Packers Huddle

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:42

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2023 22:19

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2023 22:18

Curious choice to go for it on 4th-20 and then 4th-25 after the false start

Ya, punt with essentially 4 timeouts might have been a better idea than going for that...

Would it matter that they gave up the first down on three rushing plays from a different field position? Non-factor in the game.


Also, am I the only one who, rather than come away impressed, felt like both teams looked rusty and not-contendery last night? I mean, the Chiefs were literally down 2 of their top 3 players, but the players who played did not play well enough--from the OL to the receiving weapons.

Meanwhile, the Lions were fiesty and all, but scored 14 offensive points? Also down one of their top receiving weapons (Jameson Williams) to be sure.

But both teams just looked kinda average to me last night. Not that that's saying how their seasons will turn out. But I didn't come away with the "wow, the Lions looked good" or anything.

Speaking of, I'm already annoyed with Packers fans enjoying the Lions' success. I, too, think of them more like a little brother than a hated rival; but when your little brother becomes a threat to you, you don't have to root for him. The Lions dropping this game would have been a great start for the Packers' division chances. Winning it is unequivocally bad for us.

It's not about what ultimately happened, but more about the probability of converting and then subsequently the probability of kicking the winning FG with better field position.

I wasn't impressed by either team. Lions play OK, Chiefs played worse.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:45

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:26

inaccurate? the only difference was the score was also a pass with yac that scored for KC, 3 plays for about 60 yrds=TD

The Chiefs were facing fourth-and-2 near midfield but had been called for holding, and rather than decline it, Campbell chose to push them back. Mahomes responded to third-and-17 by hitting Marquez Valdes-Scantling with a 24-yard strike. He added a 26-yard pass to Justin Watson, then hit Blake Bell with a short TD throw to give the Chiefs a 14-7 halftime lead.

The 2nd scoring drive was 6 plays and there was never a run in that drive.

The second scoring drive was 6 plays, yes. But yoop explained very clearly what he meant. From 3rd and 17 to the TD was 3 plays for about 60 yards, which was a quick strike that turned the game after an accepted penalty moved it to 3rd and long rather than 4th and short.

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:26

APB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 09:56

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 09:01

roll of the dice imo, thing is ON KC's 2nd score the offense went 3 plays for a TD that covered about 65 yrds, culminating with a gut run for about 12 yrds, Mahomes and those receivers can pull off big chunk plays, in fact that is there strong suit.

While @Yoop's recollection of that 2nd drive is completely inaccurate, I agree with the sentiment.

The best bet, IMO, is keeping Mahomes on the sideline. They tried but failed. It was a reasonable gamble, IMO.

Where Mahomes begins his drive in those clutch situations, historically and quite famously, has little impact with his ability to drive his team for a score. He's shown on many occasions he can strike quickly from anywhere on the filed in even the biggest of moments.

inaccurate? the only difference was the score was also a pass with yac that scored for KC, 3 plays for about 60 yrds=TD

The Chiefs were facing fourth-and-2 near midfield but had been called for holding, and rather than decline it, Campbell chose to push them back. Mahomes responded to third-and-17 by hitting Marquez Valdes-Scantling with a 24-yard strike. He added a 26-yard pass to Justin Watson, then hit Blake Bell with a short TD throw to give the Chiefs a 14-7 halftime lead.

"thing is ON KC's 2nd score the offense went 3 plays for a TD that covered about 65 yrds, culminating with a gut run for about 12 yrds,"

It was a 6-play (all-passes), 82 yd drive. The TD came on a 4 yd pass from Mahomes to Bell.

I don't know why you feel the need to argue this.

Again, your recollection is/was inaccurate. The greater point, tho, to which I agreed, is/was valid.

They beat em like they beat the Packers on January 8th. Basically outhustled the opponent. The 'On Any Given Sunday' statement continues to hold true. Lions fans are invading stadiums now. Interesting.

APB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:52

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:26

APB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 09:56

While @Yoop's recollection of that 2nd drive is completely inaccurate, I agree with the sentiment.

The best bet, IMO, is keeping Mahomes on the sideline. They tried but failed. It was a reasonable gamble, IMO.

Where Mahomes begins his drive in those clutch situations, historically and quite famously, has little impact with his ability to drive his team for a score. He's shown on many occasions he can strike quickly from anywhere on the filed in even the biggest of moments.

inaccurate? the only difference was the score was also a pass with yac that scored for KC, 3 plays for about 60 yrds=TD

The Chiefs were facing fourth-and-2 near midfield but had been called for holding, and rather than decline it, Campbell chose to push them back. Mahomes responded to third-and-17 by hitting Marquez Valdes-Scantling with a 24-yard strike. He added a 26-yard pass to Justin Watson, then hit Blake Bell with a short TD throw to give the Chiefs a 14-7 halftime lead.

"thing is ON KC's 2nd score the offense went 3 plays for a TD that covered about 65 yrds, culminating with a gut run for about 12 yrds,"

It was a 6-play (all-passes), 82 yd drive. The TD came on a 4 yd pass from Mahomes to Bell.

I don't know why you feel the need to argue this.

Again, your recollection is/was inaccurate. The greater point, tho, to which I agreed, is/was valid.

ok fine, but my whole point supported your opinion yet you felt the need to shout it down, reality is it took 3 freaking plays to score, and KC and Mahomes made it look easy, that is the stuff that matters in this convo, they are a big play offense, you know the way we use to be.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:47

I wasn't impressed by either team. Lions play OK, Chiefs played worse.

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 11:11

They beat em like they beat the Packers on January 8th. Basically outhustled the opponent. The 'On Any Given Sunday' statement continues to hold true. Lions fans are invading stadiums now. Interesting.

I think they come back down to earth in the not-so-distant future. They have weaknesses, especially on defense. KC couldn't exploit those weaknesses without Kelce and all the drops by WR. KC is not a scary offense without Kelce, even if the WRs don't have all those drops.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:45

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 10:26

APB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 09:56

While @Yoop's recollection of that 2nd drive is completely inaccurate, I agree with the sentiment.

The best bet, IMO, is keeping Mahomes on the sideline. They tried but failed. It was a reasonable gamble, IMO.

Where Mahomes begins his drive in those clutch situations, historically and quite famously, has little impact with his ability to drive his team for a score. He's shown on many occasions he can strike quickly from anywhere on the filed in even the biggest of moments.

inaccurate? the only difference was the score was also a pass with yac that scored for KC, 3 plays for about 60 yrds=TD

The Chiefs were facing fourth-and-2 near midfield but had been called for holding, and rather than decline it, Campbell chose to push them back. Mahomes responded to third-and-17 by hitting Marquez Valdes-Scantling with a 24-yard strike. He added a 26-yard pass to Justin Watson, then hit Blake Bell with a short TD throw to give the Chiefs a 14-7 halftime lead.

The 2nd scoring drive was 6 plays and there was never a run in that drive.

thanks for this clarification that means almost nothing in the context of the point I was trying to make, the main 3 plays where the last 3 culminating in a short pass with yac run up the gut for the TD, the point is KC can score quick with big chunk plays, it is what they are famous for, the rest had absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making and you know.

this type of over critiquing of what others say is why people just don't hang around here, how does it further conversation when all you care about is disagreeing and correcting any little mistake, seriously I'am asking you, APB, Acrobat or any of you.
people bring info, convo start ups, and others ridicule the data, seriously if the data doesn't interest ya go find something else you think others would be more interested in, this forum is becoming nit picky to the end all.

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 11:42

this type of over critiquing of what others say is why people just don't hang around here, how does it further conversation when all you care about is disagreeing and correcting any little mistake, seriously I'am asking you, APB, Acrobat or any of you.
people bring info, convo start ups, and others ridicule the data, seriously if the data doesn't interest ya go find something else you think others would be more interested in, this forum is becoming nit picky to the end all.

Because the majority of us prefer to have conversations based upon factual events and/or data, not mistaken and/or conjured information. Pretty simple principle, if you think about it.

I also want to say that it's so so weird to me how certain guys get hyped up so much that when they don't produce it becomes a disappointment.

Skyy Moore was a draft darling favorite among many (Packers fans and otherwise). Maybe this post is just confirmation bias because he always struck me as overrated and probably just a pretty regular guy coming out.

But as a rookie, he had limited opportunities, 22 catches for 250 yards and no TDs.

Despite that quiet rookie season, everyone just DECIDED that this year he'll break out. Similar to the Justin Fields hype, it hasn't happened yet, but everyone decided it would happen so hard and so early that they just started assuming it HAD happened.

When Moore was a disappointing, average-to-below-average WR last night, everyone is mad. Maybe because they drafted him in a fantasy league or something. But he has never been anything. Why do you expect him to be something now?

There's like a glitch in the hype machine in which things that get trendy as expectations are being treated as things that have happened and then disappointments when they're not true. But Moore is a 2nd-year, 2nd-round WR from a small school with pedestrian athletic traits (short with a 7.49 RAS due to terrible agility scores) and people wanted him to go out and be Mahomes' WR1 based on... vibes?

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 11:11

They beat em like they beat the Packers on January 8th. Basically outhustled the opponent. The 'On Any Given Sunday' statement continues to hold true. Lions fans are invading stadiums now. Interesting.

They've built a substantial war chest by not attending games for the last 30 years. They've got money to burn!

Say what we want about Detroit. But they do have talent. Some of it is still raw. But they bring a good energy. And that’s on Campbell quite a lot, I think.

I think the key to stopping them is to get pressure on Goff. Their OLine is one of the better ones. It almost reminds me of some of the good OLines from the 80s (Redskins in 70s too), being being and strong. Their defense will be okay. But a team that doesn’t hand over the ball to them should do fine enough most of the time.

KC is the team that is going to have rough starts or erratic consistency anyhow. In the end, they learn how to deal with their mistakes and win anyhow.

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 14:30

Say what we want about Detroit. But they do have talent. Some of it is still raw. But they bring a good energy. And that’s on Campbell quite a lot, I think.

I think the key to stopping them is to get pressure on Goff. Their OLine is one of the better ones. It almost reminds me of some of the good OLines from the 80s (Redskins in 70s too), being being and strong. Their defense will be okay. But a team that doesn’t hand over the ball to them should do fine enough most of the time.

KC is the team that is going to have rough starts or erratic consistency anyhow. In the end, they learn how to deal with their mistakes and win anyhow.

Yeah, I've been on the record that I like what Detroit is building. While I wasn't sure about Campbell if he would be another Mike Singletary or not. But their position coaches were top notch, so the Xs and Os and player development would be good; and their drafts of late have impressed me. I know they went with RB/LB/S early this year and drew a lot of flack for it, but I thought the overall haul was good.

So I am pro "the Lions have a bright future." But I am not rooting for them. And I did not see a super high-quality team last night. It may come together and look better; it may be week one rust. And getting a win with a mediocre performance is a gift in the NFL--the sort of thing good teams do to set themselves up for broader success. So I'm not taking away from them. I just thought they still have a lot of work to do AND I'm rooting against them getting Ws

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 14:41

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 14:30

Say what we want about Detroit. But they do have talent. Some of it is still raw. But they bring a good energy. And that’s on Campbell quite a lot, I think.

I think the key to stopping them is to get pressure on Goff. Their OLine is one of the better ones. It almost reminds me of some of the good OLines from the 80s (Redskins in 70s too), being being and strong. Their defense will be okay. But a team that doesn’t hand over the ball to them should do fine enough most of the time.

KC is the team that is going to have rough starts or erratic consistency anyhow. In the end, they learn how to deal with their mistakes and win anyhow.

Yeah, I've been on the record that I like what Detroit is building. While I wasn't sure about Campbell if he would be another Mike Singletary or not. But their position coaches were top notch, so the Xs and Os and player development would be good; and their drafts of late have impressed me. I know they went with RB/LB/S early this year and drew a lot of flack for it, but I thought the overall haul was good.

So I am pro "the Lions have a bright future." But I am not rooting for them. And I did not see a super high-quality team last night. It may come together and look better; it may be week one rust. And getting a win with a mediocre performance is a gift in the NFL--the sort of thing good teams do to set themselves up for broader success. So I'm not taking away from them. I just thought they still have a lot of work to do AND I'm rooting against them getting Ws

I also am not knocking the top of their draft this year. Most of the league says, “You just don’t draft a RB that high” or “You just don’t get an inside LB that early” and so on. But the Kitties didn’t just draft players. They drafted players that are, in their minds, a good fit for their team at this time. And that makes a LOT of sense anyplace in the draft.

APB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 13:02

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 11:42

this type of over critiquing of what others say is why people just don't hang around here, how does it further conversation when all you care about is disagreeing and correcting any little mistake, seriously I'am asking you, APB, Acrobat or any of you.
people bring info, convo start ups, and others ridicule the data, seriously if the data doesn't interest ya go find something else you think others would be more interested in, this forum is becoming nit picky to the end all.

Because the majority of us prefer to have conversations based upon factual events and/or data, not mistaken and/or conjured information. Pretty simple principle, if you think about it.

come on, the whole point you where trying to make is that KC has the ability to strike quick which it did to end that drive, the first 3 plays didn't produce, the last 3 did covering about 65 yrds, thats what separates KC, Mahomes, and a few other teams from the rest of the league.

nothing was conjured, and most of my comment was factual, in fact my generality comments are also close enough to accurate that we could have a civil conversation, you and a few others nit pick them apart simply to argue, thats the simplistic part of this whole thing, it's childish and you know it, what do you think your talking to some grade school adolescent

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 15:11

APB wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 13:02

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 11:42

this type of over critiquing of what others say is why people just don't hang around here, how does it further conversation when all you care about is disagreeing and correcting any little mistake, seriously I'am asking you, APB, Acrobat or any of you.
people bring info, convo start ups, and others ridicule the data, seriously if the data doesn't interest ya go find something else you think others would be more interested in, this forum is becoming nit picky to the end all.

Because the majority of us prefer to have conversations based upon factual events and/or data, not mistaken and/or conjured information. Pretty simple principle, if you think about it.

come on, the whole point you where trying to make is that KC has the ability to strike quick which it did to end that drive, the first 3 plays didn't produce, the last 3 did covering about 65 yrds, thats what separates KC, Mahomes, and a few other teams from the rest of the league.

nothing was conjured, and most of my comment was factual, in fact my generality comments are also close enough to accurate that we could have a civil conversation, you and a few others nit pick them apart simply to argue, thats the simplistic part of this whole thing, it's childish and you know it, what do you think your talking to some grade school adolescent

I am having a civil conversation. At least trying to. It is admittedly difficult when we can't even agree on what is fact and simply admit when a mistake is made.

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 14:30

Say what we want about Detroit. But they do have talent. Some of it is still raw. But they bring a good energy. And that’s on Campbell quite a lot, I think.

I think the key to stopping them is to get pressure on Goff. Their OLine is one of the better ones. It almost reminds me of some of the good OLines from the 80s (Redskins in 70s too), being being and strong. Their defense will be okay. But a team that doesn’t hand over the ball to them should do fine enough most of the time.

KC is the team that is going to have rough starts or erratic consistency anyhow. In the end, they learn how to deal with their mistakes and win anyhow.

Being crappy for so many years and drafting high repeatedly they had to get better once they got some decent people coaching the team. For a fanbase that has been suffering since I've been in diapers if they win the division it won't bother me too much seeing I doubt we'll be in the mix this year.

Pugger wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2023 08:56

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 14:30

Say what we want about Detroit. But they do have talent. Some of it is still raw. But they bring a good energy. And that’s on Campbell quite a lot, I think.

I think the key to stopping them is to get pressure on Goff. Their OLine is one of the better ones. It almost reminds me of some of the good OLines from the 80s (Redskins in 70s too), being being and strong. Their defense will be okay. But a team that doesn’t hand over the ball to them should do fine enough most of the time.

KC is the team that is going to have rough starts or erratic consistency anyhow. In the end, they learn how to deal with their mistakes and win anyhow.

Being crappy for so many years and drafting high repeatedly they had to get better once they got some decent people coaching the team. For a fanbase that has been suffering since I've been in diapers if they win the division it won't bother me too much seeing I doubt we'll be in the mix this year.

Don’t diss the Packers this year. Their main challenge is their youth. But they still have a LOT of talent. If they are coached well, they will 100% make the playoffs.

Pugger wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2023 08:56

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2023 14:30

Say what we want about Detroit. But they do have talent. Some of it is still raw. But they bring a good energy. And that’s on Campbell quite a lot, I think.

I think the key to stopping them is to get pressure on Goff. Their OLine is one of the better ones. It almost reminds me of some of the good OLines from the 80s (Redskins in 70s too), being being and strong. Their defense will be okay. But a team that doesn’t hand over the ball to them should do fine enough most of the time.

KC is the team that is going to have rough starts or erratic consistency anyhow. In the end, they learn how to deal with their mistakes and win anyhow.

Being crappy for so many years and drafting high repeatedly they had to get better once they got some decent people coaching the team. For a fanbase that has been suffering since I've been in diapers if they win the division it won't bother me too much seeing I doubt we'll be in the mix this year.

drafting high does not guarantee success no matter the coach Pugger, look at all the high pick draft capitol we've invested in our defense over the last decade and we've rarely been better then average, I think Detroit has missed on a bunch of draft picks just as we have.

I do agree though, just as MLF has been a improvement over McCarthy, Campbell is a improvement over any coach Detroits had the last decade or so.

they'll be a tougher foe going forward.