Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)
Glorydays
11 years ago

How can you think he couldn't win a High School game when he had double digit win total in College?

I believe losing Jermichael Finley and Greg Jennings would hurt, but not as much as some may think. I think Andrew Quarless and D.J. Williams can fill in admirably for Finley and also Randall Cobb, James Jones and Jordy Nelson can eat up the catches Jennings will not get. I also think that Jarrett Boykin fella is gonna contribute a couple dozen receptions too.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



My concern is if we lose a starter or two at WR. That makes a huge dropoff in talent. As far as Harrell goes, he hast displayed ANYTHING that would inspire confidence if Aaron Rodgers went down. His stumble bum play on the one yard line was agonizing to watch. Could that happen to anyone? Sure. Its still uninspiring. He's no daisy!
QCHuskerFan
11 years ago
Ok. So as long as we get a monster at DE or LB or S, we will make the playoffs with Harrell at QB for 16 games?

Every team needs new players and depth. The Super Bowl champs in Baltimore currently have major issues at LT, MLB (2), WR and Safety. Everyone has needs. Packers are no different in that regard.

The point is that I personally have no faith in this team making the playoffs if Aaron Rodgers goes down for any serious time. Any other player can go down and I think we can survive. It was proven this year. But Harrell has no experience and, so, we have no evidence to suggest that we have an adequate backup.

We are not like everyone else. Things worked out ok for 49ers with their 'backup'. Seattle has experience. Washington looks like it did well last year with both rookie QB's. Atlanta has experience. Many teams have a veteran (castoff) at backup QB. We have novices.

Favre and Rodgers have spoiled us. I don't think we place enough value on a backup QB in today's NFL, because, frankly, the backup in Green Bay has not been relied on in 20 years. Our time is coming.
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
Pack93z
11 years ago



We are not like everyone else. Things worked out ok for 49ers with their 'backup'. Seattle has experience. Washington looks like it did well last year with both rookie QB's. Atlanta has experience. Many teams have a veteran (castoff) at backup QB. We have novices.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 



What about the Champs.. the Ravens? Tyrod Taylor would give you confidence?

I agree.. Rodgers goes down, we have lost a ton. Probably will not be a playoff contender. But just as Flynn was an unknown and shined.. the same could happen with Harrell as well. Harrell has shown positives (along with negatives) in preseason.. but to discard him because of a single snap? He has been in the system for a couple of years and the staff has confidence in him.

Sorry.. this is a product of the NFL of today.. when you commit the type of money these franchise QB's are getting.. committing dollars to retain proven backups isn't always available.

The examples you are citing are teams with either young starters and highly drafted backups because both are just proving themselves and are relatively cheap or they are midline starting QB's with the future in the wings.

Now.. compare players in Rodgers pay bracket. Go look up the Brady, Brees, Manning(s), Rivers, Cutler camps. What do they all have.. a clear frontline starter collecting large money with inexperience behind them for the most part.

We are no different. Are we spoiled.. absolutely.

Would I love to have an upgrade.. absolutely.. but I have one end game in mind. The Lombardi.. I see more pushing needs in the starters of this roster than a backup QB. I have more important rotational players in mind than a backup QB.

Plus I think QB's as a whole.. the position is overrated. They are not the end all be all of a complete football team.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
play2win
11 years ago

Ok. So as long as we get a monster at DE or LB or S, we will make the playoffs with Harrell at QB for 16 games?

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 



Maybe. You don't know. No one does. Let's just hope that doesn't happen. I don't want to see Rodgers go down.

All I know, is we need to bolster our D. Is there really any question about this? Did you watch any of those games? Add to that more emphasis with running the ball, and maybe some players there to upgrade our rushing ability. Who is to say Harrell or Coleman wouldn't be able to make the playoffs? Who is to say that they wouldn't improve with more #1 reps?

These defensive upgrades are necessary for Green Bay to become a better team. If we fail to make them, again, we may not make the playoffs, WITH Rodgers. But, I doubt highly that we would go anywhere without being able to stop the run, and stop TEs roaming free across the middle of our D.

You are arbitrarily picking just one player, Rodgers, in a hypothetical scenario where he becomes injured, and saying the backup for his position will not be able to help us win. Try picking Raji, or Pickett... what do you think would happen differently? Me, I think those defensive losses would take us out of any kind of playoff running faster than the loss of Rodgers. At least with Harrell and Coleman, we'd still have a chance with a run heavy offense installed.

We have no depth on our front 7, and many holes at front 7 starter positions. Pick should be a backup by now, at his age. There is a giant sucking sound coming from the front 7 of our D... Who is it on our defense that other teams are always having to gameplan around, besides Matthews? Oh, that's right! NO ONE.
QCHuskerFan
11 years ago

Maybe. You don't know. No one does. Let's just hope that doesn't happen. I don't want to see Rodgers go down.

All I know, is we need to bolster our D. Is there really any question about this? Did you watch any of those games? Add to that more emphasis with running the ball, and maybe some players there to upgrade our rushing ability. Who is to say Harrell or Coleman wouldn't be able to make the playoffs? Who is to say that they wouldn't improve with more #1 reps?

These defensive upgrades are necessary for Green Bay to become a better team. If we fail to make them, again, we may not make the playoffs, WITH Rodgers. But, I doubt highly that we would go anywhere without being able to stop the run, and stop TEs roaming free across the middle of our D.

You are arbitrarily picking just one player, Rodgers, in a hypothetical scenario where he becomes injured, and saying the backup for his position will not be able to help us win. Try picking Raji, or Pickett... what do you think would happen differently? Me, I think those defensive losses would take us out of any kind of playoff running faster than the loss of Rodgers. At least with Harrell and Coleman, we'd still have a chance with a run heavy offense installed.

We have no depth on our front 7, and many holes at front 7 starter positions. Pick should be a backup by now, at his age. There is a giant sucking sound coming from the front 7 of our D... Who is it on our defense that other teams are always having to gameplan around, besides Matthews? Oh, that's right! NO ONE.

Originally Posted by: play2win 



So we can't live without Raji? Hope he doesn't get hurt and miss any games. Oh wait. He did. So did Woodson and Matthews. All of our supposed studs on defense missed games in 2012. Did we give up yards? Yes. Win games anyway? Yes.

Of course the D needs to get better. So does the O. So do Special Teams. I doubt Mike McCarthy is satisfied with any of them.

But Aaron Rodgers covers up for a lack of running game, injured receivers, porous line. Think Harrell can?
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
Pack93z
11 years ago



But Aaron Rodgers covers up for a lack of running game, injured receivers, porous line. Think Harrell can?

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 



So how about fixing the real issue of a sluggish running game, a porous line and better depth at receiver in place of committing more dollars (in which a FA QB will cost) or consuming a higher pick on a QB whereas that pick can be used on more immediate return. Or better yet.. build an ass kicking take no prisoners type of defense..
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
play2win
11 years ago
You have to admit, your hypothetical situation is shifting... you were talking 16 games with Harrell. I'm saying, over the course of 16 games, we would lose more with the loss of those other players I mentioned. Maybe not. Who knows? I know damn well what Rodgers does for our team.

We gave up at least 100 yds in 7 of our last 9 games of the 2012 season, including the playoffs. We averaged 132 opponent rushing yds per game by our D in 2012. We let a rookie torch us for 444 yds in his first playoff game.... we gave up 323 yds rushing in that one game. 579 total yds of offense given up.

NFL record for most rushing yds given up to a QB. That's horrendous, and unacceptable.

Woodson's comments after that game: "They're a deep team, they're a big team, they're a fast team, they're well-coached," he said. "I look at us and maybe we've got to be bigger and faster."

We gave up 409 yds rushing to AP in just two games against MIN... Ridiculous. We spent time working on tackling drills. AP had 189 yds AFTER CONTACT in just one game.

Our last 3 playoff losses we gave up 51, 37 and 45 points. This SCREAMS we need help on D.

Conversely, we never rushed for more than 100 yds away from home last year. This SCREAMS we better learn how to run the fucking football.

Two major points of emphasis for 2013 I would say...
nerdmann
11 years ago

So we can't live without Raji? Hope he doesn't get hurt and miss any games. Oh wait. He did. So did Woodson and Matthews. All of our supposed studs on defense missed games in 2012. Did we give up yards? Yes. Win games anyway? Yes.

Of course the D needs to get better. So does the O. So do Special Teams. I doubt Mike McCarthy is satisfied with any of them.

But Aaron Rodgers covers up for a lack of running game, injured receivers, porous line. Think Harrell can?

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 



One could argue that Aaron is more likely to abandon the run game and audible into too many deep passes down the field. Harrell would not be prone to stat whore, but would be forced to work within the system and maintain solid fundamentals.

With Harrell as your QB are you gonna abandon the running game? I don't think so. You're going to have balance. And he's not gonna be passing up open guys waiting 8+ seconds for something to develop deep.

Remember in '99 when Trent Green went down in the preseason? Rams fans thought their season was over. Up steps the next guy, you might have heard of him. Dude named Kurt Warner.

Is Harrell as good is Kurt Warner? Unlikely. But the Packers offense is stacked with talent, especially if we get Sherrod/Datko and Bulaga back. Dude's gonna have plenty of targets coming open.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
QCHuskerFan
11 years ago

With Harrell as your QB are you gonna abandon the running game? .

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



Please smile when you read this because I am when typing. "Didn't know we had a running game to abandon..." [grin1]

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
+1
QCHuskerFan
11 years ago

You have to admit, your hypothetical situation is shifting... you were talking 16 games with Harrell. I'm saying, over the course of 16 games, we would lose more with the loss of those other players I mentioned. Maybe not. Who knows? I know damn well what Rodgers does for our team.

We gave up at least 100 yds in 7 of our last 9 games of the 2012 season, including the playoffs. We averaged 132 opponent rushing yds per game by our D in 2012. We let a rookie torch us for 444 yds in his first playoff game.... we gave up 323 yds rushing in that one game. 579 total yds of offense given up.

NFL record for most rushing yds given up to a QB. That's horrendous, and unacceptable.

Woodson's comments after that game: "They're a deep team, they're a big team, they're a fast team, they're well-coached," he said. "I look at us and maybe we've got to be bigger and faster."

We gave up 409 yds rushing to AP in just two games against MIN... Ridiculous. We spent time working on tackling drills. AP had 189 yds AFTER CONTACT in just one game.

Our last 3 playoff losses we gave up 51, 37 and 45 points. This SCREAMS we need help on D.

Conversely, we never rushed for more than 100 yds away from home last year. This SCREAMS we better learn how to run the fucking football.

Two major points of emphasis for 2013 I would say...

Originally Posted by: play2win 



12 months ago, we were all screaming about the need to shut down the pass. We had given up historic numbers in passing yardage. We were opposing QB's fantasy games. 15-1 record but lots of hand wringing after a depressing loss in the playoffs. So lots of defensive players drafted. Much improvement in Pass D. Still won a lot of games. Gave up some embarrassing rushing yardage though. Funny how even when things change, they stay the same.


BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    buckeyepackfan (5m) : 1 NFC South @ NFC West @ AFC West other 3 games,
    buckeyepackfan (10m) : Packers play NFC East and AFC North in 2025, plus 2 other games
    Mucky Tundra (1h) : Geeze Zero get it right!😋
    Zero2Cool (2h) : I guess 3 games. Whatever
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Bleh, that only impacts two games.
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers are gonna get 3rd place division schedule next year.
    Mucky Tundra (4h) : Kanata, seek help! lol
    beast (6h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status
    Zero2Cool (6h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha
    TheKanataThrilla (6h) : That was terrible.
    TheKanataThrilla (6h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.
    beast (7h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent
    beast (7h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime
    beast (7h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing
    Zero2Cool (8h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is
    Zero2Cool (8h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true
    beast (8h) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management
    wpr (10h) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.
    Mucky Tundra (18h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago
    beast (19h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years
    Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.
    packerfanoutwest (26-Dec) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it
    beast (26-Dec) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done
    Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.
    Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore
    packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!
    Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!
    beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
    beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
    Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
    Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
    beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
    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
    34 - 0
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    35m / Green Bay Packers Talk / go.pack.go.

    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    5h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    5h / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

    14h / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

    21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.