Packers Need to Get Off to a Faster Start

The Snap on the Game-Tying TD, photo by Tom Freeman

I think we are starting to see a disturbing pattern here with the Packers.  In the last few years, many of us have complained that the Packers sometimes have a tendency to start out the season slowly.  While none of the recent seasons fit the critique exactly, last year's team can illustrate the point.  By the time 10 games had been played, the Packers were sitting at 4-6.  It took a somewhat remarkable "running of the table" for them to get to the playoffs and ultimately to the NFC Championship Game.  

This year, we are seeing the same issue in microcosm, with the Packers starting out each game slowly, before turning it on in the second half and winning 2 out of the first 3 games.  They trailed Seattle 0-3 at halftime, before winning 17-9.  They trailed the Falcons 7-24 at halftime, before at least making it close and losing, 23-34.  They trailed the Bengals on Sunday 7-21 at halftime, before winning the game in overtime, 27-24.  My friend Harv, from whose palatial estate this blog post is being written, thinks that the Packers frequently have started games slowly, even in prior years.  I took a look at a few of the box scores from last year, and I don't think that was the case, but it certainly seems to be their routine this year.  Harv goes a step further and argues that the team, and in particular Rodgers, start out the games with a lack of urgency, almost a lackadaisical approach to the games, and  only turn on the jets later in the game.  I think my wife, Judy, agrees with at least part of Harv's argument on this.  I don't know that I agree, as I was not really watching for that when watching the games live.  I will be watching the Thursday night game, and any game I get a chance to go back and re-watch next week, with a special eye for the energy level and urgency level of the Packers, on both sides of the ball, during the early part of the games.

All in all, the Packers are lucky to be 2-1 after three games, and I suspect that all of us realize that this business of playing sluggishly in the first half, and then getting it together in the second half, just is not sustainable as a means to get to the playoffs. They could easily have lost the Bengals game on Sunday.  For example, if the Bengals had not missed a field goal earlier in the game, or if the Packers had not put together their most impressive stop of the day on the opening drive of overtime, or if Geronimo Allison did not haul in the bomb on the free play; in any of these circumstances the Packers would likely have lost the game.  Almost by definition, last-minute heroics will not save the day every time.  And when they get behind to a high quality opponent, like the Falcons, they are unlikely to be able to make up the deficit.  They are going to have to learn to start games faster, and there is no time like the present, with the Chicago Bears, carrying some renewed optimism, riding into town.  If they can just keep it together, despite their many injuries, and bring home another win on Thursday night, then they will be 3-1, with a mini-bye to get healthy, before a stretch of difficult games in October.  

*   *   *   *

This is a football blog, not a political one.  But one can't really write a football-related blog post this particular week without acknowledging the whole national anthem protest issue.  My attitude on this is as follows.  Nobody who has thought about this and knows something about our civil rights doubts that athletes have a right to kneel, lock arms, sit down, or do anything else they want to do during the national anthem.  I certainly believe that.  But just because something is legal does not mean that it is right or even a good idea.  It is also legal for football players to skydive, bungee jump, and race motorcycles.  But all three are probably contrary to the player contracts, and all three are definitely a bad idea for football players to do during their playing careers.  In my mind, if you do anything other than listen, sing along, and put your hand over your heart during the anthem, you are showing some degree of disrespect for the country and the flag.  If you do this intentionally, for the purpose of scoring a political point, then you are certainly showing disrespect.  Politicizing the national anthem by protesting it may be legal, but it isn't right.  So I am not in favor of locking arms, or sitting, or kneeling during the national anthem.  I think the Packers' players and management are wrong to suggest that the anthem should be politicized in this fashion.  

Nor do I agree with those who vow to never watch the NFL or the Packers again.  I was a Packers fan before the current crop of players were even born.  God willing,  I will be alive and rooting for the Packers when the last of the current players is retired.  My fan interest in the Packers does not depend on the conduct or attitude of the current players or the current management of the team.  As a shareholder, my involvement with the team is permanent; as players and management, their involvement is more temporary.

Not everything needs to be, or should be, political, all of the time, although right now one side or the other seeks to politicize almost everything.  I regret that the players chose to politicize football and the national anthem.  I regret that the President decided to inflame the situation with his ill-thought-out comments.  I hope we can all get back to plain old football, and soon.

What Will the Packers Look Like After the Bye?

Picture by www.LionsGab.com

Watching your team lose a game is always frustrating.  Watching them dig themselves out of a hole, build a sizable lead, and then collapse and lose the game after all, is not only frustrating but infuriating.  Add in wounded players all over the field and you have the formula for despair.  All of that, and more, came out of the Packers' 34-30 loss to the Bengals last week.  They found themselves peering upward at the 3-0 Bears (now at 3-1), wondering what the rest of the season would look like.

After last week's game, speculation was running rampant.

When would the Packers dump kick returner Jeremy Ross, who was responsible for another fumbled kickoff, leading to the Packers trailing 14-0 in the opening minutes of the game?  Answer: the day after the game.  (Follow-up question: if you are going to dump him the next day, why have him run back more kicks during the game?  I have no answer on that one.)

What was the story behind Rodgers and McCarthy yelling at each other on the sideline in the second quarter, after a Packers drive fizzled at the Bengals' one yard line?  Rodgers confirmed that the discussion was about play-calling, but the antagonists otherwise brushed it off by saying that they are both fierce competitors trying to win the game.

I even heard some speculation in a Packers Talk Radio Network podcast that Rodgers sustained a concussion on the sideline hit on the drive that fizzled at the one.  I have to admit, the same thought occurred to me while watching the game.  The difference is that the podcaster in question is a medical doctor, so her observation counts for more than mine.

While the Packers were idle this week, the Packers' next opponents, the Lions, were busy beating the Bears, so that both the Lions and Bears are now 3-1.  I saw enough of that game to feel that beating the Lions will be no walk in the park on Sunday, but if the Packers are ever going to recover enough to win the division, it was probably important for the Lions to knock off the unbeaten Bears, and it is even more important that the Packers start to play more consistently and go out and beat the Lions at home.

Despite all the drama of last week's loss, it is useful to keep things in perspective - it is a long season, and if the Packers can get their act together, there is plenty of time to turn things around.  Speaking of keeping things in perspective, it is hard to say it any better than Zach Kruse of Cheesehead TV did:

– Keep this in mind: The Packers were without starters at running back, safety, cornerback and eventually tight end and outside linebacker, plus backup running back and special teams gunner. Coughing up a 16-point second half lead is inexcusable, but that’s a lot of talent to lose on the road against a good football team.

I agree on all counts.  I can't excuse the blown lead, but let's face it, when you lose that many people, before and during the game, you can say "next man up" all you want, but you still have a problem on your hands.

The Packers just came back after their bye week on Monday, so it is still a little early to know how many of these players will be back for the Sunday game against the Lions.  As of today (Wednesday), all of the injured players are back participating fully in practice, with these notable exceptions: Hayward (out, and sounds like he is not expected back this week), OL Greg Van Roten (out), James Starks (did not practice, sounds like he will be out this week) and Clay Matthews (limited participation).  I think this means that Eddie Lacy, Johnathan Franklin, Jermichael Finley and Morgan Burnett are all expected back this week.  Will that be enough?  Let's hope so, because otherwise it will be a long season.  The Lions have beaten the Vikings, Redskins, and Bears, and lost to the Cardinals, in putting up their 3-1 record.  Only the win against the Bears impresses me.  Reggie Bush has played surprisingly well for the Lions, and of course Calvin Johnson is almost impossible to stop. But I still believe that the Packers have more talent on their roster, they will be playing at home, they have had two weeks to game plan, rest up, and get some players healthier.  I am looking for a big Packers win on Sunday.

Scary Preseason Predictions

The Packers' preseason loss to the Chiefs this week was so boring that I had to write this blog post during the latter part of the game. The Packers chose to sit most of their starters for the game, which makes some sense, but must irritate anyone stuck with a full-price ticket for the game.

Meanwhile, the preseason accolades for the Packers continue to roll in. NFL.com polled its seven experts, and all seven picked the Packers to be the NFC representative in the Super Bowl. Four of them have the Packers winning the Super Bowl, while three of them have the Packers losing to the Colts, Ravens and Bengals.

The last time the Packers were the consensus Super Bowl pick was probably 1996. I remember it well, including the Sports Illustrated cover predicting the Packers and Chiefs for Super Bowl XXXI.

I love seeing this stuff, but it scares me almost as much as it pleases me. I also guess I am not yet a complete believer. In 1996, the Packers had gone to the playoffs the prior three seasons, and they were coming off an NFC Championship Game loss to the Cowboys. The Packers had led the game in the fourth quarter. To name a few players, the Packers started the season with Favre at quarterback, Edgar Bennett and Dorsey Levens at running back, Robert Brooks and Antonio Freeman at wide receiver, and Keith Jackson at tight end. On defense, they had Reggie White and Sean Jones at defensive end, and Leroy Butler, Craig Newsome and Eugene Robinson at defensive back. On special teams, they had Desmond Howard. This was an impressive team, and it was obvious at the beginning of the season. Sure, they might not win it all, but there was no team in the NFC that you would have thought had a better shot at it.

I don't see the 2010 Packers as being at the same level. I like the 2010 Rodgers as much as I liked the 1996 Favre, and Driver/Jennings/Finley compares pretty favorably with Brooks/Freeman/Jackson. I am a Ryan Grant fan, but I don't think he stacks up well against Bennett and Levens. On defense, where are the pass rushers to match up with White and Jones? Where are the defensive backs to match up with Butler, Newsome and Robinson? Charles Woodson is probably better than the 1996 defensive backs, but with Al Harris (as well as Atari Bigby) spending the first six weeks of the season on the PUP list, I just can't make a case that the defensive backs as a whole are close to being comparable. And, of course, the special teams have been shaky for most of the preseason as well as last year.

Are the Packers better, going into the season, than the Saints, the Falcons, the Vikings, the Cowboys, or the 49ers? (The same NFL.com experts pick the Cowboys, the Saints or Falcons, and the 49ers to win their respective divisions.) Maybe. But I don't see it as being so clear cut as to make the Packers a consensus pick for the Super Bowl.

Eh or Hey

My 2009 Update

The item below was not a South End Zone Article. It was a post in the old Packfans Listserv in 1995. I still chuckle about this when I think of it, so I thought I would add it to this blog. In the Listserv, there was some discussion about whether "eh" and "hey" mean the same thing or different things in Wisconsin lingo. I am still not sure of the answer to this myself. Anyway, this prompted me to throw in the following post, about Brett Favre's first regular season appearance for the Packers.

Incidentally, someone (who will remain nameless to protect the guilty) responded to this message with his own explanation of the difference between "eh" and "hey." The priceless explanation is reprinted below my post.

**********************************
All of this talk about eh and hey reminds me of an incident in the 1992 season. It was early in the season, and I am almost sure it was the game against Cincy in which Majik was injured, Favre came in and led the team to an improbable come-from-behind victory in the closing seconds.

In any event, NBC was occasionally going out to the Lambeau parking lot during lead-ins or lead-outs from commercials. I was watching the game with my family and countless other cheese-heads at a Packer sports bar in Redwood City California (the bar has, sadly, since closed).

During one of these excursions to the parking lot, a tailgater proudly held up a large (disgusting-looking) bag of meat, and said something like "Whyn't cha come on back in half an hour." I wish there was a way to convey in writing the thickness of this guy's Wisconsin accent - it was overpowering. One of the other patrons in the sports bar (an exile himself, undoubtedly) responded loudly "YA, HEY!" The entire place cracked up, probably including some non-Wis.-natives, who didn't understand exactly why that was so funny, but laughed anyway.

Anyway, three weeks left until training camp, hey?

**********************************

RLB's response:

Yah, I remember dat well. Da wife an I had sent da kids ta Bay Beach, we was really impressed dat Sure Way had a deal on Hamm's an brats on a Packer weekend. Dis whole ting about accents can't really be put over da net till we all get hooked up wid sound eh, boy won't we have some fun den. I know fer sure dat da accent gets really reved up after a few beers. I know too dat dee only place yu'll find her is in Packer country, an in a day when everyting seems to be getten as homogenous as steroid melk, it's anoder ting ta be proud of!

SO..."WE GO GREEN BAY... EH OR HEH"

PS I do tink der's a diffrence between da two. Heh...for gettin yer kid out a da refrigerater. "Heh...get away from dat thing, shut dat door eh, an grab me a cold one while ya do."

Eh...more of an agreement article, "Sure is grat ta beat da Bears twice in a season eh?" or "Yer wife looks like two miles a bad road eh" Ya..so does yers heh.