beast
2 years ago

I hope you're right altho Clements' major qualification is being Aaron's yesman.

Honestly the way Mark Murphy was talking in that recent interview, it almost sounds like Aaron will step aside when Love is ready. Dunno.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Was that Murphy saying that, or Nerdman saying that? Because that sounds exactly like Nerdman... except Nerdman had suggested Love is already better than Rodgers...

Tom Clements has never been a "yesman" to anyone. Tom was/is one of the best QB coaches the Packers ever had. Tom knows how to develop QBs. That is why Arizona hired him to work with Kyler Murray. Tom has a pretty prickly personality if you rub him the wrong way. Aaron credits Tom with a lot of his development as a young player. Aaron isn't looking for yes-man. Aaron likes to be coached. He missed having someone like Tom Clements pushing him. Tom will indeed also be very good for J-Love to further develop under.

Originally Posted by: PackerNation 

Yeah, Rodgers personality would be the type to hate yes men... he likes to be challenged and if he's not challenging then he's bored. Even see that in some of his relationship like Rodgers and TE Tom Crabtree arguing whom has the better music taste.

As for prickly personality, sounds like you might know him somehow? Or heard from people that know him?

UserPostedImage
PackersNation
2 years ago

Was that Murphy saying that, or Nerdman saying that? Because that sounds exactly like Nerdman... except Nerdman had suggested Love is already better than Rodgers...

Yeah, Rodgers personality would be the type to hate yes men... he likes to be challenged and if he's not challenging then he's bored. Even see that in some of his relationship like Rodgers and TE Tom Crabtree arguing whom has the better music taste.

As for prickly personality, sounds like you might know him somehow? Or heard from people that know him?

Originally Posted by: beast 


What I know is that Tom Clements is more than qualified to be QB coach in Green Bay. I know "Nerdmann" was merely looking for attention by saying his only qualification is being Aaron's yes-man.

Tom is a great guy. I wouldn't classify us as friends, but I have spoken to him on a few occasions.

If we were good friends, I would call him and ask him how day one with Jordan Love went, I am curious. Just meetings and workouts, but their first time meeting in person. Would be interesting to hear his thoughts.
nerdmann
2 years ago

What I know is that Tom Clements is more than qualified to be QB coach in Green Bay. I know "Nerdmann" was merely looking for attention by saying his only qualification is being Aaron's yes-man.

Tom is a great guy. I wouldn't classify us as friends, but I have spoken to him on a few occasions.

If we were good friends, I would call him and ask him how day one with Jordan Love went, I am curious. Just meetings and workouts, but their first time meeting in person. Would be interesting to hear his thoughts.

Originally Posted by: PackerNation 



Remember when Clements was briefly allowed to call plays in 2015?
“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.”
nerdmann
2 years ago
Since this is a slow time of year, let's take a poll. Who would take Jordan Love's play against KC and Detroit over Aaron's performance in our "one and done" playoff experience this year?

Which do you think was better?
“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.”
Zero2Cool
2 years ago

Since this is a slow time of year, let's take a poll. Who would take Jordan Love's play against KC and Detroit over Aaron's performance in our "one and done" playoff experience this year?

Which do you think was better?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



If it is straight up Jordan Love vs Aaron Rodgers, Aaron is going to win out every single time. Jordan wouldn't have been able to compensate for the OL getting abused in that 49ers game and would probably had a turnover or two.

Now if you say two 2022 1st round picks, a 2023 1st round pick, top 25 WR under 25 years old AND Jordan Love OR Aaron Rodgers, then we'll have some talking terms. lol
UserPostedImage
PackersNation
2 years ago
Let's wait and evaluate J-Love after Tom Clements has had his hands on him for a few months. This years preseason games will be very interesting.

I am telling you with confidence that Luke Getsy and Nathaniel Hackett hampered J-Love's development. Those two had/have zero clue how to develop a young QB.

LaFleur had too much on his plate to spend a lot of time on Jordan. Tom Clements will bring out the best in him. One problem is that Jordan tries to listen to Aaron and do what Aaron does. Worst thing he can do is try to emulate Aaron in this offense. Tom will teach him that.
beast
2 years ago

Since this is a slow time of year, let's take a poll. Who would take Jordan Love's play against KC and Detroit over Aaron's performance in our "one and done" playoff experience this year?

Which do you think was better?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Hopefully Jordan loves to carry Aaron's jock strap...

Apples to apples, Rodgers is clearly better.
UserPostedImage
PackersNation
2 years ago

Hopefully Jordan loves to carry Aaron's jock strap...

Apples to apples, Rodgers is clearly better.

Originally Posted by: beast 



I realize you are directing that directly at "nerdmann", who obviously has no clue about a lot of things. Not cutting on him, just stating the obvious after reading his comments. I do not know, but I am assuming he is quite young. I will forgive him for some of the ignorance.

But getting back to you saying Rodgers is clearly better. Yes, everyone with a clue knows that. There may not be another QB in the league better than Aaron. The only thing Mahomes and Allen have on Aaron is that they are younger. Aaron being great doesn't mean Jordan can't ever be a elite QB in the league. I actually think he can, and will be.
If the Packers win the Super Bowl this year and Aaron rides off into the sunset with Shailene, contrary to popular belief, the Packers are going to be just fine.
beast
2 years ago

I do not know, but I am assuming he is quite young. I will forgive him for some of the ignorance.

Originally Posted by: PackerNation 

I don't know that either, but I don't make that assumption. If he was quite young maybe there would be hope, but I'm all out of hope.

Rodgers is clearly better. Yes, everyone with a clue knows that.

Originally Posted by: PackerNation 

Well, someone keeps implying the exact opposite, and as you noted I was replying to them.


Aaron being great doesn't mean Jordan can't ever be a elite QB in the league. I actually think he can, and will be.

Originally Posted by: PackerNation 

I don't pretend to have a clue what Love will become, but I said well before his draft that he's a 1st rounder and a minimum of a 3 year developmental prospects (and I'm not sure if the COVID rookie year with no live training camp counts).

I haven't given up hope on Love, but so far the results have not looked good, but Rodgers looked absolutely horrible his first two years and he was supposed to be ready to go, and most developed already.

I'm not knocking Love's future at all. I am knocking those whom are seemingly suggesting Love is currently better than Rodgers. Or that it's even remotely close.

As one person (I honestly don't remember whom) put it, Love in his year two, looks like he's ahead of Rodgers in his year two. I wanted to disagree, but I can't, Rodgers looked absolutely awful those first two years. Love didn't look that good, but he didn't look absolutely awful either.

Love looks like he either lacked confidence or a strength and I don't think it's arm strength, I think the zero coverage blitzes we're getting to him mentally, and he wasn't as confident in where the WRs we're going to be and when. More chemistry and playing time can solve some of that. But as of right now, he failed the zero coverage test (as a lot of young QBs do).

My bigger surprise is that apparently the Bengals saw something on QB Lamar Jackson tape and gave him the zero coverage test and he failed as well, and then teams after the Bengals kept doing it to Jackson and he kept struggling with it. I would of thought with more practice time against it he would of figured it out quicker. And it feels especially weird since Jackson has won an MVP, and almost all MVP QB would love zero coverage as your leaving the targets one on one, they just have get the ball out fast where only their guy can get it.

And that's what I've said about LaFleur too, clearly they didn't expect zero coverage and so didn't practice or plan against it and had to adjust on the fly. So Love didn't get a second game to show corrections after preparing for it to show what he learned.

I'm really not knocking Love, other than to say, stop comparing him to Rodgers, they're not currently close to being in the same tier.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
2 years ago

I realize you are directing that directly at "nerdmann", who obviously has no clue about a lot of things. Not cutting on him, just stating the obvious after reading his comments. I do not know, but I am assuming he is quite young. I will forgive him for some of the ignorance.

But getting back to you saying Rodgers is clearly better. Yes, everyone with a clue knows that. There may not be another QB in the league better than Aaron. The only thing Mahomes and Allen have on Aaron is that they are younger. Aaron being great doesn't mean Jordan can't ever be a elite QB in the league. I actually think he can, and will be.
If the Packers win the Super Bowl this year and Aaron rides off into the sunset with Shailene, contrary to popular belief, the Packers are going to be just fine.

Originally Posted by: PackerNation 



Rodgers has high highs and low lows. This is why people call him "best thrower of the football" instead of GOAT. He is especially "inconsistent" in the playoffs.

Granted, Love is not ready yet. But as I've said before, I would take a dude who is 80% of Aaron's best over Aaron, if he is consistent.

As for Clements, good luck with that. Hope you're right.
“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.”
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (10h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (10h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (10h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (10h) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (13h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (13h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (14h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (16h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (16h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (16h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (16h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (16h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (16h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (16h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (16h) : 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 (17h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (18h) : 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 (18h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (18h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (18h) : 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 (18h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (18h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (19h) : 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 (19h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (20h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (20h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (20h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (20h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (20h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (20h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (21h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (21h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (22h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (22h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (22h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (22h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (22h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (22h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (22h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23h) : 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 (23h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (23h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (23h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (23h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (23h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (23h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
29m / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5h / GameDay Threads / Mucky Tundra

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

21h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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