Packers Huddle

APB wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 13:42

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 13:29

APB wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 12:45

...and completely unproveable in any case.

of course it's not written on a stone tablet, but it would take you all of a minute to find articles pointing out that George Halas lobbied plenty for us to build a bigger stadium then GB east HS to hold Packer games, or they he played a part in the success of our team over the years, he even played a part in the hire of Vince Lombardi.

to say we don't owe a bit of gratitude to the Chicago Bears would be the height ungraciousness.

Rather than argue unprovable points with you ad nauseum, I’ll leave this debate with this:

$%@# the Bears and their matriarch Halas clan.

there are articles upon articles that tell the Halas story concerning our team, heres just a couple.

I get that every Packer fan is suppose to hate the Chicago Bears, that is such childish BS

https://archive.jsonline.com/sports/pac ... 7831.html/

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/c ... story.html

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 14:14

APB wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 13:42

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 13:29

of course it's not written on a stone tablet, but it would take you all of a minute to find articles pointing out that George Halas lobbied plenty for us to build a bigger stadium then GB east HS to hold Packer games, or they he played a part in the success of our team over the years, he even played a part in the hire of Vince Lombardi.

to say we don't owe a bit of gratitude to the Chicago Bears would be the height ungraciousness.

Rather than argue unprovable points with you ad nauseum, I’ll leave this debate with this:

$%@# the Bears and their matriarch Halas clan.

you don't have a leg to stand on, there are articles upon articles that tell the Halas story concerning our team, heres just a couple.

I get that every Packer fan is suppose to hate the Chicago Bears, that is such childish BS

https://archive.jsonline.com/sports/pac ... 7831.html/

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/c ... story.html

I’ll agree with you to a point on this.

One can still recognize Halas’s impact on keeping us on Green Bay, respect and thank him for it. And still absolutely hate the Chicago Bears.

BF004 wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 14:24

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 14:14

APB wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 13:42

Rather than argue unprovable points with you ad nauseum, I’ll leave this debate with this:

$%@# the Bears and their matriarch Halas clan.

you don't have a leg to stand on, there are articles upon articles that tell the Halas story concerning our team, heres just a couple.

I get that every Packer fan is suppose to hate the Chicago Bears, that is such childish BS

https://archive.jsonline.com/sports/pac ... 7831.html/

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/c ... story.html

I’ll agree with you to a point on this.

One can still recognize Halas’s impact on keeping us on Green Bay, respect and thank him for it. And still absolutely hate the Chicago Bears.

sometimes your enemy is actually your best friend, and that is what Halas was to us, I'am grateful that Halas cared enough to help convince the people of GB to build a new stadium.

I don't want to get philosophical here, but the notion that adversarial partnerships are so difficult to fathom relative to our more en vougue idea that all opposition renders one an "enemy" is sorta why the world stinks.

Of course we owe a debt to Halas! And to the Maras and the Hunts and the Rooneys! They all understood that growing the game of football was something that required cooperation, and that rivalry and competition only occurred under that cooperative umbrella.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 14:47

I don't want to get philosophical here, but the notion that adversarial partnerships are so difficult to fathom relative to our more en vougue idea that all opposition renders one an "enemy" is sorta why the world stinks.

Of course we owe a debt to Halas! And to the Maras and the Hunts and the Rooneys! They all understood that growing the game of football was something that required cooperation, and that rivalry and competition only occurred under that cooperative umbrella.

Yes and no. None of these owners were supporting anything that didn't ultimately help them. Cooperative umbrella is a good term, but underlying corporate greed was still present in these early NFL decisions. Halas helped Green Bay keep the Packers, but the Packers may have also helped Chicago keep the Bears. That was Halas' motivation.

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 15:53

Yes and no. None of these owners were supporting anything that didn't ultimately help them. Cooperative umbrella is a good term, but underlying corporate greed was still present in these early NFL decisions. Halas helped Green Bay keep the Packers, but the Packers may have also helped Chicago keep the Bears. That was Halas' motivation.

You're writing this as if it is couched in a disagreement, but what I'm saying is that the ability to even recognize that it is in one's best interest to cooperate with and enhance a rival such that the whole enterprise is a more successful and profitable endeavor. I'm not making any argument against the idea that the founders' vision was in their own best interests. I'm pointing out that many are so blinded by competition that they fail to see that benefit, and they act in pure competition instead of competitive partnerships. I am giving them all credit for recognizing that the league benefits from their revenue sharing and cooperation in ways that several current owners fight tooth and nail at every new revenue stream. And in ways that some fans here can't seem capable of acknowledging out of competitive juices aimed at "the enemy"

wallyuwl wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 14:06

Hope we see this in the last game. But I assume Bakh won't play. I was a supporter, but out on Myers now. Hope he proves us all wrong.

paco wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 23:22

wallyuwl wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 14:06

Hope we see this in the last game. But I assume Bakh won't play. I was a supporter, but out on Myers now. Hope he proves us all wrong.

Well someone has to be the backup center in case Myers gets hurt. Probably they will carry a backup center on the PS but that does not help in the middle of the game if Myers gets hurt. The backups for the center of the Oline are pretty thin without Tom.

I'd like to see the Packers pick up a Guard/Center from another team on cut down day. Tom belongs at RT

Myers just needs to grow up and simply stop sucking….

Drj820 wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 06:05

Myers just needs to grow up and simply stop sucking….

We need to simply accept that he is better than most of us think.

fwiw, sans the bad snap Mike Wahle on his YT channel said he thought Myers had a good game.

I think this could be our best OL

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 20:32

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 15:53

Yes and no. None of these owners were supporting anything that didn't ultimately help them. Cooperative umbrella is a good term, but underlying corporate greed was still present in these early NFL decisions. Halas helped Green Bay keep the Packers, but the Packers may have also helped Chicago keep the Bears. That was Halas' motivation.

You're writing this as if it is couched in a disagreement, but what I'm saying is that the ability to even recognize that it is in one's best interest to cooperate with and enhance a rival such that the whole enterprise is a more successful and profitable endeavor. I'm not making any argument against the idea that the founders' vision was in their own best interests. I'm pointing out that many are so blinded by competition that they fail to see that benefit, and they act in pure competition instead of competitive partnerships. I am giving them all credit for recognizing that the league benefits from their revenue sharing and cooperation in ways that several current owners fight tooth and nail at every new revenue stream. And in ways that some fans here can't seem capable of acknowledging out of competitive juices aimed at "the enemy"

I give more credit to the people of Wisconsin that either bought shares of Packers stock or voted "YES" to either build Lambeau Field at 1265 Highland Avenue or expand Lambeau Field at 1265 Lombardi Ave. There have been six stock sales, in 1923, 1935, 1950, 1997, 2011, and 2021. Shares in 1923 sold for $5 apiece (approximately $75 in 2020 dollars), while in 1997 they were sold at $200 each, $250 each in 2011, and $300 each in 2021.

At that rally in 1956, heavily promoted on local radio, George Halas preached to locals used to booing his Bears. When voters responded April 3, 1956, by passing the stadium referendum measure to issue bonds that greenlighted more pro football in Green Bay, Halas received a share of the credit.

Bob Harlan gets a share of the credit for the Brown County voting results on September 12, 2000 to renovate and expand Lambeau Field.

Jack Vainisi gets the credit for drafting most of the key players that resulted in the Glory Years. Without the Glory Years it may have been more difficult to get the votes on September 12, 2000 than some people may realize.

In summary, April 3 and September 12 were pivotal dates in the history of the Green Bay Packers. As a result, Lambeau Field and Green Bay Packers are collectively the greatest story in the history of professional football. It has been a privilege and an honor to sit in Row 57 for the past 10 years owing to the stock sale that funded the stadium expansion. Thank You referendum voters and Packers stock purchasers. https://www.espn.com/nfl/news/1999/1226/253182.html

BF004 wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:25

I think this could be our best OL

It may be. But what happens when Bakh has a bad day and can't start? Then you move Walker from RT to LT and he has a bad day after the switch. You move Tom from center to RT and he has a bad day with the switch of position. And Myers has been sitting on the bench pissed off and has lost his concentration and has a bad day after going back in.

Musical chairs is the bane of a good Oline.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:51

BF004 wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:25

I think this could be our best OL

It may be. But what happens when Bakh has a bad day and can't start? Then you move Walker from RT to LT and he has a bad day after the switch. You move Tom from center to RT and he has a bad day with the switch of position. And Myers has been sitting on the bench pissed off and has lost his concentration and has a bad day after going back in.

Musical chairs is the bane of a good Oline.

Well I think it would simply be Nijman at LT, no?

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 20:32

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Aug 2023 15:53

Yes and no. None of these owners were supporting anything that didn't ultimately help them. Cooperative umbrella is a good term, but underlying corporate greed was still present in these early NFL decisions. Halas helped Green Bay keep the Packers, but the Packers may have also helped Chicago keep the Bears. That was Halas' motivation.

You're writing this as if it is couched in a disagreement, but what I'm saying is that the ability to even recognize that it is in one's best interest to cooperate with and enhance a rival such that the whole enterprise is a more successful and profitable endeavor. I'm not making any argument against the idea that the founders' vision was in their own best interests. I'm pointing out that many are so blinded by competition that they fail to see that benefit, and they act in pure competition instead of competitive partnerships. I am giving them all credit for recognizing that the league benefits from their revenue sharing and cooperation in ways that several current owners fight tooth and nail at every new revenue stream. And in ways that some fans here can't seem capable of acknowledging out of competitive juices aimed at "the enemy"

I was agreeing with you more than anything.

BF004 wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:56

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:51

BF004 wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:25

I think this could be our best OL

It may be. But what happens when Bakh has a bad day and can't start? Then you move Walker from RT to LT and he has a bad day after the switch. You move Tom from center to RT and he has a bad day with the switch of position. And Myers has been sitting on the bench pissed off and has lost his concentration and has a bad day after going back in.

Musical chairs is the bane of a good Oline.

Well I think it would simply be Nijman at LT, no?

It's still his best spot, so yeah, I would sure think so.

BF004 wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 08:25

I think this could be our best OL

per Andy's video yesterday afternoon, it sounded like they ran with that group in the red-zone, but that the official starting OL was still Myers at C and Tom at RT.

It is crazy that the referendum for the renovation completed in 2003 only passed by 53-47%. I think the referendum was in 2000, the middle of the years and only two years removed from a SB appearance. The referendum added a 0.5% sales tax. Almost every county in WI now has the same tax (that is the most allowed by state law unless the legislature approves more like they did in Milwaukee this year).

wallyuwl wrote: ↑

25 Aug 2023 09:29

It is crazy that the referendum for the renovation completed in 2003 only passed by 53-47%. I think the referendum was in 2000, the middle of the years and only two years removed from a SB appearance. The referendum added a 0.5% sales tax. Almost every county in WI now has the same tax (that is the most allowed by state law unless the legislature approves more like they did in Milwaukee this year).

Concur. Why the vote was so close it makes no sense. I guess not everyone in the state understand the importance of the Packers in Wisconsin.