<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More Thoughts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/</link>
	<description>All Things Green Bay Packers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:11:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron La Canne</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7357</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron La Canne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7357</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Amen!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amen!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 56Coop</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7356</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[56Coop]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:59:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, since we&#039;re being idiots, here goes. 

 If we are going to win this game it&#039;s going to be defensively.  Farve should have had 4 picks last Sunday and the last one would have been a pick 6 to seal the game.  Don&#039;t think Woodson, Collins or Harris would have dropped those unless they&#039;ve been drinking the same water as some of our offensive receivers.  Vikes O-line is not much better than ours.  We need to hit Favre &amp; hit him hard.  He was slow to get up a couple of times Sunday. (Also threw another one of those idiotic blocks where he jeopardizes himself--gotta admire his spunk--the bastard).   49er&#039;s let the Vikes hang around til the end &amp; Favre burned them for it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his arm.  Can&#039;t believe I&#039;m saying this but it makes me wonder if the right decisions were made 2 years ago.  Same with Longwell.  Oh well, that&#039;s past history-- no need to dwell-he is now the enemy, he is now the enemy, he is now the enemy.... (oh, sorry)
If we get those turnovers we can&#039;t just make field goals.  Ron&#039;s right about the drive blocks and halftime adjustments made last week.  Pound the ball, play actions, screens, quick slants, get the ball out of Aaron&#039;s hands quickly --get their defense off balance, keep our offense on the field &amp; wear down Jared &amp; the wall.  I know we&#039;re going to try the long ball but can&#039;t rely on it.  Not unless Aaron gets his touch back.  Put some glue on the receivers gloves.  Don&#039;t think we should try gimmick plays, not on that defense.  GB has to play their best game of this season -- the three previous ones will not get it done.  I want to see that team that played the 1st half of the third preseason game.

Not that this means a hill of beans but to a man every broadcaster on Fox&#039;s pregame show picked GB to win the North the first week of this season.  I think those  decisions were made based on that performance.  Time to step up.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, since we&#8217;re being idiots, here goes. </p>
<p> If we are going to win this game it&#8217;s going to be defensively.  Farve should have had 4 picks last Sunday and the last one would have been a pick 6 to seal the game.  Don&#8217;t think Woodson, Collins or Harris would have dropped those unless they&#8217;ve been drinking the same water as some of our offensive receivers.  Vikes O-line is not much better than ours.  We need to hit Favre &amp; hit him hard.  He was slow to get up a couple of times Sunday. (Also threw another one of those idiotic blocks where he jeopardizes himself&#8211;gotta admire his spunk&#8211;the bastard).   49er&#8217;s let the Vikes hang around til the end &amp; Favre burned them for it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his arm.  Can&#8217;t believe I&#8217;m saying this but it makes me wonder if the right decisions were made 2 years ago.  Same with Longwell.  Oh well, that&#8217;s past history&#8211; no need to dwell-he is now the enemy, he is now the enemy, he is now the enemy&#8230;. (oh, sorry)<br />
If we get those turnovers we can&#8217;t just make field goals.  Ron&#8217;s right about the drive blocks and halftime adjustments made last week.  Pound the ball, play actions, screens, quick slants, get the ball out of Aaron&#8217;s hands quickly &#8211;get their defense off balance, keep our offense on the field &amp; wear down Jared &amp; the wall.  I know we&#8217;re going to try the long ball but can&#8217;t rely on it.  Not unless Aaron gets his touch back.  Put some glue on the receivers gloves.  Don&#8217;t think we should try gimmick plays, not on that defense.  GB has to play their best game of this season &#8212; the three previous ones will not get it done.  I want to see that team that played the 1st half of the third preseason game.</p>
<p>Not that this means a hill of beans but to a man every broadcaster on Fox&#8217;s pregame show picked GB to win the North the first week of this season.  I think those  decisions were made based on that performance.  Time to step up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron La Canne</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7353</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron La Canne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting stat Bucky!

1srt half Grant - 2.2 YPC
2nd half Grant - 5.4 YPC
Total                 3.8 YPC

The difference?  Went back to the DVR and oila they starting using much more drive blocking on running plays.  If they can translate this result to the Queens game, it can take a whole lot of pressure off the O line on 2nd and 3rd down.  The goal for the game should be something like Grant carries the ball 25 times and averages 4.5 YPC.  If they can do that GB can win this game.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting stat Bucky!</p>
<p>1srt half Grant &#8211; 2.2 YPC<br />
2nd half Grant &#8211; 5.4 YPC<br />
Total                 3.8 YPC</p>
<p>The difference?  Went back to the DVR and oila they starting using much more drive blocking on running plays.  If they can translate this result to the Queens game, it can take a whole lot of pressure off the O line on 2nd and 3rd down.  The goal for the game should be something like Grant carries the ball 25 times and averages 4.5 YPC.  If they can do that GB can win this game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bucky</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7352</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bucky]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7352</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Trust me, there are plenty of idiots to go aronud, here and everywhere else on the interwebs. . . .

One overlooked fact is that, even as the offense struggled on the ground throughout most of last season, Grant actually ran the ball fairly effectively against the Vikings in both games.  In the opener Grant had 12 carries for 92 yards (a 7.7 yd average).  In the rematch in in the Humpdome, he had 16 carries for 75 yards (a 4.7 yd average).  One might argue that one failure of the Packers in the latter game was their reluctance to run the ball more often.  I&#039;d also note that, even with some of the problems we&#039;ve experienced with the line this season, there were nearly as many problems last year.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trust me, there are plenty of idiots to go aronud, here and everywhere else on the interwebs. . . .</p>
<p>One overlooked fact is that, even as the offense struggled on the ground throughout most of last season, Grant actually ran the ball fairly effectively against the Vikings in both games.  In the opener Grant had 12 carries for 92 yards (a 7.7 yd average).  In the rematch in in the Humpdome, he had 16 carries for 75 yards (a 4.7 yd average).  One might argue that one failure of the Packers in the latter game was their reluctance to run the ball more often.  I&#8217;d also note that, even with some of the problems we&#8217;ve experienced with the line this season, there were nearly as many problems last year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron La Canne</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7350</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron La Canne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:07:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7350</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The only idiot here is you!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only idiot here is you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Favre's Booger</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7349</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Favre's Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:01:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7349</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Ron La Full-of-Shiz,

Spare me the &quot;I&#039;m more then a casual fan&quot; bullshiz!  You&#039;re post was so over-the-top in made me sick.  You&#039;re no more knowledgeable of a fan then anyone else.  You just think you are.  Which makes you twice as ignorant.  I&#039;m not rah-rah all the time but when they win, it&#039;s nice to celebrate it a little.  Not pick the W apart.  And don&#039;t kid yourself, you&#039;re not a &quot;purist,&quot; you&#039;re a pessimist.  There is nothing special about your ability to sit on the couch and watch football.  Nothing.  Get over yourself.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Ron La Full-of-Shiz,</p>
<p>Spare me the &#8220;I&#8217;m more then a casual fan&#8221; bullshiz!  You&#8217;re post was so over-the-top in made me sick.  You&#8217;re no more knowledgeable of a fan then anyone else.  You just think you are.  Which makes you twice as ignorant.  I&#8217;m not rah-rah all the time but when they win, it&#8217;s nice to celebrate it a little.  Not pick the W apart.  And don&#8217;t kid yourself, you&#8217;re not a &#8220;purist,&#8221; you&#8217;re a pessimist.  There is nothing special about your ability to sit on the couch and watch football.  Nothing.  Get over yourself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron La Canne</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7348</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron La Canne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:50:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7348</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One thing FB can&#039;t understand about &quot;Football Purists&quot; is, we look at the game from an entirely different level than the casual fan.  I learned my attitude from the master, Vincenso Lombardi.  It was said by former players that, he trested them worse after a win than after a loss.

Quality of play are the issues we are complaining about.  Certainly, I like the win.  How they won is more important than the W when looking ahead to the next game.  Simply we are saying the O line is not ready to go one-on-one with the Viking D line.  Our evaluations are based on analysis of the game.  No, we don&#039;t know more than the coaches but we so know more than the casual fan and are willing to debate it out in the open.  I&#039;ve been calling out the Oline since the end of the 2008 season.  They have done nothing to improve that line since then  Until I see signs of improvement I plan to criticise them each and every week until they prove me wrong,

If they don&#039;t improve this week - They Will Lose.  One positvie in the O line yesterday was 2nd half run game looked somewhat better.  Going back to the VCR showed an interesting change from the 1st half.  They used almost entire a drive blocking scheme on runs.  Admittedly, the St Louis D line isn&#039;t a great one, but it was better. (Note:  Good News from GB - Clifton has made significant progress and may play Monday).

So we live vicariously through our team.  We argue about who is right or wrong about about startegies and tactics.  We want the team to win.  But, immediately move the wanting the win more than anything, we move on to the next game (i.e. what went right what went wrong and how do you fix it).

The rah rah, we love you crap is boring.  They will get the credit they have earned, no more, no less.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing FB can&#8217;t understand about &#8220;Football Purists&#8221; is, we look at the game from an entirely different level than the casual fan.  I learned my attitude from the master, Vincenso Lombardi.  It was said by former players that, he trested them worse after a win than after a loss.</p>
<p>Quality of play are the issues we are complaining about.  Certainly, I like the win.  How they won is more important than the W when looking ahead to the next game.  Simply we are saying the O line is not ready to go one-on-one with the Viking D line.  Our evaluations are based on analysis of the game.  No, we don&#8217;t know more than the coaches but we so know more than the casual fan and are willing to debate it out in the open.  I&#8217;ve been calling out the Oline since the end of the 2008 season.  They have done nothing to improve that line since then  Until I see signs of improvement I plan to criticise them each and every week until they prove me wrong,</p>
<p>If they don&#8217;t improve this week &#8211; They Will Lose.  One positvie in the O line yesterday was 2nd half run game looked somewhat better.  Going back to the VCR showed an interesting change from the 1st half.  They used almost entire a drive blocking scheme on runs.  Admittedly, the St Louis D line isn&#8217;t a great one, but it was better. (Note:  Good News from GB &#8211; Clifton has made significant progress and may play Monday).</p>
<p>So we live vicariously through our team.  We argue about who is right or wrong about about startegies and tactics.  We want the team to win.  But, immediately move the wanting the win more than anything, we move on to the next game (i.e. what went right what went wrong and how do you fix it).</p>
<p>The rah rah, we love you crap is boring.  They will get the credit they have earned, no more, no less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trav</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7347</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trav]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:50:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7347</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RayMidge - Very well said.  The baseball analogy is right on the nose.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RayMidge &#8211; Very well said.  The baseball analogy is right on the nose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RayMidge</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7346</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RayMidge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7346</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Its a matter of expectations.  Obviously 2-1 is better than 1-2 or 0-3, but many of us were expecting that the Packers would be a contender for the NFC title and we know what a contender plays like . . . and this team doesn&#039;t play like a contender- so far.  The two most basic things are that they seem to miss a lot of tackles and allow what should be losses or minimal gains to turn into productive downs for the opposing offense and they are unable to impose their will on opposing defenses by either running the ball effectively or putting together long, efficient drives.  The upside of these two things is that the Pack is 2-1 because despite these flaws they have the talent to make some big plays on either side of the ball and they have so far made more big plays than their opponents.  I can&#039;t speak for anyone else, but my anxiety or disappointment in the team so far is based on the feeling that they will be good enough to go 10-6 or 11-5 and still never be a threat to go all the way.  That&#039;s not nothing, but its not what I was hoping for based on the flashes we saw last year and in the preseason, the expected improvement to the D based on the new aggresive scheme and the expected maturation of Rodgers, jennings, Grant and the O-line.  Maybe we had unrealistic expectations . . . I would be the first to plead guilty to that.  but right now this team reminds me of a hitter in baseball who feasts on bad pitching and is ordinary-to-bad against good pitching.  Sure the numbers will be there at the end of the year, but the goal is to win and beat the good teams.  I still think the talent is there for it to come together, and it is foolish to think that a team is the same after 10 weeks that they are after 3 . . . but there are many troubling signs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its a matter of expectations.  Obviously 2-1 is better than 1-2 or 0-3, but many of us were expecting that the Packers would be a contender for the NFC title and we know what a contender plays like . . . and this team doesn&#8217;t play like a contender- so far.  The two most basic things are that they seem to miss a lot of tackles and allow what should be losses or minimal gains to turn into productive downs for the opposing offense and they are unable to impose their will on opposing defenses by either running the ball effectively or putting together long, efficient drives.  The upside of these two things is that the Pack is 2-1 because despite these flaws they have the talent to make some big plays on either side of the ball and they have so far made more big plays than their opponents.  I can&#8217;t speak for anyone else, but my anxiety or disappointment in the team so far is based on the feeling that they will be good enough to go 10-6 or 11-5 and still never be a threat to go all the way.  That&#8217;s not nothing, but its not what I was hoping for based on the flashes we saw last year and in the preseason, the expected improvement to the D based on the new aggresive scheme and the expected maturation of Rodgers, jennings, Grant and the O-line.  Maybe we had unrealistic expectations . . . I would be the first to plead guilty to that.  but right now this team reminds me of a hitter in baseball who feasts on bad pitching and is ordinary-to-bad against good pitching.  Sure the numbers will be there at the end of the year, but the goal is to win and beat the good teams.  I still think the talent is there for it to come together, and it is foolish to think that a team is the same after 10 weeks that they are after 3 . . . but there are many troubling signs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-thoughts/#comment-7345</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rich]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:33:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://packergeeks.wordpress.com/?p=3514#comment-7345</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The one thing that I think is really incredible about Rodgers at this point is that even though the guy has been sacked more than any other QB he has still not thrown a pick.  For all the pressure he has been under he keeps cool under pressure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The one thing that I think is really incredible about Rodgers at this point is that even though the guy has been sacked more than any other QB he has still not thrown a pick.  For all the pressure he has been under he keeps cool under pressure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
