Winner and Losers - @Philadelphia Eagles

[Joemailman]

With all due disrespect and mockery towards Joemailman, I agree with Vince. Not running Kuhn is a minor quibble, and 'missing the forest for the trees' is an effective metaphor. Retail, with all due hatred and cynicism towards your myopic perspective, I think you are 'making a mountain out of a molehill.'

note the attempt at humorous sarcasm with brutal dressdowns. I can just feel the loss of the flood of new posters turned off by the horror of by my misanthropic marginalization of fellow Packerrats Joe and Retail. More Rat on Rat crime! Oh, The Humanity!

Hey wait a minute! I didn't criticize anyone. It was that other guy. I praised Kuhn, but I didn't say he should have gotten the ball more.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Unbelieveable. Now, we can tell somebody their opinion is "missing the forest through the trees to me." Give me a friggin' break.

[mraynrand]

With all due disrespect and mockery towards Joemailman, I agree with Vince. Not running Kuhn is a minor quibble, and 'missing the forest for the trees' is an effective metaphor. Retail, with all due hatred and cynicism towards your myopic perspective, I think you are 'making a mountain out of a molehill.'

note the attempt at humorous sarcasm with brutal dressdowns. I can just feel the loss of the flood of new posters turned off by the horror of by my misanthropic marginalization of fellow Packerrats Joe and Retail. More Rat on Rat crime! Oh, The Humanity!

Hey wait a minute! I didn't criticize anyone. It was that other guy. I praised Kuhn, but I didn't say he should have gotten the ball more.

If I got the wrong guy, I don't apologize. You probably deserved to be run down for something else, anyway.

[vince]

If the shoes were on the other foot, I kind of think he'd have responded in much the same way.

Why don't you click on that link up there and see how I DID respond when you called my opinion ridiculous.

[ThunderDan]

Calling the head coach the biggest loser in a tough win on the road because he didn't give the emergency 3rd string running back the ball enough seems to be missing the forest through the trees to me.

So glad we're accomodating of other opinions around here.

McCarthy's play calling is always a damn mystery to me, and I agree with the original point. Trotting Kuhn out on a series each drive until they compensated for him, wouldn't have been a bad idea, in fact, not much else they did in the 4th quarter went any better.

Jackson is a complete head case. On one drive, Jackson looks like Chris Johnson, on the next, it looks like he's worried his ballet slippers are going to get dirty. I don't think there is another Packer that frustrates me as much except for my buddy Ted.

Get off your high horse and let this forum be a forum.

So what? Now ever post in every thread has to agree with the original poster? If you want to disagree you start a whole new thread on which every one can only agree with your opposite point of the first thread?

People can watch the same game and come up with different conclusions. Isn't that what you have been encouraging in the Favre thread? I mean the intolerance for BF drove away all of your virtual friends. Now you are doing the exact same thing. You are a hypocrite!

[gbgary]

if vick hadn't come into the game and been vick i don't think anyone would have any real complaints. we were on our way to a 20+ point victory.

[Tony Oday]

Vick was a stud...he looked like Vick of old and if ANYONE remembers he burned a lot of good defenses.

[mmmdk]

Gump!

[swede]

if vick hadn't come into the game and been vick i don't think anyone would have any real complaints. we were on our way to a 20+ point victory.

Good point.

The Eagles are to be respected for their physical play and for their resurgent 2nd half under a Michael Vick who had two years in Club Fed to lift weights and run during yard time. It was valiant that we survived. In the past a team like the Eagles or Steelers would hit us in the mouth and we'd quit.

Not this time. What doesn't kill the Packers will make them stronger.

[mmmdk]

if vick hadn't come into the game and been vick i don't think anyone would have any real complaints. we were on our way to a 20+ point victory.

Good point.

The Eagles are to be respected for their physical play and for their resurgent 2nd half under a Michael Vick who had two years in Club Fed to lift weights and run during yard time. It was valiant that we survived. In the past a team like the Eagles or Steelers would hit us in the mouth and we'd quit.

Not this time. What doesn't kill the Packers will make them stronger.

...somebody tried to kill the Packers!? When? Where? I won't have it!

[Smidgeon]

So glad we're accomodating of other opeinions around here.

By the laugh I assume you're being sarcastic. Not sure what you're getting at here. We perhaps have different opinions. Who's not accommodating?

Vince, we've been down this road before. I read your comment, don't have a clue what you intended to mean, but what I read told me that pack4to84 can't see the forest through the trees because you disagreed with his point.

I found it extremely condensending, and my lol smiley meant I was laughing at the absurdity.

I'd have loved to see Kuhn get three more runs in the 4th quarter on each of the drives, and more, if they had no answer and his runs were successful. It would have burned the clock in any event, and if it was successful, might not have had our defense so gassed by the end of quarter. Did you not see Clay on the sidelines gasping for breath after his sack?

I recognize that we (the collective "we", including me) don't see the other perspective very well most of the time, but I thought it had validity and for you to tell the guy he was so blind he couldn't see the forest through the trees was ridiculous. This blind guy agreed with him...

So now we've gotten to the point that if we disagree we aren't allowed to express our disagreement?
We can respond only if we agree?
If we disagree, we can only remain silent?

Vince's disagreement seems about as milk-toast as they come, yet somehow you have to complain?

His "forest for the trees" comment is condescending and unacceptable, but you calling his "ridiculous" is not, and it is OK?

What IS ridiculous is this constant whining and bitching just because someone disagrees with someone else. I'm not particularly good at walking on eggshells, so.......

Yes, I'm calling your position ridiculous, as in stupid, unfounded, dumb, etc.

How's that??? (I will let you guess as to whether I am laughing with you or at you.)

Bingo. Dissenting opinions are attacked and ridiculed, as are the posters who voiced the dissenting opinion.

[Fritz]

I dunno RG. I didn't see Vince's remark as a criticism of the poster, but a disagreement with the post itself. The basic idea I saw was that in the big picture, Vince finds that criticizing the coach for not using the third string running back enough misses the point that the team won with Jackson and that he finds that not using the third string running back enough is really not worthy of that great a criticism. That's how I read it and saw no animosity from Vince.

I disagreed with the very first post here when the poster said he though B-Jack was a winner. I disagreed - I think the guy started dancing and hesitating instead of hitting it hard immediately. I would have liked Kuhn, who seems to hit it hard, play more. I don't quite agree with Vince. But that's not a personal attack.

I'm just not seeing anything in Vince's post that is uncalled for or offensive.

[DannoMac21]

The way ESPN and every other media outlet is talking about Vick, it feels as though the Eagles won the game by 21. I feel like we're 0-1.

[Fritz]

I feel that way after reading the article about the game in the JSO. Look at the headline.

I guesss this answers the question "when is a win a loss?" without the answer being "when there is a major injury."

A win is a loss when the team doesn't play well for the entire game against an opponent. Even if that opponent is playing at home and appears to have a good defense and pretty good weapons on offense.

[sharpe1027]

IMO, missing the forest from the trees means that you agree with the point, but think there are other, larger issues. Maybe a tad disagreeable, but relatively tame.

I don't think Jackson will ever be the same as Grant when it comes to hitting the hole, but he brings something different in that he has the ability to bounce outside. It can be frustrating because he'll get stopped up more often, but nobody complains when he hesitates, draws the defenders in and then pops outside for a big gain. I also like that when he does run up the middle he has been driving the pile. IDK. I am still undecided if he could be good given a chance.