I just got here but need to get this off my chest

[Rocky11]

Hey forget favre. I was banned this week because I asked a question. I asked if Brett hated the Packers and the fans as much as all of them did. I was close a couple of other times. I am a Favre fan but he is not God.

 

[Rocky11]

I think the offense is fine. Aaron is a good leader but the defense, WOW. Could they be any worse. What does Aaron have to do with that? The leadership to fix the worse defense in the NFL has to come from a higher place than the quarterback.

 

[Bagadeez04]

The thing is the problem with this team is so clearly on defense. It's true that AR didn't look quite as picture perfect as he usually does...but I attribute that to having three weeks off. That's on MM, not Aaron. That said between all the drops and fumbles he just never was able to get into a rythm.

He is a great leader...and a terrific QB. We are so lucky to have him in Green Bay.

This was the highest scoring offense in football this year. The problem that needs fixing is the defense...let's keep the focus where it belongs.

 

[Southpaw]

Players go about leadership in different ways.

There some players like Ray Lewis who constantly yell and scream and run their mouth

There are guys like Brady who are calm yet assertive and aggressive when they need to be.

Then there are guys like Rodgers. Who is more laid back, relaxed and collected. Just because he isn't raging and yelling at players on the sidelines doesn't make him any less of a leader than other players who approach it differently.

In any event some players and teammates respond differently than others. Ray Lewis can yell and his teammates and be a loudmouth because they respond do it.


But defensively I don't know who the leader is. I would assume it's Woodson but I don't see much

 

[13 Times Champs]

My mistake. You contradicted yourself in one post, not two. Now, if you want to continue with this, please tell us the plain meaning of the phrase, "Defense Still Wins Championships".

Still trying to dissect an entire post without reading it in toto. I think most reasonable people would understand what I was saying by reading my posts 88 and 95 in their entirety.

In any case, I'd be embarrased to come back here after making a post that was laced with misrepresentations, inaccuracies and which was meanspirited in tone and words . You took a discussion to another level for whatever reason?? You were so eager to register a gotcha that you got caught in your own snare.

 

[FrankRizzo]

So, your saying that we, as fans should have assumed we would probably lose? The weather Had not a a thing to do with it. We played a crappy game, period.

No, like the loss to the Chiefs, I was just worried for the fans who had this notion that we were Superman, infallible, unbeatable.

I've learned thru decades of serious football watching that it isn't the case. I believe this was the 8th straight season where the team with the best W-L record did not win the Super Bowl. The best regular season record doesn't mean much.

Also, I still am quite sure that the weather had something to do with us playing a crappy game.
We do not fumble balls, miss passes, drop catches like that in nice weather.

 

[realcaliforniacheese]

No, like the loss to the Chiefs, I was just worried for the fans who had this notion that we were Superman, infallible, unbeatable.

I've learned thru decades of serious football watching that it isn't the case. I believe this was the 8th straight season where the team with the best W-L record did not win the Super Bowl. The best regular season record doesn't mean much.

Also, I still am quite sure that the weather had something to do with us playing a crappy game.
We do not fumble balls, miss passes, drop catches like that in nice weather.

The day football becomes more serious than fun is the day I quit watching. This is a kids game played by men. It's all about fun. You can analyze, and predict, but in the end it's all about having a good time, rooting for your team and beliving they are invicible come sunday. It's really easy when your teams 15-1. If you ain't having fun whats the point.
I believe we will go 19-0 next year. Wanna make a bet? the odds are in your favor.

 

[bozz_2006]

My rule is: football is allowed to "make" my day. It is not allowed to de-rail my day.

 

[TJV]

Still trying to dissect an entire post without reading it in toto.

Here’s a recap of our interaction the last couple of pages: You posted it 'boils down to the defense'. Not in response to you in particular but certainly including you, I posted how the playoff teams finished the regular season and noted it’s difficult to argue defense wins championships because the team that was TWENTY FIFTH in scoring defense just beat the team that finished the regular season FIFTEETH for the title. I ended that post with, “Perhaps another more narrow saying now applies. How about, 'Playing good defense in the playoffs is important' ?”

You responded with “offense might get you there but Defense Still Wins Championships”. I made the point that the teams with the best defenses didn’t win a championship. Just to be clear, I posted that and the other stats to show that “defense wins championships” certainly did not apply to this season. IMO you contradicted yourself by posting a team needs a “modicum of defense” and if a team is single faceted they fail. Seriously do you not see the obvious contradiction between these two ideas? ‘A modicum of defense still wins championships.’?

As far as my tone, I agree it was over the top. But so was yours – “I guess you are saying we don’t need a defense. That’s laughable.” Nowhere did I suggest that, I just challenged your bolded statement. At the very least “defense wins championships” implies defense is more important than offense. IMO it's a stronger statement than that. Why are you so reluctant to address what that phrase means?

 

[FrankRizzo]

Did the Giants just beat New England because of their defense?
Or was it Eli, the game's MVP?

I would argue that it was pretty much both, almost evenly.

Also, I would argue that our 4 fumbles, many dropped passes, and a few bad throws by Rodgers were almost equally to blame for our loss to the Giants as our bad 3rd down defense in the first half was, and the Hail mary failures.
I believe it was pretty equal, as it was last year when our defense stopped Big Ben on that final drive.

It takes two. Does anyone disagree with that?
A team with a bad offense but great defense cannot win a Super Bowl very easily anymore in today's NFL.

 

[Forget Favre]

Did the Giants just beat New England because of their defense?
Or was it Eli, the game's MVP?

I would argue that it was pretty much both, almost evenly.

Also, I would argue that our 4 fumbles, many dropped passes, and a few bad throws by Rodgers were almost equally to blame for our loss to the Giants as our bad 3rd down defense in the first half was, and the Hail mary failures.
I believe it was pretty equal, as it was last year when our defense stopped Big Ben on that final drive.

It takes two. Does anyone disagree with that?
A team with a bad offense but great defense cannot win a Super Bowl very easily anymore in today's NFL.

I agree with this post as I have been mentioning similar things as well.

I think a lot of us, you and me included, may have to agree to disagree on some of the reasons for the Packers playoff loss.
It's based on opinion and speculation instead of fact.
We all have our own perspectives and could respect that there are different points of view and each one is personal.

 

[Jules]

Let us not forget.

Even if the Packers beat the Giants they still would have had to have beaten a very tough and physical Niners team and then the Pats in the big one. No guarantee either happens.

The Giants were likely the most balanced team in the playoffs this year. All the weaknesses stepped it up. The regular season stats went out the window. They stepped up the run game big time after being dead last in the regular season. On defense they started to get healthy and peak around the time they played the Jets.

The Packers to me just got their butts kicked. It was not even close at times to me. They were chasing the Giants too much in the game. The refs even tried to help. Sadly it was a loss they actually deserved. It was not a last second fluke loss or something either. They got beaten. End of story to me. Move on to next season.

I don't think there is a special formula to winning it all. A combination of a good/well balanced team playing good football at the right time and some lucky breaks often help.

 

[Jules]

Did the Giants just beat New England because of their defense?
Or was it Eli, the game's MVP?

I would argue that it was pretty much both, almost evenly.

Also, I would argue that our 4 fumbles, many dropped passes, and a few bad throws by Rodgers were almost equally to blame for our loss to the Giants as our bad 3rd down defense in the first half was, and the Hail mary failures.
I believe it was pretty equal, as it was last year when our defense stopped Big Ben on that final drive.

It takes two. Does anyone disagree with that?
A team with a bad offense but great defense cannot win a Super Bowl very easily anymore in today's NFL.

I agree, both pretty evenly. The Giants can be scary when clicking and hungry. They have the pass rush to help limit offenses enough to let Eli do his thing later on. They have a combination of good defense and clutch offense that can be pretty scary.

 

[PFanCan]

I believe we will go 19-0 next year. Wanna make a bet? the odds are in your favor.

Oh, yeah? Well I think we are going to go 20-0.

 

[PFanCan]

My rule is: football is allowed to "make" my day. It is not allowed to de-rail my day.

I have a similar rule: If the Packers win, I celebrate with a victory beer. If they lose, well I drink that beer anyhow.

 

[PFanCan]

Agreed with the summary by Jules. I do not believe that any of the various strong statements hold water (e.g. "Defense wins championships", "Offense is all that matters").

This is like saying rock always wins, in a game of Rock-Paper-Scissors. Unless you are playing my little nephew, who chooses scissors 100% of the time.

At times, having a high octane offense is necessary while other times having a solid run game or a stuff-defense reigns. It simply depends on the situation.

It seems that having a balanced team with a top quality QB provide the best case for a winning formula. Then, hope for the team to emotionally and physically peak as the playoffs begin. These past two seasons are strong evidence. Both the Packers and Giants were not the dominant force throughout the season, up until the last few weeks. Both had QB/Offenses that could dominate when needed and Defenses that played extremely well throughout the playoffs.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Here’s a recap of our interaction the last couple of pages: You posted it 'boils down to the defense'. Not in response to you in particular but certainly including you, I posted how the playoff teams finished the regular season and noted it’s difficult to argue defense wins championships because the team that was TWENTY FIFTH in scoring defense just beat the team that finished the regular season FIFTEETH for the title. I ended that post with, “Perhaps another more narrow saying now applies. How about, 'Playing good defense in the playoffs is important' ?”

You responded with “offense might get you there but Defense Still Wins Championships”. I made the point that the teams with the best defenses didn’t win a championship. Just to be clear, I posted that and the other stats to show that “defense wins championships” certainly did not apply to this season. IMO you contradicted yourself by posting a team needs a “modicum of defense” and if a team is single faceted they fail. Seriously do you not see the obvious contradiction between these two ideas? ‘A modicum of defense still wins championships.’?

As far as my tone, I agree it was over the top. But so was yours – “I guess you are saying we don’t need a defense. That’s laughable.” Nowhere did I suggest that, I just challenged your bolded statement. At the very least “defense wins championships” implies defense is more important than offense. IMO it's a stronger statement than that. Why are you so reluctant to address what that phrase means?

I have addressed your comment. You don't like my argument or it seems any other I make. You say this isn't your fathers, grandfathers or greatgrandfathers NFL. Until a team with the 32 ranked defense wins the Super Bowl I have the better argument.

I think you are hung up on the regular season. I countered your argument, which you conveniently ignored, that the teams that reached the playoffs in the final analysis played very good defense and that is why they progressed. You want to take things out of context without reading the entire posts I made. The only inconsistency exists in your mind.

Seriously are you saying I escalated things with this comment: “I guess you are saying we don’t need a defense. That’s laughable.” Bromide is a strong word. My dictionary defines it as "Bore". Then you accused me of dishonesty in my post when you failed to recognize I had used modicum previously and further accused me of editing my post to cover my tracks. I think a review of your posts vs. mine will show who decided to take things to another level.

 

[TJV]

I’ve already spent way too much time on this so this is my last post on this topic. The saying you quoted has been around for a very long time. I’ll bet most NFL fans understand its meaning and it means defense is more important than offense or special teams when it comes to winning a title. “Defense wins championships” is unambiguous. Many fans, including me, believe with the changes in rules which favor offense and the passing game in particular, it no longer applies: Defense is not the most important aspect of the game.

Perhaps you are having a problem with language. For example, “bromide” does not mean “bore” in the context in which I used it. I posted, “…I only refuted your overly broad bromide that "defense wins championships". You apparently understand that to mean, “I only refuted your overly broad bore that "defense wins championships". That doesn’t make any sense in that context, does it? What it means in this context is “an unoriginal or trite saying”.

When you post ‘until a team with the 32nd ranked defense wins the Super Bowl’ it leads me to believe you don’t understand what “Defense wins championships” means. The team with the 25th scoring defense won it – a team in the bottom quarter of the league. And by posting that you contradict your argument you were just talking about the playoffs.

Here’s the definition of modicum: A small amount; a little. So what you have said in your posts is “defense still wins championships”. The plain meaning of that is defense is the most important aspect of football to win a title; defense is preeminent. You have also said a team needs a ‘modicum of defense’. Arguing that a team must be balanced in offense and defense contradicts the bromide you used: If a team needs both, one isn’t most important. And saying a team needs a ‘small amount of defense’ contradicts saying defense is most important even more. If you can’t understand that I can’t help you. And I’m done trying.

BTW, alleging that I posted something stupid when I posted no such thing escalates an argument IMO.

 

[FrankRizzo]

The Packers to me just got their butts kicked. It was not even close at times to me. They were chasing the Giants too much in the game. The refs even tried to help US. Sadly it was a loss they actually deserved. It was not a last second fluke loss or something either.

Very very true.
There were 1 or 2 zebra's who I believe were Tim Donaghy on our side in this game, and that comes from thousands of dollars of wagering experience to ID pointspreads, suspicious lines, movements, and then bad calls.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I’ve already spent way too much time on this so this is my last post on this topic. The saying you quoted has been around for a very long time. I’ll bet most NFL fans understand its meaning and it means defense is more important than offense or special teams when it comes to winning a title. “Defense wins championships” is unambiguous. Many fans, including me, believe with the changes in rules which favor offense and the passing game in particular, it no longer applies: Defense is not the most important aspect of the game.

Perhaps you are having a problem with language. For example, “bromide” does not mean “bore” in the context in which I used it. I posted, “…I only refuted your overly broad bromide that "defense wins championships". You apparently understand that to mean, “I only refuted your overly broad bore that "defense wins championships". That doesn’t make any sense in that context, does it? What it means in this context is “an unoriginal or trite saying”.

When you post ‘until a team with the 32nd ranked defense wins the Super Bowl’ it leads me to believe you don’t understand what “Defense wins championships” means. The team with the 25th scoring defense won it – a team in the bottom quarter of the league. And by posting that you contradict your argument you were just talking about the playoffs.

Here’s the definition of modicum: A small amount; a little. So what you have said in your posts is “defense still wins championships”. The plain meaning of that is defense is the most important aspect of football to win a title; defense is preeminent. You have also said a team needs a ‘modicum of defense’. Arguing that a team must be balanced in offense and defense contradicts the bromide you used: If a team needs both, one isn’t most important. And saying a team needs a ‘small amount of defense’ contradicts saying defense is most important even more. If you can’t understand that I can’t help you. And I’m done trying.

BTW, alleging that I posted something stupid when I posted no such thing escalates an argument IMO.

Where did I say you posted something stupid? You did accuse me of being dishonest by saying I had changed a post and going on a tirade about how I had not even used the word. That is where the escalation started. Futhermore, I understand that if we had Played a "bit" of defense we might be Super Bowl Champions. Yes I still think defense is more important than offense in winning a championship. If the Packers don't improve theirs we will be in the same pickle next year and I guess you will still be saying offense is more important.

Glad you finally addressed the point I made about the Pats and Giants playing defense in the playoffs. The only reason you did was to once again make a nebulous connection to previous posts.

Also, I noticed in your post # 91 you made no mention of any inconstiency regarding my use of the word modicum in the same post as I said "Defense Still Wins Championships. You evolved this straw man.

Sorry I can't acquiesce to your commands. You want your questions answered but when someone ask you one in return it's a straw man. Yes I'm done trying as well.

 

[PFanCan]

...this is my last post on this topic.

... I'm done trying as well.

It's the off season, guys. Come on, what else do us readers have for entertainment?

13TC, don't give up! He's picking on your bromide! I never let someone pick on my bromides.

ThxJack- don't yield ONE MODICUM farther! Not one!

 

[Jules]

Agreed with the summary by Jules. I do not believe that any of the various strong statements hold water (e.g. "Defense wins championships", "Offense is all that matters").

This is like saying rock always wins, in a game of Rock-Paper-Scissors. Unless you are playing my little nephew, who chooses scissors 100% of the time.

At times, having a high octane offense is necessary while other times having a solid run game or a stuff-defense reigns. It simply depends on the situation.

It seems that having a balanced team with a top quality QB provide the best case for a winning formula. Then, hope for the team to emotionally and physically peak as the playoffs begin. These past two seasons are strong evidence. Both the Packers and Giants were not the dominant force throughout the season, up until the last few weeks. Both had QB/Offenses that could dominate when needed and Defenses that played extremely well throughout the playoffs.

Yeah, I am not about to say that you have to suck for half the regular season and get hot at the right time. It happens a lot recently but then a team like the 2008 Steelers could jump in who were the second seed with a fairly balanced team (there is that balanced word again) and they sail to the SB title with a favorable postseason road.

For me, the Giants loss was not as bad as I thought it would be considering how good I felt the Giants had been looking for several weeks. I mean, the bubble started to burst a bit with me after the Chiefs loss. I got carried away at times this year thinking the Pack even go 19-0 (they looked to be nearing 16-0 for a while) but seeing a SB Champ you are a fan of start the year so hot is very exciting. There was no sign of a hangover to me at all. I always thought/hoped the D would pick it up as the year went on and sadly they never did. I think they got worse.

Aaron had a year for the ages but I certainly have my fingers crossed the rest of the team joins in next season and help him out.

I think we need to watch out for the Lions too a little. They learned to win this year and will only keep improving.

 

[net]

The thread starter's frustration is off-base. I think all of us felt really empty after losing to the Giants. But as they say, C'MON MAN! What it shows more than anything else is how spoiled we've all become. The Packers are among the top three winning teams in the last 20 years. We have just left a HOF QB behind to bring on a QB that has all the potential to be the next one. The offense set records. Our defense sucks, but have faith it will improve. We have a true star emerging in the kick return game, and a kicker and punter other teams would die to have.
Fact is the 2011 version of the Packers had too flawed of a defense to win it all, but we're still poised to challenge.
Drop the frustration and realize after some retooling, the team will be there again.

 

[Rocky11]

I agree. I am excited about next year. I think we will have another great team. Tweaks and changes are good. The management have some smarts and I am sure we will improve. 15 - 1? Tough to repeat that accomplishment even with an improved team. I think we will win 13 games for sure and maybe 14. Better defense will greatly improve our chances.