Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More Crap from ESPN

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    More Crap from ESPN

    From ESPN Insider Jeremy Green's Friday chat:

    Sean (Washburn WI): Jeremy, do you see the Pack contending for the north title this year?

    Jeremy Green: I though Green Bay had an exccellent draft. One more like that plus a year of Free Agency will put them in the mix, IF and this is a big IF Rodgers can develop.

    Heather (Indy): This probably isn't a popular opinion given Favre's popularity, but doesn't it actually hurt the Packers development that he is playing this year. Rogers won't get the playing time he needs, and the current Packers aren't ready to contend. Green Bay needs to know what it has in Aaron Rogers.

    Jeremy Green: I would agree with that 1000%. People in the organization flat out have told me that Thompson and McCarthy did not want him to come back. They could never portray it like that in Green Bay though because in Wisconsin that can get you run out of town.

    I'm going to start saving comments like this, and posting them (got a couple from SI I'll be putting up). After the 2006 season, a lot of people are going to owe Brett Favre and Green Bay a GOLD-PLATED apology.
    I can't wait to see these annoying little jack-offs eat a huge helping of crow.
    "What's one more torpedo in a sinking ship?"
    Lynn Dickey, 1984

    "Never apologize, mister. It's a sign of weakness."
    John Wayne, "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon"
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Yeah listening to their predictions in the offseason usually give you more hope. About every year their Super Bowl favorite never ends up winning it, and most teams they say are sleepers are usually just that sleeping all through the season to crappy season.

    Comment

    • #3
      Originally posted by chain_gang
      Yeah listening to their predictions in the offseason usually give you more hope. About every year their Super Bowl favorite never ends up winning it, and most teams they say are sleepers are usually just that sleeping all through the season to crappy season.
      Hey I agree and said as much a number of times. Having Rodgers take over this year makes quite a bit of sense. McCarthy has a three year contract. If I were him I'd start the rebuilding right now with the QB of the future while I develop the 12 guys I just had drafted.


      But that's just me....

      Comment

      • #4
        I don't buy it. Sitting on the bench for a couple of years is the best way for a young kid to come in the league, so this is GOOD for the development of Rodgers. Plus, I think McCarthy needs to get off to a good start. If he can pull off something close to an 8-8 season, suddenly people (nationally and locally) will buy into what he's doing. Kind of like Sherman's first year. Rhodes' team went 8-8, and Green Bay looked to be sliding. Sherman came in and when the team won those last 4 games to finish 9-7, it gave him some momentum and credibility for his regime.
        "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

        Comment

        • #5
          Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
          I don't buy it. Sitting on the bench for a couple of years is the best way for a young kid to come in the league, so this is GOOD for the development of Rodgers. Plus, I think McCarthy needs to get off to a good start. If he can pull off something close to an 8-8 season, suddenly people (nationally and locally) will buy into what he's doing. Kind of like Sherman's first year. Rhodes' team went 8-8, and Green Bay looked to be sliding. Sherman came in and when the team won those last 4 games to finish 9-7, it gave him some momentum and credibility for his regime.

          I respect your opinion. To me, 1 year is enough for a 1st round pick to sit.
          If Rodgers is learning the ropes under fire in year two and he stumbles, McCarthy will be under some heat. Anyway, it's a moot point. Favre is back so we'll see what happens.

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by Rastak
            Hey I agree and said as much a number of times. Having Rodgers take over this year makes quite a bit of sense. McCarthy has a three year contract. If I were him I'd start the rebuilding right now with the QB of the future while I develop the 12 guys I just had drafted.


            But that's just me....
            They are building to the future. Isnt Rodgers already on the team? For a while at that. Does it really harm him to sit for 2 years?

            I think it is building the right way. Instead of rushing it, it is being allowed to set and dry. By the time Rodgers has to start he will have adjusted to the game. He will have many advantage to succeed that he wouldnt have had as a rookie. The D doesnt need him to develop and if the D is good by the time he starts he will have it even better.

            Are the vikings gonna start that QB they drafted?

            Comment

            • #7
              You make an interesting point Rastak, but if you put Rodger's in right now with a younger team and he fails his confidence will be shatter ala Joey Harrington in Detroit, Akili Smith in Cincy, and so on. However, if you start Favre a veteran QB, with the young players on offense this year they get a proven leader to look up to and work with while they gain experience, and confidence. Therefore next year or whenever Favre hangs it up you have a more experienced group of players that know the offense, and the makes the Rodgers transition period more smooth. Now with any first year starter you have bumps in the road, but they should be minimal by having players that have been in the system for a few years that also have some talent.

              Comment

              • #8
                If you include Rodgers' last year of college ball, he is now learning his third offensive system in as many years. It would have been very tough for him to be a starter under those conditions. The current situation is perfect for Rodgers' development. When the time comes for him to get his chance, he will be ready.
                I can't run no more
                With that lawless crowd
                While the killers in high places
                Say their prayers out loud
                But they've summoned, they've summoned up
                A thundercloud
                They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen

                Comment

                • #9
                  From what I've read, it almost seems like M3 took M2's playbook, cut it in half and handed it out. I hear it's a much simpler program, but the terminology is different. Either way, I've also read that teams receive the best results from QB development when a new QB sits as a rookie with very few reps, has some reps his second year and then takes over in year 3. Gives him a chance to learn and gain confidence before you put the whole offense on his shoulders.
                  "Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg Jennings

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    I think Restak is full of shit. I think he is spiteful that Favre is coming back. I would be too, If I was alive 27 years ago and a packer fan, and Fran Tarkenton kept coming back I would be pissed as well.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Mark Brunell - drafted in 1993, sat for 2 years, started full-time for Jacksonville his 3rd year and he was ready. He played well.

                      Aaron Brooks - drafted in 1999, sat for most of 2 years, started full-time for New Orleans his 3rd year and he was ready. He played well.

                      Matt Hasselbeck - drafted in 1998, sat for 3 years, started full-time for Seattle his 4th year. He struggled his first year, but was solid in his 5th year in the league.

                      Let's be honest here, Rodgers isn't blessed with some of the talent that guys like Carson Palmer, Peyton Manning, and Brett Favre had coming into the league. He's going to need to have things be right around him and he's going to have to feel comfortable to succeed.

                      Would it bother you if Minnesota went 8-8 or worse this year, and Brad Johnson started over Tarvaris Jackson next year?
                      "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Nutz
                        I think Restak is full of shit. I think he is spiteful that Favre is coming back. I would be too, If I was alive 27 years ago and a packer fan, and Fran Tarkenton kept coming back I would be pissed as well.
                        I don't think Rastak is spiteful; he just believes GB has no chance to win a Super Bowl in the next few years even if Favre stays. So if that is true, then throwing Rodgers into the fire might benefit GB.

                        I don't believe that; but many do.
                        TERD Buckley over Troy Vincent, Robert Ferguson over Chris Chambers, Kevn King instead of TJ Watt, and now, RICH GANNON, over JIMMY JIMMY JIMMY LEONARD. Thank you FLOWER

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Nutz
                          I think Restak is full of shit. I think he is spiteful that Favre is coming back. I would be too, If I was alive 27 years ago and a packer fan, and Fran Tarkenton kept coming back I would be pissed as well.
                          Hey Nutz, NP with your opinion. However you ARE full of shit as to how I feel old buddy. I'm actually quite happy he came back....let the games begin. I'm only commenting on the McCarthy regime and what this means. And it's just my opinion, I know I could be wrong.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Originally posted by chain_gang
                            You make an interesting point Rastak, but if you put Rodger's in right now with a younger team and he fails his confidence will be shatter ala Joey Harrington in Detroit, Akili Smith in Cincy, and so on.
                            A valid point.....the team will be pretty young....

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
                              Mark Brunell - drafted in 1993, sat for 2 years, started full-time for Jacksonville his 3rd year and he was ready. He played well.

                              Aaron Brooks - drafted in 1999, sat for most of 2 years, started full-time for New Orleans his 3rd year and he was ready. He played well.

                              Matt Hasselbeck - drafted in 1998, sat for 3 years, started full-time for Seattle his 4th year. He struggled his first year, but was solid in his 5th year in the league.

                              Let's be honest here, Rodgers isn't blessed with some of the talent that guys like Carson Palmer, Peyton Manning, and Brett Favre had coming into the league. He's going to need to have things be right around him and he's going to have to feel comfortable to succeed.

                              Would it bother you if Minnesota went 8-8 or worse this year, and Brad Johnson started over Tarvaris Jackson next year?

                              I'd be bothered that they went 8-8...LOL, but I look at a Div IAA QB as a two year project. If he isn't starting in year three I have an issue. If he were a highly touted Div IA QB I'd want him starting in year two. Just my opinion.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X