GIL BRANDT---THE BIGGEST WINDOWS OF OPPORTUNITY FOR SUPER BOWLS

[mraynrand]

All that was .....was an apparent FLUKE...until there's a repeat Super Bowl win for 'the TT and MM and Aaron Rodgers' Green Bay Packers Era.

So you are arguing that it was an apparent fluke, not a real fluke?

[mraynrand]

Well Thank You and as I wrote earlier.

I'd relish playing you on a Texas Holdem...Five Table.

You'd be tested.

I've never focused on a certain players style and ever lost to that player.

If I decide I'll win...I'll win !

Sadly that's moot as we'll never face one another .

bragging on the internet again, I see.

[ThunderDan]

Well Thank You and as I wrote earlier.

I'd relish playing you on a Texas Holdem...Five Table.

You'd be tested.

I've never focused on a certain players style and ever lost to that player.

If I decide I'll win...I'll win !

Sadly that's moot as we'll never face one another .

Wow, when you focus on someone's style you never lose. That is amazing. You are so full of crap it is fun.

Even if you get it in way way ahead in a Hold 'Em hand, let's say AA vs KK and we are at the river you are going to lose 5% of the time. That's just math. AA vs AK preflop the aces only hold up 92% of the time. Even with your supposed studying you can't win every time.

If I want real poker advise I ask my good friend Eric Baldwin. He was the 2009 Card Player Player of the Year from Beaver Dam, WI.

[woodbuck27]

Wow, when you focus on someone's style you never lose. That is amazing. You are so full of crap it is fun.

Even if you get it in way way ahead in a Hold 'Em hand, let's say AA vs KK and we are at the river you are going to lose 5% of the time. That's just math. AA vs AK preflop the aces only hold up 92% of the time. Even with your supposed studying you can't win every time.

If I want real poker advise I ask my good friend Eric Baldwin. He was the 2009 Card Player Player of the Year from Beaver Dam, WI.

Give you advice and Texas Holdem? Where's that coming from?

Embracing that as even a possibility! I'd ask myself:

Would I possibly have enough patience.

As I recall playing TH and my way of focusing to win Vs a certain player.

In (or during) a session not on a per hand basis (get real); or in other words:

As long as he and I are on the same table.

I 'only' recall being duped by a handful of players. One fella was on a special night and owned me. That player was from Quebec. There are strong players coming out of that Province in Canada over the past decade.

ThunderDan I've been playing Poker since about 8 years of age. I love this game above all others. I dig chess aw well but sometimes it's a little slow for me.

It's been nothing for me at certain times in my life. To unwind from highly stressful work assignments or University demands etc. played Poker 3 and 4 nights a week. My head is glued into the game. FACT: I have good success reading a player and his hand. FACT: I because of experience and cool..... have 'the edge' in my game.

I don't have to discuss with you all the traits; that added up; make me a superior Poker player.

Here's Quote for your life:

A man lives by believing something: not by debating and arguing about many things. Thomas Carlyle

[Pugger]

So you are arguing that it was an apparent fluke, not a real fluke?

Evidently according to Woodbuck if a team wins a SB but doesn't repeat it within 5 years then that SB win was a fluke. Just don't tell these guys:

Seattle
Green Bay
Baltimore
New Orleans
Indianapolis
Tampa Bay
St. Louis

[King Friday]

Ah yes. Bengals and Vikings. Those are two franchises you really want to hitch the wagon to when it comes to potential Super Bowl success.

Sorry Ras.

I'm surprised Gil didn't throw the Bills in for good measure.

[Bretsky]

It was borderline idiotic not to include GB with Rodgers at his age. Don't get that

[King Friday]

I found it interesting that Brandt thinks the Steelers have a bigger window of opportunity for Super Bowls and not the Packers when he talks about Pitt having a top 5 QB - which is debable, a top 5 WR - Jordy is a top 10, and top RB - Eddie would be good enough if he can get his eating disorder under control. Our defense is better than the Steelers so I'm having a hard time trying to figure out why he believes Pitt's window is wider than ours...

Most of it is probably the conference...the AFC is just flat out weaker than the NFC. The Panthers, Seahawks, Cardinals, and Packers (if healthy) are all arguably as good as anyone the AFC has to offer. The 2 last teams standing in the AFC this year have QBs pushing 40 years of age. So, yeah, it's going to be a nice time to be in the AFC soon.

[King Friday]

It was borderline idiotic not to include GB with Rodgers at his age. Don't get that

Even more idiotic when you put the VIKINGS on the list. I agree they are heading in the right direction, but AP is a huge part of their offense and he ain't going to be an elite back much longer. I'm not sure that offense is going to be good enough under Zimmer to be a title contender unless Bridgewater becomes an elite QB. That is a big leap to take at this point.

[Patler]

It was borderline idiotic not to include GB with Rodgers at his age. Don't get that

Except for a couple freak plays, MM & Rodgers didn't make the Packers a very good team this year. Until they can prove this year was an oddity, and not the beginning of a new era in Green Bay, they will receive little or no respect from commentators. A single playoff win against a team that didn't deserve to be in the playoffs didn't do much to change impressions that were formed over the Packers last 10 regular season games.

[pbmax]

Except for a couple freak plays, MM & Rodgers didn't make the Packers a very good team this year. Until they can prove this year was an oddity, and not the beginning of a new era in Green Bay, they will receive little or no respect from commentators. A single playoff win against a team that didn't deserve to be in the playoffs didn't do much to change impressions that were formed over the Packers last 10 regular season games.

That's a relative scale. Packers did as much if not more than the Vikes or Bengals.

[Pugger]

Except for a couple freak plays, MM & Rodgers didn't make the Packers a very good team this year. Until they can prove this year was an oddity, and not the beginning of a new era in Green Bay, they will receive little or no respect from commentators. A single playoff win against a team that didn't deserve to be in the playoffs didn't do much to change impressions that were formed over the Packers last 10 regular season games.

We wouldn't be the first perennial winning team that has a less than stellar season sprinkled in. And I don't know if we can really call a 10-6 season a poor one. We had our issues the last 10 games but did play pretty well in the post season. We put a beat down on the 'Skins and took the Cards into OT only to lose basically on one broken play. I suspect our lofty expectations going into the season are what is fueling this idea that 2015 was an unmitigated disaster and a sign the end is near.

[Deputy Nutz]

Top Ten Teams 20016

1. Patriots
2. Carolina
3. Seattle
4. Green Bay
5. Pittsburgh
6. Arizona
7. Cincinnati
8. Denver
9. Kansas City
10. New York Jets

[Patler]

That's a relative scale. Packers did as much if not more than the Vikes or Bengals.

I can't comment on the Bengals, since I have not watched them at all.

However, the Vikings clearly looked like a team that was ascending, while the Packers looked like a team descending. If they were at the same relative spot (which I do not think they were the second half od this year), it was crossing paths while headed in opposite directions.

But, next year they start over. The Vikings have to prove thaat 2015 was legitimate, and the Packers have to prove that 2015 was an aberration.

[Patler]

We wouldn't be the first perennial winning team that has a less than stellar season sprinkled in. And I don't know if we can really call a 10-6 season a poor one. We had our issues the last 10 games but did play pretty well in the post season. We put a beat down on the 'Skins and took the Cards into OT only to lose basically on one broken play. I suspect our lofty expectations going into the season are what is fueling this idea that 2015 was an unmitigated disaster and a sign the end is near.

The point is that the national media never gets behind the team that had an off year, they get behind the team that surprised or even rose expectedly. However, it won't take a lot for the Packers to gain back their respect, because they have a long history. All they need to do is win at the start of the season, and look good doing it.

That said, I can't see the 2015 team as a typical "10-6" team, not after finishing 4-6, which just as easily could have been 3-7. Not after losing at home to all teams in the division. It was a team that wasn't even in a lot of the games they lost. It simply was not a very good team at the end of the year, and neither playoff game changed that very much. It was closer to the 4-6 team of its finish than it was to the 6-0 team of its start.

I'm not throwing away 2016, however. We all talk about over achieving teams; typically they do not do as well the following season. I can't help but think the 2015 Packers were an extremely underachieving team, one that should rebound in 2016. It all hinges on AR. If he returns to form, things will be fine. If he is a QB that will be retired by age 35 as he fades away, next year may not be as pleasant as we have become accustomed to.