Jump to content

Week 11: Packers @ Vikings - GB loses 34-31, falls to 8-3, and loses Elgton Jenkins :(


FAH1223

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

What if it were Russell Wilson or Martellus Bennett?

 

6 minutes ago, Norm said:

I don't want to see Jordan Reed die on the field*

What do you two have against Martellus Bennett? Other than he's the other Bennett's twin brother. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, craig said:

Will be an interesting one. Kinda hard to get any easy ones when our passing game is so limited.  But you never know.  

Aaron, Adams, and MVS haven't practiced together in a while, I assume.  So maybe a week back and a couple of practices and they'll get a little better. 

Obviously Vikings have better offense than us. 

  • Per game, they are 7th in yards; 9th in passing; 9th in rushing yards. 
  • Packers are 20th, 19th, and 19th. 

Need the offense to put some scores on the board, and complete enough passes so that the box has some holes and so Dillon can get some productive runs.  

underestimated aspect of the last few weeks.  Adams and Lazard with COVID limitations October 27th, so no practice with Rodgers.   Then those 2 get cleared while Rodgers is out.  MVS has been limited for a while and not sure how much full throttle practice he has been going with Rodgers, but probably limited to the short bit prior to the AZ game, and likely not much then if the staff was not really looking to push him back for that game.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, n8ghee said:

This is gonna be a tough game. Vikings are better than their record.

And even if they weren't, beating us has often been a Superbowl game for them.

Now, so far with how well our defense has played, I do have the confidence we can limit the damage from their main playmakers in Cook, Jefferson, Theilen and Conklin.  Our offense's recent trends concern me though, particularly waiting until the 4th quarter to score TDs as of late.  We gotta get that fixed ASAP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Only guy capable IMO is MVS. He needs to be more than the occasional home run guy.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/V/ValdMa00.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DaviAn01.htm

 

This is who he is... it's not gonna change much.  There's a reason he was a 5th round receiver and there's a reason he's never asked to do much more than run fast and run far.

Edited by skibrett15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Do you think this offense can ‘afford’ that for lack of a better word? 
 

I know we haven’t been not nearly close to full strength but I’m worried about the passing game. I don’t like what I’m seeing when Rodgers goes to anyone but the RBs or Davante. Rodgers hasn’t looked good throwing to MVS most of the year. If he’s not pinpoint to the rest of the pass catchers, I think we could run into some issues. Tbh , I would like to see more Cobb. He has impressed me with his limited opportunities. 

I am not worried about the offense. It still looks like it has elite potential and adding Bakh should do wonders for us. We will be replacing one of the leagues worst OL with perhaps the league's best once he gets his feet under him again.

I agree about Cobb and am completely comfortable with Adams/Cobb/Lazard/MVS in the playoffs with a Jones/Dillon combo. 

I would have liked to see a TE move at the trade deadline, but that wasn't a necessity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I am not worried about the offense. It still looks like it has elite potential and adding Bakh should do wonders for us. We will be replacing one of the leagues worst OL with perhaps the league's best once he gets his feet under him again.

I agree about Cobb and am completely comfortable with Adams/Cobb/Lazard/MVS in the playoffs with a Jones/Dillon combo. 

I would have liked to see a TE move at the trade deadline, but that wasn't a necessity.

I hope you’re right. I know a dominant line will help a lot . Maybe that’ll open things up for the WRs some. It’s really unfair to judge the offense because the injuries, I guess I’m just nervous because I haven’t seen them really dominate much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

I hope you’re right. I know a dominant line will help a lot . Maybe that’ll open things up for the WRs some. It’s really unfair to judge the offense because the injuries, I guess I’m just nervous because I haven’t seen them really dominate much. 

I disagree. You can judge WR skills minus OL performance. You can see how dynamic they are - or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Leader said:

I disagree. You can judge WR skills minus OL performance. You can see how dynamic they are - or not.

A better line does mean more time for the QB, more longer developing higher reward plays and the option of more receivers. 
 

I don’t worry about MVS’ being dynamic, he and Aaron haven’t been connecting much.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rainmaker90 said:

A better line does mean more time for the QB, more longer developing higher reward plays and the option of more receivers.

Understood. My comment spoke to the ability to see and judge WR talent - outside OL performance.

You can tell if the guy's a "player" or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...