So Rodgers IS the Packers?

[XPack]

Wouldn't you rather have a team that is not focused on the QB so much to give us a better chance at beating better teams in their house as well as better playoff chances?

If you're asking as theoretical question, then yes....I'd like to see a less QB focused NFL, but it's no way close to reality.

 

[rodell330]

Multiple plates in his throwing shoulder. This injury may have been worse than we all thought. We just better hope and pray that he's the same guy when he comes back NEXT season.

 

[fix8ed]

It is all about the QBs. Teams without great QBs lose a lot, get early draft picks and build, if they have good management, the rest of the team and hope they luck into a great QB.

There are no completely balanced teams unless one of the perennial losers finally gets lucky and hits on a QB.

Philly is maybe the most balanced team and they hit the above lottery after being not good for a long time, Seattle built a really good team by losing a lot until they hit on Russell, the Rams built a really good defense by losing a lot until they drafted, finally, a QB and then getting a coach this year that knows offense and can gear up the game plan around the QB. The Vikes built their defense around bad to mediocre teams until Teddy got hurt, then traded 2 firsts for a qb that was a high draft pick by a perennial loser, yep, Rams. Denver, losers for a long time, built a great defense, but until they got Manning, didn’t do dodo. After Manning, still can’t do dodo. KC has had a great D built upon losing and getting high draft picks. Got Alex and now wins, until playoff time. Cincy sucked until Dalton, got a lot of good players, finally started to win, except in playoffs, because like KC, QB is not great. Dallas built a great line, good team by going 20 years without playoff wins, added Dak and then lost to us in playoffs. San Fran had long run of losing, built a great defense, O and D lines and run game, all high draft picks, but without a great QB, hasn’t won a SB and now is known as Owen, like 0 and 8. Ravens are an outlier, twice have stunk, built great defenses. Once great enough to win with Dilfer, then had Flacco have the post season of his life. Then reverted to the mean. Chargers have Rivers, drafted because, yes, they and the Giants lived through losing years and traded top 5 picks. San Diego built up a terrific team around Rivers, won 14 games and fired the coach. Not doing so well ever since. Raiders suffered a decade of losing but had a decade of top draft picks to build a team before drafting Carr. Looked great until he got hurt just before the playoffs. But now, they are a losing team again.

Eli won 2 SBs with a great defense built on draft picks from losing. Now they are one of the worst teams in the NFC, with Eli. The Redskins sucked bad enough they were able to draft RGme and Cousins in the same draft. Still losers. Cards built a team by losing so long they got a great defense and a lot of offensive weapons, had to sign a free agent QB, still didn’t win anything, and now have no qb.

Falcons lost so much they built a great team, drafted Matt Ryan, lived with an above average QB until last year, and now he has reverted to the norm. They are not great.

Houston spent the last few years losing and drafting a great defense. Then drafted Watson. Looked good with a real QB. Then he got hurt. Even with Watson looking like the missing link, they went 3-4. With him being the AFC player of the month.

Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennessee,Jags, Detroit, Saints, Carolina... all teams that stunk for a long time, built up one side of the team but other than an odd year or two never were really relevant. And then there are the Bears and Browns. Stinkers forever it seems now. The only exception: the Pats. BB wins with whoever is QB. Brady, Cassell, no matter who, they win. They are the template. But us and the Steelers are the only other teams that seem to be perennial winners besides New England.

I know, I covered pretty much the whole league, but who are those “balanced teams” that have done anything over the timeframe NE, Pitt and us have for as long as we all have? Everyone else has endured long losing streaks to be able to build with high draft picks, has had moments of glory before falling back into mediocrity or has never won the SB.

There are no teams without weaknesses or depth issues. Or, as I believe, without coaching deficiencies. Except New England.

So who are these mythical "Balanced teams". There may be at the moment one or two, but there are no year over year balanced teams, NE excepted.

It is all about the QBs. Teams without great QBs lose a lot, get early draft picks and build, if they have good management, the rest of the team and hope they luck into a great QB.

There are no completely balanced teams unless one of the perennial losers finally gets lucky and hits on a QB.

Philly is maybe the most balanced team and they hit the above lottery after being not good for a long time, Seattle built a really good team by losing a lot until they hit on Russell, the Rams built a really good defense by losing a lot until they drafted, finally, a QB and then getting a coach this year that knows offense and can gear up the game plan around the QB. The Vikes built their defense around bad to mediocre teams until Teddy got hurt, then traded 2 firsts for a qb that was a high draft pick by a perennial loser, yep, Rams. Denver, losers for a long time, built a great defense, but until they got Manning, didn’t do dodo. After Manning, still can’t do dodo. KC has had a great D built upon losing and getting high draft picks. Got Alex and now wins, until playoff time. Cincy sucked until Dalton, got a lot of good players, finally started to win, except in playoffs, because like KC, QB is not great. Dallas built a great line, good team by going 20 years without playoff wins, added Dak and then lost to us in playoffs. San Fran had long run of losing, built a great defense, O and D lines and run game, all high draft picks, but without a great QB, hasn’t won a SB and now is known as Owen, like 0 and 8. Ravens are an outlier, twice have stunk, built great defenses. Once great enough to win with Dilfer, then had Flacco have the post season of his life. Then reverted to the mean. Chargers have Rivers, drafted because, yes, they and the Giants lived through losing years and traded top 5 picks. San Diego built up a terrific team around Rivers, won 14 games and fired the coach. Not doing so well ever since. Raiders suffered a decade of losing but had a decade of top draft picks to build a team before drafting Carr. Looked great until he got hurt just before the playoffs. But now, they are a losing team again.

Eli won 2 SBs with a great defense built on draft picks from losing. Now they are one of the worst teams in the NFC, with Eli. The Redskins sucked bad enough they were able to draft RGme and Cousins in the same draft. Still losers. Cards built a team by losing so long they got a great defense and a lot of offensive weapons, had to sign a free agent QB, still didn’t win anything, and now have no qb.

Falcons lost so much they built a great team, drafted Matt Ryan, lived with an above average QB until last year, and now he has reverted to the norm. They are not great.

Houston spent the last few years losing and drafting a great defense. Then drafted Watson. Looked good with a real QB. Then he got hurt. Even with Watson looking like the missing link, they went 3-4. With him being the AFC player of the month.

Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennessee,Jags, Detroit, Saints, Carolina... all teams that stunk for a long time, built up one side of the team but other than an odd year or two never were really relevant. And then there are the Bears and Browns. Stinkers forever it seems now. The only exception: the Pats. BB wins with whoever is QB. Brady, Cassell, no matter who, they win. They are the template. But us and the Steelers are the only other teams that seem to be perennial winners besides New England.

I know, I covered pretty much the whole league, but who are those “balanced teams” that have done anything over the timeframe NE, Pitt and us have for as long as we all have? Everyone else has endured long losing streaks to be able to build with high draft picks, has had moments of glory before falling back into mediocrity or has never won the SB.

There are no teams without weaknesses or depth issues. Or, as I believe, without coaching deficiencies. Except New England.

So who are these mythical "Balanced teams". There may be at the moment one or two, but there are no year over year balanced teams, NE excepted.

Very well

It is all about the QBs. Teams without great QBs lose a lot, get early draft picks and build, if they have good management, the rest of the team and hope they luck into a great QB.

There are no completely balanced teams unless one of the perennial losers finally gets lucky and hits on a QB.

Philly is maybe the most balanced team and they hit the above lottery after being not good for a long time, Seattle built a really good team by losing a lot until they hit on Russell, the Rams built a really good defense by losing a lot until they drafted, finally, a QB and then getting a coach this year that knows offense and can gear up the game plan around the QB. The Vikes built their defense around bad to mediocre teams until Teddy got hurt, then traded 2 firsts for a qb that was a high draft pick by a perennial loser, yep, Rams. Denver, losers for a long time, built a great defense, but until they got Manning, didn’t do dodo. After Manning, still can’t do dodo. KC has had a great D built upon losing and getting high draft picks. Got Alex and now wins, until playoff time. Cincy sucked until Dalton, got a lot of good players, finally started to win, except in playoffs, because like KC, QB is not great. Dallas built a great line, good team by going 20 years without playoff wins, added Dak and then lost to us in playoffs. San Fran had long run of losing, built a great defense, O and D lines and run game, all high draft picks, but without a great QB, hasn’t won a SB and now is known as Owen, like 0 and 8. Ravens are an outlier, twice have stunk, built great defenses. Once great enough to win with Dilfer, then had Flacco have the post season of his life. Then reverted to the mean. Chargers have Rivers, drafted because, yes, they and the Giants lived through losing years and traded top 5 picks. San Diego built up a terrific team around Rivers, won 14 games and fired the coach. Not doing so well ever since. Raiders suffered a decade of losing but had a decade of top draft picks to build a team before drafting Carr. Looked great until he got hurt just before the playoffs. But now, they are a losing team again.

Eli won 2 SBs with a great defense built on draft picks from losing. Now they are one of the worst teams in the NFC, with Eli. The Redskins sucked bad enough they were able to draft RGme and Cousins in the same draft. Still losers. Cards built a team by losing so long they got a great defense and a lot of offensive weapons, had to sign a free agent QB, still didn’t win anything, and now have no qb.

Falcons lost so much they built a great team, drafted Matt Ryan, lived with an above average QB until last year, and now he has reverted to the norm. They are not great.

Houston spent the last few years losing and drafting a great defense. Then drafted Watson. Looked good with a real QB. Then he got hurt. Even with Watson looking like the missing link, they went 3-4. With him being the AFC player of the month.

Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennessee,Jags, Detroit, Saints, Carolina... all teams that stunk for a long time, built up one side of the team but other than an odd year or two never were really relevant. And then there are the Bears and Browns. Stinkers forever it seems now. The only exception: the Pats. BB wins with whoever is QB. Brady, Cassell, no matter who, they win. They are the template. But us and the Steelers are the only other teams that seem to be perennial winners besides New England.

I know, I covered pretty much the whole league, but who are those “balanced teams” that have done anything over the timeframe NE, Pitt and us have for as long as we all have? Everyone else has endured long losing streaks to be able to build with high draft picks, has had moments of glory before falling back into mediocrity or has never won the SB.

There are no teams without weaknesses or depth issues. Or, as I believe, without coaching deficiencies. Except New England.

So who are these mythical "Balanced teams". There may be at the moment one or two, but there are no year over year balanced teams, NE excepted.

 

[Sunshine885500]

Give Hundley a chance to prove his worth. They need to run their offense and not be conservative. They still have weapons on offense and talent on defense. Please make sure not to change your pessimistic attitude once they start winning again. The Pack will be fine!

 

[fix8ed]

It is all about the QBs. Teams without great QBs lose a lot, get early draft picks and build, if they have good management, the rest of the team and hope they luck into a great QB.

There are no completely balanced teams unless one of the perennial losers finally gets lucky and hits on a QB.

Philly is maybe the most balanced team and they hit the above lottery after being not good for a long time, Seattle built a really good team by losing a lot until they hit on Russell, the Rams built a really good defense by losing a lot until they drafted, finally, a QB and then getting a coach this year that knows offense and can gear up the game plan around the QB. The Vikes built their defense around bad to mediocre teams until Teddy got hurt, then traded 2 firsts for a qb that was a high draft pick by a perennial loser, yep, Rams. Denver, losers for a long time, built a great defense, but until they got Manning, didn’t do dodo. After Manning, still can’t do dodo. KC has had a great D built upon losing and getting high draft picks. Got Alex and now wins, until playoff time. Cincy sucked until Dalton, got a lot of good players, finally started to win, except in playoffs, because like KC, QB is not great. Dallas built a great line, good team by going 20 years without playoff wins, added Dak and then lost to us in playoffs. San Fran had long run of losing, built a great defense, O and D lines and run game, all high draft picks, but without a great QB, hasn’t won a SB and now is known as Owen, like 0 and 8. Ravens are an outlier, twice have stunk, built great defenses. Once great enough to win with Dilfer, then had Flacco have the post season of his life. Then reverted to the mean. Chargers have Rivers, drafted because, yes, they and the Giants lived through losing years and traded top 5 picks. San Diego built up a terrific team around Rivers, won 14 games and fired the coach. Not doing so well ever since. Raiders suffered a decade of losing but had a decade of top draft picks to build a team before drafting Carr. Looked great until he got hurt just before the playoffs. But now, they are a losing team again.

Eli won 2 SBs with a great defense built on draft picks from losing. Now they are one of the worst teams in the NFC, with Eli. The Redskins sucked bad enough they were able to draft RGme and Cousins in the same draft. Still losers. Cards built a team by losing so long they got a great defense and a lot of offensive weapons, had to sign a free agent QB, still didn’t win anything, and now have no qb.

Falcons lost so much they built a great team, drafted Matt Ryan, lived with an above average QB until last year, and now he has reverted to the norm. They are not great.

Houston spent the last few years losing and drafting a great defense. Then drafted Watson. Looked good with a real QB. Then he got hurt. Even with Watson looking like the missing link, they went 3-4. With him being the AFC player of the month.

Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennessee,Jags, Detroit, Saints, Carolina... all teams that stunk for a long time, built up one side of the team but other than an odd year or two never were really relevant. And then there are the Bears and Browns. Stinkers forever it seems now. The only exception: the Pats. BB wins with whoever is QB. Brady, Cassell, no matter who, they win. They are the template. But us and the Steelers are the only other teams that seem to be perennial winners besides New England.

I know, I covered pretty much the whole league, but who are those “balanced teams” that have done anything over the timeframe NE, Pitt and us have for as long as we all have? Everyone else has endured long losing streaks to be able to build with high draft picks, has had moments of glory before falling back into mediocrity or has never won the SB.

There are no teams without weaknesses or depth issues. Or, as I believe, without coaching deficiencies. Except New England.

So who are these mythical "Balanced teams". There may be at the moment one or two, but there are no year over year balanced teams, NE excepted.

I enjoyed the post. Ironically, you didn't mention the quicksand known as draft inertia. This is where troubled teams, financially or skill wise end up for years. I refer here to teams who actually try to win games, unlike the perennial bottom feeders who annually dip their beaks into the top draft pick birdbath hoping for the miracle man. Evidently the road to nfl success bypasses the teams unlucky enough to win six or seven games in a season...largely thru their own talent development of later round picks. And let's not forget the fans out there who wouldn't mind "throwing" a game or two so they can snag Mr. Big for next season.

 

[Ogsponge]

Wouldn't you rather have a team that is not focused on the QB so much to give us a better chance at beating better teams in their house as well as better playoff chances?

You keep on going on about not beating good teams but just a month ago in another thread there were stats posted that said over the last 10 years or so that the packers were 2nd in the league for win % against teams with above .500 records. It is fallacy that the packers don’t bead good teams. Unless we are taking playoffs, the I suppose the point holds.

 

[Carl 2]

No. AR has proved how a great QB can elevate a moderate team. And there are other teams who despite being good in other positions can't succeed without a great QB.

Pats are the only exception to having gotten both right. And their record shows.

You are underestimating the power of QB in today's game.

Case in point.

The Texans had the highest scoring offense in the NFL coming into today.

Then, without their QB, they put up 7 offensive points against the worst defense in the league in terms of points per game. (Colts have given up 28.9 ppg).

 

[Packer Brother]

Who knows what will happen but they really should have built the team around him.
Are they going to start doing that?
Will they learn their lesson this time?

I think it would be great if we make the playoffs.
Then it would show that it is not just all about Rodgers.
That would be nice.

No I'd rather not sneak into the playoffs, get blown out, and give Murphy the impression everyone should stay. I hate to say it, but this team losing out may not be a bad thing.

As for the question, this team is Browns level bad without A.R. Speaking of, if Cleveland's only win is against us, I think there will be big time chance.

 

[rmontro]

I hate to say it, but this team losing out may not be a bad thing.

No way the team loses out. Hundley will get some more experience, learn a few things, get more comfortable, and we'll win a few games. Maybe not enough to make the playoffs, but we'll have to see how that plays out. We lost to the Saints last week, and they just won their sixth in a row, so they're no slouches.

 

[rodell330]

No I'd rather not sneak into the playoffs, get blown out, and give Murphy the impression everyone should stay. I hate to say it, but this team losing out may not be a bad thing.

As for the question, this team is Browns level bad without A.R. Speaking of, if Cleveland's only win is against us, I think there will be big time chance.

That's kinda how I feel about it. I'd love for them to give up 30+ in all there remaining games...Rodgers getting hurt may have a silver lining that results in Capers finally getting shown the door as well as other coaching changes. May even force Ted to retire and let us have a new GM who doesn't seem so out of tune with the world. If all these dudes are retained next season I'll lose it. Especially if they end with a horrible record.

 

[Forget Favre]

That's kinda how I feel about it. I'd love for them to give up 30+ in all there remaining games...Rodgers getting hurt may have a silver lining that results in Capers finally getting shown the door as well as other coaching changes. May even force Ted to retire and let us have a new GM who doesn't seem so out of tune with the world. If all these dudes are retained next season I'll lose it. Especially if they end with a horrible record.

Either they have blinders on or they see something in those guys that us fan don't.
And I would really like to know what it is.

No I'd rather not sneak into the playoffs, get blown out, and give Murphy the impression everyone should stay. I hate to say it, but this team losing out may not be a bad thing.

As for the question, this team is Browns level bad without A.R. Speaking of, if Cleveland's only win is against us, I think there will be big time chance.

Not being a grammar ****.
I think you mean "change" instead of "chance?"

If you do mean change, I just don't see it when there were multiple times they should have made big time changes.
I would really like to know what they see what us fans don't, starting with why they keep on letting McCarthy do what he does and why Capers still has his job.
I understand where you guys are coming from.
You think this could be a blessing in disguise.

 

[Forget Favre]

No. AR has proved how a great QB can elevate a moderate team. And there are other teams who despite being good in other positions can't succeed without a great QB.

Pats are the only exception to having gotten both right. And their record shows.

You are underestimating the power of QB in today's game.

If you're asking as theoretical question, then yes....I'd like to see a less QB focused NFL, but it's no way close to reality.

So you think it's impossible to expect a team to get the talent to match up to their great QB?
And since they won't meet that expectation, it's better to have a great QB than a great team and a lousy QB?

 

[Poppa San]

why they keep on letting McCarthy do what he does

Because he has a top ten offense usually and has directed a team with basically no defense to the playoffs the past 8 years. 2 of the last 3 to the NFCCG one step from the super bowl.

why Capers still has his job.

You got me there. He's the reason I had to say NFCCG instead of SB before.

 

[rodell330]

I'm convinced MM is more concerned with his relationship with his staff and showing loyalty than he is with winning. It took how many years of below average special teams play for him to replace Slocum? at least 3-4.l and Capers defense has been bad to below average for at least 5-7 seasons and he's still running it. So what does that tell you? I'm more than positive he's fired anywhere that's not Green Bay. Not to mention the fact that the guys pushing 80. Maybe the guy reminds him of his father and there's a sentimental connection there...that's the ONLY reason that semi makes sense of why he hasn't replaced him yet.

 

[Forget Favre]

Because he has a top ten offense usually and has directed a team with basically no defense to the playoffs the past 8 years. 2 of the last 3 to the NFCCG one step from the super bowl.

I'm getting frustrated and burned out by the playoff losses.
Something needs to change to help them to win.
I really have no clue as to what it is or where to start.
I have ideas like everyone else on here but all of our ideas seem to run contrary to how the brass runs the team.
Are MM and Capers scapegoats for our anger or is it ever justified?
Everyone will have different opinions and feelings on this as we have shown.

 

[OldSchool101]

Of course the QB is a key component. The entire Offense is built around him and when he goes down the team has to basically revamp the playbook. Particularly if you have a QB that has historically been successful as a more run/pass balanced guy, aka Brett Hundley.
Not to mention it takes a moderate amount of time for a backup QB just to get in sync with the first team.
Throw nearly any QB (starting or not) in that Vikings game a few weeks ago and far more often you would’ve had a Loss. IMO I don’t even consider that game anything but a step back for any QB and we are very fortunate Brett wasn’t carted off on a stretcher or seriously injured as we were both desimated mentally and physically.
The real Brett Hundley (good or bad) will step up over the next 3-4 weeks or so. I don’t think you’ll see anything like the MN game and that’s because that game was anything but his fault.
Now. In Bretts 1st NFL start he lost. So what? Dak Prescott scores 19 points in his first NFL start and lost and with an arguably better Defense backing him. He also had the luxury of much more time with the first team Offense.
Now, I’m not saying Hundley is Dak. But in that case, If everyone would’ve given up on their QB because Romo was out? They’d be chastised today.
Let’s let the season play out. Then if we’re 5 games as a starter in and zero wins or whatever, you have every right as a fan to jump overboard.
I won’t mind either I’ll get a better seat at a cheaper price.
You know part of being a loyal fan comes with supporting your team through tough times. It comes through being interested in more than just the W every week. Watching new players get a chance is just as exciting to me sometimes, kinda breaks up the monotony. Sure it makes it fun to win.
If all you care about is supporting your team in a winning year you’ve got your priorities mixed up. Life isn’t fair and you’ve gotta pull your britches up and move forward and get out of that swamp attitude we’ve all been in.
There’s not enough time to hang around with the complaining crowd. Nobody in life likes a whiner.. except another whiner.
SNL had a skit about Debbie Downer that gained a lot of popularity because it represents a large segment of our culture. More today than ever IMO.
Be happy for what you have now.

 

[rodell330]

If Cousins and the Redskins can go into Seattle and win...without his two best WRs, 4 offensive linemen out, and going against one of the leagues best defenses then there are NO more excuses for McCarthy and Capers. NONE. If they don't at least play 500
Ball starting tonight then McCarthys *** needs to go as well. Idc about how many games he's won with Aaron Rodgers.

 

[Forget Favre]

Of course the QB is a key component. The entire Offense is built around him and when he goes down the team has to basically revamp the playbook. Particularly if you have a QB that has historically been successful as a more run/pass balanced guy, aka Brett Hundley.
Not to mention it takes a moderate amount of time for a backup QB just to get in sync with the first team.
Throw nearly any QB (starting or not) in that Vikings game a few weeks ago and far more often you would’ve had a Loss. IMO I don’t even consider that game anything but a step back for any QB and we are very fortunate Brett wasn’t carted off on a stretcher or seriously injured as we were both desimated mentally and physically.
The real Brett Hundley (good or bad) will step up over the next 3-4 weeks or so. I don’t think you’ll see anything like the MN game and that’s because that game was anything but his fault.
Now. In Bretts 1st NFL start he lost. So what? Dak Prescott scores 19 points in his first NFL start and lost and with an arguably better Defense backing him. He also had the luxury of much more time with the first team Offense.
Now, I’m not saying Hundley is Dak. But in that case, If everyone would’ve given up on their QB because Romo was out? They’d be chastised today.
Let’s let the season play out. Then if we’re 5 games as a starter in and zero wins or whatever, you have every right as a fan to jump overboard.
I won’t mind either I’ll get a better seat at a cheaper price.
You know part of being a loyal fan comes with supporting your team through tough times. It comes through being interested in more than just the W every week. Watching new players get a chance is just as exciting to me sometimes, kinda breaks up the monotony. Sure it makes it fun to win.
If all you care about is supporting your team in a winning year you’ve got your priorities mixed up. Life isn’t fair and you’ve gotta pull your britches up and move forward and get out of that swamp attitude we’ve all been in.
There’s not enough time to hang around with the complaining crowd. Nobody in life likes a whiner.. except another whiner.
SNL had a skit about Debbie Downer that gained a lot of popularity because it represents a large segment of our culture. More today than ever IMO.
Be happy for what you have now.

I don't mind the whiners and complainers.
That's what breaks up the monotony of the board.

Sure, I'm willing to give Hundley a chance. I have shared in other places that he has shown promise.

Anyway, I'm learning to not put too many expectations into this team anymore because good and bad things will happen and will surprise us.
They will pull off a great play to excite us or blow a big one leaving us yet again with the cries of, "Just wait until next year!"

 

[OldSchool101]

If Cousins and the Redskins can go into Seattle and win...without his two best WRs, 4 offensive linemen out, and going against one of the leagues best defenses then there are NO more excuses for McCarthy and Capers. NONE. If they don't at least play 500
Ball starting tonight then McCarthys *** needs to go as well. Idc about how many games he's won with Aaron Rodgers.

I respect that except the "tonight" ultimatum. For instance, I would be completely ok with some moderate improvement with our Offense and an above average Defensive performance keeping us in the game or even taking the lead at times

 

[XPack]

I'm getting frustrated and burned out by the playoff losses.
Something needs to change to help them to win.

Both Seahawks and Cardinals were tough and even games as we might expect in any playoff loss. It was tough luck and we didn't get some rolls our way at crucial times.

I think we've only 'failed' vs the Falcons. But then that was vintage AR running the table carrying the team.

 

[Forget Favre]

I respect that except the "tonight" ultimatum. For instance, I would be completely ok with some moderate improvement with our Offense and an above average Defensive performance keeping us in the game or even taking the lead at times

The Lions are at a good time for us coming off a bye.
With only three wins and a healthy QB they don't seem all that impressive or not as opposing as a playoff team.
Will be a good test without A-Rod and this could be the game that will launch Hundley's confidence.
I'm sure the Packers will be as prepared as they can be.
We shall see if it was enough.

 

[Chris H]

BENCH HUNDLEY he is literally the worst QB I’ve seen I don’t know how he made it the NFL put cal or anyone even like a ol and put them at q.b they will be better

 

[Mike McCarthy]

To answer the original question, yes this team is an absolute dumpster fire without 12 on the field.

 

[P-E-Z]

No matter how badly a team does, it's the owners who are the winners.

Not on this team

 

[P-E-Z]

Of course the QB is a key component. The entire Offense is built around him and when he goes down the team has to basically revamp the playbook. Particularly if you have a QB that has historically been successful as a more run/pass balanced guy, aka Brett Hundley.
Not to mention it takes a moderate amount of time for a backup QB just to get in sync with the first team.
Throw nearly any QB (starting or not) in that Vikings game a few weeks ago and far more often you would’ve had a Loss. IMO I don’t even consider that game anything but a step back for any QB and we are very fortunate Brett wasn’t carted off on a stretcher or seriously injured as we were both desimated mentally and physically.
The real Brett Hundley (good or bad) will step up over the next 3-4 weeks or so. I don’t think you’ll see anything like the MN game and that’s because that game was anything but his fault.
Now. In Bretts 1st NFL start he lost. So what? Dak Prescott scores 19 points in his first NFL start and lost and with an arguably better Defense backing him. He also had the luxury of much more time with the first team Offense.
Now, I’m not saying Hundley is Dak. But in that case, If everyone would’ve given up on their QB because Romo was out? They’d be chastised today.
Let’s let the season play out. Then if we’re 5 games as a starter in and zero wins or whatever, you have every right as a fan to jump overboard.
I won’t mind either I’ll get a better seat at a cheaper price.
You know part of being a loyal fan comes with supporting your team through tough times. It comes through being interested in more than just the W every week. Watching new players get a chance is just as exciting to me sometimes, kinda breaks up the monotony. Sure it makes it fun to win.
If all you care about is supporting your team in a winning year you’ve got your priorities mixed up. Life isn’t fair and you’ve gotta pull your britches up and move forward and get out of that swamp attitude we’ve all been in.
There’s not enough time to hang around with the complaining crowd. Nobody in life likes a whiner.. except another whiner.
SNL had a skit about Debbie Downer that gained a lot of popularity because it represents a large segment of our culture. More today than ever IMO.
Be happy for what you have now.

In that Viking game a back up quarter back beat us......... its not true that back up can't win games. Pats manage without Brady ..... there is flaw in your theory.