T.E.D's Packers Report Card: Offense

[ThunderDan]

LMAO did you even watch any games this season with those grades? C- the QB with the highest QB rating?

I laughed at the leading TD WR getting a B+ LOTT doesn't watch the games.

[George Cumby]

LMAO did you even watch any games this season with those grades? C- the QB with the highest QB rating?

No shit, right?

Good discussion, though, in that it's drifted into some cool stuff comparing eras and how good Starr really was. That CHFF article is a classic.

[Bossman641]

LMAO did you even watch any games this season with those grades? C- the QB with the highest QB rating?

Wait, you mean Harris, Benson, Green, Cobb, Jones, Nelson, Jennings, Finley, and Crabtree DIDN'T all have better years than Rodgers??

[Smeefers]

Many argued that anyone could have won with the Packers of '60-'63 or 64. In the glory days of Hornung, Taylor, Moore and Pitts the Packers just bullied their way down the field with the RBs carrying the load. Starr sort of had that "game manager" reputation that QBs get. After Hornung and Taylor were gone, Anderson was OK, but no Hornung. Grabowski was the heir-apparent to Taylor, and really showed promise at times, but knee injuries did him in. Travis Williams was there and gone in a flash, it seemed in the late '60s.

By the years of the '65, '66, '67 (and even after that, but Starr, too declined) the team went only as far as Starr could take it. When yards, first downs or scores were needed, Starr almost willed them down the field. Since he was calling all the plays, his stamp was on all of their success. They came to rely more on his passing in critical situations, with run success being more from deception/surprise, not power. Of course, the line was getting older too, and except for Gale Gillingham the influx of young players wasn't close to the Skoronski, Kramer, Gregg, Thurston mold.

Do you remember this or are you a student of Packers history?

[mraynrand]

LMAO did you even watch any games this season with those grades? C- the QB with the highest QB rating?

I'm not defending the C- grade, because I think that's just baiting, pure and simple. However, several commentators have observed that Rodgers is being compared not to other QBs, but to Rodgers of 2011. I guess, compared to that guy, this year's Rodgers is a C - but that's due to unreasonable expectations - kinda like expecting the Packers to score TDs on most drives against the Niners defense.

[Smeefers]

The 60's Packers were loaded, it is not like Starr carried the team on his shoulders for a decade. He had a hell of a lot of Hall of Famers on that team.

The Packers had Favre, and White. I simply can't think of another Hall of Famer during that time that played for the Packers. The next closest is Leroy Butler, and maybe Darren Sharper.

I don't know if this matters or not, but Sharper is DEFINITELY a HOFer. He's 2nd all time with INT-TD with 11 behind Rod Woodson. He's also 2nd behind him in yardage with 1353 INT-return yards. He's 6th all time in interceptions with 63, tied with Ronnie Lott. He was also like, really really good.

[Deputy Nutz]

I was listening to a radio program yesterday and the theme was whether or not Rodgers needed to take more chances. I agree partially that Rodgers needs to trust his own arm accuracy to fit the ball into tighter windows to limit his sacks. Apparently once film was broken down Rodgers was responsible for 14 out of the 55 sacks in the regular season. More than anyone else. I don't think he needs to go down field more, the Packers need to go back to running the shorter routes of the West Coast Offense. With the end of Donald Driver the Packer do not have a true over the middle threat at wide receiver. Nelson has the size but he does most of his damage on the outside, same with Jones. Cobb seems to small although he has the quickness to exploit the middle of the field. More drop offs underneath, and swing passes will limit the drop depth of the linebacker opening up the second level for the tight ends and the wide receivers.

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't know if this matters or not, but Sharper is DEFINITELY a HOFer. He's 2nd all time with INT-TD with 11 behind Rod Woodson. He's also 2nd behind him in yardage with 1353 INT-return yards. He's 6th all time in interceptions with 63, tied with Ronnie Lott. He was also like, really really good.

He did a lot of his damage at the end of the half and at the end of the game.

[Patler]

Many argued that anyone could have won with the Packers of '60-'63 or 64. In the glory days of Hornung, Taylor, Moore and Pitts the Packers just bullied their way down the field with the RBs carrying the load. Starr sort of had that "game manager" reputation that QBs get. After Hornung and Taylor were gone, Anderson was OK, but no Hornung. Grabowski was the heir-apparent to Taylor, and really showed promise at times, but knee injuries did him in. Travis Williams was there and gone in a flash, it seemed in the late '60s.

By the years of the '65, '66, '67 (and even after that, but Starr, too declined) the team went only as far as Starr could take it. When yards, first downs or scores were needed, Starr almost willed them down the field. Since he was calling all the plays, his stamp was on all of their success. They came to rely more on his passing in critical situations, with run success being more from deception/surprise, not power. Of course, the line was getting older too, and except for Gale Gillingham the influx of young players wasn't close to the Skoronski, Kramer, Gregg, Thurston mold.

Do you remember this or are you a student of Packers history?

Both, but the comments above are from my memory of the those years.

[Patler]

He did a lot of his damage at the end of the half and at the end of the game.

His (Sharper) game was so one-dimensional, even in pass defense. He always had a knack for interceptions, and did well on returns, but when he was in GB I never saw him as exceptional in pass defense from down to down.

[mraynrand]

He was also like, really really good.

4th and 26

[run pMc]

Originally Posted by Smeefers
He was also like, really really good.
4th and 26

The play at the 1:06 mark of this always sticks in my mind...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjyAGArt8u0

Here's a writeup of the game. Tank's GOAT went 7 of 23 for 120 and 3 picks that day.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/favre/articles/favre_24354145.shtml