Jim Rome's burn on Aaron Rodgers· Page 2

Rockmolder
Honored Member

13 years ago

1. 28/42 - 66,7% - 423 yards - 10.1 avg - 4 TDs - 1 Int - 121,4 QB Rating.

Offense puts up 45 points.

2. 18/27 - 66,7% - 180 yards - 6.7 avg - 3 TDs - 0 Ints - 122,5 QB Rating.

Offense puts up 21 points.

Number one is a bad QB with the monkey on his back of just knacking under the pressure in the play-offs. A player who just can't win (in his 2nd year starting).

Number two is some kind of god who's balls we should all slobber on becaue he just won against the Eagles.

It really makes no sense.

musccy
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#12

+1 to brnt247 and rockmolder, my thoughts exactly. He had a good but not great game vs. the Eagles, but is a win all that it takes to validate him as quarterback royalty?

Is Bjack a HOF rb since he just happened to be on the 45 man roster of a team that happened to win a playoff game?!?

peteralan71
Registered

13 years ago

#13

It's about time that an analyst realizes that he had an amazing game last year against the Cards, and if the defense had done what they did all season, the game would have been an absolute blowout. Rodgers played phenomenally in both of his playoff games, the only difference was the defense.

It should be noted however that Starks opened it up a LOT of Rodgers. The guy can play. Hopefully now all of the haters out there for this whole season, you know who you are, will realize that there is something behind all of this talk about Starks.

Green Bay: Home of the Green & Gold. And the hunter orange. And the camouflage.

peteralan71
Registered

13 years ago

#14

"musccy" wrote:

I wouldn't necessarily say that he didn't have a great game. He had much less passes and passing yards, because we had a running game. This is why the passer rating is very valuable. It can take a small sample and grade just as well as a large sample. Look at the stats that Rockmolder put up, for example. You would think that he had a much better game last year because he had more yards and more TD's. However this year his success was quantitatively smaller, the passer rating was just slightly better because what he DID do, he did it very well. Since we had a running game, we didn't have to rely on him so much this year. But when we called on Rodgers, he excelled.

Green Bay: Home of the Green & Gold. And the hunter orange. And the camouflage.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#15

True, although his yards per attempt was phenomenal against the Cards and slightly below average against the Eagles. But yes, overall, it was a superb performance.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

13 years ago

#16

Nr. 1 is the statline of a QB who's carrying a team.

Nr. 2 is the statline of an efficient QB. One who doesn't have to win it by himself, but just has to manage the game.

musccy
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#17

"peteralan71" wrote:

By no means am I saying he had a bad game. His pocket presences was as good as ever, he moved well, kept plays alive, was accurate...all the usual stuff.

I'm just saying relative to some of his other performances, he wasn't as vital to the Packers success (thanks to Starks, defense) yet THIS is the game that gives the media wood for Rodgers?!? Morons!

peteralan71
Registered

13 years ago

#18

"musccy" wrote:

"peteralan71" wrote:

Hahaha great point. That is my "burn" on analysts, is that they constantly miss things are are glaringly obvious.

Green Bay: Home of the Green & Gold. And the hunter orange. And the camouflage.

zombieslayer
Registered

13 years ago

#19

I haven't been on his bandwagon since day 1, but since the Cows game in 2007. As awesome as Favre was that year, Rodgers looked like a pretty dang good backup in case Favre went down again.

Then in 2008, Rodgers was excellent as a starter and hasn't disappointed since.

The thing is, he's only 27. I won't say his prime yet as the prime for a QB is around 30. It would be awesome to get his first ring this year before his prime as he's only going to get better. Here's to hoping we have Aaron, TT, MM, and Dom Capers on the same team for the next 5+ years. My only fear is that some other team will give Dom an offer he can't refuse.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

musccy
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#20

. My only fear is that some other team will give Dom an offer he can't refuse.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

This is a thread I've been thinking about starting, but anywho, the hiring of Rivera with Fox, Gruden, and Cowher still floating around seems very encouraging, and obviously the deeper the Packers can go in the playoffs, the better.

Denver is apparently waist deep in their search already and although I heard Dom's name in one rumor, since then Fewell and the OC from StL have become leading candidates. I've heard Cle is heavily leaning towards Fox, so it's looking promising that we will retain Dom for at least 1 more year!

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

packerfanoutwest (39m) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (40m) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (52m) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (3h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (3h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (3h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (3h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (3h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (3h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (3h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (4h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (4h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (4h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (5h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (5h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (5h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (5h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (5h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (6h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (6h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (6h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (6h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (7h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (8h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (8h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (9h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (9h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (9h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (9h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (9h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (9h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (9h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (9h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (9h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (9h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (9h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (9h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (10h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (10h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (10h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (10h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (10h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (10h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (10h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (10h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (10h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS