Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2008/2009 Season Predictions.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Renji View Post
    Is it just me or does it seem like that Lovie Smith really knows how to play the Packers?
    It's the Tampa 2.

    You put pressure on Favre with the front 4 and drop back people into zone and Favre will throw it up for grabs.

    I'll never understand why more people don't exploit this. Favre hates to take sacks (and I would argue hates to be hit too) and will chuck it if people get in his face. He's also not good at reading zones, never has been.

    It's not just the Bears. Favre had trouble with the Bucs back in the day and the Rams when Lovie was coach. That's the main reason we hired the guy.


    Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

    Comment


    • #47
      We'll be making these again in August but for fun:

      Super Bowl Prediction? Packers defeat Chargers (We got the Colts and Cowboys at home in the reg season which helps, otherwise I'd be hesitant)

      MVP Prediction? Brian Westbrook

      #1 Pick in 2009 NFL Draft? I really don't even have a guess.

      Disappointments/Surprises? Hmm Jay Cutler will have a big year. Marvin Harrison won't get back to his normal level of play.

      Things you are looking forward to? Draft and training camp.

      Players to Retire? Keenan McCardell and all the old fat Nose Tackles.
      I remember: Sean Taylor

      Bosanac01

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
        It's the Tampa 2.

        You put pressure on Favre with the front 4 and drop back people into zone and Favre will throw it up for grabs.

        I'll never understand why more people don't exploit this. Favre hates to take sacks (and I would argue hates to be hit too) and will chuck it if people get in his face. He's also not good at reading zones, never has been.

        It's not just the Bears. Favre had trouble with the Bucs back in the day and the Rams when Lovie was coach. That's the main reason we hired the guy.
        We thought we had you figured out the first time we played - Favre dropped back and threw middle screens (which is supposed to be a big weakness for the cover 2) every other play but Urlacher made the tackle for a 2 yard gain every time. We never adjusted, and lost because of it.

        Same thing happened in the Giants game except with WR screens trying to counter the pass rush. Point being - we suck horribly at making adjustments both offensively and defensively and I think that is by far our biggest coaching weakness. Otherwise I like McCarthy and co. a lot, can't really argue against a guy that brought the best out of Favre after 16 seasons.

        Thanks to BK for the sig

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
          Every person in the world is aging, but the Bears are by no means an old team. Our offense line is older, and Moose (who isn't even our top receiver). That's about it.

          I don't think you have a very good offense at all, and therein lies the difference. I would venture to say that every player on their offense played above his expected abilities last year with the exception of maybe Chad Clifton and Greg Jennings. The Packers really aren't hard to scheme against, and I still question why most teams have trouble with it.

          On defense I think the team is much more naturally talented, though I think the secondary played above it's head this year, and a few guys in the front 7 (KGB for certain).

          I don't think the Packers will be bad next year mind you. I still think they will have a winning record and would put them ahead of the Bears (though they still probably won't beat them). I just think the Vikings are from top to bottom in better shape going into next year. We'll see.
          Don't have a very good offense at all? We have a top 5 QB. 2 WRs who could be #1s (Driver and Jennings). 3 WRs who could be #3s (Jones, Martin, Robinson). A first year running back who was second in the league only to LT since he took over as the primary back. An emerging TE. Pro Bowl calibur tackles and a solid center on our line. The only thing I could see a problem with is the guards. Ryan Grant you can say he's still unproven, but then why is Adrian Peterson being considered as the greatest RB of all time (even for the sane people not going that far have him as a top 5 current back)? In 12 games Grant has 1159 yards(97 ypg) and 11 TDs(.92 TDpg). In 14 games Peterson has 1341 yards(96 ypg) and 12 TDs(.86 TDpg). That's a bit of a double standard.

          As for KGB, he didn't play over his head at all. He had 9.5 sacks which is very good, but that's only his 5th highest total of his career. Don't see how that qualifies as overachieving. Also it has to do with taking him out of the starting role and back as a situational pass rusher where he belongs. Take a look at Mark Anderson.

          Comment


          • #50
            Super Bowl Predictions: Packers vs Steelers
            MVP: Mr Gisele Bundchen
            #1 pick in 2009: Micheal Oher to the Chiefs
            Dissappointments/Surprises: Chargers/ 49'ers
            Things you are looking foward to: Draft and even preseason
            Players to retire: Tedy Bruschi, Junior Seau, Zack Thomas, John Lynch

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by GB12 View Post
              Don't have a very good offense at all?
              Correct.

              We have a top 5 QB.
              No you don't.

              2 WRs who could be #1s (Driver and Jennings).
              I consider both very good #2s.

              3 WRs who could be #3s (Jones, Martin, Robinson).
              Umm...neat?

              [quote]A first year running back who was second in the league only to LT since he took over as the primary back./quote]
              I think Packers fans are massively overrating Grant. He had a nice run. Lots of players that amount to nothing career-wise do. I expect a large drop off.

              An emerging TE.
              Donald Lee had a nice season, but I think a lot of that was due to smart scheme. I think it's way too premature to consider him "emerging".

              Pro Bowl calibur tackles and a solid center on our line.
              To be "Pro Bowl calibur" don't you have to...I dunno...make some Pro Bowls? Clifton/Tauscher have been in the league a collective 13 years and have 1 pro-bowl combined, which was this year, that I've already stated I think is a bit of an abberation.

              The only thing I could see a problem with is the guards.
              Yes. I would consider your interior line something of a big question mark still.


              Ryan Grant you can say he's still unproven, but then why is Adrian Peterson being considered as the greatest RB of all time (even for the sane people not going that far have him as a top 5 current back)? In 12 games Grant has 1159 yards(97 ypg) and 11 TDs(.92 TDpg). In 14 games Peterson has 1341 yards(96 ypg) and 12 TDs(.86 TDpg). That's a bit of a double standard.
              I would not say that. I would say, however, that Peterson has elite skills across the board. Grant does not. Peterson is faster, more powerful, more elusive, better out of the backfield. Essentially he is better at every single thing that a runningback is required to do. To even compare the two belies the homerism of your whole post.


              Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

              Comment


              • #52
                Didnt AP face more 8 man fronts than Grant just because...u know Favre > Tavaris?

                Comment


                • #53
                  The Packers need another RB. Grant's success was admirable but he overachieved, and could use some help. Getting a premiere guy would definately help them long term.

                  And add some wrinkles to that defensive playbook. They are awfully vanilla on defense. Great talent, but too vanilla.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
                    No you don't.
                    Yes we do. Even if you want to take a Packer hater approach there's no way you can say Favre's not at least in the top ten.


                    I consider both very good #2s.
                    Well you must have some high standards. Either could be the #1 on the Packers, Vikings, Bears, Bucs, Falcons, Eagles, Redskins, Seahawks, 49ers, Ravens, Jets, Dolphins, Jags, Titans, Chiefs, Chargers, and Raiders.

                    Umm...neat?
                    Very

                    Donald Lee had a nice season, but I think a lot of that was due to smart scheme. I think it's way too premature to consider him "emerging".
                    If he fits the scheme than that's good enough for me. He produced so I don't see what the problem is. He was in the top ten in yards and TDs by a TE in the NFL.

                    To be "Pro Bowl calibur" don't you have to...I dunno...make some Pro Bowls? Clifton/Tauscher have been in the league a collective 13 years and have 1 pro-bowl combined, which was this year, that I've already stated I think is a bit of an abberation.
                    No. There's a difference between "Pro Bowl tackles" and "Pro Bowl calibur tackles". Clifton and Tauscher could have been probowlers any of the past 5 years. As far as right tackles go there aren't that many I'd take over Taucher.


                    Yes. I would consider your interior line something of a big question mark still.
                    Well I wouldn't say the interior as it's more of just the guards. Scott Wells isn't great, but he's solid and will be a part of our line for years to come.


                    I would not say that. I would say, however, that Peterson has elite skills across the board. Grant does not. Peterson is faster, more powerful, more elusive, better out of the backfield. Essentially he is better at every single thing that a runningback is required to do. To even compare the two belies the homerism of your whole post
                    I'm not comparing the two but rather making a point. I don't think there's any question that Peterson is better. I find it amazing how people will call Peterson better than Barry Sanders, but Grant's not even proven.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Thanks everyone for your vote of confidence with the Giants next year. I mean, we only won a Super Bowl or something like that. =D


                      Originally posted by Halsey
                      I don't have to watch it to know it was not interesting.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        All of these are serious...........

                        Super Bowl 43: Giants over Colts, oh thats right a Manning bowl

                        MVP: Eli Manning

                        Coach of the Year: Dick Juron, not saying they'll win the AFC East, but make the playoffs.

                        Disappointment/Suprise: Chargers/Bills

                        That is all 4 now.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          the bengals will have a winning season.

                          ^A Bonekrusher production^
                          #15
                          Gamertag= ELDUDERINO1165

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            I never thought I would say this because BF is usually one of the most intelligent and least objective posters on the board, but you sound like one of the rambling homers right now dude. Every post I have seen of yours in this thread comes off as misinformed with the exception of one. This isn't my Packers bias speaking here either. One second you say the Packers have a terrible offensive scheme , the next a good one? Uh, Flip flopper?
                            The Packers young players didn't and won't improve? Come on man, seriously? 8-8 to 13-3 with one real free agent( who didn't do ****) and a couple of young addictions.
                            The Packers coaching is suspect?And the offense? Runner up coach of the year and a top five offense. The only coaching you can really question is Bob Sanders, who apparently didn't learn how to Blitz throughout his entire football coaching career.
                            You didn't make any bad predictions on the Packers? How about saying Greg would not be anything special? or that the Bears receivers were far better than the Packers because the bears, quote " Have more than one"? How about saying the Bears would easily win the division? How about Favre being washed up?

                            I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with the Bears because I was wrong with them not winning the Norris either, but I can admit my fault as well. As far as I've seen none of your predictions this year have come to fruition with the Packers.

                            I'll give you credit on one prediction of yours i seem to remember however. I do remember when you said " Favre and his new nucleus of young players would surprise everyone". Too bad you were a year premature on that one, as you said it in 2006...

                            What do the vikings and marijuana have in common? Every time you put them in a bowl
                            they get smoked.

                            2010-2011 Super Bowl Champions
                            Hint:Not the Bears.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by TitleTown088 View Post
                              I never thought I would say this because BF is usually one of the most intelligent and least objective posters on the board, but you sound like one of the rambling homers right now dude. Every post I have seen of yours in this thread comes off as misinformed with the exception of one. This isn't my Packers bias speaking here either. One second you say the Packers have a terrible offensive scheme , the next a good one? Uh, Flip flopper?
                              I said the way they use Donald Lee is good, not the overall offensive scheme.


                              The Packers young players didn't and won't improve? Come on man, seriously? 8-8 to 13-3 with one real free agent( who didn't do ****) and a couple of young addictions.
                              Simply being older doesn't mean being better. I think that last season was an abberation, I don't know how many times I have to say that.

                              The Packers coaching is suspect?And the offense? Runner up coach of the year and a top five offense.
                              Dick Jauron won coach of the year in 2001. Don't say my response lacks intelligence and then bring that ********.

                              You didn't make any bad predictions on the Packers? How about saying Greg would not be anything special? or that the Bears receivers were far better than the Packers because the bears, quote " Have more than one"? How about saying the Bears would easily win the division? How about Favre being washed up?
                              How about learning to read? I said for the two years prior to last I was dead on. While everyone else in 2006 was telling me that the Bears were going to "flop like in 2001" I said that Favre would continue to sling the ball around and act like a moron and that we would breeze to the division title, which happened. I was wrong last year. I'll take a 2/1 ratio if that's my example of not knowing what I'm talking about.


                              The funny thing is that I still think the Packers will win 9-10 games, but most of you are so much off in dream land that anything less than the Superbowl seems like I'm smoking crack. Come back down to earth, your team isn't as good as you think it is. And no, it's impossible for you to not be a homer. There are only 2-3 Packers fans that I can think of that are able to do that, though you are better than most.


                              Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
                                I said the way they use Donald Lee is good, not the overall offensive scheme.
                                touche, I can see what you were getting at now, but it was a bit contradictory while reading it at first. I'm asking this out of pure curiosity of your opinion. If it's so simple, why was it successful?



                                Simply being older doesn't mean being better. I think that last season was an abberation, I don't know how many times I have to say that.
                                When did I directly imply that being older was a direct correlation to being better?
                                The overall growth and experience of the Packers can be noticed from many more sources than just the Players. It's easy to look at TT and MM and see a great example of this, both have continued to improve since their first year on the job. Also, I feel its relatively obvious to see the Players improvement from the first half of the 2006 season to now.


                                Dick Jauron won coach of the year in 2001. Don't say my response lacks intelligence and then bring that ********.
                                Take a look at MMs record from the second half to the NFC championship, I really don't think he's too much of a fluke. You can call me an idiot, but I think I'll be the one proven right with time here.


                                How about learning to read? I said for the two years prior to last I was dead on. While everyone else in 2006 was telling me that the Bears were going to "flop like in 2001" I said that Favre would continue to sling the ball around and act like a moron and that we would breeze to the division title, which happened.
                                Yeah, and you said it again this year, called anyone contradicting you an idiot.
                                By the way did you read the rest of it? I think the record prediction was the part I didn't critic you for because I was wrong as well, with the same predictions for the most part last year.Your other predictions/evaluations you presented before the season were the ones that gave me a chuckle.

                                The funny thing is that I still think the Packers will win 9-10 games, but most of you are so much off in dream land that anything less than the Superbowl seems like I'm smoking crack.
                                SO..... Were in the same place as Bears fans were last off season? Damn, we wetarded. I never went to say that the Packers were Super bowl favs next year. I implied that some of your evaluations sounded about as realistic as a volkish writer getting published by a Jewish firm.

                                And no, it's impossible for you to not be a homer. There are only 2-3 Packers fans that I can think of that are able to do that, though you are better than most.
                                That dosen't make too much sense, but I think you may be calling me a homer? In that case, I'll openly admit I am a giant homer, and I'd have it no other way. Quite frankly, I find the whole " enlightened football fan" to be a damn joke. The only reason I commented is because you find it so important. Sure, it's great to accurately analyze the sport and have a good knowledge on the subject, but It's football, not geopolitics, have a good time with it. Also, I know you like to think it's just Packers fans who are Homers, but basically on this site is ******* homerlishious for their team, Bear fans included. You just hate the Packers more, thus you notice it.
                                Last edited by TitleTown088; 02-04-2008, 11:52 PM.

                                What do the vikings and marijuana have in common? Every time you put them in a bowl
                                they get smoked.

                                2010-2011 Super Bowl Champions
                                Hint:Not the Bears.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information