HokieHigh Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 on a related note, if a-rod played against our defense how many points do you think he would score...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Regarding this alleged curse due to the presence of a franchise QB, is Tom Brady not a franchise QB? And if Brady has not been a franchise QB, who besides Rodger can be considered one? Or are New England's five super bowl wins and seven super bowl appearances with Brady at QB part of some sort of "curse?" Because if anyone considers the Patriots to be "cursed" due to the presence of a franchise QB, sign me up for extending that same curse to the Green Bay Packer franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Yes, if having a franchise QB is such a curse, why is every GM who doesn't have one ready to give away the farm and his first born for one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 14 hours ago, Green19 said: I know... the title is dramatic and most every fan base would say "cry me a river". But a recent topic in the sporting world media is... Green Bay has an average to below average roster "talent wise" and would be nothing without Aaron Rodgers. So it got me thinking... is the GB roster truly average across the board, from a talent stand point? Are teams like the Titans, Bears, Minnesota, Texans far more superior "talent wise" as media members and shock jocks claim? Or is it the curse of having a franchise QB that people can't see past the QB and teams with franchise QBs win only because they have one. And teams without one are crazy talented because they are winning without one. Just interested on everyone's thoughts. 2 Replace Rodgers with Hundley tomorrow, get back everyone who's injured, and IMO it's an uphill battle to make the playoffs. I think the team's performance when Rodgers went down in 2013 speaks for itself, and I don't imagine this iteration of the team would fare any better with Hundley running the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MNPackfan32 Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 I know the narrative is how Rodgers has never gotten back to another Super Bowl. But if this is really how it ends, 1 Super Bowl appearance, I won't look back at Ted/Mike/Aaron era as a failure. I will look back and remember them as the unluckiest dynasty ever. The amount of injuries that they endure every year is staggering. Then to lose an all pro FS and a TE in his prime who was really turning into something in 2013, is some of the worst luck I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 36 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said: Regarding this alleged curse due to the presence of a franchise QB, is Tom Brady not a franchise QB? And if Brady has not been a franchise QB, who besides Rodger can be considered one? Or are New England's five super bowl wins and seven super bowl appearances with Brady at QB part of some sort of "curse?" Because if anyone considers the Patriots to be "cursed" due to the presence of a franchise QB, sign me up for extending that same curse to the Green Bay Packer franchise. 1 Yep, the fact that Brady has a handful of SB rings pretty much takes a dump on the idea of franchise QB's being a curse. SB's are just hard to win, and GB's curse hasn't been their franchise QB. The primary curse GB has had during the Rodgers era has been TT's poor track drafting for the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said: Regarding this alleged curse due to the presence of a franchise QB, is Tom Brady not a franchise QB? And if Brady has not been a franchise QB, who besides Rodger can be considered one? I'm not claiming there is a curse. My original point is... Does a team's overall talent level get skewed because of a franchise QB? Because right now all the media I listen to claims this: "Green Bay is an average team, with the best QB ever. Texans, Bengals, Bears, etc all have better talent. Better WRs, RBs, TEs, better defenses..." so im curious... is that true? Where does GB's roster stack up? Is GB average? Or is that the weird downside/curse of a franchise QB... no one will look at the rest of the roster and give it credit, unless it's for a lost because they aren't good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 20 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: Yep, the fact that Brady has a handful of SB rings pretty much takes a dump on the idea of franchise QB's being a curse. SB's are just hard to win, and GB's curse hasn't been their franchise QB. The primary curse GB has had during the Rodgers era has been TT's poor track drafting for the defense. Again... just having fun with the title of the thread. It's about is GB's roster average or does everyone say this because Rodgers is so amazing that everything good that happens because of him? Are our: WR, TE, RB, OL, DL, LB, CB, S all average to below average? Are teams like the Texans, Bears, Bengals, Vikings, Jaguars, etc all far and ahead of GB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Personally, I don't see much top level talent at any position on GB's roster outside of Rodgers. Daniels is the only name I can even think of. Age and injury have taken Jordy and Clay out of that category, and Dix has had a terrible start to the year. Who else would even come close? Maybe a healthy Bak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 I think everyone is confused by my title... Here is a video from The Herd with Colin Cowherd to illustrate my point. He talks about Green Bay's lack of talent. He isn't the only one... it's a reoccurring discussion in all media: fox, espn, bleacher report, si, etc. Do they have a point? Or is it because we all love to focus on the QB and if you have one that's the only reason why you win and the rest of your team are bums? Video of Colin Cowherd talking to Greg Jennings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Off the cuff, this is how I'd rate GB's overall talent QB: Elite RB: Below average WR: Average OL: Above average (when healthy) DL: Average LB: Below average CB: Below average S: Above average Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, Green19 said: I think everyone is confused by my title... Here is a video from The Herd with Colin Cowherd to illustrate my point. He talks about Green Bay's lack of talent. He isn't the only one... it's a reoccurring discussion in all media: fox, espn, bleacher report, si, etc. Do they have a point? Or is it because we all love to focus on the QB and if you have one that's the only reason why you win and the rest of your team are bums? Video of Colin Cowherd talking to Greg Jennings So what is your opinion on the subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 29 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: So what is your opinion on the subject? My opinion is I don't think our talent is honestly that bad, I'd say it's overall slightly above average. I think people just look at who the starter is and not the depth. Atlanta has elite WRs!!!! No... they have one, the Rodgers of WRs in Julio Jones. Sanu, Gabriel, hardy are average to below average...are they better talents then Adams, Cobb, G-MO? Are the Texans, Bengals, Vikings, etc WRs top to bottom better? Or because you see Jones, Hopkins, Green that they are all better then Nelson so advantage them and Rodgers is working with terrible WR talent. I think if we didn't have comparable talent to those teams we wouldn't win as consistently as we do. I'll give you top end talent... but come on unless we traded away a ton of draft picks the last 8 years we have been drafting 20-32 in the draft. We theoretically haven't had a chance to draft your Macks, Millers, Zekes, Jones, etc talents of the NFL world. But I feel we are deeper cause that's our front office's strength. We can go thru injuries like we have and still win. Is that truly all Rodgers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 IMO This is a 6-10 or 5-11 team without Rodgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 8 minutes ago, Green19 said: My opinion is I don't think our talent is honestly that bad, I'd say it's overall slightly above average. I think people just look at who the starter is and not the depth. Atlanta has elite WRs!!!! No... they have one, the Rodgers of WRs in Julio Jones. Sanu, Gabriel, hardy are average to below average...are they better talents then Adams, Cobb, G-MO? Are the Texans, Bengals, Vikings, etc WRs top to bottom better? Or because you see Jones, Hopkins, Green that they are all better then Nelson so advantage them and Rodgers is working with terrible WR talent. I think if we didn't have comparable talent to those teams we wouldn't win as consistently as we do. I'll give you top end talent... but come on unless we traded away a ton of draft picks the last 8 years we have been drafting 20-32 in the draft. We theoretically haven't had a chance to draft your Macks, Millers, Zekes, Jones, etc talents of the NFL world. But I feel we are deeper cause that's our front office's strength. We can go thru injuries like we have and still win. Is that truly all Rodgers Let me put it this way. If given the choice, would you swap the entire GB roster other than the starting QB with HOU, CIN, MIN or ATL? I would in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.