Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

User avatar
Striker
Site Admin
Posts: 9126
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:24 pm

Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby Striker » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:02 pm

Studs
Aaron Jones - He looked good.

Kenny Clark - Having himself a season still.


Duds
Hundley - I don't know much of this game I lay at the feet of Hundley. On the one hand, that INT was bad. On the other hand, I feel like the gameplan for him was either low percentage pass or dumpoff. Which brings us to....

McCarthy - Playing not to lose will help you lose. Every. Single. Time.

Capers - Maybe teach your guys about screens? Or realize teams are burning your calls with screens.

The Defense - Good turnovers. Worn down and stupid mistakes.

User avatar
J.D. Brew
Posts: 10972
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:48 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby J.D. Brew » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:04 pm

Studs -

Our "average defense" - Only 488 total yards allowed. Pretty damn impressive stuff. That's what happens when you have Kevin King and Davon House on the field.

MM QB school - 12 for 25, 87 yards and an INT? Damn, those 3 years invested in the QB really paid off. Now I get why McCarthy snapped at that reporter for mentioning bringing in a veteran.

Duds -

None. Bang up job all around. This is a stacked roster top to bottom. Aaron who?
As the Packers were on the verge of blowing a 27-10 lead to the Bears to end their season:

dsilby wrote:This will make next week pretty exciting.
Lions in Dallas on Mon night. GB and MN.

Gotta love some football in December!

User avatar
dsilby
Posts: 14272
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:15 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby dsilby » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:09 pm

Jones was a stud for sure. Randall had a good game, House played well for the most part.

Looking back at the game, there's really no glaring thing that stands out other than McCarthy.
He gets a big dud for me today. I was happy with the first half. But his inability to adjust in the second half when clearly the Saints changed their game plan was bad.

At some point you need to let your QB play. Your only chance of winning is outscoring the Saints (thanks master of the obvious), and you can't expect your defense to shut the Saints out. They're to good.
How did Mike think they could win by run, run, run, 50 yards pass.
Didn't like it.

User avatar
BigDee
Moderator
Posts: 10031
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:19 pm
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby BigDee » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:11 pm

Stud - Jones

Duds - Rest of the team and the coaching staff.
Snapping necks and cashin checks. POW!

User avatar
tar
Posts: 2326
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:56 am

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby tar » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:11 pm

J.D. Brew wrote:Studs -

Our "average defense" - Only 488 total yards allowed. Pretty damn impressive stuff. That's what happens when you have Kevin King and Davon House on the field.

MM QB school - 12 for 25, 87 yards and an INT? Damn, those 3 years invested in the QB really paid off. Now I get why McCarthy snapped at that reporter for mentioning bringing in a veteran.

Duds -

None. Bang up job all around. This is a stacked roster top to bottom. Aaron who?

Sarcasm vapors in the air
Think i got a whif
Aaron?
Ripkowski
Jones
"He's got to be stopped, and I've got to stop him"

Dean Winters
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:32 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby Dean Winters » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:26 pm

I have a special dud J D Brew, it goes to Mark Murphy. There was a interview in the Journal Sentinel before training camp basically with Murphy defending Theodore saying that the Packers make the playoffs every year and could not figure why the fans want TT and MM fired. So I would have to think in order to get rid Theodore you have fire Mark Murphy first.

willie key
Posts: 8972
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:38 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby willie key » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:31 pm

Dean Winters wrote:I have a special dud J D Brew, it goes to Mark Murphy. There was a interview in the Journal Sentinel before training camp basically with Murphy defending Theodore saying that the Packers make the playoffs every year and could not figure why the fans want TT and MM fired. So I would have to think in order to get rid Theodore you have fire Mark Murphy first.



Well if that’s the criteria. They ain’t making it this year so time to clean house then

CaliBrewCrewFan
Posts: 10033
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:24 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby CaliBrewCrewFan » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:32 pm

Dean Winters wrote:I have a special dud J D Brew, it goes to Mark Murphy. There was a interview in the Journal Sentinel before training camp basically with Murphy defending Theodore saying that the Packers make the playoffs every year and could not figure why the fans want TT and MM fired. So I would have to think in order to get rid Theodore you have fire Mark Murphy first.


All Mark Murphy cares about is his pet project... Titletown.

Honestly... if I'm Rodgers... make an ultimatum to improve the shit product TT has assembled... or he's gone when his contract is up. It's pretty apparent he's never winning another SB in GB.
After the Packers 30-17 loss to the Lions at Lambeau.

SB Nation‏Verified account @SBNation 20m20 minutes ago
It was the first time the Lions went a game without a punt since 1971.

shipitdear
Posts: 9326
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:36 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby shipitdear » Sun Oct 22, 2017 4:52 pm

Studs - Aaron Rodgers. His absence proves this team is nothing without him.
The masses are learning what some of us have known for years: Ted is a fraud.

willie key
Posts: 8972
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:38 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby willie key » Sun Oct 22, 2017 4:55 pm

shipitdear wrote:Studs - Aaron Rodgers. His absence proves this team is nothing without him.



Lane Taylor absence has crippled this team

User avatar
J.D. Brew
Posts: 10972
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:48 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby J.D. Brew » Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:26 pm

BTW Joe Haden, who everyone insisted was over the hill and couldn't possibly be an upgrade for us, has a PFF grade 30 points higher than our top corner. Nantz and Romo currently singing his praises.

Yet another guy I suggested we should go after at the time, yet every off-season the Ted defenders ask "who would you have signed then, huh?"

These aren't bank breaking moves I'm talking about.
As the Packers were on the verge of blowing a 27-10 lead to the Bears to end their season:

dsilby wrote:This will make next week pretty exciting.
Lions in Dallas on Mon night. GB and MN.

Gotta love some football in December!

User avatar
dsilby
Posts: 14272
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:15 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby dsilby » Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:38 pm

willie key wrote:
shipitdear wrote:Studs - Aaron Rodgers. His absence proves this team is nothing without him.



Lane Taylor absence has crippled this team

SID is right though.
You removed arguably the best player of all time at the most important position on the field and replaced him with someone who's never really played a true NFL game.
And the team just isn't as good. Crazy.

matt stairs
Posts: 3148
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:24 am

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby matt stairs » Sun Oct 22, 2017 11:19 pm

dsilby wrote:
willie key wrote:
shipitdear wrote:Studs - Aaron Rodgers. His absence proves this team is nothing without him.



Lane Taylor absence has crippled this team

SID is right though.
You removed arguably the best player of all time at the most important position on the field and replaced him with someone who's never really played a true NFL game.
And the team just isn't as good. Crazy.


Find someone, anyone, who expected them to be as good with Hundley as Rodgers. That's a strawman.

What was expected was for the offense to be mediocre, and I am not even sure they were that good. Saints came into the game giving up 270 passing yards a game and 370 total yards. The Packers generated 260 yards of offense and 79 yards passing. Brett Hundley had a 39.9 passer rating. Which by the way is almost identical to the passer rating you would get if you threw every ball incomplete (39.4). That's right, according to passer rating, Hundley was as effective as someone going 0-15. No one expected a Rodgers level, but at this point they aren't even getting Anthony Dilweg level play from Hundley. He's Scott Tolzien with a little more mobility (which MM refuses to scheme for, so it doesn't matter).

User avatar
DrMortonsaltEsq1
Posts: 4188
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:03 am
Location: Rhode Island

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby DrMortonsaltEsq1 » Sun Oct 22, 2017 11:47 pm

matt stairs wrote:
dsilby wrote:
willie key wrote:
shipitdear wrote:Studs - Aaron Rodgers. His absence proves this team is nothing without him.



Lane Taylor absence has crippled this team

SID is right though.
You removed arguably the best player of all time at the most important position on the field and replaced him with someone who's never really played a true NFL game.
And the team just isn't as good. Crazy.


Find someone, anyone, who expected them to be as good with Hundley as Rodgers. That's a strawman.

What was expected was for the offense to be mediocre, and I am not even sure they were that good. Saints came into the game giving up 270 passing yards a game and 370 total yards. The Packers generated 260 yards of offense and 79 yards passing. Brett Hundley had a 39.9 passer rating. Which by the way is almost identical to the passer rating you would get if you threw every ball incomplete (39.4). That's right, according to passer rating, Hundley was as effective as someone going 0-15. No one expected a Rodgers level, but at this point they aren't even getting Anthony Dilweg level play from Hundley. He's Scott Tolzien with a little more mobility (which MM refuses to scheme for, so it doesn't matter).

Well said matt
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
Vince Lombardi

shipitdear
Posts: 9326
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:36 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby shipitdear » Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:23 am

RJ Bell‏Verified account @RJinVegas 18h18 hours ago

NO TEAM would be favored over #Packers w/Aaron Rodgers (on neutral field)

EVERY TEAM except Colts & Browns favored over GB without Rodgers!
Reply 12 Retweet 46 Like 74
The masses are learning what some of us have known for years: Ted is a fraud.

User avatar
J.D. Brew
Posts: 10972
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:48 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby J.D. Brew » Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:51 am

matt stairs wrote:
dsilby wrote:
willie key wrote:
shipitdear wrote:Studs - Aaron Rodgers. His absence proves this team is nothing without him.



Lane Taylor absence has crippled this team

SID is right though.
You removed arguably the best player of all time at the most important position on the field and replaced him with someone who's never really played a true NFL game.
And the team just isn't as good. Crazy.


Find someone, anyone, who expected them to be as good with Hundley as Rodgers. That's a strawman.

What was expected was for the offense to be mediocre, and I am not even sure they were that good. Saints came into the game giving up 270 passing yards a game and 370 total yards. The Packers generated 260 yards of offense and 79 yards passing. Brett Hundley had a 39.9 passer rating. Which by the way is almost identical to the passer rating you would get if you threw every ball incomplete (39.4). That's right, according to passer rating, Hundley was as effective as someone going 0-15. No one expected a Rodgers level, but at this point they aren't even getting Anthony Dilweg level play from Hundley. He's Scott Tolzien with a little more mobility (which MM refuses to scheme for, so it doesn't matter).

Dsilby utilizing a straw man? Crazy.

No but seriously, yesterday willie said something to the effect of "why couldn't we force them to punt once in the second half", and dsilby came back with (paraphrased) "you can't expect us to shut down the Saints."

Shut down = "one punt in the second half".

He is King Straw Man.
As the Packers were on the verge of blowing a 27-10 lead to the Bears to end their season:

dsilby wrote:This will make next week pretty exciting.
Lions in Dallas on Mon night. GB and MN.

Gotta love some football in December!

User avatar
tar
Posts: 2326
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:56 am

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby tar » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:58 am

shipitdear wrote:RJ Bell‏Verified account @RJinVegas 18h18 hours ago

NO TEAM would be favored over #Packers w/Aaron Rodgers (on neutral field)

EVERY TEAM except Colts & Browns favored over GB without Rodgers!
Reply 12 Retweet 46 Like 74

i would be intrigued by a hypothetical "Balance-of-power" study , remove every team's STARting QB

So , we already know the drop-off in our power-ranking while one #12 future HOF QB is missing

others ?
"He's got to be stopped, and I've got to stop him"

BrewCrew82
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 11:03 am

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby BrewCrew82 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:06 am

tar wrote:
shipitdear wrote:RJ Bell‏Verified account @RJinVegas 18h18 hours ago

NO TEAM would be favored over #Packers w/Aaron Rodgers (on neutral field)

EVERY TEAM except Colts & Browns favored over GB without Rodgers!
Reply 12 Retweet 46 Like 74

i would be intrigued by a hypothetical "Balance-of-power" study , remove every team's STARting QB

So , we already know the drop-off in our power-ranking while one #12 future HOF QB is missing

others ?


The Vikings are doing fine with a backup QB. It's not starting Hundley that bothers me it bothers me that the Packers don't even really consider bringing someone else in for competition. Now would be the time since they have two weeks until the next game.

yourout
Posts: 6301
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:35 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby yourout » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:05 am

I have to chuckle listening to the radio folks whining about yesterday's game when it's been painfully obvious for years that this team was Aaron Rodgers and nobody else.

Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson would be both long gone from Green Bay had he not hit the lottery with Aaron Rodgers.

Essentially without Aaron Rodgers we are the Bears. Though right now bears have a more talented roster.

User avatar
FunDmentals
Posts: 925
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:50 pm

Re: Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Saints

Postby FunDmentals » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:26 am

This thread is the main reason I don't post on this forum very often anymore.

Anytime anything negative happens to Green Bay it's all "durr, Ted Thompson suck. See! I was right. I said Ted Thompson sucks, and now I'm right! See? I'm right! Durr, STRAW MAN! Ha, got him good! Straw Man!"

This is a team that lost the player the entire offense is built around, has a very banged up offensive line, and played a team that is trending upwards. The inability to accurately evaluate anyone is why Packer fans are probably even worse than St. Louis Cardinals fans.

The 3rd down defense is probably the biggest weakness of the entire team. Capers is not scheming properly for the players that he has. He was rushing four way too frequently, and the few times he blitzed, they blitzers were having to run to far. I also wouldn't have minded not rushing up the field as much and just trying to get in Drew Brees eyelines (he is very short after all). Kyler Fackrell needs to be cut the second Biegel is ready.

HHCD is so worried about missing tackles and giving up huge plays that he isn't even bothering to play the ball. Kenny Clark is playing out of his mind, but Capers needs to give him some help by playing more base 3-4. There are so many plays where they have 2 d-lineman, and 5 DBs against the Saints base package, which is why they were constantly in 2nd and 3rd and short.

Hundley looked uncomfortable all day, but he wasn't afforded any time. I think McCarthy did a terrible job of sticking with the run in the first half, and in the second half was too reliant on outside runs (which weren't working). It's frustrating that he doesn't seem to want to stick with interior running when it is working.

The good news is the Packers have 15 days to get ready for the second half. I have full confidence that Hundley will be ready to play and they Packers will make a push for the playoffs. But don't worry. If they falter then you can be super happy and maybe everyone will get fired. Then you can root for the new Coach and GM to fail every week. FUN!


Return to “Packers and NFL Discussion”




  Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], shipitdear and 5 guests