Loyalty Test

[Tarlam!]

I demand to know if PackerRats.com is just a bunch of fair weather fans, or die hard CHEESEHEADS willing to endure the worst in the name of The Team!

Where's the cut-off line for YOU?

[Brainerd]

Season Record is 0-16. I will want TT's and M3's heads, but I'll still be here...

[the_idle_threat]

0-16 would be a hell of a ride, but on the bright side, I'd be interested in who we'd get in the draft next April.

[Terry]

I think everyone is a diehard packer fan. At least I hope so. Maybe a more appropriate poll would be a test of loyalty to the coach or GM. What is the cutoff point for wanting MM's head? Is there even such a point this year? What about Thompson and does he have a cutoff point this year? Are the two of them joined together like siamese twins - that is, does one have a different cutoff point than the other?

I've also been wondering what Thompson has really been thinking - and I mean non-judgementally, that is, without regard to whether one thinks he is right or wrong, whether one things he is just wrong headed. He's clearly opting for youth more often than not - even in the waiver wire pickups, they seem to be the type that one thinks about long term rather than immediately as helpful. It's all very curious to me.

[Brainerd]

0-16 would be a hell of a ride, but on the bright side, I'd be interested in who we'd get in the draft next April.

At 0-16 anyone we wanted. If TT survived the disaster he would probably trade down to get more picks holding steadfast in the belief that the lack of quality players caused the downfall and not his handpicked, underqualified and wholly inadequate coaching staff. Especially the DC.

He would then release more proven vets that other teams seem to think can play and continue to fill the roster with more unproven rookies and street FA's that no other team seems to want.

This scenario would likely continue year after year until the tradition of players giving kids rides to practice on their bikes will be deemed superfluous since the players themselves will be the kids. Youth above experience at all costs unless the youth and inexperience is on the coaching staff.

[the_idle_threat]

0-16 would be a hell of a ride, but on the bright side, I'd be interested in who we'd get in the draft next April.

At 0-16 anyone we wanted.

Well, duh! I was thinking more about the rounds other than the first. Picking at the top of each round (and/or trading down some) means you get a large infusion of talent. Of course, going 0-16 means you need it!

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

[Brainerd]

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

I'm relaxed. I simply don't buy into the count reasoning when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Like history and stuff.

[the_idle_threat]

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

I'm relaxed. I simply don't buy into the count reasoning when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Like history and stuff.

What history? Most of these guys are first-time coaches in the positions they hold right now. They don't have any history.

[GBRulz]

looks like hell will freeze over before any of us become a Queens fan, that's always positive

[Brainerd]

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

I'm relaxed. I simply don't buy into the count reasoning when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Like history and stuff.

What history? Most of these guys are first-time coaches in the positions they hold right now. They don't have any history.

Sure they do.

Bob Sanders has a history of being passed over for the DC position on more than one occasion when he was in the college ranks. Why? Because the HC didn't think he was qualified. Since his ego couldn't take it he decided to cash checks his talent couldn't afford. He entered the ranks of the NFL where he ended up with us. Lucky ain't we? In Green Bay he has a history of coaching the weakest link in the Packers D, the defensive line. What do we do? We promote him to DC. And what are the reasons? Only one. For consistency. So I guess we want a consistently bad defense.

Mike McCarthy has a history of being the OC of the worst offense in the league. His only season as OC. When questioned by reporters about said offense his response was, "we played not to lose". Lovely ain't it? Is that the pep talk you want him to give before a game to your Green Bay Packers? "Listen guys, Lets go out there and not lose to the Chicago Bears, ok guys, please. Don't lose. What do you say? Lets go out there and not lose one for the gipper".

I could go on but i'm even boring myself.

[falco]

I wouldn't question the loyalty of anyone here, but I think there are a ton of fair weather fans out there. Having a QB like Brett Favre and a winning streak like we did, that brings in a lot of people. Losing a QB like Brett Favre and a couple losing seasons will weed out most of them.

[Joemailman]

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

I'm relaxed. I simply don't buy into the count reasoning when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Like history and stuff.

What history? Most of these guys are first-time coaches in the positions they hold right now. They don't have any history.

Sure they do.

Bob Sanders has a history of being passed over for the DC position on more than one occasion when he was in the college ranks. Why? Because the HC didn't think he was qualified. Since his ego couldn't take it he decided to cash checks his talent couldn't afford. He entered the ranks of the NFL where he ended up with us. Lucky ain't we? In Green Bay he has a history of coaching the weakest link in the Packers D, the defensive line. What do we do? We promote him to DC. And what are the reasons? Only one. For consistency. So I guess we want a consistently bad defense.

Mike McCarthy has a history of being the OC of the worst offense in the league. His only season as OC. When questioned by reporters about said offense his response was, "we played not to lose". Lovely ain't it? Is that the pep talk you want him to give before a game to your Green Bay Packers? "Listen guys, Lets go out there and not lose to the Chicago Bears, ok guys, please. Don't lose. What do you say? Lets go out there and not lose one for the gipper".

I could go on but i'm even boring myself.

You left out the fact that McCarthy Was OC in New Orleans from 2000-2004, during which time New Orleans had a very respectable offense. I'm not sure if you didn't know that, or if you left it out because it doesn't fit into your argument. At any rate, whether McCarthy succeeds will depend on how good a leader he is, not how good an OC he was. You can bash McCarthy before he has had a chance to coach a game as HC if you want. Just don't get run over trying to jump back on the bandwagon later.

[Brainerd]

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

I'm relaxed. I simply don't buy into the count reasoning when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Like history and stuff.

What history? Most of these guys are first-time coaches in the positions they hold right now. They don't have any history.

Sure they do.

Bob Sanders has a history of being passed over for the DC position on more than one occasion when he was in the college ranks. Why? Because the HC didn't think he was qualified. Since his ego couldn't take it he decided to cash checks his talent couldn't afford. He entered the ranks of the NFL where he ended up with us. Lucky ain't we? In Green Bay he has a history of coaching the weakest link in the Packers D, the defensive line. What do we do? We promote him to DC. And what are the reasons? Only one. For consistency. So I guess we want a consistently bad defense.

Mike McCarthy has a history of being the OC of the worst offense in the league. His only season as OC. When questioned by reporters about said offense his response was, "we played not to lose". Lovely ain't it? Is that the pep talk you want him to give before a game to your Green Bay Packers? "Listen guys, Lets go out there and not lose to the Chicago Bears, ok guys, please. Don't lose. What do you say? Lets go out there and not lose one for the gipper".

I could go on but i'm even boring myself.

You left out the fact that McCarthy Was OC in New Orleans from 2000-2004, during which time New Orleans had a very respectable offense. I'm not sure if you didn't know that, or if you left it out because it doesn't fit into your argument. At any rate, whether McCarthy succeeds will depend on how good a leader he is, not how good an OC he was. You can bash McCarthy before he has had a chance to coach a game as HC if you want. Just don't get run over trying to jump back on the bandwagon later.

I stand corrected on SF being his first OC stint. Thanks. He asked for history so I gave him some history, from memory. I've stated in other posts that I'm willing to give both MM and Jag a year. At least I'm trying to provide facts to back up my complete lack of faith in this staff, not some homer, rah-rah, kool-aid drinking, everything is fine, the players suck rant.

What you consider bashing I consider analysis. If you're not interested in what I have to say then ignore me. Correcting me is appreciated but save your bandwagon cracks for the trolls. Thanks again.

[chewy-bacca]

no matter what, this is my squad. no if ands or buts.

[MasonCrosby]

You're pretty down on the coaching staff. Why not relax, and let the team play a few games that actually count before issuing so harsh a verdict?

I'm relaxed. I simply don't buy into the count reasoning when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Like history and stuff.

What history? Most of these guys are first-time coaches in the positions they hold right now. They don't have any history.

Sure they do.

Bob Sanders has a history of being passed over for the DC position on more than one occasion when he was in the college ranks. Why? Because the HC didn't think he was qualified. Since his ego couldn't take it he decided to cash checks his talent couldn't afford. He entered the ranks of the NFL where he ended up with us. Lucky ain't we? In Green Bay he has a history of coaching the weakest link in the Packers D, the defensive line. What do we do? We promote him to DC. And what are the reasons? Only one. For consistency. So I guess we want a consistently bad defense.

Mike McCarthy has a history of being the OC of the worst offense in the league. His only season as OC. When questioned by reporters about said offense his response was, "we played not to lose". Lovely ain't it? Is that the pep talk you want him to give before a game to your Green Bay Packers? "Listen guys, Lets go out there and not lose to the Chicago Bears, ok guys, please. Don't lose. What do you say? Lets go out there and not lose one for the gipper".

I could go on but i'm even boring myself.

i think he meant that playing not to lose in San Francisco was one of the negative aspects of that team and season last year, not that he actually plays to not lose and he doesn't want to be in that situation this year

i dunno i'm just trying to look at it from the other side...