Improve This Article: Reasons Packers Retreated To 6-10

[Patler]

The question then is:

Will Jon Ryan ever smarten up?

That clearly is the question. Apparently, the Packers believed that he would not. He is beyond being a "young player", he will be 28 during the season. His NFL exposure is very limited, and expectations of an NFL punter are different than a CFL punter, so he is "young" in that regard.

Some have mentioned the play he ran when a faked punt had been called off, but he failed to realize it. Preseason last year, right? I thought that was the play that might have sealed his fate in GB. Stock had some comments about it being a nice effort, but questioned why everyone else on the punt team knew it was off, but the punter did not. A mistake like that at a crucial time could be a killer. After his poor performances in crucial games in 2007, I thought this might have been the last straw, with the staff losing all confidence in Ryan.

He will be an interesting player to follow for the next year or two. Will he or won't he make it to the next level?

[woodbuck27]

The question then is:

Will Jon Ryan ever smarten up?

Some Canadians are late bloomers, so I'm still pulling for him.


GO PACK GO!!!!

I read it and I'm ignoring it.

[RashanGary]

He will be an interesting player to follow for the next year or two. Will he or won't he make it to the next level?

I'm just curious, Patler, I've seen comments like these in the past. You're interested in outcomes but rarely have any opinion one way or the other how it might pan out.

If it pans out one way or the other, what do you learn? What did you reinforce? Can you use that information for going forward for anthing other than discussion what happened? Do you know the why of anything or at least have a good theory?

You seem to be very thorough at using facts to make a strong case for what actually happened after the fact. Is that what you enjoy?

I like to see results too, but I like to find patterns and use them to predict the future. It's a challenge for me. I don't see talking about what happened as a challenge but you seem to love it. I'm just curious where you're coming from. I guess I don't understand your motivation.

[woodbuck27]

He will be an interesting player to follow for the next year or two. Will he or won't he make it to the next level?

I'm just curious, Patler, I've seen comments like these in the past. You're interested in outcomes but rarely have any opinion one way or the other how it might pan out.

If it pans out one way or the other, what do you learn? What did you reinforce? Can you use that information for going forward for anthing other than discussion what happened? Do you know the why of anything or at least have a good theory?

You seem to be very thorough at using facts to make a strong case for what actually happened after the fact. Is that what you enjoy?

I like to see results too, but I like to find patterns and use them to predict the future. It's a challenge for me. I don't see talking about what happened as a challenge but you seem to love it. I'm just curious where you're coming from. I guess I don't understand your motivation.

Your like me JH. Into the analytical. What makes this or that tick. We're not inventors or I'm not.

[Patler]

He will be an interesting player to follow for the next year or two. Will he or won't he make it to the next level?

I'm just curious, Patler, I've seen comments like these in the past. You're interested in outcomes but rarely have any opinion one way or the other how it might pan out.

If it pans out one way or the other, what do you learn? What did you reinforce? Can you use that information for going forward for anthing other than discussion what happened? Do you know the why of anything or at least have a good theory?

You seem to be very thorough at using facts to make a strong case for what actually happened after the fact. Is that what you enjoy?

I like to see results too, but I like to find patterns and use them to predict the future. It's a challenge for me. I don't see talking about what happened as a challenge but you seem to love it. I'm just curious where you're coming from. I guess I don't understand your motivation.

With all that I put in my posts on Ryan, it is rather odd that you would focus on just that one sentence. However, following him should be interesting regardless of your opinion about him, to determine if your opinion is right or wrong, if the Packers were right or wrong, if Seattle is right or wrong. It will give you a factual case history that might have value in assessing the potential of another CFL punter, or another big legged, slow get off somewhat uncontrolled punter of any background. I suppose it could provide data points for evaluating redheaded punters, but I doubt it.

The best predictor of the future is an understanding of the past. Perhaps if you focus on the content of my posts, rather than just an off-handed comment at the end of one, you will discern my opinion. I try to make my posts a logic presentation of facts that are intended to sway the reader to form an opinion which in fact is my opinion. What do my posts imply about Ryan? In short, that Ryan is what he has been, he hasn't changed, he isn't likely to change at this stage, and at least two teams don't seem to have a high regard for his development. Do you not see an opinion that I hope to sway others toward?????

A little perspective on Jon Ryan. He was similar in Seattle in 2008 to what he was in GB in 2007. Among the league leaders in gross average, but also among the league leaders in the number touchbacks, and in the lower level in number of kicks downed inside the 20. As a result, his net average (which is really more important than gross average, in my opinion) was in the middle of the league. He remains what he was, a punter with a big leg who is still learning the finer points of punting. He could be a very, very good punter if he figures out that part of it.

I'm not sure that Seattle is so set on Ryan long term. Almost every FA punter of any note has been rumored to be being courted by the Seahawks, including Adam Graessle who signed with the Packers last month after getting a similar offer from the Seahawks. The Packers have since released him, but I don't see that the Seahawks have made a new offer to him.

That clearly is the question. Apparently, the Packers believed that he would not. He is beyond being a "young player", he will be 28 during the season. His NFL exposure is very limited, and expectations of an NFL punter are different than a CFL punter, so he is "young" in that regard.

Some have mentioned the play he ran when a faked punt had been called off, but he failed to realize it. Preseason last year, right? I thought that was the play that might have sealed his fate in GB. Stock had some comments about it being a nice effort, but questioned why everyone else on the punt team knew it was off, but the punter did not. A mistake like that at a crucial time could be a killer. After his poor performances in crucial games in 2007, I thought this might have been the last straw, with the staff losing all confidence in Ryan.

Have I not focused on the aspects of his career that are negative? Have I not supported it factually? I have recognized counter arguments (lack of NFL experience) but dismissed them without support.

You seem to believe that the only way to express an opinion is by confrontation with other posters, and by using demeaning and degrading descriptions of players about whom you have a negative opinion (Favre, Blackmon, etc.). I think it can be done more diplomatically than that. Most of the players are trying their best, but they may lack talent, physical attributes, instinct or even basic intelligence. So long as their effort is there, I will not berate them.

[Scott Campbell]

So long as their effort is there, I will not berate them.

Wisdom.


It's a shame that I'm not that smart.

[Fritz]

Subtlety and class and the use of facts, Patler, are not the strong suits of some folks here.

If you would only call people names and berate them personally for, say, their opinions of whether Favre has betrayed the Packers or whether Justin Harrell is already a bust due to his laziness and Thompson's stubbornness - disregarding the injury history is what I think people say - then we could more easily discern your opinion.

It'd go something like this:

"Jon Ryan sucked before, he clearly sucks now, and will continue to suck until he's out of the league, which shouldn't take long. Plus he's Canadian and that contributes to his suckiness. And anyone who doesn't agree with me is a God*&&%%$*@!)%$*&!!@#(*^$#!!!!"

See? It's easy. You can do it!

PS - Also, P., it's perfectly acceptable to post such drivel even if, two years ago, you were touting Jon Ryan as the next Ray Guy. Most people won't remember, and of those who do, most are too lazy to try to find your posts on the topic. So you don't ever have to be wrong! It's great!

[RashanGary]

I see the purpose of your form of communication. It's certainly more persuasive than mine. I make a point that I think is obvious to somebody who obviously hasn't caught on to it. It almost draws a line in the sand.

You are sort of agreeable, but manage to sprinkle your points in, in a way that it's almost like you never expressed an opinion at all. By doing that, readers sort of connect dots and make their own opinion that happens to be like yours. Hey, the best ideas are our own ideas so I can see how your style is persuasive.



I've always thought you thought getting rid of Ryan had it's merits.
I've always thought you approve of Ted Thompson as GM.
I've always thought you approved of moving on from Brett Favre.

I don't think one person on this forum knows what you think of Ted and Mike. I don't think one person knows what you think of anything, really. They know you present facts, but you never really say you think there are more on one side than the other. You just talk about them, and then when something is finalized, you talk about what happened.

Maybe in your own mind you have theories and ideas of what you think is coming (not what already happened), I don't think you really put them out there though. It would be nice to hear what you think, not what you know once in a while. Knowing things is boring. Thinking things is open for debate and fun.

[Scott Campbell]

Hey, anybody could post like Patler if they had a research staff of 32 people.

[Scott Campbell]

I don't think one person on this forum knows what you think of Ted and Mike.

I think he's hinted at his opinion on Ted on plenty of occasions.

[RashanGary]

Hey, anybody could post like Patler if they had a research staff of 32 people.

Yeah. He's impressive. And sometimes, he remembers things that are important to an issue that you can just tell he made a little mental note of it when it was said and was going to go back to it when things are finished. You can see he's obviously got ideas. He wouldn't just happen to remember important details unless he viewed them as important at the time he read them. I know he's a good poster, I hope I'm not sending a message otherwise here.

I get a little frustrated because they're never really expressed as a theory or in a "there is more reason to believe this than that" way. It's expressed in a, "there is reason to believe this or this" way.

Obviously Patler brings some great things, particularly an attention to detail and stellar memory of details that matter. I like to see the details and facts brought together to support a defined theory, not just left so open. I'm sure he knows what he thinks will happen or thinks is happening before it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We don't though. I think I know what Patler thinks, like I said, I just don't know.

[Scott Campbell]

I get a little frustrated...............

I disagree. I think if you get 3 or 4 guys who really know there stuff like he does, then you've got yourself a football forum. And I think we have more than that many here. The rest of us are just filler.

[cpk1994]

The question then is:

Will Jon Ryan ever smarten up?

That clearly is the question. Apparently, the Packers believed that he would not. He is beyond being a "young player", he will be 28 during the season. His NFL exposure is very limited, and expectations of an NFL punter are different than a CFL punter, so he is "young" in that regard.

Some have mentioned the play he ran when a faked punt had been called off, but he failed to realize it. Preseason last year, right? I thought that was the play that might have sealed his fate in GB. Stock had some comments about it being a nice effort, but questioned why everyone else on the punt team knew it was off, but the punter did not. A mistake like that at a crucial time could be a killer. After his poor performances in crucial games in 2007, I thought this might have been the last straw, with the staff losing all confidence in Ryan.

He will be an interesting player to follow for the next year or two. Will he or won't he make it to the next level?

I think TT was fine with Ryan as his punter. Him not bringing in any competition for Ryan pretty much shows that. Stock was the only one who had a problem.

THe fake punt you mention was a regular season game at Minnesota.

[retailguy]

personally, I think it's easy to discern what Patler thinks. The facts he posts lead you to an obvious conclusion most of the time.

Why doesn't he state it? Simple, he knows he rarely has the "full information" to make a decision. Sometimes, the Packers haven't publicized it, and more often, full information requires the future. Since it hasn't happened yet, it isn't over. (Favre is a perfect example. It isn't likely that he'll have great success with the Vikings, but it is certainly possible. The future events will reveal that.)

He draws appropriate conclusions, but I can't recall him ever "forecasting" a conclusion. Likely scenarios, yes, conclusions that state definitive fact, no.

[RashanGary]

Maybe in your own mind you have theories and ideas of what you think is coming (not what already happened), I don't think you really put them out there though. It would be nice to hear what you think, not what you know once in a while. Knowing things is boring. Thinking things is open for debate and fun.

personally, I think it's easy to discern what Patler thinks. The facts he posts lead you to an obvious conclusion most of the time.

Why doesn't he state it? Simple, he knows he rarely has the "full information" to make a decision. Sometimes, the Packers haven't publicized it, and more often, full information requires the future. Since it hasn't happened yet, it isn't over. (Favre is a perfect example. It isn't likely that he'll have great success with the Vikings, but it is certainly possible. The future events will reveal that.)

He draws appropriate conclusions, but I can't recall him ever "forecasting" a conclusion. Likely scenarios, yes, conclusions that state definitive fact, no.

Not to be rude, RG, you've obviously lived more life than me and could probably school me in about 100 aspects that you're experienced in, but. . .

What the hell did you read? Are you just waking up from a dream and responding to what you imagined? Show me one point where I said Patler should know things beyond doubt before they happen. Not only did I not say that, I said the exact opposite. Again, not to be rude, but I don't know how to say I question your ability to read and reason without being rude.