PAYTON 34EVER: IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs. or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : ) 13-3. You forgot part of that last post (must have erased when you sent it) 13-3 with Favre. You're welcome.
IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs. or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : ) 13-3.
dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs. or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : )
IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs.
or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : )
13-3.
You forgot part of that last post (must have erased when you sent it)
13-3 with Favre.
You're welcome.
who is this "favre" thing you speak of
Sounds like a strain of mould you try and get rid of but keeps coming back..
The team around Rodgers is good enough that if he plays decent they will win 10 games or so.
If Rodgers implodes it could be fun watching them keep the Lions company in the cellar...lol
ozzfan1317: The team around Rodgers is good enough that if he plays decent they will win 10 games or so. If Rodgers implodes it could be fun watching them keep the Lions company in the cellar...lol
Or the Bears, right? After all, they are the defending cellar dwellers.
IHATETHEBEARS: ozzfan1317: The team around Rodgers is good enough that if he plays decent they will win 10 games or so. If Rodgers implodes it could be fun watching them keep the Lions company in the cellar...lol Or the Bears, right? After all, they are the defending cellar dwellers.
or 2005, 4-12 cellar dweller packers, can take back that rental spot : )
dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: ozzfan1317: The team around Rodgers is good enough that if he plays decent they will win 10 games or so. If Rodgers implodes it could be fun watching them keep the Lions company in the cellar...lol Or the Bears, right? After all, they are the defending cellar dwellers. or 2005, 4-12 cellar dweller packers, can take back that rental spot : )
What have you done for me lately.
IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: ozzfan1317: The team around Rodgers is good enough that if he plays decent they will win 10 games or so. If Rodgers implodes it could be fun watching them keep the Lions company in the cellar...lol Or the Bears, right? After all, they are the defending cellar dwellers. or 2005, 4-12 cellar dweller packers, can take back that rental spot : ) What have you done for me lately.
hmmmm janet let me think..
called the packers a disaster in 2008?
reminded you of the no experience at qb?
posted more of drama queen stories of whining?
oh yeah and reminded you the the pakcers suck
how about 'dem apples?
IHATETHEBEARS:That one apparently went totally over your head.
.. or janet, I turned the "phrase" from what you were intending, into a put down of pakcers, and *that* apparantly went over *your* head : )
Sure, the Packers COULD have a winning record in 2008, but it probably won't happen.
No Brett Favre, that's good for 4-5 less wins right off the bat.
A first-place schedule. Subtract another 1-2 wins.
And the biggest key that most Packers fans seem to forget: staying healthy. The Packers were incredibly lucky to have what, one starter on IR (Wynn, who was going to lose his job to Grant anyway) for the season? No way that happens next season. Most teams that stay relatively healthy during a season have a leg up on their competition. The problem is, it happens VERY infrequently.
Can you imagine the Packers even competing if they had lost the number of players the Bears did on defense last season? Look how much the Packers struggled when they lost Charles Woodson for a game or two. Imagine losing five or six starters off your defense like Chicago struggled through last season, including two for the season in the first game.
And the Bears STILL swept the Pack last season.
I say 5-11 this season for the Pack. Maybe 7-9 if Aaron Rodgers can stay healthy for four consecutive quarters, which he has never done in the NFL. Another little fact Packers fans seem to forget.
stuart scott's crazy eye: Sure, the Packers COULD have a winning record in 2008, but it probably won't happen. No Brett Favre, that's good for 4-5 less wins right off the bat. A first-place schedule. Subtract another 1-2 wins. And the biggest key that most Packers fans seem to forget: staying healthy. The Packers were incredibly lucky to have what, one starter on IR (Wynn, who was going to lose his job to Grant anyway) for the season? No way that happens next season. Most teams that stay relatively healthy during a season have a leg up on their competition. The problem is, it happens VERY infrequently. Can you imagine the Packers even competing if they had lost the number of players the Bears did on defense last season? Look how much the Packers struggled when they lost Charles Woodson for a game or two. Imagine losing five or six starters off your defense like Chicago struggled through last season, including two for the season in the first game. And the Bears STILL swept the Pack last season. I say 5-11 this season for the Pack. Maybe 7-9 if Aaron Rodgers can stay healthy for four consecutive quarters, which he has never done in the NFL. Another little fact Packers fans seem to forget.
agreed think pakcers go 5-7 wins in 20087
MikePhipps: IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs. or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : ) 13-3. 0-2 against bears got-to-do-better-then-that-weak-smack ihtb 0-2 against the Bears in two upsets. 0-1 against the Cowboys. 13-0 against everybody else, in spite of no Pro Bowl players drafted by Ted Thompson. I'll take that same scenario every year. See I love how Packers fans just totally act like Brett Favre didn't really retire. Are you guys just ignoring it and hoping that it isn't true? That tomorrow you'll wake up and he will have changed his mind? Or that he'll hold another press conference and utter one single word: "Psych!!"
IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs. or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : ) 13-3. 0-2 against bears got-to-do-better-then-that-weak-smack ihtb 0-2 against the Bears in two upsets. 0-1 against the Cowboys. 13-0 against everybody else, in spite of no Pro Bowl players drafted by Ted Thompson. I'll take that same scenario every year.
dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS:No concern to me. I'd rather have a team full of solid players than a a team with a couple of stars and a bunch of stiffs. or in packers case... no stars AND stiffs : ) 13-3. 0-2 against bears got-to-do-better-then-that-weak-smack ihtb
0-2 against bears
got-to-do-better-then-that-weak-smack ihtb
0-2 against the Bears in two upsets.
0-1 against the Cowboys.
13-0 against everybody else, in spite of no Pro Bowl players drafted by Ted Thompson.
I'll take that same scenario every year.
See I love how Packers fans just totally act like Brett Favre didn't really retire. Are you guys just ignoring it and hoping that it isn't true? That tomorrow you'll wake up and he will have changed his mind? Or that he'll hold another press conference and utter one single word: "Psych!!"
Including choking in the playoffs AGAIN!!
And a loss is a loss, regardless of whether or not it was an "upset".
"Yeah, we got crushed, but we were SUPPOSED to win and that's all that matters". Typical Packer fan logic. Any excuse in a storm...
Now where did I say that a loss (even an upset) wasn't a loss?
Again, I'll take that scenario every single season. I'd rather my team lose to the Bears twice every year and make the playoffs regardless than not make it at all.
IHATETHEBEARS: Now where did I say that a loss (even an upset) wasn't a loss? Again, I'll take that scenario every single season. I'd rather my team lose to the Bears twice every year and make the playoffs regardless than not make it at all.
again I'll take sweeping the pakcers ANd winning the divsion tittle like 2005, or despite a split of series in 2006 the title also..
anything else captain obvious?
dbears54: Mike Vandermause column: Thompson's drafts lack star power Ted Thompson finally pushed that big monkey off his back. It took long enough, but for the first time in his career, Thompson on Sunday traded up in the draft. The Packers' general manager joked last week he might do it just to silence his critics. Maybe Thompson wasn't kidding. He gave up a fourth- and fifth-round pick to move up 11 spots to select defensive end Jeremy Thompson near the top of the fourth round. There was barely time to strike up the band and celebrate before Thompson reverted to his normal routine and started trading down for extra picks. Thompson made five trades over the weekend and parlayed eight picks into nine. For good measure, he tucked in his pocket a sixth-round pick from New Orleans for next year. Thompson loves to stockpile draft choices. In the past four years, he has consummated 14 trades, and converted 31 picks into 44. Thompson has used his large collection of draft choices to transform the Packers from a 4-12 vagabond in 2005 into a Super Bowl contender. By and large, his conservative approach has worked well. However, the jury is out on the next phase of the Thompson era. It's one thing to accumulate draft picks and construct a solid nucleus, which Thompson has done. Now comes the hard part, when he must elevate the Packers to championship level. The best way to accomplish that is to draft bona fide playmakers. Thompson has filled several starting positions, but it's necessary for some of that talent to rise to Pro Bowl-caliber, which separates a title team from a mere contender. None of Thompson's draft picks in Green Bay has been invited to the Pro Bowl. It typically takes anywhere from two to four years for players to reach that status after entering the NFL, so it's too early to make any lasting judgments. But Thompson's draft success will depend on how many of his picks become elite players. Thompson's mentor, Ron Wolf, drafted 13 Pro Bowl players during his 10 years as Packers general manager, including the trade of a first-round pick for Brett Favre. Even Mike Sherman, who was considered a below-average GM, produced three Pro Bowl players in three drafts, including the trade of a second-round draft pick for cornerback Al Harris. Who has Pro Bowl potential among Thompson's picks? Perhaps Aaron Rodgers and Justin Harrell will develop into elite players, although that is only wishful thinking at this point. A.J. Hawk should be on the list, considering he was the No. 5 selection in 2006, and Greg Jennings could be added. Maybe someone in the 2008 rookie class will emerge. Thompson has proven he can wheel and deal with the best of them. Now, he needs some of his draft picks to produce in a big way. Otherwise, he'll soon be lugging an even bigger monkey on his back. Mike Vandermause is sports editor of the Press-Gazette.
Ted Thompson finally pushed that big monkey off his back.
It took long enough, but for the first time in his career, Thompson on Sunday traded up in the draft.
The Packers' general manager joked last week he might do it just to silence his critics. Maybe Thompson wasn't kidding. He gave up a fourth- and fifth-round pick to move up 11 spots to select defensive end Jeremy Thompson near the top of the fourth round.
There was barely time to strike up the band and celebrate before Thompson reverted to his normal routine and started trading down for extra picks.
Thompson made five trades over the weekend and parlayed eight picks into nine. For good measure, he tucked in his pocket a sixth-round pick from New Orleans for next year.
Thompson loves to stockpile draft choices. In the past four years, he has consummated 14 trades, and converted 31 picks into 44.
Thompson has used his large collection of draft choices to transform the Packers from a 4-12 vagabond in 2005 into a Super Bowl contender. By and large, his conservative approach has worked well.
However, the jury is out on the next phase of the Thompson era. It's one thing to accumulate draft picks and construct a solid nucleus, which Thompson has done. Now comes the hard part, when he must elevate the Packers to championship level.
The best way to accomplish that is to draft bona fide playmakers. Thompson has filled several starting positions, but it's necessary for some of that talent to rise to Pro Bowl-caliber, which separates a title team from a mere contender.
None of Thompson's draft picks in Green Bay has been invited to the Pro Bowl. It typically takes anywhere from two to four years for players to reach that status after entering the NFL, so it's too early to make any lasting judgments. But Thompson's draft success will depend on how many of his picks become elite players.
Thompson's mentor, Ron Wolf, drafted 13 Pro Bowl players during his 10 years as Packers general manager, including the trade of a first-round pick for Brett Favre.
Even Mike Sherman, who was considered a below-average GM, produced three Pro Bowl players in three drafts, including the trade of a second-round draft pick for cornerback Al Harris.
Who has Pro Bowl potential among Thompson's picks? Perhaps Aaron Rodgers and Justin Harrell will develop into elite players, although that is only wishful thinking at this point. A.J. Hawk should be on the list, considering he was the No. 5 selection in 2006, and Greg Jennings could be added. Maybe someone in the 2008 rookie class will emerge.
Thompson has proven he can wheel and deal with the best of them. Now, he needs some of his draft picks to produce in a big way. Otherwise, he'll soon be lugging an even bigger monkey on his back.
Mike Vandermause is sports editor of the Press-Gazette.
I think Ted Thompson drafts have been great considering where the Packers play. This isn't meant as a slam towards Wisconsin, but about the culture shock some players might have deal with playing there. Why draft a player that will only be on your team for 4 - 5 years? Javon Walker, Mike McKenzie and Corey Williams all couldn't wait to get out of there. Al Harris and Charles Woodson only went there because no other team would over-pay them like the Packers do.
The Packers don't draft for need or even for the best player available. They have to take the best mullethead on the board and hope they can get them to stay after their rookie contracts. Their roster is filled with what I would call mulletheads. Just to name a few;
Aaron Rodgers- has a mullet and likes to dogsled.
Donald Driver- if he had hair, it would probably be a mullet.
Jordan Nelson- from rural Kansas and has a mullet.
AaronKampman- farmboy from rural Iowa and has a mullet.
A.J. Hawk- the poster boy for mulletheads.
And a lot of other players from small schools and rural areas.
Imagine being young, rich,single and stuck in the Green Bay area as a pro athelete. Unless you like women with mullets, beer guts and tatoos, it would be like hell. I love Wisconsin, but I'm already married with kids.
I think what Thompson has done is brilliant and they may have a solid team, but it will never get them a great team.
dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: Now where did I say that a loss (even an upset) wasn't a loss? Again, I'll take that scenario every single season. I'd rather my team lose to the Bears twice every year and make the playoffs regardless than not make it at all. again I'll take sweeping the pakcers ANd winning the divsion tittle like 2005, or despite a split of series in 2006 the title also.. anything else captain obvious?
It's obvious to me. But it seems like most of your fellow fans here prefer what happened in 2007 to the Bears than to winning the division.
IHATETHEBEARS: dbears54: IHATETHEBEARS: Now where did I say that a loss (even an upset) wasn't a loss? Again, I'll take that scenario every single season. I'd rather my team lose to the Bears twice every year and make the playoffs regardless than not make it at all. again I'll take sweeping the pakcers ANd winning the divsion tittle like 2005, or despite a split of series in 2006 the title also.. anything else captain obvious? It's obvious to me. But it seems like most of your fellow fans here prefer what happened in 2007 to the Bears than to winning the division.
why do you always generalize "other bear fans".. and in next breath chstise bear fans for lumping you as "other pakcer fans" ?
Its really annoying IHTB, wnat others to just talk about your posts, you really shoudl do that in return to others.
I disagree strongly "others" would rather have a sweep over making the playoffs and see no evidence of it. much less "most"
So in the future please stop teh generalizations, thank you
Come on DB, you read everything around here. You know exactly what I'm talking about.
"I wish Favre hadn't retired. We beat him twice last year. I hope he plays five more years. Pencil in another 10 wins..."
Yet Favre's play in 2007 brought his team a division title. And with Favre playing, it makes it harder for the Bears to win the division. Yet that obvious fact is lost upon so many. All they keep going back to is the sweep in 2007.
They seem happy with the 2007 results. I know I was.
IHATETHEBEARS: Come on DB, you read everything around h
Come on DB, you read everything around h