Yes it's game 3, but should PC pull the starters in GB

[TaterHawk]

I’d guess some would like to see the Hawks go into Green bay and ‘prove it’ I worry about this one for a number of reasons. I’d like to see PC not follow the norm (starters play into the 3rd qtr in game 3) Sit the starters in GB and let them beat on Oakland next week. Not that they should fear GB, but for example Denver picked up a number of serious injuries by a jacked up Seattle. Smart is smart …no?

 

[themunn]

Practice all you want, but there is no substitute for actually playing in a game when it comes to preparation

 

[Sarlacc83]

Not worried about it. The more physical team is the one that usually comes away with fewer injuries. Green Bay doesn't strike me as a physical team.

 

[hawker84]

I was to believe this is the dress rehearsal for the season, starters usually play 3 qrters in this one.. This is the perfect challenge to test those road whoes.. On the road, in GB against arguably the best QB in the game. I can't wait to see how our offense does, but more so hopefully we'll have a few more of our defensive starters back to see how they stack up against Rogers and company.

You always want to sit your starters in week 4, to recover from all the little dings going into week one, plus this is the game where a lot of players will have one more chance to show what they can do before the cut deadline. Play your starters week 3, sit them week 4....

 

[Axx]

an elite QB on the road is a test we didn't fast last year

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Green Bay is the perfect opponent for us imo. Great QB will be a solid test for our D. Plus, a loud crowd etc. always is a good test as well. Shoot, gotta' play the starters for 3 quarters. Can't be afraid of injuries. It's a tough position for a coach. If he plays them 3 quarters and someone gets hurt, people are p.o'd that they "left them in there too long".
If he only plays them a half, it's "why is he taking them out so early, they need the work"

Whatever they do, I trust it's for the best of the team overall. I can't say, however, that I would be mad if guys didn't play much though. Part of me really wants them to be conservative because of the injury thing. Fingers crossed that both teams come out of it w/out too much on the injury front.

 

[themunn]

an elite QB on the road is a test we didn't fast last year

Nor is it one we will face this year - unless you count Matt Ryan as elite - in which case we did face an elite QB on the road last year.

 

[Hawks46]

Sitting them now, and playing Oakland is the worst thing you could do.

Even in preseason, you get nicked up. Bumps, bruises, minor strains.....none of this stuff shows up on the injury report, but it wears you down. It all goes away with a week of no contact. You have nothing to prove against Oakland...starters shouldn't even suit up. Let your 3rd stringers get some needed game reps and get beat up a little.

As for pulling them vs. GB....I'm worried about injury, sure, but no more so than any other game. Guys are just as likely to get hurt pulling them at halftime then pulling them in the 3rd quarter, and players and coaches need at least one game to work on halftime adjustments.

 

[Veilside]

an elite QB on the road is a test we didn't fast last year

Nor is it one we will face this year - unless you count Matt Ryan as elite - in which case we did face an elite QB on the road last year.

It's hard to tell, but it makes more sense if you see the typo as "pass" rather than "face". I think that's what he meant.

 

[13thMan]

Dress rehearsal! No... this game will be the best preseason indication/foreshadowing of the upcoming season. If we can put up a good fight and/or get a win in Lambeau (even in preseason), I will feel good about the season... If we struggle, I will feel less optimistic about the road games this year...

 

[RolandDeschain]

Papa Pete will do whatever he wants to do, and regardless of what that is, I fully support him; even if it means I don't get to see starters this week.

 

[themunn]

an elite QB on the road is a test we didn't fast last year

Nor is it one we will face this year - unless you count Matt Ryan as elite - in which case we did face an elite QB on the road last year.

It's hard to tell, but it makes more sense if you see the typo as "pass" rather than "face". I think that's what he meant.

Well if you consider beating Aaron Rodgers on the road in preseason as "passing that test" then we passed the test when we beat Peyton Manning on the road in preseason last year.

But I'm fairly certain he meant face, since the best QB we faced on the road last year (in the regular season) was probably... Jay Cutler??

 

[FlyingGreg]

Play them as much as possible - they don't get the live contact reps in camp like they used to.

 

[hawk79]

Not worried about it. The more physical team is the one that usually comes away with fewer injuries. Green Bay doesn't strike me as a physical team.

Agreed...This will be a much better test for our team. I'm more interested to see if they do any "game planning". You gotta think they are starting to figure out certain positions and know who they are going to keep and cut. Now would be a good time to introduce to the rookies and FA the idea of what game planning is all about. How to prepare, practice and study.

This game will be a much better test for Seattle than anything Oakland can throw at them. IMO.

 

[12th_Bob]

Naw, can't control injuries no matter what. It's worth the risk to get your starters on the same page and see them execute uniformly against NFL competition.

The players can't be thinking about injuries, they have to be thinking about making the most of their opportunities.

Game planning: I think you do game plan a little, if teams didn't it would just be chaos getting the rotations in and plays called. Never understood why people think teams don't prepare even if it is only the preseason. (I know they aren't going to show there full hand with blitzes and all of that but everyone know's Seattle is going to execute some zone running plays or that Green Bay will look to get LB or CB matchups on TE's or running pick routes, etc.) Game planning probably isn't a big prep for game 4 though, that one is an audition for other teams mostly.

 

[Sarlacc83]

It's hard to tell, but it makes more sense if you see the typo as "pass" rather than "face". I think that's what he meant.

Well if you consider beating Aaron Rodgers on the road in preseason as "passing that test" then we passed the test when we beat Peyton Manning on the road in preseason last year.

But I'm fairly certain he meant face, since the best QB we faced on the road last year (in the regular season) was probably... Jay Cutler??

I'd have to go with Matt Stafford if we're not counting the playoffs. Otherwise, RGIII and Matt Ryan are up there in the top tier of QBs.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't understand what you mean by "prove it."

This is something fans care about, the players and coaches are smart enough to know that this is just pre-season, and they're trying to work on things like efficiency and staying healthy.

There might be some chippy stuff going on, but you don't change any preparation or how long you play your starters just because it's GB. If Pete and John had that mentality, they never would have scheduled the game in the first place. In fact they probably scheduled the game on purpose to acclimate their team to a hostile environment.

 

[wrenches59864]

I hope they don't, keep up the intimidation on the rest of the "playoff teams". Besides my wife and stepson are Packer fans and I don't need to hear their crap about us kicking their butts last year at Quest.

 

[TwistedHusky]

We still have no idea what we have got.

Against San Diego, we were getting gashed up the middle and having a problem getting pressure on the QB.

Against Denver, we were still giving up rushing yards in large chunks and having problems getting to the QB. I know that was Payton and he gets rid of the ball quickly, but I do notice in other games that other teams are getting pressure. I also am aware that Clemons, Avril and a few of our other players did not play in that game.

But Denver did walk up the field twice, we just forced turnovers. It was actually an evenly matched yardage total.

We need to see something out of our defense, and thus far we aren't showing that great against the run (that are many cases not even the starting RBs) and we are not getting QB pressure against the 1s.

We need to play better and Green Bay is a good test.

Plus this team might as well get more practice in for playing in a hostile environment because we need to be good on the road, considering how we seem to have so many games against the stronger teams in their house. Our guys need to get used to getting the energy from the team, not just feeding off the crowd.

We need to be ready, I believe the 1st game is Carolina and that is a game we narrowly won last year. Isn't the game after that SF? If we start 2-0 we have good momentum but if we start 0-2 there is going to be a lot of pressure on this team. It will be really hard to keep this team on course if that happens because then the Seahawks will be a "disappointment".

 

[themunn]

I'd have to go with Matt Stafford if we're not counting the playoffs. Otherwise, RGIII and Matt Ryan are up there in the top tier of QBs.

2011 Matt Stafford maybe, but he was the epitome of average last year