HEY HO..TED MUST GO

[gex]

ROCK THE VOTE

[BallHawk]

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p222/the_x-phile/ObviousTroll.jpg

[MOBB DEEP]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

[BallHawk]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

[MOBB DEEP]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

yeah, i see folks arent around. did folks live during summer b/c favre issue?

why dont people just offer diffrnt views annd kep it moving?

[Mazzin]

No mostly because of this pointless b.s.

[arcilite]

yeah i come hear to read/talk about the packers.

not sift through 10 threads about brett favre and useless bullshit like 'should we fire our GM that was executive of the yearl ast year?'

[gex]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

Probably because they could not post or start a thread without people like yourself ridiculing them and calling them names.
Isn't that pretty much what you do around here is insult other posters that don't think/act the way you think they should EH BALLHAWK!

[BallHawk]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

Probably because they could not post or start a thread without people like yourself ridiculing them and calling them names.
Isn't that pretty much what you do around here is insult other posters that don't think/act the way you think they should EH BALLHAWK!

Yeah, ask anybody on this forum. I'm known for being the asshole that flames everybody if their opinion is different from my own.

[Mazzin]

Im not name calling, But if you dont see what TT has turned this team into AFTER sherman DESTROYED IT you are obviously blind. Or just love riding on Bretts jock.

[gex]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

Probably because they could not post or start a thread without people like yourself ridiculing them and calling them names.
Isn't that pretty much what you do around here is insult other posters that don't think/act the way you think they should EH BALLHAWK!

Yeah, ask anybody on this forum. I'm known for being the asshole that flames everybody if their opinion is different from my own.

Should I start a poll?

I am fairly sure with a little researching that you do it on a regular basis.

[BallHawk]

Go ahead. Start a poll. What's another pointless thread to you anyway?

[Mazzin]

Yea because thats what we need another thread thats GOING NOWHERE!!!!!!

God god. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :cnf:

Your last two topics were, That Brett Magic, and now this one..you sir are a troll.....Why couldn't you just put what you wanted about "bretts magic" in the Brett Favre thread?

[Mazzin]

Go ahead. Start a poll. What's another pointless thread to you anyway?...



Same time haah ROFL

[Zool]

Gex you know I hate you right? Did you seriously put fucking unreplacable?

Die in a fire plz.

[gex]

Gex you know I hate you right? Did you seriously put fucking unreplacable?

Die in a fire plz.

lol :D

[Gunakor]

Haven't we had this poll once or ten times before? We don't need a new poll every month asking the same thing just to see if anyone changed their mind...

[gex]

I don't know, right now its 6-10, so almost 40% probably think its a legit argument to bring up.

Maybe its just a little too soon?

A whole lot of people believe that tt hasn't proven anything and that last years record was Favre's leadership and will to convince his teammates to give it their all.

[BallHawk]

A whole lot of people believe that tt hasn't proven anything and that last years record was Favre's leadership and will to convince his teammates to give it their all.

Tell that to Greg Jennings.

[MJZiggy]

And Donald Driver, and Nick Collins, and Charles Woodson....

[Gunakor]

Maybe its just a little too soon?


How about we make a deal. You/others can create this poll once a year. At the end of each season, make this poll and see how fans think about our GM based upon the results of an entire season. That sounds fair.

[gex]

6-12........33% think that tt's time has come.

[PlantPage55]

As soon as we're one game under .500 it's fire Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, everyone else, cut half our players, change from the ZBS, change to the 3-4 defense...

Are you people serious? Ted MUST go at this point?

Give me a fucking break.

[cpk1994]

As soon as we're one game under .500 it's fire Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, everyone else, cut half our players, change from the ZBS, change to the 3-4 defense...

Are you people serious? Ted MUST go at this point?

Give me a fucking break.You need to realize that there are thoise that want TT fired because because he refused to put Brett above the team and ultimately traded him. This includes the poster of the pointless poll and many others. The ones that support TT or rational fans that understand TT side of the Favre saga are the ones that realize that this is a idotic and pointless thread, so they don't vote.

[GBRulz]

I disagree. They don't vote because "unreplacable" is scaring them away and they refuse to come back.

[The Shadow]

As soon as we're one game under .500 it's fire Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, everyone else, cut half our players, change from the ZBS, change to the 3-4 defense...

Are you people serious? Ted MUST go at this point?

Give me a fucking break.You need to realize that there are thoise that want TT fired because because he refused to put Brett above the team and ultimately traded him. This includes the poster of the pointless poll and many others. The ones that support TT or rational fans that understand TT side of the Favre saga are the ones that realize that this is a idotic and pointless thread, so they don't vote.

You hit it right on the head.
The Favre jock-sniffing Cult will never forgive Thompson even if the Packers win 10 Super Bowls.
It's the old 'a woman scorned' syndrome.

[SkinBasket]

Aren't we at that place yet where the mods said they weren't going to let this happen to the packer forum again the last time this happened?

[sharpe1027]

Could you bias the choices a little more next time? Obvious bias is obvious.

What's wrong, scared a fair vote wouldn't get the results you wanted?

[bobblehead]

6-12........33% think that tt's time has come.

ooo...33%, that is about the same as bush's job approval numbers...no way those people could be wrong huh?

[hoosier]

It's largely because of stuff like this that I tend to stay out of the Packer room at PR. There is stupidity in the politics room too, but at least you can expect to go a few weeks without seeing the same pointless topics being recycled. Sorry Gex, but this thread blows.

[mraynrand]

It's largely because of stuff like this that I tend to stay out of the Packer room at PR. There is stupidity in the politics room too, but at least you can expect to go a few weeks without seeing the same pointless topics being recycled. Sorry Gex, but this thread blows.

Come on! You see a thread title like this and you know what's inside. It's like all those FIRE xxxx!!! threads on any forum following a loss. You just are going to get some posters like this on every forum - guys who are a mile wide but an inch deep - they spread their crap in multiple threads, and none of it is edifying.

[Badgerinmaine]

Gee, no slant in the choices given, huh? :roll: :mrgreen:

[hoosier]

It's largely because of stuff like this that I tend to stay out of the Packer room at PR. There is stupidity in the politics room too, but at least you can expect to go a few weeks without seeing the same pointless topics being recycled. Sorry Gex, but this thread blows.

Come on! You see a thread title like this and you know what's inside. It's like all those FIRE xxxx!!! threads on any forum following a loss. You just are going to get some posters like this on every forum - guys who are a mile wide but an inch deep - they spread their crap in multiple threads, and none of it is edifying.

True, you know what you're gonna get before you open it, but that doesn't change the "unreplacable" desire to condemn it. :lol:

[mraynrand]

It's largely because of stuff like this that I tend to stay out of the Packer room at PR. There is stupidity in the politics room too, but at least you can expect to go a few weeks without seeing the same pointless topics being recycled. Sorry Gex, but this thread blows.

Come on! You see a thread title like this and you know what's inside. It's like all those FIRE xxxx!!! threads on any forum following a loss. You just are going to get some posters like this on every forum - guys who are a mile wide but an inch deep - they spread their crap in multiple threads, and none of it is edifying.

True, you know what you're gonna get before you open it, but that doesn't change the "unreplacable" desire to condemn it. :lol:

:D

[mission]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

Who? Woody?

I admit to not posting nearly as much as I normally have and much of that is due to the cyclical conversation nature of this forum but shit like that has little to do with idiots repeatedly getting owned and getting tired of it.

When I get my ass kicked over and over in Madden by "Chuck the Middleman", I no longer want to play with him anymore. In fact, I hate playing him. He destroys me.

That's kinda how this forum goes.

[SkinBasket]

I think it's more an overall decrease in participation in the packer forum because two or three posters queer up every thread with the same, tired, singular thought that bounces around their little pea brains.

I know I don't come in here as often because no matter what the thread title, it's going to be the same 4 or 5 posts over and over again from 2 or 3 of the least knowledgeable people here for the most part.

[GoPackGo]

Thank you everyone for pimpslapping Gex.
Is Gex the new Partial?

[mraynrand]

Thank you everyone for pimpslapping Gex.
Is Gex the new Partial?
Not even close. Partial makes sense on a regular basis. Gex? I'm still waiting for the first time.

[BallHawk]

Thank you everyone for pimpslapping Gex.
Is Gex the new Partial?
Not even close. Partial makes sense on a regular basis. Gex? I'm still waiting for the first time.

Yup. Partial (as much as he is made fun of) knows what he's talking about more often than not when in the Packer Forum.

Nice call on the NFC East. Does it help saying I agreed with you? :D

But there is a correlation between lack of football intelligence and the favorability of that poster. Especially if that poster is a loudmouth.

[SkinBasket]

Thank you everyone for pimpslapping Gex.
Is Gex the new Partial?

He's trying his hardest to be the next tank and, strangely enough, failing at even that. Wow. That's a sad existence...

[Zool]

Gex + Pete ~= Tank

Tank was the Barry Sanders of trolldom.

[MJZiggy]

Yes, but even tank accidentally made a point every now and again.

[The Shadow]

Yes, but even tank accidentally made a point every now and again.

I think you are being way kind.

[SkinBasket]

At least Mad addressed him in his other important thread. I'm still not convinced he isn't tank, trying to be less tanklike in an effort to cause trouble without being banned this time.

If he's not tank, he's fucking pathetic.

[cpk1994]

Yes, but even tank accidentally made a point every now and again.An he was at least entertaining.

[Tarlam!]

Yes, but even tank accidentally made a point every now and again.An he was at least entertaining.

He was irritating. And, after this thread title, I have to concur with those posters stating Gex = Tank.

Too bad.

[cpk1994]

Yes, but even tank accidentally made a point every now and again.An he was at least entertaining.

He was irritating. And, after this thread title, I have to concur with those posters stating Gex = Tank.

Too bad.True, Tank he was irritating at times, and yes I agree with the Gex = Tank. But even Tank had his funny moments. Can't say the same for Gex.

[cpk1994]

At least Mad addressed him in his other important thread. I'm still not convinced he isn't tank, trying to be less tanklike in an effort to cause trouble without being banned this time.

If he's not tank, he's fucking pathetic.Then he is multi tasking becuase he is back on Sportsbubbler yet again after just being banned there.

[Zool]

Gex cant hold Tanks jock. Maybe someday but the kid just ain't got what it takes yet. He doesn't have that IT factor that P likes to talk about so much. If I met Tank I dont know what I would do exactly. Either punch him or buy him a beer. Gex I would ignore like so many fallen leaves now under the snow in my yard.

[SkinBasket]

Gex I would ignore like so many fallen leaves now under the snow in my yard.

You're a beautiful man on the inside, Zool.

[cpk1994]

Gex cant hold Tanks jock. Maybe someday but the kid just ain't got what it takes yet. He doesn't have that IT factor that P likes to talk about so much. If I met Tank I dont know what I would do exactly. Either punch him or buy him a beer. Gex I would ignore like so many fallen leaves now under the snow in my yard. :lol: That theres funny. I don't care who ya are.

[Fritz]

Have you considered punching him, then buying him a beer? Or buying him a beer and then punching him?

Ah, Tank. A loveable A-hole.

[MOBB DEEP]

didnt tank say he was a weed head tho? get him stoned then harsh his mellow by yelln at him

no one likes being reamed when high off grass

[bobblehead]

Gex + Pete ~= Tank

Tank was the Barry Sanders of trolldom.

pete is foolish, but not nearly as inflamatory as gex. I personally am convinced that gex is tank...I think I was the first one to point it out this time. He held anonymity as long as he could, but can't contain himself any longer.

[Fritz]

To try to get this thread back to TT's future, I have been wondering lately if Ted's downfall might be his inability to construct a solid offensive line.

It takes offensive linemen, traditionally, time to develop - Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle are the Packer poster boys for this. And in my view, TT has done an excellent job with most of the position groups on this team - wide receiver, defensive backfield, running back, tight end, even linebacker. The defensive line even worked well last year, anyway.

But the o-line has never been solid. Last year, one could argue, Favre's presence led to the minimal number of sacks the QB took - he got through his reads quickly and got rid of the ball quickly.

And I don't think you can just fix an offensive line in one draft, the way Ron Wolf tried to fix the cornerback position in one draft years ago when he drafted Edwaqrds, Fred whoever and Mike Mackenzie in the first three rounds. Even if TT drafted two or three very good linemen next year, it would take at least two years - at least - for them to develop, and I don't think TT has that much time to deliver.

His fate may be tied to guys named Sitton, Barbre, Colledge, Spitz, and Giancomo (or whatever his name is).

[Bretsky]

To try to get this thread back to TT's future, I have been wondering lately if Ted's downfall might be his inability to construct a solid offensive line.

It takes offensive linemen, traditionally, time to develop - Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle are the Packer poster boys for this. And in my view, TT has done an excellent job with most of the position groups on this team - wide receiver, defensive backfield, running back, tight end, even linebacker. The defensive line even worked well last year, anyway.

But the o-line has never been solid. Last year, one could argue, Favre's presence led to the minimal number of sacks the QB took - he got through his reads quickly and got rid of the ball quickly.

And I don't think you can just fix an offensive line in one draft, the way Ron Wolf tried to fix the cornerback position in one draft years ago when he drafted Edwaqrds, Fred whoever and Mike Mackenzie in the first three rounds. Even if TT drafted two or three very good linemen next year, it would take at least two years - at least - for them to develop, and I don't think TT has that much time to deliver.

His fate may be tied to guys named Sitton, Barbre, Colledge, Spitz, and Giancomo (or whatever his name is).

I've been begging for a FA OG to get signed for years; we've got so much money the price does not matter that much. Then let all the newbies fight it out. But TT does not believe in FA, which is fine. What I see is the recipe to have a pretty decent team year after year. Not sure this is the recipe for a title unless you believe TT will hit it huge on some draft picks and get a few more stars along the way. We'll always be young though.

[sheepshead]

To try to get this thread back to TT's future, I have been wondering lately if Ted's downfall might be his inability to construct a solid offensive line.

It takes offensive linemen, traditionally, time to develop - Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle are the Packer poster boys for this. And in my view, TT has done an excellent job with most of the position groups on this team - wide receiver, defensive backfield, running back, tight end, even linebacker. The defensive line even worked well last year, anyway.

But the o-line has never been solid. Last year, one could argue, Favre's presence led to the minimal number of sacks the QB took - he got through his reads quickly and got rid of the ball quickly.

And I don't think you can just fix an offensive line in one draft, the way Ron Wolf tried to fix the cornerback position in one draft years ago when he drafted Edwaqrds, Fred whoever and Mike Mackenzie in the first three rounds. Even if TT drafted two or three very good linemen next year, it would take at least two years - at least - for them to develop, and I don't think TT has that much time to deliver.

His fate may be tied to guys named Sitton, Barbre, Colledge, Spitz, and Giancomo (or whatever his name is).

I've been begging for a FA OG to get signed for years; we've got so much money the price does not matter that much. Then let all the newbies fight it out. But TT does not believe in FA, which is fine. What I see is the recipe to have a pretty decent team year after year. Not sure this is the recipe for a title unless you believe TT will hit it huge on some draft picks and get a few more stars along the way. We'll always be young though.

The problem with OL is their production drops off after we would get them. They want huge guarantees and maybe would be worth the money for 2-3 years. I'm not saying exceptions arent out there, but that is a buyer beware position for sure.

[MOBB DEEP]

quote]

I've been begging for a FA OG to get signed for years; we've got so much money the price does not matter that much. Then let all the newbies fight it out. But TT does not believe in FA, which is fine. What I see is the recipe to have a pretty decent team year after year. Not sure this is the recipe for a title unless you believe TT will hit it huge on some draft picks and get a few more stars along the way. We'll always be young though.[/quote]

Bretsky, do u or anyone else know tt's rationale for balkn at FA?

B, do u know a lady named kelly ackley from fort?

she was the first white hottie i dated during my 2 years at uw whitewater. she had redic body for a youngn so if she hasnt been workn out it's probably flabby 15 years later. hope she's not ur wife... 8-)

[LEWCWA]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!

[wist43]

Even I don't want TT fired, even though I believe the Packers can't win a championship with him at the helm.

He's brought in enough talent to justify keeping him around, and I believe he will continue to draft the occasional Greg Jennings along with the occasional Justin Harrell. 56 draft picks every year, to what end??? Ultimately, we are spinning our wheels.

We're going to continue to run passive schemes on both sides of the ball, and we will perpetually be the youngest team in the league with all the draft picks every year, but who cares, nothing is going to change for at least 4 years. I've settled in for the long haul on this one.

Maybe I'm just feeling mellow tonight, and tomorrow I'll call for his head... :)

[Bretsky]

quote]

I've been begging for a FA OG to get signed for years; we've got so much money the price does not matter that much. Then let all the newbies fight it out. But TT does not believe in FA, which is fine. What I see is the recipe to have a pretty decent team year after year. Not sure this is the recipe for a title unless you believe TT will hit it huge on some draft picks and get a few more stars along the way. We'll always be young though.

Bretsky, do u or anyone else know tt's rationale for balkn at FA?

B, do u know a lady named kelly ackley from fort?

she was the first white hottie i dated during my 2 years at uw whitewater. she had redic body for a youngn so if she hasnt been workn out it's probably flabby 15 years later. hope she's not ur wife... 8-)[/quote]


Rationale for avoiding FA for the most part is it's better to build from within through the draft. Of course you need to keep hitting on draft picks then.
Plenty of mistakes are also made in free agency so it's a risk for a GM to go that route as well.

I don't know Kelly; if you were dating a gal named Jodi who was a hottie bartender at the Pink Cadillac...........I don't want to know about it :lol:

[ND72]

lol dnt get mad, its all fun and games

Tell that to the posters that left this forum because of this shit.

Probably because they could not post or start a thread without people like yourself ridiculing them and calling them names.
Isn't that pretty much what you do around here is insult other posters that don't think/act the way you think they should EH BALLHAWK!


Sorry, I only got this far before I had to write something. I used to love coming on this form. Many of the "originals" know what it was like here when the js board sucked, and this one was rocking. Great posts, great conversations, no putting down, no yelling, etc. etc.

I first came here the spring of the Hawk draft pick...on jso, I'd get creamed for saying we should take AJ Hawk. On here, even though some didn't agree, we had rational, adult conversations about it.

It has changed for the worse.

I still love coming here and catching up on some reading....but some of these dumb posts just make me not come back that often.

[gex]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!

Thanx LEWCWA.

Let people discuss topics because that's why we have message boards. If people don't agree, fine, don't agree but lets be constructive and not destructive like these guys like to do.

[cpk1994]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

[SkinBasket]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!

Thanx LEWCWA.

Let people discuss topics because that's why we have message boards. If people don't agree, fine, don't agree but lets be constructive and not destructive like these guys like to do.

Wow. You're not transparent or anything.

[Fred's Slacks]

This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!

Even Wist, Mr. Skeptic, says he doesn't think TT should be fired. That should tell you something. He was executive of the year last year. He makes way more good moves than bad ones. This is a ridiculous topic.

[Fritz]

Two points:

First, to Wist, I would say I agree to an extent that the Packers - on the defensive side - run a kind of defense I don't care for. For me, it's not so much about the team not blitzing, it's this two-gap scheme. That scheme's success seems predicated on every single player having to carry out his assignment perfectly, whereas it seems to my untrained eye that a one-gap scheme allows players to make plays and not just hold points of attack.

Second point, for Bretsky - come on now, you know better than to trot out the "TT doesn't believe in free agency" line. Charles Woodson. Ryan Pickett. Brandon Chillar. And a couple of guards who were washouts his first or second year, right?

He's very, very careful with it, sure. Maybe he's too careful. In fact, I'd agree with your approach to signing a guard - if there's a good one out there. It's the only way he's going to fix what seems to be a major problem in the short term. But it'd have to be a premium guard, not someone who's just a name or just another overacheiver whose best days are behind him.

[Gunakor]

Second point, for Bretsky - come on now, you know better than to trot out the "TT doesn't believe in free agency" line. Charles Woodson. Ryan Pickett. Brandon Chillar. And a couple of guards who were washouts his first or second year, right?

He's very, very careful with it, sure. Maybe he's too careful. In fact, I'd agree with your approach to signing a guard - if there's a good one out there. It's the only way he's going to fix what seems to be a major problem in the short term. But it'd have to be a premium guard, not someone who's just a name or just another overacheiver whose best days are behind him.

It doesn't have to be a premium guard necessarily. It just has to be a guard of good value. He's not going to pay Steve Hutchinson type money to a FA guard unless it is a player who is just entering his prime. He'll sign a guy nearing the end of his prime, too, just not at a premium cost. As long as the production they give warrants the salary TT signs them for, I don't think there are any players TT won't take a look at signing in FA. He just won't get caught overpaying for anyone.

[LEWCWA]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

another useless post

[LEWCWA]

Obviously, I think it was a mistake to let Brett go. Much of that may be for my own selfish reasons. I also think it is a pretty bad decision to go into a season with one QB. (Yeah I know we have 2 others on the roster, but if either of them have to play the season is over) So please spare me the smartass comments on that front! My other problem with TT is his lack of developing an offensive line....but I can't blame him too much as he has drafted guys...I'm starting to think a more power based system would be better. Not that I am any expert....all in all I like what TT has done with this team. Now we just have to see if he can take them the next step....

[Guiness]

Gex cant hold Tanks jock. Maybe someday but the kid just ain't got what it takes yet. He doesn't have that IT factor that P likes to talk about so much. If I met Tank I dont know what I would do exactly. Either punch him or buy him a beer. Gex I would ignore like so many fallen leaves now under the snow in my yard.

I was trying to figure out how to say it myself Zool, but I think you captured it.

Tank was a loveable looser, that you just shook your head at. So much of his stuff was inane that you often had to think he was sitting back and laughing at it himself.

Gex takes himself too seriously, and has a mean streak - both characteristics I don't associate with tank. Or at least not consistently.

[The Gunshooter]

Obviously, I think it was a mistake to let Brett go. Much of that may be for my own selfish reasons. I also think it is a pretty bad decision to go into a season with one QB. (Yeah I know we have 2 others on the roster, but if either of them have to play the season is over) So please spare me the smartass comments on that front! My other problem with TT is his lack of developing an offensive line....but I can't blame him too much as he has drafted guys...I'm starting to think a more power based system would be better. Not that I am any expert....all in all I like what TT has done with this team. Now we just have to see if he can take them the next step....

I am with you on the philosophy part of bigger guys for cold conditions. There is a reason animals are bigger up north and it applies to football also.

Brett is 39 and this year's team is worse than last year(injuries) even with him. They were better off getting Rodgers some experience now because Rodgers will get a lot better. The key to winning a Super Bowl or two for GB is going to rest with whether or not TT can restock this roster faster than it is depleted. So far I give TT a B-, but he needs to pick up the pace. They need a couple o-lineman(maybe Sitton is one, Wells is too small, back problems), a couple linebackers(Barnett is done, Pop sucks), a DE, a DT(Harrell has the talent but is too lazy) and another starting quality cornerback(not TW, maybe Pat Lee). If TT can do that in the next two years GB will win a super bowl. If not, they won't.

[SkinBasket]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

another useless post

Ha! I'm sure the humor here is lost on you.

[cpk1994]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

another useless postYou tell people to get through high school. But I seem to recall that you posted enough useless threads in 10-15 minutes to cover the entire first page of the forum a couple of weeks ago. So who needs to get through High school?

[LEWCWA]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

another useless postYou tell people to get through high school. But I seem to recall that you posted enough useless threads in 10-15 minutes to cover the entire first page of the forum a couple of weeks ago. So who needs to get through High school?

Yep I did and I have. Thing is you haven't. You can't help yourself I guess. You refuse to give any credence to the idea that Packer management made a mistake or Brett maybe should still be here. Mostly your here to bash anything positive said about Brett. You are a Brett junkie on the other side of the fence.

There are pros and cons both ways on this issue and both have legitimate arguments. What side you fall on doesn't really matter at this point, it is done....I'm sure this trade will be discussed for years to come here and nationally as well. Thing is many on here will discuss Brett and how he is doing as long as he plays. Face it we are all Packer fans, but many are Brett fans as well. I'm sure all Brett fans would pull for the Packers if they played against Brett, but you don't have to wash your hands of Brett to be a Packer fan. You seem to think you do. Obviously, even if some don't think so, Brett is a viable topic. His threads seem to attract the most response....

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I am with you on the philosophy part of bigger guys for cold conditions. There is a reason animals are bigger up north and it applies to football also.



Care to illustrate this point? Seems to me the largest land mammals live in warm weather...elephants, rhinos, hippotamus, etc.

[The Gunshooter]

I am with you on the philosophy part of bigger guys for cold conditions. There is a reason animals are bigger up north and it applies to football also.



Care to illustrate this point? Seems to me the largest land mammals live in warm weather...elephants, rhinos, hippotamus, etc.

That's because I am talking about America. Africa has soccer and that why the animals are assbackwards.

[Fritz]

The cockroaches are bigger in Texas.

[vince]

I am with you on the philosophy part of bigger guys for cold conditions. There is a reason animals are bigger up north and it applies to football also.



Care to illustrate this point? Seems to me the largest land mammals live in warm weather...elephants, rhinos, hippotamus, etc.
Surely you've heard of the abominable giant penguins, crackhead.
http://www.worth1000.com/entries/93000/93371lqSP_w.jpg

[Packers4Ever]

I disagree. They don't vote because "unreplacable" is scaring them away and they refuse to come back.

The author obviously meant 'irreplaceable.'
The score is approx. 25% for him to leave, 75% to remain here.

We need TT here, he obviously succeeds at what other GMs haven't.

[cpk1994]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

another useless postYou tell people to get through high school. But I seem to recall that you posted enough useless threads in 10-15 minutes to cover the entire first page of the forum a couple of weeks ago. So who needs to get through High school?

Yep I did and I have. Thing is you haven't. You can't help yourself I guess. You refuse to give any credence to the idea that Packer management made a mistake or Brett maybe should still be here. Mostly your here to bash anything positive said about Brett. You are a Brett junkie on the other side of the fence.

There are pros and cons both ways on this issue and both have legitimate arguments. What side you fall on doesn't really matter at this point, it is done....I'm sure this trade will be discussed for years to come here and nationally as well. Thing is many on here will discuss Brett and how he is doing as long as he plays. Face it we are all Packer fans, but many are Brett fans as well. I'm sure all Brett fans would pull for the Packers if they played against Brett, but you don't have to wash your hands of Brett to be a Packer fan. You seem to think you do. Obviously, even if some don't think so, Brett is a viable topic. His threads seem to attract the most response....Of course I don't give credence to that idea because I don't believe it was a mistake and Brett should be gone. Brett had been pulling his diva act for 5 years. A diva act that Mike Sherman enabled like putting gas on a fire becuase he didn't have the spine to do his job It was about time someone stood up to his B.S. and put an end to it. I continue to applaud TT and M3 for having the backbone that Sherman clearly didn't have. No one player is above the team. Football is a team sport. PLayers win together and they lose together. Unfortunately, Brett never learned that lesson.
You want to be poisitve about Brett? Fine. But if you are going, like Gex and Paco constantly do, to bag on Rodgers becuase he is not Brett, or root for the Packers to fail becuase management wouldn't kiss Lord Favre's ring and give him whatever he wants and bag on the team by using any success Brett has in New York and rub it in, then damn right you are not a Packer fan and you will be called on it. True Packer fans support the TEAM. True fans will support Aaron Rodgers when he takes the field. There are those who don't do that(and I don't mean Rastak and the two bear trolls) on this forum simply becuase Brett is no longer here. That is disgraceful.

[Tarlam!]

Honestly?

Is it worth the fight?

I think all Packer fans love and respect/ loathe and hate Brett Favre for all the right reasons.

He is an incredible player. He is just a great guy, from what I get outta TV. He helped the Packers more than his 1/53rd share as a team member every year he was with the Packers.

There can be no doubt, Favre was a unique Packer and we, as fans, would be delighted if we get another like him.

But, this discussion of whether he went at the right time or not is really a non issue.

He went. He wanted to go. He had his reasons. There can be no blame. Alternatively, equal blame must be shared.

Our in-fighting here doesn't even make for interesting reading anymore.

[pbmax]

Honestly?

Is it worth the fight?

Our in-fighting here doesn't even make for interesting reading anymore.
Could not be truer if etched into stone. Stop boring everyone by repeating yourselves.

[]{ilr]3]

Honestly?

Is it worth the fight?

I think all Packer fans love and respect/ loathe and hate Brett Favre for all the right reasons.

He is an incredible player. He is just a great guy, from what I get outta TV. He helped the Packers more than his 1/53rd share as a team member every year he was with the Packers.

There can be no doubt, Favre was a unique Packer and we, as fans, would be delighted if we get another like him.

But, this discussion of whether he went at the right time or not is really a non issue.

He went. He wanted to go. He had his reasons. There can be no blame. Alternatively, equal blame must be shared.

Our in-fighting here doesn't even make for interesting reading anymore.

Amen to that! :worship:

I have some pretty strong feelings about this as well and several times I have started replies based on those feeling and by the time I am finished with them and re-read them I almost always decide not to post it as they would only serve to polarize us even more (not that my opinion carries any wieght around here :P ).

I pretty much save all my totally biased one way glasses for when I post about the Bears or the Vikings 8-)

[LEWCWA]

Wow--look at how a real discussion can develope if people quit bashing other posters. The whole slew comes out and wastes 2.5 pages bashing one poster, with nothing intelligent to say on the subject. Now who are the trolls around here......Some of you really need to get through high school...This is a viable topic if discussed. There are viable reasons to want TT fired....but we can't discuss that, because of the thread hijacking police!Talk about Pot calling kettle.... :roll:

another useless postYou tell people to get through high school. But I seem to recall that you posted enough useless threads in 10-15 minutes to cover the entire first page of the forum a couple of weeks ago. So who needs to get through High school?

Yep I did and I have. Thing is you haven't. You can't help yourself I guess. You refuse to give any credence to the idea that Packer management made a mistake or Brett maybe should still be here. Mostly your here to bash anything positive said about Brett. You are a Brett junkie on the other side of the fence.

There are pros and cons both ways on this issue and both have legitimate arguments. What side you fall on doesn't really matter at this point, it is done....I'm sure this trade will be discussed for years to come here and nationally as well. Thing is many on here will discuss Brett and how he is doing as long as he plays. Face it we are all Packer fans, but many are Brett fans as well. I'm sure all Brett fans would pull for the Packers if they played against Brett, but you don't have to wash your hands of Brett to be a Packer fan. You seem to think you do. Obviously, even if some don't think so, Brett is a viable topic. His threads seem to attract the most response....Of course I don't give credence to that idea because I don't believe it was a mistake and Brett should be gone. Brett had been pulling his diva act for 5 years. A diva act that Mike Sherman enabled like putting gas on a fire becuase he didn't have the spine to do his job It was about time someone stood up to his B.S. and put an end to it. I continue to applaud TT and M3 for having the backbone that Sherman clearly didn't have. No one player is above the team. Football is a team sport. PLayers win together and they lose together. Unfortunately, Brett never learned that lesson.
You want to be poisitve about Brett? Fine. But if you are going, like Gex and Paco constantly do, to bag on Rodgers becuase he is not Brett, or root for the Packers to fail becuase management wouldn't kiss Lord Favre's ring and give him whatever he wants and bag on the team by using any success Brett has in New York and rub it in, then damn right you are not a Packer fan and you will be called on it. True Packer fans support the TEAM. True fans will support Aaron Rodgers when he takes the field. There are those who don't do that(and I don't mean Rastak and the two bear trolls) on this forum simply becuase Brett is no longer here. That is disgraceful.



It might be nice if you didn't embllish your statements! As far as I can tell, there was never any doubt about Brett playing until after the 4-12 season. He had mentioned retirement b4 that, but only in the context that the day was getting near. After 4-12 is when he really considered retirement, so that makes this year the 3rd year of your so called DIVA act. Big damn deal. You make my point for me. Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't mean there aren't valid reasons for moving on. I accept that, just like you should accept that there are valid reasons for Brett to still be QB'ing the Pack. Anybody that bashes, Brett the way you do is a piss poor fan. As far as I can tell, Rodgers has proven nothing to this point. He is 5-5 as a starter played well at times and played poorly at times. I've seen plenty of QB's play like him and be relegated to backup duty or out of the league within a couple years or toil in mediocrity for years. I do know one thing, he has had the ball in his hands in at least 3 of their losses late in the game and laid an egg. I don't believe Brett would have laid 3 eggs, with the game on the line.

[Gunakor]

I do know one thing, he has had the ball in his hands in at least 3 of their losses late in the game and laid an egg. I don't believe Brett would have laid 3 eggs, with the game on the line.

ORLY? Brett has thrown an INT in overtime of a playoff game twice in his career. Not only has he laid eggs in his career, he's done so on a much bigger stage than Rodgers has ever stepped on. How about the 6 INT's he threw in St. Louis? He's laid his fair share of eggs. He's done so more than once, with the SEASON on the line rather than just the game.

So let's at least be fair about things. Favre at times in his career has looked MUCH worse than Rodgers has at any point this season.

And, to be fair, the loss to Minnesota can't be laid on Aaron Rodgers shoulders - even and especially looking at the very last drive of the game. He got the Pack into long distance FG range, and then was saddled with piss poor playcalls from MM that hampered his ability to get them into a more comfortable FG situation. Crosby missed the kick, not Rodgers.

[prsnfoto]

I do know one thing, he has had the ball in his hands in at least 3 of their losses late in the game and laid an egg. I don't believe Brett would have laid 3 eggs, with the game on the line.

ORLY? Brett has thrown an INT in overtime of a playoff game twice in his career. Not only has he laid eggs in his career, he's done so on a much bigger stage than Rodgers has ever stepped on. How about the 6 INT's he threw in St. Louis? He's laid his fair share of eggs. He's done so more than once, with the SEASON on the line rather than just the game.

So let's at least be fair about things. Favre at times in his career has looked MUCH worse than Rodgers has at any point this season.

And, to be fair, the loss to Minnesota can't be laid on Aaron Rodgers shoulders - even and especially looking at the very last drive of the game. He got the Pack into long distance FG range, and then was saddled with piss poor playcalls from MM that hampered his ability to get them into a more comfortable FG situation. Crosby missed the kick, not Rodgers.



I find it funny how when Rodgers loses games it is never his fault but whenever they lost before it was always Brett's fault. I thought I saw the other day Brett is 8-1 in regular season OT games and 0-2 in the playoffs now I could make plenty of excuses for both those playoff games and how they never should have gone to OT, but generally once you are saddled with playing OT most of the time it falls on two guys to come through the QB and the Kicker and 8-3 lifetime is pretty damn good.

[LEWCWA]

I do know one thing, he has had the ball in his hands in at least 3 of their losses late in the game and laid an egg. I don't believe Brett would have laid 3 eggs, with the game on the line.

ORLY? Brett has thrown an INT in overtime of a playoff game twice in his career. Not only has he laid eggs in his career, he's done so on a much bigger stage than Rodgers has ever stepped on. How about the 6 INT's he threw in St. Louis? He's laid his fair share of eggs. He's done so more than once, with the SEASON on the line rather than just the game.

So let's at least be fair about things. Favre at times in his career has looked MUCH worse than Rodgers has at any point this season.

And, to be fair, the loss to Minnesota can't be laid on Aaron Rodgers shoulders - even and especially looking at the very last drive of the game. He got the Pack into long distance FG range, and then was saddled with piss poor playcalls from MM that hampered his ability to get them into a more comfortable FG situation. Crosby missed the kick, not Rodgers.


I wondered how long it would take for someone to mention Favre and the playoffs. Did I once say Favre hasn't had his share of eggs? Point being I believe, Brett would have won 1 or 2 of those games for the Packers and Rodgers didn't. Simple as that. I believe the Pack would be 6-4 or 7-3 with Favre under center. I do agree MM puked the end of the MN game, but the last play Rodgers could have tried to make a bigger play, in my opinion. To say the loss can't be laid on AR's shoulders is BS. He didn't do shit all day. When the guy plays a poor game please call it what it was. Winners don't make excuses, and I'm sure he wouldn't. I would bet he would say there were plays to be made and he didn't make them....I have respect for Rodgers and his play. He just hasn't shown that he will take the next step. Hopefully he will, it is still early in his run!

[Patler]

I find it funny how when Rodgers loses games it is never his fault but whenever they lost before it was always Brett's fault. I thought I saw the other day Brett is 8-1 in regular season OT games and 0-2 in the playoffs now I could make plenty of excuses for both those playoff games and how they never should have gone to OT, but generally once you are saddled with playing OT most of the time it falls on two guys to come through the QB and the Kicker and 8-3 lifetime is pretty damn good.

Just like when Favre threw an interception, to many fans it was never Favre's fault. The receiver screwed up, or Favre was "just trying to win", as if no other players want to win. "Trying to win" somehow made up for "silly decision" in those circumstances.

In all honesty, it is hard to blame a QB for an overtime loss when he doesn't even see the field in the overtime, especially after driving his team to a late score in the 4th quarter. It is also hard to blame him when he picks up enough yardage so that the head coach backs off, thinking they are already close enough for the winning fieldgoal. It is also easy to blame the QB when he throws an ill-advised interception in overtime or at the end of the game to put the other team in position to win.

[Patler]

I do agree MM puked the end of the MN game, but the last play Rodgers could have tried to make a bigger play, in my opinion. To say the loss can't be laid on AR's shoulders is BS. He didn't do shit all day. When the guy plays a poor game please call it what it was. Winners don't make excuses, and I'm sure he wouldn't. I would bet he would say there were plays to be made and he didn't make them....I have respect for Rodgers and his play. He just hasn't shown that he will take the next step. Hopefully he will, it is still early in his run!

There is a difference between a guy playing poorly when the conditions were there to play well, and a guy playing poorly when he didn't have much of a chance to play well. My feeling is that in Minnesota, Rodgers didn't have a chance to play well. He took some head snapping hits and was knocked down or sacked on half of his drop backs. Before you say he held the ball too long, I will point out that writers, coaches and players all agreed that was the case only a time or two. More often Rodgers was getting hit even before he completed his drop.

I would argue that Rodgers didn't really play that poorly, under the conditions. He avoided the killer mistake, even under immense pressure. That was one reason why the Packers still had a chance to win at the end. I'm not forgetting the play of the defense or special teams, just pointing out that Rodgers did not throw a bunch of interceptions when pressured. If he had, even the run back TDs wouldn't have helped.

If you are objective, you should acknowledge that game had the right conditions for Favre to have thrown 3 or 4 interceptions, as he did on somewhat regular occasions when under a strong rush and trying to "make a play" when behind. Rodgers was smart by keeping it close enough that others could make plays to give the Packers a chance. Maybe Favre would have won it, maybe he would have taken all chance for a win away with multiple interceptions. Hard to tell.

As for the last play, Rodgers could have gambled, maybe come up big, or maybe have eliminated even the chance for the game-winning kick. In my book, nothing wrong with putting it on the toe of Crosby, indoors for the win as they did.

[cpk1994]

I do agree MM puked the end of the MN game, but the last play Rodgers could have tried to make a bigger play, in my opinion. To say the loss can't be laid on AR's shoulders is BS. He didn't do shit all day. When the guy plays a poor game please call it what it was. Winners don't make excuses, and I'm sure he wouldn't. I would bet he would say there were plays to be made and he didn't make them....I have respect for Rodgers and his play. He just hasn't shown that he will take the next step. Hopefully he will, it is still early in his run!

There is a difference between a guy playing poorly when the conditions were there to play well, and a guy playing poorly when he didn't have much of a chance to play well. My feeling is that in Minnesota, Rodgers didn't have a chance to play well. He took some head snapping hits and was knocked down or sacked on half of his drop backs. Before you say he held the ball too long, I will point out that writers, coaches and players all agreed that was the case only a time or two. More often Rodgers was getting hit even before he completed his drop.

I would argue that Rodgers didn't really play that poorly, under the conditions. He avoided the killer mistake, even under immense pressure. That was one reason why the Packers still had a chance to win at the end. I'm not forgetting the play of the defense or special teams, just pointing out that Rodgers did not throw a bunch of interceptions when pressured. If he had, even the run back TDs wouldn't have helped.

If you are objective, you should acknowledge that game had the right conditions for Favre to have thrown 3 or 4 interceptions, as he did on somewhat regular occasions when under a strong rush and trying to "make a play" when behind. Rodgers was smart by keeping it close enough that others could make plays to give the Packers a chance. Maybe Favre would have won it, maybe he would have taken all chance for a win away with multiple interceptions. Hard to tell.

As for the last play, Rodgers could have gambled, maybe come up big, or maybe have eliminated even the chance for the game-winning kick. In my book, nothing wrong with putting it on the toe of Crosby, indoors for the win as they did.Good post. The part I bolded is key. What you mentioned about Favre is also true and even more true when you consider his problems in Metrodome the first half of his career. It took Brett 6 tries before he finally won in the Metrodome and most of those times he collapsed under the pressure.

[cpk1994]

Just like when Favre threw an interception, to many fans it was never Favre's fault. The receiver screwed up, or Favre was "just trying to win", as if no other players want to win. "Trying to win" somehow made up for "silly decision" in those circumstances.
It wasn't just the fans either. Mike Sherman used those excues all the time and also used "The ball slipped out of his hands" and "Well, you know he has a broken finger." Brett himself used the "just trying to win" excuse alot as well.

[RashanGary]

Nice post, Patler.

[Gunakor]

To say the loss can't be laid on AR's shoulders is BS. He didn't do shit all day. When the guy plays a poor game please call it what it was. Winners don't make excuses, and I'm sure he wouldn't. I would bet he would say there were plays to be made and he didn't make them....I have respect for Rodgers and his play. He just hasn't shown that he will take the next step. Hopefully he will, it is still early in his run!

The OL didn't do shit all day either. The run defense didn't do shit all day. Aside from the defensive backfield, nobody really did shit all day. All Aaron Rodgers' fault, I know. It must be rough being an NFL quarterback these days...

Point I'm making is this. If Mason Crosby hits that 52 yard FG then Rodgers gets credit for his first 4th quarter buzzer beating comeback game winning drive. He HAD his team in position to win. It's not his fault the kick didn't sail through the uprights. It would have been his fault if he had not gotten into FG range in the first place. It would have been his fault if he had turned the ball over, stripping his team of an opportunity. But he didn't make any mistakes, and got his team into FG range to win it. He did his job. To say that loss falls on Aaron's shoulders is BS.

[KYPack]

Sorry, I only got this far before I had to write something. I used to love coming on this form. Many of the "originals" know what it was like here when the js board sucked, and this one was rocking. Great posts, great conversations, no putting down, no yelling, etc. etc.

I first came here the spring of the Hawk draft pick...on jso, I'd get creamed for saying we should take AJ Hawk. On here, even though some didn't agree, we had rational, adult conversations about it.

It has changed for the worse.

I still love coming here and catching up on some reading....but some of these dumb posts just make me not come back that often.

ND,

Get your butt back on here.

We need some ol' lineman to harass.

You were around in the JSO days.
This latest little storm is nothing.
As some have pointed out, Gex is "Tank-lite".

[Deputy Nutz]

I do agree MM puked the end of the MN game, but the last play Rodgers could have tried to make a bigger play, in my opinion. To say the loss can't be laid on AR's shoulders is BS. He didn't do shit all day. When the guy plays a poor game please call it what it was. Winners don't make excuses, and I'm sure he wouldn't. I would bet he would say there were plays to be made and he didn't make them....I have respect for Rodgers and his play. He just hasn't shown that he will take the next step. Hopefully he will, it is still early in his run!

There is a difference between a guy playing poorly when the conditions were there to play well, and a guy playing poorly when he didn't have much of a chance to play well. My feeling is that in Minnesota, Rodgers didn't have a chance to play well. He took some head snapping hits and was knocked down or sacked on half of his drop backs. Before you say he held the ball too long, I will point out that writers, coaches and players all agreed that was the case only a time or two. More often Rodgers was getting hit even before he completed his drop.

I would argue that Rodgers didn't really play that poorly, under the conditions. He avoided the killer mistake, even under immense pressure. That was one reason why the Packers still had a chance to win at the end. I'm not forgetting the play of the defense or special teams, just pointing out that Rodgers did not throw a bunch of interceptions when pressured. If he had, even the run back TDs wouldn't have helped.

If you are objective, you should acknowledge that game had the right conditions for Favre to have thrown 3 or 4 interceptions, as he did on somewhat regular occasions when under a strong rush and trying to "make a play" when behind. Rodgers was smart by keeping it close enough that others could make plays to give the Packers a chance. Maybe Favre would have won it, maybe he would have taken all chance for a win away with multiple interceptions. Hard to tell.

As for the last play, Rodgers could have gambled, maybe come up big, or maybe have eliminated even the chance for the game-winning kick. In my book, nothing wrong with putting it on the toe of Crosby, indoors for the win as they did.

The Minnesota game showed everything that was wrong about the Packers football team, while the Bears game showed all that was right with the Packers football team.

Who knows I am personally sick of the Favre/Rodgers/Thomspon discussion. It is just constant bickering. It is what it is.

The Minnesota game all went wrong besides the special teams and the pass defense. Rodgers played with shell shock after getting dropped several times. Most had to do with poor offensive line play, and some had to do with his lack of experience. Like all young QBs blitz pick up and pocket awareness can be a major concern.

Against the Bears he didn't get knocked down once and had a very good day. the running game exploded, and the defense was locked in all game.

[Noodle]

Sorry, I only got this far before I had to write something. I used to love coming on this form. Many of the "originals" know what it was like here when the js board sucked, and this one was rocking. Great posts, great conversations, no putting down, no yelling, etc. etc.

I first came here the spring of the Hawk draft pick...on jso, I'd get creamed for saying we should take AJ Hawk. On here, even though some didn't agree, we had rational, adult conversations about it.

It has changed for the worse.

I still love coming here and catching up on some reading....but some of these dumb posts just make me not come back that often.



ND,

Get your butt back on here.

We need some ol' lineman to harass.

You were around in the JSO days.
This latest little storm is nothing.
As some have pointed out, Gex is "Tank-lite".

ND,
Lemme echo KY -- we miss your contributions around here. Everytime there's a thread on the OL, or your mancrush Hawk, I look to see if you've said something. Lately, nada.

Don't be a drive by packerrat. Pull up a stoll and bang out some posts. Quality posting is the best antidote for sameoldtiredcrapitis.

[MOBB DEEP]

even ive tired of the redundancy around here over the past month or so

i no longer compare the two qb's but instead enjoy what each one brings to the table along with their respective team's success/performance. which is why ive NEVER understood whats SO bad about pointn out Lord Favre's progress with the jets; i do the same for grant, gj, aaron, etc....as well as killer keller, kris BEAST jenkins, thomas jones, etc...

view it as mere ENTERTAINMENT!!!

thats the most harmonious exisistence

death to the Lunatic Fringe.....

[Patler]

Rodgers played with shell shock after getting dropped several times. Most had to do with poor offensive line play, and some had to do with his lack of experience. Like all young QBs blitz pick up and pocket awareness can be a major concern.

That is sort of the off-hand comment that is easy to make when a team is dominated as the Packers were. But I disagree completely. I watched the game in its entirety twice, and have replayed plays and series many times. I saw very little evidence of any of those things in Rodgers. He took a couple horrendous hits, yet stayed right there in the pocket on the next pass, completed many and took even more hits but got the throws off, and mostly on target, too. He did not have very many bad passes, wildly off the mark because he panicked or hurried. He didn't take off running when there was not any pressure.

He completed 15 of 26 throws. Not great, but not awful either. More importantly, he avoided interceptions in spite of more pressure and physical abuse on a QB than I have seen in a long time during a Packer game. I give him a lot of credit for that. A couple interceptions and the Packers would have had no chance for a game winning attempt as they did.

He clearly made some mistakes. Getting the ball slapped out of his hand leading to the one safety was careless on his part, whether or not you agree with the call resulting in the safety. Getting caught from behind on the other safety shouldn't have happened either. That IS a play I will agree was one where he was probably too indecisive for the situation, In or near the endzone the QB has to get it away quickly or throw it away. He sensed the pressure, and was running away from it, but not soon enough and not fast enough. He could have thrown it away and it wouldn't have mattered even if he wasn't out of the tackle box, because a safety is a safety whether by being tackled or penalized. In a close game as it was, those were big plays, I will agree. But they were not killer plays, and he and the team recovered from them.

On their last scoring drive, following the Peterson fumble, Rodgers was 3 for 3, Crosby kicked the FG for a 6 point lead, and things looked pretty good. Rodgers was 2 for 2 in their last possession leading to the missed FG. So in their last two possessions, with the game on the line, after a day of constant pressure and after taking a physical pounding, Rodgers completed 5 of 5 for 42 yards.

If Crosby had made the kick, people would have talked about the courageous, controlled game that Rodgers played, keeping them in it in spite of his pass protection being in a shambles. Crosby missed, the Packers lost, so Rodgers play is seen as erratic, unaware, panicked. Only problem is that the quality of his play doesn't change just because Crosby missed the kick.

[Spaulding]

Rodgers played with shell shock after getting dropped several times. Most had to do with poor offensive line play, and some had to do with his lack of experience. Like all young QBs blitz pick up and pocket awareness can be a major concern.

That is sort of the off-hand comment that is easy to make when a team is dominated as the Packers were. But I disagree completely. I watched the game in its entirety twice, and have replayed plays and series many times. I saw very little evidence of any of those things in Rodgers. He took a couple horrendous hits, yet stayed right there in the pocket on the next pass, completed many and took even more hits but got the throws off, and mostly on target, too. He did not have very many bad passes, wildly off the mark because he panicked or hurried. He didn't take off running when there was not any pressure.

He completed 15 of 26 throws. Not great, but not awful either. More importantly, he avoided interceptions in spite of more pressure and physical abuse on a QB than I have seen in a long time during a Packer game. I give him a lot of credit for that. A couple interceptions and the Packers would have had no chance for a game winning attempt as they did.

He clearly made some mistakes. Getting the ball slapped out of his hand leading to the one safety was careless on his part, whether or not you agree with the call resulting in the safety. Getting caught from behind on the other safety shouldn't have happened either. That IS a play I will agree was one where he was probably too indecisive for the situation, In or near the endzone the QB has to get it away quickly or throw it away. He sensed the pressure, and was running away from it, but not soon enough and not fast enough. He could have thrown it away and it wouldn't have mattered even if he wasn't out of the tackle box, because a safety is a safety whether by being tackled or penalized. In a close game as it was, those were big plays, I will agree. But they were not killer plays, and he and the team recovered from them.

On their last scoring drive, following the Peterson fumble, Rodgers was 3 for 3, Crosby kicked the FG for a 6 point lead, and things looked pretty good. Rodgers was 2 for 2 in their last possession leading to the missed FG. So in their last two possessions, with the game on the line, after a day of constant pressure and after taking a physical pounding, Rodgers completed 5 of 5 for 42 yards.

If Crosby had made the kick, people would have talked about the courageous, controlled game that Rodgers played, keeping them in it in spite of his pass protection being in a shambles. Crosby missed, the Packers lost, so Rodgers play is seen as erratic, unaware, panicked. Only problem is that the quality of his play doesn't change just because Crosby missed the kick.

Patler, you're ability to avoid emotion in your posts and excellent analytical/statistical thoughts always remind me of regardless of the petty arguments that go on this forum that there is always a "voice of reason."

Whether you agree or disagree with your posts, the objectors I would tend to believe have little to argue on other than gut or personal feeling to what has been said. Not that there is anything wrong with being passionate/emotional but the last few months on this forum has seen a bit of an overkill in that regard.

More often than not I feel dumber for having read some of the ongoing threads and would like to file in small claims court for those few minutes back. Thankfully I come across excellent posts to remedy that thought.

Thanks for making this forum what it can be.

[prsnfoto]

I find it funny how when Rodgers loses games it is never his fault but whenever they lost before it was always Brett's fault. I thought I saw the other day Brett is 8-1 in regular season OT games and 0-2 in the playoffs now I could make plenty of excuses for both those playoff games and how they never should have gone to OT, but generally once you are saddled with playing OT most of the time it falls on two guys to come through the QB and the Kicker and 8-3 lifetime is pretty damn good.

Just like when Favre threw an interception, to many fans it was never Favre's fault. The receiver screwed up, or Favre was "just trying to win", as if no other players want to win. "Trying to win" somehow made up for "silly decision" in those circumstances.

In all honesty, it is hard to blame a QB for an overtime loss when he doesn't even see the field in the overtime, especially after driving his team to a late score in the 4th quarter. It is also hard to blame him when he picks up enough yardage so that the head coach backs off, thinking they are already close enough for the winning fieldgoal. It is also easy to blame the QB when he throws an ill-advised interception in overtime or at the end of the game to put the other team in position to win.



Never is a stong word the truth is a lot of INT's are not the QB's fault and some are and some should be picks on bad throws and aren't. I am not making excuses for Brett I said I could there is no doubt both of his picks in playoff OT were bad stupid throws. To lay the blame soley at the QB's feet lets people like Sharper,Sherman,Donatell,MM,Sanders,Al Harris off Scot Free. By those standards Rodgers lost the TB,Tennessee, games himself he had the turnovers that made the difference. There is no arguing he has played well most of the time but I think the honest truth is if it were not for the Defense's huge plays this team could easily be 3-7 or 4-6 Christ the Lions almost beat them until Kitna went on a INT free for all. On the flip side do I agree with Terry Bradshaw that this team is 9-1 or 10-0 with Brett , HELL NO but they might be 7-3 which would be a lock for the division right now. No one really knows for sure but it is fun to debate these things nicely like most posters do but there is always a couple of asshats that ruin every thread.(not you Patler) GO Pack! Should be a win this week not a great pass rushing team.