JS ARTICLE "WITH SB IN SIGHT< RODGERS DOES NOT DELIVER

[woodbuck27]

These are not the same things. One is a number for one set of games that has existed for precisely 46 years and 46 games (NFC Championship).

The other is the subjective measure of the worst outcome in the entire history of the Green Bay Packers franchise. All 1339 games.

That you think the worst defeat in the history has been reported as *FACT* by the NFC Championship factoid is just muddled thinking.


EDIT: My typing was middled.

Originally Posted by woodbuck27

" The worst defeat in Green Bay Packer history" woodbuck27

I withdraw that remark as it would be a mere opinion.


As to the rest of it:

Last Sunday It was reported that the Green Bay Packers suffered the worst comeback in NFC Championship history.

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php...yoff-loss-ever

The above says that 12 of 17 Packerrats feel last Sundays collapse in Seattle was the worst playoff loss of 8 prominent losses in the Packers more recent history.

I suffered through the Packers history following Super Bowls I and II. I'm certainly well aware of many poor performances before the team won another Super Bowl or Super Bowl XXXI. That was almost 3 decades of disappointment.

[pbmax]

Originally Posted by woodbuck27

" The worst defeat in Green Bay Packer history" woodbuck27

I withdraw that remark as it would be a mere opinion.


As to the rest of it:

Last Sunday It was reported that the Green Bay Packers suffered the worst comeback in NFC Championship history.

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php...yoff-loss-ever

The above says that 12 of 17 Packerrats feel last Sundays collapse in Seattle was the worst playoff loss of 8 prominent losses in the Packers more recent history.

I suffered through the Packers history following Super Bowls I and II. I'm certainly well aware of many poor performances before the team won another Super Bowl or Super Bowl XXXI. That was almost 3 decades of disappointment.

45 years of fan memories is impressive. But it also skips the 45 years before that. And there has been somewhere between 42 and 46 NFC Championship games. Really small sample size.

As for the 12 of 17, a survey immediately after the game is a terrible way to put a loss into perspective.

But, in terms of the article, the rank of terribleness in this loss is immaterial to the main point. Rodgers poor play is indicative of several things. Its not indicative that he needs to be an even bigger part of the team.

[mraynrand]

It's hard to see how the loss can be blamed significantly on Rodgers. Let's review. Packers are up by 12 and McCarthy calls two runs and pass to Q. Runs go nowhere and q drops a defensed pass. Rodgers doesn't see the ball again until the packers are down by three with about a minute left. Rodgers just leads them to a tying FG to force OT and never sees the ball again.

Could Rodgers have played better to put Seattle away earlier? I suppose, but many of the play calls were taken out of his hand - many red zone runs and no fourth down attempts. Plus, he was injured.

Because he's the QB, he'll shoulder more blame, but an objective analysis of the game shows he only contributed in part to the loss, and probably a lot less than poor defense and STs in the last 5 minutes and OT, and a lot less than play calling choices.

Generally, I think a game like this is more of a Rorschach test for fans. The more emotive fans will generally heap blame on Rodgers because they really don't understand football and/or are of very low mental wattage.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Packers are up by 12 and McCarthy calls two runs and pass to Q. Runs go nowhere and q drops a defensed pass. Rodgers doesn't see the ball again until the packers are down by three with about a minute left. Rodgers just leads them to a tying FG to force OT and never sees the ball again.

+1