packers were shorthanded in their scouting department and lacked the necessary structure in their organization to win. The Robinson signing raises serious questions about the direction of the franchise. You might not get it, but it does and some people realize that. I have no intention of backing off.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John of Columbia City - Cliff, the game last Monday emphasized your point about playmakers to a tee. When the game was on the line Urlacher made the play. Anyone might be lucky enough to strip the ball in the first quarter of a meaningless game but when the game is on the line and someone has to step up can the player make the play then? Urlacher can! Reggie use to do that! So did Brett. But now do we have any of those guys? I hope Hawk becomes one. He impresses me because he is always around the ball and even Urlacher didn't make all those game changing plays before the talent was assembled around him but none-the-less...that guy in Chicago is a playmaker and the kind we ne need to acquire 2 or 3 of if we want to be special. Agreed?
A: Cliff Christl - Agree. But as I recall, the first time I saw Urlacher play, I thought his explosiveness was exceptional. I thought it just jumped out. I haven't seen that from Hawk. He has above average speed, range; but I don't see the same burst and explosiveness that I saw early in Urlacher. Thanks for all your questions. Good night.
A: Cliff Christl - Stinky Pete, it's my pleasure to start with you. Favre is no statue. He still throws well on the move. He might be as good as any QB in the league on that keep pass. He can sidestep a rush. So your point is well taken. He rarely makes a big play with his feet anymore, although he did today on that scramble. But he still makes a lot of little plays with them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ron of Grafton - Woodson looked like he had a good game today - an impact game. If he can continue he will justify what the Packers paid for him. They finally have a kicker who can make touchbacks. Somehow, I still believe Longwell was better.
A: Cliff Christl - Woodson had his first big game. I don't know if he'll ever justify that contract. But it was up-front money, so it's not going to strap the Packers in the future. That's why I wouldn't criticize the deal, although the Packers are overpaying him. Today, Woodson played like he did in training camp. There, too, he'd get beat, look like he was giving a half-hearted effort at times, etc. But he also made a lot of plays. Remember, he had nine interceptions in training camp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: C'Bear of Oviedo, FLA - Cliff, Well the PAckers proved they could take the heat in the kitchen of south Florida. In years past, this team would wilt and be out of gas. What was the difference today in these conditions from other "better" teams?
A: Cliff Christl - Probably that they played a struggling team with a quarterback who couldn't make a play if his life depended on it. They weren't playing Tampa Bay's defense of the past decade or so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom Lynum of Stillwater, MN - This is the type of game an improving, young, 1 & 4 team wins. Agree??
A: Cliff Christl - True. But the Packers have been competitive all season or at least since the opener. I don't think they've underachieved. I thought the same thing last year. But keep in mind that they beat a 1-6 team.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John of Columbia City, In - Hi Cliff. Lets focus on the positives today. Rayner seems to be a good choice for kicker and Ryan is holding his own. The O line still has a long way to go but they have spunk and are probably better players than Wahle and Rivera were early on. The D still gives up too amny passes but they seem to be making more plays. And Driver is a player every week while Ahman seems to have a little more in the tank than I thought. Clearly this is not the bottom that Green Bay sunk to in the 70s. Anyway would you agree with those positive assessments and is Jennings ankle going to be OK?
A: Cliff Christl - As I wrote before the season started, the Packers had three players with a track record of being playmakers: Favre, Green and Woodson. Today, they made the plays that made the difference. Favre teamed with Driver on that 34-yard strike, which was both an outstanding throw and catch; and also managed the game extremely well in a difficult situation without his left tackle. Woodson returned the interception 23 yards for a TD. He also had a sack on a blitz and broke up a handful of passes, or so it seemed. Green broke the 70-yard TD run. As I said, their plays essentially won the game. And now that's what you have to ask yourself. Will they continue to make plays on a regular basis? Or is there just enough left in the tank for them to have days like this, but no more than two, three or four a year? Jennings suffered an ankle injury. Coach Mike McCarthy said it didn't appear serious.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: JP of Orlando - Cliff, What was the call on Hawk in the 3rd Qtr? IT seemed like a bad call and gave Dolphins life.
A: Cliff Christl - Illegal contact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Eric Nordskog of Germantown - Just like to make a few points/observations. Toward te end of the 2nd quarter I saw Kampmann and KGB rush on the same side did you happen to see who rushed on the other end? The Packers must have little or no faith in their 2 minute offense as shown by letting Miami run the clock down before its field goal. If the O-line continues to develop into next year a young talented running back could completely vitalize the Packers offense/team.
A: Cliff Christl - I didn't see Kampman and KGB on the same side. But the Packers used their 3-3-5 scheme more today than in the past and usually had Poppinga rushing the passer from it. Maybe I missed it. But might that have been what you saw? I don't think most coaches, if any, would hace called a timeout late in the first half. As for a running back, there's no better way to get better faster in the NFL than to draft a special back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jordan of Milwaukee, WI - Good thing that Koren Robinson signing really helped with our depth at WR. If Jennings is out any extended period of time, teams would be foolish not to just triple-cover Driver. Honestly, as a GM, how do you put yourself in a position where an injury to one rookie leaves you with the receiving corp that the Packers are currenty using?
A: Cliff Christl - You're right. The Packers are one injury away from a disaster at wide receiver. On one hand, you can't fill every hole. Give Thompson credit for drafting Jennings. You can't expect to do much better than that in any one year. And I'm not so sure that Francies maybe couldn't be a solid third or fourth receiver at some point in the right situation. That was a nice play that he made today. He was being jostled pretty good when he caught that slant. I liked him in camp. But, you're right, the Packers also wasted their time with Robinson.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: James of Elk Grove - Cliff, it looked as though after the two huge early plays by Taylor of the Dolphins, the Packers effectively minimzed his impact for the rest of the game. The young Packer line is doing an adequate job in pass protection; however the run game is below par. Besides Green's seventy yard run (who proved he still has a burst), we were running at a 2.5 yard clip at that point in the game. Cliff, are the Dolphins front seven that much better than our young line and backs? And, based on the game today, are you seeing a slight improvement in cohesivness and effectiveness with the O-Line.
A: Cliff Christl - I think it was scheme and Favre more than the o-line that neutralized Taylor after the early going. If Colledge had been left to block Taylor one-on-one all day, the carnage might have been more than any grounds crew could handle. As for the running game, everybody has struggled against the Dolphins. Miami ranked third in the league entering the game in rushing average per attempt. Teams had been averaging only 3 yards per carry against them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Travis of Rollingstone, MN - Hi Cliff, You wrote that "I don't think most coaches, if any, would hace (sic) called a timeout late in the first half." Is that a good idea or is that coach-think fearing how to lose instead of playing to win? Also, with Jennings injured will that open the door at all for Woodson to play at WR? Perhaps as an emergency WR? The way the receivers are falling, they just might want to get Woodson some snaps on offense in practice ASAP!
A: Cliff Christl - I don't know why you'd stop the clock when the other team has the ball. What sense does that make? From what I can tell watching other games, coaches pick their spots at the end of the first half. I think it depends more on the situation than the coach as to whether they're aggressive or not. As for Woodson getting a look at wide receiver, I suppose it might be a possibility. But I don't see him helping there. Woodson isn't Deion Sanders in his prime.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike in HAyfield of Hayfield MN - Didn't see the game I am at work today, but did I see correctly that Harrington had 401 yards passing? What could a good team and QB do to this Defense?
A: Cliff Christl - Statistics can be misleading. Football isn't baseball. Harrington passed for 131 yards on the last two series when the Packers were wisely protecting a lead and keeping things in front of them. What could a good qb do the Packers' defense? Think back to McNabb, Brees, Bulger.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: STEVE B of IRMO - Everyone seems to be really critical of the Koren Robinson signing, but who else was there to sign? Alot of teams, including New Enland, Detroit, MN, etc are short wide receivers but none of them have signed any street free agents. The Packers took a chance with Koren Robinson because he was the only one out there worth taking a flyer on. Even all the wide receivers that Green Bay cut are still on the street. I understand your early comments about not worth signing him because of his character, but his talent was better then anyone else out there, and so the Packers took a chance. So again for all those who want to critize the signing of Koren Robinson name someone else they could have signed? Or could sign now?
A: Cliff Christl - That may be true about veteran receivers. But was somebody available who might blossom into a good receiver some day? That we won't know for awhile. And Willie Ponder was available as a kick returner. He ranked 11th in the league entering this weekend. Seeing the Packers have yet to find a kick returner to replace Allen Rossum (who has been gone almost five years now), they might have considered that to be an even higher priority.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: David H of Denver - With Harrington picking apart the Packers for 400+ yards, something tells me this is the theortical equivalent of "if you want to look fit, hang out with fat people."
A: Cliff Christl - I like the line, but Harrington didn't exactly pick the Packers apart.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Travis of Rollingstone, MN - Hi again, Cliff. Miami was facing 4th down and going to attempt a FG. There was 1:45 left in the 2nd quarter after Harrington was tackled on third down. While Miami had the ball at that moment, the Packers were going to get it back after the FG attempt. Miami had at least one timeout as they stopped the clock prior to attempting the FG, and Green Bay had all three timeouts. I agree that in most cases taking timeouts when the opponent has the ball isn't the thing to do, but I wonder if this situation would be an exception to the rule.
A: Cliff Christl - And what if the Packers had committed a penalty on the field goal attempt? No, when the other team has the ball at the 14-yard line, I wouldn't give them more time to operate at the end of the first half except maybe in a few rare situations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: The Grape Ape of Hanna-Barbara - I read Sports Illustrated this week on the Saints and they mentioned that they refer to their own new & improved defense as the Oreo's because all 3 of LBers are white, and their whole DL and DB is black. I know you and most of the media are taught to ignore color as if we are all the same, but do you know of any other team in the NFL, CFL, Arena League, or NFL Europe who empoy a total white starting offensive line? I'm sure that's just an accident.
A: Cliff Christl - I can't answer your question off the top of my head, but I don't want to give you the impression that I'm unwilling to address the subject. My guess would be that there are others. I'm also guessing that it is the one area other than qbs and kickers and punters where there are still more white players than black players in the league. But all that is quesswork.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: roger federer of geneva - why does it seem like punt returner charles woodson makes 2-3 guys miss every time only to squeeze out only 5 yards? doesn't anyone block on our special teams?
A: Cliff Christl - I don't see much burst from Woodson. I don't look at him as a threat to take it all the way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: JIm Scott of Rosemount, MN - Any word on Jennings's injury? Did Colledge play better after the first quarter or was he getting more help? How many rookies played today for Green Bay? I count 6 on offense alone (Jennings, Martin, Francies, Moll, Colledge, and Spitz).
A: Cliff Christl - Johnny Jolly got his first action on defense and made at least one tackle. Tory Humphrey is a first-year player. He also counts. Blackmon, Culver, Bush and Hunter also got in the game. And, of course, Hawk went the distance on defense. Tony Palmer was listed as playing too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Hal Malchow of Washington, DC - Cliff, I love your work. You may be the best. But I am a little confused. If there are no playmakers on the Packers, who were those imposters wearing numbers 80, 30, 21, 50 and 74?
A: Cliff Christl - Almost anybody in the NFL is capable of making a big play. Most players do at some point, even the Antonio Chatmans of the world. When I'm talking about playmakers, I'm talking about the players who do it almost every week, the ones who elevate their teams into the playoffs and then make plays in the playoffs. Those are the players who make the difference in the NFL. As I noted earlier, let's see how many of today's playmakers make plays over the rest of the season. I thought the Packers played well today. I thought they looked like a well coached. They didn't face much of an offense, but they faced a good defense. So that deserves plaudits. But they beat a 1-6 team. They have two wins this year, both against 1-6 teams, or two of the worst four or five teams in the league. I wouldn't anoint Nos. 80, 30, 21, 50 and 74 as superstars quite yet. They're good players. They'll be superior to their opponents on some Sundays. But they're not Urlacher or Tomlinson or Merriman, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. etc., etc.......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Steve O of Scranton, PA - Cliff- I thought McCarthy's call on 4th and 1( Driver end around) was on the money, and showed his development as a head coach/ play-caller. Doubtful that he makes that same call 3 or 4 weeks ago. Your thoughts on McCarthy's performance thus far?
A: Cliff Christl - For what little I know, McCarthy's game plans have seemed fine since week one. As for the Driver call, it worked, so it was a good play. But if Vonnie Holliday had the athletic ability to make the tackle on Driver, I doubt if you would have submitted your question. Again, plays look good when they work. When they don't, they don't look good. And unless we're football coaches or maybe a former player or a real expert who studies game films, none of us knows anything about play-calling anyway. And that certainly includes me. So I don't know if McCarthy would have called it three weeks ago. And I don't know if it was a good call. All I know was that it worked because the defender missed the tackle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael Mullendore of Ellicott City, Md - I don't understand why the Pack couldn't have taken the first kick of 55 yds that Rayner made on Miami's penalty. Any insight? Also, Woodson had a good game today for a change.
A: Cliff Christl - The penalty was called before the snap. No play.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Greg Bissy of Long Island - Cliff, I was surprised by the play of R. Martin, Francies, and Dendy today. Not they are or will be world-beaters, but they appeared to be in the right spots today to make the play, and then actually made the play. Martin's catch and run, Francies catch in traffic, and Dendy's pass defended down the sideline seemed to offer a bit of hope for the back end of the roster, even if it was against the an awful Dolphins team.
A: Cliff Christl - Francies made a nice catch. Dendy got beat on the pass to Booker for 40 yards, but it was a blitz and the safety appeared to be late coming over the top. Other than that, I thought he was solid. And Ruvell Martin has some real speed limitations, but he has been productive when given a chance. So you make a good point. Things look better at the back end of the roster. I wrote a column about the receivers in spring, where I noted that Ted Thompson seemed to be upgrading the competition for roster spots after Mike Sherman's string of lean drafts and how that's a small sign of improvement. But, also, keep in mind that the front part of the roster is what matters most.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Biker Blues of Bremerton, WA - Cliff, I'm stuck at work while Direct TV DVR's the game for me. Following the game via blog helps, but what I'm interested in is how did the O-Line do? Is the zone blocking scheme working and do you think McCarthy stick with it? How did Colledge, Stitz and Moll hold up? P.S. It's 70 degrees and sunny out here. U got yours parked for the winter yet? (smile)
A: Cliff Christl - I don't think anybody is qualified to grade the play of indiviudal offensive linemen after a game. Even the coaches want to wait until they've seen the film. All I saw were flashes, just as some of you did. Other than the one run, there weren't a lot of big holes. The pass protection was ok after they started giving Colledge help on Taylor. I think the line is improving, but I don't think it's any better than adequate at this point, if that. Don't underestimate how much it helps to have a veteran quarterback with a strong arm to ease much of the pressure on that line. As for the weather in Green Bay, it has been a cold, short fall. Didn't even get to ride during the bye week. So you've got me eating my heart out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Sidney Moncrief of Little Rock - Why are the Vikings and Bears DL all 1st round draft picks, but the Packers have all meat & potato mid round guys? How much can you expect from DL like this game in, game out? A great DL makes a defense. Look at Denver with all those former high pick flops they have they got from Cleveland. Sometimes I wonder if players taken high to crappy teams intentionally tank it so they can be released sooner than later and sign with a team they want, and of course they keep their signing bonus money and big rookie money.
A: Cliff Christl - The Vikings took Kevin Williams, one of their two best linemen, with the ninth pick in the draft. The Bears took Tommie Harris, 14th. The two Willaimses for the Vikings and Harris for the Bears are the key players for those lines. In fact, isn't Harris the only No. 1 pick starting on the Bears' line? Put Harris or Kevin Williams on the Packers' line and it probably would be as good as the Bears or the Vikings. All the rest of the linemen, other than maybe Pat Williams, fall into the category of good players. There isn't much difference between the other starters for the Bears and Vikings, and the Packers' D-linemen. In fact, Kampman and KGB might be just as good a defensive end combination as any in the division; and Pickett probably is a better player than the Bears' starter opposite Harris. Again, it's the special players -- the defensive playmakers -- who make the difference. As for the Broncos, those linemen are playing better than they did in Cleveland. But that might be only because they're playing in front of maybe the best linebacker trio in the league and the best cornerback. That's just another case of good players looking better because of their supporting cast. That's how it was with the '96 Packers. Their good players played better than they did elsewhere because they were playing with White and Butler.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jamie E. of Milwaukee of thee Wisconsin - Cliff, I read your blog post the other day where you posted a clip of the article from another reporter who basically said Hawk has largely been unimpressive in terms of blowing up the offensive players though he consistently makes tackles. And I also know you place a lot of stock in Hawk being the 5th pick. Exactly what type of player must Hawk develop into not to be considered a waste at the 5th pick? Yeah he was the 5th pick, but that also means he wasn't so great or a "game changer" in college that four other teams would pass on him. I think statiscally, he's living up to expectations and at times he has shown his explosiveness. And today, we seen his hard hitting ability on at least two occasions (though I thought I seen some helmet-to-helmet contact both times he "stunned" a player though he doesn't necessarily lead with it). The only complaint I have at this point is that he's still a second late at this point as I seen at least two plays (could've been more as I couldn't watch every single play) where he could have deflected the ball before the WR/TE caught it. And in every game this year I've seen him around the ball even when he wasn't the guy to make the tackle or assist in it. I think once he gets a better feel for the game and his reaction time improves, he will more than live up to expectation. I think anyone who implies that he's not living up to expectations either set the bar too high (L.T. / Ray Lewis playmaking) or are making a very premature argument.
A: Cliff Christl - It was a longtime scout that I quoted. Hawk was certainly active today and made some good plays again. He does every week. He has been a solid addition to that team. But I think there was at least one play, maybe two, today where he could have blown someone up in the backfield and didn't. And he got a sack today, but I think there also were some plays he didn't get much pressure blitzing. I think it's almost a given that if he stays healthy, he is going to a be a good, productive player for a long time. But for him to be one of the keys to the Packers winning a Super Bowl, he'll have to be in Urlacher's class, Merriman's class, a player of that caliber. And that kind of ability he hasn't shown yet. At this point, I think Hawk and Barnett are very similar. Barnett played well today. He missed a tackle on the play where Morris gained all those yards after the catch, but my impression from watching the game was that Barnett played as well as Hawk, if not better. Barnett is a good player, probably better than the majority of 29th picks. But if Hawk doesn't turn out any better, will he live up to his draft position?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Granger of Simsbury, CT - Cliff I've read you write what seems like hundreds of times that the Packers lack playmakers...But are they getting better? Are they better now than they were at the same point last year? I know you may say it doesn't matter if they don't have playmakers, but are they moving in the right direction?
A: Cliff Christl - When the Packers last had a legitimate shot at winning the Super Bowl, Favre was playing well, Green was one of the premier backs in the game and Javon Walker was emerging as one of the top young receivers. That was two, three years ago. Favre is slipping. Green is slipping. Walker is gone. And I don't see anybody in the class of those players coming up. So the answer on that front is no. Where I see the Packers getting better is that they're playing with fewer bad players compared to last year. I think the young guards are much better than Klemm and Whitticker and win some battles, although not nearly enough yet. Jennings is a big improvement over Ferguson. Hawk is a big improvement over last year's linebackers. Poppinga certainly has more potential than they did and seems to be playing better. I think Pickett has been a good addition. But the key here is finding young players as good as Favre and Green when they were in their primes, and Walker.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tim of Batavia - Cliff, your point about playmakers is valid. The thing is there appear to be few are far between cases of true playmakers becoming available in normal trading within the NFL. Antonio Gates (street free agent I believe) Ahman Green (traded for Fred Vinson), perhaps Marc Bulger going from New Orleans to St. Louis, heck even Hasslebeck and a future hall of famer (Hutchinson) for Jamal Reynolds and that LB from Oklahoma. My point is simple; draft the best players available ( I believe TT has done that) manage the salary cap intelligently ( ie no Cletidus Hunt or Joe Johnson long term damage signings - even if Woodson bust's out completely it will not kill their cap in future years ) and hope like heck that you find a LT in round one, or a Chad Johnson in round two or a Rudi Johnson in round 4. I think without question the core of the team has improved - tho we will not know how good the 3 young linemen are going to be in the future until the future gets here, same thing with the young LB's. Building a team is competitive just like any other business - the guys on the other teams are trying their hardest to win as well and are not going to lay down for the most GBP's. The biggest reason for optimism for us fans is simply TT's proven record of success in Seattle. Just because we are rebuilding does not make current Mngt. incompetent, we all just need to be patient.
A: Cliff Christl - I agree with you. I don't consider Rudi Johnson or even Hasselbeck to be playmakers. I think the Seahawks were unique in that they had a trio of players -- Walter Jones at left tackle, Hutchinson at guard and Shaun Alexander -- who complemented one another and were like one great playmaker combined, although two of the three were linemen. Together, they were like a Michael Jordan, although maybe only Jones was a great player. Alexander and Hutchinson were probably another notch down, but playing with Jones also made them better. In other words, the three combined were to the Seahawks was Manning is to the Colts and Brady to the Patriots.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Roger Federer of Geneva - The Vikings DL also has 1st round picks KENECHE UDEZE from USC and ERASMUS JAMES from Wisconsin, although he is hurt. Pat Williams was a hihg priced FA signing last year for the Vikings, but their other 3 starters were 1st round picks.
A: Cliff Christl - I realize that. But they're not winning because of those ends. I'm guessing that Kampman and KGB are playing better. It's the tackles who make the difference for the Vikings. And Pat Williams is a rarity in that he's that good and entered the league as a non-drafted free agent. But that happens sometimes with those big beats in the middle of the line. It almost never happens at end.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Hughston Caldwell of Indian Trail, NC - Cliff, The game today was decided by three of the Packers' "playmakers"...Woodson, Driver and Green. Finally, these guys made some plays. This is a league where games are decided by playmakers, and if Taylor had not had to leave the game, he may have decided the game himself.
A: Cliff Christl - True. Taylor returned. But the Packers nullified him by blocking him sometimes with three guys. Again, I'm not a coach, but it stands to reason that the Packers could get away with keeping a back and/or a tight end in to help on Taylor because they have Favre at quarterback. Put Joey Harrington on the Packers or put Aaron Rodgers in the lineup and try sending three receivers out in a pattern against seven defenders and see what happens. I'm guessing the offense would come to a standstill. That's part of Favre's value that I don't think people understand or appreciate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jordan of Milwaukee, WI - A poster asked who would have been a better WR option to sign or trade for than Koren Robinson. How about anybody who is actually eligible to practice or play in a game during the next 365 days?
A: Cliff Christl - Great point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jeff of Tampa - Cliff, simple question: what can we take away from this game? (Is Miami any good? Being in Florida, we hear that they are a lot better than their record.)
A: Cliff Christl - I don't think Miami is any better than it's record. I don't think it would be a whole lot better with a healthy Culpepper. That some people picked the Dolphins to win the Super Bowl, just goes to show what some so-called experts know.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark Lukens of Melbourne, FL - Is there any rule against "foreign" players being inducted into the Ring of Honor? I nominate Joey Harrington, who has contributed to dozens of Packers victories.
A: Cliff Christl - That's a worthy nomination. Isn't it painful to watch him? Watching that game -- I'm talking when the Dolphins were on offense -- was like sitting in a dentist's chair for however long.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Craig of Milwaukee - How much practice time has Colledge had at tackle? It seems like OL is one of the harder positions for rookies to learn and it is probably hard enough for him to learn guard. Is he really the best backup option at tackle or is the OL just that thin?
A: Cliff Christl - We aren't allowed to watch the team portion of practice, but I'm assuming that he doesn't get a lot of reps. And that was a thankless challenge today. But Tony Moll is listed third at left tackle on the depth chart and he had to play right guard. There probably isn't a team in the league that could lose its left tackle and not suffer immeasurably. Hardly anybody has that kind of depth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom J of DC - Well, Francies can practice 365 days a year. Maybe the Packers should have elevated him back in September? Give it a rest on the Robinson thing. You are starting to embarass yourself. It wasn't a big deal. Either way. He just isn't that good of a player. Nor is he the boogyman that you try to make him out to be. Let it go, Cliff. You are starting you embarass yourself.
A: Cliff Christl - I'm just answering the questions. There were times in the 1970s and '80s, I belabored certain points perhaps hundreds of times. I can't tell you how often I wrote back then that the Packers were shorthanded in their scouting department and lacked the necessary structure in their organization to win. The Robinson signing raises serious questions about the direction of the franchise. You might not get it, but it does and some people realize that. I have no intention of backing off.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John of Columbia City - Cliff, the game last Monday emphasized your point about playmakers to a tee. When the game was on the line Urlacher made the play. Anyone might be lucky enough to strip the ball in the first quarter of a meaningless game but when the game is on the line and someone has to step up can the player make the play then? Urlacher can! Reggie use to do that! So did Brett. But now do we have any of those guys? I hope Hawk becomes one. He impresses me because he is always around the ball and even Urlacher didn't make all those game changing plays before the talent was assembled around him but none-the-less...that guy in Chicago is a playmaker and the kind we ne need to acquire 2 or 3 of if we want to be special. Agreed?
A: Cliff Christl - Agree. But as I recall, the first time I saw Urlacher play, I thought his explosiveness was exceptional. I thought it just jumped out. I haven't seen that from Hawk. He has above average speed, range; but I don't see the same burst and explosiveness that I saw early in Urlacher. Thanks for all your questions. Good night.