"Green Bay is a bad football team..."

[Smidgeon]

Trent Dilfer still believes he is the reason the Ravens won the SB. Dude is a joke, even though I might have to agree with him about the Packers.

He wrote an article a while back that put the current NFL QBs into categories such as elite, middle of the road, etc. I thought the article was the best article I've ever read on current QBs. I couldn't find anything to argue with. I don't know if his ability to dissect QBs extends to teams (maybe not), but I thought he had the QB part down.

[packerbacker1234]

Is the shceme of running the ball that sucks... or is it more the fact that Mm DOESN'T run the ball?

After that 3rd drive when we pounded it down there throats for a TD... why didn't we continue to do that ALL GAME LONG.

Grant 180 yards rushing, Green 90 yards, Rodgers prolly with the same amoutn of yards or close (240 or so) plus a 2 td's. Grant gets 2 TD's, Green gets one. Crosby gets 2 FG's....


blow out, the other team never has the ball.

Wait, I forgot. We don't run the ball.

[mraynrand]

Is the shceme of running the ball that sucks... or is it more the fact that Mm DOESN'T run the ball?

After that 3rd drive when we pounded it down there throats for a TD... why didn't we continue to do that ALL GAME LONG.

Grant 180 yards rushing, Green 90 yards, Rodgers prolly with the same amoutn of yards or close (240 or so) plus a 2 td's. Grant gets 2 TD's, Green gets one. Crosby gets 2 FG's....


blow out, the other team never has the ball.

Wait, I forgot. We don't run the ball.

I didn't know we had 270 yards rushing. WOW!

[red]

Is the shceme of running the ball that sucks... or is it more the fact that Mm DOESN'T run the ball?

After that 3rd drive when we pounded it down there throats for a TD... why didn't we continue to do that ALL GAME LONG.

Grant 180 yards rushing, Green 90 yards, Rodgers prolly with the same amoutn of yards or close (240 or so) plus a 2 td's. Grant gets 2 TD's, Green gets one. Crosby gets 2 FG's....


blow out, the other team never has the ball.

Wait, I forgot. We don't run the ball.

I didn't know we had 270 yards rushing. WOW!

no, we didn't

i think he's saying that we would have had numbers like that if we would have ran all game

we had 170 rushing, still damn good

[packerbacker1234]

Is the shceme of running the ball that sucks... or is it more the fact that Mm DOESN'T run the ball?

After that 3rd drive when we pounded it down there throats for a TD... why didn't we continue to do that ALL GAME LONG.

Grant 180 yards rushing, Green 90 yards, Rodgers prolly with the same amoutn of yards or close (240 or so) plus a 2 td's. Grant gets 2 TD's, Green gets one. Crosby gets 2 FG's....


blow out, the other team never has the ball.

Wait, I forgot. We don't run the ball.

I didn't know we had 270 yards rushing. WOW!

no, we didn't

i think he's saying that we would have had numbers like that if we would have ran all game

we had 170 rushing, still damn good

Grant had 96. Something like 67 of those yards were on one drive.

Green had 45. Looked solid, but barely touched hte ball (I think it was 3 or 4 rushes wasn't it?)

Rodgers had 26 - which is really irrelevant to an actual rushing attack.

So damn good? Grants yards were mostly from a single drive, Green's were from very few touches, and rodgers has no bearing on the run game.

Add an extra 100 yards on that total and they pretty much never have the ball.

[pbmax]

Rodgers had 26 - which is really irrelevant to an actual rushing attack.

What is the difference between the QB escaping and running for yards and a draw play? Do draw plays have "no bearing" on the running game?

[Scott Campbell]

So damn good? Grants yards were mostly from a single drive, Green's were from very few touches, and rodgers has no bearing on the run game.

So if you throw out all our rushing yards yesterday, we had no ground game whatsoever.

[bobblehead]

Re: "Green Bay is a bad football team..."

From the mouth of Trent Dilfer on The Herd this morn

He says that they may be 4-4 but that they "have no chance!" He implied that they are actually WORSE than their record indicates

Funny how more than a few talkn heads (incld. Ditka and Schlareth) picked Pack to make noise in the post-season and are now jumping ship

Are they better or worse than 4-4?

Or is Parcells correct that "you are what your record says u are?"

Bill is a very sharp dude. We are 4-4 end of story. However as bad as we played the last 2 weeks we might not END up at .500, but we also could start playing solid ball again and end up 10-6....but at the end of the season we will be what we are. Right now, we are 4-4, we beat mostly bad teams and lost to mostly good teams....voila, .500

[sharpe1027]

Re: "Green Bay is a bad football team..."

From the mouth of Trent Dilfer on The Herd this morn

He says that they may be 4-4 but that they "have no chance!" He implied that they are actually WORSE than their record indicates

Funny how more than a few talkn heads (incld. Ditka and Schlareth) picked Pack to make noise in the post-season and are now jumping ship

Are they better or worse than 4-4?

Or is Parcells correct that "you are what your record says u are?"

Bill is a very sharp dude. We are 4-4 end of story. However as bad as we played the last 2 weeks we might not END up at .500, but we also could start playing solid ball again and end up 10-6....but at the end of the season we will be what we are. Right now, we are 4-4, we beat mostly bad teams and lost to mostly good teams....voila, .500

They are who we thought they were!

[bobblehead]

A scheme of running the ball that blows IMO for an outdoor team.

SO when Denver ran it down everyones throat in mile high stadium all those years you were emailing Mike shanahan right??

3 straight AFC rushing titles, 2 superbowl wins, first player to rush for 3 TD's in a superbowl, 2000 yard season....crappy scheme for an outdoor team. Change RB's, same success, crappy scheme. Yep, keep parroting whatever it is you are reading.

News flash einstein, it ain't the scheme, its the players.

[mraynrand]

A scheme of running the ball that blows IMO for an outdoor team.

SO when Denver ran it down everyones throat in mile high stadium all those years you were emailing Mike shanahan right??

3 straight AFC rushing titles, 2 superbowl wins, first player to rush for 3 TD's in a superbowl, 2000 yard season....crappy scheme for an outdoor team. Change RB's, same success, crappy scheme. Yep, keep parroting whatever it is you are reading.

News flash einstein, it ain't the scheme, its the players.

I thought it was the coaches.

[bobblehead]

A scheme of running the ball that blows IMO for an outdoor team.

We should have known after it failed to work in Denver.

I just never learn to read all the way down before responding to idiocy.

[g4orce]

A scheme of running the ball that blows IMO for an outdoor team.

SO when Denver ran it down everyones throat in mile high stadium all those years you were emailing Mike shanahan right??

3 straight AFC rushing titles, 2 superbowl wins, first player to rush for 3 TD's in a superbowl, 2000 yard season....crappy scheme for an outdoor team. Change RB's, same success, crappy scheme. Yep, keep parroting whatever it is you are reading.

News flash einstein, it ain't the scheme, its the players.

where did I say anywhere that teams haven't had success? Please show me. I said and so u know IMO=in my opinion, not urs, I don't think it's the tight scheme for a team like green bay. It's just my opinion. I believe big beefy guys that wear out teams is better. So sorry for having a different opinion my god.

[Smidgeon]

News flash einstein, it ain't the scheme, its the players.

Unless the scheme wasn't fully implemented to the point of mastering it, instead being implemented to the point of simple adequacy. Jags was only there for a year. I think it'd be akin to Capers coming in for a year, dropping the 3-4, then having someone else who'd never coached the 3-4 do it from there. It's widely agreed that the 3-4 takes a few years to fully implement. Maybe the ZBS doesn't, but the team doesn't seem to be doing it all that well. So while it could be the players as opposed to the scheme, it could also be the coaches who haven't successfully implemented the scheme.

Just wanted to point out another possibility.

[bobblehead]

A scheme of running the ball that blows IMO for an outdoor team.

SO when Denver ran it down everyones throat in mile high stadium all those years you were emailing Mike shanahan right??

3 straight AFC rushing titles, 2 superbowl wins, first player to rush for 3 TD's in a superbowl, 2000 yard season....crappy scheme for an outdoor team. Change RB's, same success, crappy scheme. Yep, keep parroting whatever it is you are reading.

News flash einstein, it ain't the scheme, its the players.

where did I say anywhere that teams haven't had success? Please show me. I said and so u know IMO=in my opinion, not urs, I don't think it's the tight scheme for a team like green bay. It's just my opinion. I believe big beefy guys that wear out teams is better. So sorry for having a different opinion my god.

You can have any opinion you want, I was merely pointing out that the ZBS is one of the most successful rushing schemes in history for an outdoor team that plays in the cold. Kind contradicting your "opinion" with those pesky facts.