Here are some INTELLIGENT conversations on todays game

[imscott72]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

Paco, we've had this discussion several times already. Comparing Arod's career against the 17 yr career of a HOF QB is apples and oranges. I think most Packer fans can agree given the inconsistency of the offensive line, Arod has played better than we expected to this point. We're 4-5 because of our inability to stop the run, and inability to run the ball late in games to seal the deal. I don't recall any games in his brief 9 game career where I would say we lost the game soley because of Aaron Rodgers.

[Pacopete4]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

Paco, we've had this discussion several times already. Comparing Arod's career against the 17 yr career of a HOF QB is apples and oranges. I think most Packer fans can agree given the inconsistency of the offensive line, Arod has played better than we expected to this point. We're 4-5 because of our inability to stop the run, and inability to run the ball late in games to seal the deal. I don't recall any games in his brief 9 game career where I would say we lost the game soley because of Aaron Rodgers.

ya I know we've done this before.. I guess I wasnt tryin to rip Arod so much as defend Brett... I was more so talking about the situation of how we are going to regret it in weeks to come when they are going to the playoffs and we arent

I've said before and I'll say it again, I think Arod is very talented... I just think he lacks the "it" factor that most of the good QBs have that play this game for awhile..

[imscott72]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

Paco, we've had this discussion several times already. Comparing Arod's career against the 17 yr career of a HOF QB is apples and oranges. I think most Packer fans can agree given the inconsistency of the offensive line, Arod has played better than we expected to this point. We're 4-5 because of our inability to stop the run, and inability to run the ball late in games to seal the deal. I don't recall any games in his brief 9 game career where I would say we lost the game soley because of Aaron Rodgers.

ya I know we've done this before.. I guess I wasnt tryin to rip Arod so much as defend Brett... I was more so talking about the situation of how we are going to regret it in weeks to come when they are going to the playoffs and we arent

I've said before and I'll say it again, I think Arod is very talented... I just think he lacks the "it" factor that most of the good QBs have that play this game for awhile..

It wasn't too long ago Brett was getting booed loudly in New York. Both teams success and failures aren't a result of QB play imo. The Jets have an above average defense, whereas our front 7 is killing us. The Jets can run the ball and protect Brett with an above average offensive line, whereas ours is struggling mightily. That's what I mean by apples and oranges. Different teams, and different scenarios. If you took Arod and Favre and made them switch teams, I really think Brett would stuggle for us and Arod would succeed in New York. A great offensive line, and a great running game can make virtually any QB look good. (see Kerry Collins).

[Gunakor]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

6 TD's against the Cardinals... <300 yards passing. Give Rodgers the ball on the opponents side of the field and call pass plays all day long, odds are he'd have 6 TD's as well. Besides, it's the freaking Cardinals.

Game winning pass to Coles... Game should have been put away long before that, but Favre's 3 INT's made it a game. Defense won that game by not allowing it to get out of hand. If you throw 3 INT's in a game, you are SUPPOSED to lose.

And your point about Rodgers... Let me put it this way, hopefully you'll understand. I don't want to put the game on the QB's shoulders to win. I would rather put the game on the defense to win. That is what has been happening in New York. That's what should be happening here in Green Bay. Games are not always won on offense, Paco. Those games you mentioned - more credit can and should be given to the Jets defensive performance than Favre's flawless (or not) QB performance. Open your eyes and watch the rest of the game for a change. Geez...

[Pacopete4]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

6 TD's against the Cardinals... <300 yards passing. Give Rodgers the ball on the opponents side of the field and call pass plays all day long, odds are he'd have 6 TD's as well. Besides, it's the freaking Cardinals.

Game winning pass to Coles... Game should have been put away long before that, but Favre's 3 INT's made it a game. Defense won that game by not allowing it to get out of hand. If you throw 3 INT's in a game, you are SUPPOSED to lose.

And your point about Rodgers... Let me put it this way, hopefully you'll understand. I don't want to put the game on the QB's shoulders to win. I would rather put the game on the defense to win. That is what has been happening in New York. That's what should be happening here in Green Bay. Games are not always won on offense, Paco. Those games you mentioned - more credit can and should be given to the Jets defensive performance than Favre's flawless (or not) QB performance. Open your eyes and watch the rest of the game for a change. Geez...

facts are facts... Rodgers will never be great coming up short with the ball in his hands and the game on the line


guys like Favre, Brady, Montana, Elway, Marino didnt get their fuckin status by "almost" winning games.. or depending on their defense to bail them out... Rodgers has had fuckin games gift wrapped to him if he'd just take the reigns and play ball... how many teams have as many defense or special teams TD's?.... NONE.... hes come up short and most likely will continue to do so..

[Gunakor]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

6 TD's against the Cardinals... <300 yards passing. Give Rodgers the ball on the opponents side of the field and call pass plays all day long, odds are he'd have 6 TD's as well. Besides, it's the freaking Cardinals.

Game winning pass to Coles... Game should have been put away long before that, but Favre's 3 INT's made it a game. Defense won that game by not allowing it to get out of hand. If you throw 3 INT's in a game, you are SUPPOSED to lose.

And your point about Rodgers... Let me put it this way, hopefully you'll understand. I don't want to put the game on the QB's shoulders to win. I would rather put the game on the defense to win. That is what has been happening in New York. That's what should be happening here in Green Bay. Games are not always won on offense, Paco. Those games you mentioned - more credit can and should be given to the Jets defensive performance than Favre's flawless (or not) QB performance. Open your eyes and watch the rest of the game for a change. Geez...

facts are facts... Rodgers will never be great coming up short with the ball in his hands and the game on the line


guys like Favre, Brady, Montana, Elway, Marino didnt get their fuckin status by "almost" winning games.. or depending on their defense to bail them out... Rodgers has had fuckin games gift wrapped to him if he'd just take the reigns and play ball... how many teams have as many defense or special teams TD's?.... NONE.... hes come up short and most likely will continue to do so..

Name one team in the NFL with a worse OL than we have right now, and maybe I'll buy your arguement. Until then you are just another young know-it-all who doesn't know a goddamn thing. The QB can't do his job if he's not being protected. The WR can't catch the ball if the QB doesn't have time to throw it to him. The WR can't score a TD if he doesn't have the ball. See where I'm going with this?

[Pacopete4]

so his 6 td game doesnt count against the Cardinals?
Game winning pass to coles against KC in the last minute?
An long minute drive against Buffalo to seal the game with a FG?


those are just 3 I can think of.. my beef with Rodgers is/was/most likely always will be, is that he has had the ball in his hands several times now to make a drive to win/tie a game... and he hasnt done it... so far he's no winner to me

6 TD's against the Cardinals... <300 yards passing. Give Rodgers the ball on the opponents side of the field and call pass plays all day long, odds are he'd have 6 TD's as well. Besides, it's the freaking Cardinals.

Game winning pass to Coles... Game should have been put away long before that, but Favre's 3 INT's made it a game. Defense won that game by not allowing it to get out of hand. If you throw 3 INT's in a game, you are SUPPOSED to lose.

And your point about Rodgers... Let me put it this way, hopefully you'll understand. I don't want to put the game on the QB's shoulders to win. I would rather put the game on the defense to win. That is what has been happening in New York. That's what should be happening here in Green Bay. Games are not always won on offense, Paco. Those games you mentioned - more credit can and should be given to the Jets defensive performance than Favre's flawless (or not) QB performance. Open your eyes and watch the rest of the game for a change. Geez...

facts are facts... Rodgers will never be great coming up short with the ball in his hands and the game on the line


guys like Favre, Brady, Montana, Elway, Marino didnt get their fuckin status by "almost" winning games.. or depending on their defense to bail them out... Rodgers has had fuckin games gift wrapped to him if he'd just take the reigns and play ball... how many teams have as many defense or special teams TD's?.... NONE.... hes come up short and most likely will continue to do so..

Name one team in the NFL with a worse OL than we have right now, and maybe I'll buy your arguement. Until then you are just another young know-it-all who doesn't know a goddamn thing. The QB can't do his job if he's not being protected. The WR can't catch the ball if the QB doesn't have time to throw it to him. The WR can't score a TD if he doesn't have the ball. See where I'm going with this?

then throw the ball quicker? dont roll to the right everytime someone comes within 10 yrds... step up in the pocket here and there.. hell ive seen it work a few times.. ITS NOT JUST THE OLINE.. ya they're not playing well.. but its just like Partial is sayin.. its tough to block in the NFL, its even tougher when u dont know what the fuck ur QB is doing back there..

rookie mistakes, great... but I dont see em outta Flacco or Ryan.. both who would die to have a WR core like GB does.. its pathetic dude...

[Gunakor]

Favre would just throw the ball quicker, which contributed to the NFL record interception total he currently holds and may never relinquish. You may not have a problem with that, but NFL teams do. You can't throw the ball if your guy is well covered and not risk turning it over. I'd rather take the sack than throw an INT, and that goes for any circumstance you could throw out there. The quick throws you see from Rodgers are designed quick slants and such, but you can't run those plays over and over or the defender will jump the pass and take it back for 6 the other way. Sometimes you HAVE to go downfield, and that requires protection. Protection he has not gotten the last few weeks.

I'm done arguing this with you. If there's anything I've learned in my lifetime it's that you can't fix stupid. You really don't know what you are talking about, and you lost all credibility a few days ago when you said you admired Favre's ability to not give a damn that the guy he was throwing to was triple covered. You lost even more when you said you'd rather have a guy who takes foolish risks than a game manager that will not cost you the game. You honestly believe that the QB is charged with winning the game, regardless what anybody else on the team does. If you refuse to believe that it takes everybody to win in this league, then there's nothing left to argue here. Have a great afternoon.

[Pacopete4]

Favre would just throw the ball quicker, which contributed to the NFL record interception total he currently holds and may never relinquish. You may not have a problem with that, but NFL teams do. You can't throw the ball if your guy is well covered and not risk turning it over. I'd rather take the sack than throw an INT, and that goes for any circumstance you could throw out there. The quick throws you see from Rodgers are designed quick slants and such, but you can't run those plays over and over or the defender will jump the pass and take it back for 6 the other way. Sometimes you HAVE to go downfield, and that requires protection. Protection he has not gotten the last few weeks.

I'm done arguing this with you. If there's anything I've learned in my lifetime it's that you can't fix stupid. You really don't know what you are talking about, and you lost all credibility a few days ago when you said you admired Favre's ability to not give a damn that the guy he was throwing to was triple covered. You lost even more when you said you'd rather have a guy who takes foolish risks than a game manager that will not cost you the game. You honestly believe that the QB is charged with winning the game, regardless what anybody else on the team does. If you refuse to believe that it takes everybody to win in this league, then there's nothing left to argue here. Have a great afternoon.

stupid people don't listen.. you don't listen at all... I never once, NOT ONCE, said Favre won any game all on his own, nor so I like that he throws it in triple coverage... nor a lot of things u try to feed down my throat in this convo...

but ur are right.. I'd take a QB like Favre ANY DAY than a QB like Rodgers... I will take a winner, he just wins... thats what he does... theres a reason guys like him, manning, brady ect. dont have losing seasons... Favre had ONE... ONE DAMN YEAR! ha.. the proof is in the pudding... hes good, no wait.. hes fuckin great and u just cant seem to wrap ur little mind around that..

oh and I think every franchise in this league wouldn't have a problem with a Brett Favre on their team...

[Cheesehead Craig]

what I saw was a lack of gang tackling.

Peterson was able to cut back, or somehow make the primary tackler miss, and the rest of the Packers looked like they were just standing around, assuming the player or two closest to Peterson would make the tackle. They weren't hustling to fence-in Peterson.

Completely. It seemed in the second half that they were waiting for AD to make a move and then be there when he did. The problem with that was that they were letting him dictate what was going on and his explosion and power was too much for them to handle with being tentative like this. They got too burned by his cutbacks in the first half.

[rbaloha1]

Gee Whiz

Packer Nation. Yes we played poorly and were dominated at the line of scrimmage.

But at the end of the day if the kicker makes the kick we win and fans do not dwell on the negatives.

This is still a good all around team. The defense and special teams almost won the game despite the inadequate offense.

We should have won the Titans game. Young team needs to learn to finish games.

We are still in the playoff hunt.

[Noodle]

Yes, the Pack was only a kick away, but it would have been wrong to think all is right because we got a W instead of an L.

And besides, I'm not going to crack on Mason for missing a friggin 52 yard FG. That's a long-ass kick, even in a dome. As someone else observed, four yards closer, and that ball goes through. It was inexcusable, and emblamatic, that our offense couldn't get him a little closer when it started the drive at their own 40 with two minutes left.

[Harlan Huckleby]

As someone else observed, four yards closer, and that ball goes through. It was inexcusable, and emblamatic, that our offense couldn't get him a little closer when it started the drive at their own 40 with two minutes left.

Hard to get extra yardage when you run two balls into the heart of the Vikings defense.

I understand the argument for the convervative calls. Don't agree.

[Gunakor]

I never once, NOT ONCE, said Favre won any game all on his own, nor so I like that he throws it in triple coverage... nor a lot of things u try to feed down my throat in this convo...

From the thread "Does Aaron Rodgers Have The Armstrength"

he also was a master of not giving a shit if 3 guys were there and throwing it anyways haha

Did I misread this? It sounds like you recognize the problem but don't care. Or maybe you don't think it's a problem, I don't know. But you've recognized something I feel is THE problem with Favre right now, and has been for nearly 2 decades. There is nothing "haha" about this at all IMO.

And I guess I don't mean to suggest that you said Favre has won anything all on his own, rather just debating your suggestion that Rodgers isn't a winner simply because he hasn't won a game on his own yet either. You make it sound like if Rodgers gets the ball and begins to engineer a game winning drive late in the 4th quarter, if it doesn't succeed it's all the his fault. If the OL can't block, or if the RB can't break the LOS, or if the WR's are dropping passes, or if the HC calls dumbshit plays, doesn't matter. It's still Rodgers' fault for not getting the job done. What I'm saying is that's not always the case. So you can't just put the game on the QB's shoulders. All 11 players on offense have to do their job effectively to score that winning TD or FG. If one of them fails, the other 10 won't be as efficient. That includes the QB, but also includes his line and his recievers.

And if those 11 guys had been efficient up to that point, there'd be no need for a 4th quarter comeback drive in the first place. It would be the victory formation to run out the clock instead, which I'd much rather see than the big 5 with under 2 minutes to go. I guess I'm just more concerned with the first 58 minutes of a game than I am with the last 2.

[DonHutson]

I wouldn't mind seeing Chillar move to the outside an see Hawk play the middle if Barnett is out for any serious length of time.

Nice call. That sounds like one of the options under discussion.