Green Bay Packers Past & Future Position Analysis· Page 2

dhazer
Veteran Member

15 years ago

I dont have to get on board until he proves he can make this a winning team lol. He had a decent year but i dont base 1 year on how good of a qb is after all Derrick Anderson i believe was an all pro last year and this year he was benched.

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

#12

"dhazer" wrote:

I was thinking more Scott Mitchell with your last point.

Just as you don't have to get on board because of one season, you don't need to discredit his contributions to the team because the TEAM did not do enough to win more than six games this past season.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

15 years ago

#13

It was on tv his awesome passer rating of 46 in the final 5 minutes and he had 0 game winning drives but this is all old news i just got a kick out of how that writer tried to make Rodgers out to have done nothing wrong.

"dhazer" wrote:

The Packers, in a quarter by quarter break down, scored most of their points in the 4th quarter this season, if I'm not mistaken.

I'd also like to know where exactly the Packers were in the league in 4th Q. scoring. I'm willing to say they were in the top-10, but I can't find a site that keeps those stats so can't say for certain.

If you look at the larger picture, Aaron Rodgers failure to lead us to a game winning drive at the end is a fair critique.

However, he led the team to quite a few 4th Q. come backs this year. Yet they didn't win those games.... that reveals a deeper problem than Aaron's inability to play clutch, IMO.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

Pack93z
Select Member

15 years ago

#14

So I was curious about the final five minute rating...

So here are his stats in the final five minutes..


Week 	Vs.	Att	Comp	Yards	Comp %	AVCOMP	TD's	INT
1	MIN	0	0	0	0.00%	0.0	0	0
2	DET	2	1	9	50.00%	9.0	0	0
3	DAL	17	10	117	58.82%	11.7	0	0
4	TB	2	0	0	0.00%	0.0	0	1
5	ATL	8	5	70	62.50%	14.0	1	1
6	SEA	0	0	0	0.00%	0.0	0	0
7	IND	0	0	0	0.00%	0.0	0	0
8	BYE				0.00%	0.0		
9	TEN	6	3	33	50.00%	11.0	0	0
10	MIN	2	2	22	100.00%	11.0	0	0
11	CHI	1	1	8	100.00%	8.0	0	0
12	NO	2	0	0	0.00%	0.0	0	0
13	CAR	4	1	13	25.00%	13.0	0	1
14	HOU	2	2	62	100.00%	31.0	0	0
15	JAC	6	3	32	50.00%	10.7	0	1
16	CHI	3	2	11	66.67%	5.5	0	0
17	DET	1	1	16	100.00%	16.0	0	0
SEASON	TOTALS	56	31	393	55.36%	12.7	1	4

Per the Prime Computing site.. his rating would be 53.65.

He did run for one touchdown in the final 5 minutes of a game from the 1.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

porky88
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#15

"dhazer" wrote:

Aaron Rodgers isn't Derrick Anderson. Aaron Rodgers proved he could play at a high level against higher competition as he put up good numbers against Minnesota in week one, Atlanta, Indianapolis, Chicago, and even Carolina.

Derrick Anderson played good against the bad teams and bad against the good teams in 2007. Then near the end of the year he stunk.

I do agree that Aaron Rodgers is not good in the final five minutes and I also saw what you saw on TV. That doesn't mean he can't be though and Rodgers biggest problem is once he stops thinking about everything and starts playing, he'll win close games.

http://www.row12.com/

blueleopard
Member

15 years ago

#16

Part of the reason why the Packers were so unsuccessful is that they never start fast. Don't forget to put that into play.

Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

15 years ago

#17

Part of the reason why the Packers were so unsuccessful is that they never start fast. Don't forget to put that into play.

"blueleopard" wrote:

That's a great point. Outside of the Lions game, the Packers struggled in the early going, especially opening drives.

For a HC that practices short, crisp, and inside because he wants the players to get into rhythm, the Packers sure came out flat a lot of the time.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#18

Our offensive line sucked. It sucked bad. As everyone contemplates Aaron Rodgers, kindly factor that into the equation, and while you are at it...having read our "needs" on this team, factor that into the equation for the future.

This game is won and lost in the trenches. Our lines sucked. I don't need a statistical analysis. We cannot run the ball when we need to. We cannot give the 3.3 seconds Aaron Rodgers requires when passing, and oh, btw, our defensive line sucked also. Sucked, sucked, sucked.

Aaron Rodgers did not suck. Didn't, didn't, didn't.

There... I settled it. Settled, settled, settled.

(At least that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.)

dhazer
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#19

"porky88" wrote:

"dhazer" wrote:

Ummmmmm i would be curious to see what rodgers could do against Pitt and the Ravens twice that would kill any qbs stats

I also want to add i rewatched the colts game and saw something that brings up a good question. The packers were inside the 20 Rodgers throws a pass and it almost gets picked. The next 2 plays are runs so it makes me wonder how many times Mike McCarthy did this because of no faith in the kid.

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

#20

"dhazer" wrote:

"porky88" wrote:

Ummmmmm i would be curious to see what rodgers could do against Pitt and the Ravens twice that would kill any qbs stats

"dhazer" wrote:

Curious? Is he being traded, if not I'm not sure why this was mentioned in this thread at all. Oh, because you have to find any possible way to discredit him. Gotcha.

9 QB's that played the Ravens had better stats than their QB.
6 QB's that played the Steelers had better stats than their QB.

I don't think that means a lot since the Ravens had a Rookie QB and I don't think Ben is that great of a QB, especially since both teams are predominantly run oriented.

Pressure defenses take advantage of poor decisions and poor throws. Rodgers doesn't have a knack for either of those attributes so I think he'd fair 'OK' against those teams. Although I think we'd lose the game in the final damn minutes.

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

Zero2Cool (52m) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (52m) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (52m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (3h) : 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 (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (17h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

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