NFL Week 2

[ELCABALLO45]

Yeah this sucks. Really hope Jackson can step up.

[SpongeWorthy]

Between Rice, Stafford, and Grant the Bears are making out like bandits with divisional injuries.

[ELCABALLO45]

Ok no one wants to hear me bitch but I gotta do it here.

 

I live in Wisconsin but I live on the Border of Minnesota. I have Direct TV and cable. I get Minnesota channels on Direct TV. On my cable package I get a Wisconsin version and a Minnesota version of...

 

ABC

FOX

NBC

FSN

 

However I do not get a Wisconsin version of CBS. So whenever the Packers and Vikings play at the same time on CBS I only get the Vikings game like this weekend. It really pisses me off. END RANT.

 

So question, what is the best internet site to watch this game?

[bcl412]

I hate that Grant is done for the year but in 2007 he kind of came out of no where. As long as the passing game is what it's supposed to be there is no reason that some no name guy can't be dependable along with Jackson when the running game won't be teams number one focus. The thing is, if the passing game isn't as good as it was supposed to be I the Packers probably wouldn't have won the Super Bowl with Grant anyways.

 

So losing Grant sucks but they should be ok I'd think.

[UMFan83]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

[erik316wttn]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

[UMFan83]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

[bcl412]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's weird that you said that after referencing 2005 when they went 4-12.

[UMFan83]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's weird that you said that after referencing 2005 when they went 4-12.

 

I didn't say it always leads to victories. Also funny you reference my reference when its one of only 2 losing seasons the Packers have had in the last 18 years.

[erik316wttn]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's not like Aaron Rodgers was some scrap-heap journeyman who just happened to have an amazing few years after Favre left. He was drafted to take over once Brett left, and at least on the day he was drafted was no lower than the #2 QB on a lot of draft boards.

[Flames24Rulz]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's weird that you said that after referencing 2005 when they went 4-12.

 

I didn't say it always leads to victories. Also funny you reference my reference when its one of only 2 losing seasons the Packers have had in the last 18 years.

 

Yipee, we're the Atlanta Braves of the NFL.

[UMFan83]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's not like Aaron Rodgers was some scrap-heap journeyman who just happened to have an amazing few years after Favre left. He was drafted to take over once Brett left, and at least on the day he was drafted was no lower than the #2 QB on a lot of draft boards.

 

There are a lot of QBs that are drafted much higher than Rodgers each year that never end up half as good as Rodgers has been. My bitterness comes from the Bears 50 year search for a competent QB, while the Packers are blessed with one of the best QBs in NFL history, then make one 1st round QB pick in 20 years and it so happens they get their next Top 5 QB. Not that you care but imagine how frustrating that is for Bears fans that have been waiting all this time for Favre to retire so Packers fans have to become nomads in the QB desert like we have been.

[UMFan83]

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's weird that you said that after referencing 2005 when they went 4-12.

 

I didn't say it always leads to victories. Also funny you reference my reference when its one of only 2 losing seasons the Packers have had in the last 18 years.

 

Yipee, we're the Atlanta Braves of the NFL.

 

Much better than being the New York Mets of the NFL (good every 5-6 years for at most 1-2 seasons, and never winning it all except for one time in the mid-80's and a couple more way back when).

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

In other news Justin Harrell is also out for the season with a torn ACL. I wasn't expecting much from him, but that draft choice has been a total failure. The only question remaining is if Thompson will finally cut ties with him?

[Flames24Rulz]

In other news Justin Harrell is also out for the season with a torn ACL. I wasn't expecting much from him, but that draft choice has been a total failure. The only question remaining is if Thompson will finally cut ties with him?

 

He's done. That goes right up there with the Jamal Reynolds pick, as far as busts go.

[UMFan83]

This is random, but I was intregued by comparing NFL teams to their MLB counterparts and this is what I came up with. Note: There are obviously 32 NFL teams and 30 MLB teams. As I got further down, it got a lot harder for a perfect match. The last 2 NFL teams I used an MLB team a second time.

 

 

New England Patriots - New York Yankees

Buffalo Bills - Cleveland Indians

New York Jets - San Diego Padres

Miami Dolphins - Baltimore Orioles

 

Pittsburgh Steelers - St. Louis Cardinals

Cincinnati Bengals - Tampa Bay Rays

Cleveland Browns - Washington Nationals

Baltimore Ravens - Los Angeles Angels

 

Indianapolis Colts - Philadelphia Phillies

Tennessee Titans - San Francisco Giants

Houston Texans - Toronto Blue Jays

Jacksonville Jaguars - Oakland A's

 

San Diego Chargers - Los Angeles Dodgers

Oakland Raiders - Pittsburgh Pirates

Denver Broncos - Florida Marlins

Kansas City Chiefs - Milwaukee Brewers

 

New York Giants - Chicago White Sox

Philadelphia Eagles - Minnesota Twins

Washington Redskins - Detroit Tigers

Dallas Cowboys - Boston Red Sox (without the 2 recent titles)

 

Chicago Bears - New York Mets

Green Bay Packers - Atlanta Braves

Minnesota Vikings - Chicago Cubs

Detroit Lions - Kansas City Royals

 

Arizona Cardinals - Colorado Rockies

St. Louis Rams - Seattle Mariners

San Francisco 49ers - Cincinnati Reds

Seattle Seahawks - Houston Astros

 

Carolina Panthers - Texas Rangers

Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Arizona Diamondbacks

-------------------

New Orleans Saints - Philadelphia Phillies (repeat)

Atlanta Falcons - Minnesota Twins (repeat)

[jersey cubs fan]

New England Patriots - New York Yankees

 

No.

 

Nononononononononono.

 

New England has been relavent for a decade.

 

Pittsburgh or the Giants are better options. The Giants win titles in every decade.

Edited September 15, 2010 by jersey cubs fan

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

I think the Cowboys, Steelers, and Packers qualify as the Yankees much more then the Patriots. The Patriots are certainly the flavor of the decade, but I think you need to take a more historical perspective when choosing a team to compare to the Yankees.

 

If we take the Super Bowl Era then the nod goes to the Cowboys, they have the rings, the fanbase, and are "America's Team." The Packers have the most titles of any team, but 9 came before the Super Bowl era, it's like comparing apples to oranges. Finally, I think a strong argument can be made for the Steelers, 6 Super Bowls, a heavy hall of fame lineage, and a rabid fan base, and the Rooney's most closely emulate the Steinbrenners except with a bit more class.

[jersey cubs fan]

Eagles = Braves. In the playoffs every year, almost always a bridesmaid never a bride.

[UMFan83]

I respect the argument on Pats-Yankees. I figured there would be one. It's hard to find a team that has the historical and recent success combined with the cast of colorful characters and a general hatred from fans of the other teams in the league.

 

Pats don't have the historical success, but they are generally hated by the rest of the league, they have had a consistent dominance for the last 10 years, even in non-Championhsip years), and they have a cast of well known colorful characters on their side (Moss, Brady, Belichick to name a few) to match the Yankees.

 

It's not ideal, but the Cowboys lack the recent success, and the Steelers aren't generally as reviled as the Pats/Yanks are among the entire NFL.

[UMFan83]

Eagles = Braves. In the playoffs every year, almost always a bridesmaid never a bride.

 

Yeah but I thought the Packers were the best match, making the playoffs almost as often as the Braves, and only winning 1 title each, in the mid-90's.

[jersey cubs fan]

I respect the argument on Pats-Yankees. I figured there would be one. It's hard to find a team that has the historical and recent success combined with the cast of colorful characters and a general hatred from fans of the other teams in the league.

 

Pats don't have the historical success, but they are generally hated by the rest of the league, they have had a consistent dominance for the last 10 years, even in non-Championhsip years), and they have a cast of well known colorful characters on their side (Moss, Brady, Belichick to name a few) to match the Yankees.

 

It's not ideal, but the Cowboys lack the recent success, and the Steelers aren't generally as reviled as the Pats/Yanks are among the entire NFL.

 

Pittsburgh is hated, big time. They might have the most obnoxious non-Cowboys fan base, as well as the most ubiquitous. Every NFL city is loaded with Steelers bars and obnoxious Steelers fans. Their 70's teams were successful scumbags. The Patriots are almost perfectly matched to the Red Sox. Irrelevant until this decade, save for an embarrassing loss in the big game in the mid 80's, a woe is me fan base that has now become spoiled babies. Sure it's cheap and easy to combine the two, but they are really the same.

[jersey cubs fan]

Eagles = Braves. In the playoffs every year, almost always a bridesmaid never a bride.

 

Yeah but I thought the Packers were the best match, making the playoffs almost as often as the Braves, and only winning 1 title each, in the mid-90's.

 

I think the Packers are much better match for the Cardinals. A sanctimonious fan base that thinks it is the center of the heartland of its sport.

[erik316wttn]

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

 

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee.

 

This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers.

 

Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

 

It's not like Aaron Rodgers was some scrap-heap journeyman who just happened to have an amazing few years after Favre left. He was drafted to take over once Brett left, and at least on the day he was drafted was no lower than the #2 QB on a lot of draft boards.

 

There are a lot of QBs that are drafted much higher than Rodgers each year that never end up half as good as Rodgers has been. My bitterness comes from the Bears 50 year search for a competent QB, while the Packers are blessed with one of the best QBs in NFL history, then make one 1st round QB pick in 20 years and it so happens they get their next Top 5 QB. Not that you care but imagine how frustrating that is for Bears fans that have been waiting all this time for Favre to retire so Packers fans have to become nomads in the QB desert like we have been.

 

Heh. Yeah. It is pretty funny now that you mention it.

[Warpticon]

Miami Dolphins - Baltimore Orioles

 

What?