motife
11-11-2007, 06:31 PM
Q: Mad Dog of Texas - Greg- Your opinion on how really unneccesary it was to have expended a 4th round pick on Randy Moss to make the Packers even better is well known, and while that logic makes zero sense I respect your right to carry that and print that opinion as you see fit. What in the world was that Belichick guy thinking anyhow huh? I was wondering thought if you could in any rational term explain how the Packers are a better team with Alan Barbre (the 4th round pick we couldn't live without) playing for the Packers instead of Moss. (FYI....Moss is doing kind of good this year in case you haven't been paying attention) I just wonder what your thought process is when you think the 4th rounder was to much to give up for the Packers and did that ridiculous pick-up diminish your thoughts about Belichicks ability to coach. Since you've got the ability to express your opinion on this subject, or any other, in print, I was just wondering what the thought process was behind this conclusion you came to. To me that opinion is worse than dry brisquet and warm beer (only worse) and yet each week you love to keep repeating that nonsense. We get the nonsense. Give us the reasoning. How does a 12 touchdown guy (in 8 games) hurt us. Maybe you could do a "crunch the number" article and tell us how 12 touchdowns and constant double coverage is overrated. Is Barbre actually blowing it up and only you see his greatness in comparison to that Moss fella?
A: Greg Bedard - Oh, Mad Dog. Let's end this here after I get this gnat out of the way. Randy Moss. Randy Moss. Randy Moss. Randy Moss. Why don't I think it was a good idea for the Packers to get Moss? Let's see. No. 1. How many teams has Randy Moss played for? 2. How many teams couldn't get him out of town fast enough? 2. How many were willing to give him away for anything they could get (doesn't that tell you anything)? 2. Look, Mad Dog and the rest of you Moss lovers, what he's doing in New England doesn't mean he'd be doing that here. Could the Packers, who run a totally different offense than Moss has ever been in, have dealt with him missing almost all of training camp? No. He would have hurt this team by not being there throughout training camp. You have to look at other things except his touchdowns when you think of Moss coming here. The Packers had to look at having a dirtbag of player, who has said he only plays when he wants to (among other things), in the locker room with a plethora of young players who represent the future of this franchise. Were you willing to bet the future of the Packers on having one receiver in the locker room? Who knows what kind of effect he would have had on Jennings, Jones, Martin, Barnett, Bigby, Rouse, Bush, Grant, Wynn, etc., etc. How many Little Randy Mosses would have been left behind to poison that locker room for years to come? Maybe Moss' presence would have been positive. That's possible. But the overwhelming evidence said that would have been a huge problem. It's a problem the Patriots, with all the veteran players in that locker room, didn't have to ask themselves. Good for them. But the Packers did. And I applaud them for it. I don't care what kind of player Moss is -- something that he hadn't shown since 2003, oh by the way -- he wasn't worth risking the future and character of this team. Obviously you don't agree with me, so while you watch your 8-1 Packers, you can cry all you want on your No. 81 pillow. I, like some of your Packer brethren, are content to heed the words the immortal Norman Dale: "I would hope you'd support who we are, not who we are not. These (53) individuals have made the choice to work, the choice to sacrifice, to put themselves on the line (16 Sundays) for the next four months, to represent you, this (franchise). That kind of commitment and effort deserves and demands your respect. This is your team." And with that, I bid you all a good night.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: AJQ of Milwaukee - Greg: Because of the all around excellent performance of the entire team, there are a lot of POSITIVE things to talk about and I was very impressed with the "bounce back" of our maligned guards and Attari Bigby. However, I was most impressed with Aaron Rouse who appeared to be rock solid in run support against Peterson and was not able to be exploited by MN in their passing game, even when MN gave up all pretense of running in the 4th quarter. What did you think of Rouse's performance?
A: Greg Bedard - It was fine, but, sorry Wisconsin fans, Brooks Bollinger isn't a very good QB. Hard to give Rouse anything but an incomplete until he has to face at least an adequate QB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Montana - Do you think Favre realized that he got hit late on that slide and "acted" a little to draw the penalty? I don't doubt that the hit hurt and a penalty deserved, but a few seconds after he got up, Favre was smiling. I got the feeling -- being the smart player he is -- that he made it seem worse than it was to make sure they threw the flag.
A: Greg Bedard - He specifically said after the game that he did not act to draw the flag. One of his teammates told him he did a good job of drawing that flag. That was not Favre's plan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: ChedHead of Chambersburg PA - With the conservative nature of play-off football in the NFL could you enlighten the audience as to how a control offense ie: "west coast" featuring the pass, actually runs more time off the clock then the traditional running game. The hand wringers and nay-sayers (of the Pack run game) are begging to be enlightened.
A: Greg Bedard - The west coast offense uses more shorter passes to the RBs and TEs than any other offense. Those passes are delivered in a manner where the completion percentage is high, but the yardage gained might not be. The WC offense tries to use that short passing game as an alternative to the running game. They both achieve the same thing, in theory, but how they are executed are, obviously, different. Did that make any sense? I think I need another Red Bull.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: kwed of dubuque - Greg, take away Brett favre and reggie white. Is this team better than 96? We are better at WR, better at LB, better at CB, Better at DL. Weaker at S, RB and TE. I think this team would play them close.
A: Greg Bedard - Good question, but I would save that for McGinn and/or Silverstein when they do the mid-week chat. I try not to offer opinions unless I have some sort of knowledge of the subject. I'm going to have to punt on that one. And as Dave Wannstedt once famously said, "There's no sin in punting."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: James of Fort Atkinson - Did Minnesota game plan to take away Jennings? He seemed quiet in the first half whereas Driver had some room. Do opposing teams think Jennings is more of a threat and priority to stop?
A: Greg Bedard - They played their safeties very deep.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Curt of Dunn, NC - What happened to Favre in the 3rd Quarter? On back to back plays he appeared to be limping and banged his head when he slid on a running play.
A: Greg Bedard - Favre said he was fine after the game, but did admit to being a little dazed after the hit. He said the hit was clean.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark of Metro Milwaukee - Greg, After the first TD pass to Ruvell Martin, the cameras turned to Favre and Jennings on the sideline. It appeared that words were exchanged and that Favre gave Jennings a shove. Is there disharmony in TitleTown?
A: Greg Bedard - I didn't see that but I'm sure it was just some playful banter. Favre said after the game that he's never been on a team that has this much fun or has been this loose. I'm guessing you probably saw some of that there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Dallas - Just want to check again, how is your arm Greg? Brett's is just fine.
A: Greg Bedard - Still a little creaky, especially with the weather getting cooler. You know, I'd point out that I never questioned Favre's arm strength -- only his deep accuracy (backed up by stats, BTW) -- but why let things like the facts stand in the way, right?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jon of Indianapolis - Impressive win against a bad team with Favre not looking particularly sharp early. He also made some questionable passes in the 2nd half. Running game looked sharp early but it couldn't sustain that momentum in the 2nd half. Trust me I'm not complaining. I absolutely love this team at 8-1! I do still see areas were this team can improve which should be scary to the league. Is this team finally starting to come into it's own? Will they get even better or do good teams just beat up on bad ones? Btw, I love you analysis of the team. Keep telling it like it is.
A: Greg Bedard - Thanks for the comment, Jon, but you sound you're complaining -- a little. No team is perfect. Even the Patriots have some flaws. But in this salary-cap era, you just have to be as good as you need to be to win each week. And the Packers are doing that. This team came into its "own" -- a resilient, gritty team that finds any way to win -- a long time ago. Love you(r) too. ;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jim of Grosse Pointe - Hey Greg...first time caller, long time listener. In your opinion, how good is Ruvell Martin? Should they be trying to get him into the offense more? On a side note.....Hang on to the damn ball Jennings!
A: Greg Bedard - Martin's fine. A good, big target without much speed. Who are you going to sit to play him? Driver? Jennings? Jones? Now Robinson? Don't fix what ain't broke. He's a good guy to have around, though. But nothing special.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael of Atlanta - I think one of the things that has not gotten enough press is Favre's line calls. It seems like he had every answer for the Vikings defense. The Vikings started with 2 deep safetys so we ran a lot. They came out of the second half with 8 in the box and Favre threw over the top. It just seems that he is a step ahead of the defenses this year. That seems like a big change from prior years. Did you see the same thing?
A: Greg Bedard - Well, it's not all Favre. What the Packers have done differently this year is to give Favre multiple play calls to use at the line if he thinks the defense is doing something different. And he's done a good job, for the most part, at doing that (he's also missed a few times). But I do think it's true that Favre's smarts have been a big asset this season. I don't know who said it this morning, it might have been on the Sports Reporters, but someone remarked how Favre seems to be Masters candidate playing with undergrads. How true. He sees things most quarterbacks wouldn't even know to look for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Paul of Shoreview, MN - Greg, seems quite a few Packers got dinged in this game. Any news on Tauscher, Jenkins, etc? Also, how did Barbre look?
A: Greg Bedard - Already answered on injuries (I usually try to answer that early, so scroll down and read up from the bottom). Barbre looked decent to me. We'll have to study it more this week to be sure. I'd like to see him get stronger in the offseason. That seems to be his big weakness -- no pun intended.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dave of O'Fallon, IL - Greg, you seem to have an affinity for statistics, based on the subject of many of your columns. Statistically speaking, when was the last time the Packers dominated a team so thoroughly?
A: Greg Bedard - I'm actually not a huge fan of statistics in football. There are just too many variables compared to other sports. I'm simply trying to give fans something different to chew on than what some of the other JS writers like to focus on. You know, I asked McGinn that same question late in the game. He said he'd have to study it when he got home. Let's just say I'll be very interested to read what McGinn digs up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: David Craig of New York City - McCarthy speaks often about improving every week as their secondary goal (winning being the first. Today it looked like he listened to his own advice with his game decisions (4th down and distance). Do you think he is a lock for coach of the year?
A: Greg Bedard - In my mind, yes. But nationally, I don't think it's quite a lock. Hard to dispute what Dick Jauron, Rod Marinelli, Romeo Crennel and Tom Coughlin have done, most with less talent than the Packers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Montana - I live out west (but originally from Wisconsin) and as soon as Martin scored his first TD, Fox cut away from the game and went to the Eagles/Skins game! What's the deal? Any idea how many people got screwed out of the rest of the game by Fox? I've never seen a network cut away that early in the game. What a joke, especially when there's no other way for people to catch the rest of the game. Terrible!
A: Greg Bedard - As harsh as Packers fans might view that decision, I guarantee you that there were fans of 31 other teams that were completely bored of that game and wanted to see something else. Hate to break it to you, but not every TV viewer is a Packers fan. In fact, a majority are not. But I feel your pain. We've all been on that side at one time or another. Hey, at least your team was up big.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael of Newport Beach, CA - Hi Greg - Is MM an exceptional architect, personally crafting formations and attacks that give his players an advantage with the highest possible probability of success -or- is Brad Childress and the MIN staff that unbelievably bad (an unnecessarily harsh on Williamson)? The OL seems good at pass-blocking, sux at cut- and run-blocking, so using Draws for the vast majority of runs worked well and looked genius against a respectable defense. Will it work at Detroit and at Dallas?
A: Greg Bedard - We shall see. But you can't deny that one of the driving forces behind this start has been McCarthy's ability to devise great gameplans that not only deal with the problems of his own team, but the strengths of the other team. Each week the Packers come to the game with a gameplan designed to work for that one game. Not every coach does that. Look at how Norv Turner was completely outcoached last week by Brad Childress. I can't believe I just wrote that Childress outcoached somebody.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael of Newport Beach, CA - Hi Greg - Is MM an exceptional architect, personally crafting formations and attacks that give his players an advantage with the highest possible probability of success -or- is Brad Childress and the MIN staff that unbelievably bad (an unnecessarily harsh on Williamson)? The OL seems good at pass-blocking, sux at cut- and run-blocking, so using Draws for the vast majority of runs worked well and looked genius against a respectable defense. Will it work at Detroit and at Dallas?
A: Greg Bedard - We shall see. But you can't deny that one of the driving forces behind this start has been McCarthy's ability to devise great gameplans that not only deal with the problems of his own team, but the strengths of the other team. Each week the Packers come to the game with a gameplan designed to work for that one game. Not every coach does that. Look at how Norv Turner was completely outcoached last week by Brad Childress. I can't believe I just wrote that Childress outcoached somebody.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Curt from St. John of Ummm.... St. John !! - Hey Greg!! Awesome win, huh!! I just want to say if Brett Keeps playing at this level the rest of the year, don't you think he'll have to at least gather some serious support for MVP? Especially if Brady comes back to earth a little. Brett is a great leader and is FAR more valuable to his team then Brady!! And that is supposed to be what the MVP is about!
A: Greg Bedard - The key word is "if," Curt. Obviously the Packers wouldn't be doing this without Favre. So he's very valuable. But if Brady goes on to break all sorts of single-season records, even with the great talent he has around him, Brady's going to win it. His team is 9-0. He's completing 73% of his passes and has thrown 33 TDs against 4 INTs. I mean, come on, those are ridiculous numbers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jeff C. of Delafield - First off, thanks for the time and effort you put into these post-game chats, we all appreciate it I'm sure. Now to business; WOW! I don't think anyone saw this dominating of a performance against a division rival, with the league's current best RB to boot! Today, we saw Ryan Grant break 100 yards against one of the better, if not the best run defense in the league. My question is, do you see this as a continued indicator the Packers are "getting" the run game going? Or, is this just one of those random, Samkon Gado performances that can't really be followed up on?
A: Greg Bedard - I think it's safe to say the Packers have slowly improved running the ball, especially since Grant was put back there. But I'd like to see them do this on a consistent basis. Next Sunday against the Panthers would be a nice place to start.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tyler of Sacramento - The Pack had two scoring drives start from inside their own 10 today. How many do they have on the year, seems like more than most?
A: Greg Bedard - Five of the Packers' previous 18 touchdowns had come on drives of 80 or longer. Zero on drives of 90 yards or more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Gern Blanston of West Yellowstone Montana - The Packers appeared to be stringing things out to both sides of the line, but did you see any major differences today that allowed the run game to click? Also- any comments about the lack of penalties for a change?
A: Greg Bedard - Other than what I touched on earlier about tiring the Vikings out, there was a concerted effort to help the guards depending on which side the ball was run to. And Spitz and Colledge need it. Plus, because of how good the Vikings' line is usually against the run, their linebackers don't play as close to the line as some other teams. So if the Packers could get a crease at the line, somebody was able to get to the second level and get good seal blocks on the linebackers. And I thought the Packers receivers did a much better job blocking today. They've kind of struggled with that in recent weeks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Heidi of Lake SUPERIOR, the real Wisconsin, come and visit Greg! - Could you please explain why kick off returners don't also do punt returns and vice versa? We have 9 people in my living room (4 of whom are Viking fans, who can't anwerer the question. ) Thanks for your help and really, do visit us here on the Greatest of all Great Lakes!
A: Greg Bedard - Both call for two different skill (mental) sets. On kickoffs, you don't have to worry about some 250-pound missile taking your head off as soon as you touch the ball. You don't have to worry about where you are on the field and whether you should fair catch it or not. Returning kickoffs is much easier to do. You simply catch it and run. Sure, you have to have some nerve, but nothing like on punts. That takes the guts of a burglar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ryan of Sheboygan - Greg, the run game had a great showing against one of the top run defenses in football. Now, with two 100+ yard rushing games in the last three weeks, can we assume the Packers have figured out the running game?
A: Greg Bedard - Two games does not a rushing game make. The true test won't come until the Packers can run when they need to -- late in a cold-weather game, with the game in the balance. When they do that, then the Packers' running game will have arrived.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Isaiah Kwong of Dallas - Will the national media critics still say the Packers CAN'T run the football? I think, against Chicago, they proved they COULD if they were determined to do so, but we're a better passing team and until they stop the pass, why should we stop it ourselves?
A: Greg Bedard - Well, the Packers were pretty bad rushing in most of the games. I don't think the criticism was unfair. But you're right in saying that they've only been determined to run the ball in a few games. But I don't blame McCarthy. If you try to run, even with a lead or in a tied game, and you're not successful, Packers fans paint you as conservative. You can't run the ball, especially with a lot of new backs until you get the repititions. Some people don't understand that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jesse of Atlanta - This was the game I was waiting for. Balance on offense. Great job by the defense containing #28. I noticed Tony Moll & Desmond Bishop were inactives. Seemed odd to me given the lack of depth at the two positions they play. Any idea why?
A: Greg Bedard - Both have been hurt. Moll's neck injury flared up in the last game. Bishop's been battling a shoulder injury for some time, but I think the real story is they just feel better with some other guys on special teams. Bishop, for some reason, has slowly worked his way into the doghouse. Being late for a flight earlier in the season was just the start.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Joy Fauk of Appleton - Will the Packers still use the 5-WR set (with KoRo & Ru) when Bubba returns healthy?
A: Greg Bedard - Yes. The coaches really like them. And it's not like Bubba Franks is this overwhelming talent that they have to get on the field. I'd much rather have Driver, Jennings, Jones, Robinson and Lee on the field than replace one of the receivers with Bubba Franks. And so would the coaches.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tim of Batavia - Do you think Jarrett Bush is potentially a starting caliber CB? What about Blackmon's injury status, we are going to need both of those guys to beat NE in Arizona!
A: Greg Bedard - This season or ever? He's at least a year from being ready to start. He's improved a lot this season. Remember the first Vikings game? He was terrible and we were all looking for Blackmon to take Bush's spot. Bush was very good today. He deserves to be acknowledged. The Vikings tried to pick on him again and they saw a much better player this time around. Blackmon's status will likely be determined this week.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Noel of Des Moines - If the Pro Bowl participants were to be selected based on performances through the first nine games, which Packer players would warrant an invitation, relative, of course, to the rest of the league?
A: Greg Bedard - Not big on this type of question, but off the top of my head: Favre, Jennings, Lee (maybe), Barnett, Kampman, Woodson.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Nic of Andover - the packers did well on both sides of the ball today. I've noticed Jennings drop a significant number of balls latley, whats up with that?
A: Greg Bedard - I wouldn't say 2-3 drops are a "significant" number. He's been a little off, but he's made up for them. On one last week he got hooked right before the ball got to him. Not an easy play to make. Greg Jennings is a star. Period.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Pete of Tacoma, WA - Hi Greg, Fun gme to watch for the two plus quarters that Fox showed the game here in the Pacific NW. Given the real lack of a passing game by Minnesota, can you make any judgements on the play of Rouse at safety?
A: Greg Bedard - Not really, and I don't think you will next week either against whatever has-been QB the Carolina Panthers find in the trash bin behind the training complex. Rouse will be judged soley on his performance against Detroit and Dallas, if Collins isn't back by then (doesn't look like it). But I watched Rouse today on more than a few occasions. He did a solid job. I saw him out of position a few times and Bollinger wasn't going to exploit it. But Kitna and/or Romo will. Not a bad job by Rouse for the first time out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Rich of Dayton - Although the Packers faced a pretty one-dimensional offense, would you agree that this game was as complete a game as they have put together this year?
A: Greg Bedard - It's not even close. Of course it was. They haven't played a game this good in years. I'll leave it up to the Bob McGinns of the world to put it in the proper historical perspective.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John Casper of Milwaukee - Wow, what a victory, and the Pack ran the ball! Wanted to make sure you guys in the press box saw Charles Woodson giving the football to a very young Packer fan after his interception. OT, I was really glad McCarthy replaced Favre with Rodgers.
A: Greg Bedard - You think Bill Belichick was watching and he had some grand revelation?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Rich of Dayton, Ohio - Greg: What is the initial post-game status of J. Jones, M. Tauscher and C. Williams, relative to injuries?
A: Greg Bedard - Jones: calf cramp, minor. Tauscher: ankle sprain, minor (could have gone back in if it wasn't, oh, 78-0). Williams: no injury, he's fine. Jenkins did ding a knee but looked fine in the locker room.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Chicago - Now that is the complete game I was looking for! What was the key for the running game today? Just hard running, or good blocking, or a combo of both? Great win, especially over the "Viqueens"!
A: Greg Bedard - Absolutely complete, although I'm interested to see where some of the "glass empties" go in this chat. It was a combo of both, but I think the Packers' passing game really was a big factor. The Vikings were so scared of getting beat deep, that there wasn't much perimeter defense there when Grant ran around the end. I also thought it was smart that the Packers almost always followed an end run to one side, with one to the other. There was a concerted effort to tire out the Williams boys, and I think it was very well executed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: James Thompson of Shorewood - If you're Cedric Griffth, what do you say to Darren Sharper on the sidelines after he breaks up your INT and the ball is caught by Martin for a touchdown?
A: Greg Bedard - "You know, if you weren't always running your mouth, maybe you wouldn't run into me and screw up my easy interception, old man."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jamie E. of Milwaukee of thee Wisconsin - Greg, regardless of what happens tonight, shouldn't the Packers be rated above the Cowboys being that we beat the Giants when Wynn had his best game and we shut out the Giants when Grant had his best game? The Cowboys have a iffy secondary, since Favre is the third best QB in the game and the Packers have something resembling a running game now, on paper, shouldn't we be the favorites heading into the showdown?
A: Greg Bedard - Lucky we don't have to debate it, or leave up to some stupid BCS computer. The Packers and Cowboys will meet on the field in 18 days. That will decide it, so there's no point in playing the "what if" games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ben Newton of Dallas, Texas - Greg,this is the first time all season we have not had to squeek out a close game. Have we improved that much or are the Vikes just gotten that bad since our last meeting??
A: Greg Bedard - Let's start it off with Ben, who has assured me that he has taken the proper steps to rejoin normal society. It's a good question. I think it's a little bit of both. The Vikings, while I think they're terrible, are an OK. They whipped the Chargers last week (mostly because Norv Turner wouldn't deviate from his idiotic gameplan) so the Vikings aren't the Dolphins. The Packers were terrific today. There's no way around it. Favre, after a slow start, was masterful again. The line was much better against a very good front. Grant was great again. The defense was better, especially the much-maligned Jarrett Bush (give the guy some props, people) although I saw some leaks that Peterson might have exploited in the second half. I would have liked to see him play a whole game against the Packers. That really would have been a great gauge. But things were out of hand by the time he left with the Packers up 27-0.
A: Greg Bedard - Oh, Mad Dog. Let's end this here after I get this gnat out of the way. Randy Moss. Randy Moss. Randy Moss. Randy Moss. Why don't I think it was a good idea for the Packers to get Moss? Let's see. No. 1. How many teams has Randy Moss played for? 2. How many teams couldn't get him out of town fast enough? 2. How many were willing to give him away for anything they could get (doesn't that tell you anything)? 2. Look, Mad Dog and the rest of you Moss lovers, what he's doing in New England doesn't mean he'd be doing that here. Could the Packers, who run a totally different offense than Moss has ever been in, have dealt with him missing almost all of training camp? No. He would have hurt this team by not being there throughout training camp. You have to look at other things except his touchdowns when you think of Moss coming here. The Packers had to look at having a dirtbag of player, who has said he only plays when he wants to (among other things), in the locker room with a plethora of young players who represent the future of this franchise. Were you willing to bet the future of the Packers on having one receiver in the locker room? Who knows what kind of effect he would have had on Jennings, Jones, Martin, Barnett, Bigby, Rouse, Bush, Grant, Wynn, etc., etc. How many Little Randy Mosses would have been left behind to poison that locker room for years to come? Maybe Moss' presence would have been positive. That's possible. But the overwhelming evidence said that would have been a huge problem. It's a problem the Patriots, with all the veteran players in that locker room, didn't have to ask themselves. Good for them. But the Packers did. And I applaud them for it. I don't care what kind of player Moss is -- something that he hadn't shown since 2003, oh by the way -- he wasn't worth risking the future and character of this team. Obviously you don't agree with me, so while you watch your 8-1 Packers, you can cry all you want on your No. 81 pillow. I, like some of your Packer brethren, are content to heed the words the immortal Norman Dale: "I would hope you'd support who we are, not who we are not. These (53) individuals have made the choice to work, the choice to sacrifice, to put themselves on the line (16 Sundays) for the next four months, to represent you, this (franchise). That kind of commitment and effort deserves and demands your respect. This is your team." And with that, I bid you all a good night.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: AJQ of Milwaukee - Greg: Because of the all around excellent performance of the entire team, there are a lot of POSITIVE things to talk about and I was very impressed with the "bounce back" of our maligned guards and Attari Bigby. However, I was most impressed with Aaron Rouse who appeared to be rock solid in run support against Peterson and was not able to be exploited by MN in their passing game, even when MN gave up all pretense of running in the 4th quarter. What did you think of Rouse's performance?
A: Greg Bedard - It was fine, but, sorry Wisconsin fans, Brooks Bollinger isn't a very good QB. Hard to give Rouse anything but an incomplete until he has to face at least an adequate QB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Montana - Do you think Favre realized that he got hit late on that slide and "acted" a little to draw the penalty? I don't doubt that the hit hurt and a penalty deserved, but a few seconds after he got up, Favre was smiling. I got the feeling -- being the smart player he is -- that he made it seem worse than it was to make sure they threw the flag.
A: Greg Bedard - He specifically said after the game that he did not act to draw the flag. One of his teammates told him he did a good job of drawing that flag. That was not Favre's plan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: ChedHead of Chambersburg PA - With the conservative nature of play-off football in the NFL could you enlighten the audience as to how a control offense ie: "west coast" featuring the pass, actually runs more time off the clock then the traditional running game. The hand wringers and nay-sayers (of the Pack run game) are begging to be enlightened.
A: Greg Bedard - The west coast offense uses more shorter passes to the RBs and TEs than any other offense. Those passes are delivered in a manner where the completion percentage is high, but the yardage gained might not be. The WC offense tries to use that short passing game as an alternative to the running game. They both achieve the same thing, in theory, but how they are executed are, obviously, different. Did that make any sense? I think I need another Red Bull.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: kwed of dubuque - Greg, take away Brett favre and reggie white. Is this team better than 96? We are better at WR, better at LB, better at CB, Better at DL. Weaker at S, RB and TE. I think this team would play them close.
A: Greg Bedard - Good question, but I would save that for McGinn and/or Silverstein when they do the mid-week chat. I try not to offer opinions unless I have some sort of knowledge of the subject. I'm going to have to punt on that one. And as Dave Wannstedt once famously said, "There's no sin in punting."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: James of Fort Atkinson - Did Minnesota game plan to take away Jennings? He seemed quiet in the first half whereas Driver had some room. Do opposing teams think Jennings is more of a threat and priority to stop?
A: Greg Bedard - They played their safeties very deep.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Curt of Dunn, NC - What happened to Favre in the 3rd Quarter? On back to back plays he appeared to be limping and banged his head when he slid on a running play.
A: Greg Bedard - Favre said he was fine after the game, but did admit to being a little dazed after the hit. He said the hit was clean.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark of Metro Milwaukee - Greg, After the first TD pass to Ruvell Martin, the cameras turned to Favre and Jennings on the sideline. It appeared that words were exchanged and that Favre gave Jennings a shove. Is there disharmony in TitleTown?
A: Greg Bedard - I didn't see that but I'm sure it was just some playful banter. Favre said after the game that he's never been on a team that has this much fun or has been this loose. I'm guessing you probably saw some of that there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Dallas - Just want to check again, how is your arm Greg? Brett's is just fine.
A: Greg Bedard - Still a little creaky, especially with the weather getting cooler. You know, I'd point out that I never questioned Favre's arm strength -- only his deep accuracy (backed up by stats, BTW) -- but why let things like the facts stand in the way, right?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jon of Indianapolis - Impressive win against a bad team with Favre not looking particularly sharp early. He also made some questionable passes in the 2nd half. Running game looked sharp early but it couldn't sustain that momentum in the 2nd half. Trust me I'm not complaining. I absolutely love this team at 8-1! I do still see areas were this team can improve which should be scary to the league. Is this team finally starting to come into it's own? Will they get even better or do good teams just beat up on bad ones? Btw, I love you analysis of the team. Keep telling it like it is.
A: Greg Bedard - Thanks for the comment, Jon, but you sound you're complaining -- a little. No team is perfect. Even the Patriots have some flaws. But in this salary-cap era, you just have to be as good as you need to be to win each week. And the Packers are doing that. This team came into its "own" -- a resilient, gritty team that finds any way to win -- a long time ago. Love you(r) too. ;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jim of Grosse Pointe - Hey Greg...first time caller, long time listener. In your opinion, how good is Ruvell Martin? Should they be trying to get him into the offense more? On a side note.....Hang on to the damn ball Jennings!
A: Greg Bedard - Martin's fine. A good, big target without much speed. Who are you going to sit to play him? Driver? Jennings? Jones? Now Robinson? Don't fix what ain't broke. He's a good guy to have around, though. But nothing special.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael of Atlanta - I think one of the things that has not gotten enough press is Favre's line calls. It seems like he had every answer for the Vikings defense. The Vikings started with 2 deep safetys so we ran a lot. They came out of the second half with 8 in the box and Favre threw over the top. It just seems that he is a step ahead of the defenses this year. That seems like a big change from prior years. Did you see the same thing?
A: Greg Bedard - Well, it's not all Favre. What the Packers have done differently this year is to give Favre multiple play calls to use at the line if he thinks the defense is doing something different. And he's done a good job, for the most part, at doing that (he's also missed a few times). But I do think it's true that Favre's smarts have been a big asset this season. I don't know who said it this morning, it might have been on the Sports Reporters, but someone remarked how Favre seems to be Masters candidate playing with undergrads. How true. He sees things most quarterbacks wouldn't even know to look for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Paul of Shoreview, MN - Greg, seems quite a few Packers got dinged in this game. Any news on Tauscher, Jenkins, etc? Also, how did Barbre look?
A: Greg Bedard - Already answered on injuries (I usually try to answer that early, so scroll down and read up from the bottom). Barbre looked decent to me. We'll have to study it more this week to be sure. I'd like to see him get stronger in the offseason. That seems to be his big weakness -- no pun intended.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dave of O'Fallon, IL - Greg, you seem to have an affinity for statistics, based on the subject of many of your columns. Statistically speaking, when was the last time the Packers dominated a team so thoroughly?
A: Greg Bedard - I'm actually not a huge fan of statistics in football. There are just too many variables compared to other sports. I'm simply trying to give fans something different to chew on than what some of the other JS writers like to focus on. You know, I asked McGinn that same question late in the game. He said he'd have to study it when he got home. Let's just say I'll be very interested to read what McGinn digs up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: David Craig of New York City - McCarthy speaks often about improving every week as their secondary goal (winning being the first. Today it looked like he listened to his own advice with his game decisions (4th down and distance). Do you think he is a lock for coach of the year?
A: Greg Bedard - In my mind, yes. But nationally, I don't think it's quite a lock. Hard to dispute what Dick Jauron, Rod Marinelli, Romeo Crennel and Tom Coughlin have done, most with less talent than the Packers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Montana - I live out west (but originally from Wisconsin) and as soon as Martin scored his first TD, Fox cut away from the game and went to the Eagles/Skins game! What's the deal? Any idea how many people got screwed out of the rest of the game by Fox? I've never seen a network cut away that early in the game. What a joke, especially when there's no other way for people to catch the rest of the game. Terrible!
A: Greg Bedard - As harsh as Packers fans might view that decision, I guarantee you that there were fans of 31 other teams that were completely bored of that game and wanted to see something else. Hate to break it to you, but not every TV viewer is a Packers fan. In fact, a majority are not. But I feel your pain. We've all been on that side at one time or another. Hey, at least your team was up big.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael of Newport Beach, CA - Hi Greg - Is MM an exceptional architect, personally crafting formations and attacks that give his players an advantage with the highest possible probability of success -or- is Brad Childress and the MIN staff that unbelievably bad (an unnecessarily harsh on Williamson)? The OL seems good at pass-blocking, sux at cut- and run-blocking, so using Draws for the vast majority of runs worked well and looked genius against a respectable defense. Will it work at Detroit and at Dallas?
A: Greg Bedard - We shall see. But you can't deny that one of the driving forces behind this start has been McCarthy's ability to devise great gameplans that not only deal with the problems of his own team, but the strengths of the other team. Each week the Packers come to the game with a gameplan designed to work for that one game. Not every coach does that. Look at how Norv Turner was completely outcoached last week by Brad Childress. I can't believe I just wrote that Childress outcoached somebody.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Michael of Newport Beach, CA - Hi Greg - Is MM an exceptional architect, personally crafting formations and attacks that give his players an advantage with the highest possible probability of success -or- is Brad Childress and the MIN staff that unbelievably bad (an unnecessarily harsh on Williamson)? The OL seems good at pass-blocking, sux at cut- and run-blocking, so using Draws for the vast majority of runs worked well and looked genius against a respectable defense. Will it work at Detroit and at Dallas?
A: Greg Bedard - We shall see. But you can't deny that one of the driving forces behind this start has been McCarthy's ability to devise great gameplans that not only deal with the problems of his own team, but the strengths of the other team. Each week the Packers come to the game with a gameplan designed to work for that one game. Not every coach does that. Look at how Norv Turner was completely outcoached last week by Brad Childress. I can't believe I just wrote that Childress outcoached somebody.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Curt from St. John of Ummm.... St. John !! - Hey Greg!! Awesome win, huh!! I just want to say if Brett Keeps playing at this level the rest of the year, don't you think he'll have to at least gather some serious support for MVP? Especially if Brady comes back to earth a little. Brett is a great leader and is FAR more valuable to his team then Brady!! And that is supposed to be what the MVP is about!
A: Greg Bedard - The key word is "if," Curt. Obviously the Packers wouldn't be doing this without Favre. So he's very valuable. But if Brady goes on to break all sorts of single-season records, even with the great talent he has around him, Brady's going to win it. His team is 9-0. He's completing 73% of his passes and has thrown 33 TDs against 4 INTs. I mean, come on, those are ridiculous numbers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jeff C. of Delafield - First off, thanks for the time and effort you put into these post-game chats, we all appreciate it I'm sure. Now to business; WOW! I don't think anyone saw this dominating of a performance against a division rival, with the league's current best RB to boot! Today, we saw Ryan Grant break 100 yards against one of the better, if not the best run defense in the league. My question is, do you see this as a continued indicator the Packers are "getting" the run game going? Or, is this just one of those random, Samkon Gado performances that can't really be followed up on?
A: Greg Bedard - I think it's safe to say the Packers have slowly improved running the ball, especially since Grant was put back there. But I'd like to see them do this on a consistent basis. Next Sunday against the Panthers would be a nice place to start.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tyler of Sacramento - The Pack had two scoring drives start from inside their own 10 today. How many do they have on the year, seems like more than most?
A: Greg Bedard - Five of the Packers' previous 18 touchdowns had come on drives of 80 or longer. Zero on drives of 90 yards or more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Gern Blanston of West Yellowstone Montana - The Packers appeared to be stringing things out to both sides of the line, but did you see any major differences today that allowed the run game to click? Also- any comments about the lack of penalties for a change?
A: Greg Bedard - Other than what I touched on earlier about tiring the Vikings out, there was a concerted effort to help the guards depending on which side the ball was run to. And Spitz and Colledge need it. Plus, because of how good the Vikings' line is usually against the run, their linebackers don't play as close to the line as some other teams. So if the Packers could get a crease at the line, somebody was able to get to the second level and get good seal blocks on the linebackers. And I thought the Packers receivers did a much better job blocking today. They've kind of struggled with that in recent weeks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Heidi of Lake SUPERIOR, the real Wisconsin, come and visit Greg! - Could you please explain why kick off returners don't also do punt returns and vice versa? We have 9 people in my living room (4 of whom are Viking fans, who can't anwerer the question. ) Thanks for your help and really, do visit us here on the Greatest of all Great Lakes!
A: Greg Bedard - Both call for two different skill (mental) sets. On kickoffs, you don't have to worry about some 250-pound missile taking your head off as soon as you touch the ball. You don't have to worry about where you are on the field and whether you should fair catch it or not. Returning kickoffs is much easier to do. You simply catch it and run. Sure, you have to have some nerve, but nothing like on punts. That takes the guts of a burglar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ryan of Sheboygan - Greg, the run game had a great showing against one of the top run defenses in football. Now, with two 100+ yard rushing games in the last three weeks, can we assume the Packers have figured out the running game?
A: Greg Bedard - Two games does not a rushing game make. The true test won't come until the Packers can run when they need to -- late in a cold-weather game, with the game in the balance. When they do that, then the Packers' running game will have arrived.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Isaiah Kwong of Dallas - Will the national media critics still say the Packers CAN'T run the football? I think, against Chicago, they proved they COULD if they were determined to do so, but we're a better passing team and until they stop the pass, why should we stop it ourselves?
A: Greg Bedard - Well, the Packers were pretty bad rushing in most of the games. I don't think the criticism was unfair. But you're right in saying that they've only been determined to run the ball in a few games. But I don't blame McCarthy. If you try to run, even with a lead or in a tied game, and you're not successful, Packers fans paint you as conservative. You can't run the ball, especially with a lot of new backs until you get the repititions. Some people don't understand that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jesse of Atlanta - This was the game I was waiting for. Balance on offense. Great job by the defense containing #28. I noticed Tony Moll & Desmond Bishop were inactives. Seemed odd to me given the lack of depth at the two positions they play. Any idea why?
A: Greg Bedard - Both have been hurt. Moll's neck injury flared up in the last game. Bishop's been battling a shoulder injury for some time, but I think the real story is they just feel better with some other guys on special teams. Bishop, for some reason, has slowly worked his way into the doghouse. Being late for a flight earlier in the season was just the start.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Joy Fauk of Appleton - Will the Packers still use the 5-WR set (with KoRo & Ru) when Bubba returns healthy?
A: Greg Bedard - Yes. The coaches really like them. And it's not like Bubba Franks is this overwhelming talent that they have to get on the field. I'd much rather have Driver, Jennings, Jones, Robinson and Lee on the field than replace one of the receivers with Bubba Franks. And so would the coaches.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tim of Batavia - Do you think Jarrett Bush is potentially a starting caliber CB? What about Blackmon's injury status, we are going to need both of those guys to beat NE in Arizona!
A: Greg Bedard - This season or ever? He's at least a year from being ready to start. He's improved a lot this season. Remember the first Vikings game? He was terrible and we were all looking for Blackmon to take Bush's spot. Bush was very good today. He deserves to be acknowledged. The Vikings tried to pick on him again and they saw a much better player this time around. Blackmon's status will likely be determined this week.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Noel of Des Moines - If the Pro Bowl participants were to be selected based on performances through the first nine games, which Packer players would warrant an invitation, relative, of course, to the rest of the league?
A: Greg Bedard - Not big on this type of question, but off the top of my head: Favre, Jennings, Lee (maybe), Barnett, Kampman, Woodson.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Nic of Andover - the packers did well on both sides of the ball today. I've noticed Jennings drop a significant number of balls latley, whats up with that?
A: Greg Bedard - I wouldn't say 2-3 drops are a "significant" number. He's been a little off, but he's made up for them. On one last week he got hooked right before the ball got to him. Not an easy play to make. Greg Jennings is a star. Period.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Pete of Tacoma, WA - Hi Greg, Fun gme to watch for the two plus quarters that Fox showed the game here in the Pacific NW. Given the real lack of a passing game by Minnesota, can you make any judgements on the play of Rouse at safety?
A: Greg Bedard - Not really, and I don't think you will next week either against whatever has-been QB the Carolina Panthers find in the trash bin behind the training complex. Rouse will be judged soley on his performance against Detroit and Dallas, if Collins isn't back by then (doesn't look like it). But I watched Rouse today on more than a few occasions. He did a solid job. I saw him out of position a few times and Bollinger wasn't going to exploit it. But Kitna and/or Romo will. Not a bad job by Rouse for the first time out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Rich of Dayton - Although the Packers faced a pretty one-dimensional offense, would you agree that this game was as complete a game as they have put together this year?
A: Greg Bedard - It's not even close. Of course it was. They haven't played a game this good in years. I'll leave it up to the Bob McGinns of the world to put it in the proper historical perspective.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John Casper of Milwaukee - Wow, what a victory, and the Pack ran the ball! Wanted to make sure you guys in the press box saw Charles Woodson giving the football to a very young Packer fan after his interception. OT, I was really glad McCarthy replaced Favre with Rodgers.
A: Greg Bedard - You think Bill Belichick was watching and he had some grand revelation?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Rich of Dayton, Ohio - Greg: What is the initial post-game status of J. Jones, M. Tauscher and C. Williams, relative to injuries?
A: Greg Bedard - Jones: calf cramp, minor. Tauscher: ankle sprain, minor (could have gone back in if it wasn't, oh, 78-0). Williams: no injury, he's fine. Jenkins did ding a knee but looked fine in the locker room.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Chicago - Now that is the complete game I was looking for! What was the key for the running game today? Just hard running, or good blocking, or a combo of both? Great win, especially over the "Viqueens"!
A: Greg Bedard - Absolutely complete, although I'm interested to see where some of the "glass empties" go in this chat. It was a combo of both, but I think the Packers' passing game really was a big factor. The Vikings were so scared of getting beat deep, that there wasn't much perimeter defense there when Grant ran around the end. I also thought it was smart that the Packers almost always followed an end run to one side, with one to the other. There was a concerted effort to tire out the Williams boys, and I think it was very well executed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: James Thompson of Shorewood - If you're Cedric Griffth, what do you say to Darren Sharper on the sidelines after he breaks up your INT and the ball is caught by Martin for a touchdown?
A: Greg Bedard - "You know, if you weren't always running your mouth, maybe you wouldn't run into me and screw up my easy interception, old man."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jamie E. of Milwaukee of thee Wisconsin - Greg, regardless of what happens tonight, shouldn't the Packers be rated above the Cowboys being that we beat the Giants when Wynn had his best game and we shut out the Giants when Grant had his best game? The Cowboys have a iffy secondary, since Favre is the third best QB in the game and the Packers have something resembling a running game now, on paper, shouldn't we be the favorites heading into the showdown?
A: Greg Bedard - Lucky we don't have to debate it, or leave up to some stupid BCS computer. The Packers and Cowboys will meet on the field in 18 days. That will decide it, so there's no point in playing the "what if" games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ben Newton of Dallas, Texas - Greg,this is the first time all season we have not had to squeek out a close game. Have we improved that much or are the Vikes just gotten that bad since our last meeting??
A: Greg Bedard - Let's start it off with Ben, who has assured me that he has taken the proper steps to rejoin normal society. It's a good question. I think it's a little bit of both. The Vikings, while I think they're terrible, are an OK. They whipped the Chargers last week (mostly because Norv Turner wouldn't deviate from his idiotic gameplan) so the Vikings aren't the Dolphins. The Packers were terrific today. There's no way around it. Favre, after a slow start, was masterful again. The line was much better against a very good front. Grant was great again. The defense was better, especially the much-maligned Jarrett Bush (give the guy some props, people) although I saw some leaks that Peterson might have exploited in the second half. I would have liked to see him play a whole game against the Packers. That really would have been a great gauge. But things were out of hand by the time he left with the Packers up 27-0.