Showing posts with label James Starks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Starks. Show all posts

Saturday, November 14, 2015

Time for the Packers to Stop the Slide

Press-Gazette Cover, 11-9-15
I had just about finished this post on Friday, when the news of the terrorist attacks in Paris started hitting the screen.  All of a sudden, a two-game Packers losing streak didn't seem like such a big deal after all, and I decided to wait a day before posting this.  Prayers for the victims and survivors, comfort to the families, and may France and the west be "impitoyable à l’égard des barbares de Daesh" (ruthless against the ISIS barbarians).  Having gotten that off my chest, back to football.

*    *    *    *

Cam Newton rips down and destroys an expensive Packer fan banner in the stadium (and the fan reports him to the police, and the Panthers later agree to replace the banner).  Ha Ha Clinton-Dix and Julius Peppers yelling at each other on the sidelines, with B.J. Raji and Mike Pennel doing some pushing and shoving to try to break it up. Randall Cobb and Aaron Rodgers arguing with each other on the sidelines.  Rodgers, upon seeing that he had missed a wide open Cobb on the decisive play of the game, throwing his tablet to the ground (and apparently destroying it in the process).  Packer fans are in full panic mode after the Packers lose 2 games in a row for the first time since 2010, this one by the score of 37-29 to the still-undefeated Carolina Panthers.  Then later this week, Eddie Lacy gets demoted to RB number 2.  All is not well in Titletown, that is for sure.

Will a visit by the Lions make everything OK?  Well, it will take more than a win against the Lions to make everything OK with the Packers.  But the Lions have not won in the state of Wisconsin since 1991.  This sets up a sort of a football Rorschach test.  Glass-half-full types would say, the Packers are not about to lose to the Lions in Green Bay, particularly not this year's Lions team, which is in disarray at 1-7.  While glass-half-empty types would say that the Lions are due after all those years.  Or, here is another Rorschach test.  The Packers' 6 wins have come against 6 teams, none of which currently have a winning record (the best among them are the Seahawks and Rams at 4-4).  While the Packers' two losses have come against teams that were undefeated at the time of the games.  Does that make you feel better or worse about the 2015 Packers?

Put me in the glass-half-full group.  I expect the Packers to beat the Lions, but I have to be honest in saying that nothing would shock me after the last two games.  And it is good not to forget that the Lions were 11-5 last year and only lost to the Cowboys in the playoffs on a controversial play.  So it is not as if they are as bad a team as their 1-7 record would suggest.

As for the Packers, everybody knows that there is something wrong with Eddie Lacy and with the receivers.  Eddie Lacy is some combination of too fat/too out of shape/too injured.  I love Lacy, but it is probably a good thing for right now that Starks is going to be the starter.  Starks has looked much better than Lacy for several games in a row.

The problem with the receivers is a little different.  The receivers who are starting are not very fast, and the receivers who are fast are not playing much and don't seem to have the trust factor with Rodgers or the coaching staff.  I do think that this will improve over time as some of the players continue to get healthier after their injuries (Cobb, Adams, Montgomery) and as the faster players gain more trust (Janis, Abbrederis).

But what about Aaron Rodgers?  My wife Judy has been saying for weeks that there is something wrong with him.  I did not think so at first, but I am coming around to her point of view.  He frequently seems jumpy in the pocket.  He seems to hesitate in pulling the trigger on passes (I saw this several times in the Carolina game - instances where he had open receivers available to him).  Why?  Is that a conscious decision by Rodgers, because he is looking for a longer pass, or the play call by the coaches?  Even when he does pull the trigger, he is frequently just a little off target, more so than we are used to.  It would be a violation of league injury policies for Rodgers to be injured and for the Packers not to report it.  So let's not assume that that is the case.  But if it is not, then what is the answer?  Could it be that he is taking too many hits and sacks, and getting inadequate protection from the offensive line, and that this has affected his psyche?  Perhaps, but that would not be a good answer.

Beyond this, the coaching staff continues to under-perform.  Once again, I saw insufficient offensive plays designed to take the pressure off of Rodgers (screen passes, draw plays, roll-outs, slants and other quick release passes).  They were a little better on this against the Panthers than against the Broncos, but I want to see more protective and creative play calls against the Lions.

And the defense, which a few weeks ago looked like one of the best in the league, now looks like one of the worst.  They have not had a single sack in the last two games, and they have given up 1,475 yards over the last three games.  I have never been a member of the "fire Dom Capers" club, but I might be getting closer to it if things don't improve.  They need to be more aggressive.  They need to get after Matthew Stafford.  He is not likely to look like Cam Newton when under pressure.

The next four games, all against division opponents, will in effect decide how the 2015 season will go.  To borrow from Kevin Greene in Super Bowl XLV, "it is time."

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Packers' Record-Breaking Performance

Photo by Rob Grabowski, USA Today Sports
Karma moment of the year is pictured in the USA Today photo - Brandon Meriweather being taken off the field after his second helmet-on-helmet hit against a Packers running back.  The first one knocked Eddie Lacy out of the game with a concussion.  In the second one, Meriweather knocked himself out with a concussion.  Both the Packer players and the fans in the stadium gave him a nice hand on his way off the field.  In that regard, they are much more generous than I am.  I was glad to see him knock himself out of the game before he injured anybody else. 

Either the league is serious about preventing helmet-to-helmet hits, or it is not.  If it is, Meriweather should be suspended, especially because he has a history as a head-hunter.  Ndamukong Suh just last week got a $100,000 fine, when anybody else without his history would have been fined much less.  Given Meriweather's history, nothing but a suspension will suffice.

But back to the game itself, a game filled with big smiles on the Packer sidelines and in the stands.  The Packers completely dominated the game, from start to finish, leading at one point in the third quarter by 31-0, before finishing the game 38-20, a misleading score if I ever saw one.

My favorite things about this game?  Just about everything.  Better decisions on kick returns by Jeremy Ross, a score on the opening drive despite back-to-back sacks, aggressive play on offense, including the no-huddle and a 4th down touchdown pass, aggressive play on defense, including swarming run defense and nice use of blitzes at appropriate times.  James Starks, playing in relief of Eddie Lacy, had the first 100 yard rushing game by a Packer since Brandon Jackson did it in 2010.  He also made great decisions on individual running plays, and he was the beneficiary of the Packers' old staple play, the screen pass - something they should run more often, because it was successful in both games this season.  The only real negative was the fact that the Packers gave up 4 sacks, which is not the way to keep Aaron Rodgers upright and healthy the whole year.

Speaking of records, Aaron Rodgers tied the Packers' single game passing record at 480 yards.  He shares that record with the perennial backup, Matt Flynn (now playing backup for the third team in as many seasons).  The Packers also had a 400 yard passing game and a 100 yard rusher in the same game for the first time in the long history of the franchise.  To take it one step further, no team in NFL history had a 450 yard passing game and a 125 yard rushing game in the same game, until the Packers did it on Sunday.  And finally, the Packers had the second-most YAC (yards after catch) in a game in the history of the NFL on Sunday (295 YAC).

So at 1-1, trailing the Bears by a game in the NFC North, the Packers have something to build on as they play the Bengals, in Cincinnati on Sunday, hoping to go 2-1 before their very early bye week.  In the wake of the 49ers game in week 1, I was personally worried about the possibility of the Packers going 0-3.  I was still worried about 1-2, but frankly the Bengals did not impress me that much in their Monday night game.  They do have a fearsome pass rush, they have the great A.J. Green and a developing running game with BenJarvus Green-Ellis and Giovani Bernard.  But I think the Steelers are pretty much all done, and yet they were able to stay close to the Bengals for most of the game.  So I think a team like the Packers has an excellent chance of beating them, even on the road.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Packers-Giants Post-Mortem

(Photo my Mark Hoffman, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

On Sunday, the Packers' season, which looked like it could turn out to be one of the great seasons in Packers history, came to a crashing and disappointing halt.  The visiting New York Giants ended the Packers' season, just as they did four years ago, this time by the score of 37-20.

I went in for a dental appointment on Monday afternoon.  I'm sure you can see this line coming from a mile away - I feel like I spent two afternoons in a row at the dentist.  In the waiting room I read, wistfully, Peter King's Postseason Predictions in Sports Illustrated from a couple of weeks ago: "I see New Orleans and Green Bay facing each other again [in the NFC Championship Game], with the survivor going on to win the Super Bowl."  Yeah, me too.

All year long, the Packers have set various records, week to week.  Well here is another one.  The Packers became the first ever 15-1 team to be "one and done" in the playoffs.  While it is painful to see the Packers squander their no. 1 seed position this way, it should be noted that 4 of the last 5 number 1 seeds in the NFC have been knocked out of the playoffs without reaching the Super Bowl (New Orleans in 2009 was the exception).  Not that this helps very much - I am still walking around in a daze two days later - but at least the Packers are not alone in wasting a great season.  (It was sad having to cancel my travel reservations for the NFC Championship game, so that didn't help matters, either.)

Before getting into what went wrong, it is appropriate to give some credit to the New York Giants.  They outplayed the Packers on offense, on defense, and on special teams, and in my opinion the Packers were outcoached, as well.  Or as Greg Jennings said on his Facebook page Sunday night: "Hats off to the NYG on their win today.  They played a very sound game and we didn't do enough on our end to get this one.  Thank u Packer fans for your commitment to excellence all season in bringing us closer together as a team as we fed off u all season.  We'll bounce back."

So what went wrong?  Aaron Nagler of Cheesehead TV said that the Packers picked a terrible day to play their worst game of the season, and that is certainly true.  Mike Vandermause of the Green Bay Press-Gazette says that this game will go down as the most disheartening playoff loss in team history.  I'm not at all sure I agree with him, but why quibble?  This was plenty bad enough.

I have not even re-watched the whole game yet, but to me it was a large collection of little things, all of which worked against the Packers.  (And since the Packers benefited from a couple of bad calls by referees in their favor, it is horrifying to note that things could have been even worse.)  Aaron Rodgers was off the mark on some of his passes, including what should have been a touchdown to Jennings in the first quarter.  Was rust from an unnecessary week off a factor?  I don't know.  I was not in favor of resting healthy starters for competitive reasons, but there is no question that Rodgers did not look sharp.  Rodgers also had Jennings open for an easy touchdown in the third quarter, but Umenyiora stripped him on the play for a fumble.  In Rodgers' somber post-game press conference, he was asked about the play.
Q: "On the play where you fumbled, did you see how open Greg was?"
A: "Yes."
This terse answer, together with the look on his face, says a lot about the missed opportunities in this game.

If Rodgers was off on offense, the receivers and running backs were even worse.  There were either 6 or 8 dropped passes in the game, depending on how you count them.  Since the Packers averaged about 2 dropped passes per game during the regular season, this hurt, killing promising drives in the process.  Both Ryan Grant and John Kuhn are dependable ball carriers; but they both fumbled away the ball in this game (in Kuhn's case, it was his first career fumble).

On defense, it is probably not fair to single out one player, but nobody had a worse game than Charlie Peprah.  Peprah was the one who hit Hakeem Nicks, but did not wrap him up, on what turned out to be Nicks' long touchdown catch.  At the end of the first half, he took a bad angle and failed to get Ahmad Bradshaw on the ground when the Giants ran the ball with 15 seconds left, allowing him to get out of bounds and set up the Hail Mary pass.  Peprah and Woodson were the players with the best shot to break up the Hail Mary pass, but didn't.  This game, more than any other game this year, shows how much it hurt to lose Nick Collins early in the season.  Peprah is a decent player, but he was a big downgrade from Collins.  The latest word on Collins is that he will be reexamined in March, and will decide based on medical advice (and before the draft) whether he can come back and play again.

But most fundamentally, the problem on defense is what it has been all year: the inability to get pressure on the quarterback without blitzing.  So, if the Packers rush 3 or 4 on a given play, there is no pressure, and the quarterback has plenty of time for someone to get open.  If the Packers blitz, they get pressure, but if the quarterback gets the ball out quickly enough, somebody is going to have an opening to make a big play.  It is no fluke that the Packers gave up as many yards as they did on defense this year, but two factors allowed them to mask the problem and go 15-1: (1) the MVP quality of play by Aaron Rodgers; and (2) the turnovers generated by the defense.  On a day when Rodgers did not play like an MVP, and when the Packers lost the turnover battle, we now see what can happen.

This problem will have to be addressed in the draft and/or free agency, with the top priority being the defensive line.  I will have more comments on the Packers' needs later, after we see which coaches (if any) are hired away or simply replaced by the Packers.

Putting the pieces together, how do we explain (1) a sub-par performance by our MVP quarterback; (2) an extra dose of dropped passes; (3) fumbles by our normally reliable running backs; (4) sloppy tackling on defense; (5) worse than usual pass rush; and (6) poor play in the secondary?  I had predicted that the team would use Coach Philbin's son's death as a rallying point.  But Andy Hayes (of Packergeeks) was at the game and points to some things not visible on TV that really do suggest that there was something lacking, emotionally, from the team's effort.  So I have come to the conclusion that this was a far bigger, and more negative, factor than I would have anticipated.

It has been a good run for the Packers in the first few years with Aaron Rodgers as the starting quarterback.  Despite the disappointing end to this season, the core of this team is young and good enough that there should be more opportunities in the coming years.  The caveat is that I thought the same thing when the Packers lost Super Bowl XXXII.  I was convinced that the Favre era Packers would rack up a couple more Super Bowl wins, but we found out that nothing comes easily, and nothing is guaranteed.

*  *  *  *


I had occasion over the weekend to reflect on the way that technology has changed the lives of sports fans.  When my wife and I spent a week in England in October 1983, we literally had to wait until Monday and buy the International Herald Tribune to find out who won the football games on Sunday.  (We were happy to learn that the Packers beat the Buccaneers, 55-14, October 2, 1983).  But on Sunday, we watched the game at home with friends, while our son watched the game while flying on Jet Blue, and our daughter watched it with Wisconsin expats in Amsterdam.  The expats were Erik and Mary Jo Tunison, who own Eat at Jo's restaurant in the Melkweg entertainment complex, near the Leidseplein.  They showed themselves to be classic Wisconsin people, by being nice enough to invite a total stranger to watch the game with them, just because she is a Packers fan!  As Erik said afterwards, "We had a good time, except for that one little thing..."  Eat at Jo's is on my list of places to go, if I ever get back to Amsterdam.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Super Bowl Bound!


(Photo by Nam Y. Huh, Associated Press)


Well, I am ecstatic about the Packers' 21-14 win in the NFC Championship over the Bears, despite the fact that the Packers did not play a very good game, at least on offense, after the second quarter. To take it a step further, I am not real happy with the play calling on offense or on defense in the second half. A little too much "take no chances and preserve the lead" on offense, and a little too much "sit back in coverage and don't give up any big plays" on defense. I am also worried about Aaron Rodgers, who never seemed like himself after taking the shot to the head by Julius Peppers. Fortunately, he has two weeks to get ready for the SUPER BOWL!

Basically, the win was preserved by some excellent individual plays on defense, including the two interceptions by Sam Shields, and the interception return for a TD by B.J. Raji. He is a young guy, so he probably does not remember this first hand, but he was perilously close to Leon Lett-Don Beebe Super Bowl territory. He should look it up and learn for the future.

I am not sure if my posts over the course of the season fully reflect this, but after the injuries set in early in the year, I did not believe that the Packers could make it to the Super Bowl this year. I felt that it was just one of those things, like the case of the 2008 Patriots, who lost Tom Brady in the first game, and played well (11-5) but did not even make the playoffs. I thought that the Packers might make the playoffs this year, but I did not expect them to go very far in the playoffs if they did.

Nevertheless, in each individual playoff game, I predicted a Packers win. I thought they could beat the Eagles if they played well and avoided mistakes. I thought they could beat the Falcons, but only if they were very fortunate and avoided big mistakes (like kickoff returns for touchdowns, for example). And I thought they could, and really should, beat the Bears. In fact, I probably felt more confident about the Bears' game than either of the other two playoff games. Still, when five games in a row are must-win games, something is bound to go wrong in one of them, especially when the team is not at full strength. Put it this way: what were the chances, as of five weeks ago, that the Packers could win every one of the next five games, all against playoff teams or playoff contenders, with three of the five games on the road?

In that stretch, as I said, something was bound to go wrong and cost the Packers a game (and, in this case, the season). Take the NFC Championship game. The Bears pulled within 7 points twice in the fourth quarter. That put the Packers in quite a bit of jeopardy. A stripped ball, a deflected pass, a snap over Rodgers' head, a defensive back who slips on the turf, and we could be looking at a tie game. Which is why it drives me crazy when Mike McCarthy goes into "protect" mode, or when Dom Capers starts to dial back the pressure, resulting in two fourth-quarter touchdown drives for the Bears. "All's Well that Ends Well," Shakespeare said, but still, I prefer to see the Packers keep the pedal to the metal on offense, and the boot on the throat on defense.

Game balls have to go to Sam Shields and BJ Raji on defense. James Starks (74 yards rushing and a TD) and Greg Jennings (130 yards receiving) would certainly get game balls on offense. And punter Tim Masthay certainly gets a special teams game ball as well. He averaged 41.5 yards per punt, and 34.5 yards net. With Devin Hester returning punts, that is really special, special teams play.

I remember very well what it felt like, as a fan, for the Packers to beat the Dom Capers-coached Carolina Panthers in the NFC Championship game in January of 1997, on their way to Super Bowl XXXI. It brought (quickly-freezing) tears to my eyes sitting in the stands. It had, after all, been XXIX years since the Packers went to the Super Bowl. Thankfully, we didn't have to wait that long this time, as it was only XIII years from Super Bowl XXXII to Super Bowl XLV.

So, sure, there are lots of things to criticize, there are causes for concern, heck, there may not even be a normal season next year due to contract issues. But let us pause to savor the moment, and the minor miracle of a team that overcame this kind of adversity to reach the Super Bowl. And for all that to happen by beating the Chicago Bears in the most momentous game in the history of the rivalry just adds a little extra.

If that isn't enough, consider the youth of this team. Unlike the Bears, for example, the core of this team is young and capable of being Super Bowl contenders for years to come, even if some of the older veterans (like Charles Woodson and Donald Driver) win their Super Bowl rings and retire.

Monday, January 10, 2011

Eagles Down, Falcons Coming Up




The Packers started the 2010 season by beating the Eagles in Philadelphia by the score of 20-17. This was a big win for the Packers, because they had not won in Philadelphia since 1962. The game started story lines for each team that would last the whole year. In the case of the Packers, Ryan Grant and Justin Harrell were knocked out for the season, beginning a long list of players who ended up on injured reserve. In the case of the Eagles, the Packers did them a favor, of sorts, by knocking starting quarterback Kevin Kolb out of the game, which led to Michael Vick eventually claiming the starting quarterback position, where he proceeded to lead the Eagles to 10 wins and the division crown. But it wasn't easy - Vick led a comeback for the Eagles, and it took a 4th down stop, in Packer territory in the final two minutes to seal the win.

This week, the Packers supplied the other bookend to the Eagles season by sending them home for the offseason by the score of 21-16. This was the first Packer playoff win in Philadelphia (or anywhere else), ever. If James Jones had better hands (he dropped what would likely have been a long touchdown pass late in the second quarter), or if the Packers had better play calling when trying to grind down the clock, this game might not have been so close. But as it was, it required another stop in the final minute to ensure the win. This time, it came in the form of a game-sealing interception by Tramon Williams in the final minute of the game. (Photo by Evan Siegle of the Green Bay Press-Gazette.)

As a footnote to the Tramon Williams interception, my joy at seeing him come down with the ball was immediately replaced with a second or two of abject terror. He was not touched as he went to the ground in the end zone, and he popped up and began sauntering out of the end zone. It was clear from his body language that he was not intending to run the ball out of the end zone, he was just running to celebrate. But the ball was live, and he apparently did not realize it. So he could have spiked the ball in celebration, or perhaps flipped the ball in the direction of the official, and in either case this would be treated as a fumble, possibly turning the ball back to the Eagles. Fortunately, Charlie Peprah realized what was happening, and got Williams to go to the ground, where Peprah and Nick Collins surrounded him to make sure that nobody could reach in and pull out the ball. Take a look at the video, here.

On offense, it seems to me that there were two keys to this game. The first, and one that augurs well for next week, was the re-discovery of a running game. On the second series, James Starks established what Mike McCarthy called the hot hand, and became the main running back for the rest of the game. He had 23 carries for 123 yards, and added a couple of pass receptions. The running game has been missing in action since Ryan Grant was knocked out. If Starks can consistently gain yards on the ground, that might be just the missing link we have been looking for.

The second key was the 80 yard drive the Packers mounted in the third quarter, immediately after Rodgers fumbled, and the Eagles scored quickly, to make it 14-10. The Packers got the ball back, and put together an 11 play, 80 yard drive, eating up over 6 minutes, and ending with a beautiful screen pass for a touchdown to Brandon Jackson. The Eagles had just gotten a turnover turned into a touchdown, and the momentum of the game might have shifted to the Eagles, but for the Packers' 80 yard drive.

Improvement is still needed. The Packers' receivers have just got to stop dropping balls that would have been touchdown passes. James Jones is the worst offender, but in other games other receivers have dropped TD passes as well. That kind of inconsistency can be a killer in any given game. And while, on the whole, I like the way the Packers called the game, on both offense and defense, I still have a problem with the cautiousness with which they approached the game while protecting the lead late in the game. On every possession after the Packers went ahead 21-10, with 22.5 minutes left in the game, the Packers ran on every 1st down and on every second down. That might conceivably work if the Packers had an overwhelmingly dominant running game. But they don't. It gets a lot easier to play defense if you can predict what your opponent will do on every 1st and 2nd down play. It is no coincidence that the Packers never crossed midfield after adopting this approach. Only great defense preserved the game for the Packers - since the Packers' offense did nothing in the last quarter and a half of the game.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

49er Game Review

Watching the 49er game, I was uncomfortable, as were others in my group of family and friends (judging from Facebook and text messages during the first half). It was another slow start, and the halftime score was only 14-13, Packers. Could this essential game slip away from us? But the Packers poured it on in the second half, and the final score was 34-16, Packers, so the concern was somewhat misplaced.

In hindsight, it is possible to see that the Packers were never in much real trouble. Both of the 49ers' first half field goals resulted, essentially, from a single long pass completion, after which the Packers' defense held. The 49ers' only touchdown resulted from a single, 66-yard touchdown pass, with a missed tackle playing a big part. Obviously, it would be better if these three long pass completions never took place, but you can't shut out every team every game.

I was far more interested to see if the Packers would be able to adjust things defensively at halftime, and to see how the Packers approached their own offensive game plan. I found things to be pleased with in both areas. On halftime adjustments, in the second half, the 49ers' longest pass completion for 20 yards, while they had three of 25 yards and over in the first half. In the first half, the 49ers completed 45% of their passes for 125 net yards. In the second half, they completed 36% of their passes, for 47 net yards passing.

The SF Bay Area media and sports talk radio were all over Coach Singletary yesterday, for not being able to make any halftime adjustments, unlike the Packers, and for being disconnected from the offensive and defensive game-calling, doing too much delegating and not having enough hands-on involvement. The 49er coaching staff was also criticized for having coached the playmaking ability out of QB Troy Smith, "turning him into Alex Smith." Left unspoken was the frequent refrain around here, that they could have had Aaron Rodgers, instead of Alex Smith. And speaking of Alex Smith, the 49ers announced today that they will start Alex Smith, not Troy Smith, this week against the Seahawks. (Singletary, at this writing, keeps his own job.)

I also saw good things in the Packers' offensive game plan. True, it was not as effective in the first half as in the second, but I still saw improvement. In the first place, the Packers seemed to finally recognize that their strength on offense is in the passing game. In the first few series, there was heavy emphasis on short passes, with runs being the exception, rather than the rule. Starting later in the first half and in the second half, the running game became more prominent, presumably because the 49ers were focussed so much on stopping the passing game. This is exactly what I have been looking for, using the passing game to open up the running game, rather than the other way around. Second, it looks like James Starks is going to be a big plus for the running game. He seems to have a better feel for the running game than does Brandon Jackson, although Jackson remains an excellent pass receiver.

The point is that the addition of Starks to the running back rotation opens up some additional options for the Packers, since the running game was not very successful before. While they only scored 14 points in the first half, this was because of a doinked field goal on the first drive, a disruptive sack on the second drive, and a sack and a pass bouncing off a defensive back's helmet on the third drive. The Packers were taking the right approach on offense, it just didn't pay off in those first three drives.

Between the improved offensive game plan and the halftime adjustments on defense, the result, as I heard it said on SF sports talk radio yesterday, was that the Packers administered a beating to the 49ers both ways, some on quick strike touchdowns and some on sustained drives.

The 1929 uniforms don't seem to have made a very good impression on anyone. One radio guy said maybe it is finally time to get rid of throwback uniforms, after seeing the Packers' uniforms this week. Here is Peter King's take on the 1929 uniforms:
Where'd you get those uniforms, Packers? Costco? And the helmets that looked like round FTD fall-bouquet vases? Without a question, those are the worst throwbacks I've seen, and there have been a lot of bad ones.
The Packers must have decided that they are never using these uniforms again, as they are selling off the game-worn uniforms at the Packer Pro Shop starting today.

With four games left, the pressure to win every game is intense. The only "easy" game is this week, at the Lions. It is very arguable that the Lions are much better than their 2-10 record, and indeed the Lions gave the Packers a hard time at Lambeau Field, and they came close to upsetting the Bears this week. None of that matters. With the Patriots, Giants and Bears coming up, there can be no excuse for not coming away with a victory at Detroit.

Steve Mariucci, on the NFL Network, predicted that the Packers and Bears will both be 10-5 going into the final week, when Chicago comes to Lambeau Field. He predicts that the Packers will win that game and the division. So let's look at the schedule. The Bears play the Patriots at home, then the Vikings in the dome, then the Jets at home, and then at the Packers. If the Bears are going to be 10-5, they need to lose 2 of the next 3 games. I don't know how the coach figured it, although I could see the Bears losing any or all of those games. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that they upset the Jets, but lose to the Patriots and Vikings. For the Packers to be 10-5, they need to win 2 of the next 3. At Lions, at Patriots, and the Giants at home. I assume that Mariucci thinks the Packers will lose to the Patriots, and win the other two. Everybody knows that the coach grew up as a Packer fan. So his predictions are almost as suspect as mine. But I think he is probably right on this. After watching the relentlessness of the Patriots last night against the Jets, the Patriots are certainly the remaining team I consider most likely to beat the Packers. If so, and if the Packers win the other two games, then that Bears at Packers game will be monumental. I assume the league will flex it so it ends up as the Sunday night game, the final game of the 2010 regular season, with the NFC North Division winner, and quite possibly a playoff bye, on the line.