Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by AmishMafia, Oct 28, 2012.
Rashean Mathis did not play.
Why is yours different then mine?
where did you find yours?
So I guess we are comparing Jax inactives as valuable as the Packers inactives?
Is that correct?
I wouldn't say that. JAX inactives make a bad team worse.
The point was that the Pack's depleted receiving corp was playing against a depleted secondary. Apples to apples is all.
I got my info directly from the Packers web site. And LTF it was you not me who drew the initial comparison. I simply said the Jags were also missing players. Agree with you Hard Right Edge on your post above.
I hope this doesn't sound preachy. Older fans remember alot of really bad years through the 70's and 80's where you took your pleasure from lesser things. Smash-mouth hits and freak explosive plays. Beating the Bears was always #1. So I guess I'm surprised sometimes at fan reactions to some things.
I was never "OK" with Packer losses but you just had to accept it. It didn't change my enjoyment of the game. I watched all the playoffs the Packers were never in, I watched all those Super Bowls. I loved the game.
I think it all has to do with perspective. If you've never known a poor Green Bay Packer team you think it's a birthright to always be on the winning side of the ledger. And that is the problem.
Nothing is guaranteed in the NFL and poor teams sometimes play great and great teams sometimes play poor at inopportune times. If you look around the records in the NFL you have to be at least a little encouraged at every other team's record.
If the playoffs started today they'd be in the playoffs right? That wasn't true a couple of weeks ago.
And BTW, I predicted the win over Houston but I haven't posted as often because it's no fun when everyone is so gloomy. Goodness folks, this is a good team and there is no reason, not one single reason to be down about this season.
Next ? is this
If everyone was healthy as far as WR core and their DB....Do we score more easily?
How does a thread about the positive vs the negative fan approach turn into a debate about an injury report and the effects of said injury report. lol.
Is that really a debate that can be conclusively won?
nope, am not debating anything...I am trying to get an understanding on how they feel the game would have turned out with other players..
I feel it would been a blow out with all our starters, I want to know how they feel
One would like to think so, but I'd be skeptical. They were dropping 7 in coverage with regularity because they did not need to respect the run game.
Yes, we'd be in the playoffs if they started right this moment. If AZ were to pull off an upset of SF this evening, we'd be bumped out on tie breakers...SF based on head-to-head, AZ and MIN on common opponents. I'll be pulling for SF to avoid the upset.
I'm a long time fan, and I've got a different view. Aaron Rodgers will be 30 next season. The number of seasons left with All World are limited. You need to make the most of them. Once he's gone, and replaced by the next Christian Ponder or Jake Locker, then I'll likely slip back into the '70s - '80s casual acceptance of bad-to-mediocre results you describe.
Long term fans, more than the youngsters, should appreciate this uncommon opportunity.
It truly is a blessing to have been a part of two consecutive elite QB's in Favre and Rodgers. Seeing is that we do have the 3rd best QB post 2000 Brady, Manning, A-Rod, I along with many other fans take such a personal stake in the well being of Mr Rodgers.
So it is easy to get consumed with angst when seeing Rodgers go down 8 times to the Seahawks in one half. To be in a proverbial cross hairs because of a deficient run game that we deal with week to week. Sure I am nothing more than an arm chair QB, but the Packers are playing with fire as these deficiencies continue.
This is why some have clamored for the removal of either the O-line blocking scheme or its teacher Campen. In the blink of an eye all of the promise of this fine team could go out the window due to a decomissioned Aaron Rodgers.
There's nothing you can do to help the team win. Fretting over the current personnel won't change it.
I'll be honest, I screamed at the TV Sunday for the first time in over a year. It was exciting, it was tense and fun.
We've been staring at an uncommon opportunity since 1992 and we have 2 SB championships to show for it.
See... you're a glass half empty kind of guy. You think it's impossible to expect the Packers to follow Rodgers with another franchise QB. I'm not a half full guy either. It's both. Half full AND half empty. No way to know if they'll follow Rodgers with another franchise QB. No way to expect one or the other.
I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I'm a realist. There are still only two sides to a coin, history of the flip can't determine future results.
You hit the nail on the head!!
What is it about grown men playing with a ball that makes or breaks our day??
...... makes us spend bookoo's on tickets and game fare???
......makes us spend bookoo's on team memorabilia????
.....makes us spend bookoo's getting to any town where said team is playing??
......makes us argue relentlessly about pro's and con's about how well said men can play with the ball.
.....makes us come back every weekend (or Monday or Thursday) to see which grown men could play with said ball better than the other grown men in another state..
......makes players go thru life changing decisions wether its time they quit playing with the ball!
........In the end...it's still grown men just playing with a ball!!!
I need a drink!
Who said anything about "impossible"? Just highly unlikely...and the odds go down without a 1 or 2 or 3 win season. As the number of colleges running pro set offenses continues to dwindle, finding that guy gets even tougher. The glass is exactly as full as the liquid makes it.
The evidence would indicate it is more than a game for you.
We all have our ways of playing along.
No matter how unlikely it's possible so why are you fretting about Rodgers' departure when he's in his prime?
Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. Brett Favre was a 2nd, Rodgers was picked 24th. There have been scores of good QBs picked after the 1st round. Besides, how many 1st round QBs failures have we seen? You don't need a 1-3 win season to get a QB, Favre and Rodgers are proof positive of that.
I wish I could get a window into TTs head and see what he actually thinks about the last few years' QBs as draft prospects. You have to wonder if need came to shove who he'd have picked the last few years. Also HRE, I have a strong belief in the Packers QB development philosophy. They do it better than anybody.
Brunell, Hasselbeck, Brooks, Flynn.
And the point of the glass exercise is how you view a half full glass, yes, 1/3 filled glass is 2/3 empty. That is a statisticians way of viewing it. The glass half exercise is supposed to determine if you are an optimist, pessimist or realist. And who said we're filling the glass with liquid? That is an assumption! That says alot about you too HRE.
Righhhhhht. You might be filling it with sand.
Actually it is always full..
With water AND air
Well if you want to take it that far then you have to take into account the element that would cause them to interact is absent. For example you don't exactly sit in a chair as much as you sit above it as the elements that oppose each other cause you to be repelled by the seating surface.
Else you'd interact with a chair chemically to be the ultimate arm chair QB.
So this repelling force leaves at least some room for an element that would cause air to be displaced. But yes, it's always full of something.
I guess I want to know is why it's so hard for people to admit their either pessimistic or optimistic or a realist?
Probably because they never know how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie pop
Wow. Is the glass half full or half empty?
1/2 Empty: Pessimist
1/2 Full: Optimist
Its both: Realist
Drinks it: Opportunist
Argues its full w/air n water: Humorist
Argues w/Newtonian physics: Anal-ist
Separate names with a comma.