Today's optimistic Vandermause Packers column from GBPG

[Packnut]

Rodgers

This pre season is going to be more interesting than it has been in years. Every year is interesting because you want to see what you have, but this year, with the QB position changing for the first time in ages, it's even more intriguing.

I'll be at OTA's. I don't know how to judge the QB position, so I won't be watching that, but I do remember watching last year and not noticing any change when Favre came out and Rodgers came in. The offense didn't stumble at all with Rodgers and now Rodgers will have the advantage of playing with the same starting group that all know what they are doing rather than the B team that was just learning the scheme.

Rodgers will be fine if he can take a hit and get back up on a consistent basis. I've seen enough on him to know he'll be a good WC offense QB. His ability is one thing I don't worry about.

[wist43]

The offense moved the ball last year b/c of Favre... when teams began to focus on stopping him that opened up the running game at the same time that the OL began to gel a little bit and Grant stepped to the fore.

Teams will be prepared for the running game and make Rodgers prove it... I don't know why everyone is getting a fuzzy feeling about Rodgers ??? b/c of 3/4 of a game under center in mop-up duty against Dallas??? I have higher hopes for Brohm.

Beyond that, it's not like the Packers don't have problems in the here and now... Harris, Woodson, Clifton, and Tausher are all vital cogs, and all of them have shown cracks in the armor; can Lee be good enough to take over the Nickel role??? If not, then we only have 2 viable, NFL ready CB's on the roster... everyone else is "developing" and surely has a bullseye on their back.

We can't expect any new starters out of this draft - and the new starter we'll get from last years draft (Harrell) is a step in the wrong direction. Rouse probably deserves a shot at unseating either Collins or Bigby, probably Collins, but they likely view Collins as a much better matchup in coverage than Rouse, so that doesn't seem likely to happen.

And then there is the incalcuable loss of Favre... if they struggle early, I think it's just as likely that they could be in for a very long season as they could ride Rodgers arm to glory.

They'll be in the hunt for the division probably, but not a serious threat to make a playoff run - not with Rodgers as the starter. He's going to be under a ton of pressure, he's proven to be fragile... just don't see it.

[oregonpackfan]

Packer fans definitely have more optimism this year rather than at the beginning of last season.

One huge variable to always consider is: season-ending injuries to key players.
Last season, the Packers were generally spared key injuries to their starting players. Hopefully, that will proved true for this season as well.

[ahaha]

The offense moved the ball last year b/c of Favre... when teams began to focus on stopping him that opened up the running game at the same time that the OL began to gel a little bit and Grant stepped to the fore.

I've heard this opinion a lot, and it really bothers me. I think the reason our offense moved from mediocre to explosive was the receiver play and improved pass blocking. It didn't take half the season for other teams to figure out we couldn't run the ball. Those early opponents knew it was all about stopping the pass. They tried and most failed. And then Grant emerged with some improvement in the run blocking, and our offense became a dominant group. That Seattle game was a thing of beauty. 6 straight touchdown drives in a play-off game. That is amazing.
Favre had his best year in over a decade because of his teamates, especially the receiving corps.

[The Leaper]

I have higher hopes for Brohm.

Why? The guy has a longer injury history than Rodgers does, and clearly wasn't viewed as a superior QB by most NFL GMs.

Rodgers has shown consistent improvement year-to-year in the Packer system...just as Brunell, Hasselbeck and others have shown in the system previously. Granted, his durability is a concern...but if healthy, there is little reason to doubt Rodgers' ability to make an impact.

[The Leaper]

Favre had his best year in over a decade because of his teamates, especially the receiving corps.

I agree. Favre's season was spurred by the development of Jennings and the ability of McCarthy to both understand the strengths of his QB and also effectively alter/tweak the offensive plan of attack when he needed to during the course of a game.

Favre wasn't suddenly better than he was in 2005 or 2006. The offense as a whole was put into more positions to succeed by the coaching staff, and the group as a whole took advantage of it.

[Tarlam!]

Wisty! You're REALLY back!!!! I've missed you!

[texaspackerbacker]

Same old doom and gloom wist.

I disagree, Leaper and others. It's true that Favre had a great year after a downward trend for several previous ones; And it's true that he had a lot of weapons with the young receivers and Grant. However, IMO, it was Favre himself and his enhanced off-season training regimen that caused his improvement. He said as much in his explanation for his retirement.

If we think back 2 and 3 years, Favre missed a lot of open receivers and put a lot of balls up for grabs. Also, many questioned his ability to throw the long ball, and I remember thinking his release was really getting slow. And in addition to all that, he seemed more prone to fumble when hit, or even make unforced errors with the ball.

All that improved last season, and it wasn't just because of the receivers and Grant.

[The Leaper]

If we think back 2 and 3 years

Right...back when Taco Wallace was one of our WRs getting playing time.

Case closed.

[texaspackerbacker]

I was thinking more along the lines of pre-injury Javon Walker, two years younger Donald Driver, healthy Robert Ferguson, and Terrence Iforgothislastname, the guy with the neck injury.

[The Leaper]

I was thinking more along the lines of pre-injury Javon Walker, two years younger Donald Driver, healthy Robert Ferguson, and Terrence Iforgothislastname, the guy with the neck injury.

Then you would be thinking 2004...where Favre posted stats relatively similar to 2007.

Also, Robert Ferguson was never healthy or a weapon...and Terrence Murphy never saw the field in a meaningful game for the Packers.

When Favre was given weapons, he was always been successful Tex. Favre has always been the constant in the Packer offense the last 15 years. It wasn't Favre that created the success in 2007...it was Jennings, Jones, Lee, Grant, etc.

[Packnut]

Rodgers

The reason Favre had a great year had very little to do with his ability but more with some talent surrounding him. It's just mind-boggling to me the way some of you guys view the QB position.

Why is it so hard to understand that any QB, I don't give a damn which one you name, played better with an increase in talent around him?

I hate to make it this simple, but the reality is Favre played better cause he had some freakin HELP for a change.

While no one can predict the future, one can make an educated guess that Rodgers will succeed because he has loads of talent surrounding him at the skill positions. It's also a proven fact that QB's who have a few years to sit and learn have a higher chance of success than those thrown into the fire.

Our only 2 questions on offense imo, are will the interior of the line improve and will the ZBS work on a more consistent basis?

[Packnut]

Rodgers

The offense moved the ball last year b/c of Favre... when teams began to focus on stopping him that opened up the running game at the same time that the OL began to gel a little bit and Grant stepped to the fore.

Teams will be prepared for the running game and make Rodgers prove it... I don't know why everyone is getting a fuzzy feeling about Rodgers ??? b/c of 3/4 of a game under center in mop-up duty against Dallas??? I have higher hopes for Brohm.

Beyond that, it's not like the Packers don't have problems in the here and now... Harris, Woodson, Clifton, and Tausher are all vital cogs, and all of them have shown cracks in the armor; can Lee be good enough to take over the Nickel role??? If not, then we only have 2 viable, NFL ready CB's on the roster... everyone else is "developing" and surely has a bullseye on their back.

We can't expect any new starters out of this draft - and the new starter we'll get from last years draft (Harrell) is a step in the wrong direction. Rouse probably deserves a shot at unseating either Collins or Bigby, probably Collins, but they likely view Collins as a much better matchup in coverage than Rouse, so that doesn't seem likely to happen.

And then there is the incalcuable loss of Favre... if they struggle early, I think it's just as likely that they could be in for a very long season as they could ride Rodgers arm to glory.

They'll be in the hunt for the division probably, but not a serious threat to make a playoff run - not with Rodgers as the starter. He's going to be under a ton of pressure, he's proven to be fragile... just don't see it.

What have you specifically seen from Rodgers that puts the doubt in your mind?

[Bretsky]

Re: Rodgers

The offense moved the ball last year b/c of Favre... when teams began to focus on stopping him that opened up the running game at the same time that the OL began to gel a little bit and Grant stepped to the fore.

Teams will be prepared for the running game and make Rodgers prove it... I don't know why everyone is getting a fuzzy feeling about Rodgers ??? b/c of 3/4 of a game under center in mop-up duty against Dallas??? I have higher hopes for Brohm.

Beyond that, it's not like the Packers don't have problems in the here and now... Harris, Woodson, Clifton, and Tausher are all vital cogs, and all of them have shown cracks in the armor; can Lee be good enough to take over the Nickel role??? If not, then we only have 2 viable, NFL ready CB's on the roster... everyone else is "developing" and surely has a bullseye on their back.

We can't expect any new starters out of this draft - and the new starter we'll get from last years draft (Harrell) is a step in the wrong direction. Rouse probably deserves a shot at unseating either Collins or Bigby, probably Collins, but they likely view Collins as a much better matchup in coverage than Rouse, so that doesn't seem likely to happen.

And then there is the incalcuable loss of Favre... if they struggle early, I think it's just as likely that they could be in for a very long season as they could ride Rodgers arm to glory.

They'll be in the hunt for the division probably, but not a serious threat to make a playoff run - not with Rodgers as the starter. He's going to be under a ton of pressure, he's proven to be fragile... just don't see it.

What have you specifically seen from Rodgers that puts the doubt in your mind?

He rolls out well; he runs well.......he doesn't fear running much......he doesn't feel the rush as good as Favre..........all that couple with his injuries worry me

Not to mention.........his arm is not as strong as Favre even at age 39. He won't have the same velocity to fit some of those throws in.

I'm in the middle on Rodgers overall; but until we see him do it over a course of time there will be doubt

I do like reading wist in here to debate some of the fluff as well.

[Patler]

Re: Rodgers

Not to mention.........his arm is not as strong as Favre even at age 39. He won't have the same velocity to fit some of those throws in.

The same could be said for most of the other NFL starters as well. Comparing his velocity to Favre's is hardly relevant to the liklihood that he can be a successful starter.

In fact, it can be argued (and has been) that Favre's ability to fit balls in where no one else could was a detriment and a benefit, because he felt he could ALWAYS do it, which lead to many of his interceptions. A QB who knows when he can and when he can't get a ball to a receiver may make fewer costly turnovers as well as fewer bind-boggling completions. The net benefit or loss from those two conflicting results is yet to be seen.