Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

I don't think people have gotten their heads around what makes a WR "great" post-92 yet, aside from staggering numbers. 

WR is probably the weirdest position right now, as the numbers are plain but people aren't sure what they mean. 

Going through super bowl winners, WR are just so infrequently a big factor in the team.

TB - Evans and Godwin didn't do much

KC - Hill was significant 

Just about every NE winner.

NYG,  Pittsburgh not WR focused

GB in 2010 was more about the group vs 1 of them

Indy in 2006 was significant with Harrison and Wayne

STL in 1999 with Holt and Bruce

Dallas with Irvin in the early 90's

SF in 95 with Rice

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting question posed on social media......
I'd choose the latter.

Andy Herman -  Which decade would you rather have as a fan?

Tampa Bay: 2/10 winning seasons, 1 trip to the playoffs, 7 seasons finishing last in the division, 1 Super Bowl win

Green Bay: 8/10 winning seasons, 8 trips to the playoffs, 4 trips to NFCCG, 0 Super Bowl wins

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Leader said:

An interesting question posed on social media......
I'd choose the latter.

Andy Herman -  Which decade would you rather have as a fan?

Tampa Bay: 2/10 winning seasons, 1 trip to the playoffs, 7 seasons finishing last in the division, 1 Super Bowl win

Green Bay: 8/10 winning seasons, 8 trips to the playoffs, 4 trips to NFCCG, 0 Super Bowl wins

People will lie, but it's the Packers. This board was on suicide watch for every Hundley snap. Watching 4 losing seasons in a row would put people in the ground. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Leader said:

An interesting question posed on social media......
I'd choose the latter.

Andy Herman -  Which decade would you rather have as a fan?

Tampa Bay: 2/10 winning seasons, 1 trip to the playoffs, 7 seasons finishing last in the division, 1 Super Bowl win

Green Bay: 8/10 winning seasons, 8 trips to the playoffs, 4 trips to NFCCG, 0 Super Bowl wins

Seems like a Hobson's choice of sorts. No good choice at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

People will lie, but it's the Packers. This board was on suicide watch for every Hundley snap. Watching 4 losing seasons in a row would put people in the ground. 

I have been a lot better when I just regard GB as my favourite long-running tv show - "oh, what are those scamps on Lombardi Ave up to this season!" - and by that measure, GB is going on 30 yrs of highly entertaining and enjoyable football on a weekly basis, with bonus episodes (playoffs!) most every year. 

If you go into it thinking Ted/McCarthy/Gute/MLF/Murphy are RUINING YOUR FRANCHISE because WE AREN'T WINNING THE SB EVERY YEAR, well, I don't see how that would be enjoyable. 

 

But as always, mileage varies. Maybe I'm missing out on something by not tormenting myself with anger over the franchise's failures. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

I have been a lot better when I just regard GB as my favourite long-running tv show - "oh, what are those scamps on Lombardi Ave up to this season!" - and by that measure, GB is going on 30 yrs of highly entertaining and enjoyable football on a weekly basis, with bonus episodes (playoffs!) most every year. 

If you go into it thinking Ted/McCarthy/Gute/MLF/Murphy are RUINING YOUR FRANCHISE because WE AREN'T WINNING THE SB EVERY YEAR, well, I don't see how that would be enjoyable. 

 

But as always, mileage varies. Maybe I'm missing out on something by not tormenting myself with anger over the franchise's failures. 

I have been telling this to people since I adopted that attitude.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I am not going to miss the game. And I will still yell at my TV.  It just no longer ruins my day or week when a bunch of guys, that are younger than me, lose a game.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

People will lie, but it's the Packers. This board was on suicide watch for every Hundley snap. Watching 4 losing seasons in a row would put people in the ground. 

At least the draft would be a lot more exciting....

I'm taking the SB win every time. The other 9 seasons can be whatever you want. But it's a loaded hypothetical anyways. The Packers have had 12 over that entire decade. The Bucs have had a zero at QB for the first 9 seasons, followed by 1 with Brady. The "SB win" category would likely look a lot different if we were comparing the Bucs v. Packers over 10 years with HOF QBs at the helm...at least for one of those teams.

Edited by packfanfb
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

At least the draft would be a lot more exciting....

I'm taking the SB win every time. The other 9 seasons can be whatever you want. But it's a loaded hypothetical anyways. The Packers have had 12 over that entire decade. The Bucs have had a zero at QB for the first 9 seasons, followed by 1 with Brady. The "SB win" category would likely look a lot different if we were comparing the Bucs v. Packers over 10 years with HOF QBs at the helm...at least for one of those teams.

Are we still doing this thing stupid *** hypothetical exercise where we drop an elite QB onto a roster and then talk about their hypothetical win total as some sort of validation of their front office and flagellation of our own?

If the Bucs have an elite QB at the helm for a decade, the rest of their roster wouldn't be near what it is now. They were able to stockpile a ton of high picks and then add a QB at below market value. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Are we still doing this thing stupid *** hypothetical exercise where we drop an elite QB onto a roster and then talk about their hypothetical win total as some sort of validation of their front office and flagellation of our own?

If the Bucs have an elite QB at the helm for a decade, the rest of their roster wouldn't be near what it is now. They were able to stockpile a ton of high picks and then add a QB at below market value. 

+ nice weather + no state income tax to attract people like suh

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Are we still doing this thing stupid *** hypothetical exercise where we drop an elite QB onto a roster and then talk about their hypothetical win total as some sort of validation of their front office and flagellation of our own?

If the Bucs have an elite QB at the helm for a decade, the rest of their roster wouldn't be near what it is now. They were able to stockpile a ton of high picks and then add a QB at below market value. 

It shouldn't be as hard as our fan base makes it look to understand this.

Link to post
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...