2007 Green Bay Packers Thread

[Packer487 3]

I'd take two wins over Green Bay this season even if it kept us from getting the No. 1 pick. I hate the Packers! If it weren't for them, the Lions might have actually won more than one playoff game in my life (history?).

That's the way you cover somebody in the last minute of a playoff game!

-Tim

Edited August 16, 2007 by Packer487

[Guest DetroitIan]

That's the way you cover somebody in the last minute of a playoff game!

-Tim

Sure, the Lions suck. But a Packers fan is gonna talk smack?? The Packers have done nothing but go down hill over the past few seasons. It it were a Broncos fan, or a Cowboys fan, then smack talk would mean something. But the Packers have sucked balls lately. Not as bad as the Lions of course(but who is). Im gonna be very interested in what you have to say once the regular season starts, or rather 8-10 games into the season. I dont think the Lions are making the playoffs. Cause Im just being real about it. But the Packers have done nothing but lose tale,nt, and has a quarterback at the twilight of his career. Even in the weak nfc, the Packers still wont make the playoffs. So basically, a fan of a non playoff team, talking trash to another non playoff team, is just kinda laughable and means zero. The Bears WILL win the division. And the wildcard wont be easy. The Saints, the Cowboys, the Panthers, ALL have a better shot at making the playoffs than the Packers do. I cant wait for the season to start.

[Packer487 3]

Sure, the Lions suck. But a Packers fan is gonna talk smack?? The Packers have done nothing but go down hill over the past few seasons. It it were a Broncos fan, or a Cowboys fan, then smack talk would mean something. But the Packers have sucked balls lately. Not as bad as the Lions of course(but who is). Im gonna be very interested in what you have to say once the regular season starts, or rather 8-10 games into the season. I dont think the Lions are making the playoffs. Cause Im just being real about it. But the Packers have done nothing but lose tale,nt, and has a quarterback at the twilight of his career. Even in the weak nfc, the Packers still wont make the playoffs. So basically, a fan of a non playoff team, talking trash to another non playoff team, is just kinda laughable and means zero. The Bears WILL win the division. And the wildcard wont be easy. The Saints, the Cowboys, the Panthers, ALL have a better shot at making the playoffs than the Packers do. I cant wait for the season to start.

Really? You're going to use the Broncos and Cowboys as examples? I mean, you're talking about the Packers being crappy lately...the Cowboys have had 4 10+ loss seasons in the last seven years. And it's not like Denver made the playoffs last year. You couldn't say something like "If it was a New England fan, or a Colts fan"? You're busting out the Broncos and the Cowboys? What is this, 1999? I mean, the Packers have the longest current winning streak in the NFC and they missed the playoffs on a strength of schedule tie-breaker. It's not like they were a doormat last year. It just took some time to get going since they were installing a new blocking scheme, starting 3 rookies (and an additional first year starter) on the offensive line for a time, and learning the new defensive coordinator's system (not to mention integrating something like 6 new starters on defense and up to 6 on offense as well). By the end of the season, they were a completely different team.

And the fact that your team has lost more than ten games 6 years in a row does in fact mean that I can talk smack. Especially considering that the 4-12 record the Packers posted two years ago would've been better than 3 of the last 6 years for Detroit. And that was the only sub .500 season the Packers have had since 1991. And then there's the fact that your team hasn't won a playoff game since 1991 and before that it was what? 1957? And that the Packers have beaten them at least one time every season since 1991. And the fact that our fanbase doesn't have people becoming grandfathers who have never seen their team win a Super Bowl, let alone multiple playoff games....

Saying that the Packers have done nothing but lose talent is a completely ignorant opinion. Sure they finally hit rock bottom (4-12) in a season that they were killed by injuries, and at one point late in the year were statistically the unluckiest team in the history of the league (based on # of wins that they had vs. how many wins they should have had based on points for/points allowed). As it was, they were the last team in the league to have a season below .500 in the salary cap era. It happens....

But that team is on its way back up. It might not happen this year, but they're getting there. They've got a Top 10 defense as it is, and if the offensive line has improved the way one would expect after a year of starting together, there's no reason they can't be a playoff team. The defense played like hell for the first half of last season and still ended up 2nd in the league in takeaways and ranked pretty decently overall. No reason that shouldn't improve too. And they get to play Dallas and Carolina, so if they miss out, it's their own fault. If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.

But they're well past the stage when Favre's retirement would hurt them against the cap (as it stands, when it happens they'll probably free up $12-13 million or so) and having a dominant defense will go a long ways toward helping Rodgers get acclimated. Or it frees up the money to go get a QB if they decide Rodgers isn't the guy.

-Tim

[Guest DetroitIan]

Really? You're going to use the Broncos and Cowboys as examples? I mean, you're talking about the Packers being crappy lately...the Cowboys have had 4 10+ loss seasons in the last seven years. And it's not like Denver made the playoffs last year. You couldn't say something like "If it was a New England fan, or a Colts fan"?

I was purposely NOT using awesome teams like New England and the Colts as examples, because there is absolutely no comparison between them and GB. Not even close. I was using the Broncos and Cowboys as examples, because they are both mid-level teams. And even they have way better squads than GB. They have tons of talent. And a great team core. Unlike the Packers. Who basically have jack-s***. Hell, without Donald Driver the Packers lose more games than the Lions this year.

And the fact that your team has lost more than ten games 6 years in a row does in fact mean that I can talk smack. Especially considering that the 4-12 record the Packers posted two years ago would've been better than 3 of the last 6 years for Detroit. And that was the only sub .500 season the Packers have had since 1991. And then there's the fact that your team hasn't won a playoff game since 1991 and before that it was what? 1957? And that the Packers have beaten them at least one time every season since 1991. And the fact that our fanbase doesn't have people becoming grandfathers who have never seen their team win a Super Bowl, let alone multiple playoff games....

You actually think you're telling me something here??? Gee, no s*** buddy. The Lions have sucked for years and years. News flash! This does nothing to support you're arguement. What are you saying? That you can talk smack because you're s***ty team isnt as s***ty as the Lions?? Great arguement there bud.

Saying that the Packers have done nothing but lose talent is a completely ignorant opinion.

Dude, put the pipe down. Cause obviously you have to be smoking some hardcore s*** to say that the Packers havent lost talent. They have lost several talented players. And have put young, inexperienced players in their place. Thats called losing talent. Not to mention a Brett Favre that litterally gets worse from year to year. Favre's game is on the decline. Anyone with two eyes knows this. Time to take off the homer goggles. So actually, to say the Packers havent lost any talent, is a completely ignorant opinion.

But that team is on its way back up. It might not happen this year, but they're getting there.

Thanks for making my point. ONCE AGAIN, Green Bay will be a non-playoff team. And a non-factor during the season. Because they just dont have the talent. So like I said before. A Broncos fan, or Cowboys fan, or even a Panthers fan, can talk smack and it means something. A Packers fan talking smack is just pathetic and quite laughable. "My non-playoff team is better than your non-playoff team!" HAHA Obviously you have no clue what trash talking is all about. Especially when for the first time in several, several seasons, the Lions may have the more talented squad. Good timing on the trash talk.

there's no reason they can't be a playoff team.

Here's one. How bout the fact that the Bears, Panthers, Cowboys, Saints, Giants, Seahawks, Eagles, and Rams are ALL better than GB. Hell, I'de even say the Redskins are a better team than the Packers. Every team I just named, are all more talented and more experienced than GB. Is that good enough of a reason for ya?

and having a dominant defense will go a long ways toward helping Rodgers get acclimated.

A dominant defense??? Hahahahahaha! Dude, you really need to stop. You're really making yourself look uneducated. And Im not saying the Packers defense sucks or anything. In fact, it may be the one thing they have going for em. But to call their defense DOMINANT? Thats completely laughable. Teams like New England, Baltimore, Chicago, are what you call teams with "dominant defenses." Not the f-ing Packers.

It's all good though. Keep on talking trash. Even though your team has been a joke lately. If this were the late 90s. Then your smack talk would be as legit as it gets. But now, you dont have a leg to stand on. And it just looks pathetic and sad. Get a winning team. Then talk smack. Until then, your trash talking means dick.

Edited August 16, 2007 by DetroitIan

[Packer487 3]

I was purposely NOT using awesome teams like New England and the Colts as examples, because there is absolutely no comparison between them and GB. Not even close. I was using the Broncos and Cowboys as examples, because they are both mid-level teams. And even they have way better squads than GB. They have tons of talent. And a great team core. Unlike the Packers. Who basically have jack-s***. Hell, without Donald Driver the Packers lose more games than the Lions this year.

But why would their smack mean something? Both those teams were 1 game better than GB last year. The Broncos didn't make the playoffs (despite Javon Walker's "We have a chance to win the Super Bowl. They have a chance to win 4 games" comment) and the Cowboys bowed out in the first round. So basically, if the Packers opponents had done just a little bit better last year (which would've put the Packers in the playoffs), the "smack might mean something" but now it doesn't.

It's just funny. The Broncos and Cowboys have "Way better squads" with "tons of talent" compared to the Packers' "jack-s***" and the Packers ended up with a very similar record to both of them.

You actually think you're telling me something here??? Gee, no s*** buddy. The Lions have sucked for years and years. News flash! This does nothing to support you're arguement. What are you saying? That you can talk smack because you're s***ty team isnt as s***ty as the Lions?? Great arguement there bud.

My "s***ty team" has finished under .500 once in 15 seasons. Last year they made a four game improvement over the year before, despite putting in a new defensive system, starting a bunch of rookies, putting in a new blocking scheme, and having the youngest team in the league.

Dude, put the pipe down. Cause obviously you have to be smoking some hardcore s*** to say that the Packers havent lost talent. They have lost several talented players. And have put young, inexperienced players in their place. Thats called losing talent. Not to mention a Brett Favre that litterally gets worse from year to year. Favre's game is on the decline. Anyone with two eyes knows this. Time to take off the homer goggles. So actually, to say the Packers havent lost any talent, is a completely ignorant opinion.

I didn't say they haven't lost any talent. I said that saying that they've "done nothing but lose talent" is a completely ignorant opinion. And it is.

You mistake "young and inexperienced" for "not being talented". The Packers had more players on the All-Rookie team last year than anybody else. The Dallas Morning News's respected draft guy gave the Packers the ONLY A+ in his "Draft in Review" at the end of the 2006 season.

As for Favre "literally getting worse from year to year", he threw 29 picks in 2005. 18 last year. Yup. He really got worse. But I'd ask that before making comments like that you go back through and look at how many of those picks occurred when they were trailing by two or more scores. Because it was a LOT. The guy plays to win, even when they're down by 20. You can't come back in a game like that by throwing 5 yard outs. So, however unlikely it is that they'll come back, he airs it out. And passes get picked off because, let's face it, it's pretty easy to play defense when you're up by 20. And for the record, he had something like 8 picks through 7 games in 2005, then everyone on the team got hurt. Suddenly Taco Wallace is his receiver, Troy Humphrey is his fullback, and he's got a running back who played in the Big Ten but I had never heard of him. And shocker! The interceptions went way up. Why could that be?

Thanks for making my point. ONCE AGAIN, Green Bay will be a non-playoff team. And a non-factor during the season. Because they just dont have the talent. So like I said before. A Broncos fan, or Cowboys fan, or even a Panthers fan, can talk smack and it means something. A Packers fan talking smack is just pathetic and quite laughable. "My non-playoff team is better than your non-playoff team!" HAHA Obviously you have no clue what trash talking is all about. Especially when for the first time in several, several seasons, the Lions may have the more talented squad. Good timing on the trash talk.

Because I said "it may not happen this year" I made your point. Do you have any idea how to formulate an argument? I can't talk trash to you because my team didn't make the playoffs. But fans of Denver and Carolina (two non-playoff teams last year....and oh by the way, Carolina had the same record as GB) along with Dallas (a team that made the playoffs but went 1-3 down the stretch, including a loss to the ******* Lions) are allowed to talk smack? Good thing we cleared that one up.

As for the Lions being "more talented"...how do you figure? Because they got Calvin Johnson? They've got good talent at WRs. But their QB sucks (even though he's going to throw for 50 TDs and lead the Lions to 12 wins this year apparently), the offensive line sucks, and as a whole the defense sucks. And Tatum Bell put up good numbers in Denver, but none of those Denver RBs have done anything anywhere else (Portis would be the closest, but I think every Washington fan would say he's been a disappointment).

Here's one. How bout the fact that the Bears, Panthers, Cowboys, Saints, Giants, Seahawks, Eagles, and Rams are ALL better than GB. Hell, I'de even say the Redskins are a better team than the Packers. Every team I just named, are all more talented and more experienced than GB. Is that good enough of a reason for ya?

The Giants? Seriously? You do realize that they lost Tiki Barber, they hate their head coach, they lost their Left Tackle, and Michael Strahan might not play this year right?

I can't deny those other teams will be right in the mix (except I don't think Washington is very good either). But I believe the Packers play seven of them (no New Orleans or Seattle). So they'll get their chance against almost all of them. And they don't have to beat out all of them to make the playoffs. Just 2 (since I'm not giving you the Giants or Redskins).

A dominant defense??? Hahahahahaha! Dude, you really need to stop. You're really making yourself look uneducated. And Im not saying the Packers defense sucks or anything. In fact, it may be the one thing they have going for em. But to call their defense DOMINANT? Thats completely laughable. Teams like New England, Baltimore, Chicago, are what you call teams with "dominant defenses." Not the f-ing Packers.

I didn't say that they've got one now. I said that having one will help Aaron Rodgers get acclimated. And it could very well happen. Give those young guys a couple more years, add in the fact that Favre's retirement will free up a ton of cap room (like $12-13 million), and it's well within the realm of possibility.

I said earlier that they'll be solidly in the top 10 this year, and if everything goes well (meaning someone steps up at safety, and no major injuries) they could be top 5. Which is perfectly reasonable since they were 12th last year and didn't have a clue what they were doing for the first half of the season. And they were second in the league in takeaways and 4th in sacks.

It's all good though. Keep on talking trash. Even though your team has been a joke lately. If this were the late 90s. Then your smack talk would be as legit as it gets. But now, you dont have a leg to stand on. And it just looks pathetic and sad. Get a winning team. Then talk smack. Until then, your trash talking means dick.

Good God, I wasn't even talking trash to the other poster. He commented that the Packers kept the Lions from winning more than 1 playoff game...I posted a picture from one of those games.

Then I get Mr. Internet Tough Guy trying to "put me in my place" even though you can't form a coherent thought.

And it's kind of telling that my team has been "a joke" lately, but there's not a Lions fan in the world that wouldn't gladly have them trade places with the Packers. And that's just during GB's rebuilding time...it doesn't even take into account the years they were winning divisions, conference championships, and the Super Bowl.

My team's been through their rebuilding. They're on the way back up. Your team has lost 10+ games for 6 straight years and they'd still need a minor miracle just to get back to the level they were at in 2000. That's gotta blow.

-Tim

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Oh oh oh, you got me now!

Kitna is the most useless QB in the league, and I've said it numerous times. Just because Marinelli and the Lions organization is that stupid and believe he's a good player doesn't mean the actual fans of the team do. I think everyone thinks he sucks.

In fact, when was the last time the Lions organization actually cared about the fans? I can't remember, since they haven't made the playoffs since the Stone Age, and continue to let Matt Millen run this team into the ground with nothing but an office desk and a telephone.

Sorry to veer this so far off topic, but it's silly to compare Kitna and Farve, because Kitna has never been a QB in his entire life. Favre used to be good, but I just don't think he is anymore, so why does he keep playing? The Packers really don't have a legitimate shot at a SuperBowl. Kinda the same reason why Barry Sanders retired early, because he saw that the Lions were going nowhere.

Then again, I'm not a Packers fan, so maybe I don't know everything that comes into play of his decision. I just think he's far past his prime.

edited for grammar

Did you understand the post that you quoted me on even the least bit? I basically answered all the questions you re-posed in this post.

Once again, is Favre the QB he once was: no. Is he still better than half the QB's in the league: Yes. Also, don't get your hopes up on my comparing Favre with Kitna. He doesn't even belong in the same sentence as Favre. I merely brought up Kitna because he was close in age to Favre. Nothing more.

Edited August 16, 2007 by Never Forget Mac #25

[Packer487 3]

Did you understand the post that you quoted me on even the least bit?

That seems to be a trend amongst the Lions fans in this thread.....

-Tim

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Sidenote: Packer487 wins against Detroit Ian.

[Guest DetroitIan]

And it's kind of telling that my team has been "a joke" lately, but there's not a Lions fan in the world that wouldn't gladly have them trade places with the Packers. And that's just during GB's rebuilding time...it doesn't even take into account the years they were winning divisions, conference championships, and the Super Bowl.

My team's been through their rebuilding. They're on the way back up. Your team has lost 10+ games for 6 straight years and they'd still need a minor miracle just to get back to the level they were at in 2000. That's gotta blow.

-Tim

Once again, you are proving nothing to me. I made it quite clear that the Lions are BY FAR the inferior of the two. I would take GBs worst season, over the bulls*** we've had to endure from year to year. Whats your point? Thats not even what Im talking about. Not a sharp one there are ya? This whole thing is over you talking trash and looking quite pathetic in the process, considering the team you're a fan of. I'll say it again, GB is way better than the Lions, even during their roughest period. Thats not whats in question. All I keep hearing from you is, words like "maybe", and "might" and "could happen." Well until it actually DOES happen, you look like a fool talking smack. Yeah the Lions suck. But GB has been far from good for several seasons now. And when the playoffs begin this year, both of our teams will be golfing. So how does that foot taste Timmy?

Sidenote: Packer487 wins against Detroit Ian.

Sidenote: Gee, no way. A Packers fan thinking he's right. No one saw that coming.

Edited August 16, 2007 by DetroitIan

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Sidenote: Gee, no way. A Packers fan thinking he's right. No one saw that coming.

Hate to break it to you, but your ridiculous arguments are what gave Packer487 the win.

Sidenote: Last I checked, Packer487 wasn't really talking any smack. He was more saying that the Packers have a shot of being decent this year. It's pretty different than the way you've come off in this thread, which is prick-like.

[Guest DetroitIan]

Is he still better than half the QB's in the league: Yes.

It's official. GB fans are the biggest homers i've ever seen. Favre was once one of the best in the entire league. And 4-5 seasons ago, was better than half the QB's in the league. Currently, Favre is better than some of the starting NFL quarterbacks out there. But he is absolutely not still better than half the QB's in the league. Although, I would take Favre right now over Kitna any day. But he's still not as good as you make him out to be. He's lost a significant amount of accuracy. Hell, I like the guy. I really do. But lets be real here. Father time dictates all. And its clear, that Favre is showing signs of shutting down.

Hate to break it to you, but your ridiculous arguments are what gave Packer487 the win.

Sidenote: Last I checked, Packer487 wasn't really talking any smack. He was more saying that the Packers have a shot of being decent this year. It's pretty different than the way you've come off in this thread, which is prick-like.

What was so ridiculous about what I said?? Everything I said is true. And you might wanna read back there buddy. He wasnt just saying they have a shot to be decent. He blattenly showed a picture of the Packers burning the Lions. Then made some comment about "thats how you play" with grin faces and s***. So I dont wanna hear it. Im not trying to be a prick. Im just saying that he might wanna wait till the Packers actually do something before talking smack. Cause like I said before, when playoffs come, both teams will be on the golf course. Makes the smack talk look pretty lame.

[Packer487 3]

Once again, you are proving nothing to me. I made it quite clear that the Lions are BY FAR the inferior of the two. I would take GBs worst season, over the bulls*** we've had to endure from year to year. Whats your point? Thats not even what Im talking about. Not a sharp one there are ya? This whole thing is over you talking trash and looking quite pathetic in the process considering the team you're a fan of. I'll say it again, GB is way better than the Lions, even during their roughest period. Thats not whats in question. All I keep hearing from you is, words like "maybe", and "might" and "could happen." Well until it actually DOES happen, you look like a fool talking smack. Yeah the Lions suck. But GB has been far from good for several seasons now. And when the playoffs begin this year, both of our teams will be golfing. So how does that foot taste Timmy?

My team is "By far" superior and "way better" than your team (your words, not mine). But I look pathetic talking trash "considering the team I'm a fan of"?

That doesn't even make sense. [/Gaffigan]

I've been on record several times as saying I think the Packers could be anywhere from 6-10 to 10-6 this year, depending on the development of the OL, if they can find a safety opposite Collins, and if they stay relatively healthy.

The only one I've "talked trash" to is you, because you pulled the Internet Tough Guy routine on me when I wasn't talking smack in the first place.

Oh, and I doubt our teams will be golfing, since when the playoffs begin it'll be January. Those Wisconsin winters aren't really conducive to golf...

I'm done with you. It's one thing to debate, it's another to be a complete troll in this thread. I've wasted enough time responding to your inane ramblings.

-Tim

[Guest DetroitIan]

My team is "By far" superior and "way better" than your team (your words, not mine). But I look pathetic talking trash "considering the team I'm a fan of"?

I meant over the years. Im not talking about right at this moment. Cause as I said before, the Lions may actually be as good or a little better talent-wise this season. And not just because of Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams. The Lions for once, in a long time, actually have a solid running core. In fact, once Kevin Jones comes back. I would take a Kevin Jones/Tatum Bell/TJ Duckett combo, over Morency and Gado any day of the week and 3 times on sunday. Kitna sucks. Our defense is decent. We will definitely improve on last seasons record.

I've been on record several times as saying I think the Packers could be anywhere from 6-10 to 10-6 this year, depending on the development of the OL

Exactly. With the team they have, they could easily lose 10 games. Which once again, makes my point for me. It's just smack talk between two losing squads.

Oh, and I doubt our teams will be golfing, since when the playoffs begin it'll be January. Those Wisconsin winters aren't really conducive to golf...

It's just a saying pal. I wasnt being LITTERAL. Once again, showing off your smarts.

It's one thing to debate, it's another to be a complete troll in this thread. I've wasted enough time responding to your inane ramblings.

-Tim

Im being a troll in the thread because I have a different opinion?? The only one rambling here is you. Also, I never started any sort of smack talk. So the only one coming off as a troll, is you. Come on back whenever you wanna get schooled again.

[timothy1997 0]

damn...missed all the smack talk. I don't what you two are fighting about. My ADOPTED team in New Englad is gonna win it all this year. I will still root for the Lions tho.

The sad thing with being a Lions fan is the talent HAS BEEN THERE. But its not been put together. Detroit has made several moves that even the GM of the year would make. Just cursed I guess.

IMO, the Packers lost the most talent a few years ago in the 2 guards that left. If they can fill that void, then I dont see any reason why they can't be a decent team that can just throw anyone there at halfback and have decent games. All about the O-Line baby!!

[timothy1997 0]

double post

Edited August 16, 2007 by timothy1997

[Packer487 3]

Alright. I said I was done. But I can't let idiocy like this go.

laugh.gif It's official. GB fans are the biggest homers i've ever seen. Favre was once one of the best in the entire league. And 4-5 seasons ago, was better than half the QB's in the league. Currently, Favre is better than some of the starting NFL quarterbacks out there. But he is absolutely not still better than half the QB's in the league. Although, I would take Favre right now over Kitna any day. But he's still not as good as you make him out to be. He's lost a significant amount of accuracy. Hell, I like the guy. I really do. But lets be real here. Father time dictates all. And its clear, that Favre is showing signs of shutting down.

He's lost a significant amount of accuracy? Last year he did struggle with that, yes. But he was also hurt by something like 43 dropped passes last year, which led the NFL. Add in even HALF of those (which would put him back closer to an average amount of drops) and his completion percentage would've been right where it was in 96 and 97 when he was winning MVPs. In fact, in the past 5 seasons before last year he had a higher completion percentage than he did in two of those MVP years.

He wasnt just saying they have a shot to be decent. He blattenly showed a picture of the Packers burning the Lions. Then made some comment about "thats how you play" with grin faces and s***. So I dont wanna hear it. Im not trying to be a prick. Im just saying that he might wanna wait till the Packers actually do something before talking smack.

I had to quote this just because it's so funny. "With grin faces and s***." That might be my favorite line in any post ever.

I meant over the years. Im not talking about right at this moment.

"I'll say it again, GB is way better than the Lions, even during their roughest period." Seems pretty clear cut to me.

Cause as I said before, the Lions may actually be as good or a little better talent-wise this season. And not just because of Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams. The Lions for once, in a long time, actually have a solid running core. In fact, once Kevin Jones comes back. I would take a Kevin Jones/Tatum Bell/TJ Duckett combo, over Morency and Gado any day of the week and 3 times on sunday. Kitna sucks. Our defense is decent. We will definitely improve on last seasons record.

IF Kevin Jones comes back 100% then you've got the same mediocre, injury-prone running back that you've had for years. And no Denver running back has ever done anything outside of their zone-blocking scheme (save for Portis, as I mentioned before....but he's still been a disappointment). You could have pretty much anyone, save for Barry, back there and it wouldn't matter if the line can't block.

The defense would have a chance to be decent if they had anyone in the secondary. But they don't. It was hard enough for them when they had Bly. Now their only good corner is gone.

"We will definitely improve over last year's record." You mean they won't be the second worst team in the league again? Poo. That's not a record that's real hard to improve on.

And by the way, Gado got traded for Morency. He hasn't been on the team in about a year. The other RB would be Brandon Jackson, their second round pick.

Exactly. With the team they have, they could easily lose 10 games. Which once again, makes my point for me. It's just smack talk between two losing squads.

I had 6-10 as the low point (meaning the OL hasn't improved, they have a rash of injuries, etc.) I didn't say they could "easily" lose 10 games, but it's possible. There are very few teams in the league that couldn't lose 10 games. If you've paid attention to the NFL at all, you should know that things get shuffled all the time. Teams like St. Louis go from last place to the Super Bowl. New Orleans goes from the #2 pick to the NFC Championship. And teams fall from grace.

It's just a saying pal. I wasnt being LITTERAL. Once again, showing off your smarts. laugh.gif

Oh you were being sarcastic....how'd I miss that one.

And it's pretty much a given that anytime someone insults another person's intelligence on a message board, they'll spell something wrong in the process. This one is for you, Ian:

Im being a troll in the thread because I have a different opinion?? rolleyes.gif The only one rambling here is you. Also, I never started any sort of smack talk. So the only one coming off as a troll, is you.

No, you're a troll because I get dumber every time I read one of your posts. Debate is fine. If you think the Packers are going to suck this year, tell me why and back it up. Don't just say things like "Favre has lost accuracy and they've done nothing but loose [sic] talent, LOL!!!!!!!111!" that can be easily proven wrong. And it'd help if you didn't do things like mention Samkon Gado's name. Unless you want me to start talking about how I'd take the Packers kicker over Eddie Murray.

Also, it'd be kind of hard for me to troll a Packers thread since I'm the one that actually belongs here.

Come on back whenever you wanna get schooled again.

Yeah, you're a fountain of NFL knowledge. Just a geyser. Howie Schwab has nothing on you. Next time maybe you can tell me about how Sterling Sharpe is past his prime, how Roell Preston isn't going to make the Pro Bowl this year, and how Mark D'Onofrio won't help their defensive line....I look forward to it.

IMO, the Packers lost the most talent a few years ago in the 2 guards that left. If they can fill that void, then I dont see any reason why they can't be a decent team that can just throw anyone there at halfback and have decent games. All about the O-Line baby!!

Ahhh right you are! The loss of Rivera and Wahle combined with the failure to replace them adequately by using guys like Adrian Klemm, Will Whittacker and Matt O'Dwyer was the single biggest cause of that disaster of a season two years ago. And to be fair, they had to let Rivera go. There was no way he was worth the money Dallas threw at him (and that's proven to be true). Fortunately, they drafted Darryn Colledge and Jason Spitz last year, who both started 14 or 15 games. Colledge was on the all-rookie team and they were both pretty solid down the stretch. I think the OL will actually be pretty good this year.

-Tim

Edited August 16, 2007 by Packer487

[timothy1997 0]

Ahhh right you are! The loss of Rivera and Wahle combined with the failure to replace them adequately by using guys like Adrian Klemm, Will Whittacker and Matt O'Dwyer was the single biggest cause of that disaster of a season two years ago. And to be fair, they had to let Rivera go. There was no way he was worth the money Dallas threw at him (and that's proven to be true). Fortunately, they drafted Darryn Colledge and Jason Spitz last year, who both started 14 or 15 games. Colledge was on the all-rookie team and they were both pretty solid down the stretch. I think the OL will actually be pretty good this year.

-Tim

Same thing can be said about the Lions. Led the league in sacks allowed this year and last in rushing yards last year. They fired the OL coach and brought in some new players in Foster and Muitalalo(sp) to fill the void as well as the addition of Tatum Bell and TJ Duckett. If their O-Line is ranked more like halfway instead of last in the league, they can be a decent NFL team.

[Packer487 3]

Same thing can be said about the Lions. Led the league in sacks allowed this year and last in rushing yards last year. They fired the OL coach and brought in some new players in Foster and Muitalalo(sp) to fill the void as well as the addition of Tatum Bell and TJ Duckett. If their O-Line is ranked more like halfway instead of last in the league, they can be a decent NFL team.

The OL is going to be key for them. If they can block like an NFL team, then the offense will be really fun to watch. The Lions are going to be the most exciting team in the league this year. Because they're going to score a lot of points (though Kitna is not hitting 50 TDs, no matter how many times he says it...and he's not throwing for 5,000 yards like that nfl.com writer said this week) and they're going to give up a lot of points.

It honestly wouldn't shock me if the Lions were decent this year. I don't think they're a playoff team, just because their defense is going to be really, really awful against the pass. But they won't be a laughing stock like they have been for the last 6 years. I've got them around 6-10, 7-9. Truth be told, I went through their schedule the other day and had them at 8-8....I docked em a couple games because, well, it's the Lions...and you know they're good for losing to a couple teams like Oakland or Arizona.

Without putting too much work into it, I'd guess it'll be something like this in the NFC North:

Chicago 10-6

Green Bay 9-7/8-8

Detroit 6-10/7-9

Minnesota 4-12 (I can't see them winning games with Jackson at QB. That guy is absolutely brutal.)

But the NFL changes so much year to year, the schedules that look tough could end up being really easy and vice-versa. Then you've got injuries, unexpected improvement, etc. to factor in. So I could be completely off.

-Tim

[Guest DetroitIan]

And it's pretty much a given that anytime someone insults another person's intelligence on a message board, they'll spell something wrong in the process.

Oh you really got me!! I added an extra T. Oh noooooo!! HAHA! Dude try again. You're gonna have to try a hell of alot harder to rip on me than that.

No, you're a troll because I get dumber every time I read one of your posts.

Nice "Billy Madison" comeback there. What is this like 1996???

Debate is fine. If you think the Packers are going to suck this year, tell me why and back it up. Don't just say things like "Favre has lost accuracy and they've done nothing but loose [sic] talent

Those are a few of the reasons right there! Favre is on a major decline in his career. They've lost guys like Green(when he was actually good), Javon Walker, and replace them with young less talented players. And keep dreaming about that Packer "dominant defense." Cause thats not happening. You just need to face the facts. The Packers are nowhere near where they were in years past. Favre is on the decline. He has way less weapons to work with than he used to. Playoffs will be starting, and neither of us will be watching our home teams. So like I said, any time you wanna get your ass schooled again, let me know.

P.S. We know who you are. We can all read your handle. Dont think its real neccasary to tell us you're Tim every time. I think we get it, smart guy.

Edited August 16, 2007 by DetroitIan

[timothy1997 0]

They've lost guys like Green(when he was actually good), Javon Walker, and replace them with young less talented players. And keep dreaming about that Packer "dominant defense."

how exactly do you replace guys like Green and Walker. I remember a few years ago we (Lions) had a hard time replacing Barry Sanders. And as far as the Packers having a dominant defense. No they don't, but they are better than a lot of other teams out there, especially the Lions.

P.S. We know who you are. We can all read your handle. Dont think its real neccasary to tell us you're Tim every time. I think we get it, smart guy.

Nothing wrong about having a signature. I happen to think that Tim is a good name.

[Guest DetroitIan]

how exactly do you replace guys like Green and Walker. I remember a few years ago we (Lions) had a hard time replacing Barry Sanders. And as far as the Packers having a dominant defense. No they don't, but they are better than a lot of other teams out there, especially the Lions.

Oh absolutely. I totally agree. Im just saying, even though it is hard to replace guys like that, its still considered losing talent. Nothing you can really do about it. But it is the truth.

Nothing wrong about having a signature. I happen to think that Tim is a good name.

Nah I got no problem with the name itself. Just gets a little old to say it after every single thing you post. It's like, we can all read just fine. Thats what a handle is for. I guess thats just my(and hundreds of other lgw posters) opinion.

[mannysBETTER3434 1]

I agree with both sides of this smack talking, but I'm more with Detroit Ian.

- Detroit Ian said GB is better then DET a number of times. What are you (Packer) trying to prove? Ian is also right because it's dumb to talk trash about 2 bad teams.

-GB isn't going up anytime soon. Favre is a average QB. I love Favre, but those are the facts. Average at best Favre+horrible surroding cast=nothing specail.

-The defense is nothing special. Yes they have building blocks, but Harrel hasn't proven anything, and besides AJ Hawk they don't have much. Charles Woodson is still solid, and had a second wind last year, but like Favre is on the downslide.

-Packer..you said Denver didn't make the playoffs last year, but if they were in the NFC they would have went 12-4. Denver is a very good team.

-Packers blew becoming above average when not trading for Randy Moss. Instead he went to my team (like Timothys), and they are going to win it all this year.

Edited August 17, 2007 by mannysBETTER3434

[Packer487 3]

I agree with both sides of this smack talking, but I'm more with Detroit Ian.

- Detroit Ian said GB is better then DET a number of times. What are you (Packer) trying to prove? Ian is also right because it's dumb to talk trash about 2 bad teams.

-GB isn't going up anytime soon. Favre is a average QB. I love Favre, but those are the facts. Average at best Favre+horrible surroding cast=nothing specail.

-The defense is nothing special. Yes they have building blocks, but Harrel hasn't proven anything, and besides AJ Hawk they don't have much. Charles Woodson is still solid, and had a second wind last year, but like Favre is on the downslide.

-Packer..you said Denver didn't make the playoffs last year, but if they were in the NFC they would have went 12-4. Denver is a very good team.

-Packers blew becoming above average when not trading for Randy Moss. Instead he went to my team (like Timothys), and they are going to win it all this year.

The funny thing is that I wasn't talking trash to the one poster when I posted that picture! That's the thing. The one guy said he hates GB because they kept the Lions from winning a playoff game. I posted a picture of it. Thought I'd get a laugh, since Lions fans DO sometimes joke about how s***ty they've been and how they've screwed up in the past. Hence all the "smiley faces and s***".

Ian then proceeded to go buck, started making comments he couldn't back up, and in some cases showing a complete lack of awareness of anything to do with the Packers, and I told him why he was wrong. If I wanted to talk s*** about the Lions, I'd go to the Lions thread and then back up what I say. But there's no point. They've sucked in recent years, and all their fans know that. Thus, the only time I bring it up is when someone's being a dick. Honestly, I'd prefer to not have the argument. I was having a perfectly good time talking Packers football with other Packers fans. I don't mind debate, but if I went to the Lions board and started hammering on how James Stewart isn't a good running back, I don't expect it'd go very well for me.

GB is on the up-swing though. I don't expect people who don't follow the team religiously to realize it. You have no reason to. The Packers haven't gotten a ton of coverage since they sucked 2 years ago and they were 4-8 at one point last year. Thanks to the wonders of Sopcast, though, I was able to see most of their games last year. The improvement in those young guys was amazing. It was night and day from the start of the year.

The biggest problem with the Packers the last 2 or 3 seasons has been that they don't have any veterans just entering the prime of their careers because Mike Sherman kept busting almost entire drafts. Those guys should make up the core of the team and there just wasn't anyone.

Ted Thompson came in and has turned over--a guess--70% of the roster in the last 3 years. They've been the youngest team in the league the last two years if I'm not mistaken. The benefit to all those young guys getting starting experience is going to start paying off.

The defense ended up 12th in the league in ypg allowed. They were 2nd in takeaways and 4th in sacks, which was a HUGE turnaround from recent past where they couldn't get takeaways against anyone. Aaron Kampman was 2nd in the league in sacks, Pickett is great at clogging the middle, Corey Williams put up very comparable numbers to Corey Redding (who is now the highest paid DT in the game), and Cullen Jenkins was an absolute beast after he moved outside. They're very good and very deep on the defensive line (KGB doesn't have to worry about playing the run anymore....he can just do what he's best at and get after the passer). They're just not household names like Julius Peppers. Kampman outperformed him last year though. More sacks and he set a franchise record for tackles by a DL.

The LBs are very solid as well with AJ Hawk and Nick Barnett. Brady Poppinga sucked against the pass early last season and was a big reason they gave up as many yards/TDs as they did in the early going to TEs. But he improved by leaps and bounds. He was coming off an ACL tear from 2005, so I don't doubt it took some time to shake the rust off.

Woodson and Harris are about as good of a duo of corners as you'll find in the league. Denver's duo of Bly and Bailey is obviously the top, but apart from that I'm not sure who else you'd point to (though I may be forgetting one or two). Woodson had picks in 6 straight games to close the season and was playing hurt most of the year. Nick Collins was great as a rookie, struggled for most of the year last year, but found his form late. The only real big problem on that defense is the other safety position. Marquand Manuel was terrible last year, but he had injury problems as well. We'll see if someone in the mix there can step up.

You might not call them dominant, but they were a top 10 defense by the end of the season last year, which took the ball away more than almost everyone, and was right up there in sacks as well. And a couple of the very effective changes (playing Williams, moving Jenkins outside) they made didn't happen until late in the year.

Denver's a good team. But I think you overrate them somewhat. I don't deny that the AFC is better than the NFC, and the Broncos are in a pretty tough division. But they were 1-3 against NFC teams last year and the only win was against Arizona. So I wouldn't go giving them the conference crown....

I think the Packers screwed up by not trading for Moss, too. I was livid when I heard he was a Pat. But the Packers still have a chance to have a pretty good season. And quite honestly, if they don't, I don't think it'll be the WR position that hurts them. They've got a pretty nice group...It'll be either RB, TE, OL, or SS that gets em. But I feel pretty good about the running game if Morency gets healthy (if you compare him to Benson--as I may have done in this thread already--Morency's got him pretty good and no one talks about the Bears needing a RB) and I think the OL will be pretty good as well now that they've got a year in the system and a year of playing together (and for the younger guys, a year in the weight room). The TE position was a disaster last year and they haven't really upgraded it. I'm hoping that with the improvement in the OL, the TEs will be able to actually go out for passes more and that'll help the redzone problems. But that doesn't cure Bubba Franks's dropsies....so we'll see if anything changes.

I don't doubt that the Pats can/probably should win it all this year. But they've got big-time problems in their secondary if Samuel doesn't sign. If something bites em, that'll be it. Otherwise, they did a really nice job this offseason. I don't think their receiving corps is as great as Bill Simmons thinks it is, but it's far and away better than what they've had in years past. Brady's Brady. The only other thing is that with Dillon gone, Maroney has to show he can handle being the feature back. I think he'll be fine, but they obviously don't have the depth at that position they've had before.

Adalius Thomas was a huge pickup for them. That DL is fantastic as it is and adding a guy like him to the 3-4 should make for a pretty scary front seven.

The Pats are the favorite, clearly. But it's a long season and a lot can happen....

BTW, the one thing I will admit that Ian was sort-of right about is me signing my name after each post. On certain boards I post on, the way my signature is laid out, it makes it look stupid if I DON'T give a definitive end to each post. This board isn't like that...the signature is very well set-off, so it's probably not necessary. Force of habit from 11 years of posting on these damn things....

Edited August 17, 2007 by Packer487

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

It's official. GB fans are the biggest homers i've ever seen. Favre was once one of the best in the entire league. And 4-5 seasons ago, was better than half the QB's in the league. Currently, Favre is better than some of the starting NFL quarterbacks out there. But he is absolutely not still better than half the QB's in the league. Although, I would take Favre right now over Kitna any day. But he's still not as good as you make him out to be. He's lost a significant amount of accuracy. Hell, I like the guy. I really do. But lets be real here. Father time dictates all. And its clear, that Favre is showing signs of shutting down.

What was so ridiculous about what I said?? Everything I said is true. And you might wanna read back there buddy. He wasnt just saying they have a shot to be decent. He blattenly showed a picture of the Packers burning the Lions. Then made some comment about "thats how you play" with grin faces and s***. So I dont wanna hear it. Im not trying to be a prick. Im just saying that he might wanna wait till the Packers actually do something before talking smack. Cause like I said before, when playoffs come, both teams will be on the golf course. Makes the smack talk look pretty lame.

Ack, I generally stay away when people point out things that are blatantly not true, even though their ignorance and pride keep them posting, anyway. As a result, here goes:

Is Favre better at this point than:

Steve McNair - 50-50, Debatable at this point in time

J.P. Losman - Yes

Carson Palmer - No

Charlie Frye - Yes

Jay Cutler - Yes, at this point in time

Matt Schaub - Yes

Peyton Manning - No

Byron Leftwich - Yes

Damon Huard - Yes

Trent Green - Yes

Tom Brady - No, But that hurts to say for personal reasons

Chad Pennington - Yes

Josh McCown - Yes

Ben Roethlisberger - Yes, and he proved it last year

Philip Rivers - No, simply based on SD's weapons

Vince Young - No, ONLY because he can run phenomenally. But that doesn't make him a better QB.

Matt Leinart - Yes

Joey Harrington - Yes

Jake Delhomme - Yes

Rex Grossman - Yes

Tony Romo - 50-50, Totally depends on this season

John Kitna - Yes

Tarvaris Jackson - Yes

Drew Brees - No

Eli Manning - Tough one because of Eli's potential, but to play devils advocate I'll say No

Donovan McNabb - No

Marc Bulger - No, but that hurts too

Alex Smith - Yes

Matt Hasselbeck - No

Jeff Garcia - Yes

Jason Campbell - Yes

So, I have him listed as better than 19 startings QB's in the league right now, and thats not even including the 50-50 toss-ups. Last I checked, that was better than half the league. You tell me that I'm wrong, and give me your reasons for each QB that you disagree with my assessment.

Edited August 17, 2007 by Never Forget Mac #25

[Guest DetroitIan]

Is Favre better at this point than:

Steve McNair - 50-50, Debatable at this point in time

J.P. Losman - Yes

Carson Palmer - No

Charlie Frye - Yes

Jay Cutler - Yes, at this point in time

Matt Schaub - Yes

Peyton Manning - No

Byron Leftwich - Yes

Damon Huard - Yes

Trent Green - Yes

Tom Brady - No, But that hurts to say for personal reasons

Chad Pennington - Yes

Josh McCown - Yes

Ben Roethlisberger - Yes, and he proved it last year

Philip Rivers - No, simply based on SD's weapons

Vince Young - No, ONLY because he can run phenomenally. But that doesn't make him a better QB.

Matt Leinart - Yes

Joey Harrington - Yes

Jake Delhomme - Yes

Rex Grossman - Yes

Tony Romo - 50-50, Totally depends on this season

John Kitna - Yes

Tarvaris Jackson - Yes

Drew Brees - No

Eli Manning - Tough one because of Eli's potential, but to play devils advocate I'll say No

Donovan McNabb - No

Marc Bulger - No, but that hurts too

Alex Smith - Yes

Matt Hasselbeck - No

Jeff Garcia - Yes

Jason Campbell - Yes

Ok, here's my assessment of Favre in reference to which QBs he is CURRENTLY better than.

Favre Is better at this point than:

Steve McNair - 50-50, I agree

J.P. Losman - Yes, agreed

Carson Palmer - No

Charlie Frye - Yes, agreed

Jay Cutler - Yes, at this point in time, agreed

Matt Schaub - Yes, agreed

Peyton Manning - No

Byron Leftwich - Yes, disagree, Leftwich is a warrior, and he's still pretty young, I say 50-50 on this one.

Damon Huard - Yes, agreed

Trent Green - Yes, I disagree here, at this stage of their careers, I think most gms would take Green over Favre.

Tom Brady - No, But that hurts to say for personal reasons

Chad Pennington - Yes, i only halfway disagree here, Chads injury set him back big time, but if he can get his game back to where it was, there would be no question that Chad would be the more coveted QB. 50-50 right now.

Josh McCown - Yes, agreed, even though it will be Culpepper's job, then Russell's job, who are both better than Favre.

Ben Roethlisberger - Yes, I disagree. Nothing was proved or disproved. Ben is a young superbowl champion, that has a great career ahead of him. I would go with 50-50 right now.

Philip Rivers - No, simply based on SD's weapons, Strongly disagree here, despite SD's lack of weapons, Rivers is absolutely better than Favre right now. No doubt about it.

Vince Young - No, ONLY because he can run phenomenally. But that doesn't make him a better QB. The running alone doesnt make him the better QB, but all that he brings to the table does make him better than Favre.

Matt Leinart - Yes, agreed, although, that could change in the near future.

Joey Harrington - Yes, Joey would never see the light of day if not for him getting soooo lucky with a no culpepper situation, and a no vick situation. It should be Vick, so theres a big NO for Favre being better. But i'll give you the benefit of the doubt cause techniqly Joey is the starter right now.

Jake Delhomme - Yes, Disagreed. Jake Delhomme is all around better than Favre. And once again, most gms would take Jake over Favre any day.

Rex Grossman - Yes, agreed Rex is a ******* joke of a QB.

Tony Romo - 50-50, Strongly disagree. Romo is definitely better than Favre. I would want Romo in Detroit well before I would want Favre. Romo is just all around a better QB.

John Kitna - Yes, very much agree

Tarvaris Jackson - Yes, agreed

Drew Brees - No

Eli Manning - Tough one because of Eli's potential, but to play devils advocate I'll say No, Disagreed, I definitely have Eli ranked above Favre. Not by leaps and bounds by any means. But he's definitely ranked above Brett.

Donovan McNabb - No

Marc Bulger - No, but that hurts too

Alex Smith - Yes, agreed

Matt Hasselbeck - No

Jeff Garcia - Yes, agreed

Jason Campbell - Yes, agreed

I have him better than just 12 of the league's starting QBs. And thats counting McCown, AND Joey, who we all know, will not even be starters on their teams. So actually its only 10. Last I checked, that is not half the QBs in the league. He's better than exactly 1/3 of the QBs in the leauge. So like I said originally, Favre is better than SOME of the QBs out there. Not half. Maybe 4-5 years ago he was better than half the QBs in the league. But in 2007, he is better than a third of all QBs. Thats pretty damn good for a guy at his age. But better than half the starters in the leauge? Absolutely not.

Edited August 17, 2007 by DetroitIan