49ers 2009 opponent breakdown: Green ...

49ers 2009 opponent breakdown: Green Bay Packers

There are 35 comments on the San Francisco Examiner story from Jul 3, 2009, titled 49ers 2009 opponent breakdown: Green Bay Packers. In it, San Francisco Examiner reports that:

July 3, 12:49 AM Comment RSS Aaron Rodgers wants to prove that can lead the Pack back to the playoffs.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Francisco Examiner.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
wal0645

Yorktown, VA

#1 Jul 3, 2009
Apparently there are a few folks around the country that think TT has put together a pretty nice team!!! This cuts against the grain for many of the posters on this blog who think TT is piss poor and doesn't know what he's doing. I can just hear the monotones now.
normallylikeyell ow

Houtzdale, PA

#2 Jul 3, 2009
All I read here is that he doesn't think they can come in and beat us on December 10. I hope not. If they do, we are really in trouble, looking at the subsequent weeks. It will be a "tough task," because GB "still has a lot of players from the 2007 playoff team." We expect the offense "to get back on track." He notes Grant's "inconsistent play" last year. Our offensive line "is yet to be determined," but our defense has "explosive talent." He also raves about Raji, Matthews, Collins, Woodson and our LBs. Man, you'd think it was the offense we would be changing schemes for, not the D! Do your homework, Samuel. We were 5th in offense and 22nd on D, 26th against the run. You'd think he be salivating over the thought of Frank Gore torching us for about 200 yards. Then he calls us "a veteran club." We were the youngest team in the league, man. This is weak. But I do hope he is correct about the outcome.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#3 Jul 3, 2009
First of all, the article says nothing about Turd Thompson! Plus, the guy is a typical idiot sports writer. His comments show he knows little about the NFL and even less about the Packers. For example, he incorrectly stated that the Packers were the number one seed in 2007.

More importantly, he is a writer for a San Francisco paper! His comments amount to little more than an assessment of perceived team strengths about one of the 49ers opponents this season. He apparently wrote or is writing a similar article about all of the 49ers opponents this season.

Most importantly, so what? You believe a 49ers sports writer is impressed with one of their opponents this year. Tell me which of their opponents aren't they impressed with? Oh boy, TT has managed to build a team that the 49ers may have difficulty beating, according to a stupid columnist. Unless you have been living under a rock, you know that it doesn't mean shit! I hope TT and the Packers have bigger goals than impressing sports writers for one of the NFL's worst teams.
wal0645

Yorktown, VA

#4 Jul 3, 2009
and the beat goes; and the beat goes on..........
wal0645

Yorktown, VA

#5 Jul 3, 2009
Discounting an injury to Rodgers, GB clearly has the most balanced offense in the North. Loaded at WR, very solid at RB and now they have a possible punishing FB, decent TE depth, and the line rotation has some talent there. Rodgers is definitely a top player with some fantasy experts saying he's the 3rd QB off the board. Except for Driver and Clifton the rest of these guys are TT picks. The defense has good players with four having been pro bowlers the past two years. These drafted guys haven't played yet, but they look pretty good. Then there's the defensive coaches we brought in; clearly from a knowledge standpoint no comparison to what we have had. I firmly believe GB will have an successful season and TT/MM will have been the drivers.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#7 Jul 3, 2009
wal0645 wrote:
Discounting an injury to Rodgers, GB clearly has the most balanced offense in the North. Loaded at WR, very solid at RB and now they have a possible punishing FB, decent TE depth, and the line rotation has some talent there. Rodgers is definitely a top player with some fantasy experts saying he's the 3rd QB off the board. Except for Driver and Clifton the rest of these guys are TT picks. The defense has good players with four having been pro bowlers the past two years. These drafted guys haven't played yet, but they look pretty good. Then there's the defensive coaches we brought in; clearly from a knowledge standpoint no comparison to what we have had. I firmly believe GB will have an successful season and TT/MM will have been the drivers.
The offense is basically the same as last year when the Packers only managed 4 wins against opponents that weren't the Lions, the worst team in NFL history. Yes they have added a rookie FB. The defense has a new coordinator. There were at least three others the Packers tried to hire before him. Players win games, not coaches and not schemes. The players are actually handicapped by having to learn a new scheme. The defense has no significant player changes other than two rookies, one of which may not even start. Meanwhile, our division rivals have been making significant changes in attempts to improve.

I admire your optimism. However, it is not based in fact. Your optimism is only supported by wishful thinking. That is fine for children and fairy tales, but it doesn't produce results in the NFL. I really would love to share your optimism, but I don't own a pair of those rose colored glasses that you have on.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#8 Jul 3, 2009
Steve Tellers wrote:
<quoted text>The Packers are still a quality team. With any breaks at all last year, they would have been at least 9-7.
Still a quality team? From when? 1996? I have news for you -- that team doesn't exist anymore. The 2007 team didn't exist in 2008 and last years team won't be playing in 2009. If you doubt it, all you have to do is compare the roster changes from each year. The Packers expect to have three new young inexperienced starters on the offensive line, to make no mention of other changes. How can they still be a quality team when they aren't even the same team.

Moreover, the Packers have a losing record the last 4 years despite playing in one of the NFL's weaker divisiions. Are the Redskins a quality team? They have won more games than the Packers the last 4 years. They also have made the playoffs more often in the last 4 years while playing in one of the NFL's best divisions. You wouldn't call them a "quality" team would you?

This is what Turd Thompson has done to the Packers! How can can you be so delusional? The Packers may be a quality team again someday but it won't happen under Turd Thompson's management.
normallylikeyell ow

Bellwood, PA

#9 Jul 4, 2009
We start pretty good players (except maybe the O line). This has more to do with our inability to run than who is at FB. Grant's backups didn't fare any better. Last night on Total Access they were showing the Williams's just collapsing our O line into the backfield. Aaron's great on deep balls and making big plays. He needs to spread it around and move the chains, especially late in games. Patience is his next step. We need to cover kicks better and return kickoffs more efficiently. We need a punter, period. Biggest weakness, as we saw last year, is we have no depth--except maybe at LB. Injuries are inevitable. Last year our defensive leader, Barnett, and both starting safeties missed significant time, as did Cullen Jenkins. Our youth shows when guys start going down.
wal0645

Yorktown, VA

#10 Jul 4, 2009
I would add another key point to this last post; letting Corey Williams go was the right move and the gamble with Harrell didn't pay off. Also note that Barnett was lost and Hawk played most of the year injured, plus Harris missed a few. It was one of those years if you ask me. Crosby makes two key kicks and we go at least 8-8 and sweep the division. So with the pieces added from the draft, younger players a year older, and the defensive coaches we brought in; there is plenty reason to feel optimistic.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#11 Jul 4, 2009
So you wish that the Packers had won more games last year and you hope that they win more games this year. I totally agree with those sentiments. But those aren't reasons for optimism.
wal0645

Yorktown, VA

#12 Jul 4, 2009
We've got the players; have had them since 2007. Now you add coaches that know the game and have a proven track record like Capers. There is no substitute they will have especially with this young team. Kampman, Barnett, Woodson, Harris; these are the yets that will produce irrespective of the coaching, but the younger players stand to really benefit a lot I feel. Rodgers and Co. will get the job done on the offense.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#13 Jul 4, 2009
I do hope so, but many young inexperienced players will need to step up and produce.
jeremy

Mooreton, ND

#14 Jul 5, 2009
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
The offense is basically the same as last year when the Packers only managed 4 wins against opponents that weren't the Lions, the worst team in NFL history. Yes they have added a rookie FB. The defense has a new coordinator. There were at least three others the Packers tried to hire before him. Players win games, not coaches and not schemes. The players are actually handicapped by having to learn a new scheme. The defense has no significant player changes other than two rookies, one of which may not even start. Meanwhile, our division rivals have been making significant changes in attempts to improve.
I admire your optimism. However, it is not based in fact. Your optimism is only supported by wishful thinking. That is fine for children and fairy tales, but it doesn't produce results in the NFL. I really would love to share your optimism, but I don't own a pair of those rose colored glasses that you have on.
I would have to say coaching and schemes are more important than one thinks. It is always a chess match with offense vs. defense. But in the end players are what matters, and I think we have a pretty could core of players, just need our D to step up and we'll be poised to make a serious run.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#15 Jul 6, 2009
I agree that the D needs to step up. However, many fans seem to be taking the O for granted. There will be significant changes to the line. If the line faulters the rest of the offense will suffer as well. Unless many young inexperienced players produce, it will be a long season.
jeremy

Mooreton, ND

#16 Jul 7, 2009
GBPfan wrote:
I agree that the D needs to step up. However, many fans seem to be taking the O for granted. There will be significant changes to the line. If the line faulters the rest of the offense will suffer as well. Unless many young inexperienced players produce, it will be a long season.
I think we had some young inexperienced players get valuable playing time last year with all the injuries, obviously our new rookies definitely need to play well for us to rise up to the top again.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#17 Jul 7, 2009
jeremy wrote:
<quoted text>I think we had some young inexperienced players get valuable playing time last year with all the injuries, obviously our new rookies definitely need to play well for us to rise up to the top again.
As I said, they need to produce, not just play. Unless you forgot the Packers only won 4 games last year that weren't played against the worst team in NFL history. Having played and having produced are not necessarily the same thing.
normallylikeyell ow

Moshannon, PA

#18 Jul 9, 2009
I hope the 3-4 works out, but I have to disagree with Jeremy. I grew up a fan of the St. Louis Cardinals, and coaches and schemes came and went (some who won elsewhere) and we never won anything. We were exciting, though...
jeremy

Mooreton, ND

#19 Jul 9, 2009
normallylikeyellow wrote:
I hope the 3-4 works out, but I have to disagree with Jeremy. I grew up a fan of the St. Louis Cardinals, and coaches and schemes came and went (some who won elsewhere) and we never won anything. We were exciting, though...
Patriots, Eagles, Cardinals, Ravens, Steelers, Colts, Titans are all examples of schemes and coaches that came in and put their stamp on the team, but like I said before, in the end players do need to produce and our players who came off the bench didn't produce that well, but most were first year players. So I feel they got valuable playing time and Tramon Williams is one of those guys who I think will have a big year being that Al Harris isn't getting any younger as we seen last year with his injuries, Tramon looked good last year in Al's spot.
normallylikeyell ow

Curwensville, PA

#20 Jul 10, 2009
If McCarthy is as good as those coaches, I accept your assessment. HOF QBs don't hurt either. They've been consistent winners. I'd like to get back to that.
jeremy

Mooreton, ND

#21 Jul 13, 2009
normallylikeyellow wrote:
If McCarthy is as good as those coaches, I accept your assessment. HOF QBs don't hurt either. They've been consistent winners. I'd like to get back to that.
AR has the potential, he is a film room guy and has the strong accurate arm, as long as he stays healthy McCarthy will look good. I like McCarthy's attitude towards this organization and what he expects out of this team, you very rarely ever here him make excuses for bad play, he puts it on his shoulders and I like that kind of leadership and hopefully AR picks up on that, which I think he did last year. I just want AR to get a little more into the teamates faces this year like Brady and Manning do on a regular basis with their teamates.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Alex Smith Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News How does the Alex Smith trade look now? Jul '17 Yep phart 12
News Chiefs move up, take QB Patrick Mahomes 10th ov... May '17 He pharted 6
News Starting with Bears, surprises galore on Day 1 ... Apr '17 Galore pharts 2
News Twitter Tuesday: Chiefs anger, paranoia, depres... (Jan '14) Feb '17 Another Phart 4
News Chiefs Lose to the Bucs: The Good, The Bad, and... (Nov '16) Nov '16 The Deflator 1
News Where will Colin Kaepernick land in 2016? (Feb '16) Feb '16 Fart news 2
News How the Chiefs can upset Tom Brady and the Patr... (Jan '16) Jan '16 Fart news 2
More from around the web