Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Key Questions For This Season's Success

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Nice thread Shadow. Ultimately it turned into a "whos fault was the last two years" arguement like every other good thread seems to. The orginal content was good though.

    You listed the good things first and sort of brushed over the bad so that brings out the haters who feel like it is biased which it might be to a degree. But regardless, I think you and I are in a very similar spot so I have to give you props

    The running game, the O-line and the SS are the biggest question marks. We have some young guys (A TON of them) who show promise so I think 2 of the 3 problems are a good bet to be solved. That said, I think we are a better team than last year and we make the playoffs because none of those problems were solved last year and we still went 8-8. Ultimately, I think the reason we will go to the playoffs is FAvre and Hawk. I know Hawk was just "good" last year but I think he's going to be a legit playmaker and combined with the growth of our other youth, he'll be the main cog in our improvement.
    Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Patler
      Originally posted by wist43
      One thing I'm sure of, however, is that after Favre is gone, so is any chance at winning it all.

      Aaron Rodgers??? He's got Superbowl MVP written all over him!!!

      Love the emoticons... trying to be judicious.
      The interesting thing to me is you never know for sure where a QB might come from. So from that perspective, they could end up with a Brunnell or a Hasselbeck next year or the year after, assuming Rodgers is as big of a flop as you seem to know for sure that he will be. With the right team around them, a Brunnell or Hasselbeck (obviously) can get you to the Super Bowl. It certainly doesn't have to be 10 years.
      Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.

      I actually have more hope for Ingle Martin than I do for Aaron Rodgers... but the odds are than neither one of them can play.

      Maybe Rodgers can direct the offense to medicrity for a few years, but no way do I see him having the ability to be SB QB - and isn't that the point???
      wist

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Tarlam!
        Oh great. A TT hate fest. Glad you guys have a thread to converge on. I never regarded Woody or Merlin as experts, but you Wisty?

        Enjoy your party.
        I didn't see this one... too busy arguing with Patler.

        Settle down Tar... not a TT "hatefest". Criticism of Favre and Green for last years offensive meltdown gets under my skin. Favre and Green WERE the offense - w/o them, the offense likely wouldn't have scored a single TD the whole year.

        Favre's another year older, Green is gone - and along with him any ability to get the tough yard is gone as well - and, no new talent was brought in to shore up obviously weak positions.

        Not a TT "hatefest", but he certainly deserves to be put under the microscope for his lack of effort in addressing a completely anemic offense.
        wist

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by wist43
          Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.
          I was hoping the Packers wouldn't draft him, but this is just downright silly. Like it or not, he did improve last preseason--with a passer rating over 100. The two times he's gotten regular season game action, he didn't have much of a chance. The Packers were getting routed and the OL was getting hammered by Baltimore and New England
          "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

          Comment


          • #50
            If all I cared about was being "ok", or a perennial 8-8/10-6 team... then I'd probably say Rodgers is "ok", "just give him time", blah, blah, blah...

            But I want to win championships... I think that's where I go off the beaten path with a lot of you guys - I think most of you guys would be perfectly content to have a good team, with no realistic shot at a SB... I'm not content with that at all.
            wist

            Comment


            • #51
              Neither you nor I know if Rodgers will be a good NFL QB. Period. It's silly to say that most people have already written him off--except for the extreme Kool-Aid drinkers.
              "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                Originally posted by wist43
                Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.
                I was hoping the Packers wouldn't draft him, but this is just downright silly. Like it or not, he did improve last preseason--with a passer rating over 100. The two times he's gotten regular season game action, he didn't have much of a chance. The Packers were getting routed and the OL was getting hammered by Baltimore and New England

                I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                  Neither you nor I know if Rodgers will be a good NFL QB. Period. It's silly to say that most people have already written him off--except for the extreme Kool-Aid drinkers.
                  One thing is for sure, the Packers haven't written him off... but, I have yet to see anyone write the story, "Rodgers ready and chomping at the bit", or "Rodgers pushing Favre for playing time", or "Rodgers, the time is now"...

                  What I have seen is just the opposite, "Rodgers could be 1st blemish on Thompson's record", et al.
                  wist

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Rastak
                    Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                    Originally posted by wist43
                    Rodgers has shown less than nothing... it's not just me, with the exception of the most hopeful Kool-Aid drinkers, I think most people have already written him off.
                    I was hoping the Packers wouldn't draft him, but this is just downright silly. Like it or not, he did improve last preseason--with a passer rating over 100. The two times he's gotten regular season game action, he didn't have much of a chance. The Packers were getting routed and the OL was getting hammered by Baltimore and New England

                    I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok?
                    Convenient way to lie with statistics...
                    wist

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by wist43
                      Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                      Neither you nor I know if Rodgers will be a good NFL QB. Period. It's silly to say that most people have already written him off--except for the extreme Kool-Aid drinkers.
                      One thing is for sure, the Packers haven't written him off... but, I have yet to see anyone write the story, "Rodgers ready and chomping at the bit", or "Rodgers pushing Favre for playing time", or "Rodgers, the time is now"...

                      What I have seen is just the opposite, "Rodgers could be 1st blemish on Thompson's record", et al.

                      Yea, but he probably knows there really isn't an open competition. I wonder if MM would have the seeds to start him in front of Favre if he showed himself to be the better QB in training camp. Would there be a giant riot in the state of Wisconsin?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Rastak
                        Would there be a giant riot in the state of Wisconsin?
                        Yes.
                        "Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg Jennings

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Why limit that riot to just the state of Wisconsin?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Never happen... I think it's pretty obvious that TT wants Favre gone, but given his iconic status, even TT knows he can't mess with Favre.

                            Riot??? I think they'd pull a Stalin, and burn the state of Wisconsin to ashes.
                            wist

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Rastak
                              I must point this out if Favre's passer rating is low it's an indication that passer ratings aren't a very accurate view of a QB's play but with Rodgers it means he was doing ok?
                              Where did I say passer ratings aren't accurate? I said that passer ratings can be overrated, and that they tend to skew the stats to a WCO QB (which doesn't help the argument for Favre since he plays in the WCO). Other factors come into play when looking at QBs--other than passer ratings. Some people think they are the be all and end all. Do you disagree?

                              Also, it's not like Rodgers passer ratings were inflated because he was throwing to mint WRs or had a great OL. Wouldn't most people say the Packers had a young OL that struggled in the preseason last year? Wouldn't most people say the Packers had little depth at WR last year? His rating was inflated because of a long TD to Jennings, but he still did pretty well last year in the preseason--even without that TD. Anybody who watched him in preseason in 2005 and then in 2006 could see that he made improvements. Doesn't take a scout to see that.
                              "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                2005 PRESEASON

                                20 of 37 for 172 yards with 1 TD and 2 interceptions, 55 QB rating

                                2006 PRESEASON

                                22 of 38 for 323 yards with 3 TDs and 1 interception, 101 QB rating
                                "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X