Bulldog sticking up for Brett?

[b bulldog]

It seems as though it is now fashionable nationally and locally to knock Favre for his play and decisions. Personally, I thought Brett played decent,smart football yesterday, until the fourth quarter. When Brett made those bad throws, the game was long decided and he was just trying to do something. This is fine when your down by 20 plus points and your O hasn't done nothing all day, I have problems with those throws when the games are still able to be won. He threw some lasers to Driver that looked to make Tillman think that he had great position, just that Brett made a great throw. I think the best thing for Brett would be to be traded for his own good along with the teams. We need to face the reality that we are so bad that we need guys on our team that will soon be suspended because our talent level is subpar or just very green! KRob wouldn't seem to be "Packer People". I would love to see Brett get another chance to reunite with Gruden in Tampa as long as we recieved decent compensation in return. With Brady Quinn looking us in the face, are we sure that Arod is the man? We do need to find out and I'd hate to see Brett starting games to continue his streak while being pulled come the second quarter, just to have Arod get the needed PT. Not trying to get everyone riled up, do you see my point?

[Bretsky]

I see your point.

Yesterday was brutal; I know it's only one game but we didn't even belong on the same playing field as the Bears. Red Zone ? What Red Zone ? Wow

[GrnBay007]

C'mon now guys. Before yesterday's game many, many posters said this season will be very unpredictable due to the youth on the team. Some games they will look very good and other games they will look horrible. Well, we saw horrible. Hopefully we see good play soon. I think everyone is just still in shock from a shut out.

[mraynrand]

I think everyone is just still in shock from a shut out.

What I'm in shock from is the fact that the 2005 Packers, with a far crappier team on paper, played much better ball against the Bears than this sorry bunch. My biggest complaint about Sherman was being slow to react and not being aware of what was happening on the field. Favre was throwing just fine early, and McCarthy seemed determined to take Favre out of the equation. And running up the gut with your weakest players against the teams greatest strength? Senseless.

Bulldog, I see your point. I'd love to see Favre finish his career with the Packers, but I have this odd feeling that the current GM doesn't like Favre all that much. If (notice I say IF) that's true, and he just wants the next guy in there, he should have dealt him. Forcing Favre to let the crappiest players decide the game, is a terrible way for him to finish his career.

[Packnut]

Favre

Your the last person on this planet I'd agree with about anything and as much as it would hurt to see Favre in another uniform, I have to agree with you on this. Brett in Tampa would be a great fit.

[RashanGary]

The Bears are a GREAT!! team....

This was expected. We will look better, we will win a few games but the divsion looks stronger and next years draft is already looking us in the face. I want another stud. Adrian Peterson, Brady Quinn, Calvin Johnson...I don't think we're bad enough to get one of those 3 but there are a couple DE's, a RB and WR's that should be there for us. Whoever we get in teh top 10 stands a good chance to be better than whatever we've got.

If we're lucky we'll end up in teh top 5 but I don't knwo how realistic that is. We do have an easy schedule and Brett is always good for a couple big plays.

[GrnBay007]

What I'm in shock from is the fact that the 2005 Packers, with a far crappier team on paper, played much better ball against the Bears than this sorry bunch.

Yeah that hurts! But you also have to remember this Bears team had all their starters back....opening game and they already jelled...no surprise there.

[Bretsky]

What I'm in shock from is the fact that the 2005 Packers, with a far crappier team on paper, played much better ball against the Bears than this sorry bunch.

Yeah that hurts! But you also have to remember this Bears team had all their starters back....opening game and they already jelled...no surprise there.

We knew the offense would be challenged with a subpar OL and limited depth at WR...
But our defense has a definite talent upgrade form last year
And we played a bland offense that was average at the very best
And we were dominated

Jim Bates, anyone ??

[mraynrand]

What I'm in shock from is the fact that the 2005 Packers, with a far crappier team on paper, played much better ball against the Bears than this sorry bunch.

Yeah that hurts! But you also have to remember this Bears team had all their starters back....opening game and they already jelled...no surprise there.

We knew the offense would be challenged with a subpar OL and limited depth at WR...
But our defense has a definite talent upgrade form last year
And we played a bland offense that was average at the very best
And we were dominated

Jim Bates, anyone ??

What the hell does Bates have to do with it? The defense gave up ONE TD, and four FGs - two FGs set up by the Herron fumble and the absurd 4th and one call (Hey, another Packer coach gets it wrong on fourth and one). If you think Bates would have been a better HEAD coach, OK fine - who would he have hired as O-coordinator? I have yet to see someone who wanted Bates as HC answer this question reasonably - what guy out there was going to come in and install a decent offense as OC in GB, when all the better offensive minds were getting Head coaching jobs. You really needed to hire a talented guy as OC, and who was that going to be? If you say Mariucci, I'm laughing already. If you think the problem yesterday was the defense, you just didn't watch the game closely. See that goose egg on the scoreboard? Did you notice that the Packers were 1-11 on third downs and didn't cross midfield until late in the first half, and only on a FAKE PUNT? Wake up.

[Bretsky]

What I'm in shock from is the fact that the 2005 Packers, with a far crappier team on paper, played much better ball against the Bears than this sorry bunch.

Yeah that hurts! But you also have to remember this Bears team had all their starters back....opening game and they already jelled...no surprise there.

We knew the offense would be challenged with a subpar OL and limited depth at WR...
But our defense has a definite talent upgrade form last year
And we played a bland offense that was average at the very best
And we were dominated

Jim Bates, anyone ??

What the hell does Bates have to do with it? The defense gave up ONE TD, and four FGs - two FGs set up by the Herron fumble and the absurd 4th and one call (Hey, another Packer coach gets it wrong on fourth and one). If you think Bates would have been a better HEAD coach, OK fine - who would he have hired as O-coordinator? I have yet to see someone who wanted Bates as HC answer this question reasonably - what guy out there was going to come in and install a decent offense as OC in GB, when all the better offensive minds were getting Head coaching jobs. You really needed to hire a talented guy as OC, and who was that going to be? If you say Mariucci, I'm laughing already. If you think the problem yesterday was the defense, you just didn't watch the game closely. See that goose egg on the scoreboard? Did you notice that the Packers were 1-11 on third downs and didn't cross midfield until late in the first half, and only on a FAKE PUNT? Wake up.

Then you are not asking the right person; I read where Bates and Norv Turner are very close friends. If Bates got the job Norv Turner would have been our OC.

[mraynrand]

Then you are not asking the right person; I read where Bates and Norv Turner are very close friends. If Bates got the job Norv Turner would have been our OC.

And what has Norvell done recently?

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If we're lucky we'll end up in teh top 5 but I don't knwo how realistic that is. We do have an easy schedule and Brett is always good for a couple big plays.

If were lucky!? So you want us to lose? I'll never be happy with losing. You don't need to go 4-12 for 3-4 years to be a good team again. How do you think we didn't have a losing season for 14 years before 2005. You can still have a good draft, even if you don't have a top ten pick, ron wolf showed that. I want to start winning now and still have good drafts no matter were we pick so were also good in the future.

[Bretsky]

Are you saying he's a crappy coordinator or just trying to be difficult now

[MadtownPacker]

If we're lucky we'll end up in teh top 5 but I don't knwo how realistic that is. We do have an easy schedule and Brett is always good for a couple big plays.

If were lucky!? So you want us to lose? I'll never be happy with losing. You don't need to go 4-12 for 3-4 years to be a good team again. How do you think we didn't have a losing season for 14 years before 2005. You can still have a good draft, even if you don't have a top ten pick, ron wolf showed that. I want to start winning now and still have good drafts no matter were we pick so were also good in the future.

Thats what Im saying!!! How the hell can anyone WANT to lose? Accepting it after the season is hosed is one thing but throwing the towel in after one game is just being a punk ass bitch!!

When there is nothing left to play for like last year against Seattle, fine YOU can want to lose but when there are 15 games to go true fans gotta keep the faith.

[mraynrand]

Are you saying he's a crappy coordinator or just trying to be difficult now

Nah, I don't want to JUST be difficult! Actually, I think he's lost it, frankly. That and he's been the HC for some teams that, for whatever reason, were pretty much devoid of talent.