Packers Huddle

packman114 wrote: ↑

07 Oct 2020 08:26

I remember thinking during the 2010 season that MM is a good coach but another Marty Schottenheimer, a great coach who couldn't get over the hump. Then the playoffs that year proved me wrong and the 15-1 season had me thinking otherwise. In hindsight I do think that seemed to be the case with MM. The last 8 years we couldn't catch a break (or make a break). I felt his offense had got stale and out of date. But I have to admit he is still lighting it up with Dallas this year so maybe it's not all on him.

But what makes MLF so different is just that, he's different. He will scheme up anything and I think Gutey has found him a group of players who are smart enough to allow for the diversity on offense to execute it, and having A-Rod who is probably one of the smartest QBs ever helps a lot. I mean we have more seen offensive groupings in 4 games than we did in 4 years with MM. And that makes it all fun. I think if you challenge the right players they will respond like we see them responding now. So hat's off not only to MLF and the players but also to Gutey and his crew for finding the players who can respond to a challenge.

It's fun to love MLF don't get me wrong. But the odds are really high MLF won't win the championship the next 2 or 3 seasons because odds always work that way.

And then we will say the exact same thing about him. I don't want to fill in that trap.

go pak go wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020 13:42

This is the most fun season I have ever been part of. I wasn't part of the 90s very much because of age, but I will say those early MM days were a ton of fun too. Just watching that team build and knowing they were going to be good when everyone else said we weren't was so much fun.

But these players are having a ball and that is what is so cool about 2019 and 2020.

I would say for me as far as most fun seasons:

1. 2020
2. 2007
3. 2014
4. 2019
5. 2010
6. 2009
7. 2011

Ya know, I was surprised 2016 "run the table" didn't even make your list, but I guess watching Ladarius Gunter try to cover Julio Jones will do that.

I agree 2007 was a really fun season. After 2005 & 2006, I didn't think Favre could ever play that well again. Favre actually seemed a bit pessimistic before training camp that season, too.

I actually didn't find 2010 all that fun until the "The Miracle at the New Meadowlands" and the Packers clinched a playoff spot. Up to that point, it seemed like all that overcoming adversity would be for nothing.

I guess I am coming this from a different "fun" perspective. I always have fun with seasons, some more than others, because it is football! I, personally, was talking about the fun the team is having. These 2 years, they have looked like they are having more fun than I have seen in 25ish years.

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

07 Oct 2020 13:35

go pak go wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020 13:42

This is the most fun season I have ever been part of. I wasn't part of the 90s very much because of age, but I will say those early MM days were a ton of fun too. Just watching that team build and knowing they were going to be good when everyone else said we weren't was so much fun.

But these players are having a ball and that is what is so cool about 2019 and 2020.

I would say for me as far as most fun seasons:

1. 2020
2. 2007
3. 2014
4. 2019
5. 2010
6. 2009
7. 2011

Ya know, I was surprised 2016 "run the table" didn't even make your list, but I guess watching Ladarius Gunter try to cover Julio Jones will do that.

I agree 2007 was a really fun season. After 2005 & 2006, I didn't think Favre could ever play that well again. Favre actually seemed a bit pessimistic before training camp that season, too.

I actually didn't find 2010 all that fun until the "The Miracle at the New Meadowlands" and the Packers clinched a playoff spot. Up to that point, it seemed like all that overcoming adversity would be for nothing.

2016 would probably be 8 or 9. But that team was brutal to watch. I sat in the cold FedEx Field watching our hapless Packers lose. It was the last loss in 2016 we had but I don't consider that season all that fun. We got our asses kicked by Tennessee and Indy.

The only time I ever really started to believe was around Detroit time and I will admit Dallas was a lot of fun that year.

You will notice my fun seasons are when we didn't expect to be GREAT and when we were good most of the season. Even 2019 isn't as high on the list because honestly a lot of 2010 was served with frustration.

I think 2013 is the "season that could have been". We were actually really good in 2013 and then Rodgers went down. 2014 will always be the best team in the Rodgers era. Though the 2020 Packers team has a chance to beat that.

I genuinely missed having Packer football this week.

Sometimes, I get to the bye and I enjoy it--a break, for me or for the team. Sometimes it's pretty neutral.

This year, I actually miss the football. It's a fun season so far.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020 14:07

This year, I actually miss the football. It's a fun season so far.

Yeah, when you are rolling, you don't want to stop.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020 14:07

I genuinely missed having Packer football this week.

Sometimes, I get to the bye and I enjoy it--a break, for me or for the team. Sometimes it's pretty neutral.

This year, I actually miss the football. It's a fun season so far.

I just don't think any team should have a bye before week 7. I know they don't want to have a huge gap of missing games through the bye week process, but Week 5 and 6 byes are just far too early.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020 14:43

I just don't think any team should have a bye before week 7. I know they don't want to have a huge gap of missing games through the bye week process, but Week 5 and 6 byes are just far too early.

I think they should all have a bye before 8 games and a bye after 8 games personally.

Or if there was a 17-game season and no byes in weeks 1-2, 9-11, or 18-19, but every team gets one bye apiece in weeks 3-8 and one bye in weeks 12 through 17... pair one of your bye weeks with a Thursday game so no one ever plays on a super short week. Have either 4 or 6 teams on bye each week that has byes. It's easy, it's good for the players, and it adds 2 weeks of televised regular season games to the revenue pie. Never understood why they won't add a second bye week.

But if we had two bye weeks this year, then I'd have to miss Packers football twice!

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 10:45

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020 14:43

I just don't think any team should have a bye before week 7. I know they don't want to have a huge gap of missing games through the bye week process, but Week 5 and 6 byes are just far too early.

I think they should all have a bye before 8 games and a bye after 8 games personally.

Or if there was a 17-game season and no byes in weeks 1-2, 9-11, or 18-19, but every team gets one bye apiece in weeks 3-8 and one bye in weeks 12 through 17... pair one of your bye weeks with a Thursday game so no one ever plays on a super short week. Have either 4 or 6 teams on bye each week that has byes. It's easy, it's good for the players, and it adds 2 weeks of televised regular season games to the revenue pie. Never understood why they won't add a second bye week.

But if we had two bye weeks this year, then I'd have to miss Packers football twice!

They took that 2 bye week out of the CBA agreement if I remember correct? I never understood that either. It made perfect sense. Start the NFL season the week after Labor Day. Finish the NFL season with the Regular season being the weekend of the current Wildcard weekend and as you said, give each team a bye in October and late November/early December.

I don't see why that wouldn't be good for the sport.

go pak go wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 11:14

I don't see why that wouldn't be good for the sport.

a former team physician proposed:

6 games
- everybody has a bye-
6 games
- everybody has a bye -
4 games
everybody has bye or season over-

playoffs commence

BSA wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 12:17

go pak go wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 11:14

I don't see why that wouldn't be good for the sport.

a former team physician proposed:

6 games
- everybody has a bye-
6 games
- everybody has a bye -
4 games
everybody has bye or season over-

playoffs commence

That's good for the players but not for the league. A universal bye week with no football revenue will never be approved. It's just a wasted week, financially. You gotta consider all parties with the solution. That could be the player proposal that results in a compromise like mine, but it'll never be the end result.

Of course we can't forget the 1993 season when each team was given two byes within a 5 week stretch. From what I've heard, the networks freaked out because their ratings went down due to fewer games each week. Supposedly, some teams complained that they couldn't sustain momentum with the extra time off either.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 12:40

That's good for the players but not for the league. A universal bye week with no football revenue will never be approved. It's just a wasted week, financially. You gotta consider all parties with the solution. That could be the player proposal that results in a compromise like mine, but it'll never be the end result.

IF revenue is the sole and unchallenged Decider, then yes I agree it will never happen. IF the health and safety of the players and the quality of football played is a consideration, then it makes all the sense in the world. The NFLPA and NFLFU would have to combine efforts to get the league to consider it - and with a 10 year CBA, I know its just a pipe dream.

But I don't understand why it hurts them financially ? Same number of games, same number of ads. Why does a week off matter ?
A million $$ on October 10th is just as valuable as a million $$ on October 3rd

BSA wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 13:39

But I don't understand why it hurts them financially ? Same number of games, same number of ads. Why does a week off matter ?
A million $$ on October 10th is just as valuable as a million $$ on October 3rd

It hurts stakeholders, bars, food partners, etc. Probably hurts networks, too, with no lead-ins for those two weeks. This is all indirect stuff, but it all matters when talking about billions.

Yeah. I'm a proponent of two bye weeks for each team but absolutely not weekends without football. Just learn to stagger the games. Networks may be mad they can't have as many games on a Sunday I guess and that is why they don't do it, but if the NFL schedulers are good and flexible enough, it would allow more focus to be made on larger games and give a chance for fans to watch teams they normally wouldn't watch.

NCF wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 15:30

BSA wrote: ↑

15 Oct 2020 13:39

But I don't understand why it hurts them financially ? Same number of games, same number of ads. Why does a week off matter ?
A million $$ on October 10th is just as valuable as a million $$ on October 3rd

It hurts stakeholders, bars, food partners, etc. Probably hurts networks, too, with no lead-ins for those two weeks. This is all indirect stuff, but it all matters when talking about billions.

You can build a storyline for a game for a week, also for a rare and random bye week while other teams are playing, but a week or two off for all teams with no football is stretching it. Football is a storyline business when it comes to the wide audience.

It's entertainment. The show must go on.

As a hard core fan, I wouldn't mind bye weeks that enhance the quality of the game to the max. But casual fans bring in the money. C'est la vie.

I mean, the NFL gets TV revenue for 17 weekends, not for 16 games. MOST tv revenue stems from regular degular tv, where people don't have access to ALL the games that are on.

A full week off with the same number of games means the NFL earns revenue for 16 weekends, not 17--that's lost money right there. If you add a game, that's 18 weekends of revenue, which they're trying to do. The owners want 18 games so they can have 19 weekends of revenue. In essence, an extra game and an extra bye earns them almost as much revenue, still providing them with 19 weekends of football from which to earn revenue.

The more weekends NFL has live programming on tv, the more money they make. 2/3 of league revenue comes from tv deals. Expanding TV revenue is the best way to expand total revenue.

Having two bye weeks where all the teams are off at the same time is likely a negligible difference to the health and safety of players than having two bye weeks staggered. It is not a contest between health and safety versus revenue. It is a solution that addresses both--adding a bye, eliminating short week Thursday nights and maintaining, if not adding to, the revenue capacity.

Having fun waiting for the people that opposed my early season notion that the Packers would split with the Vikings, to stand up and please identify themselves.

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2020 05:09

Having fun waiting for the people that opposed my early season notion that the Packers would split with the Vikings, to stand up and please identify themselves.

This pleases you?

I do not currently have that fun feel.