Aaron Rodgers - Some Thoughts· Page 7

porky88
Veteran Member

16 years ago

He is 24 years old. He is in his first year as a starter. He as played very well under the pressure the former Q.B. put on him by wanting to come back. He has played injured.

And..... He has taken ownership of his mistakes with amazing mature accountablity.

At this point... I could not be more pleased or expect anything more from him.

"Trippster" wrote:

Well, then let's give the rest of the team a bye on accountability too. They are all young. Yeah, lee got burnt, penalities, but give him a freebee too. Same goes for everyone else made a coverage mistake or penalty.

We are headed for a record penalty season, but since they are young, lets not worry about it.

Why should Rodgers get a pass?

"RaiderPride" wrote:

Last I checked, Rodgers has played well this season.

Much like Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, and Charles Woodson. In fact after Jennings, Woodson, and Kampman, Rodgers might be this team's next best shot at a Pro Bowl player.

I don't believe he's getting a pass. I think a lot of people are trying to jump on him fast because Brett Favre isn't a Packer anymore. I think he played worse against Dallas then what his stat line indicated and he wasnt in synch with his receivers. Heck I was there and I was saying it much to the dislike of some Packer fans in the stands.

However, if we're talking the Atlanta game, then I just don't know how anyone can say that wasn't a great and gutsy performance by Rodgers. No pain injection either. If some want to compare Rodgers to Favre in a negative way then ok that's the mission of some out there, but Sunday Rodgers was Favre-like in a positive way.

http://www.row12.com/

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

16 years ago

#62

:icon_smile:

:signcool:

:icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:

Who didn't see this coming since before the start of the season?

Those of you who are hating on Aaron Rodgers...JUST STOP

Those of you who are defending Aaron Rodgers to the hilt, like he hasn't made any mistakes......JUST STOP

Ted Thompson made his decision on who was going to be part of the 53 man roster.

Mike McCarthy is in charge of taking those players and turning them into winners.

Every team has to deal with injuries...so quit whining.

Physical mistakes can be overlooked , like Woodson slipping down, letting R. White get wide open.(just an example)

It is THE MENTAL ERRORS that are killing the Packers. That goes straight to THE COACHING STAFF!!!!

You want to hate on someone or put the blame for the 2-3 start on someone, put it on Ted Thompson for letting go the wrong people(hello Jon Ryan),
or continually making the Packers the youngest team in the NFL,
or BLAME THE COACHING STAFF not getting the team ready to play a 60 minute game, or NOT BEING ABLE TO ADJUST to their opponents schemes.l

JUST MHO....You all are beginning to sound like Cleveland Browns fans, alwayds having an excuse for a loss.

The season is still young, the goal is to win the division and make the play-offs, The Pack is only 1 game behind The Bears, still plenty of time to turn things around.

Go Pack!!!!!

"walleye" wrote:

So what are you saying?
That everthing is :sad1: Ted Thompson & Mike McCarthy fault?
So does it have anything to do with some of the players playing at a sub-par level.
OK Mike McCarthy & Ted Thompson you're fired!

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

The Packers have 20 of 22 starters from last year(don't quote me on that, but it's close), have these guys all of a sudden become sub-par players?
If so, why were they kept on the team?
90% of winning is preperation, there is a very fine line between the most talented team in the league and the least talented(that excludes The Lions, they just plain suck)that is why it seems every week there are huge upsets in The NFL.
I am saying that IMHO Aaron Rodgers is playing the best he can, but is not perfect, the talent level of the rest of the team should only be better than last year, because most have another year experience.
So why are The Packers 2-3 instead of 4-1, or 5-0?

I guess it must be the injuries. Since it seems Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy are untouchable when it comes to critisism on this Forum.

I didn't say Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy should be fired, but the buck stops at the top!!

"walleye" wrote:

No one is saying Rodgers is perfect, but ho looks Damn good.
I also stated some players are playing at a sub_par-level, like the secondary. Some of it is injuries.
yes the talent level should be better but guess what we only 5 games into the seaeson there is room for improvement.
Im not calling it after 5 games that is :xcensoredx: crazy.
Im a packer fan for better or worse as long as there is improvement lets keep moving forward.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

:? 🤔 :thumbright: :icon_smile:

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

brnt247
Registered

16 years ago

#63

:signcool:

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

"walleye" wrote:

The Packers have 20 of 22 starters from last year(don't quote me on that, but it's close), have these guys all of a sudden become sub-par players?
If so, why were they kept on the team?
90% of winning is preperation, there is a very fine line between the most talented team in the league and the least talented(that excludes The Lions, they just plain suck)that is why it seems every week there are huge upsets in The NFL.
I am saying that IMHO Aaron Rodgers is playing the best he can, but is not perfect, the talent level of the rest of the team should only be better than last year, because most have another year experience.
So why are The Packers 2-3 instead of 4-1, or 5-0?

I guess it must be the injuries. Since it seems Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy are untouchable when it comes to criticism on this Forum.

I didn't say Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy should be fired, but the buck stops at the top!!

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

When we had 20 of 22 starters we were undefeated. We've had all 4 secondary players get injured, our starting left defensive end, and our two pro bowl caliber linebackers. Yes, Rodgers performed poorly in two key spots late in games, but with a healthy team he isn't even put in that position. This may not be the year we get to the super bowl, but it is a positive step for a young team if we are able to play well together from here on out.

blank

majkowski7ever
Registered

16 years ago

#64

Rodgers stat line is amazing, he's been solid, he's poised, but there's one
problem...that stat titled "Wins". Now, he obviously is not responsible
for losing 3 games, it is after all a team game. I am not a Rodgers hater,
but I'm also not a "Mr. Rodgers Neighborhood", "Favre Who?", Rodgers lover.

He's been solid....that's it. Credit is due because he has produced, but..They're lucky to not have been embarrassed in the Detroit game, a close Minnesota game, great Dallas game, absolute mess of a Tampa game, and such a let down with Atlanta. Obviusly there are many factors going into each game and their repective outcome, play calling, injuries, defense, special teams, etc. However, this is a thread about Rodgers.

My issue is with the "extreme" in both directions on this whole Favre vs Rodgers debate. I don't care that his stats are great, I care about wins. I don't care if you think we'd be in the same spot with Favre, we'll never know. I don't care if you think we'd be 5-0 if Favre was here, we'll never know. All I do know is the Packers are sitting 2-3 at the end of week 5 with a tough schedule ahead of them and they don't look good. The problem I have with Rodger's lovers, they blame the D. They saved us from embarrassment in week 1, kept Dallas in check to have a chance, and gave us a chance to win vs Tampa with 4 turnovers. Yesterday they held them to 2 FG's when Atlanta started in their own territory, forced 2 punts, and made an amazing INT to save a TD. Yet I found myself in the 4th quarter thinking, how do we expect to win with only 17 points. Again, Rodgers stat line looks amazing but he is not getting it done, he's not winning the game. He got rattled to the max in Tampa, holds the ball way too long, and shows signs of panicking in situations when it counts, ie. yesterday's INT. I don't know, I'm disappointed right now. I'd like to see him, and the play calling, not worry about his stat line. After all, the guy that went 16/26, 194 yds, and 2TDs got the W while the guy that went 25/37 with 313 yds, and 3TDs tacked on another one to that lowly loss column. I'm not giving up on Rodgers or the Pack, but I'm preparing myself for a long, long season.

blank

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

16 years ago

#65

wtf ^^

pack_in_black
Registered

16 years ago

#66

I don't put it all on A-Rod. The O-Line stinks, we are thin on Def, Frost stinks, etc.

However we had a QB that could overcome that at one time, we don't anymore. A-Rod isn't a game changing QB. Just my observation.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

DD80, I respect + applaud you being able to realize this isn't a one man problem, it's a collective problem.

As for the "QB who overcame that" bit, I think you have to put it in context: Favre had 17 years of experience that allowed him to cover many of the holes that have appeared this season.

Rodgers doesn't even have 1 full season as the starter. To say that Rodgers is not a game changing QB is jumping the gun IMO, you can't really call it until he's played 17 (or however many he'll play) years in the NFL.

"dd80forever" wrote:

Let's really put this into context: No offensive line = 4-12 season. I only bring that up to point out the fact that no QB, no matter who he is, can win games consistently w/out an offensive line.

As far as having better blitz recognition and all that BS, look how Brett's handled the Pats and Chargers this year. He's taken sacks. And thrown picks. Just like Aaron has. A QB CANNOT overcome a sad-sack O-line like ours has been. When our run game and pass pro improve, so will our win %

Thanks to Pack93z for the sig!

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

16 years ago

#67

Rodgers stat line is amazing, he's been solid, he's poised, but there's one problem...that stat titled "Wins".

Now, he obviously is not responsible for losing 3 games, it is after all a team game. I am not a Rodgers hater, but I'm also not a "Mr. Rodgers Neighborhood", "Favre Who?", Rodgers lover.

He's been solid....that's it. Credit is due because he has produced, but..They're lucky to not have been embarrassed in the
Detroit game, a close Minnesota game, great Dallas game, absolute mess of a Tampa game, and such a let down with Atlanta.

Obviusly there are many factors going into each game and their repective outcome, play calling, injuries, defense, special teams, etc. However, this is a thread about Rodgers.

My issue is with the "extreme" in both directions on this whole Favre vs Rodgers debate. I don't care that his stats are great, I care about wins. I don't care if you think we'd be in the same spot with Favre, we'll never know.

I don't care if you think we'd be 5-0 if Favre was here, we'll never know. All I do know is the Packers are sitting 2-3 at the end of week 5 with a tough schedule ahead of them and they don't look good.

The problem I have with Rodger's lovers, they blame the D.

They saved us from embarrassment in week 1, kept Dallas in check to have a chance, and gave us a chance to win vs Tampa with 4 turnovers.
Yesterday they held them to 2 FG's when Atlanta started in their own territory, forced 2 punts, and made an amazing INT to save a TD.

Yet I found myself in the 4th quarter thinking, how do we
expect to win with only 17 points.

Again, Rodgers stat line looks amazing but he is not getting it done, he's not winning the game.

He got rattled to the max in Tampa, holds the ball way too long, and shows signs of panicking in situations when it counts, ie. yesterday's INT.

I don't know, I'm disappointed right now. I'd like to see him, and the play calling, not worry about his stat line.

After all, the guy that went 16/26, 194 yds,and 2TDs got the W while the guy that went 25/37 with 313 yds, and 3TDs tacked on another one to that lowly loss column.

I'm not giving up on Rodgers or the Pack, but I'm preparing myself for a long, long season.

"majkowski7ever" wrote:

MJK7 your points well taken, but try seperating them with periods and spaces, much easier to read and understand.
:icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

majkowski7ever
Registered

16 years ago

#68

MJK7 your points well taken, but try seperating them with periods and spaces, much easier to read and understand.
:icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

:sad1: Sorry, typed it on my blackberry and got effed up obviously. Should be better now.

blank

dhazer
Veteran Member

16 years ago

#69

This loss was a team effort exept for Rodgers, this hguy played extremly well with a fudged up shoulder.
And for all you Rodgers haters 2 words for you.
BITE ME!!!

"walleye" wrote:

awwww whats wrong don't like the fact Rodgers just isnt producing the wins
and so what about his shoulder big ben has been playing with the same thing since week 1 and i cant stand him either

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

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

16 years ago

#70

and so what about his shoulder big ben has been playing with the same thing since week 1 and i cant stand him either

"dhazer" wrote:

Ahh ... dhazer = equal opportunity hatah! 🙂

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

beast (9m) : 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 (21m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (4h) : 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 (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

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

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS