Letters to the Editor

Fans vent over loss to Bears; looking back on Super Bowl XXXII; suggested plays for offense

Still bitter over Packers' Super Bowl XXXII loss
Hi Todd,
Dear Mr. Korth I just finished reading Mr. Roerdink's article (January 2008 Packer Report magazine) about the Pack's loss in Super Bowl XXXII. I'm somewhat comforted to see I am not the only one who still can't get over that loss, even after ten years. I completely agree with Mr. Roerdink's assertion that there was nothing to take away from that loss to make it palatable.

I remember saying to my brothers, who are also diehard Packer fans, that if Sean Jones hadn't retired, there is no way Denver would have run all over us. I was also very unimpressed with Gabe Wilkins lack of intestinal fortitude when he left the game never to return. The Packers were the best team in the NFL in 1997 and that is what makes that loss even harder to take. The only way I will ever be able to put SB XXXII to rest, even a little, is when the Pack wins a Super Bowl again.

I just pray Packerland doesn't have to go through another drought like we suffered in the 70's and 80's. Our guys could do it this year, even though they are not the best team in the league. But, they are close. They have the heart and leadership to do it. I would dearly love to see Brett get at least one more Super Bowl victory before he retires to Hattiesburg.
Scott Satre, ssatre76@hotmail.com, Jeffersonton, VA
Packer fan since 1963, (Son of Bob Satre, Packer fan since 1935)!

Defense has lots of problems
As I had wrote to you the Packers overall defense has a lot of problems and it showed its ugly head again Sunday. They gave a team with a poor offensive line all day to let their QB throw the ball. The offense was the worst I've ever seen in my lifetime and I have been a Packer fan ever since I was old enough to remember thinking about football, and I'm 66 years old.

Don't expect to hear from anyone in the Packer organization that the conditions were the problem. Maybe they ought to go outside and practice, or put a dome in Green Bay because they evidently can't play in inclement weather. Seems as though we should recall that from the beating a warm weather team [Atlanta] gave us the last time we were in the playoffs.
Steve, branson1@charter.net, Janesville, WI

Who was McCarthy trying to fool?
In your article Monday, you quoted Coach McCarthy as saying: "The weather is no excuse," said Packers coach Mike McCarthy. "We prepared for the weather. We met about it Friday. We watched the forecast. Saturday morning, we went through the whole thing with the quarterbacks. As far as the approach to the game, I comfortable with, but the execution was very poor."

He thinks he was prepared for the weather? Oh, my gosh! Is he crazy? Is he blind? Did he not know THE WIND WAS BLOWING??!! It was ignorant to line up his kick returners on the goal line for kick offs when the ball wouldn't possibly travel that far in the wind, but he didn't figure that out until the 3rd or 4th quarter. The QB can't play from shotgun because the wind will blow the ball all over the place. He never did figure that one out. You can't throw the ball deep with any accuracy at all because of the wind. He never figured that one out. Thus, 4 and 5 wide running deep patterns was no threat what so ever. He never figured that one out. And he thinks he was ready for the weather and blames execution for the loss? The man is clueless!!

Frankly, ALL THREE LOSSES this year can be completely blamed on stupid play calling on the offensive side of the ball. Hmm ... who would that be? Oh, yeah... COACH MCCARTHY!!!!!!
Ken Parrish, KenParrish53@aol.com, Lynchburg, VA

Packers probably better off on road for NFC title game
Hi Todd,
I am not a subscriber so didn't read your article (Blessing in disguise? Dec. 23, PackerReport.com), but your title was intriguing because I pondered the same thing today (Sunday): Was this a good thing? I think moreso that it woke this team up and will make them take inventory of what they need to do from here on out to make it into February. I agree they appear to be better off on the road. I would think more about how successful they have been on the road – anywhere - coupled with the fact that they have already faced Dallas once there as the major reasons.

HOWEVER, I was at a sports bar in Scottsdale watching today and guys, both Packers and Bears fans, were talking about how the weather was the main issue in GB's lack of production. WHAT?! You're talking about a team who plays in that same weather and considers it an advantage. Up until 5 years ago, GB had never lost a playoff game at Lambeau where temperatures are sure to be below 20 degrees in January. Now because of today's game, people are talking about how they're better off on the road and away from the cold. Chicago put up 35 points today so you can't tell me that a team who plays further north than Chicago is less capable of playing in that type of weather. The Pack has won more championships than any other in NFL history and many of those championships took place in our home stadium at the time. Why are they struggling now and should be be concerned over one loss?

WELL, Favre would need to overcome the Dallas curse and much will be made of it IF that game happens. Everyone is talking about GB versus Dallas in the NFC championship game and I have to think after today's showing, that the round 2 game at Lambeau is not a shoe in. Whichever team is coming into Lambeau in Week 2 of the postseason will likely look at this game as motivation that they can win. While they are at it, they can also take a look at the 2003 game in January when Atlanta handed the Pack their first loss at Lambeau in the postseason. The last time they won a playoff game in regulation at Lambeau, you have to look back to the 2002 playoffs versus San Francisco. Most of the guys on this roster were in high school at the time. They don't have any experience to look back on and their hunger is different, having not tasted postseason victory yet. And why is it that when Ryan Grant has a long run, they can't seem to win? Wasn't the lack of a running game the "one missing" piece to this team in looking at the playoffs? Now apparently you can add a lack of a "cold" game. I guess we'll see soon enough.
Jason, jasonperone@yahoo.com, Chandler, AZ

Why not pull Favre late against Bears disaster?
Dear Todd,
I am watching the last 11 minutes of the game and trying to figure out McCarthy's logic, keeping the starters in? Is he that delusional that he thinks they are going to come back with a 5 possession game and 11 minutes left? He is risking his starters, and Greg Jennings is already in the locker room.

VERY POOR decision-making that I hope TT is making note of. I refuse to blame weather. This is a bad weather team! I read online this week that rather then expose this team to the elements and acclimate it to bad weather, he has them practicing in the Hutson Center! It's clear, albeit he is 12-2 and soon to be 12-3, his judgment is still not that of a premier coach!

Lastly, much like the Mike Sherman era game prep for a big game, in this case for homefield is out of the question. I know I am ranting and will irritate some fans, but I am a realist and what really happened today is Mac's team mailed this one in from Green Bay.
Mike Fosso, mf_050@yahoo.com, Thousand Oaks, CA

Thinking outside the box on offense
Hello Todd,
I hope that your Christmas is a very good one for you and your family. I also wish you a happy new year!!

I have one thing to ask you about the Pack this season:

I see them as a team that must pass first to set up a run. I think that Grant has that one big play in him even if he runs only for 10-15 touches. I feel the Pack is at its best when they use more 3-5 man pass formations.

What do you feel would be the best way to have the Packer offense play? Try to establish the run and pass when needed? Or pass in many different sets and run when the look is there?

I would like to see a 4-man receiver spread with Grant to the right of Favre and Favre set about 2 yards behind Grant (shotgun). Let Grant take the snap draw the defense going left and then toss to Favre working right and let him throw to any of the three receivers on the right. With the fourth receiver on the left running a post pattern still giving Favre another toss that he can make. Nothing going to his left. I could see this play working well.

Well, that is my thought. What do you think they will do going into the play-offs? I think we have a good shot at getting to the big game. No mistakes and having the defense play up a bit more and I think we can make it!! I like to read your thoughts. Take care and hope you had a great day on Christmas.
Jerry Ingaldi, jerry04pack@msn.com, Erie, PA

I think the Packers will go with what has gotten them to 12 wins this year – spread the offense out and pass more than they run. Of course, many of those passes are disguised as runs, giving the receivers opportunities to create big gains. Grant certainly can help the Packers, and it would benefit the offense if they feed him the ball a little bit more, especially in unfavorable weather/field conditions. I thought they should have used Grant a little more against the Bears, but tried to do what they do best in awful weather for passing the football. That obviously didn't work.
-- Todd Korth

Editor's 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