The debate should end...for now

net

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
980
Reaction score
22
Location
Rhinelander
The Press-Gazette allows readers to comment on stories. Each day, it inevitably ends with the "Good Ted" vs. "Bad Ted" debate. I'm no fan of Ted's, as you know, but I posted this below. It's a bit like yacht design. You can argue the merits of this or that, but once the race begins, GRAB A LINE!
--------------
Reading the comments above you would swear the Packers lost the game against Philly.

Hey folks...the team is ahead of the Bears!

I'm one of the original members of a fire Ted Thompson website, so I'm no fan of Ted's, but I've come to the realization that regardless of what decisions have been made it's time to suck it up and go with it.

Quite honestly, I like the idea of a defensive-oriented team with good special teams. That took the Bears to the Super Bowl last year. It's been a long time since great defense was played here and you can't be a winner for long without it.

For all of you fixated on eye-popping offensive numbers consider this:
You can win the Super Bowl and never score a touchdown all season.
In theory, if your defense doesn't allow a point, all you need is a safety or a field goal to win the game. The goal is to win the game, not run up your fantasy numbers.

So if the Packers defense keeps the team in the game, the Packers have a chance to win ugly. An ugly win in the Super Bowl is still a championship!
 

Obi1

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
0
Yes,

Yet I differ some in my view of the necessity for Offense. A team that doesn't score well on offense won't get very far in the playoffs.

Look at the Bears of 2001 when they won 13 games with an anemic offense... then lost immediately and handily in the playoffs.

Look at this the other way... IF your offense scores on EVERY play, how hard does your defense need to work?

I am in agreement with YOU. I have longed for a strong defense for MANY years. However, Packers will need a much better offense than what they displayed or they won't get very far.

A team that is dependent on the defense must depend on the opponent's mistakes and capitalize on them. They come accross teams who make very few mistakes and....

I am personally looking forward to the return of Jennings, Morency and Robinson. I am thinking between the 3 of them, they should be worth a TD or 2/game...
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
in case you forgot, the bears, who were a defensive minded team, lost to the colts, an offensive minded team. end of story.
 

digsthepack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
0
Please overlook the fact that the Colts' defense was playing lights out when Bob Sanders came back. They were not a one dimensional team, by any means.

Success in football begins with defense, and the offense can grow into their role while the defense keeps us in, and wins us a few games along the way.
 

Bobby Roberts

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
770
Reaction score
0
Strong defense is necessary and we have a good one, but we're not good enough to make up for offensive mistakes and multiple 3 and outs. There are still plenty of holes in our defense and I don't think that we can relay on the defense to save us everytime.

The keys at this point are:
1) defense stays strong and healthy
2) special teams plays steady - not giving up big returns
3) OL plays strong for run and pass, which allows the offense to click

#1 and 2 happened on Sunday and we won because #2 actually produced points/turnovers, while the D held the Eagles in check. Now if our OL comes together, we will have a very good team to push for the playoffs.

Basically, there's 3 phases to the game and we need to be strong in each in order to take the next step.

GO PACK GO!!!
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
Bobby Roberts said:
There are still plenty of holes in our defense...
Honestly, I don't see any holes right now. It's still too early to tell about some players who have yet to prove themselves, but at this point I'm optimistic. There is no Marquand Manuel, and no KGB, who became a major liability against the run when he began to wear down about halfway through last season. Poppinga had problems in pass coverage early last season, but he's been pretty good since then. Also, we don't have Ahmad Carroll playing the nickel, we have Jarret Bush, who looks pretty good so far. Also, I think Johnny Jolly brings more to the table at DT than Corey Williams and Colin Cole did, plus we still have those guys.

There's little depth at safety or LB, but as long as there are no major injuries at those spots (knock on wood) I just don't see any major weaknesses.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
The way our D looked...........if our O improves at all (which i think it will) we should be able to win the division, and then who knows?
I think Jennings and Morency will help alot. And they both had another week to recover, and we won without them! WITH them we should be greatly improved.
And i think MM is gonna be all OVER the o-line this week in practice.
We will see the results come sunday!
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
in case you forgot, the bears, who were a defensive minded team, lost to the colts, an offensive minded team. end of story.

And the Colts won with amazing defensive play. End of story.

******.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
dhpackr said:
in case you forgot, the bears, who were a defensive minded team, lost to the colts, an offensive minded team. end of story.

And the Colts won with amazing defensive play. End of story.

******.

its the flaming spell checker! and peyton won MVP for a reason.
 

wpr

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
1,517
Reaction score
0
Net, to answer your orignal question, I guess the debate isn't nor will it ever be over.
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
Colts forced: 2 interceptions, 4 fumbles

When your defense does that, the offense gets the ball a lot more to do things, which is why the Colts won the TOP battle with 38:04 to 21:56

And Manning, your man with the MVP, didn't even get 250 yards, and had 1 TD and 1 INT.

Defense won that game for the Colts.

End of story.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
Colts forced: 2 interceptions, 4 fumbles

When your defense does that, the offense gets the ball a lot more to do things, which is why the Colts won the TOP battle with 38:04 to 21:56

And Manning, your man with the MVP, didn't even get 250 yards, and had 1 TD and 1 INT.

Defense won that game for the Colts.

End of story.

and the 113 yards rushing by Rhodes, and the 77 yards rushing by Addai, had nothing to do with the win?
 

Obi1

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
0
Colts forced: 2 interceptions, 4 fumbles

When your defense does that, the offense gets the ball a lot more to do things, which is why the Colts won the TOP battle with 38:04 to 21:56

And Manning, your man with the MVP, didn't even get 250 yards, and had 1 TD and 1 INT.

Defense won that game for the Colts.

End of story.

On the same token, IF the Colts did NOTHING after the tunovers, BEARS win that game. Colts offense scored the points...

Having said that, I wish we had THIS defense and the 2003 Offense...
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
I like how you ignore things when it helps your argument. That's very Depack and Pyledriver80 of you.

When your defense does that, the offense gets the ball a lot more to do things, which is why the Colts won the TOP battle with 38:04 to 21:56

Because of their DEFENSIVE takeaways, the Colts offense had the ball damn near TWICE AS MUCH as the Bears, allowing them to run a LOT of offensive plays. Nobody said the Colts offense was bad.

You FAIL.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
I like how you ignore things when it helps your argument. That's very Depack and Pyledriver80 of you.

tromadz said:
When your defense does that, the offense gets the ball a lot more to do things, which is why the Colts won the TOP battle with 38:04 to 21:56

Because of their DEFENSIVE takeaways, the Colts offense had the ball damn near TWICE AS MUCH as the Bears, allowing them to run a LOT of offensive plays. Nobody said the Colts offense was bad.

You FAIL.
tell me flaming spell checker, what did i fail at? the first takeaway resulted in a punt, the second was a fumble on special teams, which had nothing to do with the colts defense, the third was a fumble by benson, but that led to a punt. I know reggie wayne caught a long pass for a TD. it was at least 50 yards. what did i lose at again. you are so silly. FSC that should be your new nickname. hahahahahaha!
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
so 1 of the 4 fumbles was on special teams. ok.

And the fact that you think field position isn't important further shows how ignorant you are.

YOU FAIL.
 

MassPackersFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
831
Reaction score
2
I really wish we could stop bickering. It's amazing that we beat the Eagles, shutting down one of the best offenses in the league (2nd last year), and people are still complaining. Our offense will improve, no doubt about it.
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
Nah, I put the ****** on block. I just hope nobody quotes him because I'll be able to read his stupidity.

I've argued with a lot of stupid people but this guy takes the cake.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
so 1 of the 4 fumbles was on special teams. ok.

And the fact that you think field position isn't important further shows how ignorant you are.

YOU FAIL.

WTF, FSC, the turnovers resulted in punts, do you understand?
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
and ignore doesn't work. Wonderful.

and you still FAIL at understanding field position.

FAIL.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
Nah, I put the ****** on block. I just hope nobody quotes him because I'll be able to read his stupidity.

I've argued with a lot of stupid people but this guy takes the cake.

more insight from the forum FLAMING SPELL CHECKER. if you try and discuss anything with him , and start to prove him wrong.
Bang, the names fly.

you proved your point
 

MassPackersFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
831
Reaction score
2
Just make sense. That way people won't target you. Don't say crap like, "He dropped a ball at the goal line!" when it clearly isn't the case. It's hard to respect irrationality.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
Nah, I put the ****** on block. I just hope nobody quotes him because I'll be able to read his stupidity.

I've argued with a lot of stupid people but this guy takes the cake.

I think of several far worse than he. If he'd jus tone his aggression down he'd have more people listening and less people wanting to see him get banned. Hopefully he can turn it around. I mean, gosh, football season is upon us. The Packers WON at HOME. Against a good team too!
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top