NFCN Rivals - Packers Thread

[dll2000]

7 hours ago, soulman said:

I don't think Fangio wanted any part of that deal where his QB wants to run his own show.

But I do agree that coaches like LaFleur are who you hire to develop young QBs like Mariota.

For guys like Rodgers you need established winners with schemes he'll respect.  Unfortunately they're in short supply and Vince Lombardi isn't coming back.

They should have hired Arians and LaFleur after Rodgers retired.  

[Fl0nkerton]

The mental gymnastics in this thread is astounding.

[Spartacus]

5 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

took a blown chip shot FG in OT to tie MIN

TBH that game should have been won in the first place if not for a BS roughing the passer penalty on Clay that overturned an INT.  That also happened to be the last straw before they modified the rule. 

[dll2000]

34 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

TBH that game should have been won in the first place if not for a BS roughing the passer penalty on Clay that overturned an INT.  That also happened to be the last straw before they modified the rule. 

That's actually true.  Also might have got in Matthews head as he didn't play so great after that.  

Edited August 7, 2019 by dll2000

[malak1]

9 hours ago, Norm said:

That is completely irrelevant to what I posted. Fackrell sucks ***. But he has just beaten a guy  twice but they didn't post that and they didn't start fighting because they were getting whooped. It was in response to a returner getting lit up and the player that hit him already had done some bull**** and was kicked out of practice and held out the next day.

Lol, my joke was only about the Fackrell part of your post. I read about what Lonnie Johnson did. Pretty messed up. 

[dll2000]

LOL

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27334871

"I think the [NFL Players Association] is going to look at that, for sure."

Spin that one Packers fans.  Sure the HC loved Rodgers saying that.

Packers fans:

LaFleur didn't understand what he was doing and really appreciated Rodgers trying to publicly bring him up on a breach of CBA.   This brought them closer and they are better besties than ever now.

 

[TheBitzMan]

8 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

I don’t think he did either - just saying that he would have been a hire that made more sense there to me.

Even beyond the Rodgers drama that roster needed a lot though. Like the Deadspin article said, even getting to 6-9-1 took a blown chip shot FG in OT to tie MIN, a miracle comeback against us week 1 and struggle wins against bottom-of-the-league teams in SF and NYJ despite AR only throwing 2 picks all season. They were a few favorable bounces switched around from being a very ugly 3-13 last year despite Rodgers playing in every game. Hell, lowly Detroit swept them and they finished on a 3-7 stretch despite Rodgers showing no glaring signs of issues with his knee after their week 7 bye. That’s a whole lot of meh right there. 

Outside of Rodgers, Adams, HHCD and maybe Bahktiari (sp?) would any position players from the 2018 Packers team start on the 2019 Bears? I guess Daniels over Nichols too. Is this version of Jimmy Graham better than a healthy Trey Burton at this point? I’d say probably not. So 5 position players out of 23 (considering nickel CB as well). How many wins does that 2018 roster get with a replacement level starting QB instead of Rodgers? Not many. 

LOL - The best LT in the league would maybe start on the Bears? Can't wait to watch the Bears flame out ala the Jags. 

[TheBitzMan]

Just now, dll2000 said:

LOL

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27334871

"I think the [NFL Players Association] is going to look at that, for sure."

Spin that one Packers fans.  Sure the HC loved Rodgers saying that.

Packers fans:

LaFleur didn't understand what he was doing and really appreciated Rodgers trying to publicly bring him up on a breach of CBA.   This brought them closer and they are better besties than ever now.

 

Here's the actual reason why Rodgers didn't like the joint practice...BUT RODGERS AND LAFLEUR HATE EACH OTHER!!!!

"I like the scheme," Rodgers said. "I mean, I do. I like the scheme a lot. I like the stresses that it puts on defenses, I like the marriage of the run game with the action. I like our concepts from both stack alignments, bunch alignments and from wide alignments. I think it's going to be very tough to get a bead on what we're doing.

"We do more under-center stuff, which I'm totally confident with and comfortable under center. I feel like that allows us to get some more one-high stuff as many defenses basically have checks -- if you're in the gun it's two-high, if you're under center it's one-high. I think it's going to allow us to open some more things up, get some one-on-one opportunities outside. Just this minor frustration is when you do so many fun, schematic stuff for eight or nine days and then it gets kind of cut back for a couple day. But we'll be on next week, probably playing, and looking forward to just practices."

[dll2000]

1 minute ago, TheBitzMan said:

Here's the actual reason why Rodgers didn't like the joint practice...BUT RODGERS AND LAFLEUR HATE EACH OTHER!!!!

"I like the scheme," Rodgers said. "I mean, I do. I like the scheme a lot. I like the stresses that it puts on defenses, I like the marriage of the run game with the action. I like our concepts from both stack alignments, bunch alignments and from wide alignments. I think it's going to be very tough to get a bead on what we're doing.

"We do more under-center stuff, which I'm totally confident with and comfortable under center. I feel like that allows us to get some more one-high stuff as many defenses basically have checks -- if you're in the gun it's two-high, if you're under center it's one-high. I think it's going to allow us to open some more things up, get some one-on-one opportunities outside. Just this minor frustration is when you do so many fun, schematic stuff for eight or nine days and then it gets kind of cut back for a couple day. But we'll be on next week, probably playing, and looking forward to just practices."

Why aren't they communicating on this stuff privately?  Why is it always playing out in media?

Why pull the whole scheme for Texans and go 100% vanilla when they apparently aren't for public training camp practices anyway.  They did fun schematic stuff for 9 days straight and just stopped?  Texans aren't on the schedule.  Run your plays.  

Why so sensitive anytime anyone brings up news stories from beat writers?  I am not making this stuff up.  I am pasting quotes.  Granted I am commenting on them, but it's fun.  

Not like no one could foresee potential problems with a 40 year old ego driven QB and a 20 year old first time pretty boy HC.   Sure there is zero frustration from either party on anything.  Everything is awesome. 

 

 

 

 

[RJ_11]

12 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

Here's the actual reason why Rodgers didn't like the joint practice...BUT RODGERS AND LAFLEUR HATE EACH OTHER!!!!

"I like the scheme," Rodgers said. "I mean, I do. I like the scheme a lot. I like the stresses that it puts on defenses, I like the marriage of the run game with the action. I like our concepts from both stack alignments, bunch alignments and from wide alignments. I think it's going to be very tough to get a bead on what we're doing.

"We do more under-center stuff, which I'm totally confident with and comfortable under center. I feel like that allows us to get some more one-high stuff as many defenses basically have checks -- if you're in the gun it's two-high, if you're under center it's one-high. I think it's going to allow us to open some more things up, get some one-on-one opportunities outside. Just this minor frustration is when you do so many fun, schematic stuff for eight or nine days and then it gets kind of cut back for a couple day. But we'll be on next week, probably playing, and looking forward to just practices."

But, to be fair, you have left out the part of the article where Rodgers said the drills they were doing weren't smart, and it was not the best use of the inter-squad practices. He also said he wouldn't mind if they didn't do it again for another 14 years.

LaFleur also said he 100% wants to do the joint practices again next season. No-one's saying they hate each other, but they certainly have differing opinions on these practices.

Just clearing it up for those who haven't read the article, and might think from your comments that the only reason he didn't like them is because they've had to cut back the offense

[TheBitzMan]

4 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Why aren't they communicating on this stuff privately?  Why is it always playing out in media?

Why pull the whole scheme for Texans and go 100% vanilla when they apparently aren't for public training camp practices anyway.  They did fun schematic stuff for 9 days straight and just stopped?  Texans aren't on the schedule.  Run your plays.  

Why so sensitive anytime anyone brings up news stories from beat writers?  I am not making this stuff up.  I am pasting quotes.  Granted I am commenting on them, but it's fun.  

Not like no one could foresee potential problems with a 40 year old ego driven QB and a 20 year old first time pretty boy HC.   Sure there is zero frustration from either party on anything.  Everything is awesome. 

 

 

 

 

They are for public practices, first off. Secondly why would you want to put a scheme on tape for another team prior to the season, keep the looks as unscounted as you can. Never said everything was perfect but there are many more reports about how LaFleur/Rodgers are getting along than some stupid argument over a joint practice. 

If I were you I'd me much more worried about Rich Campbell saying that Matt Nagy was visibly upset about Mitch's accuracy against the second string defense than any Packer fan will ever be about this nonsense. 

[TheBitzMan]

1 minute ago, RJ_11 said:

But, to be fair, you have left out the part of the article where Rodgers said the drills they were doing weren't smart, and it was not the best use of the inter-squad practices. He also said he wouldn't mind if they didn't do it again for another 14 years.

LaFleur also said he 100% wants to do the joint practices again next season. No-one's saying they hate each other, but they certainly have differing opinions on these practices.

Just clearing it up for those who haven't read the article, and might think from your comments that the only reason he didn't like them is because they've had to cut back the offense

He said the Special Teams live drills weren't smart because they are the most dangerous plays in football. He was sticking up for a player who is battling for a roster spot who got injured during it. Said player also played at Cal and was having a great camp by all accounts. That doesn't fit the narrative of Rodgers hating his teammates and vice versa though. 

Is it a great look that he disagreed with a coach about joint practices? No. Is it being totally overblown and people are disregarding the true quotes from Rodgers? Yes. Both things can be true. 

[dafreak]

15 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

He said the Special Teams live drills weren't smart because they are the most dangerous plays in football. He was sticking up for a player who is battling for a roster spot who got injured during it. Said player also played at Cal and was having a great camp by all accounts. That doesn't fit the narrative of Rodgers hating his teammates and vice versa though. 

Is it a great look that he disagreed with a coach about joint practices? No. Is it being totally overblown and people are disregarding the true quotes from Rodgers? Yes. Both things can be true.

Packers haven't been relevant for a couple of years, I see no reason why that would change this year. The fact that the above is going on at all does not bode well for the team. And the savior, Rodgers, is perhaps the teams biggest problem. They also seem to be pinning their defensive hopes on rookies and free agents. Might work but history would say otherwise. Maybe next year, just don't see the team finishing ahead of the Bears or Vikings and perhaps even the Lions.

[TheBitzMan]

16 minutes ago, dafreak said:

Packers haven't been relevant for a couple of years, I see no reason why that would change this year. The fact that the above is going on at all does not bode well for the team. And the savior, Rodgers, is perhaps the teams biggest problem. They also seem to be pinning their defensive hopes on rookies and free agents. Might work but history would say otherwise. Maybe next year, just don't see the team finishing ahead of the Bears or Vikings and perhaps even the Lions.

Says the forum with pages dedicated to an "irrelevant" team...

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

Eh,  I wouldn't make too much of it. They might just be keeping their special stuff off the tape and not letting anything slip out a la John Fox.