SF's defense is tough, and their offense looks like it has improved with Moss, but Green Bay losing to SF the way they did at Lambough was kind of unexpected. When you consider that 8 of Green Bay's 22 points came off of a Kick Return that was really a blown call by the scab official, their offense only scored 2 TDs.

What happened to Green Bay's offense. Could Philbin have been a factor in that loss?

------------------------------------------------------------

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

Are you possibly giving Ireland credit for hiring Philbin if he indeed was the difference maker?

No I think he's saying maybe Philbin is also no good.

Hooligan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you possibly giving Ireland credit for hiring
> Philbin if he indeed was the difference maker?


Considering that Philbin was third on Ireland's list... no I wasn't giving him credit.

Still, the OC of Green Bay was an obvious choice for HC, and so I'm not surprised that Ireland tried to land him. I am surprised that Philbin took the job.

------------------------------------------------------------

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No I think he's saying maybe Philbin is also no
> good.


LOL!

If I wrote this, then the ONLY POSSIBLE WAY to read this is that I think that Philbin screwed up the Green Bay offense before he left, or somehow figured out a way to screw it up while HC of the Dolphins. It couldn't possibly be because I think Philbin was a good coach and perhaps a bigger loss for Green Bay than the Packers want to admit.

Yea, thats it. You people crack me up. Hilarious.

------------------------------------------------------------

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

LOL. No! My interpretation was not based on the fact that you wrote it.

The post was ambiguous. It could have been read either way. Next time think about that and eliminate the ambiguity.

But I guess you've been attacked enough on this board to be gun shy.

And BTW, I'm not too happy myself with Tannehill's performance and I partly blame Philbin for either not getting him prepared or failing to recognize that he was not prepared and perhaps needs some more seasoning time on the bench.

Apparently, Tannehill got the job based on his second half performance in the 1st exh. game alone when he was playing against 2nd and 3rd stringers.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL. No! My interpretation was not based on the
> fact that you wrote it.
>
> The post was ambiguous. It could have been read
> either way. Next time think about that and
> eliminate the ambiguity.
>
> But I guess you've been attacked enough on this
> board to be gun shy.
>
> And BTW, I'm not too happy myself with Tannehill's
> performance and I partly blame Philbin for either
> not getting him prepared or failing to recognize
> that he was not prepared and perhaps needs some
> more seasoning time on the bench.
>
> Apparently, Tannehill got the job based on his
> second half performance in the 1st exh. game alone
> when he was playing against 2nd and 3rd stringers.


I don't know if that had to do with Philbin or Garrard or Ireland.

Philbin may be feeling some pressure to play him early.

------------------------------------------------------------

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

I thought he got the job before Garrard got hurt? I may be wrong.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I thought he got the job before Garrard got hurt?
> I may be wrong.

Yes, you are wrong.

------------------------------------------------------------

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

Green Bay had a kick-ass offense last season and threatened to go undefeated for awhile. This season without Philbin they start off on a dull note. That was the way I took the opening post.

Let's just hope that its not "The Peter Principle" at work with Philbin.

Hooligan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Green Bay had a kick-ass offense last season and
> threatened to go undefeated for awhile. This
> season without Philbin they start off on a dull
> note. That was the way I took the opening post.


Yup. That is what I meant.

Part of Green Bay's problems could have been going up against what may be the best defense in the NFL. But in the past, a good defense didn't stop them. Green Bay was always prepared.

They nearly the same Offensive team as last year. So what is missing? A: Philbin.

------------------------------------------------------------

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

> What happened to Green Bay's offense. Could Philbin have been a factor in that loss?

I don't know guys this seemd pretty clearly stated that Philbin was a loss to GB and could have accounted for the difference.
- Hope he can make as big a contribution in Miami.

DK says enough to get the comments flowing on this board, but this wasn't one of them.

I think any good team gets figured out eventually to some extent. SF has a kick ass defense and GB still put up some points. SF will be a force this year ... solid O and D, maybe the most balanced team.

I would not be surprised to see them in the SB

If Philbin is a really good coach then of course GB will miss him...

That much is a no brainer.

He was there for years and even if his replacement is just as good there's bound to be a period of adjustment. if his replacement is not as good... Well, the answer is obvious.

Maybe we ought to wait on that judgement until we see how RT corrects his mistake from last week, BNF.

Interesting... You loved on the Sloth for years... How long are you willing to give Thill to amp his game for the NFL?

IMO Thill has already shown a TON more upside and basic "game" than the Sloth.

Don't be a hypocrite.

K?

You've got it wrong. We were not discussing RT. We were discussing Philbin and his decision to rush RT too early.

He has to account for that decision.

The second part of the discussion involved RT tapping the ball and staring down receivers.

That's a coach's job to correct.

To end like you do you are "BNF and slightly off point."