How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now? (1 Viewer)

[parasaurolophus]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

I agree Rodgers has not been the Packer's problem, and he has performed pretty well this year and definitely gives me hope for future years. However, there is still no way of knowing how Favre would have done with the Packers -- i'm sure his stats would be better this year if he had been allowed to stay with the Packers than his current stats with the Jets, but of course that is all hypothetical. Whether or not his stats would be better or worse than Rodgers is all debatable (i think they would be) and no one will ever be able to agree.

My biggest problem is that the Packers could have easily brought Favre back for 1 more year, taken one more shot, and still have been able to extend Rodgers contract and let his era start next year.

I think just pure numbers would be close to the same as Rodgers.Look at Rodgers pure numbers (not situational or late game or whatever breakdown...because that is where differences would really be) but look at Rodgers 2008 just numbers compared to Favre 2007.

Favre in 2007 had a 95.7 rating, completed 66.5% of his passes for 4155 yards, 28 TDs, 15 INTs, 3 fumbles lost.

Rodgers 2008 has a 91.4 rating, completed 63.4% of his passes for 3730 yards, 26 TDs, 13 INTs, 3 fumbles lost through 15 games.

Yardage is the only big difference with Favre having about 30 more attempts (which Rodgers might get in the last game but he won't catch him in yardage...even against the Lions).

Rodgers may tie in TDs and INTs...you never know...also added the rushing TDs.

Could Favre have improved on last year's numbers? Possibly...though, with another year on his body, without the offseason program he had prior to last year, and the wear he is showing currently...I don't see it improving all that much.

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

thompson has admitted he had decided to extend Rodgers before the 7th start of the season. Whats the difference?0 starts? 3starts? 6starts? its all the same.

pretty sure TT left that cap room for this very purpose, but thats just my best guess. Plus he could have just done the same thing next year and used up the 12 million he will certainly leave free anyway. So again, no real difference.

 

[GreenNGold]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again. I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

 

[sho nuff]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

I agree Rodgers has not been the Packer's problem, and he has performed pretty well this year and definitely gives me hope for future years. However, there is still no way of knowing how Favre would have done with the Packers -- i'm sure his stats would be better this year if he had been allowed to stay with the Packers than his current stats with the Jets, but of course that is all hypothetical. Whether or not his stats would be better or worse than Rodgers is all debatable (i think they would be) and no one will ever be able to agree.

My biggest problem is that the Packers could have easily brought Favre back for 1 more year, taken one more shot, and still have been able to extend Rodgers contract and let his era start next year.

I think just pure numbers would be close to the same as Rodgers.Look at Rodgers pure numbers (not situational or late game or whatever breakdown...because that is where differences would really be) but look at Rodgers 2008 just numbers compared to Favre 2007.

Favre in 2007 had a 95.7 rating, completed 66.5% of his passes for 4155 yards, 28 TDs, 15 INTs, 3 fumbles lost.

Rodgers 2008 has a 91.4 rating, completed 63.4% of his passes for 3730 yards, 26 TDs, 13 INTs, 3 fumbles lost through 15 games.

Yardage is the only big difference with Favre having about 30 more attempts (which Rodgers might get in the last game but he won't catch him in yardage...even against the Lions).

Rodgers may tie in TDs and INTs...you never know...also added the rushing TDs.

Could Favre have improved on last year's numbers? Possibly...though, with another year on his body, without the offseason program he had prior to last year, and the wear he is showing currently...I don't see it improving all that much.

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

thompson has admitted he had decided to extend Rodgers before the 7th start of the season. Whats the difference?0 starts? 3starts? 6starts? its all the same.

pretty sure TT left that cap room for this very purpose, but thats just my best guess. Plus he could have just done the same thing next year and used up the 12 million he will certainly leave free anyway. So again, no real difference.

I think he knew he wanted to extend him sure...but if he played terribly, do you think the same thing would have happened?I think he did save the cap room to extend certain guys and wanted Rodgers to be one of them. I think they wanted Jennings to be another.

This is what they should have done with Corey Williams last year too.

Next year? Or, he could do it now rather than let that cap money go to waste...and have the other money to hopefully do something. You will have a point if he chooses to do absolutely nothing this offseason. I don't think they will do nothing...if nothing else they need to extend Jennings and possibly resign Tauscher.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again. I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

You would be happy with just like a 9-7 and one and done in the playoffs?I wouldn't be.While the playoffs would be nice...Im at least happy they got to see what Rodgers could do...and are now a year further rather than setting the team back.This is what I talked about the whole time in that it was a move not just for this year but for the future.Had they fallen short and Favre then retires...we would have more questions going into next year than we do now.I supported the decision then...and I have trouble now with those that can't see, with the help of hindsight, that this move appears to be the right one.Sure the rift is there...and good for the resellers to have to take a loss rather than continuing to gouge fans for tickets.I don't think they are the 3 stooges and could be much worse than it is.There is plenty to kill TT on (Dline, Oline failures...coaches...his own ego and attitude) but IMO, the Favre decision continues to look like the right move given Favre's play recently and how the rest of this team has panned out.

 

[Phurfur]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

 

[Phurfur]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Don't count on it, I'm not giving up my tickets and I don't know anyone who is. I doubt you are even on the waiting list, you don't sound like a Packer Fan to me.

 

[Sabertooth]

I am thinking that 5-9 is an EXTREMELY disappointing season after 13-3 and almost all the players returning. I can't figure out why some of you seem to have no problem with 5-9 and are so quick to defend Rodgers. Rodgers has played well at times. He does look like he could be a very good QB. However, there are several things he did this year that he needs to improve on including showing he can win a game in crunch time. What will it take for some of you TT supporters to start to question the results he has produced as a GM including a losing record in 4 seasons and only one playoff appearance.

What do you think the teams record would be with Favre?(all things being equal, injuries,etc.)

This isn't just about Favre not being there. I think the Packers would be better than 5-9 at this point. How can any Packer fan sit here and not question TT at this point in his tenure in GB? If you think the defense is the only reason the team is 5-9 this year than you are missing other reasons including decisions that TT has made.

This thread isn't about Thompson, it as about Rodgers. Now, am I dissappointed in Thompson, sure am. But not for the way he handled the saga that has become Brett Favre. He did that about as well as could be expected. He made the right move. Should he be on the hot seat? I don't think so.

If the Packers struggle next season do you think he should be back for 2010?

Yes. Well, if by struggle you mean injuries and losing record. If by struggle you mean they stay relatively healthy and go 3-13 then maybe no. Either way he needs to spend some of that cap space.

Please stop with the injury excuse. Injuries happen to ALL NFL teams. Thompson did not have any depth on this team to help make up for the injuries that took place. He does need to make a few key free agent signings this offseason and he needs to have a very strong draft. This season has been a complete mess for Thompson.From JSOnline....

Another chapter of failure and pain was heaped onto one of the worst seasons in the Green Bay Packers' 90-year history Monday night at Soldier Field.

A 13-3 team just a season ago, the Packers lost for the seventh time in eight games and crashed all the way to 5-10, the 13th-worst record in the NFC. It also gave them their first five-game losing streak since the final five games of 1990, a time when the franchise was considered almost a lost cause.

From Greg Bedard at JSOnline..

Anyways, of course TT deserves...I'll give you a year. If the Packers don't win next year then his system is flawed and will probably need to be tweaked in short order. I still think he's on the right track. He has made some missteps, of course, and some were big (the defensive line). But, as I said last year at the end of the season, he needs to show he is a good GM, just not a good college talent scout. He's good at that. Very good, actually, but his title has much more weight. It's time for him to live up to his job title.This year it's all going to be about Ted Thompson ponying up and paying some guys. And after watching him get fleeced by Ryan Grant and Aaron Rodgers after 10 and 7 starts, respectively, plenty of agents are going to be looking to get their players paid. The Packers really screwed up their scale with Grant's deal at least. He took them to the shed.

I am talking about a hypothetical in the future. Injuries would certainly mitigate any decision the board would make on Thompson. I mean if Rodger, Jenning, Driver, Woodson, Kampman, Barnett, and Crosby all ended up on IR, don't you think that would make a difference. I am not stating what I think. I am stating how I think the board would react.

 

[bcr8f]

JS Online stinks. They're always looking to stir up controversy. Take what they say with a large grain of salt.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I have high expectations for next year. Failure to meet those expectations will be closely scrutinized. My support of the current regime hangs in the balance, and you know what, neither they nor anybody else really gives a damn about my lone voice.

 

[GreenNGold]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

I'm so sick of people making that false distinction. You can disagree with the way TT is running things, or even want TT fired and still be a Packer fan. I would actually go as far as to say those who are happy Favre is gone are not true Packer fans. You can also agree with his decision and still be a Packer fan, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying some people (especially in wisconsin) value loyalty, such as starting every game for your beloved team for 16 years straight, and then to just kick him to the curb like that has a lot of people still pissed off (don't start the he retired argument -- he actually was not allowed to report to training camp to compete for the starting job after they said he could, and has since been traded and still plays to this very day). Go to practically any bar in wisconsin on gameday and you will see what i'm talking about.

Also, I suppose if we disagree with a single thing GWB has ever done that means we hate our country and should move to France, right?

 

[Aaronstory]

JS Online stinks has the best Packer coverage anywhere. Period.

Fixed.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

I'm so sick of people making that false distinction. You can disagree with the way TT is running things, or even want TT fired and still be a Packer fan. I would actually go as far as to say those who are happy Favre is gone are not true Packer fans. You can also agree with his decision and still be a Packer fan, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying some people (especially in wisconsin) value loyalty, such as starting every game for your beloved team for 16 years straight, and then to just kick him to the curb like that has a lot of people still pissed off (don't start the he retired argument -- he actually was not allowed to report to training camp to compete for the starting job after they said he could, and has since been traded and still plays to this very day). Go to practically any bar in wisconsin on gameday and you will see what i'm talking about.

Also, I suppose if we disagree with a single thing GWB has ever done that means we hate our country and should move to France, right?

I don't think there are many that are just happy that Favre is gone.And I don't think all that are unhappy with TT are just Brett fans only either.

 

[sho nuff]

JS Online stinks has the best Packer coverage anywhere. Period.

Fixed.

I agree they have great coverage. Would not say they stink like the previous poster.McGinn is about the only one I ever take issue with as he goes back and forth...one minute praising a decision or a move...the next minute acting like he said all along it was a bad move.

I can't find it without paying...but in his year in review last year he talked about how it might be time to move on without Favre...yet read his stuff now and you would never imagine he wrote something like that.

The piece on Grant's contract being too much was out there too....and he seems to have a few scouts he likes and uses when its convenient to rip someone.

I mean the most recent one on Rodgers...while it had valid points...3 people voting Vince Young better than Rodgers...how am I supposed to take the rest of what those 3 guys might vote seriously?

 

[GreenNGold]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

I'm so sick of people making that false distinction. You can disagree with the way TT is running things, or even want TT fired and still be a Packer fan. I would actually go as far as to say those who are happy Favre is gone are not true Packer fans. You can also agree with his decision and still be a Packer fan, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying some people (especially in wisconsin) value loyalty, such as starting every game for your beloved team for 16 years straight, and then to just kick him to the curb like that has a lot of people still pissed off (don't start the he retired argument -- he actually was not allowed to report to training camp to compete for the starting job after they said he could, and has since been traded and still plays to this very day). Go to practically any bar in wisconsin on gameday and you will see what i'm talking about.

Also, I suppose if we disagree with a single thing GWB has ever done that means we hate our country and should move to France, right?

I don't think there are many that are just happy that Favre is gone.And I don't think all that are unhappy with TT are just Brett fans only either.

Agreed.

 

[sho nuff]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

 

[Phurfur]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

:IBTL:



I'm so sick of people making that false distinction. You can disagree with the way TT is running things, or even want TT fired and still be a Packer fan. I would actually go as far as to say those who are happy Favre is gone are not true Packer fans. You can also agree with his decision and still be a Packer fan, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying some people (especially in wisconsin) value loyalty, such as starting every game for your beloved team for 16 years straight, and then to just kick him to the curb like that has a lot of people still pissed off (don't start the he retired argument -- he actually was not allowed to report to training camp to compete for the starting job after they said he could, and has since been traded and still plays to this very day). Go to practically any bar in wisconsin on gameday and you will see what i'm talking about.

Also, I suppose if we disagree with a single thing GWB has ever done that means we hate our country and should move to France, right?

You are very misinformed my friend.

 

[Phurfur]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

I'm so sick of people making that false distinction. You can disagree with the way TT is running things, or even want TT fired and still be a Packer fan. I would actually go as far as to say those who are happy Favre is gone are not true Packer fans. You can also agree with his decision and still be a Packer fan, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying some people (especially in wisconsin) value loyalty, such as starting every game for your beloved team for 16 years straight, and then to just kick him to the curb like that has a lot of people still pissed off (don't start the he retired argument -- he actually was not allowed to report to training camp to compete for the starting job after they said he could, and has since been traded and still plays to this very day). Go to practically any bar in wisconsin on gameday and you will see what i'm talking about.

Also, I suppose if we disagree with a single thing GWB has ever done that means we hate our country and should move to France, right?

Why would anyone want a QB that publically stated he can no longer take the mental aspect of the game? I guess the NYJ are finding out what he meant.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

What I have wondered the last couple weeks is, if I had absolute knowledge back in August that Aaron Rodgers would start all 16 games and have 3800 yards and 28 TDs but the Packers won't make the playoffs, how would I have felt? Who knows.

 

[Aaronstory]

JS Online stinks has the best Packer coverage anywhere. Period.

Fixed.

I agree they have great coverage. Would not say they stink like the previous poster.McGinn is about the only one I ever take issue with as he goes back and forth...one minute praising a decision or a move...the next minute acting like he said all along it was a bad move.

I can't find it without paying...but in his year in review last year he talked about how it might be time to move on without Favre...yet read his stuff now and you would never imagine he wrote something like that.

The piece on Grant's contract being too much was out there too....and he seems to have a few scouts he likes and uses when its convenient to rip someone.

I mean the most recent one on Rodgers...while it had valid points...3 people voting Vince Young better than Rodgers...how am I supposed to take the rest of what those 3 guys might vote seriously?

Agree to an extent, though the reason I like him is that he's willing to put himself out there. Last year in preseason, he wrote the Packers should win 12 games and everyone thought he was nuts. Well, he was right. This year, same thing - he wrote how the Packers would struggle to win more than 5 to 6 games - and again, he was right.I completely agree about the use scouts and personnel people. He tends to quote people if they are enforcing whatever view his weekly column is taking. Still, it's interesting to hear what people who are employed by NFL teams have to say.

 

[sho nuff]

What I have wondered the last couple weeks is, if I had absolute knowledge back in August that Aaron Rodgers would start all 16 games and have 3800 yards and 28 TDs but the Packers won't make the playoffs, how would I have felt? Who knows.

 

[sho nuff]

JS Online stinks has the best Packer coverage anywhere. Period.

Fixed.

I agree they have great coverage. Would not say they stink like the previous poster.McGinn is about the only one I ever take issue with as he goes back and forth...one minute praising a decision or a move...the next minute acting like he said all along it was a bad move.

I can't find it without paying...but in his year in review last year he talked about how it might be time to move on without Favre...yet read his stuff now and you would never imagine he wrote something like that.

The piece on Grant's contract being too much was out there too....and he seems to have a few scouts he likes and uses when its convenient to rip someone.

I mean the most recent one on Rodgers...while it had valid points...3 people voting Vince Young better than Rodgers...how am I supposed to take the rest of what those 3 guys might vote seriously?

Agree to an extent, though the reason I like him is that he's willing to put himself out there. Last year in preseason, he wrote the Packers should win 12 games and everyone thought he was nuts. Well, he was right. This year, same thing - he wrote how the Packers would struggle to win more than 5 to 6 games - and again, he was right.I completely agree about the use scouts and personnel people. He tends to quote people if they are enforcing whatever view his weekly column is taking. Still, it's interesting to hear what people who are employed by NFL teams have to say.

Agreed that he does do that....sometimes as an antagonist though (and every team needs one IMO...he does serve a purpose and is a pretty good writer).I agree its interesting to hear what some say...but Id rather listen to more than just 3-4 guys...especially if 3 of them are putting Vince Young ahead of Aaron Rodgers at this point.

 

[Phurfur]

What I have wondered the last couple weeks is, if I had absolute knowledge back in August that Aaron Rodgers would start all 16 games and have 3800 yards and 28 TDs but the Packers won't make the playoffs, how would I have felt? Who knows.

This is more than I had hoped for and I would make the trade in a heartbeat. Of course I have been convinced that Favre was not going to take this team anywhere this year and he has done nothing to change my mind.

 

[Aaronstory]

JS Online stinks has the best Packer coverage anywhere. Period.

Fixed.

I agree they have great coverage. Would not say they stink like the previous poster.McGinn is about the only one I ever take issue with as he goes back and forth...one minute praising a decision or a move...the next minute acting like he said all along it was a bad move.

I can't find it without paying...but in his year in review last year he talked about how it might be time to move on without Favre...yet read his stuff now and you would never imagine he wrote something like that.

The piece on Grant's contract being too much was out there too....and he seems to have a few scouts he likes and uses when its convenient to rip someone.

I mean the most recent one on Rodgers...while it had valid points...3 people voting Vince Young better than Rodgers...how am I supposed to take the rest of what those 3 guys might vote seriously?

Agree to an extent, though the reason I like him is that he's willing to put himself out there. Last year in preseason, he wrote the Packers should win 12 games and everyone thought he was nuts. Well, he was right. This year, same thing - he wrote how the Packers would struggle to win more than 5 to 6 games - and again, he was right.I completely agree about the use scouts and personnel people. He tends to quote people if they are enforcing whatever view his weekly column is taking. Still, it's interesting to hear what people who are employed by NFL teams have to say.

but Id rather listen to more than just 3-4 guys...especially if 3 of them are putting Vince Young ahead of Aaron Rodgers at this point.

Right? That floored me.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

They said those guys were from teams who had played against GB this year, so I figure one or more is from TEN. Even so...

 

[Irish]

If Rodgers does not come up with a game winning drive here... who is going to blame the defense here? They have given up 10 points when the Bears had "normal" field position. They also have a couple of INT's to boot.The defense sucks, huh?

Yes the defense suxors. What do you guys want Rodgers to do? Is Rodgers to blame for Crosby's 2 missed FGs?

 

[Stinger Ray]

If Rodgers does not come up with a game winning drive here... who is going to blame the defense here? They have given up 10 points when the Bears had "normal" field position. They also have a couple of INT's to boot.The defense sucks, huh?

What do you guys want Rodgers to do? Is Rodgers to blame for Crosby's 2 missed FGs?

Of course he isn't. However, at this point in his career he has not lead the Packers to a win in crunch time even if you take away Crosby's 2 missed FGs.

 

[Stinger Ray]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

I'm so sick of people making that false distinction. You can disagree with the way TT is running things, or even want TT fired and still be a Packer fan. I would actually go as far as to say those who are happy Favre is gone are not true Packer fans. You can also agree with his decision and still be a Packer fan, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying some people (especially in wisconsin) value loyalty, such as starting every game for your beloved team for 16 years straight, and then to just kick him to the curb like that has a lot of people still pissed off (don't start the he retired argument -- he actually was not allowed to report to training camp to compete for the starting job after they said he could, and has since been traded and still plays to this very day). Go to practically any bar in wisconsin on gameday and you will see what i'm talking about.

Also, I suppose if we disagree with a single thing GWB has ever done that means we hate our country and should move to France, right?

Why would anyone want a QB that publically stated he can no longer take the mental aspect of the game? I guess the NYJ are finding out what he meant.

 

[Stinger Ray]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

 

[BeaverCleaver]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

None of that changes the fact that Favre's arm seems "noodle like". He's missing on the deep ball consistently. It's looking like that shoulder stinger earlier this year is affecting his deep passes, or he's lost it.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

None of that changes the fact that Favre's arm seems "noodle like". He's missing on the deep ball consistently. It's looking like that shoulder stinger earlier this year is affecting his deep passes, or he's lost it.

I have seen many of his WRs make key drops on the deep ball. You guys can spin and hate all you want but Favre going to the Jets was a positive thing for them.

 

[zDragon]

If Rodgers does not come up with a game winning drive here... who is going to blame the defense here? They have given up 10 points when the Bears had "normal" field position. They also have a couple of INT's to boot.The defense sucks, huh?

Special teams surely does.You just going to blame Rodgers?

Are you not going to blame him at all? Defense has a good game and they still lose. Should've put them away early.

Of course some is on him.For the most part, he had a very good game.Defense played well for the most part...til very late.A TD drive to tie and a drive to get the winning FG in OT.Special teams ####ed this one up big time.10 points off of bad special teams play.The offense could have been better, but given the weather and all, Rodgers played pretty damn well with what amounted to little of a run game for much of it.

Good that you admit it.He had an ok game not a very good game. Two picks and 210 total yards for the defense and that played well for the most part? Offense did not take advantage of what was given to them by the D.Making excuses for the offense. Ortan managed to outscore the Packer offense so it couldnt' have been that bad right.

I have never denied it.But they gave up the yards and points again in crunch time.Like I said, they played well for the most part.Late in the fourth...not so much. Why is that so hard for you to understand?Im not making excuses for the offense...they were again inconsistent and got way too conservative late. Rodgers for the most part played very well (better than OK given the conditions).Yes, Orton managed to outscore the Packer offense by getting the ball twice in great field position for a FG and a TD (and his kicker made his FGs).Oh...and the Packers D is not as good as the Bears D...

No crunch time if the offense did it's job early.What's so hard for you to understand the offense disappeard for a quarter then didn't take advantage of all turn-overs while giving the ball up itself.I hear offense inconsistent and conservative. I hear Rodgers played very well better than OK given the conditions. Funny how you separate the two.No one said they were but the Packers D was the better defense the majority of the game. They Packer O just did not take advantage of it.

 

[zDragon]

Mason Crosby was a much better kicker when Favre was there...they should have kept Favre!

Rodgers and McCarthy both agree that the QB blew it, not the kicker

The game might not have come down to Crosby's kick had the Packers cashed in on a first-and-goal from the Chicago 5-yard line earlier in the fourth quarter, when Rodgers didn't see a wide-open Donald Lee in the right corner of the end zone and threw incomplete to the opposite side.

Asked if he should have seen Lee, McCarthy replied, "Yes."

"I didn't see him," Rodgers said. "Looked for him, couldn't see him. You throw a touchdown there — by the look on his face as he ran off the field, he was wide open — that puts us up by 11, a two-score game. Disappointing."

Rodgers was taken down for a 5-yard loss on the next play, then threw incomplete on third down, forcing the Packers to settle for a 28-yard Crosby field goal to make it 17-10 with 12:58 left.

"Offensively we didn't cash in on our opportunities. You have to get touchdowns when it's first-and-goal," Rodgers said. "I mean, the amount of yards we put up and the efficiency with which we moved the ball, we've got to get more points than 17. ... We didn't score enough points on offense to win the game."

Here is something too that really pisses me off about McCarthy.... this is from JSOnline today

The Packers forced the Bears into third and 9, but a flat pass to Matt Forte gained 14 when McCarthy said linebacker A.J. Hawk was picked.

WTF is McCarthy talking about? Hawk slipped on that play and I didn't see a pick? He needs to stop making excuses for his team!

Yes, Rodgers shares some blame...can't always see every guy and no guarantees Lee catches it either.But nowhere do they just say Rodgers was to blame...that is classic spin by HK.

I would not say he was picked...he was rubbed by his own guy I think before making the turn and slipping and was out of position on the play.

Knew you could spin it. Good job.

 

[zDragon]

The Packers would be going to the playoffs if they still had Favre, and 55% of America agrees with me.

What was the percentage of America that voted for Bush?How about the percentage that voted Favre to the probowl?Polls like that mean little.And even I have conceded they may have made it there...I think most will agree (beyond the anything can happen part) that this team, even with Favre was not going anywhere in the playoffs.Would Favre have won it for them last night? Given his recent cold weather performances in both GB and NY...I doubt it.

So how would you spin this if the Poll showed something you supported? Versus something that you don't agree with? How would you respond to your post above if it was in reply to a poll you had posted supporting your side?

 

[zDragon]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

You do understand they are in two different systems and have different experience levels in each.Favre is new to the system he is playing in and has to learn the system and get more of it on the fly. Rodgers has practiced and played in the Packers system for what 3 years now? Big difference so comparing the two's output just on that level alone isn't very productive.

 

[zDragon]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Who are all these fans, I don't know any of them. I can only assume you mean the Favre fans and not Packer fans. I have followed this team long before Favre and will follow them long after. I see the big picture and am happy with the decision. All of you unhappy Favre fans can go pick another team to follow, we won't miss you.

A few questions1. How many packer fans are there?

2. How many packer fans do you know?

3. Do you truly feel you have talked to enough fans to justify you comments (what 70,000 or so?)

4. So if a fan thinks they organization made a wrong move with Favre they are no longer fans but Favre fans?

 

[zDragon]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

Don't count on it, I'm not giving up my tickets and I don't know anyone who is. I doubt you are even on the waiting list, you don't sound like a Packer Fan to me.

So if you have season tickets your a Packer fan?So if you on the waiting list your a Packers fan?

 

[zDragon]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

 

[Saints-Man]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge. One difficult decision with which you don't agree hardly qualifies them as "three stooges".

 

[Stinger Ray]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

 

[sho nuff]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

Have you watched the guy play this year? Im not diminishing his play...he has been bad the past few weeks. He talks about his arm being sore and not having much on it (or something to that effect).Yes...he got voted into the probowl...a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently.

Yes, he was one of the reasons they got where they did. Read the jets collapse thread...the jets fans know he was part of it...but some don't even feel he was the biggest part...and they say his play has been terrible too. I guess they are just diminishing him and are Favre haters.

You just can't take the fact that Brett is not playing well right now. It burns you up that this thread is alive and well because the decision at this point, based on Favre's play, looks like the right one.

Almost everything I do is tied to knocking him? Not at all. In this thread it has been about Favre vs. Rodgers...so yes, negative things about Favre's play are going to come up.

But his play in recent weeks has been bad...some of the worst of his career. At least in 2005 he was playing bad, but trying to do too much on his own because of injuries to his WRs and RBs and he needed to go for it far more. He has more support now. Some of its poor coaching in NY...some of it is Brett being wreckless and at 39 he may just not be able to do as much as he thought he could.

Sorry you can't see that and just think its to diminish him.

As I have posted, I hope if he is going to retire for good, that he has a good game Sunday and goes out looking like the Brett of old rather than how he has looked the past several weeks.

 

[sho nuff]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

None of that changes the fact that Favre's arm seems "noodle like". He's missing on the deep ball consistently. It's looking like that shoulder stinger earlier this year is affecting his deep passes, or he's lost it.

I have seen many of his WRs make key drops on the deep ball. You guys can spin and hate all you want but Favre going to the Jets was a positive thing for them.

Where did I claim it was not.And talk about spin. yes, he has had some drops...does that excuse the off the backfoot duck that was intercepted? All the passes that came up well short this past Sunday.

Read some of the Jets threads. These are Jets fans saying the same thing about his play the past few weeks.

but of course you though Stinger's post was good...some of you don't want to see the fact that Im being truthful about the guy's play...and it bothers you that TT is starting to look completely correct in this decision.

 

[Stinger Ray]

From JSOnline today-

McCarthy doesn't think the Packers are choking in the biggest moments.

"I do not see pressure as a problem for our football team in the fourth quarter," McCarthy said Tuesday.

Each football game has a handful of game-deciding plays and for whatever reason - take your pick, there are plenty to choose from - the Packers just aren't getting it done.

"It's not just the defense is not doing this or the offense is not doing that," McCarthy said. "It's a team game, and we've had a number of opportunities throughout the game. There's plays in the third quarter, frankly, that you can look at and say, 'Boy, that had a very big impact on the game.' "

McCarthy pointed to the opening possession of the second half Monday, when the Packers held the Bears without a first down and forced them to punt. On the punt, however, Packers cornerback Jarrett Bush was blocked into the bounding ball. It went off his leg, the Bears recovered and five plays later Chicago scored a touchdown to pull within 14-10.

OK, so maybe Lucy isn't taking the ball away from the Packers at the last second. She's bouncing it off their leg on a punt.

"It's a nightmare, you know?" safety Nick Collins said after the game. "Every game we've been in. We're just not closing."

This season, once so full of promise after a 2-0 start, has become a horror show.

But it has to come to an end, right? The Packers surely will learn from all these close games and put the knowledge to good use next season, won't they?

If history is any predictor, don't bet on it.

The four other teams the Packers are grouped with for close-game futility improved a collective 19 games the next season (13-51 to 32-32) but only one posted a winning record. The '93 Patriots were 5-11 in Bill Parcells' first season as coach and went 10-6 the next to make the playoffs as a wild-card entry.

But it didn't come easy. The Patriots continued to be the heartbreak kids by losing their first two games by four and three points - behind quarterback Drew Bledsoe, who was starting his second season - and starting 3-6. However, they found ways to win close games against Cincinnati (31-28) and the Packers (17-16) to help set the stage for a season-ending, seven-game winning streak.

But the Patriots are the exception, not the rule.

The Browns went from 5-11 to 8-8, the Panthers from 1-15 to 7-9 and the Oilers were 7-9 after being 2-14. Even the Packers improved from 4-12 in '91 to 9-7 the next season under new coach Mike Holmgren.

Incidentally, Parcells was the only coach to survive a season of close losses.

McCarthy isn't likely to be going anywhere after the season except to the chalkboard to try to get his team righted. He'll point to the Patriots and even the Packers under Holmgren. But in most cases, teams that can't close the deal one year don't suddenly do it the next.

If that happens, it will once again be "Groundhog Day" for the Packers. And it will most certainly not be a comedy by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[sho nuff]

Mason Crosby was a much better kicker when Favre was there...they should have kept Favre!

Rodgers and McCarthy both agree that the QB blew it, not the kicker

The game might not have come down to Crosby's kick had the Packers cashed in on a first-and-goal from the Chicago 5-yard line earlier in the fourth quarter, when Rodgers didn't see a wide-open Donald Lee in the right corner of the end zone and threw incomplete to the opposite side.

Asked if he should have seen Lee, McCarthy replied, "Yes."

"I didn't see him," Rodgers said. "Looked for him, couldn't see him. You throw a touchdown there — by the look on his face as he ran off the field, he was wide open — that puts us up by 11, a two-score game. Disappointing."

Rodgers was taken down for a 5-yard loss on the next play, then threw incomplete on third down, forcing the Packers to settle for a 28-yard Crosby field goal to make it 17-10 with 12:58 left.

"Offensively we didn't cash in on our opportunities. You have to get touchdowns when it's first-and-goal," Rodgers said. "I mean, the amount of yards we put up and the efficiency with which we moved the ball, we've got to get more points than 17. ... We didn't score enough points on offense to win the game."

Here is something too that really pisses me off about McCarthy.... this is from JSOnline today

The Packers forced the Bears into third and 9, but a flat pass to Matt Forte gained 14 when McCarthy said linebacker A.J. Hawk was picked.

WTF is McCarthy talking about? Hawk slipped on that play and I didn't see a pick? He needs to stop making excuses for his team!

Yes, Rodgers shares some blame...can't always see every guy and no guarantees Lee catches it either.But nowhere do they just say Rodgers was to blame...that is classic spin by HK.

I would not say he was picked...he was rubbed by his own guy I think before making the turn and slipping and was out of position on the play.

Knew you could spin it. Good job.

I don't think you understand the word spin.The point is...Rodgers did not see him. Can't see every guy all the time. It was a mistake and a bad one.

Sorry you don't like that.

 

[bcr8f]

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Really? Prove it. They lost respect from ESPN and many pundits but reporters are not the league.

Who? What GM/head coaches?

 

[sho nuff]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

You do understand they are in two different systems and have different experience levels in each.Favre is new to the system he is playing in and has to learn the system and get more of it on the fly. Rodgers has practiced and played in the Packers system for what 3 years now? Big difference so comparing the two's output just on that level alone isn't very productive.

This is pure spin...you whine about me spinning.But Favre is a 15 year vet...its week 17 coming up...when will the new system excuse be played out? He has been in the system for quite some time now...its time to give it up.No system out there is it ok for a QB to throw off his backfoot, across his body like Favre tried the other day. That was great when he was younger...not so much now. That...and for all the flack Rodgers has taken about holding the ball too long...did you see Favre in Seattle?Comparing a 1st year starter to a 15 year vet...the new system thing is pretty much a wash IMO.And Brett is a 3 time MVP... I think at this point he should be able to pick up a new system pretty quick and should not need the rest of you to make excuses for his poor play.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Update:

Posts by sho nuff in this thread: 635

Total posts in this thread: 2298

Percentage of posts in this thread that are by sho nuff: 27.6%

 

[sho nuff]

If Rodgers does not come up with a game winning drive here... who is going to blame the defense here? They have given up 10 points when the Bears had "normal" field position. They also have a couple of INT's to boot.The defense sucks, huh?

What do you guys want Rodgers to do? Is Rodgers to blame for Crosby's 2 missed FGs?

Of course he isn't. However, at this point in his career he has not lead the Packers to a win in crunch time even if you take away Crosby's 2 missed FGs.

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

In the Minnesota game, Rodgers was given the ball at their own 41 with 2:15 left. He moved them 23 yards in 1:44. Getting them in position for a 50 plus yard FG is hardly impressive at all. The play-calling was a bit too conservative, but that probably had a lot to do with how ineffective Rodgers and the passing game had been for most of the day. In the Chicago game, thanks to a great special teams return and a bad penalty by the Bears, they started with the ball at the Chicago 35 with 3:05 left. Rodgers moved them a whole 15 yards in 2:40. Real impressive! Face it: He has sucked in crunch time this year, and the numbers quite clearly demonstrate that. You won't admit it, but they are there for everyone to see. Later.