Out-Coached? Or out-GM'd?

[easyk83]

Most players are going to be free agents already after their 4th season.

I'm not saying you can expect everyone to be Clay Matthews or Eddie Lacy in their rookie year, but if you're still waiting for most of your guys to come around when half of their career is over, it's going to hurt. It's fair for them to expect some productivity from guys like Nick Perry at this point.

And Rodgers doesn't really belong in that category. He wasn't struggling, he was just waiting behind Favre.

Waiting behind Favre and getting injured constantly. In 2006 he broke his foot after limited action against the Patriots, and then in 2007 he suffered a bad hamstring injury. A good many Packer fans considered him an injury prone bust prior to his 2008 campaign. Yes it is reasonable to expect production from Nick Perry and I'd say we've seen some, with Perry it hasn't been a lack of splash plays. He had some huge plays last season, it's always been a matter of staying healthy.

 

[Bignutz]

Hell yes we were outcoached last night.

Their OL is average at best. Remember, Breno Giacomini was a starter for them the past 2 or 3 years. Our Castoff.

Lynch was not even drafted by them. So how can be be any good?

CB Richard Sherman? He was taken a few picks after Teddy took Davon House.
Pass-rushers Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril were also castoffs from other teams. Avril from 2 previous teams.
They can't be any good either, they didn't draft them.

Percy Harvin? Hell he was drafted by the Vikings. Seattle traded for the guy. He can't be any good if the Vikings drafted him. Plus he was drafted after Darius Heyward-Bey, and after Aaron Maybin, Larry English, Josh Freeman, Jeremy Maclin, Aaron Curry, Mark Sanchez, and BJ Raji.

All sarcasm aside, I don't think the overall talent on the Seahawks is that much better than ours is.
I think coaching is a bigger difference.
What do you think is a bigger difference: Overall talent, or Coaching (Head and coordinators, positional coaches, etc.)

Case in point: The Percy Harvin Jet-Sweeps.
They did this to Denver in the Super Bowl, for big gains.
They made it look easy.
Did Capers just hope they wouldn't run it?
It is hard to defend if the WR's can block.
But you need to have the safeties up closer.
Without Harvin a threat to go deep, you have to trust Shields & Traymon to prevent the other WR to beat them deep. Move Hyde and Richardson or HaHa (I'm done with Burnett) up closer to the line to diagnose these and come up and hopefully take Harvin's head off.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

But it looked like our players had no idea about it.
Kinda like when we got killed by Kaepernick in the playoffs 2 years ago, we appeared as if we'd never seen film of them trying that, even though the Rams had stopped them twice.

If Harvin can hurt us with that thing, why can't Randall Cobb run the same thing?
We better put that in the playbook going forward (until Cobb gets hurt). Plus Cobb was a former QB (lefty), so he could ultimately add that diminsion too once they start to plan for the Jet Sweep.

Also, the fact that McCarthy and/or Rodgers simply didn't even test Sherman's side. That's horsecrap.
That allowed Seattle to usually cover 3 or 4 receivers with 6 guys. That's why we didn't get any deep passes. They had it covered over-the top with help deep, plus medium.

And once Sherrod got schooled, by those free agent castoffs from last year (Avril & Bennett), then Rodgers had no time to see if Cobb & Jordy could beat their double-teams.

It was a poor game plan, But I'll stick with MM and TT. They are doing a good job and I refuse to jump ship after one game.

 

[Sanguine camper]

MM has often mentioned the career trajectory where good players are making important contributions if they aren't already starters by the end of year 2. I agree with MM on that point most good players don't take 3-4 years to show their talent. TT hit on some great draft picks from 2005-2009 but since then his drafts have struggled and the Packers are not Super Bowl contenders. TT deserves a lot of the credit for the Super Bowl win in 2010 but he also deserves most of the blame IMO for the Packers inability to fix their chronic problems like a lack of playmakers on defense. Too many of his draft picks have failed to get on the right career trajectory that MM harps about.

 

[I_am_smoked_cheddar]

GO PACK GO !!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes it is reasonable to expect production from Nick Perry and I'd say we've seen some, with Perry it hasn't been a lack of splash plays. He had some huge plays last season, it's always been a matter of staying healthy.

While injuries have played a role in Perry not producing like a first round pick it has mostly been his inconsistency that has fans going crazy. And the fact that Thompson should have never drafted him as he clearly stated that he doesn't want to stand up in a 3-4 defense before the draft.

 

[brandon2348]

Out-coached or out-GMed? Both. Really? No chance? You must have missed the postings of a certain poster who posted an incredible 105 times on the "Will the Packers win in Seattle? You bet they will!" thread. Other than commenting on the scintillating Luck vs. Wilson argument, he was extremely confident of the Packers chances. Nothing wrong with being optimistic but IMO even as a fanatic it's always a good thing to keep your feet planted firmly on the ground.

Perhaps the reactions to yesterday's loss on this board had a little something to do with raised expectations expressed on that thread?

Well it's a long season. I didn't know it was the Super Bowl? I thought they would win and they didn't. The defense obviously isn't where a lot of people thought it was. Rodgers had a bad game to his standards and are best Tackle who was "pancaking' those guys got hurt.

I think the best 53 will win out over the course of 16 games and I still think our 53 is better then the Seahawks. The defense will get better. Well see how this plays out.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think the best 53 will win out over the course of 16 games and I still think our 53 is better then the Seahawks.

I'm sorry, brandon, but that assessment of the situation is just out of touch with reality. I still expect the Packers to be a pretty good team this year but after watching the game last week it's pretty obvious to me that we don't match up well with the Seahawks.

 

[ivo610]

I think the panic is a bit much. It was one game. We got beat top to bottom by a better team, but lets give it a few more games before we grab the pitchforks. There is a reason why this team was so hyped up coming into the season. If we are 3-3 after 6 games like in 2010 then we can hit the panic button

 

[PackerFlatLander]

I think the panic is a bit much. It was one game. We got beat top to bottom by a better team, but lets give it a few more games before we grab the pitchforks. There is a reason why this team was so hyped up coming into the season. If we are 3-3 after 6 games like in 2010 then we can hit the panic button

Panic button? You should see what I see around here in Chicago. I'd say that about 80% of my friends on facebook who are Bears fans, changed their logos to the Blackhawks and are ready for hockey season. After one game. I swear - the gene pool for Chicago sports fans works in reverse. Biggest conglomerate of fickle idiots you could ever imagine. They talk so tough like they're Al Capone, but poke 'em with a stick and they fall so hard. It's hilarious. I loved that Bills game. My wife was confused as to why I was screaming and hollering up a storm in the basement, when she knew I wasn't watching the Packers. It's because my hatred for the Bears nearly equals my love for the Packers. Hey - I live here. It's quite simple.

 

[TJV]

Well it's a long season. I didn't know it was the Super Bowl? I thought they would win and they didn't. The defense obviously isn't where a lot of people thought it was. Rodgers had a bad game to his standards and are best Tackle who was "pancaking' those guys got hurt.

I think the best 53 will win out over the course of 16 games and I still think our 53 is better then the Seahawks. The defense will get better. Well see how this plays out.

You were the one posting as if it were the Super Bowl, not me. And you were the one going way overboard about the Packers not only winning but possibly running them off the field. The Seahawks were coming off a Super Bowl in which they humiliated the team with the best offense last season at a neutral site. They have one of the best home field advantages in the league. As I posted IMO there’s nothing wrong with being optimistic about the team you root for, but it’s good to keep your feet planted firmly on the ground. You definitely did not do that while posting on that thread.

 

[JBlood]

Panic button? You should see what I see around here in Chicago. I'd say that about 80% of my friends on facebook who are Bears fans, changed their logos to the Blackhawks and are ready for hockey season. After one game. I swear - the gene pool for Chicago sports fans works in reverse. Biggest conglomerate of fickle idiots you could ever imagine. They talk so tough like they're Al Capone, but poke 'em with a stick and they fall so hard. It's hilarious. I loved that Bills game. My wife was confused as to why I was screaming and hollering up a storm in the basement, when she knew I wasn't watching the Packers. It's because my hatred for the Bears nearly equals my love for the Packers. Hey - I live here. It's quite simple.

I lived in Minnesota for 25 years. Greatest place in the world to be for a Packers fan during football season.

 

[PackerFlatLander]

I lived in Minnesota for 25 years. Greatest place in the world to be for a Packers fan during football season.

Ha! The difference between Bears and Vikings fans is this ... Bears fans think they need to all live up to this ridiculous "we're street tough and we have baseball bats and shovels" crap. It's like they watched GoodFellas and Casino a thousand times and somehow, they all morphed into Joey Bananas Shinebox wannabe's. Puffing their chests out, woof woof, bear down and all that garbage. The Saturday Night Live Superfans thing didn't help, it only inflated their silly BS.

Vikings fans are just a sad, bitter bunch, since they're the Cubs of the NFL and get their hearts broken repeatedly. That's how I'd sum it up overall.

 

[Carl]

I think the panic is a bit much. It was one game. We got beat top to bottom by a better team, but lets give it a few more games before we grab the pitchforks. There is a reason why this team was so hyped up coming into the season. If we are 3-3 after 6 games like in 2010 then we can hit the panic button

Giving an example of a season where they started out 3-3, but then went on to win the Super Bowl, isn't the best example of a reason to hit a panic button.

In fact, it shows the total opposite in that being .500 after 6 games isn't the time to panic.

 

[Carl]

Panic button? You should see what I see around here in Chicago. I'd say that about 80% of my friends on facebook who are Bears fans, changed their logos to the Blackhawks and are ready for hockey season. After one game. I swear - the gene pool for Chicago sports fans works in reverse. Biggest conglomerate of fickle idiots you could ever imagine. They talk so tough like they're Al Capone, but poke 'em with a stick and they fall so hard. It's hilarious. I loved that Bills game. My wife was confused as to why I was screaming and hollering up a storm in the basement, when she knew I wasn't watching the Packers. It's because my hatred for the Bears nearly equals my love for the Packers. Hey - I live here. It's quite simple.

Bears fans confuse me. They have really high expectations every year, but have only made the playoffs once in the last 6 seasons. I don't know where they get these expectations from.

 

[OldSchool101]

As I said in another thread.now that the agony of us playing miserable has diminished im glad we got our butts handed to us week 1. Early. We got what we deserved but we don't have a target on our back and we have plenty of time to make adjustments and although we exposed our vulnerability, we can make adjustments and strengthen our weakness. As someone else in here said. It's easy to ridicule another's predictions but even easier not to make one at all.. The GB O gets some life while the GB D improves its struggles only slightly. GB 27 Jets 23
I'll be eating that 22" horse collar kielbasa this week. I'll let y'all know how it was.

 

[PackerFlatLander]

Quite honestly, I did not get upset at all from the game - it was the world champion Seahawks - the very best team (by a sizable margin, I might add), in football. I mean, the first half was not really a bad game at all. Dix missed that tackle and the Seahawks made more plays on offense than we did, plus we really couldn't get the running game going. But that's the extent of "bad" that I saw out of the first half. Once Bulaga went down and Sherrod was awful - that's when the pendulum swung in full gear and we got spanked by a better team in their stadium.

This was nowhere near the stupid Bears losing to the Bills.

 

[ivo610]

Giving an example of a season where they started out 3-3, but then went on to win the Super Bowl, isn't the best example of a reason to hit a panic button.

In fact, it shows the total opposite in that being .500 after 6 games isn't the time to panic.

lol, exactly. Im glad someone caught that.

 

[JBlood]

Bears fans confuse me. They have really high expectations every year, but have only made the playoffs once in the last 6 seasons. I don't know where they get these expectations from.

I'll give this to the Bears fans: They rarely root against their team. Vikings fans, on the other hand, are usually rooting for their team to lose in order to get a better draft pick. Pathetic.

 

[brandon2348]

You were the one posting as if it were the Super Bowl, not me. And you were the one going way overboard about the Packers not only winning but possibly running them off the field. The Seahawks were coming off a Super Bowl in which they humiliated the team with the best offense last season at a neutral site. They have one of the best home field advantages in the league. As I posted IMO there’s nothing wrong with being optimistic about the team you root for, but it’s good to keep your feet planted firmly on the ground. You definitely did not do that while posting on that thread.

Yeah I got a little carried away because of my hatred towards the Seahawks but I am tired of people thinking we can't play with those guys. The difference between blowin someone out and gettting blown out in the NFL is so small sometimes.

I am done with the Seahawks game but if I had to do it all over again I would bet the Packers with that money line "in Seattle". Hopefully McCarthy learned not to be such a "chicken" and play the whole field while running more quick hitting fast developing run plays. I am getting a little worn on these "pitch plays" and "slow developing run plays". Line Lacy up behind Rodgers and "Smash".

 

[brandon2348]

I'm sorry, brandon, but that assessment of the situation is just out of touch with reality. I still expect the Packers to be a pretty good team this year but after watching the game last week it's pretty obvious to me that we don't match up well with the Seahawks.

Yeah, you can say that now but if we beat the Jets up and the Seahawks go down to San Diego and lose then what?

My point is it's a long season. Seahawks back end of roster is not what ours is overall. Just look at there secondary situation. Carroll rushed Jeremy Lane's bad groin back against us and now he is on the IR cause he tore it up.

Let's see what happens over 16 games.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah, you can say that now but if we beat the Jets up and the Seahawks go down to San Diego and lose then what?

That would make absolutely no difference. I know you have a hard time acknowledging that the Seahawks are a great team, but after last week's game you should really alter your thought about the Packers having the better roster. Trying to hang on to it makes you look like a fool.

 

[brandon2348]

That would make absolutely no difference. I know you have a hard time acknowledging that the Seahawks are a great team, but after last week's game you should really alter your thought about the Packers having the better roster. Trying to hang on to it makes you look like a fool.

That's my whole point. We don't know who has the best 53 man roster yet because it's week 2. IMO our roster is deeper. They may have the best "starting 22" right now but as we all know that doesn't usually cut it in the NFL.

What if Harvin goes down and couple guys on defense?

 

[brandon2348]

That would make absolutely no difference. I know you have a hard time acknowledging that the Seahawks are a great team, but after last week's game you should really alter your thought about the Packers having the better roster. Trying to hang on to it makes you look like a fool.

Even Seahawk fans will tell you they have glaring weakness in back half of there roster that was not there the last couple years. You seem to be the one a little miss-informed.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Even Seahawk fans will tell you they have glaring weakness in back half of there roster that was not there the last couple years. You seem to be the one a little miss-informed.

Geez, just let it go. They defeated us by 20 points just a week ago, I don't care if you think they have glaring needs on the inactive list, they're the better team at the moment. Period.

 

[brandon2348]

That would make absolutely no difference. I know you have a hard time acknowledging that the Seahawks are a great team, but after last week's game you should really alter your thought about the Packers having the better roster. Trying to hang on to it makes you look like a fool.

You giving up on our defense week 1 makes you look like a fool. This defense is going to be good. Brad Jones is finally out of there I'm looking for someone to keep him off the field for the rest of the year.