No AFC roster should be in anyone's 5 best. There are only 2 AFC rosters that should be in anyone's 10 best.
Didn't PFF consistently rank EDS high while we all watched him block air?
EDS was simply ranked higher than AJ Hawk week after week.
The bar was low.
So the Packers, without their top 2 pass rushers (Matthews, Perry), their top TE (Finley), and their starting LT (Bulaga), lost to the almighty 49ers on a last second FG but wouldn't have been able to compete with the Denver Mannings? Seneca Wilson, Marshawn and their OC Darrell Bevell (let that soak in) walked all over the Broncos D with ease, and you think Aaron Rodgers, Eddie Lacy and Mike McCarthy would have had a tough time? The Broncos had zero running game to speak of and relied exclusively on Manning to produce, the Seahawks sold out 100% to stop Manning and it worked. I think GB would have done the same and while I don't think GB would have walked over Denver like Seattle did, I think GB would still have won by a comfortable margin. To think Denver would have raced by GB is the opposite of homerism, it's purposely being a pussy because you don't like the decisions the team has made as far as the roster goes. Objective my a$$. The team didn't make decisions you agreed with and your butthurt so you think GB is doomed to fail.
Seems like many fans are "unhappy" about the ratings of "below average" and that's certainly understandable. But what does that really mean in this context ?
Look at Bak at LT- if he is considered below average, that really isn't much of a knock
He's a rookie and he's already better than some of the veteran starters. Let's say he is the number 22 out of 32 LTs- that's below average, but its still damn good considering his circumstances
Stated another way, 10 teams have a ****tier LT than the Packers' 4th round rookie who will only get better.
Same with Matt Flynn- he is a below average starter, but GB doesn't need him to start; he's a back-up and he is still better than a few current starters
James Starks is listed as a below average starter, no big deal. He's one of the best # 2 RBs in the league and that's what GB needs him for
CAPackfan 95 said it best, who really cares what these monkeys put out ? If you add in a little more context, then their ratings matter even less
Its something to keep the fans busy till training camp, and when GB hoists another Lombardi in February, we can point back and laugh. Or we can credit it ALL to Rodgers as some deep- thinkers are wont to do.
We don't need any stoopid website to tell us what we already know.
The 2014 Green Bay Packers are a Championship contender on the field;
On paper ?...opinions vary.
I'm convinced Satori is the only one who should be allowed to post opinions on here.
Well, him and Goalline. But for diversity purposes only.
If you post an opinion that Satori and Goalline should be the only ones to post opinions, what's the ruling there? How many ways can you ask the same question?
Well, him and Goalline. But for diversity purposes only.
Affirmative Reaction.
Awwww damnit! There goes my shot at the #1 ranking in the community.
We are all of the brotherhood of below average posters here. Which is good for me because it makes me feel less stupider.
GD:
So the Packers, without their top 2 pass rushers (Matthews, Perry), their top TE (Finley), and their starting LT (Bulaga), lost to the almighty 49ers on a last second FG but wouldn't have been able to compete with the Denver Mannings?
Just to be clear, the following is what I asserted is not objective:
ChilliJon:
Last years Packers would have kicked Denver's ass is the SB.
Cite where I said the Packers would not be able to compete with Denver. I am OK with the suggestion the Packers may have moved up and down the field all day, thus making the game competitive. I said nothing about what the Packer’s offense would do. My disagreement was the claim the Packers would have kicked Denver’s ass.
Me:
I see no reason why Denver's offense would not have moved up and down the field with ease against the Packers, especially given that Manning likely would have had all day.
By the way, I wrote the above interpreting Chilli to be referring to the Packers as they were in the playoffs, injuries and all. That was my interpretation as evidenced by my later writing that I stand corrected.
GD:
and you think Aaron Rodgers, Eddie Lacy and Mike McCarthy would have had a tough time?
Citation please. What the hell did I say about what I thought the Packer’s offense would do?
Interesting that you omitted the Packers extremely crappy quality at ILB and S.
So much for objectivity.
GD:
it's purposely being a pussy because you don't like the decisions the team has made as far as the roster goes.
What roster decisions have I expressed a dislike toward? Citation please.
Again, so much for objectivity.
I am actually unsure I have a dislike for ANY roster decisions though I hold out that in the last couple of years, maybe TT could have placed more emphasis on S and ILB
Originally Posted by antooo:
Originally Posted by phaedrus:
whatever
The caliber of this post is truly awe-inspiring and I thank you.
Originally Posted by phaedrus:
Originally Posted by antooo:
Originally Posted by phaedrus:
whatever
The caliber of this post is truly awe-inspiring and I thank you.
You are welcome.
AJ Hawk and Brad Jones Carpooling?
Definitely looks like an indica guy.
Northern Lights #5 perhaps.
I guess it all comes down to how you define "ass"
Looking for his marker...
Explaining his choice to run Cobb on the goal line instead of Lacy.
And, the new #9.
Yes your track record for objectivity is impeccable.
Originally Posted by Boris:
Awwww damnit! There goes my shot at the #1 ranking in the community.
Must be nice! I can't even crack the top 43.
That last pic of MM is what makes him a QB coach. 1. Teaching QB's to spot outside coverage before the snap without tipping your hand where the ball's going. 2. Talk about looking a safety off. Damn.
Originally Posted by Grave Digger:
Yes your track record for objectivity is impeccable.
ad hominem logical fallacy - look it up.
Wisconsin just allowed ad hominem marriages, right?
Now Pandas?
Slippery slope.
Rong.
Pisces.
Which are not included in the Ad Hominem Panda Man Love marriage bill.
Just wait.
My petition is at the printer.
I could see a thread about roster rankings taking damn near two pages to get to Ad Hominem Panda Man marriage during the season. But not in June. Sad