Damn Straight!

[packinpatland]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3026958

"4. Damn straight, the Pack is back

Rich Kane/US Presswire
Even Brett Favre admits he has no clue whether the Packers are for real. The team has won six in a row dating to last season, but Favre was quick to say the Packers don't feel like a team on a six-game win streak. That's what he should say because the Packers are young in key areas and can't afford to think they've arrived. The Packers appear strong enough on defense to stay in games. They are also in the right conference. It's not too early to consider Green Bay a potential playoff team in the NFC, but the Pack is not all the way back. Not yet. -- Mike Sando

Settle down, Green Bay fans. The Packers aren't back -- and in many ways, they're the same as they were in 2006, at best an 8-8 team that could get to nine wins. To say they are back would be to say that this team has 10-11 win expectations. They are limited on offense because of the running game. Brandon Jackson can't do much after about 15 carries, and he could be replaced as a starter in the next few weeks. Brett Favre has a 13-year generation gap with seven offensive starters, and he's forced to throw more checkdowns and cautious passes. His 6.1 yards per attempt is the lowest in 16 years in Green Bay. The defense is good but not great. The good news is that the Packers should be in most games because of the defense, but without that running game, they will struggle holding second-half leads against good teams. -- John Clayton "

************************************************** ******
John Clayton..............I don't know, but this is one of those times I'd like to just slap that little nerdy-looking guy. :cat:

[MJZiggy]

Maybe we need to bookmark this so we can ram it down Clayton's throat should he ever claim he knew they'd be at least a 10-win team.

[Carolina_Packer]

Please under-estimate the Pack, national press. It would make the story all the sweeter if they continued to have a good season, and actually make the playoffs.

[Maxie the Taxi]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3026958

"4. Damn straight, the Pack is back

Rich Kane/US Presswire
Even Brett Favre admits he has no clue whether the Packers are for real. The team has won six in a row dating to last season, but Favre was quick to say the Packers don't feel like a team on a six-game win streak. That's what he should say because the Packers are young in key areas and can't afford to think they've arrived. The Packers appear strong enough on defense to stay in games. They are also in the right conference. It's not too early to consider Green Bay a potential playoff team in the NFC, but the Pack is not all the way back. Not yet. -- Mike Sando

Settle down, Green Bay fans. The Packers aren't back -- and in many ways, they're the same as they were in 2006, at best an 8-8 team that could get to nine wins. To say they are back would be to say that this team has 10-11 win expectations. They are limited on offense because of the running game. Brandon Jackson can't do much after about 15 carries, and he could be replaced as a starter in the next few weeks. Brett Favre has a 13-year generation gap with seven offensive starters, and he's forced to throw more checkdowns and cautious passes. His 6.1 yards per attempt is the lowest in 16 years in Green Bay. The defense is good but not great. The good news is that the Packers should be in most games because of the defense, but without that running game, they will struggle holding second-half leads against good teams. -- John Clayton "

This John Clayton guy doesn't get it. We don't know if the Pack is for real. Brett doesn't know if the Pack is for real. But John Clayton knows.

Come on, John. 6.1 yards per attempt is actually a good thing given our team's defense. And our first two games were against good teams and we took the lead during the second half of each game.

[FritzDontBlitz]

Please under-estimate the Pack, national press. It would make the story all the sweeter if they continued to have a good season, and actually make the playoffs.

thats the way the national media played my beloved chicago white sox back in 2005 until they ran away with the title. and yes, its much sweeter to be the underdog.

[b bulldog]

I do agree with him when he stated that the D is good but not great.

[FritzDontBlitz]

Settle down, Green Bay fans. The Packers aren't back -- and in many ways, they're the same as they were in 2006, at best an 8-8 team that could get to nine wins. To say they are back would be to say that this team has 10-11 win expectations. They are limited on offense because of the running game. Brandon Jackson can't do much after about 15 carries, and he could be replaced as a starter in the next few weeks. Brett Favre has a 13-year generation gap with seven offensive starters, and he's forced to throw more checkdowns and cautious passes. His 6.1 yards per attempt is the lowest in 16 years in Green Bay. The defense is good but not great. The good news is that the Packers should be in most games because of the defense, but without that running game, they will struggle holding second-half leads against good teams. -- John Clayton "


funny how he acts like only packer fans are raving about green bay...

[Joemailman]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3026958

"4. Damn straight, the Pack is back

Rich Kane/US Presswire
Even Brett Favre admits he has no clue whether the Packers are for real. The team has won six in a row dating to last season, but Favre was quick to say the Packers don't feel like a team on a six-game win streak. That's what he should say because the Packers are young in key areas and can't afford to think they've arrived. The Packers appear strong enough on defense to stay in games. They are also in the right conference. It's not too early to consider Green Bay a potential playoff team in the NFC, but the Pack is not all the way back. Not yet. -- Mike Sando

Settle down, Green Bay fans. The Packers aren't back -- and in many ways, they're the same as they were in 2006, at best an 8-8 team that could get to nine wins. To say they are back would be to say that this team has 10-11 win expectations. They are limited on offense because of the running game. Brandon Jackson can't do much after about 15 carries, and he could be replaced as a starter in the next few weeks. Brett Favre has a 13-year generation gap with seven offensive starters, and he's forced to throw more checkdowns and cautious passes. His 6.1 yards per attempt is the lowest in 16 years in Green Bay. The defense is good but not great. The good news is that the Packers should be in most games because of the defense, but without that running game, they will struggle holding second-half leads against good teams. -- John Clayton "

This John Clayton guy doesn't get it. We don't know if the Pack is for real. Brett doesn't know if the Pack is for real. But John Clayton knows.

Come on, John. 6.1 yards per attempt is actually a good thing given our team's defense. And our first two games were against good teams and we took the lead during the second half of each game.

Actually the 6.1 is likely to go up unless the OL regularly blocks as poorly as they did against Philly. Favre's YPA was under 5 against Philly, over 7 against NYG.

[Merlin]

I would say our Defense is not good, not great, but average. That's where they are ranked right now, average. Since we have no other tangible things to rate them by, we have to go with the stats. Even though stats do lie, we are an average defense who got lucky enough not to let the big plays go for TD's like last year and the year before. We can't stop the run and the teams we played were too stupid in their play calling to see it.

[Zool]

Seriously, it is always raining where you live?

[Merlin]

Reality is seldom sunny and rose filled. You cannot be become better at anything if you do not recognize current and past short comings and potential future pitfalls. If you are happy with things the way they are, great. That's not for everyone.

[Zool]

You can never be happy if you always look for fault in everything and everyone.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I would say our Defense is not good, not great, but average. That's where they are ranked right now, average. Since we have no other tangible things to rate them by, we have to go with the stats.

That's if you are dumb enough to rank a defense by yardage allowed only. Where do they rank in points allowed?

[swede]

Show me anyone in Green Bay fandom, besides the guys that wear antlers to the games, who is thinking and saying that this team is a lock to win ten games.

The national media may think our rather unexpected two game win streak would cause many of us fans to recalibrate our pre-season predictions from 8-9 wins up to 10-11 wins, but they are wrong. Informed Packer fans are thrilled to be 2-0 but realistic about this team and what it has shown.

The defense has been good and plays gutty but they are neither dominant nor particularly polished.

The running game?--plug in anybody's rant here.

Special teams won the first game and Brett won the second game but we will be in major trouble without a good run game and a defense that plays great in most games.

Consequently--

If the running game straightens itself out and if the defense gets better game by game you damn betcha this is a playoff team and the national media, including John Clayton, can kiss Tarlam's arse.

(I don't want John Clayton anywhere near my arse.)

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think our defense has been pretty darn good. The second quarter in both games was pretty poor, but other than that, they've played good football against two good offensive teams.

[swede]

I think our defense has been pretty darn good. The second quarter in both games was pretty poor, but other than that, they've played good football against two good offensive teams.

The last time we had an argument like this was when the forum (maybe as long ago as jso) went back and forth about whether an "average" player like Kampman was worth the money the Vikes tried to give him. He was variously described as good, above average, average, just a guy, great lockeroom guy, great motor, etc.

He then went out and had an all-pro season.

So if we're arguing about whether the defense is good, pretty good, average, above average, bend but don't break, dominant, not dominant but gutty, maybe they'll go out in the next few weeks and be so good that this momentary parsing of words becomes irrelevant.

Anyway, Harv, I have you down for "pretty darn good."
:cow:

[Merlin]

You can never be happy if you always look for fault in everything and everyone.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. However, I am quite happy. Just because it isn't the way you chose to go about things doesn't mean it doesn't work for someone else. Remember, everyone isn't like you.

[Merlin]

I would say our Defense is not good, not great, but average. That's where they are ranked right now, average. Since we have no other tangible things to rate them by, we have to go with the stats.

That's if you are dumb enough to rank a defense by yardage allowed only. Where do they rank in points allowed?

Okay, how about yards per carry? How about big plays? How about sacks? Why is it that you chose to focus on only one stat and say we are good? I don't rank our defense on yards allowed only, I look at the whole picture and it is very pedestrian. We aren't good, we are average. Points or no points, we got lucky that no one kept running the ball at us. The Eagles would have won and in the Giants game it may have effected us having the ball so much and the score. You can't give up 4.4 yards a carry and expect to not run into a team that will just pound it at you and keep your offense off the field. Stranger things have happened I guess. We will see this week if LT lights us up, I promise you the Chargers won't abandon the run.

[Partial]

I would say our Defense is not good, not great, but average. That's where they are ranked right now, average. Since we have no other tangible things to rate them by, we have to go with the stats.

That's if you are dumb enough to rank a defense by yardage allowed only. Where do they rank in points allowed?

Okay, how about yards per carry? How about big plays? How about sacks? Why is it that you chose to focus on only one stat and say we are good? I don't rank our defense on yards allowed only, I look at the whole picture and it is very pedestrian. We aren't good, we are average. Points or no points, we got lucky that no one kept running the ball at us. The Eagles would have won and in the Giants game it may have effected us having the ball so much and the score. You can't give up 4.4 yards a carry and expect to not run into a team that will just pound it at you and keep your offense off the field. Stranger things have happened I guess. We will see this week if LT lights us up, I promise you the Chargers won't abandon the run.

Woulda, shoulda, coulda. Who gives a shit? We've given up two touchdowns against two good offenses, and 13 points a game. If they keep that up, they'll have one of the most effective defenses ever and in addition to that they will be very, very tough to beat.

[Zool]

You can never be happy if you always look for fault in everything and everyone.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. However, I am quite happy. Just because it isn't the way you chose to go about things doesn't mean it doesn't work for someone else. Remember, everyone isn't like you.

I will if you will.

[Carolina_Packer]

Optimist vs. Realist vs. Pessimist; I understand. That's kind of the continuum or gradient scale on which perceptions exist. I tend to be a hopeful realist. I think most here on this forum know what the Packers flaws are, but are hopeful they can get them squared away this season and grow as a team. Some may think it will be their achilles heel and why they will trip up this season.

I love rooting for the team, and it gives me a lot of satisfaction to do so. Their warts are obvious, but what can you do as a fan? They may not get it squared away this season, but damn, it sure is fun being 2-0 and having something to look forward to, rather than wonder what the hell is going on out there (to quote Lombardi). That may be 2 weeks from now! :lol: Just enjoy the ride and don't worry about the destination because someone else is driving the bus.

[packinpatland]

Show me anyone in Green Bay fandom, besides the guys that wear antlers to the games, who is thinking and saying that this team is a lock to win ten games.

The national media may think our rather unexpected two game win streak would cause many of us fans to recalibrate our pre-season predictions from 8-9 wins up to 10-11 wins, but they are wrong. Informed Packer fans are thrilled to be 2-0 but realistic about this team and what it has shown.

The defense has been good and plays gutty but they are neither dominant nor particularly polished.

The running game?--plug in anybody's rant here.

Special teams won the first game and Brett won the second game but we will be in major trouble without a good run game and a defense that plays great in most games.

Consequently--

If the running game straightens itself out and if the defense gets better game by game you damn betcha this is a playoff team and the national media, including John Clayton, can kiss Tarlam's arse.

(I don't want John Clayton anywhere near my arse.)



"Show me anyone in Green Bay fandom, besides the guys that wear antlers to the games, who is thinking and saying that this team is a lock to win ten games."

I think it's possible. The Packers weren't exactly favored to beat the Eagles were they? Who knows....................ON ANY GIVEN SUNDAY :wink:

[MJZiggy]

If you look in the predictions thread, there were a few of us who thought 10-6 is completely doable.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Okay, how about yards per carry? How about big plays? How about sacks? Why is it that you chose to focus on only one stat and say we are good? I don't rank our defense on yards allowed only, I look at the whole picture and it is very pedestrian. We aren't good, we are average. Points or no points, we got lucky that no one kept running the ball at us. The Eagles would have won and in the Giants game it may have effected us having the ball so much and the score. You can't give up 4.4 yards a carry and expect to not run into a team that will just pound it at you and keep your offense off the field. Stranger things have happened I guess. We will see this week if LT lights us up, I promise you the Chargers won't abandon the run.

4.4 yards/carry? Big deal. All that's gotten them is slightly better situations on 3rd down that they couldn't convert. BTW, Westbrook averaged 4.3 yards/carry--well below his 5.1 yards/carry last year and well below his 5.6 yards/carry in week 2. We don't know much about Ward, but he averaged 6.8 yards/carry in week 1. When you play two good passing offenses, you are likely going to give up a little bit in the run game--which is probably why Westbrook, Barber before, and Ward now have had such a good yards/carry averages. It didn't mean much. Also, what's the opposing QBs passer rating? Try 65. That's very good. How about the pressure? It doesn't show up in sacks, but if you watched the game, you'd notice they got good pressure in both games. I've seen good pressure, good tackling, and few coverage breakdowns. They were good in the first two games. Whether or not they struggle against San Diego is irrelevant.

[Merlin]

I will if you will.


Fortunately I do recognize this. Everyone isn't like me nor would I want them to be.

"You can never be happy if you always look for fault in everything and everyone."

It's when you make a statement directed at me that makes an assumption used as fact where anyone can see that you believe your opinion (not fact) is the way it is where people are concerned. You made the statement, it's pretty black and white as to what your opinion is. Even though as I said you are entitled to it, it's wrong.

[Merlin]

Okay, how about yards per carry? How about big plays? How about sacks? Why is it that you chose to focus on only one stat and say we are good? I don't rank our defense on yards allowed only, I look at the whole picture and it is very pedestrian. We aren't good, we are average. Points or no points, we got lucky that no one kept running the ball at us. The Eagles would have won and in the Giants game it may have effected us having the ball so much and the score. You can't give up 4.4 yards a carry and expect to not run into a team that will just pound it at you and keep your offense off the field. Stranger things have happened I guess. We will see this week if LT lights us up, I promise you the Chargers won't abandon the run.

4.4 yards/carry? Big deal. All that's gotten them is slightly better situations on 3rd down that they couldn't convert. BTW, Westbrook averaged 4.3 yards/carry--well below his 5.1 yards/carry last year and well below his 5.6 yards/carry in week 2. We don't know much about Ward, but he averaged 6.8 yards/carry in week 1. When you play two good passing offenses, you are likely going to give up a little bit in the run game--which is probably why Westbrook, Barber before, and Ward now have had such a good yards/carry averages. It didn't mean much. Also, what's the opposing QBs passer rating? Try 65. That's very good. How about the pressure? It doesn't show up in sacks, but if you watched the game, you'd notice they got good pressure in both games. I've seen good pressure, good tackling, and few coverage breakdowns. They were good in the first two games. Whether or not they struggle against San Diego is irrelevant.

I don't see it that way. Not at all. The line and the pointof attack vs. the run is horrible. The LB's are getting blown out of the play by the OL who should never be at the 2nd tier. I don't consider the Eagles or the Giants good passing offenses. Sure we had pressure. Sure the QB ratings sucked. Why did the Eagles try to throw so much when their ground game WAS getting the job donw? The Giants went to the pass to early as well. Their ground game was doing just fine. QB ratings, pressure, doesn't matter. We did not stop the run. I agree to disagree Harv.

[Zool]

I will if you will.


Fortunately I do recognize this. Everyone isn't like me nor would I want them to be.

"You can never be happy if you always look for fault in everything and everyone."

It's when you make a statement directed at me that makes an assumption used as fact where anyone can see that you believe your opinion (not fact) is the way it is where people are concerned. You made the statement, it's pretty black and white as to what your opinion is. Even though as I said you are entitled to it, it's wrong.

You give opinions stated as fact as well. Everyone does, but I'm trying.

[Merlin]

Sometimes, but I do try and watch it to make sure I get the facts in there. I am not the world's more eloquent writer and sometimes through haste I miss supporting crucial points to my arguments. Again, I am always looking for ways to get better. Just by posting here I can catch some things and make them sound the way they are meant to by the response I am given. When it comes to name calling though, I just don't give a shit at that point and I say what I am thinking. Not that that is the case here.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Just by glancing at the season stats at NFL.com, there's not a lot of difference between San Diego and Green Bay on paper. Does that mean the Packers are as good as the Chargers? Or that the Chargers are as bad as the Packers?

I think it means it's kind of early in the year to rely on stats to prove much of anything at this stage.

We'll see Sunday what both teams are made of.

[swede]

Show me anyone in Green Bay fandom, besides the guys that wear antlers to the games, who is thinking and saying that this team is a lock to win ten games...

...Informed Packer fans are thrilled to be 2-0 but realistic about this team and what it has shown...

Consequently--

If the running game straightens itself out and if the defense gets better game by game you damn betcha this is a playoff team and the national media, including John Clayton, can kiss Tarlam's arse.



"Show me anyone in Green Bay fandom, besides the guys that wear antlers to the games, who is thinking and saying that this team is a lock to win ten games."

I think it's possible. The Packers weren't exactly favored to beat the Eagles were they? Who knows....................ON ANY GIVEN SUNDAY :wink:

I'm just saying the lack of a reliable rushing game is going to be effectively exploited by good teams if it does not get fixed, and the defense needs to play at an even higher level if we are going to flat-out win games against teams like Chicago, Denver, and San Diego.

The most exciting thing about this season is the 2-0 start is here and yet there is a kind of suspense yet among the fans and among the league as we wait to find out for certain if this team is on a steep growth curve (watch out NFC-North if that's the case) or just an exciting team with some lopsided strengths and weaknesses (hello 8-8 if that is the case).

[Him8123]

theres some serious peepee going on in some peoples cereals. you know the last 2 years we got to watch the Pack drop their first couple of games each season. We are 2-0 beating 2 playoff teams and everyone is still bitching! Our Defense wether they give up so many yards as one would say on the run, the pass whatever, it doesn`t matter. What matters is our final score compared to theirs. And for the last 2 weeks ours was higher. We didn`t let them score many points one 2 tds in 2 games so I would say our D is doing a stand up job. by the way I picked us to go 10-6 hell after seeing some of the teams that we get to play later play I may bump it up to 11-5. dont like it suck on it.

[The Shadow]

Give me a T!
Give me a T!
Give me a T!

What's that spell?

Disaster...
.................................................. ................................................

Please, please grant us just 14 more such 'disasters' + a few more in the postseason and all will be perfect.

[LEWCWA]

People around here worry way too much. Enjoy this team for what it is. Remember, this is a young team that should steadily improve. For years we have gotten off to slow starts only to come on in the second half of the season. A quick start bodes well for a young improving team....These guys aren't world beaters yet, but signs are pointing up not down!

[Iron Mike]

If you look in the predictions thread, there were a few of us who thought 10-6 is completely doable.

I'm calling 16-0 again for 2011!!!!!

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001858189/830642836_yay_answer_1_xlarge.jpeg