Five most disappointing 08 seasons..· Page 3

Rockmolder
Honored Member

15 years ago

Too conservative? That's odd because I can recall quite a few games where the coach is blasted for going deep on 1st and 10.

It's amazing people want it both ways when things don't get executed.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

I always find this amazing aswell.

I'm watching the game, looking at the chat, and someone start yelling when they call a screen play on 3 and 9. I can understand that, these plays don't og anywhere 9 out of 10 times... especially not if you use them 4 times a game.

Bit later in the game, we're on 3rd and 10, Rodgers throws it deep, he overthrows his receiver, and the same person start yelling.

I'm always wondering excactly what they want... Call a pass play and let all the receivers run hooks and outs after 10 yards?

The most dissapointing is obviously all the close losses. Especially the Tennesse one, because that really got your hopes up, nearly winning against an undefeated team, only to fall even deeper later in the season.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

15 years ago

#22

Unless the opposing team has shut down our offense completely and we're in desperate need of any kind of spark, I rarely like deep, downfield passes (unless, of course, the receiver is WIDE open). It's high-risk, high-reward, but the risk always seems higher than the reward. Let's face it: most interceptions occur on the deep bombs. Unless and until the medium passing game gets shut down, I don't see the reason to unnecessarily risk giving the ball back to the other team.

When I bitch about conservative playcalling, it's the choice of runs in obvious medium-distance passing situations that I'm protesting. I can with complete consistency complain about bad choices of runs and deep passes.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

15 years ago

#23

I agree, but we pretty often go to Jordy on a curl route or Jennings/Driver on a route over the middle. After a while they get predictable though. Maybe McCarthy somehow hopes to get the 10 yards with a quick screen play, but that usually doesn't work with alot of defenders on the 1st down line.

I do pretty often see Jennings running free though, seems lke they sneak their defenders up when Jordy has catched some balls on underneath routes etc. and either Jennings or Driver are one on one and gain some seperation... the only problem is that Rodgers as of late seems to under or overthrows these balls (Ofcourse, an incompletion like that is easier to remember than a completion), otherwise, they seem like pretty good calls.

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#24

I have been saying it since before the regular season started.
Aaron Rodgers will not be a successful( as far as wins-losses)qb for Green Bay with the current management and coaching staff that is in place.

They were so worried about AR's stats, with the comparison to Brett Favre, that they forgot The Packers needed to win the close games.

It has been posted almost every losing week, "you can't blame Aaron Rodgers for this loss, look at his stats, he played a great game."

I am not blaming Aaron Rodgers for anything, I tend not to "put the blame" on any one player, in the end IT IS THE COACHING STAFF who have to take responsibility.

Way to conservative in their play calling, how many times this year have The Packers either got an early lead or came back from a deficit, only to start playing"not to lose" ball, leading to another defeat?

Some of you tend to focus on the last 2-5 minutes of a ball game, when it seems The Packers could never either put the ball into the endzone and settled for a FG, or couldn't stop the other team from scoring.

Go back and look at most of those close games and you will see where The Packers were in close games at the end because they would not let the offense continue, early in the game,what they did best which was move the ball through the air.

This is a 60 minute game, games are not won and loss on the last drives, they are just finished off.

I would have much rather seen Aaron Rodgers with 30-35 tds even if it meant he had 18-20 interceptions, I am betting The Packers would have more than 5 wins at this point.
Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy next year don't try and protect your QB's stats, let him show what he can do for a full 60 minutes, I bet the W-L record will be a lot better.

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

DGB454
Registered

15 years ago

#25

I have been saying it since before the regular season started.

Aaron Rodgers will not be a successful( as far as wins-losses)qb for Green Bay with the current management and coaching staff that is in place.

They were so worried about Aaron Rodgers's stats, with the comparison to Brett Favre, that they forgot The Packers needed to win the close games.

It has been posted almost every losing week, "you can't blame Aaron Rodgers for this loss, look at his stats, he played a great game."

I am not blaming Aaron Rodgers for anything, I tend not to "put the blame" on any one player, in the end IT IS THE COACHING STAFF who have to take responsibility.

Way to conservative in their play calling, how many times this year have The Packers either got an early lead or came back from a deficit, only to start playing"not to lose" ball, leading to another defeat?

Some of you tend to focus on the last 2-5 minutes of a ball game, when it seems The Packers could never either put the ball into the endzone and settled for a FG, or couldn't stop the other team from scoring.

Go back and look at most of those close games and you will see where The Packers were in close games at the end because they would not let the offense continue, early in the game,what they did best which was move the ball through the air.

This is a 60 minute game, games are not won and loss on the last drives, they are just finished off.

I would have much rather seen Aaron Rodgers with 30-35 tds even if it meant he had 18-20 interceptions, I am betting The Packers would have more than 5 wins at this point.

Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy next year don't try and protect your QB's stats, let him show what he can do for a full 60 minutes, I bet the W-L record will be a lot better.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

It seemed like that to me in a lot of games. There were some we went all out to win (Bears and Colts) but way too many we just played not to loose. Let Aaron Rodgers and the rest of the O play up to their potential the full 60 minutes.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

#26

I have been saying it since before the regular season started.

Aaron Rodgers will not be a successful( as far as wins-losses)qb for Green Bay with the current management and coaching staff that is in place.

They were so worried about Aaron Rodgers's stats, with the comparison to Brett Favre, that they forgot The Packers needed to win the close games.

It has been posted almost every losing week, "you can't blame Aaron Rodgers for this loss, look at his stats, he played a great game."

I am not blaming Aaron Rodgers for anything, I tend not to "put the blame" on any one player, in the end IT IS THE COACHING STAFF who have to take responsibility.

Way to conservative in their play calling, how many times this year have The Packers either got an early lead or came back from a deficit, only to start playing"not to lose" ball, leading to another defeat?

Some of you tend to focus on the last 2-5 minutes of a ball game, when it seems The Packers could never either put the ball into the endzone and settled for a FG, or couldn't stop the other team from scoring.

Go back and look at most of those close games and you will see where The Packers were in close games at the end because they would not let the offense continue, early in the game,what they did best which was move the ball through the air.

This is a 60 minute game, games are not won and loss on the last drives, they are just finished off.

I would have much rather seen Aaron Rodgers with 30-35 tds even if it meant he had 18-20 interceptions, I am betting The Packers would have more than 5 wins at this point.

Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy next year don't try and protect your QB's stats, let him show what he can do for a full 60 minutes, I bet the W-L record will be a lot better.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

ROFL so now the staff is padding Rodgers stats to safe face even in losses?

So how is your theory that we never landed on the moon going for ya? :physassult: :physassult: :physassult: :physassult: :physassult: :physassult: :wickedfart: :wickedfart: :wickedfart:

DGB454
Registered

15 years ago

#27

For me I'm not saying the coaches worried about Rodgers stats as much as they played way too consevitively. Once you are up keep playing to win and destroy the other team.

longtimefan
Registered

15 years ago

#28

I have been saying it since before the regular season started.

Aaron Rodgers will not be a successful( as far as wins-losses)qb for Green Bay with the current management and coaching staff that is in place.

They were so worried about Aaron Rodgers's stats, with the comparison to Brett Favre, that they forgot The Packers needed to win the close games.

It has been posted almost every losing week, "you can't blame Aaron Rodgers for this loss, look at his stats, he played a great game."

I am not blaming Aaron Rodgers for anything, I tend not to "put the blame" on any one player, in the end IT IS THE COACHING STAFF who have to take responsibility.

Way to conservative in their play calling, how many times this year have The Packers either got an early lead or came back from a deficit, only to start playing"not to lose" ball, leading to another defeat?

Some of you tend to focus on the last 2-5 minutes of a ball game, when it seems The Packers could never either put the ball into the endzone and settled for a FG, or couldn't stop the other team from scoring.

Go back and look at most of those close games and you will see where The Packers were in close games at the end because they would not let the offense continue, early in the game,what they did best which was move the ball through the air.

This is a 60 minute game, games are not won and loss on the last drives, they are just finished off.

I would have much rather seen Aaron Rodgers with 30-35 tds even if it meant he had 18-20 interceptions, I am betting The Packers would have more than 5 wins at this point.

Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy next year don't try and protect your QB's stats, let him show what he can do for a full 60 minutes, I bet the W-L record will be a lot better.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

I agree Z...

You would think to pad his stats they would want to score lot of points as well..

That in turn would led to more wins

I am going to say with 100% certainty that there was no plan to pad his stats which in turn led them to losing games

::roll:

longtimefan
Registered

15 years ago

#29

Great article, really put the season in sum very well. Can't wait to hear what hazer has to say about that article saying that Rodgers has played well...

"dhazer" wrote:

Ok you want to know what i will say is that its just another person with the Rodger goggles on he is a decent qb but yet i like how they say its not any of his fault. I have seen alot of posters doing the same exact thing its always some other part of the teams fault. But yet when you compare rodgers to another qb its always because that qb has a running game or they have a great defense. But like some say it takes 53 guys to win a game and it takes 53 guys to lose a game.

See i didnt even cut Rodgers down.

"go.pack.go." wrote:

Of course he gets part of the blame, as does the D and S/T

That is what we have been saying all along..

Trouble is you focus just on his last 2 minutes and blame him...

there was 58 other minutes the D could have done something, as well as S/T..

And yes Aaron Rodgers could have got more points in that time frame as well..

But just as your famous stat of q/b rating of 45 in last 5 minutes, you forget he is one of the best in the red zone.

So if it wasnt for that, the team might not even be in the spots to win the games at the end..

flep
Member

15 years ago

#30

A good team finds ways to win close games

A poor team finds ways to lose close games.

That's where we are at, at the moment.

We win 4 of those games we lost by 4 or less (especially the one at Minny) and we would have been in the playoffs allready.

Formed Merseyside Nighthawks. British Champions 1992. Packer fan for 32 years

I feel very wrong now!!!!!!!!!

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (1h) : S learn from McKinney who learns from Hafley who learns from the fans. Guaranteed Super Bowl

Zero2Cool (4h) : could*

Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Safeties should learn from Xavier.

dhazer (29-Apr) : And what about grabbing a Gilmore or Howard at CB ? Those are all Free Agents left

dhazer (29-Apr) : out of curiosity do they try and sign Simmons or Hyde to let these young safeties learn from, they can't be day 1 starters.

Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : I miss having Sam Shields.

Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Not that he's making excuses, just pointing it out

Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : That's for dang sure. Make our erratic kicker have no excuse!

packerfanoutwest (28-Apr) : having a great long snapper is gold

Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : LaFleur looking like he had some weight. Coachin will do that lol

Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : Thanks Mucky and whomever created topcos for each pick!

Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : Insane about Kingsley

dfosterf (28-Apr) : Putring it here so Mucky sees it. He was our guy!

dfosterf (28-Apr) : Bowden long snapper Wisconsin. Consensus best LS in college.

dfosterf (28-Apr) : We got Peter Bowde

dfosterf (28-Apr) : I personally interpret that as a partial tear that can be recovered from with rehab

dfosterf (28-Apr) : MLF said Kingsley Enagbare did NOT tear his ACL and did NOT require surgery, and that he is "looking good" for the 2024 season!

beast (28-Apr) : T.O. son signs with the 49ers

Mucky Tundra (28-Apr) : damn those vikings

beast (27-Apr) : UDFA Vikings sign TE – Trey Knox, South Carolina

beast (27-Apr) : Kitchen was all high from Miami, he was more lucky than talented in 2022 and it showed in 2023

beast (27-Apr) : Reportedly Packers have UDFAs Jennings and Jones

beast (27-Apr) : OL – Donovan Jennings, USF OT – Trente Jones, Michigan

TheKanataThrilla (27-Apr) : Interesting draft. A bit shocked that we didn't select an early CB. Definitely have Safety help. Pretty happy overall.

dhazer (27-Apr) : wow the last 2 picks are really stupid and probably will be special teams players Top 10 draft pick next year book it

TheKanataThrilla (27-Apr) : I think he ended up with a terrible RAS score

dhazer (27-Apr) : Anyone know what went on with Kitchens from Florida? At 1 point he was to be the Packers 1st round and he is way down the board now

Martha Careful (27-Apr) : Z, could you please combine my thread with yours please. I obviously did not see it when I Created it

Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Re: 'Kool-Aid' McKinstry. Other than Icky Woods, has there ever been a good NFLer with a childish nickname?

Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Packers looking to trade up

Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Flag?

Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Sag?

Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : It rhymes with "bag."

beast (26-Apr) : Family? That's Deadpool's F word

Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : Not THAT f-word.

Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : fuck

beast (25-Apr) : 49ers are Cap Tight

beast (25-Apr) : Fuck

Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Kanata, I will be when I'm on my lunch later

TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Love you NSD

Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Huh. I guess the F-word is censored in this fan shout.

Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Anyone who doesn't hang out in the chat probably smokes pole.

TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : GoPackGo Thinking CB is the pick tonight

TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Anyone hanging out in the chat tonight?

Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : whoa...49ers have had trade conversations about both Deebo Samuel and Brandon Aiyuk

Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : I hope they take a Punter at 9th overall. Be bold!

Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : I may end up eating those words but I think they need a lot more talent then their 4 picks can provide

Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : I really hope they stand pat and Draft a WR

Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : @DMRussini

Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : The Chicago Bears are very open for business at 9 and telling teams they are ready to move for the right price, per source

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2023 Packers Schedule

Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM

Bears

38 - 20

Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM

Falcons

24 - 25

Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM

SAINTS

18 - 17

Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM

LIONS

20 - 34

Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM

Raiders

13 - 17

Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM

Broncos

17 - 19

Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

10 - 24

Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM

RAMS

20 - 3

Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM

Steelers

19 - 23

Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM

CHARGERS

23 - 20

Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM

Lions

29 - 22

Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM

CHIEFS

27 - 19

Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM

Giants

22 - 24

Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM

BUCCANEERS

20 - 34

Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM

Panthers

33 - 30

Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM

Vikings

33 - 10

Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM

BEARS

17 - 9

Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM

Cowboys

48 - 32

Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM

49ers

21 - 24