Revis...

[PackerDNA]

Get over it. The 'pessimists' like me are tire of the sanctimonious sycophants defending their hero . I'm tired of the schtick every year. Wash , rinse, repeat. The defense sucks , the special teams suck, they can't run the ball worth a damn, and the WR's need their all world QB- the only reason they win more than 3 games a year- to buy them a half hour to get open.
Their half a step above catatonic GM's answer? Let go a second all-pro guard go without a replacement, their top RB go, and ignore any other problems. This ain't gettin 'fixed in the draft, pally. Time the TT club woke up.
Legit SB contenders don't need 6 game winning streaks to finish a season just to get in the playoffs ( that largely due to Rodgers being Superman) or get embarrassed in the NFCCG.
But again, keep buying that TT snake oil.

 

[RRyder]

Legit SB contenders don't need 6 game winning streaks to finish a season just to get in the playoffs ( that largely due to Rodgers being Superman) or get embarrassed in the NFCCG.
But again, keep buying that TT snake oil.

****. Didn't realize we weren't SB contenders the last time we actually won a SB. Like damn. We needed a winning streak AND a D Jackson punt return to get in then also. Maybe your definition of contender is skewed when by your own definition, a team that literally won the SB, shouldn't be considered a legit contender

Guess the Steelers weren't contenders either last year since they got ran off the field in the AFCCG.

You accuse everyone else of sticking their heads in the sand all the while you're doing just as much of that as anyone in order to serve your own bias. The fact that you can't even see that is more concerning then anything

 

[PackerDNA]

Uhhh,.... that was 2010. Which has what to do with now... 7 years later. And yeah, they needed a lot of things to go right that year. Fast forward to now. This GM and his style don't work anymore for where this team is now. It would work great for the Browns, but not for this team now.
Ted wants to just draft and develop. That leaves the team vulnerable when too much youth is on the field. He's always midway into a 5 year plan to get to the top. But tommorow never comes.
His self imposed glass ceiling- refusing to aggressively use all the tools available to him- has cost this team. Holes go unfilled, more are created. Draft only won't fix it; too many holes even if he hit on all the picks, and his drafting hasn't been great recently.
His stubborness costs this team; 'TT won't do that, TT won't pay that'. Then TT should become president of a bank or start an accounting firm.
His cheapness will hurt this team. His final offer to Lang was an embarrassment; over 25% less. Read Demovsky the other day. Sayd there was a lot of locker room grumbling over that. Not the first time I'm hearing players getting fed up with him. You'll see less and less of your own staying here, more and more of your good picks leaving when their deals are up, and no one from outside wanting to be here.
But hey, enjoy another year of smoke and mirrors, kidding yourself about how great TT is and how we're gonna win the Super Bowl. Year 13 and counting.
Wash, rinse, repeat.........
Don't concern yourself with my 'bias' or inability to see it; it's something all of us who question the Great TT share.
And it beats the hell out of being delusional.

 

[brandon2348]

Paying Revis 8 mill would be a bad move.

Acquiring Mo Claiborne for 5 mill would of been a great Move but that boat has sailed on.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/4155/darrelle-revis

According to The Ringer's Mike Lombardi, free agent Darrelle Revis remains unsigned because Revis "has not really taken care of his body" and "looked slow" on game tape last season.

Lombardi pointed to 38-year-old Terence Newman as a cornerback who has taken care of himself late in his career, whereas 31-year-old Revis has not. "He played slow. He looked slow," said Lombardi. "Players that gain weight during their career fall off the Earth." Also noting Revis had "two massages a week" during his time in New England, Lombardi believes "no one is going to take the $6 million burden off the Jets," referring to Revis' $6 million in offset guarantees. "I think Revis is begging for a job." Retirement is squarely in play for Revis.

Sandbagging would also make him look slow too. Not caring. Going through the motions... but I would bet that a player like Revis could flip that switch right back on.

He went from 17mil a yr last year, to people thinking 8mil is too much.....little reality check. Time to go prove himself.

 

[PackerDNA]

Of course you disagree, RRyder. You
and all the friends of TT.
Time for a meeting of the TT club.

 

[RRyder]

Of course you disagree, RRyder. You
and all the friends of TT.
Time for a meeting of the TT club.

I disagreed with your post because you confirmed that in no way shape or form will you admit that TT has managed to field two legit contenders 2/3 years because it doesn't fit your narrative. All the while immediately discounting 2010 when it was referenced as a counter point to your view that legit contenders don't need to go on hot streaks simply to make the POs. In other words since it proved your definition wrong you discounted it out of hand and yet you still don't see an issue with your approach to the matter?

I hit the button and didn't respond in post cause there was nothing of substance that you posted for me to respond too. Simply more of the same "TT sucks" mantra you've become accustomed too that in no way shape or form can you deviate from. Your almost the literal definition of someone that can't acknowledge anything outside of your own tunnel vision on the matter

You can want TT gone and still acknowledge when he's managed to field teams that ended up as contenders.

You can also defend TT while acknowledging that he could be doing better.

You can argue that his approach might not hold the best chances of another SB.

The problem is your not arguing those points. Anything that deviates from the mindset of "TT is horrible and doing nothing but holding this team back" is completely discounted by you and refused to even be acknowledged.

In other words your binary way of thinking is unequivocally wrong and I would prefer not to get into a debate with someone who is intellectually dishonest with themselves

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Tt is great. The team is great every year, year in and year out...

If we could figure out a way to not have so many injuries... then we would have more Superbowl's imo

 

[PackerDNA]

I disagreed with your post because you confirmed that in no way shape or form will you admit that TT has managed to field two legit contenders 2/3 years because it doesn't fit your narrative. All the while immediately discounting 2010 when it was referenced as a counter point to your view that legit contenders don't need to go on hot streaks simply to make the POs. In other words since it proved your definition wrong you discounted it out of hand and yet you still don't see an issue with your approach to the matter?

I hit the button and didn't respond in post cause there was nothing of substance that you posted for me to respond too. Simply more of the same "TT sucks" mantra you've become accustomed too that in no way shape or form can you deviate from. Your almost the literal definition of someone that can't acknowledge anything outside of your own tunnel vision on the matter

You can want TT gone and still acknowledge when he's managed to field teams that ended up as contenders.

You can also defend TT while acknowledging that he could be doing better.

You can argue that his approach might not hold the best chances of another SB.

The problem is your not arguing those points. Anything that deviates from the mindset of "TT is horrible and doing nothing but holding this team back" is completely discounted by you and refused to even be acknowledged.

In other words your binary way of thinking is unequivocally wrong and I would prefer not to get into a debate with someone who is intellectually dishonest with themselves

If you'll remember past postings of mine, you'll see I'm not part of the TT sucks and must die crowd. Stop assuming what you want to in my posts to fit your agenda. 2013 and 14 were the last two legit years for this team. The last 2 years they have not been and continue to slide as we speak due to their GM's hard headedness. I'm tired of his act, and no longer believe he has any interest in adjusting to make this team a top contender.
Your attempts at psycho analysing me suck; if your'e a psychiatrist, you must be starving.

 

[fistfullofbeer]

Tt is great. The team is great every year, year in and year out...

If we could figure out a way to not have so many injuries... then we would have more Superbowl's imo

I actually get that luck (matchups) and injuries are big during the playoffs. But honestly, blaming them in no way should excuse TT from the state of the team. You can look it however you want, but in the end the team on the field is the one TT assembled. At some point in time getting to the playoffs is just not enough. You need to win it all. If the GM cannot get that done, that is on him. As harsh as this sounds, that is the reality of pro sports. Not just football.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Ask Revis to come in and play Safety ala Cwood late in his career. I bet Revis would be an excellent Safety and it would prolong his career some too.

Even if Revis skill set would be a decent fit at safety, which I don't believe it is, he doesn't present an upgrade over Burnett or Clinton-Dix.

 

[kevans74]

haven't posted in a while...

In addition to serving as a mentor, Revis can MAKE PLAYS!!!

He would/could come in and get 2-3 interceptions is my guess.. which is what the defense needs

If it's still "bend but don't break" which is fine IMO then you need guys who can make plays

 

[Half Empty]

Can make plays or could make plays? http://www.nfl.com/player/darrellerevis/2495717/profile Production has been heading downhill, and I don't think a 'splash' signing for 2-3 INTs is worth it.

 

[kevans74]

Can make plays or could make plays? http://www.nfl.com/player/darrellerevis/2495717/profile Production has been heading downhill, and I don't think a 'splash' signing for 2-3 INTs is worth it.

is Clay at $3million PER sack worth it?

 

[Half Empty]

Not even close.

 

[Poppa San]

is Clay at $3million PER sack worth it?

We're not discussing Clay here. Overpaying at one position for one player does not mean we should do it at another.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In addition to serving as a mentor, Revis can MAKE PLAYS!!!

He would/could come in and get 2-3 interceptions is my guess.. which is what the defense needs

If it's still "bend but don't break" which is fine IMO then you need guys who can make plays

The Packers need a cornerback capable of covering opposing top receivers and not one that intercepts two or three passes a season.

 

[PackerDNA]

I disagreed with your post because you confirmed that in no way shape or form will you admit that TT has managed to field two legit contenders 2/3 years because it doesn't fit your narrative. All the while immediately discounting 2010 when it was referenced as a counter point to your view that legit contenders don't need to go on hot streaks simply to make the POs. In other words since it proved your definition wrong you discounted it out of hand and yet you still don't see an issue with your approach to the matter?

I hit the button and didn't respond in post cause there was nothing of substance that you posted for me to respond too. Simply more of the same "TT sucks" mantra you've become accustomed too that in no way shape or form can you deviate from. Your almost the literal definition of someone that can't acknowledge anything outside of your own tunnel vision on the matter

You can want TT gone and still acknowledge when he's managed to field teams that ended up as contenders.

You can also defend TT while acknowledging that he could be doing better.

You can argue that his approach might not hold the best chances of another SB.

The problem is your not arguing those points. Anything that deviates from the mindset of "TT is horrible and doing nothing but holding this team back" is completely discounted by you and refused to even be acknowledged.

In other words your binary way of thinking is unequivocally wrong and I would prefer not to get into a debate with someone who is intellectually dishonest with themselves

I haven't seen one argument/counterpoint to any point I made in post#103 as a good example. It's time for change. Or let Mannequin Man stay as long as he wants and leave a mess for the next guy with no more SB's to show for it.
Special shoutout to Schmidt23, who would apparently disagree with me if I said that water was wet. Welcome to my fan club!

You can want TT gone and still acknowledge when he's managed to field teams that ended up as contenders.

You can also defend TT while acknowledging that he could be doing better.

You can argue that his approach might not hold the best chances of another SB.

Which I have done many times in many posts over the past years. But this off season tears it for me with this guy. Time for change. We could/ should have been what Brady and the Patriots have been. Instead we'll end up with "2010" and a bunch of b-b-b-but we're contenders after getting blown out of the playoffs.
You can have your boy; just quit with the putdowns of everyone who doesn't worship at his alter.

 

[swhitset]

We're not discussing Clay here. Overpaying at one position for one player does not mean we should do it at another.

That is the kind of intellectually dishonest argument that drives me crazy. (referring to using Mathews as an excuse to overpay Revis... not your rebuttal lol).

 

[RRyder]

I haven't seen one argument/counterpoint to any point I made in post#103 as a good example. It's time for change. Or let Mannequin Man stay as long as he wants and leave a mess for the next guy with no more SB's to show for it.
Special shoutout to Schmidt23, who would apparently disagree with me if I said that water was wet. Welcome to my fan club!



Which I have done many times in many posts over the past years. But this off season tears it for me with this guy. Time for change. We could/ should have been what Brady and the Patriots have been. Instead we'll end up with "2010" and a bunch of b-b-b-but we're contenders after getting blown out of the playoffs.
You can have your boy; just quit with the putdowns of everyone who doesn't worship at his alter.

To the bolded points.

You said SB contenders don't need 6 game winning streaks just in order to make the POs to which I responded by bring up the 2010 team. How that isn't a good counter point to you I don't understand when if D Jackson doesn't return that punt we don't even make the POs

As to the second bolded point. I couldnt care less if you like TT. My replys in this post were in defense of the idea that on at least 2 out of the 3 past seasons we've fielded legit contenders backed up by vitrue of them making the conference title games. If your contention was that wasn't good enough I wouldn't have taken issue but rather your insistence that they weren't title contenders.

Also were am I putting everyone down that holds criticism of TT? It's only been you because I disagree with your points but really more importantly how your framing them.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You said SB contenders don't need 6 game winning streaks just in order to make the POs to which I responded by bring up the 2010 team. How that isn't a good counter point to you I don't understand when if D Jackson doesn't return that punt we don't even make the POs.

FWIW the Packers would have still made the playoffs even if the Giants had won that game against the Eagles but would have played at Chicago in the wild card round.

 

[PackerDNA]

FWIW the Packers would have still made the playoffs even if the Giants had won that game against the Eagles but would have played at Chicago in the wild card round.

Not to mention they didn't have a 6 game winning streak to make the playoffs in 2010.
Without looking it up, Cap, I think they also needed Tampa's upset of Detroit; same day as the Giants game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Not to mention they didn't have a 6 game winning streak to make the playoffs in 2010.
Without looking it up, Cap, I think they also needed Tampa's upset of Detroit; same day as the Giants game.

True, the Lions beating Tampa Bay was necessary for the Packers to make the playoffs.

 

[PackerDNA]

To the bolded points.

You said SB contenders don't need 6 game winning streaks just in order to make the POs to which I responded by bring up the 2010 team. How that isn't a good counter point to you I don't understand when if D Jackson doesn't return that punt we don't even make the POs

As to the second bolded point. I couldnt care less if you like TT. My replys in this post were in defense of the idea that on at least 2 out of the 3 past seasons we've fielded legit contenders backed up by vitrue of them making the conference title games. If your contention was that wasn't good enough I wouldn't have taken issue but rather your insistence that they weren't title contenders.

Also were am I putting everyone down that holds criticism of TT? It's only been you because I disagree with your points but really more importantly how your framing them.

They didn't need a 6 game winning streak to make the playoffs in 2010.
I couldn't care less if you're in love with TT. I don't like him, hate him, couldn't care less about him. I want him- or whoever's in the position- to do his job,
The how I frame things issue I'll buy; has been a bugaboo for me now and then.

 

[Poppa San]

They didn't need a 6 game winning streak to make the playoffs in 2010.
I couldn't care less if you're in love with TT. I don't like him, hate him, couldn't care less about him. I want him- or whoever's in the position- to do his job,
The how I frame things issue I'll buy; has been a bugaboo for me now and then.

FWIW they didn't NEED a 6 game winning streak to make the playoffs this year either. They just ended up with one. They had a playoff spot clinched before the kickoff on week 17 vs the Lions.