Letters to the Editor

Fans offer their opinions on tall receivers, Robinson, Super Bowl XXXII

Winning is everything in Super Bowl
I noticed that a lot of reporters covering the Packers and elsewhere have been knocking Grossman's effort in the Super Bowl. While I agree that he didn't play well, it depends whether you win or lose.

Grossman was 20/28 for 165 yds 1 TD and 2 Int. While another QB having gone 17/29, 195 yds, O INT, and 0 TD's is hailed as a hero and received the MVP for the Super Bowl. His name is Namath. So going by stats Namath should have been called a joke, also.

Guess it depends on if you win or lose, doesn't it? So hopefully these reporters will stop with the name calling. No, I am not a Grossman fan, but I also don't think Namath deserved to be MVP of Super Bowl 3.
Joe Kempski, animal70@att.net, Belleville, NJ

Why not pursue 7-foot receivers for bigger targets?
Hello Todd,
I have been thinking about this for many years and still have no solid answer for this. Maybe you would like to give me your take on it? Why is it that no team has yet to sign a very large person that is 7 feet tall and 300 lbs? He would be able to get catch a ball when it is third and short and convert his catch to a first down rather easy. I think his lack of speed would not matter. Two quick steps and he got the 3-5 yards. His reach over any cover guy even a tall lineman that somebody would try would be too much. A basketball player has good hands, so catching a football should be easy with those big hands.

The only thing I can really come up with is why play football for so much less money when you can play basketball? Maybe the contact too, but really, if he was 300 lbs and has strong legs, most would, he should be able with the help of NFL pads be able to take the hits on his legs. I do not think that he could get hit much from the waste up he is just too big.

So what is your take on a guy that size playing as a receiver?

Thanks for your opinion.
Jerry Ingaldi, jerry04pack@msn.com, Erie, Pa.

Good question, but I would assume that tall receivers simply are not as quick and would be too slow in trying to get open in the NFL. It also is difficult for tall players to get any kind of leverage in blocking or tackling an opponent. I hear coaches all the time talking about leverage and keeping your 'pad level' low to the ground. A tall guy has trouble with that and often gets flattened in an hurry by someone half his size.

Korth owes Robinson an apology
Lighten up man. It was just one word and it's hard for us drunks to say I've quit. Myself I've never said I quit, but I'm not going to drink today, I could tomorrow if I want. I've been doing that since 12/04/1986 and it works just fine. Are things so slow that you have to search for a word that someone said that you can make a story of?

Give him a break he's trying to do the best he can and, really, what more can we ask of him? He has a disease called Alcoholism and I wonder if you would be on his case if he had a disease with another name like Diabetes or Heart Disease?

Just me, but I think you owe him an apology.
Fritz, Gfritzmeier, Rochester, MN

Holmgren to blame for loss in Super Bowl XXXII
Hi Bob!
I admire your willingness to watch the tape of Super Bowl 32. I still can't watch it. I change channels whenever a story comes on about it. We should have won two in a row, and I've always blamed Holmgren for the loss. Your analysis makes more sense than mine (getting away from the run; passing too much; a tired defense). I've always felt the team was not mentally prepared and that Holmgren was totally distracted by the prospect of going to the Seahawks as GM. The lack of focus, I've always believed, was Holmgren's doing. The Packers were the better team, but didn't play like it.

To this day I look upon Mike Holmgren with great ambivalence -- he helped restore the Packers to a high level, but his ego and eagerness to assume duties as coach and GM made him vulnerable at the end. Thanks for talking about it -- I know it was painful.
Dave Steeno, dsteeno@gbpackersfan.com, Big Rapids, MI

Ball was taken out of Levens hands
Why the Packers quit running the ball in the second half, which cost them the Super Bowl? I can tell you the answer. I heard Dorsey Levens on the radio, he said he had run for almost 100 yards in the first half. He felt like they were going to win the Super Bowl at halftime. Dorsey said on the radio that Mike Holmgren wanted Brett Favre to be the Super Bowl MVP, so he called passing plays in the second half, which cost them the game. Dorsey said this is the whole reason they did not run the ball in the second half.

Dorsey Levens is still very upset about that topic to this day, as he admitted on the radio about 2 months ago.
Greg Moriva, gmoriva@charter.net

Note: E-mail your thoughts on the Green Bay Packers to PackerReport.com and Packer Report managing editor Todd Korth at packrepted@aol.com. Please include your name and city/state.

Packer Report Top Stories