Storm Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 the weakest 12-4 in NFL history as I recall their first playoff game Philadelphia ripped then a new A hole Again, the misfortunes, injuries, loss of any game-changing receiver (what? was it after Burress shot himself, Toomer, Smith, and Manningham then?) had already taken hold by that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 the weakest 12-4 in NFL history That's pure fiction. we beat both SB teams during the season, and had earned homefield advantage throughout the playoffs. It wasn't the 2000 schedule at all. as I recall their first playoff game Philadelphia ripped then a new A hole Unfortunately, we were too beat up to get the job done. A damn shame, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Again, the misfortunes, injuries, loss of any game-changing receiver (what? was it after Burress shot himself, Toomer, Smith, and Manningham then?) had already taken hold by that point. I think we were starting Hixon, weren't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 The Packers we played in 2007 was a good team as well. So it was good competition in 2007. On the other hand, the teams we met in the playoffs and regular season this year didn't slaughter us like Dallas and Green Bay did in 2007. The question is whether or not the Green Bay or San Fran teams better than Dallas and Green Bay in 2007, or were we more competitive? Yeah, I guess that's what I'm trying to say...it's pretty tough to tell. Offensively, this 2012 team is much better at skill positions. The O-line is slightly suspect, but we must remember, it is essentially the same line we had last year, PLUS Beatty back, that really started to play well towards the end of the season. Defensively, I'm not sure, and I tend to think, that we are only slightly better off right now than we were back then....mainly due to an improved secondary and linebacking corps. Back then, we had a younger and hungrier core of defensive lineman (and Strahan to lead them)....now we still have a group of young and hungry lineman, better DTs and an X-factor like JPP....and Tuck to lead them. So time will tell, but the two teams are definitely comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I think we were starting Hixon, weren't we? Yeah, I think so, I also remember starting Devin Thomas and Michael Clayton at times, too....or at the least, them seeing a lot of playing time. Not sure if that was 2008 or after, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 That's pure fiction. we beat both SB teams during the season, and had earned homefield advantage throughout the playoffs. It wasn't the 2000 schedule at all. Unfortunately, we were too beat up to get the job done. A damn shame, really. We were DOMINATING teams early on, too. Like to the tune of 30+ to scores in the tens and teens.... It's too bad we lost to Cleveland that early on, I was looking forward to being undefeated toward the end of that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Yeah, I guess that's what I'm trying to say...it's pretty tough to tell. Offensively, this 2012 team is much better at skill positions. The O-line is slightly suspect, but we must remember, it is essentially the same line we had last year, PLUS Beatty back, that really started to play well towards the end of the season. Defensively, I'm not sure, and I tend to think, that we are only slightly better off right now than we were back then....mainly due to an improved secondary and linebacking corps. Back then, we had a younger and hungrier core of defensive lineman (and Strahan to lead them)....now we still have a group of young and hungry lineman, better DTs and an X-factor like JPP....and Tuck to lead them. So time will tell, but the two teams are definitely comparable. There's definitely a different dynamic in the two offenses: Ward and Jacobs (with a healthier Bradshaw) were a great combo, and we had that oline at its peak. Last year we fed off of Eli's arm--which no one figured on back then. I think I would take the current defense (when healthy) over the 2007 version. The dlines are comparable, but the back sevens are not even close. And believe it or not, I prefer Kiwi at LB than at DE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 There's definitely a different dynamic in the two offenses: Ward and Jacobs (with a healthier Bradshaw) were a great combo, and we had that oline at its peak. Last year we fed off of Eli's arm--which no one figured on back then. I think I would take the current defense (when healthy) over the 2007 version. The dlines are comparable, but the back sevens are not even close. And believe it or not, I prefer Kiwi at LB than at DE. I also prefer Kiwi at LB, too. People were talking about who they think the best LB we have is and most say Boley...IMO, Kiwi is our best linebacker. The linebackers are definitely better and the secondary is definitely better, I'd take Rolle and Phillips over Gibril Wilson and...who Michael Johnson? Any day. We had the same CBs, and were probably more deep at that position in 2007 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now