Are there any Packer fans here?

[GuidingLight 3]

I forget who all the Packer fans are.

 

I see the Packers as much improved. The first 3 weeks should be easy money. Chi, NO, Det. They are my lock for three weeks. Convince me otherwise.

 

 

 

Also, hoffdaddy - YGM.

[Jay 0]

Definitely a Packer fan here. I think the Packers are improved from a long-term personnel perspective, but I have my reservations about this season. New coach, new system.....a very young team overall. There is a lot of talent, but I'm not willing to count any game as a given, much less early in the season.

[Brad GLuckman 519]

I agree with Jay here. I see TT building the team for a few years down the road, and not necessarily for this year. As far as their first few games, I really don't see them as a lock against any of those teams. I think NO may really turn things around this year, Chicago is the obvious favorite in the division, and Detroit has the potential (especially witht the new coaching staff) to surprise some people. So beating any of those teams will be a challenge.

 

The popular pick is picking GB to go 4-12, or in that area. My homerism tells me that they were too hurt by injuries last year to show what they really had...but in the offseason I'm not so sure they did much to make an immediate improvement on those positions that hurt them. I think some of their draft picks, especially on the O line, will pan out long term, but not in 2006.

[adam smitty 0]

Packer fan here. I can easily see a 500 season, but anything above that would be a good year for them IMO.

[swamp dog 0]

Packer fan here. I can easily see a 500 season, but anything above that would be a good year for them IMO.

 

not sure i'd put the word "easily" in there, but anything's possible. just look at the detroit tigers this year

[uubeee 0]

Sniffs......Looks around.....Guys, I think Guiding Light has set a trap for us.....he's luring us in to his thread.

 

Why does this feel like a cage will drop on me any second?

[kristv 0]

Packers fan here as well. I definitely think they have made some improvements, but I can't imagine them going over .500 this season. I think they have the talent to do it, but whether that materializes on the field remains to be seen. As ever, I am hopeful for what the new season may bring. Winning or losing record, I can't wait to see what the team does this year!

[hoffdaddy 1]

Well, I like what Thompson has done in the draft. I really think these two drafts will pay huge dividends for them. Sherman the GM put this team in a terrible position, depth and youth wise. Thompson is slowly digging out from that. Heck, he got pretty good contributions from last year's rookie class. Anything they get out of Charles Woodson is better than trotting out Carrol for another season of penalties. Defensively, I think they'll be pretty good.

 

The O line has some question marks, and this is a new offense, so there should be concern there. I'm optimistic though.

 

I did get your email. Let me know what's up.

[Grateful Parrot 0]

Packer homer here as well. IMO it's still too early to make predictions. I agree with Hoff that TT has improved the defense a bunch, but at this time, if Harris holds out and doesn't play, the CB depth really worries me. On offense, I would like to see a RB be healthy and actually run at practices, because I don't think Gado is our savior. O line has some questions whether the rooks can pick up the new blocking schemes. WR depth kinda scares me, Jennings I think will be good, as in the past years, we have to see how Fergie reacts, if he's going to step up or not. Plus we don't have a concrete kicker or punter. Not to be a downer, just a little realistic. I don't think any game is a given for us at this point in the year, I'll have to wait until training camp to see what evolves.

[swamp dog 0]

Well, I like what Thompson has done in the draft. I really think these two drafts will pay huge dividends for them. Sherman the GM put this team in a terrible position, depth and youth wise. Thompson is slowly digging out from that. Heck, he got pretty good contributions from last year's rookie class. Anything they get out of Charles Woodson is better than trotting out Carrol for another season of penalties. Defensively, I think they'll be pretty good.

 

The O line has some question marks, and this is a new offense, so there should be concern there. I'm optimistic though.

 

I did get your email. Let me know what's up.

 

hoff:

 

not trying to bust your chops, but a legitimate question: how can you say the 2005 draft will pay big dividends? there's collins in there and...? the second-round pick is already out of football because of an injury...i think there's a long way to go before thompson gets a passing grade on the 2005 draft.

 

i like what the packers did early in this year's draft, but hey, millen has gotten an A every spring on his drafts. look how that's turned out.

[hoffdaddy 1]

hoff:

 

not trying to bust your chops, but a legitimate question: how can you say the 2005 draft will pay big dividends? there's collins in there and...? the second-round pick is already out of football because of an injury...i think there's a long way to go before thompson gets a passing grade on the 2005 draft.

 

Getting a starting safety in round 2, one who has all the making of a pro bowler, makes it a very good draft. We don't know anything about Aaron Rodgers.

 

Couple things:

Brady Poppinga was starting in his first game at OLB when he tore his ACL. Kurt Campbell, another LB, tore his ACL early in the year and never played.

 

Mike Montgomery was a DE contributor most of the season.

 

Overall, I think this draft was a good one. Sadly, injuries certainly hurt. I count three guys, Murphy, Poppinga, and Campbell who were out with major injuries. Not sure how you can put that on Thompson.

 

However, I think both Popppinga and Campbell can add some special teams pop, possibly even LB depth as they return from their ACLs. Collins will only get better. Montgomery, Coston and Whitacker provide some depth on the o line, assuming they stick with the new offense.

 

Now put those guys together with this year's haul. That's a very solid, young nucleas. Just my opinion. Perhaps I'm just optimistic because Mike Sherman isn't pulling the trigger on the likes of Ahamad Carrol, Donnel Washington, and BJ Sander.

[Walter34 3]

I like what the Pack has done with their D. The best results may be a year away instead of this year however. A new system and at least 4 new starters, 2 being rookies - there should be an adjustment period. Overall, I see them as solid next year and ok this year.

 

On O, they are still held together with bubble gum and duct tape.

 

- The RBs have major health issues. Is Ahman in trouble as far as health right now? Davenport has his own injury history as well.

- The WRs are very suspect after Driver

- The oline needs alot of improvement on the interior

- Franks needs to return to previous form after a bad 2005

 

The thing going for them is favre hanging around one more year instead of aaron taking over.

 

Overall, it looks like a 7 win team with 5-8 as the win range based on health and luck.

[DaWeffa 0]

I forget who all the Packer fans are.

 

I see the Packers as much improved. The first 3 weeks should be easy money. Chi, NO, Det. They are my lock for three weeks. Convince me otherwise.

Also, hoffdaddy - YGM.

 

 

Chi, best D last season...not too sure they can win that...

 

NO...big upgrades to an already potentially solid offense...not too sure there either...

 

who knows on DET....

[Sho Nuff 720]

Getting a starting safety in round 2, one who has all the making of a pro bowler, makes it a very good draft. We don't know anything about Aaron Rodgers.

 

Couple things:

Brady Poppinga was starting in his first game at OLB when he tore his ACL. Kurt Campbell, another LB, tore his ACL early in the year and never played.

 

Mike Montgomery was a DE contributor most of the season.

 

Overall, I think this draft was a good one. Sadly, injuries certainly hurt. I count three guys, Murphy, Poppinga, and Campbell who were out with major injuries. Not sure how you can put that on Thompson.

 

However, I think both Popppinga and Campbell can add some special teams pop, possibly even LB depth as they return from their ACLs. Collins will only get better. Montgomery, Coston and Whitacker provide some depth on the o line, assuming they stick with the new offense.

 

Now put those guys together with this year's haul. That's a very solid, young nucleas. Just my opinion. Perhaps I'm just optimistic because Mike Sherman isn't pulling the trigger on the likes of Ahamad Carrol, Donnel Washington, and BJ Sander.

 

Can agree to a point...not sure how much I expect out of Poppinga this season. His rehab is going quicker than expected...but that is a year long type recovery from that. Time will tell.

 

I agree also that the defense is looking good and that Thompson's draft last year looks to be shaping up quite well. And so far not looking bad out of this draft either.

 

I like what the Pack has done with their D. The best results may be a year away instead of this year however. A new system and at least 4 new starters, 2 being rookies - there should be an adjustment period. Overall, I see them as solid next year and ok this year.

 

On O, they are still held together with bubble gum and duct tape.

 

- The RBs have major health issues. Is Ahman in trouble as far as health right now? Davenport has his own injury history as well.

- The WRs are very suspect after Driver

- The oline needs alot of improvement on the interior

- Franks needs to return to previous form after a bad 2005

 

The thing going for them is favre hanging around one more year instead of aaron taking over.

 

Overall, it looks like a 7 win team with 5-8 as the win range based on health and luck.

 

It will not be a whole new system on defense really. Sanders is a long time Bates assistant...I see very few changes from all I have read.

 

2 new rookie starters? Just Hawk really. I doubt Hodge starts. He will most likely be backing up Barnett.

Hawk, Barnett, Taylor are the most likely starters at this point.

 

So that is one new starter, Pickett is the other, Woodson the other. 3 new starters. 2 being veterans...one being a rookie...

 

Agree on the RBs, big question mark there as how long can they stay healthy. If healthy, good depth there with Green, Najeh, Gado, and Herron.

WRs are suspect, but Gardner staying around is better than just having to rely on Ferguson and Chatman.

Oline needs improvement. New scheme there and two rookies winning the guard spots so far. Only real contact will tell how well that will work.

Franks spent so much time injurred early. I hope to see him more in there to block and be the redzone target while they utilize Donald Lee more in the pass catching role between the 20s.

 

Im with you on the 7 wins...possibly 8 thing. Looking at the schedule that should be accomplished.

[Walter34 3]

2 new rookie starters? Just Hawk really. I doubt Hodge starts. He will most likely be backing up Barnett.

Hawk, Barnett, Taylor are the most likely starters at this point.

 

Picket, Woodson, Hawk and ...

 

SS Manuel?

 

Isnt Taylor new as well?

 

Hodge would be a 5th new starter if he did make it.

[cixelsyd 0]

Packer fan here... I'm not worried about the coaching change... I think it was much needed... The whole division is in flux and I feel the Pack can win the division this year...

[Sho Nuff 720]

Picket, Woodson, Hawk and ...

 

SS Manuel?

 

Isnt Taylor new as well?

 

Hodge would be a 5th new starter if he did make it.

 

Yes, Taylor would be new...forgot about that...and Manuel if he beats out Roman.

 

So actually I guess there would be 5...Hodge would keep it at 5 and be 2 rookies. But I do not see it happining.

 

Looks more like Hodge will backup Barnett, Poppinga will backup Hawk, and Roy Manning will backup Taylor.

 

Obviously so many things could change between now and the season.

[Walter34 3]

Packer fan here... I'm not worried about the coaching change... I think it was much needed... The whole division is in flux and I feel the Pack can win the division this year...

 

Not much flux in chitown with all 22 starters returning.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Not much flux in chitown with all 22 starters returning.

 

On defense I would brag about it...on offense, I think I would be a bit worried that all of the starters are returning.

[Walter34 3]

On defense I would brag about it...on offense, I think I would be a bit worried that all of the starters are returning.

 

True, but qb is upgraded by being healthy and i expect benson and Bradley to start.

 

grossman, benson, bradley > orton, jones, gage

 

I also like the depth in Griese. Last year, the Bears were forced to go with orton. It wasnt a grand plan. This year, they made sure they had a plan B just in case.

 

The O has alot to prove, but there is reason to expect improvement.

[donhaas 19]

14-2.

Super Bowl win.

[swamp dog 0]

i predicted 5-8 wins for the packers last year at this time. this year it's 4-7.

 

there's a helluva lot that has to go right for the high end of 7-8 wins. i just don't see it. the interior o-line is very suspect, the wrs are all ?? after driver, the kicking game is suspect now. pickett was let go from the rams for not putting out effort and underachieving and he promptly blows off his first off-season workout in green bay.

 

there's some stuff being possibly assembled for down the road, but there isn't much to like about the packers or their chances in 2006.

[donhaas 19]

i predicted 5-8 wins for the packers last year at this time. this year it's 4-7.

 

there's a helluva lot that has to go right for the high end of 7-8 wins. i just don't see it. the interior o-line is very suspect, the wrs are all ?? after driver, the kicking game is suspect now. pickett was let go from the rams for not putting out effort and underachieving and he promptly blows off his first off-season workout in green bay.

 

there's some stuff being possibly assembled for down the road, but there isn't much to like about the packers or their chances in 2006.

 

Your just like FOX News, Swamp - fair and balanced

[swamp dog 0]

Your just like FOX News, Swamp - fair and balanced

 

i'm not predicting much better for the lions. there's nothing in my post that a majority of non-packer homers wouldn't agree with.

[Let Da Big Dog Eat 42]

Haven't seen any talk of this from Onieda or elsewhere. When the season starts, I would not be the least bit surprised to see a LB corps of Hodge in the middle and Hawk and Barnett outside. Barnett played outside in college and Hodge played middle. It just seems natural. Some big plays given up early but with time, I really like the idea. Youth and a ton of speed and able to blitz from anywhere.

[Jay 0]

Yeh, I originally predicted an 8-8 season for the Packers, but I haven't liked what I've heard about the difficulty of learning the new offense by Favre. I think 6-10 is probably likely, but I think the Packers are going to be a very tough out, especially late in the season as the offensive line comes together. I think the Packers had one of the best off-seasons in football, but I don't think they'll reap the benefits until a little ways down the road. I'm thrilled about our draft. I think it could legitimately net us 6 starters over the long haul (Hawk, Colledge, Spitz, Hodge, Jennings, Blackman (CB)), and I really like the free agent additions as well. The youth will hurt in terms of consistency, but it's nice to have the influx of young talent.

[Grateful Parrot 0]

Yeh, I originally predicted an 8-8 season for the Packers, but I haven't liked what I've heard about the difficulty of learning the new offense by Favre. I think 6-10 is probably likely

Ok..this is just silly. Favre is a HOF QB, he can draw plays in the sand and make them happen. He never said he's not picking up the new offense, he just has to relearn the new termonology, which is different than the last 14 years. It's the same plays for the most part, he's seen them all and knows the playbook. Giving them 2 more losses because Favre has trouble with words is just nuts.

 

One thing that Huffdaddy said and everybody seems to be just passing over...it's a new coach. Sherman and his double duties (coach and GM) was a drain waiting to open. He made some real blunders in both areas, whether it was drafting busts (sanders), signing washed up FAs (nickerson), or just bad coaching (taking over play calling when OC got sick, when OC got better, his ego wouldn't let him turn back over the reins). It seems there's a new attitude in work ethic and responsibility that wasn't there the past years. I know on paper that really doesn't mean much, but a winning attitude can do wonders sometime.

[swamp dog 0]

Ok..this is just silly. Favre is a HOF QB, he can draw plays in the sand and make them happen. He never said he's not picking up the new offense, he just has to relearn the new termonology, which is different than the last 14 years. It's the same plays for the most part, he's seen them all and knows the playbook. Giving them 2 more losses because Favre has trouble with words is just nuts.

 

One thing that Huffdaddy said and everybody seems to be just passing over...it's a new coach. Sherman and his double duties (coach and GM) was a drain waiting to open. He made some real blunders in both areas, whether it was drafting busts (sanders), signing washed up FAs (nickerson), or just bad coaching (taking over play calling when OC got sick, when OC got better, his ego wouldn't let him turn back over the reins). It seems there's a new attitude in work ethic and responsibility that wasn't there the past years. I know on paper that really doesn't mean much, but a winning attitude can do wonders sometime.

 

and giving them wins because favre is coming back is foolish as well--as last year showed. there are reasons they were able to draft hawk at #5 this year--and #4 was one of those reasons. he singlehandedly gave away games last year. singlehandedly.

 

i do think he's a better option at this point than rodgers, obviously, but his days of leading anyone to the promised land are long gone.

 

steve yzerman's a hof-er, too. but he needs to retire. just like brett.

[remote controller 143]

and giving them wins because favre is coming back is foolish as well--as last year showed. there are reasons they were able to draft hawk at #5 this year--and #4 was one of those reasons. he singlehandedly gave away games last year. singlehandedly.

 

i do think he's a better option at this point than rodgers, obviously, but his days of leading anyone to the promised land are long gone.

 

steve yzerman's a hof-er, too. but he needs to retire. just like brett.

[Jay 0]

There are other reasons why I'm concerned. 2 rookie starters on the offensive line. While these guys are talented (especially Colledge), they are still rookies. 5 new starters on defense. Stupid Rod Gardner hasn't been in the OTAs I think this means there is a good chance that we'll be starting a rookie at WR, which is always more difficult. If not, it just means that Gardner will be that much more "out of the groove". Woodsen, Harris, and Pickett were all off-season no-shows. Promising secondary draft pick Blackmon hurt himself, and he was raw to begin with. All of these guys were expected to be big parts of the team this year. They are not getting the work off-season work that they will need to be productive.

 

I was hoping for a lot more buy-in and participation in the off-season program than I've seen so far.

[Parja 0]

Not much flux in chitown with all 22 starters returning.

 

But they're the Bears.

[Walter34 3]

But they're the 11-5 defending division champ Bears.

 

yeah, and your point?

[Jay 0]

I think the Bears will be better, just because they are a pretty young team. If I were a Bear fan, I'd be furious that they didn't do anything significant to bolster the WR or the TE spots. When you consider that they could have taken Marcedes Lewis in the draft, it makes you go

[Walter34 3]

I think the Bears will be better, just because they are a pretty young team. If I were a Bear fan, I'd be furious that they didn't do anything significant to bolster the WR or the TE spots. When you consider that they could have taken Marcedes Lewis in the draft, it makes you go

 

agreed. I would have liked to see them take another playmaker on O or at least sign a vet to replace Clark or bolster the wr spot.

 

They did upgrade KRs and the secondary which were also needs. They could have grabbed Lewis or Pope or Klop'stein or ...

[remote controller 143]

agreed. I would have liked to see them take another playmaker on O or at least sign a vet to replace Clark or bolster the wr spot.

 

They did upgrade KRs and the secondary which were also needs. They could have grabbed Lewis or Pope or Klop'stein or ...

I feel Muhammed will be a very stout weapon for the Bears this season, especially if Berrian steps up. He is the perfect wideout for a team that looks to try to control the clock.

[Snoopy1 0]

i predicted 5-8 wins for the packers last year at this time. this year it's 4-7.

 

there's a helluva lot that has to go right for the high end of 7-8 wins. i just don't see it. the interior o-line is very suspect, the wrs are all ?? after driver, the kicking game is suspect now. pickett was let go from the rams for not putting out effort and underachieving and he promptly blows off his first off-season workout in green bay.

 

there's some stuff being possibly assembled for down the road, but there isn't much to like about the packers or their chances in 2006.

 

Coming off a division win....Favre, Walker, Green, Driver, and you predicted 5-8 wins...ya okay.

[Walter34 3]

Coming off a division win....Favre, Walker, Green, Driver, and you predicted 5-8 wins...ya okay.

 

and he over estimated. The writing was on the wall when a good part of the oline left. The D was already in bad shape despite the winning record the year before. Add the walker injury and the RB woes and it wasnt that far fetched to see the decline coming.

[Snoopy1 0]

and he over estimated. The writing was on the wall when a good part of the oline left. The D was already in bad shape despite the winning record the year before. Add the walker injury and the RB woes and it wasnt that far fetched to see the decline coming.

 

 

WR and RB woes, not coming into the season.

 

No doubt the team was on the decline, especially with the loss of Rivera and Wahle, but going into the season, the offense still looked good enough to pencil in 8 wins.

 

I guess though we should give Swamp a break, he's only been predicting the demise of the Packers since 1996

[donhaas 19]

and giving them wins because favre is coming back is foolish as well--as last year showed. there are reasons they were able to draft hawk at #5 this year--and #4 was one of those reasons. he singlehandedly gave away games last year. singlehandedly.

 

i do think he's a better option at this point than rodgers, obviously, but his days of leading anyone to the promised land are long gone.

 

steve yzerman's a hof-er, too. but he needs to retire. just like brett.

 

Why don't you admit that the packers had a lot of injuries last year? They were starting a fifth and sixth string running back most of the season. The inside of their line was a mess. Chatman would be a decent World League receiver but not in the NFL.

 

What makes Favre a 3-time HOF QB? His arm. He can still throw the ball harder than anybody in the NFL. But that doesn't matter if has no time to throw, no running game, no receivers, and is always trying to come from behind.

 

Favre is a QB. They can play forever. Gannon and Elway won MVPs older than Favre.

Favre was one of the best ever in his prime. What part of his game has declined so much that you barely rate him ahead of Rodgers? He's not a running QB. His arm? He's still breaking WRs fingers.

 

Other question: Which QB in the league had less offensive talent around him last year than Favre? I can't think of one.

 

Favre played poorly last year. He still has great talent. He still made incredible 3rd down throws that nobody else in the league could make. Unfortunately, he made plenty of bad decisions. I don't see how with a better defense, a better running game, a better o-line, and better receivers, how he couldn't rebound.

 

You can debate whether any of these happen, and as a obsessive Packer hater you will despite the overwhelming facts and despite the fact that it will be near impossible for all of these positions to be worse than last year, but to rate Favre slightly over Rodgers at this point is just plain stupid.

 

Favre's decision-making was terrible last year. But again: What part of Favre's physical game has declined so much that you rate him so low?

Did you see the Carolina game? He single-handedly brought them back from way down in that game.

I don't predict an MVP season for Favre, but if he can be put in a position where the running game works, the defense is stout, and he just has to move the chains once in awhile, he will excel.

 

That wasn't the case last year.

 

[remote controller 143]

Why don't you admit that the packers had a lot of injuries last year? They were starting a fifth and sixth string running back most of the season. The inside of their line was a mess. Chatman would be a decent World League receiver but not in the NFL.

 

What makes Favre a 3-time HOF QB? His arm. He can still throw the ball harder than anybody in the NFL. But that doesn't matter if has no time to throw, no running game, no receivers, and is always trying to come from behind.

 

Favre is a QB. They can play forever. Gannon and Elway won MVPs older than Favre.

Favre was one of the best ever in his prime. What part of his game has declined so much that you barely rate him ahead of Rodgers? He's not a running QB. His arm? He's still breaking WRs fingers.

 

Other question: Which QB in the league had less offensive talent around him last year than Favre? I can't think of one.

 

Favre played poorly last year. He still has great talent. He still made incredible 3rd down throws that nobody else in the league could make. Unfortunately, he made plenty of bad decisions. I don't see how with a better defense, a better running game, a better o-line, and better receivers, how he couldn't rebound.

 

You can debate whether any of these happen, and as a obsessive Packer hater you will despite the overwhelming facts and despite the fact that it will be near impossible for all of these positions to be worse than last year, but to rate Favre slightly over Rodgers at this point is just plain stupid.

 

Favre's decision-making was terrible last year. But again: What part of Favre's physical game has declined so much that you rate him so low?

Did you see the Carolina game? He single-handedly brought them back from way down in that game.

I don't predict an MVP season for Favre, but if he can be put in a position where the running game works, the defense is stout, and he just has to move the chains once in awhile, he will excel.

 

That wasn't the case last year.

 

waiting fo the canned Swamp Dog reponse .........which will scream of irrelevance