So proud of this team

[RashanGary]

I disagree bobblehead. I'm with Christl.


Bring all of our guys back and instead of having 15 or 16 guys on IR, let's change that to 5.


Clay Matthews
Cullen Jenkins
BJ Raji
Jermichael Finley
Greg Jennings


Those 5 players would hurt us worse than the other 15 combined. Playmakers.

[RashanGary]

Credit to Thompson, he's built and incredibly deep team, but it's also incredibly talented at the top. We haven't lost those top guys other than Finley. The two injuries that hurt, one is Finley becuase he's a playmaker and game changer. The other is Grant because TT had a hole at backup RB. So yeah, holes effect things, but it's the star players that make it go. When Clay was hurt our whole defense looked like crap. Either him or Raj being injuried would destroy us IMO. Raj is a beast. Clay too.

[vince]

I disagree bobblehead. I'm with Christl.


Bring all of our guys back and instead of having 15 or 16 guys on IR, let's change that to 5.


Clay Matthews
Cullen Jenkins
BJ Raji
Jermichael Finley
Greg Jennings


Those 5 players would hurt us worse than the other 15 combined. Playmakers.

I think the point is that it's both. Playmakers and quality throughout the roster. Christl only talked about playmakers.

Two years ago Rodgers was thought of by Christl as an average QB who folds in the 4th quarter. Turns out it was actually because his defense couldn't stop anyone. Lack of quality throughout the roster.

Of course he's improved with experience but he's still the same guy throwing for 4000 yards and 30 TDs. People seriously thought that the defense's success the prior year was due to Favre's leadership.

If this defense still had holes like last year's, Christl would still be preaching his gospel about how Rodgers can't win the big games. The single-minded focus on playmakers is a common assessment that too simplistic for the game of football IMO.

[bobblehead]

I disagree bobblehead. I'm with Christl.


Bring all of our guys back and instead of having 15 or 16 guys on IR, let's change that to 5.


Clay Matthews
Cullen Jenkins
BJ Raji
Jermichael Finley
Greg Jennings


Those 5 players would hurt us worse than the other 15 combined. Playmakers.

I give up, you and cliff win. If you take the 5 most talented players off of any team they will suck....was that your point? Oh wait, thats MY point. First off, we played many games without at least 2 of those guys and never got blown out. What if I get to choose 5 guys you don't consider the "elite" playmakers. What if instead, Sam Shields, Brian Bulaga, TJ Lang, Chad Clifford, and Josh Sitton went down with injury. You think we would still be dominant because we would have your 5 on the roster? Really?? Lets see, we would be starting College at LT, Bush at the nickel, Spitz at LG, I'm not sure at RG or RT. Pretty sure that suddenly TWill wouldn't be making plays, Wood would have to actually cover deep routes, ARod would be a vegetable, and we would all blame MM and TT.

Also, your list included one of the guys who actually DID miss the season, and another that missed the 2 games we MUST win to get into the playoffs. It also included Jennings who I think we could survive without, but we would be weaker. Would losing Jenkins be that bad if we hand't lost Neal and Harrell (yea I know, but you get my point). If we had both of them, along with chillar, poppinga, Jones, and barnett, might we be able to fade losing Clay? And before you point out that I focused on the OL, remember, you focused 2 out of the 3 starters on the DL.

The point we both make is that injuries weaken your team, and the better the player hurt, the more it weakens your team....I'm not sure what that has to do with the overall point that weak links lose more games than strong links win.

[mmmdk]

I give up, you and cliff win. If you take the 5 most talented players off of any team they will suck....was that your point? Oh wait, thats MY point. First off, we played many games without at least 2 of those guys and never got blown out. What if I get to choose 5 guys you don't consider the "elite" playmakers. What if instead, Sam Shields, Brian Bulaga, TJ Lang, Chad Clifford, and Josh Sitton went down with injury. You think we would still be dominant because we would have your 5 on the roster? Really?? Lets see, we would be starting College at LT, Bush at the nickel, Spitz at LG, I'm not sure at RG or RT. Pretty sure that suddenly TWill wouldn't be making plays, Wood would have to actually cover deep routes, ARod would be a vegetable, and we would all blame MM and TT.

Also, your list included one of the guys who actually DID miss the season, and another that missed the 2 games we MUST win to get into the playoffs. It also included Jennings who I think we could survive without, but we would be weaker. Would losing Jenkins be that bad if we hand't lost Neal and Harrell (yea I know, but you get my point). If we had both of them, along with chillar, poppinga, Jones, and barnett, might we be able to fade losing Clay? And before you point out that I focused on the OL, remember, you focused 2 out of the 3 starters on the DL.

The point we both make is that injuries weaken your team, and the better the player hurt, the more it weakens your team....I'm not sure what that has to do with the overall point that weak links lose more games than strong links win.

You're on the Stubby path of learning - Stubby improving...will you?

[bobblehead]

You're on the Stubby path of learning - Stubby improving...will you?

Were you going to address anything I said, or just take a jab? PS...you must have missed the point of my entire post. I feel exactly the same as I did before, therefore I learned nothing by definition.

Also, stubby is not improving, you were simply wrong in the first place. He is the same coach that went to the NFCC in '07, but if you can save face by saying you were right, and Stubby changed, hey, have at it.

[mmmdk]

Were you going to address anything I said, or just take a jab? PS...you must have missed the point of my entire post. I feel exactly the same as I did before, therefore I learned nothing by definition.

Also, stubby is not improving, you were simply wrong in the first place. He is the same coach that went to the NFCC in '07, but if you can save face by saying you were right, and Stubby changed, hey, have at it.

McCarthy has improved. Your Stubby "logic" suggests he was a Belichick from the get go. That doesn't fly well.

BTW...Chilly went to the NFCC & that doesn't tell 1% of the story. Chilly sucked.

[RashanGary]

It's easier to find 5 average guys than it is one superstar. Superstars are rare. They make the difference. It's easy for a GM to find a decent player to fill a bad hole than it is to find a difference maker that changes a whole unit. All 11 guys on the field matter but there are rare players who rise above the rest and win games. I buy that.

[mmmdk]

It's easier to find 5 average guys than it is one superstar. Superstars are rare. They make the difference. It's easy for a GM to find a decent player to fill a bad hole than it is to find a difference maker that changes a whole unit. All 11 guys on the field matter but there are rare players who rise above the rest and win games. I buy that.

I agree & I'll pay the bill too.

[Fritz]

I have to say that after the ridiculous spate of injuries and the back to back Washington/Miami losses, I was despondent. I wasn't one of those "well, let's start talking about next year's draft" people, but I was sick that the season was lost.

I was obviously wrong. Mea Culpa.

By the way, did anybody notice how well Starks blocked for Rodgers? I think he earned some trust and some more playing time with that protection.

[pbmax]

The problem with Cliffy's playmakers and McGinn's blue chippers is that they often cannot tell whether it is the player, teammates/role or a combination of the two that make a player standout. And I don't think watching them in training camp can fill in the all those blanks (though it can identify a young player like Shields or Williams).

So, by the time both writers are sure about certain playmakers/blue chippers, the actual GM has had to make 25 decisions elsewhere about the roster and depth. And he clearly needs to hope some younger players develop. Their system might explain the Packers Offense right now (Rodgers and some good players and as such, occasionally inconsistent) but it doesn't cover the defense (Matthews, Raji, Collins, Williams, Woodson).

[HarveyWallbangers]

I just listened to the Tramon interview. He said he baited him on the pick six, then he had under coverage in cover 2 on the other one. I'd have to go back and look at it, but that wasn't even Tramon's zone. The way the coverage played, Tramon had nobody so he went back to help deep where the safety was supposed to be. Had Tramon no made such an amazing athletic play, the safety was beat. Was that Peprah or Collins? Whoever it was, was beat.

Peprah. The announcer made it seem like Tramon was beat and if Matty Melt hadn't made the pump fake, it would have been a TD. In actuality, Peprah had coverage until the pump fake. Peprah bit on it. Matty Melt had to pump fake to get the Peprah to bite inside. The problem with the play was Matty Melt's average arm strength. Rodgers would have roped that bad boy in there--like he did against the Bears late in the game on our lone TD drive.