The Key Questions For This Season's Success

[The Shadow]

Ok, this is as good a time as any :

1. Will the defense continue the evolution to top-tier status?
Adding potential cornerstones like Hawk and Harrell to an upgraded talent core - Pickett, Woodson - with solid stalwarts like Kampmann, Harris, & Barnett plus emerging players like Collins, Jenkins, and Poppinga seems like a solid strategy for success.
The players have now had a year in the system.
But a defense must come together on the field.
If the defense takes that next step, the Packers will be in every game.

2. Will the offensive line continue to improve?
[b]Colledge, Spitz, Wells, and Moll now have a year of experience under their belts, as well as an offseason in a pro weight program. Their progress, as well as Barbre's and maybe Thompson's, will be the key to the offense.
3. Will Brett Favre take the leap to a new leadership/maturity level?
Favre's willingness to 'play within himself' with this year's version of the Green Bay Packers is crucial. If the team emerges as a true defensive force, less 'hometown hero' heroics are in order - in favor of a smart, ball security approach. Individual records are fine, but wins are the name of the game.

4. Will special teams finally become a positive?
Some of the younger players must distinguish themselves as ST aces, and the Packers must finally find the returners that can be true answers.

5. Will the secondary jell?
Will Collins leave the lightbulb on that finally seemed to switch on in the last Bear's game? Will Manuel - or someone else - finally make the SS position a strength? Can Woodson & Harris stave off Father Time? Will Blackmon or Walker become that solid Nickel we need so badly? Will Underwood, Culver, and Bigby upgrade things?
And : will Schottenheimer prove he can coach them?

6. [b]Can Morency and Jackson provide the ground game necessary for success?
I think we are all going to be pleasantly surprised with a fresh young tandem.

7. Will the receiving corp come through?
Driver is a known quality commodity. Jennings seems to have a lot of the same flair that Antonio Freeman had in his early phase. Jones could be the tough WR turning slants into long gains. Clowny could provide the same type of field-stretching that Berrian has done for the Bears. Carlyle Holliday impressed in his brief stint. And Koren Robinson's return could help on kickoffs as well as receiving.
Tight ends are more of a crapshoot. I suspect Lee will be the guy, and would not be surprised to see Bubba cut.

8.
He seems like a bright guy, and the promotion of Moss seems like a solid move. Can he keep a young, improving group focused on the prize?
This year should reveal a lot about him.

[Bretsky]

To me 2 is the biggest key

Will the OL at least be average as a group, or will MM need to hide their deficiencies by holding additional receiving options in to block on passing downs?

I really have no expectations of Green Bay becoming a top tier running team so I think the above question will have huge relevance.

If MM has to do that the offense will have another long year.

[Packnut]

Favre will always be Favre, meaning he is'nt happy going 3 and out. You still need to score points in order to win. Playing conservative football ONLY works with a shut down defense or a defense that scores points. We have neither.

May-be in place of Favre not making mistakes i.e. throw picks, you should have mentioned one about not having 400 freaking drops this season. Or one about getting some kind of PRODUCTION out of the TE group. Or how about one needing MM to dump his max protect schemes and actually give his QB more than 2 targets to throw to. All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football.

[The Shadow]

".....All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football."

Receivers drop passes; that's part of the game. But Favre needs to work on playing smarter - consistently -in order for the team to win.

[Joemailman]

I think Favre did play within the system last year. His 18 INT's weren't bad considering he threw more passes than anyone in the league, plus the poor play of the defense for much of the year meant he was often trying to bring the team from behind. Favre's percentage of passes that were intercepted was lower than a lot of guys that had a higher passer rating than he did. His low passer rating was in part due to a low pass completion percentage. If the Packers can send more people out in pass patterns this year, the pass completion percentage should go up, and the interceptions should go down a little bit.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Funny! The Packers max protect on more plays than normal, and suddenly people act like they had max protect on a majority of plays.

[oregonpackfan]

All the points Shadow mentioned are certainly valid.

For me, the biggest concerns are:

--will the ground game become an influential part of the offense with Ahman Green gone?

--will the TE be a position where Favre can consistently throw to or will it just be used for blocking?

I agree with Bretsky that I don't think the Packers will be a top tier team but in the weak NFC-North division, they may qualify for the playoffs.

[Bretsky]

Funny! The Packers max protect on more plays than normal, and suddenly people act like they had max protect on a majority of plays.


With a WR group not deep enough last year the effects were obvious, regardless of how much they did it.

[BEARMAN]

Why don't you fellers just raise the white flag and call it a day ? Haven't you all relised that cheese left out of the frig too long spoils? Now that is what you all got there in gb, a whole lot of spoiled cheese ! Speaking of cheese, my fave is blue, with alittle goat ever now and then, how about you all ? Your team must like limburger, 'cause they "stink" :shock:

[Bretsky]

Why don't you fellers just raise the white flag and call it a day ? Haven't you all relised that cheese left out of the frig too long spoils? Now that is what you all got there in gb, a whole lot of spoiled cheese ! Speaking of cheese, my fave is blue, with alittle goat ever now and then, how about you all ? Your team must like limburger, 'cause they "stink" :shock:


REX GROSSMAN EVERYBODY :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap: :bclap:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Just think. If the Bears had won the Super Bowl last year, they would have only been 4 championships behind Green Bay. Now, they still need 5 championships to tie the Pack.

[Merlin]

I agree that Favre played well within the system last year. The Packers were in "max" protect A LOT last season. Not a majority of the time, but most of the time when they needed a crucial first down or score and that hurt us. His passer rating had more to do with the low per catch yards then the completion percent. Everyone knows the QB Rating is a joke and normally doesn't show the true talent of a QB unless he goes 10 for 15 for 150 yards and 3 TD's and no ints every game. Can't seem to find any QB in the league who can do that week in and week out. Favre threw the ball more then anyone else last season and had 18 ints, big deal. He would have probably had 3 or 4 more TD's if people could catch the damn ball and we may have won one or two more games.

Favre is not the problem. The offensive line played okay for starting basically 3 rookies. I expect this year they will have that "gell" thing down and they will play just fine. Driver will get his, Favre will throw the ball. Outside of that, what can you say for certain will be positive on offense? The RB position? Nope. The FB position? Nope. The other 2 WR positions? Nope. The TE position? Nope. TT basically put all of our eggs into the "someone has to step up" bs basket. It is highly unlikely that more then one player steps up, sometimes two and hardly ever three. We need 4-6 players to step up on offense from a cast of rookies and no names. I just don't see it.

Defensively, we have the talent save Manual. I just don't think Sanders is the answer at DC. It took him most of the season to get them to communicate and be all on the same page. Why? The defense didn't change much from the year before and they players on defense weren't stupid. So what's the excuse? I don't think Sanders has a clue as to what he is doing, so much for first time DC's. Our secondary coaching with Shittenheimer (who has NEVER been successful at ANY level) is probably the biggest achilles heal you will ever see. We have to rely on the talent of the players this season because the coaching just isn't there. They should be improved but if they don't address the Manual issue (cut his ass), then anyone with a WR that can run a 40 yard dash backwards in 20 seconds will beat him for the deep ball.

Face it, our special teams is a joke. Step up or not step up, it will take 11 guys to step up on those units, again, I just don't see it with a bunch of no names and rookes.

[HarveyWallbangers]

His passer rating had more to do with the low per catch yards then the completion percent.

Actually, it had a lot to do with the completion percentage. In Favre's two worst seasons, he had 5 more interceptions than TDs and 9 more interceptions than TDs--compared to the same interceptions as TDs last year. His yards/attempt were almost identical to last year, but because his completion % was over 60% those years (compared to 56% last year) his passer rating was virtually the same as those two years--despite the high number of interceptions those two years.

Also, because the drops also affects his yards/attempt, it has a double effect on his passer rating. It hurts his completion % and his yards/attempt. Let's say he had 20 less drops last year, and those drops would have netted 200 more yards. Then, his yards/attempt all of a sudden becomes 6.7. That's about where he was at in a lot of seasons in his career and puts him closer to his career average of 7.0 yards/attempt than his 6.3 yards/attempt he had last year.

[Patler]

His passer rating had more to do with the low per catch yards then the completion percent.

Actually, it had a lot to do with the completion percentage. In Favre's two worst seasons, he had 5 more interceptions than TDs and 9 more interceptions than TDs--compared to the same interceptions as TDs last year. His yards/attempt were almost identical to last year, but because his completion % was over 60% those years (compared to 56% last year) his passer rating was virtually the same as those two years--despite the high number of interceptions those two years.

Also, because the drops also affects his yards/attempt, it has a double effect on his passer rating. It hurts his completion % and his yards/attempt. Let's say he had 20 less drops last year, and those drops would have netted 200 more yards. Then, his yards/attempt all of a sudden becomes 6.7. That's about where he was at in a lot of seasons in his career and puts him closer to his career average of 7.0 yards/attempt than his 6.3 yards/attempt he had last year.

Intersting "what ifs".

If he had 20 fewer dropped, and picked up 200 more yard because of it, his QB rating would have been 76.75. If one of the drops would have been a TD, it goes up to 77.29

[Merlin]

Passer rating is a joke no matter how you analyze it. Here is my passer rating:

1) Who won
2) Did the QB do anything to help the team
3) Did the QB do anything to hurt the team

2 = perfect.

[HarveyWallbangers]

BTW, Green Bay wasn't the only team using max protect. I just read an article about how the Rams (supposedly, with a pretty good OL) went to max protect a lot against the Lions last year--after the Lions had shown a good pass rush in early season games. We didn't max protect all of the time, and situations dictated when we used it. A lot of times teams will max protect when they want to get their receivers in deeper routes. The OL needs to improve, but I think people may be overstating the max protect schemes a bit. I'd like to see the percentages again on how often we max protected. The TEs, RBs, and secondary receivers combined for close to 200 of the 350 completions, so obviously we didn't go to max protect on a majority of plays.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Passer rating is a joke no matter how you analyze it. Here is my passer rating:

I tend to agree that passer rating is overrated. A lot of elements out of the QB's control affect it, and it "seems" to favor certain types of QBs. Personally, it seems to favor WCO QBs with a high completion %. Still, completion % is a big part of it.

[Patler]

Passer rating is a joke no matter how you analyze it. Here is my passer rating:

1) Who won
2) Did the QB do anything to help the team
3) Did the QB do anything to hurt the team

2 = perfect.

So by your formula, Grossman was a pretty darn good QB. #1 was high, all in all games with "yes" for #2 was probably more than for #3. Bearman will be pleased!

I also am not a big fan of the QB rating calculation. All you have to do is look at the list in order, and instincts tell you something is wrong with the calculation. It has been used for a long time, and was modified once quite a while ago. I have wondered why it has not been toyed with since.

[Patler]

Passer rating is a joke no matter how you analyze it. Here is my passer rating:

I tend to agree that passer rating is overrated. A lot of elements out of the QB's control affect it, and it "seems" to favor certain types of QBs. Personally, it seems to favor WCO QBs with a high completion %. Still, completion % is a big part of it.

If you are in a WC offense, and have a coach who likes to pass in the red zone, you will have a good QB rating.

[Packnut]

".....All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football."

Receivers drop passes; that's part of the game. But Favre needs to work on playing smarter - consistently -in order for the team to win.


Well, according to that logic, so are picks. Your views on Favre and the QB position in general are way off. It's a TEAM game. Even Manning has 2 outstanding WR's and a very good run game. You wanna put all the responsibility on Favre which is a load of BS.

It's pretty easy to see what's coming from you in the future. If there is no improvment in the offense and we struggle in the RZ again, your gonna use Favre as the scape-goat instead of putting the blame where it really belongs which is squarely on the GM's shoulders.

Then again, if blaming Favre for the offense floats your boat, by all means go ahead. However, not taking into account things like leading the league in dropped passes or no TE production, using max protect schemes and lack of any consistent running game make your "Favre needing to play smarter" opinion look very foolish.

[Packnut]

BTW, Green Bay wasn't the only team using max protect. I just read an article about how the Rams (supposedly, with a pretty good OL) went to max protect a lot against the Lions last year--after the Lions had shown a good pass rush in early season games. We didn't max protect all of the time, and situations dictated when we used it. A lot of times teams will max protect when they want to get their receivers in deeper routes. The OL needs to improve, but I think people may be overstating the max protect schemes a bit. I'd like to see the percentages again on how often we max protected. The TEs, RBs, and secondary receivers combined for close to 200 of the 350 completions, so obviously we didn't go to max protect on a majority of plays.

MM was quoted stating they used max protect a good majority of the time. His version of max protect was keeping either the RB or TE in to block and he stated that there were several times he kept both in. In a 1 back-1 TE set, that would still give you 3 WR's to throw to. Therefore the secondary WR stats you include in your post would not count. If you take them away and focus on the TE/RB passing stats, you get a more accurate view.

[Patler]

".....All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football."

Receivers drop passes; that's part of the game. But Favre needs to work on playing smarter - consistently -in order for the team to win.


Well, according to that logic, so are picks. Your views on Favre and the QB position in general are way off. It's a TEAM game. Even Manning has 2 outstanding WR's and a very good run game. You wanna put all the responsibility on Favre which is a load of BS.

It's pretty easy to see what's coming from you in the future. If there is no improvment in the offense and we struggle in the RZ again, your gonna use Favre as the scape-goat instead of putting the blame where it really belongs which is squarely on the GM's shoulders.

Then again, if blaming Favre for the offense floats your boat, by all means go ahead. However, not taking into account things like leading the league in dropped passes or no TE production, using max protect schemes and lack of any consistent running game make your "Favre needing to play smarter" opinion look very foolish.

So Favre is to shoulder none of the blame? Its all TT?
Not the coaches?
not the players?
Not the future Hall of Famer?

I suppose even if Favre were to fall off the ledge and be absolutely horrible you could blame that on TT, because TT is responsible for not having replaced him on the roster.

In reality, not everything is TT's fault, and some things are Favre's responsibility. Like not throwing deep down the middle of the defense late in a play, which is a bad decision virtually all of the time. Favre did it several times last year for interceptions, and even got an earful from MM once on TV for doing it. How is that TT's fault? How is it not Favre's fault?

I think to some extent Favre did control himself a little better last year. He needs to do it again this year, and maybe even control himself a bit more, for several reasons:

1. The team isn't good enough to make up for his mistakes most of the time.
2. Favre isn't nearly as likely to make the unbelievable play as he was in the past. Like it or not, his big play ability has declined. Therefore, his risk-taking does not have positive results as often as it used to, and he needs to adapt accordingly. That's not a criticism. just a recognition that he is older (even just plain OLD in football terms!)

[Packnut]

Here are the facts on max protect according to MM. Note the paragraph about MM stating "MOST OF THE TIME" in regards to max protect. I would say that backs up my point about max protect the MAJORITY of the time.

JS ONLINE: SPORTS: PACKERS: E-MAIL | PRINT
THIS STORY



Coach aims to get Favre on target
QB's decision-making the focus for McCarthy
By TOM SILVERSTEIN
tsilverstein@journalsentinel.com
Posted: March 28, 2007
Phoenix - Green Bay Packers coach Mike McCarthy won some battles last season getting quarterback Brett Favre to play more efficiently in his version of the West Coast offense.

Packers/NFL


Photo/Mark Hoffman

Green Bay Packers coach Mike McCarthy would like Brett Favre to improve his QB decision-making.

Related Coverage
Overtime: NFL tables tweak
Favre: Coach aims to get QB on target
NFL: Redskins inquire about Bears' Briggs

Packer Insider
Chat: Christl's finale, 7 p.m. Thursday
Forum: Say your farewell to Christl

Packers Etc.
'07 Opponents
'07 Roster
'07 Draft Order
'07 Draft Picks
'07 Cap Figures
'06 Results
'06 Depth
'06 Statistics
'06 Rookie Pay
'06 Draft Section

NFL Basics
Standings
Statistics
Scoreboard
'07 Draft Order
'07 Calendar
'06 Draft Review
Player index
Team pages
Injuries
Movements

Packer Insider

SIGN-UP: Subscribe to Packer Insider for exclusive online insights and analysis.
Packer Forum
Got something to get off your chest? Voice your opinion and interact with other fans in our free Packer Forum.
Go to Forum

Advertisement

Buy a link hereBut the fight isn't over.

As he embarks on a second full season as Favre's head coach, McCarthy is focused on improving the quarterback's decision-making and overall efficiency.

McCarthy made significant headway with Favre last year, getting him to lower his interceptions from 29 to 18 despite an increase in attempts from the previous season, but he got slightly less production and saw a significant drop in completion percentage.

In the West Coast offense, coaches aim to have their quarterback complete 60% of his passes, and for the 13 seasons since Mike Holmgren brought the system to Green Bay, Favre had only twice completed less than 59%.

The 56% he completed last season was a career-low and the 55.6% the team completed ranked 27th in the league. There were many factors involved in those numbers, not the least of which were a league-high 43 drops and an inability to keep opposing defenses on their toes with a productive running game.

But Favre always has controlled the reins of the offense, and McCarthy will start with him in an attempt to make the passing attack more efficient, especially inside the opponents' 20-yard line where the Packers failed too often.

"He's part of the improvement in the completion percentage," McCarthy said Wednesday at the annual NFL owners meetings. "We need to get that up and quarterback is obviously a part of that. We dropped the ball too much and he did have a number of (different) receivers travel through.

"That's part of it, and frankly so is it being Year 1 (of his tenure). You can always look to improve your decision-making. You're always trying to improve that year to year. We need to improve in that area. We can't (complete) 56%. That's not what we're looking for."

In fairness to Favre, if the receivers had caught roughly half the passes they dropped last season, his completion percentage would have been better than 59%. And most of the time, McCarthy kept in seven blockers to protect his three rookie starting offensive linemen, leaving Favre fewer options.

Still, the increasing impatience Favre has shown over the years showed through in games in which the Packers fell behind. Of his 18 interceptions, 13 came in the second half and 12 came with the Packers trailing. At total of 11 came on first down, a likely indication Favre was trying to get it all back at once.

McCarthy wants to continue working on Favre's decision-making, which McCarthy thinks can improve even though Favre is a 37-year-old quarterback who has seen everything. When Favre returns from his off-season, the molding process will be picked up where it was left off last season.

"The decision interceptions are the ones that kill you because those are the ones that should not happen," McCarthy said. "They're the ones you can definitely fix. You're going to have a ball tipped. You might have a ball dropped. Those things you can't control, but the one thing that is constant year to year, you have to control the decision-making.

"He was much better than the year before, but that's not the goal. We need to improve that area. That's a yearly must in trying to improve."

McCarthy figures he won't have to be as conservative in the passing game this season because his rookie linemen will be stronger and wiser. He has put a major emphasis on strength training this off-season for his young linemen because too often they didn't match up physically with the opposition.

Favre will be greatly aided in his ability to find open receivers if he has the option of throwing to a running back or tight end out of the backfield, which wasn't the case last year when they were kept in to help block. McCarthy hopes to stretch the width of the field by sending his backs out, thereby opening up the middle or offering Favre an outlet.

"It's the most seven-man protection I've ever used, I'm not going to lie," McCarthy said of last season. "So we'll be able to get back to more of the base six-man protections and maybe some of the five-man protections that we have used."

McCarthy also might have the luxury of some added offensive talent to help inject some life into the offense. But even if the Packers select a wide receiver in the first round of the draft, they can't expect him to make that much of an impact.

So someone in the group behind Donald Driver - Greg Jennings, Robert Ferguson, Ruvell Martin, Carlyle Holiday, Shaun Bodiford among them - will have to play beyond expectations. And someone will have to replace tight end David Martin's role as a down-field receiver.

"Yeah, I'd like to add players," McCarthy said. "But I also think you have some young guys that are going to step up. Like I told them, 'A number of you guys have been standing in the back row for a number of reasons: injuries, you didn't get an opportunity, maybe the guy in front of you is a better player right now.

"It's time for you young guys to get in the front row."

And should they make it there, McCarthy intends to have Favre connect with them at a rate befitting of a true West Coast offense.




Buy a link here





From the March 29, 2007 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Have an opinion on this story? Write a letter to the editor or start an online forum.

Subscribe today and receive 4 weeks free! Sign up now.


BACK TO TOP



News | Business | Sports | Entertainment | Classifieds | Jobs | Wheels | Homes | Rentals

XML/RSS News Feeds (What's this?) | JSO Wireless

© 2005, Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights reserved. | Produced by Journal Interactive | Privacy Policy

Journal Sentinel Inc. is a subsidiary of Journal Communications.

[MJZiggy]

How 'bout we do something crazy, like blaming Favre for inaccurate passes and blaming the receivers when they drop good balls? Franks was a very good red zone threat in 2005, there was no reason to believe he'd be anything else in '06, and yet he treated the ball like a greased pig. That's not the GM's fault, it's Franks' fault. Favre's interceptions are not the GM's fault. More often than not, they're his fault (except of course when a receiver blows a route, in which case it's the receiver's fault). Not having a deep passing threat (or a free agent signing for that matter) does not make receivers drop balls.

[MJZiggy]

Passer rating is a joke no matter how you analyze it. Here is my passer rating:

1) Who won
2) Did the QB do anything to help the team
3) Did the QB do anything to hurt the team

2 = perfect.

So by your formula, Grossman was a pretty darn good QB. #1 was high, all in all games with "yes" for #2 was probably more than for #3. Bearman will be pleased!

I also am not a big fan of the QB rating calculation. All you have to do is look at the list in order, and instincts tell you something is wrong with the calculation. It has been used for a long time, and was modified once quite a while ago. I have wondered why it has not been toyed with since.

Mad? :idea:

[wist43]

Favre played great last year - so did Green, especially considering the chaos that was going on around them.

I think it's reasonable to expect that the OL should be better, but that's relative. They HAD TO max protect a disproportionate amount of the time b/c, quite simply, they were incapable of blocking 4 with 5... when they weren't max protecting, they were rolling Favre out, or taking 3 step drops, or chipping with the TE or back, or both.

Even though I think it's reasonable to expect improvement from the OL, I think it's just as reasonable to expect that the RB situation will be worse than last year, and the WR/TE positions will remain largely the same.

People are discounting what Green meant to Favre and to the offense... last year, Green was consistently getting hit in the backfield, and far too often had to break tackles just to get back to the LOS. The Packers don't have any backs on their roster that can get a tough yd... that inability is going to kill an awful lot of drives next year.

That being the case, I expect we'll see about the same production from the offense that we were getting at the end of last year - which was pretty much nothing.

[retailguy]

Here are the facts on max protect according to MM. Note the paragraph about MM stating "MOST OF THE TIME" in regards to max protect. I would say that backs up my point about max protect the MAJORITY of the time.

In fairness to Favre, if the receivers had caught roughly half the passes they dropped last season, his completion percentage would have been better than 59%. And most of the time, McCarthy kept in seven blockers to protect his three rookie starting offensive linemen, leaving Favre fewer options.

Still, the increasing impatience Favre has shown over the years showed through in games in which the Packers fell behind. Of his 18 interceptions, 13 came in the second half and 12 came with the Packers trailing. At total of 11 came on first down, a likely indication Favre was trying to get it all back at once.

McCarthy wants to continue working on Favre's decision-making, which McCarthy thinks can improve even though Favre is a 37-year-old quarterback who has seen everything. When Favre returns from his off-season, the molding process will be picked up where it was left off last season.

"The decision interceptions are the ones that kill you because those are the ones that should not happen," McCarthy said. "They're the ones you can definitely fix. You're going to have a ball tipped. You might have a ball dropped. Those things you can't control, but the one thing that is constant year to year, you have to control the decision-making.

"He was much better than the year before, but that's not the goal. We need to improve that area. That's a yearly must in trying to improve."

McCarthy figures he won't have to be as conservative in the passing game this season because his rookie linemen will be stronger and wiser. He has put a major emphasis on strength training this off-season for his young linemen because too often they didn't match up physically with the opposition.

Favre will be greatly aided in his ability to find open receivers if he has the option of throwing to a running back or tight end out of the backfield, which wasn't the case last year when they were kept in to help block. McCarthy hopes to stretch the width of the field by sending his backs out, thereby opening up the middle or offering Favre an outlet.

"It's the most seven-man protection I've ever used, I'm not going to lie," McCarthy said of last season. "So we'll be able to get back to more of the base six-man protections and maybe some of the five-man protections that we have used."

McCarthy also might have the luxury of some added offensive talent to help inject some life into the offense. But even if the Packers select a wide receiver in the first round of the draft, they can't expect him to make that much of an impact.



Harvey,

The bolded points above, plus the games I saw with MY OWN TWO EYES are the reason that I'm talking about MAX Protect.

It was used A LOT more than occasionally.

If the emphasis on weight training doesn't work, this line is SCREWED. They were consistently beaten with a 4 man rush. Bringing the LB's or a safety in, was almost guaranteed pressure for the defense last season.

That can't continue. It simply can't.

[Packnut]

".....All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football."

Receivers drop passes; that's part of the game. But Favre needs to work on playing smarter - consistently -in order for the team to win.


Well, according to that logic, so are picks. Your views on Favre and the QB position in general are way off. It's a TEAM game. Even Manning has 2 outstanding WR's and a very good run game. You wanna put all the responsibility on Favre which is a load of BS.

It's pretty easy to see what's coming from you in the future. If there is no improvment in the offense and we struggle in the RZ again, your gonna use Favre as the scape-goat instead of putting the blame where it really belongs which is squarely on the GM's shoulders.

Then again, if blaming Favre for the offense floats your boat, by all means go ahead. However, not taking into account things like leading the league in dropped passes or no TE production, using max protect schemes and lack of any consistent running game make your "Favre needing to play smarter" opinion look very foolish.

So Favre is to shoulder none of the blame? Its all TT?
Not the coaches?
not the players?
Not the future Hall of Famer?

I suppose even if Favre were to fall off the ledge and be absolutely horrible you could blame that on TT, because TT is responsible for not having replaced him on the roster.

In reality, not everything is TT's fault, and some things are Favre's responsibility. Like not throwing deep down the middle of the defense late in a play, which is a bad decision virtually all of the time. Favre did it several times last year for interceptions, and even got an earful from MM once on TV for doing it. How is that TT's fault? How is it not Favre's fault?

I think to some extent Favre did control himself a little better last year. He needs to do it again this year, and maybe even control himself a bit more, for several reasons:

1. The team isn't good enough to make up for his mistakes most of the time.
2. Favre isn't nearly as likely to make the unbelievable play as he was in the past. Like it or not, his big play ability has declined. Therefore, his risk-taking does not have positive results as often as it used to, and he needs to adapt accordingly. That's not a criticism. just a recognition that he is older (even just plain OLD in football terms!)


As I've stated here several times before, Favre is Favre. He makes throws he should'nt attempt and he does complete throws that no one else could. You take the good with the bad. Also if you really examine his picks, as the article I posted says, most came when trailing.

My point which the article backs up is that there are several things that were out of Favre's hands like the dropped passes and limiting his passing options. Therefore, it's my contention that judging Favre and blaming him for mistakes is the easy way out. Yes, of course sometimes Favre made the wrong decision like all QB's do. Yes he takes chances that he should'nt. But good Lord, that is Brett Favre! That same competitveness that makes him able to throw a laser in a small window, or play hurt when no one else would is also the same competitiveness that makes him try to make a play that he should'nt. You can't take that away from him and expect positive results.

Now as far as your comments about my blaming TT for everything. I'm sure you would not like it if I put words in your mouth so don't do it to me. I have never blamed Thompson for everything. I am on record here stating he has done some good things and made some positive moves. I'm just not a blind follower who takes Teddy's word that all is well. I was a blind follower for a long time-2 decades as a matter of fact in the 70's and 80's and I learned the hard way that following blindly ends in utter disappointment.

For what I hope is the last time I will state my position. I believe Teddy should have made a much more consertive effort to give Favre more weapons. I believe Teddy made a major blunder with Walker that set this team back. I believe Teddy could have made a few FA signings that would have given us a better shot this season and I've already stated for the record that Eric Johnson will have a great season with the Saints. That was the move Teddy blew and we'll see how Johnson does this season compared to our TE's. I'm on record BEFORE MM was hired when I voiced my preference for the Saint's HC. Since he was voted coach of the year, I'd say my opinion on that has been proven correct.

With all that said, I also Believe Teddy did a good job getting us in healthy cap space even if he does'nt use it. I believe he's done a good job of building some depth. He's making a good effort to get better talent in order to improve our pathetic special teams coverage. His FA signing of Woodson was brilliant. Exept for our first pick, I thought he did a good job with the draft this season, and I don't fault the Harrell pick as far as need goes, but rather his extensive injury history.

I am not a Thomspon basher as you have gone out of your way to insinuate, but neither am I blind to the mistakes I believe Teddy has made. I also am not just gonna sit back and watch the Thompson crowd shift the blame this season on #04 when virtually EVERY analyst and media person agree that at this point on paper, Favre does'nt have a whole lot to work with. Of course that can change. May-be the O line is stronger, may-be the new WR's will help. May-be Jennings takes the next step. May-be the running game improves. If these things happen, I'll be the first one to slap Teddy on the back and say I was wrong, but I can't help but wonder if we see the same offense from last season, how many Thompson followers will also step up and admit being wrong?

From what I've seen the excuses are already being planted by a few here. Either it's Favre needing to play smarter, or the schedule is to tough. :lol:

[Zool]

I believe Teddy made a major blunder with Walker that set this team back.

Eric Johnson will have a great season with the Saints.

In hind site #1 is right on the money. I'm not sure how many GM's are going to renegotiate with a WR that had 2 years left on his contract, 1 stud season and was coming off a knee reconstruction, but now that I see the end result I agree. If one of our guys becomes this years Colston, then it wont matter.


#2 He probably should have made a big push for Johnson. If he plays 6 games, he will have better receiving stats than any of our TE's. Johnson signed in N.O. for 1 season. Maybe Johnson didn't want to play in GB. I don't even recall a visit.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Harvey,

The bolded points above, plus the games I saw with MY OWN TWO EYES are the reason that I'm talking about MAX Protect.

It was used A LOT more than occasionally.

If the emphasis on weight training doesn't work, this line is SCREWED. They were consistently beaten with a 4 man rush. Bringing the LB's or a safety in, was almost guaranteed pressure for the defense last season.

That can't continue. It simply can't.

Depends what you mean by MAX protect. I think different people have different definitions. Max protect in the truest sense is keeping 3 extra guys in and sending two receivers out. I didn't see a lot of that. Teams go to six-man protection a majority of passing plays. How often do you see 5 man routes? Unless it's a team that is purposely spreading the field and doing 3 step drops to keep a good DL from dominating, not very often. Teams go to seven-man protections a good amount time on passing plays when the defense blitzes. That isn't something unique to Green Bay. Hardly. If that's the definition we are going with, then Detroit max-protected against Green Bay last year. St. Louis max-protected against Detroit, Chicago max-protected against Green Bay. Those years when teams were sending extra blockers at KGB, they were max protecting then. It happens all of the time. When a team blitzes (which they do on a lot on obvious passing downs), offenses will have extra blockers in. You have to match up numbers. Do a google search on "max protect". People act like max protect is something new to the Packers last year. Of course, they max protected more. They don't have Wahle, Rivera, and Flanagan. They max protected a lot in 2005 also (McCarthy wasn't here), but that didn't help out much. If the definition of MAX protect is keeping one or two extra blockers in (whether it's the TE, two TEs, a HB, a FB), I'd venture to guess that most teams max protected on a majority of passing plays.

People talk about how the Packers rookie OL can't match up with the Vikings DTs, for example. Well, the first game, the Packers kept a lot of extra blockers in. However, in the second game, they had more 5 receiver sets than any other game and handled the Vikings defense without a lot of protection (according to Bob McGinn).

Personally, I thought the drops were as big of a detriment to the offense last year as the OL. I also thought you could fault Favre in some games. This team needs improvement in the OL to have a better offense, but it also needs fewer drops and it needs Favre not to fade in the second half of the season again--like he has the last couple of years.

[Patler]

As I've stated here several times before, Favre is Favre. He makes throws he should'nt attempt and he does complete throws that no one else could. You take the good with the bad. Also if you really examine his picks, as the article I posted says, most came when trailing.

My point which the article backs up is that there are several things that were out of Favre's hands like the dropped passes and limiting his passing options. Therefore, it's my contention that judging Favre and blaming him for mistakes is the easy way out. Yes, of course sometimes Favre made the wrong decision like all QB's do. Yes he takes chances that he should'nt. But good Lord, that is Brett Favre! That same competitveness that makes him able to throw a laser in a small window, or play hurt when no one else would is also the same competitiveness that makes him try to make a play that he should'nt. You can't take that away from him and expect positive results.

Now as far as your comments about my blaming TT for everything. I'm sure you would not like it if I put words in your mouth so don't do it to me. I have never blamed Thompson for everything. I am on record here stating he has done some good things and made some positive moves. I'm just not a blind follower who takes Teddy's word that all is well. I was a blind follower for a long time-2 decades as a matter of fact in the 70's and 80's and I learned the hard way that following blindly ends in utter disappointment.

For what I hope is the last time I will state my position. I believe Teddy should have made a much more consertive effort to give Favre more weapons. I believe Teddy made a major blunder with Walker that set this team back. I believe Teddy could have made a few FA signings that would have given us a better shot this season and I've already stated for the record that Eric Johnson will have a great season with the Saints. That was the move Teddy blew and we'll see how Johnson does this season compared to our TE's. I'm on record BEFORE MM was hired when I voiced my preference for the Saint's HC. Since he was voted coach of the year, I'd say my opinion on that has been proven correct.

With all that said, I also Believe Teddy did a good job getting us in healthy cap space even if he does'nt use it. I believe he's done a good job of building some depth. He's making a good effort to get better talent in order to improve our pathetic special teams coverage. His FA signing of Woodson was brilliant. Exept for our first pick, I thought he did a good job with the draft this season, and I don't fault the Harrell pick as far as need goes, but rather his extensive injury history.

I am not a Thomspon basher as you have gone out of your way to insinuate, but neither am I blind to the mistakes I believe Teddy has made. I also am not just gonna sit back and watch the Thompson crowd shift the blame this season on #04 when virtually EVERY analyst and media person agree that at this point on paper, Favre does'nt have a whole lot to work with. Of course that can change. May-be the O line is stronger, may-be the new WR's will help. May-be Jennings takes the next step. May-be the running game improves. If these things happen, I'll be the first one to slap Teddy on the back and say I was wrong, but I can't help but wonder if we see the same offense from last season, how many Thompson followers will also step up and admit being wrong?

From what I've seen the excuses are already being planted by a few here. Either it's Favre needing to play smarter, or the schedule is to tough. :lol:

WOW! Talk about being overly sensitive and reading more into a few casual statements!

Where did I suggest that you are a Thompson basher? (However, derogatorily referring to him as "Teddy" might lead one to presume that you are.) I did write:


So Favre is to shoulder none of the blame? Its all TT?
Not the coaches?
not the players?
Not the future Hall of Famer?

I suppose even if Favre were to fall off the ledge and be absolutely horrible you could blame that on TT, because TT is responsible for not having replaced him on the roster.

but after all your previous posts, and even the one quoted above seem to imply that Favre is to be absolved of responsibilty, unless his protection is great, his receivers drop few balls and the running game is strong. I would point out your "squarely on TT's shoulders" comment.

I'm sorry, "Favre will be Favre" is really not a suitable analysis. Unfortunately, he is no longer the quarterback he was. So in that regard "Favre can't be Favre", at least not the same one that he used to be.

The simple fact is he, just like all aging athletes, has to adapt his game to is declining performance abilities. He can no longer carry this team. That does not mean he cannot help it or be an important part of that, but there was a time when most would have agreed that a .500 record was almost guaranteed just because he was the QB. He is more dependent on those around him now than he was in the past, and his play should recognize that.

Yes, many of his interceptions came when they were behind. However, too many of them came on first or second down. Even if you are trailing, that is not necessarily the time to take a risk. You have other downs. I'm not going to go back and rehash it, I did that once before, so if you don't want to believe this don't. However, a lot of his interceptions came after the team had driven slowly to a couple first downs, and he seemed to become impatient. I can see calling a play to take a shot, but if its not there, why not make a more cautious decision and wait to play another down? Those are the times that I would like to see him be more cautious.

As I said, his risk-taking no longer yields the benefits it used to. He no longer makes the plays as frequently as he used to. Because of that, he needs to reduce the number of chances that he takes. Again, that's not a criticism of Favre, it's merely recognition of the fact that he is much older than he was at his best. He no longer makes plays as often as he did in the past, nor should he be expected to.

It's interesting because even the article you quoted clearly has MM suggesting that Favre has to make better decisions. That was the whole gist of the article. Did you overlook that in your zeal to point out the writer's comment about the frequency of max protection in the passing game?

[Patler]

Personally, I thought the drops were as big of a detriment to the offense last year as the OL. I also thought you could fault Favre in some games. This team needs improvement in the OL to have a better offense, but it also needs fewer drops and it needs Favre not to fade in the second half of the season again--like he has the last couple of years.

I think that sums it up very well. The drops tend to be momentum busters, and this team can't afford that.

Favre's second halves of the last two season are a concern. In his defense, 2005 was the only time in his career that he had attempted more than 600 passes in a season, and then he topped it in 2006. That can't be a good thing. Maybe if they can balance things out a bit more, and he has fewer attempts, he won't fade later in the season. Ideally a player will get less work in their last few years, not more.

[woodbuck27]

It is so clear to me.

Unless our OL plays alot better this season and promotes a ground game; we are going to see our QB placed in a situation where his arm will have to bail us out.

That means we are going to see a lot of third and longs with max protect that will afford little room for him making an error. The blame for failure in the pass will fall all over Brett Favre.

He would be the first one to absorb that blame. He always has in the past.

So realistically, it's going to fall on the HC and his staff to step up and prepare that OL, and re-build confidence in our RB's and TE's with a little help fr. the FB.

How much help did TT afford that HC and his staff? Forget about jumping the gun and blaming, what essentially must befall Brett Favre, if the offense sputters.

Rather PLEASE. Lay blame where it's deserved.

Clearly on the man that supplies the talent and annoits the coaching staff and it's program (schemes).

Too many people here that understand the game, the real situation the Packers are in, and it's obvious consequences want to elect Brett Favre as the scapegoat and that is clearly stupid.

The blame for the failure we will endure in 2007 falls clearly on one man.

Our GM Ted Thompson.

He is so, and all wrapped up in his agenda to acquire more CAP space and a higher draft pick that he has sacrificed the team and it's fans. The blame for that failure must fall clearly on TT and he alone has to be dealt with for his non chalence or disregard for obvious need on our team.

That need is clearly more talent on offense. Rather he allows our team to sink deeper in the hole with it's talent base on offense and relies on proclamations that all will be just swell in his eyes.

His arrogance, or is it just plain incompetence is overwhelming and not forgivable.

[wist43]

I don't know how you guys can judge Favre guilty of anything given the junk around him.

Guys running wrong routes, dropped passes, pathetic protection, no running game, questionable coaching... It's a miracle they ever scored, or that Favre is still alive.

TT is the one who dismantled the OL; TT is the one who punted Walker out of town; TT is the one who showed Green the door; TT is the one who brought in the ZBS; TT is the one who said we don't need any upgrades on offense - the upgrades will "come from within". Seems to me, if you're going to point fingers...

I'm not a habitual Favre defender... but, given that he's trying to get the job done with a bunch of kids in front of him, and questionable talent everywhere else... don't see how anyone can point a finger at Favre.

[woodbuck27]

I don't know how you guys can judge Favre guilty of anything given the junk around him.

Guys running wrong routes, dropped passes, pathetic protection, no running game, questionable coaching... It's a miracle they ever scored, or that Favre is still alive.

TT is the one who dismantled the OL; TT is the one who punted Walker out of town; TT is the one who showed Green the door; TT is the one who brought in the ZBS; TT is the one who said we don't need any upgrades on offense - the upgrades will "come from within". Seems to me, if you're going to point fingers...

I'm not a habitual Favre defender... but, given that he's trying to get the job done with a bunch of kids in front of him, and questionable talent everywhere else... don't see how anyone can point a finger at Favre.

Yes. That is just plainly sick.

To already lay a fondation of blame of failure on Brett Favre, when realistically that should be the only result in this season.

Unless everything goes very well for us, and all manner of adversity strikes our opponents.

[Merlin]

".....All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football."

Receivers drop passes; that's part of the game. But Favre needs to work on playing smarter - consistently -in order for the team to win.


Well, according to that logic, so are picks. Your views on Favre and the QB position in general are way off. It's a TEAM game. Even Manning has 2 outstanding WR's and a very good run game. You wanna put all the responsibility on Favre which is a load of BS.

It's pretty easy to see what's coming from you in the future. If there is no improvment in the offense and we struggle in the RZ again, your gonna use Favre as the scape-goat instead of putting the blame where it really belongs which is squarely on the GM's shoulders.

Then again, if blaming Favre for the offense floats your boat, by all means go ahead. However, not taking into account things like leading the league in dropped passes or no TE production, using max protect schemes and lack of any consistent running game make your "Favre needing to play smarter" opinion look very foolish.

What I find interesting is McCarthy telling Favre last year that he wouldn't have to carry the team, and he was called upon to do so. This year it looks like more of the same. It is a team game and at this point in Favre's career, you don't ask him to carry the team, you take the load off of him so he can make those good decisions.

[Patler]

TT is the one who dismantled the OL;

Saying TT "dismantled" the line is simply inaccurate. It was dismantling itself for the most part, as it naturally would with as old as some of them were.

Green Bay got all they could out of Rivera and Flanagan. Rivera was no where near the Rivera of old even in his last year in GB, let alone the two he has played in Dallas. Now it looks like he is done. Flanagan has been injured the last three season, and is probably close to finished, too. He has played only 26 of 48 games in the last three years, including only 9 last year, his first away from GB.

The only one who left that would have been nice to keep was Wahle, and I'm not convinced that was even possible, at the time. Losing one desireable player as a FA because of an unmanageable contract clause hardly constitutes a "dismantling".

[Tarlam!]

Oh great. A TT hate fest. Glad you guys have a thread to converge on. I never regarded Woody or Merlin as experts, but you Wisty?

Enjoy your party.

[wist43]

OK, Patler... how does this sound - he pulled the feeding tube, and let the line starve to death - does that sound more accurate???

Then, when he decided that starving the OL to death was, in retrospect, a bad idea, he brought in a bunch of children, to expedite the killing of Favre - all the while, proclaiming that his goal was not to kill Favre, but to let the kids learn and grow... using Favre as a practice cadaver.

How's that??? :eyes:

[MJZiggy]

Favre got killed with the children at guard? I missed that... :roll:

[Patler]

OK, Patler... how does this sound - he pulled the feeding tube, and let the line starve to death - does that sound more accurate???

Then, when he decided that starving the OL to death was, in retrospect, a bad idea, he brought in a bunch of children, to expedite the killing of Favre - all the while, proclaiming that his goal was not to kill Favre, but to let the kids learn and grow... using Favre as a practice cadaver.

How's that??? :eyes:

Well, not very accurate either. There was no feeding tube. The feeding tube for the line SHOULD have been players brought in by Sherman to mature and handle eventual retirements and departures.

People seem to want to forget that the Wahle, Rivera and Sharper situations were the cards TT had waiting for him when he came. Sherman put them there. TT came in January. Wahle, Rivera and Sharper left within what, 6-8 weeks? These situations need to be planned for in advance. Dealing with them retroactively is nearly impossible. They were stuck with what they could get in one off season.

A GM can't make players materialize out of thin air. The O-line was on the verge of collapsing when he got here, with one decent replacement on hand in Wells. IF the line begins to recover with the 2006 rookie group, TT will have done a pretty decent job of avoiding a longterm disaster that was waiting to happen.

[wist43]

Had no problem letting Rivera and Sharper walk... had a big problem with Wahle though. We've fought this fight 10 billion times. :beat:

Bottom line on everything is - the Packers are more than 10 years removed from winning the SB, with no realistic hope that they can get back any time soon.

Where anybody wants to lay the blame... throw a dart - there's plenty of blame to go around... most of it lying with Sherman, and a good chunk of it lying with Wolfe.

That said, I agree that TT inherited a mess, and the odds that they could have made any sort of run while Favre was still here were long indeed. One thing I'm sure of, however, is that after Favre is gone, so is any chance at winning it all.

Aaron Rodgers??? He's got Superbowl MVP written all over him!!! :bs2:

Love the emoticons... trying to be judicious.

[Patler]

One thing I'm sure of, however, is that after Favre is gone, so is any chance at winning it all.

Aaron Rodgers??? He's got Superbowl MVP written all over him!!! :bs2:

Love the emoticons... trying to be judicious.

The interesting thing to me is you never know for sure where a QB might come from. So from that perspective, they could end up with a Brunnell or a Hasselbeck next year or the year after, assuming Rodgers is as big of a flop as you seem to know for sure that he will be. With the right team around them, a Brunnell or Hasselbeck (obviously) can get you to the Super Bowl. It certainly doesn't have to be 10 years.

[The Shadow]

".....All of these things will contribute to Favre playing "smarter" football."

Receivers drop passes; that's part of the game. But Favre needs to work on playing smarter - consistently -in order for the team to win.


Well, according to that logic, so are picks. Your views on Favre and the QB position in general are way off. It's a TEAM game. Even Manning has 2 outstanding WR's and a very good run game. You wanna put all the responsibility on Favre which is a load of BS.

It's pretty easy to see what's coming from you in the future. If there is no improvment in the offense and we struggle in the RZ again, your gonna use Favre as the scape-goat instead of putting the blame where it really belongs which is squarely on the GM's shoulders.[/i]

Then again, if blaming Favre for the offense floats your boat, by all means go ahead. However, not taking into account things like leading the league in dropped passes or no TE production, using max protect schemes and lack of any consistent running game make your "Favre needing to play smarter" opinion look very foolish.

[b]What's 'coming from me in the future' is exactly what came from me in the past : as honest an analysis of the team as I can provide. If the problems lie with the offensive line, that will gladly be noted. If it's poor receiver play, blame should be assigned there.
But if it's dumb quarterback play, Favre has no free pass here; that too will be correctly noted. Sorry, no idol worship here. Favre, although a future Hall of Fame player, still must produce - just like every other player.

The blame always lies with the GMin your world. I think I've got it!

"Favre needing to play smarter" is [i]a foolish opinion????
According to that wondrous logic, Favre ALWAYS is perfect, right? Got it!
And every interception and poor judgment is strictly the fault of Ted Thompson. Correct?
What on earth on you going to do when #4 finally retires? Become a Bears fan?

[Bretsky]

One thing I'm sure of, however, is that after Favre is gone, so is any chance at winning it all.

Aaron Rodgers??? He's got Superbowl MVP written all over him!!! :bs2:

Love the emoticons... trying to be judicious.

The interesting thing to me is you never know for sure where a QB might come from. So from that perspective, they could end up with a Brunnell or a Hasselbeck next year or the year after, assuming Rodgers is as big of a flop as you seem to know for sure that he will be. With the right team around them, a Brunnell or Hasselbeck (obviously) can get you to the Super Bowl. It certainly doesn't have to be 10 years.


EXACTLY what I was thinking as TT drafted him

[RashanGary]

Nice thread Shadow. Ultimately it turned into a "whos fault was the last two years" arguement like every other good thread seems to. The orginal content was good though.

You listed the good things first and sort of brushed over the bad so that brings out the haters who feel like it is biased which it might be to a degree. But regardless, I think you and I are in a very similar spot so I have to give you props :)

The running game, the O-line and the SS are the biggest question marks. We have some young guys (A TON of them) who show promise so I think 2 of the 3 problems are a good bet to be solved. That said, I think we are a better team than last year and we make the playoffs because none of those problems were solved last year and we still went 8-8. Ultimately, I think the reason we will go to the playoffs is FAvre and Hawk. I know Hawk was just "good" last year but I think he's going to be a legit playmaker and combined with the growth of our other youth, he'll be the main cog in our improvement.

[wist43]

One thing I'm sure of, however, is that after Favre is gone, so is any chance at winning it all.

Aaron Rodgers??? He's got Superbowl MVP written all over him!!! :bs2:

Love the emoticons... trying to be judicious.

The interesting thing to me is you never know for sure where a QB might come from. So from that perspective, they could end up with a Brunnell or a Hasselbeck next year or the year after, assuming Rodgers is as big of a flop as you seem to know for sure that he will be. With the right team around them, a Brunnell or Hasselbeck (obviously) can get you to the Super Bowl. It certainly doesn't have to be 10 years.

Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.

I actually have more hope for Ingle Martin than I do for Aaron Rodgers... but the odds are than neither one of them can play.

Maybe Rodgers can direct the offense to medicrity for a few years, but no way do I see him having the ability to be SB QB - and isn't that the point???

[wist43]

Oh great. A TT hate fest. Glad you guys have a thread to converge on. I never regarded Woody or Merlin as experts, but you Wisty?

Enjoy your party.

I didn't see this one... too busy arguing with Patler.

Settle down Tar... not a TT "hatefest". Criticism of Favre and Green for last years offensive meltdown gets under my skin. Favre and Green WERE the offense - w/o them, the offense likely wouldn't have scored a single TD the whole year.

Favre's another year older, Green is gone - and along with him any ability to get the tough yard is gone as well - and, no new talent was brought in to shore up obviously weak positions.

Not a TT "hatefest", but he certainly deserves to be put under the microscope for his lack of effort in addressing a completely anemic offense.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.

I was hoping the Packers wouldn't draft him, but this is just downright silly. Like it or not, he did improve last preseason--with a passer rating over 100. The two times he's gotten regular season game action, he didn't have much of a chance. The Packers were getting routed and the OL was getting hammered by Baltimore and New England

[wist43]

If all I cared about was being "ok", or a perennial 8-8/10-6 team... then I'd probably say Rodgers is "ok", "just give him time", blah, blah, blah...

But I want to win championships... I think that's where I go off the beaten path with a lot of you guys - I think most of you guys would be perfectly content to have a good team, with no realistic shot at a SB... I'm not content with that at all.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Neither you nor I know if Rodgers will be a good NFL QB. Period. It's silly to say that most people have already written him off--except for the extreme Kool-Aid drinkers.

[Rastak]

Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.

I was hoping the Packers wouldn't draft him, but this is just downright silly. Like it or not, he did improve last preseason--with a passer rating over 100. The two times he's gotten regular season game action, he didn't have much of a chance. The Packers were getting routed and the OL was getting hammered by Baltimore and New England


I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok? :wink:

[wist43]

Neither you nor I know if Rodgers will be a good NFL QB. Period. It's silly to say that most people have already written him off--except for the extreme Kool-Aid drinkers.

One thing is for sure, the Packers haven't written him off... but, I have yet to see anyone write the story, "Rodgers ready and chomping at the bit", or "Rodgers pushing Favre for playing time", or "Rodgers, the time is now"...

What I have seen is just the opposite, "Rodgers could be 1st blemish on Thompson's record", et al.

[wist43]

Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.

I was hoping the Packers wouldn't draft him, but this is just downright silly. Like it or not, he did improve last preseason--with a passer rating over 100. The two times he's gotten regular season game action, he didn't have much of a chance. The Packers were getting routed and the OL was getting hammered by Baltimore and New England


I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok? :wink:

Convenient way to lie with statistics...

[Rastak]

Neither you nor I know if Rodgers will be a good NFL QB. Period. It's silly to say that most people have already written him off--except for the extreme Kool-Aid drinkers.

One thing is for sure, the Packers haven't written him off... but, I have yet to see anyone write the story, "Rodgers ready and chomping at the bit", or "Rodgers pushing Favre for playing time", or "Rodgers, the time is now"...

What I have seen is just the opposite, "Rodgers could be 1st blemish on Thompson's record", et al.


Yea, but he probably knows there really isn't an open competition. I wonder if MM would have the seeds to start him in front of Favre if he showed himself to be the better QB in training camp. Would there be a giant riot in the state of Wisconsin?

[MJZiggy]

Would there be a giant riot in the state of Wisconsin?

Yes. :shtf:

[packinpatland]

Why limit that riot to just the state of Wisconsin?

[wist43]

Never happen... I think it's pretty obvious that TT wants Favre gone, but given his iconic status, even TT knows he can't mess with Favre.

Riot??? I think they'd pull a Stalin, and burn the state of Wisconsin to ashes.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok? :wink:

Where did I say passer ratings aren't accurate? I said that passer ratings can be overrated, and that they tend to skew the stats to a WCO QB (which doesn't help the argument for Favre since he plays in the WCO). Other factors come into play when looking at QBs--other than passer ratings. Some people think they are the be all and end all. Do you disagree?

Also, it's not like Rodgers passer ratings were inflated because he was throwing to mint WRs or had a great OL. Wouldn't most people say the Packers had a young OL that struggled in the preseason last year? Wouldn't most people say the Packers had little depth at WR last year? His rating was inflated because of a long TD to Jennings, but he still did pretty well last year in the preseason--even without that TD. Anybody who watched him in preseason in 2005 and then in 2006 could see that he made improvements. Doesn't take a scout to see that.

[HarveyWallbangers]

2005 PRESEASON

20 of 37 for 172 yards with 1 TD and 2 interceptions, 55 QB rating

2006 PRESEASON

22 of 38 for 323 yards with 3 TDs and 1 interception, 101 QB rating

[BallHawk]

Never happen... I think it's pretty obvious that TT wants Favre gone, but given his iconic status, even TT knows he can't mess with Favre.

I don't think TT wants Favre "gone." However, I don't think he'll be devastated when Favre retires. What GM doesn't what to have made all the pieces? What GM doesn't want to say "Yeah, see that QB? I picked him up. He was my find." Any GM wants that. TT isn't some weirdo who enjoys seeing Favre stumble to the finish line. He wants to build a winning football team. Sure, he may do it different then most GMs do, but the goal is still the same, to win a Super Bowl. TT is leading this team on its way.

[Rastak]

I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok? :wink:

Where did I say passer ratings aren't accurate? I said that passer ratings can be overrated, and that they tend to skew the stats to a WCO QB (which doesn't help the argument for Favre since he plays in the WCO). Other factors come into play when looking at QBs--other than passer ratings. Some people think they are the be all and end all. Do you disagree?

Also, it's not like Rodgers passer ratings were inflated because he was throwing to mint WRs or had a great OL. Wouldn't most people say the Packers had a young OL that struggled in the preseason last year? Wouldn't most people say the Packers had little depth at WR last year? His rating was inflated because of a long TD to Jennings, but he still did pretty well last year in the preseason--even without that TD. Anybody who watched him in preseason in 2005 and then in 2006 could see that he made improvements. Doesn't take a scout to see that.


I'm only pointing out that I've heard you and others downplay the significance of a QB rating and you used it here to support your argument, that's all. I'm really not arguing that Rodgers is bad, I agree there isn't enough data to say for sure.

[RashanGary]

He did look pretty good in the pre-season last year. It sounds like he made improvements this off-season too. This is definitly an interesting topic and something to keep a close eye on during the preseason. If Rodgers goes out and puts up bigtime numbers in the preseason we might start to sing his praise. Let's not forget that he was 21 when we drafted him. He's only 23 right now, the age of many rookies. He's got a long career ahead of him and he's continued to get better. Nothing about his progress suggest he's not going to make it. In fact, he's shown the steady, consistant improvement that you'd hope from a young QB. The odds are against every young QB, but Rodgers has done nothing outside of his injury to suggest he can't play in this league any more than any other young QB.

[oregonpackfan]

Never happen... I think it's pretty obvious that TT wants Favre gone, but given his iconic status, even TT knows he can't mess with Favre.

Riot??? I think they'd pull a Stalin, and burn the state of Wisconsin to ashes.

Packer fan bars, like the Corbett Fish House in Portland, would also have transplanted Wisconsinites burn it to ashes! :oops:

[BooHoo]

He did look pretty good in the pre-season last year. It sounds like he made improvements this off-season too. This is definitly an interesting topic and something to keep a close eye on during the preseason. If Rodgers goes out and puts up bigtime numbers in the preseason we might start to sing his praise. Let's not forget that he was 21 when we drafted him. He's only 23 right now, the age of many rookies. He's got a long career ahead of him and he's continued to get better. Nothing about his progress suggest he's not going to make it. In fact, he's shown the steady, consistant improvement that you'd hope from a young QB. The odds are against every young QB, but Rodgers has done nothing outside of his injury to suggest he can't play in this league any more than any other young QB.

We haven't seen enough of Rodgers to tell if he is a bust. a pro-bowler, or somewhere in the middle!

[Scott Campbell]

Never happen... I think it's pretty obvious that TT wants Favre gone, but given his iconic status, even TT knows he can't mess with Favre.

Riot??? I think they'd pull a Stalin, and burn the state of Wisconsin to ashes.

Packer fan bars, like the Corbett Fish House in Portland, would also have transplanted Wisconsinites burn it to ashes! :oops:

Is that the one right on the Columbia - by the airport?