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.

    Sign Up 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!

Favre and Packer image tarnished

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by packedhouse01, Apr 5, 2006.

  1. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    Home field in the NFL is not what it used to be my friends in todays NFL. So don't even bring home field into the arguement.

    Only the future will tell........but it's looking like a 3-5 yr plan we have going here. Atleast my daughters season ticket number will improve!!!

    So you are disappointed with Sherman's results........what will you be with what is looking like to be a train wreck?
     
  2. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    Nice of you to completely ignore the decimation of entire positions as a contributor to that 4-12 record. Yeah, I know tha party line about overcoming injuries, somebody has to "step up". Remember, we were down to our 5th RB, lost 3 of our 5 WRs for much or all of the season, and had a QB who grew increasingly erratic, out of control, and sometimes just plain stupid under the wet noodle tutaledge of MS and his staff. The most glaring mistake MS and his staff made was being so in awe of the 1st ballot HOF QG to properly coach the guy. He regressed lightyears in the horrible offensive sysyem and "leadership" of MS. Oh, yeah.....MS also had the priveledge of playing in the consistently worst division in football during his entire tenure.......it would have actually been bigger news if he did not win the division against such stiff competition.

    MS is like Daunte Culpepper...monster stats but folds in the big moment. Looks good on paper, but further investigation bears out reality...and reality is that Sherman was in the deep end without his water wings.
     
  3. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    C'mon digs........................the facts are that he won......I disagree that he was in awe of Mr Farve!
     
  4. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ummmm..espn. read my words before you climb down my throat. Cronyism is the act of hanging on to unqualified people because of friendship, not hiring people you like. Big difference. If some on MM's staff prove to be hacks and he keeps them on because of friendship he is no better than MS. That said, MS hung onto players and coaches after it was abundantly evident they were not working out because they were buddies or his picks.

    If you cannot or will not allow for this distinction, well, there really is not need to continue the dialogue.

    As far as our ST coach, he is actually very well regarded in league circles. He just happens to have spent much of his recent career in St. Louis where Mike Martz never placed a priority on ST or defense. How can he do well when he was never given the tools to do so?

    As for the dearth of talent on the roster..who exactly was responsible for that 4 of the past 5 years? Oh, yeahhhh, that would be MS the GM. You pretty much make my case. Thanks, man!

    P.S. I was at the Queens game that was lost on that 56 yarder. Going into the half dominating with a 17 point lead, EVERY Packers' fan I talked with at halftime was concerned that a different team would exit the locker room for the second half, and not for the better, because of MS's uncanny ability to play not to lose. I have never in my life witnessed a coach who could take a hot team into the half and extinguish that flame in the span of a halftime like MS.
     
  5. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
    In his SI column today, Peter King made the point that if the Packer management told Favre there was no deadline but are now beginning to pressure him (which may or may not actually be the case) Favre has a right to be peeved about it. That's a perfectly valid point.

    But the truth is a little more complicated. There is something called "good faith." Maybe Favre had earned the right not to have a deadline (if any player ever did earn that right, it would be Favre) but the assumption was that he would act in good faith and would not drag it out to a ridiculous extent, and also that he would not make demands of the GM when interviewed by ESPN. I don't hate him for it, but he's not doing the team any favors at this point.

    However, I will say that as long as he's waited THIS long, he might as well wait till the minicamps to make his decision. The free agent market is mostly played out, and Favre's decision will not affect the draft.
     
  6. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    digs..

    That's total BS that Favre "regressed" and you know it..!

    Try the Packers had NO DEFENSE and Favre had to try and score a million points to win a game (and did!) with rookie receivers who were still developing...(Walker and Ferguson)...

    basically Driver's been the one reliable WR weapon that Favre's had in 6 years...(besides the 1 year that Walker had..), so that had alot to do with it...

    That and the poor play calling and lack of defense...

    Is it any wonder he's trying to hold TT accountable for being committed to winning??
     
  7. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    what difference does it make if he says nothing???????????????????????




    answer...............NONE
     
  8. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    Personally, I think all the confusion makes the Packers one dangerous and unpredictable animal come draft day.

    I look forward to a great draft!
     
  9. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    The Packer's d was their strength last year....games like Cinncy were lost by the offense...

    And this blame MS for everything is getting old...he sucks because he didn't bring them a superbowl in 5 years?!? Well I guess that means that about 29 other gms suck too!

    MS went for broke when he brought in Johnson, Nickerson, Glenn, and Gordon...that didn't work out for some unforseen reasons, and last year we saw the results (no $$$ for Sharper, Wahle, Rivera, other FAs) which TT had to fix.

    MS swung for the fences and missed, and now some of the same ppl that are criticizing MS for striking out are asking TT to do the same thing...swing for the fences, throw butt loads of $$$ at FAs...because that strategy is bound to work :roll:
     
  10. Anubis

    Anubis Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Ratings:
    +0
    Because we had an offence decimated with injuries, no running game, a ****** o-line and one good receiver who was under double coverage most of the season. Did you actually watch any games past week 5?

    Regardless of all that, we lost the majority of our games by 4 points or less, and Favre managed to finish 3rd in passing overall.

    Now think about what the season would have been like without him.

    GO PACK!!!

    Robert C. Hedley
     
  11. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    No Musscy..

    MS sucked because he "sucked"...and didn't know what he was doing...

    If he was so great..teams would have been jumping at him to sign him as their HC this year....

    The offense sucked because their was no running game or receivers for Favre to throw to...what is so hard about that to comprehend?

    But no..go ahead...Let's give TT the farm and relize he too is the wrong guy after 5 or 6 years...

    after all...He has a "plan"...
     
  12. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
     
  13. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    I agree!

    The whole situation sucks
     
  14. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Musscy..

    "There are 3 kinds of lies...Lies..Damn Lies..and STATISTICS"....
    Mark Twain...

    Big deal...they piled up alot of numbers with SherRossley that year..but couldn't win it when it counted because they had ASSCLOWNS for coaches...who didn't have what it takes to WIN in BIG GAMES...

    (You know..I think it was the Giants who piled up alot of statistics that year as well and led the league with Kerry Collins at QB and Fassel as HC--but they still SUCKED!)
     
  15. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    The only number that truly matters is that in the Pckers scorebox at the end of the game. Sherossley (thanks 66...your best so far) was impressive on paper, but failed in the scorebox too often.

    It has been mentioned by several opponents of the Packers in recent years that the offense was highly predictable because of the specific personnel packages that Sherossley employed. Basically, it was pointed out that Sherossley had 3 or 4 personnel groupings, and in each of those a fairly limited number of formations and motion. By identifying the personnel group, and reflecting on film study to the formations and motion employed in the personnel group, the defense on the field and in the booth pretty much knew what was coming....just like many of us fans.

    No need to out-think or out-hustle our offense when the coaches are basically telling the defense what they are going to do. And we now wonder why it was that far too often it appeared that the defense was in our huddle. Remember folks, this is the coach who failed to change our gameplan from only two weeks earlier when we were embarrassed by the Queens in the playoffs. The Queens players and coaches all knew what was coming.

    But, hey...they did put up some big stats!!!!
     
  16. espnpack

    espnpack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    The point is cronyism goes on all the time in the NFL...Not just your giddiness with bashing 44-20 GM Mike Sherman... (although, I'll give you the benefit of how you used it vs. my point with MM - which, by the way, I am completely fine with his hires...)

    So you are telling me that You and "the others" in the concourse are certain that Mike Sherman (alone) is responsible for that collapse?

    Then, Mike Sherman (alone as GM and HC) is responsible for 44-20.

    I really am dumbfounded by some of the stuff I read...And the passion in which it is written...And the magnitude of its error.
     
  17. mattresell

    mattresell Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Ratings:
    +0
    I like how this almost implies that TT reads this forum and is deliberatly hoodwinking a certain sector of its members into thinking that he is a "victim" of Favre's prolonged retirement decision. Classic TT bash.
     
  18. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    well tt bashing has been going on for so long, they have to reach for something.
     
  19. espnpack

    espnpack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is a prime example of where individual quotes within the context of a message can skew the meaning of the author...

    (maybe some people should re-read that...and also consider that it may also apply to "interviews" during a fund-raising event for victims of a horrible natural disaster...)

    The point I was (trying) making, was that most Shermanhators love the "well the only reason we won Division Titles was because we had Favre at QB..." The Shermanhators are also very much TT lover's...and my point was, TT had Brett at QB, and managed to field a team that finished last in the Division with Brett at QB... I have no problem with people being more satisfied that we have a new coach, but they are very misguided in their harsh assessment of Sherman...VERY misguided.
     
  20. WinnipegPackFan

    WinnipegPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,943
    Ratings:
    +0
    Excellent Post Pyledriver and yes 66 it reminds me a little of the Joe Montana situation as well. Call me foolish but I always thought the Brett / Packers situation would wind up differently in that when Brett was finally finished, he will be treated with the utmost respect that he deserves from our organization. Let's hope it "somehow" still does !!!
     
  21. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    GB isnt forcing Brett out.

    GB isnt saying "We'll let you come back after you judge our moves."

    GB isn't saying "we'll wait and see."

    That's BRETT FAVRE.
     
  22. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    I am not dismissing the record that MS accumulated during his time, it is in the record books. I am simply saying there is a big difference winning against quality opposition and a bunch of weak sisters. You can at least be honest and recognize the horrid state of the NFC Central/North during Sherman's tenure....and that the weak division had an impact in accumulating that record.

    Lemme ask you...if the Packers had to play 10 games against the Steelers, and 10 games against the Detroit Lions...where do you think they have the best chance of ringing up wins? If you answered the Lions, you are correct....and honest. The NFC Central/North has been the Lions for a long time.

    Why is this basic concept of winning is easier against ****** opponents so hard to understand?
     
  23. espnpack

    espnpack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    Huh?

    If the impassioned display of the knowledge of formations and playbooks and 3 or 4 looks off certain formations and being in our huddle was all there, don't you think it would show up in the stats?

    I appreciate your passion, but let's get real here...
     
  24. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    well out of 16 games, we only play 6 vs the North.

    Im not arguing with you, Im just saying 6\16 vs the weak north.

    North is better now too, which sucks for GB.
     
  25. espnpack

    espnpack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +0
    Winning in the NFL is hard period...And that is the point that I feel a good portion of the Packer Fandom Population is setting themselves up for extreme disappointment...

    The Sherman era was disappointing for not winning League or World Championships, but was certainly a successful era compared to the peer group.

    Sherman fielded a consistent 3-6th ranked team in the NFC. Where you line 'em up after that doesn't bother me... Nobody here is arguing that we were Steeler Quality...But I don't think that it would have been inconceivable to think this same team would have finished 10-6, 11-5 vs. NFC South, West, or East...
     

Share This Page