AR wants out?!

[King Friday]

Most may scoff at the prospect of retirement, but Rodgers is a different kind of dude.

Rodgers has repeatedly maintained that he wants to play into his 40s. He's only won a single Super Bowl, and you damn well know that eats at him everyday.

So you think he's going to walk away knowing he is still capable of playing MVP caliber ball?

Fuck no.

[texaspackerbacker]

Why? The amount of talent on this roster is better then average, even without Rodgers. True, they aren't a title contender right now without Rodgers...but with a halfway capable QB they are a playoff contender.

Hell... The fucking Bears with a dumbass coach and weaker overall roster won 8 games last year. Losing Rodgers and getting two starting caliber players in return would not make the Packers shitty.

If the talent SEEMS better, it's because of Rodgers. Our O Line, our receivers, even Aaron Jones would be hugely less effective if teams didn't need to gameplan for Rodgers' accuracy, mobility, intelligence, and mindset. Even the D benefits from ball control and getting leads by the offense.

[Tony Oday]

If the talent SEEMS better, it's because of Rodgers. Our O Line, our receivers, even Aaron Jones would be hugely less effective if teams didn't need to gameplan for Rodgers' accuracy, mobility, intelligence, and mindset. Even the D benefits from ball control and getting leads by the offense.

Packers still win the division with or without AR.

[Spaulding]

Packers still win the division with or without AR.

Like the optimism but even with Rodgers the Vikings are going to be a battle for the division. Injuries and an opt out hurt their DL substantially last season and so without doing anything they improve by getting Hunter and Pierce back to solidify the front four.

Add to that possibly better oline play and dangerous skilled players in the Cook/Thielen/Jefferson and a non dumpster fire at corner (Peterson isn't what he was coming into the league but he's still far better than what scrubs they played last year) they could very well be neck and neck with the Packers.

One thing we can still count on though are the Lions sucking and the Bears pulling defeat out the of the hands of victory.

[RashanGary]

Like the optimism but even with Rodgers the Vikings are going to be a battle for the division. Injuries and an opt out hurt their DL substantially last season and so without doing anything they improve by getting Hunter and Pierce back to solidify the front four.

Add to that possibly better oline play and dangerous skilled players in the Cook/Thielen/Jefferson and a non dumpster fire at corner (Peterson isn't what he was coming into the league but he's still far better than what scrubs they played last year) they could very well be neck and neck with the Packers.

One thing we can still count on though are the Lions sucking and the Bears pulling defeat out the of the hands of victory.

Well said. I agree the vikes are poised for a bounce back year. The Bears dont have an NFL ready QB and their defense has kinda fallen off. The Lions suck. The Vikings should press for the division.

[RashanGary]

The Packers have a tough schedule

[Tony Oday]

Vikes are trash. Terrible coach, QB that can't pull it out in the clutch, can't draft Olinemen ever, CBs that couldn't cover a WR if their lives depended on it.

[Upnorth]

If the talent SEEMS better, it's because of Rodgers. Our O Line, our receivers, even Aaron Jones would be hugely less effective if teams didn't need to gameplan for Rodgers' accuracy, mobility, intelligence, and mindset. Even the D benefits from ball control and getting leads by the offense.

When deshone was chucking the rock in 2017 the line was not the problem. He had time. This line is better with bakh

12 is not the god you see him as. When our line gives up pressure he looks mortal. When it doesnt he is a highlight reel. Perhaps give the line some credit or start suggesting we trade them for wrs.

Imagibe how good they would look with some one who had an average time to release. Oh wait we did in 2020 and 2 were all pros and a third should have been.

[texaspackerbacker]

The Packers O Line has been giving up pressures a large percentage of the time as long as Rodgers was the starter. Yes, Rodgers has occasionally looked mortal when the pass rush got a lot worse than normal. I'll give the O Line credit for improving last season in the run game, and maybe a little bit in pass pro too, but I stand by it, their reputation for being any more than slightly above average is undeserved and mainly the result of Rodgers' excellence.

I've heard this bullshit about getting rid of the ball quicker for more years than I care to think about. There's no question, Rodgers has a quick release. The reason for the longer time to get rid of the ball is mindset - the absolute hating of throwing interceptions as well as the ability and intention to avoid the rush with his mobility. And I wouldn't have it any other way in both.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Packers O Line has been giving up pressures a large percentage of the time as long as Rodgers was the starter.

Mostly due to Rodgers holding onto the ball more than most QBs--until MLF got here. His time before throw has traditionally been high. Plenty of years where he plays hero ball and looks for the deep shot rather than taking his check down--especially early in a season. There's been noticeable improvement by Rodgers since MLF took over.

[Packers4Glory]

Mostly due to Rodgers holding onto the ball more than most QBs--until MLF got here. His time before throw has traditionally been high. Plenty of years where he plays hero ball and looks for the deep shot rather than taking his check down--especially early in a season. There's been noticeable improvement by Rodgers since MLF took over.

also perhaps to him holding the ball longer because outside of Adams his receivers that past several years couldn't get open. hence the obscene number of throwaways the years prior. Last year wasn't so bad. But when that core of Driver, Jordy, and Cobb got old, all the was left was a young Adams. The position was never addressed save for late round lotto picks like MVS and ESB among other flops. Plus the line prior to last year was average at best a lot of the time. Some of it due to injuries to Bulaga who was great when healthy but often was not.

[bobblehead]

If the talent SEEMS better, it's because of Rodgers. Our O Line, our receivers, even Aaron Jones would be hugely less effective if teams didn't need to gameplan for Rodgers' accuracy, mobility, intelligence, and mindset. Even the D benefits from ball control and getting leads by the offense.

True. Its the reason I hate it when Rodgers refuses to take what the D gives him. For about 5 years before Flower came along he was NOT playing MVP ball, and in season one he argued with Flower constantly. He gets on board and plays the way he is supposed to finally and now we owe him the world. I think not.

[bobblehead]

also perhaps to him holding the ball longer because outside of Adams his receivers that past several years couldn't get open. hence the obscene number of throwaways the years prior. Last year wasn't so bad. But when that core of Driver, Jordy, and Cobb got old, all the was left was a young Adams. The position was never addressed save for late round lotto picks like MVS and ESB among other flops. Plus the line prior to last year was average at best a lot of the time. Some of it due to injuries to Bulaga who was great when healthy but often was not.

Not even close. The problem was that we didn't run the ball. Period. End of story.

[Joemailman]

also perhaps to him holding the ball longer because outside of Adams his receivers that past several years couldn't get open. hence the obscene number of throwaways the years prior. Last year wasn't so bad. But when that core of Driver, Jordy, and Cobb got old, all the was left was a young Adams. The position was never addressed save for late round lotto picks like MVS and ESB among other flops. Plus the line prior to last year was average at best a lot of the time. Some of it due to injuries to Bulaga who was great when healthy but often was not.

Last year wasn't so bad? Last year was great because he was actually running the damn offense instead of holding onto the ball forever. His completion pct. went from 62% to 71% even though he was basically throwing to the same group of receivers. And his sacks went from 36 to 20 even though the offensive line wasn't quite as good due to the loss of Bulaga. And the offense didn't miss a beat during the 2 games Adams missed which disproves the theory that the Packers have no receiving weapons other than Adams.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'll give LaFleur some credit for getting Rodgers to change a little bit, but I'll give him more credit for making the running game a viable option. The creativity there made success all the way around, running and passing easier. Mostly, though, I'll give LaFleur credit for subordinating his ego and letting Rodgers be Rodgers. Also, there's a lot of truth in what r4g said above too about receivers not getting open in previous years. r4g, I HOPE you weren't including MVS among those flops, though. He and Tonyan and Lazard made the difference last season. The success there was probably partly better personnel, but LaFleur and his staff seem to have designed better packages of patterns too.

The sacks went down from 36 to 20 without Bulaga and minus Bakhtiari for a large part of the season? One interpretation of that could be getting rid of the ball quick, but I tend to think it is more because O Line play good or bad just isn't that big a factor in the passing game - beyond the bare minimum, of course, which we didn't have against Tampa. If it was just unloading quicker, there would have been way more interceptions and the old complaint about throwaways would have resurfaced.