The Super Bowl or Road To It

[go pak go]

Yup. That was the era of "Aaron Rodgers can't close." "Aaron Rodgers chokes in the 4th quarter"

There is always a narrative.

[Pckfn23]

The only thing I'd fight you on is the CB group - I don't think it's that close. Woodson was a huge difference maker and we had a prime Tramon + Shields as our nickle. I'd say that:

Woodson>>>Anyone
Jaire>Tramon/Shields
Tramon/Shields>>>Anyone else we have right now

which makes me lean pretty heavily to 2010. I agree that Jaire is probably a better cover corner, but Tramon and Shields generated TO's much better. I mean Tramon/Shields basically sealed all three NFC playoff games that year.

Also, I had forgotten about SB hero Jarrett Bush until this moment. Boy, I remember how people hated that guy.

I agree, mostly, but again here is where the rosy look back comes in. We definitely don't have a Woodson on the current team. That in itself makes the 2010 unit better. Jaire is better than Williams, in my opinion. Shields was a rookie and while he did flash good things, he definitely was not starter Shields good. He made a lot of rookie mistakes. King right now is better than Shields was as a rookie. Woodson alone makes the 2010 group better, which is why I say that it is closer than we think. Woodson didn't even have a great year in 2010.

If Lupe was older at the SB time, he definitely would have hated Bush. HA!

[go pak go]

The only thing I'd fight you on is the CB group - I don't think it's that close. Woodson was a huge difference maker and we had a prime Tramon + Shields as our nickle. I'd say that:

Woodson>>>Anyone
Jaire>Tramon/Shields
Tramon/Shields>>>Anyone else we have right now

which makes me lean pretty heavily to 2010. I agree that Jaire is probably a better cover corner, but Tramon and Shields generated TO's much better. I mean Tramon/Shields basically sealed all three NFC playoff games that year.

Also, I had forgotten about SB hero Jarrett Bush until this moment. Boy, I remember how people hated that guy.

I agree, mostly, but again here is where the rosy look back comes in. We definitely don't have a Woodson on the current team. That in itself makes the 2010 unit better. Jaire is better than Williams, in my opinion. Shields was a rookie and while he did flash good things, he definitely was not starter Shields good. He made a lot of rookie mistakes. King right now is better than Shields was as a rookie. Woodson alone makes the 2010 group better, which is why I say that it is closer than we think. Woodson didn't even have a great year in 2010.

If Lupe was older at the SB time, he definitely would have hated Bush. HA!

Fall on the damn ball Bush!!!!

Don't try and pick it up. You wasted Favre's career.

[YoHoChecko]

Comparing this team to the 2010 team is fun, but also weird, right?

I mean, we're not playing 2010 us or 2010 opponents.

If we compared our 2010 team to our 1997 team, we'd take the 1997 team every time.

And also, of course, the rosy lookback people are talking about. No one through 12 weeks in 2010 was like "we're the best team because we haven't trailed by more than 7!" We had just lost to the Falcons. We lost the close games early in the season. And we were about to lose Rodgers to a concussion.

Even the close loss to the Pats with Matt Flynn at the helm only swayed a small portion of the fans to think "hey, this team can roll with the best with a backup QB." Most were focused on the fact that we were 8-6, probably missing the playoffs, and had just lost.

People weren't raving about our whole secondary yet. People weren't convinced about Rodgers yet. We had no rushing game and it was going to cost us. Driver was washed. Jones was a disappointment. Jordy wasn't anything yet.

Like, fan sentiment toward the end of the 2010 regular season was not AT ALL that we were watching something special or some great team that had some bad breaks.

To a LOT of people... We were watching Ted Thompson fail. We were watching Rodgers not be good enough. We were watching WR draft picks fail to produce. We were watching the post-Favre era become the widely-expected mediocrity we had feared.

Looking back, knowing how it ended and how the team played the next year, it's very easy to talk about how good they were all along (because by many measures they were). But gosh, the message boards around then were a lot less friendly and optimistic than they are now.

[Pckfn23]

[mention]YoHoChecko[/mention] absolutely it is weird, but people like to do it because then they want to show how worse off we are now than we were then. The problem is that people remember the 2010 regular season much more rosy than it actually was.

[go pak go]

Comparing this team to the 2010 team is fun, but also weird, right?

I mean, we're not playing 2010 us or 2010 opponents.

If we compared our 2010 team to our 1997 team, we'd take the 1997 team every time.

And also, of course, the rosy lookback people are talking about. No one through 12 weeks in 2010 was like "we're the best team because we haven't trailed by more than 7!" We had just lost to the Falcons. We lost the close games early in the season. And we were about to lose Rodgers to a concussion.

Even the close loss to the Pats with Matt Flynn at the helm only swayed a small portion of the fans to think "hey, this team can roll with the best with a backup QB." Most were focused on the fact that we were 8-6, probably missing the playoffs, and had just lost.

People weren't raving about our whole secondary yet. People weren't convinced about Rodgers yet. We had no rushing game and it was going to cost us. Driver was washed. Jones was a disappointment. Jordy wasn't anything yet.

Like, fan sentiment toward the end of the 2010 regular season was not AT ALL that we were watching something special or some great team that had some bad breaks.

To a LOT of people... We were watching Ted Thompson fail. We were watching Rodgers not be good enough. We were watching WR draft picks fail to produce. We were watching the post-Favre era become the widely-expected mediocrity we had feared.

Looking back, knowing how it ended and how the team played the next year, it's very easy to talk about how good they were all along (because by many measures they were). But gosh, the message boards around then were a lot less friendly and optimistic than they are now.

I thought I had the whole football thing figured out because I was SUCH A HOMER and I believed everything Green and Gold and their method.

So when it got validated....I thought I was the smartest man on campus.

2011 almost got boring, and I think honestly did get boring for Packers fans, because we expected to win no matter what.

[texas]

I agree that there is no way the Saints are that much of a favorite. The fact that football outsiders had TB ranked by far the highest a mere month or so ago makes me think they're garbage. I already thought PFF was sort of garbage too. What's Taysom Hill going to do, gadget them to a Super Bowl?

Also where is SEA

You may have heard me mention it before, but they aren't good.

Idk about that, but even if you believe that, they should still be in the top 10 of most likely SB winners. Baltimore's on there and they are garbage.

[texas]

Comparing this team to the 2010 team is fun, but also weird, right?

I mean, we're not playing 2010 us or 2010 opponents.

If we compared our 2010 team to our 1997 team, we'd take the 1997 team every time.

And also, of course, the rosy lookback people are talking about. No one through 12 weeks in 2010 was like "we're the best team because we haven't trailed by more than 7!" We had just lost to the Falcons. We lost the close games early in the season. And we were about to lose Rodgers to a concussion.

Even the close loss to the Pats with Matt Flynn at the helm only swayed a small portion of the fans to think "hey, this team can roll with the best with a backup QB." Most were focused on the fact that we were 8-6, probably missing the playoffs, and had just lost.

People weren't raving about our whole secondary yet. People weren't convinced about Rodgers yet. We had no rushing game and it was going to cost us. Driver was washed. Jones was a disappointment. Jordy wasn't anything yet.

Like, fan sentiment toward the end of the 2010 regular season was not AT ALL that we were watching something special or some great team that had some bad breaks.

To a LOT of people... We were watching Ted Thompson fail. We were watching Rodgers not be good enough. We were watching WR draft picks fail to produce. We were watching the post-Favre era become the widely-expected mediocrity we had feared.

Looking back, knowing how it ended and how the team played the next year, it's very easy to talk about how good they were all along (because by many measures they were). But gosh, the message boards around then were a lot less friendly and optimistic than they are now.

I disagree with your recollection. We were unanimously picked by every nfl.com (might have been ESPN but it was one of the major ones) expert before the season to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl, which I think might have been a first. I remember making a point of the fact that our defense won us that first game, which hadn't happened in like a decade. I remember being astounded at how bad our luck was and how good we would have been if we just had a few lucky breaks here and there. Also I remember reading a playoff QB ranking at the start of the playoffs, where they ranked Rodgers near the bottom and specifically, below Matt Ryan, and I thought it was just so much trash because I could tell Rodgers was like the best or 2nd best QB in the whole damn league. I don't think I was alone during that season either in thinking we had gotten incredibly unlucky and were in fact one of the top teams. People like MM's famous quote "we're nobody's underdog" for its message, but I think a lot of people also legitimately believed it at the time too.

[texas]

The only thing I'd fight you on is the CB group - I don't think it's that close. Woodson was a huge difference maker and we had a prime Tramon + Shields as our nickle. I'd say that:

Woodson>>>Anyone
Jaire>Tramon/Shields
Tramon/Shields>>>Anyone else we have right now

which makes me lean pretty heavily to 2010. I agree that Jaire is probably a better cover corner, but Tramon and Shields generated TO's much better. I mean Tramon/Shields basically sealed all three NFC playoff games that year.

Also, I had forgotten about SB hero Jarrett Bush until this moment. Boy, I remember how people hated that guy.

I agree, mostly, but again here is where the rosy look back comes in. We definitely don't have a Woodson on the current team. That in itself makes the 2010 unit better. Jaire is better than Williams, in my opinion. Shields was a rookie and while he did flash good things, he definitely was not starter Shields good. He made a lot of rookie mistakes. King right now is better than Shields was as a rookie. Woodson alone makes the 2010 group better, which is why I say that it is closer than we think. Woodson didn't even have a great year in 2010.

If Lupe was older at the SB time, he definitely would have hated Bush. HA!

I agree. People say Jaire might be the best CB in the whole league right now, but Woodson was still better. He just made plays whereas Jaire is more of a shutdown guy. Tramon and Shields were so solid but yeah you can make a solid case Jaire is better than they were.

Man did I hate Jarrett Bush. Until the SB of course, then I only ever spoke highly of him from that point on. He had one good game in his entire career and boy did he pick a good time to have it.

[BF004]

Rodgers has MVP for me - still time to go. He is better than Mahomes and does it with less.

I just don't see the difference makers for the packers that you need in the playoffs. Comparing this team to our 2010 SB team only positions that are better would be RB and possibly Oline.

You don't see Aaron Jones and Davante Adams?

I mean we have 5 legit top 3 talents on O.

Rodgers, Adams, Bakhtiari, Linsley and Jones.

Damn near 50% of the offense could be considered the best player at their position in the NFL. Maybe not Jones, but the other 4, yes.

This is what a lot of people have been saying here for years. We absolutely have the star power, we just need to cut down on the liabilities and looks like we have done that. Adding guys like Jenkins to replace a Justin McCray, bringing in Turner, just the internal progressions of said Billy Turner, Lucas Patrick, Tonyan, Lazard and even MVS is better than he was. This is the best Jamal Williams we’ve had, Sternberger putting out some decent reps.

Still could use that quality average level WR on there, Lazard appears to meet that criteria, MVS a shade below, but that is literally the only blind spot on this O right now.

[YoHoChecko]

I disagree with your recollection. We were unanimously picked by every nfl.com (might have been ESPN but it was one of the major ones) expert before the season to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl, which I think might have been a first. I remember making a point of the fact that our defense won us that first game, which hadn't happened in like a decade. I remember being astounded at how bad our luck was and how good we would have been if we just had a few lucky breaks here and there. Also I remember reading a playoff QB ranking at the start of the playoffs, where they ranked Rodgers near the bottom and specifically, below Matt Ryan, and I thought it was just so much trash because I could tell Rodgers was like the best or 2nd best QB in the whole damn league. I don't think I was alone during that season either in thinking we had gotten incredibly unlucky and were in fact one of the top teams. People like MM's famous quote "we're nobody's underdog" for its message, but I think a lot of people also legitimately believed it at the time too.

There's some contradictions here.

So, maybe you're right that everyone picked the Packers before the season; that would be a little strange, since we were just fine in 2009, but like... there's a hot "rising" team to pick every year. Look at all the people who picked the Cardinals to soar this year or the Browns last year. Preseason expectations are not what I'm discussing.

In-season, maybe you were optimistic and positive about the team; I can't speak for you. But a) that feels a bit out of your current m.o., and b) that doesn't mean you were representative. In fact, the two things you mention--Rodgers being ranked low on playoff QBs and MM's slogan--speak exactly to the fact that expectations for the Packers had, in the general public, dropped off precipitously.

MM wouldn't have to say "we're nobody's underdog" if the general consensus was that we were, in fact, the underdog. Rodgers wouldn't be ranked low if the general consensus was that the Falcons' regular season win over the Packers was just bad luck and would not likely be repeated in the playoffs. The notion that "Rodgers can't win when it matters" was always stupid, because losing a playoff shootout where both teams score in the 40s the previous year does not make you a bad crunchtime QB, but that was the feeling and the vibe that existed.

So if you were a rebel who thought the Packers were better than they were perceived to be (and rebellion does fit what I know of your m.o.), then great. But don't re-write the script to say that analysts and fans generally felt that way. It just isn't the case.

[Pckfn23]

Like I said, people remember the 2010 regular season more rosy than it actually happened:
http://www.espn.com/nfl/powerrankings/_ ... 010/week/0
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... n_odds.htm

While we were high on the list of representing the NFC, few picked us as the outright favorites before the season.

2011, however, we were favorites up until we lost to the Chiefs, and maybe even beyond.

[BF004]

Yes and No.

Sure we were not happy with the losing to the Lions 7-3 and dropping to 8-6 and not looking playoff bound. But I think a lot of people did know how good this team was or at least could be or should be. They were 2nd in point differential in the league, actually were right next to New England best in the league before New England won their last two games by a combine 62 points. So I think everyone knew this team was special, yet disappointed we couldn't close out some closer games. But no one was saying we weren't good enough and no one said we didn't have a Super Bowl caliber defense.

And I also think everyone who followed the Packers close enough to be posting on forums, was completely sold on him by the end of his 2nd year. Nervous about the concussions if he would have a long enough career, but I think everyone was already sold on him going into those Lions and Patriots games.

I mean we did have legit concerns, the running game, experience, the team's mentality in close games, etc. But we had the #2 scoring D in the league, #5 in yards, and what we all knew was a special QB. I think people were just disappointed we let ourselves drop to 8-6, because we all knew we were better than that. Clearly no one thought we were Super Bowl bound at 8-6, but I think we all knew this team absolutely should have those expectations.

[Pckfn23]

So I think everyone knew this team was special, yet disappointed we couldn't close out some closer games. But no one was saying we weren't good enough and no one said we didn't have a Super Bowl caliber defense.

I think there were definitely people who, like now, didn't think the team was good enough and were vocal about it.

[YoHoChecko]

So I think everyone knew this team was special, yet disappointed we couldn't close out some closer games. But no one was saying we weren't good enough and no one said we didn't have a Super Bowl caliber defense.

Ok, I strongly disagree but also... no one said we didn't have a SB caliber defense but they did say we didn't have a SB caliber offense.

Just because the concerns were not identical does not mean there wasn't a huge heaping pile of concern/disappointment and negative nancies.

[BF004]

There was really only one guy I could see that was really down in the dumps consistently from thread to thread.

image.png (72.07 KiB) Viewed 342 times

We won a Super Bowl 7 weeks later.



But read around, definitely more negativity on this board now than there was in December of 2010. http://packersnews.net/phpbb3/viewforum ... tart=14210


Also don't ask me how or why the old site is back, lol.

[BF004]

Hell, even Wally was optimistic.

Pretty sure that automatically wins me this argument.

image.png (47.75 KiB) Viewed 336 times

[Pckfn23]

Whoa! It's back! Crazy. Quick, someone copy it!

[BF004]

Whoa! It's back! Crazy. Quick, someone copy it!

That is where I just got all the past dynasty drafts.

We can't copy it without logging into the host which is what we've never been able to do.

[YoHoChecko]

But read around, definitely more negativity on this board now than there was in December of 2010. http://packersnews.net/phpbb3/viewforum ... tart=14210


Also don't ask me how or why the old site is back, lol.

Crazy! Good resource....

that said... you showed us late December. Creep back a few pages on there:

This thread, in particular, seems to indicate that people like 23 and me had the same complaints then that we do now

And we can't overlook the fact that in the middle of the night, JimT posted a thread called "It feels like Julie's World In Here Today"