Skip to main content

Tagged With "Week 7"

Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

BrainDed ·
Positives. + A couple young guys looked good. Ryan taking a jump, Dix making impact plays and Adams starting to look like a NFL caliber WR. Negatives - Rodgers back to beyond bad QB play. Staring down his guy and not reading the D. - Special teams cost us 13 points. TD return for 7, long return for 3 and missed FG for 3. - Defense has no heart two weeks in a row. Can't make a play when it matters most. - Pass rush. Colts can't pass protect for ****. Our front 4 couldn't get home. What...
Reply

Re: Playoffs

MichiganPacker ·
If they win out, they probably need one other thing to happen to get in. They were at #7 last week and Texas AM lost, so they should bump up to #6. If they win out that means that both OSU and Michigan will have lost, so the only other teams currently ranked above them are Alabama, Clemson, Washington, and Louisville. If all those teams win out, they would be out of the playoff. If Alabama, Clemson, and Washington lose once, they still might stay in front of a two loss Wisconsin team. There...
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

50k Club ·
I have no doubt that MM is a very good coach, but his team is in a rut since Game 7 last year. The same issues with the O keep cropping up, and the insistence on going with 11 personnel and iso routes is purely coaching. The same issues with the D not being capable of carrying off-days for the O under Dom, middle of the field being open, giving up last second scores, etc. is again on coaching. The coaches understandably may not see the forest for the trees as well - who gets playing time,...
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

Maxi54 ·
Slowmo... Seriously considering some changes doesn't in any way mean that I think M.M. has been a complete failure or that he's not a good coach. His record and accomplishments speak for themselves and put him right up there with other very successful coaches. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he went on to do well with another team at some point in his career. In addition, I'm not sure that I'm completely enamored with the way T.T. has done everything throughout his tenure with the Parkers...
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

"We"-Ka-Bong ·
Two weeks ago conservative killed us. Loss. This week a blitz burned us. Loss There is no compensation like overcompensation, I assume Dom will break out the 11 drop back in zone (10 on the perimeter, 1 shadowing the QB. He'll call it the inverted "U") defense next week. It will cause 7 turnovers and the Pack will win by 30. Dom commits to it because it works, defense will get crushed for the rest of the season. Side note, I think Fackrell will be a player for us. High BFI
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

MichiganPacker ·
Good rationale post. The personnel issues related to the RBs have to come under some scrutiny for TT/MM did there. Letting go of Sitton might have been the right choice, but somehow thinking that Barclay was an adequate option was shortsighted at best. This is still a borderline playoff team, but I think that's the ceiling this year. At best, this is a team that will likely just miss the playoffs this year or limp in and get beat in the first round. I agree with others, this team has never...
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

H5 ·
@packerbackerdpm Whitehead's been cut.
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

ChilliJon ·
Looking at the coverage. That kick was supposed to be outside the numbers. Not on the hash. Might be something Mason has to answer.
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

PackerBackerDPM ·
Thanks man, I appreciate it. Like I said I know you know your stuff and all I had was just the replays that shown him being blown away, now I see why.
Reply

Re: Positives and negatives

H5 ·
Here's a positive.
Reply

Re: Playoffs

H5 ·
Need MICH to win last 2 then lose to WI in the title game. IMO, that is what the Badgers need for a shot into the playoffs. Also having Louisville drop another would be great just to be sure. My CFP projection after yesterday 1 - Alabama 2- Mich 3 - Ohio St 4 - Louisville 5 - Wisconsin 6 - Washington 7 - Clemson Wash and Clem were losses at home. Clemson to an unranked Pitt.
Reply

Re: Playoffs

The Heckler ·
This weeks rankings just came out: 1. Bama 2. O$U 3. Michigan 4. Clemson 5 Washington 6. Bucky 7. PSU 8 Oklahoma 9. Colorado 10. Oklahoma St. So it kind of shakes out like this I guess. OSU or Michigan will have 2 losses after their game but will the committee drop down either of them if the game is close? I kind of wonder if they will? Bama has Auburn but it is at Bama so I don't expect an upset Clemson has a so so South Carolina team Washington has the apple cup with Wash St. If Bucky...
Reply

Re: Playoffs

FreeSafety ·
Good point. I don't know so I looked at a few of them. Colley Matrix , Sagarin and Congrove OSU 4, 15, 3 Average 7.33 Alabama 10, 7, 6 Ave 7.66 Wisconsin 25, 20, 4 Ave 16.33 Penn St 28, 39, 15 Ave 27.33 Colorado 42, 23, 17 Ave 27.33 Michigan 11, 33, 41 Ave 28.33 Oklahoma 54, 18, 29 Ave 33.66 Clemson 21, 47, 47 Ave 38.33 Washington 69, 60, 43 Ave 57.33 My point remains: Washington hasn't been tested anywhere near what the other top teams have. And when they were, they lost by two scores at...
Reply

Re: Playoffs

Tschmack ·
I agree on Michigan. They have a stronger case than Wisconsin to be in before Washington. Plus they have a team that (I think) can match up well with any of the top teams. Defensively, the Badgers are there and can play with anyone. Offensively? They only scored 7 against Michigan and not sure they score at all against Bama. That's a problem.
Reply

Re: Playoffs

MichiganPacker ·
Washington is up 31-7 in the 3rd quarter. There in. 1. Alabama (win or lose the SEC championship) 2. Ohio State 3. Washington Clemson if they beat Virginia Tech
Reply

Re: Since No One Else Has The Stomach For It....Pos/Neg

PackerPatrick ·
+ Considering we were short on olinemen, the offense had some good plays. Lots of time to work on timing with the pass game. I believe it will pay off in the future. Starks looked better than he did pre injury. Adams and Jordy played well. I cannot fault the playcalling. (I guess a not complain now becomes a positive) - I loved some of the fire on defense but it did not help stop our porous defensive backfield. Injurys to Bak and Ryan. Why do we have 7 wrs but no backup true MLB? Just the...
Reply

Re: Since No One Else Has The Stomach For It....Pos/Neg

Diggr14 ·
You are right man, that just goes to show how bad our division is right now. If they can take care of business in division (win all 3 at the end of season) and win 3 of the next 4 games. They finish 10-6 and that would be good enough. 9-7 might be cutting it.. so 2-2 coupled with winning the last 3 might be good enough too... but they need to win those division games for certain.
Reply

Re: Since No One Else Has The Stomach For It....Pos/Neg

fightphoe93 ·
I agree with you, and yet I'm not sure if that's a positive or a negative. I will say that Seattle made the playoffs as a 7-9 division champ in 2010, then won a Super Bowl 3 years later. That said, if the Pack were to win this division at 7-9, I don't feel like that would be a springboard to anything other than a quiet whimpering of a quick and dirty playoff exit.
Reply

Re: Since No One Else Has The Stomach For It....Pos/Neg

H5 ·
+ Really good visit this afternoon at the University of Tulsa w/my son. - the Packers game that I stopped watching at 21-7.
Reply

Re: Since No One Else Has The Stomach For It....Pos/Neg

Timmy! ·
+ Individual performances by Adams and Cobb. Starks did reasonably well. Spriggs did pretty good for coming in cold. He's still got work to do, though. Hell, I'm even going to give Barclay a '+'. At least he wasn't a turnstile today! - Lost to a 4-5 team, after losing to a 3-5 team the week before. No pass rush. None. No defense. None. 7-0 before folks have found their seats, 21-0 at the end of the 1st qtr, and 5 TDs by halftime is NOT good football. Yeah, being fairly decimated by injury is...
Reply

Re: Since No One Else Has The Stomach For It....Pos/Neg

packerboi ·
This team could quite easily limp home at 4-7 and finish 6-10 or even 5-11. That's not being an alarmist, IMHO that's just the reality of this team.
Reply

Re: MNF: One team better than the Packers vs. a team the Packers somehow beat

Boris ·
Timmys comment was game related although facetious. as it was 7-7 in the first 6 minutes of the game. ALWAYS 29 Blair Kiel.....always 29. Did everyone on the Packers get their paycheck? wouldn't want them to be unable to feed their families.
Reply

Re: #9 Wisconsin @ #22 Crieghton

MichiganPacker ·
Tough early season game, but the fact there is very little offense other than Koenig and Hayes is cause for concern. Creighton clearly was not going to let Happ beat them in the post and they have a 7 footer to guard him.
Reply

Re: 2 years ago...

Grave Digger ·
Passing 2014 Player Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Lng Y/A Y/C Y/G Rate Sk% Aaron Rodgers 341 520 65.6 4381 38 7.3 5 80 8.4 12.8 273.8 112.2 5.1 2016 Player Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Lng Y/A Y/C Y/G Rate Sk% Aaron Rodgers 233 369 63.1 2410 22 6.0 7 58 6.5 10.3 267.8 93.9 5.6 Not a huge dropoff, TD% is lower and Yards/Attempt is lower. INTs are up, telling me he's forcing the ball more or someone else is fukking up. There have been a couple tipped passes that have been picked which aren'this...
Reply

Re: 2 years ago...

FLPACKER ·
I know, pts. are the only thing that really matter, however I find it pretty amazing that if a team wins those two stats; 1) Which team won the turn over battle 2) Which team had a higher "average yards per pass attempt", they win the game over 90% of the time. We can talk about all the other stuff but if; 1) Our defense was forcing more turnovers 2) Our offense was making more big plays in the passing game, we would not be in the situation we are in. I think last year we were 7-0 when this...
Reply

Re: 2 years ago...

Grave Digger ·
They're the exception, not the rule. They're eeking out wins over mediocre teams and getting pummeled by good teams aside from a 7 point win vs. Kansas City.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

fightphoe93 ·
The Ugly: The NFC North overall. The Vikings won today, but wow, with that offensive line, I don't know if they have more than a couple more wins in them it is that bad. The Lions are the Lions and I think at best that is a 9-7 team, maybe an 8-8 team. One thing that does help both teams... one of them will automatically be 7-4 after Thanksgiving since they play eachother. Having 7 wins going into December might be enough for the winner of that Vikings/Lions game to barely limp to a division...
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

packerboi ·
The Good? The Packers may very well be drafting in the top 5-7 in 2017 after going 4-12 or 5-11. The Ugly? After choosing that high draft choice, it's equally likely it'll be Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy and Dom Capers high fiving one another after they make the pick.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

MichiganPacker ·
The Good. 1. Cook showed how much the offense can benefit when you have a TE that is a receiving threat. They really haven't had that since Finley. 2. Rodgers missed a few, but it was clear that Cousins was also having problems with balls thrown in the flat because of the wind. A couple of those moved several feet when thrown in that direction. Other than that, Rodgers played pretty well. The OL can't run block and can't really protect, so Rodgers is what's keeping them somewhat respectable.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

MichiganPacker ·
The problem is that they are more than 1 player away from being a top flight contender again. They are about 4 players away and that's if those players are Ezekiel Elliott, Richard Sherman, Joe Thomas, and a healthy JJ Watt.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

packerboi ·
Agree, this team is far from one player away. Which is why it continues to be so damn frustrating Ted is so obsessed with the draft and completing his roster with UDFA's and almost never considers free agency. The one thing we know about Ted's "tree" of exec's that have since left him...Reggie McKenzie, John Dorsey, and Schneider is that these guys will use and sign veteran free agents to fill their rosters. Ted simply refuses to. And considering he's missed on key players in his last 3...
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

50k Club ·
This team is just not mentally tough. There is something missing from the character of the team, and I don't know if that is coaching or players. Used to be that first drive of every game for the O resulted in points. Used to be that the Packers tried to double-up scoring before the half and coming out of halftime. Now, it is a guarantee that the O will start slow with inflexibility in formation adjustments, D will give up 7 right before half, D will wilt under pressure to get a stop (OK -...
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

pablopackerfan ·
I agree with the draft and develop philosophy and have been a big TT fan historically but now, we're getting key injuries every year that basically take us out of contention and it's frustrating to see. Additionally, I think the leadership necessary to propel a team over the top is just not there with Rodgers and McC. Do you guys think there's a chance they can win the division with 10-6 or 9-7? Would be cool to see them pull together and scrap out a playoff berth.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

The Heckler ·
I do think this division could be won at 9-7 or even 8-8. The Vikings are floundering a bit and their OL is a disaster and the Lions? well you just never know they are the Lions. I for one never ever blame injuries but this team is just absolutely devastated right now. On offense Cook has missed almost the whole year, the OL is banged up, they had to start a WR at RB, Phat Eddie has been gone for what 4-5 weeks now? Shields has missed the whole season, Starks missed quite a few games, Jordy...
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

Grave Digger ·
Injuries aren't anyone's fault, that is just bad luck. TT gambles annually that they can sustain injuries and young guys can step up, sometimes it works (2010) and sometimes it fails (2016). It's a risk/reward scenario, the reward is that you get to essentially redshirt young talent like Gunter and Trevor Davis which is beneficial down the road. Normally I'm okay with the strategy, but he gambled in some very odd ways in 2016: -Keeping 7 WRs and only 2 RBs. I'm okay with 6 WRs, but RB is a...
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

packerboi ·
Agree on the OL. In fact, especially through the 1st 6-7 games, Rodgers had so much time to throw the football it became detrimental to him because he overthought things and wasn't making his reads and just getting rid of it. Week after week, announcers calling the games during that stretch could not believe all the time AR had to throw.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

Grave Digger ·
Yeah I actually have very few complaints with the OL. The complaint is actually with Campen. Why the F has Spriggs not been playing Guard in place of Lang from the moment he was injured? Sure he doesn't fit the "prototype" Guard, he's tall and lean, but he was clearly better than Barclay from the his first snap at RG. He moved better, he was smarter, quicker, and held up better against the bull rush. I don't have to see practice to know who is the better OL. Put your best 5 out their dummy.
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

Pikes Peak ·
I say this with all due respect, when GD, possibly the last Green and Gold kool ade drinker on the site starts to see what others have been pointing out for a while it says volumes. GD is a Packer fan extraordinaire and knows his team and football.
Reply

Re: The Invisible Man known as Ted Thompson

grignon ·
If you're not drafting at the top of the first round, you're not getting elite talent and your team will be relatively worse. Draft and develop is a concept to avoid taking players with major flaws to fill out your roster but it cannot make your team dominant. Beginning with the 1976 draft 46 first round draft choices have made the HOF. That compares with 26 other players from all other rounds (AND free agents) combined. What's more, 38 of those first rounders were chosen in the top half of...
Reply

Re: Viking Clap vs Our Man Dak game thread

catts ·
Looks like they will be 7-5 and the Cowboys will fall to 10-2.
Reply

Re: Viking Clap vs Our Man Dak game thread

ChilliJon ·
"Looks like they will be 7-5 and the Cowboys will fall to 10-2" This is Skip Bayless spicy.
Reply

Re: Viking Clap vs Our Man Dak game thread

catts ·
On the other hand maybe the Vikettes will be 6-6 and my Cows will be 11-1. Yep, I like that better.
Reply

Re: Rodger wants Thursday Night Playoffs

ChilliJon ·
That punt return for 7 is 100% on Oakland. After the penalty you don't kick to the middle of the field and expect a tired coverage team to cover again. Kick that ball into row 2 and move on.
Reply

Re: 2016 (Team 96) WK14 Seahags @ GB GDT

Blair Kiel ·
QB Aaron Rodgers is standing up on the sideline. He's not receiving any treatment and definitely isn't in any distress. by Tom Silverstein 7:05 PM
Reply

Re: 2016 (Team 96) WK14 Seahags @ GB GDT

titmfatied ·
@dannyoneil For historians and masochists: This would be #Seahawks' most lopsided loss since Seattle lost 41-7 to New York Giants on Nov. 7, 2010.
Reply

Re: 2016 (Team 96) WK14 Seahags @ GB GDT

titmfatied ·
@PFF_Matt If the Packers hold on to win, they will be 7-6 and still have a mathmatical shot at getting the 2 seed and a bye, albeit very very unlikely That must be one hell of a scenario
Reply

Re: 2016 (Team 96) WK14 Seahags @ GB GDT

Blair Kiel ·
Seahawks QB Russell Wilson has thrown 10 INTs in his last three games against the Packers. by Tom Silverstein 7:30 PM
Reply

Re: Are you "feeling it" NOW? +/- Seahawks WIN!

H5 ·
4th week. Even though they lost to WAS, Rodgers has been Rodgers for 4 weeks now. comp att comp% yards TD Int y/att rtg WAS 26 41 63.40% 351 3 0 8.6 115.0 PHI 30 39 76.90% 313 2 0 8 116.7 HOU 20 30 66.70% 209 2 0 7 108.9 SEA 18 23 78.26% 246 3 0 10.7 150.8
Reply

Re: Are you "feeling it" NOW? +/- Seahawks WIN!

PackerPatrick ·
Ah WOW thanks for that stat
Reply

Re: The Ugly, The Bad ...and the Good?

fightphoe93 ·
I like your analogy there. Winning the division at 7-9 or 8-8 might be a temporary "feel good" story, but it might actually be a detriment in terms of re-building this team to reach World Championship caliber. In 2014 when the Pack was borderline World Championship caliber, the strength of the team was Jordy Nelson, Aaron Rodgers, Randall Cobb, Clay Matthews, Julius Peppers, and Eddie Lacy. Since that time Nelson has hit age 30 and had a significant injury. Cobb also received a big contract,...
 
×
×
×
×