This guy looks like a moron now

[Bretsky]

Did Clifton go from stud to dud overnight?

I think the answer is yes. Clifton at his best was a great pass protector and a below average run blocker. The pass blocking was not even close to what we were used to last year and he continues to commit far too many drive killing penalties. He is my biggest concern with this team next year.

I think he'll be fine. He's still extremely athletic. Was the pass protection of a problem of incompetent starters (who have been pro-bowlers the year before), or a new quarterback running all over the place making it very difficult to protect for him?

I tend to believe its the latter. I think Clifton will be fine. I definitely think there are much bigger concerns on the OL, and I still think without a doubt he's a top 10 LT.

I do think Favre had a better feel for the rush, but that comes with experience

I don't think AROD's scrambling was much of a factor in our OL issues. Maybe occasional..........but not that noticeable

[SnakeLH2006]

Did Clifton go from stud to dud overnight?

I think the answer is yes. Clifton at his best was a great pass protector and a below average run blocker. The pass blocking was not even close to what we were used to last year and he continues to commit far too many drive killing penalties. He is my biggest concern with this team next year.

I think he'll be fine. He's still extremely athletic. Was the pass protection of a problem of incompetent starters (who have been pro-bowlers the year before), or a new quarterback running all over the place making it very difficult to protect for him?

I tend to believe its the latter. I think Clifton will be fine. I definitely think there are much bigger concerns on the OL, and I still think without a doubt he's a top 10 LT.

I do think Favre had a better feel for the rush, but that comes with experience

I don't think AROD's scrambling was much of a factor in our OL issues. Maybe occasional..........but not that noticeable

Cliffy really looks done. His whole game is athleticism, and when it slips with bad legs, he loses his magic. He been slowly slipping from 3 years ago, but really fell off this last year. No doubt this is his last year.

[Scott Campbell]

Colledge had more false start penalties than Clifton in 2008 (4 to 3)

Very interesting - only 3 for the year. Is there a good source for looking that stuff up? I'd like to see how many he's had over the course of his career. It feels like a ton, but maybe I'm smoking crack.

[Scott Campbell]

I do think Favre had a better feel for the rush, but that comes with experience....

I think Favre always had a terrific feel for the rush. He kept a lot of plays alive even as an older plyer, but with subtle movement more than athleticism.

[Pacopete4]

I do think Favre had a better feel for the rush, but that comes with experience....

I think Favre always had a terrific feel for the rush. He kept a lot of plays alive even as an older plyer, but with subtle movement more than athleticism.

though, even Favre at times, felt too much of a rush and didnt let plays develop..

[pbmax]

I disagree with you 100% on the AFC East. Two best coaches in the NFL. Two of the best QBs, etc.

Even Hall of Fame coaches have bad seasons. And both Belicheck and Parcells got beat by some average teams.

Number 6 scoring offense is above-average. I don't care how many points they run up against scrubs. They cannot score against decent teams. The image of people blaming the D in a game where the offense scores 16-20 points is ridic... Against the Vikes they scored one offensive touchdown yet people blame the D for losing the game despite the offense getting blown out...

The offense did struggle at times. So did the QB. But that isn't unexpected of a first year starter at QB. The Packer schedule wasn't a collection of East Carolina's. It may surprise you, but very good offenses score A LOT of points against bad teams and not as many against good teams.

The offense that I saw and remember and was a crystal clear reflection of our record is the one that couldn't score against Jax, Tenn, Minn or Tampa. Awful, awful, awful. Put a presentable offense on the field and we're 10-6 and in the playoffs instead of 6-10.

You are just burying the lede here. The defense was terrible and coughed up a lot of fourth quarter leads after the offense had scored. The offense isn't perfect, but it played very well. The defense and special teams were a tire fire. Without the offense, we would have been drafting Matthew Stafford instead of the Lions.

[Fred's Slacks]

Did Clifton go from stud to dud overnight?

I think the answer is yes. Clifton at his best was a great pass protector and a below average run blocker. The pass blocking was not even close to what we were used to last year and he continues to commit far too many drive killing penalties. He is my biggest concern with this team next year.

I think he'll be fine. He's still extremely athletic. Was the pass protection of a problem of incompetent starters (who have been pro-bowlers the year before), or a new quarterback running all over the place making it very difficult to protect for him?

I tend to believe its the latter. I think Clifton will be fine. I definitely think there are much bigger concerns on the OL, and I still think without a doubt he's a top 10 LT.

I hope you're right. If we can have Cliffy in close to prime form, that would go a long way towards solidifying the Offense.

Maybe I'm unfair to Clifton but he was one of my biggest disappointments last season. I remember him doing a pretty good job against Allen week 1 but having a lot of penalties and generally playing sloppy. I remember him playing badly against Tampa and Atlanta and 1 penalty from the second MN game sticks out in my mind. It appeared that we had a beautiful fade route TD to Jennings only to find that Clifton false started. Instead of 6 we had 3rd and 15 and had to settle for a FG.

I do remember how well he played against Freeny and the Colts. IIRC his improved play coincided with M3 making him practice everyday instead of letting him rest his knees. Hopefully they can carry that into this year succesfully.

[woodbuck27]

You still think Rodgers is not the real deal, huh Parsh?

Well, you and LEWCA can have that corner. It's going to be awfully lonely awfully quick.

Not the real deal? He's certainly not a top 5 quarterback imo. Most people in the world aren't. Define real deal. I think he's the 14-16 best starting QB in the NFL right now. Could get better, could get worse. He has an unbelievable amount of talent around him right now, and it will undoubtedly be significantly worse in the future.

I'd definitely put Rogers top 12; possibly top 10 with current performance.

Aaron Rodgers had a great first year as our starting QB in 2008. I was somewhat concerned about his durability previous to last season but he played very strong and was let down by a horrible defense. I see AR having an equally strong season in 2009. He has the confidence of his team behind him and we can look forward to an improved 'D' in 2009 and beyond.

Our record will improve to about 10 wins next season.

GO PACKERS!

That is not taking into account looking into the future

[Tyrone Bigguns]

[quote="Partial"]

WE have phenomenal receivers and they are blue chip. LOL

Didn't say that. We have a top 5 receiving corps in the NFL.

Is it possible at all that Rodgers play was improved due to the phenomenal receiving corps?

I see, our phenominal receivers are phenominal (not that you said that , but they aren't blue chip. Sigh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

[RashanGary]

I agree with Bretsky. In Rodgers first year starting he was about a top 12 QB. I expect him to be better this year. I expect him to be in the probowl.

[ThunderDan]

I would gladly give in if I actually believed Rodgers was a star. He's not yet. He hasn't shown any reason to believe he will be. If the QB is not a star, move on imo. Too many things have to go right to build a consistent winner without a star at QB.

So being the 2nd QB EVER in the history of the league to throw for over 4,000 yards his 1st year starting gives you no hope at all?

What a complete joke!!!

[The Shadow]

I would gladly give in if I actually believed Rodgers was a star. He's not yet. He hasn't shown any reason to believe he will be. If the QB is not a star, move on imo. Too many things have to go right to build a consistent winner without a star at QB.

So being the 2nd QB EVER in the history of the league to throw for over 4,000 yards his 1st year starting gives you no hope at all?

What a complete joke!!!

Sometimes you just have to scratch your head.

[cpk1994]

I would gladly give in if I actually believed Rodgers was a star. He's not yet. He hasn't shown any reason to believe he will be. If the QB is not a star, move on imo. Too many things have to go right to build a consistent winner without a star at QB.

So being the 2nd QB EVER in the history of the league to throw for over 4,000 yards his 1st year starting gives you no hope at all?

What a complete joke!!!

Sometimes you just have to scratch your head.

What I find amazing is that the Defense and ST were around 25th in the league in 2008 while the offense was top 10, and Partial blames Rodgers.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I would gladly give in if I actually believed Rodgers was a star. He's not yet. He hasn't shown any reason to believe he will be. If the QB is not a star, move on imo. Too many things have to go right to build a consistent winner without a star at QB.

So being the 2nd QB EVER in the history of the league to throw for over 4,000 yards his 1st year starting gives you no hope at all?

What a complete joke!!!

Sometimes you just have to scratch your head.

What I find amazing is that the Defense and ST were around 25th in the league in 2008 while the offense was top 10, and Partial blames Rodgers.

Pack could go with high school players on ST and Defense...and he'd still find a way to blame it on Rodgers.

A. Stats are overrated.
B. You judge a QB on wins and loses

A is always correct, except when you want to validate your argument in regards to a 4 time all-pro (randall cunningham) by using stats. But, cannot be used to argue against Vince Young and his 68.8 passer rating or his 22 tds to 32 ints.

B is always correct, except when you want to diminish a QB like Cunningham who won 85 of 144. Which puts him in ahead of many qbs.

Using partial criteria: the punky QB is obviously a great QB..won about 70%.

Carson Palmer sucks...loses over half his games.

Archie Manning sucked with only 35 wins.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=1808=1

[Partial]

[quote="Tyrone Bigguns"]

WE have phenomenal receivers and they are blue chip. LOL

Didn't say that. We have a top 5 receiving corps in the NFL.

Is it possible at all that Rodgers play was improved due to the phenomenal receiving corps?

I see, our phenominal receivers are phenominal (not that you said that , but they aren't blue chip. Sigh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

You said Blue chip, not I. They are absolutely phenomenal. I love how you call me out on that, but fail to acknowledge the massive plate of crow I served you. I guess thats how losers play the game, though.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

[quote="Partial"]

WE have phenomenal receivers and they are blue chip. LOL

Didn't say that. We have a top 5 receiving corps in the NFL.

Is it possible at all that Rodgers play was improved due to the phenomenal receiving corps?

I see, our phenominal receivers are phenominal (not that you said that , but they aren't blue chip. Sigh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

You said Blue chip, not I. They are absolutely phenomenal. I love how you call me out on that, but fail to acknowledge the massive plate of crow I served you. I guess thats how losers play the game, though.

I don't have time to go over some many errors. I just looked at the most glaring.

You said you never said phenomenal, you did.

But, now i we are getting a view of how you use adjectives...phenomenal/top 5 receiving crew doesn't equal blue chip. Unbelievable talent doesn't equal blue chip. [b]

phenemenal
highly extraordinary or prodigious; exceptional

Let me get this straight...highly extraordinary/exceptional isn't blue chip.
It might help if you learned your mother tongue.

Cunningham: You play with stats, and lie with them. Cunningham didn't start a game till his second year and tenth game.

He lead his team to the playoffs in his first starting year. Pro bowl consecutively 88, 89, 90. All pro 89, 90, 92. So, we can safely say that for a 5 year run he was at the top of his profession. Also, he punted and was very good at that as well.

It is hilarious to watch you argue against a player that was Vince Young before there was a Vince Young..and was better at it. In 90 he ran 942 yards..3rd most EVER..and 10th best in the league.

Blew out his ACL and came back the next year and was ALL-PRO and comeback player of the year. LOL

Next 2 years he had injuries and the eagles were in disarray coaching wise. He retired in 95.

Comes back after being out for a year and leads the Vikes to the playoffs...oops, we don't judge a qb on wins and losses do we?

In 98 he is again All-Pro. So, ten years into his career..with 2 missed seasons..one for injury, one retired...he is at the top of his game. So, he is 4 time all-pro while really only playing 7 seasons.

99 he was benched for to many ints...9 in 6 games..for Jeff George..hmm, seems like a viking decision.

After that he was a backup. That is what happens as you get older...in your late 30s.

I guess under your logic, if Brett plays this year..he is a journeyman. 4 teams to Cunninghams 4.

A player that passed for over 200 tds and threw less than 140 picks.

And, then you are stupid enough to bring up QB rating..which RC's career was 81.5 to Favre's 85.4.

And, Brett played with an offensive coach in Holmgren and a decent offense. Anyone who watched Buddy Ryan's teams would tell you there was no offensive philosophy..Ryan didn't care about offense.

RC played for Ryan and rich kotite. LOL

The rest of your shit is just stupid. You think Plax isn't as good as DD. Plax is a dominant receiver, you have to game plan for him..DD not so much. Plax has played and started on SB winners...DD, not so much.

You think our TE is good...that is why we spent a high draft pick on a te.

You think our line was good last year.

Keep digging.

[LEWCWA]

I think many of you miss the point here. Thing is the Packers probably made the right decision. My only concern is if the Packers suck or are mediocre for the next 5 years, I would have rather watched Favre for 1 or 2 more years...Brett is a once in a generation type player and I will never get enough of watching him play. I hope Rodgers leads this team to a superbowl and "great success", but chances are he will end his career as an average to slightly above average quarterback for one reason or another and we will have missed out on Favre finishing his career here for us.

[Fritz]

I would gladly give in if I actually believed Rodgers was a star. He's not yet. He hasn't shown any reason to believe he will be. If the QB is not a star, move on imo. Too many things have to go right to build a consistent winner without a star at QB.

So being the 2nd QB EVER in the history of the league to throw for over 4,000 yards his 1st year starting gives you no hope at all?

What a complete joke!!!

Sometimes you just have to scratch your head.

What I find amazing is that the Defense and ST were around 25th in the league in 2008 while the offense was top 10, and Partial blames Rodgers.

Pack could go with high school players on ST and Defense...and he'd still find a way to blame it on Rodgers.

A. Stats are overrated.
B. You judge a QB on wins and loses

A is always correct, except when you want to validate your argument in regards to a 4 time all-pro (randall cunningham) by using stats. But, cannot be used to argue against Vince Young and his 68.8 passer rating or his 22 tds to 32 ints.

B is always correct, except when you want to diminish a QB like Cunningham who won 85 of 144. Which puts him in ahead of many qbs.

Using partial criteria: the punky QB is obviously a great QB..won about 70%.

Carson Palmer sucks...loses over half his games.

Archie Manning sucked with only 35 wins.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=1808=1

Tyrone's post has the perhaps unintended effect for me of pointing out that Partial is much like Big Brother in Orwell's 1984.

Wow. Partial, do you serve bad gin at parties?

[RashanGary]

I think many of you miss the point here. Thing is the Packers probably made the right decision. My only concern is if the Packers suck or are mediocre for the next 5 years, I would have rather watched Favre for 1 or 2 more years...Brett is a once in a generation type player and I will never get enough of watching him play. I hope Rodgers leads this team to a superbowl and "great success", but chances are he will end his career as an average to slightly above average quarterback for one reason or another and we will have missed out on Favre finishing his career here for us.

This is an honest, reasonable view for supporting Favre. It's not based in pseudo facts or fairytales. It's another persons opinion. I agree to disagree, but still, I can't argue your reasoning and I can't hate on it. We're just different.

Partial's problem is that he's just wrong.

[Bossman641]

But, now i we are getting a view of how you use adjectives...phenomenal/top 5 receiving crew doesn't equal blue chip. Unbelievable talent doesn't equal blue chip.

Quote:
phenemenal
[b]highly extraordinary or prodigious; exceptional


Let me get this straight...highly extraordinary/exceptional isn't blue chip.
It might help if you learned your mother tongue.

Would you expect anything else from someone who once broke down the QB categories as

Elite 1-4
Average 5-25
Terrible 26-32