1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

2008 Packers Season

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by ivo610, Sep 22, 2011.

  1. ivo610
    Offline

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,161
    Location:
    Madison
    Ratings:
    +3,618 / 92 / -35
    I was checking in at 18to88.com the other day (colts fan website thats one of the best websites around as far as teams go) and caught this line in a post about possibly taking Andrew Luck with their pick next year in the draft..
    "People point at the Packers situation as an ideal, but forget that they wasted a season recovering from the Favre/Rodgers fiasco. They went from a Super Bowl caliber team to 6-10 in 2008. Yes, they won the Super Bowl in 2010, but they could have won it in 2008 or 2009 if they hadn't screwed around. "

    Now I dont think I could have disagreed more with that statement. It sounded like piling on of Aaron Rodgers, and well, that just not something I can let stand. So I took my argument up with the author.

    "I am unsure if this is a general league perspective or just your perspective but I would like to point out, under Rodgers in 2008 the Packers offense did not miss a beat. It was the defense that struggled. The offense was 4th in the league in 2007 and went to 5th in the league in 2008. While the defense went from 6th in 07 to 22nd in 08."

    his response : I'm well aware of the debate about the 08 Packers, and I know full well about the injuries on D and the problems. They also struggled in close games, however, going 1-7. Now, that might normally be attributable to 'bad luck', but often statistical bad luck has other explanations. I believe that team struggled with the negativity and pressure that surrounded the Favre move. Rodgers struggled down the stretch of many games. In three of those close losses, the defense gave up 20 points or fewer.

    My response: Lets talk about the QB struggles. In 2007 Brett Favres passer rating was 95.7 for the season. He dipped more than 10 points below that 6x. Aaron Rodgers in 08 had a season avg passer rating of 93.8 and dipped below that by more than 10 points 5x.

    Arod should take the majority of the blame for some of the losses. No doubt about it. Tampa Bay game stands out. As far as the defense in 07 the defense allowed 27 or more points scored on them 3x. In 08 that happened 6x.

    And finally his again: Again, you are missing the point. The way the mess went down didn't just
    affect just the QB. It affected the entire team. 1-7 in one score games is statistically unlikely. So, we can either say the Packers just had terrible luck or we can admit that perhaps there was some outside force exerting
    unusual pressure on the players causing them to play particularly poorly in
    high pressure situations that year. This isn't Madden. They didn't swap out
    one set of stats with the name "Favre" on it for another with the name
    "Rodgers" and it affected nothing but the algorithms. They upset the
    balance of the team and put it through hell for months. A situation that
    extreme is going to have effects that are felt for awhile.

    While that's generally a difficult thing to speculate on, I think everyone
    can agree there was a unique pressure on that team unlike what any team has faced in a long time from the media and fans. Given the poor play of not
    only Rodgers but many players in the close games, I think saying that the ridiculous way management handed the transition helped to sink the season.

    I understand why Pack fans want to rewrite history to pretend that wasn't
    the case. I understand why stat people stick to what is knowable and say,
    bad luck. I also think that given the preponderance of the evidence it's reasonable to conclude that the team suffered because of the poor front and coaching management of the transition.

    Like I said, I'm fine with people disagreeing. It's a debatable position for sure. I think mine is entirely rational, however, and based on known facts about the season.

    So the question is, was it the packers fault for "screwing around" or was it just the defense and some bad shakes in games that led to the team winning less games than the season before?
  2. Bogart
    Offline

    Bogart Duke Mantee

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,551
    Location:
    Mobile, AL U.S.
    Ratings:
    +871 / 5 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1992
    What a lot of people forget is, we didn't just lose Favre going into 2008. He was one of many departures.

    2008 was more of a rebuilding year and going into new transactions. It was time for a change and look it paid off!

    I totally disagree that we "wasted" 2008. Every team rebuilds, and in a rebuilding year you can't always expect the playoffs.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. slaughter25
    Offline

    slaughter25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Ratings:
    +211 / 7 / -2
    I just find it hard after watching that team to call that year a rebuilding year (which I guess it probably was) But in that year it never felt that way, every game felt like we should go out and win and the cookie crumbled the wrong way a lot. 10 times for that matter. Maybe that was because of stress of one of the best QBs in NFL history was walking all over the franchise but it is impossible to measure that impact. You cant say that if everything went smooth, he retired, and everyone was happy that the same team would have won 10 or even 7 games.
  4. Mr. StyleZ
    Offline

    Mr. StyleZ Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Location:
    Mayville, WI
    Ratings:
    +376 / 5 / -0
    How did this guy explain then going from 6-10 to 11-5? I bet Rodgers had nothing to do with it.

    Then you can ask him why Manning took a 3-13 team in '97 to a...... 3-13 team in '98 in his first year starting.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Forget Favre
    Online

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,270
    Ratings:
    +2,417 / 55 / -16
    This person is acting like a know it all, when in fact, he/she doesn't know what led to those Packers losses.
    Unless one works for the Packers organization, then one has no idea, no clue whatsoever as to why the Packers lose.
    Whoever this is can only come up with speculation (Which is nothing but opinion) based on observation.

    Did any Packers players coaches, office temp etc. come right out and say, "I know 100% for a fact why we are losing and it's because of the Rodgers/Favre fiasco."?
    I doubt it.
    And besides, everything is not so black and white.
    There could have been a million reasons happening at the same time why the Pack didn't do so well.

    Yeah, go ahead and put a rookie QB fresh from College ball in there and I'm sure we'll see the Colts in the SB in the same year.
    Just like we did with Tim Tebow and like we will with Cam Newton.
    No, there won't be all the drama like there was with the Pack but there won't be a winning team right off the bat either.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Bogart
    Offline

    Bogart Duke Mantee

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,551
    Location:
    Mobile, AL U.S.
    Ratings:
    +871 / 5 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1992
    I don't see the Colts winning it with a Quarterback that quick. Packers had a WAY BETTER defense in 2010 than they did in 2007 using that 4-3 scheme.
    The Colts proved this season that they depend way too much on one guy to run the team. Their defense let the Browns look like the 1980's old Browns, and last year they let teams run all over their asses. Arian Foster broke the record of most rushing yards the Colts had ever given up. They get run all over with their aged defense that has fallen apart. What you see of the Colts today is what you would have seen of the 49ers if they just decided to run it all out without replacing and thinking of the future after Montana.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. cheeseheadfanatic87
    Offline

    cheeseheadfanatic87 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    104
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    To be honest, I don't think it's "screwing" around personally. I am sure it affected the team a bit about losing Favre, but I think generally especially the receiving corp had faith in Rodgers. I was furious when they said they we're trading Favre-- but through out the season, I seen a great player in Rodgers. I mean let's face it folks, the defense was horrible in 08.

    It was pretty average in 09 when Capers first installed the 3-4 scheme. And in 2010 the defense was dominant. I mean lets face it there we're a few times the defense lost our games for us. I don't think 08-09 would be Super Bowl years... this was perfect timing because the talent was there, there was great chemistry between the players, and they finally just started clicking.
  8. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,845
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings:
    +2,621 / 77 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    Some of it might have been trying to hard to show they could do it with out Brett..That for me is very reasonable..

    But the D did cost them games

    Tenn, Houston and last Bear games come to mind

Share This Page