Jump to content

2014 NFL Season Thread


Recommended Posts

For all the reasons that the NFL went with all divisional games in Week 17, those same reasons just aren't happening for these Thursday night games. Aside from Dallas-Chicago the week after Thanksgiving, these are all division games. (And the Bears and Cowboys will get a full week to prepare for their Thursday night game.)

Why is Dallas playing back-to-back weeks on Thursday? Isn't that what Thanksgiving Day was for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I'm proud to be a Packers fan...both Brett and Aaron were known for playing THROUGH injuries (except for last season, but still, we brought Aaron back earlier than most teams would have).

Zim is a coward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to Christian Ponder, we have yet another Thursday Night Beatdown.

So that's what...every Thursday Night game this year? All 4 of them?

All five, if we include the Green Bay-Seattle game from Week 1. 20 points has been the closest game so far.

For all the reasons that the NFL went with all divisional games in Week 17, those same reasons just aren't happening for these Thursday night games. Aside from Dallas-Chicago the week after Thanksgiving, these are all division games. (And the Bears and Cowboys will get a full week to prepare for their Thursday night game.)

If the league is going to insist on these Thursday games, why don't they just have the participants play after a bye week (then not have Thursday games for weeks 2-3 and 12-17 or whenever there are no byes)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zim is a coward.

What?

Apparently for not playing his QB four days after spraining his ankle in a rainy game in Green Bay. It seems that Bridgewater's injury is able to be deemed the same as all of Favre's and Rodgers's injuries.

For my part, I did not want him to play at less than 100%. The game was unwinnable and I'd rather he have 10 more days to heal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zim is a coward.

What?

Apparently for not playing his QB four days after spraining his ankle in a rainy game in Green Bay. It seems that Bridgewater's injury is able to be deemed the same as all of Favre's and Rodgers's injuries.

For my part, I did not want him to play at less than 100%. The game was unwinnable and I'd rather he have 10 more days to heal.

Seriously? Wow. Looking back at his post I guess your right... I just couldn't figure out why, after his confusing comment comparing Rodger's toughness with former Viking great Brett Favre (never heard that before... Favre's toughness is legendary, while Double-check just missed half a season), he decided to take a random shot at the Viking's coach. But I guess your right... weird.

I like to think that if I'd just watched my team dismantle a division opponent I'd be too busy grinning like a monkey to be bothered to arbitrarily insult the other teams coach. (But if I was interested in insulting GB's coach, I'd probably point out that he was grossly fat, and looked vaguely like a suburban pedophile. Luckily, I am way above such things :P )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to complain about your team being so successful for so long, but the fact that there are people drinking in bars now who weren't alive when the Packers QB wasn't a HOFer has made me kinda miss the old days... back when the Packers were so bad you had to be a genuine football fan to follow this team. We used to have one of the most reasonable and knowledgeable fan bases in the NFL. Now we're the NFL's version of the St. Louis Cardinals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to complain about your team being so successful for so long, but the fact that there are people drinking in bars now who weren't alive when the Packers QB wasn't a HOFer has made me kinda miss the old days... back when the Packers were so bad you had to be a genuine football fan to follow this team. We used to have one of the most reasonable and knowledgeable fan bases in the NFL. Now we're the NFL's version of the St. Louis Cardinals.

I understand what you're saying, but the football version of the St. Louis Cardinals is the Pittsburgh Steelers. Right down to the self-aggrandizing, completely humorless fan base.

I guess the Packers are too, but I've always thought of them as their own entity. No other team in sports is quite like the Packers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to complain about your team being so successful for so long, but the fact that there are people drinking in bars now who weren't alive when the Packers QB wasn't a HOFer has made me kinda miss the old days... back when the Packers were so bad you had to be a genuine football fan to follow this team. We used to have one of the most reasonable and knowledgeable fan bases in the NFL. Now we're the NFL's version of the St. Louis Cardinals.

I understand what you're saying, but the football version of the St. Louis Cardinals is the Pittsburgh Steelers. Right down to the self-aggrandizing, completely humorless fan base.

I guess the Packers are too, but I've always thought of them as their own entity. No other team in sports is quite like the Packers.

You don't think that might have something to do with being a Cincinnati fan? I grew up in Ohio, so I've known a lot of both Steeler and Packer fans... the parallels between some (some!) of their more... let's say committed fans are pretty obvious.

There's nothing quite like that moment when a Packer fans shakes their head at you with that condesending half smile and sadly tells you that you'll just never understand if you haven't been to Lambeau Field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to complain about your team being so successful for so long, but the fact that there are people drinking in bars now who weren't alive when the Packers QB wasn't a HOFer has made me kinda miss the old days... back when the Packers were so bad you had to be a genuine football fan to follow this team. We used to have one of the most reasonable and knowledgeable fan bases in the NFL. Now we're the NFL's version of the St. Louis Cardinals.

I understand what you're saying, but the football version of the St. Louis Cardinals is the Pittsburgh Steelers. Right down to the self-aggrandizing, completely humorless fan base.

I guess the Packers are too, but I've always thought of them as their own entity. No other team in sports is quite like the Packers.

I arrived at the University of Wisconsin in fall 1993. Favre was just gettin' good and the Vikes were still the better team. Two years later, the Packers were fighting Dallas for dominance and the people there became far more Packer-obsessed. For a great fan base (which I am not saying it's not; just that it's not as different as some people think), it sure was interesting to watch the fervor skyrocket (as it does when any team gets good).

And maybe I cannot totally get around my bias, but "Packer Nation" is really annoying to me. More than any fan base, I see it as people thinking that there's is "more than just a football team." The Lombardi with Pope headwear signs, the "God is a Packer Fan" buttons, etc. There is something "different" there and while it's partly "our team is always good" like with the Yankees or something, there is a sense of "we are special" that I don't get from any other fan base. But again, I lived in Wisconsin and my mild dislike of the Packers really intensified; more than it probably would have had I never lived there. But I will say I knew some pretty serious Brewer fans (and one or two Bucks fans) and I never had the same vibe. Maybe the critical mass was just not there.

Since I first started watching sports in the early 1980s, my first memories are of the Packers as a consistently sub-.500 team and it was quite a while before I realized that almost all of their history is good. I cannot imagine them ever not being a contender at this point and by the time Rodgers retires, they'll have had 25 years or so of HOF QB's starting just about every game. So after Rodgers, they could come back down to earth, but that's hard to fathom at this point.

To Illwauk's point, my wife grew up watching the bad Pack of the 1980s. Since they won the 1996 Super Bowl, her interest has dropped; I think she liked rooting for the "bad" Packers more than the "good" ones. (And we both transitioned to wasting our Saturdays and not Sundays)...

EDIT: Also to his point, these younger fans who's earliest memories are of Brett Favre are going to really struggle if the Packers hit a mediocre stretch. I think there is a sense of entitlement out of some who never went through any lean years. There will be some un-bandwaggoning going on.

I suppose we are all biased...for me, I have no beef with Steelers, Cardinals, even Yankees/Saux fanbases. And I can deal with rival fans but some Packer fans really do think they are "God's Team."

But McCarthy's struggles with the Steelers fans and mine with the Pack fans probably says a lot about what's really at play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of course it's probably mostly due to my location and where I was conditioned and that my favorite teams are division rivals with these teams. I can totally see Packers fans being this same way, though every where I've been in the US people hate Steelers fans, and I don't think the same is true of Packers fans.

Steelers fans, like Cardinals fans, believe they're blessed, that they exist on a higher plane than common football fans, that they're better fans because of the success of their team, that they're somehow responsible for the team's success on the field. They lack all sense of humor towards their team, losing isn't something they're used to and they can't understand why anyone would be a fan of any other team.

It's just a little uncanny the way the two teams operate and that they're always good. Also, their recent histories are very similar. They both take random players and turn them into productive system guys. They both had somewhat long championship droughts whilst remaining competitive throughout said drought. They both won a couple championships when they shouldn't have (05 & 08 for the Steelers, 06 & 11 for the Cardinals). They both lost in the championship round recently to a historic team (2010 for the Steelers, 2013 for the Cardinals).

The Packers were bad at one point where people as young as their mid-30's can remember what it's like to suck. The Steelers have no idea. Any Steelers fan who remembers their down period is in their 60's and 70's. I just want to see the Steelers one time go 2-14 so their fans can understand what it's like for the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to complain about your team being so successful for so long, but the fact that there are people drinking in bars now who weren't alive when the Packers QB wasn't a HOFer has made me kinda miss the old days... back when the Packers were so bad you had to be a genuine football fan to follow this team. We used to have one of the most reasonable and knowledgeable fan bases in the NFL. Now we're the NFL's version of the St. Louis Cardinals.

I understand what you're saying, but the football version of the St. Louis Cardinals is the Pittsburgh Steelers. Right down to the self-aggrandizing, completely humorless fan base.

I guess the Packers are too, but I've always thought of them as their own entity. No other team in sports is quite like the Packers.

I arrived at the University of Wisconsin in fall 1993. Favre was just gettin' good and the Vikes were still the better team. Two years later, the Packers were fighting Dallas for dominance and the people there became far more Packer-obsessed. For a great fan base (which I am not saying it's not; just that it's not as different as some people think), it sure was interesting to watch the fervor skyrocket (as it does when any team gets good).

And maybe I cannot totally get around my bias, but "Packer Nation" is really annoying to me. More than any fan base, I see it as people thinking that there's is "more than just a football team." The Lombardi with Pope headwear signs, the "God is a Packer Fan" buttons, etc. There is something "different" there and while it's partly "our team is always good" like with the Yankees or something, there is a sense of "we are special" that I don't get from any other fan base. But again, I lived in Wisconsin and my mild dislike of the Packers really intensified; more than it probably would have had I never lived there. But I will say I knew some pretty serious Brewer fans (and one or two Bucks fans) and I never had the same vibe. Maybe the critical mass was just not there.

Since I first started watching sports in the early 1980s, my first memories are of the Packers as a consistently sub-.500 team and it was quite a while before I realized that almost all of their history is good. I cannot imagine them ever not being a contender at this point and by the time Rodgers retires, they'll have had 25 years or so of HOF QB's starting just about every game. So after Rodgers, they could come back down to earth, but that's hard to fathom at this point.

To Illwauk's point, my wife grew up watching the bad Pack of the 1980s. Since they won the 1996 Super Bowl, her interest has dropped; I think she liked rooting for the "bad" Packers more than the "good" ones. (And we both transitioned to wasting our Saturdays and not Sundays)...

EDIT: Also to his point, these younger fans who's earliest memories are of Brett Favre are going to really struggle if the Packers hit a mediocre stretch. I think there is a sense of entitlement out of some who never went through any lean years. There will be some un-bandwaggoning going on.

I suppose we are all biased...for me, I have no beef with Steelers, Cardinals, even Yankees/Saux fanbases. And I can deal with rival fans but some Packer fans really do think they are "God's Team."

But McCarthy's struggles with the Steelers fans and mine with the Pack fans probably says a lot about what's really at play.

It's funny that you say that your wife's interest in the Packers has waned since they have been more dominant. I am the same way about the Seahawks. People are huge Eagles fans around here and looked at me weird when I rooted for the Seahawks of the early 90s. They were bad but that's a big part of why I have stayed with them. Now, they are the trendy, "sexy" team and I don't like as much as I used to. They are still by far my favorite NFL franchise but the bad team charm has completely been erased now that they have won a title.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And maybe I cannot totally get around my bias, but "Packer Nation" is really annoying to me. More than any fan base, I see it as people thinking that there's is "more than just a football team." The Lombardi with Pope headwear signs, the "God is a Packer Fan" buttons, etc. There is something "different" there and while it's partly "our team is always good" like with the Yankees or something, there is a sense of "we are special" that I don't get from any other fan base. But again, I lived in Wisconsin and my mild dislike of the Packers really intensified; more than it probably would have had I never lived there. But I will say I knew some pretty serious Brewer fans (and one or two Bucks fans) and I never had the same vibe. Maybe the critical mass was just not there.

Since I first started watching sports in the early 1980s, my first memories are of the Packers as a consistently sub-.500 team and it was quite a while before I realized that almost all of their history is good. I cannot imagine them ever not being a contender at this point and by the time Rodgers retires, they'll have had 25 years or so of HOF QB's starting just about every game. So after Rodgers, they could come back down to earth, but that's hard to fathom at this point.

To Illwauk's point, my wife grew up watching the bad Pack of the 1980s. Since they won the 1996 Super Bowl, her interest has dropped; I think she liked rooting for the "bad" Packers more than the "good" ones. (And we both transitioned to wasting our Saturdays and not Sundays)...

EDIT: Also to his point, these younger fans who's earliest memories are of Brett Favre are going to really struggle if the Packers hit a mediocre stretch. I think there is a sense of entitlement out of some who never went through any lean years. There will be some un-bandwaggoning going on.

I suppose we are all biased...for me, I have no beef with Steelers, Cardinals, even Yankees/Saux fanbases. And I can deal with rival fans but some Packer fans really do think they are "God's Team."

But McCarthy's struggles with the Steelers fans and mine with the Pack fans probably says a lot about what's really at play.

Sad to say, but much of Packers fandom is what it is because most of Wisconsin (especially outside of the M&M cities) are hicks who've been sheltered from the rest of the world, and lack the perspective to know how irritating and pretentious things like this are. They don't even think they can be pretentious because they're "hard-nosed blue-collar people" and "Real Americans," unlike the snobby elitists who make up the fans of all those big city teams. And of course, "big city" to them means anywhere with more people than cows... so, basically, anywhere that's not Green Bay.

I love Wisconsin, but crap like this makes it really hard to live here sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steelers fans, like Cardinals fans, believe they're blessed, that they exist on a higher plane than common football fans, that they're better fans because of the success of their team, that they're somehow responsible for the team's success on the field. They lack all sense of humor towards their team, losing isn't something they're used to and they can't understand why anyone would be a fan of any other team.

Much of your bold highlights my thoughts on Pack fans.

  • Blessed? Check.
  • Higher plane? Check
  • Better fans? Check (though not because of success of their team; more because the Packers' history and how just darn cool Lambeau is)
  • Responsible for the success? Not really.
  • Lack sense of humor? Not really. Though they don't do well with, say, Vikings fans cheering against 'em in the postseason. They feel that we should be cheering for "the division" (though I don't recall them doing that in 1998 when the Vikes were 15-1)
  • Can't understand why anyone would cheer for other team? More checks than I can count. Most of 'em thought I should have converted upon my arrival.

But then again, the Gopher fans here are upset that I cheer for UW. So I am pissing everyone off. I am from Minnesota (Pro) and I went to school at UW (College). Not that difficult. And I can give plenty of criticism about MINN pro/college fans too (mostly that no team here has ever lost a game without the officials screwing 'em)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to see the Steelers one time go 2-14 so their fans can understand what it's like for the rest of us.

You don't want that if you really think about it, because you know they would end up drafting the best QB of all time that next season.

I agree with the thoughts about the Packers. I disliked them growing up just because they were the Bears' division rival, but it has grown to a hatred seeing 1) all the Chicagoland douchers who became Packers fans just because the Packers were good and the Bears were bad, and 2) marrying into Packers fans, who didn't really have a reason to be Packers fans to begin with because they were from Chicago. It might be anecdotal, but I heard that Rex Grossman wasn't tough enough to play with a broken ankle in 2005, and Jay Cutler was a wimp because he didn't play with a severe MCL sprain in 2011, and the Packers would never settle for such cowardice. So, they're much like Steelers fans in them not knowing what it's like to have misfortune. I mean, Favre wouldn't have been able to pop a dozen Vicodins and get back on the field had his ACL snapped, so it wasn't all about toughness. Rodgers has missed games with injuries unlike Favre, but he's still a great QB and nobody in the family outside of my father-in-law saw the Packers without a franchise QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • IceCap locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.