It is currently Wed Nov 27, 2024 3:28 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9743 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 ... 325  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Hawg Ass wrote:
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Erin Rodgers couldn't beat Jimmy Garapolo last season. Screw Rodgers he sucks.

2 Time MVP
Super Bowl Winner
1st Ballot Hall of Famer
Yep if that is sucking, I will take all I can get.


You should of sent that to your GM before the draft... :lol:

Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


It's too bad GB thought it was better to expend precious draft capital on a backup QB and a third string RB rather than shore up the porous defense. That's why they are fake contenders. I hope Jordon Love can rush the passer.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30328
veganfan21 wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Erin Rodgers couldn't beat Jimmy Garapolo last season. Screw Rodgers he sucks.

2 Time MVP
Super Bowl Winner
1st Ballot Hall of Famer
Yep if that is sucking, I will take all I can get.


You should of sent that to your GM before the draft... :lol:

Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


It's too bad GB thought it was better to expend precious draft capital on a backup QB and a third string RB rather than shore up the porous defense. That's why they are fake contenders. I hope Jordon Love can rush the passer.

We have the guy tied for the NFL lead in sacks?

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:20 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:14 pm
Posts: 1871
pizza_Place: Colombo's
Hawg Ass wrote:
Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


Using a 1st round pick like that when Rodgers obviously has a lot of good years left was something I will never understand. Your window is wide open. He should of been thinking about the 49ers and the AFC and it seems he was thinking Rodgers was spent or nearly so. I don't buy that garbage about him doing it to motivate Rodgers. Are you comfortable with your GM?

I don't feel one way or the other about the Packers so I'm not attacking them. I did watch most of their games last season and I saw a QB who was still elite and could buy time trying to find receivers that didn't seem able to get open.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30328
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


Using a 1st round pick like that when Rodgers obviously has a lot of good years left was something I will never understand. Your window is wide open. He should of been thinking about the 49ers and the AFC and it seems he was thinking Rodgers was spent or nearly so. I don't buy that garbage about him doing it to motivate Rodgers. Are you comfortable with your GM?

I don't feel one way or the other about the Packers so I'm not attacking them. I did watch most of their games last season and I saw a QB who was still elite and could buy time trying to find receivers that didn't seem able to get open.

I am very comfortable with the GM and the level of talent and depth on this team, I think it showed last night with as many people as we had not playing.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Hawg Ass wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Erin Rodgers couldn't beat Jimmy Garapolo last season. Screw Rodgers he sucks.

2 Time MVP
Super Bowl Winner
1st Ballot Hall of Famer
Yep if that is sucking, I will take all I can get.


You should of sent that to your GM before the draft... :lol:

Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


It's too bad GB thought it was better to expend precious draft capital on a backup QB and a third string RB rather than shore up the porous defense. That's why they are fake contenders. I hope Jordon Love can rush the passer.

We have the guy tied for the NFL lead in sacks?


Meaningless. It is increasingly easy to score on the GF defense as the following chart demonstrates:

https://www.lineups.com/nfl-team-rankings/defense

You all have a long way to go and in the end your lack of a decent defense will do you in, just like it did last year. But at least Erin is having a good year!

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Brick wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Nice to have the best start in years. Clearly a legitimate contender. Jaire becoming a shutdown corner is a welcome development

Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:26 pm

I knew we had done this before.

They got the NFCCG so yeah legitimate contender was accurate. Thanks!

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
veganfan21 wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Erin Rodgers couldn't beat Jimmy Garapolo last season. Screw Rodgers he sucks.

2 Time MVP
Super Bowl Winner
1st Ballot Hall of Famer
Yep if that is sucking, I will take all I can get.


You should of sent that to your GM before the draft... :lol:

Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


It's too bad GB thought it was better to expend precious draft capital on a backup QB and a third string RB rather than shore up the porous defense. That's why they are fake contenders. I hope Jordon Love can rush the passer.

Defense did better against Atlanta than the Bears D did.

Keep throwing up them bricks

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Erin Rodgers couldn't beat Jimmy Garapolo last season. Screw Rodgers he sucks.

2 Time MVP
Super Bowl Winner
1st Ballot Hall of Famer
Yep if that is sucking, I will take all I can get.


You should of sent that to your GM before the draft... :lol:

Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


It's too bad GB thought it was better to expend precious draft capital on a backup QB and a third string RB rather than shore up the porous defense. That's why they are fake contenders. I hope Jordon Love can rush the passer.

Defense did better against Atlanta than the Bears D did.

Keep throwing up them bricks


Every single team they've played so far has shredded the Atlanta Falcons. Are you really using them as a measuring stick? How does Garopolo's ass taste?

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Packers and Bears faced two common opponents so far, Detroit and Atlanta. GB’s defense did better in both games. GB has a better offense and a better defense than the Bears

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:04 pm
Posts: 13259
Location: God's country
pizza_Place: Gem City
MongoMuller wrote:
Hawg Ass wrote:
Assets are a positive thing, we seem to be doing ok. You have a lot of Raiders concerns that should probably take up your time.


Using a 1st round pick like that when Rodgers obviously has a lot of good years left was something I will never understand. Your window is wide open. He should of been thinking about the 49ers and the AFC and it seems he was thinking Rodgers was spent or nearly so. I don't buy that garbage about him doing it to motivate Rodgers. Are you comfortable with your GM?

I don't feel one way or the other about the Packers so I'm not attacking them. I did watch most of their games last season and I saw a QB who was still elite and could buy time trying to find receivers that didn't seem able to get open.
The receivers seem to be getting open this year without having expended a draft pick. Maybe the GM liked what he had more than what was available. So far I will give him the benefit of the doubt. I questioned the draft as well as the coaching hire but it's hard to make that argument now. Love is for 3 yrs down the road. They will know by then what they have in both players. If he's good it will be another brilliant pick which keeps them relevant for another decade and save them a big salary cap hit. If not you continue to pay Rodgers and hope he holds up. We have seen how quickly older QB's fall off (see Rivers, Brees and Brady) and beyond age injuries are always looming. As they sit right now the are SB contenders. Of course that can change in a heartbeat but they chose players early this year (& last in Gary) with an eye on the future which includes salary cap considerations at both the QB and RB positions. As a fan I don't necessarily like that but I understand it and hopefully come to appreciate it.

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
FavreFan wrote:
Packers and Bears faced two common opponents so far, Detroit and Atlanta. GB’s defense did better in both games. GB has a better offense and a better defense than the Bears


The Bears defense is a huge disappointment. They don’t generate turnovers, and Mack/Quinn are all but invisible.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
veganfan21 wrote:
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.


The performance is more or less consistent with last year so I'm comfortable extrapolating, and Indy isn't terrible. The clear path for the Packers to win it all is to have a D like the Bears do. Maybe you can use Jordan Love for something.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.


The performance is more or less consistent with last year so I'm comfortable extrapolating, and Indy isn't terrible. The clear path for the Packers to win it all is to have a D like the Bears do. Maybe you can use Jordan Love for something.

Packers have a better defense than the Bears so far based on play against common opponents. A D like the Bears do would be a downgrade.

Indy is terrible. They lost to the Jaguars

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
:lol: What a stupid argument.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:57 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
FavreFan wrote:
You're simply wrong about them playing nobody.
They have played 3 winless teams and a team with a 1-2 record. You can argue about the Aints all you want, but to date the Packers have played nobody. Hard not to argue.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 10794
Location: Parrish, FL
pizza_Place: 1. Peaquods 2. Aurelios
Frank Coztansa wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
You're simply wrong about them playing nobody.
They have played 3 winless teams and a team with a 1-2 record. You can argue about the Aints all you want, but to date the Packers have played nobody. Hard not to argue.

I would argue the Packers have played a pretty soft schedule to date. The big difference is they look a hell of a lot better than the Bears have against an equally soft (if not a slightly softer) schedule.

My God...the Buccaneers appear to be the toughest game on the schedule for the Packers....woof.

_________________
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
brick (/brik/) verb
1. block or enclose with a wall of bricks
2. Proper response would be to ask an endless series of follow ups until the person regrets having spoken to you in the first place.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Frank Coztansa wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
You're simply wrong about them playing nobody.
They have played 3 winless teams and a team with a 1-2 record. You can argue about the Aints all you want, but to date the Packers have played nobody. Hard not to argue.

There's nothing to argue about with the Saints. They're a good football team. They're going to be in the playoffs again. As for the other three teams GB faced, well, they did what good teams are supposed to do to bad teams - thoroughly dominated all three games.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:04 pm
Posts: 13259
Location: God's country
pizza_Place: Gem City
Frank Coztansa wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
You're simply wrong about them playing nobody.
They have played 3 winless teams and a team with a 1-2 record. You can argue about the Aints all you want, but to date the Packers have played nobody. Hard not to argue.
While your point still stands, do you get your stats from last weeks newspaper? :wink:

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:04 pm
Posts: 13259
Location: God's country
pizza_Place: Gem City
FavreFan wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
You're simply wrong about them playing nobody.
They have played 3 winless teams and a team with a 1-2 record. You can argue about the Aints all you want, but to date the Packers have played nobody. Hard not to argue.

There's nothing to argue about with the Saints. They're a good football team. They're going to be in the playoffs again. As for the other three teams GB faced, well, they did what good teams are supposed to do to bad teams - thoroughly dominated all three games.
I predict the Vikings will turn it around with a soft schedule in the 2nd half and slide into the playoffs @ 9-7.

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 10794
Location: Parrish, FL
pizza_Place: 1. Peaquods 2. Aurelios
Zippy-The-Pinhead wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
You're simply wrong about them playing nobody.
They have played 3 winless teams and a team with a 1-2 record. You can argue about the Aints all you want, but to date the Packers have played nobody. Hard not to argue.

There's nothing to argue about with the Saints. They're a good football team. They're going to be in the playoffs again. As for the other three teams GB faced, well, they did what good teams are supposed to do to bad teams - thoroughly dominated all three games.
I predict the Vikings will turn it around with a soft schedule in the 2nd half and slide into the playoffs @ 9-7.

I agree...the Vikings will finish better than the Bears. I don't they're AS bad as their start of the season showed.

_________________
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
brick (/brik/) verb
1. block or enclose with a wall of bricks
2. Proper response would be to ask an endless series of follow ups until the person regrets having spoken to you in the first place.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.


The performance is more or less consistent with last year so I'm comfortable extrapolating, and Indy isn't terrible. The clear path for the Packers to win it all is to have a D like the Bears do. Maybe you can use Jordan Love for something.

Packers have a better defense than the Bears so far based on play against common opponents. A D like the Bears do would be a downgrade.

Indy is terrible. They lost to the Jaguars


So because these "common opponents" scored more points against the Packers than they did against the Bears, this means the Bears' D is worse? :lol:

And Erin is terrible...he lost to Garropolo.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:04 pm
Posts: 13259
Location: God's country
pizza_Place: Gem City
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.


The performance is more or less consistent with last year so I'm comfortable extrapolating, and Indy isn't terrible. The clear path for the Packers to win it all is to have a D like the Bears do. Maybe you can use Jordan Love for something.

Packers have a better defense than the Bears so far based on play against common opponents. A D like the Bears do would be a downgrade.

Indy is terrible. They lost to the Jaguars


So because these "common opponents" scored more points against the Packers than they did against the Bears, this means the Bears' D is worse? :lol:

And Erin is terrible...he lost to Garropolo.
The use of Erin is almost as funny as Trubinsky. Do you also say White sux?

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 5:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Zippy-The-Pinhead wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
You seem to be a numbers guy, denis, so what's not to like about being ranked 8 overall in points given up per game?

You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.


The performance is more or less consistent with last year so I'm comfortable extrapolating, and Indy isn't terrible. The clear path for the Packers to win it all is to have a D like the Bears do. Maybe you can use Jordan Love for something.

Packers have a better defense than the Bears so far based on play against common opponents. A D like the Bears do would be a downgrade.

Indy is terrible. They lost to the Jaguars


So because these "common opponents" scored more points against the Packers than they did against the Bears, this means the Bears' D is worse? :lol:

And Erin is terrible...he lost to Garropolo.
The use of Erin is almost as funny as Trubinsky. Do you also say White sux?


Hey man, I can understand how you're still sore about losing to a no-name QB last year, and how you're at risk for doing it again due to having a defense that sux. Hope some meaningless regular season success makes the inevitable playoff loss easier to bear, assuming you get that far.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
veganfan21 wrote:
So because these "common opponents" scored more points against the Packers than they did against the Bears, this means the Bears' D is worse? :lol:

Detroit scored 23 against Bears and 21 against GB. Atlanta scored 26 against the Bears and 16 against GB.

You're bad at this. Have you even watched a football game this year?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 1:04 pm
Posts: 13259
Location: God's country
pizza_Place: Gem City
veganfan21 wrote:
Zippy-The-Pinhead wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
You've faced four terrible teams so far. Good luck with clinging to that ppg ranking.


The performance is more or less consistent with last year so I'm comfortable extrapolating, and Indy isn't terrible. The clear path for the Packers to win it all is to have a D like the Bears do. Maybe you can use Jordan Love for something.

Packers have a better defense than the Bears so far based on play against common opponents. A D like the Bears do would be a downgrade.

Indy is terrible. They lost to the Jaguars


So because these "common opponents" scored more points against the Packers than they did against the Bears, this means the Bears' D is worse? :lol:

And Erin is terrible...he lost to Garropolo.
The use of Erin is almost as funny as Trubinsky. Do you also say White sux?


Hey man, I can understand how you're still sore about losing to a no-name QB last year, and how you're at risk for doing it again due to having a defense that sux. Hope some meaningless regular season success makes the inevitable playoff loss easier to bear, assuming you get that far.

FF is right; you really aren’t very good at this.

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 7:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30328
And here I thought Vegan's basketball thoughts were the worst.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82242
when BritishOverseasTerritories referenced 12 in his post I thought we were going back to some old, familiar patterns in his posting.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Green Bay Packers
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Rest of the league would rather get Covid than see GB win another title. Very sad

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9743 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 ... 325  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group