Announcement

**Partial** · 01-21-2008, 01:43 PM

I wish they'd blitz more and get a little more creative. They're very conservative on defense. They've got a great blitzing safety and they never use his strengths.

**Patler** · 01-21-2008, 02:00 PM

I think there are a lot of good players on the defense, but I'm not sure there is an abundance of highly talented players. No one that is really "special". I can't say that they underachieved.

**The Leaper** · 01-21-2008, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by Patler

I think there are a lot of good players on the defense, but I'm not sure there is an abundance of highly talented players. No one that is really "special". I can't say that they underachieved.

I agree. We have a lot of "very good" players on defense, but I don't think there are any players who are "elite" players. Elite players are the ones that make the difference in the NFL between winning titles and coming up short.

I think that can also be said of the offense. Favre used to be an elite player...he's not there anymore.

This team really overachieved in 2007. There really is no way to claim they underachieved IMO. They simply don't have the All-Pro caliber talent truly great teams usually have.

**pbmax** · 01-21-2008, 02:13 PM

Re: New Defensive Scheme...

The Packers have better D personnel than the Sixers or the Orioles, but the football franchises are still a different story. Although its a lot closer than it was a year ago. Philly was really banged up in the secondary this season and Baltimore is getting old.

Our cornerbacks seem to have gotten old fast. Especially Harris. He has had a steep decline against premier competition.

Originally posted by packers11

...GB has far superior talent on D then teams like Philly and Baltimore, and look at their defenses....

Thoughts???

**Patler** · 01-21-2008, 02:17 PM

Originally posted by The Leaper

I agree. We have a lot of "very good" players on defense, but I don't think there are any players who are "elite" players. Elite players are the ones that make the difference in the NFL between winning titles and coming up short.

I think that can also be said of the offense. Favre used to be an elite player...he's not there anymore.

I agree. Elite players make the stop in the backfield that Hawk missed late in the game and that Barnett missed earlier, they get that extra sack that the d-line did not, they complete the pass that Favre threw for his last interception, they make plays instead of commit the penalties that Woodson and Harris committed, they catch the difficult balls that Martin and Jennings did not in key situations.

Good players get close to all of those and keep the game close. I'm not suggesting that the Giants won because they had elite players make plays. Instead, the lack of elite players on both teams made the game a toss up that could have gone either way.

**Partial** · 01-21-2008, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by The Leaper

Originally posted by Patler

I think there are a lot of good players on the defense, but I'm not sure there is an abundance of highly talented players. No one that is really "special". I can't say that they underachieved.

I agree. We have a lot of "very good" players on defense, but I don't think there are any players who are "elite" players. Elite players are the ones that make the difference in the NFL between winning titles and coming up short.

I think that can also be said of the offense. Favre used to be an elite player...he's not there anymore.

This team really overachieved in 2007. There really is no way to claim they underachieved IMO. They simply don't have the All-Pro caliber talent truly great teams usually have.

Favre has been pretty elite thus the 13-3 season

**hurleyfan** · 01-21-2008, 02:21 PM

What was the term ol' Cliff Cristl used to say in his "chats"... BLUECHIP Players make the difference, and as others have stated, the Packers don't have any bluechippers..

We have some very good players, and there's a possiblility some of our youngsters could grow into that mold, but not in the very near future...

Now with another draft in the very bottom, not much of a chance of getting a true difference maker, unless TT really finds a hidden gem..

**Partial** · 01-21-2008, 02:24 PM

Favre was a blue chipper all year long. Are you kidding me? Our record with a Jon Kitna would have been 8-8

**hurleyfan** · 01-21-2008, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by Partial

Favre was a blue chipper all year long. Are you kidding me? Our record with a Jon Kitna would have been 8-8

Favre had a great year, don't get me wrong, and he is the best player the Packers had.. But one great player usually doesn't win a game when most of the other top tier players didn't play up to that BLUE" type of player

**Partial** · 01-21-2008, 02:39 PM

Cliffs theory was there are a lot of average players in the NFL and a few premiere ones. Get 2 or 3 blue chippers and your team would be in contention

A blue chipper is defined as the top 2-3 players at a particular position.

I would say Favre and Woodson were blue chippers.

Barnett, Harris, Clifton and maybe Driver were red chippers.

**Patler** · 01-21-2008, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by Partial

Originally posted by The Leaper

Originally posted by Patler

I think there are a lot of good players on the defense, but I'm not sure there is an abundance of highly talented players. No one that is really "special". I can't say that they underachieved.

I agree. We have a lot of "very good" players on defense, but I don't think there are any players who are "elite" players. Elite players are the ones that make the difference in the NFL between winning titles and coming up short.

I think that can also be said of the offense. Favre used to be an elite player...he's not there anymore.

This team really overachieved in 2007. There really is no way to claim they underachieved IMO. They simply don't have the All-Pro caliber talent truly great teams usually have.

Favre has been pretty elite thus the 13-3 season

Actually I would say he has been more controlled than elite. I'm not suggesting that he can't make plays at times, because he can. But playoffs are the playoffs, and he has not been a major difference maker in a positive way for a long time, save maybe somewhat against Seattle.

That doesn't mean he sucks, is awful, should be replaced, should retire or anything like that. He just isn't as special as he once was. He can still help them win, but won't carry them as he once did.

It happens with all the great QBs when they get older.

**The Leaper** · 01-21-2008, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by Partial

Favre was a blue chipper all year long.

Favre played well. He's not a consistent blue chip or elite player anymore. He certainly still can attain that level on certain days, but that is the exception and not the rule.

He's still a very good QB...and one capable of leading a team to a title. He just needs a little more help around him. Hell, it took having guys like Reggie White and LeRoy Butler on defense to help him win SB31. We don't have anyone on defense right now near the caliber of White or Butler.

**Patler** · 01-21-2008, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by Partial

Cliffs theory was there are a lot of average players in the NFL and a few premiere ones. Get 2 or 3 blue chippers and your team would be in contention

A blue chipper is defined as the top 2-3 players at a particular position.

I would say Favre and Woodson were blue chippers.

Barnett, Harris, Clifton and maybe Driver were red chippers.

I think you can also win with a lot of players who are better than average, even if not blue chippers. That is sort of where the Packers are. Blue chippers at key positions make it easier.

**The Leaper** · 01-21-2008, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Partial

Favre has been pretty elite thus the 13-3 season

Favre was pretty non-elite yesterday thus no Super Bowl title.

Announcement

New Defensive Scheme...

New Defensive Scheme...

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment