Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Toddfather said:

pqw2zibgmlv41.jpg

Here we go.

Every year there is some sort of controversy in GB.  This is mostly fake news I would think, but Rodgers is tough to deal with I'm sure. Bob is really an outsider these days .. I don't think the players even talk to him.  I'll take James Jones word for it that Rodgers will be professional in his dealings with Love and the coaches.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Every year there is some sort of controversy in GB.  This is mostly fake news I would think, but Rodgers is tough to deal with I'm sure. Bob is really an outsider these days .. I don't think the players even talk to him.  I'll take James Jones word for it that Rodgers will be professional in his dealings with Love and the coaches.

I totally think Rogers could be a **** and push back against what MLF want to do or game plan. MLF may want more leverage in case things do go south which is ok. Keeps Rogers working as a team player while building the future. If report’s are true about how he acted toward MM and his calling his own plays it would make sense. There have also been more and more  times when Rogers sits on the bench and looks to be pouting when things are going south. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Just like Tennessee was going to fire LaFleur, but luckily we hired him as HC. 

Love McGinn's draft stuff every year, but man he is a bitter old man when it comes to the Packers. 

McGinn took the bait with a fake Rapsheet tweet and the wrote that article referencing that tweet. Now, Evan Silva, a Bears beat writer, retweets this ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, VonKarman said:

McGinn took the bait with a fake Rapsheet tweet and the wrote that article referencing that tweet. Now, Evan Silva, a Bears beat writer, retweets this ****.

Silva is a fantasy pundit not on the Bears beat. All of the analytics and fantasy people love to dump on Rodgers any chance they can get, this isn't surprising at all. Rodgers obviously deserves some criticism for his play and not playing on schedule within the offense but unless every person involved with the team or close to Rodgers is lying, all of this relationship drama is just clickbait gossip. Rodgers' relationship troubles are the NFL version of the National Enquirer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, packfanfb said:

I think he's missing the mark in that this is more about money and less about Aaron Rodgers. No coach in the NFL would choose Jimmy Garoppolo over Aaron Rodgers, I don't care how well Garoppolo "runs the offense." The problem isn't Aaron Rodgers. The problem is Aaron Rodgers being 38 years old and having a $40 million cap hit in 2022. That's why Love was picked. 

Moreover, if LaFleur and the Packers were truly looking for a game manager QB like Garoppolo (who Cosell mentioned which is why I keep bringing him up), it would make the Love pick a colossally stupid one. You can get those guys on days 2 and 3 of the draft. They could have drafted Jake Fromm for that. They didn't draft Love to be the game managing QB within LaFleur's system, they drafted him to become the next Aaron Rodgers, i.e. a franchise, top 10 QB.

Calling Jimmy G a "game manager" is ridiculous considering he put up similar numbers that Rodgers did in about 100 less passing attempts.  It's more about the fact that he wants  someone who is willing to work within the offense.  It's been shown time and time again that Rodgers leaves throws on the field.  I'm not even sure that's even debatable at this point.  Best case scenario with a true game manager like Fromm would be hoping you'd get something like Dak Presoctt in a best case scenario.  Otherwise, you're probably looking at a Nick Foles as a realistic upside.  If you can't see the difference between Fromm and Love, I can't help you.  One is a potential franchise QB, the other might be out of the league in 2 years.  Just little food for thought, if Jimmy G had half as many interceptions as he did, his ANY/A would be more than a full yard higher than Rodgers last year.  Let that sit in.  The only reason why Rodgers' numbers look better is because he didn't throw many interceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Calling Jimmy G a "game manager" is ridiculous considering he put up similar numbers that Rodgers did in about 100 less passing attempts.  It's more about the fact that he wants  someone who is willing to work within the offense.  It's been shown time and time again that Rodgers leaves throws on the field.  I'm not even sure that's even debatable at this point.  Best case scenario with a true game manager like Fromm would be hoping you'd get something like Dak Presoctt in a best case scenario.  Otherwise, you're probably looking at a Nick Foles as a realistic upside.  If you can't see the difference between Fromm and Love, I can't help you.  One is a potential franchise QB, the other might be out of the league in 2 years.  Just little food for thought, if Jimmy G had half as many interceptions as he did, his ANY/A would be more than a full yard higher than Rodgers last year.  Let that sit in.  The only reason why Rodgers' numbers look better is because he didn't throw many interceptions.

I really don't know what you're even arguing here. I was the one who said they were different in that you're not drafting Love to be a limited, game-managing QB. If you want to run a system and have Love operate it, fine. But you're drafting Love so he can still make the very types of plays that Rodgers makes, whether within the system or on the fly. They didn't draft Love because LaFleur is throwing a temper tantrum about how Rodgers plays. That's the same BS Bob McGinn and Florio are spewing--the same crap they spewed when we first hired LaFleur and then proceeded to go 13-3. The Love move has nothing to do with that. It's about picking a date to cut ties with Rodgers financially. 

Let's not compare Garoppolo to Rodgers. Let's not go there. SF didn't get to the Super Bowl because of Garoppolo, they got there with a superb defense and running game, took Jimmy along for the ride, and then lost the SB because of him. He's the definition of a manager. He wouldn't survive one week in an offense where he had to do the heavy lifting, without Shanahan spoon-feeding him wide open looks on play-action. 

Edited by packfanfb
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I really don't know what you're even arguing here. I was the one who said they were different in that you're not drafting Love to be a limited, game-managing QB. If you want to run a system and have Love operate it, fine. But you're drafting Love so he can still make the very types of plays that Rodgers makes, whether within the system or on the fly. They didn't draft Love because LaFleur is throwing a temper tantrum about how Rodgers plays. That's the same BS Bob McGinn and Florio are spewing--the same crap they spewed when we first hired LaFleur and then proceeded to go 13-3. The Love move has nothing to do with that. It's about picking a date to cut ties with Rodgers financially. 

Let's not compare Garoppolo to Rodgers. Let's not go there. SF didn't get to the Super Bowl because of Garoppolo, they got there with a superb defense and running game, took Jimmy along for the ride, and then lost the SB because of him. He's the definition of a manager. He wouldn't survive one week in an offense where he had to do the heavy lifting, without Shanahan spoon-feeding him wide open looks on play-action. 

It seemed that you were arguing that Fromm drafted where he was (middle of the 5th round) would be better value than Jordan Love and where he was drafted (late in the first round).  And basing it off the argument that Jimmy G is a "game manager" QB as supporting evidence.  That I disputed.  Realistically speaking, Fromm's upside is something akin to what Ryan Fitzpatrick and Nick Foles have managed to do.  A high-end backup that has their occasional time to shine, but is a largely unimpressive.  That's not a realistic upside for Jordan Love.

You're the one who brought up Jimmy G and compared him (maybe unintentionally) to Rodgers.  All I argued was that Jimmy G produced similar numbers, but with about 100 less pass attempts.  The Niners lost not just because of Jimmy G.  The D gave up 21 points in the 4th quarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chili said:

The Rich Eisen show is producing quite a bit of Packers related content at the moment.

 

He isn’t wrong about Rodgers leaving throws on the field. Just remembering the play with Janis years back where Janis is WIDE open for like 10 yards literally in front of him and Rodgers holds it and forces it to either Adams or Jones.

Edited by Green19
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...