parasaurolophus
Footballguy
wait... Did sho nuff call Rodgers a choker?

He brought it up for effect and impact! Nothing more.YOU BROUGHT IT UP!!!!!!You are stuck on the word choker.You are beyond pathetic. Just because it has been pointed out he is 0-4 in close games DOES NOT IMPLY HE IS A CHOKER! You want to read it that way due to your blind homerism.The fact is he is playing well but is 0-4 in crunch time. Does that make him a choker? HELL NO! All is shows is that he is a young QB that hopefully can learn from the adversity and take a step to the next level in his career. As a Packer fan I hope he does that. At this EARLY POINT in his career he hasn't. No one is ready to proclaim Rodgers as a choker after only 12 starts. You are the only one that is trying to spin that. Please, please take the homer glasses off for one day.What do you think people who are bringing up him being 0-4 in the close games are saying?What do you think people saying he needs to show he can bring them back from behind late in a game are saying?They have not used the word choker...but the sentiment still applies. Not everyone used the word choker with Manning.But said he could not win the big game or come up big in the clutch.THe point stands, not even a full season in and people are trying to say the same things about Rodgers.Deny it all you want...but why else is the 0-4 number being thrown out there several times now?You are really a piece of work, sho. NO ONE HAS TRIED TO LABEL RODGERS AS A CHOKER!And you claim you never spin!Not even one full season in, people already trying to label Rodgers with that.I've read that Favre had to ask Ty Detmer what Nickel meant. Mind you this was his second year as a pro. I don't know that he ever really learned to read defenses properly in the sense that a Manning or Montana did. Or that he could.Holmgren kept the reins tight on Favre, dont kid yourself. Brett threw a lot of bad passed that drove Holmgren nuts because he did not read the defense correctly. Holmgren was ready to bench Brett in year two because of his carelessness with the ball.![]()
![]()
So if Choker is not the proper word what is?Could it be lack of experience he needs to gain by playing. Maybe confidence in his teammates and himself? I think 0-4 is a perfect description for what I just said.Thanks for the support stinger...though, coming from someone who tried denying something someone said earlier, you don't have much credibility on this.Do you deny people have been bringing up the 0-4 number?Don't get stuck on the word choker, I admit that was strong language and a mistake.Take that word out...the point still remains.You are beyond pathetic. Just because it has been pointed out he is 0-4 in close games DOES NOT IMPLY HE IS A CHOKER! You want to read it that way due to your blind homerism.The fact is he is playing well but is 0-4 in crunch time. Does that make him a choker? HELL NO! All is shows is that he is a young QB that hopefully can learn from the adversity and take a step to the next level in his career. As a Packer fan I hope he does that. At this EARLY POINT in his career he hasn't. No one is ready to proclaim Rodgers as a choker after only 12 starts. You are the only one that is trying to spin that. Please, please take the homer glasses off for one day.What do you think people who are bringing up him being 0-4 in the close games are saying?What do you think people saying he needs to show he can bring them back from behind late in a game are saying?They have not used the word choker...but the sentiment still applies. Not everyone used the word choker with Manning.But said he could not win the big game or come up big in the clutch.THe point stands, not even a full season in and people are trying to say the same things about Rodgers.Deny it all you want...but why else is the 0-4 number being thrown out there several times now?You are really a piece of work, sho. NO ONE HAS TRIED TO LABEL RODGERS AS A CHOKER!And you claim you never spin!Not even one full season in, people already trying to label Rodgers with that.I've read that Favre had to ask Ty Detmer what Nickel meant. Mind you this was his second year as a pro. I don't know that he ever really learned to read defenses properly in the sense that a Manning or Montana did. Or that he could.Holmgren kept the reins tight on Favre, dont kid yourself. Brett threw a lot of bad passed that drove Holmgren nuts because he did not read the defense correctly. Holmgren was ready to bench Brett in year two because of his carelessness with the ball.![]()
sho....enough on trying to spin this one. It hurts you even more in this thread.
You all obviously do not agree...but I think its been brought up and its not just been about lack of experience.Just saying 0-4 again ignores other things that happened in those games....some of which were not all Aaron Rodgers.So if Choker is not the proper word what is?Could it be lack of experience he needs to gain by playing. Maybe confidence in his teammates and himself? I think 0-4 is a perfect description for what I just said.Thanks for the support stinger...though, coming from someone who tried denying something someone said earlier, you don't have much credibility on this.Do you deny people have been bringing up the 0-4 number?Don't get stuck on the word choker, I admit that was strong language and a mistake.Take that word out...the point still remains.You are beyond pathetic. Just because it has been pointed out he is 0-4 in close games DOES NOT IMPLY HE IS A CHOKER! You want to read it that way due to your blind homerism.The fact is he is playing well but is 0-4 in crunch time. Does that make him a choker? HELL NO! All is shows is that he is a young QB that hopefully can learn from the adversity and take a step to the next level in his career. As a Packer fan I hope he does that. At this EARLY POINT in his career he hasn't. No one is ready to proclaim Rodgers as a choker after only 12 starts. You are the only one that is trying to spin that. Please, please take the homer glasses off for one day.What do you think people who are bringing up him being 0-4 in the close games are saying?What do you think people saying he needs to show he can bring them back from behind late in a game are saying?They have not used the word choker...but the sentiment still applies. Not everyone used the word choker with Manning.But said he could not win the big game or come up big in the clutch.THe point stands, not even a full season in and people are trying to say the same things about Rodgers.Deny it all you want...but why else is the 0-4 number being thrown out there several times now?You are really a piece of work, sho. NO ONE HAS TRIED TO LABEL RODGERS AS A CHOKER!And you claim you never spin!Not even one full season in, people already trying to label Rodgers with that.I've read that Favre had to ask Ty Detmer what Nickel meant. Mind you this was his second year as a pro. I don't know that he ever really learned to read defenses properly in the sense that a Manning or Montana did. Or that he could.Holmgren kept the reins tight on Favre, dont kid yourself. Brett threw a lot of bad passed that drove Holmgren nuts because he did not read the defense correctly. Holmgren was ready to bench Brett in year two because of his carelessness with the ball.![]()
sho....enough on trying to spin this one. It hurts you even more in this thread.
The entertainment value that sho brings to this thread is priceless!
WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Just saying 0-4 again ignores other things that happened in those games....some of which were not all Aaron Rodgers.So if Choker is not the proper word what is?Could it be lack of experience he needs to gain by playing. Maybe confidence in his teammates and himself? I think 0-4 is a perfect description for what I just said.Thanks for the support stinger...though, coming from someone who tried denying something someone said earlier, you don't have much credibility on this.Do you deny people have been bringing up the 0-4 number?Don't get stuck on the word choker, I admit that was strong language and a mistake.Take that word out...the point still remains.You are beyond pathetic. Just because it has been pointed out he is 0-4 in close games DOES NOT IMPLY HE IS A CHOKER! You want to read it that way due to your blind homerism.The fact is he is playing well but is 0-4 in crunch time. Does that make him a choker? HELL NO! All is shows is that he is a young QB that hopefully can learn from the adversity and take a step to the next level in his career. As a Packer fan I hope he does that. At this EARLY POINT in his career he hasn't. No one is ready to proclaim Rodgers as a choker after only 12 starts. You are the only one that is trying to spin that. Please, please take the homer glasses off for one day.What do you think people who are bringing up him being 0-4 in the close games are saying?What do you think people saying he needs to show he can bring them back from behind late in a game are saying?They have not used the word choker...but the sentiment still applies. Not everyone used the word choker with Manning.But said he could not win the big game or come up big in the clutch.THe point stands, not even a full season in and people are trying to say the same things about Rodgers.Deny it all you want...but why else is the 0-4 number being thrown out there several times now?You are really a piece of work, sho. NO ONE HAS TRIED TO LABEL RODGERS AS A CHOKER!And you claim you never spin!Not even one full season in, people already trying to label Rodgers with that.I've read that Favre had to ask Ty Detmer what Nickel meant. Mind you this was his second year as a pro. I don't know that he ever really learned to read defenses properly in the sense that a Manning or Montana did. Or that he could.Holmgren kept the reins tight on Favre, dont kid yourself. Brett threw a lot of bad passed that drove Holmgren nuts because he did not read the defense correctly. Holmgren was ready to bench Brett in year two because of his carelessness with the ball.![]()
sho....enough on trying to spin this one. It hurts you even more in this thread.
Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is life as an NFL QB. They get the glory they get the blame.You all obviously do not agree...but I think its been brought up and its not just been about lack of experience.Just saying 0-4 again ignores other things that happened in those games....some of which were not all Aaron Rodgers.So if Choker is not the proper word what is?Could it be lack of experience he needs to gain by playing. Maybe confidence in his teammates and himself? I think 0-4 is a perfect description for what I just said.Thanks for the support stinger...though, coming from someone who tried denying something someone said earlier, you don't have much credibility on this.Do you deny people have been bringing up the 0-4 number?Don't get stuck on the word choker, I admit that was strong language and a mistake.Take that word out...the point still remains.You are beyond pathetic. Just because it has been pointed out he is 0-4 in close games DOES NOT IMPLY HE IS A CHOKER! You want to read it that way due to your blind homerism.The fact is he is playing well but is 0-4 in crunch time. Does that make him a choker? HELL NO! All is shows is that he is a young QB that hopefully can learn from the adversity and take a step to the next level in his career. As a Packer fan I hope he does that. At this EARLY POINT in his career he hasn't. No one is ready to proclaim Rodgers as a choker after only 12 starts. You are the only one that is trying to spin that. Please, please take the homer glasses off for one day.What do you think people who are bringing up him being 0-4 in the close games are saying?What do you think people saying he needs to show he can bring them back from behind late in a game are saying?They have not used the word choker...but the sentiment still applies. Not everyone used the word choker with Manning.But said he could not win the big game or come up big in the clutch.THe point stands, not even a full season in and people are trying to say the same things about Rodgers.Deny it all you want...but why else is the 0-4 number being thrown out there several times now?You are really a piece of work, sho. NO ONE HAS TRIED TO LABEL RODGERS AS A CHOKER!And you claim you never spin!Not even one full season in, people already trying to label Rodgers with that.I've read that Favre had to ask Ty Detmer what Nickel meant. Mind you this was his second year as a pro. I don't know that he ever really learned to read defenses properly in the sense that a Manning or Montana did. Or that he could.Holmgren kept the reins tight on Favre, dont kid yourself. Brett threw a lot of bad passed that drove Holmgren nuts because he did not read the defense correctly. Holmgren was ready to bench Brett in year two because of his carelessness with the ball.![]()
sho....enough on trying to spin this one. It hurts you even more in this thread.
sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't know...you going to say any other things that simply are not true and say I am spinning?Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
![]()
Is today the day his head explodes?
Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
![]()
its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
I hope Rodgers never throws a pick 6 late in the game while in FG range ready to put the game away.its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
in Sho's defense the jets did win the KC game.Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
Instead you decide to insult Favre.
Looks more and more like you just want to bash Favre and heap praise on Rodgers.
You can't have it both ways.
And if he does you will have a laundry list of excuses on why it wasn't his fault.I hope Rodgers never throws a pick 6 late in the game while in FG range ready to put the game away.its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And if he does you will have a laundry list of excuses on why it wasn't his fault.I hope Rodgers never throws a pick 6 late in the game while in FG range ready to put the game away.its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said. I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
![]()
I hope Rodgers never throws a pick 6 late in the game while in FG range ready to put the game away.its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Because no one is crazy enough to try and explain this one away like you are.And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
![]()
The Jets lost the game with Oakland where he led a comeback to tie the game (though, it was tied because of a pick in FG range too)I did not insult Favre. You brought the man up and his comebacks.Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
Instead you decide to insult Favre.
Looks more and more like you just want to bash Favre and heap praise on Rodgers.
You can't have it both ways.
That game was not all Favre's fault either.That the team could not score more against KC is pretty bad.But that throw, was on Favre.Just as most of Rodgers picks have been on him.But you can keep claiming to know what I just would do if it makes you feel better.I did not say the loss is not with some fault to Rodgers. Never have I done that. Nice try though.And if he does you will have a laundry list of excuses on why it wasn't his fault.I hope Rodgers never throws a pick 6 late in the game while in FG range ready to put the game away.its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
if any other posted 350 times in this thread we will treat him the same way Sho. I promise.Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.![]()
![]()
So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.
I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.
Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.
![]()
Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.
Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.
And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said.
I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.
None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.
Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.
I love how a few of you laugh and postAnd if he does you will have a laundry list of excuses on why it wasn't his fault.I hope Rodgers never throws a pick 6 late in the game while in FG range ready to put the game away.its nice when a QB can overcome his own mistakes and lead his team to victory, isnt it?Thanks for pointing that out, i didnt even realize thats how it happened. It will be cool if Rodgers gets to that level.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.I only see the Green Bay Packers record.It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.It ignores plenty.0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
![]()
if any other posted 350 times in this thread we will treat him the same way Sho. I promise.Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.![]()
![]()
So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.
I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.
Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.
![]()
Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.
Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.
And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said.
I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.
None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.
Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.
Its not about the number of posts. Its about people saying nearly the exact same thing as I have in this thread...and the focus almost every time gets put on my post.I post alot, because I get responded to with BS an awful lot in this thread.if any other posted 350 times in this thread we will treat him the same way Sho. I promise.Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.![]()
![]()
So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.
I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.
Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.
![]()
Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.
Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.
And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said.
I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.
None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.
Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.
Ahhh. My mistake. Still sounds the same to me though.in Sho's defense the jets did win the KC game.Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
Instead you decide to insult Favre.
Looks more and more like you just want to bash Favre and heap praise on Rodgers.
You can't have it both ways.
Umm...who else is to blame for that INT returned for a TD?From what I saw...it was not the WRs fault at all.Ahhh. My mistake. Still sounds the same to me though.
NO ONE has agreed with you trying to make excuses for the fact the Packers with Rodgers trying to lead them back are 0-4 at crunch time. Then you come up with your spin attempts(even though you admit you don't spin) and you don't have the common sense to figure out why you get laughed at. The meltdown today has been one of your best and you brought it all on yourself when you used the term "choker" and then tried to defend Rodgers. Just classic, sho!Its not about the number of posts. Its about people saying nearly the exact same thing as I have in this thread...and the focus almost every time gets put on my post.I post alot, because I get responded to with BS an awful lot in this thread.if any other posted 350 times in this thread we will treat him the same way Sho. I promise.Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.![]()
![]()
So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.
I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.
Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.
![]()
Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.
Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.
And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said.
I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.
None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.
Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.
Like people claiming I will just make excuses if Rodgers does bad at any time...like I would make excuses if he threw an INT returned for a TD that cost or almost cost his team the game.
I did not make an excuse for Favre throwing that INT against the Giants last year. It was a bad throw to the one spot he could not afford to miss.
pick 6 or pick against carolina means nothing and you know it. You have made excuses for Rodgers INT against Carolina.You have made excuses for Rodgers picks against the Saints, Say what you want, but that was actually worse than a pick 6. They still scored and it took more time off the clock.Its not about the number of posts. Its about people saying nearly the exact same thing as I have in this thread...and the focus almost every time gets put on my post.I post alot, because I get responded to with BS an awful lot in this thread.if any other posted 350 times in this thread we will treat him the same way Sho. I promise.Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.![]()
![]()
So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.
I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.
Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.
![]()
Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.
Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.
And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said.
I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.
None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.
Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.
Like people claiming I will just make excuses if Rodgers does bad at any time...like I would make excuses if he threw an INT returned for a TD that cost or almost cost his team the game.
I did not make an excuse for Favre throwing that INT against the Giants last year. It was a bad throw to the one spot he could not afford to miss.
Sho, do you not see from this post why people think you are nuts and are dying to throw Favre under the bus yet defend Rodgers to the death?ETA I am not disagreeing with your point, so please dont get defensive about that.Umm...who else is to blame for that INT returned for a TD?From what I saw...it was not the WRs fault at all.Ahhh. My mistake. Still sounds the same to me though.
Where did I bring up Brett's commbacks? That was another poster as I am not a Packers or Favre fan.You mean the Jets needed to make a comeback because as a team they had not done enough to secure the win at that point. This is what you are saying with Rodgers. That it is a team that wins and loses.The Jets lost the game with Oakland where he led a comeback to tie the game (though, it was tied because of a pick in FG range too)I did not insult Favre. You brought the man up and his comebacks.Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
Instead you decide to insult Favre.
Looks more and more like you just want to bash Favre and heap praise on Rodgers.
You can't have it both ways.
I did not bash him...I posted the fact that he needed to make a comeback in that game because while in FG range he threw an INT returned for a TD. Or did the Jets throw that INT and help carry the defender into the endzone to score so it was not Brett's fault on that one.
Im not having it both ways. You brought up Brett's comebacks on this one...not me.
From the Carolina GameIts not about the number of posts. Its about people saying nearly the exact same thing as I have in this thread...and the focus almost every time gets put on my post.I post alot, because I get responded to with BS an awful lot in this thread.if any other posted 350 times in this thread we will treat him the same way Sho. I promise.Its not nuts.To pull a victory a player needs help from the rest of the team. Faver NEVER did it by himself.There is no point to try and refute this one because you are completely nuts!Take a deep breath and accept that Rodgers hasn't been able to pull out a victory late in the game after only 12 starts. It is ok to admit that sho. It doesn't have any bearing on his future and hopefully he will learn from it and it will only make him better. It really is ok to accept that, sho. The excuses that you are coming up with are really making you look like a joke and I do you hope you stop. Again, it is ok to admit that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and that he has the potential to learn from this adversity at the end of games. Do you need help finding your pills?Shocking...the 2 usuals can't say anything to refute it and the new one thinks the same thing.Too funny really.sho has officially went off the deep edge!Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.![]()
![]()
So saying its 0-4 does not ignore those things? Its not the Packers record but just Rodgers.
I guess I will notify the NFL and have them change the standings out there in every publication to quit reading the Green Bay Packers and instead just say Aaron Rodgers.
Oh...and change the Jets to Brett Favre too.
![]()
Its ok to admit that he took the lead late in that game the defense screwed it up. ITs ok for you who think all would be great with Favre around to do that.
Its not an excuse...its the reality of what actually happened. Its ok for you to admit that.
And seriously...some of you who have been posting in this thread telling me I look like a fool is hilarious. When all you can do is focus on me and sling insults like calling me pathetic or ask if I need help finding my pills...yeah, what do you think some of you look like. You focus only on me...when several others have mirrored almost everything I have said.
I have admitted that Rodgers has suffered growing pains and he is learning. I have said over and over there has been a slight dropoff and it was expected.
None of you can admit this defense has let him down at times as have other phases of the game. Instead...its Rodgers is 0-4 and not the team is to you all.
Thats the point that you all want to deny. And some of it seems solely because I am the one making that point rather than another poster.
Like people claiming I will just make excuses if Rodgers does bad at any time...like I would make excuses if he threw an INT returned for a TD that cost or almost cost his team the game.
I did not make an excuse for Favre throwing that INT against the Giants last year. It was a bad throw to the one spot he could not afford to miss.
Nobody has taken much of a position on the 0-4 thing overall. Plenty have pointed out that its not all on Rodgers though.As for me admitting I don't spin? Nope. I have said in certain instances that I was not spinning...but again, please dont try and make things up.Laughed at? You think I care what you, Ookie, or Phase think about me? Sorry, none of you are all that important enough for me to care.Meltdown? You call it a meltdown because I post alot? Nice one.I defend Rodgers because just saying 0-4 is on him deserves defending. Just as I have with other non-Packer players.NO ONE has agreed with you trying to make excuses for the fact the Packers with Rodgers trying to lead them back are 0-4 at crunch time. Then you come up with your spin attempts(even though you admit you don't spin) and you don't have the common sense to figure out why you get laughed at. The meltdown today has been one of your best and you brought it all on yourself when you used the term "choker" and then tried to defend Rodgers. Just classic, sho!![]()
Pick 6 when you have a lead and are in FG range to put the game away means nothing? Worse than a pick 6?Come on...if you all want to talk about going off the deep end...that right there seals it for you.I did not make an excuse for his INT against Carolina. It was a terrible pass and something he did not need to do at that moment.Saying he had the lead with under 2 minutes is not making an excuse for that pass.Saying the D did not hold up is not making an excuse for that pass.No more than saying Jarrett Bush should have fallen on the fumble late in the NFC title game is making an excuse for Favre's INT.Nor did I ever put that entire loss on that Favre INT and I never will.pick 6 or pick against carolina means nothing and you know it. You have made excuses for Rodgers INT against Carolina.You have made excuses for Rodgers picks against the Saints, Say what you want, but that was actually worse than a pick 6. They still scored and it took more time off the clock. I wonder where people get it from?
Sorry, you did not, spring did.As for securing the win. They were trying to when Brett threw the INT returned for a TD.Where did I bring up Brett's commbacks? That was another poster as I am not a Packers or Favre fan.You mean the Jets needed to make a comeback because as a team they had not done enough to secure the win at that point. This is what you are saying with Rodgers. That it is a team that wins and loses.The Jets lost the game with Oakland where he led a comeback to tie the game (though, it was tied because of a pick in FG range too)I did not insult Favre. You brought the man up and his comebacks.Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
Instead you decide to insult Favre.
Looks more and more like you just want to bash Favre and heap praise on Rodgers.
You can't have it both ways.
I did not bash him...I posted the fact that he needed to make a comeback in that game because while in FG range he threw an INT returned for a TD. Or did the Jets throw that INT and help carry the defender into the endzone to score so it was not Brett's fault on that one.
Im not having it both ways. You brought up Brett's comebacks on this one...not me.
You were very clear on that and the 0-4 record in close games being team driven.
I'm fine with that but lets stick to A or B and not use A for example 1 and B for example 2.
Did that one pass cost them the game? No.In both situations they were already losing the game prior to the INT during an attempted comeback.Did it help them win? Nope. Did it hurt the team? Yes. Never have denied that.But like I did with Brett's INT against Philly...it should have never happened if another phase of the game had done its job.From the Carolina Game2-10-GB 17 (1:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 52-J.Beason at CAR 39. 52-J.Beason to CAR 39 for no gain (80-D.Driver). Did that cost them the game Sho? Or how about in the Tampa game(2:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 90-G.Adams [91-G.White] at TB 47. 90-G.Adams to GB 48 for 5 yards (87-J.Nelson).
Why are we focusing on one play by one player all the sudden when it's a Team that has wins and loses? What had the Team done in the time leading up to said pick six? You need to go A or B.Umm...who else is to blame for that INT returned for a TD?From what I saw...it was not the WRs fault at all.Ahhh. My mistake. Still sounds the same to me though.
Then why are you so big on Brett Favre throwing the interception in the playoffs last year? If another phase of the game (running) had been doing its job, he wouldn't have been in that situation either. For the record, I really don't think it was solely Rodgers has cost them those games. It would be nice to see a win though in a situation like the ones the Packers have been in this year. I don't think Rodgers is at the point in his career where he can carry a team on his back. He has played well overall, but he has yet to pull out a victory in those close games.Did that one pass cost them the game? No.In both situations they were already losing the game prior to the INT during an attempted comeback.Did it help them win? Nope. Did it hurt the team? Yes. Never have denied that.But like I did with Brett's INT against Philly...it should have never happened if another phase of the game had done its job.From the Carolina Game2-10-GB 17 (1:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 52-J.Beason at CAR 39. 52-J.Beason to CAR 39 for no gain (80-D.Driver). Did that cost them the game Sho? Or how about in the Tampa game(2:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 90-G.Adams [91-G.White] at TB 47. 90-G.Adams to GB 48 for 5 yards (87-J.Nelson).
We were discussing his comebacks...I simply mentioned why a comeback was needed in that game where he had the lead and gave it up on his own...unlike Rodgers who had the lead, that he did not give up to have to make the comeback.Do you get it?Why are we focusing on one play by one player all the sudden when it's a Team that has wins and loses? What had the Team done in the time leading up to said pick six? You need to go A or B.Umm...who else is to blame for that INT returned for a TD?From what I saw...it was not the WRs fault at all.Ahhh. My mistake. Still sounds the same to me though.
From what you saw? There's no way you could know if it's the WR's fault or not. You do not have the playbook and have no idea what was called.
Then why are you so big on Brett Favre throwing the interception in the playoffs last year? If another phase of the game (running) had been doing its job, he wouldn't have been in that situation either. He has played well overall, but he has yet to pull out a victory in those close games.Did that one pass cost them the game? No.In both situations they were already losing the game prior to the INT during an attempted comeback.Did it help them win? Nope. Did it hurt the team? Yes. Never have denied that.But like I did with Brett's INT against Philly...it should have never happened if another phase of the game had done its job.From the Carolina Game2-10-GB 17 (1:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 52-J.Beason at CAR 39. 52-J.Beason to CAR 39 for no gain (80-D.Driver). Did that cost them the game Sho? Or how about in the Tampa game(2:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 90-G.Adams [91-G.White] at TB 47. 90-G.Adams to GB 48 for 5 yards (87-J.Nelson).
I see that both Teams did not do enough up to that point in the game. For example in the Green Bay game a few less holding penalties, delay of games and better offense in the first quarter could have prevented the comeback by the Panthers. You can also had better defense or one more stop. Same goes for the Jets game. The Teams put themselves in the position to lose.Sorry, you did not, spring did.As for securing the win. They were trying to when Brett threw the INT returned for a TD.Where did I bring up Brett's commbacks? That was another poster as I am not a Packers or Favre fan.You mean the Jets needed to make a comeback because as a team they had not done enough to secure the win at that point. This is what you are saying with Rodgers. That it is a team that wins and loses.The Jets lost the game with Oakland where he led a comeback to tie the game (though, it was tied because of a pick in FG range too)I did not insult Favre. You brought the man up and his comebacks.Seems you should have pointed out that the Jets lost that game and that the Jets have won several close games this year. After all Favre does not have a record. Therefore the Wins are as a team as are the Loses.You mean like the one against KC that was only needed because he threw a pick 6?Take away Favre's three 4th Qtr comebacks this year and they have the same record as the Packers. Im just sayin.Rodgers has a record?Where? I don't see it in the standing.WRONG! 0-4 does not ignore the other things that happened in those games. 0-4 is Rodgers record when trying to get the Packers back in crunch time.
5-7 is the record you want when you want to focus on all the other things that took place.
SPIN sho....SPIN sho.....SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only see the Green Bay Packers record.
It ignores that twice he had a lead in that game.
It ignores the FG missed by Crosby.
It ignores plenty.
0-4 is the "Packers" record when trying to come back late in games.
Spin...not in this case...spin is putting it all on Rodgers as you are still attempting to do.
Instead you decide to insult Favre.
Looks more and more like you just want to bash Favre and heap praise on Rodgers.
You can't have it both ways.
I did not bash him...I posted the fact that he needed to make a comeback in that game because while in FG range he threw an INT returned for a TD. Or did the Jets throw that INT and help carry the defender into the endzone to score so it was not Brett's fault on that one.
Im not having it both ways. You brought up Brett's comebacks on this one...not me.
You were very clear on that and the 0-4 record in close games being team driven.
I'm fine with that but lets stick to A or B and not use A for example 1 and B for example 2.
What I am saying with Rodgers is he had the lead...he did not give up the lead like that INT did for the Jets.
If you don't see the difference there...I can't help you.
you know that if a coach has to choose between two scenarios when losing...QB throws a pick 6 orQB throws a pick and the other team will still score a TD after it.anybody who is not from planet sho nuff would pick pick the first scenario. So yes, Rodgers throwing a pick that was taken back 42 yards to the freakin 3 yard line and they scored a td turned out to be worse for them than a pick 6. Following it with a 3 and out and another INT was pretty crappy too. In fact the three possessions in a row there for the Packers in that saints game was one of the poorest stretches of QB play all season from any QB in the league.Pick 6 when you have a lead and are in FG range to put the game away means nothing? Worse than a pick 6?Come on...if you all want to talk about going off the deep end...that right there seals it for you.I did not make an excuse for his INT against Carolina. It was a terrible pass and something he did not need to do at that moment.Saying he had the lead with under 2 minutes is not making an excuse for that pass.Saying the D did not hold up is not making an excuse for that pass.No more than saying Jarrett Bush should have fallen on the fumble late in the NFC title game is making an excuse for Favre's INT.Nor did I ever put that entire loss on that Favre INT and I never will.pick 6 or pick against carolina means nothing and you know it. You have made excuses for Rodgers INT against Carolina.You have made excuses for Rodgers picks against the Saints, Say what you want, but that was actually worse than a pick 6. They still scored and it took more time off the clock. I wonder where people get it from?
Where have I been so big on Favre throwing INTs in the playoffs last year? Care to show me?And why was the running game not working...according to some here, the great Brett Favre makes the rest of the team so much better.It would be nice to see them close one of those wins out for sure. Id love it.But what does it take to get it done. A close...tie game or being behind...and executing a nice scoring drive close to the end?I think he thought he had done that.And maybe its some mental toughness that he has some of...but not enough yet...did he and others feel a let down that the D gave up the lead after they led a 16 play, 79 yard, 9 minute and 13 second scoring drive to take the lead with under 2 minutes left? Perhaps. Again, that is not excusing the INT at all. But I would say that drive showed some clutch in it as well. It makes me think he has exactly what it takes to perform late in games.Then why are you so big on Brett Favre throwing the interception in the playoffs last year? If another phase of the game (running) had been doing its job, he wouldn't have been in that situation either. For the record, I really don't think it was solely Rodgers has cost them those games. It would be nice to see a win though in a situation like the ones the Packers have been in this year. I don't think Rodgers is at the point in his career where he can carry a team on his back. He has played well overall, but he has yet to pull out a victory in those close games.Did that one pass cost them the game? No.In both situations they were already losing the game prior to the INT during an attempted comeback.Did it help them win? Nope. Did it hurt the team? Yes. Never have denied that.But like I did with Brett's INT against Philly...it should have never happened if another phase of the game had done its job.From the Carolina Game2-10-GB 17 (1:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 52-J.Beason at CAR 39. 52-J.Beason to CAR 39 for no gain (80-D.Driver). Did that cost them the game Sho? Or how about in the Tampa game(2:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 90-G.Adams [91-G.White] at TB 47. 90-G.Adams to GB 48 for 5 yards (87-J.Nelson).
No...Sho hates when people say Rodgers has yet to pull one out when its not just about Aaron Rodgers.That much you still don't understand.Then why are you so big on Brett Favre throwing the interception in the playoffs last year? If another phase of the game (running) had been doing its job, he wouldn't have been in that situation either. He has played well overall, but he has yet to pull out a victory in those close games.Did that one pass cost them the game? No.In both situations they were already losing the game prior to the INT during an attempted comeback.Did it help them win? Nope. Did it hurt the team? Yes. Never have denied that.But like I did with Brett's INT against Philly...it should have never happened if another phase of the game had done its job.From the Carolina Game2-10-GB 17 (1:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 52-J.Beason at CAR 39. 52-J.Beason to CAR 39 for no gain (80-D.Driver). Did that cost them the game Sho? Or how about in the Tampa game(2:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right intended for 80-D.Driver INTERCEPTED by 90-G.Adams [91-G.White] at TB 47. 90-G.Adams to GB 48 for 5 yards (87-J.Nelson).Exactly! sho just can't accept that Rodgers has yet to pull one out.