Wouldn't matter who we drafted for the O-Line. Until we get rid of James Campen, our O-Line will continue to stink. McCarthy will realize it some day, hope it is not the same day he is driven out of Packerland too.

Why do you post here?

True, which is why I'll start worrying about the '12 49ers if and when the '12 Packers play them again.
That's at least 5 weeks away which is a hell of a long time in the NFL.

Dude...seriously. I've never seen so much pessimism in my online life.

The 49ers are so good they could beat the Packers without a qb. Yet, teams lose games they shouldn't. With that logic, why couldn't the 49ers lose to the Packers? Yet, I suspect you give <1% chance of that happening.

The 49ers are really good. If they played the Packers again, I would (sadly) predict a 49ers win. Okay, I just want that to be clear. I too would predict a 49ers win.

Here's the difference, I would at least watch the game with anticipation and not vomit on the jersey of every person lacing up green and gold. If they lose, I would be disappointed, but at the rate you're going, it always sounds like you take it as a personal attack, and anyone who hints at any optimism is clueless.

You're going to have a stroke, dude.

i guess i'm so pessimistic because i had such high hopes.

i see rodgers' years slipping away.

got that first one.

had a chance to be something special.

now i see the window closing.

every season another roster flaw needs to be repaired... if it's not a week d-backfield, it's the lack of a pass rush. if it's not a lack of a running game, it's the inability to protect the quarterback.

i know all teams have holes, it just seems like this team can never be BALANCED... be respectable at everything... there's always something that they're MONUMENTALLY bad at. last season it was defending the pass. this season it pass pro.

the prime years of a GREAT quarterback are being wasted... and it bothers me.

Unfortunately, cow, you're correct. Alot of these dudes simply don't understand that any team with an elite QB has to "cash in" while they can.

It's very possible that after AR retires, fans will look back & see many lost opportunities. The "love-fest" that fans have for TT & MM now will disappear. ----- Hey, I expected several Lombardi Trophies after SB 31 with #4 at the helm. ---- It never happened.

I think this is fair to see for every team, though. Over the last 15 years, who has been the most successful franchise? The Patriots? 3 Super Bowls and 5 appearances (6 if you go back an additional year in their loss to the Pack). Yet, I strongly suspect that Pat fans felt AWFUL last year with their defense (as they should have) and struggling running game. In fact, even at 16-0, I'll bet they felt like there were holes. The system is setup to allow teams only to clean up so many gaps.

People complain about TT being cheap. He works under the same floor and ceiling as every other GM. There's not much room to maneuver. He also needs to be careful so that we can sign Rodgers and hopefully resign the likes of people like Matthews, Raji, and maybe even Jennings....oh, and Bush. What would we do without Jarrett Bush? :)

People forget about resigning Jennings once already, resigning Williams for a straight STEAL compared to what he would have gotten on the open-market, shoring up the secondary for much cheaper than anticipated, even after unexpectedly losing Collins.

Have there been errors? Well sure. But the people who want to bring up Harrell and Pat Lee and Brian Brohm have unbelievably selective memories. And show me ONE GM of any era who didn't make some awful picks.

And to Rocky - do people still not respect the hell out of the Wolf/Holmgren/Favre era? People may not favor TT,MM, and AR like they did with Lombardi and Starr - that may, in fact, NEVER be duplicated. I do think it's a real reach to think that the love will "disappear."

Anyway, what was I talking about again? Oh yeah, Jarrett Bush.

"When? All you did all off-season was talk about how bad this team was going to be…"

not true - it took me until 1/2 way through the 2nd quarter of the first game to realize that this team wasn't going to accomplish anything significant this season.

and they may not.

they're gonna need 11 wins.

are they about to go 3 of 4?

that's debatable.

Cow. I think you are a decent dude. But man, you are really a weird guy.

I can't, for the life of me, see what makes you tick.

that loss was due to a bogus illegal formation call "Lining up over the center" for the record

This is little late in coming, but this Cow character needs to get a clue. The Packers are tied for the most wins, regular and post-season, since 2009, have the most wins against playoff caliber teams, hold the best overall spot for average rankings of relevant statistics, and are tied for the best post-season "score card" with New Orleans (a SB win, a Wild Card appearance, and a Divisional appearance). In other words, THEY ARE THE BEST TEAM IN FOOTBALL SINCE 2009.

And all you can do is weep and moan because the aren't "cashing in" like a dynasty of the 60's, 70's and 80's. In case you missed it (which is probably very likely) the days of dynasties are over. The NFL barely has the titanic teams it used to have out of which dynasties could emerge. For what the NFL is the last 20 years or so, the Packers have been one of the best, and the best in the recent window of relevancy. If it's not good enough, learn to knit.

Lastly, for all the "fixes" that are necessary and "imbalances" etc etc, the Packers have washed out of the playoffs due to GIVEAWAYS. Look it up. Nine of the last 12 SB champions won the playoff turnover margin, the other 3 were 2nd in turnover margin for that year. Since 2009, the year the Packers won the turnover margin, they won it all, when they turned it over two out of the first three offensive plays, and again in overtime, they washed out. And when they gave the ball away 4 times last year, they washed out. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHATEVER PERCEIVED HOLES you think you saw. If the Packers make the playoffs (now at ~88%) and if they win the turnover margin, they will win it all. It's as simple as that. And there's little that the regular season, pessimistically broken down play by play, game by game, is going to tell you one way or the other which way the turnover margin is going to go. They just have to make the playoffs first. And then hang onto the ball.

funny thing is...

most people don't like my "tone" and don't like hearing what i have to say...

BUT

very rarely can the people who take exception to my observations say that I'm flat out wrong.

often times complainers are right.

Often times complainers are right?

Or perhaps there are people who are whiners that their team isn't #1 by more. They are intolerably spoiled because even though they have a mountain of toys most kids would sell their little brother have, they don't have the one that comes in that slightly different shade of blue so "f**k it, I'm so underprivileged".

If this is your attitude - Super Bowl or it's a wasted year - I can only imagine your reaction if the Packers do win it all, a terse nod of recognition and a "don't disappoint me next year like you almost did this year" tumbling from your lips.

I don't know how old you are, but there was a time when all the Packers had to do was lose their starting running back and the season went from an optimist's long shot at a playoff birth to no hope. Now, we've got a team that has had one of the toughest schedules at the beginning of the year and a boat load of injuries since, and is one historically horrible call away from being the 2nd seed and a bye in the playoffs. And it's doom and gloom.

In 2009, the Packers broke the franchise scoring mark, and had a good defense. In 2010, the offense had a few injuries and a down year, but the defense was the 2nd best since the Lombardi era. Coming out of 2010, I allowed myself the "what if" the Packers field a 2009 offense and a 2010 defense at the same time? They would be great. But I also thought what if they fielded 2010 offense and a 2009 defense? Well, in 2011 they ended up with an historically great offense and a mediocre defense, and if they had hung onto the ball in the playoffs, stood as good a chance as any. And going into 2012, the "what if's" were the same. And lo and behold, the Packers, where it counts in all practicality are fielding a 2010 offense and a 2011 defense (their points given up and QB rating surrendered are a little better than last year, but not hugely) and they effectively 9-3 with a playoff bye if Mr. Magoo hadn't been on the field reffing. So I have my answer what the Packers could be made of if they weren't running up high end points or only giving up historically low points. They are a playoff caliber team and would trade spots with only three other teams in the NFL as of this moment. If that isn't something to be amazed by, a "down season" which still has a team decently positioned, and would be even more so if it weren't for that terrible call, then I don't know what would be amazing. This a year to appreciative of that this team can whether the set backs so well and still be relevant.

But I guess for some if their hopes for a Lombardi aren't stroked by every play and every game, all they can do is be sour about it. And it's sad for you to have the bar set so high that you can't find any wonderment in having 10-11 guys of quality potency on the IR and STILL be in such decent shape. I shudder to think how you're going to react when the Packers inevitably go back to the 4-12 years serially and hopes for anything are dashed because one guys goes down.