Admit you were wrong (But at least you know who Red Green is)

quote:

Originally posted by XLV-Ka-Bong:
Shame on TT

No doubt about it. The Packers took the ball out of Jackson's hands because they could not win handing him the ball. How many carries in the SB? NFC Championship game? Anybody else could see the deficiency with Jackson being the RB but you're hopeless.

How many carries for Kuhn in those games?

I stand behind every statement I made above.

quote:

Originally posted by PackerRick:

I stand behind every statement I made above.

Of course you do.

You're Rick.

Obviously Rodgers & Co. were the main reason we won it all. But are people suggesting that Starks was not a vital piece? I'm not sure we pull it out in Philly without Starks. And this isn't a shot at TT at all. In fact, I'm acknowledging that he made the right decision in passing on Lynch (due to the fact that he was too expensive), and trusting that Starks could carry the load. TT made the right call, and as a result, we have another draft pick in the upcoming draft. Great call, TT!

Rick, Rick, Rick..................The only reason they "took" the ball out of Jackson's hands is Starks was a better option. That DOES NOT MEAN Lynch would have been a better option. And they still used Jackson on short passes which MM himself said is an extension of the rushing game. Why is this so hard to understand?

And it's also not a shot at Starks to say we didn't need him to win it all. He contributed, and I glad we have him. But he's not why we won.

Examples (down the stretch when we were already in "win or go home mode"):

1. Giants @ Lambeau.

2. Bears @ Lambeau.

that was you?

shame on Ted

Let's assess the "we wouldn't have won without starks" vs Philly.

First 6 drives:
21 points
3 TD Passes
1 fumble
1 punt
1 end of half
28 passes
18 rushes

Last 3 drives (won't count the last kneel down)
0 points
0 TDs
3 punts
11 runs
3 passes

When we threw the ball the majority of the time, we scored 21 pts. When we become a run first team we score 0 and thereby we allowed an 11 pt lead end up with a final drive the defense needed to stop them.

I'd posit that we won the game because our passing attack got a lead. The rushing game didn't do anything and thereby allowed Philly back in the game and made it tight.

I was ok with bringing Lynch in. I was ok with them not bringing him in. Basically I was ok with whatever TT did because I think he knows more than me. That has always been my philosophy.

Slocum on the other hand...

The biggest point was the Packers won with what they had. The End.

Instead, the Packers might have lost WITH Lynch and been out 2 draft picks.

Is Dum contagious around here?

quote:

Originally posted by CAPackFan95:
Let's assess the "we wouldn't have won without starks" vs Philly.

Ever heard of play action or is it like the spread offense that you couldn't define?

quote:

Originally posted by ammo:
Rick, Rick, Rick..................The only reason they "took" the ball out of Jackson's hands is Starks was a better option.

Thanks for making my point. Jackson and Kuhn were not the answer.

Your point was Ted should have done whatever he could to trade for another running back becasue the stable he put together would "prevent us from winning in the playoffs" and Lynch would have "made us a better team," and keeping that third round pick was not as important as trading for another running back.

Something about being one dimensional with AR was a bad thing, that too.

Good thing the best defense in football focused on making us one dimensional in the Superbowl. That worked.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach:

quote:

Originally posted by PackerRick:

I stand behind every statement I made above.

Of course you do.

You're Rick.

Agree.

We're very aware of your "opinion" on this subject. I've seen enough of it to last thru 2020.

Here's the bottom line.....

We're World Champions despite your opinion on our running game which renders your opinion irrelevant.

Move along and choose another subject to discuss now. Yes, that's an order.

quote:

Originally posted by XLV-Ka-Bong:
Your point was Ted should have done whatever he could to trade for another running back becasue the stable he put together would "prevent us from winning in the playoffs" and Lynch would have "made us a better team," and keeping that third round pick was not as important as trading for another running back.

Something about being one dimensional with AR was a bad thing, that too.

Good thing the best defense in football focused on making us one dimensional in the Superbowl. That worked.

Sorry partner, the Packers don't even get a sniff if they had kept handing the ball to Jackson. The fact that Starks was going to emerge and be a factor down the stretch was unknown to everyone, even the Packer brass. That is evidenced by the fact that he was inactive a couple games after he made his debut. Ya, I know the company line was he needed to practiced better but after waiting a year and a half to get on the field again does anybody think Starks' practice habits tailed off?

Your next post in this thread will either be you admitting you were wrong or you won't be posting in this forum any longer.

Is that clear enough for you

Strike out.

SF Giants.

quote:

Originally posted by CAPackFan95:
Let's assess the "we wouldn't have won without starks" vs Philly.

When we threw the ball the majority of the time, we scored 21 pts. When we become a run first team we score 0 and thereby we allowed an 11 pt lead end up with a final drive the defense needed to stop them.

I'd posit that we won the game because our passing attack got a lead. The rushing game didn't do anything and thereby allowed Philly back in the game and made it tight.

With all due respect:

quote:

First Quarter:
Green Bay Packers at 5:46 (2nd drive of the game)
1-10-GB 32 (5:46) A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to G.Jennings.
2-10-GB 32 (5:42) J.Starks left end to PHI 41 for 27 yards (D.Patterson). R3
1-10-PHI 41 (5:00) J.Starks up the middle to PHI 40 for 1 yard (M.Fokou).
2-9-PHI 40 (4:21) J.Starks left end to PHI 36 for 4 yards (M.Patterson).
3-5-PHI 36 (3:40) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete short middle to A.Quarless.
PENALTY on PHI-K.Clayton, Defensive Offside, 5 yards, enforced at PHI 36 - No Play. X4
1-10-PHI 31 (3:36) J.Starks left end to PHI 27 for 4 yards (J.Chaney).
2-6-PHI 27 (2:59) A.Rodgers pass short right to J.Starks to PHI 19 for 8 yards (J.Chaney). P5
1-10-PHI 19 (2:20) B.Jackson right end to PHI 17 for 2 yards (Q.Mikell).
2-8-PHI 17 (1:38) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass short left to J.Starks to PHI 16 for 1 yard (J.Chaney).
3-7-PHI 16 (:53) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass short left to J.Kuhn to PHI 7 for 9 yards (D.Patterson). P6
Timeout #2 by PHI at 00:13.
1-7-PHI 7 (:13) A.Rodgers pass short right to T.Crabtree for 7 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

That's 45 out of the 68 yards on that drive including two first downs and positive yardage that ended up getting another first down on a five yard Eagles penalty. It also was a nice 5m30s drive after the defense was out there for 7 of the first 10 minutes.

Starks started the very next drive (which also ended in a TD) with runs of 4 and 5 yards to set up a 3rd and 1 and then picked up another first down on the drive with a 6 yard run on a 2nd and 3.

On the third TD drive Starks agains started the drive with two runs that set up a 3rd and 5, had a 19 yard run from the 49 yard line, another 5 yarder after that and a three yard run on first down inside the 10.

Starks was fantastic in that game and was a key part of all three of those TD drives. MM appreciated his contribution after the game:

quote:

(How were you guys able to sustain the longer drives tonight and can you talk about your ability to consistently convert third downs on those drives?)...Our plan was to come in here and try to establish the run, play in favorable down-and-distance, have the patience and take our shots when we can.

Starks helped execute that plan exceptionally. Not only that, but at the start of the fourth quarter the defense stuffed Philly on a 3 and out. Starks got his chance the next drive on first and second down and got the offense to a 3rd and 4 that they converted. They kept feeding him the next two downs and he answered with runs of 2 and 7 yards to set up a 3rd and 1. Kuhn didn't convert it.

The next drive they gave it to him on first and second again, he answered with runs of 3 and 12 yards.

Now there was only 3:48 left in the game. His last two runs were 1 and -1. If you want to kill him for not putting the final nail in the coffin your welcome to it but the guy gave the team everything else you could ask for besides those two plays.

despite quoting my post in it's entirety, rick failed to actually respond to the post.

I can put it this way, Ted chose not to follow your advice and trade a pick for a running back, something you felt was shameful because we needed to make that trade to be successful in the playoffs and holding on to a future pick when you could clearly upgrade the team was a bad move because next years pick doesn't impact this years team. Ted didn't do what you though he should do and we are better for it. Ted was right, you were __________.

Just how good was MM? He remade his team each week in the six playoff games, using different players in each. Kuhn, Starks, etc.

Fair and reasoned response titm, I don't disagree with any of it, and I'm not trying to downplay his contribution. Starks played a significant role in the win, however, when we stopped passing and focused solely on the run, we didn't do a damn thing. 3 drives 11 runs 3 passes, 3 punts when we could have ended it.

My point is those crediting the victory over Philly to Starks alone are blinded by their narrative. This is a passing team, when we pass well, we win, when we don't (or give up on it in a conservative run the clock manner) we struggle.

I wanted to say that I was totally wrong about Hawk. The injuries to Barnett and Chillar proved to be a blessing for AJ. He was pretty solid in coverage too.

Hi.

I'm getting my ass kicked.

Can we please change topics?

But please keep paying attention to me.

PM from Rick.....

"You are a dumb SOB that has never contributed anything relevant to any topic in 8 years. You are clearly the attention whore on the board."
Location: Las Vegas | Registered: 10-14-2002

And his point?

Awwww...Rick's all butthurt.

And he doesn't count very well.

Did he delete his post?!?!

Think so.

For those who missed it, Rick immediately went into a discussion about linebackers....'til he got laughed at. Then he deleted it and quit X4........we hope.

More dumb bites the dust.

Bye Rick.

quote:

Originally posted by CAPackFan95:
Strike out.

Carved up like a Thanksgiving turkey.

quote:

Originally posted by AquaBreaker:
I never even posted this, but hell, I'm man enough to admit it.

I honestly thought we were done after we got beat in Detroit. Then we went on that crazy run, and I stopped doubting once we kicked the Bears' teeth in the first time.

No way in hell did I think they would make the run they did. At that point a successful season would have been limping into a wild card playoff.

That's the beauty of it, you can talk up opinions and even irrational rants all you want, just own it.

Honest?

My brain told me we were a dead man walking after Detroit.

My heart said we'd win the Super Bowl.

Follow yer heart.

And Rick said my posts suck.

Does anybody miss Rick yet?

quote:

Originally posted by Blair Kiel:
And Rick said my posts suck.

Maybe he did say that.

But he didn't say it in this thread.

So you're saying there's a chance my posts don't suck?

Well, your use of vocabulary is a little flat.

Just like his chest. Pussy, get a boob job.