We haven't lost a meaningful game since last December in Foxboro. Are you taking the Packers for granted? Are we spoiled?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
No. Uncle Ted loves us the fans and loves to give us presents every April.
NOW GIMME MY BWANKIE BACK!!!
NOW GIMME MY BWANKIE BACK!!!
12-0 going back to last season.
And that's not 12 wins against crap teams either. Steelers, ATL X 2, New Orleans, Eagles, and a solid 2010 Bears team to name a few.
The one area, and it's arguably the most important position on the team where GB is spoiled rotten IMO is QB. Good grief we have a HOF QB replaced with one who if healthy may very well end up better then the HOFer he replaced. That's just incredible.
Since 1992 GB's had a quality franchise/pro bowl calibur QB.
And that's not 12 wins against crap teams either. Steelers, ATL X 2, New Orleans, Eagles, and a solid 2010 Bears team to name a few.
The one area, and it's arguably the most important position on the team where GB is spoiled rotten IMO is QB. Good grief we have a HOF QB replaced with one who if healthy may very well end up better then the HOFer he replaced. That's just incredible.
Since 1992 GB's had a quality franchise/pro bowl calibur QB.
I don't think we're spoiled.
What game should we have lost?
TT has built an almost unheard of modern era roster. He didn't have it fall into his lap, he built it with hard work and discipline. And IMO they haven't even been playing up to their potential most of this season.
AR didn't fall into his lap and he didn't just happen to be a great QB. TT spent a 1st round pick, took him when nobody else wanted him and put him on the bench for 3 years. Then hired the right coaches to coach him up.
We have our share of injuries, starters missing games. We've haven't won games by lucky bounces or bad calls by the refs.
Went through a ton of adversity last season, lost a ton of players, lost some games.
To me that is not a team that has spoiled its fans. Lucky wins and injury free seasons spoil fans who wonder why their team sucks the next year.
We have witnessed how a team should be built and what such a team can and should accomplish.
We shouldn't feel sorry or ashamed for our success because it is the result of doing things the right way.
What game should we have lost?
TT has built an almost unheard of modern era roster. He didn't have it fall into his lap, he built it with hard work and discipline. And IMO they haven't even been playing up to their potential most of this season.
AR didn't fall into his lap and he didn't just happen to be a great QB. TT spent a 1st round pick, took him when nobody else wanted him and put him on the bench for 3 years. Then hired the right coaches to coach him up.
We have our share of injuries, starters missing games. We've haven't won games by lucky bounces or bad calls by the refs.
Went through a ton of adversity last season, lost a ton of players, lost some games.
To me that is not a team that has spoiled its fans. Lucky wins and injury free seasons spoil fans who wonder why their team sucks the next year.
We have witnessed how a team should be built and what such a team can and should accomplish.
We shouldn't feel sorry or ashamed for our success because it is the result of doing things the right way.
This team isn't taking anything for granted. They're not making the same dumb mistakes, and they're definitely not making them twice. They realized their potential in the playoffs and they realized they were good enough to win a SB and they're playing with that kind of confidence. I also think the entire organization has complete confidence in Rodgers and they're trusting him to do what he does and he's delivering.
Screw you, FS. This is a bulletin board not a Mensa meeting. Intelligence and common sense have no place here.
When the first loss comes then we'll see the spoiled appear. I have to admit, I watched more of the Lion/9ers game yesterday.
With great QB since 1992? Absolutely.
With our team wins? No. Each week our coaches keep the players grounded and humble. Last year we lost a bunch of players to IR; so far this year we have also lost playing time by Pro Bowl starters and/or IR. Losing great players keeps fans humble and wondering who is going to play and how well.
With our coaches? Absolutely. I think all but a handful of teams would gladly trade their coaches for ours. The rest are idots.
As to having the best franchise in the world? ABSOLUTELY.
With our team wins? No. Each week our coaches keep the players grounded and humble. Last year we lost a bunch of players to IR; so far this year we have also lost playing time by Pro Bowl starters and/or IR. Losing great players keeps fans humble and wondering who is going to play and how well.
With our coaches? Absolutely. I think all but a handful of teams would gladly trade their coaches for ours. The rest are idots.
As to having the best franchise in the world? ABSOLUTELY.
I am not spoiled and I believe the majority here also are not spoiled.
That being said, I recall a great deal of aghast and anguish in here from 2000-2008 by many. I was often left with the impression that many of them seemed to believe they had an entitlement to a NFCC game and/or SB appearence every.
I regularly wondered if these folks had on become fans in 94 or so.
That being said, I recall a great deal of aghast and anguish in here from 2000-2008 by many. I was often left with the impression that many of them seemed to believe they had an entitlement to a NFCC game and/or SB appearence every.
I regularly wondered if these folks had on become fans in 94 or so.
I predict epic melt-downs and hang-wringing from the Eeyores here upon the next loss---whenever it might be. We had some mild-whining yesterday because the second half was "boring".
Geesh.
Geesh.
Let's say that Rodgers stays healthy and plays to 38. That would mean that we could theoretically go from 1992 to 2022 with just 2 starting QBs? Yes, I know Flynn started one game due to injury, I'm just sayin 2 "named" starting QBs.
30 years. 2 QBs. Unheard of. Beyond unheard of.
This year already Denver, Jax, and Indy have started 2 QBs that wasn't forced by an injury.
Minnesota and Washington very likely to join that list by end of year. Arizona? Cleveland? Kansas City? Seattle?
You could have almost 25% of the teams in the league name as many starters in one year as Green Bay has had in 30. Again, I'm talking just "we need to change things up at QB or this guy sucks" not injury.
THAT is being spoiled.
Holy Cripes.
30 years. 2 QBs. Unheard of. Beyond unheard of.
This year already Denver, Jax, and Indy have started 2 QBs that wasn't forced by an injury.
Minnesota and Washington very likely to join that list by end of year. Arizona? Cleveland? Kansas City? Seattle?
You could have almost 25% of the teams in the league name as many starters in one year as Green Bay has had in 30. Again, I'm talking just "we need to change things up at QB or this guy sucks" not injury.
THAT is being spoiled.
Holy Cripes.
Maybe spoiled is the wrong word, but I feel extremely fortunate to be a Packer fan right now.
I was lucky that I started watching the team in 1978 after most of the fallout of Dan Devine was over and the Pack actually had a winning record that year. Certainly the late '70s through 1991 had alot of bad bad football in them, but there were just enough good things to give a Packer fan hope during those years (i.e. playoffs in '82, a fun 10-6 year in '89, lots of 8-8 years that never led to better things).
But after 1991, wow, there really haven't been many years that weren't fun. The 1999, 2005, and 2008 seasons were not real good years, but other than that, almost every year has been good to great. But those years from '78 through '91 where I watched ALOT of bad football played in Green Bay do make you appreciate the past 19 years. I can imagine those who saw the Dan Devine debacle in the mid '70s where he gave away every draft pick the team had probably appreciate this regime even more.
I was lucky that I started watching the team in 1978 after most of the fallout of Dan Devine was over and the Pack actually had a winning record that year. Certainly the late '70s through 1991 had alot of bad bad football in them, but there were just enough good things to give a Packer fan hope during those years (i.e. playoffs in '82, a fun 10-6 year in '89, lots of 8-8 years that never led to better things).
But after 1991, wow, there really haven't been many years that weren't fun. The 1999, 2005, and 2008 seasons were not real good years, but other than that, almost every year has been good to great. But those years from '78 through '91 where I watched ALOT of bad football played in Green Bay do make you appreciate the past 19 years. I can imagine those who saw the Dan Devine debacle in the mid '70s where he gave away every draft pick the team had probably appreciate this regime even more.
Not spoiled but waiting for the other shoe to drop. The 70's and 80's were so bad after living through the Glory years it is hard for some old timers to accept the Packers are this good.
Anyone of us who lived through the 70's and 80's can never be spoiled. We paid our dues.
This run has definitely put a damper on my negative coping mechanism. I've always expected the worse and been pleasantly surprised by success (note my prediction on the penultimate Viking thread). But with the negative never happening lately, I've started to develop an inferiority complex.
Yes, spoiled. We win 24-3 and many talk like it was a loss because of no scores in the 2nd half.
quote:Anyone of us who lived through the 70's and 80's can never be spoiled. We paid our dues.
No kidding!
People forget how frustrating it was to be a Packers fan before Holmgren and Wolf arrived. For about 25 years Green Bay was the Siberia of the NFL.
The good thing about the current franchise is that it's all business all the time. TT doesn't mess around, and neither does MM. Other franchises can go "dream team" mode, and all the Packers do is win.
quote:Originally posted by Boston Jim:
Anyone of us who lived through the 70's and 80's can never be spoiled. We paid our dues.
Exactly.
Here Here!!quote:Originally posted by Boston Jim:
Anyone of us who lived through the 70's and 80's can never be spoiled. We paid our dues.
quote:we're not spoiled, we're soiled.
Suggest you change your depends then.
quote:Originally posted by Tschmack:
People forget how frustrating it was to be a Packers fan before Holmgren and Wolf arrived. For about 25 years Green Bay was the Siberia of the NFL.
Was it anything like being a Vikings fan nowadays?
If this Packers team wins three SBs without getting busted for cheating, then I'll feel spoiled.
Seriously, I do feel spoiled as a fan. After the Brent fiasco all I wanted was for Rodgers and the Pack to prove that they were above the drama and that they had made the right decision. They did so in a BIG way. I'll never forget the Greta interview, the "trade me cuz TT wouldn't sign Moss" BS, the "ThanksTed" Vikings jersey, the epic INT Brent threw in the 2007 and 2009 NFCC games, and everything else that was the soap opera that Doosh Bag caused.
Rodgers lead the Pack to a SB win, AND he won the MVP. Anything else is just icing on the cake. Hopefully that icing means a couple more SB trophies.
The pessimistic side of me says that the TT/MM combo won't last forever, and I think that may very well be the most important piece of the puzzle.
Dont forget the phone call to the loIns for 'insider information'.
C U Brent!
C U Brent!
Not spoiled, but expectations are extremely high, often unrealistically so. That's what happens when you have a QB who performs routinely at a level approaching flawless.
Some people are answering the question assuming "we" is the Green Bay Packers. I took the question to mean "we" is the fans.
Yeah, I would say we are spoiled. It's kind of a natural reaction to being fed a ton of success. As to the team? Probably varies by player, but MM seems to be good at keeping it grounded and so all in all, I'd guess not so much.
Yeah, I would say we are spoiled. It's kind of a natural reaction to being fed a ton of success. As to the team? Probably varies by player, but MM seems to be good at keeping it grounded and so all in all, I'd guess not so much.
Found on the internet:
quote:From the AFL-NFL merger in 1970 until 1991 the Packers had only 4 winning years including the strike shortened 1982 season. Already this year we have more wins than we had total in 14 of those years. The other seven years in that time frame had two 10 win and five 8 win seasons.
quote:Originally posted by phaedrus:
Yeah, I would say we are spoiled. It's kind of a natural reaction to being fed a ton of success.
Yup. The dark side of having only two losing seasons in the last 20 is that we throw a fit when the team isn't dominant season after season -- and also when they win but not by enough points (see last Sunday). Then there's the mindset that any season without a championship is a failure, which is in its own category of neurosis.
quote:Originally posted by CitizenDan:
Then there's the mindset that any season without a championship is a failure, which is in its own category of neurosis.
After the way that the Packers have played in the last year, that's kinda where I'm at right now. It's unrealistic to think that way, and the disappointment will inevitably be huge, but I can't help it.
What Boston Jim said. I'm greatly enjoying the ride, but in some ways I'm probably luckier than those who started following the team in the early '90s. I don't think you can fully appreciate success without knowing what failure is like...
I am 53 and watched most Packer games in 67, including the Ice Bowl (Ram game not televised in Milwaukee tho).quote:Originally posted by StarrToDowler:
What Boston Jim said. I'm greatly enjoying the ride, but in some ways I'm probably luckier than those who started following the team in the early '90s. I don't think you can fully appreciate success without knowing what failure is like...
I decided to fully embrace being a Packer fan in 68.
How's that for knowing failure.
Man, I still remember the year they opened the season losing 40-0 to the Lions.
From a JSO Insider article looking back on the 1991 season (hope it's OK to post a snippet):
"Jeff Cieply, the club's director of marketing, sizes up the situation: 'There's still a good portion of our fan base who can very personally recall the championship days. Now if we go on a drought where a generation of fans have never seen a championship, things will get tighter for us.'"
I cannot believe they even won a game in 1991.
"Jeff Cieply, the club's director of marketing, sizes up the situation: 'There's still a good portion of our fan base who can very personally recall the championship days. Now if we go on a drought where a generation of fans have never seen a championship, things will get tighter for us.'"
I cannot believe they even won a game in 1991.
quote:Originally posted by Brak:
"'There's still a good portion of our fan base who can very personally recall the championship days...'"
Interesting to see someone from the team admit what everyone suspected at the time: The Packers were more than happy to coast on the Lombardi years as long as they could. The attitude was, "Yeah, we suck now, but remember those good old days?" Many of their struggles between Lombardi and Holmgren can be traced to that complacency.
I recall being so frustrated during the '70s and '80s that when people asked me if I was a Packer fan I'd say, "Yes. I bleed Green-and-Gold, and these days I'm bleeding ALOT!"
Don't want to have to see those days of futility again. Although, it's never quite as bad as being a Vikings fan.
Don't want to have to see those days of futility again. Although, it's never quite as bad as being a Vikings fan.
Sort of wish I had Insider so I could read that piece. By 1991 the Packers were fast becoming the Chicago Cubs of the NFL: They always lost, their facilities were run-down, the organization as a whole was lethargic and second-rate -- and yet they still sold out every home game, and fans had a great time at the stadium and bought souvenirs and the team made fistfuls of money, so why bother changing anything?
Thank god Bob Harlan didn't see it that way and pushed to hire Ron Wolf. Wolf's first two major realizations were that 1) Lindy Infante had to go, and 2) there was this goofy third-string QB in Atlanta who might be worth a look.
Thank god Bob Harlan didn't see it that way and pushed to hire Ron Wolf. Wolf's first two major realizations were that 1) Lindy Infante had to go, and 2) there was this goofy third-string QB in Atlanta who might be worth a look.
FYI, I've said this before....
I was ready to denounce my "fanship" to the Packers if Ron Wolf didn't turn things around.
I'm willing to wager beers, many others were going to jump ship too. I had had quite enough of the "Bengal" way of doing things.
Oh yeah, F-U Judge Parins. F-U!
I was ready to denounce my "fanship" to the Packers if Ron Wolf didn't turn things around.
I'm willing to wager beers, many others were going to jump ship too. I had had quite enough of the "Bengal" way of doing things.
Oh yeah, F-U Judge Parins. F-U!
quote:Originally posted by Boris:
I was ready to denounce my "fanship" to the Packers if Ron Wolf didn't turn things around. I'm willing to wager beers, many others were going to jump ship too.
I don't know if I ever was going to completely jump ship, but there were times I bandwagoned other teams. I was a pretty big San Diego Chargers fan in from '79 - '81, but once John Jefferson came to the Packers that fandom faded pretty quickly. Also kind of liked those Dave Krieg led Seahawks teams in the '80s, but at heart I was always a Packer fan from 1978 and forward.....
Packer's fan for life (I'm 49). Prefer winning to losing (DOH!) but I wouldn't switch allegiance. Surprised to read you would Boris.
quote:Originally posted by CitizenDan:
Sort of wish I had Insider so I could read that piece.
I don't have the Insider, but I was fortunate that the local sports page ran that piece. Bob McGinn reviewed his notes and articles from that year and summarized the low-points in a nice long article. There was definitely a losing culture of complacency at that time.
One of the many interesting tidbits McGinn touches on was when Harlan fired Braatz. Braatz told Harlan that the only way the situation would improve would be to hire a GM with total football control. Whether Harlan was planning to do that or not, he ultimately did hire Wolf with the full control.
The other interesting tidbit was Infante, after being fired with a 4-12 season, saying that he was about 6 plays from being named coach-of-the-year. McGinn chronicles some of the destructive things Infante did behind the scenes, including telling the local police to apologize for arresting his son.