OFFICIAL AARON RODGERS THE LIVING LEGEND THREAD

[texaspackerbacker]

Mostly right, run pMc. It's a "probably" at this point, but probably we in fact are doomed to much worse seasons. And yes, there's no choice now but to move on and hope for the best. The shitheads I have a problem with, though, are the ones who were calling for that "moving on" before the trade actually happened. And all that negative shit you ascribe to Rodgers was for the most part conjured up or at least blown all out of proportion by media pukes and dutifully swallowed by some dumbasses in here.

And I say again, the contract was good, make that glorious, as it woulda/shoulda kept Rodgers in Green Bay for several or more additional years that would have almost certainly been much better than what we are doomed to now.

[Bretsky]

Rodgers no longer bought in. He wanted Gutebag fired two years ago and GB made the mistake of allowing Rodgers to bend them over in the contract instead of just trading him then.

I appreciated what Rodgers did for GB.

But he turned Karen and it was time to let Karen move on

[sharpe1027]

IMO, a team that loaded doesn't miss the playoffs with a HOF, GOAT candidate, QB, injured thumb or not. Far worse QBs made the playoffs.

[texaspackerbacker]

That just illustrates the importance of a healthy Rodgers at QB. (this was response to sharpe's above.)

[sharpe1027]

That just illustrates the importance of a healthy Rodgers at QB. (this was response to sharpe's above.)

So it was Rodgers' fault we didn't make the playoffs? Bullshit. What a shithead.

[run pMc]

That 2010 team was stealthy good too - they lost two back to back OT games (WAS and MIA) and graded out elite on more advanced metrics. Injuries and some bad luck derailed them mid-season, but then there was something of a regression (to where they should have been) or uptick in their fortunes. I doubt any NYG fan cares they were a WC team when they went 9-7 in 2011, what they remember is they beat up the 15-1 packers and went on to beat NE in the Super Bowl.

The Super Bowl is the goal for every team, winning regular season games is nice and is the path to the playoffs. I'd take 10-6 and a ring over 15-1 and an ugly 37-20 playoff loss to a 6 seed any year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2xUEy-vXtU

[Fritz]

There is already a story out there about how Rodgers is interrupting coaches at meetings, quizzing players on the field, and all that. The article both suggested that it could be really annoying - rude, actually, with the interrupting - and that it could be seen as how damn invested in the team he really is.

Fun! Shit-stirring!

[Anti-Polar Bear]

There is already a story out there about how Rodgers is interrupting coaches at meetings, quizzing players on the field, and all that. The article both suggested that it could be really annoying - rude, actually, with the interrupting - and that it could be seen as how damn invested in the team he really is.

Fun! Shit-stirring!

Success tends to drown people in self-entitlement. And self-entitlement, in turn, makes people cocky/arrogant. Butte ain’t an exception.

Ask Tony ODay what he does for a living and how much he makes annually…(See Musings of a Polar Bear thread in FYI for more.)

[run pMc]

There is already a story out there about how Rodgers is interrupting coaches at meetings, quizzing players on the field, and all that. The article both suggested that it could be really annoying - rude, actually, with the interrupting - and that it could be seen as how damn invested in the team he really is.

Fun! Shit-stirring!

You mean this article?
https://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-j...ns-pop-quizzes

Some interesting comments and a few little digs in there from Rodgers. What I'm most curious about is why Rodgers thinks motion would make it harder to read a defense?
There must be a reason I'm forgetting, because I'd think motion would help reveal the coverage and help the offense dictate to the defense.

[MadScientist]

You mean this article?
https://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-j...ns-pop-quizzes

Some interesting comments and a few little digs in there from Rodgers. What I'm most curious about is why Rodgers thinks motion would make it harder to read a defense?
There must be a reason I'm forgetting, because I'd think motion would help reveal the coverage and help the offense dictate to the defense.

So the guy who added audibles and 5287 Hans signals to MLF's offense complained that the offense needed to be simplified?

[NewsBruin]

I read the "Fairweather Fluff" ESPN bog article above, and it didn't say that motion made it easier for Rodgers to read the defense; it just said that it's easier for him to run plays before the defense gets set or freeze them until the last second on the play clock.

If LaFleur's offense has motion from one side of the QB to the other, especially for sweeps or sweep play action, then you only have a certain window when you can snap the ball -- and really a small window for the QB to read the defensive key. If it's the motion that I'm used to from the 90s and 2000s, where a big receiver or back just kinda plods around from the O-line to the far hashmark and re-sets somewhere to move a safety, then that doesn't demand the same kind of precision timing that modern offense does.

" It needs to be a free-flowing conversation between the coaches and the players." - I'm sure that's exactly how Aaron will feel when Zonovan Knight interrupts him to ask why he can't get better touch on block-and-release screen passes when there's a red dog blitz.

Separately, how often did Aaron's cadences actually draw players offside? I know the announcers made a big deal of him and Brett's snap counts, but I don't remember as many free plays or new first downs as they talked it up. It seems like the fear of an offside penalty makes defense less likely to time the snap and more likely to react, which isn't a bad thing either..

[MadScientist]

Separately, how often did Aaron's cadences actually draw players offside? I know the announcers made a big deal of him and Brett's snap counts, but I don't remember as many free plays or new first downs as they talked it up. It seems like the fear of an offside penalty makes defense less likely to time the snap and more likely to react, which isn't a bad thing either..

In 2014 he was getting one a game with the hard count. Defenses prepare better for him now and it only works once or twice a season.

[run pMc]

In 2014 he was getting one a game with the hard count. Defenses prepare better for him now and it only works once or twice a season.

Yeah I think teams were better prepared for his hard count.
Thing was, he ran the clock down to 0 all the time - GB had one of the slowest-paced offenses in the league - so I'm not sure it really would have worked all that well anymore anyway. If you're just lining up with 10 on the clock and getting everyone set, calling protections, etc., you're probably not snapping the ball THAT early. I'm actually surprised DL don't take off when the clock turns 0, whether the ball was snapped or not - it should be a delay penalty.

[sharpe1027]

Yeah I think teams were better prepared for his hard count.
Thing was, he ran the clock down to 0 all the time - GB had one of the slowest-paced offenses in the league - so I'm not sure it really would have worked all that well anymore anyway. If you're just lining up with 10 on the clock and getting everyone set, calling protections, etc., you're probably not snapping the ball THAT early. I'm actually surprised DL don't take off when the clock turns 0, whether the ball was snapped or not - it should be a delay penalty.

Pretty sure the DL was aware when the clock got near zero.

[sharpe1027]

If your decisions on offensive strategy are premised on how many more times you can draw the other team offsides, you're focusing on the wrong thing.

[Fritz]

I would agree that for a while, Rodgers seemed to get lots of offsides calls - he'd get about one a game, and take a shot. But the last year or three, it didn't seem to work so well.

He also seemed to use the same trick - the same rhythm, or lack there of - every time. I was always surprised he didn't switch it up.

[texaspackerbacker]

There's been a couple of rule changes, as I recall, too: blowing the whistle quicker on offsides and alowing the D to make changes if the offense substitutes as well as giving that offical in the O backfield time to get out of the way.

[Joemailman]

Craig Carton of FS1, who previously reported that the Green Bay Packers had conversations with the San Francisco 49ers about quarterback Aaron Rodgers, stated Thursday on The Carton Show that the New England Patriots also made a trade offer for the former Packers quarterback.

The New England Patriots made an offer to the Green Bay Packers to get Aaron Rodgers. When Aaron Rodgers heard it, his agent said, “No. We ain’t playing for New England. We want to be a Jet.”

If true, Rodgers may have figured Patriots weren't going to let Rodgers call personnel shots like the Jets were. However, if word had gotten out that the Packers were negotiating with the Patriots, it may have given the Packers some leverage with their talks with the Jets.

[Sparkey]

If true, Rodgers may have figured Patriots weren't going to let Rodgers call personnel shots like the Jets were. However, if word had gotten out that the Packers were negotiating with the Patriots, it may have given the Packers some leverage with their talks with the Jets.

It wouldn't surprise if we were to hear that the Pats leaked the whole "Rodgers interest" just to get the Jets to cough up more draft picks.

[bobblehead]

It wouldn't surprise if we were to hear that the Pats leaked the whole "Rodgers interest" just to get the Jets to cough up more draft picks.

Doubtful. These teams all have "spies" in other teams infrastructure so they have an idea whats going on. Thats why I scoff at theories like "the packers wasted the trade up cuz Van Ness would have been there at 14". Bellicheck wanted Van Ness and Gutes knew it. We, as fans, have a lot of theories that simply are grounded in our own fantasy of what we would be doing in their positions.