What was the impact of no A. Carroll

gmann001

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
190
Reaction score
17
Unfortunately (fortunately?) I didn't get to see the game yesterday. I was curious if the release of Ahmad Carroll on Tuesday had any impact at all on the D (positive/negative).

Did there seem to be less mistakes, penalties, etc? Or was it just the same horrible mess as in weeks past?
 

DePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,904
Reaction score
1
Location
Newark, Delaware
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.
 

Gopackgo82

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
DePack said:
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.

On the positive side, Carroll finally went penalty free!
 

Heatherthepackgirl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
2,274
Reaction score
0
Location
Fontana, CA
You have to be agressive and at times you will be called for a penalty, but thats just Harris and Woodson trying to make plays, now if they were just sitting back not covering then I would say they played for crap...
 

Packnic

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
Reaction score
6
Location
Salisbury, NC
DePack said:
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.

really depack... cause the stats look pretty good to me, all but the one in the W/L column


they held the best WR corp in the league to under 40 yards.... thats a huge step in the right direction. We held onto carroll too long now it looks like.
 

DePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,904
Reaction score
1
Location
Newark, Delaware
Packnic said:
DePack said:
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.

really depack... cause the stats look pretty good to me, all but the one in the W/L column


they held the best WR corp in the league to under 40 yards.... thats a huge step in the right direction. We held onto carroll too long now it looks like.

You've gotta be kidding. I'm not going to defend Carroll but our corners blew yesterday. They both had a chance to make gameturning ints but didn't. They both had penalties that you'd be ripping Carroll for if had them. Both receivers had less than 40 yards receiving because apparently that's all they needed to win the game.
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
Secondary actually played better. 3 dropped INT's but overall there really was no big play given up all game long and Holt and Bruce were held in check most of the game.
 

DePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,904
Reaction score
1
Location
Newark, Delaware
porky88 said:
Secondary actually played better. 3 dropped INT's but overall there really was no big play given up all game long and Holt and Bruce were held in check most of the game.

Do we win the game if they make just one of those picks????
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
DePack said:
porky88 said:
Secondary actually played better. 3 dropped INT's but overall there really was no big play given up all game long and Holt and Bruce were held in check most of the game.

Do we win the game if they make just one of those picks????

Maybe? Do we win the game of Tauscher doesn't get owned by Little?

Maybe? Pends if GB would of taken advantage.

How about Rayner making that 44 yard field goal. GB can play it safe then by the red zone and kick a field goal for the win.
 

DePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,904
Reaction score
1
Location
Newark, Delaware
I never thought I'd see the day when Packer "fans" were happy about being competitive but losing to the Rams at Lambeau field.
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
DePack said:
I never thought I'd see the day when Packer "fans" were happy about being competitive but losing to the Rams at Lambeau field.

If your implying to me. Where did I say I was happy?

In fact I even said I felt like I wanted to puke in the thoughts thread. I kept it nice and short as well.
 

PackFanInSC

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
563
Reaction score
0
DePack said:
Packnic said:
DePack said:
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.

really depack... cause the stats look pretty good to me, all but the one in the W/L column


they held the best WR corp in the league to under 40 yards.... thats a huge step in the right direction. We held onto carroll too long now it looks like.

You've gotta be kidding. I'm not going to defend Carroll but our corners blew yesterday. They both had a chance to make gameturning ints but didn't. They both had penalties that you'd be ripping Carroll for if had them. Both receivers had less than 40 yards receiving because apparently that's all they needed to win the game.


Three dropped INTs are better than the three completions the Rams could have had if Woodson and Harris had not been in position.
 

DePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,904
Reaction score
1
Location
Newark, Delaware
PackFanInSC said:
DePack said:
Packnic said:
DePack said:
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.

really depack... cause the stats look pretty good to me, all but the one in the W/L column


they held the best WR corp in the league to under 40 yards.... thats a huge step in the right direction. We held onto carroll too long now it looks like.

You've gotta be kidding. I'm not going to defend Carroll but our corners blew yesterday. They both had a chance to make gameturning ints but didn't. They both had penalties that you'd be ripping Carroll for if had them. Both receivers had less than 40 yards receiving because apparently that's all they needed to win the game.


Three dropped INTs are better than the three completions the Rams could have had if Woodson and Harris had not been in position.


Like I said....Kumbaya...everybody...the Packers were competitive with the Rams at Lambeau. We ALMOST won!!!!!!!!

Good try guys!!!
 

Packnic

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
Reaction score
6
Location
Salisbury, NC
DePack after last year and last week. Receivers not being wide open in the endzone, not roaming free in the middle and not catching huge breakaway passes over 20 yards ... For three huge receptions to be broken up is a much needed improvement. Next game we need turnovers. as long as we keep improving this season and look good going into next year.
 

DePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,904
Reaction score
1
Location
Newark, Delaware
Packnic said:
DePack after last year and last week. Receivers not being wide open in the endzone, not roaming free in the middle and not catching huge breakaway passes over 20 yards ... For three huge receptions to be broken up is a much needed improvement. Next game we need turnovers. as long as we keep improving this season and look good going into next year.

I agree with what you are looking for but I don't agree with your premise. We had too many penalties and mental mistakes i.e. dropped ints, wrong # of players on the field. I don't see any improvement and it's got to be Schottenheimer and Manuel. Our DB's were solid last season.
 

Chamuko

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
0
Location
Guadalajara, Mexico
Packnic said:
DePack said:
Same ****....different guys. Woodson and Harris both played like ****, dropped sure ints and each had penaties called on them.

really depack... cause the stats look pretty good to me, all but the one in the W/L column


they held the best WR corp in the league to under 40 yards.... thats a huge step in the right direction. We held onto carroll too long now it looks like.

I might be wrong but to me the W/L colum is the most important one...And so far it looks awful for us.
 

kewlbeans

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
160
Reaction score
0
Bulger had a 112 QB rating yesterday. Ram's offensive penalties kept it from being higher.



EDIT: although there actually may have been improvement, if you consider going from terrible to bad an improvement. I do not consider improvement in 1 game to be a trend. And I do not expect this secondary to improve beyond anything better than below average this season under the circumstances.
 

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top