Peter King names ___ ___ Defensive player of the week

[ThunderDan]

This forum defines many, many packer fans. Maybe sports fans in general. Nothing is ever good enough. It really is sad. Oh well, it looks like I'm in the minority on this one. So maybe I'm the dope! :P

Notice I am not calling for Nick Barnetts replacement.

[ThunderDan]

Re: Peter King names ___ ___ Defensive player of the week

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/10/20/week7/2.html

Defensive Player of the Week

Nick Barnett, LB, Green Bay. To watch this game was to watch one of the most frustrating days of Peyton Manning's career. The Packers defense, led by Barnett (six tackles, two tackles for loss, excellent sideline-to-sideline athleticism), kept Manning scoreless on eight of 10 possessions and forced him into throwing two interceptions, both returned for Green Bay touchdowns.

I have already e-mailed Peter King on this one. What a dope!!! Barnett is not the reason the Packers keep Peyton down. As I stated in another thread if Manning doesn't throw the INTs it's a 20 point swing and the D doesn't look that good.

I give all the credit to Woodson, T Williams, Rouse and "Pro Bowl" Nick Collins. Chillar played well also.

Why Barnett? He had a lot of tackles isn't that what our D scheme is supposed to create for the MLB?

What I saw on run play after play was Barnett getting blown off the ball unable to shed blockers.

Hmmm....a Packer fan emailing King to tell him that Barnett does not deserve any credit for holding an explosive offense down on Sunday. Sure, the secondary played well but so did Barnett. I don't know what more the guy can do to satisfy some of you. It's kind of pathetic. Peter King may look at your email and say "And this guys is calling ME a dope?" But maybe not.

Wouldn't you be surprised if my e-mail lands in Tuesdays Edition.

[gbpackfan]

I would be. My point is this. Peter King wants to give Nick Barnett, A GREEN BAY PACKER, some props. LET HIM! Geesh. So what if he believes Barnett played lights out. Maybe he saw something you didn't? Well, obviously he did. Ha ha. But don't email the guy, as a Packer fan, and take a shit on Barnett. Let the media put Barnett over if they want. Why would you email him and basically ask him to take it back? IMHO that is just silly.

[ThunderDan]

I would be. My point is this. Peter King wants to give Nick Barnett, A GREEN BAY PACKER, some props. LET HIM! Geesh. So what if he believes Barnett played lights out. Maybe he saw something you didn't? Well, obviously he did. Ha ha. But don't email the guy, as a Packer fan, and take a shit on Barnett. Let the media put Barnett over if they want. Why would you email him and basically ask him to take it back? IMHO that is just silly.

Hey, it is great to see the Pack get some props. But its the wrong guy and you know it!!!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Well, Woodson was our stud, but if King wants to give Barnett props, that's fine. I guess it all depends on how you worded the email. If you dumped on Barnett, then I don't agree with that. If you said something like "hey Barnett was solid, but Woodson was the real MVP," then that's good to go in my book.

[gbpackfan]

I would be. My point is this. Peter King wants to give Nick Barnett, A GREEN BAY PACKER, some props. LET HIM! Geesh. So what if he believes Barnett played lights out. Maybe he saw something you didn't? Well, obviously he did. Ha ha. But don't email the guy, as a Packer fan, and take a shit on Barnett. Let the media put Barnett over if they want. Why would you email him and basically ask him to take it back? IMHO that is just silly.

Hey, it is great to see the Pack get some props. But its the wrong guy and you know it!!!

I think Woodson played great! The entire D played lights out. It's hard to tell though sometimes. What were Barnett's assignments? How many passes were not thrown because Barnett was there? It's more then just stats. I have no problem with Peter King praising Barnett. None what so ever. Long overdue!!!!