Eagles, Vikings show Packers how they could've won without Aaron Rodgers· Page 2

Cheesey
Preferred Member

6 years ago

Rodgers money isn't the problem. We HAVE the money to sign guys. Ted just didn't use all the cap to get it done.
Maybe now we will spend what's necessary to build up the weak spots on the team. Hopefully the new GM will use the cap to get it done.
Rodgers IS the star player on the team. Can you blame him for trying to get all he can?
Otherwise he may bolt to a team that will go all out for a championship.

nerdmann
Premier Member

6 years ago

#12

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

We spend all the cap money every year. If Ted has money left over, it goes to prorate extentions, like Davante’s this year.

Rodgers can demand all the money he wants. But if he does so, he has no business crying about how the franchise is letting him down.

“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.”

bboystyle
Member

6 years ago

#13

.500.

I mean let's face it, that Pittsburgh game was just a damn lightning bolt. Ben does that to alot of teams. I mean, Hundley is what he is. He needs to work in his accuracy mid to deep, and he needs to anticipate better. Know the routes, know the WRs, throw them open by leading them with the ball. Know when the dude is gonna make his move to separate. Put the ball on the dime.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

in other words, he's a terrible QB that doesnt belong in the NFL.

bboystyle
Member

6 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

He has every right to cry about the franchise letting him down as they have had over 7 years to field a decent D, a good run game, a solid consistent O line, and a legit TE but failed horribly to do so.

going on 8 years since the SB, now he doesnt have the right to cry when he deserves every last penny in the cap? lol

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

6 years ago

#15

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

.500 what? Face it Hundley failed to meet even the most modest standards. He wasn't even close.
I another post I suggested that expecting him to have the stats of a starting QB may not have been fair but it doesn't change the fact that he failed to meet them.

Just suck it up and admit it.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

6 years ago

#16

Look at the facts. Take away Rodgers, and we SUCK with NO chance to even SMELL the playoffs.
Get ready for a trip back in time to the 1970s and 1980s after Rodgers is gone.
Some take so much for granted.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

6 years ago

#17

Look at the facts? Oh, hell yeah, let us look at the FACTS.

Yeah, we sure did suck didn't we?? Won enough games to be in the playoff hunt until Aaron Rodgers threw the damn season away against the Panthers while he tried playing hero instead of taking what the defense gave him.

The thing is, you CANNOT take away Aaron Rodgers. That's like saying "well that RB wouldn't have had more than 40 yards if you take away his 89 yard touchdown run". Can we be more absurd?

Aaron Rodgers IS part of the Packers and he IS the best player on the team and one of the best in the league. No freaking kidding your team is going to be DIFFERENT without him. Did we expect Brett Hundley, a player who was starting his third NFL season and making his for NFL starts to be the same as Aaron Rodgers? Are we really that clueless of a fan base?

No doubt, we got holes, like every damn team out there, but we're far from "suck". You wanna see suck, go watch teams like the Colts, Giants, Broncos, etc.

Sorry, but that's just bullshit to take without Rodgers anything because Rodgers is part of the team. You can't go and take players away arbitrarily to suffice alleged "fact" dropping.

WE ARE NOT THAT FAR OFF PEOPLE!!

Cheesey
Preferred Member

6 years ago

#18

It's NOT BS. We wouldn't have won as many games had Aaron Rodgers not been healthy until the Vikings knocked him out.
How about the Vikings as an example? They lost their starting QB (Bridgewater) then their second QB (Bradford) then have their 3rd QB taking them maybe to the SB.
We couldn't get past losing our QB, and the team goes to the toilet.
7-9.
And it would have been a lot worse if Aaron Rodgers would have been lost sooner in the year.
A few years ago we went 15-1 in the regular season. But our defense SUCKED. How else can you explain getting bounced out of the playoffs then, and in 2014? Our defense blew it. Had we even had a middle of the road D, we possibly could have had 2 or 3 SB appearances since SB45.
GREAT teams have players that can hold the fort when their best goes down. Ours can hardly keep up when we HAVE AR.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

6 years ago

#19

It would also have helped to have had a head coach who didn't instantly become conservative and tentative as soon as his team had a two-score lead. If there is one thing I love about Bill Belichick, it's that he has his starters out there even if they're up by 30 or 40 points. The game isn't over until every digit on the time clock reads zero. I ran the numbers a few years back, and the only score that is truly "safe" is 50. Anything less than that, and you're playing with fire to take your foot off the pedal.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

6 years ago

#20

It's NOT BS. We wouldn't have won as many games had Aaron Rodgers not been healthy until the Vikings knocked him out.

How about the Vikings as an example? They lost their starting QB (Bridgewater) then their second QB (Bradford) then have their 3rd QB taking them maybe to the SB.

We couldn't get past losing our QB, and the team goes to the toilet.

7-9.

And it would have been a lot worse if Aaron Rodgers would have been lost sooner in the year.

A few years ago we went 15-1 in the regular season. But our defense SUCKED. How else can you explain getting bounced out of the playoffs then, and in 2014? Our defense blew it. Had we even had a middle of the road D, we possibly could have had 2 or 3 SB appearances since SB45.

GREAT teams have players that can hold the fort when their best goes down. Ours can hardly keep up when we HAVE AR.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

Your first blurb there has so many negatives, I can't tell what you're saying. Are you saying the Packers wouldn't have won more games had Aaron Rodgers played all 16 regular season games? Or are you saying without Aaron Rodgers we wouldn't have went 4 - 1? If that's the route you're taking, why are you removing the QB? Are you saying Packers should get rid of Aaron Rodgers to build a better team? What makes you think you can remove Aaron Rodgers and then grade the team without its best player? I don't understand that at all. My truck would be crap if I removed one of the wheels. Should I then say my truck is a pile of shit because without one tire it's useless? I know that comes off very prick, but it just doesn't make any sense to me how someone can grade a team while removing the best piece. I mean, no shit the team is different. What the hell do you expect? You think the Packers should still win 10+ games even with one of the BEST PLAYERS IN THE NFL? Sorry, I am just not following the train of thought.

Yes, 2011 the offense set records, sadly, so did the defense, just not the records you want to set.
Yes, 2014 we should have been representing the NFC in the Super Bowl. I put that firmly on the coaching staff.

We should really stop taking the Packers success for granted and appreciate what we have with the Packers.

Anyhow, Vikings and Eagles built teams through upper half draft selections and actually DEVELOPED the draft picks. The Packers do the draft thing great, they just aren't developing the talent. Eagles traded for Jay Ajayi (actually Dolphins contacted them, but still) and he's now their starting RB.

Maybe Packers fans wouldn't be such spoiled jerks if Packers had missed the playoffs seasons like Vikings (except 2012, 2015) and Eagles (except 2010, 2013) did.

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 (3m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (4m) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (25m) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (1h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (1h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (2h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (2h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (2h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (2h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (2h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (2h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (2h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (2h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (2h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (2h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (2h) : 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 (2h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (2h) : 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 (3h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (3h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (3h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (3h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (3h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (3h) : Packers will get in

beast (3h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (3h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (3h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (5h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (6h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (6h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (6h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (7h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (16h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (16h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

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

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (20h) : 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.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

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 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS