Oski
Cheesehead
Raji definitely looks good so far. Those fat guys have problems sustaining it though.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like nothing better than this defense outperforming the 2010 D. But that's a very tall order. I hope this is true, but I really don’t know what you are basing this on.
Not putting anyone on the current D with Woodson and Collins’ was a very important point. The current secondary may be deeper but there’s not a playmaker to compare with Woodson and Collins is head and shoulders above the current safeties. IMO Zombo doesn’t make this team but he, and midseason acquisition Walden combined for 7 sacks and 2 FF during the 2010 regular season and 2 sacks in postseason. That’s not great but that’s ‘not noth’n’ either. The Packers are deep at OLB but how many can they play at one time? And how do you like the starters and depth at ILB? We've been hearing and reading about the difference in schemes this season - certainly the DL will be less bulky - but I'm sure we haven't seen all they have in mind or how effective it will be when the real bullets fly. I’m sure we’ll revisit this during and after the season and again, I hope this D surpasses the 2010 version.
I am not sold 100 percent on our inside linebackers yet but they don't look like the 2013 one's so far. Barrington, Palmer, and Lattimore have all been making play's as well. We could be seeing some 2nd and 3rd year guys developing here.
The starters at ILB will be the same as in 2013 and it seems like Brad Jones will continue to be the lone inside linebacker in the dime.
Palmer is an OLB.
Still disagree with you, the offense will be great but no way this defense is as good as the ones we had in 2009 and 2010.
It doesnt need to be. If this defense can be middle of the pack (ie around that 12-15 ranked range, and this is realistic) then hardly nobody can beat us with our offense. This maybe the most talented offense that we have had since the mid 90s.
Wrong. The numbers I quoted were for the 2010 regular season: Second in points allowed at 15 points/game was "all that great".I'd be ecstatic about 12-15. Remember the d wasn't all that great until the playoffs last time the packers won the sb
I'd be ecstatic about 12-15. Remember the d wasn't all that great until the playoffs last time the packers won the sb
Looking at the 2010 team, this current team doesn't compare. I do think we have upgraded opposite Clay Matthews with Julius Peppers (we were using a combination of Jones, Zombo, and Poppinga), but Raji was playing well, Williams was paying better, Wells had C locked down, Grant was a 1200 yard rusher in his previous 2 seasons (and it's unfair to compare that team without it's injured players to a healthy team this year),
Finley was better than anything we have right now at TE, Lee, Crabtree, and Quarless added better depth than what we have now at TE (Crabtree always made a play or two),
.
There are lots of worries about this team IMO. I think we will be in the race to make the playoffs, and we probably will, but if we didn't I wouldn't be shocked. Tramon Williams isn't what he was, we need Daniels to step up in a big way (and yes, he has taken a step but he still has some issues), ILB is below average at best, TE is below average at best, C is very questionable (Tretter recovers well, but if you watch him he gets thrown back almost every snap on first contact, although I do like the rest of the OL), Kuhn is getting old at FB, CB is excellent, but S is still questionable (HHCD has been getting beat up pretty badly IMO, although I think the long-term future looks bright), and I think we're seriously lacking depth in certain areas. We may even want to designate Barclay IR to return if we think he can come back in time. I was surprised at how terrible Sherrod looked.
Looking at the 2010 team, this current team doesn't compare. I do think we have upgraded opposite Clay Matthews with Julius Peppers (we were using a combination of Jones, Zombo, and Poppinga), but Raji was playing well, Williams was paying better, Wells had C locked down, Grant was a 1200 yard rusher in his previous 2 seasons (and it's unfair to compare that team without it's injured players to a healthy team this year), Finley was better than anything we have right now at TE, Lee, Crabtree, and Quarless added better depth than what we have now at TE (Crabtree always made a play or two), Clifton, Tauscher, and Bulaga were our Top 3 OT's (enough said), Jenkins and Pickett were nice at DE with Wilson as good run-support depth, Collins and Burnett made a good S combo with Woodson playing CB/S with Williams and Shields (although lets not talk about the depth after that ), and our ILB's were much better with Barnett, Hawk, Bishop, and Chillar. Those 4 players played in very different ways and we were able to make very specific packages for very specific situations.
Overall, when I look at this team I see too many questionable starting positions and too much questionable depth. When I look at the 2010 team I see very few questionable starting positions and questionable depth at only a couple of spots (mainly RB and CB).
There are lots of worries about this team IMO. I think we will be in the race to make the playoffs, and we probably will, but if we didn't I wouldn't be shocked. Tramon Williams isn't what he was, we need Daniels to step up in a big way (and yes, he has taken a step but he still has some issues), ILB is below average at best, TE is below average at best, C is very questionable (Tretter recovers well, but if you watch him he gets thrown back almost every snap on first contact, although I do like the rest of the OL), Kuhn is getting old at FB, CB is excellent, but S is still questionable (HHCD has been getting beat up pretty badly IMO, although I think the long-term future looks bright), and I think we're seriously lacking depth in certain areas. We may even want to designate Barclay IR to return if we think he can come back in time. I was surprised at how terrible Sherrod looked.
Looking at the 2010 team, this current team doesn't compare. I do think we have upgraded opposite Clay Matthews with Julius Peppers (we were using a combination of Jones, Zombo, and Poppinga), but Raji was playing well, Williams was paying better, Wells had C locked down, Grant was a 1200 yard rusher in his previous 2 seasons (and it's unfair to compare that team without it's injured players to a healthy team this year), Finley was better than anything we have right now at TE, Lee, Crabtree, and Quarless added better depth than what we have now at TE (Crabtree always made a play or two), Clifton, Tauscher, and Bulaga were our Top 3 OT's (enough said), Jenkins and Pickett were nice at DE with Wilson as good run-support depth, Collins and Burnett made a good S combo with Woodson playing CB/S with Williams and Shields (although lets not talk about the depth after that ), and our ILB's were much better with Barnett, Hawk, Bishop, and Chillar. Those 4 players played in very different ways and we were able to make very specific packages for very specific situations.
Overall, when I look at this team I see too many questionable starting positions and too much questionable depth. When I look at the 2010 team I see very few questionable starting positions and questionable depth at only a couple of spots (mainly RB and CB).
There are lots of worries about this team IMO. I think we will be in the race to make the playoffs, and we probably will, but if we didn't I wouldn't be shocked. Tramon Williams isn't what he was, we need Daniels to step up in a big way (and yes, he has taken a step but he still has some issues), ILB is below average at best, TE is below average at best, C is very questionable (Tretter recovers well, but if you watch him he gets thrown back almost every snap on first contact, although I do like the rest of the OL), Kuhn is getting old at FB, CB is excellent, but S is still questionable (HHCD has been getting beat up pretty badly IMO, although I think the long-term future looks bright), and I think we're seriously lacking depth in certain areas. We may even want to designate Barclay IR to return if we think he can come back in time. I was surprised at how terrible Sherrod looked.
Looking at the 2010 team, this current team doesn't compare. I do think we have upgraded opposite Clay Matthews with Julius Peppers (we were using a combination of Jones, Zombo, and Poppinga), but Raji was playing well, Williams was paying better, Wells had C locked down, Grant was a 1200 yard rusher in his previous 2 seasons (and it's unfair to compare that team without it's injured players to a healthy team this year), Finley was better than anything we have right now at TE, Lee, Crabtree, and Quarless added better depth than what we have now at TE (Crabtree always made a play or two), Clifton, Tauscher, and Bulaga were our Top 3 OT's (enough said), Jenkins and Pickett were nice at DE with Wilson as good run-support depth, Collins and Burnett made a good S combo with Woodson playing CB/S with Williams and Shields (although lets not talk about the depth after that ), and our ILB's were much better with Barnett, Hawk, Bishop, and Chillar. Those 4 players played in very different ways and we were able to make very specific packages for very specific situations.
Overall, when I look at this team I see too many questionable starting positions and too much questionable depth. When I look at the 2010 team I see very few questionable starting positions and questionable depth at only a couple of spots (mainly RB and CB).
I understand that, but as I said in my post, it's unfair to compare a healthy team this year to an unhealthy team in 2010. If you want to go back after the season and then look at who got hurt this year compared to that year then that's one thing, but we can't do that quite yet.
They didn't. That was 2009.
This offense is going to be the best Packer offense of all time and maybe the best in the history of the NFL.
Actually they do, see example Greatest Show on Turf. They often do if they work in tandem with an adequate defense. You are right though that the offenisve juggernauts that do not have balance on defense usualyl do not fare well.2. Lets hope youre wrong, great offenses dont win the big one
Actually they do, see example Greatest Show on Turf. They often do if they work in tandem with an adequate defense. You are right though that the offenisve juggernauts that do not have balance on defense usualyl do not fare well.
I thought the 1998 Vikings were such a team but it seems their defense is not bad as I recall.
Thats 1 in 12 bro. LOL im glad you like those odds.
1. 2013 Broncos - 606 points (lost in SB)
2. 2007 Patriots - 589 points (lost in SB)
3. 2011 Packers - 560 points (lost in playoffs)
4. 2012 Patriots - 557 points (lost in playoffs)
5. 1998 Vikings - 556 points (lost in playoffs)
6. 2011 Saints - 547 points (lost in playoffs)
7. 1983 Redskins - 541 points (lost in SB)
8. 2000 Rams - 540 points (lost in playoffs)
9. 1999 Rams - 526 points (won SB)
10. 2004 Colts - 522 points (lost in playoffs)
11. 2010 Pats - 518 points (lost in playoffs)
12. 1984 Dolphins - 513 points (lost in SB)
I'd be careful about that type of argument. There is around a 50% playoff turnover rate, and it's hard to know what teams will take a step forwards and what teams will take a step backwards. All too often a schedule looks easy and ends up difficult.
Why don't you accurately and completely quote yourself, like including the part where you disagreed with my statement?
If you pay attention to the original post that I quoted, he said this is going to be the best packers offense of all time (which if you glance at the list would at minimum make it the 3rd best all time). He was talking record setting level offense thus why I listed the top 12 offenses, so if you had paid attention you would have obviously realized it's not "somewhat imperfect". It's accurate.