Thurs Bears game: Stopping Howard will be Key

[gbgary]

Murphy went out and battled. He got schooled on Sunday at LT. They beat him with speed, they beat him with power, they beat him with almost every move in the book. The guy battles though, we'll see if he learns from it and gets better. But he isn't quitting. He did better the week before.

he won way more than he lost. 42 pass plays.

 

[GleefulGary]

I'm sure you'll find one. That doesn't have anything to do with making sure the o/line is stout tho man. If you can't protect Rodgers the Packers have zero chance at going to the playoffs.

You can't plan on losing your top 4 OT's. It almost never happens.

 

[Mondio]

I'm sure you'll find one. That doesn't have anything to do with making sure the o/line is stout tho man. If you can't protect Rodgers the Packers have zero chance at going to the playoffs.

I'm sure I'll find more than one It sure does have things to do with the Oline, Ted Thompson and the Green Bay Packers are not afforded roster exemptions to add extra players because we have Aaron Rodgers and need to make sure he's protected. We also don't get extra cap space. In a time when most teams don't have 2 legitimate starting tackles on their teams, you're now expecting Ted Thompson to have 6 or 7?

 

[PackAttack12]

I'm sure I'll find more than one It sure does have things to do with the Oline, Ted Thompson and the Green Bay Packers are not afforded roster exemptions to add extra players because we have Aaron Rodgers and need to make sure he's protected. We also don't get extra cap space. In a time when most teams don't have 2 legitimate starting tackles on their teams, you're now expecting Ted Thompson to have 6 or 7?

Yes, damnit.

 

[sschind]

I also think it's a little funny the Bears are getting praise right now after the way Tampa Bay kicked their ***** just last week.

Like Mondio said, its a week to week league. That and the fact that some teams may not be as bad as they appear to be on the surface. I think the Bear are one of them. Their passing game, well the QB and WR parts of it anyway (pass catching RBs are pretty good and that is where we seem to struggle) is pretty bad but their RBs are well above average and their D is pretty darn good but they are banged up pretty bad as well. Its a divisional game and its the Bears, I expect a win but I don't expect it to be easy. My prediction for O and D MVPs of the game are Marty B and HHCD.

 

[swhitset]

Like Mondio said, its a week to week league. That and the fact that some teams may not be as bad as they appear to be on the surface. I think the Bear are one of them. Their passing game, well the QB and WR parts of it anyway (pass catching RBs are pretty good and that is where we seem to struggle) is pretty bad but their RBs are well above average and their D is pretty darn good but they are banged up pretty bad as well. Its a divisional game and its the Bears, I expect a win but I don't expect it to be easy. My prediction for O and D MVPs of the game are Marty B and HHCD.

I was with you til the last sentence....

 

[Dantés]

Glennon is not a good QB and the Bears receivers are the worst in the NFL. Bears' receivers accounted for 1 reception total on Sunday.

Therefore, I think the game on defense will be getting the right mix of personnel to both be able to stop Howard on the ground while also dealing with Cohen and the tight ends in the passing game.

If they can stop Howard without using both Martinez and Ryan, that would be ideal. Having Jones at the other ILB spot would be my choice.

 

[PackerDNA]

I'm looking for the D to have a big game. Some INT's would be nice.

 

[OldSchool101]

This is one of those "trap" games we all talk about. Chicago has improved just enough to pose problems if we don't keep the gas on or we get conservative. Playing at Lambeau should give us a significant edge though.

 

[bigbubbatd]

This is one of those "trap" games we all talk about. Chicago has improved just enough to pose problems if we don't keep the gas on or we get conservative. Playing at Lambeau should give us a significant edge though.

When you are playing your 6th and 7th tackles as a pass first team there are no trap games. When you are missing arguably your best two defenders in Daniels and Perry there are no trap games. This team has talent but not enough to look past anyone

 

[OldSchool101]

When you are playing your 6th and 7th tackles as a pass first team there are no trap games. When you are missing arguably your best two defenders in Daniels and Perry there are no trap games. This team has talent but not enough to look past anyone

Oh. That makes me feel much better.

I'd rather be the Trapper than the Trappee anyhows!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not to stir up the whole OL depth thing, because most of you have done a good job of stirring and simmering the pot, but my "beef" with TT stems back to the same beef I brought up before week 1. Bulaga, Spriggs and Barclay started the season hurt and/or IR'd. THAT was the time TT needed to gauge the depth of the OL and bring in a veteran body or 2 and they were out there. Sure, he had some guys like Murphy, Pankey, McCray and Patrick for "depth". But how good of depth was that at the time and how confident should the Packers have been with it? So yeah, losing Bahk sucks, Bulaga still not ready and Murphy now IR'd sucks, but I still say TT started the season with a very shaky 53 when it comes to the OL and now it appears to be biting him in the ****. Talk all you want about losing Bahk and Bulaga......but Bulaga was injured before the season started, as was Spriggs and Barclay. Either the Packers doctors/training staff are feeding TT bad information or TT just started the season without considering what happens when guys start going down on the OL.

 

[Dblbogey]

Bobb and Bakhtiari returned to practice today.

I hope Bobb is a right tackle.

 

[Dblbogey]

We add O lineman every single draft. At what point can u not hold the lines depth against TT? When their starters are hurt and the top 3 choices to back up those Tackles are on IR maybe?

You even said it yourself. Most teams don't even carry 4. If Bakhtiari and Bulaga sit out were playing our 6th n 7th best options. There's literally no way to prepare for that

Well, we could carry 7 quality tackles if we cut Cobb, let Davante walk, and trade A. Rodgers for a good long snapper.

 

[Poppa San]

I thought it was lost but I found my ticket to the game:

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

 

[PackerDNA]

I thought it was lost but I found my ticket to the game:

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

Three dollars and fifty cents?!? What?!?!? WHAT?!?!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I thought it was lost but I found my ticket to the game:

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

That $3.50 probably doesn't even buy you a bottle of water at a game now! I have seen tickets on Craigslist for "big games" asking for $350. I guess the 70's was a great time.....although the team sucked for the most part of it.

 

[AmishMafia]

Not to stir up the whole OL depth thing, because most of you have done a good job of stirring and simmering the pot, but my "beef" with TT stems back to the same beef I brought up before week 1. Bulaga, Spriggs and Barclay started the season hurt and/or IR'd. THAT was the time TT needed to gauge the depth of the OL and bring in a veteran body or 2 and they were out there. Sure, he had some guys like Murphy, Pankey, McCray and Patrick for "depth". But how good of depth was that at the time and how confident should the Packers have been with it? So yeah, losing Bahk sucks, Bulaga still not ready and Murphy now IR'd sucks, but I still say TT started the season with a very shaky 53 when it comes to the OL and now it appears to be biting him in the ****. Talk all you want about losing Bahk and Bulaga......but Bulaga was injured before the season started, as was Spriggs and Barclay. Either the Packers doctors/training staff are feeding TT bad information or TT just started the season without considering what happens when guys start going down on the OL.

But what about roster spots? Murphy and McCray did okay in there. You want to carry 8 or 9 OTs on the roster? It's only going to hurt depth at another position and a promising developmental guy.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Well, we could carry 7 quality tackles if we cut Cobb, let Davante walk, and trade A. Rodgers for a good long snapper.

Thats exactly what I was thinking.........................oh nurse, can I have more Percocet pleeeeeeze!

 

[PackerDNA]

But what about roster spots? Murphy and McCray did okay in there. You want to carry 8 or 9 OTs on the roster? It's only going to hurt depth at another position and a promising developmental guy.

This is the thing. If you have to go heavier than you planned with certain position groups, you create weaknesses at others.

 

[GleefulGary]

I just turn injuries off on Madden. I don't get why our S&C staff can't just do that. Easy as the click of a button.

 

[Mondio]

But what about roster spots? Murphy and McCray did okay in there. You want to carry 8 or 9 OTs on the roster? It's only going to hurt depth at another position and a promising developmental guy.

They did do ok in there as backups. Murphy had a tougher time last game, but then he was also put on IR afterwards so something tells me there was a reason he looked worse last week than the week before that we don't know about. Regardless, they were ok as backups, but some people don't think our back ups were good enough anyway and this is a way they can bring it up again, to say "see, we needed more OLinemen" What they're not seeing is, even if we had our 2 starters and 3 other quality backups, NOBODY has #6,7, and8 on their roster as quality backup tackles. They are all development guys. Every single last one of them. There isn't a veteran in the league worth a **** that is sitting at a #4 tackle position let alone 6,7 or 8 deep. Nobody even keeps that many. Why can't people just accept the situation for what it is? It's not good, and any scenario you've made up in your mind in which you've prepared for this is insane at best.

 

[PackerDNA]

They did do ok in there as backups. Murphy had a tougher time last game, but then he was also put on IR afterwards so something tells me there was a reason he looked worse last week than the week before that we don't know about. Regardless, they were ok as backups, but some people don't think our back ups were good enough anyway and this is a way they can bring it up again, to say "see, we needed more OLinemen" What they're not seeing is, even if we had our 2 starters and 3 other quality backups, NOBODY has #6,7, and8 on their roster as quality backup tackles. They are all development guys. Every single last one of them. There isn't a veteran in the league worth a **** that is sitting at a #4 tackle position let alone 6,7 or 8 deep. Nobody even keeps that many. Why can't people just accept the situation for what it is? It's not good, and any scenario you've made up in your mind in which you've prepared for this is insane at best.

You never want to use injuries as an excuse, but at some point if they get out of hand they become a reason for diminished play.
Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes he gets you. There's really no plan or defense against a run of injuries like this.

 

[Mondio]

no there isn't. we need to get our starting tackles back healthy. If it was just 1 at a time i'm not too worried being this far down on the depth chart because they can gameplan around it and everyone is good enough to do it. The coach, the rest of the line, the QB, and all the skill positions. Both being guys so far down makes it a lot tougher, but they aren't going to give them a do over. Just gotta line up and play.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Agreed Mondio. It's such killer when they come back for a game and re injure themselves and we lose them for the next 2 or 3.