Tweet
At Vanderbilt Cutler finished with an 11-34 record as a starter.
-
-
The thing I'm wondering about, is did he ever have a winning season in high school? In Pop Warner?Originally posted by Pugger
Ah, looked it up. At Heritage High School in Lincoln Indiana, Cutler went 26-1 through his Junior and Senior seasons, with a perfect season for a state championship his senior year.
Well, at least the kid has had some success...</delurk>Comment
-
Just like Shaq, a champion all his life up through High School.Originally posted by Lurker64Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.Comment
-
I agree that the Pack were good in 2008. Hence my point that one year the Packers broke long runs (2007) and one year they killed in short yardage (2008). I also broke my own rule by referring to the running game as ZBS only, but many of Grant's in 07 were on Zone runs.Originally posted by Waldo
I can't argue 2007 on anything other than memory because I have never found a reliable source for short yardage statistics. If you have such a website, please pass it along.
In 08, this forum was counting the short yardage plays like Golden Tickets as everyone was deathly afraid of another fullback dive.Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.Comment
-
I've never found a good source for run only statistics, but I have seen general 3rd and short statistics.
2007 there was a Chicken or Egg situation. They didn't even bother running on 3rd and short most of the time (which is what the argument changed to, from failing on 3rd down, to being "forced" to pass because of an assumption of failing). The question is, did they not choose to run on 3rd and short because they sucked at it, or did they choose to pass on 3rd and short because they excelled at it? Statistically we were one of the best on 3rd and short.
The "Fab 5" was a fan favorite in 2007. MM first busted it out in 2006 as a short yardage/goal line play. In 2006 we tried in vain to pick those things up but couldn't, and MM adapted adding in the 5 WR shotgun set on occasion.
In 2007 the use grew big time, and even on other downs. But it was still mostly used as a 3rd and short / GL situational play. Overall it is a crappy play for moving down the field (unless playing a team with a garbo secondary used to always playing off coverage), but with Favre and our WR's it was very reliable for a yard or two.
Why change something that is working well? No method of gaining a first down is superior to any other method. But after the failings of 2006 (of course aided by the running commentary by the press), when they lined up to pass on 3rd and 1, people got angry at the ZBS and lauded it as a failure. Never mind that MM figured out a passing play that we converted with the reliability of an elite power running team.
Comment
-
There is no reason to argue with you again on these issues. Once again when 4,000+ yards and 28 TDs is average in the NFL call me!!Originally posted by PartialSince when? I have opinions and will own them. I'm not ashamed of what I think, and rarely does something that I have a firm stance get proven wrong:Originally posted by ThunderDanMan is that funny coming out of your mouth!!!Originally posted by Partial
Ike - Blew out an ACL before he could run screwed up his chances
Young - Has shown flashes of being spectacular
Rodgers - Was average last year, looks a lot better this year, have owned it and said I very likely could be wrong but we will see come the season.
What say you?But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim HarmstonComment
-
Headline - QB'sOriginally posted by Tyrone Bigguns
-The division sucked last year
-Everybody but us got a new QB
-Who is the best?
-Cutler is the better than Rodgers
-Praise of Cutler
-Slight lead in to records
-Packers lead
-Little discussion
-Why scouts thought the other teams would win
-Favre concerns
-Player turnover in Detroit
After the Cutler section everything else randomly jumped from topic to topic with no lead in.
The take notice punchline in the article is "Who is the best?", the rest is pretty blah
There is a clear flow from headline, intro, punchline, answer, after that is just a bunch of fluff really.
This time of year is full of predictions, ESPN, SI, NFLN....all the who is better stuff. Most sources say that AR is the best.
Call me crazy, but the top dog beat reporter for a team should not put out a "who is better" on the eve of the season, saying that our rivals QB is better than ours, when most of the national media disagrees with him. If it was clear cut, sure why not, say he's better, but if it is up to debate, why?
Especially since right now fandom is in the midst of a little Rodgers mania, and many parts of the national media are predicting an MVP like season for him. It is one thing to try to tone down expectations, quite another to pee in our cornflakes.
Sure he can try to hide behind journalistic objectivity and say "scouts said it, not me", but he still wrote it. Even if he claimed his info is from elsewhere, he wrote an article on the eve of the 2009 season that said Culter is better than Rodgers. His name is on the article, his name is attached to that prediction. And yes, this time of year, that is a prediction. You can argue the merits of "right now" as to when it applies when talking who's better with football players in the offseason, but 3 days from kickoff, right now is the upcoming season.
A good % of the national media is saying MVP like season, the JSO's top dog is saying the Bears QB is better. Pathetic. As time fades the whole "scouts" thing will disappear. If Rodgers wins the MVP, people will remember that buzzkill JSO writer that says Cutler is better.
We'll we get to see the QB that is better than AR in a little over 2 days.
The worst part about it, for 17 years our beat writers were the biggest Favre homers, our QB was god.
What happened?
I don't remember articles about Culpepper being better than Favre, when Daunte was getting his roll on, and at the time, that was certainly just as debatable as Rodgers vs. Cutler.Comment
-
Waldo,Originally posted by Waldo
Your bias is showing.
Headline - QB's (NOPE: QBS Rising...that means all...positive note...but, headlines aren't written by McGinn)
-The division sucked last year
-Everybody but us got a new QB (seems like you are implying something negative...nice of you to leave out that part where he says Arod was 6th)
-Who is the best?
-Cutler is the better than Rodgers (key words used...nod...slight margins...)
-Praise of Cutler (Praise....'gives them a, quote-unquote, bona fide quarterback'...that is damning with faint praise)
-Slight lead in to records
-Packers lead
-Little discussion (nice of you to ignore the 'I really think Rodgers is set to come out and do big things' quote...that is as much as was written about Cutler...yet you labeled that as praise...lol)
-Why scouts thought the other teams would win
-Favre concerns
-Player turnover in Detroit
Yes, i will call you crazy. Why shouldn't he? Who the fuck cares...my god, you are acting like a child. Your acting like he is being irresponsible by putting this story out. And, i look for the beat writer and his sources to provide me info that the national talking heads don't know. There is a huge difference tween espn's writers and analysts and a scout. And, i find your use of them to be hypocritical as you would be the first to note how they really dont' know our team that well.
As for disagrees with him. You are personalizing this. It is mcginn's opinion. I don't know if mcginn thinks favre is the best...he is telling us what scouts say. Unless you can prove that he polled 5 scouts that he knew would give him the answers he wanted..so as to write a stealth "cutler is best" story....you should just quit this bullshit.
He is peeing in the cornflakes...dude, you are now rivaling partial. Seriously. I usually like what you write, but this is ridiculous. Even a smart guy like yourself should realize that the MVP and "best" aren't synonymous. This is a longstanding argument. And, for you to pretend that the MVP goes to the best player, well, it really makes you look stupid. And, previously i thought of you as smart.
Deciding what to write about because Arod might win an mvp...fuck, that is even more ridiculous. Mcginn and the jsonline are their own business. They dont' make decisions based on what the trib is running or what espn is doing.
As for remember, the only one who is going to remember is you...seems like you are pretty petty. Most of us want even recall an article written before the season.
As for, Culpepper vs. Favre...well, if you don't recall...then why bring it up. And just because they didnt' write it then is no logic to not do it now. Really, this is your argument? Maybe they didn't write it because Favre was a MVP and Culpepper wasn't..or Favre was a multiple MVP.
1. Find one sentence where mcginn says cutler is better. Just one.
2. He isn't hiding, he is quoting sources. If he is hiding, then you are speculating.
3. Who are you to say what type of stories he should write. He has an editor. That person makes the decision. I and others have no problem with the story.
4. There are plenty of people that think Cutler is better than Rodgers..and vice versa. So what? The story gives you an idea of what some scouts are saying.
5. Prediction? How so. The article didn't go into who will have a better season. It addressed who was thought to be the best. You are, i'm sorry to say, being ridiculous. I don't know exactly what your issue is, but it sounds like you are one of those people that needs to have all local writers think our players are the best.
I'm going to tell you something, waldo. Before this post of yours and this whole mcginn thing...i had a lot more respect for your posts (not that i assume you care one whit about ty's opinion or others). I thought partial was crazy for calling you out. Now i'm not so sure. And, anyone on this forum will tell you it takes a lot for me to side with partial. I want that to sink in....your post is that deranged imho, that i'm now considering siding with partial. Please, think about it...don't make me side with him. I'm begging you...come to your senses.
At the risk of offending both you and our female posters...you are coming off like a crazy, menopausal, illogical woman...who feels something, more than she thinks.
Please stick to facts, analyzing trends, giving insight into schemes, etc...you are GREAT AT THAT...but as a media critic, frankly, you are terrible.Comment
-
Sheesh, the season really needs to start already.Comment
-
"McGinn hides behind his "scouts" like a little girl. "
I'm feeling Waldo channeling Arnold Schwarzenegger here. Or Dana Carvey. I'm not sure.
Oh god. Now whenever I read a Waldo post I'm going to hear it in my head like Hans and Franz from SNL.
I'm doomed."The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPackComment
-
That could be kinda fun, actually.Originally posted by Fritz"Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
Here's the deal Ty.
That which we know as the Green Bay Packers is not just Lambeau field, MM, and a couple of players. There is a whole spectrum of things that make it up, and most of the time the JSO/GBPG are the Packers even moreso than the players.
The players are just concepts and quotes for the bulk of the year. Then in the fall you get 4 preseason games, 16 regular season games, and perhaps the playoffs, 3 hours each.
At all other times the Green Bay Packers are the JSO and GBPG. Most national media information trickles up from them. Are they good? Well, lets see what the JSO has to say.
There is a symbiotic relationship between the team and the beat press. The better one is, the better the other is.
Most people don't know shit about football. The ones that do know very little. Nobody can remember shit (honestly, think of more then 5 distinct plays that any random player was involved in). Fan groupthink and the press largely create "good" and "bad".
You know what makes players good in the NFL? People talking about the fact that they are the shit. Stats can "prove" that a player is the shit, but outside of stats, most of the time most people need somebody else to tell them that something is good or bad.
Football is too complex for anybody to follow, no matter how hard you try. There is just too much information.
I don't think that any of the GB papers take the fact that they are the Packers just as much as the team seriously. They are a gad damn embarrassment half the time.
Most fanbases have a lunatic fringe. In GB, most fans are the lunatic fringe. The fucked up concepts that the press discusses half the time makes it way to the mainstream, and you end up with riled up fans running around nuts. I listen to a lot of Sirius NFL radio. Most fanbases are fairly normal. GB's are a bunch of nutcases.
Boy, I can't wait until my first trip to the Packer bar this year. It is obvious what the topic of convo is going to be pregame early this year. Should we cut AJ Hawk.. Aj Hawk is a bust... He can't handle it.... I've already had people at work come up to me, fans of other teams, talking about it, saying their Packer fan friends.... This shit didn't originate last season. It is solely from what people read online about the Packers.
I've been around a lot of message boards for a long time. Almost all noobs are god damn nutcases. Their view of shit is so god damn skewed it is crazy. Most of them are not hardcore fans. They are a product of their perception; what they saw on TV, the little they recall, and what was wrote about it, what they are told is good, what they are told is bad.
The experience of Green Bay Packers could be so much better if the press did its part. But they don't. They come from this fucked up point of view that is partially created of fact, partially a creation of ignorance, partially a creation of an agenda.
Have you ever got the impression, from any of GB's reporters, that they actually like the Packers? That they are interested in the team? That they are Packer fans?
The press create storylines that live on for a long time. Fandom doesn't forget. Like the short yardage thing. The hatred of Ted Thompson. He fucking cut Mike Wahle. Get over it.
Instead of harping on that idiot TT for cutting Sutton and Smith, they could tell fans about players like Jarius Wynn and Evan Dietrich-Smith that played great for us this summer, but they didn't notice, because they were too fixated on proving that Hawk is a bust. If they sat down and did the legwork, they would know that Wynn was not credited with a sack he had in the Az game, instead Lansanah got a TFL (the QB has the ball in his hands and it is a TFL, mmk), add that in and he tied with Everette Brown for #2 amongst all rookie's for sacks. Not to mention he had an int causing QB hit, and got a lot of pressure. That shit ain't normal. Especially for a 3-4 DE. He looked better in preseason than Tyson Jackson and Evander Hood. And Ted dug him up in the 6th round.
But that isn't important. The little midget that could, a RB that has a speed profile like Noah Herron that can't pass block to save his life, he was really special. And Ted that fucking moron cut him. Uh oh, AJ is getting benched on pass downs, time for the B word.
There is a finite amount of story space. The little bit they print is fan perception. While one could say don't read it, there is nothing else. That which they choose to write, that which they choose to ignore, says just as much as what the substance is. It isn't the reporters, they are just doing their job, the editors, they are god. Millions of Packer fans, what they know and don't know about the team, is largely the creation of 2 people; the editor at the GBPG and the JSO. The job they have done, is simply sad and irresponsible.
There is positive hype and negative hype. Most teams have a little of both. There is very little positive hype that originates from our press, the little that there is only comes about if they are bludgeoned by it. They create very, very little on their own. Some teams press creates a ton. They are talked about on TV all the time, their players are great, they all go to pro bowls. You think that it is Jerry that has convinced the world that every player on the Cowboys is the shit. Do you really think those Vikings are actually that good? Both have a beat press that is capable of creating positive hype.Comment
-
All that and you completely left out lazy. It's easier to jump on the story you've already created, so why not just find an anonymous "scout from another team" to say what you want to write so you don't have to work to find a new story."Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
Waldo - You headed up to TJs on Sunday? I was going to but since the game is on national TV, I might wait until the following game. Who knows, might make a fun Sunday night out with the chica anyway.
Comment
-
I'm gonna wait until next weekend. I can drink more at home, at TJ's I gotta stop in the 3rd QTR.Originally posted by missionWaldo - You headed up to TJs on Sunday? I was going to but since the game is on national TV, I might wait until the following game. Who knows, might make a fun Sunday night out with the chica anyway.
Next week though....
Say Hi, 3rd booth from the main screen up front. I have a Barnett jersey, my wife has a Finley jersey.Comment
Comment