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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Injuries Comparison - 49ers vs. Packers

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by BorderRivals.com, Jan 9, 2013.

  1. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    Actually, I think they have at LEAST 4.

    Parys Haralson
    Kyle Williams
    Kendall Hunter
    Mario Manningham

    Plus Darius Fleming, a rookie

    EDIT: oops...I see someone beat me too it. I forgot Dobbs as well. He was kinda like a jack of all trades. That one hurt. He played both offense AND defense.
     
  2. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    Injury comparison is more like a "woulda shoulda coulda" thing. They are what they are and in no way is there some form of handi-cap play installed to even things out. It sounds more like an early excuse factor. Put it this way, if we lose, it was due to us having more injuries right? But, if we win, a beat up from the feet up team just won against a 95% healthy team...right? lol
     
  3. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Ratings:
    +868
    Forums are exactly the place to discuss "woulda shoulda coulda" things. As I wrote-- the chart is simply a hypothetical scenario.

    It is exactly the place for fans to lament the bad things that have happened to our team and rejoice the things that went well.

    Not sure what your point is...
     
  4. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58

    Of course it's key....but When its Patrick Willis, Navorro Bowman...or maybe Ray Lewis, its a WHOLE different story.

    All I'm saying is you can't say losing Bishop is the same as losing Willis.

    Its losing a good player on one team compared to one of the best players in the NFL and a HUGE reason for their recent success.
     
  5. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    ALl I'm saying is that all things are not equal....IE losing our starting QB is different han losing your starting QB. Losing our ILB is different than losing you starting LB.

    These players have different values and fill different rioles on our teams.

    Willis is a 6 time Pro Bowler and arguably the best ILB in the NFL (tho some think he may not be the best on his own team). Losing him is much bigger than losing Bishop simply because willis is a much larger part of the 49ers recipe for success than Bishop is.

    That all I'm saying.

    I will say this tho...whats up with the Packers and that injury bug.

    Wow.
     
  6. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    Bishop was GREAT.
    Just like Nick Collins was.
    Just because the media doesn't hype these guys up like they do the East Coast guys or Patrick Willis, doesn't mean they weren't great players.
    We all knew Jennings was great before the national fans and media figured it out.
    Same thing with Collins & Bishop.

    I think people forget those 2 made Super Bowl winning huge plays?
    They are not guys easily replaceable, as we have learned the hard way.
    Just because they aren't "names" to the non-experts doesn't mean they aren't/weren't great.
    Bishop was our only thumper in there.
     
  7. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Which is why I went Bowman. However, personally I think Bishop is just as big a factor in our Defense as Willis is in yours. Bishop was our enforcer, and our best cover man. He was our tone setter.
     
  8. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    I guess we'll just have to respectfully disagree.

    Willis on one of the reasons this team is where it is. Losing him for an extended period would be catastrophic.
     
  9. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Ratings:
    +868
    Totally understand your point- and it has merit and I agree with you. I will buy that Willis is way better than Bishop.

    Just for discussion, another factor to consider is the "drop-off" beyond the player that is injured. Said another way, I would rather lose a top player who has an up-and-comer behind him (e.g. Woodson and Burnett) rather than a "good" player with no one to back him up (e.g. Bishop).

    So, though Bishop himself doesn't carry the defense like Willis does, having a pedestrian Jones manning the middle really hurts the Packers. If I could have any one of the Packers injured back... it would be Bishop in a heartbeat.

    And, against the 49ers, having a soft interior LB crew (Hawk was never known to have Bishop's aggressiveness), is a serious problem.
     
  10. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    I didn't say he wasn'ty a good player.

    I said he isn't as important to your team as Willis is to his.

    Can we at least admit the "slight" probability that a guy who has made 6 Pro Bowls in 6 years just might be a bigger linchpin to a team that does its dirty work on the defensive side of the ball?
     
  11. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    OK, now THAT argument I can buy.

    The 49ers are actually one of the deepest teams in the league (thanks to great GMs and horrible coaches securing great draft opicks). If Willis or Bowman were to go down, they do have Larry Grant and Tavares Gooden to back them up.

    It would still be a big dropoff tho. I don't know anything about Jones so I'll have to take your word for it.
     
  12. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    So would you give us Bowman as a Bishop equivalent? Our Defense would be much improved with Bishop, cover man for cover man?
     
  13. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Ratings:
    +868
    Luckily for us Packer fans, GB also has a very deep and talented roster. Thank you, Ted Thompson!

    2010 was a very bad year full of injuries (16 on IR, including 5 starters), but there is a nice shiny trophy in Green Bay from that season!
     
  14. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    LOL...I dunno....there are some who say Bowman is BETTER than Willis. :D Both guys are scheduled to start in Hawaii and hopefully neither will be able to attend.
     
  15. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Well since you put it that way, Willis will do nicely. Bowman can cover for him as the "better player":laugh:
     
  16. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    hehe.

    I guess I can boil it down to this....

    The Packers have a high-flying powerful offense led by the best QB in the NFL.

    The 49ers have IMO the best D in the NFL (even though they had some issues in 2 of the last 3 games there).

    The Packers can lose a LB and allow 20 points per game and still win because they have that offense.

    The 49ers can't do that. They put ALOT more pressure on their D to perform because they DON'T have that high-flying ofense.

    THAT is why I say you are comparing apples to oranges when talking about Willis and Bishop.

    Of course I think Willis is better, but it's also simply that the 49ers D can't afford to give up the yards or points that the Packers can because the Packers have that offense. Every play on D takes on a larger significance so there is much less room for error...IEmore importance on those guys playing very, very well.

    Does that make sense?
     
  17. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    IMO if losing a LB impacts you that much you have lousy depth. What position would you liken your LB to here? WR? Because we got along without a WR for most of the year. Fact is that we have depth at most of our positions that allows for somesome wiggle room, even if there is some drop off. Do you really not believe in Haralson, Gooden, Grant, and Wilhoite that much that you sell your season without your starter?

    I think your offense does just fine, especially when you control the clock. It is more than capable of scoring, as you've noted. Plus, weren't you saying something about Kaep's deep ball ability? Because that kinda helps equalize.
     
  18. Marvin49

    Marvin49 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Ratings:
    +58
    LOL.

    I guess we'll just disagree.

    Yeah..Kaep is very good at throwing deep, but that has just been the last half here. This team isn't built around him...yet.

    I agree with you tho....taking a Pro Bowl starting player off the O is a close comparison. Its like you have Adrian Peterson back there and he gets hurt. I can't say Rodgers because that would be overstating.
     
  19. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Fact is we dealt with losing a probowl WR. we dealt with losing our probowl FB and a probowl G for a game or so, we benched our probowl C. I don't think that because your boys play a little better than ours that it makes them any more important to your game than our players are to ours. Fact is we don't have a lot of probowlers, that doesn't make our boys any less valuable or any more replaceable.We dealt with injury all season long, yet you refuse to deal with it even in thought. Almost makes me wish your boys WOULD go down for the year. We have had to deal with significant dropoff in ability and talent and have performed admirably in the face of that adversity. Your players may be tough, but you as a fan seem really weak.
     
  20. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    We lost a probowler in Woodson for 8 games, we lost Matthews for 4, Raji played injured, Tramon still hasn't fully recovered from nerve damage, and we kept winning. If all you have are your starters I'm no longer worried about your shell team. Our team is good enough that apparently we can compensate for our injured players, whereas yours obviously is not. You had a nice run though.
     
  21. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    Yes, but Bowman, they tell me, is better than Willis now.
    Bishop was our best ILB.
     
  22. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    I'm just Curious as to which of THEIR ILB does the dirty work. I don't see how being a better overall player makes you any more valuable than the man who does the exact same thing for another team. It doesn't make the other guy any more replaceable.

    You remember when OUR probowl LB got injured and sat out a few games? Seems like their team is so weak that any of their pro bowlers fall and they'll fall apart. We'll 2 probowlers, since Justin is already having trouble
     
    • Like Like x 1
  23. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    I'm not picking on the chart by any means, it is actually well laid out. what i meant was, it just seams that some people are maiking the injury bug for this game out to be any early excuse if we lose......that is all. Which in no way it is. We have delt with this all season and stuck it to teams like Houston and came away with a big win, so why can't we do it now since we are healthier now? I just don't like the pre-excuse type thing.
     
  24. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Ratings:
    +868
    Actually, I am proud that the team I cheer for continues to do well despite the injury bug. Remember 2010? That trophy shines even more (in my eyes) considering how many starters went down that year.

    But, you are right. This is a game for big boys. No whining or pre-excuses allowed. Final score is the only thing that matters...
     
  25. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Ratings:
    +868
    That's kind of harsh. I think Marvin has been a very reasonable poster on this forum. I don't consider him a weak fan at all.
     

Share This Page