The Castration of Packer Fans at Acme Continues..

One of my main criticisms of Acme Packing Company is the "Corporatization" of the site and all that that entails for the organic, bold, in-your-face (and at times ribald) discourse between Packer fans themselves and with fans of other teams.   The goal of SB Nation (being administered by the toadies who now run Acme now and other team blogs) is to create an antiseptic, politically correct blog that comes to resemble a cookie cutter ideal of something that is safe to advertise on (I suppose).

So out goes any sort of "edgy" spontaneity.  Thus, witness the spontaenous (and righteous) anger expressed by Packer fans in the aftermath of the Seahawks debacle.   A user by the name Packer3485 attempted to counter the inordinate amount of trolls bombarding the Acme site.   One particular troll, the supercilious, unctuous and unfunny blogger over at Daily Norseman, Ted Glover, trolled packer fans with his crocodile tires...

Packer3285 responded  understably by telling him to "go to hell" (we'll never get the full comment or context because it was deleted by Kevin McCauley Culkin (the man child head of Acme).

Packer3485 rightly responded:

Apparently we're not allowed to insult Ted Glover on this site.

I didn’t know Chris Gates took over APC. Fantastic.

by Packers3485 on Sep 25, 2012 1:01 AM CDT reply   4 recs

Notice the 4 recs?  McCauley-Culkin, ever so sensitive at losing "the masses", responded in douchenozzle fashion saying "oh we can't insult anyone on this site".    Notice what a stupid, arbitrary amorphous standard that is?   What is the separation between a reasonable description of reality and calling out BS, versus "insulting" someone?  Who draws that line? Weren't we all insulting the replacement referees?  Didn't we all call them out and insult them?  Why are some insults OK and others not?

Apparently, we should all be OK with letting man-child McCauley Culkin figure that out (in his arbitrary way)

I’m curious. How can we phrase what Ted was doing without it being an “insult.” If we say he’s “two-faced” ….that’s an attack. If I say he’s being “dishonest”….that’s certainly insulting to him. No one wants to be told they’re a liar!

We’re essentially at the point where people are allowed to come over and be dicks here, but we aren’t actually allowed to SAY that they’re being dicks.

by Packers3485 on Sep 25, 2012 1:41 AM CDT up reply  

Packer3485, let me help you understand what happened here.   The reason man-child deleted your comments wasn't because they were "insulting" -- it was because THEY WERE DIRECTED AT SOMEONE YOU DARE NOT INSULT.   Man child has a stronger allegiance with Ted, who in the hiearachy of things is higher up than you or any other regular commentator will ever be.   He defended a Viqueen Concern Troll because of his STATUS.   They are both part of the same stupid hiearchy that is ruining SBNation.  

You are just a regular Packer fan expressing your passions in an authentic way -- something that makes a blog fun and interesting.   Not a priority in the Brave New World of politically-correct, corporate sensitive blogging.

Easy Peasy.

Dynasty...

Oh give it a rest...

For those new to this blog, click here for why I was banned from Acme Packing Company, SB Nation's Packers blog.

And as I suspected, Acme is throwing a tantrum after tonight's game.

Look, it was a bad call.  But you know what?  Bad calls are part of the game -- a bigger part nowadays because of the referee lockout fiasco.  And don't forget the following:


1) We got plenty of breaks from the refs as well against Seattle.   Don't act as if the bad calls were all one-sided.

2) MD Jennings should have punched/batted the ball away down into the turf.  Period.  As Gary Eller said on 1250 am postgame Green Bay "everyone is coached to do that from when they were a kid" (paraphrase)


But I've moved on.   Time to focus on New Orleans and time focus on these realities:

1)  We are now 3-4 over the last 7 games.   And in reality, we are really 1-4 since two of those wins were meaningless (Chicago minus Cutler, Detroit game was last of the season and we started Flynn, totally meaningless)

2)  Our offense looked invincible last year mostly because we did NOT PLAY A SINGLE DEFENSE RANKED IN THE TOP 10.   The top defense we played, KC, was ranked 11th...held us to 7 points through 58 minutes until we scored a meaningless TD at then end when they went into prevent.

3)  Our Offensive Line gave up 8 sacks in ONE HALF.   That's atroicious.   It means we can't do seven step drops and let our dangerous receivers have time to get open deep.   That's why we were relegated to quick hitters in the 2nd half, to negate the rush.

And I could go on.

We haven't solidified the LB position opposite Clay, the Safety positions (though MacMillan is improving) are still a concern.

And did I mention our offense is just plain sputtering?

All these are more important than one bad fluke call  -- but don't expect the Acme Packing Company brass to let off on this.   Maybe they'll prove me wrong...but I doubt it.

Dynasty.

Two back-to-back dumb article titles on Acme

If you are new to my blog, please view this .   That'll give an idea of the who, what, where and why of this blog.   And thanks for coming on board!

Today is game day (or should I say game night) as the Pack take on Seattle in a matter of moments.   As I covered earlier , Acme blog has done a crappy job of covering this game from an objective standpoint (par for the course for them).

Even more laughably, in an attempt at "serious" analysis, today's Acme contained the two blog entries with the following titles:   "Packers need to establish a running game"  and "Packers need to start fast".   Wow, what deep thoughts!   As for the "the Pack need to start fast"...Well, duh...what's the alternative?  Starting slow?  Does any team want to start  slow?  As one commenter there accurately put it:

That the plan is always to start fast. I mean, its not like the team gets together and says,“Ok guys, what we’re going to do is stall on the first couple of drives and let the other team get a lead, and then we’re really going to turn it on.” Not trying ti be a smart alec, but I think that the Packers goal is to score every time they have the ball.

Exactamundo!  

And as for "we need to establish the running game" to win.  Let's recall that last year we went 15-1 while averaging about 60 yards per game.   And many of those yards were disproportionately in the 4th quarter, when we were icing our win.   Objectively, it's WAAAAY more significant for us to "establish the pass" (!) in order to set up the run (!).   But the "cool kids" in Acme prefer to repeat the hackneyed slogan which has been around for decades and appeal to popular prejudices, but proven irrelevant over the past 4 seasons, if one cares to look at the stats.

Typical hackneyed "lazy" thinking...

Anyways, it's kickoff...go Pack go and I hope we can win this tough game!  

Dynasty.

For Those New to My Blog...

Welcome!  I am hoping this website will appeal not just to Packer fans, but those who have been rail-roaded by the increasing "politically correct" fascism that is dooming SBNation, as it hastens to join the middle of the road, yellow-stripe-down-the-middle, politically correct "corporatocracy" that is limiting so much speech nowadays.  (In other words, they want to sell out to corporate America).

So instead of the raw, in-your-face fandom that makes blogging so much fun and unpredictable, it's become as predictable, contrived and just outright lame as the lamestream media in general.

Briefly, here is why I was dispatched from Acme Packing Company, after 9,000 comments and four years of painstakingly following the team (including when the team went 6-10 in 2008 and I was like one of only 4 people during the game day live threads):


1) Referring to the NFL draft as a "slave auction" in the context of players being forced to play for a team against their possible wil, instead of the free market that most of us enjoy when seeking employment

2) Referring to the Vikings as the "Queens" -- (this is something that every packer baby mouths right after "Mom" "Dad" "Go Pack Go"; "queens" usually follows although sometimes it's "Bears still suck").

3) In the aftermath of Seau's suicide, I engaged in a little gallow's humor. Context: When it comes to death, some of us face this difficult life moment with humor, often of the wry, semi-twisted sort. I joked that he killed himself b/c he never won a Super Bowl. And I blamed the Giants for ruining his best chance.  (Waaah)

4) I labeled my critics on APC "soft like women" and was banned for being a sexist. This coming from a site that calls Ponder "Christina" and feminizes other teams' players.

Yep, for all those innocuous observations, I got warned and then finally banned!

So in short, that's basically my story -- but it doesn't end there.   After I got banned, countless new members have faced "the people's razor" (For you Francophobes, that was the nickname given to the Guillotine during the French Revolution), dropped by Kevin McCauley (The Robespierre of Acme Packing Company) and the rest of the Jacobins (Kevin, Devin, and a retard editor named O'Brien Schofield).

If you have faced similar treatment or just hate the general PC drift of SBNation then....WELCOME!   And by all means, chime in and voice your grievances.

Dynasty.

Brief word on the upcoming Seattle game...

I was planning on writing on some ridiculousness from Acme Packing Company (about fan attitudes toward Packer coaching), but I came across a fantastic analysis of the upcoming Packer-Seahawks over at http://www.hawkblogger.com/

He restricts his analysis to a  very realistic appraisal of the Packers offense, something you rarely see from Acme Packing Company or from Packer fans in general, even outside that hijacked blog.  After reading Hawkblogger, here is how I responded to him below:

Yeah this is really eye opening! As a Packer fan, I am very concerned about this game. The Packers are 3-3 over the past 6 gamesn -- yeah, we've been struggling. One thing you neglected to mention, in that Kansas City game, the Pack played without Greg Jennings. But I don't think that was overwhelmingly significant.

The key with Chiefs, Niners and Giants losses has been their ability to rush just 4 and put 7 back and watch Rodgers and the Pack offense just lose patience. We are a big play offense and when teams form that umbrella, that cover 2 or even cover 3 umbrella (and disguise it well) our offense is VERY containable. And we are beatable, as our recent record suggests.

Even the Bears in the last game contained our offense, but what killed them was Jay Cutler's 4 interception which gave us short fields multiple times. Otherwise, their umbrella defense contained us just fine...

By the way, if you guys are facing lots of arrogance from AcmePackingCompany fans over at SBNation, don't worry. That site has been hijacked by faux Packer fans. Check out my blog site acmepackingcompanysucks [(dot]) blogspot [(dot] com , where I detail how I was kicked off that blog after four years of loyal and honest criticism of the Packers and their fans.

Love your analysis Hawk Blogger and take care!

Dynasty.

It's something Packer fans need to get used to:  Defenses are taking the KC game as a  template and now amplying it writ large.  I still feel we are a dynasty in the making, but it's not going to be easy.   And the Seahawks are for REAL.  Look out for them come January.

  

The stick in your eyes is way worse than the log in mine...

Or perhaps more accurately, the rocks in your brain will fill the holes in mine.

This past week after the blowout victory over the Bears (always welcome for us Pack fans who had to deal with the Bears crushing us in the 80s -- yeah, I still remember), those in the "Chat Hiearachy" at Acme Packing Company (the self-styled "cool kids") love to go on and on about Cutler and his poor sportsmanship when he was yelling and pouting at his teammates.

First point I have to make:   Acme'ers love to finger point at opposing team's players and their foibles as if those characteristics are foreign to their own players.   Secondly, and more importantly, they missed a very egregious example of the very thing they accuse Cutler, namely, Aaron Rodgers ugly tantrum against James Jones in the 4th Quarter.

Now Jones is actually known for this (running bad routes).   Matt Flynn's interception in his first NFL start, against NE, was because James Jones ran a very weak route.   Flynn, ever so cool as ice, stared a bit and walked off the field.   Granted, he doesn't have the leadership cache of a Rodgers, but he showed excellent leadership there.

Rodgers was just plain ugly.  A competent packer blog would have addressed this issue head on.   Instead, I had to rely on yahoo sports for their analysis, comparison and contrast of Jay Cutler and Rodgers.  You can read about it here .  They actually praise Rodgers for apologizing.  James Jones is saying that it's all good .

When you are winning, it's easy to brush this ugly incident aside.  That's why I always say, "winning breeds chemistry" not "chemistry breeds winning."   Winning helps cover lots of wounds.  But those are cuts and Rodgers yelling to Jones could breed resentment in the long runand it's also a signal to other players.   I think it's something to watch out for.

The incompetents running Acme Packing Company didn't bother to cover this story.

Ahh remembrances of things past...

OK this is my inital blogspot...and unlike those that stick a toe in the water before jumping in, I am going to sky(!)dive right into it, hoping I don't hit my head too hard against the bottom...

One of the most grating features of Acme Packing Company (and this is pro forma for various blogs that cater to irrational fanatics) is that you get lots of "rationalizations" of preconceived prejudices, but very little in the form "rational analysis".

For example, you get a lot of empty sloganeering like "you need a balanced attack" (Glad Truman didn't take that advice when he dropped two canteloupes over Japan),  Or "ZOMG you HAVE to establish a running game" (I think these people might be possessed by the ghost of Amos Alonzo Stagg).   These views are held with religious fervor, even though the facts OVERWHELMING point otherwise, as I will show in a future posts.

And when I presented these facts, it was "damn these facts, full stupidity ahead"  (One particular moron was a guy named Phoenician, doubtless an Obama voter...)

When studying phenomena on the football field, I try my best to develop a "theory of the case" understanding full well that theories can be falsified WHEN NEW FACTS arise.

One of the contentious issues that got these weak kneed, girly-men pack fans all angry was when I contended they were wrong in their denunciations of Eli Manning as being just an average QB. One particular knuckle dragger named "Weidman" even insisted Manning was inferior to Tony Romo (BWAHHAHAHAHA!).   Manning is clearly and obviously top 5, elite and just plain great.   A winner, a great passer under pressure.  One of the best playoff/clutch QBs in NFL history.   But even after being curbstomped by Manning not once but twice, Packer fans won't budge.  Not even after the NEW FACTS of him setting record after playoff record for things like road wins and 4th quarter comebacks, these numbnuts couldn't change their POV.  It's a form of severe immaturity and perhaps retardation (sorry Sarah Palin, I had too -- but love ya toots).

In short, this is what one encounters all the time over at AcmePackingCompany.  There are exceptions, like Strohman, but overall, it's just a bunch of rationalizers and people that put up stupid GIFs (virtually one and the same).