NFL 2005 Season Week 7 Picks

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/21/2005 @ 12:04:32 AM
Yes...Paul Tagilabue dislikes the Vikings. There is a conspiracy going around the league to do whatever it takes to make the Vikings lose. Also, considering that the Vikings lost 28-3 one week after their bye, I'm really convinced that it would make a difference. And in this year's case, the Packers had like the biggest victory in team history and 2 whole weeks for them to lose that any momentum they would have had. So actually, you should be glad that the Packers had their bye week when they did this year. Man, who actually keeps track of that stuff:) One more thing: the Vikings website sucks. The Packers website has scores and stats from every game (or at least every season) going back to like 1960. I can't even find last year's schedule on the Vikings schedule.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - 3619 Posts 10/21/2005 @ 12:19:45 AM
My mom could make more in-depth comments on the games than these. I actually slip the schedulers a 20 every year to get this game setup just to piss off Vikings fans. I've never been to the Viking's website, but I would assume it sucks just because it's the Viking's website.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 10/21/2005 @ 12:29:47 AM
since we're in the business of complaining about meaningless details.....from 1993-1996, the Packers played at Dallas 4 straight seasons, and that doesn't include the playoffs.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 10/21/2005 @ 08:40:24 AM
New England plays Buffalo after New England's bye week for the second straight season, and Buffalo also plays San Diego coming off of San Diego's bye week, Oakland after Oakland's bye week, the Jets after New york's bye week, Miami after Miami's bye week. I think the league is out to get Buffalo. I mean, what are the odds that a team plays 5 teams come off of each one's bye week. Can't be good.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - Who controls the past now controls the future 10/21/2005 @ 01:22:42 PM
The only valid reason I can think of to be figuring that stuff out at 8 in the morning is because you were in class?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jon - 1 bajillion posts 10/21/2005 @ 03:23:03 PM
Alex, in regard to the comments not being in depth, here are two responses. One, who ever said tehy were supposed to be in depth? Two, you can have a full refund for all your page three payments over the years.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/21/2005 @ 05:16:42 PM
actually, I don't have class on Fridays, but I do work at 10:00. But upon further review, it would seem weird why I would be up at 8:00 making really bizarre random statistical comments.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - 3619 Posts 10/21/2005 @ 06:42:51 PM
Jon, in regard to your response, here are two responses. One, who ever said that I said that they were supposed to be in depth? Two, not only do I want a full refund, but I think there should be an incentive program for Page3 visitors who leave comments.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 10/21/2005 @ 07:35:36 PM
I think mine were the most in-depth of all. And don't get me started on the Cowboys thing. It took forever for us to get them up to Lambeau and when we did we get kicked their arses.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - So's your face 10/22/2005 @ 10:44:43 AM
We rule! and since I don't feel like html crap just copy and paste: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=fleming/051020		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - On your mark...get set...Terrible! 10/22/2005 @ 12:02:54 PM
Man, where has Jeremy gone to? I've been trying to sling poo at his comments for 2 days now with no reaction. Nothing. It hardly makes it even worth it:)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - 3619 Posts 10/22/2005 @ 09:43:40 PM
Badgers keep it going with a win. Somebody needs to beat Northwestern though, preferably Iowa and then the Badgers can beat Iowa the week after that. Illinois next week, they pretty much suck and are getting killed by Penn St right now. Whities with a one run lead, woohoo!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 08:46:28 AM
this is the slowest Vikings-Packers week ever		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - How do you use these things? 10/23/2005 @ 09:24:54 AM
I'm leaving the house in like 10 minutes to go to the game. Vikings are going down. Yea this has been a slow week. It's been a busy week I guess.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - Refactor Mercilessly 10/23/2005 @ 02:58:34 PM
worst play call ever		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 10/23/2005 @ 03:49:07 PM
what was?, the 3rd down play for the Packers at the end that got them 0 yards?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 07:54:29 PM
That sucked. :( They didn't deserve it. All the fans were booing and begging for Johnson to come in. Bastards.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - On your mark...get set...Terrible! 10/23/2005 @ 09:10:57 PM
Well, Favre now leads the league in TD Passes, is near the lead for passing yards, and hasn't thrown a pic in 2 games. Add that to the fact that the Packers only have 1 receiver left, they are down to Tony Fisher for a starting running back, and you've got yourself a one man team. Favre in his prime couldn't have done any better than this with this team. I say go for the number 1, 2, or 3 overall draft pick, draft Reggie Bush, and go from there.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 10/23/2005 @ 09:13:06 PM
I also think another crappy coaching move by Mike Sherman at the end could have made things much different. On 3rd and 2 the Packers ran a draw play up the middle and got stuffed. I'm no offensive coordinator, but I would have liked to see a pass, considering Favre threw like 6 incompletions all day and the running game was averaging like 2 yards per carry anyway. Fire Mike Sherman at the end of the season.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 09:43:52 PM
There would be fans yelling for (fill in current Viking #2 QB here) if daunte had 5 ints or 5 TDs.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - 3941 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 10:03:13 PM
Indeed... Some Vikings fans have a sort of weird obsession w/the backup QB. Culpepper didn't even have that bad of a first half, besides the fumble.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - 3941 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 10:07:20 PM
I almost forgot your Week 7 Trivia Question, I'm sure everyone was looking for it. Who "said" the following famous quote, and during what did he "say" it: "England expects that every man will do his duty"		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - 3619 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 10:47:21 PM
Yes the 3rd down play was the one I was talking about. On the road play for the win = throw the stupid ball on 3rd and 2 and get a TD for goodness sake, not run the crappiest looking draw play I've even seen to the 3rd string RB so you can kick a FG. Utterly inexcusable, incomprehensible, and sucky. All the close games pretty much saw the teams I was rooting for lose. I can't believe the Eagles came back. Or the Vikings. Or the Seahawks. At the current rate I think the 12 teams I dislike the most will be the 12 that make the playoffs. Go Bucks (and Badgers)!!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/23/2005 @ 11:00:37 PM
Alex has a getting on AIM issue.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist 10/23/2005 @ 11:02:48 PM
"England expects that every man will do his duty" was a signal sent by Admiral Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson from his ship HMS Victory as the (A naval battle in 1805 off the southwest coast of Spain; the French and Spanish fleets were defeated by the English under Nelson (who was mortally wounded)) Battle of Trafalgar (1805) was about to commence. Trafalgar was the decisive naval engagement of the (A series of wars fought between France (led by Napoleon Bonaparte) and alliances involving England and Prussia and Russia and Austria at different times; 1799-1815) Napoleonic Wars: it gave the (A monarchy in northwestern Europe occupying most of the British Isles; divided into England and Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland) United Kingdom control of the seas, removing all possibility of a Napoleonic invasion and conquest of Britain.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 12:14:16 AM
Sherman refuses to play to win. He should have a chat with Herm Edwards. In baseball the saying goes, "if you are gonna get beat, get beat with your best pitch." Well, Sherman took the ball out of the hands of Roger Clemens and put it in the hands of Wes Obermueller and expected something good to happen. I will be very disappointed if the Packers keep Sherman at the end of the season. For Sherman to accomplish so little with some of the teams he has had is sickening. "You play to win the game." Scott Podsednik is my hero, and I'm rooting for the Astros.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 10/24/2005 @ 12:23:37 AM
Jeremy's plagiarized and oddly worded answer is correct. It was sent by Adm. Nelson (via signal flags) to the rest of his fleet at the Battle of Trafalgar, which occurred 200 years ago this month (Oct. 21st 1805 to be precise).		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - 3941 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 12:30:44 AM
It should also be noted that Oct. 21st was also the 200th anniversary of the death of The Right Honourable Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson, KCB, as he was killed during the battle. P.S. British titles and honorifics are cool. P.S.S. Scott, what happened with your team this week?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 10/24/2005 @ 08:48:51 AM
the old, "I forgot to check my lineup until it was too late". Oops.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children. 10/24/2005 @ 09:40:10 AM
Speaking of plagerism How bizzare is this?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - 3941 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 11:13:59 AM
Apparently, I'm Azfar		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 11:21:45 AM
Yeah, I can't figure that out. Why copy one part and link to another?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 10/24/2005 @ 02:25:45 PM
still a bad article, with not good points		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 03:19:11 PM
Scott you are playing with fire. You don't want to incur the wrath of Sarah.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 04:39:08 PM
ha the Packers have 3 WR on their active roster right now. and now they have 1 RB. I think it is officially ok to blame the Packers bad season 95% on injuries.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 05:41:09 PM
Horatio Nelson was on the cover of US News and World Reports this past week.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - How do you use these things? 10/24/2005 @ 06:07:33 PM
What the hell? Should I sue? I still think it stands the test of time. But if they're going to take credit for my work they could at least take out Jeremy and Matt's (azafar's) names. I think we should just play with Favre. He could run, pass, catch, kick, punt, and play defense. Watching the game, i was quite pissed with the play calling. It was too conservative. First down.... hmm lets throw a five yard pass. Oh and then lets run for the next two plays and then punt. I mean come freakin' on. It's not fair to Favre. I heard some dumbasses after the game, "we won thanks to favre" What the hell did Favre do? He had like the best passer rating of the day. Stupid dumb fans who shouldn't even have been at the game. Damn. Ok... add to my grudge list...		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Ombudsman 10/24/2005 @ 06:43:25 PM
The name is Azfar, not azafar		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i 10/24/2005 @ 07:26:23 PM
I didn't really realize this until I finished the standings but can people stop dogging on the NFC North? The AFC East looks just as bad right now, have they been mentioned once?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - But let history remember, that as free men, we chose to make it so! 10/24/2005 @ 07:29:19 PM
All 6 Big Ten teams in the top 25 of the BCS poll are ranked higher in the computer polls than the human polls. Which says to me that peeps be hating on the Big Teezy.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 07:34:14 PM
Also just looking at it as a general comparison it's not like "wow that's awful" just leaps off the screen. People have pointed out the fact that the division has played itself a lot and therefor would only have like 3 non-division/non-saints win. Well guess what people, if we've played a higher amount of intradivisional games than a lot of other divisions that means that someone has to lose too. Chew on that.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?" 10/24/2005 @ 07:35:16 PM
Get on AIM Alex.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - Who controls the past now controls the future 10/24/2005 @ 08:02:20 PM
Now that I've finally had a good ff week, I think I've accumulated some trash talking points. I'm assuming that picking up William Henderson is some attempt to lighten the mood of Packers fans? Cause if you're being serious, I'll have to laugh even harder. Possibly even out loud. Also, to those who picked up Tony Fisher, I won't laugh at you but I can also see now why you're in last. The Packers have had 2 rushing TDs as a team all year and quite frankly Fisher is a 3rd string RB for a reason. Vitals, you're going to have a lot more 2nd to lowest weekly totals if you plan on riding Chris Brown and Kevin Jones on your way to last place. Speaking of Chris Brown, was not our conversation before week 6 quite ironical? "icbeast13: brown probably wont even have a single 2 td game..." and then did that Sunday. "icbeast13: i think i got taylor in like the 9th round... [19:28] vita10gy: hes an injury risk... [19:28] icbeast13: its football, everyone is an injury risk" as we were working on a trade involving RMoss who got hurt that Sunday.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 08:14:41 PM
I'm not sure you can complain about Ahman's injury as a "derailing" injury. He was hardly lighting it up. Your best rushing game was with Closet McDumperson and for all you know Tony Fisher is the spark you need like Davenport seemed to be. As for Superstar Robert Fergeson you might be better off without him (At least as far as Alex is concerned). As far as yesterdays game, not that any of you said it nessisarly but I've heard it, Ahman's injury was not why you lost, he had firmly established himself as a non factor prior to going out. Side note: Did you guys realize the Texans have not even LED a game at any point this season?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 10/24/2005 @ 08:28:58 PM
I don't think I'll go as far as to say that the Packers are better off without Fergesonofa. I will however say once again that his injury prone, underachieving stankiness did not deserve a contract extension that makes him higher paid then Driver. Also, Davenport is even more injury prone, yet he hangs around. They overpay Franks for 4 years and he goes out and gets hurt only to replaced by some guy who no ones ever heard of who's first 2 catches are for TDs (ie any self respecting TE could put up Frank's numbers on this team). My point u ask? Not only does Sherman need to be sent packing, but I should be given Thompson's GM duties as the door hits him on the way out. He may have inherited a mess, but he's already screwed us for the next 3 to 4 years as well. The Salary Cap era only allows teams to retool if they stop bleeping up all the time!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 10/24/2005 @ 09:41:12 PM
What is with defensive lineman/linebackers attempting to lateral the ball after an int/fumble no matter how many people they have draped all over them? They seem to do everything possible to ensure the offense gets the ball back.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/24/2005 @ 09:50:58 PM
By the way since I haven't commented on it yet. Boo ya. I could watch Edinger chase that kick all day.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 10/25/2005 @ 12:17:28 AM
I'm not saying that Fergusons or Green's injury were bad in terms of losing really good players. But think about it, When you are trying just to have enough players to put a 3 wr set on the field, losing ferguson really but a damper on that. I don't care how good he is, he's better than Chatman or Jones. And Green's injury wasn't necessarily detrimental either, but that gave the packers only 1 running back, and I'd trust Green on his worst day before I would put the ball in the hands of Tony Fisher on 3rd in 2 with 50 seconds remaining. I thought even a Viking fan could figure this out: The injuries hampered the attempt to even put a full team on the field, and such was no doubt a big factor in why the packers collapsed offensively in the 2nd half. I don't understand how you can say that those injuries were "nonfactors".		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 12:31:23 AM
This could be really sad, because Green's injury may have ended his career in Green Bay. From 2000-'04 he rushed for more yards (6,848) and had more total yards from scrimmage (9,036) than any player in the National Football League. He was arguably the best running back in football for 5 years. Though his best days are probably behind him, even if he comes back and plays for another team, he will be missed.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i 10/25/2005 @ 12:34:30 AM
Ahman had been a non factor in the game. You didn't lose because Ahman went down. You were running the ball poorly with Ahman and passing the ball without Ferguson. The game came down to the Vikings offense finally stepping it up a notch. Ahman and Robert don't play defense.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 09:09:44 AM
Actually, Ferguson got hurt on a play in which he caught a very long ball, so don't tell me he wasn't a factor for this particular game. I picked up Henderson because he's my favorite player and well now I have no one else to pick up until I look more closely. Plus, Favre is going to need to dump it off to someone, so hell, I'll watch and see if he finds a new favorite guy. It's not like you're beating me, so na na na na na.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 10/25/2005 @ 09:15:58 AM
I don't agree		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 10:16:21 AM
But you moved the ball passing without Ferguson. Maybe if Favre could throw any ball over 20 yards that isnt a jump ball your receivers would stop awkwardly hitting the ground and getting hurt.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - 584 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 11:10:45 AM
From 01-04, Priest Holmes was the best RB in football. More yards from scrimmage and 76 TD's(!!). And he only played in 8 games in 2004. He didnt play (much) in 00 so you can't compare. But Green was still good. If Barry Sanders had been playing though, he would have had better seasons. We should be allowed to draft retired players in FF and then get their stats strat-o-matic football style. A real quesiton would be: Who will win in the epic GB/Detroit WR matchup of Terrence Murphy vs. Scottie Vines		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 01:06:31 PM
First off, how many packer receivers this year have gotten hurt in the act of jumping to catch a ball? One. Walker hurt his knee being tackled probably 10 yards after the catch, if that is what you are refering to. So yet another attempt to find a example to Favre's bad playing ability (315yds, 2tds, league leader in tds) is proved false. The point I am trying to make is that the Packers lost yet another WR. They went from 4 WR to 3 because of Ferfusons injury. now, explain to me how a team isn't hurt by going form 4 wr to 3. It doesn't matter that it was Ferguson necessarily. All you seem to be trying to do is denigrate certain players. By your logic, the Packers were moving the ball without Chatman or jones, so it wouldn't have mattered if both of them got hurt. And Fisher wasn't rushing, so losing him wouldn't have hurt them either. I'm saying that the Packers are having trouble putting an entire team on the field. I'm not even talking about talent at this point. A bad player is better than no player, but apparently you don't agree. Or you just don't like Ferguson or Green. and for the record, Green accounted for 70 total yards. Not outstanding, but better than the .4 yards per carry that Fisher was capable of. Also, Ferguson was hurt one minute into the 2nd quarter. Which means they went almost 3 full quarter with only 3 wide recievers. I'm I the only person on the face of the planet that understands that this might have an effect on a team's performance. I guess considering that most teams usually only suit up 3 WR anyway, the Packers simply need to figure out how to deal, right? Anyway, that leaves significant amount of time for the hapless Vikings defense to figure out that Donald Driver is pretty much the only receiver needed to be covered. And guess what, they did. Driver only had 2 catches for 13 yards in the 2nd half. Again, it wasn't losing "Ferguson" that hurt, it was losing a WR. When the Packers beat the Saints, BY 49 POINTS, who were riddled with injuries, Vikings say they beat their B squad. But when the Vikings beat the Packers with equally if not worse injury situations, it's a "non-factor"? explain that. Oh, here's the explanation. The Vikings managed to beat the Packers B-squad bit a desparate field goal with time running out. Chew on that. Comparing Holmes and Green.....good points, but KC relied heavily on scoring on the ground and GB relied on scoring through the air. So it has something to do with the types of offenses they played in. Find a way to mix TD's and yards, and being healthy is a huge huge factor, and you come to a better conclusion about who was better during that period.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Anon. Nut Can Fan (Guest) 10/25/2005 @ 01:29:02 PM
This might take a while. Losing Green and Ferguson had to negatively affect the Packers. It's the only logical conclusion that losing 2 starting players to injury is not good for a team, regardless of anything they had done up to that point. That's a fact, you can't possibly argue against it. It's not why they lost the game though. The most blame for that goes to the conservative play calling of Sherman in the second half. When you have the lead you want to run to drain the clock, but you still have to at least move the ball down the field if not score points. Also, on the road play for the win not the tie. A draw play on 3rd and 2 is not playing for the win. Unfortunately, I'll also have to give the Vikings defense credit for double-teaming Driver. I've been wondering why teams haven't done that every play since Walker got hurt. This is more of a basketball strategy but it still applies, if you're going to get beat, make the supporting cast step up instead of getting beat by the number one guy. Jeremy, your 20 yard Favre pass comment doesn't even deserve a response. Sarah, I believe you meant to say I'm not beating you YET :)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - 3619 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 01:31:26 PM
Not that you couldn't figure out who it was.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 01:37:50 PM
Now there's a comment I agree with. The injuries were not the reason, but they compounded the poor coaching. But the injuries were indeed factors. My original comment was that it is now ok to blame the Packers bad season almost entirely on injuries. Had the Packers not lost 4 opening day starters to injury, my bet is that they are not 1-5.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - Refactor Mercilessly 10/25/2005 @ 01:55:25 PM
good stuff if you're a college bball fan http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/051019		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 10/25/2005 @ 02:23:22 PM
First of all about 93.82% of everything I say on here is just to get a rise out of people. Secondly yes injuries will affect teams but it isn't why you lost. The Vikings adjusted to put Smoot on Driver, and often double covered him. They kept shutting down the running game, finally opened up the offense and the rest was history.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 02:29:35 PM
not why, but factor. and 70 yards in the first half isn't shutting down a player. 3.6 yards per carry is doing pretty good, but not shutting down a player. 93.81% of what I respond to is to not give the orignial commentor the satisfaction of the comment going unresponded to. And I guarentee, if this were face to face, I probably wouldn't say a thing:)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 02:30:17 PM
have I ever mentioned that I have trouble letting things go?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 02:38:06 PM
WAIT!!!! One more comment to win the argument, and then I'm done, I promise. The "injuries" I'm talking about are the collective injuries for the season: Walker, Murphy, Green, Ferguson, Flannigan, Diggs, Clifton, etc. so while the Green/Ferguson injury was not necessarily the "cause" of the loss to the Vikings, my argument was that the loss of all these players to injury is the cause for the bad season, and indirectly, the cause for the loss to the Vikings. Here, I'll demonstrate: Injuries = poor season Poor season = losing games losing games = losing to the Vikings Injuries ==losing to the vikings the "=" stands for "leads to" So my original point was indeed true, that injuries are now to blame for the bad season.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - 584 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 03:22:33 PM
From 01-04, KC threw the ball 2072 times while GB threw the ball 2075 times (using just T. Green and Favres stats). They relied exactly the same upon the pass as the run. Favre had more TD's (121-94) but I'm not arguing that Trent Green is a better QB than Favre (although he is terribly unappreciated as a QB). Holmes actually had less carries over this period then Green did. Even if you extrapolate the year he was injured he would have only had a hundred or so carries more than Green From 01-04 Green vs. Holmes Rushes: 1203 vs. 1156 Catches: 225 vs. 210 YPC: 4.72 vs. 4.74 YPtouch: 5.17 vs. 5.53 Yards: 7302 vs. 7645 TDs: 76 vs. 48 Its close and Green made a good run at it, but Holmes had a better 4 years. And the fantasy football implications are astounding. No one player has dominated leagues in the history of FF as Holmes did for those years. But thats neither here nor there.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 04:12:08 PM
The Jets are without their center and are on to their 95th string qb. The Lions have 50% of their starting offense in the infirmary at any given time for like 5 years running. To say it's uneffected the Packers would be nieve but it's not like they were destened for the Super Bowl before all those players went down. If the Packers have a problem it's that they've lost some very close games while Ryan Longwell is batting like .400 on the year. I'm assuming Micah got his td's flipped.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 04:25:05 PM
I'll flip YOUR tds. I'm going to cling to my 23ish point lead for the week. I've been at the five spot for a while now. I think the loss was mostly bad play calling. We still had other WRs to throw it to. We still had our TEs out there. We had options, despite our whole team being out with injuries. Let's move onto the Bungles, who(m?) we will surely decimate. Yea, I think things are looking up from here on out.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 10/25/2005 @ 04:31:16 PM
I would be hard pressed to find a team that has had more key injuries to key players than the Packers this year. I mean, did you really expect the packers to be 1-5 at this point. No one ever said Super Bowl bound, but without losing Walker, Diggs, and others, the Packers probably would be at worst 3-3. And yes, Longwell has missed some key kicks. also, since 01, Holmes was the better back. But why should we not talk about 00 simply because Holmes was hurt. From 00-04, Green had the most rushing and total yards. That's what I'm talking about. Also during that stretch, Green was the BEST 3rd down back in the league on third and less than 4. Can we settle for one of the best over that period? Or does being a Packer make him overrated		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - You've got to trust your instinct, and let go of regret 10/25/2005 @ 06:40:13 PM
All anyone keeps saying is that the Packers lost. This is significant in the fact that they pretty much blew the game and the Vikings didn't really do anything that special to win, other than have their kicker who couldn't hit squat the week before get lucky and hit his career longest FG. I don't know that I really broke it down game-by-game so I can't estimate what I thought the Packers record would be right now, but I think I did forecast something like 7-9 if Walker held out, which he might as well have. If I had to rank them I'd give Holmes a slight edge because I think he probably did a little more with a little less to work with.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/26/2005 @ 11:21:44 AM
I disagree. The Packers seemed to be pretty even keeled in the two halves. The Vikings defense stepped it up a little bit, mainly canging the focus to Driver in the second half. However the packers didn't play a great half and a terrible half. The Vikings on the other hand played a terrible half and a great half. They looked like the Vikings of old in the second half, and not only because the Packers sucked. You didn't turn the ball over or do anything to blow the game where you could claim "you blew it" and that "the Vikings did nothing special". If anyone was blowing anythng it was the Vikings that were blowing plays which let you get it to 17-0 in the first place. (70 yard kick return only to fumble on the next play, hail mary pass which 90% of the Vikings roster touches, ect)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/26/2005 @ 11:24:00 AM
You want to know what's funny? Now that I have the schedules up I just realized how plausable a 1-10 record for the Packers could be in a few weeks.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 10/26/2005 @ 01:34:14 PM
Thank god we didn't sign Freddie Mitchell, otherwise I may have had a problem.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - I didn't make that! It fell out of your hair that way! 10/26/2005 @ 01:40:55 PM
Holmes wasn't hurt in 2000. I didnt count it because he was a on the Baltimore Ravens playing as a backup to Jamal Lewis. Ans he STILL had over 500 yards that season. You can take 3rd and less than 4 all the way to the bank.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 10/26/2005 @ 07:54:45 PM
I give up. I can't aruge with your illogical logic. Screw it, I don't like to give up. In the first half they had no 3 and outs and managed 2 TDS. The Packers second half drives: 3 and out, miss a FG, 3 and out, get a FG because they ran on 3rd and 2 instead of going for a TD. That is not even keel. Vikings will lose their next 4.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/26/2005 @ 08:39:19 PM
But they weren't lighting it up, they just moved the ball by going no where for 2 plays and then a big pass. It was only 17-0 because they Vikings were sucking offensively, and not usually because of anything the Packers were doing. Daunte couldn't hit the broadside of a barn in the first half. They made their own miscues and for the most part stopped themselves. My main point is that you can't implie the Vikings didn't do anything and only won because a tottally different Packers team showed up, because it was the Vikings that came out a new team. Daunte wasn't htting guys that were open by ten yards in the first half and won offensive player of the week for his second half. You have to give some credit where credit is due.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	icbeast - You've got to trust your instinct, and let go of regret 10/26/2005 @ 08:54:03 PM
Fine. But the Packers still should have won.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - 4671 Posts 10/27/2005 @ 09:22:54 AM
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051027/SPT02/510270376/1066 It's kind of an interesting article, maybe it'll turn things around for us once again... I remember watching that game and telling my dad, hey dad! We just beat the Bengals, and my dad just kind of shrugged his shoulders and said well we should beat the Bengals. Little did we know that that new QB was about to change the Packers forever... On a side note, today I meet one fourth of my doom. :) Hurray for the CPA exam. :( Why are the times all messed up wit the halloween theme?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 10/27/2005 @ 10:45:19 AM
The webserver changed how time stamps are stored, thanks a pant load chet.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.