Charles Woodson

duck wrote:Anyone missing him these days?

Not to bash on Charles who has meant a lot to the Packers, no doubt is still a great locker room presence, and probably still has something to bring to the team for the final push... but I like the way our secondary has been playing better without him.

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

MB20 wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

While I'm in total agreement re: Woodson and Matthews, my huge concern is that this piece of shit that is loosely referred to as an offensive line is going to get Rodgers killed. Even before Bulaga got hurt, these dipshits have been actively handicapping this offense. If the media had more ability to discern its ass from its elbow than a common farm animal, they'd realize that there is no one even remotely more deserving of the MVP award this year for being able to produce like he has while behind those clowns. I mean, Marshall Fucking Newhouse is the most solid guy on the line right now

Yes--it's not that TT hasn't tried... However, Sherrod has provided exactly zero value to date for his first round status and the other first rounder he selected--Bulaga--is no better than pretty good. Sitton is the best player on that line...and, while I have no issue with TT letting Wells go given the contract he received, Center is a position that will need to be addressed again in the off season with exactly nobody on the roster being developed to be the long-term answer at that all-important position that is very, very difficult to find someone with the wherewithal to trust coming straight out of the draft... Yes, Saturday was signed to a two-year deal...but one merely needs to take a passing glance at the way he trims his beard to get clued-up on the way he plays, eh? The best O-lineman make it nasty... [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes me want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

MB20 wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

While I'm in total agreement re: Woodson and Matthews, my huge concern is that this piece of shit that is loosely referred to as an offensive line is going to get Rodgers killed. Even before Bulaga got hurt, these dipshits have been actively handicapping this offense. If the media had more ability to discern its ass from its elbow than a common farm animal, they'd realize that there is no one even remotely more deserving of the MVP award this year for being able to produce like he has while behind those clowns. I mean, Marshall Fucking Newhouse is the most solid guy on the line right now

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes me want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

You disappoint me, HD. This is an odd mix of Rooferistic simplicity with Milani-ish negativity. You're not seeing the positives underneath that broad stroke of pessimism.

Have the Packers been playing great since the Houston game? No, and I never said so. I even titled my first post about the Detroit game "It doesn't feel like a win." If the playoffs were to start right now, the Pack wouldn't go very far, if anywhere. It would quickly boil down to San Francisco vs. Atlanta in the NFC. Frankly, however, I'm actually happy that the Packers didn't bring their A game in October, though I hope to see some signs of it again soon. I really believe that in this physical and emotional game teams have major mood swings and its important to peak at the right time. Case #1 is the 2011 Packers: they peaked too early. Case #2 is the 2010 Packers: they peaked at the perfect time. The path of this team is eerily parallel to the 2010 club, especially with all the injuries. Who woulda thunk in mid-November that the 2010 Packers would have run the table? They looked dead after they lost to Detroit 7-3. They didn't catch fire until the very end.

Yes, the Pack has recently played some mediocre opponents and won in unspectacular fashion. However, the bottom line is they won. Any win in the NFL is significant. Shocking upsets are not at all uncommon.

I see a defense that's slowly but steadily improving. I think our young secondary is very good and it's great to get other young guys like Moses get meaningful experience. Our offense has been particularly hard hit by injuries and, all things considered, they're still a formidable unit. Once our injured players start coming back, I think they can play at a new level. Getting Jennings and Benson back before the playoffs will be huge.

I'm not guaranteeing a thing. Frankly, the Niners made a statement last night against Chicago. Last night was as dominating a performance -- in all phases of the game -- as I've seen in quite a while. The scariest part is they now have a legit QB. If they continue to row from here, they are clearly the team to beat. However, I like the fact that this year, unlike last, we're flying under radar. And, as you point out, MM coaches best under these circumstances.

The next several weeks should be interesting.

RingoCStarrQB wrote:Wow, that was awesome Ringo !!!!!!!!!

Ringo--you go give Ringo his medication and tuck him into bed now... Remember--they're finishing up their birdhouses tomorrow at the special needs workshop and you don't want the short bus pulling up in the afternoon with Ringo only having three fingers on one hand...

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes me want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

You disappoint me, HD. This is an odd mix of Rooferistic simplicity with Milani-ish negativity. You're not seeing the positives underneath that broad stroke of pessimism.

Have the Packers been playing great since the Houston game? No, and I never said so. I even titled my first post about the Detroit game "It doesn't feel like a win." If the playoffs were to start right now, the Pack wouldn't go very far, if anywhere. It would quickly boil down to San Francisco vs. Atlanta in the NFC. Frankly, however, I'm actually happy that the Packers didn't bring their A game in October, though I hope to see some signs of it again soon. I really believe that in this physical and emotional game teams have major mood swings and its important to peak at the right time. Case #1 is the 2011 Packers: they peaked too early. Case #2 is the 2010 Packers: they peaked at the perfect time. The path of this team is eerily parallel to the 2010 club, especially with all the injuries. Who woulda thunk in mid-November that the 2010 Packers would have run the table? They looked dead after they lost to Detroit 7-3. They didn't catch fire until the very end.

Yes, the Pack has recently played some mediocre opponents and won in unspectacular fashion. However, the bottom line is they won. Any win in the NFL is significant. Shocking upsets are not at all uncommon.

I see a defense that's slowly but steadily improving. I think our young secondary is very good and it's great to get other young guys like Moses get meaningful experience. Our offense has been particularly hard hit by injuries and, all things considered, they're still a formidable unit. Once our injured players start coming back, I think they can play at a new level. Getting Jennings and Benson back before the playoffs will be huge.

I'm not guaranteeing a thing. Frankly, the Niners made a statement last night against Chicago. Last night was as dominating a performance -- in all phases of the game -- as I've seen in quite a while. The scariest part is they now have a legit QB. If they continue to row from here, they are clearly the team to beat. However, I like the fact that this year, unlike last, we're flying under radar. And, as you point out, MM coaches best under these circumstances.

The next several weeks should be interesting.

Fair enough, Duck... We seem to be in basic agreement on the reality of the here/now, yet you seem wanton to run naked and free with your dopplegonger thrashing through the soft petals of the sun-drenched daisies about the future... LOL As you'll recall--I saw the potential there in 2010. I do not today. The primary reason is this: Underperformance. This year's team is mired in it and the 2010 team was not. Underperformance is a systemic disease. It becomes pervasive. Bring back some of the injured and the potential of the team to succeed will improve--but that doesn't address the established proclivity of this team to underperform... It isn't just the players. Shrek is repeatedly making game-management decision-making errors beyond his usual norm this season. That alone will be difficult to overcome...

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes me want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

You disappoint me, HD. This is an odd mix of Rooferistic simplicity with Milani-ish negativity. You're not seeing the positives underneath that broad stroke of pessimism.

Have the Packers been playing great since the Houston game? No, and I never said so. I even titled my first post about the Detroit game "It doesn't feel like a win." If the playoffs were to start right now, the Pack wouldn't go very far, if anywhere. It would quickly boil down to San Francisco vs. Atlanta in the NFC. Frankly, however, I'm actually happy that the Packers didn't bring their A game in October, though I hope to see some signs of it again soon. I really believe that in this physical and emotional game teams have major mood swings and its important to peak at the right time. Case #1 is the 2011 Packers: they peaked too early. Case #2 is the 2010 Packers: they peaked at the perfect time. The path of this team is eerily parallel to the 2010 club, especially with all the injuries. Who woulda thunk in mid-November that the 2010 Packers would have run the table? They looked dead after they lost to Detroit 7-3. They didn't catch fire until the very end.

Yes, the Pack has recently played some mediocre opponents and won in unspectacular fashion. However, the bottom line is they won. Any win in the NFL is significant. Shocking upsets are not at all uncommon.

I see a defense that's slowly but steadily improving. I think our young secondary is very good and it's great to get other young guys like Moses get meaningful experience. Our offense has been particularly hard hit by injuries and, all things considered, they're still a formidable unit. Once our injured players start coming back, I think they can play at a new level. Getting Jennings and Benson back before the playoffs will be huge.

I'm not guaranteeing a thing. Frankly, the Niners made a statement last night against Chicago. Last night was as dominating a performance -- in all phases of the game -- as I've seen in quite a while. The scariest part is they now have a legit QB. If they continue to row from here, they are clearly the team to beat. However, I like the fact that this year, unlike last, we're flying under radar. And, as you point out, MM coaches best under these circumstances.

The next several weeks should be interesting.

Fair enough, Duck... We seem to be in basic agreement on the reality of the here/now, yet you seem wanton to run naked and free with your dopplegonger thrashing through the soft petals of the sun-drenched daisies about the future... LOL As you'll recall--I saw the potential there in 2010. I do not today. The primary reason is this: Underperformance. This year's team is mired in it and the 2010 team was not. Underperformance is a systemic disease. It becomes pervasive. Bring back some of the injured and the potential of the team to succeed will improve--but that doesn't address the established proclivity of this team to underperform... It isn't just the players. Shrek is repeatedly making game-management decision-making errors beyond his usual norm this season. That alone will be difficult to overcome...

Underperformance? Hmmm... I might be inclined to agree with you if it weren't for the fact that we've had a carousel of players drifting in and out of our line up all season. It's hard to draw a bead on the actual character of this team with a young evolving defense and so many injured starters. Are we underperforming to gut out five straight wins, including a road divisional win without Matthews, our best defensive player (and I would argue #2 most important to the team overall) on the sidelines?? I honestly don't know.

Maybe you don't see the potential in this team, but I sure do. A solid core of players with lots of playoff experience and a Super Bowl win; the best QB in the game with a chip on his shoulder who seems to play his best when people doubt him most; a young talented defense that hasn't even begun jell as a unit; and a head coach that for all his warts seems to have buy in from his players and performs best in adversarial situations.

You call it underperformance, I call it pacing. I see a team with the potential to turn it on and become a dominant team in the playoffs.

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes me want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

You disappoint me, HD. This is an odd mix of Rooferistic simplicity with Milani-ish negativity. You're not seeing the positives underneath that broad stroke of pessimism.

Have the Packers been playing great since the Houston game? No, and I never said so. I even titled my first post about the Detroit game "It doesn't feel like a win." If the playoffs were to start right now, the Pack wouldn't go very far, if anywhere. It would quickly boil down to San Francisco vs. Atlanta in the NFC. Frankly, however, I'm actually happy that the Packers didn't bring their A game in October, though I hope to see some signs of it again soon. I really believe that in this physical and emotional game teams have major mood swings and its important to peak at the right time. Case #1 is the 2011 Packers: they peaked too early. Case #2 is the 2010 Packers: they peaked at the perfect time. The path of this team is eerily parallel to the 2010 club, especially with all the injuries. Who woulda thunk in mid-November that the 2010 Packers would have run the table? They looked dead after they lost to Detroit 7-3. They didn't catch fire until the very end.

Yes, the Pack has recently played some mediocre opponents and won in unspectacular fashion. However, the bottom line is they won. Any win in the NFL is significant. Shocking upsets are not at all uncommon.

I see a defense that's slowly but steadily improving. I think our young secondary is very good and it's great to get other young guys like Moses get meaningful experience. Our offense has been particularly hard hit by injuries and, all things considered, they're still a formidable unit. Once our injured players start coming back, I think they can play at a new level. Getting Jennings and Benson back before the playoffs will be huge.

I'm not guaranteeing a thing. Frankly, the Niners made a statement last night against Chicago. Last night was as dominating a performance -- in all phases of the game -- as I've seen in quite a while. The scariest part is they now have a legit QB. If they continue to row from here, they are clearly the team to beat. However, I like the fact that this year, unlike last, we're flying under radar. And, as you point out, MM coaches best under these circumstances.

The next several weeks should be interesting.

Fair enough, Duck... We seem to be in basic agreement on the reality of the here/now, yet you seem wanton to run naked and free with your dopplegonger thrashing through the soft petals of the sun-drenched daisies about the future... LOL As you'll recall--I saw the potential there in 2010. I do not today. The primary reason is this: Underperformance. This year's team is mired in it and the 2010 team was not. Underperformance is a systemic disease. It becomes pervasive. Bring back some of the injured and the potential of the team to succeed will improve--but that doesn't address the established proclivity of this team to underperform... It isn't just the players. Shrek is repeatedly making game-management decision-making errors beyond his usual norm this season. That alone will be difficult to overcome...

Underperformance? Hmmm... I might be inclined to agree with you if it weren't for the fact that we've had a carousel of players drifting in and out of our line up all season. It's hard to draw a bead on the actual character of this team with a young evolving defense and so many injured starters. Are we underperforming to gut out five straight wins, including a road divisional win without Matthews, our best defensive player (and I would argue #2 most important to the team overall) on the sidelines?? I honestly don't know.

Maybe you don't see the potential in this team, but I sure do. A solid core of players with lots of playoff experience and a Super Bowl win; the best QB in the game with a chip on his shoulder who seems to play his best when people doubt him most; a young talented defense that hasn't even begun jell as a unit; and a head coach that for all his warts seems to have buy in from his players and performs best in adversarial situations.

You call it underperformance, I call it pacing. I see a team with the potential to turn it on and become a dominant team in the playoffs.

Pacing? There are those who do, Duck...and those who will... It's the same old story, my friend. Potential unrealized is only fodder for disappointment. The concept of pacing is suggestive of a free will effort in holding something back...yet--when you hold back, that very characteristic becomes part of your identity, disrupts your path to greatness and undermines the joy in the actualization of knowing that you are all that you can be. Do you think for a moment that Jimmy Page, for example, was pacing himself and living for tomorrow when he sat down in his basement and penned this absolute masterpiece of timeless beauty that almost transcends the soul? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] With pacing himself--could he ever have come close to creating it?

You're a bright guy, Duck... You know what I say is true. You reveal it in the double-standard you demonstrate in feeling the need to call it pacing when the dysfunction is overt in your's/mine favorite team...but yet when applied to others that you don't hold dear, like Randy Moss for example, the underperformance is viewed quite differently and in quite different terms, eh?

What you more correctly hold is hope...and that's cool. Your optimism is fueled by it. I hold hope that this team call pull their shit together, too...but unlike you--I'm just not feelin' it this time...

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Hard to tangle with that formidable Milani/HD axis.

I know you guys have soft spots in your heart for particular aging veterans (in Milani's case, just about all of them), but it sure seems to me that our secondary has been playing better since Woodson left. Now some of this could be coincidence, and/or the fact that our young defense has simply matured since then. However the results speak for themselves.

Duck--please... You're layin' out Duck farts in the bathtub and trying to get me geeked over your *green* jacuzzi again. Yeah-yeah, I know. It only cost you two red-pepper chili dogs to operate for the evening...

You want to know the primary season our secondary has been looking better since Woodson left? It's called Blaine Gabbert and the 1-9 Jaguars... It's also known as John Skelton and the 4-6 Cardinals and Matthew Stafford and the 4-6 Lions... In short--the secondary, along with the D overall, has recently looked better because of the abysmal level of competition they have recently faced. You're like Chuckie tonight heaping the superlatives on the 9er secondary... Really? For exactly what? Was there a remotely catchable ball even delivered into the secondary in that game by the Bears? The DB's could have taken the night off with the way the 9ers box was gang-raping the Bears O-line... I mean--seriously--Thor even ran home in full sprint eagerly hoping to make in back in time to get in on the action and try out his new double-headed helga hammer on Gape Careame...

Why exactly does it recently feel every week like the Packers have lost even though they have won? Because any informed Packer fan that is inclined to hold their per-annum paint-thinner consumption below what it would take to refinish the municipal water tower in a medium-sized town is alarmed by how the Packers continue playing down to their level of competition throughout this steak of patsies and generally left with only the gifts from special teams to eke out W's... All while their ass-shrekked head coach is trying to convince everyone about how this is something they all should be proud of. A W is a W, right? Well--I've tasted that bran muffin the shrekker seems so proud to have taken the blue-ribben for in the 5th fucking grade city-wide home-ec ADHD bake-off competition and here's the newsflash--it tastes like wood pulp and makes me want to do nothing but shit wood pulp... LOL

All I can say is this... This is one team living in a wet dream under a golden shower to have had the streak of absolute fucking patsies to play while players like Woodson and Matthews, etc are out because with the way they've played since the Houston game--they could very easily be 0-4 had they played any real competition... The good news is they trend better for the bigger competition. They had better... In six weeks it's coming...

You disappoint me, HD. This is an odd mix of Rooferistic simplicity with Milani-ish negativity. You're not seeing the positives underneath that broad stroke of pessimism.

Have the Packers been playing great since the Houston game? No, and I never said so. I even titled my first post about the Detroit game "It doesn't feel like a win." If the playoffs were to start right now, the Pack wouldn't go very far, if anywhere. It would quickly boil down to San Francisco vs. Atlanta in the NFC. Frankly, however, I'm actually happy that the Packers didn't bring their A game in October, though I hope to see some signs of it again soon. I really believe that in this physical and emotional game teams have major mood swings and its important to peak at the right time. Case #1 is the 2011 Packers: they peaked too early. Case #2 is the 2010 Packers: they peaked at the perfect time. The path of this team is eerily parallel to the 2010 club, especially with all the injuries. Who woulda thunk in mid-November that the 2010 Packers would have run the table? They looked dead after they lost to Detroit 7-3. They didn't catch fire until the very end.

Yes, the Pack has recently played some mediocre opponents and won in unspectacular fashion. However, the bottom line is they won. Any win in the NFL is significant. Shocking upsets are not at all uncommon.

I see a defense that's slowly but steadily improving. I think our young secondary is very good and it's great to get other young guys like Moses get meaningful experience. Our offense has been particularly hard hit by injuries and, all things considered, they're still a formidable unit. Once our injured players start coming back, I think they can play at a new level. Getting Jennings and Benson back before the playoffs will be huge.

I'm not guaranteeing a thing. Frankly, the Niners made a statement last night against Chicago. Last night was as dominating a performance -- in all phases of the game -- as I've seen in quite a while. The scariest part is they now have a legit QB. If they continue to row from here, they are clearly the team to beat. However, I like the fact that this year, unlike last, we're flying under radar. And, as you point out, MM coaches best under these circumstances.

The next several weeks should be interesting.

Fair enough, Duck... We seem to be in basic agreement on the reality of the here/now, yet you seem wanton to run naked and free with your dopplegonger thrashing through the soft petals of the sun-drenched daisies about the future... LOL As you'll recall--I saw the potential there in 2010. I do not today. The primary reason is this: Underperformance. This year's team is mired in it and the 2010 team was not. Underperformance is a systemic disease. It becomes pervasive. Bring back some of the injured and the potential of the team to succeed will improve--but that doesn't address the established proclivity of this team to underperform... It isn't just the players. Shrek is repeatedly making game-management decision-making errors beyond his usual norm this season. That alone will be difficult to overcome...

Underperformance? Hmmm... I might be inclined to agree with you if it weren't for the fact that we've had a carousel of players drifting in and out of our line up all season. It's hard to draw a bead on the actual character of this team with a young evolving defense and so many injured starters. Are we underperforming to gut out five straight wins, including a road divisional win without Matthews, our best defensive player (and I would argue #2 most important to the team overall) on the sidelines?? I honestly don't know.

Maybe you don't see the potential in this team, but I sure do. A solid core of players with lots of playoff experience and a Super Bowl win; the best QB in the game with a chip on his shoulder who seems to play his best when people doubt him most; a young talented defense that hasn't even begun jell as a unit; and a head coach that for all his warts seems to have buy in from his players and performs best in adversarial situations.

You call it underperformance, I call it pacing. I see a team with the potential to turn it on and become a dominant team in the playoffs.

Pacing? There are those who do, Duck...and those who will... It's the same old story, my friend. Potential unrealized is only fodder for disappointment. The concept of pacing is suggestive of a free will effort in holding something back...yet--when you hold back, that very characteristic becomes part of your identity, disrupts your path to greatness and undermines the joy in the actualization of knowing that you are all that you can be. Do you think for a moment that Jimmy Page, for example, was pacing himself and living for tomorrow when he sat down in his basement and penned this absolute masterpiece of timeless beauty that almost transcends the soul? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] With pacing himself--could he ever have come close to creating it?

You're a bright guy, Duck... You know what I say is true. You reveal it in the double-standard you demonstrate in feeling the need to call it pacing when the dysfunction is overt in your's/mine favorite team...but yet when applied to others that you don't hold dear, like Randy Moss for example, the underperformance is viewed quite differently and in quite different terms, eh?

What you more correctly hold is hope...and that's cool. Your optimism is fueled by it. I hold hope that this team call pull their shit together, too...but unlike you--I'm just not feelin' it this time...

You're confusing two things here, HD: the creative process vs. an athletic performance and the individual vs. a team.

I agree that there is no "holding back" when you are creating a work of art; it's all or nothing. However, I'm sure everyone knows that players have different "gears" and that they play with more intensity, for example, in the fourth quarter of a tight playoff game than in a blowout regular season game. It's human nature and it's also wise. Athletically, you can't play at a peak level for too long a period without getting burned out or hurt.

Dear Duck,

I have longed for this day and appreciate your apology. Please get back to me ASAP so that we may schedule some hott fucking make up sex. I promise to leave it all on the field.

XOXO,

Randy

More to the point, the energy of a team is the sum of the output of each individual player (orchestrated of course by the coach). You seldom see all these pistons firing at once. Football is a very emotional game and teams collectively do have ebbs and flows of emotion. You know that too. That's my point.

You may not see the same underlying potential for this team that I do -- and that's a perfectly valid opinion on your part -- but I don't see how you can refute the notion that teams do "pace" themselves emotionally over the course of a season.

duck wrote:Dear Duck,

I have longed for this day and appreciate your apology. Please get back to me ASAP so that we may schedule some hott fucking make up sex. I promise to leave it all on the field.

XOXO,

Randy




Dear Randy,

I forgive you for your loafing, especially now. Old men need their rest.

However, can't you give your fans a little more statistical production? A race horse like you isn't supposed to be 161st out of all the receivers in the league! HD has some sexual favors for you if you can just do a better job while you're out there on the field.

Your pal,

Duck