So proud of this team

[MadtownPacker]

After the Detroit embarrassment put the season in danger something changed in this team. Maybe pride kicked in or something but they are play all world and are now the team to beat. It is a great feeling knowing you have a game to watch next Sunday.

[MadtownPacker]

I loved that pick six by Tramon. Before the snap he was just strolling around like he was falling asleep on the play, then he jumped that route. It was great.

He did that on both picks. Made Melty Ice look like a little bitch. I know the announcers said Tramon had got beat but and the throw was late but I didn't see it that way.

[RashanGary]

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.

[Tony Oday]

I never lost faith in this team!!!

[gbgary]

No, I'd replace the backups. It takes 53 to get it done. all of those guys would be on the 53 and contibuting if healthy.

ok...my original question concerned current starters only.

[vince]

gotcha. I think Burnett and Jones would start if healthy. And Neal would be a key contributor I suspect. There's no depth at ILB now, but I agree that we haven't missed Barnett or Chillar much. All the backups on D have come in and held down the fort pretty well.

[rbaloha1]

One of the announcers said that only 2 teams in recent history have lost 6 starters, much less 18? players total. Both of those teams finished with 6 or less wins.

To add -- starters did not play in 90 games. GB is the only team to make the playoffs with this stat.

[bobblehead]

Cliff Chrisl used to say that. He talked iwth a lot of old NFL Personnel guys. It's part of the old NFL bible. Superstars are 80% of the equation. Chrisl is my favorite sports writer ever but I wasn't sure he was right about that. I test that theory all of the time. It seems to be holding up alright.

I argued this even in emails with cliffy. Problem with that theory is that certain players who are very good, but have lack of talent around them don't look so good, but the minute the team starts winning and putting talent on the field everyone looks elite. Take a look at our defense, and short of Walden, who would you define as a JAG? Even walden, when surrounded by superior talent managed 3 sacks in a game.

The QB is the only player that must be superior to win. You also can't have exploitable holes. I think they have it wrong and that bad players lose games. If we were forced to start Jarret Bush at nickel our D looks a hell of a lot worse (see last season). Cliffy also used to say that an elite RB made the line look good. Bullshit, the Broncos and the 80's Rams could plug in anyone at RB and get 1k yards. The current packers have glimmers, but the same RB that everyone loves gets 123 yards with blocking and 50? without. Great teams have both elite players and solid players. Right now on D we all define Wood, TWill, Clay as great. Take away Shields and you have no clue how good TWill is. Take away Clay and all our DB's look more average. Take away ARod and the receivers start to look pedestrian.

Football is the ultimate team sport where everyone relies on everyone else. One gaping hole and an offense or a defense can go from very good to below average. Elite players tend to be the difference between an elite unit and a very good one....but no more. We lost Clay for 2 games and the defense still held the line. We lost Finley for the year and the O adjusted and looks just a tad better than average right now. Why? Because we don't have any gaping holes.

If it truly was about a few playmakers then TT truly does fail as a GM because he doesn't go get studs in FA. The Redskins should dominate. But something funny happens when you take another teams stud and put him on your team. If the players around him suck, so does he. On the flip side, something weird happens to teams like the steelers who lose Joey Porter. Other guys step up. Depth of talent wins the day. A chain is only as strong as what other coaches identify as the weakest link. Only if the weak links hold can your elite talent do what he does.

[Joemailman]

This is the first time since 1997-98 that the packers have won 2 playoff games.

First time the Packers have ever won 2 road playoff games.

[vince]

I argued this even in emails with cliffy. Problem with that theory is that certain players who are very good, but have lack of talent around them don't look so good, but the minute the team starts winning and putting talent on the field everyone looks elite. Take a look at our defense, and short of Walden, who would you define as a JAG? Even walden, when surrounded by superior talent managed 3 sacks in a game.

The QB is the only player that must be superior to win. You also can't have exploitable holes. I think they have it wrong and that bad players lose games. If we were forced to start Jarret Bush at nickel our D looks a hell of a lot worse (see last season). Cliffy also used to say that an elite RB made the line look good. Bullshit, the Broncos and the 80's Rams could plug in anyone at RB and get 1k yards. The current packers have glimmers, but the same RB that everyone loves gets 123 yards with blocking and 50? without. Great teams have both elite players and solid players. Right now on D we all define Wood, TWill, Clay as great. Take away Shields and you have no clue how good TWill is. Take away Clay and all our DB's look more average. Take away ARod and the receivers start to look pedestrian.

Football is the ultimate team sport where everyone relies on everyone else. One gaping hole and an offense or a defense can go from very good to below average. Elite players tend to be the difference between an elite unit and a very good one....but no more. We lost Clay for 2 games and the defense still held the line. We lost Finley for the year and the O adjusted and looks just a tad better than average right now. Why? Because we don't have any gaping holes.

If it truly was about a few playmakers then TT truly does fail as a GM because he doesn't go get studs in FA. The Redskins should dominate. But something funny happens when you take another teams stud and put him on your team. If the players around him suck, so does he. On the flip side, something weird happens to teams like the steelers who lose Joey Porter. Other guys step up. Depth of talent wins the day. A chain is only as strong as what other coaches identify as the weakest link. Only if the weak links hold can your elite talent do what he does.

Nail meet hammer. Well said.

[Packgator]

The issue I've always had with Christl is that people take his "playmakers" argument and conclude that going after every high-priced free agent "playmaker" is the way to go. You definitely need great players, but it's the strength of the team up and down the roster that enables great players to be great. Overpaying playmakers at the expense of solid players throughout the roster always fails. It takes good players all over, combined with a few great ones, to win. Weaknesses tend to get exploited, no matter how good the playmakers are. I have never seen Christl make that argument.

Well put. Football = the ultimate "team" sport. Which is why a good GM is so valuable.

[bobblehead]

The issue I've always had with Christl is that people take his "playmakers" argument and conclude that going after every high-priced free agent "playmaker" is the way to go. You definitely need great players, but it's the strength of the team up and down the roster that enables great players to be great. Overpaying playmakers at the expense of solid players throughout the roster always fails. It takes good players all over, combined with a few great ones, to win. Weaknesses tend to get exploited, no matter how good the playmakers are. I have never seen Christl make that argument.

Sorry vince, I should have read this before babbling on. You pretty much said what I said in a much shorter narrative.

[vince]

I liked yours better.

[rbaloha1]

Veteran leadership was key. A-rod working out the kinks with MM was also vital.

[Tarlam!]

on a side note, I didn't think gravy was a sauce?

Depends on what you call gravy, I guess. To me, thickened deglaced pan juices is gravy. That makes it a sauce. If you just deglace and reduce, that makes it a Jus, strictly speaking, which is technically in a class of its own.

I'd have to go back and check my textbooks, but that's how I remember it.