| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Packershine50
Joined: 28 May 2009
Posts: 141
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
It's real simple...Bears beat the Colts...We embarrased the Bears...we more than embarrass the Colts.
Seriously though I like the Colts and they should be good in a couple years and my prayers go out to their head coach and family.
Having said that though Rodgers in a dome=BELT.
Predator in a dome on turf=more than beast and I'll say over on the post of O/U 1.5 sacks.
I'll say 42-13 for the simple fact Rodgers gets to wear his favorite shoes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GoneWithTheWind
Joined: 01 Jun 2012
Posts: 1020
Location: TommyC376=The Best Sig Maker.
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The Colts certainly have some offensive line issues and need some issues on defense but they're really not that far off. This game will be closer then you think.
Packers 34
Colts 24 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pack4life7
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 3101
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| GoneWithTheWind wrote: | The Colts certainly have some offensive line issues and need some issues on defense but they're really not that far off. This game will be closer then you think.
Packers 34
Colts 24 |
I could definitely see it. Not sure about the health of Freeney but if the Colts harass Rodgers and M3 ignores the running game our Offense has shown it can be shut down. That being said I think we've learned our lesson and Benson will get a lot of touches early resulting in our Offense moving the ball quite easily.
As for the Defense goes who knows which one is going to show up.
_________________
Ted brought us Clay
Same Old Jay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
palmy50
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13057
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Have read this take a few times now and just don't understand it. I see marked improvement in this years defense from last year. Clearly they still have some bugs to work out and I bet they fall a bit short of the leagues elite this year. But they showed up. Thing is, so did the HOF QB that is Drew Brees. Man made some big boy throws in that game. Just need to take away some of the easy ones he made. As a group, playing hard though.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
strat1080
Joined: 16 Apr 2010
Posts: 1544
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ramonesfan wrote: | I may be the only one who is worried about this game. Three-fold reasons.
1. I feel absolutely awful about Pagano. Leukemia, no matter how easy it is to cure, sucks. I feel that the Colts are going to come out with a little extra fire in their bellies, especially after the bye week, and are going to really be looking to take it to the Packers for their coach. Never underestimate a motivated team.
2. I am a little worried about Andrew Luck and the Colts D-Line. Capers seems adamant about playing a zone defense, and if our line doesn't put pressure on him I think that Luck could pick that zone apart. He's not Brees' level, but I would put him at Alex Smith level and he didn't seem to have any trouble with our zone.
I worry about the Colt's D-Line because the Seahawks showed that a simple four man rush could be all it takes to put pressure on Rodgers, and I think the Colts have the kind of talent to do that. If they get him on the run it could be a long day for our offense.
3. From what I hear the Vikings are a top 5 NFL team. Who is the one team to beat them? The Colts. Logic tells me that if the Colts can beat one of the best teams in the NFL, they should be able to do it to a team that may be considered top 15.
With all that being said, my prediction is Green Bay 34 Indy 13. |
It wasn't just the front 4 for the Seahawks. There was nowhere for Rodgers to go with the ball. Those corners flat out destroyed our WRs. They were invisible.
And no. I don't think the Colts have the talent on DL. They have a damn good pair of edge rushers but as we've seen in the past. That really doesn't bother Rodgers. He has had some of his best games against teams that have a notorious tandem of edge rushers. Rodgers struggles against a team that can contain the edge but collapse the interior.
The Colts secondary isn't even in the same stratosphere as Seattle. While I think the Colts will get pressure at times on Rodgers I know that there are going to be blown assignments by the Colts secondary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
strat1080
Joined: 16 Apr 2010
Posts: 1544
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| palmy50 wrote: | | Have read this take a few times now and just don't understand it. I see marked improvement in this years defense from last year. Clearly they still have some bugs to work out and I bet they fall a bit short of the leagues elite this year. But they showed up. Thing is, so did the HOF QB that is Drew Brees. Man made some big boy throws in that game. Just need to take away some of the easy ones he made. As a group, playing hard though. |
I agree. The Packers and Saints defenses were equally as inept last year. This year that just isn't the case for the Packers. The Saints haven't shown any improvement on defense but I think the Packers definitely have. The Packers were able to get some key stops and play solid red zone defense. Limiting the Saints to just two TDs in four trips to the red zone is a solid defensive performance. The Packers scored TDs in four out of five trips.
I think red zone defense is a key part of winning or losing football games. The Packers limited the Saints to 50% in the red zone while the Saints defense allowed the Packers to score a TD in 80% of their trips to the red zone, and really probably would have been five out of five if not for Rodgers getting poked in the eye. That was the difference in the game. Yes Brees threw for a bunch of yards but it took him 54 pass attempts to do so. He had 19 incompletions.
Simply looking at the yardage allowed to the Saints, it would appear the Packers haven't improved but I have definitely seen improvement. Jay Cutler with his new weapons would have torched last year's defense. The Saints put up 500 yards of offense on the 49ers in the playoffs last year. A defense considered by many to be the best in the NFL. The Packers already have half as many sacks as they had all last year.
We are starting a bunch of very young players on defense including multiple rookies. There are going to be growing pains. I think this defense will get better as the season goes along. It was completely different last year. That defense just got worse and worse as the season went on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pugger
Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 6398
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| strat1080 wrote: | | palmy50 wrote: | | Have read this take a few times now and just don't understand it. I see marked improvement in this years defense from last year. Clearly they still have some bugs to work out and I bet they fall a bit short of the leagues elite this year. But they showed up. Thing is, so did the HOF QB that is Drew Brees. Man made some big boy throws in that game. Just need to take away some of the easy ones he made. As a group, playing hard though. |
I agree. The Packers and Saints defenses were equally as inept last year. This year that just isn't the case for the Packers. The Saints haven't shown any improvement on defense but I think the Packers definitely have. The Packers were able to get some key stops and play solid red zone defense. Limiting the Saints to just two TDs in four trips to the red zone is a solid defensive performance. The Packers scored TDs in four out of five trips.
I think red zone defense is a key part of winning or losing football games. The Packers limited the Saints to 50% in the red zone while the Saints defense allowed the Packers to score a TD in 80% of their trips to the red zone, and really probably would have been five out of five if not for Rodgers getting poked in the eye. That was the difference in the game. Yes Brees threw for a bunch of yards but it took him 54 pass attempts to do so. He had 19 incompletions.
Simply looking at the yardage allowed to the Saints, it would appear the Packers haven't improved but I have definitely seen improvement. Jay Cutler with his new weapons would have torched last year's defense. The Saints put up 500 yards of offense on the 49ers in the playoffs last year. A defense considered by many to be the best in the NFL. The Packers already have half as many sacks as they had all last year.
We are starting a bunch of very young players on defense including multiple rookies. There are going to be growing pains. I think this defense will get better as the season goes along. It was completely different last year. That defense just got worse and worse as the season went on. |
And probably would have been 5 for 5 had Rodgers not gotten poked in the eye. That whole sequence of events changed that game big time - it was in effect a possible 14 point swing - and it took a solid drive in the 4th by Rodgers to secure the win.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ECPackers
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Posts: 940
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| strat1080 wrote: | | ramonesfan wrote: | I may be the only one who is worried about this game. Three-fold reasons.
1. I feel absolutely awful about Pagano. Leukemia, no matter how easy it is to cure, sucks. I feel that the Colts are going to come out with a little extra fire in their bellies, especially after the bye week, and are going to really be looking to take it to the Packers for their coach. Never underestimate a motivated team.
2. I am a little worried about Andrew Luck and the Colts D-Line. Capers seems adamant about playing a zone defense, and if our line doesn't put pressure on him I think that Luck could pick that zone apart. He's not Brees' level, but I would put him at Alex Smith level and he didn't seem to have any trouble with our zone.
I worry about the Colt's D-Line because the Seahawks showed that a simple four man rush could be all it takes to put pressure on Rodgers, and I think the Colts have the kind of talent to do that. If they get him on the run it could be a long day for our offense.
3. From what I hear the Vikings are a top 5 NFL team. Who is the one team to beat them? The Colts. Logic tells me that if the Colts can beat one of the best teams in the NFL, they should be able to do it to a team that may be considered top 15.
With all that being said, my prediction is Green Bay 34 Indy 13. |
It wasn't just the front 4 for the Seahawks. There was nowhere for Rodgers to go with the ball. Those corners flat out destroyed our WRs. They were invisible.
And no. I don't think the Colts have the talent on DL. They have a damn good pair of edge rushers but as we've seen in the past. That really doesn't bother Rodgers. He has had some of his best games against teams that have a notorious tandem of edge rushers. Rodgers struggles against a team that can contain the edge but collapse the interior.
The Colts secondary isn't even in the same stratosphere as Seattle. While I think the Colts will get pressure at times on Rodgers I know that there are going to be blown assignments by the Colts secondary. |
lets not PRETEND that bruce irvin didn't press Bulaga's face mask/helmt off his head almost every single play, and it NEVER got called until 2nd half...they never had 1 more sack.
_________________
GREEN BAY PACKERS
JARRET BUSH IS MY BOY!
Brewers
Bucks
Badgers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 11276
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
^it's over and done with. Hopefully this team treats that loss as they treated the loss to Atlanta in 2010(different circumstances between the teams and all, but still - lost the game at the end and both games had questionable calls.
| palmy50 wrote: | | Just need to take away some of the easy ones he made. As a group, playing hard though. |
Easier said than done, I'm guessing. Some of those third down completions ticked me off because Dom would completely change what he was doing(and what was working) to seemingly try something, only to see it backfire. QB's have made it look easy at times vs our 3rd down defense dating back to last year(Ok, maybe just good QB's but my point still stands). Honestly that is one of the only gripes I have with our defense.
_________________
@PJHotel_
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DavidatMIZZOU
Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 7959
Location: The ZOU
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Pugger wrote: |
And probably would have been 5 for 5 had Rodgers not gotten poked in the eye. That whole sequence of events changed that game big time - it was in effect a possible 14 point swing - and it took a solid drive in the 4th by Rodgers to secure the win. |
I would ammend that to say, "If Harrell never got in the game." I believe we could have scored with Cobb as a wildcat QB or even a direct snap to Kuhn or Benson. Harrell really is the worst player in the league.
_________________
GO PACK GO!
| mistakebytehlak wrote: |
My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justo
Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 10381
Location: Hood River, Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Isn't there some 3rd QB rule? If Cobb comes in and Rodgers didn't ready then what? You send out Harrell and no one else can play QB the rest of the game. the way you get around it with the wildcat is if the QB is lined up at WR like most are and Aaron couldn't have been on the field.
_________________
| DavidatMIZZOU wrote: | | GBPACKMAN4LIFE wrote: | | At least they're not a cheating disgrace to their respective sports. |
We don't talk about Wilson here. There's a Seahawks board for that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 9371
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| justo wrote: | | Isn't there some 3rd QB rule? If Cobb comes in and Rodgers didn't ready then what? You send out Harrell and no one else can play QB the rest of the game. the way you get around it with the wildcat is if the QB is lined up at WR like most are and Aaron couldn't have been on the field. |
The 3rd QB rule only applied to the QB that was part of the gameday "inactives" but suited up anyway. Teams basically got to dress their 3rd QB without him being part of the game day 45 man active roster. There is no 3rd QB rule anymore which has led to more and more teams not even carrying a 3rd QB on their roster.
_________________
| Wilfred wrote: | | Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBURGE25
Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 9892
Location: Canadia
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Cam gave us fits last year. I don't see this #1 pick giving us as much trouble. And with Pagano's terrible news, who knows what the state of the team is right now. Will they be prepared?
I hope this doesn't turn in to a trap game for us.
_________________
PSN: ShiiNyIV
FC: 1521-3326-4221
FLEX TWB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justo
Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 10381
Location: Hood River, Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | justo wrote: | | Isn't there some 3rd QB rule? If Cobb comes in and Rodgers didn't ready then what? You send out Harrell and no one else can play QB the rest of the game. the way you get around it with the wildcat is if the QB is lined up at WR like most are and Aaron couldn't have been on the field. |
The 3rd QB rule only applied to the QB that was part of the gameday "inactives" but suited up anyway. Teams basically got to dress their 3rd QB without him being part of the game day 45 man active roster. There is no 3rd QB rule anymore which has led to more and more teams not even carrying a 3rd QB on their roster. |
Never mind.....ignore my post then 
_________________
| DavidatMIZZOU wrote: | | GBPACKMAN4LIFE wrote: | | At least they're not a cheating disgrace to their respective sports. |
We don't talk about Wilson here. There's a Seahawks board for that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GBPACKMAN4LIFE
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 16972
Location: Spokane, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
COLTS
Did not participate – LB Pat Angerer (foot), CB Vontae Davis (ankle), CB Justin King (groin), G Seth Olsen (knee), G Joe Reitz (knee), LB Robert Mathis (ankle).
Limited participation – RB Mewelde Moore (ankle), C Samson Satele (knee).
Full participation – TE Coby Fleener (head), LB Dwight Freeney (ankle).
Colts could be without Davis and King. Davis is a starter (albeit a bad one), and King is the third/fourth corner. If those two are out, the Indianapolis CB group will consist of Jerraud Powers, Cassius Vaugn, Josh Gordy, and Darius Butler.
_________________
| DontTazeMeBro wrote: | | Packers 20, Ravens 44 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
