| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
El ramster
Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 24334
Location: Sam Bradfords Bed!
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| c0insnap wrote: | People have such knee-jerk reactions. The truth is that we still don't know who's who in the NFL...
The damn Bills were what? 5-0? 6-0? To start last year and ended up sucking. I know they lost Fred Jackson, but he wasn't the only reason.
Let a few more games play out before we start crowning divisions, champions, and MVP's.
I understand the speculation, but you people state it with such a matter-of-factness... |
It happened to them twice lol. With Trent Edwards as well.
_________________
| Dus10 wrote: | | Note to self: Do not lose a sig bet to Rammy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16410
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ugLymayNe wrote: | | Superman(DH23) wrote: | | Pack4life7 wrote: | | ugLymayNe wrote: | | Superman(DH23) wrote: | | Did you watch the game? The Pack played a 2 deep look the entire game, something they have never done before,.........................If you can't realize how much the Pack changed their look for that 1 game, you aren't paying attention. |
Uhm.
Sorry...but you don't know the Packers very well if you say that. 2011 they got away from it(Peprah was not trustable in that call without Nick Collins being able to over compensate) but in 2009 and 2010 their safeties played predominately 2 deep coverage. Last year vs the Lions the Packers used a similar game plan on Thanksgiving. |
This. Watch more football before you comment on a teams past. The way we played you was how Dom called D all of 2010 when we won the Super Bowl. |
Sorry, but you need to watch more football, b/c that's not how the Pack has ever played the Bears before, the commentators even talked about it. It's always been nearly exclusively press man coverage. There was no press man coverage in this game. And there was always AT LEAST 2 defenders surrounding Marshall. |
Way to change your argument.
You went from "The Pack played a 2 deep look the entire game, something they have never done before" to " It's always been nearly exclusively press man coverage. There was no press man coverage in this game."
When you say two deep look, that means safeties - not how much of a cusion the CB gives WR's. Of course were not going to play bump when you have WR's like Marshall/Jeffery - previously your WR's were Hester and Knox and those are WR's you play bump and run against. |
I think you and I are on the same page, my argument is really w/ Pack4Life7 who is saying the defensive gameplan was the same as it always is. Its obvious to anyone who was watching the game that the gameplan was completely different than in years past. The 2 deep look w/ off zone coverage and very little blitzing compared to a single high w/ press man coverage, and lots of blitzing from different angles is a completely different gameplan.
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10740
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
To me that change isn't so drastic, but it might be to you because it was different specifically for your team. Considering the shift in play style you had this year at WR it shouldn't have been so surprising. After the Larry Fitzgerald fiasco in the 2009 wild card game the Packers have tried to avoid playing bump vs bigger WR's.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16410
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ugLymayNe wrote: | | To me that change isn't so drastic, but it might be to you because it was different specifically for your team. Considering the shift in play style you had this year at WR it shouldn't have been so surprising. After the Larry Fitzgerald fiasco in the 2009 wild card game the Packers have tried to avoid playing bump vs bigger WR's. |
It was so shocking b/c it was a complete polar shift in the way I've watched your dbs play our WRs in I don't know how long, and seeing the DL line up and rush 4 on every down. I think the Bears prepared all week for press coverage, and heavy blitzing and they expected to get hot reads to the big WRs. Maybe if Webb could have held off Matthews for 2.5 secs 1 on 1 we would have seen that come eventually.
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ugLymayNe
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 10740
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Superman(DH23) wrote: | | ugLymayNe wrote: | | To me that change isn't so drastic, but it might be to you because it was different specifically for your team. Considering the shift in play style you had this year at WR it shouldn't have been so surprising. After the Larry Fitzgerald fiasco in the 2009 wild card game the Packers have tried to avoid playing bump vs bigger WR's. |
It was so shocking b/c it was a complete polar shift in the way I've watched your dbs play our WRs in I don't know how long, and seeing the DL line up and rush 4 on every down. I think the Bears prepared all week for press coverage, and heavy blitzing and they expected to get hot reads to the big WRs. Maybe if Webb could have held off Matthews for 2.5 secs 1 on 1 we would have seen that come eventually. |
Packers actually busted out some neat blitz packages vs you guys- Specifically with Hawk lined outside of Clay edge rushing. He didn't get any push on those plays, but it gave the OL a headache dealing with Clay(the LG was burnt once or twice). Sort of similar to you guys running Shae outside of Peppers on a few plays - creates the same type of mismatch.
_________________
@PJHotel_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nbanflguy
Joined: 16 Jan 2011
Posts: 564
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| eagles101 wrote: | | Nbanflguy wrote: | | Nbanflguy wrote: | | TL-TwoWinsAway wrote: | The Lions have lost three close games, two to quality opponents, and due to uniquely terrible ST play. They haven't played well at any point over the last three weeks, yet were bounces away from winning.
If they find an offensive identity, and shore up the ST play, there isn't a reason why they can't win a bunch of games down the stretch. |
9 of the injury riddled Vikings 13 losses last year were by 7 points or less, but no one cared. Everyone said bad teams find a way to lose games and thats what the Lions are doing. They had a 5-0 start last year and even that was kind of fluky with 2 huge comebacks against the Vikes and Cowboys. Since then they are 6-10. 6-10 over the past 16 games. They are simply not that good. Over the past 16 games they havent been able to run the ball, stop the run, stop the pass, or convert 3rd downs. They score alot of points, but they give up alot of points to. Their special teams is horribly bad. They commit a ton of penalties and play undisciplined football. Stafford is good, but overrated and throws alot of ints. Calvin Johnson is amazing, but no other wr on their team can catch a pass. They also havent beat a team over .500. They have beat no good teams and struggled to beat some bad teams.
The truth is, they got out to a hot start last year against bad and injured teams and since then they have come back to earth. |
Am I really the only one who sees this? |
i think so...its kind of a silly post in general.
they are 2 or 3 players picking up there game from getting back in the hunt. they dont have a running game but thats because there rb is injured. titus young seems like a good option for them. if pettigrew could learn how to catch easy passes they would be doing a lot better. also if they fixed there special teams there team improves seven fold.
discipline is there biggest issue. they play very undisciplined football. if there team fixed that they can be going places even if they dont fix the other things. |
I respect your opinion, but I disagree. Almost every thing I said was not an opinion. They were facts. They are 6-10 over their past 16 games. They did not beat 1 team last year that finished over .500, They cant run the ball, they cant stop the run, they cant stop the pass, they give up points they commit penalties and are undisciplined, their special teams is horrific, they dont convert 3rd downs, and any wr not named Calvin can not catch. Those are not opinions. Those are facts.
Are you saying they cant run because Javhid Best is hurt? The same guy who has a 3.7 ypc for his career and if you take out 1 game it goes down to 3.2.
_________________
"Friends dont let friends be Packer fans"
Vikings Fanatic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1_two_3_forte
Joined: 17 Oct 2010
Posts: 1454
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Nbanflguy wrote: | | Nbanflguy wrote: | | TL-TwoWinsAway wrote: | The Lions have lost three close games, two to quality opponents, and due to uniquely terrible ST play. They haven't played well at any point over the last three weeks, yet were bounces away from winning.
If they find an offensive identity, and shore up the ST play, there isn't a reason why they can't win a bunch of games down the stretch. |
9 of the injury riddled Vikings 13 losses last year were by 7 points or less, but no one cared. Everyone said bad teams find a way to lose games and thats what the Lions are doing. They had a 5-0 start last year and even that was kind of fluky with 2 huge comebacks against the Vikes and Cowboys. Since then they are 6-10. 6-10 over the past 16 games. They are simply not that good. Over the past 16 games they havent been able to run the ball, stop the run, stop the pass, or convert 3rd downs. They score alot of points, but they give up alot of points to. Their special teams is horribly bad. They commit a ton of penalties and play undisciplined football. Stafford is good, but overrated and throws alot of ints. Calvin Johnson is amazing, but no other wr on their team can catch a pass. They also havent beat a team over .500. They have beat no good teams and struggled to beat some bad teams.
The truth is, they got out to a hot start last year against bad and injured teams and since then they have come back to earth. |
Am I really the only one who sees this? |
Dude, I've been saying this for a long time.
Lions are overrated. Last year, they did not be ONE winning team.
They had to overcome 15 point leads in 3 games to win IIRC....against losing teams.
They lose those games? They win 7 games...and they are an afterthought.
They are simply OVERRATED. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
1_two_3_forte
Joined: 17 Oct 2010
Posts: 1454
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SnA ExclusiVe wrote: | | Mossburg wrote: | | SnA ExclusiVe wrote: | | Mossburg wrote: | | Quote: | | The Packers are having serious offensive troubles right now, and let's put aside them playing a CFL defense in NO, they're not that good. |
The Packers have played 3 outstanding defensive teams in 4 games....
Outside of the 1st half against Seattle, they haven't looked bad at all offensively considering who they were facing. |
It's not even really the defenses they've faced. Just watching Aaron Rodgers, he doesn't look the same. His throws look rushed, his footwork looks suspect at times, and his accuracy is NOT what it was last year. |
I'm guessing you're basing this off of the 1st half of the Seattle game.
Rodgers looks fine. The Bears, Seahawks, and Niners made the Packers earn every yard they got. Just because they don't make it look easy does not mean they are not playing good football. Rodgers is still completing 70% of his passes, a lot of it to WRs. |
No, it was from watching some of the Saints game. |
No - this is wrong. Rodgers is going to tear this league apart.
1st game? San Fran - disgusting defense
2nd game? Bears - Ferocious defense
3rd game? Seattle - Top 5 defense
4th game? Saints....ummm destroys them.
He played against, arguably, 3 top 5 defenses the first 3 weeks - and didn't play super bad either. Now since that stretch is over....he will start ripping this league to shreds again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LA Niner Fan
Joined: 20 Oct 2011
Posts: 324
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well I guess we shouldn't see many more posts that say "do you know what Rodgers does against top 10 defenses or how good his numbers are against top 10 defenses" like we've seen over the last year or so to his fanboys that think he is a godly QB. Because apparently like all QBs, even the greats, he struggles against them.
Although he was playing better and looked more confident last year, he was rarely tested against good defenses and maybe that's why he had such a historic season.
Not saying he's bad or not a top 3 QB in the league, but I think he has been a bit overrated in the last year or so by many on this board. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Superman(DH23)
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16410
Location: Abdi on the sick sig
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ugLymayNe wrote: | | Superman(DH23) wrote: | | ugLymayNe wrote: | | To me that change isn't so drastic, but it might be to you because it was different specifically for your team. Considering the shift in play style you had this year at WR it shouldn't have been so surprising. After the Larry Fitzgerald fiasco in the 2009 wild card game the Packers have tried to avoid playing bump vs bigger WR's. |
It was so shocking b/c it was a complete polar shift in the way I've watched your dbs play our WRs in I don't know how long, and seeing the DL line up and rush 4 on every down. I think the Bears prepared all week for press coverage, and heavy blitzing and they expected to get hot reads to the big WRs. Maybe if Webb could have held off Matthews for 2.5 secs 1 on 1 we would have seen that come eventually. |
Packers actually busted out some neat blitz packages vs you guys- Specifically with Hawk lined outside of Clay edge rushing. He didn't get any push on those plays, but it gave the OL a headache dealing with Clay(the LG was burnt once or twice). Sort of similar to you guys running Shae outside of Peppers on a few plays - creates the same type of mismatch. |
Technically that wasn't a blitz, they only brought 4 and one of the DEs dropped. It was the closest to the psycho looks that I'm used to, but still was just creatively rushing 4.
_________________
| OneBadCat wrote: | | Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris00cm
Joined: 01 Feb 2008
Posts: 16216
Location: St. Charles, Missouri
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The stats speak for themselves. Right now the NFC West is the best division in football. There's no doubt about it.
_________________
Xbox Live Gamertag: Chris Sanity |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RandyMossIsBoss
Joined: 01 Jun 2012
Posts: 8058
Location: Peppers90 on the sig, Kiltman on the avy
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
NFCW vs. NFCN
1. San Francisco 49ers
2. Green Bay Packers
3. Chicago Bears
4. Arizona Cardinals
5. Seattle Seahawks
6. Minnesota Vikings
7. Detroit Lions
8. St. Louis Rams
For now I'm going with the West, NFCN in a very close second though. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see the power shift back to the NFCN in the next few weeks.
NFC East is da best doe
_________________
Chip...Chip...Chipadelphia |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteelKing728
Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 10849
Location: Pittsburgh
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Badger75 wrote: | Some really good team is going to go wheeling into Detroit and find themselves in a trap game. 
The Vikings get a hot schedule at the end. Week 10 they host the Lions, a bye, Week 12 at Bears, Week 13 at GB, Week 14 host Bears, Week 16 at Texans and they conclude by hosting the Packers.  |
and the only one that scares me from that list is the Texans.
But, they could be resting their starters.
I feel Minnesota could take Chicago, Greenbay and St. Louis.
_________________
Thanks Jamison on that avi.
2013 Adopt a Minnesota Viking - Jared Allen - DE - #69 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBURGE25
Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 5806
Location: Canadia
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SteelKing728 wrote: | | Badger75 wrote: | Some really good team is going to go wheeling into Detroit and find themselves in a trap game.
The Vikings get a hot schedule at the end. Week 10 they host the Lions, a bye, Week 12 at Bears, Week 13 at GB, Week 14 host Bears, Week 16 at Texans and they conclude by hosting the Packers. |
and the only one that scares me from that list is the Texans.
But, they could be resting their starters.
I feel Minnesota could take Chicago, Greenbay and St. Louis. |
We shall see about that soon. I still say GB sweeps the Vikes.
_________________
Kempes on the sig
XBL ShiiNy IV |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yfz01
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 8297
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| JBURGE25 wrote: | | SteelKing728 wrote: | | Badger75 wrote: | Some really good team is going to go wheeling into Detroit and find themselves in a trap game.
The Vikings get a hot schedule at the end. Week 10 they host the Lions, a bye, Week 12 at Bears, Week 13 at GB, Week 14 host Bears, Week 16 at Texans and they conclude by hosting the Packers. |
and the only one that scares me from that list is the Texans.
But, they could be resting their starters.
I feel Minnesota could take Chicago, Greenbay and St. Louis. |
We shall see about that soon. I still say GB sweeps the Vikes. |
Wouldn't shock me. That high powered offense is still going against a young and inexperienced secondary. As good as Megatron is (Best in the league), I think Greg Jennings is a more difficult matchup for Chris Cook and company.
_________________
Lil Uno with the sig. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
