Packers 2010

[snoozebutton]

Typically, McCarthy's teams have started slowly and our offense is still pretty much intact (minus Finley and Grant.) The offense wasn't too bad before Finley got here and Jackson has been solid so far but I don't see our defense holding up against a good offensive team. The Jets are pretty good at running the ball with Green and Tomlinson and Sanchez has been throwing the ball pretty well. Not sure if our defense is going to hold up against them.

[Steve Foss]

The Jets are pretty good at running the ball with Green and Tomlinson and Sanchez has been throwing the ball pretty well. Not sure if our defense is going to hold up against them.

That's my concern as well.

[CJH]

+1 Not a good time to be short handed on D Lineman.

[SkunkedAgain]

It's truly time for the offense to click. They need to have a goal of one punt per game or less. They need to challenge themselves so that even if the defense struggles, we are constantly matching the other team by putting points on the board. One punt or less per game by the Packers isn't a fantasy when you look at their potential.

[FISHINGURU]

Rex is a fairly smart guy, he should realize he'll be able to run the ball at will against the Packers, kind of like what the Vikes did but the only difference is we have the worst coach and play calling in the league.

[Antero]

Pack wins......big road victory, great d (with help from the Jets O and Rex). A road win is tough against anyone.

[snoozebutton]

Sure am glad I was wrong about our defense. What an effort by them today!!!

[Antero]

Pack wins......big road victory, great d (with help from the Jets O and Rex). A road win is tough against anyone.

[CJH]

Not sure what Dom and MM did to fire up the "D", but wow. Nothing like shutting down one of the best running teams in the league AND getting big turnovers from the secondary. Not sure you can expect more from a banged up team.

The O didn't click yet, but they did just enough to win, so you have to hand them some credit as well. No turnovers and cut down on the penlaties - that's how you win the close games.

[fishersofmen]

Pack continues to have the refs in their back pocket...a win none the less.

[SkunkedAgain]

Yup, I read that the wind was crazy and could be partially responsible for the lack of passing games by both teams. It just highlights the need for a running game come December/January.

A great win and a huge relief. Does anyone think that Dallas has something to give next week?

[mrklean]

Kitna is playing pretty good, but if we can get pressure on him i think its a win, one good thing is they are coming to green bay to play they dont play well in dallas never have

[SkunkedAgain]

I'm intentionally burying this post and not labeling it a "Randy Moss" thread. It's an older article from earlier this fall when Moss ranted about the Patriot's not giving him a new contract. It's still appropriate considering the recent Moss rant and cut from the Vikings. I think that it shows how well Andrew Brandt (former team negotiator) and Thompson handled Favre's whines:

Quote:

Randy's Rant - Part I

Written by: Andrew Brandt

September 15, 2010

The strange ranting of Randy Moss this week takes me back to the weekend of the 2007 Draft; much of it spent trying to sign Moss. It was a brief but intense negotiation that fueled some fire with Brett Favre when, for the first of two times, the Packers couldn’t agree with Moss on a contract.

Moss for sale

The Raiders bold experiment with Moss – they had traded Napoleon Harris and the 7th pick in the 2005 Draft for him – ended after two seasons when Moss could be had for a mid-round pick. Ted Thompson surprisingly had some interest, having been impressed with the way Moss handled himself at a charity event that he happened to be at in Texas. And Brett, of course, was extremely jazzed about the idea.

Now there were two parts to the deal to make it happen. First, there had to be agreement with the Raiders on draft pick compensation. We were offering a fifth-round pick and the Patriots later came up with a fourth. That, however, was the not the key to the deal.

One-year deal breaker

Moss was scheduled to make $9.75 million for 2007 and $11.25 million in 2008. Those amounts may well have been $100 million and $200 million; he was not making what was on the contract. We needed to bring in Moss, coming off a year with a pedestrian 43 receptions, at a more reasonable number with upside. The Patriots were also showing interest.

I negotiated with Moss’s agent while the recruiting from the alpha dogs – Brett and Tom Brady -- intensified. Moss was getting texts and calls throughout the weekend from both Favre and Brady both imploring him to come and form a powerhouse duo.

The offers from both teams were very similar for 2007, both around $3 million with additional incentives. Our proposal allowed Moss to make more than the Patriots proposal, although we had significant money tied to 45-man active roster bonuses, protecting us from injury if he could not play.

Our offer, however, required a second year in 2008. Moss and his agents were adamant that he wanted only a one-year deal. Having lost market value from his Raider experience, Moss would agree to a massive pay reduction for 2007 but wanted to hit the open market in 2008 coming off what he expected to be a big season.

The feeling in our discussions was that we did not want to rent Randy for a year only to have him shop to highest bidder in a few months trying to recoup some of his lost earnings in 2007. We discussed different ideas, but in the end we were insistent on a two-year deal. While we haggled about an appropriate roster bonus to activate the second year of the deal, the Patriots relented on the length and agreed to a one-year deal. That was it; he was going with Brady.

Mississippi burning

Brett was livid. The rest of the weekend I was fielding calls from Bus Cook about what went wrong in trying to sign Randy. Ted did not want to deal with Bus, so I listened patiently to their rancor and tried to explain our position.

I truly empathized with Brett. He had befriended and admired Randy for years and the two of them had dreamed of playing together. Here was an opportunity for us to make it a reality. But ultimately, we stood on our principles requiring more than a one-year commitment.

I told Brett to trust what we had at the position; that Greg Jennings would be a star in a couple years. He said he didn’t have a couple of years. Brett offered to give up some of his salary for the following season – although that was his last season with the Packers (see below) -- to bring in Randy. I told that was much appreciated but we would never take his money away from him to sign another player.

Brett was forever wanting a more aggressive attitude by the front office toward player acquisition than the present regime. My constant message that our method of drafting and developing talent rather than acquiring proven commodities only served to infuriate him and his resentment of a general manager that showed him none of the compassion and welcomed input of previous regimes.

Patriot games

Fast forward to 2008. After a wonderful year for the Patriots, catching 98 balls for 1493 yards and 23 touchdowns, Moss was a free agent as he designed, now with interest from several teams to cash in on his one-year deal. And cash in he did, re-signing with the Patriots for a three-year, $27 million deal with over $14 million guaranteed.

And guess what team showed some decent interest again in 2008? Yes, the Packers (along with the Eagles and Cowboys). But again, despite getting Brett's hopes up again, the Packers bowed out of the bidding (I had left the Packers at that point but heard the anger and frustration from Brett’s camp). Moss re-signed with the Patriots on March 3rd. Favre retired from the Packers on March 4th. Coincidence?

Whither Randy?

Now Moss is coming to the end of that deal with deafening silence from the Patriots about re-signing for the third time. A lot can change between now and March, but it appears he has had his run wit the team, and it’s been a successful and lucrative one. And one that found the Packers in second place for his services twice.

[CJH]

Brett played the Aw-shucks I'm a small town country boy image to the public, but behind the scenes he was pretty demanding and difficult to work with. Gotta give TT the credit for having a pair and standing up to him, since Brett was baby Jesus in GB at the time.

[mrklean]

makes you really wonder about old brett what kind of guy he really is

[SkunkedAgain]

The kind of guy that sits in a hot tub with teenage girls and then lets his buddy take the fall

[mrklean]

what so your saying Brett was in there with Marky Mark?

[FISHINGURU]

I guess it beats being R Kelly and peeing on people.

[SkunkedAgain]

It was strongly rumored at the time, and with their reputation at the time, and the things we know about Brett now, I don't see any reason not to think that it may have been true.

The whole point is that Favre has never been a saint. Let's go through the list:

- alcoholic in his early days (now sober)

- children out of wedlock (with Diana)

- widely rumored that he was very popular with the ladies in the mid-90s - i.e. sleeping around on his long-time girlfriend who had his kids

- addicted to vicodin (rehab in 1997)

- "possibly" in the hot tub with Chumura and Winters

- Jen Sterger photos

Who knows what else

[Antero]

I wanted #4 traded back in the early 2000's. My family and friends thought I was nuts. I felt the Pack could have rcvd a lot for him and at that time he was imploding at the end of every year. That being said, I see no sense in trashing his personal reputation with half truths and no truths as reported by skunked. Of all the things he has listed we know for sure that 3 are true. Until proven, the others as he reported are rumors.

[SkunkedAgain]

That's fine. I realize that some of those listed are rumors. Back to the original point which is that the guy is not a saint. Why aren't there similar rumors about Donald Driver? Because Driver is a great person. I'm a where-there's-smoke-there's-fire type of thinker, and there's enough to add up on Favre in my opinion.

What we do know about him is that Holmgren kept him in line. Sherman let him have the reigns and the Packers faltered in those years, with Ahman Green and the O-line keeping the team competitive (remember the years when teams would stop the run to force Favre to have to beat them). McCarthy tightened the reigns again, Favre despised the control and left. He found another Mike Sherman in Brad Childress (a pushover) and we're seeing how well that is working for Favre. Like so many people, he doesn't know when to self-evaluate and understand if he is truly a good leader or if he is more effective being led. Favre needs a lead horse but always wants to be at the front of the line, regardless of how he postures publicly.

[Antero]

Driver is my favorite Packer player ever ( other than #66 ) but we have no idea if he is a great person. Thinking he is is not knowing he is.

Remember whan we used to think Kirby Puckett was a saint? How did that turn out?

[CJH]

Let's TRULY get back on topic. Big game with "Them Cowboys" Sunday night. A win would put us at 6-3 heading into the bye. Harris and Bigby will be back, and a number of other player (Picket, Jenkins, Driver, etc...) should be healthy after the bye.

That sets up nicely for the final 7 games of the season.......

[snoozebutton]

Those final 7 games sure aren't a cake walk. At Minny, at Atlanta, San Fran at home, at Detroit, at N.E., and finish the season with the Giants and Bears at home.

[CJH]

Atlanta, N.E., and the Giants are good teams. The Pack should beat the rest of them, but you never know with the rivalry games.

[Born2Fish]

At Minnesota, at Atlanta, at Detroit, at New England......ALL those games are VERY much "loseable" for the Packers. Favre will be looking to put down the Packers and play lights out football at home. Turner will run all over them (Just like AP will do also). Stafford and Johnson will put up some pretty big numbers and either blow the Pack away, or keep it VERY close and squeak one out in the end. And of course, Brady and Co. will dominate every aspect of the game against the Packers. As for the Giants and Bears, those will both be close games, but I can also see the Giants taking one from the Packers in Lambeau. If the DOLPHINS can take one there, the Giants and maybe even the Bears have a shot too.

[SkunkedAgain]

Ahhh, football predictions from a delusional Viking fan. Still talking a Vikings Super Bowl too?

[SkunkedAgain]

An interesting side item to this week is the activation of our three PUP players. They've only held open one roster spot after letting Mike Montgomery go. They don't need Bigby this week since Peprah has been playing so well. The secondary in general has held up nice so Harris is needed, but he would be good insurance at the nickel or dime. Shields has been playing well in the nickel so it's a great situation for the Packers to be in right now.

Call me crazy but I think that if they activate only one player for Sunday, it may be James Starks. He can be an instant contributor on kick returns (he's been practicing there lately) and we all know that the running game needs a boost.

If it's not Starks then I think that Harris is the most likely to be activated. Either way, come Monday's PUP deadline I have a feeling that they'll activate at least two players but probably all three. The real question will be whom to let go.

[CJH]

No idea. The rumor I had read was they will activate one (Bigby or Harris) for this weeks game, then activate the other one Monday and probably cut either Johnson (FB) or one of the bottom feeder OL.

Supposedly they might put Starks on IR since they have Nance and Starks hasn't played in any real action in two years. It'd be tough to throw him in there and expect him to do anything.

You never know though.

[Born2Fish]

Nope I will not go as far as saying the Vikings will reach the Super Bowl this year. I am very realistic and just look at things how they are. Delusional is thinking the Packers can win every single one of those games.