His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.
"Stevetarded" wrote:
That isn't his attitude so you don't have to be bothered.
"WhiskeySam" wrote:
You might want to read this line again: You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.
If your only option is taking a sack or throw the ball up for grabs, then yes take the sack. Too many times this year, Rodgers has had other options that hurt the team less and doesn't take them.
I haven't even touched on the fact he wanted to know about passer ratings which goes back to the point RedSox has been making in multiple threads about QBs needing to sacrifice their ratings for the benefit of the team.
"Stevetarded" wrote:
You might want to reread the whole thing and make an effort to try to understand what he was saying rather than just reading what you want to and making stuff up about it.
It seemed pretty obvious to me that he was referring to taking sacks on 3rd down when it doesn't bring you out of FG range.
"And Rodgers argues there are times a sack has minimal cost, namely, on third downs if it doesnt take the team out of field-goal range."
You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.
"WhiskeySam" wrote: