Another QB's late game performances

[Patler]

Harv the detroit example is horrible. They scored 6 offensive points in the second half after dominating the first against an horrendous unbeaten team.

That was a severe offensive failure in the second half.

You also have to recognize that when the defense or special teams score touchdowns, the offense has little opportunity to score points because they don't even get possession of the ball. It goes right back to the other team. In the second half against Detroit the offense had only 7 possessions not counting the clock killer at the end. They scored two FGs and a TD in those seven possessions. That's not really so awful.

[cpk1994]

Harv the detroit example is horrible. They scored 6 offensive points in the second half after dominating the first against an horrendous unbeaten team.

That was a severe offensive failure in the second half.

They scored 34 points before the defense scored their first TD. How's that for offensive production? They had a bad third quarter. Big deal. They scored 24 points in the first half (of course, Rodgers gets no credit for those three first half TD passes), had a comfortable lead, and the defense gave it up. When they fell behind in the 4th quarter, did the Packers offense reclaim the lead or not on the next possession?

Of course the defense blew it.

BS about the 34. What a crock. The D picks off a ball and puts them in prime position for their first second half TD.

They had 27 points before the D took over. The Packers D let Detroit back in the game without a doubt, but why did the offense suddenly fail against such a poor team?

There you go with excuses to try to bolster your failing argument.

[prsnfoto]

Harv the detroit example is horrible. They scored 6 offensive points in the second half after dominating the first against an horrendous unbeaten team.

That was a severe offensive failure in the second half.

They scored 34 points before the defense scored their first TD. How's that for offensive production? They had a bad third quarter. Big deal. They scored 24 points in the first half (of course, Rodgers gets no credit for those three first half TD passes), had a comfortable lead, and the defense gave it up. When they fell behind in the 4th quarter, did the Packers offense reclaim the lead or not on the next possession?

Of course the defense blew it.

BS about the 34. What a crock. The D picks off a ball and puts them in prime position for their first second half TD.

They had 27 points before the D took over. The Packers D let Detroit back in the game without a doubt, but why did the offense suddenly fail against such a poor team?

Holy shit P, now there's qualifiers on the O scoring points? Did you research that in your posts on how many points the O has scored league wide? At the same time you say stats dont tell the tale. You cant have it both ways.

Actually they do keep track of points scored off TO and as of last week the Packers led the league, most teams and stats freaks don't count those as O points hence you will see many color guys and even posters on here will give you two seperate points scored numbers like last week some would say the TEAM was averaging 28.3 a game and the O was averaging 20.3 a game. The Houston game for example the O scored 0 points the team scored 21. Not saying it is the best way to do things because they may get the ball at the 2 yard line and have to go 98 yards to score I would give the Offense the points but on the other hand just as the defense has played like shit and lost games there are many games this year that they are completely blown out without the D creating TO the Minnesota and Houston games come to mind the Offense was atrocious in both games.

[Patler]

Harv the detroit example is horrible. They scored 6 offensive points in the second half after dominating the first against an horrendous unbeaten team.

That was a severe offensive failure in the second half.

They scored 34 points before the defense scored their first TD. How's that for offensive production? They had a bad third quarter. Big deal. They scored 24 points in the first half (of course, Rodgers gets no credit for those three first half TD passes), had a comfortable lead, and the defense gave it up. When they fell behind in the 4th quarter, did the Packers offense reclaim the lead or not on the next possession?

Of course the defense blew it.

BS about the 34. What a crock. The D picks off a ball and puts them in prime position for their first second half TD.

They had 27 points before the D took over. The Packers D let Detroit back in the game without a doubt, but why did the offense suddenly fail against such a poor team?

Holy shit P, now there's qualifiers on the O scoring points? Did you research that in your posts on how many points the O has scored league wide? At the same time you say stats dont tell the tale. You cant have it both ways.

Actually they do keep track of points scored off TO and as of last week the Packers led the league, most teams and stats freaks don't count those as O points hence you will see many color guys and even posters on here will give you two seperate points scored numbers like last week some would say the TEAM was averaging 28.3 a game and the O was averaging 20.3 a game. The Houston game for example the O scored 0 points the team scored 21. Not saying it is the best way to do things because they may get the ball at the 2 yard line and have to go 98 yards to score I would give the Offense the points but on the other hand just as the defense has played like shit and lost games there are many games this year that they are completely blown out without the D creating TO the Minnesota and Houston games come to mind the Offense was atrocious in both games.

If you are talking about points scored directly on the turnover (an interception or fumble returned for the TD) I will agree. Those are not considered offensive points. But the offense gets credit for the points even if the defense turns it over in "prime position" to score. Otherwise, when does the offense get credit and when not? If they drive 90 yards after a fumble recovery at the 10, or 80 yards after an interception in the end zone, is that not to the credit of the offense? What if it is a 50 yard drive to a TD? 40 yards? 20 yards? 1 yard?

[prsnfoto]

Harv the detroit example is horrible. They scored 6 offensive points in the second half after dominating the first against an horrendous unbeaten team.

That was a severe offensive failure in the second half.

They scored 34 points before the defense scored their first TD. How's that for offensive production? They had a bad third quarter. Big deal. They scored 24 points in the first half (of course, Rodgers gets no credit for those three first half TD passes), had a comfortable lead, and the defense gave it up. When they fell behind in the 4th quarter, did the Packers offense reclaim the lead or not on the next possession?

Of course the defense blew it.

BS about the 34. What a crock. The D picks off a ball and puts them in prime position for their first second half TD.

They had 27 points before the D took over. The Packers D let Detroit back in the game without a doubt, but why did the offense suddenly fail against such a poor team?

Holy shit P, now there's qualifiers on the O scoring points? Did you research that in your posts on how many points the O has scored league wide? At the same time you say stats dont tell the tale. You cant have it both ways.

Actually they do keep track of points scored off TO and as of last week the Packers led the league, most teams and stats freaks don't count those as O points hence you will see many color guys and even posters on here will give you two seperate points scored numbers like last week some would say the TEAM was averaging 28.3 a game and the O was averaging 20.3 a game. The Houston game for example the O scored 0 points the team scored 21. Not saying it is the best way to do things because they may get the ball at the 2 yard line and have to go 98 yards to score I would give the Offense the points but on the other hand just as the defense has played like shit and lost games there are many games this year that they are completely blown out without the D creating TO the Minnesota and Houston games come to mind the Offense was atrocious in both games.

If you are talking about points scored directly on the turnover (an interception or fumble returned for the TD) I will agree. Those are not considered offensive points. But the offense gets credit for the points even if the defense turns it over in "prime position" to score. Otherwise, when does the offense get credit and when not? If they drive 90 yards after a fumble recovery at the 10, or 80 yards after an interception in the end zone, is that not to the credit of the offense? What if it is a 50 yard drive to a TD? 40 yards? 20 yards? 1 yard?

I think I said that in my post but on the other hand if there is no TO how would they score those points? Better yet the other team may have scored making it a 14 point swing. All I am trying to point out is the problems on this team run deeper than just the D they play like they are the youngest team in Football and SHOCK they are!

[RashanGary]

In 2005 we lost 3 of our top 5 offensive lineman with nobody adequate to replace them.
In 2008 we lost 3 of our top 6 defensive lineman with nobody adequate to replace them.

In 2005 we lost are top running backs
In 2008 we lost our top strong safeties

In 2005 we lost a probowl receiver (walker)
In 2008 we lost Barnett

I see the mirror. I agree that 2005 was worse, but we're not doing as badly now as we did then either.

[Gunakor]

I think this team has 5x the talent of '05. We have two pro bowl receivers this year with great depth... We had Taco Wallace in '05. We have a first round pick as a third receiver... our second receiver in '05 was the midget returner from the CFL that is on the Bengals now.

in '05 we had an injured Ahman Green.. In '08 we have two healthy backs entering their prime, though Grant did start out unhealthy.

In '05 we had an aging, slow TE in Bubba.. in '08 we have a borderline pro-bowl TE in Donald Lee.

I could continue, but it would be tough to dispute that this team does not have more individual talent.

What about the DEFENSE Partial? You haven't said a word in this entire post about the defense. Do they not count? Or do you just not care?

By the way P, just to set the record straight, we do not have a WR drafted in the first round on our entire roster. You might want to check your info before posting.

And you would be hard pressed to find a single AP writer that would even nominate much less vote for Donald Lee as a Pro Bowl TE. Where did you ever get the idea that he was even borderline PB quality?

[Partial]

I think this team has 5x the talent of '05. We have two pro bowl receivers this year with great depth... We had Taco Wallace in '05. We have a first round pick as a third receiver... our second receiver in '05 was the midget returner from the CFL that is on the Bengals now.

in '05 we had an injured Ahman Green.. In '08 we have two healthy backs entering their prime, though Grant did start out unhealthy.

In '05 we had an aging, slow TE in Bubba.. in '08 we have a borderline pro-bowl TE in Donald Lee.

I could continue, but it would be tough to dispute that this team does not have more individual talent.

What about the DEFENSE Partial? You haven't said a word in this entire post about the defense. Do they not count? Or do you just not care?

By the way P, just to set the record straight, we do not have a WR drafted in the first round on our entire roster. You might want to check your info before posting.

And you would be hard pressed to find a single AP writer that would even nominate much less vote for Donald Lee as a Pro Bowl TE. Where did you ever get the idea that he was even borderline PB quality?

Donald Lee was spectacular last year. I can't help it our quarterback doesn't know how to use the middle of the field, and or coach doesn't trust him to. He was a pro-bowl alternative last year. He was an epic playmaker for our team.

The D in 2005 was pretty damn similiar. KGB on the end getting gashed for rushing yards, Kamoman starting to come into his own, Gravy at tackle, a young Barnett, Robert Thomas is a huge step back from Hawk, and Poppinga is a MUCH better player now (although still bad). We had Ahmad Carroll, a rookie Nick Collins, Al Harris, and Turnstyle Mark Roman at the other safety spot.

Is that not enough evidence for you?

Kampman today >>>>>>> Kampman of 05
Pickett > Gravy Jackson
Jolly == a young Corey Williams
Turnstyle KGB == Monty (both are horrible)

Hawk today >>>>>> Robert Thomas
Poppinga Today > Poppinga '05
Barnett today > Barnett 05

Collins Today >>>>>> Collins as a rookie
Harris Today > Harris of 05 (JSO is saying he is playing his best ball this year though)
Chuck >>>>>>> Ahmad Carroll
Rouse/Bigby >>>>>> Roman


So... With that said, we have a clearly superior offense, and a clearly superior defense, yet the record is almost the same? The difference is intangibles and leadership.

[sharpe1027]

Donald Lee was spectacular last year. He was an epic playmaker for our team.

You can do better than that to stir the pot! I expect more.

[Gunakor]

Donald Lee was spectacular last year. He was an epic playmaker for our team.

You can do better than that to stir the pot! I expect more.

I know, right? He was SO good last year that TT drafted a NEW tight end in the draft right after his epic playmaking performance. Swell.

[Gunakor]

Kampman today >>>>>>> Kampman of 05
Pickett > Gravy Jackson
Jolly == a young Corey Williams
Turnstyle KGB == Monty (both are horrible)

Hawk today >>>>>> Robert Thomas
Poppinga Today > Poppinga '05
Barnett today > Barnett 05

Collins Today >>>>>> Collins as a rookie
Harris Today > Harris of 05 (JSO is saying he is playing his best ball this year though)
Chuck >>>>>>> Ahmad Carroll
Rouse/Bigby >>>>>> Roman


So... With that said, we have a clearly superior offense, and a clearly superior defense, yet the record is almost the same? The difference is intangibles and leadership.

Kampman of '05 and Kampman today are equal. Kampman of '05 had way more sacks and QB pressures, but I think that had something to do with a healthy KGB rushing the passer on the other side. Even though KGB had his problems against the run, he was still WAY better than Monty will ever be. What the hell has Monty done all season that makes you think he'll ever be more than a solid career backup? And DT? You think our DT's this year are better or equal to those we had in '05? Partial, I've been following the Packers for nearly 20 years and I can't remember a worse performance from our DT's than I've seen this year. They can't collapse a pocket to save their lives, and they can't even get in the way of a RB on a consistent basis. Overall, this line is SHIT compared to '05.

You might be right about the LB's, if only our LB's were lined up that way still. Where has AJ Hawk played during this late season meltdown? MLB, that's right. Barnett of '05 >>>>> AJ Hawk of '08 at MLB. The next mistake you made was putting Robert Thomas and Brady Poppinga in your arguement, because our OLB's in 2005 were Na'il Diggs (OLB for the NFC leading Carolina Panthers) and Paris Lenon. So remembering that Hawk has been at MLB during this meltdown, the comparison should be whether Poppinga is better than Lennon was (I think he is) and is Brandon Chillar better than Na'il Diggs was (no fucking way).

You are absolutely correct in your comparisons of our DB's. Note the DB's have been one of the lone bright spots on our defense this year. I'm not arguing that with you at all. Every one of them is better than what we had in 2005, though an arguement could be made that Woodson has been playing SS for the last 3 weeks, not cornerback. Which changes little, because I think Tramon Williams is still better than Ahmad Carroll, but I'm not sure Woodson is a better SS than Mark Roman was. Certainly not a whole lot worse, but probably not better either.