Winners and Losers - Bears week

[ThunderDan]

Son of a Long:

Shouldn't that have been a penalty for illegal touching since a lineman touched the ball first for Chicago?

[denverYooper]

Man, Cutler was bad. Not just the INTs, either. He had several throws that were just way, way off.

Was he having problems with the wind?

[ThunderDan]

Hoes:

Hawk: This oughta be Hawk's last season in Green Bay. He's not even average this year. He simply sucks. Look at the Claymakers production's tonight at ILB vs Hawk's and tell me the difference. The Claymaker shot through his gaps, shed blocks and covered well. Hawk? He simply sucks.

Funny that you call Hawk a hoe and then we see the Hayward pick 6 and it is Hawk in excellent coverage, realizes the ball has been tipped and wraps up Forte to allow Hayward to make the pick.

He wasn't a stud but he wasn't a dud last night either.

[hoosier]

Son of a Long:

Bitch all you want about Hawk and his lack of splash plays, but somehow he had the presence of mind here to notice that the ball had been tipped and then tackle Fort before the ball got to him, allowing Hayward to make the pick. He should get a pick assist on that play.

[ThunderDan]

Man, Cutler was bad. Not just the INTs, either. He had several throws that were just way, way off.

Was he having problems with the wind?

I think he is allergic to the grass in Lambeau.

[denverYooper]

McGinn used to be the shining star at the Urinalscented, but now he's just a guy trying to generate controversy. Still, he does a decent write-up here and there.

The secret to beating the Packers is pretty simple - if you can generate pass rush with your defensive front four, you have a good chance to defeat Rodgers. If not, Katie bar the door. Against the Packer D you have to have an above average quarterback and the patience to keep running the ball against the 2-4.

Clefty would pick Sitton and Clay Matthews as his game day stars. Rodgers and Nelson were great as always, but they were shooting fish in a barrel out there.

It'll be interesting to see if CM3 inside helps some of their issues on defense against better teams, but 1 game against a Bears team that was forced to be 1-dimensional from the gun is not going to provide that answer.

Edit... in the first game, GB gave up 235 yards rushing. Yesterday, they gave up 55 (2.3 per). It's a big difference on a small sample.

[denverYooper]

I'd give a stud to M3/Capers. They are clearly not standing pat this year and just trying to stay the course on failing players/looks. Jones and now Lattimore disappearing in favor of CM3 (or maybe Perry) is a nod to their search for improvement in an area they've been gashed over the last few years.

[Fritz]

I'd give a stud to M3/Capers. They are clearly not standing pat this year and just trying to stay the course on failing players/looks. Jones and now Lattimore disappearing in favor of CM3 (or maybe Perry) is a nod to their search for improvement in an area they've been gashed over the last few years.

Who knows how this will play out long-term, but kudos to MM, to Capers, and to Matthews for this move. Without the move, this team looked like a typical Packer team of the past few years: lots of offense, shitty defense, 10-6 or 11-5 and not a contender to go to the SB, really.

This move doesn't change that, necessarily, but the team needed something drastic to be done in order to shore up that horrible inside linebacking corps. And it makes sense: they have depth outside. I also like Perry playing more. He may not be a pro bowler, but he can play the run and be physical doing it, and if he can get matched up with the right blocker can use his strength to bull rush. Now this move gives Neal, Perry, and Peppers more snaps, and Matthews takes snaps away from Lattimore/Jones/Barrington. That's a good tradeoff.

It gives this team a chance, now.

[hoosier]

Funny that you call Hawk a hoe and then we see the Hayward pick 6 and it is Hawk in excellent coverage, realizes the ball has been tipped and wraps up Forte to allow Hayward to make the pick.

He wasn't a stud but he wasn't a dud last night either.

Quit stealing my ideas.

[pbmax]

Bitch all you want about Hawk and his lack of splash plays, but somehow he had the presence of mind here to notice that the ball had been tipped and then tackle Fort before the ball got to him, allowing Hayward to make the pick. He should get a pick assist on that play.

He is also VERY close to Forte in coverage to make that hit. Which is another good sign.

[pbmax]

I'd give a stud to M3/Capers. They are clearly not standing pat this year and just trying to stay the course on failing players/looks. Jones and now Lattimore disappearing in favor of CM3 (or maybe Perry) is a nod to their search for improvement in an area they've been gashed over the last few years.

Its a closer match to Thompson's player acquisition method. Could be that McCarthy understands that, another reason he is a good head coach.

[pbmax]

Who knows how this will play out long-term, but kudos to MM, to Capers, and to Matthews for this move. Without the move, this team looked like a typical Packer team of the past few years: lots of offense, shitty defense, 10-6 or 11-5 and not a contender to go to the SB, really.

This move doesn't change that, necessarily, but the team needed something drastic to be done in order to shore up that horrible inside linebacking corps. And it makes sense: they have depth outside. I also like Perry playing more. He may not be a pro bowler, but he can play the run and be physical doing it, and if he can get matched up with the right blocker can use his strength to bull rush. Now this move gives Neal, Perry, and Peppers more snaps, and Matthews takes snaps away from Lattimore/Jones/Barrington. That's a good tradeoff.

It gives this team a chance, now.

The amazing thing about Matthews (and its what makes him different than every other player on D except possibly Peppers and Dix) is that he is 6' 3" and 255, which should be too long to play ILB. But he has less trouble changing direction in short space than some other ILBs.

It remains to be seen whether he can shed blocks and take a beating by a team committed to running inside, but its astonishing he moves that well at the position.

[Zool]

He is also VERY close to Forte in coverage to make that hit. Which is another good sign.

Before we all start fellating Hawk, lets look back at his coverage of Forte in the flat a few plays earlier. He got fooled then outran to the corner.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Flynn is a dud backup QB. Packers had such capable backups during Favre years.

[pbmax]

Before we all start fellating Hawk, lets look back at his coverage of Forte in the flat a few plays earlier. He got fooled then outran to the corner.

That was brutal. It was like he didn't remember Forte is fast.