Rodgers on Film· Page 4

dhazer
Veteran Member

15 years ago

I think Rodgers should try this, it might help on the holding flags lol.

The original longest yard was better because he does this to the pass rusher lol

[youtube]6-h5FRN_IRM[/youtube]

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

Rockmolder
Honored Member

15 years ago

#32

Oh, man. That is just wrong.

I should really go and see that movie once. Lol.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

#33

On the Mike McCarthy show he was out of the gate asked "Is Rodgers holding the ball too long?"
Coach replies "that's a convenient question after last game. It's something because when Aaron holds the ball an makes a play he's done great, but when he's trying to do the same thing and gets sacked then he's holding the ball too long"

longtimefan
Registered

15 years ago

#34

in Mikes p/c

Holding the ball sometimes is not what we want to do.

TengoJuego
Rookie

15 years ago

#35

How can you feel comfortable hitting your check downs when the two guys(Grant and Wynn) we have in those situations cant catch a cold in December?

Remember last year, we would always want Mike to let Aaron loose. He didn't take enough shots down field. He wont stop checking down...well now we've seen Aaron off the leash.

He needs to get backing to taking what the defense gives him, instead of forcing plays and passes. Interception was a perfect example of forcing a throw.

Lets work the short passing game and get our run game going. Quick slant FTW.

porky88
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#36

He's thrown one pick all year. I kind of want to see him take more chances even now. I think most people understand Rodgers is not the problem.

Does he have flaws in his game such as holding onto the ball too long? Yes he does, but Brett Favre had flaws of forcing things too often. Sometimes Favre won and sometimes he loss those forced throws. Rodgers does the same thing as hanging onto the ball too long. He's playing his game and the Packers know this.

I think there is an overreaction about Rodgers from a certain percentage of the fanbase that has never accepted him as a QB. I'm talking profootballweekly and Favre fans. Truth is, the tackles can't block anyone one on one.

http://www.row12.com/

packfan4
Registered

15 years ago

#37

I, personally, feel like Rodgers is going to explode in the coming weeks with Detroit, Cleveland, Minny, Tampa, and Dallas on tap. This Offensive Line will improve, with Cliffy back, Spitz/Colledge returning to their most productive positions, and Tauscher heading back into town for some valuable insurance to Allen Barbre, we should be able to buy Rodgers the time he needs to dissect Defenses like we know he's capable of.

RedSoxExcel
Registered

15 years ago

#38

"porky88" wrote:

This is why I try to avoid any kind of criticism of Rodgers because it automatically turns into "your a Favre lover". I'm not the only person who thinks he holds on to the ball too long. Boomer on CBS said that he thinks 6 of Rodgers sacks were a result of him holding the ball too long, and he was a QB in the league, so he would know. And he loves Rodgers, he called him the best QB in the division just before that.

He does, he holds the ball too long. If his O-line sucks, which it does, he has to recognize that and realize I don't have the luxury of going for the deep bomb. It's better for me to get 5 yards and not take a 8 yard loss.

Its a legit criticism and I don't think its an overreaction. If he is holding on to long, its costing you take 5-10 yards and the loss of the down, stalling many drives.

blank

porky88
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#39

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:

"porky88" wrote:

Where am I saying you're a Favre lover?

I don't need to say who those people are. They know who they are and why they're doing it. They know they're instigating things as opposed to criticism which I've done several times on this board regarding Rodgers especially his play in the fourth quarter of last year.

He has flaws, but expecting perfection out of a quarterback playing behind an offensive line like this is a little much. People are overreacting because of who the Packers loss too and most importantly who was playing quarterback for them. I don't care what Boomer has to say. He's been wrong before and right before. Players are seldolm the best analysis and he's wrong this time. It's not even close to six. The line was man handled by the Vikings. Forget about Rodgers for one moment and look at them when they try and block.

They were overwhelmed, technique was horrible, and overpowered. It looked like a college line trying to block the best line in football.

http://www.row12.com/

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

15 years ago

#40

He has flaws, but expecting perfection out of a quarterback playing behind an offensive line like this is a little much. People are overreacting because of who the Packers loss too and most importantly who was playing quarterback for them. I don't care what Boomer has to say. He's been wrong before and right before. Players are seldolm the best analysis and he's wrong this time. It's not even close to six. The line was man handled by the Vikings. Forget about Rodgers for one moment and look at them when they try and block.

They were overwhelmed, technique was horrible, and overpowered. It looked like a college line trying to block the best line in football.

"porky88" wrote:

Yes, this.

Nobody's saying Rodgers hasn't held on the to ball too long at times this season - he has, and I wouldn't be shocked if he does it more - that's a part of his style of play. I'm not sure if people are feeling bad for the o-line or what, but I'm surprised at the rising number of attempts to shift the blame from them onto the QB.

No, he isn't perfect. Nobody is. Favre threw a very Favre-esque pick just yesterday - it happens. But the problem here is the line, period.

As for Boomer, I recall Steve Young being incredibly complementary about Rodgers' play - who knows more? They're both ex-players, they both played at a high level, and in the end their opinions are still just opinions.

blank

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 (18m) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (2h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (12h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (12h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (12h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (12h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (12h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (15h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (16h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (16h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (18h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (18h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (18h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (18h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (18h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (18h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (18h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (18h) : 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 (19h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (20h) : 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 (20h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (20h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (20h) : 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 (20h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (21h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (21h) : 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 (21h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (22h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (22h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (22h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (22h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (22h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (22h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

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