"There are some things I'm looking for .." - Favre

[pyledriver80]

I think TT has actually done a good job this off-season. I like all of his moves. I am not going to blam TT for the Vinitieri thing. The guy went to a dome, I don't think its a Jab to GB or TT at all.

The center thing is kind of a glass half full, glass half-empty type of thing. He was getting up there in age and injuries were a factor. It was far from his best season last year and I think it was the right time to let him walk. O-Lineman, other than tackles, were probably the weakest FA position available. I am happy with what TT has done so I do not understand the TT bashing either.

My question is would he have been this active if not for Brett, or would we be signing more Arturo Freeman's and Ray Thompson's?

 

[PPierce]

If Brett's real beef is he wants to go to the Superbowl, he'd better try another team. It won't be us for a few years, and he'll be long gone. I'm getting tired of Favre's behavior. I may be the only one on the board who is, but I'm sure I'm not the only Packer fan who wishes he'd make up his mind NOW. Several of my buddies are tired of his games too.

 

[pyledriver80]

LOL, Tired of his games? The guy is making a HUGE decision in his life. Until you are put in that spot to say anything negative because of YOUR impatience is ludacris.

 

[Zero2Cool]

Brett, Aaron, VET QB
Aaron, VET QB, FA slapnuts QB.





... get it?

 

[bozz_2006]

it took me a second (mainly because i have never heard the phrase 'slapnuts' before), but yes.

 

[longtimefan]

According to NFL.com, Brett Favre was ranked #3 overall in passing in 2005 with 3881 yards. Tom Brady was #1 overall with 4110 yards and Trent Green was #2 with 4014. Now, one can analyse this to death, but with the 3rd overall in passing, why did we only score an average of 18 points a game and finished the season at 4-12?

Our defense was ranked #7 overall, so I find it hard to believe that was a major factor.

However, we had NO running game whatsoever. Gado was the only bright spot all season, however he came into the game a little late. Green was having a horrendous year prior to his injury, which caused many on this board to claim he was "over the hill" and "out of gas" (regardless of the fact he was a pro-bowler the year before). We need an o-line that not only can protect the passer, but open holes for our running backs as well. Right now, we do not have that. You can claim all you want that MM and his "zone blocking" defense is the cure to all our problems in GB, but we have a new coach who's legacy includes such powerhouse offenses as the 2000-2004 New Orleans Saints and the 32nd ranked 2005 San Francisco 49ers. For some reason, this does not instill much faith in me about MM's coaching ability. IMO, the biggest mistake TT has made to date was hiring MM over Jim Bates. Bates turned our pathetic defense into a top 10 in one season, and has had proven himself on every team he has coached on. If MM's coaching is so good, then what did the 49ers finsih 32nd overall in offense last year, and why isn't EVERY team in the NFL using the allegedly superior "zone blocking" defense? Can you blame Favre for being a little hesitant to come back and lead basically the same team as last year, with the addition of an unproven coaching staff???

Of course, you will probably claim that Favre's interceptions were the cause of or dismal record.

So he is supposed to play forever? Or is he supposed to just take the same ridiculous criticism if they don't win? Haven't most of you been claiming it was Favre's interceptions that cost GB the season?

Favre is going to retire. Maybe not this year, but I don't see him under center in 2007. Comments like the one you made above make it clear to me that you are all ready to blame Favre for ******** the team once he does. Forget about the 15 or so seasons you cheered him on when he played. Forget about the 3 time MVP awards. Forget about him bringing home the Lombardi in Super Bowl XXXI. He will be forever known to you as the guy who screwed GB over when "he retired and left that kid in charge"... and you wonder why WinnipegPackFan called you "ingrates".

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

Niners offense was bad because of injuries just like the Pack ( which you said was a reason for our bad offense) So if it is an excuse for the Pack, then it has to be one for the Niners? MM's teams in N.O did pretty well on offense in his years heading it..Other then one year they were always in top ten...

The defense while tons better then most have thought, the #7 ranking is sort of misleading..That is only based on yards..

Go look at TD receptions, rushing avg, rushing 1st downs per game and others...Those stats they were in the bottom half of the league...

Sure they were #2 against the pass in yards allowed, but N.O was #1..

As far as MM zone blocking being good...

Seems to me that the west coast offense was not used by a lot of teams but yet the ones using it did very well..It took a while for teams to hire the right people to install that system, why can't the zone blocking be the same way? It is pretty well known the ones using it do well in the running game..

 

[porky88]

Favre has taken along time to make his decision but the media seems to be blaming Favre and only Favre when the fingers need to be pointed at the Front Office as well. McCarthy and Thompson have never gave Favre a deadline so what exactly is Favre doing so bad? He made a joke that is being taken out of context and he's getting ready to make a tough decision.. Thompson and McCarthy I think have total faith that Favre will be back no matter what for next season.. I still rather of seen them give him a deadline..

Why would Favre's legacy be tarnished? What for taking his time when their is no deadline on a very tough decision for him... Oh Yeah he's Mike McKenzie alright.. He's holding out into the season...

Front office deserves as much blame as Favre for not setting a deadline..

 

[Anubis]

Niners offense was bad because of injuries just like the Pack ( which you said was a reason for our bad offense) So if it is an excuse for the Pack, then it has to be one for the Niners? MM's teams in N.O did pretty well on offense in his years heading it..Other then one year they were always in top ten...

32nd in the league isn't bad... It is abysmal. Our offense was bad due to injuries COUPLED with a porous o-line, and a predictable attack (Favre to Driver ring a bell?). Granted I did not watch San Fran play much last year, but if you are saying that their offense was predictable as ours, you are not instilling much faith in me as far as MM goes.

The defense while tons better then most have thought, the #7 ranking is sort of misleading..That is only based on yards..

Go look at TD receptions, rushing avg, rushing 1st downs per game and others...Those stats they were in the bottom half of the league...

Sure they were #2 against the pass in yards allowed, but N.O was #1..

Say what you will, but our defense was the main reason we lost the majority of our games by only 4 points or less, which is why I don't buy the "bottom half of the league" arguement. If our D was so ****-poor, why were we not blown out half the season??? It's not like we had a powerhouse offense by any stretch. :roll:

As far as MM zone blocking being good...

Seems to me that the west coast offense was not used by a lot of teams but yet the ones using it did very well..It took a while for teams to hire the right people to install that system, why can't the zone blocking be the same way? It is pretty well known the ones using it do well in the running game..

Let me reiterate my point:

I never said zone blocking was not good. It may be a great innovation, and could propel the Pack to the playoffs. What I did say however. is we have (as it stands at this moment) an HC who was OC of the absolute worst offense in the league last year who is implementing a much-touted, yet unproven, zone blocking scheme. Additionally, I have not seen TT make any changes to our offense (other than letting 2 pro-bowl guards, our center and kicker walk over the last two years), so I am wondering how you can assume we already "have the right people to implement it". I hope you understand why I may be a little skeptical.

Perhaps TT has big plans for the draft and some kind on Machiavellian trick up his sleeve for the 2006 campaign. However, I am not going to assume anything about the future when not a single person on this forum has a single clue what it holds. I can only comment on what I have seen so far.

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

 

[tromadz]

wouldn't setting a deadline for a HoF'er who has served GB for over 10 years be disrespectful?

Front Office is damned if they do, damned if they don't.

 

[longtimefan]

32nd in the league isn't bad... It is abysmal. Our offense was bad due to injuries COUPLED with a porous o-line, and a predictable attack (Favre to Driver ring a bell?). Granted I did not watch San Fran play much last year, but if you are saying that their offense was predictable as ours, you are not instilling much faith in me as far as MM goes.

where did I say it was predictable? It was his 1st year in Frisco, with very very raw talent and new people in place...Where as in N.O he had players that were around for a while...Look up the stats of the team when he was there and then make another call..Just do not base what he can do on his last season..

Say what you will, but our defense was the main reason we lost the majority of our games by only 4 points or less, which is why I don't buy the "bottom half of the league" arguement. If our D was so ****-poor, why were we not blown out half the season??? It's not like we had a powerhouse offense by any stretch. :roll:

Look at rushing att per game...Near the top if not the top, that tells me that teams were running the ball to burn up the clock..I.E Tampa Bay game, what did Cadillac do near the end?? Or yeah stuffed it down their throats.. :roll: :roll:

 

[Anubis]

Say what you will, but our defense was the main reason we lost the majority of our games by only 4 points or less, which is why I don't buy the "bottom half of the league" arguement. If our D was so ****-poor, why were we not blown out half the season??? It's not like we had a powerhouse offense by any stretch. :roll:

Look at rushing att per game...Near the top if not the top, that tells me that teams were running the ball to burn up the clock..I.E Tampa Bay game, what did Cadillac do near the end?? Or yeah stuffed it down their throats.. :roll: :roll:

So, you are saying that the majority of the teams that faced the Pack last season would settle for a field-goal lead and constantly run the ball to (hopefully) run the clock out before GB would get a chance to try to tie it up or win? :roll:

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

 

[warhawk]

IMO what this is really all about is that Brett has an extreme disdain for TT. He is really working him over on this "wait and see what he does" approach and putting TT on the hot seat big time.

I can not imagine him taking this same position if Sherman were still the GM because of their relationship. I am not implying in any way that we should have kept him in that position because he stunk as a GM.

I have heard rumblings about Favre's dislike for TT and it seems that has as much to do with all this as anything else.

 

[tromadz]

Really, cuz Favre said he likes TT.

So unless Favre is a hypocrite(which he's making a case for as each day passes, which breaks my heart)...I disagree.

I'd like to hope that he just isn't sure yet, and thats why he hasnt decided, NOT disdain for TT. If he did that, it would make him a hypocrite, and anything BUT a team player.

But I dont think thats the case. I hope...

 

[longtimefan]

Say what you will, but our defense was the main reason we lost the majority of our games by only 4 points or less, which is why I don't buy the "bottom half of the league" arguement. If our D was so ****-poor, why were we not blown out half the season??? It's not like we had a powerhouse offense by any stretch. :roll:

Look at rushing att per game...Near the top if not the top, that tells me that teams were running the ball to burn up the clock..I.E Tampa Bay game, what did Cadillac do near the end?? Or yeah stuffed it down their throats.. :roll: :roll:

So, you are saying that the majority of the teams that faced the Pack last season would settle for a field-goal lead and constantly run the ball to (hopefully) run the clock out before GB would get a chance to try to tie it up or win? :roll:

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

If you look at rushing attps per game avg something pops out at you..

Jets, Clev, Texans,...31 to 34 rushes per game...GB was around 5 for that..

Den, S. D. and K.C round out bottom 3...21 to 24 rushes per game...


See my point?? Good D have less rushing att per game, and more passing atts per game...Average or poor D have just the opposite...

 

[tromadz]

....

i dont get it. please PM me.


Defensive stats aside, GB was scared to run the ball, and by GB I mean Sherman and Rossley. If Ahman didn't get 30 yards in his first 4 rushes, they just abandonded the running game. I think Ahman only had 1 game where he had over 20 rush attempts(I know he got injured). Gado didnt get the 20 mark much either.

No, Sherman thought it would be smart to put it on Favres shoulders, which isnt a bad idea, except his WRs were hurt, and he had no Offensive line...

 

[warhawk]

Maybe I'm crazy but IF we pick up Woodson and then draft Hawk (which is probably a little more realistic than getting Williams) won't we be looking really tough on "D"?

Harris, Woodson, Collins, Manuel, Barnett, Hawk, Kampman, KGB, Pickett. I would think that would have a lot of people rating this "D" WAY up there at the beginning of the season.

I know Brett wants to see what we do to improve but I don't see how he could complain about that. I mean defense wins games.

I know we still need to get him some help on "O" but if that defense becomes reality I know I will be happy.

 

[tromadz]

yeah our D will have some talented players, and should be real good (again)

on offense we need guards, and a WR(if javon stays stupid) which we will do through the draft and june cuts I hope.

 

[Anubis]

:agree:

If they manage to shore up the above problems with some half-decent players, GB will certainly be in the running again this year.

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

 

[tromadz]

:agree:

If they manage to shore up the above problems with some half-decent players, GB will certainly be in the running again this year.

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

Yeah! A positive attitude! Whoooo!

Go Pack!

 

[P@ck66]

Hawk will be a rookie..

(Maybe he'll turn out to be another Barnett...who is still developing..)

 

[DePack]

UH OH...*******? I'm sure zero will be right here to spank you. Oh nevermind, it seems the mods allow you guys to call 66 anything you want.

 

[all about da packers]

UH OH...*******? I'm sure zero will be right here to spank you. Oh nevermind, it seems the mods allow you guys to call 66 anything you want.

We have all been busy lately, and we are trying to do the best we can. There is no need to bash 66, because of the fact is if you bash ANYOTHER poster, you will be banned.

 

[Zero2Cool]

This thread is over. If you want to discuss "There are some things I'm looking for .." - Favre please start a new thread and stay on topic.