Official studs and duds Viking game

[Mondio]

I don’t know why people think Dez would be better than anyone in this team? He was fading in skills with Dallas, then blew an Achilles. He’ll be lucky to be able to keep up with Graham when it comes to game speed. That’s bad enough I don’t even need to talk about where I think his hands are

 

[swhitset]

I don’t know why people think Dez would be better than anyone in this team? He was fading in skills with Dallas, then blew an Achilles. He’ll be lucky to be able to keep up with Graham when it comes to game speed. That’s bad enough I don’t even need to talk about where I think his hands are

I think it’s pretty obvious that most NFL GMs agree with you.

 

[elcid]

What makes you say this, about the locker room never being strong? Have you seen any of the players talking about each other, in the locker room? I have and I would say it seems quite the opposite, this team seems to have good chemistry. Taking the chance on poisoning the well with a bad apple wouldn't be smart IMO. While I acknowledge your point that he might be better than a lot of our receivers, I just wouldn't risk it.

I think you're misunderstanding my point, which is that IF Dez comes in and IF he is actually able to turn our locker room upside down, than the chemistry must have seemed better than it really is. I am not saying that our locker room is in a bad state right now, on the contrary. I too believe the guys are gelling very well together. I am just saying that if the fears of many are true and Bryant is able to wreck our team spirit, then our team spirit must have been more of an illusion than an actual fact to begin with. Adding to that very conditioned statement, I find it highly unlikely that a humbled veteran coming in during the season can create much havoc and division in our locker room anyway.

I don’t know why people think Dez would be better than anyone in this team? He was fading in skills with Dallas, then blew an Achilles. He’ll be lucky to be able to keep up with Graham when it comes to game speed. That’s bad enough I don’t even need to talk about where I think his hands are

What's the cost of actually finding out? I'm all for someone better/cheaper/humbler/younger joining the team. But the pickings are slim, and we need receiving help. I am willing to not panic yet, but it seems to me our passing attack is same old same old for the past 3 years. Aaron does not consistently trust anyone outside of Adams. We need to find experienced receivers who he does trust. I'd advocate giving Jordy a call too by the way.

I think it’s pretty obvious that most NFL GMs agree with you.

Most GM's run teams which are not in dire need of receivers as the Packers are though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don’t know why people think Dez would be better than anyone in this team? He was fading in skills with Dallas, then blew an Achilles. He’ll be lucky to be able to keep up with Graham when it comes to game speed. That’s bad enough I don’t even need to talk about where I think his hands are

I think many are remembering the pre-injured 2014 and prior version of Dez Bryant, as well as forgetting about all the team issues he had. While I do think he potentially could be better than some of the WR's currently on the team, I wouldn't risk putting him into the mix. Sure, he may have softened with age, but what happens when he is only getting 4-8 snaps a game? Reports say that he won't be looking to play until mid October, if the Packers feel they need WR help, I would prefer they look elsewhere.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think you're misunderstanding my point, which is that IF Dez comes in and IF he is actually able to turn our locker room upside down, than the chemistry must have seemed better than it really is.

I didn't misunderstand your point. If you have ever been on a team, with a poison apple, you will know that it doesn't take much to start getting guys who were previously pretty happy and content, off tilt. Do you really want to risk testing "how strong that chemistry is" by adding Bryant? Sounds more like a social experiment. "If the chemistry is strong, they will survive him, if they don't, it wasn't strong to begin with."

Still a hard pass for me.

 

[elcid]

I didn't misunderstand your point. If you have ever been on a team, with a poison apple, you will know that it doesn't take much to start getting guys who were previously pretty happy and content, off tilt. Do you really want to risk testing "how strong that chemistry is" by adding Bryant? Sounds more like a social experiment. "If the chemistry is strong, they will survive him, if they don't, it wasn't strong to begin with."

Still a hard pass for me.

Again, I do not believe that an older Bryant would be much of a distraction, let alone a social experiment. Adding a guy like AB or Richie Incognito sounds like a social experiment to me, adding a guy like Bryant a calculated risk. But agree to disagree then.

 

[sschind]

I don’t know why people think Dez would be better than anyone in this team? He was fading in skills with Dallas, then blew an Achilles. He’ll be lucky to be able to keep up with Graham when it comes to game speed. That’s bad enough I don’t even need to talk about where I think his hands are

Bring in a guy with the same skillset as the ones we have only he is on his way down instead of maybe being on his way up? Nah, I'd rather stick with who we have.

I didn't watch the viking game so I'm not sure what happened there but I am willing to concede that just maybe facing two very good defenses along with being in a new system (I give the defense theory more weight by the way) might have had something to do with it. I'm not saying the guys we have are the answer but I'm not ready to give up on them yet. I just don't think there are any FA's to bring in that would give us an upgrade and certainly any trades that would really help us would need to be studied for the overall cost involved. It may just be too much.

Again, I do not believe that an older Bryant would be much of a distraction, let alone a social experiment. Adding a guy like AB or Richie Incognito sounds like a social experiment to me, adding a guy like Bryant a calculated risk. But agree to disagree then.

Its possible and maybe even probable that Bryant has been humbled a bit by his situation and he would accept his role with grace and professionalism. I don't think adding Bryant would be an issue from that standpoint. My question at this point would be is he really any better than who we have given his injury and time away from the game. I'm sure there are other teams "hurting" as much as we are at WR and he still doesn't have a job.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I didn't watch the viking game

Wait....what???? You call yourself a Packer fan?

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

 

[sschind]

Wait....what???? You call yourself a Packer fan?

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

A friend of mine recently lost his wife and he had an event he had to attend for the first time without her and I went along for moral support.

Just so you know I will be missing a lot of the games. As punishment for not being able to work Fridays and Saturdays my new boss has been scheduling me every Sunday. It used to kill me to miss Packer games but then my nephews started youth football and played on Sundays and I missed a quite a few over the years. It doesn't bother me anymore.

From what I understand when you are voted off the island you are put up in seclusion in a luxury 5 star hotel for the remainder of the program so you don't spill your guts. I can be ready in 30 minutes. When does the limo pick me up?

 

[greengold]

sschindy, hat’s off to you bud!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I hope I am wrong, but I think there is legit concern over our passing game. I say that knowing who we have played, as well as witnessing the first Q of Sundays game. I say that for a couple of reasons. One, we have seen this before in Green Bay and the group of WR's we have now aren't screaming "experience" IMO. Second, the other 2 teams that faced the Vikings (Atlanta Week 1) and the Bears (Broncos Week 2), fared much better passing against these great defenses than the Packers did.

Vikings VS Falcons: Ryan: 304 passing yards
Vikings VS. Packers: Rodgers: 209 yds.

Bears VS Broncos: Flacco: 292 yards
Bears VS Packers: Rodgers: 203 yds.

So while I am not in panic mode, I think the Packer offense has some work to do and part of that work is improving the passing game. Whether or not the low production has been due to not that great of receivers beyond Adams or due to an offense that is still trying to gain traction and learn a new system, is something I am not sure of. Probably a combination of both. However, I am leaning towards the fact that it is something the Packers need to fix and it isn't something that was just because they played 2 solid defenses.

It is a good thing our defense has improved a lot, because had it not, I am afraid we are 0-2.

 

[greengold]

I don’t know why people think Dez would be better than anyone in this team? He was fading in skills with Dallas, then blew an Achilles. He’ll be lucky to be able to keep up with Graham when it comes to game speed. That’s bad enough I don’t even need to talk about where I think his hands are

Agree 1000%. People in DAL know he lost his ability to go up a get jump balls two years prior to his being let go.

 

[greengold]

I hope I am wrong, but I think there is legit concern over our passing game. I say that knowing who we have played, as well as witnessing the first Q of Sundays game. I say that for a couple of reasons. One, we have seen this before in Green Bay and the group of WR's we have now aren't screaming "experience" IMO. Second, the other 2 teams that faced the Vikings (Atlanta Week 1) and the Bears (Broncos Week 2), fared much better passing against these great defenses than the Packers did.

Vikings VS Falcons: Ryan: 304 passing yards
Vikings VS. Packers: Rodgers: 209 yds.

Bears VS Broncos: Flacco: 292 yards
Bears VS Packers: Rodgers: 203 yds.

So while I am not in panic mode, I think the Packer offense has some work to do and part of that work is improving the passing game. Whether or not the low production has been due to not that great of receivers beyond Adams or due to an offense that is still trying to gain traction and learn a new system, is something I am not sure of. Probably a combination of both. However, I am leaning towards the fact that it is something the Packers need to fix and it isn't something that was just because they played 2 solid defenses.

It is a good thing our defense has improved a lot, because had it not, I am afraid we are 0-2.

Just give it 4 more weeks on O.

 

[Do7]

I hope I am wrong, but I think there is legit concern over our passing game. I say that knowing who we have played, as well as witnessing the first Q of Sundays game. I say that for a couple of reasons. One, we have seen this before in Green Bay and the group of WR's we have now aren't screaming "experience" IMO. Second, the other 2 teams that faced the Vikings (Atlanta Week 1) and the Bears (Broncos Week 2), fared much better passing against these great defenses than the Packers did.

Vikings VS Falcons: Ryan: 304 passing yards
Vikings VS. Packers: Rodgers: 209 yds.

Bears VS Broncos: Flacco: 292 yards
Bears VS Packers: Rodgers: 203 yds.

So while I am not in panic mode, I think the Packer offense has some work to do and part of that work is improving the passing game. Whether or not the low production has been due to not that great of receivers beyond Adams or due to an offense that is still trying to gain traction and learn a new system, is something I am not sure of. Probably a combination of both. However, I am leaning towards the fact that it is something the Packers need to fix and it isn't something that was just because they played 2 solid defenses.

It is a good thing our defense has improved a lot, because had it not, I am afraid we are 0-2.

Well again bare in mind a few factors here.

1. We went up against teams that are more defensive oriented than offensive, so it comes to no surprise that our offense struggled a bit.

2. The offense had several opportunities to score but due to turnovers, penalties, and whatnot, the other team got the ball. We've seen this in both instances, but we definitely squandered a lot of opportunities in The Vikings game. There were plenty dropped passes as well, and missed throws, so I think you'll see some major improvement by the offenses when we face against less formidable defenses.

3. When going up against high powered offenses, I imagine that opposing teams will score a fair amount of points, however I think our offense will be able to go match them due to how pitiful their defense will be. I believe we're one of the rare few teams that actually has found a delicate balance on both sides of the ball. Quarterbacks can throw for many yards, but it won't really matter if those don't result in TDs. It's one of the reasons why I'm confident we'll beat Dallas when we face them.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A friend of mine recently lost his wife and he had an event he had to attend for the first time without her and I went along for moral support.

Just so you know I will be missing a lot of the games. As punishment for not being able to work Fridays and Saturdays my new boss has been scheduling me every Sunday. It used to kill me to miss Packer games but then my nephews started youth football and played on Sundays and I missed a quite a few over the years. It doesn't bother me anymore.

From what I understand when you are voted off the island you are put up in seclusion in a luxury 5 star hotel for the remainder of the program so you don't spill your guts. I can be ready in 30 minutes. When does the limo pick me up?

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

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Well again bare in mind a few factors here.

1. We went up against teams that are more defensive oriented than offensive, so it comes to no surprise that our offense struggled a bit.

2. The offense had several opportunities to score but due to turnovers, penalties, and whatnot, the other team got the ball. We've seen this in both instances, but we definitely squandered a lot of opportunities in The Vikings game. There were plenty dropped passes as well, and missed throws, so I think you'll see some major improvement by the offenses when we face against less formidable defenses.

3. When going up against high powered offenses, I imagine that opposing teams will score a fair amount of points, however I think our offense will be able to go match them due to how pitiful their defense will be. I believe we're one of the rare few teams that actually has found a delicate balance on both sides of the ball. Quarterbacks can throw for many yards, but it won't really matter if those don't result in TDs. It's one of the reasons why I'm confident we'll beat Dallas when we face them.

I read and understand all of that, but it still doesn't make me feel any better about what the Packers have done in the Passing game. Had the Falcons (VS Vikings) and the Broncos (VS Bears) had similar results, as the Packers did, passing the ball against these 2 defenses, I would be fine with the "its due to the Packers facing great defenses excuse". While 2 games is limited data, I still think the concern of asking just how good our receiving group is, is a very legit question for Packer fans to be asking right now.

 

[Do7]

I read and understand all of that, but it still doesn't make me feel any better about what the Packers have done in the Passing game. Had the Falcons (VS Vikings) and the Broncos (VS Bears) had similar results, as the Packers did, passing the ball against these 2 defenses, I would be fine with the "its due to the Packers facing great defenses excuse". While 2 games is limited data, I still think the concern of asking just how good our receiving group is, is a very legit question for Packer fans to be asking right now.

The Falcons were getting blown out as a result they had to air it out, and even still that only resulted in 12 points, and Denver was trailing for most of the game against Chicago and only ended up with 14 points for their trouble, so honestly those yards are hollow numbers if you ask me. And considering in The Vikings game we had over 100 yards in rushing as well as a decent amount in passing yardage that resulted in points, I think we can expect more of the same when facing less formidable defenses.

Typically when you have a lead and this is something I'm noticing more of, the defense will play more of a prevent defense which will allow the opposing offense to get yardage on short routes, or depending on the QB and the receiver, they'll just chuck it up there and say a prayer, hoping their receiver will catch the ball. Case in point Matt Ryan. I think Julio makes this guy a lot better than he actually is. But in any case, this is also what worries me if we ever play a close game and all the opposing team needs is a FG to win.

We've seen Denver make this mistake, as well as Houston when they lost against New Orleans. Even though in Denver's case the refs cost them that win due to the time clearly hitting zero before the guy got to the ground.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just give it 4 more weeks on O.

Like I said, I am not panicking and the next 2-3 games are going to give us a much better indication of where we stand as far as the receiving group goes and I include TE in that group as well.

However, if I am Gute, I am keeping an eye on the Calendar and October 30th (NFL trade deadline) and talking to teams about potential trade deals for a WR between now and then. If this team is still winning come October 28th, but needs a WR to bump it up a level, then I would pull that trigger and do what it takes to give Rodgers another weapon to try and get us to a Super Bowl.

 

[greengold]

Oh, I agree. Gutes is always looking. Im wondering if he’s trying to trade Graham? That would not surprise me.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Oh, I agree. Gutes is always looking. Im wondering if he’s trying to trade Graham? That would not surprise me.

Would you trade for Graham? I doubt there is a team out there that would give us a 5th (not booze) for him. I will admit, I was optimistic about Graham, but so far this year, I have soured on him a bit. Sunday, he almost looked like he was walking through the plays. I could be wrong, but unless things change, I could see JG definitely being cut after this season and then just retiring.

 

[Do7]

Oh, I agree. Gutes is always looking. Im wondering if he’s trying to trade Graham? That would not surprise me.

I would see if New Orleans would do a straight up trade for Graham for Cook!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would see if New Orleans would do a straight up trade for Graham for Cook!

Maybe after that we could swap Kamara for Juice Williams?

That turned out to be a HUGE mistake to sign Bennett over Cook and its been stinging us ever since.

 

[sschind]

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

Thanks Poker. I'm not going to tell you why I missed the Bears game though




Just kidding I saw that one.

 

[gbgary]

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

at least he didn't fall into a giant coffee cup on a billboard.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Thanks Poker. I'm not going to tell you why I missed the Bears game though




Just kidding I saw that one.

Glad to hear that, I was afraid you were traveling for the Bears game.

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