1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Packers Managment

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Zero2Cool, May 9, 2007.

  1. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    I'm trying to figure out exactly what you're saying. Forgive my ignorance please.
    So, to help better understand you for myself (and obviously those who read this) could you give us your thoughts on the Packers in this thread? I know its a lot to ask, but I'm just getting this feeling your being misunderstood by some of us here and want to give you the opportunity to clear it up, if you so chose to.

    Issues like, the Packers not doing better than 7-9, Hawk < Urlacher, Barnett going to SAM, etc.
  2. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    You're being facetious, right? If this is serious... PM me... I'll gladly respond.
  3. Bertram
    Offline

    Bertram Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    532
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    lol
  4. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    [​IMG]
  5. pack_in_black
    Offline

    pack_in_black Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,876
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    God, I love this movie.

    -Am I wrong, Dude? Am I wrong?

    -No, Walter, you're not wrong, you're just an ---hole.
  6. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Re: Packers & Oannes


    Judging from the posts I've read, I'm not the only one who's misunderstanding ya but thats cool. You don't have to respond. Just don't say no one tried.
  7. MassPackersFan
    Offline

    MassPackersFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    803
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    He's just an objective fan who doesn't cheer for his team or view them any differently than the 31 other teams in the NFL. :)
  8. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    I'm really puzzled by your invitation? Perhaps, I should offer you an open invitation to explain why you believe what you believe.

    The way I think on things is well documented. There's little I could add in this thread to those that confuse you elsewhere. Since, I'm going to ripped for not trying to help you understand my mind.... Here ya go...

    You asked why I thought 7-9 for this season...

    8-8 was a mirage last season and should've been 7-9 if the Bears had been playing for something.

    The schedule, at this point, looks very strong. The schedule does often have a way of adjusting from first perceptions.

    I think Favre is a tired old shell of himself QB. I don't expect him to play with the passion he might have if we'd landed Moss. I really thought Randy was the one guy who could rekindle a fire that's been gone for years.

    Our secondary is shaky. Safety is a HUGE question mark. Nick Collins is not all that good, or smart, to begin with and God only knows who is going to be paired with him?

    Woodson is injury prone. Al Harris is starting to get up there in age and was never a speed burner to begin with.

    KGB hasn't done diddly since he got the money and played full-time.

    Cullen Jenkins is a budding star but didn't do it enough to know for sure.

    Kampman is a favorite with his hustle and intelligence.

    Pickett is solid up front and Harrell is an unknown. Cole and Jolly would be hard pressed to make too many other teams. Corey Williams is a personal favorite of mine.

    I have little faith in quiet D. Coord. Bob Sanders.

    The team doesn't play well at home. Lambeau has a reverse mystique these days.

    Offensively, we have no proven RB. No proven TE. An aging Donald Driver and a nice rookie who couldn't stay healthy last year. Koren Robinson would be a huge help if he can stay clean. Jones and Clowney are raw rookies and are unlikely to be any factor in the offense.

    The guards are young and need to improve. Clifton's knee is an area of huge concern. No solid left tackle to protect if he's unable to go.

    We just don't have one dominant piece on offense at any position

    We have a new offensive coordinator with no experience doing it at the NFL.

    -------


    I'm shocked anyone would be thinking we're going to be better. All teams improve from within every year. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Some fans are acting like our improvement is taking place in a vacuum. It isn't. We're not getting better while everyone else is the same or worse. Illogical.

    --------

    The point of the Urlacher/Hawk thing was that Urlacher had more impact as a rookie than Hawk. It was a comparison of each of them as ROOKIES and their ROOKIE seasons. It was, and is not, a comparison of Urlacher now vs. Hawk. That's been hashed to death in another thread. The funny thing is I got told how dumb I was in the end because everyone agreed Urlacher was a better rookie. That issue puzzled me more than any other so far. Urlacher plays his rookie season and is on every ad known to man because he was such a dominant force. Hawk plays his rookie season and Packer fans have him elevated to where the general population had Urlacher, but no one else does.

    ----------------------------------------


    Barnett going to SAM? The staff thought of moving him to SAM which means STRONG SIDE, which is the side of the offensive formation that the TE lines up on. His responsibility would've been covering the TE thus reducing his stats and he didn't want to go.

    In previous years, Barnett was considered to be moved to Will...Weakside LB. Why? He's too light to be as effective as he should be in the middle with lineman coming at him. The staff wanted to see more production out of him. Production doesn't mean simple tackling numbers. It means game changing plays. They wanted to put him out on the weakside where there was less resistance from lineman to use his speed and athleticism to make big plays. Also, the staff thought, wrongly, that Hodge would be the better guy for the middle, so none of this happened and Poppinga got in the rotation at Sam.

    Enter AJ Hawk... He goes immediately to WILL. Why? He's got the best skill set. That is why he's on the weakside. He'll be more effective not taking on blocks and can use his speed, strength and overall athleticism most effectively at that position. Weakside is the PLAYMAKER position. You get your big plays/game changing plays from that position.


    ===For whatever reason, everyone wants to argue points that seem pretty clear cut to me.
  9. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    is that right? its 3:23 right now, but i'm sure thats just a mirage.

    the packers shoulda won some of those close games last year, but didnt, so maybe i should say they're really 10-6.

    or maybe we can look at what their actual record is, and say they're friggin 8-8
  10. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    Yes... and their record is 0-0 for '07 just like everyone else's.

    I guess there's no such thing as a "fluke" to you?
  11. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    fluke?

    things are what they are, no matter what you want to call them. It's reality. In reality, the Packers were 8-8.

    I'm sure the Colts winning the superbowl was a fluke too, go ahead and tell them that. I'm sure they'd agree.
  12. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    Not the point.

    You didn't answer the question directly but in reading your answer I deduce you think there is no such thing as a fluke?

    You said above that that Pack "shoulda" won some of those close games last year. Which ones are you referring to? St. Louis? Buffalo?

    Colts were no fluke. For you not to realize the Packers would've likely lost at Chicago last year if the Bears weren't in safe mode is a little disingenuous. We were DESTROYED by top competition last year. The Bears were a SuperBowl team. We didn't score on them in Week 1. We got shut out by NE, also. These games weren't even close.

    Tell me what you think is going to happen when we face that schedule next year? It doesn't look pretty right now from where I'm typing.
  13. PackFanInSC
    Offline

    PackFanInSC Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    563
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    Yes, the schedule looks tough -- based on last year's standings.

    But we cannot quite go so far as to assume that we do not have a decent chance against teams that won a lot last year. Free agents move around -- quite often from good teams to weaker teams (except apparently NE). Teams that are weak surprise the next year (New Orleans) and teams expected to be competitive stumble (Carolina). It happens every year.

    Just starting the season, we have the Eagles who may or may not have McNabb back; the Giants who have defensive issues and, like us, do not know who their running backs will be; and San Diego who lost their HC and both coordinators this offseason. Think of the momentum it would give a young team like ours to upset 2 or 3 of last year's playoff teams right out of the box. It may not be all that likely but could happen.

    I seriously think that if Harrell is anything close to what everyone that I talk to that watched Tennessee football thinks he is and Rouse can take over for Manuel, we can have a very dominant front seven in Kampman, Harrell, Pickett, Jenkins, Hawk, Barnett, and Poppinga -- allowing the DBs more opportunities to make plays in the secondary.

    With games run heavy teams like San Diego, KC and Chicago, closing the door on the running game would put us in a very good position to upset. It is not all that hard to see the potential.
  14. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    K, so only you get to declare what is and is not a fluke. :rotflmao:

    k, I'm done with the thread, i'll let you and zero go back to your thing.
  15. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    No. I just wanted to know how you felt. Sorry, if that's too personal. It is interesting there are a lot of one line answers to my posts. Most of it is just criticism bereft of any well thought out debate. I'm not talking about you PackFanInSC.

    It's more than just the schedule looking tough. Examine it and you'll see we're playing a lot of teams we haven't traditionally played well against and at some places we don't play well.

    I think it's a hard year on the horizon. That's wrong?
  16. gopackgo
    Offline

    gopackgo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    730
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    Well, that's just, like, your opinion man...
  17. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    Not true. Just because you can't or won't debate doesn't mean you should bash me.

    My opinions, whether you agree with them or not, are well defined. You won't see me being a jerk to someone making a point that was well thought out just because I disagree with some inane one line comment.

    Please, enlighten me to where I've lost my way. If you can't then I guess it'll just be a lot of one liners as responses to my lengthy posts.
  18. MassPackersFan
    Offline

    MassPackersFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    803
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    Nobody f*cks with the Oannes. *hip thrust*
  19. Oannes
    Offline

    Oannes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    196
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    MassPackersFan... You are hired as my agent. If you want to "f" with me as you so eloquently stated, do it with some actual debate instead of vapid remarks.
  20. gopackgo
    Offline

    gopackgo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    730
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    8 year-olds dude.
  21. arrowgargantuan
    Offline

    arrowgargantuan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    3,645
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    Ratings Received:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    Oannes..that was a movie quote, not a dig at you.

    personally, i think you argue very respectfully. i don't see a need for anybody to question your loyalties or takecheap shots at you. a healthy debate should always be encouraged.

    and MassPackersFan..."You're outta your element!"
  22. MassPackersFan
    Offline

    MassPackersFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    803
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    Sorry I was just going with the quote gopackgo posted.

    I'll reply with something substantive so my contribution goes beyond a modified Big Lebowski quote.

    I agree with much of what you said about the players, although Woodson didn't do too badly injury-wise last year, but it is always a concern because of our lack of CB depth (Woodson is too good for someone to step in without a decline in quality of play). And I think using the word "shell" to describe Favre is a bit cliche and overdone. He's not in 3 time MVP form though. I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

    EVERY team improves from year to year? I understand the theory you were running with here, but I have to disagree. Team's may try to improve, but players may want to retire or go somewhere else, injuries happen, teams have to make cuts due to their cap situation if it was handled poorly before, other crap happens, new players bust and having them on the field hurts the team, etc...
  23. bozz_2006
    Offline

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,510
    Location:
    Grand Forks, ND
    Ratings Received:
    +612 / 5 / -0
    Packers & Oannes

    the bozz abides.
  24. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Packers & Oannes

    I kind of figured this could find itself on the bad side. it was a slim chance, but thought I'd chance it.

    Sorry.
  25. cheesey
    Offline

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Re: Packers & Oannes

    I STILL have trouble understanding..............WHY call yourself a fan of a certain team, if you don't feel they have a snowballs chance in hell of winning? I mean.......if they win, its a "fluke". What is it if they lose then?
    I watched the Packers through the 1970's and 80's. I KNEW they sucked, but HOPED every week they would win. I didn't go around screaming how lousy they were. Oh, i was made FUN of by many people cause i still loved and backed them, no matter how awful they were.
    You don't love them because they are great, you love them because they are YOURS.

Share This Page