"brnt247" wrote:

It all sounds great and everything but then again I can just imagine what would happen on this forum if McCarthy did turn him loose and there was a misfortunate turnover. A tipped ball at the LOS or INT that bounces off the receiver or a fumble after the catch and people here go APE crap on McCarthy AND Rodgers.

I can understand the thinking "hey, let's get the monkey off Rodgers back" logic but the bottom line here is the OL is payed to block, Crosby is paid to make FG's, and Mike McCarthy is paid to win football games.

I think the team is in a lot bigger trouble if they start changing WHY they make the decisions they should make. What's ironinc about this thread with a "help the young QB" theme is that if everything worked out the way they should have last night there would have been a LOT of people saying "oh yeah, he played it conservative to get Rodgers the win."

I don't understand why every time something doesn't work the way it's supposed there is something WRONG and so many are off in far, far places looking for the answers.

It's Rodgers arm, it's Rodgers head, it's Rodgers inability to produce late in games, it's because Rodgers ain't Favre, it's McCarthy who can't call plays, McCarthy who can't coach, McCarthy who can't whatever.

I could swear all I saw was an offensive line that didn't block very well and a kick that didn't appear to get high enough fast enough in a place on the field where it should have been ROUTINE. At least the other guy made the same kick look pretty routine to me a couple of minutes later.

Didn't that look routine to you?

"warhawk" wrote:

I disagree with the playcalling on a philosophical level. It has nothing to do with whether it succeeds or fails -- I just don't like it. Had Crosby's FG attempt split the uprights, I still would have complained that it was a boring and anticlimactic way to limp into a victory. Given the choice between a game-winning TD pass from Rodgers and a game-winning FG from Crosby, I'll choose the TD pass every single time.

I could understand playing the percentages if we had a mediocre QB; but we have a fantastic, top-ten QB -- who's a first-year starter at that. I could understand the concern about a possible red-zone turnover if Rodgers had a history of screwing up in the red zone, but he is the best red-zone quarterback in the NFL this year.

We just have to agree to disagree, because my objections have nothing to do with the fact the FG attempt failed. I was vociferously protesting the play choices as they lined up. It was the same tired, old formula that's taken us nowhere this season.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I disagree with the playcalling on a philosophical level. It has nothing to do with whether it succeeds or fails -- I just don't like it. Had Crosby's FG attempt split the uprights, I still would have complained that it was a boring and anticlimactic way to limp into a victory. Given the choice between a game-winning TD pass from Rodgers and a game-winning FG from Crosby, I'll choose the TD pass every single time.

I could understand playing the percentages if we had a mediocre QB; but we have a fantastic, top-ten QB -- who's a first-year starter at that. I could understand the concern about a possible red-zone turnover if Rodgers had a history of screwing up in the red zone, but he is the best red-zone quarterback in the NFL this year.

We just have to agree to disagree, because my objections have nothing to do with the fact the FG attempt failed. I was vociferously protesting the play choices as they lined up. It was the same tired, old formula that's taken us nowhere this season.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote: