Chuck?

[-Jaymo-]

Yep. How many times have we read this (We have a defense!) story?

31
24
21
18
14

I’m sure somebody will need to explain it to Chuckles.

[Herky]

Chuck?

[Chuck North]

Herky?

[Chuck North]

Have we already moved on from touting the leagues 24th ranked defense?


http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats? ... 447263-n=1

How's this thread work'en out for ya?

[-Jaymo-]

How's this thread work'en out for ya?

workin’


Just fine.

By the end of the year, we’ll just combine it with your other “We have a defense!” threads.

[Chuck North]

Workin' about as well as your Full Blown Espionage!!! thread.

[tbgh]

Going into WEEK 6!

But But.. The Packers have a terrible roster..

So you quit watching the pack last season after arod went down?

[packfaninvikeland]

So you quit watching the pack last season after arod went down?

Watched every game last season, it was pretty bad. Pretty sure Chuck was showing the standings of this year though. Which are improved. There is room for optimism with the Packers D for the first time in about 5 seasons. I believe our D will only get better in the next few seasons if Pettine can establish a solid scheme here. We are still an average team at best atm. I get that.

[tbgh]

So you quit watching the pack last season after arod went down?

Watched every game last season, it was pretty bad. Pretty sure Chuck was showing the standings of this year though. Which are improved. There is room for optimism with the Packers D for the first time in about 5 seasons. I believe our D will only get better in the next few seasons if Pettine can establish a solid scheme here. We are still an average team at best atm. I get that.

Then why are you trash talking about the roster?

[Chuck North]

Then why are you trash talking about the roster?

Because you guys started it. Because you couldn't brag about on field post season success, so you always divert to the roster arguement that your roster is soooo much better than the Pack. Not even close they say.

Well look at things now. Your d has been playing like shit for a while now compared to what it was supposed to be. And the Pack rank quite a bit higher. But, the rosters are not even close right?

So which is it? They're closer than you think or your players aren't as good as you thought?

Or maybe they're under achieving? Choking or un motivated? Or is it Zims fault?

Which is it if the roster is soooooo much better?

[tbgh]

Then why are you trash talking about the roster?

Because you guys started it. Because you couldn't brag about on field post season success, so you always divert to the roster arguement that your roster is soooo much better than the Pack. Not even close they say.

Well look at things now. Your d has been playing like shit for a while now compared to what it was supposed to be. And the Pack rank quite a bit higher. But, the rosters are not even close right?

So which is it? They're closer than you think or your players aren't as good as you thought?

Or maybe they're under achieving? Choking or un motivated? Or is it Zims fault?

Which is it if the roster is soooooo much better?

I’ve never wavered. The Viking roster is far superior to the packer roster. I watched last season the pack is terrible except for arod who is great.

I know packer fans like to crown champs after five games every year. In this case call the Viking season a failure but there is a lot of season left. I think the vikes will figure it out. But not having everson is gonna hurt bad. He’s a major reason the vikes overall are better than the pack. But that’s life. If the vikes don’t get going it’s a problem because they should be decent even without ev.

I don’t think packer fans would be wise to trash on the vikes fans takes about the roster. But I don’t think half of what you guys do is wise. In the end we will see. But the reason the pack is even close to the vikes is because of one player. That’s it one guy. And if he were to go down that’d be it for the pack. We all know it.

When the vikes qb goes down then the next one goes down we have seen that it doesn’t really matter. The roster overall is good enough to soldier on. If you don’t agree with that then you’re dumber than I thought. As dumb as synikin.

But to even bring up the roster is not smart imo.

[Bogey Bob]

Then why are you trash talking about the roster?

Because you guys started it. Because you couldn't brag about on field post season success, so you always divert to the roster arguement that your roster is soooo much better than the Pack. Not even close they say.

Well look at things now. Your d has been playing like shit for a while now compared to what it was supposed to be. And the Pack rank quite a bit higher. But, the rosters are not even close right?

So which is it? They're closer than you think or your players aren't as good as you thought?

Or maybe they're under achieving? Choking or un motivated? Or is it Zims fault?

Which is it if the roster is soooooo much better?

Another angsty Packer fan.

[Bogey Bob]

Then why are you trash talking about the roster?

Because you guys started it. Because you couldn't brag about on field post season success, so you always divert to the roster arguement that your roster is soooo much better than the Pack. Not even close they say.

Well look at things now. Your d has been playing like shit for a while now compared to what it was supposed to be. And the Pack rank quite a bit higher. But, the rosters are not even close right?

So which is it? They're closer than you think or your players aren't as good as you thought?

Or maybe they're under achieving? Choking or un motivated? Or is it Zims fault?

Which is it if the roster is soooooo much better?

I’ve never wavered. The Viking roster is far superior to the packer roster. I watched last season the pack is terrible except for arod who is great.

I know packer fans like to crown champs after five games every year. In this case call the Viking season a failure but there is a lot of season left. I think the vikes will figure it out. But not having everson is gonna hurt bad. He’s a major reason the vikes overall are better than the pack. But that’s life. If the vikes don’t get going it’s a problem because they should be decent even without ev.

I don’t think packer fans would be wise to trash on the vikes fans takes about the roster. But I don’t think half of what you guys do is wise. In the end we will see. But the reason the pack is even close to the vikes is because of one player. That’s it one guy. And if he were to go down that’d be it for the pack. We all know it.

When the vikes qb goes down then the next one goes down we have seen that it doesn’t really matter. The roster overall is good enough to soldier on. If you don’t agree with that then you’re dumber than I thought. As dumb as synikin.

But to even bring up the roster is not smart imo.

And why does Chuck gloss over the offensive side of the roster? Does that not count now that the Vikings O has really caught up to that vaunted Packer O? Weird...

[Chuck North]

Because of Jaymo's, "that defense though" comments.


Try to follow along.

[Chuck North]

Then why are you trash talking about the roster?

Because you guys started it. Because you couldn't brag about on field post season success, so you always divert to the roster arguement that your roster is soooo much better than the Pack. Not even close they say.

Well look at things now. Your d has been playing like shit for a while now compared to what it was supposed to be. And the Pack rank quite a bit higher. But, the rosters are not even close right?

So which is it? They're closer than you think or your players aren't as good as you thought?

Or maybe they're under achieving? Choking or un motivated? Or is it Zims fault?

Which is it if the roster is soooooo much better?

I’ve never wavered. The Viking roster is far superior to the packer roster. I watched last season the pack is terrible except for arod who is great.

I know packer fans like to crown champs after five games every year. In this case call the Viking season a failure but there is a lot of season left. I think the vikes will figure it out. But not having everson is gonna hurt bad. He’s a major reason the vikes overall are better than the pack. But that’s life. If the vikes don’t get going it’s a problem because they should be decent even without ev.

I don’t think packer fans would be wise to trash on the vikes fans takes about the roster. But I don’t think half of what you guys do is wise. In the end we will see. But the reason the pack is even close to the vikes is because of one player. That’s it one guy. And if he were to go down that’d be it for the pack. We all know it.

When the vikes qb goes down then the next one goes down we have seen that it doesn’t really matter. The roster overall is good enough to soldier on. If you don’t agree with that then you’re dumber than I thought. As dumb as synikin.

But to even bring up the roster is not smart imo.

Of course it's a long season. Of course you're not going to finish 21st in defense. Of course we're not going to finish 4th.

But, right now it's funny as hell.

The other thing that's funny? That because of your continued failures and under achievements on the field in the post season, all you have to hang your hat on is roster talk.

Better roster and pro bowl players. What has it gotten you so far?

Nanner nanner, our roster is better? It's not even close? Well what has it gotten you to this point? And how much better could it actually be to get smoked at home vs the Bill's? That's a classic vikling loss right there.

If your roster is that much better, then are your players just unmotivated talented losers? Is it the coach?

[-Jaymo-]

Pretty sure Chuck was showing the standings of this year though. Which are improved.

Are you pretty sure? I mean, you can take a look at this exact same post, from damned near exactly a year ago, and see that’s not the case.


http://forum.mnrubecentral.com/viewtopi ... 8&start=30

[tbgh]

Because you guys started it. Because you couldn't brag about on field post season success, so you always divert to the roster arguement that your roster is soooo much better than the Pack. Not even close they say.

Well look at things now. Your d has been playing like shit for a while now compared to what it was supposed to be. And the Pack rank quite a bit higher. But, the rosters are not even close right?

So which is it? They're closer than you think or your players aren't as good as you thought?

Or maybe they're under achieving? Choking or un motivated? Or is it Zims fault?

Which is it if the roster is soooooo much better?

I’ve never wavered. The Viking roster is far superior to the packer roster. I watched last season the pack is terrible except for arod who is great.

I know packer fans like to crown champs after five games every year. In this case call the Viking season a failure but there is a lot of season left. I think the vikes will figure it out. But not having everson is gonna hurt bad. He’s a major reason the vikes overall are better than the pack. But that’s life. If the vikes don’t get going it’s a problem because they should be decent even without ev.

I don’t think packer fans would be wise to trash on the vikes fans takes about the roster. But I don’t think half of what you guys do is wise. In the end we will see. But the reason the pack is even close to the vikes is because of one player. That’s it one guy. And if he were to go down that’d be it for the pack. We all know it.

When the vikes qb goes down then the next one goes down we have seen that it doesn’t really matter. The roster overall is good enough to soldier on. If you don’t agree with that then you’re dumber than I thought. As dumb as synikin.

But to even bring up the roster is not smart imo.

Of course it's a long season. Of course you're not going to finish 21st in defense. Of course we're not going to finish 4th.

But, right now it's funny as hell.

The other thing that's funny? That because of your continued failures and under achievements on the field in the post season, all you have to hang your hat on is roster talk.

Better roster and pro bowl players. What has it gotten you so far?

Nanner nanner, our roster is better? It's not even close? Well what has it gotten you to this point? And how much better could it actually be to get smoked at home vs the Bill's? That's a classic vikling loss right there.

If your roster is that much better, then are your players just unmotivated talented losers? Is it the coach?

Am I supposed to apologize for gasp! talking football in here?

Also The Viking roster isn’t much better in the league chuck. But they are much better than the packers. Is that so hard to understand?

[Chuck North]

Can you post the trophy they give for that?


So your side has been reduced to, we can't win when favored in the post season and we lost at home to Buffalo, but nanner nanner our roster is better than the Packers?


SKOAL!!

[-Jaymo-]

So your side has been reduced to, we can't win when favored in the post season and we lost at home to Buffalo, but nanner nanner our roster is better than the Packers?


SKOAL!!

As opposed to, you know, posting defensive rankings from week five.

Have they handed out a trophy for that?

[Bogey Bob]

So your side has been reduced to, we can't win when favored in the post season and we lost at home to Buffalo, but nanner nanner our roster is better than the Packers?


SKOAL!!

As opposed to, you know, posting defensive rankings from week five.

Have they handed out a trophy for that?

[Chuck North]

So your side has been reduced to, we can't win when favored in the post season and we lost at home to Buffalo, but nanner nanner our roster is better than the Packers?




SKOAL!!

As opposed to, you know, posting defensive rankings from week five.

Have they handed out a trophy for that?

IDK, you might want to check who started this thread.




What a maroon.

[-Jaymo-]

IDK, you might want to check who started this thread.




What a maroon.

Go on........



http://forum.mnrubecentral.com/viewtopi ... 36&t=13585

[tbgh]

Can you post the trophy they give for that?


So your side has been reduced to, we can't win when favored in the post season and we lost at home to Buffalo, but nanner nanner our roster is better than the Packers?


SKOAL!!

So you don’t like when we have football talk?
I’m not surprised.

You should make a thread about your favorite color next.

[Qman65]

Our defense is being groomed for the playoffs.

The purple like to focus on the regular season and winning as many preseason games as possible.

Apparently.

No sniff of post season since?

[A Kickass Offense]

Going into WEEK 6!

With a full season nearly in the books can we get an update from Chuck?

Hint: Vikings are in the top 5, but Chuck couldn't help himself, bought the fools gold that he himself was selling, and blew his load on a very small sample size.

[Bogey Bob]

Going into WEEK 6!

With a full season nearly in the books can we get an update from Chuck?

Hint: Vikings are in the top 5, but Chuck couldn't help himself, bought the fools gold that he himself was selling, and blew his load on a very small sample size.

I guess when Chuck said the Packer D was being groomed for the playoffs he should have clarified which season?

[salamander]

Going into WEEK 6!

So you're saying the problem is offense?

[Ron Burgundy 4 President]

Going into WEEK 6!

But But.. The Packers have a terrible roster..

Still laughing dickwad? The Packers do have a terrible roster. It's taken a Hall of Fame QB just to get them to five wins through 14 games. It's an atrocious reflection on the rest of the roster, it just is. When are fools like you and Chuck going to accept reality?

[salamander]

Going into WEEK 6!

But But.. The Packers have a terrible roster..

Still laughing dickwad? The Packers do have a terrible roster. It's taken a Hall of Fame QB just to get them to five wins through 14 games. It's an atrocious reflection on the rest of the roster, it just is. When are fools like you and Chuck going to accept reality?

What's sad is Peyton Manning with an equally terrible roster could get his team to at least 12 wins and/or into the playoffs constantly.
Aaron Rodgers can not.

P Manning > A. Rodgers. At this point you could even say E. Manning is more accomplished than A. Rodgers.
No one would say E. Manning is a top 10 all time QB would they? I don't think so.

[packfaninvikeland]

Still laughing dickwad? The Packers do have a terrible roster. It's taken a Hall of Fame QB just to get them to five wins through 14 games. It's an atrocious reflection on the rest of the roster, it just is. When are fools like you and Chuck going to accept reality?
[/quote]

Um yep. I am still laughing at you dolts. You guys cry and complain when we bump old threads, but of course, how convenient its ok when you guys do it. Adding to your 3 new threads a week saying the same corny old shit you guys say every week. So yea, I still laugh at you.

That being said, we are a year removed from getting rid of our DC, and a handful of other roster changes and staff. I dont think our roster is shit at all, I think its below average. I'd like to see what a healthy Packers team can do. Enjoy the Packers reloading struggling period, it wont last long.