Skip to content

Packers finally bring back Tauscher

As expected, the Green Bay Packers have renewed acquaintances with tackle Mark Tauscher. 

Tauscher spent nine seasons in Green Bay, rising from seventh-round pick to first-year starter.  But he had been lingering on the free-agent shelf, after getting a recent sniff from the Chiefs.

He provides needed help along an offensive line that was allowed 20 sacks of quarterback Aaron Rodgers in four games.

And though the move was expected last week, the Packers wisely waited until the day after their bye, which allowed them to not pay him for a week of no football.

To create a roster spot for Tauscher, the Packers placed cornerback Will Blackmon on injured reserve.  Blackmon tore up his knee during Monday night’s loss to the Vikings.

Permalink 67 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
67 Responses to “Packers finally bring back Tauscher”
  1. packerswin says: Oct 12, 2009 11:30 AM

    Thank God, if Tauscher can get back to his old form and Clifton comes back healthy then this could be the turning point to the Packers season!

  2. Chickenfoot says: Oct 12, 2009 11:31 AM

    Deeperate times call for desperate measures.
    1 guy will not fix that putrid “offensive” line.

  3. Fan_Of_ Four says: Oct 12, 2009 11:37 AM

    First of all Blackmon needs to be let go, the guy gets hurt waking to the shower.
    To me Tauscher’s return illuminates Thompson’s inability to draft O linemen. When your back ups are so bad that you need to sign a nine year Vet coming off major knee surgery I’d say it’s pretty clear you’re clueless. The Packers O line has sucked for years and with Tauscher’s and Clifton’s best years behind them don’t expect it to get better anytime soon.

  4. j4a1 says: Oct 12, 2009 11:42 AM

    LMAO…everything on line or in sports talk is either “putrid” or the “the greatest ever”.
    The Packer line is beat up and shuffled. Getting Clifton back puts Colledge back at guard and Spitz back at center. Let’s not overstate things. The Packers have lost two games. One team is 4-1 the other is 5-0. They have games coming up against Detroit and Cleveland. They will be fine.
    Not great…not putrid…but fine.

  5. footballrulz says: Oct 12, 2009 11:43 AM

    Actually it’s 2 guys Chickenfoot, if Clifton can play again.
    Typical TT, bringing back old has beens, –oh no, wait a minute–we don’t bring back old has beens–just ask Favre, or Longwell.
    At least it’s something–now if they would just put Kampman back on the line, sit Poppinga & play Bishop. AND FIRE TT

  6. Fan of Football says: Oct 12, 2009 11:49 AM

    The way Ted Thompson has treated him, I would have signed with another team.

  7. CutlerISaPussy says: Oct 12, 2009 11:53 AM

    I agree Fanof4, signing a crusty veteran coming off of major surgery isn’t going to change much.

  8. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 12, 2009 12:04 PM

    “And though the move was expected last week, the Packers wisely waited until the day after their bye, which allowed them to not pay him for a week of no football.”
    ———————-
    Wisely? Not in my opinion. They risked having to pay him MORE by letting him sit for a week. If another team had a tackle go down to injury yesterday and decided to pay Tauscher a visit, they’d be paying more now.
    Not to mention that he would’ve gotten more reps in practice if he were signed last week.
    I agree with bringing him back in (assuming he’s in shape and fully recovered). I don’t agree with letting him dangle in free agency. The Packers don’t have the luxury of solid guys to get them through.

  9. hk94 says: Oct 12, 2009 12:15 PM

    Considering that even KC didn’t want Tauscher, I doubt he’s the answer. He’s a fan favorite though, and people will let emotion cloud reality – this does not address anything. As far as “the way TT has treated him”, there are legitimate reasons to hate TT. This is not one of them. Tasucher came off of significant surgery and was recovering behind schedule. The Packers did not renew his contract, and other than a workout from KC, he drew ZERO interest as a FA. I can’t see why TT has done anything here that Tauscher should take personally.
    I laughed at the bears going after Pace in the offseason, thinking he was hardly an improvement. However, if he was in green and gold, our line would be significantly better.

  10. SpartaChris says: Oct 12, 2009 12:25 PM

    @Adam-Chris Scheftersen-
    Packers were off last week, so there were no reps to be had.
    Plus, Tauscher was on the market for quite a while, and only got one look. While there was definitely a risk of losing him to someone else, I don’t think the Packers were all that worried about it.

  11. GB3Pack4 says: Oct 12, 2009 12:29 PM

    TAUSCHER: Fan_O_Four’s comment on O-line are on the money. I’ve felt that way for a long time, in the face of all the hype.
    KAMPMAN: Agree that Kampman needs to back on that line – playing him where he is, is just squandering his huge talent. I understand they’re trying to make the round peg fit, but IT’S A SQUARE HOLE. He’s played so well for GB – they owe him more than this; if they can’t put him back where he belongs, they need to cut him loose -
    LONGWELL: What I read (can’t recall where now) about Longwell’s leaving was that he was unhappy, said something like “nothing was ever good enough”, and that he initiated the move, not the Pack.
    THOMPSON: Could be completely wrong – but it seems to me that if you build 99.99 % thro the draft, in order to develop players for the future, you are taking a HUGE risk that those players may not be “developable”, i.e., just never be good enough. If you don’t periodically acquire an ALREADY GOOD player, one with some experience and some success on his resume – not just one with the POTENTIAL to be good – you’re risking a team-wide breakdown.
    COACHING: I’m pulling for my guys, but I think there are huge obstacles in their way this season. Except for M-McC (not sure there), I think that the coaching staff is good. Hope a lightbulb goes on somewhere, soon.
    VIKINGS: Purple has two tough games coming up, before they get to the Pack. Pack has two non-tough games before they get to the Vikes. If the V handles even one of the two well, they’re going to be coming at us with not only a stronger line, but enormous self-confidence. We can’t lose that second game.
    Go, Pack – go go go go go go go !

  12. Bob Nelson says: Oct 12, 2009 12:32 PM

    Tauscher did not “rise” to be a starter. He has been a starter since his rookie season.
    The next 4 weeks have the Packers playing Detroit, Cleveland, the lucky so far viklings, and Tampa Bay. Those are 4 easy wins.
    Now that Tauscher is back from his injury it will make everything look good.

  13. Chickenfoot says: Oct 12, 2009 12:33 PM

    j4
    20 sacks in 4 games, average of 5 per game is putrid, what else are you going to call it?
    And, it is 1 “NEW” guy.
    Also, too look past teams like Detriot and Cleveland is asinine.
    The Lions gave the Steelers a game yesterday.
    Trust me, the Packsers are not the Steelers.
    That is the type of packer fan arrogance that irritates me.
    Adam. nice to see it only took you a week to comeback after the Vikes spanked your Packers…. That’s ok, I didn’t expect anything less out of you.
    Footballrulz: Yeah it is something, maybe he will cause the line to gel a little, I don’t see just Tauscher being the answer though.
    They should trade Hawk. Kampman is wasted at LB. Trade Hawk to the Raiders, if they have any lineman whatsoever there.

  14. CutlerISaPussy says: Oct 12, 2009 12:41 PM

    It will be funny to hear what Bob Nelson has to say once the ‘next 4 easy games’ still has the Pack sitting at .500.
    I predict they split those 4.

  15. Vikes-N-Favre says: Oct 12, 2009 12:43 PM

    Let me get this straight. GB is putting their eggs into the basket of a OL that had a very significant ACL injury last year, wasn’t retained, got a few sniffs in FA, and hasn’t played a down of football in a very long time and is expecting him to all of a sudden be the cure to the worse OL in the NFL?
    Good luck with that. At least give GB an A for effort.. LOL.

  16. Hauschild says: Oct 12, 2009 12:53 PM

    Isn’t it ironic that as much as TT was driving to distance himself from Sherman/Wolf draftees, that he has put himself in a position to beseech with hat in hand for a player Sherman and Wolf drafted due in large part to his inability to effectively evaluate and draft offensive line talent?

  17. Chickenfoot says: Oct 12, 2009 12:58 PM

    It would be great if we could all just quit responding to Bob Nelson.
    He’s obviously been sniffing glue for the last 15 years.
    Hi, My name is Bobby and I can count to potato!!

  18. DocBG says: Oct 12, 2009 1:02 PM

    Bob Nelson says: October 12, 2009 12:32 PM
    Tauscher did not “rise” to be a starter. He has been a starter since his rookie season.
    The next 4 weeks have the Packers playing Detroit, Cleveland, the lucky so far viklings, and Tampa Bay. Those are 4 easy wins.
    Now that Tauscher is back from his injury it will make everything look good.
    ——————————————————
    Yeah, 4 easy wins for Detroit, Cleveland, The Vikes, and Tampa you dbag……..
    It was a real easy win last time wasn’t it bob? are watching replays from games a couple years ago? you’ve got to be if you honestly think that will be an easy win against the vikes. Hell, unless the packers win all 4 of those, they don’t have much of a chance my guess is that at best, they beat tampa or cleveland. The lions will pwn you fools as will the vikes.

  19. jusford says: Oct 12, 2009 1:06 PM

    @Vikes-N-Favre
    You shouldn’t comment on something you know nothing about. Take Hutchinson out of the Vikings OL and shift everyone over and see what happens.
    Bringing Tauscher back doesn’t make them an elite line, but it does put everyone back to where they spent time practicing to play.

  20. jruphoff says: Oct 12, 2009 1:09 PM

    i say trade Kampman for Joe Thomas . i like him a lot but they are waisting his talent and there are better linebackers on the team than him. trade him now while you can. a 10+ sack/year DE is worth a lot in this league and we could use the oline help. the only reason he is on the field is because of who he is. i looks lost and has been taken completely out of games. I would love to see Thomas in a packers uni.

  21. Hauschild says: Oct 12, 2009 1:19 PM

    jruphoff:
    What makes you believe Green Bay can simply move Kamp on a whim? And, not only that, but all Cleveland would have to give up is Joe Thomas??? Good Lord, what kinda dope you on, pal???
    Seriously – why are Packers’ players so frightfully overvalued to Packers’ fans??? I’m a fan, but I tend toward the realistic for obvious reasons.

  22. RotoWorld Administrator says: Oct 12, 2009 1:21 PM

    test

  23. SpartaChris says: Oct 12, 2009 1:31 PM

    @Bob Nelson-
    From a fellow Packer fan, lay off the crack. We’re not in the position to be looking past any team in the league, whether it be the Lions, Browns or Bucs.
    And there’s no way Minnesota is an easy win. Yes, we can beat them, but it’s far from guaranteed. It’s going to be a tough game. To think otherwise is ignorant.

  24. Beer Cheese Soup says: Oct 12, 2009 1:32 PM

    Chickenfoot says:
    Deeperate times call for desperate measures.
    1 guy will not fix that putrid “offensive” line.
    ___________________
    It’s actually 2-3 guys, as Clifton will be back and Colledge (who SUCKS at LT but is a perfectly adequate guard) should be as well. Besides, anything helps at this point. Rodgers threw for 384 yards against a damn good defense with no blocking whatsoever. Now just imagine what he could do if he could stay upright.
    I can certainly understand why you WISH that was true, but that doesn’t mean it is. Time will tell.
    jruphoff says:
    i say trade Kampman for Joe Thomas . i like him a lot but they are waisting his talent and there are better linebackers on the team than him.
    ________________________
    You need to do your homework. while I am all for trading Kampman, and have been saying it since week 2, there are a number of problems with your plan.
    First, Joe Thomas is a franchise LT. NO TEAM, not even the Browns or Raiders, is stupid enough to deal a young franchise LT. Second, the reason we’re wasting Kampman’s talent is because he’s a poor fit for the 3-4 defense. The same exact scheme the Browns use. Third, maybe you’ve heard of Ted Thompson? He doesn’t trade anything except backup RBs and 6th round picks, and since I probably need to tell you this, you can’t get even a serviceable LT for either. Thank you, come again.
    Chickenfoot says:
    It would be great if we could all just quit responding to Bob Nelson.
    __________________
    Agreed. That’s the most sensible thing I’ve read on here in a month.

  25. Twiz says: Oct 12, 2009 1:39 PM

    Packer fans, you need to wake up and smell the coffee……
    You honestly think bringing in Tauscher and getting Clifton back is really going to help your line? The line has far more problems than 2 guys are going to fix, not to mention a QB that is more indecisive than ol FumblePepper. Difference between those to is once upon a time ,’Pepper was a decent QB. Rodgers needs to improve jus to be considered adequate.
    Maybe now Packer fans (and Lord Florio) will realize that preseason means absolutely nothing.

  26. footballrulz says: Oct 12, 2009 1:43 PM

    Chicken–Can’t hardly call Tauscher new but I get your point. I also agree, he’s not the answer. Gave a lot to GB but too many injuries lately (same as Clifton). Running backs & O lineman especially generally have a shortened “lifespan” simply because of job requirements.
    For the Packers (or any other team really) to look past any game on any Sunday is foolish. There are no givens. Packers have a tendancy to make whatever team they are playing look good.
    Wouldn’t mind seeing Hawk get traded. Although his playing has improved slightly as of late he’s nowhere near what he shold (we thought) he could be.
    GB3Pack4–I think Longwell was at a contract year and followed the money (Packers may have had some salary cap issues). Our kicking game has not been the same since. Only complaint I had against him was he could rarely get a KO in the endzone but he’s usually money on FG’s even from 50-48 yard range.
    Next 3 weeks are very important & presonally, I’m not feeling real warm & fuzzy. Can’t believe they didn;t at least keep the O-line & D-line in last week for at least some fundamental & technique drills (which is ridiculous to have to be doiong with “professional” football players. I mean they’ve only been doing this for their whole life.

  27. Fan of Football says: Oct 12, 2009 1:44 PM

    “i say trade Kampman for Joe Thomas .”
    You would have to be smoking Meth or be totally ignorant of how the business works to think that is even a viable trade. Not in a million years would a team give up a young top 5 fraft pick OL for a middle of his career DL.

  28. CutlerISaPussy says: Oct 12, 2009 1:51 PM

    Well, removing Hutch wouldn’t create that ripple effect on the Vikes b/c we have competent back ups that can play any position. Hence, no shifting players all over the line.
    Either way, I don’t think a couple of those boys starting on the Pack o-line would even make it on other teams. Tauscher was around forever and nobody even looked at him (well besides 0-5 KC). Everybody knew he was going to be ready by about week 5/6.

  29. Osterhouse says: Oct 12, 2009 1:59 PM

    jruphoff says:
    October 12, 2009 1:09 PM
    i say trade Kampman for Joe Thomas . i like him a lot but they are waisting his talent and there are better linebackers on the team than him. trade him now while you can. a 10+ sack/year DE is worth a lot in this league and we could use the oline help. the only reason he is on the field is because of who he is. i looks lost and has been taken completely out of games. I would love to see Thomas in a packers uni.
    ——————————
    Did I really just read that? lololololol

  30. footballrulz says: Oct 12, 2009 2:15 PM

    Well CIaP, I finally can agree with you. I’d much rather have a competent backup as opposed to having to shift the entire line. That’s on reason I’m hoping that bringing Tauscher back & having Clifton helathy (hope, hope, hope)will have some impact. At least players will be back in their original positions and hopefully, Barbre will be on the bench.

  31. Chickenfoot says: Oct 12, 2009 2:29 PM

    footballrulz:
    After reading your post, I have rethought my position.
    You are correct. I do believe that the line will be improved, just for the sole fact that it couldn’t be any worse than it has been.
    I don’t want you to take that as me being snide. It’s just that as of now, it’s been atrocious. If they even get semi-adequate, it makes Rodgers that much more dangerous.
    I just don’t see how TT and MM went into yet another season without trying to rectify this problem.
    I for one was nervous about the Rams game, that is usually a team that the Vikes would lose to, for that same reason, I’m more worried about the 2 lions games than i am about the Ravens and Steelers.
    It may not be reflected in the records yet, but I see definite improvement from the Lions, and we ALWAYS seem to struggle with them.
    Minnesota has a tough 3 weeks coming up, If the Pack can fix that line, they could get healthy quickly.
    It would make for a more entertaining season if they do.

  32. longrodvanhungendong says: Oct 12, 2009 2:31 PM

    Kampman, Barnett and Hawk should all get a sniff for a trade. And no, I sure as hell wouldn’t want to loose all three of them at once but Packers have some serious needs. I think Kampman and Barnett are in the last year of their contracts. It would just make sense to shop them.

  33. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 12, 2009 2:46 PM

    Hauschild says:
    October 12, 2009 1:19 PM
    jruphoff:
    What makes you believe Green Bay can simply move Kamp on a whim? And, not only that, but all Cleveland would have to give up is Joe Thomas??? Good Lord, what kinda dope you on, pal???
    Seriously – why are Packers’ players so frightfully overvalued to Packers’ fans??? I’m a fan, but I tend toward the realistic for obvious reasons.
    —————————
    I’m not saying Cleveland would make that trade or that Kampman would like it, but there are only two guys in the NFL with more sacks in the past three years than Kampman.
    45 – Ware
    37.5 – Jared Allen
    37 – Kampman
    Open your eyes. He’s got some trade value.

  34. Plankshelmet says: Oct 12, 2009 2:48 PM

    OMG THEY DID IT !!!!! They found the missing piece of the puzzle. Now the Packers will go 14-2 and roll onto a SUPER BOWL VICTORY !! HOOOORAY!! LMAO.

  35. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 12, 2009 2:48 PM

    Twiz says:
    October 12, 2009 1:39 PM
    Packer fans, you need to wake up and smell the coffee……
    You honestly think bringing in Tauscher and getting Clifton back is really going to help your line? The line has far more problems than 2 guys are going to fix, not to mention a QB that is more indecisive than ol FumblePepper. Difference between those to is once upon a time ,’Pepper was a decent QB. Rodgers needs to improve jus to be considered adequate.
    Maybe now Packer fans (and Lord Florio) will realize that preseason means absolutely nothing.
    ————————-
    You sir, are the gold standard for idiots everywhere. I commend you.

  36. Plankshelmet says: Oct 12, 2009 2:58 PM

    Even before Clifton went down the O-line was garbage so why is it suddenly going to be drastically better with him ?

  37. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 12, 2009 3:00 PM

    For all the hand-wringing here you’d think the Packers were one of the worst teams in the league. Let’s not forget they’ve lost two games.
    Bengals – they’re 4-1 and one deflected pass away from being 5-0. Say what you want about the Bengals and their pathetic recent history. They’re playing well this season. Wins against Baltimore and Pittsburgh confirm that. And the Packers were one play short of extending that game to overtime.
    Vikings – 5-0. Lost by 7 and outgained them by 100 yards. Against their “vaunted” 14th ranked defense. If they had been able to keep Rodgers upright that game would’ve been close. Having said that, they were very far removed from keeping Rodgers upright.
    So the Packers lost to two teams who have a combined 9-1 record. This is not the end of the world and those are not bad losses.

  38. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 12, 2009 3:04 PM

    Plankshelmet says:
    October 12, 2009 2:48 PM
    OMG THEY DID IT !!!!! They found the missing piece of the puzzle. Now the Packers will go 14-2 and roll onto a SUPER BOWL VICTORY !! HOOOORAY!! LMAO.
    —————————
    Yeah, that sums up what everyone’s saying. Nice job.

  39. karpsta says: Oct 12, 2009 3:13 PM

    Good ol Cheapskate Thompson, throwing around nickels like man hole covers again. That must have drove him nuts having to spend money on a player he didn’t draft. The fact that he waited till after the buy to save a couple bucks proves he less interested in making the team better, then meeting the bottom line.
    I really wish Tauscher would have told him to F off and signed with someone else.

  40. Chickenfoot says: Oct 12, 2009 3:16 PM

    Adam:
    Really?! That’s your comeback?
    Where were you all week? The tears finally dry up?
    Freaking blowhard windbag leading up to the game, and then you can’t show up for a WEEK afterwards?
    Honestly, I figured you to be that type of fan. I really did.
    You are one of the masses that thinks your team is Superbowl bound every year, and are dumbfounded when they suck.
    What are you going to do when the Lions beat the Packers this week? Will you be gone a month then?
    You are a horrible fan and an even worse poster.
    I bet you suck at life as bad as you suck at posting on PFT don’t you?
    I’m willing to bet thats the case.

  41. purpleguy says: Oct 12, 2009 3:32 PM

    Tauscher and Clifton coming back should be an improvement, but mostly because pretty much any warm body would be an improvement from the existing O-line. However, the combination of age and injury to both guys will really limit their effectiveness to the point that the O-line is still going to be below average.
    I’ve seen some of it from posters above, but this steaming pile of O-line dung has plopped directly out of the rear-end of Ted Thompson. The guy makes no realistic effort to improve the O-line in the off-season till it’s too late, leaves Tauscher hanging all off-season, and then stiffs him over the bye week to avoid paying another week’s salary. What, has he been going to the Red McCombs school of tightwaddedness? Pack fans should be jumping all over the guy, as Rodgers and the team deserve better.

  42. Canned Heat says: Oct 12, 2009 3:59 PM

    This will be a slight improvement…but not much. What they need is to get the run blocking scheme changed or fixed to allow Grant and the no names a chance to eat some clock up with ball control. Between an inept strategy, bad personnel decisions, and injury, the defense of GB is suspect enough and then having to be on the field 40 minutes a game isn’t helping.
    I like the over confidence of the queens fans too. As if you haven’t watched one Brett Lorenzo Favre self-destruct on his own over the last 5 years, you need to call up the Karma-Gods? this has all the smell of the same bandwagon jumping, trash talking, “locked-up Lombardi Trophy” crap that we listened to when Culpepper was throwing to Moss and Carter…when they were led by: “The walking dunce cap.” This year, they won’t get far enough to see the missed field goal.

  43. DCViking says: Oct 12, 2009 4:07 PM

    Assuming Clifton is completely healthy, the Pack line should get better. I know he did a great job against Allen in Green Bay, but I think JA got the better of him in Minnesota last year.
    Pack should get to fatten its record for the next two weeks. I’d like really like to see Minnie one out of the next two.
    I sincerely the Pack keeps using Kampman the way they are now…loved watching him drop into coverage last Monday night.

  44. packers4life says: Oct 12, 2009 4:11 PM

    “It would be great if we could all just quit responding to Bob Nelson.”
    It would be great if you and your Viking buddies go troll on some other team’s post. I can’t come and read about my favorite team without coming up to one of your stupid, moronic posts thinking you are so tough.
    and oh yeah the Vikings are not as good as you think. Luck is the best defintion I have for their season.

  45. packers4life says: Oct 12, 2009 4:13 PM

    “Even before Clifton went down the O-line was garbage so why is it suddenly going to be drastically better with him ?”
    Actually they weren’t. Yes they allowed Adewale Ogunleye to get 3 sacks week one but that was nearly all Allen Barbre. Clifton did struggle against Odom but it got worse when he went down.
    and I know Tauscher is coming off knee surgery but he had it nearly 10 months ago. He is fully healthy and I am really glad we brought him back.

  46. packers4life says: Oct 12, 2009 4:23 PM

    “The way Ted Thompson has treated him, I would have signed with another team.”
    Yes let’s keep on finding a way to make this look like all Ted Thompson’s fault even though he did nothing wrong to Tauscher.
    Dude look up the facts. He had offseason knee surgery and he was not fully healthy at the time and they weren’t going to take any chances on him since he has not completed his 10 month deadline of which was the time he was going to be fully healthy. At the time which was around February, he was just about a month or two off surgery.
    So next time look up the facts on what is called the internet instead of making it look like it was Thompson’s fault just because he mistreated your man-crush who you can’t get enough of.

  47. Chickenfoot says: Oct 12, 2009 4:50 PM

    Packers for life:
    Nah non of your cheesehead brethren troll vikings sites either…..yourself included you Jagoff!!
    Luck, schmuck!
    Thanks for defining yourself as an idiot.
    Mantra of a typical Packer fan: When the Pack wins it’s all skill, when the Vikes do thier lucky.
    Pathetic.
    I’m sure you are one of the Packer fans that according to your reasoning, the Pack has never lost EVER.
    1- injuries
    2- refs screwed us
    3 – other team is lucky
    4- a car was coming
    5- we were on gool when that play occured
    Luck?
    Browns won by 14
    lions won by 14
    49ers—-favre luck
    Packers 30-14 til garbage time
    rams won by 28
    Yeah, that’s luck alright.
    You are racing to the top of Asshat mountain as we speak!!

  48. jruphoff says: Oct 12, 2009 5:23 PM

    why is everyone so mean!!!
    anyway… i do not think they they would trade Thomas for Kampman straight up… not do i think it will actually happen. I would just like to see them make a move for him.
    The browns have nothing to play for at this point and if they could get Kampman and a draft pick (or clifton) for one guy they might go for it.
    I know thompson will not part with the picks, which is why this wouldnt happen, but a fan can dream right?

  49. JimmySmlth says: Oct 12, 2009 5:26 PM

    Bob Nelson and I are laughing at these posts while snuggling in bed together…

  50. Crazydiamond says: Oct 12, 2009 5:52 PM

    Did Footballrulz call Favre and Longwell has beens? They are outperforming Rodgers and Crosby are they not?

  51. Beer Cheese Soup says: Oct 12, 2009 6:42 PM

    packers4life says:
    It would be great if you and your Viking buddies go troll on some other team’s post.
    and oh yeah the Vikings are not as good as you think. Luck is the best defintion I have for their season.
    _____________________
    Please don’t go there.. I have seen your name on plenty of Viking threads.
    Also, I agree the Vikings have played nothing but crappy teams so far (and that most certainly includes us), but I would only call one of their wins luck, and even that is debatable. Do you watch the games at all?
    Chickenfoot says: October 12, 2009 2:29 PM
    I do believe that the line will be improved, just for the sole fact that it couldn’t be any worse than it has been.
    It’s just that as of now, it’s been atrocious. If they even get semi-adequate, it makes Rodgers that much more dangerous.
    ____________________
    Thank you for summing up what I’ve been saying all day. Rodgers led the league in passing while being sacked eight times and pressured easily a dozen more. Now just IMAGINE what he can do if he only gets sacked three or four times, haha…
    I don’t think anyone not named Bob is saying we can make a Superbowl run, but to go from the absolute worst line in the league to a mediocre one, with the weapons we have, should be enough to stay competitive within the division.

  52. packers4life says: Oct 12, 2009 8:43 PM

    “Please don’t go there.. I have seen your name on plenty of Viking threads.
    Also, I agree the Vikings have played nothing but crappy teams so far (and that most certainly includes us), but I would only call one of their wins luck, and even that is debatable. Do you watch the games at all?”
    Yeah that is true. I do go and post on the Viking threads. I shouldn’t of said what I said in my earlier post since I do the same.
    and no I don’t watch their games but I do look up their stats. Some are good. Some aren’t that good. I do know that against the Browns and Lions, they played pretty bad in the 1st half and were down at halftime. Against the 49ers, Favre wasn’t really much of anything until that last play but I do admit they played pretty well against the Pack. As for this past Sunday, they didn’t play that well because they allowed the Rams to go over 400 total yards. It was turnovers that got them the win.
    …I do say some dumb things in my posts and when I read them later, sometimes I wonder why I posted it in the first place. I honestly do think the Vikes could get far this season. However, they won’t go the Super Bowl. They might win a playoff game but that’s it. I also think my Packers could slide in as a wildcard team and possibly even face the Vikes. It would be one hell of a game if there was.

  53. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 13, 2009 10:14 AM

    Chickenfoot says:
    October 12, 2009 3:16 PM
    Adam:
    Really?! That’s your comeback?
    Where were you all week? The tears finally dry up?
    Freaking blowhard windbag leading up to the game, and then you can’t show up for a WEEK afterwards?
    Honestly, I figured you to be that type of fan. I really did.
    You are one of the masses that thinks your team is Superbowl bound every year, and are dumbfounded when they suck.
    What are you going to do when the Lions beat the Packers this week? Will you be gone a month then?
    You are a horrible fan and an even worse poster.
    I bet you suck at life as bad as you suck at posting on PFT don’t you?
    I’m willing to bet thats the case.
    ——————————–
    I posted a response to your pathetic little question yesterday. For whatever reason, “the powers that be” chose not to allow it to hit the site.
    I’ll restate it, with probably slightly less inflammatory language. I WAS HERE on Tuesday. Dicknose. In fact, we traded insults on more than one thread on Tuesday. Dicknose.
    Look it up, idiot:
    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/10/06/packers-vikings-one-liners-1/
    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/10/06/jared-allen-is-a-beast-favre-sheds-a-burden/
    And in my post yesterday I mentioned that I’ve been coming here less because (although I’m a slow learner) I’m realizing that daffodils like you, Vikes-N-Favre, Fanof4, etc will never listen to reason. So this is a waste of my time. And I’ve been pulling back. I have better things to do than highlight the idiocy of your inane ramblings.
    Anyway, your little pathetic insults just seem funny. I’m not going to stoop to your level and make broad assumptions about what it is you do for a living or how terrible you might be at it.
    What’s really funny, though, is how you make me out to be some irrational fan who can’t accept reality. In reality, I expected a loss on Monday night (as I posted both before AND after the game). In reality, I know the Packers won’t go anywhere if they can’t protect Rodgers. And even if they do protect Rodgers, they need more pressure on opposing QBs and they need more production in the running game. Those are the biggest problems facing this team and they are big problems.
    You, on the other hand, are unable to see or accept the limitations and weaknesses of your team. You fail to realize that their defense is not very good. Last year they won games because of their defense. This year they’re winning games because of their offense. They get plenty of pressure on the QB (especially when they play GB), but the linebackers and secondary are not good. Without that great defensive line they’d be exposed.

  54. Chickenfoot says: Oct 13, 2009 1:03 PM

    At least you know your place Adam.
    You are right, you are a slow learner.
    If I caused you to leave this site, or “scale back”( does that mean you are only going to retort back to every other post)? Then I consider that a bonus for every other poster on this site.
    I never said the Vikes were flawless. Ever.
    I never said they were going to the Super Bowl.
    14 isn’t that good for defense? out of 32? It’s in the upper half.
    You know when you pull ahead and win by 2 tds your 1st 2 games, have a tight one in SF, lead GB by 16 with 7 minutes to go and lead the Rams 24-3 very early in the THIRD quarter, it’s hard not to give up garbage yards.
    You do know rankings are based on yardage allowed correct?
    You are definitely wrong in saying that the back 7 isn’t good, they aren’t the best ever, but not horrible either.
    It’s a good thing we have that d-line…..wouldn’t want to be exposed.
    5-0 is 5-0…deal with it.
    Don’t go away mad pissandmoanerson, just go away.

  55. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 14, 2009 3:59 PM

    Now you’re going to claim that 14th is good for the defense? You wouldn’t have admitted that before the Vikings slipped down that far. Yes, 14 is in the upper half. But it’s also mediocre.
    On the LBs and secondary:
    I didn’t say they were horrible. I said they were not good. Big difference, but not one that I expect you to see. You’re too busy putting your words in my mouth for those little details.
    You can try to explain away the defense’s deficiencies all you want, but the facts will always get in the way.
    The facts:
    - No team has outscored their opponents more than the Giants, but their defense is ranked #1 overall. The Saints are also undefeated and have been involved in more blowouts than the Vikings. Their defense is ranked #6 overall. The Broncos are undefeated and have outscored their opponents by a wide margin. Their defense is ranked #2 overall. So I don’t buy this notion that the Vikings are giving up lots of yardage because they’re blowing teams out. They’re just not that good. There’s other teams blowing out their opponents AND still stopping them on defense.
    - If the Vikings were giving up lots of yards because they were blowing teams out, then their rushing yardage allowed would be anemic because teams would be passing on them to try to score quickly. And yet their rush defense is ranked #10 in the league after three consecutive years of leading the league in rush defense.
    - They’ve played some of the worst offenses in the league so far this season and their defense is still ranked in the middle of the pack. Teams are moving the ball at will against the Vikings, as evidenced by the Rams (28th offense in the league) rolling up 400 total yards on them.
    - Chad Greenway and Ben Leber agree with me. http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/64178942.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUo8cyaiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr
    Yes, 5-0 is 5-0. And I do accept that. But 14 is also 14. And you’re not accepting that.

  56. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 14, 2009 4:02 PM

    Oh, and nothing to say about your stupid comment that I wasn’t here last week? Eat the crow, dumbshit. Chew it well. You don’t want to choke. That would be a tragedy.

  57. Chickenfoot says: Oct 14, 2009 9:45 PM

    Well, well. Pissandmoanerson is back!
    Oooh so you were here for 2 posts and got out quick, not your normal answering every last post usual.
    14th is above average—-average is 16.
    Piss and moan all you want, you arent accounting for turnover, 3rd down eff. or anything like that.
    Yards are just 1 facet, I learned this From Supersuckers.
    Check out Aikmans eff. ratings.
    Vikes 1 offense
    Vikes3 defense
    Here you go:
    Offense
    Aik NFL Team AER
    1 19 Vikings (n) 91.7
    2 3 Saints (n) 90.4
    3 4 Colts (a) 89.6
    4 5 Ravens (a) 89.0
    5 15 Dolphins (a) 87.6
    6 7 Steelers (a) 87.3
    7 2 Giants (n) 86.9
    8 9 Patriots (a) 84.8
    9 13 Falcons (n) 84.4
    10 1 Cowboys (n) 84.4
    11 8 Eagles (n) 84.0
    12 14 Packers (n) 81.7
    13 6 Broncos (a) 81.1
    14 24 Jets (a) 78.6
    15 20 Jaguars (a) 77.8
    16 22 Bears (n) 77.6
    17 18 Bengals (a) 76.9
    18 12 Seahawks (n) 76.5
    19 21 Lions (n) 76.3
    20 30 Chiefs (a) 74.9
    21 17 Titans (a) 74.3
    22 29 49ers (n) 74.2
    23 10 Chargers (a) 73.6
    24 11 Texans (a) 72.9
    25 26 Buccaneers (n) 70.5
    26 23 Redskins (n) 69.0
    27 16 Cardinals (n) 68.4
    28 25 Bills (a) 60.9
    29 27 Panthers (n) 60.3
    30 31 Browns (a) 56.8
    31 32 Raiders (a) 55.4
    32 28 Rams (n) 54.3
    NFL Average 76.8
    Aikman Efficiency Ratings Through Week 5, 2009 — Defense
    Aik NFL Team AER
    1 2 Broncos (a) 94.0
    2 6 Saints (n) 94.0
    3 14 Vikings (n) 86.9
    4 3 Eagles (n) 82.8
    5 1 Giants (n) 80.3
    6 10 Ravens (a) 80.3
    7 4T Redskins (n) 79.9
    8 11T Seahawks (n) 79.4
    9 9 Jets (a) 78.6
    10 17 Bengals (a) 78.3
    11 16 49ers (n) 77.6
    12 20 Falcons (n) 77.5
    13 7 Colts (a) 77.4
    14 8 Dolphins (a) 75.4
    15 13 Bears (n) 74.6
    16 27 Cardinals (n) 74.3
    17 4T Steelers (a) 71.7
    18 11T Patriots (a) 71.5
    19 31 Raiders (a) 70.6
    20 21 Cowboys (n) 69.9
    21 18 Packers (n) 68.5
    22 29 Browns (a) 68.1
    23 23T Titans (a) 67.5
    24 30 Jaguars (a) 66.7
    25 15 Panthers (n) 66.5
    26 23T Texans (a) 64.6
    27 19 Bills (a) 64.1
    28 28 Buccaneers (n) 63.9
    29 23T Rams (n) 63.7
    30 32 Chiefs (a) 61.4
    31 26 Chargers (a) 60.7
    32 22 Lions (n) 59.1
    NFL Average 73.2
    The offense doesn’t surprise me, but I am a bit surprised by the D I guess the Miami game is still skewing results a bit. Any way I have always founf the AERs to be a better ranking system than just about anything else devised (at least that has been devised for general viewing by the public and not the systems mathematicians have developed for the betting industry)
    Here’s how the AERs are determined.
    Aikman Efficiency Ratings Formula
    “The Aikman Efficiency Ratings measure offensive and defensive performance using a combination of seven key statistics identified by Troy, and then measured against league norms (and extremes) established over the last 10 years. An offense or defense performing exactly at league norms in all categories will achieve a score of 75. The better the offense or defense, the higher the score on either scale.
    It will take a truly exceptional unit to score more than 90 during an entire season on either the offensive or defensive scale. Higher scores are possible in individual games.
    In 2005, AER scores ranged on offense from 92.6 (Seattle) to 60.9 (San Francisco) and on defense from 89.3 (Chicago) to 61.1 (Houston). The seven categories measured are:
    Adjusted Points (20%) — Total Points Scored or Allowed minus Points on Returns and Safeties
    Turnovers (20%)
    Red Zone Efficiency (20%) — Measured by Percent of Possible Points (see below)
    Yards Per Play — divided into Yards Per Rush (10% of total) and Yards Per Pass Play (10% of total). Yards Per Pass Play includes yards on plays involving sacks.
    First Down Achievement — divided into Total First Downs (10% of total) and 3rd Down Conversion Percentage (10% of total)
    Percentage of Possible Points in the Red Zone is figured by taking the number of Red Zone Chances times 7, then dividing it by the number of Points Actually Scored (defined as TDs times 7 plus FGs times 3). ”
    Link:
    http://forum.colts.com/showthread.php?t=46227
    You need to do what you say you were going to and just leave the site. It will be better off w/o you.
    But, I’m sure you’ll TRY to blow these #’s out too.
    Worry about your own pathetic team, not ours, ok?
    is that too much too ask? I bet it is.

  58. Chickenfoot says: Oct 15, 2009 8:49 AM

    In case u can’t figure it out, it’s a copied website.
    The comments to beging and end the post are mine.
    Otherwise you’d be bitching that “I don’t even know who my team plays”, right?
    Eat the crow? Hardly.
    You should be eating heaping platefuls of it for all the yapping you did in the preseason.
    We all know that won’t happen.
    Really, Just leave.

  59. Chickenfoot says: Oct 15, 2009 10:55 AM

    You are limiting yourself because your knowledge is limited!
    I’m a homer? Jesus H. Christ!! you sitting here defending your tard of a GM and HC with spittle hanging off your chin!
    All the while thinking that the Pack has some sort of chance this year.
    You can give that a rest.
    Obviously genius, yards allowed is not a very good indicator of where teams rank. It’s what the NFL uses, so that’s how they are ranked.
    I’ll take 14 anyway, it’s led us to 5-0. Piss and moan all you want thae Packers are still 2.5 games back and are irrelevant to the season.
    I will pat myself on the back. If anything I did causes you to come here less or not at all, I consider that a blessing.
    It’s asshats like you who ruin this site, not me.
    You think you have this vast plethora of knowledge that you feel the need to impart to everyone. I got news for you, you don’t know squat!
    Oh, and I’m supposed to remember every word from the myriad of post you’ve made? really?!
    You know you ran your mouth, so does everyone else.
    While I’m not at work, I’ll do some research. I’m positive that you will have some explaining to do.
    As for the Aikman ratings, I’m of the understanding that the NFL is considering adopting this as the official stats for the league.
    Take it as you will, the Packers blow this year, you’d think you’d stop running your mouth, but no, you are a Packer fan, hear you roar!!

  60. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 15, 2009 9:41 PM

    Well, once again my response was deemed unfit for the delicate eyes perusing this website. Just slap yourself in the face twice and have someone kick you in the balls. That would have the same effect as reading my response.

  61. Chickenfoot says: Oct 15, 2009 11:08 PM

    you still here?
    You are an asshat. You are a blowhard that thinks he knows better than everyone else on this site.
    No one really cares what you have to say, i don’t really either.
    I’m just making it my goal to out you for the idiot you are every time you post.
    Keep coming back moron.
    you think pretty highly of your posting skills don’t you? I really don’t know why.
    It’s the same slapdick bile that Jimmy and Bob post every day.
    the funny thing is, is that you think you are getting the best of me, you aren’t.
    It’s not about “points” it’s about getting you so riled up, that you can’t even get your posts on the site.
    I’m sure you are so pissed that it was filled with unheard of vulgarity…..all the while I’m sitting here laughing at you and how pissed you are getting for no reason!
    you get suckered in every time, I find it hilarious and it amuses me to pisss you off so badly.
    You see, I took a dislike to you from the start. Your insatiable need to answer every post with a retort, the condescending tone of your posts, like you are some eminent sage on all things NFL.
    You are just another loud mouth Packer fan that thinks it’s your birthright to have a winning team ever year. Dust off the trophies when your team bewilders you and piles up loss after loss.
    Meanwhile, back at the ranch, your former icon is helming a bitter rival to a 5-0 start.
    I bet that just frosts your pop tarts doesn’t it?
    You haven’t even come near to slapping me in the face or kicking my balls.
    That you think I give 2 farts in the wind what you say is even more comical.
    That you can’t see I’ve been playing you like a violin from day one is incredible.
    Tine for bed adam, I’ll be at a sattelite clinic of the hospital I work for in the am, I’ll rest assured that your next post will dazzle me……
    Now you know that I was playing with you, like a cat plays with a mouse, maybe you”ll just shut up.
    I doubt it though. You have to ” kick my balls”, right?
    Pathetic.

  62. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 16, 2009 10:11 AM

    Chickndick’s rulz of intergoogle posteing:
    - Nevr ooose real events or numbers. Thems doesnt always makes the Vikings look gud.
    - Always poste based on emoshun and shun them facks. Emoshuns is bettr then facks.
    - Oose lotz of insutls an not much come on cents. Insultz flummoxes thems.
    - Hit that there return key afta every peeriod. That maks it looks like youse gots mor ta say.
    - Twiste tha argument inta jus a insult fest.
    - When dey proofs you rong on sumting, oose a diffrent ranking to say you rite. If they aint got no other ranking, ignor it. Toss in sum more dem insultz.
    - Be hippocrit and refoos to admit it.
    - Where faggy purple cloths and blond wigs. Trie to ack like its normul or manly. Dunno why, thats jus wut we due.
    - Skoal bandits!

  63. Chickenfoot says: Oct 16, 2009 1:04 PM

    Pissandmoanerson:
    Now you are resorting to my typing errors?
    That’s the sign of a defeated man.
    No real events, numbers or facts? Are you high?
    You must be.
    I insult you because you deserve it.
    You haven’t ever proved me wrong jagoff, it’s an OPINION page!!!
    be a hypocrite—–hello pot, this is the kettle, you’re black.
    Then to top it all off let’s throw in the “faggy” clothes and wigs…lol
    The only thing that was funny or original out of that post, was skoal bandits…I like that.
    Anyway, asshat. I posted last night, what i had to say. I told you, you were a fool, because i was playing you like a violin. Yet, what do you do? Just try to walk away with your dignity intact?
    No, you come back with one of your lamest posts ever. It took you all this time to come up with something that even Jimmy and Bob would be ashamed to post?
    I’m actually embarassed for you.
    It’s time for you to just take your big mouth and your ” inkow more than you” attitude elseswhere.
    Nobody here cares about your pontifications.
    All it amounts to is you trying to prove the packers don’t suck ass.. It’s boring and very tiresome. Get lost!

  64. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 16, 2009 5:29 PM

    Chickendick:
    No, I’m not resorting to typing errors. I’m calling you stupid. There’s a difference.
    At no point in any of our discussions have you EVER brought any facts to the table. All you ever do is insult, falsely attribute quotes and hit the enter key as much as possible. That’s what you do. You don’t care to debate the actual statistics or look at actual facts. You don’t care to take an objective view of your team.
    Yes, I called purple faggy. As does everyone other sane, normal, straight man in this country. Know why? Because purple IS faggy. That’s why. But then again, so is wearing blonde wigs. So maybe they cancel each other out or something.
    Hey dipshit, whatever happened to your research? You remember typing this?
    “While I’m not at work, I’ll do some research. I’m positive that you will have some explaining to do.”
    How did that work out for you? It must’ve gone stunningly well, considering you’ve got jack shit to show for it. So how about you put your money where your mouth is and follow through on something? I’ll be waiting.

  65. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 16, 2009 5:38 PM

    Chickenphallus:
    No, I’m not resorting to typing errors. I’m calling you stupid. There’s a difference.
    At no point in any of our discussions have you EVER brought any facts to the table. All you ever do is insult, falsely attribute quotes and hit the enter key as much as possible. That’s what you do. You don’t care to debate the actual statistics or look at actual facts. You don’t care to take an objective view of your team.
    Yes, I called purple faggy. As does everyone other sane, normal, straight man in this country. Know why? Because purple IS faggy. That’s why. But then again, so is wearing blonde wigs. So maybe they cancel each other out or something.
    Hey dipshit, whatever happened to your research? You remember typing this?
    “While I’m not at work, I’ll do some research. I’m positive that you will have some explaining to do.”
    How did that work out for you? It must’ve gone stunningly well, considering you’ve got jack shit to show for it. So how about you put your money where your mouth is and follow through on something? I’ll be waiting.

  66. Chickenfoot says: Oct 16, 2009 7:38 PM

    You calling me stupid is laughable, it really is.
    Unlike you, I seem to have a life, don’t worry. I’ll get around to it.
    You better be careful there Sparky, you may have a gripper in front of the keyboard.
    An objective view of my team? They are 5-0.
    Beat 3 teams by over 2 tds per, were leading the Packers with SEVEN MINUTES AND TWENTYFIVE SECONDS TO GO.
    Went into a soft zone and made asshats like you feel like you were actually in the game.
    God you are pathetic. What are you waiting for, me to say the packers are good?
    They suck and so do you for thinking otherwise.
    debate statistics? The only stats that matter are wins and losses…5-0. 2-2!
    Oh wait Minnesota had the 14 th ranked D in week 5, oooooh they suck……idiot
    Wait i have a stat here that proves the Vikes record is a mirage!
    Jared Allen has 2 dwi’s and Percy smoks pot, games shouldn’t count.
    If it wasn’t for the refs…
    Piss off you big crybaby.
    That you”ll be waiting is proof enough to me that you have no life. What a pathetic loser.
    You know what the funniest thing of all is? I’ve told you in not one but 2 posts that I’m pulling your chain, TRYING TO PISS YOU OFF, yet you still don’t get it.
    Yeah, I’m sure the stupid one out of the 2 of us….
    I hit the return key alot there…just 4 you.

  67. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Oct 16, 2009 9:39 PM

    The refs, DWIs, pot, blah blah blah. More shit from you I’ve never brought up. Keep it up. If you make up this many excuses when your team is undefeated it’ll be hilarious to read your shit when they flunk out of the playoffs and Favre retires.
    Again.
    And just look at you. Failing to produce on your promises. Again. Words, words, words.. But no action.
    Bottom line: you didn’t find shit because I don’t make predictions and I don’t run my mouth about how great the Packers are.
    But you’ll keep this up because you’re a ninny with nothing better to do than make himself look like a stupid dafodil. And because you’re unable to let someone else have the last word.
    Anyway, I’ve thrown stats at you, I’ve reminded you that your defense has been mediocre against some of the worst offenses in the league. You’ve never responded with facts. Unless you find an obscure alternate ranking to help you sleep better on that big purple pillow of yours.
    Don’t worry, chicken. I’m sure Uncle Brett will fulfill all your purple dreams and finally bring home a trophy for that empty case in the Metrodump. And then Zygi can start looking for another QB for 2010. Maybe the euphoria will actually provide an environment conducive to building a new improved indoor playground for your purple boys. And you’ll need to scrub out the protein stains in those purple footy pajamas of yours.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!