Jump to content

This might be it for Rodgers


pf9

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Go read 4-5 posts above. You too have said egregious stuff about Rodgers as well .

1 dude who isn't even a Packer fan, great. 

I haven't said a damn thing egregious about Rodgers in this thread to anybody who isn't a Rodgers fan instead of a Packers fan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Joe said:

You had me until this point. This game was lost because of a lack of depth at LT and a poor defensive scheme. It's really that simple.

Not to mention a mind boggling defensive lapse to end the half and a fumble on the 1st series of the 2nd half.  Put that with what you mentioned ... amazing game was as close as it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Brady's INTs weren't the back breaking kind.

A 30 yard INT that set GB up at the GB30

A 12 yard INT that set GB up at the GB19 (This one was rough, but it still led a long drive for the defense)

A 28 yard INT that set GB up at the GB24

I'm not going to say INTs 1 and 3 were basically punts because it wasn't that extreme, but this wasn't the 18 yard Rodgers INT which set the Bucs up at midfield. Brady's picks at least gave his defense plenty of field to defend. 

And everybody is wondering why Rodgers didn't get any scores off Brady's picks compared to Packer's turnovers.  Field position between the teams turnovers were a huge difference in the game.   70+ yards to drive vs 8 and 50 yards is BIG.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

And everybody is wondering why Rodgers didn't get any scores off Brady's picks compared to Packer's turnovers.  Field position between the teams turnovers were a huge difference in the game.   70+ yards to drive vs 8 and 50 yards is BIG.  

It was still a bad showing off of the Turnovers, especially the 3 and Outs. That third INT would have had much better field position if the offense hadn't flamed out on the drive previous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It was still a bad showing off of the Turnovers, especially the 3 and Outs. That third INT would have had much better field position if the offense hadn't flamed out on the drive previous.

Still doesn't change the facts  and yes, the 3 and outs weren't good but field position between the teams were a huge game changer.  Play calling wasn't very good during that time.  They got away from the run/play action with our long striding wr's needing separation/scheming to get open especially with our tackles getting torched.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Still doesn't change the facts  and yes, the 3 and outs weren't good but field position between the teams were a huge game changer.  Play calling wasn't very good during that time.  They got away from the run/play action with our long striding wr's needing separation/scheming to get open especially with our tackles getting torched.  

Field position between the teams was a huge game changer, caused predominantly in the 4th quarter by our damn offense not gaining any field position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Yes. Yes we are.  In fact, it's like a dream at this point on the same level of winning a full paid trip to Tahiti.  I would run down Madison square butt-naked in flip flops holding a troll doll and playing Justin Beiber in my headphones if you guys got rid of Rodgers. 

Seriously, for those of you who want Rodgers gone...that would be a huge mistake for your team. 

You guys have been blessed with TWO HOF QBs spanning nearly 30 years, back-to-back, and so I don't think you guys really understand how hard it is to find a QB. Much less one who is as good as Rodgers is. 

There are a few very spoiled fans here wanting to trade Rodgers and that would be a mistake.  HOF QBs don't grow on trees.  I suppose this might sound churlish but for all we know Love could be a clone of Trubisky.   I endured the 25 years between Starr and Favre and Bears fans know what it is like to not have a good QB under center.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sgtcheezwiz said:

Dude HAS to play perfect or the Packers lose. Not a good recipe against the other best team in the NFC. 
 

Even if he does play close to perfect, his guys have to catch it. 
 

it’s a sick joke.

Rodgers wasn't the reason why we lost.  We lost it in the trenches on both sides of the ball.  Until we fix that we'll be pushed around by teams like Tampa and the 49ers when they get all their guys back next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Field position between the teams was a huge game changer, caused predominantly in the 4th quarter by our damn offense not gaining any field position. 

Yup as I stated ... not running the ball, no play action passing, wr's not getting separation/open, poor protection all adds up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AJG said:

Trust me, as a long time lurker on the Pats forums if there were football gods that determined team success based on the stupidity of their fanbase, the Patriots would have as many Super Bowls in the last decade as the Packers do. I think pretty much every season I've watched them play there are a large number of extremely pessimistic, short sighted fans that say something like "this is it, Brady/Belichick is done, no way we're ever winning another Super Bowl with these guys again". They get the loudest when they don't reach the pinnacle of success for an extended period of time, and not just QBs. Brady started getting a reputation for not being able to win a Super Bowl when he's the one carrying the team after his after his second Super Bowl loss and not having won in a decade. Andy Reid had a reputation too for not being able to coach his team to a Super Bowl win. That talk was all garbage, and it's the same with Rodgers to. He already won a Super Bowl and he might be the best quarterback in the NFL now and going into next season. Not winning for a decade means nothing about his ability to get them there anymore than it did other greats like Brady and Reid. And anyway, who else is going to get them there in the near term if not Rodgers? You guys would be pissing away the opportunity you have right now for a Super Bowl run unless you got extremely lucky and ended up with another all-time great.

I believe ya here (I ran out of likes today).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Not to mention a mind boggling defensive lapse to end the half and a fumble on the 1st series of the 2nd half.  Put that with what you mentioned ... amazing game was as close as it was.

A lot of folks are gripping about Jones' 2nd fumble but the guy got so hurt he never returned.   The issue I had was giving up that TD at the end of the half.  Why we didn't go into a 2 minute offense and try to get points at the end of the half is more egregious than kicking the FG late in the 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...