Originally Posted by JJSD:
Remember when CAP95 made Seppy cry?
Ha Ha ! CAP95's talent in that arena is Exquisite.
I think Nagler still has scars from one of CAP95's more entertaining excoriations:
"Rodgers isn't clutch, prove me wrong "
I WILL PRAY FOR YOU CAP95!
That's always an amusing one. Pray for me. I've told folks in the past that instead of wasting their time with that crap, just give me a hundred bucks. It'll help more and make me happier.
Originally Posted by Sep:
You're not invited. To anything of mine.
Even your Sweet 16 party?!?
Or is this innuendo about your lady parts?
Originally Posted by JJSD:
I WILL PRAY FOR YOU CAP95!
That's always an amusing one. Pray for me. I've told folks in the past that instead of wasting their time with that crap, just give me a hundred bucks. It'll help more and make me happier.
I bet they still prayed
Originally Posted by Pikes Peak:
I bet they still prayed
yeah, they prayed for someone to give JJSD a hundred dollars
And look how that turned out.
Dumbasses.
It makes way, way more sense to just give me a hundred bucks directly and then pray that some miracle replaces your hundred bucks.
Win-win.
take it out of Kiel's shampoo budget
Originally Posted by Henry:
Originally Posted by Sep:
You're not invited. To anything of mine.
Even your Sweet 16 party?!?
Or is this innuendo about your lady parts?
You can come to my party as long as you can put up with this:
McCarthy & Rodgers worked over the PHI D on the 2nd drive that ended with the TD to Adams. PHI came out in 8 and then 7 man fronts on the first two plays... after AR hit Cobb on 3rd down for 22 yards PHI went 4, 5, or 6 man fronts. Even with GB throwing every down PHI couldn't stop them. When they blitzed Rodgers made them pay.
Doing some film review H5 ?
Great stuff and thanks for sharing it. I think the Linsley video is an apt metaphor for how the GB offense handled Philly on Sunday
I love me some NFL Game Rewind. GB just has too many weapons. 8 man front to stop Eddie and AR finds Cobb, or Jordy, or Adams, or Quarless, or RRodgers, or Lacy... just not fair.
Speaking of too many weapons...
I sent a letter to CBS Sports, addressed to a Mr. Tony Gonzalez
I told him: IT... IS... TIME
Nice idea and would be welcome I'm sure, though AR has had some high praise of late for his brother from another mother.
"brother from another mother" ??? who's that?
also, I can't wait until Janis joins that group...yikes!
Dick Rodgers. Janis has some work to do to crack this WR group. Abbrederis watching and learning. Loaded.
Originally Posted by Hungry5:
I love me some NFL Game Rewind. GB just has too many weapons. 8 man front to stop Eddie and AR finds Cobb, or Jordy, or Adams, or Quarless, or RRodgers, or Lacy... just not fair.
Where is Finley when his God needs him?
Has he filed a restraining order yet?quote:I sent a letter to CBS Sports, addressed to a Mr. Tony Gonzalez
Originally Posted by Sep:
3. MM wasted time early by not immediately torching the Eagles with the pass because everyone knows Chip Kelly stacks the box against the run and dares teams to pass.
I guess I don't understand why this is a negative. What would have been different? Scoring faster? Giving the ball back to the Eagles faster? What you're criticizing was part of a drive that resulted in a touchdown. You have it listed as a negative. Why was it a negative? What different result were you hoping to see? Is there a "wasting time" stat that the Packers need to improve on?
You just like to bag on McCarthy. Plenty of real, actual things to complain about instead of making **** up.
Is there a "wasting time" stat that the Packers need to improve on?
I'd say no.
a - They lead the league in Pts/Game @ 33.
b - They also have the (4th) fewest plays from scrimmage @610. Only OAK(588), TAM(582), & TEN(553) have run fewer plays. This essentially means the Packers are extremely efficient offensively.
c - The Packers are 2nd in yards per play (6.1) to DEN @ 6.2.
d - Their TOP is 8th in the league.
Originally Posted by Brak:
Originally Posted by Sep:
3. MM wasted time early by not immediately torching the Eagles with the pass because everyone knows Chip Kelly stacks the box against the run and dares teams to pass.
I guess I don't understand why this is a negative. What would have been different? Scoring faster? Giving the ball back to the Eagles faster? What you're criticizing was part of a drive that resulted in a touchdown. You have it listed as a negative. Why was it a negative? What different result were you hoping to see? Is there a "wasting time" stat that the Packers need to improve on?
You just like to bag on McCarthy. Plenty of real, actual things to complain about instead of making **** up.
I would also add that testing the run using a bruiser RB like Lacey would also be a proverbial sortie in using him to slow down the game and control the clock against a very fast Philly offense. Instead, Philly decided to give the gift of air miles. I want MM plying for weaknesses. If he stuck with it all half like that dip**** Kelly, then I would be pissed. He attempted to use his stud RB to find holes, then let Rodgers rip them apart.
Originally Posted by Brak:
Originally Posted by Sep:
3. MM wasted time early by not immediately torching the Eagles with the pass because everyone knows Chip Kelly stacks the box against the run and dares teams to pass.
I guess I don't understand why this is a negative. What would have been different? Scoring faster? Giving the ball back to the Eagles faster? What you're criticizing was part of a drive that resulted in a touchdown. You have it listed as a negative. Why was it a negative? What different result were you hoping to see? Is there a "wasting time" stat that the Packers need to improve on?
You just like to bag on McCarthy. Plenty of real, actual things to complain about instead of making **** up.
It's not a "OMG MY HAIR IS ON FIRE" negative. They won 53-20 and it wasn't even that close. But credit MM for seeing what the Eagles were giving him. My point was just "why even bother running at all" when the Eagles are begging you to cut them apart with the passing game. MM scripts the first 10 (?) plays of the game... Those three runs that I mentioned from the 2nd drive that started World War 9 fell into the scripted batch of plays. It's been no secret the Eagles play defense by daring teams to pass. That's all. You can call it nit-picking because trying to find negatives from an historic blowout victory is harder than a game in which the entire team collapsed.
If negatives bother you, start your own "POSITIVES/POSITIVES" post-game thread. Or just ignore me if I'm really that stupid.
One thing I will indeed grant you is that, yeah, I do kind of bust on McCarthy. I think sometimes he can be a real dope. I suppose it takes one to know one, right, Brak? Which reminds me -- didn't you call me a "dum phuck"?
Originally Posted by Henry:
Originally Posted by Brak:
Originally Posted by Sep:
3. MM wasted time early by not immediately torching the Eagles with the pass because everyone knows Chip Kelly stacks the box against the run and dares teams to pass.
I guess I don't understand why this is a negative. What would have been different? Scoring faster? Giving the ball back to the Eagles faster? What you're criticizing was part of a drive that resulted in a touchdown. You have it listed as a negative. Why was it a negative? What different result were you hoping to see? Is there a "wasting time" stat that the Packers need to improve on?
You just like to bag on McCarthy. Plenty of real, actual things to complain about instead of making **** up.
I would also add that testing the run using a bruiser RB like Lacey would also be a proverbial sortie in using him to slow down the game and control the clock against a very fast Philly offense. Instead, Philly decided to give the gift of air miles. I want MM plying for weaknesses. If he stuck with it all half like that dip**** Kelly, then I would be pissed. He attempted to use his stud RB to find holes, then let Rodgers rip them apart.
I think we're closer on this than you ever thought possible, Henry.
What's the complaint? MM is testing the defense and if a bruiser like Eddie can start making dents to their base, pressure defense you just added an element to control the tempo of the game, which helps your defense. That's just good strategy.
If by now you don't understand my point there is no use -- repeating myself for probably the third or fourth time likely won't do neither you nor this thread any good. You disagree with me. Big surprise. Let's move on, shall we?
Originally Posted by Henry:
What's the complaint? MM is testing the defense and if a bruiser like Eddie can start making dents to their base, pressure defense you just added an element to control the tempo of the game, which helps your defense. That's just good strategy.
But to ask you a question completely unrelated to the previous discussion: If you were walking down the street and suddenly came to a giant wall that was blocking your path, would you keep walking into it -- ya know, to test its strength, hoping to make dents? Or would you find another way to get to where you were trying to go? There's no wrong answer. Just tell us all what you'd do. I won't even respond, as our correspondence has run its course.
Originally Posted by Sep:
Originally Posted by Henry:
What's the complaint? MM is testing the defense and if a bruiser like Eddie can start making dents to their base, pressure defense you just added an element to control the tempo of the game, which helps your defense. That's just good strategy.
But to ask you a question completely unrelated to the previous discussion: If you were walking down the street and suddenly came to a giant wall that was blocking your path, would you keep walking into it -- ya know, to test its strength, hoping to make dents? Or would you find another way to get to where you were trying to go? There's no wrong answer. Just tell us all what you'd do. I won't even respond, as our correspondence has run its course.
I would bang your head into it creating a gap for me to go thru.
I really do not understand why some people aren't coaching in the NFL.
Originally Posted by GBFanForLife:
I really do not understand why some people aren't coaching in the NFL.
Like yourself? I can't figure that one out either.
Originally Posted by GBFanForLife:
I really do not understand why some people aren't coaching in the NFL.
Funny, I can't understand why some are
Originally Posted by Pikes Peak:
Originally Posted by Sep:
Originally Posted by Henry:
What's the complaint? MM is testing the defense and if a bruiser like Eddie can start making dents to their base, pressure defense you just added an element to control the tempo of the game, which helps your defense. That's just good strategy.
But to ask you a question completely unrelated to the previous discussion: If you were walking down the street and suddenly came to a giant wall that was blocking your path, would you keep walking into it -- ya know, to test its strength, hoping to make dents? Or would you find another way to get to where you were trying to go? There's no wrong answer. Just tell us all what you'd do. I won't even respond, as our correspondence has run its course.
I would bang your head into it creating a gap for me to go thru.
Violence doesn't solve anything. Besides, I'm not there -- I already went around it. Use Henry's head. It's probably much bigger (like his brain).
Originally Posted by Pikes Peak:
Originally Posted by Sep:
Originally Posted by Henry:
What's the complaint? MM is testing the defense and if a bruiser like Eddie can start making dents to their base, pressure defense you just added an element to control the tempo of the game, which helps your defense. That's just good strategy.
But to ask you a question completely unrelated to the previous discussion: If you were walking down the street and suddenly came to a giant wall that was blocking your path, would you keep walking into it -- ya know, to test its strength, hoping to make dents? Or would you find another way to get to where you were trying to go? There's no wrong answer. Just tell us all what you'd do. I won't even respond, as our correspondence has run its course.
I would bang your head into it creating a gap for me to go thru.
Win.
between sep and hank, the silent killer is making us all dummer
I'm lazy.
just use the damn "post" reply button or I'm taking the feather away
regardless of current condition
Originally Posted by Henry:
What's the complaint? MM is testing the defense and if a bruiser like Eddie can start making dents to their base, pressure defense you just added an element to control the tempo of the game, which helps your defense. That's just good strategy.
Testing the defense is key. I would add "influence" and "adjust". Philly was showing single high safety/8 in the box early to stop the run. So give them some run game nibbles to further set up the pass. Both of Jordy's long receptions were owing to this D and the resulting man coverage. Billy Davis was stupid enough to play this card and MM/Rodgers good enough to exploit it.
MM and Rodgers are all about figuring out the opponent's defense and adjusting to take advantage of the match-up. Packers have all the pieces except a seam busting TE to take advantage be it running or passing assuming the OL stays on its game.
Will be most interesting to see what Belichick does when that game comes. His MO is to try and take away what you do best meaning we'll see Revis following Jordy everywhere with safety help if necessary. Cobb and Eddie could be set for big games.
But thump the Queens first.
Originally Posted by Sep:
Originally Posted by Brak:
Originally Posted by Sep:
3. MM wasted time early by not immediately torching the Eagles with the pass because everyone knows Chip Kelly stacks the box against the run and dares teams to pass.
I guess I don't understand why this is a negative. What would have been different? Scoring faster? Giving the ball back to the Eagles faster? What you're criticizing was part of a drive that resulted in a touchdown. You have it listed as a negative. Why was it a negative? What different result were you hoping to see? Is there a "wasting time" stat that the Packers need to improve on?
You just like to bag on McCarthy. Plenty of real, actual things to complain about instead of making **** up.
It's not a "OMG MY HAIR IS ON FIRE" negative. They won 53-20 and it wasn't even that close. But credit MM for seeing what the Eagles were giving him. My point was just "why even bother running at all" when the Eagles are begging you to cut them apart with the passing game. MM scripts the first 10 (?) plays of the game... Those three runs that I mentioned from the 2nd drive that started World War 9 fell into the scripted batch of plays. It's been no secret the Eagles play defense by daring teams to pass. That's all. You can call it nit-picking because trying to find negatives from an historic blowout victory is harder than a game in which the entire team collapsed.
If negatives bother you, start your own "POSITIVES/POSITIVES" post-game thread. Or just ignore me if I'm really that stupid.
One thing I will indeed grant you is that, yeah, I do kind of bust on McCarthy. I think sometimes he can be a real dope. I suppose it takes one to know one, right, Brak? Which reminds me -- didn't you call me a "dum phuck"?
I don't need to start a new thread. Unless one needs to be started. Until then, I'll just comment on the comments. You don't like it, don't post.
They didn't run once on the first drive. 3 pts.
They ran the ball on the second drive. 7 pts.
You bitch about it.
It's not an opinion, You are a dum phuck.
And an increase in ice cream sales causes an increase in shark attacks.
Though Cuqui makes a good point -- perhaps the runs were just to further draw in the Eagles defense or keep them in the pass-friendly alignment. That's actually a good point. Not "the sun rose and I found $10 in my pants pocket, therefore, the sun rising causes $10 to appear in my pocket" logic of Brak's last post.
I think we all can learn a lesson or two by snuggling on the couch and remembering what real problems are:
OK, guy.
