Not good enough, not good enough, not good enough.

[Patler]

Offense - not good enough.
Defense - not good enough.
Special Teams - not good enough.

Good teams win a few games each year when one aspect of the team carries the team even though one or both of the others is/are having a bad game. The offense scores a bunch on a day the defense struggles. The defense shuts a team down on a day the offense struggles. Special teams scores TDs, gets turnovers or wins field position battles when the O and/or D aren't at their best.

That isn't happening for the Packers right now. No aspect of the team is stepping forward to win games that are there to be won, especially the last two weeks. The offense isn't good enough, the defense isn't good enough and special teams aren't good enough to pull out close fought games on any regular basis.

Kind of feels like last year at this time, doesn't it???

[Bretsky]

The losses actually feel like our horrid year a few years ago when we did all of the little things poorly in order to lose.

[Joemailman]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

[3irty1]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

Not good enough when the team loses. We're talking about a unit that plays well enough to overcome the poor play of other units.

[Tarlam!]

I agree with Joe, if the O plays to its full potential, they should be capable of 35 points a game. But they're not. If the ST covering units don't play like 32nd best in the legue, the makeshift D has better field position.

The D isn't great, but it's good enough.

[Joemailman]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

Not good enough when the team loses. We're talking about a unit that plays well enough to overcome the poor play of other units.

Based on what you're saying, no unit is good enough unless the team is 6-0. I think that's unrealistic.

[3irty1]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

Not good enough when the team loses. We're talking about a unit that plays well enough to overcome the poor play of other units.

Based on what you're saying, no unit is good enough unless the team is 6-0. I think that's unrealistic.

Well we should be 6-0 to be honest. We've been beaten three times by inferior teams imo.

[Tarlam!]

We've been beaten three times by inferior teams imo.

Although it's just semantics, I differentiate beetween being beaten and losing. Being beaten implies being dominated, IMO. Losing implies a certain self-infliction.

The result is obviously the same, but to me, there's a distinct difference: The Packers haven't been dominated and the losses have been self inflicted. Chicago, 18 penalties, Washington, 2 missed FG's and not taking the chipshot on 4th coupled with the drops,now against the Fins,poor QB play, poor WR play cost them the game.

To me, Bretsky's newest sig has it pretty well nailed.

[Joemailman]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

Not good enough when the team loses. We're talking about a unit that plays well enough to overcome the poor play of other units.

Based on what you're saying, no unit is good enough unless the team is 6-0. I think that's unrealistic.

Well we should be 6-0 to be honest. We've been beaten three times by inferior teams imo.

The Packers team that took the field yesterday was not superior to a rested, healthy Miami team. Nor were they a superior team the week before once Pickett, Lee, Finley and Matthews left. I agree they should have beaten the Bears. They shot themselves repeatedly in the foot on that one.

[Pugger]

I think our D was dominated by Miami's offense yesterday. Yes, we only gave up 20 points in regulation but they had the ball for what seemed like eons and we had problems getting off the field. I don't think we layed a finger on Henne all afternoon. If you don't harrass the QB you are in for a long afternoon. Our ST is the worst of the lot and that doesn't help either our O or D. Let's hope we get some of our walking wounded back soon and we can turn this nightmare around starting Sunday night.

[mraynrand]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

Not good enough when the team loses. We're talking about a unit that plays well enough to overcome the poor play of other units.

Based on what you're saying, no unit is good enough unless the team is 6-0. I think that's unrealistic.

Well we should be 6-0 to be honest. We've been beaten three times by inferior teams imo.

Yep. Even injured the Packers were better than Miami. Underperforming team. Offense was to blame yesterday. Even though teams were marginal, It's hard to hold them to an incredible standard, as they were diminished because of trickle down effect from injuries.

[Pugger]

I would argue that the defense has been good enough. It's unrealistic to expect an injury-riddled defense to completely shut teams down. The Packers are 9th in the NFL in defensive PPG. That should be good enough to be better than 3-3.

Not good enough when the team loses. We're talking about a unit that plays well enough to overcome the poor play of other units.

Based on what you're saying, no unit is good enough unless the team is 6-0. I think that's unrealistic.

Well we should be 6-0 to be honest. We've been beaten three times by inferior teams imo.

The Packers team that took the field yesterday was not superior to a rested, healthy Miami team. Nor were they a superior team the week before once Pickett, Lee, Finley and Matthews left. I agree they should have beaten the Bears. They shot themselves repeatedly in the foot on that one.

I think we had problems once Matthews left the game in DC last weekend. Once we lost his fire and pass rush McNabb looked like a different QB and the game slipped away.

[Tarlam!]

I think our D was dominated by Miami's offense yesterday. Yes, we only gave up 20 points in regulation but they had the ball for what seemed like eons and we had problems getting off the field. I don't think we layed a finger on Henne all afternoon. If you don't harrass the QB you are in for a long afternoon. Our ST is the worst of the lot and that doesn't help either our O or D. Let's hope we get some of our walking wounded back soon and we can turn this nightmare around starting Sunday night.

I almost agree completely except the part about being dominated. Sure, Miami had thiri way most of the time, but they only managed 20 points. That to me speaks volumes.

Now, if the O and ST are clicking, score points and salvage valuable yardage, kep their D on the field and their own resting, then it's a different ball game.

[Kiwon]

Next week's game against the Vikings will help answer the question if the Packers are "good enough" even to take the division title.

They better hope they are with the Jets, Cowboys, Vikes, and Falcons coming in succession. They should beat the 49ers and Lions but finishing the season against the Pats, Giants, and Bears would be difficult even if they were completely healthy.

[gbgary]

it's the o that's dragging the team down. special teams could be better and the d could get some more turnovers but it's the o that's dragging the team down.