Hey Everyone! Long time I know; but life happens..... This too is a drive-by as they would say.

Okay; living in Wisconsin and listening to everything Packers and so on; plus interjecting my own opinions of heavy debate; come up with some thoughts....

1.) TT- I think he's pretty darn good at skill position picks and drafting overall. He rebuilt the team through more picks by the numbers. Hasn't hit the big home run (aka PB players) but it's only a matter of time before A-Rod and a couple of others on their way up should get notice.

That's the good side of things. The bad side IMO is this- I'm over the Farve thing as that is water over the bridge and was handled badly by both sides. But Ron Wolf always said Job #1 is to protect your Franchise QB. This is where I take issue with TT. His picks on O-line for the most part are lower round and small school guys. RW used draft rd1 and 2 (Wahle supplemental draft) Now if the player didn't workout at OT; they made a good guard and then would fill in via FA. I believe TT & MC were overly optimistic on Cliffton this year. Personally I thought he hit the wall 2 years ago. Maybe T.J.Lang saves the day; but letting Merideth go wasn't wise as wasn't the RB we cut after pre-season.

I asked myself; outside of Brett leaving what is the biggest difference from '07 to this year? Personal changes on the O-Line and WR. Tauscher was gone, Cliffton isn't the same and Wells was out of the line-up. Then at WR Martin was cut. What some might not realize is that Martin was one of our best blocking WR's with his size. This was basically a 4 player change.

My question is why did it take losing at Minn; to make changes that should have been prepared for from the get? It seems so far the biggest improvement has come from Wells back in and having a healthy LT; even if he is green.

On Defense- Absolutely loved the trade-up for Matthews. However; (know I wasn't here at the time) before the draft; I thought top need was LT; even though there were a lot of good Def. players. We had the 3-4 before here; when RW and MH took over. They went with a 4-3. Look both Defenses can work and each have their strengths and weaknesses. But tell me how would have this sounded? Kampman, Pickett, Jenkins; and Peppers. Would have been similar to when we had White, Brown, Dotson and Jones. But anytime one can get done with 4 guys and leave the other 7 free it terrorizes Offenses. The 3-4 is popular these days; so much so; it isn't as if opposing teams haven't played against it; as was the case with the '85 Bears and Ryan's 46 defense. Don't get me wrong; I think Raji has a good shot at being good. Much better then Reynolds and Harrell.( again anything is better as neither one did squat Anyways was second-guessing and food for thought.

MC- This one I find a bit more disturbing then TT. Even in the games we win the team has still been sloppy. I still go off of MH here. He was our last HC to actually win the SB here. Yeah I got over those mistakes from the past also. But I listen to former players like Chewy and so here. MH had great attention to detail. Right down to he knew who the refs were and what type of penalties they called and looked for and everyone was informed. If you screwed up as Andruzzi did; he yanked you out or got in your face. Now MC is a good HC; I just don't know that he'll be a great one to take us back to the SB. I question (as do many with more experience then me) the play calling at times and his attention to details.. We supposedly have a good run-blocking O-line but it sure don't look it most of the time. One of the staples of the WCO under MH was the screen. Maybe that's why they brought back Green; not sure. But I question this Zone Blocking vs. Man we used to have. Though if one watches closely; you will see some Man back.

As for A-Rod: This guy has really showed me something here; as far as toughness. But even the toughest QB won't last a full season if he keeps getting hit the way he did before this last game. I think the problems we have here is the same they had in SF; when Young replace a HOF Montanna. Young's stats beat out Montanna's just as A-Rod seems to be doing with Favre this year. The one big difference I notice is this: Go back and watch old tapes of Favre throwing deep; he could throw farther then anyone; but they weren't always pretty and sometimes a bit off target. Rodgers throws some of the prettiest, tight spirals down the field I've seen in awhile. Which also means he has a stronger arm then most figured when he came out of college. We just need to protect him and give him time to throw with better protection and some resemblence of a running game. I believe the best is yet to come from him; especially when he steps out on his own on that field. (translation- becomes his own on field general w/audibles; instead of MC's method QB)

What changes after the Minnesota game are you referring to? TJ went in for an injured Clifton the next week. We brought back Tauscher after he recovered from his knee injury, as was always the plan (not in so many words, but when asked about whether the team wanted to bring Tauscher back, the brass referred to it as not a matter of wanting...). Do you mean signing Ahman Green? Or Matthews starting full time?

And A-Rod's been calling his own audibles since last year.

I agree with the assessment of TT. My biggest complaint is also protecting AR. The complaint about MM and zone blocking is a bit off base. We don't run that much zone blocking. And AR is the man

I think Terranimals main points are reasonable. TT should have addressed the lines more diligently, something I think just about everybody around here agrees with. He should have done this through free agency, if necessary.

As for Tauscher and Green, the question remains as to why these fixes were necessary so far into the season? It's not injuries, certainly, as our RB has not been injured, nor has the RT. Losing Meredith and letting go of the only producing RB in preseason does not seem very far sighted. And the point about MM and the lack of attention to detail is a reasonable one, I think.

To be completely fair, bringing back Tauscher seemed like it was always part of the plan, so I don't know that it can be deemed a 'fix' for anything. There was just no benefit in doing it before he was healed.

If Barbre remains healthy I don't know what value he adds, however--it seems they are content with Barbre. Now, with Breno and Tausch they have 2 backups who only play RT. Still scratching my head as to how Breno made the team and Meredith didn't.

Sutton isn't exactly taking the league by storm at whatever team he ended up on. So, I'm not sure that's a huge loss. RB isn't typically a position where it takes time to get up to speed, barring injury.

Sutton has yet to be activated for a game, despite Johnathan Stewart being a walking injury bug.

We had only two healthy running backs and had a chance to bring in a Packers legend who still has some value. Not seeing why this is questioned as anything bad.

I also fail to see why a team having a lot of penalties automatically means the coach doesn't pay attention to detail. Seems like armchair quarterback logic to me.

I look at a team like Denver and I really start to see why they look like a much better team than the Packers, despite having a far inferior QB.

They have what IMO, are the main ingredients -- a LT, a good running game, a good pass rusher and a good safety.


Out of those, what do we have? Well, Collins is a good safety, but at this point, I'm still not sure he's as good as Dawkins. Dumervil crushes any of our linebackers (for now anyway) Ryan Clady is a stud and their running backs are able to keep the chains moving.

I think it's an excellent recipe for success that McDaniels has concocted. And he did it in ONE off-season

Meanwhile, several years after Thompson has arrived, the same problems persist. No safety to complement Collins. Terrible offensive line. Anemic running game and our linebackers, once thought of as a huge plus for the Packers, look more overrated than anything (apologies to CM3).

Personally, I'm a bit tired of the whole, "Give TT time...he's still building" argument. It, like his methods of doing so are getting old.

It's funny heatseaker, because if you ask a Denver fan, they'd probably say, "We love Dawkins but he's no Nick Collins, our running backs fumble too much and I wish they'd give Buckhalter more time, I like Orton but I'd like Aaron Rodgers a lot more, etc. etc."

The grass is greener, I understand. But a lot more goes in to winning than the ingredients that you mentioned.

And I'd bet Kampman has more sacks the rest of the year on than Dumervil does.

Possibly. But if I'm a Broncos fan, I'm pretty thrilled being undefeated and coming off a bye. Doesn't get much better than that. Sure they'd take Rodgers over Orton. I'd take Manning over Rodgers, too. There's always better, "ingredients" out there. But McDaniels managed to blend some very good ingredients (young AND old....) along with a good philosophy and a winning game plan. That's not something I've seen the Packers able to accomplish from the head office and head coach in 4+ years now. McDaniels traded away a guy who was perceived as a top 5 QB and is still doing it -- in one year. I think that shows a lot.

I just find it a little difficult to compare a management group that's been in the league for over 3 years and currently sits at 4-2 this season with a management group that's been around for 6 games and is 6-0.

After MM's first season, would you have rather had him or Eric Mangini? How about now?

EDIT: I just want to emphasize this comparison. A solid running game, the best LT to come along in years, and a defense that limited opponents to 18 points a game. Orton even bears a strong resemblance to a good Pennington.

Not sure I see the difficulty at all.

Look, I'm not, "crowing their asses" (apologies to Denny) after six games. I'm just agreeing with the OP's point that after 5 years, you're telling me Thompson has still been unable to put a decent o-linemen on the field? Really? He's still been unable to find a reasonable complement to Collins? He's still been unable to put a linebacker out there that can rush the passer?

He's had the time. There's no arguing that point.

Meanwhile, the Broncos seem to have at least a few good pieces of the puzzle that, key phrase here, (IMO) are crucial to winning (see my previous post about Tackle, Safety, Running back, etc.). That's impressive in such a short time.

Will it lead to anything more than the Packers have accomplished in the grand scheme of things? No friggin' clue. But I'll say this, they've got a damn good start. The Packers meanwhile are still at square one in several areas.

In your opinion Heat. I think it's a little clouded, not very realistic, but that's just mine.

lol I love the, "No offense, but you're an a-hole" delivery.

Ok, tell me this. Looking at the offensive line, would you say the team has progressed in the time that Thompson has been here? If so, please explain. I'd love to hear your unclouded more realistic opinion.

I'll play. Which offensive line are you looking at? The 2004 version or the 2005? I will assume you're referring to the 2004 version, because you'd be silly to think our current offensive line is as bad as, Clifton-Wells-Ruegamer-Whitticker-Tauscher. But the 2004 version is a little harder to say, isn't it? Mike Wahle was released and signed a contract that he never lived up to. He was released and signed with Seattle - only to be cut again. What's up with that? He was great for us! Flanagan left and signed with the Texans as a last ditch effort to make some money. Rivera left and had one bad year in Dallas.

They were all great players and that was one of the best lines in Packers history. But players get old and change. What you're seeing now with Clifton is what TT avoided with all three of those guys.

How do you do that, by the way? You've got a great line, but the players get old. How do you improve on that? It's hard. All five of those players were acquired over the course of a decade. I think what we have now is an NFL line, which is not what we had with the 2005 version. So my answer is: you can't answer your question. It's not black and white - improvement or degradation.

Bigby is a fine complement to Collins. His injuries are not TT's fault.
Kampmann has been one of the best pass rushers in the NFL over the past 3-4. Then TT drafted CMIII. He looks promising. Oline looks like Colledge, Spitz and Sitton could be good players and Barbre and Lang would be icing on the cake.
You dont draft ProBowlers with every pick. So Denver hit big seemingly with a very undersized DE and aging Safety. Thoes moves along with trading Cutler for Orton did not appear to be recipes for success. In my estimation those moves will turn out ot be very shortterm success.
Nobody believe Orton is the answer. Dawkins might maintain his play for this year possibly next. Dumerville I think is solid.
These Bronco's at 6-0 could possibly implode and not make the playoffs and it would surprise nobody.

That is a MAJOR reach at this point

Since a big part of this thread seems to be comparing the Packers to the Broncos, allow me to throw a wrench in the works. Given their fast start out of the gates, how many of you would be extremely surprised to see the Broncos slip up a couple times during the middle third of the season, then fade down the stretch to finish at 10-6 or even 9-7? Likewise, it's quite possible for the packers (or any team hovering around the .500 mark at this point) to get hot and finish the season strong, also with a mark of 10-6 or even 11-5. Would we still be having this discussion then - about how we wsh TT and MM were more like the McDaniels and the Denver staff?

I'm not saying this is how it will go down... just that it's still pretty early in the season, and we have absolutely no idea how things are going to turn out.

On a side note, I kind of like how McDaniels seems to have handled the Denver team, especially the immature Cutler and the malcontent and me-firster.. Marshall.

Season's not over yet. We'll see how Denver does down the stretch, but they do have the benefit of playing 2 very poor teams twice a year. That excellent O-line (a young one) in Denver was assembled by Shanahan, not McDaniels. Denver always had a good offense - it's their defense that was awful (Bob Slowik, anyone?). The transition to the 3-4 under Mike Nolan was a big factor, if not the biggest. Think of all the good players that McDaniels inherited. If anything, he's getting more out them than Shanahan did. He didn't have to retool the roster like TT did. We were within reach of the playoffs in Year 2 of TT's tenure and the Super Bowl in Year 3. Year 4 was a huge disappointment, but Year 5 isn't over yet (although some posters seemed to think so after Week 2 or 3).

The O-line is certainly; for me anyways; the proverbial "Black Eye" for this team under TT &MH. Now TT for all the good he has done; if he seems to have a fault it is this. Another thing too; and I don't know if anyone else has picked up on this; is he wants his own players on this team and pretty much got rid of anyone RW drafted or traded or signed in FA. This team wouldn't have brought back Tausch and Green if there wasn't some sense of desperation and need of insurance. Don't get me wrong; I like that he did do this and we don't know what they left in the tank. But I expect to see Green in on 3rd downs and if this line can block; see the screen pass return (hopefully)

As some have posted; They first went for Athletic guys for ZB and then went for bigger guys for ZB. But IMO where they have sort of missed the mark is on the intangibles. Tausch was a 7th Rd pick; but he was very smart and had those intangibles. So far Lang is showing that. You know they said he has too short of arms and so on; but the guy "gets it" the first time and has those intagibles as does Wells and he also had the same Knocks on him. These two are Battlers. On paper don't appear to be anything; but on the field they do their job however they have to. Another late Rd guy we used to have fell into the same category as Wells, Lang, and Tausch and became a PB and started his rookie year here.

Remember who he was? Adam Timmerman out of Neb. Didn't make the PB here; but did when left via FA to the Rams.

Tauscher and Green weren't picked up out of desperation. They were picked up because they are cheap vets that know the system.

TT can be criticized for the O line, and some of that is deserved. But he saw the same things we saw with Barbre. He was solid in camp and pre-season games, as Sitton was. For whaever reson, that didn't translate ealry on in the regular season. But he has been better, that book is still open. I just don't think this line is as bad as everyone thinks. Barbe had a horrible game or two, Colledge had a horrible game at LT. Other than that, the line hasn't been horrible. Very mediocre, yes, but not horrible.

WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA NELLY.....

I'm sorry but I just can't let a good ole Cherokee IOWA farmboy fall under the label of being from nebraska..just can't

Maybe a more fair comparison of these 2 teams is at the HC opsition. McDanils has picked a better staff FROM THE START than McCarthy. A GOOD staff can trump talented players who never can attain their higher level of play.

nuff said

Heat - I guess that was a reasonable reply. You ask if the OL has improved, then I ask over what and you refuse to answer it. I am curious, though, because you seem to have not read my reply at all. How do you do what you're asking? We had Clifton and Tauscher in their primes... should we have given them 'roids to keep them going? They give out. How many picks should TT have spent on the line that he didn't? Because right now we're staring at the OL being his favorite position to draft.

The realistic way to approach any situation is to realize it's never as good as it seems and it sure as hell isn't as bad as it seems.

Jesus............

I did answer. I answered in essentially the same snide way you replied in saying that your opinion was that MY opinion sucked. So there ya go -- I think your question was worthless. Because you only asked it to keep the, "discussion" going and prove your point. The only offensive line I'm concerned with is the 2009 version. I am absolutely perplexed at how in the world you can possibly think that the line has improved. You asked if it was better or worse than the 2004 version. Ok, well then, while we're at pointless discussions, let's compare this line to the 1981 line. I'm sure that line was worse. So see!!! Things ARE improving! Let's all rejoice...

The line this year leads the league (or is near it after the Browns game) in sacks allowed. Last time I checked, that wasn't good. I get the feeling you're taking offense to me calling out Thompson's ability as a General Manager. I wouldn't waste your time. Because really, the only area I'm talking about is the line. I thought the last year's draft was his best yet. I was giddy over the selections.

You ask how could we have, "kept them going?" (see, I do read!) in regards to Tauscher and Clifton. Well, let's see here, I guess drafting a guy here or there that was worth a lick would be a good start. I know there's no such thing as a sure bet in the draft, but seriously...how many picks does he need to finally, "hit" on one of these guys? At this point, I'd say Sitton has been his only real success. Also, in order to stablize the success of an offensive line, there is this mystical thing called, "free agency." Apparently, only the level 99 sorcerer GM's are able to use this potentially powerful ability. Who knows, maybe with another 5 years we'll get there.......

Sorry, Monkey Soul, but I have to agree with Heatseeker big time on this one. You keep saying players get older and run out of gas essentially, which is true. The article that was posted on another thread about Ted Thompson (which was a great article and gave me a new perspective on the man) said that "he's always looking 5 years ahead." What happened with that approach regarding the OL? Shouldn't he have seen that coming? Everybody on the planet knew Clifton was running out of steam and that both OT's were getting a bit long in the tooth. If you want a stud OT, you have to take him high in the draft, not 4th-7th rounds from small schools hoping to land another Tauscher or Timmerman. Heatseeker and Terranimal are right in my opinion. Ted has flopped in regards to the OL. I hope he turns that around this off-season and uses FA and the draft to land a couple of top-notch OT's. Aaron Rodgers would be grinning from ear to ear...if he has any teeth left after this season.

APPLAUSE! Well said.

Sigh. I take no offense to calling out Ted Thompson. I do take offense to your arguments.

Referencing things like, "hitting on draft picks" or "this mystical thing called free agency" is ambiguous and lends itself to the armchair quarterback talk I mentioned earlier. Using sacks given up as your only stat proving this line "sucks" is also faulty. I hope you understand these points.

You're not using stats, but anecdotal evidence. Tell me something: what's Grant doing better than MJD, DeAngelo Williams, Ray Rice, Frank Gore, and Brandon Jacobs? Rushing, per game (he ranks 7th in rushing yards per game in the NFL). Any fantasy football player will tell you Grant is about as consistent and safe a play as you can have at the running back position. I guess he's doing that with an atrocious line?

What's the biggest critique levied against KGB? He got sacks, but not consistent pressure. That's your fault in using sacks as an indicator of line play.

Any mention by you right now about Thompson building the line is simply confusing for me. First you ask me if he's improved it. Then you say we can't compare it to previous lines. Then you go on a diatribe about how it compares to the previous lines.

By the way, why don't you acknowledge Colledge, Spitz, or the retention of Wells as solid pieces of our line?

I have to weigh in supporting Heat-- TT has so far failed on the OL, taking so long to find his starting guards that he was unable to get the tackles to take over for Clifton and Taucher. He failed to anticipate their decline.

I am hopeful that Lang has a breakout game Sunday, shuts down Allen, and proves me wrong.

I have been re-watching games, and have watched Barbre in slow-motion replay on almost every play. He really hasn't improved that much, he just hasn't played against anyone good lately. I don't believe he is the right tackle of the future. I believe he stinks, and again, I hope he proves me wrong.

I do disagree with Heat on one point. Aaron Rodgers really isn't running around like a naked man in the city-- if he was in that position he would be mobbed by beautiful women, not ugly jerks named Jarred.

Or both, depending on what part of the city he was running in. And to a lesser degree, which particular city. I wouldn't recommend it playing a road game against the 49ers, for example.

I don't think we have to compare the line to anything in the past. Period. This line is on pace to allow Aaron to get hit 100 times this year. That stinks pure and simple. Why compare to past lines? This line is stinking it up.

I agree the interior is in much better shape. But the pressure on Rodgers is coming from the lack of ability to protect from the Tackle positions. Five years is PLENTY of time to get ready to replace Clifton and Tauscher. This should have been done.

I wish you were in my fantasy league.

I can't really side with Heat OR Monkey in this debate. I think part of this goes back to those bottomless and endless arguments about talent. Most people persist in seeing talent as a static quality. Barbre is X good; he's not improving and so he doesn't have talent; the line doesn't have talented players; etc. I think talent is a dynamic quality that depends on many, many things. Success and talent may correspond on occasion, but they often do not, even in something as tangible as athletics. Ok, there's no denying that athletic talent is more quantifiable than, say, artistic talent; that it's more identifiable. But still, even if to a lesser degree, there's a huge dynamic that goes into the development of talent that's hard to evaluate. Can anyone really say that Alex Smith is so much less talented than Aaron Rodgers? Or, even if you can, was the statement true a few years ago and can you be certain it'll be true a few years from now?

There's a chain of people and events involved in the development and production levels of talent, from the evaluation and selection of the talent by the GM to the head coach to the offensive coordinator to the position coach to the talent itself - not to mention the interweaving of surrounding talent, the team success, and the most elusive quality of all - psychology. Thus I think it's impossible to make absolute statements about what Thompson has done to fill the line with talent. That he is ultimately responsible - that the buck stops at him, so to speak - is a different argument.

On the other hand, I suspect Monkey is understating the importance of sacks. I've been reading a lot about sacks recently and it would appear that they are often of vital importance to a team's success. Bedard makes a strong argument that penalties are really not of any great significance as long as there aren't sacks. One former player (I forget who at the moment) talked about how Jimmy Johnson told the team before a big game that he didn't want to see any sacks - he allegedly said that he didn't care if they got ten holding calls, he just didn't want to see ANY sacks, period!


Well, you could do a lot worse, I suppose. After all, Monkey is a Hindu god.

Why? Because you like to lose?

Grant is my second fantasy back and I couldn't ask for a better one. His average is 12.65 with a 3.88 standard deviation. That is incredibly consistent. If he were your main back that wouldn't be great, but still the average is 13th in my league (In my non-PPR league). Anyway Monkey was right.

I can... I think Heat is dead on.



So is the rat.

Doesn't make it right nor does hold any real weight. Especially when discussing Packer football.

If I had Grant I would offer him up to Monkey for MJD or Rice since he mentioned them by name in his post and covets Grant so highly, especially after a nice game Grant had last week. And for your information, I am in first place in two leagues that I spend some pretty good jack on both. If I even had Grant he wouldn't be starting 90% of the time over the backs I have in both leagues.

Anyways, this isn't even a fantasy football thread. I have no idea why fantasy stats even got brought into the above discussion. Makes no sense at all and proves nothing. After all, it is called "fantasy football" for a reason. My bad for replying to Monkey's fantasy football part of his post and keeping this going.

In regards to the Oline and TT's body of work I believe that this year is critical in the analysis. I am seeing that these draft picks the TT has assembled are getting a chance to prove themselves with the long time tackles fading into the suset giving the new guys that chance. I think that Sitton is performing pretty good and Spitz was doing well before his injury.Colledge was doing ok at LG till he was moved to LT with Cliftons injury and that created some problems in his performance. Now he is back at LG to stay and hopefully he will turn the corner and maintain at an average to slightly above average status.Barbre had a bad start but has been improving every week and brings run blocking and a nasty attitude that has not been at that position for awhile.Lang has done ok and he should continue to get better and gain some confidence with a decent outing against the hillbilly tommorrow.If Lang and Barbre continue to improve it will open up the run game finally as Clifton and Tausher have pretty much be pretty good pass protecters for bert the last few years while affecting the running game negatively.

Gb made a miscalculation at LT solely relying on Clifton with no backup plan. Now if Barbre and Lang continue to grow the backup situation at both tackles is set with the two vets and if the young guys dont cut it both Clifton and Tausher should both be back up to speed to step in.It was too bad that Meridith did not gain the coaches favor and I believe that the coaches weighed heavily on the decision to put him on the PS which basically wasted a draft pick.

Evan D Smith has showed enough to be a backup in the interior three spots and helps make up for the loss of the draft pick as Smith was a long shot and a pleasant surprise. While the season started like s$%t for the Oline when this young line gets some time together and gets some continuity GB very well could be looking good with a young line to mature and become a good unit for years to come.Making TT's ineffectiveness at the Oline position look pretty effective.TT needs to continue to draft at the Oline postion to make sure there is depth and replacements when the time comes.Flame away but we will know within a couple weeks if it will work out.

Has Barbre really improved?

Go back and watch the Detroit game again, where he blocks no one as the DE runs between him and the guard to sack Rodgers. Watch him in run blocking, where he moves to the next level but can't find anyone to block. Barbre seems to have the physical talent to play the game, but he doesn't have the instincts to react to the play as it happens.

I've been pretty patient with our personel decisions in previous years, but the error was bigger than counting on Clifton, as there wasn't enough effort put to replace Taucher as well. There has been a consistant issue that efforts to replace starters on the line have been so-so since TT came to Green Bay. It is likely in my mind that the scouting just isn't that good when it comes to linemen.

Terry raises a good point in that there are a lot of factors that go into success or failure of a player. What disturbs me is the pattern of average line play at best. Whether talent, coaching, psychology, team chemistry, injuries, or just plain luck, the pattern suggests to me that the boss has not been able to get the puzzle pieces together when it comes to offensive line play.

Another great showing by that improved OL tonight ey Monkey??

TJ Lang was clearly overmatched -- IMO the Pack should get back to starting Clifton as soon as he's ready to go.

Trouble here is we'll emphasize OL guys next year and then be short someplace else. No team is without its weak points.

The biggest problem is that the O-line consists of 5 players, almost half of the entire offense, and each position along the line seems to have their own issue. Tackle more so than the other positions, of course.

If the Packers have soooo much talent and don't play well, doesn't that fall on the coach? It seems we are a badly coached team.

You nailed it, JB. The game-plan was 100% recycled from week 4:
- Offense - Run, 30+ yd pass, 5 step drop and a sack, punt.
- Defense - Stop AP, Stop AP, rush 3...let Favre carve-up the secondary and give-up a 1st down ... Stop AP, stop ?? for a short gain, knock-down pass - STUPID PENALTY yielding 1st down!

MM needs to go, bland, predictable play calling, no "cleaning up" of mistakes/penalties, poor game-plan.

Last complaint: AR dropped back over 40 times for passes, and was hit at least 11 times. I knew AR was going to run the QB draw from the 7 before they even broke the huddle in which AR got speared in the back... how long does MM intend AR to keep getting up? If/when AR gets hurt and doesn't get back up is the day that TT fires MM. TT needs to "clean things up" if MM can't/won't.

No doubt about it. But wouldn't you say your tackles being a weak point is more of a problem than say, your fullbacks being a problem? Or having 1 good safety and not the other (like we have)?

IMO, there's several key positions on the field that if good, can mask the other problem areas. I mean hell, look at the Steelers D with and without Polomalu. He changes that secondary. Look at the time Favre has to throw the ball with McKinnie and Loadholdt as his bookends. Look how Chad Henne looks pretty efficient and good because of the crazy running threat the Dolphins have.

Yet, all of those teams, like you said, still have problems.

The Packers problems however, are at key positions. We run a 3-4 but have no rush linebacker. Our coach calls 7-step drops but our line is unable to block for more than 2.5 seconds. Our running game does nothing to set up the pass and keep a defense honest. Those areas are hard to mask. So while I agree that even next year, this team will have problems, it'd be nice to at least solidfy some of those key areas at some point. Even if it's just one at a time.

Imagine what a Joe Thomas would do for this team. Or a DeMarcus Ware. Or hell, an Adrian Peterson. Those are building-block types of players. Right now, we have one of those -- Aaron Rodgers. Unfortunately, he can't do it all by himself.

DING DING DING, we have a winner. the lack of fire, the looking unprepared for such an important game. thats all on the coaching staff. add in the crappy game plans, and i'm jumping on the fire MM bandwagon. we cant run the ball, but he refuses to do short passes. we did it against the lions, against the browns, and not until the 2nd half did we start against the vikings. what took so damn long??? I think our talent showed in the second half. look how quick we came back. we dominated for parts of the 2nd half.

GET A NEW HC AND OC.

When is the last time the Packers started the game prepared and ready to play? And I don't mean against crappy teams. Against the top teams in the league, it seems like we continuously fall flat in the 1st qtr. By the time they pick it up, it's too little too late.

When you consider that if we beat Tampa and yes we should the teams we beat this year will have a combined record of 3-28 again sans CHI . The reality is that sans Chicago the only teams we beat over the last 18 have been Detroit, STL and Cleveland. IMO it comes down to talent and/or player developement. You can only scheme with what you have

Nope it's GM Ted Thompson's fault.

Good try though.

So you're of the opinion that there's not talent available to the coaching staff? Yes, it's TT's job to procure talent, and oversee the Packers and ultimately the HC is his selection.

It's Campen's job to coach-up the offense line and teach them to hold a block for more than 1/2 second. It's Edgar's job to teach the RB's to hit the holes, blitz pick-up and catch outlet/screen passes. It's Caper's job to install the 3-4 D, teach the players their responsibilities, and figure-out a plan to apply defensive pressure, while adequately stopping the run. It's Slocum's job to teach coverage assignments and adequately man the coverage units with the players available. It's Philbin's job to assist MM with a gameplan to score points. It's MM's job to motivate this team to play UP to their potential and to put the players into a position to maximize their talents, as well as provide accurate feedback to TT on his players' skill-level.

While the ultimate responsibility is TT's, I think the coaches above are all responsible for the lack of performance of their units-THAT'S the place to start. MM continues to talk about "cleaning things up" while not doing so. He continues to fail at game-planning and playcalling. He doesn't hold the players or his coaches accountable for mistakes and failures. The next move is TT's, IMHO, NOT Murphy's.