Archive for December 17th, 2007

The Crack Smoker Is Back

December 17, 2007

Tempting as it is to engage Andy on his nerf punting prowess, I’ll pass.

But on Greg Jennings, I’ll happily answer his rather bizarre claims. Andy has been a Jennings doubter since early last year, for no apparent reason. (Just as he is quick with his man-crushes, he is fast with his man-aversions, if you will. And speaking of man-crushes, as I’m writing this, Andy’s current man-crush, Tarvaris Jackson, threw his second interception of the first half.)

Back to Jennings. He is currently the 13th receiver in the NFL in yards per game. And he’s 4th — that’s right, 4th — in touchdown receptions. Did I mention that he missed two games? Factor that in and he’s scoring TDs at a better pace than any receiver in the league other than Randy Moss. All that, and Andy concedes Jennings “isn’t bad — he’s very good?” That’s it?

And here’s a question that should end this silly debate: If Jennings causes Favre to throw risky passes, why is Favre having his best season ever in terms of pass attempts to interception ratio? See this article, which reads, in relevant part: “He’s on pace to surpass his career marks in completion percentage, yards passing and fewest interceptions per attempts.”


Response to response on Jennings

December 17, 2007

I wouldn’t say Jennings was open on either of those 2 interceptions yesterday with a defensive back in tight coverage and a safety over to help. In fact, his unwideness, as it were, was clearly what led to the interceptions. And, adding to the frustration, he didn’t seem to do much in the way of trying to disrupt the picks either. Wuss. James Jones at least would have tried to break up the pass. And, Jennings’ smiling the whole time doesn’t mean much – a used car salesman smiles at you too, it’s a tool for persuasion. Again, Jennings isn’t bad – he’s very good, but it’s still likely he’s playing a role in some of Favre’s chancy throws into coverage.

Now more importantly, to ward off any concerns readers may have re my athletic prowess, I’ll immodestly share that my football career began as the 1st pick overall in the 1982 McKinley Elementary School Draft (3rd grade). I didn’t disappoint. I played all positions including handling the punting and kicking duties (20 yards per punt – nerf). But when I was the wideout, I just let my burning speed aided by my Zips and my wideopenness, if you like, do the talking. No need to badger the QB, the QB knew I was always “wide” and that I’d be money in the YAC department.

How were you, Steve in elementary football – or were you already sidelined by Osgood Schlatter’s?

Cowboys Coming to Lambeau…

December 17, 2007

next year. Hopefully they will be returning to Lambeau for the second time in a year.

Who Knew? The Larry McCarren Pinky Obsession

December 17, 2007

One of the cool things about having a blog is that we can see which posts have generated the most interest. We can also see what kind of internet searches have sent readers to PackerGeeks.

Here’s why that’s interesting: Almost every single day someone — presumably some of you — conducts a search wanting more information on Larry McCarren’s messed up pinky. (It’s basically a right angle.) Andy wrote about it here.

(We also get a lot of traffic because of Elizabeth Hurley searches. I’m guessing this, ahem, is not what most guys are looking for.)

Back to McCarren’s pinky. Someone wrote about it this summer. And this guy has come up with a smart proposal:

We gathered together to watch the Green Bay Packers pre-season game when Heidi and I came to a startling conclusion — no matter when Larry McCarren is on the television giving commentary, whatever he says is completely overshadowed because we’re staring at his grossly disfigured dislocated left pinky finger.

I completely understand that Mr. McCarren’s pinky, which is permanently bent at a 90-degree left angle, is sort of a badge of honor for him, showing he was one tough SOB when he played center for the Green Bay Packers from 1973-1984. I have always been a big Larry McCarren fan and think he is a smart football guy with a great radio voice.


Packer fans should take up a collection to send money to Larry so he can get his pinky fixed.

If we can’t raise a lot of money, we thought of several options. I suggested he get some tape from the Packers training room and simply tape his left pinky finger to his left ring finger. Heidi went one step further saying that Larry could use a popsicle stick as a splint and then secure it with flesh-colored Band-Aids. That would straighten out his pinky and depending on how close the camera was, we wouldn’t even notice.

In any regard, Larry’s got to do something about that distracting pinky finger. He talks so much with his hands that it is mesmerizing.

Given that it’s responsible for half of our traffic just because of that one post, I think Andy should contact McCarren himself and try to get a picture of it so that we can post it here. Good idea, no?

No, He’s Not

December 17, 2007

The fact is, Greg Jennings is open so often that he probably doesn’t need to remind Favre. (If you need more details about Jennings’ breakout season, see here.) And Jennings is always smiling when he’s talking to Favre, something that suggests his quarterback isn’t aggravated by whatever their discussions are.

In any case, the annoying kid in high school wasn’t the guy who was open and reminded the quarterback, but the guy who told the quarterback that he was open when he wasn’t.

For reasons I probably don’t need to explain, Andy should understand this.

Is Jennings that annoying kid in grade school?

December 17, 2007

Because CBS, Fox and the NFL Network focus 90% of their broadcasts on the Packers and often just on Favre, we as fans have the benefit of seeing lots of Favre’s sideline interactions. Over the course of the season I’ve watched these interactions and have been particularly interested in Favre’s frequent discussions with Greg Jennings. Brother Steve astutely called the overtime bomb in Denver that Favre heaved to Jennings because throughout that game, there were several shots of Jennings talking to Favre and Steve surmised that something was brewing. Nice call Steve. However, I’ve noticed that several of Favre’s picks this year have been on passes thrown to Jennings (not just the 2 yesterday) and I’ve begun to worry a bit that Favre is being lured into these throws by an overzealous Greg Jennings.

Is Jennings that kid in grade school who comes back to the huddle proclaiming after each play that he was “wide” and that the QB should just “throw a bomb” because he’ll just get it. I think so. I do like Jennings and think he’s a high quality receiver (though I don’t have the mancrush on him that Steve does). I’m just concerned that he may have the power of persuasion with Favre that could be causing some unnecessary turnovers. The same play has worked in other games, but opponents may be catching on.

Did the Packers sign Nall just for Favre?

December 17, 2007

Yes. Nall was not with the team last year when McCarthy and his high-octane offense arrived – so arguments that Nall already knew the system don’t really fly. Arguments that Nall knows the Green Bay culture well and cold-weather play well are decent, but not adequate. I think the only real reason Nall was brought back was because he’s a good friend of Favre’s (hunting buddy etc). Let’s face it, he’s not a steal of a pick-up for anyone (as evidenced by Nall being cut by several teams). I’m sure there were other QBs sitting out there who at the very least could have brought more potential to the table. But why do that when Rodgers should be OK to back Favre up going forward (until Rodgers gets another Paul Molitor-like injury) and Nall has a good connection with our most important player? I think this was an intentional signing just for Favre and a smart one psychologically.

“We’re Playing for Home-Field Advantage”

December 17, 2007

That’s what Mike McCarthy just told reporters at his Monday press conference. Good. That’s exactly the right attitude. I’m for resting players who are dinged up — McCarthy did this with Nick Collins yesterday and may have to do it with Ryan Pickett going forward — but if you’ve got a shot at home-field advantage you need to do everything possible to get it. It could matter, especially since Brett Favre is 0-9 in Dallas over his career.

Here is Greg Bedard on McCarthy’s presser.

Moron Alert: Another Fake Scandal

December 17, 2007

These guys don’t learn.

Remember a few weeks back when played up a report that Al Harris might have been seeking to collect a “bounty” by taking out Adrian Peterson? It was a sensational story, hyped by the rumor-mill that is PFT and for a moment it looked like it might be huge news. (For those of you not familiar with their “work,” PFT is like the Drudge Report of the NFL, only Drudge is a great site and rarely gets things wrong. PFT is read religiously by NFL beat writers, executives, agents and even players.) In this case, as in many others, the PFT guys had no clue what they were talking about. It turns out Harris would have been the one paying the incentive for keeping AP under 100 yards. (Despite the irresponsible suggestions from PFT, there never was a “bounty,” in the sense that Packers were out to injure Peterson or anyone else.)

We posted on the subject several times and emailed PFT with a chance to explain, retract and/or apologize. They did nothing. Maybe they were just too busy.

Last week, the hacks at PFT suggested that ESPN’s Mike Golic, a former football player who has admitted using steroids, had been taken off the air because the network didn’t want him discussing the Mitchell Report on steriods in baseball. They wrote:


Isn’t it odd that Mike Golic has been MIA the past couple of days from his radio show on ESPN? With the sports news dominated by the “Mitchell Report” regarding steroid use in baseball, shouldn’t Golic be there to offer up his views on the content of the report (assuming he can read) and the consequences of the revelations regarding the extent to which baseball players were using steroids?

Well, yeah, if Golic wasn’t an admitted steroid user himself.And absent a full explanation as to Golic’s whereabouts, offered up at the top of the return from every break, we think it’s fair to assume that Golic was given a couple of days off without pay so that he wouldn’t have to comment on the propriety of something that he himself has done. 

Only it wasn’t fair to assume that at all. Golic was absent because of a death in the family, news that had to be unbelievably embarrassing to PFT. If I had made a similar accusation — without a shred of evidence, mind you — I would make a full and unambiguous apology and beg my readers not to abandon me in spite of my tasteless and irresponsible behavior. What did PFT do? They blamed ESPN. I am serious.

It’s worth reading the whole thing.


As it turns out, ESPN’s Mike Golic missed last week not because he was ducking discussion regarding the Mitchell report, but because of a death in his family.

We extend our condolences to Golic, and to his family.

All that said, his employer did the guy a major disservice by not making it known that Golic was absent due to a personal family issue. By not addressing Golic’s absence on a regular basis (it would have taken all of three seconds), ESPN allowed many to unnecessarily speculate that Golic didn’t want to talk about steroids in baseball given his admission last month that he used steroids in 1987.

Even if everyone who thought that Golic was absent because he didn’t want to talk about steroids eventually learns the truth, nothing can change the fact that they were under the impression for several days that he might have been looking for a way to not have to talk about his use of the juice. 

What a crock of shit. (Sorry, Mom.)

ESPN “allowed many to unnecessarily speculate?” Are they serious? Who was this “many” they are talking about? Anyone who didn’t first read such speculation at PFT?

These guys are irresponsible hacks. The only remaining question is why the NFL Network — an arm of the NFL itself — would continue to sponsor the site.

That Eerie Feeling…

December 17, 2007

Here’s what I wrote last week after watching the ugly end of the game between the Dallas Cowboys and Detroit Lions:

The Lions would have won if Paris Lenon, former Packer and Andy man-crushee, would have fallen on a Tony Romo fumble with less than two minutes left. Instead, he wanted to be the hero, so he scooped it up and then dropped it, when a Cowboy lineman fell on it. Dallas scored the game-winning touchdown. I have an eerie feeling that play could be the difference between the NFC Championship at Lambeau Field or at that “pretty” Dallas Stadium.

As you surely know by now, Dallas lost to Philadelphia yesterday, 10-6. And while I am pleased to see further confirmation that the Cowboys are not a good 12-2 team (in addition to their loss to Detroit, they should have lost to Buffalo), it’s difficult to think that the Packers could have had homefield advantage throughout the playoffs with two more wins and an unspectacular play by Paris Lenon.There is still a chance, however. Dallas plays Washington in Washington the last game of the season. Even with Jason Campbell out and no Sean Taylor, the Redskins have played reasonably well. (In fact, the original “eerie feeling” post played up a potential Cowboys loss to Washington and mentioned Philly in passing.) If the Redskins can beat the Vikings next week, they would be 8-7 heading into the Dallas game, a mark that would give them a decent shot at the playoffs. (They would have a head-to-head tiebreaker over the Vikings — giving the Vikings a win against Chicago tonight — but New Orleans has a better conference record.)Of course the Packers still have to beat the Bears (in Chicago) and Lions (at home) before this becomes an issue. But…