Jump to content

Aaron Rodgers breaks collarbone - could miss rest of 2017


Apparition

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PapaShogun said:

Damn. I don't think you would have enjoyed football in the 80's. 

Lol I've never opined my feelings on this rule, I am simply providing the current rule to read and showing why it applies. You have no idea whether or not I agree with it because I've never once said it.

I absolutely understand the reason for it and it makes sense to me why it exists. I've no problem with the hit from a real football perspective and I've actually said that a few times already.

Why is everyone so anxious to build strawmen in this thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TENINCH said:

Welcome to the regular NFL where you don't get 20 plus years of zero injuries to your most important player. Barr didn't do anything we haven't seen a million times in the NFL. QB makes a throw and gets his immediately afterwards. No intent to injure but definitely an intent to throw the QB off his game on the next pass or set of downs. Rodgers has been protected for years by those wearing the zebra costumes and it's cost Dallas, Seattle, Minnesota, Detroit, and Chicago wins. Life goes on. If Thompson is as great as Packer fans think he is the rest of their roster won't miss a beat and the Packers will continue their winning ways.

How inane.

This isn't the first injury in 20 years to a starting QB in GB.

And the last sentence is such utter nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legal or illegal, people get injured every week in football. Move on and get ready for next week.

Every year I see TT and MM rated as amongst the best of their respective positions. No we will see if that holds any truth. (Pro-tip: it won’t).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, malak1 said:

Legal or illegal, people get injured every week in football. Move on and get ready for next week.

Every year I see TT and MM rated as amongst the best of their respective positions. No we will see if that holds any truth. (Pro-tip: it won’t).

I'm not really sure why TT is under analysis for our backup QB. Why would a better option come to GREEN BAY to be a backup, for the night life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Lol I've never opined my feelings on this rule, I am simply providing the current rule to read and showing why it applies. You have no idea whether or not I agree with it because I've never once said it.

I absolutely understand the reason for it and it makes sense to me why it exists. I've no problem with the hit from a real football perspective and I've actually said that a few times already.

Why is everyone so anxious to build strawmen in this thread?

You claimed the hit on Rodgers was illegal because there are official rules that protect the quarterback because of his popularity to the sport. What? Where in the rules document does it state that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure why TT is under analysis for our backup QB. Why would a better option come to GREEN BAY to be a backup, for the night life?

I think they're referring more to the team, not just the backup QB. Pats lost Brady and won 11 games. Colts lost Manning and picked #1. One team is regarded as best run, the other relied too heavily on one guy (at least in those years). FWIW, I think the Packers are a lot closer to those Pats than those Colts if we use them as a scale. Barring another QB becoming a legend, obviously the team has to change a lot and I think they can do it, as do several people who posted here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mossburg said:

 

 

I think they're referring more to the team, not just the backup QB. Pats lost Brady and won 11 games. Colts lost Manning and picked #1. One team is regarded as best run, the other relied too heavily on one guy (at least in those years). FWIW, I think the Packers are a lot closer to those Pats than those Colts if we use them as a scale. Barring another QB becoming a legend, obviously the team has to change a lot and I think they can do it, as do several people who posted here.

To soon man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

You claimed the hit on Rodgers was illegal because there are official rules that protect the quarterback because of his popularity to the sport. What? Where in the rules document does it state that? 

The rule has been posted and quoted like 10 times in this thread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

The rule has been posted and quoted like 10 times in this thread...

Didn't see anything in the CRD regarding elite quarterbacks needing to have special protection because of their popularity to the sport.

No wonder all the non elite quarterbacks are non elite. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Didn't see anything in the CRD regarding quarterbacks needing to have special protection because of their popularity to the sport. 

What? What is your point? You're off in left field.

*Edit, I'm not sure what the confusion is here. It was illegal because there is a rule against it. It's retty obvious why the rule exists, but ultimately doesn't matter whatsoever why it exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Didn't see anything in the CRD regarding elite quarterbacks needing to have special protection because of their popularity to the sport.

No wonder all the non elite quarterbacks are non elite. 

Who has said anything about elite? The rule has to apply to all QBs because when they suffer injuries, the quality of the NFL exponentially decreases.

Obviously when stars like Brady, Rodgers, Manning etc... get hurt that's a tougher pill to swallow, but it's easy to see why the NFL protects QBs the way they do, they are vital to their bottom line. 

How many people turned off the Bears Vikings MNF game after that Star Wars trailer? There's your proof. 

Again I don't think this particular instance being flagged would change anything, but if QBs keep leaving the pocket to extend plays (usually the most exciting plays of a game) the NFL might look to extend their protection outside the pocket and take away the gray area many are arguing about with this hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Barr was trying to make sure Rodgers woke up the next day remembering how hard he was hit.  He wanted him aching on Monday.

Which is perfectly fine and good and part of the game and shouldn't be taken out.

I don't think he was trying to injury him though.

I have no issue with players trying to make a guy hurt.  But there's a difference between that and trying to injure someone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...