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

24567…153

Comments

  • #32
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Not sure I like this whole Michelle Beadle-Aaron Rodgers-Clay Matthews stuff.

    It may be a thing of nothing. Maybe it's all a load of nonsense. And its not like some drug fuelled Cowboys-esque orgy. But it's a bit unedifying all the same.


  • #33
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,576 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    Ugly win for the Pack last night.

    Once again defense cut open by a rookie QB, gave up way too many big plays.

    Could easily have lost it.


  • #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Another week in which the other QB had great stats, another week when they should have strolled to victory but instead left it if not clinging on, at least tight enough at the end, but maybe they'll be better for these experiences. Think last season they might have lost those types of games during the regular season, and Brees and Newton will have great stats against a lot of teams. They do tend to allow big plays, which is a bit of a worry, but no alarm bells yet. 2-0 will do nicely, the Colts wouldn't mind it right now!


  • #35
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    I remember watching a few games last season where I was thinking we should've stopped a team on a march down the pitch. Falcons cut into us in regular season iirc! I think its something we have to acknowledge we'll be right up in your face and scramble well but give a good QB half a yard, when we have the lead we seem to get more cautious step off the gas a bit, and he'll fill in the holes for some serious retension of downs. Its the Packers way, to do it the difficult way.


  • #36
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,576 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    me-skywalker wrote: »
    I remember watching a few games last season where I was thinking we should've stopped a team on a march down the pitch. Falcons cut into us in regular season iirc! I think its something we have to acknowledge we'll be right up in your face and scramble well but give a good QB half a yard, when we have the lead we seem to get more cautious step off the gas a bit, and he'll fill in the holes for some serious retension of downs. Its the Packers way, to do it the difficult way.

    :rolleyes:

    That's for sure.

    Big third down concessions will hurt them eventually.

    There was an occasion last night when it was 3rd & 22 with a stop to practically win the game. They couldn't do it.

    4th & 26 against the Eagles came back to haunt them.


    Can't be allowing that stuff on a regular basis.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,109 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    Bad news.

    Collins out for the season.

    Burnett and co will have to take up the slack.

    About time they started utilising Starks and Grant more to control the clock and keep their defence off the field.


  • #38
    SantryRed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,224 ✭✭✭✭SantryRed


    Huge blow!


  • #39
    WakeyTyke
    Registered Users Posts: 526 ✭✭✭WakeyTyke


    Very sad news about Nick Collins, just hope it's not career-ending injury.

    Hope this isn't the prelude to another rash of serious injuries to star players:(


  • #40
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    I watched the America's Game last night. I thought it was enjoyable, mainly being a Packers fan to relive the season. However as a piece of film-making I wasn't overly impressed compared to previous episodes.

    I thougth they missed a beat with the dramatic element. Not that they under-played the dramatic elements to the season it was more just whitewashed, lightly referenced than I would have expected. The whole tone of dramatic elements you would expect from last season were there but it all felt hurried and rushed. The token backstories of McCarthy, Rodgers and Woodson were very rushed and , the injuries early season where only referenced after week 2, the Rodgers V Favre arc was well done I'll admit, the loosing streak the 2 O/T defeats was brushed off in a 30sec segment, the Bears game had no intensity to it. The road games, the Eagles match was just another match in it.

    Its possible there was just so much that happend to us last season that it was so hard to refine and edit into a smaller time frame, but I didn't feel once watching it that they caputured the emotion, the intensity, the gravity and importance of the SB. It was rather subdued and underwhelming.

    Maybe I was just tired and need to give it another watch. Maybe I'm looking for an epic romanticised version of the season as a fan always will try to be over-dramatic. Maybe I'm being over critical about it all completly and just enjoy it. Either-way WORLD CHAMPS YEA!!


  • #41
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Packers were impressive in an underwhleming kind of way. They ticked over, and went through the gears when needed. Rodgers had great stats but I feel he wasnt 100% there mentally last night. Just seemed 'too relaxed'. I feel the win was really amde easy in the end thanks to the disgraceful behaviour of the Bears O-Line!

    Defence again gave up too many big plays! But I have to give it to Cutler he made some great trows while also some miserable play calling, how man 3rd big bombs did he attempt when they could've ran the ball in the 2nd down to get screen plays or quick pass offs for the down?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    So far, the 3 games have been kinda strange. 3 fine results. Can hardly ask for much more. But the performances are not exactly purring. Efficient, workmanlike, some great individual performances like Cobb day 1 or Finley last night, and of course as ever Rodgers keeping the whole thing together. But it's not as pretty as I had hoped, nor as efficient. Maybe they will be a dynasty, but so far it doesn't seem to be clicking the same way as the Pats or the Colts of the last decade. And it sounds so petty or miserable by me, because I remember a decade when we couldn't get a result against the Bears home or away and now we just turn them over for the Championship, to maintain the winning start etc. But there seems to be a burden of expectation from many quarters this season, and not sure they are wearing that mantle easily.


  • #43
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So far, the 3 games have been kinda strange. 3 fine results. Can hardly ask for much more. But the performances are not exactly purring. Efficient, workmanlike, some great individual performances like Cobb day 1 or Finley last night, and of course as ever Rodgers keeping the whole thing together. But it's not as pretty as I had hoped, nor as efficient. Maybe they will be a dynasty, but so far it doesn't seem to be clicking the same way as the Pats or the Colts of the last decade. And it sounds so petty or miserable by me, because I remember a decade when we couldn't get a result against the Bears home or away and now we just turn them over for the Championship, to maintain the winning start etc. But there seems to be a burden of expectation from many quarters this season, and not sure they are wearing that mantle easily.


    I've been thinking about what they sayin in football(soccer) 'Its the mark of champions to win even when not playing well.'

    Think we have to give them credit, got the win, against our nemesis, some good building running plays, good performances from return players, rookies, 2 INT a couple of sacks for the def. Rodgers and Jennings still on the same page.

    Its not as explosive as last year but lets just chalk that up to the bad summer. We will loose a game sooner or later we wont get as lucky, its about ho wwe recover from that lose and kick on get some rhythm to the Offense in the next couple of weeks.


  • #44
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=70562448&postcount=210

    Don't wanna jinx us but 3 games in and its following on...


  • #45
    WakeyTyke
    Registered Users Posts: 526 ✭✭✭WakeyTyke


    Think the Packers have played much better than the first 3 games of last season. They are going about their business with an impressive air of quiet confidence.

    This is only Week 3, coming off a shortened pre-season, and there are areas where things haven't quite clicked into place but you sense that when they do things are going to get very exciting.:D


  • #46
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,109 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    me-skywalker wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=70562448&postcount=210

    Don't wanna jinx us but 3 games in and its following on...

    They were 13 pts down to the Panthers.


  • #47
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,576 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    Kind of difficult to put a finger on what the problem is.

    Had the Bears on the ropes for most of that game yet could have lost it.

    Pack intercepted late in the 4th..nice set of downs afterwards, and the game is over, no need to even score.

    What happens?

    Fumble the football on the first down and two plays later Bears are in the end zone.

    You gotta put these teams away...in all 3 games they could never do that.

    Not complaining too much though, held the Bears running game to minimal yardage.


  • #48
    spiralism
    Registered Users Posts: 6,299 ✭✭✭spiralism


    FlutterinBantam wrote: »
    Kind of difficult to put a finger on what the problem is.

    Had the Bears on the ropes for most of that game yet could have lost it.

    Pack intercepted late in the 4th..nice set of downs afterwards, and the game is over, no need to even score.

    What happens?

    Fumble the football on the first down and two plays later Bears are in the end zone.

    You gotta put these teams away...in all 3 games they could never do that.

    Not complaining too much though, held the Bears running game to minimal yardage.

    If there's one thing i notice about the pack is that one thing they are brilliant at is establishing the lead and holding off the opposition for the remainder of the game, even if they make a strong push late on ye're great at holding on and keeping them at arms length. Ye did it in the NFC conference game last year, in the superbowl, against the saints and again this weekend.... basically if a team goes two scores down to this GB team anymore that's it by the looks of things.

    Anyways, here's to a good game this sunday....please be gentle with us:pac:


  • #49
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    They were 13 pts down to the Panthers.

    That is truye, we've never been more than 2 TD's behind a team so...
    spiralism wrote: »
    If there's one thing i notice about the pack is that one thing they are brilliant at is establishing the lead and holding off the opposition for the remainder of the game, even if they make a strong push late on ye're great at holding on and keeping them at arms length. Ye did it in the NFC conference game last year, in the superbowl, against the saints and again this weekend.... basically if a team goes two scores down to this GB team anymore that's it by the looks of things.

    Anyways, here's to a good game this sunday....please be gentle with us:pac:

    We might be good at holding them off but we havnt shown so far that we are able to push ahead oursleves and hammer the nails into the coffin points wise.


  • #50
    BillN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13 ✭BillN


    We're off to a good start. I'm surprised by the Vikings at 0 and 3. Both wild cards could come out of the NFC North, making for 3 playoff teams. The Pack still needs a better running game though.


  • #51
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,576 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    BillN wrote: »
    We're off to a good start. I'm surprised by the Vikings at 0 and 3. Both wild cards could come out of the NFC North, making for 3 playoff teams. The Pack still needs a better running game though.

    Hmmm... Pack running game not too bad, it's the D that needs to stop giving up those big plays.

    Impressed by Ryan Grant have to say, does the best with what he gets.

    Only reason it's not better is the focking blockers are missing their assignments.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    BillN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13 ✭BillN


    While I am amazed at Rodgers' play week in week out, they still need a better running game. We're lucky to be at 4 and 0. But I'll take victory any way I can get it.


  • #53
    spiralism
    Registered Users Posts: 6,299 ✭✭✭spiralism


    BillN wrote: »
    While I am amazed at Rodgers' play week in week out, they still need a better running game. We're lucky to be at 4 and 0. But I'll take victory any way I can get it.

    even if it's only by 26 points


  • #54
    WakeyTyke
    Registered Users Posts: 526 ✭✭✭WakeyTyke


    BillN wrote: »
    While I am amazed at Rodgers' play week in week out, they still need a better running game. We're lucky to be at 4 and 0. But I'll take victory any way I can get it.

    :confused::confused::confused::eek:


    We won the Superbowl basically without any running game.

    When we have the hottest QB in the game, who is getting better every game he plays and the best receiving corp in the NFL why is the running game such a big issue?

    Now, the defensive secondary's tendency to regularly give up the big play, that is something to be concerned about!


  • #55
    UnitedIrishman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭UnitedIrishman


    WakeyTyke wrote: »
    :confused::confused::confused::eek:

    We won the Superbowl basically without any running game.

    When we have the hottest QB in the game, who is getting better every game he plays and the best receiving corp in the NFL why is the running game such a big issue?

    Now, the defensive secondary's tendency to regularly give up the big play, that is something to be concerned about!

    Well you could say the Packers did it without any running game but in the playoff games Starks had a huge couple of games (123 yards vs. Eagles, 74 yards and a TD vs. Bears).

    I know it's a passing league but the rushing side of things keeps defences honest. I don't think you'll see Grant or Starks getting huge amounts of carries or put up huge yardage but they need to gain yardage or else Rodgers will be under huge pressure from the opposition D.

    And totally agree with the secondary problem this year. Orton launched two bombs yesterday, one caught and the other called back - to a wide open Lloyd. Don't know if that's because of the D not putting enough pressure on or the secondary not covering well enough but they need to step it up a bit.


  • #56
    cooker3
    Registered Users Posts: 6,646 ✭✭✭cooker3


    I've only seen the New Orleams game so I am speaking from a position of ignorance but I think you guys are being way too pessimistic. Recall that we have always started, the first half of the season, very slowly in the Rodgers era hence we we've been wildcards the previous 2 seasons. The Patriots were not all conquering during their dynasty, barely scraped into play-offs 1 year, got destroyed by Bills another. From highlights I've seen and match reports I've read. We have been efficient and done the job whole beating some decent teams and We know this team has what it takes to turn it on when it really matters.
    At this point in the season I think we are exactly where we need to be.


  • #57
    me-skywalker
    Registered Users Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭me-skywalker


    Been thinking about the big plays we are allowing teams so regularly and I have come to the conclusion that the fact that we are ahead in the majority of gamess and sometimes a few scores ahead forces the opposing offense co-ord/QB to push harder for them bigger plays, to make them longer passes than they would in a tighter closer game. (so in essence our own off is forcing more press on our def by scoring so bloody much! Speaks volumes!)

    I'm willing to allow the defense some slack in fact we've forced a few turnovers and hada good stand off v Saints on day 1. Lets see how the Def holds up when we're ahead by 2 and they have the ball in our 20 on more regular occasions before beign too critical.


  • #58
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,109 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    Big game on Sunday night @ Atlanta. They'll have to execute well on offence while shutting down their dangerous run game.

    Rodgers is the "1st quarter" MVP. I hope he can continue playing as well. I also hope he can avoid taking hefty shots like he did when scoring his first TD on Sunday.


  • #59
    WakeyTyke
    Registered Users Posts: 526 ✭✭✭WakeyTyke


    Rodgers had probably the finest game of his career in last year's play-off game in Atlanta and playing indoors certainly is a positive for the Packs air offence, so this game will give a good indication if the offense is already again playing at that level, even so early in the season.

    You can be sure that Atlanta will be bursting for revenge which will surely make this the most intriguing game of the season so far.

    This game could very easily see the Pack lose their unbeaten record or, alternatively, see them cement their status as the hottest team in the NFL. Can not wait:D


  • #60
    UnitedIrishman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭UnitedIrishman


    WakeyTyke wrote: »
    Rodgers had probably the finest game of his career in last year's play-off game in Atlanta and playing indoors certainly is a positive for the Packs air offence, so this game will give a good indication if the offense is already again playing at that level, even so early in the season.

    You can be sure that Atlanta will be bursting for revenge which will surely make this the most intriguing game of the season so far.

    This game could very easily see the Pack lose their unbeaten record or, alternatively, see them cement their status as the hottest team in the NFL. Can not wait:D

    Going to be a great game. Matt Ryan is a top QB at home so his passing game will put the Packers under a bit of pressure whilst the chance to go into the bye week unbeaten (pending beating the 0-4 Rams Sunday week), would be a massive boost.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,109 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    me-skywalker wrote: »
    Been thinking about the big plays we are allowing teams so regularly and I have come to the conclusion that the fact that we are ahead in the majority of gamess and sometimes a few scores ahead forces the opposing offense co-ord/QB to push harder for them bigger plays, to make them longer passes than they would in a tighter closer game. (so in essence our own off is forcing more press on our def by scoring so bloody much! Speaks volumes!)

    Absolutely right! Opponents have been forced to abandon the run in favour of passing more.

    Two simple stats: Packers have had the fewest runs to defend against in the whole league, and are 4th in the league in opponents' pass attempts.

    The opposition are throwing more, which naturally leads to more big plays, but they are also making more mistakes. Packers are tied for the league lead with 8 interceptions.


Advertisement