Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Green Bay Packers Thread

Options
189111314153

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2 trident1066


    Wow, thought I was the only Packers fan in Ireland! (since 2000) - couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this thread.
    Bengals up next for preseason week three - should see more first string playing this week and would be nice to see some consistent rhythm to the play. Hopefully Jennings and Finlay will get 1st half play. Anyways - yes we're losing some meaningless games but once the 49ers turn up on September 9th at Lambeau, then we'll know whether the oline really has issues and if the dline has solved theirs. Go Pack!


  • Registered Users Posts: 526 ✭✭✭WakeyTyke


    Wow, thought I was the only Packers fan in Ireland! (since 2000) - couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this thread.
    Bengals up next for preseason week three - should see more first string playing this week and would be nice to see some consistent rhythm to the play. Hopefully Jennings and Finlay will get 1st half play. Anyways - yes we're losing some meaningless games but once the 49ers turn up on September 9th at Lambeau, then we'll know whether the oline really has issues and if the dline has solved theirs. Go Pack!

    Welcome to the Board's Packer's roster Trident:).

    Agree with your sentiments.

    Preseason games are primarily to reduce 90 players to 53, playing very basic football. It's not logical to expect first-string players to commit with the same intensity as a regular season game, though that's no excuse for sloppiness.

    Will be interesting to see what opportunities having a hard-nosed running back like Benson will create for the offense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2 trident1066


    Many thanks Wakeytike! Yep I try to ignore the stuff that goes on preseason but it hard to look away.....roll on September,


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    I lke the sounds of this, seems like Benson is taking this serious and doing everythign he can to be ready. He should be in line to be RB1 against the 49ers, he's gonna need to be ready for running inside that D.
    Running back Cedric Benson has gotten between McCarthy and quarterback Aaron Rodgers - literally.

    According to McCarthy, Benson has started attending quarterback meetings so he can learn the offense more quickly and he usually takes the seat next to Rodgers.

    "He's taken my seat in the meeting room," McCarthy said. "I've been bumped back a row. I think that's a good thing. He's really into trying to learn this offense. He's trying to learn a different language."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Good!

    I'm looking forward to a big improvement against the Bengals.

    From reading a few bits I think the attitude has really started to ramp up after two defeats.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    And it looks like we got it.
    Nice win against the Bengles.

    Lets hope for more of the same against the Chiefs next week.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Didnt see any. Stats wise looks solid for the 1st string. How was Benson? looked liek he got a few decent carries?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I lke the sounds of this, seems like Benson is taking this serious and doing everythign he can to be ready. He should be in line to be RB1 against the 49ers, he's gonna need to be ready for running inside that D.

    He better. He's drinking in the last chance salo...actually maybe not an appropriate analogy...


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Looking at the Over/Under thread and was thinking about somethings Packers.

    Is their too much focus on strength of schedule? Since the Packers have a considered "easy" SoS, I would acutally argue its a difficult schedule with the Divisional rivals we have and the amount of playoff teams we are playing from last year. I could see the Bears beating us in Chi, maybe the Lions in another shootout, can see the 49ers beating us opening weekend and the Saints 2weeks after, with our injuries who knows what could happen, also the Giants seem to be our new bogey team, so thats 5 legit loses. I think 11.5 is about right based on them 5 loses we'ld have 11wins. Although we could just as easy beat the 49ers and Saints and loose to the Texans. Leaving us 12-4.


  • Registered Users Posts: 127 ✭✭markontap


    Looking at the Over/Under thread and was thinking about somethings Packers.

    Is their too much focus on strength of schedule? Since the Packers have a considered "easy" SoS, I would acutally argue its a difficult schedule with the Divisional rivals we have and the amount of playoff teams we are playing from last year. I could see the Bears beating us in Chi, maybe the Lions in another shootout, can see the 49ers beating us opening weekend and the Saints 2weeks after, with our injuries who knows what could happen, also the Giants seem to be our new bogey team, so thats 5 legit loses. I think 11.5 is about right based on them 5 loses we'ld have 11wins. Although we could just as easy beat the 49ers and Saints and loose to the Texans. Leaving us 12-4.

    Given the development needed in a lot of players on our D and the severe lack of depth on the OL until Sherrod gets back; I'd be happy with 11 wins and a playoff spot. Anything more and it's a very good season IMHO! Looking forward to the 49ers, the OL really has to have a big game if we're to do well.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    So.... how bad was it last night?

    (I don't have sky, so didnt see it)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,052 ✭✭✭poldebruin


    I would say it wasn't as close as 30-22 scoreline read. The 49ers dominated for most of the game. A punt return gave GB a spark and SF tightened up.

    While I was surprised at how impotant the GB Offence was, a lot of credit has to go to SF D. GB could do little or nothing on the ground, and SF passrush was doing enough to make Rodgers look human.

    Alex Smith looked very good, the best I've seen him, and pretty much everything clicked for SF through the first 3 quarters.

    Cobb looked like he could be a star man this year for GB, running, little swing passes, and returns, he was doing it all.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    I suppose they have no time get too down about it with a quick turnaround before Thursday night.

    I was listening to the Bears-v-Colts on BBC radio. Chicago sounded pretty good.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,052 ✭✭✭poldebruin


    Yeah it is already a big game now on thursday.

    The bears did look good, but it's tough to say for sure after 1 game. Luck certainly had success against them (int's aside he found plenty of holes in the bears secondary - even under duress), so I imagine Rodgers will do better. The Bears, of course had relaxed a little by the 2nd half.

    I do fear for Cutler though - as his confidence grows he throws more and more reckless passes imo (broncos fan, so I know all about that) and he was slinging it about yesterday. The Bears front 4 were getting consistent pressure on Luck, but I doubt GB will come up against a tougher D for the rest of the year, than the one they faced last night.Thursday nights game is going to be fantastic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Why would management, with the leagues highest passer rating QB, against the leagues #1 run defence, decide to try establish a running game? With a new RB learning the playbook and no huddle.

    Rodgers betting with Boyz II Men he would wear a 49ers jersey if we lost. Bush saying that we lost the game rahter than the 49ers winning it. Players need to get their head out of the clouds we're clearly not invincible and we need to play to our own strengths and keep busy making plays rahter than noise.

    Hopefully we can bounce back Thursday. Give Driver some game time and make Finley catch some balls.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭UnitedIrishman


    Struggling to find a link with highlights/full game from the game Sunday. Missed it due to a family do so can't comment much on th 49ers game.

    But regardless of performance, this Thursday's game is absolutely massive already. Going two games behind the Bears and possibly two games behind the Lions (although unlikely against the 49ers) - and even two games behind the Vikings (who play the Colts) - would not be a great start to the season.

    Although I do think that we should win 4 or 5 out of our 6 divisional games given the quality of the squad, I'm worried that the lackadaisical nature of our pre-season has crept into the start of the regular season.

    Also, our run game once again was non-existant looking at the stats. Benson - 2 YPC? Not good. And Starks returning isn't going to improve it all that much either. I know he's only returning from a big injruy but Alex Green is surely worth a shot at RB?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Its the big kahuna!


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,644 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Greg Jennings is inactive for tonights game against the bears.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,409 ✭✭✭basillarkin


    Could the pack lose 2 in a row? Is Jennings injured? Will Forte run riot? I think it will be very close and but can see the Bear nicling this


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,644 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Could the pack lose 2 in a row? Is Jennings injured? Will Forte run riot? I think it will be very close and but can see the Bear nicling this

    The jennings thing is from twitter. It's a groin injury.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Well dats how we do it!!

    - Dominant Defense especially Clay getting some sacks (I've missed seeing that 'predator' celebration thing :D )

    - A much improved running game capped with a terrific play for the fake field goal / TD

    - Seeing Driver get a TD is always a pleasure.


    Satisfying is what I would call it


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    Satisfying is what I would call it

    I wouldn't be too satisfied if I was you, the Packers offense was pretty poor at times. The run game was more by necessity rather than design. Defenses dominated and the only highlight for me was the excellent fake field goal. It was a critical play, because up until that point it was a close run thing. Put pressure on Cutler and you know he'll throw the ball to you. So I'll give all the credit to Matthews & Co, but that was one poor OL the Bears had on the pitch last night.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,559 ✭✭✭Dymo


    I loved that play that lead to the thouchdown, totally fooled the Bears defense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 526 ✭✭✭WakeyTyke


    I am holding back on criticising the offense, it's only Week 2 after all and I would much rather see us improving week-on-week and have the finished product at the business end of the season.

    We know what this offense is capable of, nothing significant has changed in the passing game, if anything Cobb looks to be a far more potent, exciting attacking force this season.

    After seeing the way the defence were able to turn their game around on Thursday, giving a glimpse of how good they could potentially become, I think we have all the pieces their now to have another great shot at the play-offs. We also have the coaches that can put all those pieces together, maybe not immediately but pretty soon :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    I wouldn't be too satisfied if I was you, the Packers offense was pretty poor at times. The run game was more by necessity rather than design. Defenses dominated and the only highlight for me was the excellent fake field goal. It was a critical play, because up until that point it was a close run thing. Put pressure on Cutler and you know he'll throw the ball to you. So I'll give all the credit to Matthews & Co, but that was one poor OL the Bears had on the pitch last night.

    I'll agree with you that the Bears Oline was awful and our OFF was plucky. However I think your wrong with the assessment of the run game "more by necessity rather than design"; McCarthy has stated he wants to run the ball more, he wants us to establish more momentum with the rush in order the give our pass game more flexibility. He wants Benson involved more, to get a experience of our ingame situationals and behind that Oline making holes for him.

    Our passing game has been off for sure and I think Finley has really let us down, I've called him out a couple of times already and I don't want to beat on his door but last season we had too many dropped passes and again in 2 games I think Finley has 3 dropped passes. Finley might find Rodgers going more and more to other receivers if he doesnt make em stick.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    I'll agree with you that the Bears Oline was awful...

    On another note I could also add that Cutler held onto the Ball far too long on at least 3 of them sacks. As a football fan, not a Packers fan, I was disappointed to see him not either throw it away or look for a checkdown, take the short yardage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 429 ✭✭jman0war


    Why would management, with the leagues highest passer rating QB, against the leagues #1 run defence, decide to try establish a running game? With a new RB learning the playbook and no huddle.
    Is this a serious question?
    Why establish a running game? Because it is CRITICAL to returning to the SB. If you remember the Cheifs and NY Giants have laid a nice blueprint for beating the Packers: Pound the ball, good defense and keep Rodgers on the sidelines.

    I am glad to take an early loss or 3 in the 1st half of the season if it means the team learns, and peak later in the playoffs. Plus they don't have to have that "undefeated season" monkey nonsense off their back.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭UnitedIrishman


    jman0war wrote: »
    Is this a serious question?
    Why establish a running game? Because it is CRITICAL to returning to the SB. If you remember the Cheifs and NY Giants have laid a nice blueprint for beating the Packers: Pound the ball, good defense and keep Rodgers on the sidelines.

    I am glad to take an early loss or 3 in the 1st half of the season if it means the team learns, and peak later in the playoffs. Plus they don't have to have that "undefeated season" monkey nonsense off their back.

    It is pretty massive alright. Even going back to the Superbowl season a couple of years ago, Starks really upped his game once we hit the playoffs and it gave Rodgers a lot more time with play action than he had previously had.

    If we could manage to find a proper RB in the next couple of drafts (although Benson I have hopes will improve once he settles in) we'd open up teams a lot more.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Did anyone watch last night?

    I saw the 7mins hightlight reel online this morning.
    I know the final play / hail Mary was a travesty, it looked like GB weren't good enough to deserve the win anyway?

    Anyone agree?


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Yeah, though was fighting sleep for large periods of it. Drab game, Rodgers sacked time and again in the first half. Exploded into life at the end. Commentators just open mouthed at the whole thing. Not sure it was picked up in the written reports but there was a big issue as to whether the Packers would take the field again to face the field goal. A farce, but they did the right thing. Outraged at the time, but in the cold light of day hard to say Packers really deserved the win. Think we should really look at ourselves, blaming it all on the officiating would be an easy cop out - though to be fair I don't think McCarthy has done that at all and see reports praising his dignity.


Advertisement