Pack needs a lot more than Favre to contend

[vikesrule]

Ok, first off I am not posting this for the purposes of smack. I rarely post in this section, let alone start a thread. I respect the site rules.

However, I found this article interesting, and somewhat relevent.
I am really curious as to Packer fans response.

No need to "spank" the Vikings here, I know as well as anyone the many faults and difficulties that the Vikes currently have to contend with.

Just looking for your perspective as to this article.

Pack needs a lot more than Favre to contend
By Court E. Mann
Feb. 16, 2007


Bolstered by a late-season surge, Brett Favre is coming back.

Encouraged by a four-game winning streak to close out the 2006 campaign, the first-ballot Hall of Famer is spitting in the face of retirement for at least one more season.

Inspired by finishing out of the playoffs by a mere tiebreaker, the three-time MVP is ready for one last run at the Super Bowl.

“I am so excited about coming back,” Favre said in his formal announcement to the Biloxi (Miss.) Sun Herald. “We have a good nucleus of young players. We were 8-8 last year and that's encouraging. My offensive line looks good, the defense played good down the stretch. I'm excited about playing for a talented young football team.”

“He definitely feels good about it,” Scott Favre, Brett's older brother, told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. “He's still playing good and he sees the future is brighter. … I think that (four-game win streak) pretty much summed it up. Winning those four games late kind of changed everybody's mindset. … I told him, ‘You pick up a couple players, everybody stays healthy, who knows, you might make a run at it next year.’ ”

Did I miss something here? Since when did the 8-8 Packers become the ’72 Dolphins?

Look, Favre is more than entitled to play whenever and wherever, whether his team is 16-0 or 0-16. However, the notion that this Packers team is inches away from contending for a Super Bowl title is bright-eyed, bushy-tailed optimism seen through cheddar-stained glasses.

Yes, the NFC is the junior varsity. Yes, the Saints were 3-13 a year ago. It’s not completely ludicrous to imagine the Packers sneaking into the NFC tournament in 2007. It’s also not all that probable, either.

How quickly we forget that Green Bay won a grand total of one game against winning teams in 2006. In eight games against teams .500 or better, the Packers were 1-7 and outscored by a margin of 228-116. Their one win was a bizarre season finale that pitted an admittedly distracted Bears team against a focused Packers squad motivated by the spectacle of Favre’s possible swan song.

How easily we bypass the fact that the other three teams left in the dust by the surging Packers in this “rejuvenating” win streak were the sunken Vikings, the hapless Lions and the dynasty formerly known as the 49ers.

How distant in our memory is the three-game losing streak that preceded this surge. And the 3-5 record the Packers posted on their prestigious home turf, including three drubbings by the Bears (26-0), the Patriots (35-0) and the Jets (38-10).

I don’t mean to be unnecessarily harsh. Green Bay most certainly made strides last season, and there is reason for optimism. But to hear the talk, in the wake of Favre’s comeback revelation, that they’re on the cusp of greatness is a little much. One NFL pundit to remain nameless went as far as suggesting the NFC North is wide open.

Evidently that team from Chicago with a Super Bowl berth, two straight division titles and more wins than anyone in the conference over the past two seasons is waving the white flag for the Green and Gold.

More realistically, the Packers will need to exploit the rest of the North — as they did this year in sweeping the Lions and Vikings — to compete for a wild-card spot. Considering the depth and competition in the NFC East and the NFC South, that will be no small task, especially with a schedule that trades the NFC West and the AFC East for the NFC East and the AFC West. Goodbye, Cardinals and Bills; hello, Chargers and Eagles.

Long story short, it’s going to take a lot more than Favre and a promising, young nucleus to make this team a legitimate contender. And considering the Packers already have last year’s rookies playing prominent roles all over the field, adding another round of youngsters, even an impact class, isn’t likely to help.

Another young receiver or lineman will not provide sufficient punch for the NFL’s 31st-ranked red-zone offense. Hence the Randy Moss conjecture, however sordid and unlikely it seems. Veteran linebacking and safety help is needed for a defense that seems to be measuring itself far too often on success against the Niners, Lions, Vikings and skeleton Bears.

A complete overhaul is in order for a special-teams unit that ranked dead last for the second straight season. That stat paints a scary, yet telling, picture regarding the team’s overall depth. Let’s not forget that the Packers were remarkably healthy a year ago, losing only one game total to its starting defense.

So the onus is on the Packers’ front office to get it done when free agency opens on March 2, and GM Ted Thompson has the cap space to make it happen — even if his history suggests reluctance to do so and a preference for leaning more heavily on the draft.

“We feel like if we're doing things to help the team get better, whatever it is, whoever the quarterback is, whether it's Brett or whomever it might be, we're going to try to get better,” Thompson said. “And if we can do that in free agency, we'll do that.”

If Thompson can follow through on that, perhaps then I’ll smell what the Cheeseheads are cookin’.

Link to Pro Football Weekly

 

[gopackgo]

Critics said this last year when Brett commented on how this was the most talented team he had ever played on. Yes, the Packers need quite a few positions to contend, but not to make the playoffs. His brother said they need to pick up a couple of players. If the Pack get a solid TE or WR and S, they are a serious contender. What other spots do they need to fill?

 

[retiredgrampa]

Not a bad summary, Vikesrule. Obviously, I hope for the best but I believe we are two strong drafts and a few good FAs away from contending. Our weak areas (TE, FS, depth) are VERY weak will take time to overhaul. I happen to believe that FA could cover those areas but Ted Thompson is reluctant to make full use of it. So, the crapshoot that is the draft will probably be utilized with mixed results. So much also depends on our young OL. If it doesn't improve, neither will our W-L column. I agree that Favre's return does NOT guarantee better results than last year. It only assures us of a QB who will most likely complete just over 50% of his passes and a QB rating around 72. Hardly inspiring IMO. So, a better running game is the only way we can hope to improve our record. We will be very competitive in our division but outside of it is another question. We will not be a come-from-behind team once again, so it behooves us to get the early lead and hang onto it.

 

[rundemc]

Critics said this last year when Brett commented on how this was the most talented team he had ever played on. Yes, the Packers need quite a few positions to contend, but not to make the playoffs. His brother said they need to pick up a couple of players. If the Pack get a solid TE or WR and S, they are a serious contender. What other spots do they need to fill?

upgrades at te wr and safety will help but before u start to consider the pack serious contenders remember they only beat 1 team with a winning record last year and that was in a meaning less game week 17

 

[Obi1]

Ok, first off I am not posting this for the purposes of smack. I rarely post in this section, let alone start a thread. I respect the site rules.

However, I found this article interesting, and somewhat relevent.
I am really curious as to Packer fans response.

No need to "spank" the Vikings here, I know as well as anyone the many faults and difficulties that the Vikes currently have to contend with.

Just looking for your perspective as to this article.

Pack needs a lot more than Favre to contend
By Court E. Mann
Feb. 16, 2007


Bolstered by a late-season surge, Brett Favre is coming back.

Encouraged by a four-game winning streak to close out the 2006 campaign, the first-ballot Hall of Famer is spitting in the face of retirement for at least one more season.

Inspired by finishing out of the playoffs by a mere tiebreaker, the three-time MVP is ready for one last run at the Super Bowl.

“I am so excited about coming back,” Favre said in his formal announcement to the Biloxi (Miss.) Sun Herald. “We have a good nucleus of young players. We were 8-8 last year and that's encouraging. My offensive line looks good, the defense played good down the stretch. I'm excited about playing for a talented young football team.”

“He definitely feels good about it,” Scott Favre, Brett's older brother, told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. “He's still playing good and he sees the future is brighter. … I think that (four-game win streak) pretty much summed it up. Winning those four games late kind of changed everybody's mindset. … I told him, ‘You pick up a couple players, everybody stays healthy, who knows, you might make a run at it next year.’ ”

Did I miss something here? Since when did the 8-8 Packers become the ’72 Dolphins?

Look, Favre is more than entitled to play whenever and wherever, whether his team is 16-0 or 0-16. However, the notion that this Packers team is inches away from contending for a Super Bowl title is bright-eyed, bushy-tailed optimism seen through cheddar-stained glasses.

Yes, the NFC is the junior varsity. Yes, the Saints were 3-13 a year ago. It’s not completely ludicrous to imagine the Packers sneaking into the NFC tournament in 2007. It’s also not all that probable, either.

How quickly we forget that Green Bay won a grand total of one game against winning teams in 2006. In eight games against teams .500 or better, the Packers were 1-7 and outscored by a margin of 228-116. Their one win was a bizarre season finale that pitted an admittedly distracted Bears team against a focused Packers squad motivated by the spectacle of Favre’s possible swan song.

How easily we bypass the fact that the other three teams left in the dust by the surging Packers in this “rejuvenating” win streak were the sunken Vikings, the hapless Lions and the dynasty formerly known as the 49ers.

How distant in our memory is the three-game losing streak that preceded this surge. And the 3-5 record the Packers posted on their prestigious home turf, including three drubbings by the Bears (26-0), the Patriots (35-0) and the Jets (38-10).

I don’t mean to be unnecessarily harsh. Green Bay most certainly made strides last season, and there is reason for optimism. But to hear the talk, in the wake of Favre’s comeback revelation, that they’re on the cusp of greatness is a little much. One NFL pundit to remain nameless went as far as suggesting the NFC North is wide open.

Evidently that team from Chicago with a Super Bowl berth, two straight division titles and more wins than anyone in the conference over the past two seasons is waving the white flag for the Green and Gold.

More realistically, the Packers will need to exploit the rest of the North — as they did this year in sweeping the Lions and Vikings — to compete for a wild-card spot. Considering the depth and competition in the NFC East and the NFC South, that will be no small task, especially with a schedule that trades the NFC West and the AFC East for the NFC East and the AFC West. Goodbye, Cardinals and Bills; hello, Chargers and Eagles.

Long story short, it’s going to take a lot more than Favre and a promising, young nucleus to make this team a legitimate contender. And considering the Packers already have last year’s rookies playing prominent roles all over the field, adding another round of youngsters, even an impact class, isn’t likely to help.

Another young receiver or lineman will not provide sufficient punch for the NFL’s 31st-ranked red-zone offense. Hence the Randy Moss conjecture, however sordid and unlikely it seems. Veteran linebacking and safety help is needed for a defense that seems to be measuring itself far too often on success against the Niners, Lions, Vikings and skeleton Bears.

A complete overhaul is in order for a special-teams unit that ranked dead last for the second straight season. That stat paints a scary, yet telling, picture regarding the team’s overall depth. Let’s not forget that the Packers were remarkably healthy a year ago, losing only one game total to its starting defense.

So the onus is on the Packers’ front office to get it done when free agency opens on March 2, and GM Ted Thompson has the cap space to make it happen — even if his history suggests reluctance to do so and a preference for leaning more heavily on the draft.

“We feel like if we're doing things to help the team get better, whatever it is, whoever the quarterback is, whether it's Brett or whomever it might be, we're going to try to get better,” Thompson said. “And if we can do that in free agency, we'll do that.”

If Thompson can follow through on that, perhaps then I’ll smell what the Cheeseheads are cookin’.

Link to Pro Football Weekly

Let's talk about a more RELAVENT topic for you.

What will it take for the Vikings to contend with the Packers?

I'd say a MUCH better offense, a MUCH better Defense, better Special Teams and a coaching staff... Hmmmm... I'd say that's about it.

I didn't reply to your note intending to smack, or to be stir things up, so no need to get hostile or begrudging...

 

[porky88]

I certainly think Green Bay can contend to make the playoffs next year. They did it this year whether you want to accept it or not. The NFC is the JV League in the NFL like the article states. It's not going to be tough to contend especially when you look at the Giants losing their best player and the Cowboys losing their Coach.

However I think to contend for a Super Bowl they'll need to fix some problems. I think DE, S, WR, TE, and RB are all concerns right now as well as depth on the offensive line. If the Packers can fix some of those problems then the Packers could realistically be back in the playoffs. In my opinion Favre needs to commit to 2 more seasons with the Packers (including this one) and then we'll see from there about being a legit NFC Contender. Right now they need to catch the Bears to make it to the Super Bowl and I still believe they’re a year away from Chicago.

 

[gopackgo]

Critics said this last year when Brett commented on how this was the most talented team he had ever played on. Yes, the Packers need quite a few positions to contend, but not to make the playoffs. His brother said they need to pick up a couple of players. If the Pack get a solid TE or WR and S, they are a serious contender. What other spots do they need to fill?

upgrades at te wr and safety will help but before u start to consider the pack serious contenders remember they only beat 1 team with a winning record last year and that was in a meaning less game week 17

I meant making the playoffs, not the SB. This is a young team that has had a year together to build upon. We can beat teams we are supposed to beat and next year we can beat a couple good teams, that will give us a playoff spot. It doesn't hurt we are in the NFC North.

 

[refpacker]

Moss = Superbowl

 

[cheesey]

The whole NFC is weak, and a few bounces the right way can put the team not only in the playoffs, but deep into it. Am i being optimistic? Yes, but thats why they play the games. At the end of the season, the O line was jelling, and the D was playing pretty darn good. Favre by himself won't win it, but with a few additions i think the Packers can surprise alot of people.
Look at 2 seasons back. The Steelers won it all, and they had alot of breaks go their way. I didn't think they were that great of a team, but that didn't stop them from winning it all.
So i remain optomistic. Maybe i'm looking at it through "green and gold" colored glasses, but i have always hoped for the best as far as "my" team goes. Doom and gloom just doesn't cut it for me.

 

[vikesrule]

Let's talk about a more RELAVENT topic for you.

What will it take for the Vikings to contend with the Packers?

I'd say a MUCH better offense, a MUCH better Defense, better Special Teams and a coaching staff... Hmmmm... I'd say that's about it.

I didn't reply to your note intending to smack, or to be stir things up, so no need to get hostile or begrudging...

gopackgo, retiredgrampa, rundemc, and porky88, I appreciate your thoughts. Some good perspective.

Obi1, thanks for the spelll check. Glad that you are not "to be stir things up" :roll: Save the Bovine ***** Matter for the smack section.

With that said, "contending with the Packers" is not important. The Vikings are contending with too many other problems right now.

Just on the "O"

#1: The O-Line wasn't doing it's job well. Hicks and Johnson looked more like turnstiles and McKinnie struggled with speed guys. Brad Johnson seldom had time to make multiple reads, or for receivers to get open. Putting Jackson in, added to that available time via his mobility, but it also meant that a unpolished small-school kid got subjected to a lot of heat out of the chute.

#2: Our Receivers weren't getting open, and weren't making plays when they did. The primary blame lies with Troy Williamson. In his second year as a pro, Troy had yet to master the basic concept of "Catch the ball". His inability to do so diminished Brad Johnson's confidence in him.
Travis Taylor and Marcus Robinson were the only two to be productive.

#3: Everything we see comes straight from Brad Childress...and it's not pretty. Aside from a handful of trick plays, Childress has shown a stunning lack of imagination in play calling. Couple that with our receiver's inability to catch, and you have a recipe for 2 kinds of plays;
A: Run Chester Taylor
B: Short dump off passes.
This team was put together intentionally to be a short pass/running team. They told us that all pre-season. They came right out and said it, over and over.
No deep threat, and all the other teams knew it.

#4: The QB issue is totally up in the air.

The O-Line needs to be solidified, the WR Corps needs to be rebuilt, and a real Offensive Coordinator needs to be brought in, and Brad Childress needs to NOT CALL PLAYS. He needs to over see the game, not micromanage it.

At this point, I am not a big Chidress fan. Chilly needs to wake up, or the next season could be his last.

I will save the "D' issues for later.

Always Purple !!!! :thumbsup:

 

[warhawk]

This is another article that is purely individual perspective on a given topic.

I can easily counter much of this with my perspective that the Packers SHOULD have been 10-6. We were gifted (given away by our opponents) no games and yet we gave away TWO games at the least.

I am speaking of games we clearly outplayed the other team in every way yet lost. It cannot be said the season "evened" out with wins we never should have had. That didn't happen.

Yes, we were clearly outplayed in three consecutive games. IF memory serves me correctly Indy was getting kicked so badly there for a stretch they were considered no playoff threat what so ever.

They came around. We came around also but the hole we were in was deeper than theirs.

My point is we played as well as anyone out there on the Defensive side of the ball the last part of the season. Other supposed "better" teams did not shut down the last four teams we played like we did.

That's a big start.

It should also be noted that the odds are now no longer in the Bears favor for post season success. EVERY year the SB runner ups look good the following year only to fall on their faces. Smart money won't go there.

So who then do you look to in the NFC?

I look to the Green Bay Packers. They have as legitimate of a shot as any team out there (whom all, by the way, have their own concerns to deal with).

 

[cheesey]

Let's talk about a more RELAVENT topic for you.

What will it take for the Vikings to contend with the Packers?

I'd say a MUCH better offense, a MUCH better Defense, better Special Teams and a coaching staff... Hmmmm... I'd say that's about it.

I didn't reply to your note intending to smack, or to be stir things up, so no need to get hostile or begrudging...

gopackgo, retiredgrampa, rundemc, and porky88, I appreciate your thoughts. Some good perspective.

HEY!!! What about ME!?!? Sure........first thing, you forget the ol' CHEESEY!

Anyway........i think some of the people that come here and don't know you, see the purple and automatically think you are trying to start trouble. They don't know that in reality, you are just a Packer fan that somehow lost his way! :rotflmao:

I do think the Packers are closer to solving their problems then the Vikings. Although if Jackson has some protection and settles down, who knows what they can do.
There again.....thats why they play the games!

 

[gopackgo]

If the Vikes pick up a decent QB and WR, they can have quite an offense. Taylor is a good running back, but he is seriously hindered by the passing game.

What are your thoughts on Teddy? That seems to be the unanimous decision by the "experts".

And can we stop the "should have" record? Every team has bad losses, we aren't the only team.

 

[Greg C.]

There must be a class at journalism school called Stating the Obvious. Because that's all this guy did. He sums up the Packers' situation pretty well, but I would like to know who all these people are who consider the Packers to be a serious threat to win a championship next year.

The Packers have a shot at being a contender, and that's about it. Stranger things have happened. But there are a lot of holes to fill and a lot of young players, so I think they are still at least a year away. Of course Favre would love to come back this year and win a title, but I think he will be pleased if they make the playoffs and maybe win a playoff game or two.

Personally, I see the Pack as somewhere between an 8-8 and 10-6 team in 2007.

 

[vikesrule]

HEY!!! What about ME!?!? Sure........first thing, you forget the ol' CHEESEY!

Anyway........i think some of the people that come here and don't know you, see the purple and automatically think you are trying to start trouble. They don't know that in reality, you are just a Packer fan that somehow lost his way! :rotflmao:

I do think the Packers are closer to solving their problems then the Vikings. Although if Jackson has some protection and settles down, who knows what they can do.
There again.....thats why they play the games!

Na cheesey, I didn't forget ya. I was in the middle of posting when you posted.
Cheesey is unforgettable. :mrgreen:

As far as being a "lost Packer Fan".........

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

"What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully?"


I agree gopackgo, "shoulda, coulda, woulda" doesn't cut it.

The Packers did improve from 2005. But half of the Packers wins were against the Vikes and the Lions....nothing to brag about there.

And to say that the last Vikes/Packer game was pathetic, is a gross understatement. Both teams were terrible. It was just a matter of which team wasn't the worst.

And yes the guy that wrote this article, seems to be somewhat biased.
However, I believe that the point that he is trying to make is that quite a few people (some here) believe that with Favre returning, all is well in Packerland.

 

[cheesey]

HEY!!! What about ME!?!? Sure........first thing, you forget the ol' CHEESEY!

Anyway........i think some of the people that come here and don't know you, see the purple and automatically think you are trying to start trouble. They don't know that in reality, you are just a Packer fan that somehow lost his way! :rotflmao:

I do think the Packers are closer to solving their problems then the Vikings. Although if Jackson has some protection and settles down, who knows what they can do.
There again.....thats why they play the games!

Na cheesey, I didn't forget ya. I was in the middle of posting when you posted.
Cheesey is unforgettable. :mrgreen:

As far as being a "lost Packer Fan".........

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

"What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully?"


I agree gopackgo, "shoulda, coulda, woulda" doesn't cut it.

The Packers did improve from 2005. But half of the Packers wins were against the Vikes and the Lions....nothing to brag about there.

And to say that the last Vikes/Packer game was pathetic, is a gross understatement. Both teams were terrible. It was just a matter of which team wasn't the worst.

And yes the guy that wrote this article, seems to be somewhat biased.
However, I believe that the point that he is trying to make is that quite a few people (some here) believe that with Favre returning, all is well in Packerland.

"Unforgettable......thats what I are!!!"LOLOLOL!!!
With Favre coming back all is not necessarily well, but it sure makes things look a whole lot better!

 

[vikesrule]

If the Vikes pick up a decent QB and WR, they can have quite an offense. Taylor is a good running back, but he is seriously hindered by the passing game.

What are your thoughts on Teddy? That seems to be the unanimous decision by the "experts".

And can we stop the "should have" record? Every team has bad losses, we aren't the only team.

I think that the draft field is pretty deep with WR's. Since the Vikes have a #7 in the first round, go with Calvin Johnson (if by some miracle is still available)
Otherwise we could really use a DE and go for a WR afterward or by FA

I don't think that Ginn is worth a #7 first round for the Vikes.

I don't see Chilly drafting a QB with that #7. (i.e Quinn). I believe that he is still looking to Jackson, with maybe a veteran QB coming in also.

 

[tkpckfan]

A WIN IS A WIN THATS ALL IM GONNA SAY.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

There must be a class at journalism school called Stating the Obvious. Because that's all this guy did. He sums up the Packers' situation pretty well, but I would like to know who all these people are who consider the Packers to be a serious threat to win a championship next year.

The Packers have a shot at being a contender, and that's about it. Stranger things have happened. But there are a lot of holes to fill and a lot of young players, so I think they are still at least a year away. Of course Favre would love to come back this year and win a title, but I think he will be pleased if they make the playoffs and maybe win a playoff game or two.

Personally, I see the Pack as somewhere between an 8-8 and 10-6 team in 2007.

With the parity in the NFL, there are 32 teams who are legit contenders. I know that's a big statement, but even the Lions and Cardinals had some very good games last season. Who knows what can happen any given Sunday?

That being said, GB is a contender but not a favorite. Many things need to work out for GB to get to the title game, but Chicago made it there with a ton of holes. It doesn't take a team full of top name FAs to get to the big game, just look at how Washington has done -- the annual preseason SB favorite of many, who struggle to reach the playoffs each year.

We have the guys on the team to win many games, but they need to step it up. The biggest problem on offense has been red zone scoring, and Franks has the ability to be a go to guy near the goal line. He played terrible last season and he needs to step it up big time. Just having that one player step up to his abillity would change the whole red zone offense and open it up for everyone else.

GO PACK GO!!!

 

[warhawk]

There must be a class at journalism school called Stating the Obvious. Because that's all this guy did. He sums up the Packers' situation pretty well, but I would like to know who all these people are who consider the Packers to be a serious threat to win a championship next year.

The Packers have a shot at being a contender, and that's about it. Stranger things have happened. But there are a lot of holes to fill and a lot of young players, so I think they are still at least a year away. Of course Favre would love to come back this year and win a title, but I think he will be pleased if they make the playoffs and maybe win a playoff game or two.

Personally, I see the Pack as somewhere between an 8-8 and 10-6 team in 2007.

With the parity in the NFL, there are 32 teams who are legit contenders. I know that's a big statement, but even the Lions and Cardinals had some very good games last season. Who knows what can happen any given Sunday?

That being said, GB is a contender but not a favorite. Many things need to work out for GB to get to the title game, but Chicago made it there with a ton of holes. It doesn't take a team full of top name FAs to get to the big game, just look at how Washington has done -- the annual preseason SB favorite of many, who struggle to reach the playoffs each year.

We have the guys on the team to win many games, but they need to step it up. The biggest problem on offense has been red zone scoring, and Franks has the ability to be a go to guy near the goal line. He played terrible last season and he needs to step it up big time. Just having that one player step up to his abillity would change the whole red zone offense and open it up for everyone else.

GO PACK GO!!!

I will go one step further and say both the TE and the run game needs to get more productive or at least more consistant down in the red zone. I recall a few times our running game looked decent down in there but most times it was not effective.

I have concerns about Bubba. He looked clumsy and awkward out there and didn't hold onto the ball that great either. I hope he's not done but the signs don't look to good to me.
I know he was used to block more but I don't see where that should have that negative of an affect on how he performs in running routes, catching the ball, and, what he does after he catches it.

I was very glad to see TT address the LB position and move on without Digg's and Lenon. They were not bad ball players but they were not the type to help get us to the playoffs. I'm not sure that doesn't describe Bubba today.

I wholeheartedly agree that players already on this team need to step up and play big next year to help us advance. Not just who we can add thru FA or the draft. I'm just not sure Bubba is one of them.