RODGERS "PRIME TIME PERFORMER!"

[MOBB DEEP]

he was voted that on nfl primetime (trey wingo, etc...). "that rarely happens with the losing qb"

thats REAL cool; they gave him mad dap for "gutting it out" and havn great game. "He showed moxie..."


good to hear him get credit since some other talkn heads were tryn to say pack record woul;d be bettr if #4 was there (i.e., he's the piece thats missn). even i dont need to hear that all the time so this should help folk accross the country see arod has MAJOR upside; the boy can ball and the pack WILL be good for a minute (no thanks to tt of course - he he)

way to represent aaaron; slow start/this loss DOES NOT FALL ON U

[Chevelle2]

is this true? I am suspicious of the source.

[MOBB DEEP]

is this true? I am suspicious of the source.


good news rt? i was watchn the show and was shocked when trey said it. thats major respect imho

[run pMc]

I think playing with a shoulder injury is one thing, but to be able to throw at 67% accuracy, 300+ yds and 3 TDs is pretty impressive. Any QB who does that deserves some credit
No, I'm not being a homer or a Rodgers-fan -- if it were Favre or Manning, people would be talking about how tough he was and how great he played. I can almost imagine what Peter King and John Madden would be saying.

As to those who think the
pack record woul;d be bettr if #4 was there I'd like to point out that #4 didn't play defense. IMO if your QB is throwing for 3TD you shouldn't be losing many games.

The O lost the TB game, and the D lost the ATL game. Hopefully they'll figure it out and start winning games together. Getting a healthy D would also help.

[LL2]

Rodgers will only keep getting better. If the team wasn't decimated with injuries then they probably would've won. Last year the team won 13 games because they had very few injuries and Favre had a good year. If you look back at the years the team had a lot of injuries Favre didn't always do too well, and if he carried the team it was to a 9-7 or 8-8 season. If the team can make it through the next two games and then have the bye week to get healthy they could make a strong second half run. That is my hope anyways.

[hurleyfan]

If the team can make it through the next two games and then have the bye week to get healthy they could make a strong second half run. That is my hope anyways.

Fingers firmly crossed!!

[packrat]

But, but, but, if the Pack wins, how are guys going to knock TT? WHAT are your priorities?!!!!!

[Pacopete4]

But, but, but, if the Pack wins, how are guys going to knock TT? WHAT are your priorities?!!!!!


if this plays well, wins... do u think anyone would be bitching? nope... the problem is, that its not winning and we now see the weaknesses that TT did not address... we were all fooled

[Gunakor]

But, but, but, if the Pack wins, how are guys going to knock TT? WHAT are your priorities?!!!!!


if this plays well, wins... do u think anyone would be bitching? nope... the problem is, that its not winning and we now see the weaknesses that TT did not address... we were all fooled

What weaknesses? Elaborate please. We are down to our 4th safety, we are playing our 5th and 6th corners in dime situations, we lost our best run stuffing DE for the season, Charles Woodson is playing on a broken toe, AJ Hawk is playing with a groin injury... Are you implying that the weakness TT did not address is that our backups still play like backups? I can't agree, because backups cannot be expected to play as well as the starters. When the defense is hit this hard by injury, with several key players out with injury and several others playing through injury, the defensive production is going to plummet. That's the way it is.

[cpk1994]

But, but, but, if the Pack wins, how are guys going to knock TT? WHAT are your priorities?!!!!!


if this plays well, wins... do u think anyone would be bitching? nope... the problem is, that its not winning and we now see the weaknesses that TT did not address... we were all fooled

What weaknesses? Elaborate please. We are down to our 4th safety, we are playing our 5th and 6th corners in dime situations, we lost our best run stuffing DE for the season, Charles Woodson is playing on a broken toe, AJ Hawk is playing with a groin injury... Are you implying that the weakness TT did not address is that our backups still play like backups? I can't agree, because backups cannot be expected to play as well as the starters. When the defense is hit this hard by injury, with several key players out with injury and several others playing through injury, the defensive production is going to plummet. That's the way it is.How dare you you use common sense and facts. Don't you know on this forum people would rather blame TT becuase it feeds the their hate of the man? :)

[oregonpackfan]

I was also very impressed with Rodgers. Not only did he play through pain but he played effectively through pain! At one point in the game, he had a passer rating of 105--a respectable rating.

Though Rodgers has seemed to have been around for awhile, we have to remember last Sunday was just his fifth NFL start. He also started for the youngest team in pro football.

Overall, Rodgers has had a very solid start of the year. I am confident he will steadily improve as the season progresses.

[PackerTimer]

But, but, but, if the Pack wins, how are guys going to knock TT? WHAT are your priorities?!!!!!


if this plays well, wins... do u think anyone would be bitching? nope... the problem is, that its not winning and we now see the weaknesses that TT did not address... we were all fooled

What weaknesses? Elaborate please. We are down to our 4th safety, we are playing our 5th and 6th corners in dime situations, we lost our best run stuffing DE for the season, Charles Woodson is playing on a broken toe, AJ Hawk is playing with a groin injury... Are you implying that the weakness TT did not address is that our backups still play like backups? I can't agree, because backups cannot be expected to play as well as the starters. When the defense is hit this hard by injury, with several key players out with injury and several others playing through injury, the defensive production is going to plummet. That's the way it is.

I think that pretty well sums it up. There are some people who have not liked TT since day 1. It was tough to criticize him last year. With the early struggles, some are reaching a little to say that Favre carried the team and we were fooled by last years success. I don't buy it. TT put a good team on the field, the problem is that a good chunk of that team is out or playing through significant injury. We weren't fooled by anything, the defense is riddled with injuries and that is were the major problem on this team is right now.

[Noodle]

OPF brings a good perspective to this. You've also got to think that ARod earned some huge locker room respect by gutting it out and playing well.

It's a tough-guy game, and while his teammates would probably have understood if he sat it out, he gained mucho kwan on Sunday.

[Harlan Huckleby]

OPF brings a good perspective to this. You've also got to think that ARod earned some huge locker room respect by gutting it out and playing well.

It's a tough-guy game, and while his teammates would probably have understood if he sat it out, he gained mucho kwan on Sunday.

the coaches should have told him he couldn't play. It would have been better for the team to let the injury heal for an extra week.

Ya, I know the team doctor said he isn't going to damage it further by playing with it, but he means he isn't going to do permanent structural damage. Anybody who has had that sort of sprain knows that rest is required for the sucker to heal.

The Packers have actually been very conserative about playing guys with injuries, they typically don't take foolish chances. I guess this was a close call, I disagree with the cost/benefits on their decision this time.

[Gunakor]

OPF brings a good perspective to this. You've also got to think that ARod earned some huge locker room respect by gutting it out and playing well.

It's a tough-guy game, and while his teammates would probably have understood if he sat it out, he gained mucho kwan on Sunday.

the coaches should have told him he couldn't play. It would have been better for the team to let the injury heal for an extra week.

Ya, I know the team doctor said he isn't going to damage it further by playing with it, but he means he isn't going to do permanent structural damage. Anybody who has had that sort of sprain knows that rest is required for the sucker to heal.

The Packers have actually been very conserative about playing guys with injuries, they typically don't take foolish chances. I guess this was a close call, I disagree with the cost/benefits on their decision this time.

It's just an issue of dealing with the pain. He's not going to injure himself any worse. As long as he can function effectively as a QB and make all the throws required of him then it should be his call. If he can deal with the pain while still doing what is asked of him then I have no problem with him being in there.

Injury never kept Favre from making a start, even when that injury was a fractured thumb on his throwing hand - an injury that isn't going to heal very fast when he's taking 60 snaps from center every game on top of throwing 30+ passes. Or how about the wicked shot he took from LaVar Arrington a few years back when we saw his knee buckle and thought he'd never play football again. I don't recall a single person crying that Favre should have been sat down to let those or any of his other injuries heal. Not a soul. All anyone said about it was that he was a warrior with the heart of a champion - which is true. So why is Brett any different in this situation than Rodgers?

[Patler]

the coaches should have told him he couldn't play. It would have been better for the team to let the injury heal for an extra week.

Ya, I know the team doctor said he isn't going to damage it further by playing with it, but he means he isn't going to do permanent structural damage. Anybody who has had that sort of sprain knows that rest is required for the sucker to heal.

The Packers have actually been very conserative about playing guys with injuries, they typically don't take foolish chances. I guess this was a close call, I disagree with the cost/benefits on their decision this time.

If pro athletes didn't play every time it would be better for an injury healing if they didn't play, we would barely have games in any sport.

You are 100% correct that the Packers have been conservative when it comes to playing guys with injuries. I can't believe they would take a chance with the long term health or safety of their chosen player at the most important position on the team.

No reason to have sat him if he was able to play through it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We're talking about the throwing shoulder of the QB. That's a unique situation, very different from a sprained ankle.

I think the coaches felt playing Rodgers gave them a strong competitive advantage over Flynn. That's what made the difference. If they had backup they were comfortable with, Rodgers would have sat a week.

Gunkor, I disagree with your statement that it is just a question of enduring pain. The pain indicates that the damaged tissue is being further inflamed.

[Pacopete4]

We're talking about the throwing shoulder of the QB. That's a unique situation, very different from a sprained ankle.

I think the coaches felt playing Rodgers gave them a strong competitive advantage over Flynn. That's what made the difference. If they had backup they were comfortable with, Rodgers would have sat a week.

Gunkor, I disagree with your statement that it is just a question of enduring pain. The pain indicates that the damaged tissue is being further inflamed.



:bs2: :wait: :bs2:



if ur starting QB says he's ready to go, and wants the ball and can throw the way Arod did... u give him the damn ball... its just how the game of football works... it has ZERO, let me repeat... ZERO to do with a backup QB..

[Gunakor]

We're talking about the throwing shoulder of the QB. That's a unique situation, very different from a sprained ankle.

I think the coaches felt playing Rodgers gave them a strong competitive advantage over Flynn. That's what made the difference. If they had backup they were comfortable with, Rodgers would have sat a week.

Gunkor, I disagree with your statement that it is just a question of enduring pain. The pain indicates that the damaged tissue is being further inflamed.


I'll bet Brett's thumb hurt like a SOB when the football smacked his hand 60 times a game while the thumb was fractured. It wasn't getting worse (kinda like Rodgers shoulder injury - sez the Packers training staff that I'm certain has a bit of expertise dealing with injuries), but it certainly wasn't healing very quickly. Should Favre have been sat down to let it heal?

My point is that Favre has had and played through injuries that ordinary QB's would have been deactivated for. That's what made him an extraordinary QB. That doesn't make him superhuman. Could Rodgers be an extraordinary QB that's not superhuman but can play through injuries that ordinary QB's would be deactivated for as well?

[Noodle]

I'm in the Bluedog's camp -- I hate it that guys get pressured to play when they're hurt, and I admire the conservative bent of the Packers in this regard.

BUT, this is a very special case due to who ARod is replacing. It's not fair to him, but it's the way it is. In the big scheme of things, I think here it was worth the risk for Arod to establish a bold and bouncy sack of his own.

[SnakeLH2006]

he was voted that on nfl primetime (trey wingo, etc...). "that rarely happens with the losing qb"

thats REAL cool; they gave him mad dap for "gutting it out" and havn great game. "He showed moxie..."


good to hear him get credit since some other talkn heads were tryn to say pack record woul;d be bettr if #4 was there (i.e., he's the piece thats missn). even i dont need to hear that all the time so this should help folk accross the country see arod has MAJOR upside; the boy can ball and the pack WILL be good for a minute (no thanks to tt of course - he he)

way to represent aaaron; slow start/this loss DOES NOT FALL ON U

Who cares if we didn't win? Stats don't always win games.

[MOBB DEEP]

We're talking about the throwing shoulder of the QB. That's a unique situation, very different from a sprained ankle.

I think the coaches felt playing Rodgers gave them a strong competitive advantage over Flynn. That's what made the difference. If they had backup they were comfortable with, Rodgers would have sat a week.

Gunkor, I disagree with your statement that it is just a question of enduring pain. The pain indicates that the damaged tissue is being further inflamed.


I'll bet Brett's thumb hurt like a SOB when the football smacked his hand 60 times a game while the thumb was fractured. It wasn't getting worse (kinda like Rodgers shoulder injury - sez the Packers training staff that I'm certain has a bit of expertise dealing with injuries), but it certainly wasn't healing very quickly. Should Favre have been sat down to let it heal?

My point is that Favre has had and played through injuries that ordinary QB's would have been deactivated for. That's what made him an extraordinary QB. That doesn't make him superhuman. Could Rodgers be an extraordinary QB that's not superhuman but can play through injuries that ordinary QB's would be deactivated for as well?


QFT

[packerbacker1234]

he was voted that on nfl primetime (trey wingo, etc...). "that rarely happens with the losing qb"

thats REAL cool; they gave him mad dap for "gutting it out" and havn great game. "He showed moxie..."


good to hear him get credit since some other talkn heads were tryn to say pack record woul;d be bettr if #4 was there (i.e., he's the piece thats missn). even i dont need to hear that all the time so this should help folk accross the country see arod has MAJOR upside; the boy can ball and the pack WILL be good for a minute (no thanks to tt of course - he he)

way to represent aaaron; slow start/this loss DOES NOT FALL ON U

Nothing against Rodgers - but just look at what the jets are like with Favre just being there. It's not necessarily just about what Rodgers or Favre does on the field, it's the effect they have in the locker room, and to the entire team. Favre puts a sense of belief in every player in a locker room that no matter what, he is going to be there, and there will always be a good chance to win every game just solely because Favre walks onto the field.

Most of the talking heads that say the packers would be better feed off that aspect - Favre makes the team around him better, Rodgers while playing good doesn't have that effect. Most don't. It's nice noting how much better the defense was at this point last season then this season. Injuries aside, Favre inspires better play from everyone. I do like rodgers, and I do not blame him for last weeks loss. However, I still can say it would not have been different with Favre. People step up out there with him at the helm.

Rodgers did show me a lot in playing, but I think what showed me more was the coaching staff leaving him in when his arm was hanging the last 8 minutes of the game. I would rather have a healthy rodgers for most the season, then a hurt one for the rest of it. If he keeps pushing it each anc every week, his success last week will be soon forgotten. That injury really effected him in the later stages of the game, and if it lingers all season, could turn out to be some bad performances late in the year.

[Scott Campbell]

Nothing against Rodgers - but just look at what the jets are like with Favre just being there.



Uhhh, the last time I checked the Jets are 2-2. So I guess Brett makes everyone around him mediocre.

[packerbacker1234]

Nothing against Rodgers - but just look at what the jets are like with Favre just being there.



Uhhh, the last time I checked the Jets are 2-2. So I guess Brett makes everyone around him mediocre.

Wow, seriously? Go look at the jets last year and get back to me.

[Scott Campbell]

Nothing against Rodgers - but just look at what the jets are like with Favre just being there.



Uhhh, the last time I checked the Jets are 2-2. So I guess Brett makes everyone around him mediocre.

Wow, seriously? Go look at the jets last year and get back to me.


I can't find any Jet tape from last year with Alan Faneca on it.

[Scott Campbell]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-07-30-offseason-grades_N.htm

Here's an except from a USA Today article on free agent acquisitions this summer - published prior to the Favre trade.


"NEW YORK JETS - A-

It remains to be seen if the Jets make a play for a certain Packers quarterback they wanted to draft in 1991. Regardless, New York has already made $140 million worth of noise to upgrade its roster. G Alan Faneca and T Damien Woody should help the running game take flight, especially with FB Tony Richardson also on board. Rookie sack artist Vernon Gholston is expected to be a force, and LB Calvin Pace fits the 3-4 defense like a glove, though new NT Kris Jenkins must adapt. Locking up S Kerry Rhodes was a wise move. Now about that quarterback position ... "



I guess you can watch tape of the old Jet roster from last year and give Favre all the credit for the team raising its performance to mediocre from awful - if you're a simpleton.

[RashanGary]

Thomas Jones is healthy this year.

They took a big step forward at left guard by replacing a dud with possibly the best guard in football.

They added Damieon Woody at RT and seem to be getting good play out of the vet.

They saw gains from their young LT (d'brickshaw Ferguson) and their young center (Nick Mangold).

They added Jenkins and Pace as starters on the DL and are getting really good production from both

They're healthy

They replaced Noodle arm Pennington with Brett Favre and have two very good WR's in their prime.



Favre is a big addition and still a probowl level QB when he has weapons. There are many reasons that team got better, including Favre.


I'm a big believer that the surrounding team is much more important than any one player, even the QB. Favre is still a damn good player and a part of their success. It's not to take anything away from what he's done. It's more than I expected, but that was a 10-6 team two years ago that had some pretty serious injuries last year, are having good health now, added some good players and saw gains through grown - on top of the FAvre addition.

[Scott Campbell]

Favre puts a sense of belief in every player in a locker room that no matter what, he is going to be there, and there will always be a good chance to win every game just solely because Favre walks onto the field.



And just look at the way the light glistens off his helmet.

[Scott Campbell]

There are many reasons that team got better, including Favre.


Amen.

[packerbacker1234]

There are many reasons that team got better, including Favre.


Amen.

Agreed. I was not solely giving Favre credit, but look at what those FA aquisitions have done.

Despite the line upgrades - the jets OL is horrible. Thomas Jones has been very underwhelming by himself, let alone the lack of blocking. Kris Jenkins, to this point, is the only real FA aquisition outside of Favre to make a major impact ont he team. If he isn't on the field, the jets can't play defense. If he is? SOme reason he is the defensive cog, just like favre is the offensive cog.

[Bretsky]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-07-30-offseason-grades_N.htm

Here's an except from a USA Today article on free agent acquisitions this summer - published prior to the Favre trade.


"NEW YORK JETS - A-

It remains to be seen if the Jets make a play for a certain Packers quarterback they wanted to draft in 1991. Regardless, New York has already made $140 million worth of noise to upgrade its roster. G Alan Faneca and T Damien Woody should help the running game take flight, especially with FB Tony Richardson also on board. Rookie sack artist Vernon Gholston is expected to be a force, and LB Calvin Pace fits the 3-4 defense like a glove, though new NT Kris Jenkins must adapt. Locking up S Kerry Rhodes was a wise move. Now about that quarterback position ... "



I guess you can watch tape of the old Jet roster from last year and give Favre all the credit for the team raising its performance to mediocre from awful - if you're a simpleton.


Scott,

It sounds like you might be making a case for using free agency to better a team :?: :wink:

[Scott Campbell]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-07-30-offseason-grades_N.htm

Here's an except from a USA Today article on free agent acquisitions this summer - published prior to the Favre trade.


"NEW YORK JETS - A-

It remains to be seen if the Jets make a play for a certain Packers quarterback they wanted to draft in 1991. Regardless, New York has already made $140 million worth of noise to upgrade its roster. G Alan Faneca and T Damien Woody should help the running game take flight, especially with FB Tony Richardson also on board. Rookie sack artist Vernon Gholston is expected to be a force, and LB Calvin Pace fits the 3-4 defense like a glove, though new NT Kris Jenkins must adapt. Locking up S Kerry Rhodes was a wise move. Now about that quarterback position ... "



I guess you can watch tape of the old Jet roster from last year and give Favre all the credit for the team raising its performance to mediocre from awful - if you're a simpleton.


Scott,

It sounds like you might be making a case for using free agency to better a team :?: :wink:



I'm all for it, as long as were landing more players like Woodson and Pickett, and not players like Manuel and Joe Johnson. I also don't want us signing so many that were constantly battling the cap, and we have to watch other teams take players we'd rather keep like Wahle.

It's one of the tools of the trade.

[RashanGary]

Scott,

It sounds like you might be making a case for using free agency to better a team :?: :wink:

I'll jump in here too :)

Patler brought up an interesting point on Olineman. Sometimes a situation can effect an offensive lineman and he can improve just by a change to stable scenery. Also, I think there is a bit of a progression for these guys. I believe real, brute power takes more time to develop than explosion or speed. The positions that require explosion and speed tend to be able to play sooner than the positions that require power. Offensive lineman can take time to really get their NFL strength and because of that I think teams can give up too soon as well. Teams seem to regularly swoop in and add quality lineman. Dallas made a whole unit of them. I think maybe DT's could be similar. Pickett is an example, but many DT's seem to play poorly early (power run stuffers more than quick pass rushers). Maybe you can pick one up just entering his physical prime that was given up on by the previous team.

I'm more open to OL (esspecially interior) and DT in free agency because they are such long developing positions and there have been more examples of recent success than at other positions. I'm also open to free agency at any position, but it can't be a move jsut to make a move. I think there are fewer good moves than we want to believe.

[Scott Campbell]

I was not solely giving Favre credit......


Yes you were. Re-read your initial post.

[Bretsky]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-07-30-offseason-grades_N.htm

Here's an except from a USA Today article on free agent acquisitions this summer - published prior to the Favre trade.


"NEW YORK JETS - A-

It remains to be seen if the Jets make a play for a certain Packers quarterback they wanted to draft in 1991. Regardless, New York has already made $140 million worth of noise to upgrade its roster. G Alan Faneca and T Damien Woody should help the running game take flight, especially with FB Tony Richardson also on board. Rookie sack artist Vernon Gholston is expected to be a force, and LB Calvin Pace fits the 3-4 defense like a glove, though new NT Kris Jenkins must adapt. Locking up S Kerry Rhodes was a wise move. Now about that quarterback position ... "



I guess you can watch tape of the old Jet roster from last year and give Favre all the credit for the team raising its performance to mediocre from awful - if you're a simpleton.


Scott,

It sounds like you might be making a case for using free agency to better a team :?: :wink:



I'm all for it, as long as were landing more players like Woodson and Pickett, and not players like Manuel and Joe Johnson. I also don't want us signing so many that were constantly battling the cap, and we have to watch other teams take players we'd rather keep like Wahle.

It's one of the tools of the trade.


Completely agree; it's part of the equation

The key is hitting on the players

[Scott Campbell]

Completely agree; it's part of the equation

The key is hitting on the players


I think "value" is key too. If you're overpaying too many good players, you can end up tying your hands. I'm conservative, and even I think Ted has gone too conservative.

[Pugger]

Injury never kept Favre from making a start, even when that injury was a fractured thumb on his throwing hand - an injury that isn't going to heal very fast when he's taking 60 snaps from center every game on top of throwing 30+ passes. Or how about the wicked shot he took from LaVar Arrington a few years back when we saw his knee buckle and thought he'd never play football again. I don't recall a single person crying that Favre should have been sat down to let those or any of his other injuries heal. Not a soul. All anyone said about it was that he was a warrior with the heart of a champion - which is true. So why is Brett any different in this situation than Rodgers?

Yes, why is that? As long as the doctors don't feel he will make the the injury worse by playing (and I heard he is feeling better this week than last) why should we wring our hands? Everyone thought Brett was being a warrior for playing thru injuries but some don't if Aaron displays the same character? I just wonder if Rodgers, by gutting out a pretty decent performance last week in a h3ll of a lot of pain, made leadership brownie points with his teammates? We've all been wondering who the next guy was gonna be to take over BF's leadership role. They say guys become leaders by getting their peer's respect. Maybe we'll see some subtle changes in attitude today?

[MOBB DEEP]

Injury never kept Favre from making a start, even when that injury was a fractured thumb on his throwing hand - an injury that isn't going to heal very fast when he's taking 60 snaps from center every game on top of throwing 30+ passes. Or how about the wicked shot he took from LaVar Arrington a few years back when we saw his knee buckle and thought he'd never play football again. I don't recall a single person crying that Favre should have been sat down to let those or any of his other injuries heal. Not a soul. All anyone said about it was that he was a warrior with the heart of a champion - which is true. So why is Brett any different in this situation than Rodgers?

Yes, why is that? As long as the doctors don't feel he will make the the injury worse by playing (and I heard he is feeling better this week than last) why should we wring our hands? Everyone thought Brett was being a warrior for playing thru injuries but some don't if Aaron displays the same character? I just wonder if Rodgers, by gutting out a pretty decent performance last week in a h3ll of a lot of pain, made leadership brownie points with his teammates? We've all been wondering who the next guy was gonna be to take over BF's leadership role. They say guys become leaders by getting their peer's respect. Maybe we'll see some subtle changes in attitude today?



possible