Why not 10 wins

[chibiabos]

I would be surprised if this years team wins more then six games, if that. They may think we have the talent but, that's a long way from being able to use it effectively.. According to one of the sports writers GB was an unsettled team as late as mid-Aug last year. It's mid-Aug again and I can't see that GB is settled either offensively or defensively. I am also beginning to suspect (that's suspect) there was a bit more to Sherman's firing of Jag then we have been led to believe.Let's just say I'm not impressed with anything the Pack has done so far this season. Too many players taking off for minor injuries, etc. Certainly not a Lombardi approach!!!

Yeah, I feel the same way Chibi, these guys are football players getting paid millions and they sit out every time they get a hangnail. I thought MM talked about changing the attitude? Then numerous players miss OTA's because of European vacations, and they are held out because of minor injuries. I tell you what this garbage wouldn't go on with Vince and you can bet your *** he would hold these guys responsible.

Apparently we are both from the old school pyledriver and can't get the hang of donning those rose colored glasses that are required these days. I can picture Lombardi trying to kick someone's *** as they come off the field during last weeks performance. Bet he'd make contact too.

 

[pyledriver80]

I would be surprised if this years team wins more then six games, if that. They may think we have the talent but, that's a long way from being able to use it effectively.. According to one of the sports writers GB was an unsettled team as late as mid-Aug last year. It's mid-Aug again and I can't see that GB is settled either offensively or defensively. I am also beginning to suspect (that's suspect) there was a bit more to Sherman's firing of Jag then we have been led to believe.Let's just say I'm not impressed with anything the Pack has done so far this season. Too many players taking off for minor injuries, etc. Certainly not a Lombardi approach!!!

Yeah, I feel the same way Chibi, these guys are football players getting paid millions and they sit out every time they get a hangnail. I thought MM talked about changing the attitude? Then numerous players miss OTA's because of European vacations, and they are held out because of minor injuries. I tell you what this garbage wouldn't go on with Vince and you can bet your *** he would hold these guys responsible.

Apparently we are both from the old school pyledriver and can't get the hang of donning those rose colored glasses that are required these days. I can picture Lombardi trying to kick someone's *** as they come off the field during last weeks performance. Bet he'd make contact too.

Funny, I was thinking the same Chibi. I would bet that thier is an age difference between some of us who hold TT accountable and those who make excuses. It's just not acceptable to me. I am a stand-up guy, when I screw up, I admit it but I expect the same in return. I believe a Football team is a reflection of thier coach. You can bet that if my team doesn't give 100% effort, they will pay. If the parents don't like it, maybe thier kid should try Golf. I have a school system that supports my approach and It was discussed before I was given the job. I have the greatest relationship with my kids. Some never realized it when they were playing, but as they matured, it all made sense.

 

[retiredgrampa]

Like most of you, I believe we have improved the talent level but we're very young and inexperienced. We'll improve towards the middle of the season but I think 6-10 is where we wind up. But next off-season we'll have much higher hopes. JMHO.

 

[porky88]

The Team has talent. Most people "inside" the NFL agree the Packers have a lot of young talent. That's the problem. It's young and inexperience with a rookie Head Coach. No chemistry either. So I wouldn't expect 10 wins. I have GB going 7-9.

 

[krd005]

OK....Why are we all making exceptions because we have a rookie HC? Either he gets it done or he doesn't. I don't see why being a first year HC means anything. He's been a coach for some time.


It's still football isn't it....or does it become rocket science when you become a HC?????

 

[DePack]

I agre krd....no excuses for being a "young staff" or "young team". Most of you think we have more talent than 2 years ago. The same group thinks that Mike Sherman, who led that team to 10 wins, sucks as a coach. That very same group is predicting a 6 win season under MM.

Isn't that kinda like covering your as$? No matter what happens under this scenario MM and TT are unaccountable for the teams win/loss record this year. If we truly have more talent and lose more games then someone has to go. If we are less talented than two years ago then TT is not doing his job. I actually have faith in both TT and MM for the time being which is why I think we will win 10+ games. That's what they are paid to do now......no excuses!

 

[net]

I mentioned this in another thread to some nitwit. I'd like to see what real Packer fans think.


One question: Does this team have more talent on the roster this season than we had 2 years ago?

If so....why can't we expect to win AT LEAST 10 games like we did then?

If not....why not? Isn't that what TT was brought in to do?

I'd be particularly interested in what the "Sherman bashers/ TT's poop don't stink" guys have to say. Don't give me future/potential, just answer the question. Do we have more talent today than two years ago? We can debate the future later.

A requirement for one win is an offensive line capable of not getting your Hall of Fame quarterback killed. At this point, we don't have one.
The Bears are waiting in less than three weeks.

10 wins will occur from 6 this season and 4 through the first 8 games next season.

 

[Obi1]

DePack,

16-0, SUPERBOWL.

1. There IS more talent on this team.
2. Better defensive players.
3. Favre's LAST year? Goes out with a bang...
4. No one on the schedule that is UNbeatable.

I know, I know, everyone thinks I am being unrealistic... BUT, at this juncture, who is to say that my pick or anyone else's is more unrealistic than the next?

 

[DePack]

DePack,

16-0, SUPERBOWL.

1. There IS more talent on this team.
2. Better defensive players.
3. Favre's LAST year? Goes out with a bang...
4. No one on the schedule that is UNbeatable.

I know, I know, everyone thinks I am being unrealistic... BUT, at this juncture, who is to say that my pick or anyone else's is more unrealistic than the next?

Now THAT'S what I'm looking for!!!


Don't worry about what everyone thinks. Everyone thought Son of Sam was crazy also!!!!

Maybe I should have used Jeffery Dahmer for you midwesterners :lol:

 

[DakotaT]

DePack,

16-0, SUPERBOWL.

1. There IS more talent on this team.
2. Better defensive players.
3. Favre's LAST year? Goes out with a bang...
4. No one on the schedule that is UNbeatable.

I know, I know, everyone thinks I am being unrealistic... BUT, at this juncture, who is to say that my pick or anyone else's is more unrealistic than the next?

Now THAT'S what I'm looking for!!!


Don't worry about what everyone thinks. Everyone thought Son of Sam was crazy also!!!!

Maybe I should have used Jeffery Dahmer for you midwesterners :lol:

No De, midwesterners like to use the Fargo movie for guidance. In fact I named my wood chipper Depack/Pyledriver.

 

[cheesey]

OK....Why are we all making exceptions because we have a rookie HC? Either he gets it done or he doesn't. I don't see why being a first year HC means anything. He's been a coach for some time.


It's still football isn't it....or does it become rocket science when you become a HC?????

Well......with this thought pattern, EVERY NFL team should be 16-0 EVERY year, right? NO team should EVER lose.
Maybe they should do like they do with kids today........just play, not keep score, and at the end of the year give EVERY team a "LOMBARDI TROPHY".
By the way.......i don't remember many first year head coaches that take their team to the SB. Even Lombardi didn't win the NFL title his first year.
HE didn't "get it done." He should have been fired too, right?
Sherman had several YEARS to get it done, and didn't. BIG difference.
I liked Sherman as a person. VERY nice man. But there were so many times where he let games get away with his play calling, or lack there of.
Just my opinion. You don't have to agree with me.

 

[Packnic]

OK....Why are we all making exceptions because we have a rookie HC? Either he gets it done or he doesn't. I don't see why being a first year HC means anything. He's been a coach for some time.


It's still football isn't it....or does it become rocket science when you become a HC?????

Well......with this thought pattern, EVERY NFL team should be 16-0 EVERY year, right? NO team should EVER lose.
Maybe they should do like they do with kids today........just play, not keep score, and at the end of the year give EVERY team a "LOMBARDI TROPHY".
By the way.......i don't remember many first year head coaches that take their team to the SB. Even Lombardi didn't win the NFL title his first year.
HE didn't "get it done." He should have been fired too, right?
Sherman had several YEARS to get it done, and didn't. BIG difference.
I liked Sherman as a person. VERY nice man. But there were so many times where he let games get away with his play calling, or lack there of.
Just my opinion. You don't have to agree with me.

Well......with this thought pattern, EVERY NFL team should be 16-0 EVERY year, right? NO team should EVER lose.

there does seem to be this thought out there... that everything is cut and dry and that this whole head coach and GM thing is pie in the sky.

only one team wins the superbowl and not many rookie head coaches have ever won the superbowl. in fact i dont believe its ever happened. so if we fire him after one season how will you ever keep a head coach?
all great coaches are given a chance to prove their methods. and no one can do it in a single year.

 

[pyledriver80]

OK....Why are we all making exceptions because we have a rookie HC? Either he gets it done or he doesn't. I don't see why being a first year HC means anything. He's been a coach for some time.


It's still football isn't it....or does it become rocket science when you become a HC?????

Well......with this thought pattern, EVERY NFL team should be 16-0 EVERY year, right? NO team should EVER lose.
Maybe they should do like they do with kids today........just play, not keep score, and at the end of the year give EVERY team a "LOMBARDI TROPHY".
By the way.......i don't remember many first year head coaches that take their team to the SB. Even Lombardi didn't win the NFL title his first year.
HE didn't "get it done." He should have been fired too, right?
Sherman had several YEARS to get it done, and didn't. BIG difference.
I liked Sherman as a person. VERY nice man. But there were so many times where he let games get away with his play calling, or lack there of.
Just my opinion. You don't have to agree with me.

Still missing the point Cheesey. If this team has more TALENT, Then why can't they get the 10 or more wins MS did with LESS talent? 2 pages and not 1 answer, hmmmmm.

 

[digsthepack]

We are better across the board on defense, a little weaker on offense as we lost JW and interior OL on offense, special teams will not be as good due to Longwell's defection. However, we have depth across the board where none existed in the past.

Put in the scale, we are about a wash when we consider only the starters. But when we look at the roster top to bottom, we are a much more talented team.

 

[pyledriver80]

We are better across the board on defense, a little weaker on offense as we lost JW and interior OL on offense, special teams will not be as good due to Longwell's defection. However, we have depth across the board where none existed in the past.

Put in the scale, we are about a wash when we consider only the starters. But when we look at the roster top to bottom, we are a much more talented team.

So we can expect 10 wins this year?

 

[TOPackerFan]

No because we're devoid of any playmakers (other than Favre).

 

[TomAllen]

We are better across the board on defense, a little weaker on offense as we lost JW and interior OL on offense, special teams will not be as good due to Longwell's defection. However, we have depth across the board where none existed in the past.

Put in the scale, we are about a wash when we consider only the starters. But when we look at the roster top to bottom, we are a much more talented team.

uh..uh..uh..

They're almost getting it pyle. I can smell the wood burning and see the flickering lights starting to brighten!

The answer is....(drum roll please)

We are not a more talented team!

 

[umair]

i dont see why some of you think that we wont do good this season just because we have a first year coach.

no wildcard team had ever won a super bowl until last year.

so why cant a first year coach win a super bowl?????

these Statistics dont mean much to me.

 

[pyledriver80]

i dont see why some of you think that we wont do good this season just because we have a first year coach.

no wildcard team had ever won a super bowl until last year.

so why cant a first year coach win a super bowl?????

First year coach? What about the Offensive Line?

 

[digsthepack]

We will improve over last year. How much, who knows. TA...there is nothing to "get", I have said from day one that we are a more talented team, particularly from a depth standpoint. I don't know where the confusion comes in. Never claimed a 10 win season, but have suggested that we are positioned to make very large strides in years 3 and 4 and the abundance of young talent matures.

 

[pyledriver80]

Ok, so with more Talent and Depth, we will have a worse record than MS had 2 years ago with lesser depth and lesser talent?


I'm sorry, it just doesn't sound right.

 

[pack_in_black]

PD, he said nothing about experience, which is very important. But I think we have a good chance to win this division this yr. cause its awful

 

[all about da packers]

PD, he said nothing about experience, which is very important. But I think we have a good chance to win this division this yr. cause its awful

Well, the Bears are favourites to win, and with good reason. Their D is sick, and their O should improve leaps and bounds over last year, with a healthy QB, better backup, another WR to compliment Mushin, and a RB better than Thomas.

The Packers may finish second in the division, but that won't get them into the playoffs IMO. There is too much competition from teams such as the Panthers, Bucs, Giants, Redskins, Cardinals, Seahawks, Falcons, Cowboys. Only 6 of the teams will make the playoffs, and I think there will be simply too much competition from the above mentioned teams for the final two spots that the Packers will have to go 11-5 to have a legit shot. That is just too high a standard, IMO.

 

[pyledriver80]

PD, he said nothing about experience, which is very important. But I think we have a good chance to win this division this yr. cause its awful

Where was the experience 2 years ago? Barnett was young, Carroll was a rookie,we had Hawthorne, Joey Thomas, etc.


This team is JUST as experienced or MORE experienced than it was 2 years ago.

 

[digsthepack]

pyle...I have explained it every way but sideways for you over several days. I will assume that you enjoy yanking chains more than having spirited debate where this matter is concerned. For you to not understand my position by now is simply a willful act on your part.