PDA

View Full Version : Green Bay Packers Discussion


Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

Moses
12-04-2006, 09:03 PM
I really don't think RB is as big of a need as everyone seems to think it is. Sure, Lynch would be great, but Green still runs with speed and power, when there is a hole. And even if there isn't he still has the ability to make something happen. I still wouldn't be opposed to Lynch, but i still think Green can be the RB.

I like Green but he's not the long-term solution. First of all, he's a UFA so he might not even be back next year. Also, he's aging and he's starting to show signs of slowing down. Finally, he's been constantly dinged up and there is a high probability that he'll miss time due to injuries. I could see the Packers scraping by for one more season with their current runningback situation but it will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Picking up a top guy in the 1st or 2nd round seems like the perfect answer to me.

jackalope
12-04-2006, 09:24 PM
any word on if Tauscher will play this week?

RockJock07
12-04-2006, 09:32 PM
Well said moses, I think a RB in round 1 is the overwhelming choice for alot of Packer Fans.

I like Kolby Smith too. If we could get Lynch and have Smith as a #2 and morency as 3rd and a change of pace back.

They need to clean house in the RB dept.

A WR that has some bulk to him would be nice, Dallas Baker or Bowe would be nice.

Matt Spaeth would be a nice fit, he'll probably go in the 4th round.

Boston
12-04-2006, 09:39 PM
The packers need to get a tall, legitamate deep threat in this draft. You can tell Favre has been missing Walker this year, and even last year.

12-04-2006, 09:43 PM
The packers need to get a tall, legitamate deep threat in this draft. You can tell Favre has been missing Walker this year, and even last year.Walker was the most perfect receiver for Favre. He would just throw it up and Walker would come down with it most of the time. Walker was nothing short of amazing the last year he played. It still pisses me off that he left.

What about Randy Moss? Is this someone that anybody can see coming to Green Bay. I doubt it, but I can dream sometimes.

49ersfan_87
12-04-2006, 09:44 PM
Well we are facing you guys next week at home. Should be an interesting game. I loved those steve young-brett favre matchups. You guys always got the best of us too :evil:

So anyways, what do you think your guys chances are? I watched that game on sunday and you got destroyed by the jets. Your defense is almost as bad as ours, but our offense isnt so good either. I think the best way for us to win is to run with gore gore and gore. We also need to work in some VD and bryant. Hopefully VD will have his breakout game.

ny10804
12-04-2006, 09:46 PM
I think the most immediate needs, in order, are:

(coverage) Strong Safety -- LaRon Landry
ZBS Running Back -- Marshawn Lynch
Complete DE -- Gaines Adams?
WCO Possesion WR (WR3) -- Calvin Johnson

followed by mild concerns:

(future) Cornerback -- Leon Hall
Complete TE -- Zach Miller (Franks is no longer a threat, Martin can't block)
ZBS Tackle -- Joe StaleyRun-Stopping DT -- Amobi Okoye
QB of the Future -- Brady Quinn (I don't have a good feeling about Rodgers)
SSLB -- (I can't put this under the option below, I just believe Popp has already reached his ceiling, and he's nothing special)

and, no concern:
Center
RG, LG
WSLB
FS
DT1
DE1
WR1
WR2

12-04-2006, 09:47 PM
Well we are facing you guys next week at home. Should be an interesting game. I loved those steve young-brett favre matchups. You guys always got the best of us too :evil:

So anyways, what do you think your guys chances are? I watched that game on sunday and you got destroyed by the jets. Your defense is almost as bad as ours, but our offense isnt so good either. I think the best way for us to win is to run with gore gore and gore. We also need to work in some VD and bryant. Hopefully VD will have his breakout game.I think it should be a pretty close game. Obviously we have been struggling and you guys have been OK. But I think we match up pretty evenly and I wouldn't be surprised if this came down to the wire. For some reason I think this will be a low-scoring game, even though it's unlikely.

GB12
12-04-2006, 10:34 PM
Well we are facing you guys next week at home. Should be an interesting game. I loved those steve young-brett favre matchups. You guys always got the best of us too :evil:

So anyways, what do you think your guys chances are? I watched that game on sunday and you got destroyed by the jets. Your defense is almost as bad as ours, but our offense isnt so good either. I think the best way for us to win is to run with gore gore and gore. We also need to work in some VD and bryant. Hopefully VD will have his breakout game.

:lol: :lol:

Anyways I think it will be close, I also thought the Jets game would be close, but I like how this one matches up better.

roughrider30
12-05-2006, 12:13 AM
Well we are facing you guys next week at home. Should be an interesting game. I loved those steve young-brett favre matchups. You guys always got the best of us too :evil:

So anyways, what do you think your guys chances are? I watched that game on sunday and you got destroyed by the jets. Your defense is almost as bad as ours, but our offense isnt so good either. I think the best way for us to win is to run with gore gore and gore. We also need to work in some VD and bryant. Hopefully VD will have his breakout game.

:lol: :lol:

Anyways I think it will be close, I also thought the Jets game would be close, but I like how this one matches up better.

watching them this sunday i realized the jets are a pretty good team this year. everyone just underestimated them coming into this year, including me. Pennington looked really good yesterday

TitleTown088
12-05-2006, 12:44 AM
Well we are facing you guys next week at home. Should be an interesting game. I loved those steve young-brett favre matchups. You guys always got the best of us too :evil:

So anyways, what do you think your guys chances are? I watched that game on sunday and you got destroyed by the jets. Your defense is almost as bad as ours, but our offense isnt so good either. I think the best way for us to win is to run with gore gore and gore. We also need to work in some VD and bryant. Hopefully VD will have his breakout game.

:lol: :lol:

Anyways I think it will be close, I also thought the Jets game would be close, but I like how this one matches up better.

watching them this sunday i realized the jets are a pretty good team this year. everyone just underestimated them coming into this year, including me. Pennington looked really good yesterday

everyone looks good agianst the packers pass defense.

Nitschke-Hawk
12-05-2006, 10:17 AM
I really don't think RB is as big of a need as everyone seems to think it is. Sure, Lynch would be great, but Green still runs with speed and power, when there is a hole. And even if there isn't he still has the ability to make something happen. I still wouldn't be opposed to Lynch, but i still think Green can be the RB.

I like Green but he's not the long-term solution. First of all, he's a UFA so he might not even be back next year. Also, he's aging and he's starting to show signs of slowing down. Finally, he's been constantly dinged up and there is a high probability that he'll miss time due to injuries. I could see the Packers scraping by for one more season with their current runningback situation but it will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Picking up a top guy in the 1st or 2nd round seems like the perfect answer to me.

The problem with the running game has been the inconsistent blocking, Ahman Green's game has only slightly diminished, he's had a 70 yarder and several other 10 plus yard runs showing that he still has it, like the Minnesota game there were a few runs with good blocking and got into the Safeties before he was tackled, the other times, there was no blocking whatsoever, I agree we need a back that is almost as capable as Ahman when he's not in the game, obviously, if Ahman isn't resigned RB will probably be the first round pick, and it might even be if he is back. I just don't like it when people say, let's get an RB because Ahman has lost it, no, he hasn't, watch what he does when somebody decides to block.

Now moving on, I was thinking this morning and, if Brady Quinn is still on the board when we pick, would you (everybody) be for, or against picking him? Personally I would be for it, I've seen a lot more from Brady Quinn that would lead me to believe he is the real deal than I have from Rodgers. Now I'm not a ND fan but one player I really like is Quinn, I think he's a can't miss and I don't know where ND would be without him, something we may end up lacking in the future is big name guys and the ability to draw players to the franchise and become boring to the public, I think if we have Hawk on Defense and Quinn on Offense we're going to have our two franchise players for the next decade certainly two guys who have All-Pro futures in front of them.

roughrider30
12-05-2006, 10:48 AM
I really don't think RB is as big of a need as everyone seems to think it is. Sure, Lynch would be great, but Green still runs with speed and power, when there is a hole. And even if there isn't he still has the ability to make something happen. I still wouldn't be opposed to Lynch, but i still think Green can be the RB.

I like Green but he's not the long-term solution. First of all, he's a UFA so he might not even be back next year. Also, he's aging and he's starting to show signs of slowing down. Finally, he's been constantly dinged up and there is a high probability that he'll miss time due to injuries. I could see the Packers scraping by for one more season with their current runningback situation but it will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Picking up a top guy in the 1st or 2nd round seems like the perfect answer to me.

The problem with the running game has been the inconsistent blocking, Ahman Green's game has only slightly diminished, he's had a 70 yarder and several other 10 plus yard runs showing that he still has it, like the Minnesota game there were a few runs with good blocking and got into the Safeties before he was tackled, the other times, there was no blocking whatsoever, I agree we need a back that is almost as capable as Ahman when he's not in the game, obviously, if Ahman isn't resigned RB will probably be the first round pick, and it might even be if he is back. I just don't like it when people say, let's get an RB because Ahman has lost it, no, he hasn't, watch what he does when somebody decides to block.

Now moving on, I was thinking this morning and, if Brady Quinn is still on the board when we pick, would you (everybody) be for, or against picking him? Personally I would be for it, I've seen a lot more from Brady Quinn that would lead me to believe he is the real deal than I have from Rodgers. Now I'm not a ND fan but one player I really like is Quinn, I think he's a can't miss and I don't know where ND would be without him, something we may end up lacking in the future is big name guys and the ability to draw players to the franchise and become boring to the public, I think if we have Hawk on Defense and Quinn on Offense we're going to have our two franchise players for the next decade certainly two guys who have All-Pro futures in front of them.

I havent really seen anyone give that as a reason for wanting an RB in the first round. Green has been solid this year and rebounded nicely from his injury, but as people have said he is almost ancient in terms of RBs and he is in a contract year. I dont think the reason we should get an RB is because Green has lost it. He has been pretty effective at times and not at all at others. This is caused by what u said the O-Line when their on hes on and when their not hes not. That is part of the problem tho, Green hasnt really been able to make something out of nothing like he used to. If he has a big run its usually becuase of the hole that was created and i dont think ive seen him break a big gain on a situation where it looks like there is no where to go. I think he lost the ability to create his own holes lik he used to.

IMO Lynch is the kind of player that will be able to do that.

and about Quinn i wouldnt be against taking him this year, but i would really like to give Rodgers a chance first.

Moses
12-05-2006, 12:15 PM
I really don't think RB is as big of a need as everyone seems to think it is. Sure, Lynch would be great, but Green still runs with speed and power, when there is a hole. And even if there isn't he still has the ability to make something happen. I still wouldn't be opposed to Lynch, but i still think Green can be the RB.

I like Green but he's not the long-term solution. First of all, he's a UFA so he might not even be back next year. Also, he's aging and he's starting to show signs of slowing down. Finally, he's been constantly dinged up and there is a high probability that he'll miss time due to injuries. I could see the Packers scraping by for one more season with their current runningback situation but it will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Picking up a top guy in the 1st or 2nd round seems like the perfect answer to me.

The problem with the running game has been the inconsistent blocking, Ahman Green's game has only slightly diminished, he's had a 70 yarder and several other 10 plus yard runs showing that he still has it, like the Minnesota game there were a few runs with good blocking and got into the Safeties before he was tackled, the other times, there was no blocking whatsoever, I agree we need a back that is almost as capable as Ahman when he's not in the game, obviously, if Ahman isn't resigned RB will probably be the first round pick, and it might even be if he is back. I just don't like it when people say, let's get an RB because Ahman has lost it, no, he hasn't, watch what he does when somebody decides to block.

Now moving on, I was thinking this morning and, if Brady Quinn is still on the board when we pick, would you (everybody) be for, or against picking him? Personally I would be for it, I've seen a lot more from Brady Quinn that would lead me to believe he is the real deal than I have from Rodgers. Now I'm not a ND fan but one player I really like is Quinn, I think he's a can't miss and I don't know where ND would be without him, something we may end up lacking in the future is big name guys and the ability to draw players to the franchise and become boring to the public, I think if we have Hawk on Defense and Quinn on Offense we're going to have our two franchise players for the next decade certainly two guys who have All-Pro futures in front of them.

You can't give up on Rodgers before he's had a chance to play. It just doesn't make sense. I'm not saying Green isn't good anymore, I'm just saying he's declining and he's not a long-term solution.

TitleTown088
12-05-2006, 12:27 PM
I really don't think RB is as big of a need as everyone seems to think it is. Sure, Lynch would be great, but Green still runs with speed and power, when there is a hole. And even if there isn't he still has the ability to make something happen. I still wouldn't be opposed to Lynch, but i still think Green can be the RB.

I like Green but he's not the long-term solution. First of all, he's a UFA so he might not even be back next year. Also, he's aging and he's starting to show signs of slowing down. Finally, he's been constantly dinged up and there is a high probability that he'll miss time due to injuries. I could see the Packers scraping by for one more season with their current runningback situation but it will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Picking up a top guy in the 1st or 2nd round seems like the perfect answer to me.

The problem with the running game has been the inconsistent blocking, Ahman Green's game has only slightly diminished, he's had a 70 yarder and several other 10 plus yard runs showing that he still has it, like the Minnesota game there were a few runs with good blocking and got into the Safeties before he was tackled, the other times, there was no blocking whatsoever, I agree we need a back that is almost as capable as Ahman when he's not in the game, obviously, if Ahman isn't resigned RB will probably be the first round pick, and it might even be if he is back. I just don't like it when people say, let's get an RB because Ahman has lost it, no, he hasn't, watch what he does when somebody decides to block.

Now moving on, I was thinking this morning and, if Brady Quinn is still on the board when we pick, would you (everybody) be for, or against picking him? Personally I would be for it, I've seen a lot more from Brady Quinn that would lead me to believe he is the real deal than I have from Rodgers. Now I'm not a ND fan but one player I really like is Quinn, I think he's a can't miss and I don't know where ND would be without him, something we may end up lacking in the future is big name guys and the ability to draw players to the franchise and become boring to the public, I think if we have Hawk on Defense and Quinn on Offense we're going to have our two franchise players for the next decade certainly two guys who have All-Pro futures in front of them.

You can't give up on Rodgers before he's had a chance to play. It just doesn't make sense. I'm not saying Green isn't good anymore, I'm just saying he's declining and he's not a long-term solution.
Yeah if Lynch or AP are avialable the packers better take one.

70challenger457
12-05-2006, 04:29 PM
Yeah if Lynch or AP are avialable the packers better take one.
QTF

GB12
12-05-2006, 07:54 PM
Francies is cut and Holiday is signed. http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=2&date=12/5/2006&id=15380

TitleTown088
12-05-2006, 08:10 PM
Francies is cut and Holiday is signed. http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=2&date=12/5/2006&id=15380

anyone think the pack should pick up tony parrish?

sik wit it
12-05-2006, 08:11 PM
I really don't think RB is as big of a need as everyone seems to think it is. Sure, Lynch would be great, but Green still runs with speed and power, when there is a hole. And even if there isn't he still has the ability to make something happen. I still wouldn't be opposed to Lynch, but i still think Green can be the RB.

I like Green but he's not the long-term solution. First of all, he's a UFA so he might not even be back next year. Also, he's aging and he's starting to show signs of slowing down. Finally, he's been constantly dinged up and there is a high probability that he'll miss time due to injuries. I could see the Packers scraping by for one more season with their current runningback situation but it will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. Picking up a top guy in the 1st or 2nd round seems like the perfect answer to me.

The problem with the running game has been the inconsistent blocking, Ahman Green's game has only slightly diminished, he's had a 70 yarder and several other 10 plus yard runs showing that he still has it, like the Minnesota game there were a few runs with good blocking and got into the Safeties before he was tackled, the other times, there was no blocking whatsoever, I agree we need a back that is almost as capable as Ahman when he's not in the game, obviously, if Ahman isn't resigned RB will probably be the first round pick, and it might even be if he is back. I just don't like it when people say, let's get an RB because Ahman has lost it, no, he hasn't, watch what he does when somebody decides to block.

Now moving on, I was thinking this morning and, if Brady Quinn is still on the board when we pick, would you (everybody) be for, or against picking him? Personally I would be for it, I've seen a lot more from Brady Quinn that would lead me to believe he is the real deal than I have from Rodgers. Now I'm not a ND fan but one player I really like is Quinn, I think he's a can't miss and I don't know where ND would be without him, something we may end up lacking in the future is big name guys and the ability to draw players to the franchise and become boring to the public, I think if we have Hawk on Defense and Quinn on Offense we're going to have our two franchise players for the next decade certainly two guys who have All-Pro futures in front of them.
i hate brady quinn and i dont want a family affair

jackalope
12-05-2006, 09:09 PM
Yeah if Lynch or AP are avialable the packers better take one.
QTF :lol: almost. nice 1st try though

i don't think we should take Quinn. i have faith in Rodgers. it's nothing against Quinn but we shouldn't spend another 1st on a QB after getting Rodgers only 2 years ago.

GB12
12-05-2006, 09:16 PM
Yeah if Lynch or AP are avialable the packers better take one.
QTF :lol: almost. nice 1st try though

i don't think we should take Quinn. i have faith in Rodgers. it's nothing against Quinn but we shouldn't spend another 1st on a QB after getting Rodgers only 2 years ago.

Agreed, there is no way we should waste a first round pick on a QB. We have to at least see what Rogers can do. And even then he needs to start a couple years before we replace him.

Nitschke-Hawk
12-05-2006, 10:31 PM
Good story here:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=538513

It reminded me that Underwood may be starting rigt now had he not been injured and Allen would help our D tackle rotation

TitleTown088
12-06-2006, 01:55 AM
Good story here:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=538513

It reminded me that Underwood may be starting rigt now had he not been injured and Allen would help our D tackle rotation

yeah.. but the pack still need landry :roll:

they don't need anymore safties!! we need a new DC.

Boston
12-06-2006, 12:52 PM
Good story here:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=538513

It reminded me that Underwood may be starting rigt now had he not been injured and Allen would help our D tackle rotation

yeah.. but the pack still need landry :roll:

they don't need anymore safties!! we need a new DC.

We need...


http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/18/189766.jpg

TitleTown088
12-06-2006, 05:07 PM
why is there so many Gb packers threads?

70challenger457
12-06-2006, 05:12 PM
why is there so many Gb packers threads?
well I tell ya what I told my german teacher every day freshman year, Ich veiB nicht = I don't know

70challenger457
12-06-2006, 05:13 PM
why is there so many Gb packers threads?
well I tell ya what I told my german teacher every day freshman year, Ich veiB nicht = I don't know

TitleTown088
12-06-2006, 06:05 PM
favre needs surgery

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-packers-favre&prov=ap&type=lgns there are also some interesting comments in there by brett.

jackalope
12-06-2006, 06:32 PM
if Bates was willing to take the DC job now that'd be great, but i don't see us firing McCarthy for Bates after 1 season.

jackalope
12-06-2006, 06:32 PM
if Bates was willing to take the DC job now that'd be great, but i don't see us firing McCarthy for Bates after 1 season.

jackalope
12-06-2006, 06:33 PM
if Bates was willing to take the DC job now that'd be great, but i don't see us firing McCarthy for Bates after 1 season.

jackalope
12-06-2006, 06:35 PM
sorry about these posts. the server was weird.

70challenger457
12-06-2006, 06:52 PM
why the hell did moses make 3 new ones

Jim Jim
12-06-2006, 07:46 PM
I miss the Bates.

70challenger457
12-06-2006, 08:45 PM
Is there any chance the packers look at a de second round

Big_Brother
12-07-2006, 12:32 AM
Ah here is the good ole Packers thread, I feared the worst. Which would be that too many Packers fans complained about that #5 pick so Scott deleted us... :P

Moses
12-07-2006, 07:28 AM
why the hell did moses make 3 new ones

This thread was temporarily deleted due to the database here being broken. That's also the reason for 3 instead of 1 post being created.

jackalope
12-07-2006, 07:30 AM
favre needs surgery

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-packers-favre&prov=ap&type=lgns there are also some interesting comments in there by brett.i wouldn't expect him back next year :(

bearsfan_51
12-07-2006, 11:30 AM
I saw a while back that you picked up P.J Pope from us off our practice squad. A lot of Bears fans really liked him but I thought he was too runtish to ever make a final roster. Has he been active for a game yet this year? Any ideas why the Packers wanted to add another RB?

roughrider30
12-07-2006, 02:17 PM
I saw a while back that you picked up P.J Pope from us off our practice squad. A lot of Bears fans really liked him but I thought he was too runtish to ever make a final roster. Has he been active for a game yet this year? Any ideas why the Packers wanted to add another RB?

They signed him when Green was coming back from his hamstring injury when Herron was starting, to add some depth. I think he was active for the Vikings game but i dont think hes been active since.

RockJock07
12-07-2006, 04:10 PM
Bates won't return unless he is the HC. He probably should have been HC in my eyes, what he did with that D was amazing. McCarthy better get his **** together.

Secondly, I have mixed feelings about Scott's new Mock draft, Hall and the packers pass on AP?

TitleTown088
12-07-2006, 04:19 PM
Bates won't return unless he is the HC. He probably should have been HC in my eyes, what he did with that D was amazing. McCarthy better get his **** together.

Secondly, I have mixed feelings about Scott's new Mock draft, Hall and the packers pass on AP?
that's just because scott is from Minnesota and he dosen't want the packers to get AP. :wink:

TitleTown088
12-07-2006, 04:39 PM
BTW i just saw that KGB is going to lose some playing time to williams at the DE spot.

Boston
12-07-2006, 04:53 PM
BTW i just saw that KGB is going to lose some playing time to williams at the DE spot.

Corey Williams? And I also think he should lose some playing time to Hunter on passing downs.

TitleTown088
12-07-2006, 05:45 PM
BTW i just saw that KGB is going to lose some playing time to williams at the DE spot.

Corey Williams? And I also think he should lose some playing time to Hunter on passing downs.

yep

70challenger457
12-07-2006, 06:07 PM
BTW i just saw that KGB is going to lose some playing time to williams at the DE spot.
he's not even good at the one thing he's good at, pass rushing

sik wit it
12-07-2006, 06:30 PM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?

12-07-2006, 06:40 PM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?I don't think it's anyone not liking MM. It's just that some people think that Jim Bates would be doing a better job.

70challenger457
12-07-2006, 07:22 PM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?I don't think it's anyone not liking MM. It's just that some people think that Jim Bates would be doing a better job.
I sure think so

jackalope
12-07-2006, 08:06 PM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?i really like McCarthy, i'm just disappointed that we weren't able to keep Bates at DC. We'd be doing much better with him.

Nitschke-Hawk
12-07-2006, 08:42 PM
While we're on McCarthy I believe he's not the coach to take us to the promise land but he's probably the best coach for right now even though I believe we have the talent to possibly have a .500 or slightly winning record this year with our weak schedule, there's been a couple of games passed up that were very winnable and a couple we were in the position to win gainst good teams and you could strongly argue that it was coaching's fault in all 4. I know that if we see more of the same next year I think he'll be gone after that. You've gotta beat the teams you're supposed to beat and come out with the win when you have a good team down. I keep thinking of the Rams game, the Bills game, the Seahawks game and the Saints game. Certainly the Rams and Bills games were very winnable going into them and we were in position to win them and we didn't, came out smoking against the Saints and ended up losing, and the Seahawks game we were certainly in position to win. That's 4 games right there that were make or break type situations when execution, offensive and defensive play calling were at fault.

I don't even ask that all 4 of those were won, I'd be happy with two and maybe even one more win. The problem is going down the final stretch the coaching staff has allowed our team's weaknesses to get exposed against the Patriots and Jets, now bad teams have an even better chance at beating us because of those two games. This situation has now made those close games earlier in the year more crucial to the final record.

TitleTown088
12-07-2006, 10:29 PM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?i really like McCarthy, i'm just disappointed that we weren't able to keep Bates at DC. We'd be doing much better with him.
exactly i like MM too,for offense atleased, but i still wish we had bates :cry:

GB12
12-07-2006, 10:31 PM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?i really like McCarthy, i'm just disappointed that we weren't able to keep Bates at DC. We'd be doing much better with him.
exactly i liek MM too for offense, but i still wish we had bates :cry:

MM as OC and Bates as HC would be perfect.


And your avatar was on today. :D

TitleTown088
12-08-2006, 01:49 AM
why are you guys not liking MM anymore>?i really like McCarthy, i'm just disappointed that we weren't able to keep Bates at DC. We'd be doing much better with him.
exactly i liek MM too for offense, but i still wish we had bates :cry:

MM as OC and Bates as HC would be perfect.


And your avatar was on today. :D

yeah it would i like MM's scheme alot but just not the teams D.

and yes i know it was that was what gave me the inspiration.

TitleTown088
12-08-2006, 02:35 AM
is there any way to post a picture that you have saved on your computer in my pictures but don't know the internet adress it came from?

ny10804
12-08-2006, 08:39 AM
is there any way to post a picture that you have saved on your computer in my pictures but don't know the internet adress it came from?

Host it on ImageShack (http://imageshack.us/)

70challenger457
12-08-2006, 10:26 AM
is there any way to post a picture that you have saved on your computer in my pictures but don't know the internet adress it came from?

Host it on ImageShack (http://imageshack.us/)
thats what I use

TitleTown088
12-08-2006, 12:50 PM
is there any way to post a picture that you have saved on your computer in my pictures but don't know the internet adress it came from?

Host it on ImageShack (http://imageshack.us/)

ok thanks, but how do u get rid of the black stripe on the bottem with the size written on it?

ny10804
12-08-2006, 01:24 PM
is there any way to post a picture that you have saved on your computer in my pictures but don't know the internet adress it came from?

Host it on ImageShack (http://imageshack.us/)

ok thanks, but how do u get rid of the black stripe on the bottem with the size written on it?

There's a little box that says "remove size/resolution bar from thumbnail?" on that page. Click that box.

The Legend
12-08-2006, 04:49 PM
wow why does madden hate woodson

Normal Game Roster
Woodson - 90 spd / 92 agi / 90 acc - 88 ovr
Harris - 88 spd / 89 agi / 93 acc - 89 ovr
1st Update Roster
Woodson - 89 spd / 92 agi / 90 acc - 88 ovr
Harris - 88 spd / 89 agi / 93 acc - 89 ovr
Woodson - 87 spd / 92 agi / 88 acc - 86 ovr
Harris - 89 spd / 90 agi / 93 acc - 91 ovr

it sucsk because i play online alot and its gonna be hard to use woodson now

and for the people wondering madden is saying woodson is the 5th slowest cb in madden its crazy

TitleTown088
12-08-2006, 06:30 PM
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b290/packlova4/sbtroph.jpg

johbur
12-08-2006, 06:52 PM
Got to read a bit about Carlyle Holiday today. He has that WCO triangle. I'm not sure if it was jsonline or packers.com, but they had an interesting note how Greg Jennings has faded into ineffectiveness after his injury. He had been so explosive early in the season, and nothing since early October.

Scott has a CB being taken for the Packers at #5. Having the #5 pick again would blow dog. Too much money taken by rookies. Maybe TT would trade down as I don't see anyone like Hawk in this year's draft. Maybe slide some spots and take Ginn and get more picks. Is there any team this year with multiple picks?

TitleTown088
12-08-2006, 06:54 PM
Got to read a bit about Carlyle Holiday today. He has that WCO triangle. I'm not sure if it was jsonline or packers.com, but they had an interesting note how Greg Jennings has faded into ineffectiveness after his injury. He had been so explosive early in the season, and nothing since early October.

Scott has a CB being taken for the Packers at #5. Having the #5 pick again would blow dog. Too much money taken by rookies. Maybe TT would trade down as I don't see anyone like Hawk in this year's draft. Maybe slide some spots and take Ginn and get more picks. Is there any team this year with multiple picks?

AP? CJ?

ny10804
12-08-2006, 07:24 PM
Got to read a bit about Carlyle Holiday today. He has that WCO triangle. I'm not sure if it was jsonline or packers.com, but they had an interesting note how Greg Jennings has faded into ineffectiveness after his injury. He had been so explosive early in the season, and nothing since early October.

Scott has a CB being taken for the Packers at #5. Having the #5 pick again would blow dog. Too much money taken by rookies. Maybe TT would trade down as I don't see anyone like Hawk in this year's draft. Maybe slide some spots and take Ginn and get more picks. Is there any team this year with multiple picks?

AP? CJ?

I definitely think TT would pick Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson if they were available. If we had the 5th pick, however, both of them would most likely be gone (along with Quinn and Thomas). After those two, Landry is the most logical pick, IMO at least. I can only hope he realizes that Marquand is garbage.

mancl
12-08-2006, 07:24 PM
NE has their own pick as well as Seattles for Branch. Can't see them giving up two #1's- If the Pack trades down, which is a strong possibilty it will be further down into the lst and an extra 2ns or 3rd

Moses
12-08-2006, 08:26 PM
Got to read a bit about Carlyle Holiday today. He has that WCO triangle. I'm not sure if it was jsonline or packers.com, but they had an interesting note how Greg Jennings has faded into ineffectiveness after his injury. He had been so explosive early in the season, and nothing since early October.

Scott has a CB being taken for the Packers at #5. Having the #5 pick again would blow dog. Too much money taken by rookies. Maybe TT would trade down as I don't see anyone like Hawk in this year's draft. Maybe slide some spots and take Ginn and get more picks. Is there any team this year with multiple picks?

AP? CJ?

I definitely think TT would pick Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson if they were available. If we had the 5th pick, however, both of them would most likely be gone (along with Quinn and Thomas). After those two, Landry is the most logical pick, IMO at least. I can only hope he realizes that Marquand is garbage.

Landry at #5 is a terrible pick. He's not the type of safety that you invest the 5th overall draft pick in (and the money that goes along with that).

ny10804
12-08-2006, 10:29 PM
Got to read a bit about Carlyle Holiday today. He has that WCO triangle. I'm not sure if it was jsonline or packers.com, but they had an interesting note how Greg Jennings has faded into ineffectiveness after his injury. He had been so explosive early in the season, and nothing since early October.

Scott has a CB being taken for the Packers at #5. Having the #5 pick again would blow dog. Too much money taken by rookies. Maybe TT would trade down as I don't see anyone like Hawk in this year's draft. Maybe slide some spots and take Ginn and get more picks. Is there any team this year with multiple picks?

AP? CJ?

I definitely think TT would pick Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson if they were available. If we had the 5th pick, however, both of them would most likely be gone (along with Quinn and Thomas). After those two, Landry is the most logical pick, IMO at least. I can only hope he realizes that Marquand is garbage.

Landry at #5 is a terrible pick. He's not the type of safety that you invest the 5th overall draft pick in (and the money that goes along with that).

Well then TT can trade down to 7-15 to get him. Michael Huff went at 7... Point is, I really want him on this team...

The Legend
12-08-2006, 10:30 PM
i say get something to help the pass defence if we move down

TitleTown088
12-09-2006, 02:12 AM
Got to read a bit about Carlyle Holiday today. He has that WCO triangle. I'm not sure if it was jsonline or packers.com, but they had an interesting note how Greg Jennings has faded into ineffectiveness after his injury. He had been so explosive early in the season, and nothing since early October.

Scott has a CB being taken for the Packers at #5. Having the #5 pick again would blow dog. Too much money taken by rookies. Maybe TT would trade down as I don't see anyone like Hawk in this year's draft. Maybe slide some spots and take Ginn and get more picks. Is there any team this year with multiple picks?

AP? CJ?

I definitely think TT would pick Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson if they were available. If we had the 5th pick, however, both of them would most likely be gone (along with Quinn and Thomas). After those two, Landry is the most logical pick, IMO at least. I can only hope he realizes that Marquand is garbage.

Landry at #5 is a terrible pick. He's not the type of safety that you invest the 5th overall draft pick in (and the money that goes along with that).

Well then TT can trade down to 7-15 to get him. Michael Huff went at 7... Point is, I really want him on this team...

what do you plan to do with the rest of the 8978789 young safties the packers have?

cuzifelt1ikeit
12-09-2006, 09:02 AM
id rather get merriweather in the second if hes available which i have a feeling he will be...

Moses
12-09-2006, 10:02 AM
id rather get merriweather in the second if hes available which i have a feeling he will be...

I can't see Merriweather be taken before the Packers pick in the 2nd but I think that's a bit too early for him. He has the talent but his attitude and character is questionable to say the least. I wouldn't mind giving him a shot in the 3rd round but I doubt the Packers would actually pull the trigger and draft him at any pick.

Trading down is generally pretty difficult, especially at the top of the 1st round. I think the Packers will have to use their 1st themselves and won't end up grabbing a safety or cornerback. I could see the Packers taking somebody like Gaines Adams if he falls to them although I'm not 100% sure about that pick.

Jim Jim
12-09-2006, 12:57 PM
I would like to see Green Bay trade down and pick either Revis or Nelson.

12-09-2006, 03:54 PM
Some pregame notes:

The Packers have won 10 of the last 11 meetings in the series (including playoffs), including four of the last five meetings in San Francisco. Green Bay has scored 20+ points in each of the last 13 meetings in the series (including playoffs).

The Packers have lost eight of their last 10 road games vs. non-division opponents, but are 9-3 in the state of California since 1990 (including playoffs and Super Bowls).

Green Bay has allowed 23 touchdown passes this season, which are tied for the most in the league.

Packers' QB Brett Favre has a 103.1 rating with a 72.7 completion percentage in his last five games vs. the 49ers (including playoffs). Favre also has a touchdown pass in all 11 career games vs. San Francisco (including playoffs).

Green Bay WR Donald Driver has a touchdown reception in each of his last four road games.

The 49ers are 5-1 this season when allowing 20 points or fewer (0-6 when allowing more than 20).

San Francisco has lost its last four home games played in December, after winning 37 of its previous 46 December home games.

TitleTown088
12-09-2006, 04:19 PM
jags could be gone after the season...

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061208/PKR01/612080621/1989




Jagodzinski wouldn't say whether he'd be interested in the head coaching job at Boston College, which is expected to lose coach Tom O'Brien to North Carolina State. Jagodzinski could be a candidate because he was BC's offensive coordinator in 1997 and 1998.

"I haven't been contacted by them," Jagodzinski said. "All I'm trying to do right now is beat San Francisco. I'm happy with what I'm doing here."

GB12
12-09-2006, 04:24 PM
jags could be gone after the season...

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061208/PKR01/612080621/1989




Jagodzinski wouldn't say whether he'd be interested in the head coaching job at Boston College, which is expected to lose coach Tom O'Brien to North Carolina State. Jagodzinski could be a candidate because he was BC's offensive coordinator in 1997 and 1998.

"I haven't been contacted by them," Jagodzinski said. "All I'm trying to do right now is beat San Francisco. I'm happy with what I'm doing here."

I wouldn't hire him as a HC. It might be good though because I don't really like him as an OC either.

sik wit it
12-09-2006, 05:40 PM
jags could be gone after the season...

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061208/PKR01/612080621/1989




Jagodzinski wouldn't say whether he'd be interested in the head coaching job at Boston College, which is expected to lose coach Tom O'Brien to North Carolina State. Jagodzinski could be a candidate because he was BC's offensive coordinator in 1997 and 1998.

"I haven't been contacted by them," Jagodzinski said. "All I'm trying to do right now is beat San Francisco. I'm happy with what I'm doing here."

I wouldn't hire him as a HC. It might be good though because I don't really like him as an OC either.
would we keep the zbs?

TitleTown088
12-09-2006, 08:41 PM
jags could be gone after the season...

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061208/PKR01/612080621/1989




Jagodzinski wouldn't say whether he'd be interested in the head coaching job at Boston College, which is expected to lose coach Tom O'Brien to North Carolina State. Jagodzinski could be a candidate because he was BC's offensive coordinator in 1997 and 1998.

"I haven't been contacted by them," Jagodzinski said. "All I'm trying to do right now is beat San Francisco. I'm happy with what I'm doing here."

I wouldn't hire him as a HC. It might be good though because I don't really like him as an OC either.
would we keep the zbs?

yeah that was what i wondering, i think we would . MM is the "offensive guy" anyways...

bearsfan_51
12-09-2006, 08:51 PM
The BC coaching spot was filled yesterday by the Steelers QB coach. That must be an old article.

TitleTown088
12-10-2006, 02:09 AM
The BC coaching spot was filled yesterday by the Steelers QB coach. That must be an old article.


yeah he deffiently deserves it because of the job he did with big ben.

cuzifelt1ikeit
12-10-2006, 02:19 PM
id rather get merriweather in the second if hes available which i have a feeling he will be...

I can't see Merriweather be taken before the Packers pick in the 2nd but I think that's a bit too early for him. He has the talent but his attitude and character is questionable to say the least. I wouldn't mind giving him a shot in the 3rd round but I doubt the Packers would actually pull the trigger and draft him at any pick.

Trading down is generally pretty difficult, especially at the top of the 1st round. I think the Packers will have to use their 1st themselves and won't end up grabbing a safety or cornerback. I could see the Packers taking somebody like Gaines Adams if he falls to them although I'm not 100% sure about that pick.true, although i would hope we would take a risk on somebody who yields a big return sometime.

70challenger457
12-10-2006, 06:34 PM
good solid, decisive win

RockJock07
12-10-2006, 07:20 PM
A.J. is playing so well, He might be Pro Bowl material. I wouldn't mind seeing the linebacker out of Penn St. on the other side of Barnett. This would be a LB core that would flat out dominate.

the packers need to start winning at home.

Moses
12-10-2006, 07:24 PM
A.J. is playing so well, He might be Pro Bowl material. I wouldn't mind seeing the linebacker out of Penn St. on the other side of Barnett. This would be a LB core that would flat out dominate.

the packers need to start winning at home.

That could very well be true but there are more pressing needs.

GB12
12-10-2006, 07:48 PM
good solid, decisive win

Yep, there was one area that was having trouble. Passing was great, got a nice run game, Besides the long run by Gore we held that down, and for once the pass D was very good.

GB12
12-10-2006, 07:51 PM
A.J. is playing so well, He might be Pro Bowl material. I wouldn't mind seeing the linebacker out of Penn St. on the other side of Barnett. This would be a LB core that would flat out dominate.

the packers need to start winning at home.

That could very well be true but there are more pressing needs.

Yeah, the is no way we take a LB in round 1 no matter where we pick. If we upgrade at LB it would be through FA, like Briggs. That probably wont happen either and will stay with Popinga.

TitleTown088
12-10-2006, 07:54 PM
poppinga has improved greatly as the season has gone on there is no need to replace him with some one like brigs or a high round draft pick, that would be way too much money wrapped up in the LB core . He is still not great in pass coverage, but his improvement has been like night and day since the beginning of the season .

ny10804
12-10-2006, 09:40 PM
KGB looked good pass rushing today -- he had a few good pressures. Once again, he was bad against the run, and he was one of 3 people to have a missed tackle on Gore's 70+ yard run. It's a fact that he does better soley as a pass rusher:KGB played a career-high 87% in 2003 after signing a seven-year, $37.3 million contract that April. He had 13½ sacks in 2001 while playing merely 39.3%.

link (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=540179)

The problem with this draft is that the two top DEs -- Moses and Adams -- aren't too great against the run. Maybe we could draft Amobi Okeye and slide Corey Williams over to DE on running downs?

70challenger457
12-11-2006, 02:12 AM
poppinga has improved greatly as the season has gone on there is no need to replace him with some one like brigs or a high round draft pick, that would be way too much money wrapped up in the LB core . He is still not great in pass coverage, but his improvement has been like night and day since the beginning of the season .
QTF

jackalope
12-11-2006, 07:21 AM
if we could get a solid run-stopping DE in the 2nd that would really help. i don't think we'll take one in the 1st.

drowe
12-11-2006, 09:51 AM
the TD pass to Driver is my favorite play of the last few years. Favre threw that flatt footed too. crazy.

70challenger457
12-11-2006, 10:28 AM
the TD pass to Driver is my favorite play of the last few years. Favre threw that flatt footed too. crazy.
at first I was like oh-no, farve's throwin up another prayer, then boom, DD is open, and I really think DD is in the top five best after catch recivers in the league, I'd like to see where his YAC rank, plus that was solid fantasy points

drowe
12-11-2006, 12:32 PM
here is a crazy question:

Brett Favre is only 13 completions away from breaking the all time completions record held by Dan Marino. this is a big one. one of the big 4 records Marino has (completions, attempts, yards, TD passes). the question is; why has this not been brought up yet? seems like a big deal to me.

TitleTown088
12-11-2006, 12:55 PM
the TD pass to Driver is my favorite play of the last few years. Favre threw that flatt footed too. crazy.

proves hes still got that cannon and he will be good to play for a couple more years. :D

and yeah those records are a big deal, it would be great if he surpasses marino on a few of them.

bearsfan_51
12-11-2006, 01:15 PM
here is a crazy question:

Brett Favre is only 13 completions away from breaking the all time completions record held by Dan Marino. this is a big one. one of the big 4 records Marino has (completions, attempts, yards, TD passes). the question is; why has this not been brought up yet? seems like a big deal to me.
Cause completions are for sissies. Touchdowns and yards are the sexy stats.

TitleTown088
12-11-2006, 01:16 PM
here is a crazy question:

Brett Favre is only 13 completions away from breaking the all time completions record held by Dan Marino. this is a big one. one of the big 4 records Marino has (completions, attempts, yards, TD passes). the question is; why has this not been brought up yet? seems like a big deal to me.

even if he dosen't beat them maybe he will be back next year to try... "Days like today make me think I can play 10 more," he said. "After last week (the 38-10 loss to the New York Jets), I would've told you I'd be on the last bus out of town. . . . Now I can go home and say, I can still do this for a while."
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=540487

BTW anyone see favre lay down that block for morency? this cat still wants to ball.

TitleTown088
12-11-2006, 01:22 PM
here is a crazy question:

Brett Favre is only 13 completions away from breaking the all time completions record held by Dan Marino. this is a big one. one of the big 4 records Marino has (completions, attempts, yards, TD passes). the question is; why has this not been brought up yet? seems like a big deal to me.
Cause completions are for sissies. Touchdowns and yards are the sexy stats.
well he's closing in on those two records too :wink:

Jim Jim
12-11-2006, 01:51 PM
The WR needs a little bit more depth out there, but with Koren Robinson coming back next year. We may have something interesting there with Jennings, Driver and Robinson.

Moses
12-11-2006, 03:03 PM
The WR needs a little bit more depth out there, but with Koren Robinson coming back next year. We may have something interesting there with Jennings, Driver and Robinson.

Depending on Koren Robinson to be anything but a pleasant surprise if he plays next season would be suicidial. The Packers need another WR desperately.

TitleTown088
12-11-2006, 03:10 PM
The WR needs a little bit more depth out there, but with Koren Robinson coming back next year. We may have something interesting there with Jennings, Driver and Robinson.

Depending on Koren Robinson to be anything but a pleasant surprise if he plays next season would be suicidial. The Packers need another WR desperately.

why wouldn't he play next season? the WR's wil be fine next year if koren is back.

Boston
12-11-2006, 03:31 PM
The WR needs a little bit more depth out there, but with Koren Robinson coming back next year. We may have something interesting there with Jennings, Driver and Robinson.

Depending on Koren Robinson to be anything but a pleasant surprise if he plays next season would be suicidial. The Packers need another WR desperately.

why wouldn't he play next season? the WR's wil be fine next year if koren is back.

The packers need another reciever. Period. Whether it's in the first few rounds of the draft, or through free agency, it has to happen.

Moses
12-11-2006, 03:44 PM
The WR needs a little bit more depth out there, but with Koren Robinson coming back next year. We may have something interesting there with Jennings, Driver and Robinson.

Depending on Koren Robinson to be anything but a pleasant surprise if he plays next season would be suicidial. The Packers need another WR desperately.

why wouldn't he play next season? the WR's wil be fine next year if koren is back.

It's Koren Robinson. He's Mr. Inconsistency.

TitleTown088
12-11-2006, 03:53 PM
I could see the need for a WR in FA , but taking one in the first round is just malarkey. Not that you guys said it, but i have heard alot of people chirping about it.

cuzifelt1ikeit
12-11-2006, 04:38 PM
do you guys think barring some odd ball at where we pick should we just go best player available? it seems like we have needs basically everywhere so picking the best player available seems logical kind of to me

GB12
12-11-2006, 04:48 PM
do you guys think barring some odd ball at where we pick should we just go best player available? it seems like we have needs basically everywhere so picking the best player available seems logical kind of to me

maybe BPA on our needs but not total BPA. I guess really the only positions we're fine at are LB and QB though.

cuzifelt1ikeit
12-11-2006, 05:16 PM
do you guys think barring some odd ball at where we pick should we just go best player available? it seems like we have needs basically everywhere so picking the best player available seems logical kind of to me

maybe BPA on our needs but not total BPA. I guess really the only positions we're fine at are LB and QB though.thats what i was aiming at i just didnt know how to put it

sik wit it
12-11-2006, 05:23 PM
the only way i want a WR is if we get Calvin Johnson, otherwise I say we don't touch WR at all unless TT has another trick up his sleeve like Jennings.

49ersfan_87
12-11-2006, 05:44 PM
Good game guys. You out played us. Man, favre needs to retire. Im sick of losing to him :evil:

TitleTown088
12-11-2006, 05:53 PM
do you guys think barring some odd ball at where we pick should we just go best player available? it seems like we have needs basically everywhere so picking the best player available seems logical kind of to me

could happen, but i could also see TT trading down..

cuzifelt1ikeit
12-11-2006, 06:13 PM
the only way i want a WR is if we get Calvin Johnson, otherwise I say we don't touch WR at all unless TT has another trick up his sleeve like Jennings.i wouldnt mind having him regardless of whose available

70challenger457
12-11-2006, 06:59 PM
Good game guys. You out played us. Man, favre needs to retire. Im sick of losing to him :evil:
favre has been quite sucessful in San Fran, good game

RockJock07
12-12-2006, 12:12 AM
I wish the Packers could get Calvin Johnson, but they won't. Keep an eye on the Fiesta bowl and AP to see how he does.

roughrider30
12-12-2006, 12:32 AM
I wish the Packers could get Calvin Johnson, but they won't. Keep an eye on the Fiesta bowl and AP to see how he does.

yep there will be a lot of ppl with their eyes on him that game

Moses
12-12-2006, 11:55 AM
do you guys think barring some odd ball at where we pick should we just go best player available? it seems like we have needs basically everywhere so picking the best player available seems logical kind of to me

maybe BPA on our needs but not total BPA. I guess really the only positions we're fine at are LB and QB though.

That's basically the strategy I expect the Packers to take, especially if they end up picking in the top 10. They need to get good value this draft since there's quite a few spots that need some new talent.

mancl
12-12-2006, 12:07 PM
You can't count on Robinson for next year because he is suspended until something like the 5th game. That means he can't even play catch with the QB until then, much less practice or play in pre season games.

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 12:12 PM
well you might be counting out a RB for the packers now....

Quote:
Lions | K. Jones could miss 2007 season
Mon, 11 Dec 2006 21:05:47 -0800

Nicholas J. Cotsonika, of the Detroit Free Press, reports Detroit Lions RB Kevin Jones (foot) could miss the 2007 season if he has a Lisfranc fracture dislocation. Lions LB Teddy Lehman took a year to recover from the Lisfranc injury he suffered in 2005 and is still experiencing pain and stiffness in his foot. "I've heard that it can take as long as two years to feel right. Some guys never play with it again. It's a real serious injury," Lehman said.



this mean detriot could possibly snag one before the packers get to pick

Moses
12-12-2006, 12:24 PM
well you might be counting out a RB for the packers now....

Quote:
Lions | K. Jones could miss 2007 season
Mon, 11 Dec 2006 21:05:47 -0800

Nicholas J. Cotsonika, of the Detroit Free Press, reports Detroit Lions RB Kevin Jones (foot) could miss the 2007 season if he has a Lisfranc fracture dislocation. Lions LB Teddy Lehman took a year to recover from the Lisfranc injury he suffered in 2005 and is still experiencing pain and stiffness in his foot. "I've heard that it can take as long as two years to feel right. Some guys never play with it again. It's a real serious injury," Lehman said.



this mean detriot could possibly snag one before the packers get to pick

They already invested a 1st in Jones and a 3rd in Calhoun. They have bigger fish to fry.

bearsfan_51
12-12-2006, 12:46 PM
I don't see how you could be in the AP running. Even if you lose to the Vikings and Lions (come on..you aren't going to lose to the Lions) that still leaves you with the Bears 2nd string team, which you should easily beat. Even then you're 6-10 and picking anywhere from 9-14, which should knock you out. If you're 7-9 or even 8-8 you could be well out of the running and possibly out of the running for Lynch too depending on how he does at the combine.

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 12:46 PM
well you might be counting out a RB for the packers now....

Quote:
Lions | K. Jones could miss 2007 season
Mon, 11 Dec 2006 21:05:47 -0800

Nicholas J. Cotsonika, of the Detroit Free Press, reports Detroit Lions RB Kevin Jones (foot) could miss the 2007 season if he has a Lisfranc fracture dislocation. Lions LB Teddy Lehman took a year to recover from the Lisfranc injury he suffered in 2005 and is still experiencing pain and stiffness in his foot. "I've heard that it can take as long as two years to feel right. Some guys never play with it again. It's a real serious injury," Lehman said.



this mean detriot could possibly snag one before the packers get to pick

They already invested a 1st in Jones and a 3rd in Calhoun. They have bigger fish to fry.

true, but who is going to be their feature back next year if jones is out? calhoun?

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 12:49 PM
I don't see how you could be in the AP running. Even if you lose to the Vikings and Lions (come on..you aren't going to lose to the Lions) that still leaves you with the Bears 2nd string team, which you should easily beat. Even then you're 6-10 and picking anywhere from 9-14, which should knock you out. If you're 7-9 or even 8-8 you could be well out of the running and possibly out of the running for Lynch too depending on how he does at the combine.


i know, i never expected the packers to be in the runing for AP really, but Lynch is my hopeful pick for the packers and now it appears he might not be avialable.

BTW do you really thin kthe bears will play their second stringers? Last night on MNF they were talking about the bears playing their starters the whole game because it is brett favre and the packers, but i dunno.

bearsfan_51
12-12-2006, 01:15 PM
I don't see how you could be in the AP running. Even if you lose to the Vikings and Lions (come on..you aren't going to lose to the Lions) that still leaves you with the Bears 2nd string team, which you should easily beat. Even then you're 6-10 and picking anywhere from 9-14, which should knock you out. If you're 7-9 or even 8-8 you could be well out of the running and possibly out of the running for Lynch too depending on how he does at the combine.


i know, i never expected the packers to be in the runing for AP really, but Lynch is my hopeful pick for the packers and now it appears he might not be avialable.

BTW do you really thin kthe bears will play their second stringers? Last night on MNF they were talking about the bears playing their starters the whole game because it is brett favre and the packers, but i dunno.
I would hope that Lovie is way too smart to risk injuries to his players to win a meaningless game.

I'd much rather have Favre set the TD record at Soldier Field than lose an important player for the playoffs.

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 01:21 PM
I don't see how you could be in the AP running. Even if you lose to the Vikings and Lions (come on..you aren't going to lose to the Lions) that still leaves you with the Bears 2nd string team, which you should easily beat. Even then you're 6-10 and picking anywhere from 9-14, which should knock you out. If you're 7-9 or even 8-8 you could be well out of the running and possibly out of the running for Lynch too depending on how he does at the combine.


i know, i never expected the packers to be in the runing for AP really, but Lynch is my hopeful pick for the packers and now it appears he might not be avialable.

BTW do you really thin kthe bears will play their second stringers? Last night on MNF they were talking about the bears playing their starters the whole game because it is brett favre and the packers, but i dunno.
I would hope that Lovie is way too smart to risk injuries to his players to win a meaningless game.

I'd much rather have Favre set the TD record at Soldier Field than lose an important player for the playoffs.
we'll hes going to set that record before that game so you won't have to watch it at soldier feild. :wink:

Jim Jim
12-12-2006, 01:23 PM
I did see some improvement, KGB should have been moved WAY before the end of the season.

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 01:37 PM
so Favre only needs 4 more TD's to break the all time record, correct?

bearsfan_51
12-12-2006, 01:49 PM
so Favre only needs 4 more TD's to break the all time record, correct?
Try 8

drowe
12-12-2006, 02:10 PM
7 to tie
8 to break.

he needed more than 2 TD passes against the 49ers lousy defense if he wanted to break it this year.
Completion record should go down this weekend though.

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 02:42 PM
so Favre only needs 4 more TD's to break the all time record, correct?
Try 8

i'm retarted. http://www.darkhousenetwork.com/ChrisFarley.jpg

12-12-2006, 04:09 PM
so Favre only needs 4 more TD's to break the all time record, correct?
Try 8

i'm retarted. http://www.darkhousenetwork.com/ChrisFarley.jpgRIP Chris Farley :cry:

Beverly Hills Ninja was awesome

TitleTown088
12-12-2006, 04:22 PM
so Favre only needs 4 more TD's to break the all time record, correct?
Try 8

i'm retarted. http://www.darkhousenetwork.com/ChrisFarley.jpgRIP Chris Farley :cry:

Beverly Hills Ninja was awesome
I thought he said "i'm retarde d" in tommy boy?

12-12-2006, 05:51 PM
so Favre only needs 4 more TD's to break the all time record, correct?
Try 8

i'm retarted. http://www.darkhousenetwork.com/ChrisFarley.jpgRIP Chris Farley :cry:

Beverly Hills Ninja was awesome
I thought he said "i'm retarde d" in tommy boy?Probably, but i don't remember much of that movie. Beverly Hills Ninja was my favourite movie as a kid.

70challenger457
12-12-2006, 07:43 PM
It was from tommy boy but got to love Beverly hills nija to, great stuff, great stuff

12-12-2006, 08:56 PM
Sooooo.......

This Favre character. I hear he may retire.

TitleTown088
12-13-2006, 12:11 AM
Sooooo.......

This Favre character. I hear he may retire.

where you hearing that? I am hearing the opposite.

70challenger457
12-13-2006, 05:35 AM
Sooooo.......

This Favre character. I hear he may retire.
it's time

johbur
12-13-2006, 02:13 PM
Favre retirement discussions are for after the season.

I would still want Brett to come back and break Marino's record. A-Rod has a busted foot, but the two of them could do rehab together after Brett's surgery. With a receiver and a decent pass-catching TE (wtf happened to our TEs this year?) Brett still has the juice to put points on the board. If Jags is back next year, it would be another year in the system for those three rookie linemen and the O-line overall would likely be better. I'm for bringing back our RBs, with maybe a round 3 rookie. If TT is aggressive with the off-season again as far as getting picks and bringing in a top defender, then things can be turned around. For the defense, what I'd really like to see is TT offer Jim Bates 1.5 million to come back as the DC and get the defense back on track. Scrotenheimer and Sanders are places where the defense can be upgraded, and you don't even have to worry about the cap or a roster spot with them.

12-13-2006, 03:48 PM
Favre retirement discussions are for after the season.

I would still want Brett to come back and break Marino's record. A-Rod has a busted foot, but the two of them could do rehab together after Brett's surgery. With a receiver and a decent pass-catching TE (wtf happened to our TEs this year?) Brett still has the juice to put points on the board. If Jags is back next year, it would be another year in the system for those three rookie linemen and the O-line overall would likely be better. I'm for bringing back our RBs, with maybe a round 3 rookie. If TT is aggressive with the off-season again as far as getting picks and bringing in a top defender, then things can be turned around. For the defense, what I'd really like to see is TT offer Jim Bates 1.5 million to come back as the DC and get the defense back on track. Scrotenheimer and Sanders are places where the defense can be upgraded, and you don't even have to worry about the cap or a roster spot with them.

QFT

TitleTown088
12-13-2006, 04:05 PM
Favre retirement discussions are for after the season.

I would still want Brett to come back and break Marino's record. A-Rod has a busted foot, but the two of them could do rehab together after Brett's surgery. With a receiver and a decent pass-catching TE (wtf happened to our TEs this year?) Brett still has the juice to put points on the board. If Jags is back next year, it would be another year in the system for those three rookie linemen and the O-line overall would likely be better. I'm for bringing back our RBs, with maybe a round 3 rookie. If TT is aggressive with the off-season again as far as getting picks and bringing in a top defender, then things can be turned around. For the defense, what I'd really like to see is TT offer Jim Bates 1.5 million to come back as the DC and get the defense back on track. Scrotenheimer and Sanders are places where the defense can be

upgraded, and you don't even have to worry about the cap or a roster spot with them.

QFTyou guys are spinning your wheels, he's not comming back, but we can dream can't we?

and it's not time for favre to retire challenger. :evil:

GB12
12-13-2006, 05:00 PM
Favre retirement discussions are for after the season.

I would still want Brett to come back and break Marino's record. A-Rod has a busted foot, but the two of them could do rehab together after Brett's surgery. With a receiver and a decent pass-catching TE (wtf happened to our TEs this year?) Brett still has the juice to put points on the board. If Jags is back next year, it would be another year in the system for those three rookie linemen and the O-line overall would likely be better. I'm for bringing back our RBs, with maybe a round 3 rookie. If TT is aggressive with the off-season again as far as getting picks and bringing in a top defender, then things can be turned around. For the defense, what I'd really like to see is TT offer Jim Bates 1.5 million to come back as the DC and get the defense back on track. Scrotenheimer and Sanders are places where the defense can be

upgraded, and you don't even have to worry about the cap or a roster spot with them.

QFTyou guys are spinning your wheels, he's not comming back, but we can dream can't we?

and it's not time for favre to retire challenger. :evil:

They should give Bates what ever he wants to get him back. Hell, give him 3 million. It's not like we don't have the money and it will help more than any FA player we could bring in.

As for Favre, I'd like to see him back next year and then it's time to move on.

Boston
12-13-2006, 05:08 PM
Bates, in my opinion, is extremely crucial to next years success. If the packers can get him, he will not only help the defense skill wise, but nobodies a better motivator than Bates. The talent we had on last years D fails in comparison to this years, yet last years was ranked seventh, and this years is ranked 29th. :?

cuzifelt1ikeit
12-13-2006, 05:55 PM
Bates, in my opinion, is extremely crucial to next years success. If the packers can get him, he will not only help the defense skill wise, but nobodies a better motivator than Bates. The talent we had on last years D fails in comparison to this years, yet last years was ranked seventh, and this years is ranked 29th. :?i dont see it ikely that he will come back next year at all, and i dont think it is extremely crucial either

70challenger457
12-13-2006, 06:42 PM
Bates, in my opinion, is extremely crucial to next years success. If the packers can get him, he will not only help the defense skill wise, but nobodies a better motivator than Bates. The talent we had on last years D fails in comparison to this years, yet last years was ranked seventh, and this years is ranked 29th. :?
the worse part is we have better players this year

TitleTown088
12-13-2006, 11:32 PM
Favre retirement discussions are for after the season.

I would still want Brett to come back and break Marino's record. A-Rod has a busted foot, but the two of them could do rehab together after Brett's surgery. With a receiver and a decent pass-catching TE (wtf happened to our TEs this year?) Brett still has the juice to put points on the board. If Jags is back next year, it would be another year in the system for those three rookie linemen and the O-line overall would likely be better. I'm for bringing back our RBs, with maybe a round 3 rookie. If TT is aggressive with the off-season again as far as getting picks and bringing in a top defender, then things can be turned around. For the defense, what I'd really like to see is TT offer Jim Bates 1.5 million to come back as the DC and get the defense back on track. Scrotenheimer and Sanders are places where the defense can be

upgraded, and you don't even have to worry about the cap or a roster spot with them.

QFTyou guys are spinning your wheels, he's not comming back, but we can dream can't we?

and it's not time for favre to retire challenger. :evil:

They should give Bates what ever he wants to get him back. Hell, give him 3 million. It's not like we don't have the money and it will help more than any FA player we could bring in.

As for Favre, I'd like to see him back next year and then it's time to move on.

Bates already publicly said he won't come back to the packers so it don;t matter what we offer him.

Big_Brother
12-14-2006, 12:51 AM
Whenever I get worried about Favre and Rodgers, and just look back at Scotts 2005 player rankings...

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/archive/2005/top100.html
(sorry if its not a cool linky thingy, hey cool it did it auto)

Sure the draft seems to be junk compared to the years before and after if you go by player impact, but Scott has never failed us before right?

He can't be THAT wrong about him can he? It's not much, but it gives me hope.

Moses
12-14-2006, 01:34 AM
Whenever I get worried about Favre and Rodgers, and just look back at Scotts 2005 player rankings...

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/archive/2005/top100.html
(sorry if its not a cool linky thingy, hey cool it did it auto)

Sure the draft seems to be junk compared to the years before and after if you go by player impact, but Scott has never failed us before right?

He can't be THAT wrong about him can he? It's not much, but it gives me hope.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/rodgers_aaron

Best Case Scenario: Drew Brees
Worst Case Scenario: Akili Smith, Trent Dilfer, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Kyle Boller

TitleTown088
12-14-2006, 01:57 AM
Whenever I get worried about Favre and Rodgers, and just look back at Scotts 2005 player rankings...

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/archive/2005/top100.html
(sorry if its not a cool linky thingy, hey cool it did it auto)

Sure the draft seems to be junk compared to the years before and after if you go by player impact, but Scott has never failed us before right?

He can't be THAT wrong about him can he? It's not much, but it gives me hope.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/rodgers_aaron

Best Case Scenario: Drew Brees

lets hope it's not the latter.
Worst Case Scenario: Akili Smith, Trent Dilfer, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Kyle Boller

Xonraider
12-14-2006, 01:58 AM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Moses
12-14-2006, 02:00 AM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Tedford System. :evil:

Xonraider
12-14-2006, 02:04 AM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Tedford System. :evil:

Eh.. good luck. :lol:

TitleTown088
12-14-2006, 11:51 AM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Tedford System. :evil:

Eh.. good luck. :lol:

didn't rodgers play at a JC before he went to cal? or am i wrong? whats the problem with the tedford system i always hear about? Does it really ensure that a QB will be unsucsessful?

Moses
12-14-2006, 12:17 PM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Tedford System. :evil:

Eh.. good luck. :lol:

didn't rodgers play at a JC before he went to cal? or am i wrong? whats the problem with the tedford system i always hear about? Does it really ensure that a QB will be unsucsessful?

It doesn't ensure it but here's a list of recent first round Tedford quarterbacks:
-Akili Smith
-Trent Dilfer
-Joey Harrington
-David Carr
-Kyle Boller

TitleTown088
12-14-2006, 12:36 PM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Tedford System. :evil:

Eh.. good luck. :lol:

didn't rodgers play at a JC before he went to cal? or am i wrong? whats the problem with the tedford system i always hear about? Does it really ensure that a QB will be unsucsessful?

It doesn't ensure it but here's a list of recent first round Tedford quarterbacks:
-Akili Smith
-Trent Dilfer
-Joey Harrington
-David Carr
-Kyle Boller

I know for the most part which QBs are from this system, but WHY do they fail to become "good NFL QBs"? what characteristics from his system dont allow players to become good?


Also i found this poll interesting , 75% of packers fans say they dislike the vikings more than the bears, also kinda funny how the lions arn't even an option.. http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage

Moses
12-14-2006, 12:49 PM
I think Rodgers is going to be a good one down the road, but Akili Smith? Don't think he will be that bad.

Tedford System. :evil:

Eh.. good luck. :lol:

didn't rodgers play at a JC before he went to cal? or am i wrong? whats the problem with the tedford system i always hear about? Does it really ensure that a QB will be unsucsessful?

It doesn't ensure it but here's a list of recent first round Tedford quarterbacks:
-Akili Smith
-Trent Dilfer
-Joey Harrington
-David Carr
-Kyle Boller

I know for the most part which QBs are from this system, but WHY do they fail to become "good NFL QBs"? what characteristics from his system dont allow players to become good?

It's just an offensive style that doesn't fit the pros and makes college quarterbacks appear better than they are.

Jim Jim
12-14-2006, 12:50 PM
David Carr is a decent QB, his line has just sucked for the longest time, but he has had his spots.

Harrington has played well for the Dolphins at times this year.

jackalope
12-14-2006, 05:42 PM
Also i found this poll interesting , 75% of packers fans say they dislike the vikings more than the bears, also kinda funny how the lions arn't even an option.. http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpagei definitely dislike the Vikings more than the Bears

what do you guys think the chance Jagodonski gets the BC job?

Moses
12-14-2006, 06:41 PM
Also i found this poll interesting , 75% of packers fans say they dislike the vikings more than the bears, also kinda funny how the lions arn't even an option.. http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpagei definitely dislike the Vikings more than the Bears

what do you guys think the chance Jagodonski gets the BC job?

Vikings were the Packers biggest competetion for quite awhile now. The Bears were terrible so it's sort of like how the Packers don't really "hate" the Lions anymore.

cheesehead10790
12-14-2006, 07:18 PM
Ah cmon no matter what the bears gotta be the Packers most hated team. I personally dislike the Bears more maybe because theyre completely overrated but i dont know. I get the most satisfaction beating chicago.

Nitschke-Hawk
12-14-2006, 08:25 PM
Beating the Bears is more important to me but losing to Minnesota bothers me more than losing to the Bears, maybe it's cause I've been so used to us beating the Bears and I probably hate losing to the Vikings because I believe we have a better team year in and year out so when I see us lose in the dome when Favre used to play bad there it really aggravates me and probably cost us some playoff seeding-positioning is past years I'm not sure. Getting nervous about playing a game in any year against any team is not a good thing and I get that with the Vikings because I've seen winnable games get blown to them several times.

cheesehead10790
12-14-2006, 09:12 PM
Ya this whole season consists of winnable games getting handed to the other team. St Louis, New Orleans, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and Seattle.

I went to the game in SF last week and the Pack looked solid. Granted it was only the niners, but SF has a decent offense. Favre looked great, the O-line did its job, and (brace yourself for this) the defense stepped it up and didnt give up over 20 points! I was thoroughly impressed.

With a win against Detroit and Minnesota and possible a little help in Chicago with most of their starters out, we could be in reach of 8-8 and even make the playoffs in the aweful NFC.

Maybe, just Maybe, we have a chance.

70challenger457
12-14-2006, 09:17 PM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

GB12
12-14-2006, 09:22 PM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say.

TitleTown088
12-14-2006, 11:20 PM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say.

you forgot the to mention that they play in a dome.

GB12
12-15-2006, 12:10 AM
Jenkins to start ahead of KGB. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=542320

cheesehead10790
12-15-2006, 12:11 AM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say.

you forgot the to mention that they play in a dome.

And the best QB they can find is Brad Johnson

roughrider30
12-15-2006, 12:26 AM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say.

you forgot the to mention that they play in a dome.

And the best QB they can find is Brad Johnson

i just find their fans more annoying and obnoxious than any other team, but that could be because I have deal with so many every day living in Viking Country. :evil:

GB12
12-15-2006, 12:27 AM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say.

you forgot the to mention that they play in a dome.

And the best QB they can find is Brad Johnson

i just find their fans more annoying and obnoxious than any other team, but that could be because I have deal with so many every day living in Viking Country. :evil:

As much as I dislike Viking fans Eagles fans are probablyy worse. I can't stand them.

TitleTown088
12-15-2006, 01:17 AM
see the reason why I hate the vikings more is because the bears are a much more respectible team to lose to. They have tradtion, they have championships, they have good colors. Vikings have no tradition. They haven't won a championship and they wear purple.

yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say.

you forgot the to mention that they play in a dome.

And the best QB they can find is Brad Johnson

i just find their fans more annoying and obnoxious than any other team, but that could be because I have deal with so many every day living in Viking Country. :evil:

hey man i hear ya, i live right in the heart of viking country because i go to the university of Minn now. .

jackalope
12-15-2006, 07:26 AM
Jenkins to start ahead of KGB. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=542320Jenkins on run downs and KGB on pass downs should work better. i think our run-D will improve.

cheesehead10790
12-15-2006, 08:26 AM
Jenkins to start ahead of KGB. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=542320Jenkins on run downs and KGB on pass downs should work better. i think our run-D will improve.

That sounds good. Jenkins' brother is amazing and now Cullen is shaping up too. Our defense is terrible right now but you gotta look at the ages. We have a vey young defense and by the next two years will have the most potent linebacking core (Hawk, Barnett, and Hodge). We will get better.

70challenger457
12-15-2006, 12:19 PM
Jenkins to start ahead of KGB. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=542320Jenkins on run downs and KGB on pass downs should work better. i think our run-D will improve.

That sounds good. Jenkins' brother is amazing and now Cullen is shaping up too. Our defense is terrible right now but you gotta look at the ages. We have a vey young defense and by the next two years will have the most potent linebacking core (Hawk, Barnett, and Hodge). We will get better.
As far as I know, I think we have the youngest team in the leauge

TitleTown088
12-15-2006, 12:28 PM
Jenkins to start ahead of KGB. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=542320Jenkins on run downs and KGB on pass downs should work better. i think our run-D will improve.

That sounds good. Jenkins' brother is amazing and now Cullen is shaping up too. Our defense is terrible right now but you gotta look at the ages. We have a vey young defense and by the next two years will have the most potent linebacking core (Hawk, Barnett, and Hodge). We will get better.
As far as I know, I think we have the youngest team in the leauge
actuallly i think were like the 2nd youngest.. i think the 49ers are the youngest.

Jim Jim
12-15-2006, 01:10 PM
I would just like to finish the season 8-8.

TitleTown088
12-15-2006, 01:32 PM
I would just like to finish the season 8-8.

I don't think your alone on that one, but to do that we gotta win the rest of our games, which won't be all that easy.

cheesehead10790
12-15-2006, 07:35 PM
Am i alone on this...I was thinking we should move Barnett to SSLB, Hawk to WSLB and Hodge at MLB. This would work well, huh?

someone447
12-15-2006, 08:13 PM
I really like that KGB isn't going to be playing all the time. I hope it works out well, as much as others don't like him, I do.

TitleTown088
12-15-2006, 08:23 PM
Am i alone on this...I was thinking we should move Barnett to SSLB, Hawk to WSLB and Hodge at MLB. This would work well, huh?

it might but didn't you see how hodge played at MIKE vs seattle and how bad our run D was. barnett is a good MLB, if it's not broke, don't fix it.

jackalope
12-15-2006, 08:41 PM
I would just like to finish the season 8-8.if we win out (which is very possible) we actually could make the playoffs. now i don't think we will but i'm just saying.

i think we should keep our Line backers the way they are. it's been working out fine.

GB12
12-15-2006, 09:55 PM
I would just like to finish the season 8-8.if we win out (which is very possible) we actually could make the playoffs. now i don't think we will but i'm just saying.

i think we should keep our Line backers the way they are. it's been working out fine.

Where I would like to see that happen, Hodge isnt ready yet. With our already bad pass coverage putting him in would just kill us. I realize that he wouldn't be in any pass packages but it's still not worth it. Poppinga's been playing well enough that there isnt a reason for it.

someone447
12-15-2006, 10:59 PM
dunkleosteus
they have so many needs it's hard to know where to start... Sad As usual so much depends on FA for which GB has a ton cap money for (and will probably be in danger of breaching the minimum cap number with TT in controll if Favre calls it quits). Anyhoo, here is my early assesment:

Draft Need #1 has to be QB. Rodgers bombed this year again in his limited showings (as I predicted he would). Favre again has committed too many mistakes (fumbles, missed recievers, and setting the all time interception record) so I don't see this 10 million dollar QB taking us to the Super Bowl in 2007. Ingle Martin is a joke that isn't funny.

The problem here is that IMO this is a poor QB year. Everybody loves Brady Quinn, but I just see him being a Tedford like college overachiever because Weiss is such an offensive mastermind (who I wouldn't mind replacing a fired McCarthy). The QB's I really liked were in last years which is most unfortinite. (To all the people flaming me last year for advocating GB take Leinart, still disagree?)

#2 priority has to be DE. KGB will not be resigned. He's struggled all year and getting stonewalled by D'Brick against the Jets a couple of weeks ago pretty much clinched it. Giving up the big runs against Gore early against SF definitly clinched as GB's staff took him out of all run downs and only put him in on pass downs. A 3rd and 10 rush end can't make 5 million+ in this league, so KGB is in trouble. It looks like like this year will be a good year for DE's, so Green Bay should be interested.

#3 Need goes to safety. Manual will be cut... He is a strong safety trying to play a free safety position and it isn't working.

#4 is RB. Green hasn't been as bad as I suspected, but he isn't the elite back we need and he still is too much of a fumble risk. I actually like Morency, but think he fumbles too much and doesn't seem very durable.

Normally, I don't like taking RB's very high, but Adrian Peterson is the best RB prospect the draft has had for a couple of years now (much better then Bush who can't run between tackles and fumbles, Maroney, Brown, and Williams). Frankly I'm a little confused as to why Scott doesn't have Adrian as a top 5 pick...

#5 is TE. Bubba Franks has been a disaster first round selection. He can't run, can't break tackles, and is being picked on in pass protection by opposing teams. Franks will probably be cut, so this will be a major draft need.

#6 is CB. We have no 3,4,5 CB's thanks to TT so we desparately need depth here. Harris is overrated and getting older. Woodsen is also overrated and will continue to have health issues.

Don't like Leon Hall as my pick though... After seeing Ted Guinn dominate him, I have my doubts about the guy and wouldn't like to see him drafted in the first round.

#7 is Tackle. Clifton continues to digress, and now Mark Tauscher is having difficulty getting healthy. Moll is too small and can't be an option.

If Thomas falls, GB has to take him.

#8 is Guard. TT's midget guard experiment isn't working so this position will need to a overalled though the draft (again!).

#9 is Wide Reciever. Driver is team MVP but he is getting old and can't be counted on down the road. Jennings will make a big play here and there, but gets thrown around like a rag doll on most plays which totally shuts down the rest of his production. I just don't the guy is big enough to be a major NFL reciever. For plays in which he does get open Favre has trouble hitting him because he is such a small target and can't jump.

I love Calvin Johnson and Samardzija (but only if he is baseball free).

#10 would be DT. Pickett is ok and everybody else is forgettable.

Getting Alan Branch wouldn't be a bad pick here...

#11 is Outside Linebacker. Poppinga is a DE conversion story that isn't working and he will probably not make the 2007 squad.

#12 P. By now the organization is on to Ryan's trick of getting booming punts by sacrifising serious hang time. This strategy doesn't work and neither does Ryan

#13 K. Rayner just doesn't have NFL accuracy.

Wow, where to start? QB as the biggest need? I think Favre will come back for another year, he might not be as good as he used to be, but there are still plenty of teams that would take him as their starter.

KGB is no longer starting, he is going to be used as a pass rushing specialist. Which is what he should have been all along. Let's see how Jenkins does the rest of the year.

Safety is a big need. But Manuel will not be cut.

RB should be higher, Green is getting up there in age.

Yes, a player who has made multiple pro bowls was a disaster...

Depth at CB is also a lacking area.

Tackle and guard aren't very big needs. We have been starting 3 rookies on the line.

GB12
12-15-2006, 11:14 PM
I say that in the draft section. I'm not even going to start with that.

Nitschke-Hawk
12-15-2006, 11:17 PM
Wow that guy is dumb




Everybody needs to get off Ahman's back

TitleTown088
12-16-2006, 12:30 AM
Wow that guy is dumb




Everybody needs to get off Ahman's back
he needs to get off more than just ahman's back.

cheesehead10790
12-16-2006, 02:12 AM
Wow that guy is dumb




Everybody needs to get off Ahman's back
he needs to get off more than just ahman's back.

Lets be fair here though, drafting AD seems like a good idea especially with Ahmans contract ending soon. Green is good enough, but I want more than just good enough.

jackalope
12-16-2006, 09:43 AM
Draft Need #1 has to be QB. Rodgers bombed this year again in his limited showings (as I predicted he would). Favre again has committed too many mistakes (fumbles, missed recievers, and setting the all time interception record) so I don't see this 10 million dollar QB taking us to the Super Bowl in 2007. Ingle Martin is a joke that isn't funny.

i don't understand how Rodgers bombed this year again. he had extremely limited playing time in situations where we had no chance of a comeback and he played poorly. not terribly though. he was 6 of 15 with no touch downs and no interceptions. how does that constitute him as a bust? he looked good in training camp and preseason. every body is giving up hope on Rodgers after 31 career attempts. also Favre hasn't been too bad this year as he makes it sound, and i don't understand the statement "Ingle Martin is a joke that isn't funny".

70challenger457
12-16-2006, 10:42 AM
Draft Need #1 has to be QB. Rodgers bombed this year again in his limited showings (as I predicted he would). Favre again has committed too many mistakes (fumbles, missed recievers, and setting the all time interception record) so I don't see this 10 million dollar QB taking us to the Super Bowl in 2007. Ingle Martin is a joke that isn't funny.

i don't understand how Rodgers bombed this year again. he had extremely limited playing time in situations where we had no chance of a comeback and he played poorly. not terribly though. he was 6 of 15 with no touch downs and no interceptions. how does that constitute him as a bust? he looked good in training camp and preseason. every body is giving up hope on Rodgers after 31 career attempts. also Favre hasn't been too bad this year as he makes it sound, and i don't understand the statement "Ingle Martin is a joke that isn't funny".
the first thing I said after reading that whole thing "Wow, what a dumba**" Rodgers has had no chance to tell us anything about what type of QB he will be. I didn't understand the whole martin ingle thing either

12-16-2006, 11:53 AM
dunkleosteus
they have so many needs it's hard to know where to start... Sad As usual so much depends on FA for which GB has a ton cap money for (and will probably be in danger of breaching the minimum cap number with TT in controll if Favre calls it quits). Anyhoo, here is my early assesment:

Draft Need #1 has to be QB. Rodgers bombed this year again in his limited showings (as I predicted he would). Favre again has committed too many mistakes (fumbles, missed recievers, and setting the all time interception record) so I don't see this 10 million dollar QB taking us to the Super Bowl in 2007. Ingle Martin is a joke that isn't funny.

The problem here is that IMO this is a poor QB year. Everybody loves Brady Quinn, but I just see him being a Tedford like college overachiever because Weiss is such an offensive mastermind (who I wouldn't mind replacing a fired McCarthy). The QB's I really liked were in last years which is most unfortinite. (To all the people flaming me last year for advocating GB take Leinart, still disagree?)

Rodgers has played all of two quaters this year and those two quarters was against one of the best and most expeienced defense's in the NFL. To say that he bombed again this year is just foolish. If you think he's gonna bomb when he does start, well than that is your personal opinion. There is no way that you can judge what kind of QB Aaron Rodgers will be because he hasn't played nearly enough. And yes BTW I still disagree with the Packers taking Leinart. Aaron Rodgers was thought by many including Scott Wright ( He had him the #1 Overall player) to be the best QB in the 2004 draft. He dropped to Green Bay with a later pick and got about a quarter of regular season playing time last year. Why, when you already have another #1 ranked QB and 1st round pick from a year's prior draft, draft another elite QB in the first round. It just makes no sense it would be the same if the packers went and drafted Paul Poslunzky this year.

#2 priority has to be DE. KGB will not be resigned. He's struggled all year and getting stonewalled by D'Brick against the Jets a couple of weeks ago pretty much clinched it. Giving up the big runs against Gore early against SF definitly clinched as GB's staff took him out of all run downs and only put him in on pass downs. A 3rd and 10 rush end can't make 5 million+ in this league, so KGB is in trouble. It looks like like this year will be a good year for DE's, so Green Bay should be interested.

#3 Need goes to safety. Manual will be cut... He is a strong safety trying to play a free safety position and it isn't working.

#4 is RB. Green hasn't been as bad as I suspected, but he isn't the elite back we need and he still is too much of a fumble risk. I actually like Morency, but think he fumbles too much and doesn't seem very durable.

Normally, I don't like taking RB's very high, but Adrian Peterson is the best RB prospect the draft has had for a couple of years now (much better then Bush who can't run between tackles and fumbles, Maroney, Brown, and Williams). Frankly I'm a little confused as to why Scott doesn't have Adrian as a top 5 pick...

I would think he wouldn't be a top 5 pick becuse of either injury concerns or that the teams drafting in the top 5 don't need a RB. If AP dropped to the Packers in whatever pick they have, they should take him. If Marshawn Lynch is still on the board and AP is gone then I think it is still up for debate who the Packers should take

#5 is TE. Bubba Franks has been a disaster first round selection. He can't run, can't break tackles, and is being picked on in pass protection by opposing teams. Franks will probably be cut, so this will be a major draft need.

Bubba Franks has been a disaster for sure, but a guy like David Martin has somewhat stepped up and become better than Bubba and the #1 pass catching tight end on the team. DM still isn't very good though and probably below the league norm. TE is a need but I don't think it is a bigger need than positions like CB or WR.

#6 is CB. We have no 3,4,5 CB's thanks to TT so we desparately need depth here. Harris is overrated and getting older. Woodsen is also overrated and will continue to have health issues.

Don't like Leon Hall as my pick though... After seeing Ted Guinn dominate him, I have my doubts about the guy and wouldn't like to see him drafted in the first round.

This is a need that you need to but higher on your list. Dendy is not very good and to me I think Al Harrid is a little overated. Charles Woodson though has been nothing short of amazing this year for the Packers and has been worth every penny they gave him in free agency. You are being pessimistic by saying that he will continue to have health issues. I think he only had the one injury this year and he almost missed one game. He has played in every game and played well in them all. Leon Hall has been great for almost all of the year at michigan, I wish I knew more about him but to me, 1 game doesn't scare me away from a prospect. There could have been valid reasons why he didnt play so well that game.

#7 is Tackle. Clifton continues to digress, and now Mark Tauscher is having difficulty getting healthy. Moll is too small and can't be an option.

If Thomas falls, GB has to take him.

Tackle is slowly becoming an issue, Clifton and Tauscher arent getting any younger and like you saif Tascher has struggled to stay healthy. There is no reason to panic at tackle yet and I think if the Packers would like to pick up a tackle in the draft it would be in the later rounds.

#8 is Guard. TT's midget guard experiment isn't working so this position will need to a overalled though the draft (again!).

There is no way this position needs to be overhalled. The two Guards Spitz and Colledge have shown a steady improvement throughout the year and will be able to do the job for us in year's to come.

#9 is Wide Reciever. Driver is team MVP but he is getting old and can't be counted on down the road. Jennings will make a big play here and there, but gets thrown around like a rag doll on most plays which totally shuts down the rest of his production. I just don't the guy is big enough to be a major NFL reciever. For plays in which he does get open Favre has trouble hitting him because he is such a small target and can't jump.

I love Calvin Johnson and Samardzija (but only if he is baseball free).

This needs to be higher on the needs chart. I'm not sold on Koren Robinson and we have no talent beyond the #3 receiver. It's okay if you don't like Jennings but I don't think size is a good reason to say why he won't be a good receiver. There has been lot's of other small receivers before him become very good in the NFL. I don't think there is anyway that we get CJ and I really wouldn't want to take Samadzija unless he dropped to us in the 2nd round, there are too many question marks about him.

#10 would be DT. Pickett is ok and everybody else is forgettable.

Getting Alan Branch wouldn't be a bad pick here...

#11 is Outside Linebacker. Poppinga is a DE conversion story that isn't working and he will probably not make the 2007 squad.

#12 P. By now the organization is on to Ryan's trick of getting booming punts by sacrifising serious hang time. This strategy doesn't work and neither does Ryan

Ryan has been fine this year, he is also young there is no reason to get rid of him after his first season.
#13 K. Rayner just doesn't have NFL accuracy.

Wow, where to start? QB as the biggest need? I think Favre will come back for another year, he might not be as good as he used to be, but there are still plenty of teams that would take him as their starter.

KGB is no longer starting, he is going to be used as a pass rushing specialist. Which is what he should have been all along. Let's see how Jenkins does the rest of the year.

Safety is a big need. But Manuel will not be cut.

RB should be higher, Green is getting up there in age.

Yes, a player who has made multiple pro bowls was a disaster...

Depth at CB is also a lacking area.

Tackle and guard aren't very big needs. We have been starting 3 rookies on the line.

Twiddler
12-16-2006, 09:57 PM
Haha, I see that you guys are arguing over dunkleostus's post. If this happens to be your first time reading one of his posts than I have this advice: get a good laugh out of it and ignore it. I mean I've figured out over time that he's a stubborn Bears fan who comes on acting as a Packers fan.

12-17-2006, 11:01 AM
Haha, I see that you guys are arguing over dunkleostus's post. If this happens to be your first time reading one of his posts than I have this advice: get a good laugh out of it and ignore it. I mean I've figured out over time that he's a stubborn Bears fan who comes on acting as a Packers fan.He must be because that was one of the worst put together draft needs list i've seen in a while.

jpapa4490
12-17-2006, 11:16 AM
Anyone else remember the stuff he had said about our this past years draft. Had to be the dumbest thing i have ever read.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 11:40 AM
I know that I once tried to argue with him before last season's draft. Now I never do...

someone447
12-17-2006, 01:36 PM
BUBBA FRANKS HAS NOT BEEN A DISASTER!!!

3 out of his 6 years in the league he has made a pro bowl.
1. CLEVELAND DE Penn State Courtney Brown 6-5 / 270
2. WASHINGTON(via New Orleans) OLB Penn State LaVar Arrington* 6-3 / 250
3. WASHINGTON(via San Francisco) LT Alabama Chris Samuels 6-5 / 325
4. CINCINNATI WR Florida State Peter Warrick 5-11 / 195
5. BALTIMORE(via Atlanta) RB Tennesse Jamal Lewis* 6-0 / 240
6. PHILADELPHIA NT Florida State Corey Simon 6-2 / 297
7. ARIZONA RB Virginia Thomas Jones 5-10 / 216
8. PITTSBURGH WR Michigan St. Plaxico Burress* 6-6 / 231
9. CHICAGO OLB New Mexico Brian Urlacher 6-4 / 258
10. BALTIMORE(via Denver) WR Florida Travis Taylor* 6-1 / 199
11. NY GIANTS RB Wisconsin Ron Dayne 5-11 / 259
12. NY JETS(via San Francisco/via Washington) DE Tennessee Shaun Ellis 6-5 / 280
13. NY JETS(via Tampa Bay/via San Diego) DE/OLB So. Carolina John Abraham 6-4 / 252
14 GREEN BAY TE Miami (Fla.) Daniel "Bubba" Franks* 6-6 / 265
15. DENVER(via Baltimore) CB California Deltha O'Neal 5-11 / 195
16. SAN FRANCISCO(via NY Jets/via New England) OLB Michigan St. Julian Peterson 6-3 / 232
17. OAKLAND PK Florida State Sebastian Janikowski* 6-2 / 255
18. NY JETS QB Marshall Chad Pennington 6-3 / 229
19. SEATTLE(via Dallas) RB Alabama Shaun Alexander 6-0 / 218
20. DETROIT RT Oklahoma Stockar McDougle 6-5 / 361
21. KANSAS CITY WR Jackson State Sylvester Morris 6-3 / 216
22. SEATTLE RT Wisconsin Chris McIntosh 6-7 / 315
23. CAROLINA(via Miami) CB Jackson State Rashard Anderson 6-2 / 205
24. SAN FRANCISCO(via Washington) CB Ohio State Ahmed Plummer 5-11 / 191
25. MINNESOTA DT Boston College Chris Hovan 6-3 / 305
26. BUFFALO DE Arizona State Erik Flowers 6-4 / 271
27. NY JETS(via Tampa Bay) TE West Virginia Anthony Becht 6-6 / 270
28. INDIANAPOLIS ILB Brigham Young Rob Morris 6-2 / 250
29. JACKSONVILLE WR So. California R. Jay Soward 5-10 / 177
30. TENNESSEE OLB Syracuse Keith Bullock 6-3 / 244
31. ST. LOUIS RB Arizona Trung Canidate 5-11 / 193


This is the entire first round of the 2000 NFL draft. Who would you rather have than Bubba Franks from that first round? He has made the pro bowl in half of his seasons in the league. Cut him some slack.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 02:05 PM
BUBBA FRANKS HAS NOT BEEN A DISASTER!!!

3 out of his 6 years in the league he has made a pro bowl.
1. CLEVELAND DE Penn State Courtney Brown 6-5 / 270
2. WASHINGTON(via New Orleans) OLB Penn State LaVar Arrington* 6-3 / 250
3. WASHINGTON(via San Francisco) LT Alabama Chris Samuels 6-5 / 325
4. CINCINNATI WR Florida State Peter Warrick 5-11 / 195
5. BALTIMORE(via Atlanta) RB Tennesse Jamal Lewis* 6-0 / 240
6. PHILADELPHIA NT Florida State Corey Simon 6-2 / 297
7. ARIZONA RB Virginia Thomas Jones 5-10 / 216
8. PITTSBURGH WR Michigan St. Plaxico Burress* 6-6 / 231
9. CHICAGO OLB New Mexico Brian Urlacher 6-4 / 258
10. BALTIMORE(via Denver) WR Florida Travis Taylor* 6-1 / 199
11. NY GIANTS RB Wisconsin Ron Dayne 5-11 / 259
12. NY JETS(via San Francisco/via Washington) DE Tennessee Shaun Ellis 6-5 / 280
13. NY JETS(via Tampa Bay/via San Diego) DE/OLB So. Carolina John Abraham 6-4 / 252
14 GREEN BAY TE Miami (Fla.) Daniel "Bubba" Franks* 6-6 / 265
15. DENVER(via Baltimore) CB California Deltha O'Neal 5-11 / 195
16. SAN FRANCISCO(via NY Jets/via New England) OLB Michigan St. Julian Peterson 6-3 / 232
17. OAKLAND PK Florida State Sebastian Janikowski* 6-2 / 255
18. NY JETS QB Marshall Chad Pennington 6-3 / 229
19. SEATTLE(via Dallas) RB Alabama Shaun Alexander 6-0 / 218
20. DETROIT RT Oklahoma Stockar McDougle 6-5 / 361
21. KANSAS CITY WR Jackson State Sylvester Morris 6-3 / 216
22. SEATTLE RT Wisconsin Chris McIntosh 6-7 / 315
23. CAROLINA(via Miami) CB Jackson State Rashard Anderson 6-2 / 205
24. SAN FRANCISCO(via Washington) CB Ohio State Ahmed Plummer 5-11 / 191
25. MINNESOTA DT Boston College Chris Hovan 6-3 / 305
26. BUFFALO DE Arizona State Erik Flowers 6-4 / 271
27. NY JETS(via Tampa Bay) TE West Virginia Anthony Becht 6-6 / 270
28. INDIANAPOLIS ILB Brigham Young Rob Morris 6-2 / 250
29. JACKSONVILLE WR So. California R. Jay Soward 5-10 / 177
30. TENNESSEE OLB Syracuse Keith Bullock 6-3 / 244
31. ST. LOUIS RB Arizona Trung Canidate 5-11 / 193


This is the entire first round of the 2000 NFL draft. Who would you rather have than Bubba Franks from that first round? He has made the pro bowl in half of his seasons in the league. Cut him some slack.

Well, Julian Peterson, Shaun Alexander, or Keith Bullock would be nice (all picked after Bubba) :wink:

IDK what happened to Bubba, he used to be a great red-zone threat. He still has some game left, not to mention 6 years on his contract.

Boston
12-17-2006, 02:55 PM
:lol: Anybody else see favre spike the ball after a false start penalty, than Redding caught the ball, and spiked it. :lol:

jbombul
12-17-2006, 03:11 PM
thanx for beating us today :) in all honesty and im not trying to be mean or anything i was worried about this game for us actually being competitive and maybe winning but im glad we didnt, we now secure our spot at the top of the draft, again thank you packers :)

ny10804
12-17-2006, 03:16 PM
Some stats today:

3 sacks for Cullen Jenkins.

2 sacks for Aaron Kampman.

1 sack for Corey Williams.

2 INTs. 1 for Harris, 1 for Woodson

123 yards from scrimmage by Ahman Green.

54 yards on 7 rushes for 2 TDs by Vernand Morency.

3 INTs and 0 TDs by Brett.


With Minnesota and Carolina losses, we're still in the playoff hunt. Whoever loses today in the PHI-NYG game has to lose its next two games for us to be in, IIRC.

Boston
12-17-2006, 03:18 PM
thanx for beating us today :) in all honesty and im not trying to be mean or anything i was worried about this game for us actually being competitive and maybe winning but im glad we didnt, we now secure our spot at the top of the draft, again thank you packers :)

Well, at least lions fans have adapted...

GB12
12-17-2006, 03:18 PM
thanx for beating us today :) in all honesty and im not trying to be mean or anything i was worried about this game for us actually being competitive and maybe winning but im glad we didnt, we now secure our spot at the top of the draft, again thank you packers :)

Your welcome now have fun with CJ.


Just kinding I hope they get Quinn.

GB12
12-17-2006, 03:19 PM
Some stats today:

3 sacks for Cullen Jenkins.

2 sacks for Aaron Kampman.

1 sack for Corey Williams.

2 INTs. 1 for Harris, 1 for Woodson

123 yards from scrimmage by Ahman Green.

54 yards on 7 rushes for 2 TDs by Vernand Morency.

3 INTs and 0 TDs by Brett.


With Minnesota and Carolina losses, we're still in the playoff hunt. Whoever loses today in the PHI-NYG game has to lose its next two games for us to be in, IIRC.

If only we had one of those 4 or so games back that we blew.

jbombul
12-17-2006, 03:28 PM
cj wouldnt be bad if roy williams wasnt having the year he is. but i like what the packers have done with building that offensive line that zone blocking is nice

ny10804
12-17-2006, 03:30 PM
Some stats today:

3 sacks for Cullen Jenkins.

2 sacks for Aaron Kampman.

1 sack for Corey Williams.

2 INTs. 1 for Harris, 1 for Woodson

123 yards from scrimmage by Ahman Green.

54 yards on 7 rushes for 2 TDs by Vernand Morency.

3 INTs and 0 TDs by Brett.


With Minnesota and Carolina losses, we're still in the playoff hunt. Whoever loses today in the PHI-NYG game has to lose its next two games for us to be in, IIRC.

If only we had one of those 4 or so games back that we blew.

Don't remind me.

The big ones:

13-0 lead over NO -- loss.

Turnover in redzone (11 yard line) when down by 3 with 44 seconds left versus STL -- loss

21-12 lead over SEA in the 3rd quarter -- loss.

Bad:

4 turnovers in a game that was tied in the 4th quarter. A 4th quarter INT on the Bills' 1 yard line sealed the -- loss.

To a lesser extent:

Halftime lead over Philly -- loss.


We could easily have been 10-4 right now :cry:

GB12
12-17-2006, 03:31 PM
cj wouldnt be bad if roy williams wasnt having the year he is. but i like what the packers have done with building that offensive line that zone blocking is nice

Tauscher hasn't been in for 5 weeks and Moll has done alright at RT. Unlike last season I dont think we really need to upgrade at all.

GB12
12-17-2006, 03:33 PM
Some stats today:

3 sacks for Cullen Jenkins.

2 sacks for Aaron Kampman.

1 sack for Corey Williams.

2 INTs. 1 for Harris, 1 for Woodson

123 yards from scrimmage by Ahman Green.

54 yards on 7 rushes for 2 TDs by Vernand Morency.

3 INTs and 0 TDs by Brett.


With Minnesota and Carolina losses, we're still in the playoff hunt. Whoever loses today in the PHI-NYG game has to lose its next two games for us to be in, IIRC.

If only we had one of those 4 or so games back that we blew.

Don't remind me.

The big ones:

13-0 lead over NO -- loss.

Turnover in redzone (11 yard line) when down by 3 with 44 seconds left versus STL -- loss

21-12 lead over SEA in the 3rd quarter -- loss.

Bad:

4 turnovers in a game that was tied in the 4th quarter. A 4th quarter INT on the Bills' 1 yard line sealed the -- loss.

To a lesser extent:

Halftime lead over Philly -- loss.


We could easily have been 10-4 right now :cry:

At least the near or at .500 finish should keep Brett interested enough to comeback one more time.

jpapa4490
12-17-2006, 03:53 PM
Some stats today:

3 sacks for Cullen Jenkins.

2 sacks for Aaron Kampman.

1 sack for Corey Williams.

2 INTs. 1 for Harris, 1 for Woodson

123 yards from scrimmage by Ahman Green.

54 yards on 7 rushes for 2 TDs by Vernand Morency.

3 INTs and 0 TDs by Brett.


With Minnesota and Carolina losses, we're still in the playoff hunt. Whoever loses today in the PHI-NYG game has to lose its next two games for us to be in, IIRC.

If only we had one of those 4 or so games back that we blew.

Don't remind me.

The big ones:

13-0 lead over NO -- loss.

Turnover in redzone (11 yard line) when down by 3 with 44 seconds left versus STL -- loss

21-12 lead over SEA in the 3rd quarter -- loss.

Bad:

4 turnovers in a game that was tied in the 4th quarter. A 4th quarter INT on the Bills' 1 yard line sealed the -- loss.

To a lesser extent:

Halftime lead over Philly -- loss.


We could easily have been 10-4 right now :cry:

At least the near or at .500 finish should keep Brett interested enough to comeback one more time.

To be honest i dont want favre to come back, I want to move on and see what we have with Rodgers. However, if favre does come back, I wont complain.

GB12
12-17-2006, 03:54 PM
One more seson then I believe it's time to move on with Rodgers.

Boston
12-17-2006, 03:55 PM
We need a red zone threat. Bubba Franks is no more, and our other tight ends can't catch the ball. 39% TD percentage in the red zone is just unacceptable.

GB12
12-17-2006, 03:56 PM
We need a red zone threat. Bubba Franks is no more, and our other tight ends can't catch the ball. 39% TD percentage in the red zone is just unacceptable.

Walker was perfect for that. We need a big WCO WR.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 04:10 PM
Free agents GB should take a good hard look at:

Eric Johnson, TE
Adalius Thomas*, LB
Nate Clements, CB
Ken Hamlin, FS

Poppinga is alright, but adding Thomas would really impact this defense.

sik wit it
12-17-2006, 04:13 PM
the only way i want favre to come back is if we are a series playoff contender, meaning we get in and have a chance to do some series damage. Otherwise I think its time we start looking to the future with Rodgers

GB12
12-17-2006, 04:13 PM
Free agents GB should take a good hard look at:

Eric Johnson, TE
Adalius Thomas*, LB
Nate Clements, CB
Ken Hamlin, FS

Poppinga is alright, but adding Thomas would really impact this defense.

Hamlin is my #1 want in FA. Then Johnson would be second. Thomas would be noce but will cost way too much. As for Clements, Harris is good for another year or 2 and I dont think he would come to be a nickleback. Not to mention that he is a little overated.

TitleTown088
12-17-2006, 04:15 PM
the only way i want favre to come back is if we are a series playoff contender, meaning we get in and have a chance to do some series damage. Otherwise I think its time we start looking to the future with Rodgers

the packers wouldn't be a playoff contender without Favre. How could anyone not want him to come back? he gives the pack the best chance to win and he is still exciting to watch.

Empire
12-17-2006, 04:23 PM
hey guess, new Packer fan here. I just wanted to say that the best chance for the Packers to get to the playoffs would be to root for the Giants to win this game against the Eagles. This would give the Packers the likeliest chance to get to the playoffs given they win out the rest of the season. That would eliminate the Vikings automatically. I also believe the Panthers will not be able to stop the Saints in New Orleans. I have also eliminated the 49ers because of their final game against the Broncos. Here's what it would look like:

Giants- Eagles, Saints, Redskins
First of all, we need the team that loses today to lose out the remaining schedule. The Giants could win out but I doubt they beat the Saints. Final record would be 9-6 with a win against the Eagles and Redskins. They would grab one of the wild card spots

Eagles- Giants, Cowboys, Falcons
With a loss today against the Giants, they are forced to go into Dallas. With a loss there they will play Atlanta at home. Although the Eagles have a great shot against the Falcons I think they have a better shot of losing out than the Giants do. Final record would be 7-9.

Falcons- Panthers, Eagles
Here's the big one. The Panthers MUST beat the Falcons and the Falcons must beat the Eagles. That would make the Falcons 8-8 but the Packers would have a better conference record.

So in summary the games all Packers need to be watching closely is today , rooting for the Giants, next week rooting for the Cowboys against the Eagles and Panthers against Falcons, and finally root for the Falcons to beat the Eagles. Tough road? Yes. Possible? Very possible.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 04:31 PM
hey guess, new Packer fan here. I just wanted to say that the best chance for the Packers to get to the playoffs would be to root for the Giants to win this game against the Eagles. This would give the Packers the likeliest chance to get to the playoffs given they win out the rest of the season. That would eliminate the Vikings automatically. I also believe the Panthers will not be able to stop the Saints in New Orleans. I have also eliminated the 49ers because of their final game against the Broncos. Here's what it would look like:

Giants- Eagles, Saints, Redskins
First of all, we need the team that loses today to lose out the remaining schedule. The Giants could win out but I doubt they beat the Saints. Final record would be 9-6 with a win against the Eagles and Redskins. They would grab one of the wild card spots

Eagles- Giants, Cowboys, Falcons
With a loss today against the Giants, they are forced to go into Dallas. With a loss there they will play Atlanta at home. Although the Eagles have a great shot against the Falcons I think they have a better shot of losing out than the Giants do. Final record would be 7-9.

Falcons- Panthers, Eagles
Here's the big one. The Panthers MUST beat the Falcons and the Falcons must beat the Eagles. That would make the Falcons 8-8 but the Packers would have a better conference record.

So in summary the games all Packers need to be watching closely is today , rooting for the Giants, next week rooting for the Cowboys against the Eagles and Panthers against Falcons, and finally root for the Falcons to beat the Eagles. Tough road? Yes. Possible? Very possible.

I like the way this man thinks!

GB12
12-17-2006, 04:34 PM
hey guess, new Packer fan here. I just wanted to say that the best chance for the Packers to get to the playoffs would be to root for the Giants to win this game against the Eagles. This would give the Packers the likeliest chance to get to the playoffs given they win out the rest of the season. That would eliminate the Vikings automatically. I also believe the Panthers will not be able to stop the Saints in New Orleans. I have also eliminated the 49ers because of their final game against the Broncos. Here's what it would look like:

Giants- Eagles, Saints, Redskins
First of all, we need the team that loses today to lose out the remaining schedule. The Giants could win out but I doubt they beat the Saints. Final record would be 9-6 with a win against the Eagles and Redskins. They would grab one of the wild card spots

Eagles- Giants, Cowboys, Falcons
With a loss today against the Giants, they are forced to go into Dallas. With a loss there they will play Atlanta at home. Although the Eagles have a great shot against the Falcons I think they have a better shot of losing out than the Giants do. Final record would be 7-9.

Falcons- Panthers, Eagles
Here's the big one. The Panthers MUST beat the Falcons and the Falcons must beat the Eagles. That would make the Falcons 8-8 but the Packers would have a better conference record.

So in summary the games all Packers need to be watching closely is today , rooting for the Giants, next week rooting for the Cowboys against the Eagles and Panthers against Falcons, and finally root for the Falcons to beat the Eagles. Tough road? Yes. Possible? Very possible.

nice post. I was going to do that but you saved me some time.

Boston
12-17-2006, 05:12 PM
Free agents GB should take a good hard look at:

Eric Johnson, TE
Adalius Thomas*, LB
Nate Clements, CB
Ken Hamlin, FS

Poppinga is alright, but adding Thomas would really impact this defense.

Hamlin is my #1 want in FA. Then Johnson would be second. Thomas would be noce but will cost way too much. As for Clements, Harris is good for another year or 2 and I dont think he would come to be a nickleback. Not to mention that he is a little overated.

It's not like we don't have the money for Thomas.

GB12
12-17-2006, 06:20 PM
Free agents GB should take a good hard look at:

Eric Johnson, TE
Adalius Thomas*, LB
Nate Clements, CB
Ken Hamlin, FS

Poppinga is alright, but adding Thomas would really impact this defense.

Hamlin is my #1 want in FA. Then Johnson would be second. Thomas would be noce but will cost way too much. As for Clements, Harris is good for another year or 2 and I dont think he would come to be a nickleback. Not to mention that he is a little overated.

It's not like we don't have the money for Thomas.

I know but then it's a lot of money locked up at one position. We have space now but going out and signing everyone we want could create some serious cap problems later.

Empire
12-17-2006, 06:29 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 06:29 PM
Free agents GB should take a good hard look at:

Eric Johnson, TE
Adalius Thomas*, LB
Nate Clements, CB
Ken Hamlin, FS

Poppinga is alright, but adding Thomas would really impact this defense.

Hamlin is my #1 want in FA. Then Johnson would be second. Thomas would be noce but will cost way too much. As for Clements, Harris is good for another year or 2 and I dont think he would come to be a nickleback. Not to mention that he is a little overated.

It's not like we don't have the money for Thomas.

I know but then it's a lot of money locked up at one position. We have space now but going out and signing everyone we want could create some serious cap problems later.

Not if TT does it the same way he did last year: give two big contracts (Kampman and Woodson, or in this case, say, Thomas and Johnson) and frontload them so that each successive year the cap number is lessened. We'll have about the same amount of $$$ as last year, and it will be 10 million more if Brett retires. Also, we won't have as high of a pick next year, meaning we won't have to give too big of a contract to our first rounder.

Boston
12-17-2006, 06:31 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

ny10804
12-17-2006, 06:33 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

Also, STL has the same record as us, as well as having beating us head-to-head. They have to lose one of there last two games, vs Redkins, @ Minnesota.

GB12
12-17-2006, 06:35 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

That was awesome.

I don't think that the Giants will **** it up like minnesota though.

Boston
12-17-2006, 06:39 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

That was awesome.

I don't think that the Giants will *********** it up like minnesota though.

It depends when everybody comes back.

GB12
12-17-2006, 07:56 PM
Ok, what do you guys think the offseason needs are at this point

S
DE
TE
WR
RB
LB

I think we are ok for atleast another season with Ahman and would be ok with not useing our 1st rounder on a RB.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 08:10 PM
DE

You know what, I think the combination of Cullen Jenkins on running downs and KGB on passing downs is much better than any DE we could get from this draft. By staying with these two we don't have to spend a high pick on a DE and can use that pick on a more pressing need.

Boston
12-17-2006, 08:20 PM
DE

You know what, I think the combination of Cullen Jenkins on running downs and KGB on passing downs is much better than any DE we could get from this draft. By staying with these two we don't have to spend a high pick on a DE and can use that pick on a more pressing need.

QFT. Cullen Jenkins alone is better than any DE we could get in the draft.

12-17-2006, 08:24 PM
I'm just gonna say anywhere in the secondary

jackalope
12-17-2006, 08:36 PM
did Jenkins get all those 3 sacks playing DE today? if so he should be our starting DE.

TitleTown088
12-17-2006, 08:45 PM
did Jenkins get all those 3 sacks playing DE today? if so he should be our starting DE.
yeah he did i think. He really impressed me.

BuckNaked
12-17-2006, 08:45 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

Now that was an unecessary cheap shot.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 08:47 PM
did Jenkins get all those 3 sacks playing DE today? if so he should be our starting DE.

I believe 2 came at DT. He had an outstanding day -- 2 tackles, 3 sacks, and a FR. He's gonna be a restricted free agent this offseason. He needs to be resigned.

Boston
12-17-2006, 08:51 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

Now that was an unecessary cheap shot.

Not really. The packers needed the cardinals to win that game to go to the playoffs, similar to the situation at hand. And, it's the vikings. :roll:

ny10804
12-17-2006, 09:06 PM
Here's an article on Jenkins: link (http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061217/PKR01/61217027/1989)

As for the Packers defensive needs, I'd rank them as:

(coverage) SS, (runstuffing) DT, (complete) SLB*. WLB, MLB, LDE, FS, DT1 are set for the future (5-8 years). CB1 and CB2 are good for 2-3 years.

* as I've said before, Brady is alright, but a major improvement in Adalius Thomas could be had.

Offensive needs:

(complete) TE, RB* (of the future), (posession) WR. RT and LT are good for about 1-3 years (Clifton being the main concern). C, LG, RT, WR2 are set for the future (7-10 years). QB could be a concern if A-Rod doesn't pan out.

* With Vernand Morency, less is more -- he cannot carry the load by himself but is very effective in limited duty.

GB12
12-17-2006, 09:18 PM
DE

You know what, I think the combination of Cullen Jenkins on running downs and KGB on passing downs is much better than any DE we could get from this draft. By staying with these two we don't have to spend a high pick on a DE and can use that pick on a more pressing need.

QFT. Cullen Jenkins alone is better than any DE we could get in the draft.

Just a reminder this is ment for offseason needs meaning FA and draft. With that being said I should have had it a little farther down but we are still going to need someone. I like the Jenkins/KGB combinantion and if we choose to stick with that then DT becomes a need.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 09:23 PM
DE

You know what, I think the combination of Cullen Jenkins on running downs and KGB on passing downs is much better than any DE we could get from this draft. By staying with these two we don't have to spend a high pick on a DE and can use that pick on a more pressing need.

QFT. Cullen Jenkins alone is better than any DE we could get in the draft.

Just a reminder this is ment for offseason needs meaning FA and draft. With that being said I should have had it a little farther down but we are still going to need someone. I like the Jenkins/KGB combinantion and if we choose to stick with that then DT becomes a need.

Exactly my thinking. Enter 6-1 317 Amobi Okoye or 6-6 331 Alan Branch.

Empire
12-17-2006, 09:26 PM
I'm not too sure how many people will agree with me, but with all the salary cap space the Packers have, Michael Turner would be a very interesting addition. He could be the running back of the future and the Packers could focus on other needs in the draft.

BuckNaked
12-17-2006, 09:28 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

Now that was an unecessary cheap shot.

Not really. The packers needed the cardinals to win that game to go to the playoffs, similar to the situation at hand. And, it's the vikings. :roll:

As a Vikings fan, that's a moment I never want to remember.

GB12
12-17-2006, 09:29 PM
DE

You know what, I think the combination of Cullen Jenkins on running downs and KGB on passing downs is much better than any DE we could get from this draft. By staying with these two we don't have to spend a high pick on a DE and can use that pick on a more pressing need.

QFT. Cullen Jenkins alone is better than any DE we could get in the draft.

Just a reminder this is ment for offseason needs meaning FA and draft. With that being said I should have had it a little farther down but we are still going to need someone. I like the Jenkins/KGB combinantion and if we choose to stick with that then DT becomes a need.

Exactly my thinking. Enter 6-1 317 Amobi Okoye or 6-6 331 Alan Branch.

I'm so confused about who I want in the draft right now.

GB12
12-17-2006, 09:32 PM
I'm not too sure how many people will agree with me, but with all the salary cap space the Packers have, Michael Turner would be a very interesting addition. He could be the running back of the future and the Packers could focus on other needs in the draft.

If we can get him without a huge contract I would like to see how that works out. It'd be nice to get a RB of the future without useing a high draft pick. How would that work out with him Green and Morency though, we would have to get rid of one of them.

TitleTown088
12-17-2006, 09:36 PM
With the Eagle win today, it makes things very interesting for the Packers. Looking back at it now, it seems like there are now less variables for the Packers making it to the playoffs. Again the Packers must win out. 49ers will be eliminated by the Broncos and the Panthers will be eliminated by the Saints

Giants- Saints, at Redskins
This one is easy, the Giants must lose out. Saints, I think, are a much better team than the Giants and the Giants will not be able to control the Saints offense. The big game will be at Washington. Washington showed today they are a dangerous team, and hopefully they can beat the Giants. Final record: 7-9

Eagles- at Cowboys, Falcons
Cowboys game does not matter much for Packer fans next week but the the Eagles must beat the Falcons. Watching the Giants-Eagles game today, I don't think that's too hard too assume. The Eagles will still be fighting for a playoff position and will not sit any starters out against the Falcons. With the Falcons loss, the Packers will win the second wild card.

So here is the best show the Packers get into the playoffs. Looking back at it now, it seems to be an easier road than the one I originally proposed. Games Packer fans must watch for and teams Packer fans must root for are in old bold

Week 16:
Vikings at Packers
Saints at Giants

Week 17:
Bears at Packers
Falcons at Eagles
Panthers at Saints
49ers at Broncos
Giants at Redskins

As long as the Packers win out, the only real upset the Packers would need would be a Redskins win over the Giants. Other than that, it's very possible.

All this playoff talk has me excited. It reminds me of this game.

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img6963091.jpg

Now that was an unecessary cheap shot.

Not really. The packers needed the cardinals to win that game to go to the playoffs, similar to the situation at hand. And, it's the vikings. :roll:

As a Vikings fan, that's a moment I never want to remember.

as a packer fan that's a moment i never want to forget :) .... that and freemans catch on MNF. well maybe i don't want to forget the Superbowl either.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 09:47 PM
I'm not too sure how many people will agree with me, but with all the salary cap space the Packers have, Michael Turner would be a very interesting addition. He could be the running back of the future and the Packers could focus on other needs in the draft.

If we can get him without a huge contract I would like to see how that works out. It'd be nice to get a RB of the future without useing a high draft pick. How would that work out with him Green and Morency though, we would have to get rid of one of them.

RB by commitee. All 3 would split time in 07, and when Ahman's gone, Turner and Morency would split time.

GB12
12-17-2006, 10:23 PM
I'm not too sure how many people will agree with me, but with all the salary cap space the Packers have, Michael Turner would be a very interesting addition. He could be the running back of the future and the Packers could focus on other needs in the draft.

If we can get him without a huge contract I would like to see how that works out. It'd be nice to get a RB of the future without useing a high draft pick. How would that work out with him Green and Morency though, we would have to get rid of one of them.

RB by commitee. All 3 would split time in 07, and when Ahman's gone, Turner and Morency would split time.

I don't know if Turner would sign if he knew that he would be the feature back though. Also I doubt that Green would be too happy about shring with 2 other guys. I think using two of them would work very nicely but I dont think three would.

ny10804
12-17-2006, 10:29 PM
I'm not too sure how many people will agree with me, but with all the salary cap space the Packers have, Michael Turner would be a very interesting addition. He could be the running back of the future and the Packers could focus on other needs in the draft.

If we can get him without a huge contract I would like to see how that works out. It'd be nice to get a RB of the future without useing a high draft pick. How would that work out with him Green and Morency though, we would have to get rid of one of them.

RB by commitee. All 3 would split time in 07, and when Ahman's gone, Turner and Morency would split time.

I don't know if Turner would sign if he knew that he would be the feature back though. Also I doubt that Green would be too happy about shring with 2 other guys. I think using two of them would work very nicely but I dont think three would.

It worked in Denver (the system our running game is based on) in 2004 (Droughns, Bell, Griffin) and 2005 (Anderson, Bell, Dayne). It also worked last year with the Bears (Jones, Peterson, Benson).

In all likelihood, Ahman will be gone after next year, and Turner and Morency would take over. This same situation is happening in aforementioned Denver and Chicago -- Tatum and Mike Bell are splitting carries; as are Jones and Benson.

It could work...

mancl
12-18-2006, 12:06 PM
Please spare me the playoff talk. It's more important to get the Packers to be playing at a playoff caliber. If it had been any team but the Lions or Raiders the Packers would have lost yesterday.

Branch will be long gone by the time the Packer pick.

I'd have to think long and hard if Lynch were available when the Packer pick. A receiver like Ginn or Jarrett might be but there are a lot receivers in this draft- they could get one later. Looking into my crystal ball I see a DB taken with the first pick tho there are so many factors that could change this.

You don't want to pay big bucks for a LB as a FA now because he'd be off the field on nickel and dime situations. This could change if they traded Barnett and went with Hodge.

Featherstone
12-18-2006, 03:38 PM
Well it looks like Jags is going to coach BC. I would guess the OLine coach would take over as OC and probably keep the job since McCarthy calls all the plays so OC isn't that big of a deal.

ny10804
12-18-2006, 04:11 PM
Landry is still my favorite pick. I would also love the prospect of

Jenkins -- Okoye -- Pickett -- Kampman

on running downs, and

Gbaja-Biamila -- Jenkins -- Okoye -- Kampman

on passing downs. Colin Cole could sub in on running dows, and Corey Williams on passing downs. Mike Montgomery could spell Kampman.

Featherstone, is this inside knowledge or speculation? I hear some QB coach from Pittsburgh was on the inside track? I think the ZBS is here to stay, and M3 would probably want someone who's familiar with the system. I believe (OL coach) Joe Philbin doesn't have experience with the scheme, and it's only his first year coaching the o-line, ie he probably wouldn't get the job.

Empire
12-18-2006, 04:15 PM
Well it looks like Jags is going to coach BC. I would guess the OLine coach would take over as OC and probably keep the job since McCarthy calls all the plays so OC isn't that big of a deal.

Where'd you hear that news? From the news reports I've been hearing the Steelers QB coach is still the leading candidate.

As for the runningback situation, I wouldn't be too upset if the Packers let Ahman walk and sign Turner. I would keep Morency, though, and may draft a project player in the draft. In today's NFL I think the teams that find the most success are those with two good runningbacks. By signing Turner we could draft say Laron Landry to help shore up the secondary. I think we could also use a corner, but not a high draft pick. I like Will Blackmon and think he should be given a shot.

Featherstone
12-18-2006, 04:29 PM
ESPN and JSonline have been reporting it for last couple hours, I figured I was behind in knowing it.

Empire
12-18-2006, 04:41 PM
ESPN and JSonline have been reporting it for last couple hours, I figured I was behind in knowing it.

Ah I just saw it on ESPN. Sorry just got home. Well it looks like the Packers will still be running the ZBS next year even without Jags.

ny10804
12-18-2006, 04:43 PM
ESPN and JSonline have been reporting it for last couple hours, I figured I was behind in knowing it.

Good looks, here's the link (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2701480).

As I said before, I doubt Philbin gets the job, but I really don't know. I'd have to think we'd stay with the ZBS. Wells, Spitz, and Colledge all fit the system well.

GB12
12-18-2006, 04:53 PM
Guess Im a little late. Here's the local link http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=2&date=12/18/2006&id=16108

We definately should stay with ZBS as the young players have played very well in it and changing it would be stupid.

Moses
12-18-2006, 05:23 PM
I wouldn't mind picking up LaRon Landry if we're around the 10th pick or lower. Playing him alongside Collins would make for a very athletic safety combination and the thing I like most about Landry is that he's a leader, something the Packers desperately need.

70challenger457
12-18-2006, 05:47 PM
I wouldn't mind picking up LaRon Landry if we're around the 10th pick or lower. Playing him alongside Collins would make for a very athletic safety combination and the thing I like most about Landry is that he's a leader, something the Packers desperately need.
I can't say I wouldn't dig that

TitleTown088
12-18-2006, 07:17 PM
I wouldn't mind picking up LaRon Landry if we're around the 10th pick or lower. Playing him alongside Collins would make for a very athletic safety combination and the thing I like most about Landry is that he's a leader, something the Packers desperately need.
I'd like that pick too, but what do you propose to do for RB? i just don't think ahman and morency can cut it for much longer, we need some new young blood at hte RB postion. I really like what this cat morency has done though, whata good trade by TT.