WhiskeySam
15 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stevetarded
15 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Can you ever take a quote from somebody in context or is this just an issue you have? I never said "Taking a sack is a minimal cost" Jesus Christ you are irritating.
blank
WhiskeySam
15 years ago

Yep, you missed the point of his asking completely. You're taking a few words out of a whole thought and stretching it, big time.

I'm out of that discussion. You're too off key for me to continue this one with.

I'm sure because of that though I'm wearing green and gold goggles and think Rodgers is supreme, right?

:) (thats right, im smiling at you!)

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Then why did Rodgers ask about the QB rating? You can't pick and choose from the comments he made. It's obvious he thinks QB rating has some bearing on whether high sack totals are negative. I didn't mean to make it sound like you were wearing the Green and Gold glasses specifically because you're typically balanced. However, there are more than a few posters who do come off that way at the slightest hint of criticism of Rodgers' decision-making. You can give him a great line, and he'd still be holding the ball too long. Look at Roethlisberger. He gets away with it because of his size.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stevetarded
15 years ago

Yep, you missed the point of his asking completely. You're taking a few words out of a whole thought and stretching it, big time.

I'm out of that discussion. You're too off key for me to continue this one with.

I'm sure because of that though I'm wearing green and gold goggles and think Rodgers is supreme, right?

:) (thats right, im smiling at you!)

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Then why did Rodgers ask about the QB rating? You can't pick and choose from the comments he made. It's obvious he thinks QB rating has some bearing on whether high sack totals are negative. I didn't mean to make it sound like you were wearing the Green and Gold glasses specifically because you're typically balanced. However, there are more than a few posters who do come off that way at the slightest hint of criticism of Rodgers' decision-making. You can give him a great line, and he'd still be holding the ball too long. Look at Roethlisberger. He gets away with it because of his size.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



If you are referring to me I have no issue with you criticizing Rodgers at all. I only have an issue with you taking his quotes completely out of context to try and make your argument stronger. If you have something to say do it fairly without "cheating".
blank
WhiskeySam
15 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Can you ever take a quote from somebody in context or is this just an issue you have? I never said "Taking a sack is a minimal cost" Jesus Christ you are irritating.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Yes, I am irritating because I'm not going toe the company line and blow sunshine up Rodgers' butt. Considering the original quote itself had to qualify the circumstances that made a sack okay, I think it's you who isn't taking it in context. The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many? Why aren't they calling better plays? Why aren't they moving the pocket? Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can? We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.
Nemo me impune lacessit
IronMan
15 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Can you ever take a quote from somebody in context or is this just an issue you have? I never said "Taking a sack is a minimal cost" Jesus Christ you are irritating.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Yes, I am irritating because I'm not going toe the company line and blow sunshine up Rodgers' butt. Considering the original quote itself had to qualify the circumstances that made a sack okay, I think it's you who isn't taking it in context. The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many? Why aren't they calling better plays? Why aren't they moving the pocket? Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can? We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.

"Stevetarded" wrote:


Another +1. You are on a roll today. You should post more often.

Part of the problem is we have a coach that doesn't know what he's doing.
WhiskeySam
15 years ago

Another +1. You are on a roll today. You should post more often.

Part of the problem is we have a coach that doesn't know what he's doing.

"IronMan" wrote:



Thanks, I stopped posting last year when things got toxic between the pro and anti Favre crowds. It's cleared up this year, and I do think there are good, insightful discussions here.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Zero2Cool
15 years ago

The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many?
Why aren't they calling better plays?
Why aren't they moving the pocket?
Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can?
We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:


Why? No running game. Grant runs with his head down. Pussy. lol

Calling better plays sure would help. I'd like to see us go back to a quick three step offense on the majority of plays if we haven't already. I don't get the luxury of seeing the whole field on replays.

Rodgers does need to learn to go through his progressions and either run or throw it away, in my opinion that's his weakest attribute.

I think they are CAPABLE of adjusting, but refuse to. I think mm is too stubborn to adjust. This team is FULL of confidence, paper confidence, if you ask me. I don't want to hear my 4 - 3 team have nearly every player say in their interviews they have confidence. Fuck confidence, give me grit, heart, your all, and give me wins!
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
15 years ago

The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many?
Why aren't they calling better plays?
Why aren't they moving the pocket?
Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can?
We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:


Why? No running game. Grant runs with his head down. Pussy. lol

Calling better plays sure would help. I'd like to see us go back to a quick three step offense on the majority of plays if we haven't already. I don't get the luxury of seeing the whole field on replays.

Rodgers does need to learn to go through his progressions and either run or throw it away, in my opinion that's his weakest attribute.

I think they are CAPABLE of adjusting, but refuse to. I think Mike McCarthy is too stubborn to adjust. This team is FULL of confidence, paper confidence, if you ask me. I don't want to hear my 4 - 3 team have nearly every player say in their interviews they have confidence. Fuck confidence, give me grit, heart, your all, and give me wins!

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



I agree with this. I think McCarthy's undoing is going to be his refusal to change. The QB decision we have with a bad line is: experienced, immobile player who can get the ball out quicker to the right read (think late career Marino), or mobile, young player who can move to buy time (think Romo replacing Bledsoe). We took the latter option, but the time he's buying is not being used productively. If you're going to roll out and still take the sack, what does it matter?

If I come across as sounding like Rodgers is the primary problem, then that's my mistake. #1 the offensive line sucks. #2 the running backs scare no one. #3 the defense looks great against bad teams, but not too hot against good ones. I'd have Rodgers holding the ball below those and behind the special teams. I'm just trying to point out that some of Rodgers' decisions have hurt the team, and it needs to be corrected. That it doesn't change week after week really chaps my hide since I've seen other teams make adjustments to hide bad protection with less talent than we have. I have no confidence in the running game improving this year because that's a personnel problem, but the passing game could be better executed.
Nemo me impune lacessit
porky88
15 years ago
This entire regime is the most stubborn regime I've ever seen. From Murphy to Thompson to McCarthy to some of the position coaches like Winston Moss.

Rodgers is always going to be sacked a lot because he's always going to keep the play alive as long as possible. Eventually, he'll learn to throw the ball away on certain situations, but Rodgers' philosophy is simple....

1. Keep the play alive as long as possible.

2. A sack is better than an INT.

3. We can always get the yards back on the next play.

He'll improve to a point where it's acceptable, but I never expect to see Rodgers sacked less than 25-30 times in a season. He needs to learn to avoid hits though when he rolls out. He's taken some shots already this season that he shouldn't take.

Now with that said, I've seen the offensive lineman get beat in one and one matchups far more than I've seen Rodgers take an unnecessary sack. The offensive line is a huge problem. It's effecting the passing game and let's not forget the running game too.
http://www.row12.com/ 
UserPostedImage
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Zero, regarding Woodson, that'd why I find the timing with Williams peculiar
    dfosterf (15-May) : Ryan Hall y'all does a great job of tracking thesr
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : Fear not!! I planned to do 33mi bike ride tomorrow morning, so ... yeah
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : We got some dark clouds and nasty winds right bout now.
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : Madison they had hail 4pm.
    dfosterf (15-May) : Sure looks like these tornadoes are headed towards Green Bay
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : Woodson of Charles fame was reluctant and then loved it. that didn't really come out until post career
    Mucky Tundra (15-May) : IE "We bought into the Bears and they let us down, we have no choice to seek alternatives"
    Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Or that Williams and his family are preparing an exit ramp if they don't like how things are going in a few years
    Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Either Williams thought it would make him look good (reluctant but then embraces the city and franchise)
    Mucky Tundra (15-May) : I can only assume that the Williams camp agreed to cooperate with that article tells me 2 things
    dfosterf (15-May) : Ya. They are in a great mood
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : I should visit again
    dfosterf (15-May) : ChiCity Sports entering freakout mode due to Caleb and his dad not wanting him to go there
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : "He's looking really good out there," Derrick Ansley said of Kalen King. Adds that he's been playing inside and out.
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : Him saying he doesn't have one to give haha
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : True, that was awesome. The whole F thing was great actually.
    dfosterf (15-May) : I did like the Mark Murphy part, sorta
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : Some comments on it saying it was great, amazing... I came away thinking... awkward.
    dfosterf (15-May) : Packers schedule release video is "interesting" I guess.
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : SOOO glad that tool still works. Saves from manually entering each game
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : NFL Pick'em import was done last night.
    Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Atlanta with 5 primetime games lol
    Zero2Cool (15-May) : Week Five BYE?? NFL is hell.
    wpr (14-May) : Vikings schedule leaked. Week 12 in GB. Week 18 in MN.
    wpr (14-May) : CBS has GB @ NYG Week 11 Nov 16 and they will face MN in week 18 but don't say where. I think away
    Zero2Cool (14-May) : W15: Packers at Broncos
    Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ben Sirmans on MarShawn Lloyd: “Everything’s full go for him.”
    Zero2Cool (14-May) : Luke Butkus says training camp will allow plenty of time to implement new center Elgton Jenkins
    Zero2Cool (14-May) : wk 2 commanders at packers
    Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ugh. Packers thanksgiving detroit ...boring
    Zero2Cool (14-May) : Panthers at Green Bay in week 9, Nov 2nd
    buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Week 1
    buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Packers Host Detroit Week 1! ML finally gets a week home opener.
    beast (13-May) : I was kind of hoping Douglas might come back to the Pack
    beast (13-May) : My question is how much do we trust Jenkins? In bad weather, he seemed to struggle a bit with ball control snapping, though he started at OG
    beast (13-May) : Well Jenkins probably knows he's not getting that 2026 salary number without a new contact... so just trying to get the new contact early
    Zero2Cool (13-May) : CB Rasul Douglas is visiting the #Seahawks today, per source.
    dfosterf (13-May) : He's a switch and baiter. Its the same as a bait and switcher except he agreed to the switch first lol
    dfosterf (13-May) : 6.8 mil raise next year. Those are existing contract numbers
    dfosterf (13-May) : 12.8 plus 4.8 pro rata signing bonus is 17.6 mil. Top center in the league at 18
    Zero2Cool (13-May) : Elgton Jenkins wants to rework contract ahead of position change to center
    Zero2Cool (13-May) : 🏈Monday, Nov. 10: Eagles at Packers
    buckeyepackfan (12-May) : Packers @ Bears week 16(Saturday Game)
    Zero2Cool (12-May) : Clifford hasn't been the same since losing 8
    dfosterf (12-May) : Sean Clifford would probably disagree
    dfosterf (12-May) : Canuck Cannon. Got a very good feeling about this
    Zero2Cool (12-May) : Tom Pelissero also reports what bboy stated
    bboystyle (12-May) : The Green Bay Packers on Monday signed Taylor Elgersma, the Canadian-born quarterback who tried out at the team’s rookie camp last weekend
    beast (12-May) : There were reports four days ago that the Packers were signing QB Taylor Elgersma, but no official action since
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2025 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
    COMMANDERS
    Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
    Browns
    Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
    Cowboys
    Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
    BENGALS
    Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
    Cardinals
    Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
    PANTHERS
    Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
    EAGLES
    Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
    Bears
    Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
    RAVENS
    Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
    Vikings
    Recent Topics
    16-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

    15-May / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    14-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

    13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    12-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    12-May / Around The NFL / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.