20 THINGS THE PACKERS DO NOT NEED

[Bretsky]

Here are 20 things the Packers don't need
Posted: July 10, 2007

Last year the entire league thought playing the Packers was a gimme. But after a terrible start, Green Bay went out and laid some wood, going 5-1 against the division.

Winning their last four games to finish 8-8, the Packers are relying on a young roster and an aging quarterback to take another big step toward advancing to the playoffs. Optimism, as usual, is running high along the banks of the Fox.

Maybe the Packers can close the gap between them and the division-favorite Chicago Bears. Maybe they can't.

One thing for sure: Here are 20 things they don't need:

1. Another woeful start. Nothing would deflate the optimism faster than following last year's script by losing four of the first five games. The schedule isn't doing the Packers any favors with games against the Eagles, at the New York Giants, the Chargers, at Minnesota, and the Bears to start the new season.

2. No replacement for Green. Ahman Green was a proven running back for seven seasons with Green Bay, yet the Packers weren't willing to reward him for his efforts and they let him walk. They are left with a bushel of marginal backs trying to fill big shoes. Now that he's gone, the Packers will find out how valuable he was.

3. Another No. 1 draft bust. Ted Thompson took a gamble drafting Tennessee defensive tackle Justin Harrell, whose résumé in 2006 was limited to only three games because of a torn biceps. He better not turn out like Ahmad Carroll, who never should have been a No. 1 pick in the first place and was cut after 2½ seasons at Green Bay.

4. Same old scene at Lambeau Field. What ever happened to the mystique surrounding one of the great pro football venues? Strangely, Lambeau Field lost its magic touch when it was renovated in 2003. The Packers were 3-5 at home last year. Since going 8-0 in 2002, they are 15-17 in Green Bay, which is no way to contend.

5. Brett Favre's streak ends. The worst thing that could happen to the Packers would be for Mr. Durability to get hurt. He's still has the arm, the toughness and is the leader of this team. Without Favre, the Packers are in big trouble. Aaron Rodgers may or may not be the quarterback of the future. Because of limited play, no one is sure if he can do it or not.

6. Andy Reid out-coaches Mike McCarthy. If any rival coach knows the Packers, it's Reid who was on Mike Holmgren's staff and was Favre's quarterbacks coach. After losing four-consecutive games to Reid's Eagles, McCarthy's team was in a position to stage a major upset last season at Philadelphia. The Packers played a solid, smart first half and left with a 9-7 lead. But in the second half, they collapsed on both offense and defense, losing, 31-9. They meet again in the league opener at Lambeau Sept. 9.

7. John Jones goes public. Citing his side of the story when he was dismissed as the successor to president and CEO Bob Harlan, Jones hangs out his dirty linen, exposing cracks in the Packers' front office. If this happens, it will go down as the most embarrassing episode in the team's administrative history.

8. McCarthy gets carried away. Before facing their archrivals at home last year, the new coach, inheriting a 4-12 team, was asked if his club would put out a strong emotional effort against the Chicago Bears. It was the home opener, alumni week, against the opponent picked to win the division crown. McCarthy guaranteed the Packers would be ready. Ready for what? The Packers lost, 26-0, and all of those negative emotions quickly settled in.

9. Donald Driver is overloaded. The belief is the Packers have a good corps of receivers. The reality: Driver is the only star. He has meant everything to an offense that doesn't have enough playmakers. Driver certainly needs others to help punch up the team's passing attack. If he goes down, it could be disastrous for Favre.

10. A Mile-High low. The Packers travel to Denver for a Halloween night game against the Broncos. Make that two nights before Halloween. The Packers will be looking for their first victory in the Mile-High city. Their 0-5 mark (0-10) counting exhibition games), includes a 31-10 beating in 1999. This game also will mark former Packers' wide receiver Javon Walker's first game against his former team. Will he come back to haunt them?

11. Special teams woes. Sometime this season, someone is going to make a big play on special teams. It might be a punt return for a touchdown. Whatever it is, the odds are it will be the Packers' opponents making the play. The Packers haven't had a great punt returner since Desmond Howard ran wild in 1996, and the search still is on.

12. Losing to the Lions at home. Be wary of what you wish for, Packers. The Lions come to town Dec. 30 and will be looking for their first victory on Wisconsin soil since 1991. The Packers have won 16 in a row, but the last three have been decided by an average of fewer than five points.

13. Brett puts foot in mouth. Eternally optimistic, Favre stunned a room of reporters in his first training-camp interview last summer when he told them the 2006 Packers, a group that eventually would feature 27 rookies or second-year players, was the most talented group he has played with. Surely, he won't go out on a limb this time until these guys have proved themselves.

14. Sophomore jinx. Fifteen rookies made the team last season, including linebacker A.J. Hawk, wide receiver Greg Jennings, guards Daryn Colledge and Jason Spitz - all starters. All played well and showed great promise, but will they continue to grow?

15. Bubba Franks doesn't have it. Once he was one of the best tight ends in the league. No more. The team's former No. 1 draft choice hasn't been the same player after signing a huge contract two years ago. He needs to prove he's still a productive player or he's gone.

16. Nobody will catch the Bears. They won the NFC North by five games, the widest margin for a division champion in the NFL. They aren't quite the heavy favorite they were a year ago but still better than the rest.

17. Pre-season injuries. It isn't a pre-season as much as a minefield. The primary goal of every team is to get through it intact. The scene no one wants to see played out is a starter going down for the year. So what's being done to avoid this? Fingers are being crossed.

18. It's Ryan Longwell's turn. The last three Packers-Vikings regular season games at Lambeau Field have been decided by a kicker. The Packers edged the Vikings, 9-7, last Dec. 21 when rookie Dave Rayner kicked a 44-yard field goal off the rain-slicked turf with 1:34 remaining. The teams will meet Nov. 11 at Lambeau and Longwell, who left Green Bay for Minnesota last year, will kick the winning field goal.

19. Texas Stadium woes. Having made regular trips to Dallas in the 1990s, the Packers return to one of their most hated venues where playoff runs in three consecutive seasons (1993-'95) ended in disappointment to Troy Aikman and Co. Assuming he remains the Cowboys' starting quarterback, Tony Romo, a native of Burlington, Wis., will face his home-state team for the first time.

20. A letter of apology from the league office. This is the last thing the Packers want. Officials make mistakes. But what good is a letter of apology after a blown call - a call that could have turned into a victory?

[Packnut]

Damn, after reading all of this stuff, my tankard of kool-aid spiked with rum has run dry. Thanks for reminding me of what a bleak disaster this season has the potential to become........ :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[GrnBay007]

Damn, after reading all of this stuff, my tankard of kool-aid spiked with rum has run dry. Thanks for reminding me of what a bleak disaster this season has the potential to become........ :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

We will have none of that here!!!! :P

And yeah....weren't you the one that ran dry during the draft or some important game last season and hiked to the liquor store for more goods? :twisted: Don't let that sweet kool-aid run dry!!!!

[Spaulding]

Valid but grim observations - time for another beer to dull any potential pain from dwelling on this too much :)

[the_idle_threat]

18. It's Ryan Longwell's turn. The last three Packers-Vikings regular season games at Lambeau Field have been decided by a kicker. The Packers edged the Vikings, 9-7, last Dec. 21 when rookie Dave Rayner kicked a 44-yard field goal off the rain-slicked turf with 1:34 remaining. The teams will meet Nov. 11 at Lambeau and Longwell, who left Green Bay for Minnesota last year, will kick the winning field goal.

Kind of a bold prediction, don't ya think?. It's a stretch to say Longwell will kick the winning FG, even if it's possible that he might.

[GrnBay007]

All I have to say is B better be posting "The 20 great things about the Packers 2007" tomorrow!!!!!!! :evil:
:P :wink:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Reminder: most of the so-called optimists predicted 8 or 9 victories last year (I believe I predicted 8-8). Most of the so-called pessimists predicted 4 or 5 victories. The Packers finished 8-8. Again, just a friendly reminder.

[RashanGary]

Reminder: most of the so-called optimists predicted 8 or 9 victories last year (I believe I predicted 8-8). Most of the so-called pessimists predicted 4 or 5 victories. The Packers finished 8-8. Again, just a friendly reminder.

I predicted 6-10 last year. I was saying 9-7 at this time but I backed it down to 6-10 after the preseason.

This year I'm 9-7 again. Let's hope they don't disappoint in the preseason again. I NEED to see a running game and I'll stick to my 9-7.

[Joemailman]

Reminder: most of the so-called optimists predicted 8 or 9 victories last year (I believe I predicted 8-8). Most of the so-called pessimists predicted 4 or 5 victories. The Packers finished 8-8. Again, just a friendly reminder.

Yes Harv, but very wise people on this forum have assured me that although the record said 8-8, the Packers were really a 4-12 team.

[Bretsky]

All I have to say is B better be posting "The 20 great things about the Packers 2007" tomorrow!!!!!!! :evil:
:P :wink:


I want to point out to everybody that I did NOT write this; this was an article from JS

[Bretsky]

Reminder: most of the so-called optimists predicted 8 or 9 victories last year (I believe I predicted 8-8). Most of the so-called pessimists predicted 4 or 5 victories. The Packers finished 8-8. Again, just a friendly reminder.


I often get blamed for pessimism, but I predicted 7-9 last year. The true doom and gloomers were calling four to five wins, but last year we were a bit below average and my gut tells me we are the same this year.

[Packnut]

Damn, after reading all of this stuff, my tankard of kool-aid spiked with rum has run dry. Thanks for reminding me of what a bleak disaster this season has the potential to become........ :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

We will have none of that here!!!! :P

And yeah....weren't you the one that ran dry during the draft or some important game last season and hiked to the liquor store for more goods? :twisted: Don't let that sweet kool-aid run dry!!!!



I think you mis-understood. Any alcohol I consume is for medicinal purposes only. :oops: :roll:

[woodbuck27]

Reminder: most of the so-called optimists predicted 8 or 9 victories last year (I believe I predicted 8-8). Most of the so-called pessimists predicted 4 or 5 victories. The Packers finished 8-8. Again, just a friendly reminder.


I often get blamed for pessimism, but I predicted 7-9 last year. The true doom and gloomers were calling four to five wins, but last year we were a bit below average and my gut tells me we are the same this year.


There certainly is a load to think about there.

I also predicted a 7-9 record but I hoped our receiving core (including TE's)would be more productive than what I saw. Still we went 8-8. and 5-1 in our division.

I'm not at all sure what we have as WR's this season.I see diddly at TE and FB.

The experience level required all round, on an assignment sure basis at RB is zilch,

All that combined doesn't offer me a lot of optimism. How will we score?

I believe that record (5-1) in the NFCN will be difficult to duplicate. I believe that we will start slow because the SOS in the first five games is brutal. If we defeat the Vikings but start 1-4. To get to the playoff's we should at least expect to be 8-8.

That means we have to go 7-4 in the remainder of our schedule.

We face Carolina (they will rebound in 2007) and ( Denver,KC and Dallas . .all at their house) in those 11 games.

All very difficult opponents.

YES !! We must have a quick start in our schedule.

Now back up. Look at those first five games.

All of those 20 points smack me in the chops. I can't fool myself into believing that they arn't legitimate concerns to consider. There is litle there I havn't thought of in this off season.

I don't want to be a pessismist or cynical. I don't want to piss on anyone's parade. I have real concerns as a Packer fan. I've had them for three seasons now and that frustrates me. :)

I'm positive there are some here that came up with all 20 concerns in this list.

We have a real load this season.

I just don't want to see the Packers get crushed.

GO PACKERS !!

[Harlan Huckleby]

2. No replacement for Green.[/u] Ahman Green was a proven running back for seven seasons with Green Bay, yet the Packers weren't willing to reward him for his efforts and they let him walk. They are left with a bushel of marginal backs trying to fill big shoes. Now that he's gone, the Packers will find out how valuable he was.

It's possible that Morency will have a better season than Green. I wouldn't predict it, but I see age on Green, and Morency has some talent.

[Fritz]

The whole "magic at Lambeau" crap makes me laugh. The only "magic" that ever happened to make the Pack so good at home back in the day was the talent they'd assembled. You impropve the talent level and the magic will return.

I'll try to inject one note of optimism: the Pack finished strong last year despite Mr. Favre throwing lots o' picks in the last five games. If he can just be solid and not try to do it all, then maybe the defense and the improved offensive line can help the team out.

Last year I said 7-9. I'll wait til the end of training camp to make my predicition for this year.

[Packnut]

The whole "magic at Lambeau" crap makes me laugh. The only "magic" that ever happened to make the Pack so good at home back in the day was the talent they'd assembled. You impropve the talent level and the magic will return.

I'll try to inject one note of optimism: the Pack finished strong last year despite Mr. Favre throwing lots o' picks in the last five games. If he can just be solid and not try to do it all, then maybe the defense and the improved offensive line can help the team out.

Last year I said 7-9. I'll wait til the end of training camp to make my predicition for this year.

Yeah picks tend to happen when you have a rookie run the wrong route (Jennings in the Vikes game) and tight ends who do nothing but drop passes. Yes, Favre does force things at times but to make the statement implying that he is soley responsible is just plain wrong.

How many of those picks were max protect when he's throwing to 2 or 3 possible targets who are covered by at leat 6 defenders?

I also remember at least 1 of those picks coming after one of his te's tipped the ball up in the air.

I'm not saying Favre is blameless, I'm just saying to many look at the QB position as an individual and not in a team concept. When a QB completes a pass, there are other factors that need to go right besides just the throw being made. The OL not only needs to provide enough time but also provide a throwing lane. The WR has to get a slice of seperation and make the catch.

The Bears game was a perfect example. The line gave him time and the wideouts got open. As a unit, the offense played much better than in the previous 3 games and as a result, Favre produced.

[wist43]

The whole "magic at Lambeau" crap makes me laugh. The only "magic" that ever happened to make the Pack so good at home back in the day was the talent they'd assembled. You impropve the talent level and the magic will return.

I'll try to inject one note of optimism: the Pack finished strong last year despite Mr. Favre throwing lots o' picks in the last five games. If he can just be solid and not try to do it all, then maybe the defense and the improved offensive line can help the team out.

Last year I said 7-9. I'll wait til the end of training camp to make my predicition for this year.

As one of the resident pessimists, I have to point out that last years "strong finish" was anything but... they damn near lost at home to Minnesota and Detroit, and probably should have lost both games. The Packers were absolutely putrid in both games, the Lions and Vikes were just more putrid.

7-9 this year... subject to change, but 7-9ish at this early stage.

[Zool]

The whole "magic at Lambeau" crap makes me laugh. The only "magic" that ever happened to make the Pack so good at home back in the day was the talent they'd assembled. You impropve the talent level and the magic will return.

I'll try to inject one note of optimism: the Pack finished strong last year despite Mr. Favre throwing lots o' picks in the last five games. If he can just be solid and not try to do it all, then maybe the defense and the improved offensive line can help the team out.

Last year I said 7-9. I'll wait til the end of training camp to make my predicition for this year.

As one of the resident pessimists, I have to point out that last years "strong finish" was anything but... they damn near lost at home to Minnesota and Detroit, and probably should have lost both games. The Packers were absolutely putrid in both games, the Lions and Vikes were just more putrid.

7-9 this year... subject to change, but 7-9ish at this early stage.Not to be the eternal optimist, but they also almost won against StL and at Buffalo.

I assume you would rate both of those teams ahead of the Lions and Vikings from '06? So they were almost 6-10 but then again they were almost 10-6.

Had they won both of those games it would have been a 5 game winning streak heading into the NE game. The still would have lost that game, but it might not have been so ugly.

[The Shadow]

The whole "magic at Lambeau" crap makes me laugh. The only "magic" that ever happened to make the Pack so good at home back in the day was the talent they'd assembled. You impropve the talent level and the magic will return.

I'll try to inject one note of optimism: the Pack finished strong last year despite Mr. Favre throwing lots o' picks in the last five games. If he can just be solid and not try to do it all, then maybe the defense and the improved offensive line can help the team out.

Last year I said 7-9. I'll wait til the end of training camp to make my predicition for this year.


Fritz : well done.
You always seem to have a better grasp on things than most.

[Charles Woodson]

The whole "magic at Lambeau" crap makes me laugh. The only "magic" that ever happened to make the Pack so good at home back in the day was the talent they'd assembled. You impropve the talent level and the magic will return.

I'll try to inject one note of optimism: the Pack finished strong last year despite Mr. Favre throwing lots o' picks in the last five games. If he can just be solid and not try to do it all, then maybe the defense and the improved offensive line can help the team out.

Last year I said 7-9. I'll wait til the end of training camp to make my predicition for this year.

As one of the resident pessimists, I have to point out that last years "strong finish" was anything but... they damn near lost at home to Minnesota and Detroit, and probably should have lost both games. The Packers were absolutely putrid in both games, the Lions and Vikes were just more putrid.

7-9 this year... subject to change, but 7-9ish at this early stage.Not to be the eternal optimist, but they also almost won against StL and at Buffalo.

I assume you would rate both of those teams ahead of the Lions and Vikings from '06? So they were almost 6-10 but then again they were almost 10-6.

Had they won both of those games it would have been a 5 game winning streak heading into the NE game. The still would have lost that game, but it might not have been so ugly.

The thing your not understanding is that our record was pretty damn misleading. I mean the fact that the only team over .500 that we beat was the bears leaves something to be desired. If you look at the stats of the games that we lost, we got killed in a lot of them. basically every team we lost to (besides rams and saints) we lost by over 10 points

Chicago 0-26

New Orleans 27-34

Philadelphia 9-31

St. Louis 20-23

Buffalo 10-24

New England 0-35

Seattle 24-34

NY 10-38

[packers11]

every team we lost to (besides rams and saints) we lost by over 10 points


The seattle game should have been a win with the packers...

If barnett was playing, i'm 110% sure that the packers would have pulled that one off...

Alexander was stomping on Hodge, but I couldn't blame him, hes a rookie...

Also that late roughing the passer call which allowed to give them a touchdown...

The only three losses that the packers got dominated on both sides of the ball were the Pats, Jets, and the season opener against the bears...

[Freak Out]

#21. VD

[Charles Woodson]

every team we lost to (besides rams and saints) we lost by over 10 points


The seattle game should have been a win with the packers...

If barnett was playing, i'm 110% sure that the packers would have pulled that one off...

Alexander was stomping on Hodge, but I couldn't blame him, hes a rookie...

Also that late roughing the passer call which allowed to give them a touchdown...

The only three losses that the packers got dominated on both sides of the ball were the Pats, Jets, and the season opener against the bears...

Phili?

[run pMc]

Three thoughts:
(1) some of these things are right on, most seem like crazy filler that the sports editor told somebody to make up to reach 20 things. Any team can have their season sabotaged by injuries or suspensions -- especially to the starting QB. How many games does ATL win with Joey H instead of Mike Prick?

(2) I always thought Allen Rossum was a decent kick returner. He was post-Desmond. Remember his TD return in that wild game vs. Indy?

(3) I predicted GB to finish around 5-11 or 6-10; I think they might win 6 games this year - because of a tougher schedule, not because it's a worse team. I think most of last year's rookies will actually play better. I also think there will be less losses by > 10 pts...a team that loses 8 games by as many pts tells me they were a young team learning the pro game.

...just my 2 cents.

[RashanGary]

I'll list the teams we play and based on what I know of the teams, I'll give a our chances of victory as a percent.

Philly - OVERRATED but still proven to be a pretty good team, 40%
Giants - Most overrated team in the NFL IMO, 65%
Chargers - Great team, 15%
Vikings - Horrible QB solid everywhere else, 65%

Chicago - Really good team, 40%
Washington - Bad team, 70%
Denver - Very good team, 25%

Kansas City - Average team, 65%
Minnesota - 65%
Carolina - Dline much older, missed their window, 60%
Detroit - Bad team but can't be as bad as last year, 75%
Dallas - Good team, 50%

Oakland - HOrrible team, 85%
St Louis - Aging team, not what they used to be, 65%
chicago - 40%
Detroit - 75%


Average percent over 16 games is 56.25%

.5625 multiplied by 16 games = 9.00 wins


I think we're better than the Giants, Vikings, Vikings, Lions, Lions, St Louis, Washington, Kansas City, Carolina and Oakland.

I think we're worse than Chicago, Chicago, San Diego, Philly, Denver

9 wins seems very possible IMO.



Our improvment comes from

Hawk
Jennings
Collins
Harrell
Colledge
Spitz
Moll (top backup)
Corey Williams

And many other young players who should be better than they were a year ago. The only player we lost was Green and he was not a great player last year so he is very replacable at this point in his career. Did we add players to make us better? not really but we do have a bunch of guys who stand a very good chance to get better. A couple of those guys could emerge as legit playmakers. I have confidence in the young core of this team to get better much like the Brewers this year.

[woodbuck27]

I'll list the teams we play and based on what I know of the teams, I'll give a our chances of victory as a percent.

Philly - OVERRATED but still proven to be a pretty good team, 40%
Giants - Most overrated team in the NFL IMO, 65%
Chargers - Great team, 15%
Vikings - Horrible QB solid everywhere else, 65%

Chicago - Really good team, 40%
Washington - Bad team, 70%
Denver - Very good team, 25%

Kansas City - Average team, 65%
Minnesota - 65%
Carolina - Dline much older, missed their window, 60%
Detroit - Bad team but can't be as bad as last year, 75%
Dallas - Good team, 50%

Oakland - HOrrible team, 85%
St Louis - Aging team, not what they used to be, 65%
chicago - 40%
Detroit - 75%


Average percent over 16 games is 56.25%

.5625 multiplied by 16 games = 9.00 wins


I think we're better than the Giants, Vikings, Vikings, Lions, Lions, St Louis, Washington, Kansas City, Carolina and Oakland.

I think we're worse than Chicago, Chicago, San Diego, Philly, Denver

9 wins seems very possible IMO.



Our improvment comes from

Hawk
Jennings
Collins
Harrell
Colledge
Spitz
Moll (top backup)
Corey Williams

And many other young players who should be better than they were a year ago. The only player we lost was Green and he was not a great player last year so he is very replacable at this point in his career. Did we add players to make us better? not really but we do have a bunch of guys who stand a very good chance to get better. A couple of those guys could emerge as legit playmakers. I have confidence in the young core of this team to get better much like the Brewers this year.

My interpretation of this is that you have us walking all over the Lions and the Vikings for a solid shot at 4 wins.

We almost blew that game late last season with the Vikings and wasn't that one of Taverus Jackson's first starts? We absolutely did all we could to lose that game.

That was the game fr. HELL to watch !!! Ever see Favre roll his eyes that much in a game? We were terrible.

Also you had better do a tad more research on the Redskins and the Chiefs.

These will be very tough teams to defeat.Especially playing KC in their house.

[retailguy]

Also you had better do a tad more research on the Redskins and the Chiefs.

These will be very tough teams to defeat.Especially playing KC in their house.


Aw c'mon Woody! If you make him do that, he can't get to 9 wins and then he'll be WRONG.... You aren't going to make him WRONG in July, are you?

He needs about 3 months to come up with denials and plausible reasons WHY he is wrong and it IS NOT his fault.

Let up on him, K? :P

[woodbuck27]

Also you had better do a tad more research on the Redskins and the Chiefs.

These will be very tough teams to defeat.Especially playing KC in their house.


Aw c'mon Woody! If you make him do that, he can't get to 9 wins and then he'll be WRONG.... You aren't going to make him WRONG in July, are you?

He needs about 3 months to come up with denials and plausible reasons WHY he is wrong and it IS NOT his fault.

Let up on him, K? :P

We all hope he is right too. :)

and of course, all predictions can't be wrong in July.

[HarveyWallbangers]

St Louis - Aging team, not what they used to be, 65%

I don't see them as an aging team. They don't have a lot of old guys. Four that I can think of that start -- Bruce, Pace, Chavous, and Little (sort of).

Bulger, Jackson, McMichael, Tye Hill, Tinoisomoa, Witherspoon, Wroten, Incognito, Setterstrom, Holt (he may be around 30, but he has several years left in him), Atogwe, etc. are all in their prime or yet to hit it.

[woodbuck27]

St Louis - Aging team, not what they used to be, 65%

I don't see them as an aging team. They don't have a lot of old guys. Four that I can think of that start -- Bruce, Pace, Chavous, and Little (sort of).

Bulger, Jackson, McMichael, Tye Hill, Tinoisomoa, Witherspoon, Wroten, Incognito, Setterstrom, Holt (he may be around 30, but he has several years left in him), Atogwe, etc. are all in their prime or yet to hit it.

This is a very good matchup for us to measure our progress.

The loss to them was heartbreaking last season. Especially so for Mike McCarthy.

Bulger,Jackson and Holt are a solid big three on their offense.

We matchup well at QB and #1 WR (WR) but we have to find a running game to come even close to competing with Stephen Jackson.

[Rastak]

St Louis - Aging team, not what they used to be, 65%

I don't see them as an aging team. They don't have a lot of old guys. Four that I can think of that start -- Bruce, Pace, Chavous, and Little (sort of).

Bulger, Jackson, McMichael, Tye Hill, Tinoisomoa, Witherspoon, Wroten, Incognito, Setterstrom, Holt (he may be around 30, but he has several years left in him), Atogwe, etc. are all in their prime or yet to hit it.

This is a very good matchup for us to measure our progress.

The loss to them was heartbreaking last season. Especially so for Mike McCarthy.

Bulger,Jackson and Holt are a solid big three on their offense.

We matchup well at QB and #1 WR (WR) but we have to find a running game to come even close to competing with Stephen Jackson.

Match up well at QB? Bulger is a much better QB at this stage of his career.


Maybe Favre will prove me wrong but his numbers the last three years just aren't that great. I doubt at his age they improve going forward.


(waiting for Harv to bring up the Vikings somehow now......) :wink:

[retailguy]

Match up well at QB? Bulger is a much better QB at this stage of his career.


Maybe Favre will prove me wrong but his numbers the last three years just aren't that great. I doubt at his age they improve going forward.


(waiting for Harv to bring up the Vikings somehow now......) :wink:

Jackson looked pretty good today, (oh wait), since I thought he looked good that's probably bad for you, huh? :twisted:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Match up well at QB? Bulger is a much better QB at this stage of his career.

I don't think he's much better, but I'd take him. Bulger has had Torry Holt, Isaac Bruce, Mike Furrey, Kevin Curtis to throw to, Faulk and Steven Jackson to hand off, and the likes of Orlando Pace and Alex Barron blocking for him. I think Favre is still around the top 10 among QBs. I think Bulger is around the top 5. I don't think he's "much better."


Maybe Favre will prove me wrong but his numbers the last three years just aren't that great. I doubt at his age they improve going forward.

Ummm.. the last TWO years. The year before that he went for a 64.1 completion %, 4088 yards, 30 TDs, and 17 picks, 92.4 passer rating. That's pretty damn great to me.

2005 was an aberration. Pretty much everybody on offense was injured. I think he can improve upon his numbers from last year. Blocking should be better. Jennings may stay healthy for the whole year. Jones might be a good third wideout. Will he? That's why they play the games.


(waiting for Harv to bring up the Vikings somehow now......) :wink:

I got nothing. I'm interested to see how all of the Vikings question marks pan out. I heard TJack struggled a lot on the first day of camp. I heard Williamson dropped the first ball thrown to him. I heard Greenway looks healthy. These all from the homers on KFAN. Haven't heard anything else.

[Rastak]

Harv, I stand corrected, he had a very good year in 2004. I should never assume things are true when I read them somewhere.


An optomist could argue that in 2005 2006 the OL wasn't the greatest and if they come together well this year his numbers go up. I'll concede that possibility.