Actually, there is nothing anyone can say to me on this board that could possibly make me take offense. It does not matter at the end of the day.
did I learn well, Henry?
luv ya brotha
GrainBelt66 posted:Actually, there is nothing anyone can say to me on this board that could possibly make me take offense. It does not matter at the end of the day.
did I learn well, Henry?
luv ya brotha
Now the defense is another matter...a disaster
El-Belichick-Landry posted:Wait a god damn second
There are sex websites?
Yes, I think so. Do you mean with wimmen and stuff?
PackerPatrick posted:GrainBelt66 posted:Actually, there is nothing anyone can say to me on this board that could possibly make me take offense. It does not matter at the end of the day.
did I learn well, Henry?
luv ya brotha
Now the defense is another matter...a disaster
Marine up!!
i was in the army and I am tougher than this..
Besides, never take one word out of one of my posts in order to try to make your point.It simply makes you look weak.
El-Belichick-Landry posted:Wait a god damn second
There are sex websites?
Yes, I think so. Do you mean with wimmen and stuff?
No point was made against you GP, "Army Strong" is cool. I was just sticking with the topic.
No, you took a word out of comment used it. Own up to that and perhaps we can be friends. You highlighted one word out of my entire post and used it for your Benefit. Congratulations. You are now my hero.
PackerPatrick posted:Well, I guess I am mistaken. I thought this was a GBP football forum. There are plenty of sites for "comedy", "politics" and "sex". Yet I do admit to enjoying the wit and humor here when referencing the game. Other things...not so much.
So you're looking for a humorless, sex-less, apolitical forum that only talks Packers football. I think that is called Packerchatters...can anyone confirm that? Is LongTimeFootballFan still here?
You are only doing one thing here. You think you are separating people like me from others. But, the only thing you are doing is making my belief stronger.
GrainBelt66 posted:No, you took a word out of comment used it. Own up to that and perhaps we can be friends. You highlighted one word out of my entire post and used it for your Benefit. Congratulations. You are now my hero.
I did. I will. My mistake.
GrainBelt66 posted:so, now I am a free range assholea.
you, sir, I take offense to that...
No no. You're just a regular asshole. I'm Free Range.
Grave Digger posted:PackerPatrick posted:Well, I guess I am mistaken. I thought this was a GBP football forum. There are plenty of sites for "comedy", "politics" and "sex". Yet I do admit to enjoying the wit and humor here when referencing the game. Other things...not so much.
So you're looking for a humorless, sex-less, apolitical forum that only talks Packers football. I think that is called Packerchatters...can anyone confirm that? Is LongTimeFootballFan still here?
I can confirm no one on that site has ever had sex.
Crazy posted:Or maybe getting juked by a WR has something to do with a bad groin. Call me crazy.
Yup. Injuries are never an excuse, except when they are. I expect some servings of crow after Randall's 3rd year.
http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/o...amarious-randall-311
An interesting take on Randall.
In my opinion an honest look at both the good and the not as good.
Hungry5 posted:Crazy posted:Or maybe getting juked by a WR has something to do with a bad groin. Call me crazy.
Yup. Injuries are never an excuse, except when they are. I expect some servings of crow after Randall's 3rd year.
At minimum Randall is a hell of slot guy considering his background but I expect him to be in the running on the outside.
IF injury was the main driving force for both Randall and Rollins then this backfield is looking pretty stacked.
PackerPatrick posted:http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/o...amarious-randall-311
An interesting take on Randall.
In my opinion an honest look at both the good and the not as good.
That's the same kind of stuff they were writing about Adams before 2016..."yeah he was injured, but even when he was healthy he showed signs of being mediocre." When people get it in their minds a player is a failure then every missed tackle or reception allowed is a sure sign of failure. That review lists his lack of eye discipline and his poor technique from 2015, those are the hallmarks of a rookie play. Not every rookie struggles, but I would say most of them struggle with those issues. Inconsistency is also a pretty common trait for players who are playing through pretty rough injury. Also using college clips of him playing an entirely different position with different responsibilities isn't a great way to prove your point...why don't we use Ty Montgomery's college film of him playing WR to prove why he's going to struggle at RB? Occam's razor...he had ups and downs in 2015 because he's a rookie and almost all of them do, he struggled in 2016 because he had multiple injuries. Doesn't have to be more complicated than that. Let's let year 3 or 4 come and go before we point to any kind of tendencies, that's why teams give players 4 year contracts and not 2 year contracts. You can't learn much about young players after 2 years, especially if they dealt with injuries at all.
We'll certainly find out what kinds of competitors these guys are. Their bad years in 2016 could catapult them to success in 2017 if they were honest.
And if no, you have to cut them loose. Big camp for both guys, I think.
Randall was a first round pick. He was not injured as a rookie and had Shields beside him. He was not injured for all of last season. He did not look good against mediocre receivers. Yes he was injured but not matched up against the best WR's. So maybe in his 4th year he will be better? Perhaps he will be like Adams, but I have my doubts. I would love to be wrong and eat crow.
headtv.com/blog/packers-under-pressure-to-attack-opposing-quarterbacks-519
PackerPatrick posted:Randall was a first round pick. He was not injured as a rookie and had Shields beside him. He was not injured for all of last season. He did not look good against mediocre receivers. Yes he was injured but not matched up against the best WR's. So maybe in his 4th year he will be better? Perhaps he will be like Adams, but I have my doubts. I would love to be wrong and eat crow.
He looked fine as a rookie, not perfect but few rookies are. He was injured most of the season, I think week 5 is when it started and they had a week 4 BYE, so he played 3 games uninjured. I guess I need you to explain to me why an injured player, a CB with a severe groin injury no less, should be expected to perform like he's 100% and make any improvement?
Grave Digger posted:PackerPatrick posted:Well, I guess I am mistaken. I thought this was a GBP football forum. There are plenty of sites for "comedy", "politics" and "sex". Yet I do admit to enjoying the wit and humor here when referencing the game. Other things...not so much.
So you're looking for a humorless, sex-less, apolitical forum that only talks Packers football. I think that is called Packerchatters...can anyone confirm that? Is LongTimeFootballFan still here?
One word------- Tooner!!
Henry posted:Grave Digger posted:PackerPatrick posted:Well, I guess I am mistaken. I thought this was a GBP football forum. There are plenty of sites for "comedy", "politics" and "sex". Yet I do admit to enjoying the wit and humor here when referencing the game. Other things...not so much.
So you're looking for a humorless, sex-less, apolitical forum that only talks Packers football. I think that is called Packerchatters...can anyone confirm that? Is LongTimeFootballFan still here?
I can confirm no one on that site has ever had sex.
Wait, what? I thought that in the rule book it said that farm animals count as sex??
did I not understand the rules again?
Grave Digger posted:PackerPatrick posted:Well, I guess I am mistaken. I thought this was a GBP football forum. There are plenty of sites for "comedy", "politics" and "sex". Yet I do admit to enjoying the wit and humor here when referencing the game. Other things...not so much.
So you're looking for a humorless, sex-less, apolitical forum that only talks Packers football. I think that is called Packerchatters...can anyone confirm that? Is forLongTimeFootballFan still here?
On a day when there was very little new news I wrote the above.
That day I did not write that I wanted a humorless sex-less apolitical forum just more football stuff. I thought that I wrote that you guys are clever. And I mean it. But I see some are a bit thin-skinned. God forbid if someone disagrees even a little bit. I have chosen to back off a bit and try to avoid conflict. I have been here since 2001 and I enjoy this forum too much to do otherwise.
Its kind of strange to me that some people say nothing bothers them...until it does.
Bothers, or disagree with?
Wait do you approve of the humor, sex, and politics or don't you? Which of the three do you think Henry is best at (Hint: it's none)?
Although everyone has thoroughly covered this topic from every angle and we still haven't started training camp yet- I have now developed an intense interest is seeing if Randall had developed the "eye discipline" necessary to play slot cornerback. When I was a little younger we called that gambling and shameless gamblers were usually out of the league by year three. This might be make or break season for Damarius and I am hoping unlike Batman (The Grabber) Carroll that he has developed the patience to be a productive plyer in the NFL. Howabaout that Segway back to the topic at hand!!
I agree on the Eye Discipline thing, and it will be key to him taking his game to the next level or being out of the league.... Though people like Carroll and Buckley seemed to milk a lot of years out of the NFL if I'm not mistaken. Says a lot about the rarity of competent CBs in the league.
Peeking at the QB has been a common thing in GB for years. To the point I think it's taught. Tramon did it. Woodson did it (although he did the same thing at Michigan), Randall does it. Rollins does it. Shields was the worst offender of any of them. He just had enough top end speed that saved his ass more than once. Sometimes he wasn't so fortunate.
PackerPatrick posted:Grave Digger posted:PackerPatrick posted:Well, I guess I am mistaken. I thought this was a GBP football forum. There are plenty of sites for "comedy", "politics" and "sex". Yet I do admit to enjoying the wit and humor here when referencing the game. Other things...not so much.
So you're looking for a humorless, sex-less, apolitical forum that only talks Packers football. I think that is called Packerchatters...can anyone confirm that? Is forLongTimeFootballFan still here?
"I see some are a bit thin-skinned." {snip}
I disagree....
Some are a LOT thin-skinned
I think Randall & Rollins are going to kick ass this year
Peeking in the backfield is fine when your EDGE guys (or anyone) get to the Q. Those two variables are critical to the formula for the 34 causing a lot of turnovers. In theory. And it worked well while we had an ascending CM, Jenkins, Bishop, Woodson, et. al.
If the D can turn the heat up on the pass rush we'll see lots of TO's again, and the corners will be still be peeking.
I'm anxious to see if Pro Football Focus comes out with an 'Eye Discipline' metric for this season.
EDM?
Add it to the list. Anyone have the numbers on Clay Matthews EDM rating? Might help understand why his Steps rating is so low and his Position Fit index is lacking.
With Clay it is more likely his problem is in his OTJ (off the juice) Index
Interesting point, FLPACKER. I thought the same thing. Maybe he had been using a substance, and then once off of it, injuries happen. It seems it happens to a lot of top notch athletes. Merriman out here in San Diego. A "can't miss" LB and after one year fizzled out with injuries and non-dominance. Rumor was he went off the juice due to NFL testing. He was never the same player.
I do hope we're wrong about Clay.
SanDiegoPackFan posted:Merriman out here in San Diego. A "can't miss" LB and after one year fizzled out with injuries and non-dominance. Rumor was he went off the juice due to NFL testing. He was never the same
Fizzled after one year????
Have you actually ever watched an NFL game from start to finish?
Yes, my bad. It was more than one year before he fizzled out. My off-the-cuff memory isn't as good as it used to be...
sooooooooo.....he fizzled out after 3 years....but hey, thanks for clearing that up in such a polite way, CJ. 
So, to be more accurate: "Lights out" had a decent first year after he made the starting lineup in mid0season. In his second year, a steroid suspension. Then, had a terrific season leading the league in sacks. Then, he had very good third year in 2007, too. Then the injuries started. Many whispers out here were once he got off steroids, the injuries started piling up on his body. Hence my comment earlier.
BTW....why the snottiness? "Have I actually watched an NFL game from start to finish?": Really? What kind of a$$holeness is that? Why talk like that? Does that make you feel superior? Come on, CJ. I really do think you're better than that.
