Aaron Rodgers' hidden weakness· Page 2

sschind
Senior Member

11 years ago

Rodgers played pretty bad all game. I don't know why we're getting on him for not winning the game when the Bengals Defense had momentum stopping him throughout the game. Idc what the stats say. Could any other qb win that game with the Bengals D covering every single receiver and knocking down passes left and right with no solid protection?

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon

That is a good point. Everyone blames the Packers offense and Rodgers but they forget that the defense gets paid to do what they do as well. I think a lot of it goes back on the fact that people feel better about the loss if they can claim our offense didn't get the job done as opposed to their defense did get the job done. It's our fault we lost, we didn't get beat.

We got beat by the 49ers and now we got beat by the Bengals.

warhawk
Senior Member

11 years ago

#12

Rodgers did not play well but if there is a positive that can come from it I would venture to say he will not allow it to happen again. Just his personality. He will take this performance to heart.

Over the balance of 16 games I am not worried about Arod.

I am worried about how our defense has a tendency to coast when we get a lead. There is this thing called momentum and I don't think some of the younger guys get it.

The pass D lapsed for awhile against the Redskins and then again this week. Yeah, we were killing the Redskins but it still happened. Once the Bengals D saw the O starting to move they became even more motivated and they had already done a pretty damn good job given the field position they were often left with.

In '10 there were games when the offense struggled but the D was there to make sure we walked off with a W. THIS week should have been a W. If our D had played as hard for 60 minutes as the Bengals D it would have been one.

I will be glad to see Burnett and Hayward back. We need them.

"The train is leaving the station."

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#13

He was up and down but so was the team. We have to deal with the fact that right now we are not the best team in our division. Swallowing pride time I guess. In any case, I will give the Bengals D credit again, but in that last drive, I assume it is easy when the other team doesn't have a running back available... at all. The worst thing to be is predictable. No running back? You won't beat a great team missing an integral part of an offense like that.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: sschind

Here's how they did it: Taking an illegal shot to Finley's head.

How do we defend that?

“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.”

sschind
Senior Member

11 years ago

#15

Here's how they did it: Taking an illegal shot to Finley's head.

How do we defend that?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

Let me guess, it was bullshit and we shit ourselves.

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

#16

Let me guess, it was bullsh!t and we sh!t ourselves.

Originally Posted by: sschind

We shit ourselves repeatedly to be sure.

But the illegal hit on Finley's head went uncalled, and that cannot continue.

“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.”

DoddPower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#17

or threw it to the RB in the flat there and let let him fight for the first down.

I rather the Packers attack first downs than getting greedy so much. But then I'm also one of the people who says stay on the gas and put the game away.

If the RB wasn't there, I'd be okay with this being Jones fault. Since there's someone wide open and could most likely get the first down if the WR on the edge blocks... I think this is on Rodgers decision making.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

The RB just doesn't look that open to me. I see a LB within range that would very likely close and lay the wood right as the RB caught the ball, if he caught it at all. I wouldn't expect that option to get a first down. Sure, the defender could miss, but Jones could have also had better position and caught the ball, but that didn't happen either. Overall, just a bad offensive play/good defensive play.

sschind
Senior Member

11 years ago

#18

We sh!t ourselves repeatedly to be sure.

But the illegal hit on Finley's head went uncalled, and that cannot continue.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

#19

We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.

Originally Posted by: sschind

Even Pereira mentioned it. Defenseless player.

Three shots to the head in a row, uncalled. Lacy, Starks and Finley. Finally they did one against JJ iirc and it got called.

“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.”

steveishere
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#20

We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.

Originally Posted by: sschind

You mean other than it being against the rules? You can't hit a receiver who is catching a pass in the head. It's as simple as that. The defender didn't hit Finley anywhere BUT his head.

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

Zero2Cool (50m) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.

packerfanoutwest (11h) : don't care

Zero2Cool (16h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22-Apr) : now 3

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

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

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24