The running game will be key, but I'd also like to see MM use the short pass to the tight end, some screens and slants to pull those safeties up as well. It can't all depend on the running game to open up the vertical lanes; some short stuff has to be part of the mix. It would also get and keep AR into the flow of the game.
quote:Originally posted by Fandame:
The running game will be key, but I'd also like to see MM use the short pass to the tight end, some screens and slants to pull those safeties up as well. It can't all depend on the running game to open up the vertical lanes; some short stuff has to be part of the mix. It would also get and keep AR into the flow of the game.
...running everyone on deep routes & then throwing underneath to backs isolated on LBers is another option. Get Green & Harris in open space....
quote:Originally posted by Goalline:
This team has no chance to win the Super Bowl. Enuff said.
I used this argument on my thesis, BTW.
And what did your thesis think of it?
She thought I was adorable. I am, you know?
quote:Originally posted by cuqui:
I don't disagree, Henry. Next year, it will really help to get Des Bishop back and if TT drafts a slobberknocking ILB too.
Next year? F next year.
quote:This team can compete with anyone. But I also believe a team like the NYG is a bit inside the Packers heads. Maybe that SF team too.
Beating the Giants and the 49ers is all about game-planning. Empty backfields won't work against teams with strong fronts. GB can beat either one of them, any where.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:
GB can beat either one of them, any where.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:quote:This team can compete with anyone. But I also believe a team like the NYG is a bit inside the Packers heads. Maybe that SF team too.
Beating the Giants and the 49ers is all about game-planning. Empty backfields won't work against teams with strong fronts. GB can beat either one of them, any where.
We saw the inverted bone a few times last night with Van Roten and I think once with Finley who then motioned out. Now is the time for McCarthy to show us how smart an offensive mind FS thinks he is.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:
Beating the Giants and the 49ers is all about game-planning. Empty backfields won't work against teams with strong fronts. GB can beat either one of them, any where.
The common factor in the 3 losses against these two teams, going back to January, is that each time GB was physically manhandled on both lines. Imo, the Pack need to be able to take that first haymaker punch and withstand it, and respond by throwing some themselves. In each game, GB played into the opponents hands, and got away from their own game.
The point about empty backfields is a good one, and we can only speculate as to how injuries affected the outcome of the last NYG game. The good sign that came last night was the drive that was exclusively running the ball, imposing their collective will on the Lions. Now let's do it against a strong front 7. That will be the difference between a one and out or a SB run.
The last 3 butt whoopings - Giants x2 and San Fran...if memory serves me all 3 times the other team scored the first TD of the game. Who knows if the Packers score first in a future game against these guys it could be a completely different result. Just look at the 2010 Giants game, the big bomb to Jordy on the 1st or 2nd play and the Packers steamrolled them.
I'm drinking tequila. How about you?
**** YEAH!!! Johnny of the Bench Brigade to the rescue!! Here's to the Quicker Pecker Upper helping to kick the running game into gear for the playoffs. Yes, I'm serious even if there is a snarky vibe.
They have a chance, but not likely this year IMO. Hope I'm wrong, but I'm thinking they maybe win one game in the playoffs.
The one thing I do like is the defense finally seems to be gelling together. Adding back Shields and Clay has been huge and Neal stepping up means Raji doesn't get so much attention. I greatly prefer Moses over Walden as well. Walden has been shown to play better when he needs to earn it and play better with limited snaps.
Biggest worry is the safeties haven't been tested against a top notch QB in a good while now. I don't worry too much about the front 7 or the outside CBs but the safeties have been brutal at times this year. How they hold up once we start playing the more talented QBs will be interesting.
Worthy has also hit that rookie wall it seems. Nothing unusual for a first year guy but the less we need to count on him the better.
Biggest worry is the safeties haven't been tested against a top notch QB in a good while now. I don't worry too much about the front 7 or the outside CBs but the safeties have been brutal at times this year. How they hold up once we start playing the more talented QBs will be interesting.
Worthy has also hit that rookie wall it seems. Nothing unusual for a first year guy but the less we need to count on him the better.
quote:Originally posted by Ryan Grant:
They have a chance, but not likely this year IMO. Hope I'm wrong, but I'm thinking they maybe win one game in the playoffs.
Need to work on BFI first, IMO.
quote:Originally posted by JJSD:
The GBP have found themselves a running game.
Hmmmm, does No. 3 refer to The Prisoner? If so, nice moniker.
All you ninnies can go **** yourselves. They're still winning the big one.
Look who's here? Good Ol' Number Three... absent for months but shows up now.
Eat me.
Look who's here? Good Ol' Number Three... absent for months but shows up now.
Eat me.
I like the Packers chances as much or more than anyone else out there, that's for sure.
quote:Originally posted by Illini Kev:
I like the Packers chances as much or more than anyone else out there, that's for sure.
This
I think SF is in a better position than the Packers. If they play, the Pack will be on the road. The Pack also have to stop AP and beat the Vikings to even get a rematch with SF.
quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:
I think SF is in a better position than the Packers. If they play, the Pack will be on the road. The Pack also have to stop AP and beat the Vikings to even get a rematch with SF.
I like the Packers chances out in SF if we can get by the Vikes next week. Obviously you would rather get them at home, but the Packers seem to play on the road as well as any other team out there.
I do know this. Nobody in the NFC playoffs wants to face Aaron Rodgers.
quote:I do know this. Nobody in the NFC playoffs wants to face Aaron Rodgers.
+1
quote:Originally posted by Illini Kev:quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:
I think SF is in a better position than the Packers. If they play, the Pack will be on the road. The Pack also have to stop AP and beat the Vikings to even get a rematch with SF.
I like the Packers chances out in SF if we can get by the Vikes next week. Obviously you would rather get them at home, but the Packers seem to play on the road as well as any other team out there.
The Packers were 4-4 on the road. At least 8 teams have better road records. 4-4 is really not that good. And while the Seattle game 'should've' been a win, it shouldn't have come down to the last play of reg.
quote:Originally posted by cuqui:
I do know this. Nobody in the NFC playoffs wants to face Aaron Rodgers.
So the Vikes are not going to GB next week?
The Seattle game is past tense. History. It happened months ago. Any thoughts on the game from GB is nothing but wasted energy. They had a full season to remedy that blunder themselves and fell short.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:
The Seattle game is past tense. History. It happened months ago. Any thoughts on the game from GB is nothing but wasted energy. They had a full season to remedy that blunder themselves and fell short.
Like holding a 21 point lead at INDY?
I like the Packers chances as much or more than anyone else out there, that's for sure.
Yes!
Pummel the Poser Vikes
Beat the already beat-up Niners
THEN
Beat the Falcons in their dome AGAIN
OR Beat the Seahawks at Lambeau for the NFC championship.
Yes!
Pummel the Poser Vikes
Beat the already beat-up Niners
THEN
Beat the Falcons in their dome AGAIN
OR Beat the Seahawks at Lambeau for the NFC championship.
quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:quote:Originally posted by Illini Kev:quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:
I think SF is in a better position than the Packers. If they play, the Pack will be on the road. The Pack also have to stop AP and beat the Vikings to even get a rematch with SF.
I like the Packers chances out in SF if we can get by the Vikes next week. Obviously you would rather get them at home, but the Packers seem to play on the road as well as any other team out there.
The Packers were 4-4 on the road. At least 8 teams have better road records. 4-4 is really not that good. And while the Seattle game 'should've' been a win, it shouldn't have come down to the last play of reg.
I think they were 3-5 on the road in 2010.
I'm merely pointing out that they aren't 'great' on the road, and other teams have fared better.
Stats, records, algorithm, etc don't matter in the playoffs
Pakrz disagrees
Of all 8 NFL teams that played Seattle at home, we came closest to beating them.
I still think we're a good road team. Despite the madness today.
I still think we're a good road team. Despite the madness today.
quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:
The Packers were 4-4 on the road. At least 8 teams have better road records. 4-4 is really not that good. And while the Seattle game 'should've' been a win, it shouldn't have come down to the last play of reg.
Packers lost at Minn by 3, at Indy by 3, at Seattle by 2. The only truly poor performance was at NYG. Bring it on!