Time to face fact

[Pugger]

What is also frustrating is we have the same roster offensively sans Wells as we had last year's 15-1. We have the talent to go toe to toe with any team but we go into Indy and bomb in the second half. It almost appeared like the teams changed uniforms at halftime. If we perform like that second half during any stretch tonight in Houston its gonna be a long night.

If Raji is out tonight I hope Pickett ate his Wheaties this morning...

[Patler]

We have often commented here about a lack of hustle, intensity, whatever on defense; contrasting the Packers one or two guys in on a tackle to the gang tackling seen from the leagues better defenses. The following article makes a player by player analysis of effort/hustle on defense:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...174061711.html

As usual, since I agree with everything except a few statements in the article, I think it is exceptionally well-written!

[Patler]

What is also frustrating is we have the same roster offensively sans Wells as we had last year's 15-1. We have the talent to go toe to toe with any team but we go into Indy and bomb in the second half. It almost appeared like the teams changed uniforms at halftime. If we perform like that second half during any stretch tonight in Houston its gonna be a long night.

Sure, but in 2011 you had a number of people outplay their previous bests by a wide margin, and you had to ask yourself if the overall result was the perfect storm of a several players having career years at the same time, or if those players had shown development to a status of being among the best in the league. Rodgers, Nelson and Bulaga come quickly to mind.

Rodgers - I think we all expected a lesser performance in 2012. 2011 will be hard to duplicate.

Nelson & Bulaga were both young enough and talented enough for the hope to be that we were seeing their evolution as players in 2011, especially with Nelson who had seemed to show steady improvement until then. Bulaga particularly has shown an alarming regression in 2012. Just two months ago he was being called one of the best RTs in the league. Both look very ordinary this year.

Throw in the change at center, injuries to Jennings, continued regression from Finley, a change at RB whether an improvement or not, and significant change in coaching assignments and it is really very different from 2011. A vastly different offensive outcome is not completely surprising until all of the changes are absorbed.

[George Cumby]

Sure, but in 2011 you had a number of people outplay their previous bests by a wide margin, and you had to ask yourself if the overall result was the perfect storm of a several players having career years at the same time, or if those players had shown development to a status of being among the best in the league. Rodgers, Nelson and Bulaga come quickly to mind.

Rodgers - I think we all expected a lesser performance in 2012. 2011 will be hard to duplicate.

Nelson & Bulaga were both young enough and talented enough for the hope to be that we were seeing their evolution as players in 2011, especially with Nelson who had seemed to show steady improvement until then. Bulaga particularly has shown an alarming regression in 2012. Just two months ago he was being called one of the best RTs in the league. Both look very ordinary this year.

Throw in the change at center, injuries to Jennings, continued regression from Finley, a change at RB whether an improvement or not, and significant change in coaching assignments and it is really very different from 2011. A vastly different offensive outcome is not completely surprising until all of the changes are absorbed.

This is the factor which I think has the greatest bearing on the O's performance but was in denial about during the off-season. I blithely thought that the O was going to continue to hum, not at the 2011 level, but hum nonetheless. How many coaches have to learn new jobs this season.

I, for one, was foolish to think the team was going to perform at a high level after so much coaching turnover...........

[Harlan Huckleby]

I wish there was a way of seeing how many people have you on ignore.

Where do I split this thread so I can put all the crap some wheres else?

The issue you should focus on is the censor who responded to wishes of a mob rather than follow guidelines.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Symbols, images, films, etc. CAN be speech, they are not automatically protected speech or even speech generally. YOU described the film in your use of it as "just a prop" in your "parody" of Zool and others. If it was just a prop, it was not your "speech", so what are you bitching about if some wanted your prop removed?.

Images and symbols are speech, of course. I'm surprised that you are arguing this point. If the image was conveying a message just like words.

Demanding that something be removed is intolerance. Now, every community has a right to set their limits and guidelines. But a community that won't stand by the guidelines when they are upset is intolerant.

When did I say the Seinfeld parody was harmless? I can understand it being offensive to some.
I don't recall Kiwon declaring that any reference to the assassination is in poor taste.
Up to your old tricks again, I see. When backed into a corner you simply make up shit about others, then "refute" it. What a weakass approach to discussion.?.

You're squirming out of your position. You said the Seinfeld parody was just fine, that all would have a good chuckle if I had constructed my joke in that manner. Re-read your post. You didn't use the word "harmless", but that was your message. I agree that my joke was a failure, badly constructed and offensive.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Where is the "ignore" button, anyway?

Just hang-in there a little longer, George.

I totally understand why you and others were upset by my post. The problem for me was when the post was removed by the censor.

Every community has a right to its standards. To me, it's very important that free speech be respected within the bounds of those standards.

[pbmax]

I wonder why Nelson is having such a struggle this year, Jennings or no. When Jennings was the Y (Wide Receiver) and Nelson the X (Split End), he had to line up on the LOS. Which means in mulitple instances, he had to face pressure coverage. He couldn't line up with a buffer and use the space to avoid a jam.

As Y he should have more tools available to escape the jam. He might face a higher caliber of CB if Jennings is out. I would buy that but he seemed as off when Jennings was available. There has been a wide variety of defensive talent opposing the Packers, so he should have been able to abuse someone. The Bears don't pressure the WRs on every down.

I think all of these things might be holding Nelson up, but I think it all starts with the LOS and Rodgers trust/non-trust in his line.

[packer4life]

Jason Laconforma tweeting that Raji is out tonight. Foster and company are going to control TOP. If Rodgers starts slow with some quick 3 and outs as has been the case this year, we may have another game of 85 plays against our defense. I'm going to start drinking now...

[pbmax]

Pickett at nose is not a bad thing versus a running team. They will miss Raji's pass rush. Of all the hot teams the Texans and 49ers are the teams I would want to have to start Pickett over Raji against.

[LegandofthePack15]

I understand that I am a newbie so my opinion doesn't mean much. But I didn't find Harlan's clip offensive and he has made a valid argument.

[mraynrand]

I understand that I am a newbie so my opinion doesn't mean much. But I didn't find Harlan's clip offensive and he has made a valid argument.

I don't know about the valid argument part, since it's a private forum of another - Madtown - Harlan has only the rights Madtown chooses to allow. But, as a purveyor of incessant crap - including inane videos and bad photoshopping - I fully realize that the best response to bilge you don't like is to just ignore it and move on.

[MadtownPacker]

I understand that I am a newbie so my opinion doesn't mean much. But I didn't find Harlan's clip offensive and he has made a valid argument.

I suggest you not accept any candy from Harlan.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I suggest you not accept any candy from Harlan.

I suggest you be nice to my only friend, or I will kick your candy ass.

But isn't a GIF of blood spatter (used with whatever intention), simply and in of itself off topic enough that it can be removed from the Packer board (not the others) with no other questions asked?

Its already tangential (commenting on others commenting about the physics of a collision), adds nothing substantive to the thread and is grotesque.

The intention of that blood splatter makes all the difference. IF it is making a point about the conversation, it is on topic.

I made a mistake in choosing that particular .gif, I was only trying to evoke a memory of Kennedy assasination. I was really interested in all the analytical talk surrounding it, and so I included that text. Evidently that .gif was too graphic and spoiled any hope for the joke. IT was the first .gif that came up on google.

I do think you exagerate the "grotesque" part, since it was a small gif of a blury distant shot for Christ's sake. But that is in the eye of the beholder.

[MadtownPacker]

I suggest you be nice to my only friend, or I will kick your candy ass.

Let me guess, you want to "rassle"? I bet you do you sick freak.