Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Green and Bold: Why So Serious?

By Category

Green and Bold: Why So Serious?

In temperatures approaching 100 degrees at EverBank field, after being on the field for 65 plays, Clay Matthews ran and jumped into Letroy Guion's arms, the pair celebrating the Green Bay Packers' 27-23 victory over the Jacksonville Jaguars. 

And why shouldn't they? The Packers front seven, in sweltering heat and humidity, held the Jaguars to just 48 rushing yards. This from an inside linebacking corps anchored by a second-year player and a rookie.

The defense sacked Blake Bortles three times, and Joe Thomas came away with an interception off a deflected pass—one he had to motor 10 yards to grab, since he had actually been blitzing on that play, his first of the game. The unit also had 10 tackles for loss and seven passes defensed. 

And there, on the offensive side of the ball, was Aaron Rodgers getting pulled to the ground by his jersey at the hands of Jalen Ramsey, and still firing off a 29-yard pass to a diving Davante Adams that somehow ended up in the wideout's hands rather than on the field.

There was Jordy Nelson catching three passes on one drive in the second quarter as Mike McCarthy increased the tempo of the offense, culminating in a touchdown that gave Green Bay a 14-10 lead.

There was Eddie Lacy breaking away for a 28-yard run and taking a reception for another 17. 

There was Lane Taylor and the offensive line, after much handwringing, allowing just one sack on Aaron Rodgers.

Sure, there were some sore points for the Packers in their season opener. Davante Adams failed to bring in a deep ball in the first quarter that could have made an early statement for the Packers. 

The offense had four three-and-outs and there was some miscommunication between Rodgers and his line, which was especially egregious when Rodgers was forced to call a timeout and then immediately the Packers got slapped with a delay of game penalty that eventually killed the drive. 

There was also an issue in the fourth quarter when half the offensive line was run-blocking and half was pass-blocking, resulting in James Starks getting stuffed on third down and the Packers having to settle for a field goal. Aaron Rodgers personally called that "embarrassing."

But why, after a Week 1 win in far-less-than-ideal conditions, is there so much negativity?

Is it because people failed to estimate the Jaguars, a team on the rise that features a pair of talented young receivers in Allen Hurns and Allen Robinson, a confident quarterback with a strong arm, and a defense filled with playmakers? 

If so, that's their own fault. This was by no means a "gimme" game.

Packers fans also seem to have an issue in comparing the team's present performance to its past performance—or, perhaps more accurately, a formed idea of how the team is capable of playing. And, hey, potential is everything in football; teams who live up to theirs go to Super Bowls.

But let us also remember that each season exists on its own, as well; this is a new team with new starters at many positions. The Packers don't have to put up 2011 numbers to be considered successful. At this point, their benchmark is set at improving upon their 23rd-ranked offense in 2015. 

Considering that they have Jordy Nelson back, Aaron Rodgers hasn't thrown an interception yet this year, the offensive line isn't falling apart, and Eddie Lacy looks much quicker, they're well on their way. 

The Packers' 27 points against Jacksonville puts them at No. 10 in the league in scoring. Sure, that doesn't mean much given the sample size, but Green Bay scored more points than 14 other teams this week, accounting for ties. That's more than Arizona, Carolina, and Seattle—the conference rivals expected to go toe-to-toe with the Packers this year en route to a possible NFC Championship Game. 

Let's not feel like we can't give criticism where it is due. Quinten Rollins, for instance, definitely deserved to be benched in favor of LaDarius Gunter after giving up a couple big plays. But he also came back and had one of the most clutch plays of the game when he broke up a pass in the end zone intended for Allen Robinson. 

And the offensive miscommunications were mistakes that definitely don't belong in the regular season, but, as Wes Hodkiewicz said this week, "It's easier to learn from a win than a loss."

All things considered, this team looks just fine.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (78) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

croatpackfan's picture

Well said. I agree completely. With just one addition. Quinten Rollins make that interception possible, playing in the slot fighting for the ball!

Hematite's picture

Certainly there is a lot to be positive about regarding the Packers after one week but I think many fans are still suffering a hangover from last year and hangovers never leave a person feeling good.

staffordsneckfat's picture

Losing in OT of the divisional playoffs counts as a hangover?

I remember in '75, waking up at 5am on Mondays in December for my shitty summer mill job in Kaukauna, having drowned another John Hadl performance with about 14 warm Schlitz's the night before.

Now THAT was a hangover my friend.

PaulRosik's picture

Just breathing in the Kaukauna air in 1975 was enough to make you feel sick.

mrj007's picture

Now that is funny...

Amanofthenorth's picture

Amen. The spoiled cheese around here is starting to stink and it is sipping in to the writing. Criticizing the coach because the packers are 11-6 in early season games or some such lindberger.

johnnyd17's picture

and some people think the Sam Bradford trade was a bad one, a 1 a 2 a 123...coming months after the horrible Jim DelGaizo trade...after Scott Hunter n Jerry Tagge...

Tundraboy's picture

I liked DelGaizo. A bright spot at a time when there were not many.

ATLPack's picture

I agree on most points except for the "Lacy looks much quicker." My eye test tells me Lacy has packed about 15lbs back on, after losing about 20lbs or so in the offseason. John Lynch and others can talk about Tony Horton and P90X all they want, but it appears to me that #27 looks eerily similar to the 2015 version. Perhaps that's why the Packers are still bringing in RB's for workouts?

Nick Perry's picture

I felt at the time the schedule was released the first 2 games of the season were 2 of the toughest, maybe tougher than the Seattle game in Green Bay later in the season. Excessive heat in Week one on the road is a difficult challenge, especially against a Top 10 offense. As the Preseason wore on I became even more concerned simply because the Packers Offense was hardly on the field and at times it showed in week one. A win is a win, and the Packers are 1-0 which brings me to week 2.

I was hoping the Packers weren't the team to "Open" the Vikings new stadium. The crowd will trying to be the loudest ever to attend a NFL game. The Home Team will be charged up to show the world last season wasn't a fluke, AND they'll be hanging their "Division Championship Banner" from 2015 because, well because they have NOTHING else to hang! Despite ALL of that I think the Packers Offense will be better than week one. Eddie Lacy ALWAYS has big games against Minnesota, and Aaron Rodgers isn't Marcus Mariota. I like Mariota but AR he's not. Rodgers won't gift wrap 2 turnovers to let the Vikings back into a game. The Packers will be just as jacked up as the Vikings because they'll be coming back to claim what's theirs, the NFC North, even if it's only week 2. Nothing will quiet a bunch of Swedes and Norwegians (I'm Swedish and Norwegian) than Rodgers to get back to normal (QB rating over 100) and Eddie rushing for over 100 yards. Lacy has run for over 100 yards in 4 of the 6 games vs the Vikings, and 2 of the 3 games in Minnesota including 125 yards in 2014, 100 yards in 2015, and 94 yards in 2013, all Wins for the Packers.

RCPackerFan's picture

While the Packers have the 'easiest' schedule on paper this year, the schedule makers really didn't do them any favors in the timing of the games. Its not the easiest schedule when you look at it.

Including the preseason they will have 4 straight road games to start the year. They had to play in Jacksonville in week 1 which will likely be the hottest game of the year. Week 2 they play at the Vikings new stadium, which will probably be the loudest environment of the year. They have their bye in week 4. Then after a stretch of home games they have 4 out of 5 games on the road. Basically all of November they are on the road. Then to finish the season they play against Seattle, at Bears, against Vikings and at Lions. 3 division games to end the year with 2 of them on the road is not the easiest of things to do.

phillythedane's picture

Well said.

Juli Hogan's picture

totally agree. they old R E L A X comes to mind.

RCPackerFan's picture

I always look forward to Wednesdays to see what Michelle writes. Another great article Michelle!

I thought for the first game, which was on the road against a team they haven't faced since 2012, and a team that is ascending, i thought they played well.

For the first game of the year, to play in that heat, I thought it was a good start to the year.

dobber's picture

"I always look forward to Wednesdays to see what Michelle writes. Another great article Michelle!"

Well said. Thanks to Michelle and all the other writers who take time out of their day jobs and family lives to provide this for us.

mnbruton's picture

Thanks so much, guys! It really means a lot to know I'm not just shouting into the void. :)

Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

I don't know...there are plenty of voids out here posting on CHTV. But thanks from me as well. To you and all of our writers.

bleedsgreen's picture

Not at all! "positivity" isn't simply just a pollyannaish "let's only see the good side so we feel good" kind of thing. It's a very healthy and accurate assessment of a long-term project in the making. Players and management can generally understand this, fans unfortunately do not lol

Carping early on actually harms a team in the long run. Focusing on strengths and building them is the way to peek at the end of the year. Thanks for your writing Michelle.

Jersey Al's picture

Appreciation feel soooooooooo good.

porupack's picture

Happy for the win, but, we all are looking for signs that our criticisms/worries of the past are finally over. Until we see dominance, we're going to keep worrying. Why? Because though GB won the first 6 games last year (we heard the 'win is a win' mantra then too) many saw some serious vulnerabilities, and by week 7, so did other OCs and DCs.... and so wins weren't just wins. The initial wins just masked weaknesses.

So last week (forgive our negativity please), but understand that we see Jax receivers making big plays with high yards per catch. GB had pretty modest yards per catch. Nor did the run game alter the Jax defensive plan. We're just not seeing dominance on offense. Rogers was hurried too much. We're tired of so many games won with the clocking winding down on a too-close-comeback attempt.

When we start seeing GB shut down comeback attempts, or better yet, make them hopeless by early 4Qer, then we might not lack so much confidence after wins. Until then, we just have the nagging doubt that GB is really good.

dobber's picture

You're right: the struggles of a year ago, when they couldn't find consistency on offense and they struggled with injuries, have to be weighing on their minds. A win IS still a win, so long as you're still assessing your performance and not shrugging off your issues and moving ignorantly forward.

In general, you want the team to be loose. You want them to be confident. You don't want them to be uptight. I don't get the feel that they're uptight, but there are plenty of distractions and plenty of questions swirling around this team, many of which have nothing to do with what's going on on the field.

John Galt III's picture

Yards per pass

We were worst in the NFL last year @ 5.7 yards per pass. First game, again 5.7 yards per pass. Good article in Saturday's Wall Street Journal of all places discussing this statistic. No team since the merger in 1970 that finished last in this stat in a year made it to the SB the next year.

Given that, what does it portend and what to do about it. Stats point out good things or bad things. I am guessing that if you average 5,7yards per pass, that the safeties play up closer and limit your options and/or more defensive players are in the box so to speak, again limiting you options. The defenses just don't think you can throw deep consistently..

This out for discussion - any ideas or nothing to worry about, now that you are aware,

Just asking.

dobber's picture

"We were worst in the NFL last year @ 5.7 yards per pass. First game, again 5.7 yards per pass."

It's easy enough to say that it's just one game and that the sample size isn't yet large enough to be meaningful, but in all likelihood the fast, aggressive defense they'll see in Minneswampy this weekend will keep their ypa down, too, which will give them two games to start the season where they're less than impressive in that regard. I think we'll have to wait until the bye to truly know something about the quality of this offense and whether or not 2015 is an aberration or 2016 is the lingering hangover.

John Galt III's picture


makes sense - thanks

lucky953's picture

"There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics" - Mark Twain

badaxed's picture

astute observation. we will see more of the samje I am afraid.

scullyitsme's picture

You can't stop the doom and gloomers. Lacy is still fat, Davonte can't catch, lane Taylor will never be josh sitton, ypc sucks, what else did I miss? It's a football game, what's the actual point of being negative? I prefer to leave the negativity to the Viking sites and their trolls on this one, but I hate to say, this one has been trending that way lately.

John Galt III's picture

Coaches in theory correct errors. Knowledgeable fans can recognize things that need changes as well. It's not doom and gloom. It's constructive criticism, because we like our team.

mnbruton's picture

Oh, and I'll be the first to say that my columns are by no means always positive. There is definitely a place for constructive criticism. But after the first game of the season, a win, I was shocked to see so much negativity.

Finwiz's picture

There's negativity because many fans on here like myself and "Since61" have seen many iterations of Packer rosters over the years, and the inevitable comparisons take place. I played football, watched football and love football, so I think I know what A,B,C, and D grade quality of performance looks like. IMO, the Packers have plateaued, and many of us are looking for something to indicate team performance is on the "rise" or taking the next step as MM is fond of saying. It isn't as much about individual game results as it is about general execution of the offense and defense...fundamentals. A team with an 11 year tenured coach shouldn't be having blown assignments, missed "audibles" and flawed execution of simple basics. These failures point to coaching rather than individual performance, meaning there's a problem in teaching of the concepts. I didn't see much different in game 1, that we haven't seen in the last 4-5 years, and I fear not much is going to change with the same O & D coaching philosophies.

I recall one play in the Steeler/Redskin game on Monday night, 4th and 1 at about the 45, 1:15 seconds in the half. Tomlin goes for it. It was a perfectly executed play, a crossing route where the receiver broke his route off perfectly about 4-5 yards downfield, had at least 2-3 yards separation, ( what I would classify as WIDE OPEN) pass delivered in stride by Rothlisberger and an easy 1st down. This was a new receiver, number 10 I believe, no big name, no big star, but he knew his job and what to do. I thought, damn, they made that look so easy, that's what I NEVER, or very rarely, see out of the Packers.

Bohj's picture

It's like a business right!? So...if you have constant staff turnover there's going to be a learning curve before the business runs smoothly. You can't expect the business to run perfectly the first day you open with new guys on the job. No matter who the boss is. Let one of the youngest teams in the NFL get a few games going before we gauge things like a 'rise' in performance. None of these NFL teams are the same from year to year. The draft and cap are making turnover every 3-4 years now for many positions. Because guys do or don't can't say that Tomlin > McCarthy. They're not on the field of play. Scheme means little. Just execute. You can draw up the worst play ever, but if you get open.....scheme doesn't mean anything.

Finwiz's picture

Not sure what you meant by this post....scheme means the difference between success or failure of a play, and can result in better execution. Flawed scheme doesn't necessarily equate to guaranteed success, even if executed perfectly. Flawed scheme indicates failure from the start. It comes down to evaluating flawed scheme vs. failure of execution. We don't know the specifics to comment intelligently on what applies in this case. But we've seen enough over the years to know there's far too many total breakdowns in execution from game to game. When you have turnover and the talent is young, then it falls on the shoulders of the coaches to get players up to game speed. If you fail to execute, well, you drafted the players because you know they have talent, they're on your team, so when they fail it's on YOU as the coach. I didn't imply that Tomlin>McCarthy, that wasn't my point. The point was the separation from a very young receiver, and that points to either perfect execution, great coaching, or talent. I think the Packers have sufficient talent, so when they fail to have receivers running free, I suspect it's coaching or scheme that's at fault. Don't know about you, but I got my heart ripped out by the Giants game for a trip to NFC championship in Favres last year, and the Seattle game that was CLEARLY won, with any modicum of successful performance in the last five minutes, and of course last years total debacle that has become ALL TOO FAMILIAR! If it's different players every year due to salary cap turnover, then I've only got two places left to go to place culpability....coaching or scheme.

holmesmd's picture

Players aren't robots....there is that. These overly empirical arguments like football is science is truly puzzling. Cops, doctors, teachers...and every other profession in the world either screw up or may not be as efficient as desired. It's called life. This deification of NFL players is beyond if these guys are really that much different than any other human employee? Sure they have tremendous talent and make a relatively large wage but they are people just the same guys. Sorry to break it to ya. GB is one of the bet organizations in all of pro sports. I think we should all appreciate that from time to time instead of this neurotic obsession with what always wrong. It's a friggin buzz kill at minimal. Just sayin

scullyitsme's picture

The key word being constructive. Since unlike coaches, gm's and players, you opinion doesn't really matter to their game of football, unless you think all the above read your comments and think...hmm, I was going to play football this way but that John galt on cheeseheadtv made a good point. Then really it's not constructive, just whining.

johngalt's picture

Easy on the John Galt reference. I don't share his opinion- just his nod to Ayn Rand. Btw- Ayn would tell JGIII to "toughen up buttercup, and quit griping."

johnnyd17's picture

you left out weak punting

holmesmd's picture

That's the most perspective based comment on this thread so far. I don't get it either. Perseverate and worry.... what's the point. Not one here plays, could play, or could coach. Isn't it better to enjoy the season. This blog is starting to feel like ESPN, analysis upon analysis for the sake of....analysis. I sure hope that more fans are actually enjoying and appreciating the games than it seems here?!:( Makes me just kind of feel sad.

carusotrap's picture

It's like the difference between a MINI and a BMW. We expect the BMW and, if we're honest, have sort of been promised it, but we've been getting the MINI. Nice car, gets you places, and is even fun. But it's not the same. Now maybe, we need to admit that the BMW isnt realistic...except they're both made by the same company out of parts that do the same thing. So why do our parts always add up to a MINI why the guy across town gets the BMW?

And just to torture the metaphor even more, what's more, we seem to be able to afford the BMW, but we always buy the MINI straight off the lot with hail damage and missing floor mats and then repair it in our garage.

OK...yeah...I'm done here.

Finwiz's picture

@Caruso....loved the analogy and metaphor. Not sure we've been getting a MINI, but we clearly haven't been getting the BMW. The Packers clearly know fans will continue to pay for, and accept the flawed BMW, so they have no intention of changing the franchise to Mercedes or Lexus. That's another component of this discussion that gets entirely overlooked. There's nobody held accountable for all the quality and performance problems, given the price paid, not only in monetary terms, but blind brand loyalty as well!

PaulRosik's picture

Its a good analogy until you realize that there is only one team you can point to out there who is this BMW. And they have the GOAT coach and QB on their roster. Otherwise the Packers are the next in line model on this lot. So the Packers are not a mini but are more an Audi. A good, safe model with lots of features but maybe a bit boring. 90 % of the league wish they could have the Audi but they haven't measured up.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

LOL. I like your analogy, Paul.

Spock's picture

I don't know. It was the first game of the season. I saw: Packers defenders flowing to the ball, lots of energy, a Jag team that appeared to be MORE gassed than the Packers in the heat, Rodgers making the type of play only he can make, etc. I liked most of what I saw. It's early, but I really enjoyed the game (especially since they won!). Let's wait a few games before running up the white flag people! Peace.

Since '61's picture

Week 1 in the NFL has become a week of over reactions no matter what the results. If your team loses "the season is doomed". If your team wins "they didn't do this or they should have better at this". It's not just Packer fans, it's all around the league. Packer fans want/need to see dominance from their team. In fact 2011 was the last season when our offense was consistently dominant. We need to go back to the Holmgren days 95-97 to find a Packers team dominant on both sides of the ball. This era of the NFL has been purposely arranged to prevent dominant teams. The league does not want one or two dominant teams and the CBA, free agency, salary caps and rules changes all work to prevent dominant teams from evolving. The NFL's last true "dynasty" were the Cowboys teams of the early '90s which is almost 25 years ago. The Pats of the early 00s were efficient but not dominant. They were one play away from losing their SBs. Over reaction is a matter of managing expectations. If you expect your team to be dominant every week you are likely to be disappointed win or lose. I prefer to enjoy the Packer victories for what they are. A good team which finds a way to win while overcoming the flaws and weaknesses in their roster. Thanks, Since ' 61

JDK52's picture

Well said, '61. Also, who puts a 'dislike' on this?? There are some real prizes in this group.

PaulRosik's picture

it is true. Every advantage in the NFL goes to the losing teams. The draft, and salary cap is designed to make it impossible to keep an all star team on one roster. But somehow fans seem to expect a perfect roster when the NFL is working to make sure you cant have one.

The margin between winning and losing in the NFL is always tiny. Being upset over the margin of victory on the road in the NFL is always just expecting too much.

lucky953's picture

There's no draft or salary cap on coaching or scouting. The Packers keep making the playoffs despite drafting in the bottom half for 10 years. I know many cant wait for TT to be gone but I'd say we're pretty fortunate to have talent at the top.

ray nichkee's picture

I just want to echo most of what has been said. Perfectly stated by Michelle and the commentors.

Handsback's picture

The biggest issue I see is the passing game. Not a lot of long completions or over the middle attempts. It may be just getting Cook and Rodgers on the same page.

The defense looks good to me. Perry and Jones worked great and the DBs will play better w/ or w/o Shields.

PaulRosik's picture

I think it is total spoiled fandom for the Packers. They are winning 10 + games per year and going to the playoffs 7 years in a row but with only one Super Bowl win the spoiled fans want heads rolling.

Get rid of Thompson, fire McCarthy, trade Lacy, buy every free agent that's out there. These fans want to see something like this happening. The spoiled ones make it sound like winning the Super Bowl is easy and all you got to do is: insert their favorite theory here.

Just read the "there is no accountability" comments here. These people want firings for making the playoffs but not the Super Bowl. There will never be any way to make these people happy.

Tarynfor12's picture

A win is a win.
We made the playoffs 7 years in a row.
We win our Division as often.
We get double digit victories.

We have the best QB, supposedly, in the NFL. These ' achievements' are expected and the norm for any top 5 QB. It's what is achieved beyond that that is being dismissed by the thinking of the previous. The play in week one is again being accepted as more than it should be allowed.
Acceptance of mediocrity is the path to, dare I say it,....excuses.....something that this team has excelled in that leads the fans to accepting the previous mentioned as successful seasons.
Hail to Ceasar!
Hail to the Packers!
Every week and every month until our Ides of March in January, when the ignorance of complacency appears with dagger in hand.
: )

Finwiz's picture

Excellent post, honest, objective, logical and accurate.

PaulRosik's picture

Such an easy and lazy argument. They didn't win it all so something must be wrong. We don't want to fire the coach so we are all mindless sheep who don't care about winning, The Packers didn't make the move you thought they should have so the management must only care about "good enough" and doesn't actually want to win.

When you make specific arguments they can be discussed. But you just make vague accusations of complacency and incompetency with no substance. It is just claptrap.

Rodgers is indeed a future hall of fame QB. Why that is a guarantee of Super Bowl wins is puzzling to me. The Saints have a future HOF QB and struggle to win 8 games. The Steelers have a future HOF QB and have missed the playoffs 2 of the last 4 years. Believe it or not winning a Super Bowl is difficult. Making it to the playoffs seven years in a row is difficult.

By and large I feel the Packers management and staff have done a quite good job. But when they make errors lets point them out and disucss it. By all means when you have a specific argument and point I want to hear it. But when its just this angst claptrap of Packer fans are sheep and Packer management doesn't care might I suggest you vent these rantings to another source.

Tarynfor12's picture

I have never called for the firing of MM or TT. I have often called into question the complacent offensive play, which appears as lack if confidence since the 2011 season. Yes, Rodgers gas gotten his stats, but this team on offense has had the ability to put the defense at ease when it was bad and hasn't and when the defense plays well, the offense via play calling and individual effort has left them hanging.
It's the forte' of MM to do all he can to keep opponents in the game and lose games that shouldn't have been a thought possible.
McCarthy is too conservative and equate to a larger degree of lack of confidence in his tools or blueprints each game. : )

PaulRosik's picture

Now that's an actual criticism with some specificity that can be discussed. I may even agree with it. I think it would behoove the Packers to go at a fast tempo almost constantly. My wife is always asking me what's wrong as I groan during Packer games as Rodgers once again lets the play clock slip from 1 towards 0 before he snaps the ball. I understands why he does it I just think the Packers would benefit from more alacrity. They should go to the fast pace offense often and not just when Rodgers is trying to catch a 12th man on the field. A fast paced offense keeps the defense in simple alignments and forces them to keep the same personnel on the field. It often benefits the running game even more than the passing game. The Packers (and in fact all NFL teams) also go way too much into a shell with the lead and don't go for the kill often enough.

I don't think its a lack of confidence but rather the opposite that he thinks he can control the clock and win the game without the risks. I would be excited to see the Packers go into a quick break offense and stay in it for large chunks of the game. But I doubt I will see it other than in spots when the Packers are trying to jumpstart the offense when things go bad.

holmesmd's picture

Agreed. It is however tough to do when it's a 110 degrees and the 1st unit hasn't played together in a game? Patience Grasshopper;) Lol

dobber's picture

"We have the best QB, supposedly, in the NFL. These ' achievements' are expected and the norm for any top 5 QB."

Tell that to Drew Brees, stuck on a low-talent, shallow team, dealing with 25% of its cap in dead money (after cutting CJ Spiller yesterday).

Tarynfor12's picture

An yet, if the Packers were to get that offensive effort from the more clearly talented offense, these discussions would never take place. But, most despise any or all dispute when the Packers simply survive week to week and then get tossed aside in January.
If Brees can get so much from a shallow team, what the hell is wrong in GB. : )

dobber's picture

I think the issue is that Brees is playing well, but his team is crap.

Tarynfor12's picture

Saints team plays like crap, Brees plays great, lose by a gutsy call for two by Del Rio by 1 put after still getting a field goal attempt.

Rodgers is being touted for his play, Jac has been called lame, and we couldn't close it out early as was expected but need a defensive play with under a minute to hold onto a ' win is a win '.

Again, what's wrong in GB?

staffordsneckfat's picture


You're messing with us right? You can't possibly believe this argument. You started this thread saying Top 5 QBs making the playoffs is the norm and should be expected. Now that this statement turned out to be flat wrong, you're arguing the Saints loss at home was better than the Packers road win??

Please, pass me whatever you're smoking.

Tarynfor12's picture

How is it flat wrong?
Drew Brees is dealing with a cluster f%#3 of crap in the FO. The play of Brees weekly and with what he has, begs to the rare time when my statement looks wrong. Point is he does more with less and loses out, while we get less with more and garner playoff spots via weak division play more often than not the last 8 seasons. We shouldn't be clinching a spot in week 17 but in week 14-15 yearly at the worst.

LAS VEGAS-TOM's picture

Tarynfor12, GREAT POST!! I love reading your posts & the way you write. Everything you are saying is CORRECT, According To Hoyle.

You are Missing out on the Most Important reason for what you are saying.

Wish I could get through to you. It's so simple!!

LAS VEGAS-TOM's picture

Tarynfor12, You know we see a number of things the same. Do you think the money showed up for Oakland by accident? Do you think the line moved 2 pt's to Jacksonville because money was showing up for Jac. Do you think the Oak line went to +3 because $$$ was being bet on NO?

Wish we could meet sometime, just as friends, & talk.

Hope you are doing what I think? I have money on GB to take it all. It's early, but I like what I see. I'm looking at things differently than you are. (I Think)?

What's wrong in GB? What's wrong is right. What's right is wrong?

I have No Opinion on TT, but MM is a SMART COACH.

I'll have a hard time Betting GB -2 1/2 at Minn. But I just might. It sounds like you're running left after Sunday's game. It looks like a loss coming. I just might run right.

Look forward to more of your posts. I have gotten some good info. Betting on GB Sunday would go against everything I stand for. I don't want to bet anymore, but It's hard to stop.

Where is the $$$$ going Sunday night? 30 years tell me GB. What do you think?

Tarynfor12's picture

The sharps/wise guys had their money on Jac for a reason as did I.
The public will push this game back up to 3.5 by Sunday and the sharps will be all over Minn.
Never bet for/against your team unless you can see things for what they are in your head.
Be careful of the Oak/Atl game. Can the Raiders keep cool after a big road win and Atl will surely give their all to stay relevant and even with Car, though they'll fizzle later. Take the over in Saints and perhaps three team tease them moving the points.

LAS VEGAS-TOM's picture

Tarynfor12, Most here don't like our talk, or take on games. I can see your
entire outlook. It doesn't matter what game you are talking about, I know your mind set. You do not see mine.

The Big Money was Lost on Jacksonville, the Smart money was on GB.
The Big Money was Lost on NO, the smart money was on Oakland.

I personally would rather see this line go up. At 3 1/2, if I were betting, I'd be on GB. If it would go to -1, I'd be on Minn. Then again, as I've said, I tend to overthink the GB game.

holmesmd's picture

Get married and talk privately...please;) Lol, eye roll.

LAS VEGAS-TOM's picture

Tarynfor12, For some reason they removed all my comments to you from this thread, some of yours as well.

mcduff67's picture

Do or die, my Packers are my team, Living in NM but still continue to follow. Die hard Green & Gold live & die forever, never to jump off the ship. 1966 until today they are my team, love em' support em' good or not so good. GO PACK !!

Lphill's picture

Way too much criticism after 1 game, it was a road win in tough weather conditions , against a team on the rise , Blake Bortles is better than any QB the Vikings have , plus if you compare defensive stats from last year for the Packers and Vikings they are pretty close . I think the Packers win by 2 scores on opening night which will be a nightmare for Vikings fans which is well deserved .

Bohj's picture

It's all about perspective for this style of managing.
1) The pack is one of the youngest teams every year. It is a "new" team.
2) McCarthy has been there for ten years and should be responsible for missed fundamentals? See point #1 about new players.
3) See Since 61's comment about Cap era
4) Name one other team to have the success the Packers are having excluding Patriots.
5) Two Overtime losses and a walk off field goal in the playoffs = Accepting a mediocre team?
6) Young teams need the full season to hit their stride. Get hot at the end. Go on a run. Hopefully get a ring. That's good enough for me.

Icebowler's picture

A "W" Sunday night in the brand new "Glass Green House" to the West (with emphasis on the Green) will go a long way toward putting all of the pessimism to rest.

mrj007's picture

I just want the Pack to pound the living shit out of a team from kick off to the end in a Nationally televised game. A win so convincing there can be no doubt as to their "identity". And I have been teased before. Can they do it this Sunday? I can see that based on some of what I saw last week they can. ESPN even put them at no. 1 on power ranking. (I think Pats or Steelers could be more deserving). Stop the dumb penalties, improve the communication, and make tackles. Do that perfectly on Sunday and no one will doubt who is on top. I just hope this year's version of the Packers has the fortitude to get it done.

holmesmd's picture

So... that has to happen the 1st friggin game of the season?! Are you guys high?! Jesus, chill out and let the team gain some mojo. It seems many here that are the most opinionated have never actually competed in athletics and fail to understand the concept of "rhythm"? It's real. You either know, or you don't. SMH

PaulRosik's picture

The Packers won a road game in the NFL. I am never going to be mad about how they did that.

Now if you want to discuss a problem - whos playing corner for the Pack this week? Shields is dinged, Hawkins is watching practice with a hammie, Dorleant was placed on IR. So we are ready to roll with Rollins, Randall and Gunter? Hyde will have to end up playing corner some. Or is there a move off the PS coming?

lucky953's picture

Stop the run, stop the run. MN passing game a mere shadow of JAC.

holmesmd's picture

TT just called my phone and asked if I had plans Sunday? Lol. Looks like I may get a shot?!Hahaha.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Bortles dropped back to pass 42 times. 35 times there was no pressure. Some concern, but then we were in nickel a lot.

On defense, we have one new starter, Martinez. One could argue that Perry is a new starter, but he's played that position for quite a while. We might see another starter down the road at NT or DE. The D is pretty young overall. On offense, new starters are Taylor and Cook. Both at least are veterans. I expect to see more of Monty, who is new-ish.

The offense looked a lot like last year's offense. AR's back must be getting tired. Lacy did look quicker, though he doesn't look 235. Overall, Lacy looks like he can establish the run. Definitely a Plus over last year. WRs didn't look any better than last year. So, we need Nelson to be elite, or Cook to develop into a weapon. Taylor's play overall was encouraging, but GB did give him help in pass pro about 55% of the time. We will see if the coaches continue to think he needs that much help. Most thought he could run block without much drop off from Sitton. The defense looked pretty good against an easily above average offense.

So, some pluses, some minuses, but it was a win on the road against a decent team, one good enough to beat us.

toolkien's picture


Yeah, serious.

Have people forgotten how 2014 ended?

So there was a mulligan year last year due to Nelson getting hurt. But, the seasons are running through the hour glass. Too many seasons with guys getting fat, too many seasons pushing sideways with injuries (Rodgers, Nelson), and too much insistence on trying to be the NY Giants of the last decade instead of utilizing the talent of arguably one of the best QB's in NFL history. I wasn't against making such a shift in theory, but McCarthy isn't a Coughlin, much less a Belichick.

That's what's so serious. The Packers in the Favre era made too little out of the regular season abilities that turned into playoff berths only to fade away with many embarrassments. We seem to be riding the same train the last decade. I REALLY try and enjoy the ride, but it's been five years - going on ten before we know it - since the last Super Bowl.

I can take the endless youth movement, I can take different philosophies than mine, I can take making bold moves, but it gets hard to look at the last 24 years and see SOME ultimate success, but certainly not commensurate with the potency at hand, year in, year out. There's MAYBE three years left in the Rodgers bottle, including this year. Two-thirds of the time since 2010 is already gone with one NFCCG collapse to show for it. Each season is its own story, but there's a big picture as well, and I don't want to reach 2020, with almost THREE DECADES of one of the top 2-3 regular season teams and only three SB appearance and two wins. The longer it takes, the greater each season becomes, and the greater each game within each latter-end season becomes. Sorry if I'm big picture guy turned small picture, but it's how to be philosophical in the long run and not get constantly worked up. But it eventually has to give way to a reasonable expectation of success of the ultimate kind. The Packers already lag behind the Patriots and the Steelers and now the Broncos for accumulating long term success. They have as much ultimate success as the slightly above mediocre NY Giants over the last few decades.

There was a lot of sloppiness in that game on Sunday. Sloppiness is what killed the 2014 season. I see a LOT of potency, but consistency seems elusive. McCarthy has been quick with the "we'll fix that NEXT year" line the last half-decade, and to his credit they usually do. But then SOMETHING ELSE gets deathly out of whack to become this year's "thing to fix for next year". Enough with "next year", my expectation is get it fixed THIS YEAR. An in-flux, mis-communicating offense - with a bend but don't break D yet again - doesn't get things off with a bang.

AGAIN, certain powers-that-be have 2014's collapse to answer for. A "we're so good we can cruise through the pre-season and get things tight by October" attitude isn't comforting. Seems to be a lot of room for the "we'll fix that NEXT YEAR" line to be invoked yet again when things are still too loose in late November. Pretty soon you run out of "next years".

We're likely within a few short years of having a consistently frustrating team to watch again. The likelihood we get ANOTHER HOFer QB is slim to none. Watching McCarthy make decisions like he's got Jerome Bettis in the backfield and the '00's Pittsburgh defense, instead of a back that can keep the passing lanes honest for a guy possibly better than Peyton Manning and a bend-but-don't-break D, is getting really old. I don't want to watching a 4-12 team come 2021 and shaking my head at what became of the previous decade. Watching clips of McCarthy babble about "next year" and "pad level" isn't going to do it for me. Watching a couple more "America's Games" on top of 2010 is what I'm looking for.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."