Official Packers vs Jets discussion

DrMortonSaltEsq1

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Location
Rhode Island
We need a GM who can bring in talent. TT is a bum.....how many years has he been in it and we are one game in the playoffs and out.
Biggest question TT is..where are our talented WRs that ARod has to roll out to get more time
 

gatorpack

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
1,317
Reaction score
235
Location
Florida
we didn't "squeak" by the raiders we really whooped them in all aspects of the game. Go on NFL.com right now and check team stats.. we're on top in everything except Passing & Receiving. They scored in garbage time on us for their only pass to go more than 15 yards the whole game. But who cares that's the raiders.. watch my boys dominate the trenches this game. BTW Geno Smith went head to head and beat Brady and Brees last year with practice squad WR's. Just hope that weak o-line & d-line doesn't turn y'all into this year Falcons of last year.. just sayin.
How did it work out for the Jets???
 

JetLifeLo

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
How did it work out for the Jets???


We had you guys man.. Terrible coaching and unfortunate situations + Nelson having a career game killed us. Good game, yall fought back.. Rodgers is the man. Cant believe we wiped out our own TD & INT due to coaching.. Jokes! Lol. Congrats packer nation
 

Powarun

Big Bay Blues fan
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
2,047
Reaction score
355
Location
Madison
Got to say this game was ummmmm, wow, kind of unbelievable. First the Packers having that great comeback.
After the Jets had 14, I was thinking, so if this game turns out to be a shoot out, I hope the Packers can still have it, since one turnover can make the difference.
Thought the forward pass/backwards/parallel/fumble snafu was incorrect but that is through green and gold eyes.
Once the Jets scored 21, I was thinking, wonder what the Patriots are thinking. (Have the correlation that Patriots and Packers are very similar teams)
Also could the Jets get a penalty for the non-timeout? I know they got punished kind of hard and not asking for "just rubbing salt in the wound" response, but wouldn't that be a delay of game?

Glad the Packers won.
 

P-E-Z

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
602
Reaction score
51
Was just me or did Rogers toss short easy passes into ground or of target? I am not talking about when he had no time
 

PackerFlatLander

Cheesehead
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
489
Reaction score
86
Location
Bloomingdale, IL
The Jets' coaching blunders aside, I thought the Packers' defense really buckled up, compared to the 1st quarter, when they were dreadful. The season has started and we're 1-1. I don't find it very constructive to complain about Ted and this and that. This is the team we have. I saw worse in 1986 and I've seen them win two titles since. I ain't complaining much.

I am concerned about the running game. Seattle is one thing and perhaps the Jets' d-line is pretty decent. But Lacy hasn't had much room to go anywhere and get in a big rhythm. Let's hope they improve there next week. Detroit's d-line isn't exactly terrible.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
A win is a win is a win. Once cannot help but like what one saw in the last 35 minutes of this game.

As for the criticisms of Rodgers, be it the sacks or dumping balls (on plays going nowhere), this was an 18 point come-from-behinder with a stat line as follows:

25-42; 60.0%; 346 yds; 8.2 yds./pass; 3 TDs; 0 INTs

Of course, when it comes time once against to highlight his "poor" 4th. quarter come-from-behind stats, this game won't be included seeing as it was accomplished by the 3rd. quarter.

Complaints regarding falling short of perfection in an outstanding performance, with no run game support to boot, reflects an ignorance of what side the bread is buttered on and the volume of butter thereon.

I would note that once again, as we saw in abundance last season in Rodgers' absence, the defense perks up when confidence in the ability to win is justified and sags when it is less so. There's an obvious correlation that plausibly merits a conclusion of causation...the defense knows where the butter is.
 

PackerFlatLander

Cheesehead
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
489
Reaction score
86
Location
Bloomingdale, IL
A win is a win is a win. Once cannot help but like what one saw in the last 35 minutes of this game.

As for the criticisms of Rodgers, be it the sacks or dumping balls (on plays going nowhere), this was an 18 point come-from-behinder with a stat line as follows:

25-42; 60.0%; 346 yds; 8.2 yds./pass; 3 TDs; 0 INTs

Of course, when it comes time once against to highlight his "poor" 4th. quarter come-from-behind stats, this game won't be included seeing as it was accomplished by the 3rd. quarter.

Complaints regarding falling short of perfection in an outstanding performance, with no run game support to boot, reflects an ignorance of what side the bread is buttered on and the volume of butter thereon.

I would note that once again, as we saw in abundance last season in Rodgers' absence, the defense perks up when confidence in the ability to win is justified and sags when it is less so. There's an obvious correlation that plausibly merits a conclusion of causation...the defense knows where the butter is.

I agree with you - absolutely no reason to be a negative nelly regarding Rodgers. However - none of us can deny it - some of those sacks he took yesterday ... he simply is very stubborn about not throwing the ball away most of the time. Is this why we lose games? No, but I think I've come to accept that this is just how he is and how he's always going to be. I don't mind sacks in terms of losing yardage. What I mind, are injuries and getting beat up, when in some instances, it can be avoided or made less frequent.
 
Last edited:

JBlood

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
467
1. Thank God and TT for Rogers being in Green Bay. 97 yd drive at end of 1st half basically won the game.
2. Thank God for Marty Mornhinweg abandoning the read-option; playing Mike Vick; and the time-out.
3. We're a finesse team on both sides of the ball. Not good.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
I agree with you - absolutely no reason to be a negative nelly regarding Rodgers. However - none of us can deny it - some of those sacks he took yesterday ... he simply is very stubborn about not throwing the ball away most of the time. Is this why we lose games? No, but I think I've come to accept that this is just how he is and how he's always going to be. I don't mind sacks in terms of losing yardage. What I mind, are injuries and getting beat up, when in come instances, it can be avoided or made less frequent.

This team needs to get better in the situational offense, whether it's on Rodgers or McCarthy our O checked out once we went up by 7 points. Vet quarterbacks have no business taking back to back sacks up by 7, why didn't we keep it on the ground we were starting to run over them?
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
This team needs to get better in the situational offense, whether it's on Rodgers or McCarthy our O checked out once we went up by 7 points. Vet quarterbacks have no business taking back to back sacks up by 7, why didn't we keep it on the ground we were starting to run over them?

We had 80 yards rushing on 22 carries (3.6 avg.), hardly what I would call running over another team.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
We had 80 yards rushing on 22 carries (3.6 avg.), hardly what I would call running over another team.

"This team needs to get better in the situational offense, whether it's on Rodgers or McCarthy our O checked out once we went up by 7 points. Vet quarterbacks have no business taking back to back sacks up by 7, why didn't we keep it on the ground we were starting to run over them?"

I had the drive sequence wrong but on the very next drive we picked up 14 yards in two carries by Lacy against a Jets defense that was playing the run. In that situation conventional widsom would dictate attempting to establish the running game. Besides, as well as he played throughout the day Rodgers needs to know that he can't take sacks and let the Jets back in the game.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I had the drive sequence wrong but on the very next drive we picked up 14 yards in two carries by Lacy against a Jets defense that was playing the run. In that situation conventional widsom would dictate attempting to establish the running game. Besides, as well as he played throughout the day Rodgers needs to know that he can't take sacks and let the Jets back in the game.

I agree with your take on running the ball in the fourth quarter, I just don´t think we ran it pretty well. BTW Rodgers didn´t play well all day long, he started 10-of-21 for only 112 yards before finally starting to improve during the last drive in the first half.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
I agree with your take on running the ball in the fourth quarter, I just don´t think we ran it pretty well. BTW Rodgers didn´t play well all day long, he started 10-of-21 for only 112 yards before finally starting to improve during the last drive in the first half.

I don't disagree that we struggled to run the ball throughout the day and those numbers would look worse without Rodgers scrambling. But, as we appear to agree, you need to take into account the flow of the game and momentum. In hindsight I would have liked to see the Packers roll out more Big Sets and try to run the football, more 2 TE and put pressure on their outside corners.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,111
Reaction score
1,590
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Congrats to the Jets because they were a very good team and took it to GB on their own turf. I don't know if the Wilkerson ejection had much effect as we still didn't rush effectively after his departure. However, Geno was certainly less effective once Decker left the game. Our defense started making plays in two key ways: the D-line shut down the run and our DBs started knocking down passes. That's all that our offense needed to start going...and Jordy.

It wasn't a pretty game from many perspectives, but as a coach or fan, you should be impressed with the ability to beat good teams using whatever tools are available.

In terms of the whole Fire Capers mentality, I wonder if the pro-Fire folks believe that Capers started calling a better game in the second half or if the players themselves just started playing better?
 

PackerFlatLander

Cheesehead
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
489
Reaction score
86
Location
Bloomingdale, IL
I thought the play selection got weird. Being down 21-0 or whatever it was - we can't run the ball much in that situation. All the passing was understandable. But once we got the lead, it got weird. Did Starks even get one carry? You would think MM would have let him have a few, if only for change of pace, etc. Also - one big beef I have ... WHY are there no plays of Cobb going on quick slants across the middle??? He seems to be on fly patterns most of the time, but when you're built like he is, they should be using him like we used Driver all those years. I'm thinking they don't want to expose him to the nasty hits you take when going across the middle, but it's just a thought.
 

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
I think this game points to how good this team can be. Everyone can nit-pick the defense in the first half and sloppiness on offense but let's remember Bulaga was not out there. The Jets have one of the best "front sevens" in the league. With all the things that went wrong they still found a way to win. The team is getting better and if clicking on all cylinders for 60 minutes could of blown the jets out by 40. I'd rather be playing our best ball in December and January.

The bottom line is we got a win.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
• I haven’t read through the entire thread but regarding the TD over Shields has anyone mentioned that was a perfect pass? Yes, he probably peaked into the backfield but that was a tight window that Smith hit. What concerned me more about that play was it seemed to affect Shields afterwards – CBs particularly have to have short memories.
• Glad to see Daniels step up.
• Matthews lost contain on the option that Smith pitched that went for big yardage on third and short. Clay went right down the line taking the fake to the RB going the other way.
• I posted in another thread I thought Rodgers was to blame for both 4th quarter sacks. I don’t think they had to run the ball – it was the beginning of the fourth quarter - but how about an outlet pass? Or how about once he didn’t find an open receiver within about 3 seconds he roll to his right (away from pressure) and run and slide? Or how about throwing it away? They didn’t want to stop the clock but that would have been better than losing 22 yards due to the sacks.
• captainWIMM, did you lose another bet? A lost bet explains your signature but what about that new avatar??!! That can’t be voluntary, can it? Either way, should we be concerned? ;)
 

PFanCan

That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
2,067
Reaction score
491
Location
Houston, TX
In terms of the whole Fire Capers mentality, I wonder if the pro-Fire folks believe that Capers started calling a better game in the second half or if the players themselves just started playing better?

I think it had more to do with the Jets changing their play calling. They were killing the Packers with the read option-- the blueprint that has been proven by the 49ers (and now the Seahawks). I saw no improvement in containment on any type of misdirection play.

But then, the Jets stopped running these types of plays... I don't recall the read-option a single time in the second half.

Why?

Not that I am complaining, but... Why?
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
1,576
Reaction score
377
Location
Charlotte
I think it had more to do with the Jets changing their play calling. They were killing the Packers with the read option-- the blueprint that has been proven by the 49ers (and now the Seahawks). I saw no improvement in containment on any type of misdirection play.

But then, the Jets stopped running these types of plays... I don't recall the read-option a single time in the second half.

Why?

Not that I am complaining, but... Why?
I think it's because either

1. The Jets just simply didn't have many different read option plays (used them all
or
2. The Jets got too comfortable with their lead and started taking unnecessary risks.
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
We watched the game after recording it. Better that way. FF through the ads.
Anyway, I had to rewind and watch that Jordy Nelson TD catch and run 3 times!
That was awesome.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
captainWIMM, did you lose another bet? A lost bet explains your signature but what about that new avatar??!! That can’t be voluntary, can it? Either way, should we be concerned? ;)

:D You don't have to be concerned, the avatar is completely voluntary. I love those minions out of the Despicable Me movies and I thought there's nothing better than putting a tiny cheesehead on one of these creatures.

Well, thinking about it now maybe you should be concerned. ;)
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top