Packers Still Too Soft

[pbmax]

you keep taking stuff so literally. its about match ups against certain units.

honestly i do not know what you are watching -- thank goodness mm is not buying your mindset.

Now this I can agree with. It is about matchups. And schemes I would add.

But MM doesn't think his team was soft either

[rbaloha1]

Now this I can agree with. It is about matchups. And schemes I would add.

But MM doesn't think his team was soft either

what coach admits to that? why is the question being asked? does anyone pose the same questions to the niners or ravens?

what does mm say behind close doors? why did mm force the defensive staff to tamu?

the draft will answer numerous questions along with the preseason and the niner opener.

[Patler]

remains speculation since we have not seen them as a unit. mm loves competition and tt needs to deliver more defensive players that match desmond bishop type mentality with production and experience against newer offenses. these players exist.

It is less speculative to discuss the impact of players we have seen in the NFL and who are under contract to the Packers than it is to worry about players who have never played a down in the NFL and who may not be available to the Packers anyway.

I wasn't suggesting that the Packers shouldn't draft for defense, ideally every draft will have a mix of O & D. But for next year, I won't put a lot of my hopes on the rookies anyway, no matter who they are.

[rbaloha1]

It is less speculative to discuss the impact of players we have seen in the NFL and who are under contract to the Packers than it is to worry about players who have never played a down in the NFL and who may not be available to the Packers anyway.

I wasn't suggesting that the Packers shouldn't draft for defense, ideally every draft will have a mix of O & D. But for next year, I won't put a lot of my hopes on the rookies anyway, no matter who they are.

tracey hayward.

did tt screw-up last year by drafting 6 defensive players in a row last year? did tt actually pick the best player available?

[rbaloha1]

It is less speculative to discuss the impact of players we have seen in the NFL and who are under contract to the Packers than it is to worry about players who have never played a down in the NFL and who may not be available to the Packers anyway.

I wasn't suggesting that the Packers shouldn't draft for defense, ideally every draft will have a mix of O & D. But for next year, I won't put a lot of my hopes on the rookies anyway, no matter who they are.

did tt screw up by not securing canty or the 2 niner d-linemen available in free agency?

[Cheesehead Craig]

did tt screw up by not securing canty or the 2 niner d-linemen available in free agency?

Back to Kim Kardashian, did she get pregnant by screwing Canty or the 2 niner DL available in free agency?

[rbaloha1]

Back to Kim Kardashian, did she get pregnant by screwing Canty or the 2 niner DL available in free agency?

nah a rapper who temporarily ran off.

[rbaloha1]

Back to Kim Kardashian, did she get pregnant by screwing Canty or the 2 niner DL available in free agency?

nice redirecting. check out tmz for updates.

[Patler]

did tt screw up by not securing canty or the 2 niner d-linemen available in free agency?

Several different reporters reported that Canty was not cleared by the Packers medical staff. I expect TT to rely on them for those things, so as to Canty my opinion is unequivocally "No", not a mistake by TT if the med staff failed Canty.

As to any others, I don't know what they signed for or what it would have taken to get them to GB. Take McLendon as an example. Obviously the Steelers would have matched anything up to what they signed him for, maybe even a little more. Not sure he is proven enough to risk more than what the Steelers are, so I don't think that was a mistake.

I don't really have much of an opinion about FA "mistakes", or what they should have done, until I see what they do with the cap space when all is done.

[rbaloha1]

Several different reporters reported that Canty was not cleared by the Packers medical staff. I expect TT to rely on them for those things, so as to Canty my opinion is unequivocally "No", not a mistake by TT if the med staff failed Canty.

As to any others, I don't know what they signed for or what it would have taken to get them to GB. Take McLendon as an example. Obviously the Steelers would have matched anything up to what they signed him for, maybe even a little more. Not sure he is proven enough to risk more than what the Steelers are, so I don't think that was a mistake.

I don't really have much of an opinion about FA "mistakes", or what they should have done, until I see what they do with the cap space when all is done.

demonstrates what the packers desire. the te signing adds to the physicalness of the o-line.

[Patler]

tracey hayward.

did tt screw-up last year by drafting 6 defensive players in a row last year? did tt actually pick the best player available?

Do you mean Casey Hayward? Sure, fantastic for a rookie. You could also mention Matthews as a rookie. That doesn't change my expectations for rookies generally. Nick Collins started as a rookie, but wasn't an answer to defense shortcomings for a couple years. I have more hope for guys like Perry, House, McMillan, Manning and Moses to step up and make a difference than I have for the 2013 rookies to. It's an added bonus when a rookie does.

[Patler]

demonstrates what the packers desire. the te signing adds to the physicalness of the o-line.

If he makes the team, which I expect he will.
But that isn't what you asked. You asked if TT made mistakes by not signing specific players, and that is what I answered.

[rbaloha1]

If he makes the team, which I expect he will.
But that isn't what you asked. You asked if TT made mistakes by not signing specific players, and that is what I answered.

you failed to answer questions about last years draft and why mm demanded his coaches go to tamu.

[pbmax]

1. Interest in D lineman can not only be driven by the soft (headed?) and small (minded?) critique. As you yourself pointed out (I think it was you), the Packers have 5 DL who will be FAs next year. A restocking of some sort will need to happen over the next year + a couple of months regardless of soft and small. It also gives you another reason why McGinn's report about Thompson and McCarthy being "aware" of a perception and prepared to address a particular position group does not mean they agree with soft&small.

2. If McCarthy would never admit to soft, how do you (rb) know he doesn't agree with me?

3. Casey Hayward. And we are not criticizing Thompson's draft because virtually the entire board wanted defense, defense, defense. But that focus and in particular the demand for more pass rush, is precisely the basis for McGinn's small critique.

4. Addendum to my point about match ups and scheme. The execution of a scheme, is what I should have written. I don't think any particular alignment is the issue here. Its the execution of an assignment by a player who in most other circumstances, is being asked to be aggressive.

[rbaloha1]

1. Interest in D lineman can not only be driven by the soft (headed?) and small (minded?) critique. As you yourself pointed out, the Packers have 5 DL who will be FAs next year. A restocking of some sort will need to happen over the next year + a couple of months regardless of soft and small. It also gives you another reason why McGinn's report about Thompson and McCarthy being "aware" of a perception and prepared to address a particular position group does not mean they agree with soft&small.

2. If McCarthy would never admit to soft, how do you (rb) know he doesn't agree with me?

3. Casey Hayward.

4. Addendum to my point about match ups and scheme. The execution of scheme, is what I should have written. I don't think any particular alignment is the issue here. Its the execution of an assignment by a player who in most other circumstances, is being asked to be aggressive.

1. jumbling of words -- unable to decipher. Bottom Line -- the packers d-line is not equipped to stop newer offenses.

2. irrelevant due to typical circular logic

3. okay casey -- big deal

4. do not know what you are watching? WHY WERE COACHES AT TAMU?


P.S. When are you e-mailing Mcginn with your findings attempting to debunk his findings with your partners in crime?