From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I couldn't argue a single thing that you wrote above. Still, this Packer team has not played well against the best teams. The best teams have been better. The results prove it. It isn't just a one-time thing. We have five games to draw from. The Packers are not at the level that the Lions, Vikes, and Eagles are. That isn't a silly argument. Again, five games state the case pretty well.
You have, once again, argued a point I never made.
Again, the point I'm trying to highlight is the Packers, for whatever reason, do not play their best ball, or even competent football for that matter, when facing the best competition this year. Alignment issues, drops, coverage lapses, etc. Silly mistakes that, when combined, kill drives and lose ball games.
These mistakes have nothing to do with what the other team is doing or who is better than who. The Packers are beating themselves. It's frustrating to watch as a fan.
Yes, the Packers are 0-5 against the elite teams in the conference. Those teams are "better" than the Packers. However, if the Packers collectively pull their heads from their ass and eliminate those repeated self-destructive plays, they can beat any one of them. Of that I have no doubt.
The word "better" doesn't need to be written in quotes. If one team consistently makes dumb mistakes and beats themselves and one doesn't, the team that doesn't is better. Period, full stop. Discipline is part of being a good team. Maybe the biggest part. Ever since LaFleur took over, discipline has been sporadic with this team, especially on the big stages against good teams. He is innovative as a play designer, caller, etc., but I'm not convinced he knows how to get a handle on a team.
It's pretty clear I am not articulating my point very well. That's on me.
<sigh>
For those in the back, let me make this point abundantly clear...
I concede Philadelphia, Detroit, and Minnesota are, at this point, BETTER teams than the Packers.
Is that the bend-the-knee statement required from you football purists in order to move on from this "better"....er, sorry...better (without quotes)...argument?
You have, once again, argued a point I never made.
Again, the point I'm trying to highlight is the Packers, for whatever reason, do not play their best ball, or even competent football for that matter, when facing the best competition this year. Alignment issues, drops, coverage lapses, etc. Silly mistakes that, when combined, kill drives and lose ball games.
These mistakes have nothing to do with what the other team is doing or who is better than who. The Packers are beating themselves. It's frustrating to watch as a fan.
Yes, the Packers are 0-5 against the elite teams in the conference. Those teams are "better" than the Packers. However, if the Packers collectively pull their heads from their ass and eliminate those repeated self-destructive plays, they can beat any one of them. Of that I have no doubt.
The word "better" doesn't need to be written in quotes. If one team consistently makes dumb mistakes and beats themselves and one doesn't, the team that doesn't is better. Period, full stop. Discipline is part of being a good team. Maybe the biggest part. Ever since LaFleur took over, discipline has been sporadic with this team, especially on the big stages against good teams. He is innovative as a play designer, caller, etc., but I'm not convinced he knows how to get a handle on a team.
It's pretty clear I am not articulating my point very well. That's on me.
<sigh>
For those in the back, let me make this point abundantly clear...
I concede Philadelphia, Detroit, and Minnesota are, at this point, BETTER teams than the Packers.
Is that the bend-the-knee statement required from you football purists in order to move on from this "better"....er, sorry...better (without quotes)...argument?
Everyone in 2027 on this forum after the Packers pull a 2010 and win their next 5 games.
Everyone could see the Packers were the best team in the league. They just lost becuase of dumb mistakes and it was so obvious once that got cleaned up they couldn't be touched.
Can't tell from that picture. if there is one, however, if I were to guess, 55, his hand is way out there. A photo down the line would be better. If that photo is even only 5 degrees off from the dead center, it changes the perspective greatly.
How about #76 from the Vikings?
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
I came into this world KICKING and screaming, naked, and covered in blood that wasn't mine.
I am prepared to go out the same way if I need to.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Can't tell from that picture. if there is one, however, if I were to guess, 55, his hand is way out there. A photo down the line would be better. If that photo is even only 5 degrees off from the dead center, it changes the perspective greatly.
How about #76 from the Vikings?
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
So what you're saying is that no one was offsides and I should just move on from it?
Can't tell from that picture. if there is one, however, if I were to guess, 55, his hand is way out there. A photo down the line would be better. If that photo is even only 5 degrees off from the dead center, it changes the perspective greatly.
How about #76 from the Vikings?
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
My gawd there was no offsides on that kick. It was a horrendous call. Atrocious call. Absolutley uncalled for penalty that gifted MN 3 points.
It is what it is. But there is no need to get geometry in play. Clearly, clearly, clearly there was no Packer offsides. If you have to get geometry involved and camera angle arguments going....then it is pretty clear a call should have never been made to begin with.
I think we have to face the facts that being the youngest team in the league has its drawbacks. The good news is we have enough talent to be competitive with the top teams in the league.
I'm more upset with either the play calls or Love's decision making in this game. I only remember 1 or 2 swing passes to RBs and one screen pass to Kraft that went for 10+ yards. One checkdown to Musgrave that I can remember. Jacobs has been good receiving the last few weeks and I don't think we threw to him once. Love's best games are when he uses the checkdowns and they were no where to be found this week.
Can't tell from that picture. if there is one, however, if I were to guess, 55, his hand is way out there. A photo down the line would be better. If that photo is even only 5 degrees off from the dead center, it changes the perspective greatly.
How about #76 from the Vikings?
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo?
This is a remarkable level of denial from you. Just admit it. It was a bad call that gifted the Vikings 3 points.
And about this bit. Wrong. Just focus on the center in this video from about the 8-11 second mark.
Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle.
We won the first Q but we didn't get any payoff. We had 3 good drives going. We had a good pass rush that didn't get home but kept them at 0. Score 9 to 17 pts and this turns into a different game. To say we can't play with them is bull. Going into the playoffs after this loss is really no different now than before. Play smarter, hold on to the ball, get Jaire on the field, and let the chips fall. Play quality games and we can make the run.
You have, once again, argued a point I never made.
Again, the point I'm trying to highlight is the Packers, for whatever reason, do not play their best ball, or even competent football for that matter, when facing the best competition this year. Alignment issues, drops, coverage lapses, etc. Silly mistakes that, when combined, kill drives and lose ball games.
These mistakes have nothing to do with what the other team is doing or who is better than who. The Packers are beating themselves. It's frustrating to watch as a fan.
Yes, the Packers are 0-5 against the elite teams in the conference. Those teams are "better" than the Packers. However, if the Packers collectively pull their heads from their ass and eliminate those repeated self-destructive plays, they can beat any one of them. Of that I have no doubt.
The word "better" doesn't need to be written in quotes. If one team consistently makes dumb mistakes and beats themselves and one doesn't, the team that doesn't is better. Period, full stop. Discipline is part of being a good team. Maybe the biggest part. Ever since LaFleur took over, discipline has been sporadic with this team, especially on the big stages against good teams. He is innovative as a play designer, caller, etc., but I'm not convinced he knows how to get a handle on a team.
It's pretty clear I am not articulating my point very well. That's on me.
<sigh>
For those in the back, let me make this point abundantly clear...
I concede Philadelphia, Detroit, and Minnesota are, at this point, BETTER teams than the Packers.
Is that the bend-the-knee statement required from you football purists in order to move on from this "better"....er, sorry...better (without quotes)...argument?
Yes, that's what I was looking for. Thank you.
"It's better to decide wrongly than weakly; if you're weak, you're likely to be wrong anyway."
- Bill Parcells
Can't tell from that picture. if there is one, however, if I were to guess, 55, his hand is way out there. A photo down the line would be better. If that photo is even only 5 degrees off from the dead center, it changes the perspective greatly.
How about #76 from the Vikings?
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
you can absolutely tell the RG is out past the entire head of the center. So yes you can absolutely tell someone is offsides. and centers can line up with head over the ball, they are the only ones allowed to have their melon in the neutral zone.
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
My gawd there was no offsides on that kick. It was a horrendous call. Atrocious call. Absolutley uncalled for penalty that gifted MN 3 points.
It is what it is. But there is no need to get geometry in play. Clearly, clearly, clearly there was no Packer offsides. If you have to get geometry involved and camera angle arguments going....then it is pretty clear a call should have never been made to begin with.
we have been very close to encroachment all season, I must have mentioned it with LVN 3 or 4 games, eventually, the officials will come down hard on it, and they have, right or wrong, why coaches allow players to push that issue as though several inches actually makes that big a difference is mind numbing, these procedural issues are a sign of poor coaching.
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
My gawd there was no offsides on that kick. It was a horrendous call. Atrocious call. Absolutley uncalled for penalty that gifted MN 3 points.
It is what it is. But there is no need to get geometry in play. Clearly, clearly, clearly there was no Packer offsides. If you have to get geometry involved and camera angle arguments going....then it is pretty clear a call should have never been made to begin with.
we have been very close to encroachment all season, I must have mentioned it with LVN 3 or 4 games, eventually, the officials will come down hard on it, and they have, right or wrong, why coaches allow players to push that issue as though several inches actually makes that big a difference is mind numbing, these procedural issues are a sign of poor coaching.
Don't excuse the call. It was a bad call.
This is the NFL. Everything is on the line. Every inch counts in this game of inches. It is literally called the game of inches.
Stop excusing the call. The Packers did nothing wrong on that play.
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo? Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle. And I would say about 5 degrees give or take a few.
My gawd there was no offsides on that kick. It was a horrendous call. Atrocious call. Absolutley uncalled for penalty that gifted MN 3 points.
It is what it is. But there is no need to get geometry in play. Clearly, clearly, clearly there was no Packer offsides. If you have to get geometry involved and camera angle arguments going....then it is pretty clear a call should have never been made to begin with.
we have been very close to encroachment all season, I must have mentioned it with LVN 3 or 4 games, eventually, the officials will come down hard on it, and they have, right or wrong, why coaches allow players to push that issue as though several inches actually makes that big a difference is mind numbing, these procedural issues are a sign of poor coaching.
It's a game of inches. There was no offsides, pure and simple. No need to make other excuses for a very bad call.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
There is no way to tell from that picture who is or isn't offside. Just move on from it. The photo isn't centered over the ball. The only way you would be able to tell is a shot down the line from the sideline. Do I need to draw a diagram showing how much being even 5 degrees off will make a huge difference in that photo?
This is a remarkable level of denial from you. Just admit it. It was a bad call that gifted the Vikings 3 points.
And about this bit. Wrong. Just focus on the center in this video from about the 8-11 second mark.
Now, how do I know it's off? Simple. Can you see the ball? Now, tell me how many centers have the ball directly under their head? None, because they could be called offsides. They always have the ball in front of them. If you can't see the ball, the shot is from an angle.
Sorry, I'm only dealing with that photo.
I think the call was BS. It's one of those phantom calls the refs seem to make each game. We have been on the receiving end as much as the giving end. Notice how no one has come up with a photo down the line. Every single one is off-line. And yes, it makes a huge difference.
I came into this world KICKING and screaming, naked, and covered in blood that wasn't mine.
I am prepared to go out the same way if I need to.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
I don't agree that this throw is extra special, but it is good.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
