Rodgers playoffs since the Super Bowl

[Chicocheese]

Some idiot on Fox Sports Radio is TRYING to claim that Rodgers is no different than Joe Flacco in the sense that he doesn't have a great playoff record, won a Super Bowl and cashed in and he won the Super Bowl on an "Eli Manning-like run." He even said that Rodgers' 1 playoff win since the Super Bowl came against the Webb-lead Vikings. Sorry, but even if Ponder was playing we still would have won.

Oh really? I didn't know Joe Flacco won a league MVP award. I didn't know that Joe Flacco holds the single season and career QB rating records. I didn't know that Joe Flacco has the lowest INT% of all time.

Had the O-line not been crap for the first couple offensive series in Sunday's game we would have moved the ball a TON better. I also didn't understand 3 straight runs for a 3-and-out in in the first series. McCarthy baffled me with that one.

 

[NOMOFO]

lmao....oh my god you two are hilarious! holding onto the ball too long and not being willing to take what the defense gives are two different things!!! Yes...three exclamations!!! It's really not that confusing. I agree he could throw the ball away more but NO - HE DOES NOT OFTEN PASS UP OPEN RECEIVERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If he did-HELLO- LOOK AT HIS STATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob McGinn? lol.... Bob McGinn?!!!!! I had the "pleasure" of talking to him last year and questioning him about yet another of his idiotic articles. I forgot more about the game of football than Bob McGinn ever knew. To Bob's credit, when you talk to him he admits to not being a student of the game. He appears to be a good guy. He's quick to tell you he writes his articles on feedback he gets but seldom gives any sources.

lmao- DID YOU EVEN READ THE QUOTE YOU POSTED EINSTIEN??!??!??! "Rodgers was at least partially responsible for three of the four sacks. At times, he had receivers open but thought better of it and decided not to take the chance downfield" .

He's saying he had guys open DOWNFIELD but didn't want to risk the pick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yep... that's Rodgers...conservative to a fault but that says NOTHING about passing up receivers running short!!!!!!!!!

 

[FrankRizzo]

True or False:
Payton Manning would have beaten the Niners last Sunday if his defense held the Niners to 23?
What about Brees? Brady?

Rodgers and McCarthy both said after the game that if they had been told before the game, that the Packers D would only allow 23, they'd have expected to win. We all I think, agree with that.

The OL did okay. Okay to good I would say, and that is the NFL's best Front 7 they faced.

 

[Powarun]

True or False:
Payton Manning would have beaten the Niners last Sunday if his defense held the Niners to 23?
What about Brees? Brady?

Manning - No he would of thrown a pick and lost it
Brady - Maybe he wouldn't of ran it half as much as Rodgers did, would of gotten sacked, and had a chance of an interception.
Brees - No/Maybe Depends on if he takes Nyquil or Dayquil the night before. Dayquil he may of lacked Rodgers precision yet could of taken the hits, Nyquil he would of fumbled it and lost it.

I'd still take Rodgers over all other qbs

 

[FrankRizzo]

I'd still take Rodgers over all other qbs

I would too.
But I'm not so sure those 3 would have all lost, been held to 177 yards, taken 4 sacks. That day same circumstances.
I think Rodgers gets a C+ for that game.

 

[easyk83]

lmao....oh my god you two are hilarious! holding onto the ball too long and not being willing to take what the defense gives are two different things!!! Yes...three exclamations!!! It's really not that confusing. I agree he could throw the ball away more but NO - HE DOES NOT OFTEN PASS UP OPEN RECEIVERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If he did-HELLO- LOOK AT HIS STATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob McGinn? lol.... Bob McGinn?!!!!! I had the "pleasure" of talking to him last year and questioning him about yet another of his idiotic articles. I forgot more about the game of football than Bob McGinn ever knew. To Bob's credit, when you talk to him he admits to not being a student of the game. He appears to be a good guy. He's quick to tell you he writes his articles on feedback he gets but seldom gives any sources.

lmao- DID YOU EVEN READ THE QUOTE YOU POSTED EINSTIEN??!??!??! "Rodgers was at least partially responsible for three of the four sacks. At times, he had receivers open but thought better of it and decided not to take the chance downfield" .

He's saying he had guys open DOWNFIELD but didn't want to risk the pick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yep... that's Rodgers...conservative to a fault but that says NOTHING about passing up receivers running short!!!!!!!!!

Easy on the exclamation mark there kiddo, based off McGinn's other articles and the context he likely meant that he did pass up the open shorter routes. This conversation has ended, you're bringing nothing to the table except clownish stupidity. Now get lost, the adults in here are having a conversation.

 

[easyk83]

I would too.
But I'm not so sure those 3 would have all lost, been held to 177 yards, taken 4 sacks. That day same circumstances.
I think Rodgers gets a C+ for that game.

Rodgers was decent, but we need and are paying him to be more than that. I wouldn't trade him for anyone else. Brees Brady, Manning, none of those guys ever had the arm Rodgers has. Nor have they ever had the wheels. Rodgers' current shortcoming, like Brett Favre's post Holmgren problem with picks, is very correctible.

 

[NOMOFO]

Manning - No he would of thrown a pick and lost it
Brady - Maybe he wouldn't of ran it half as much as Rodgers did, would of gotten sacked, and had a chance of an interception.
Brees - No/Maybe Depends on if he takes Nyquil or Dayquil the night before. Dayquil he may of lacked Rodgers precision yet could of taken the hits, Nyquil he would of fumbled it and lost it.

I'd still take Rodgers over all other qbs

...and I love how he (frank) changed the subject. Predictable really.

Frank ...seriously ...of all of the things to rag on or even debate, dropped interceptions, red zone play calling, dropped passes on 3rd downs... you wanna talk Rodgers play? Really? Answer me this Frankie boy...three dropped passes.. what is Rodgers QB rating if those are caught? One was a big gainer. Honest to God. Rodgers failed to throw a ball away a few times and failed to make a few throws and you are going to debate Aaron Rodgers playoff results and make a thread to question it? CLUE-LESS. He's human-yes... but no need to work so hard to make something more out of this loss.

 

[NOMOFO]

Easy on the exclamation mark there kiddo, based off McGinn's other articles and the context he likely meant that he did pass up the open shorter routes. This conversation has ended, you're bringing nothing to the table except clownish stupidity. Now get lost, the adults in here are having a conversation.

That's what I would expect from you and people like you. !!!

!!!!
Yep...conversation has ended now that you've got no place to go with your say nothing diatribe. !!! Quoting McGinn -FANNNNNNTASTIC!

Hey, I'm fine with any opinions and viewpoints even from the clueless. It's only when people get personal that I have an issue. So....sorry. Keep it cool and all is fine.

!!!!

 

[pacmaniac]

He even said that Rodgers' 1 playoff win since the Super Bowl came against the Webb-lead Vikings. Sorry, but even if Ponder was playing we still would have won.

You saying Ponder is a great QB?

 

[Chicocheese]

You saying Ponder is a great QB?

No, but the radio guy is saying that the Packers didn't face the Vikings starting QB, who was the team's best option last season. I'm saying we would have beat the Vikings regardless of who played QB.

 

[Powarun]

...and I love how he (frank) changed the subject. Predictable really.

Frank ...seriously ...of all of the things to rag on or even debate, dropped interceptions, red zone play calling, dropped passes on 3rd downs... you wanna talk Rodgers play? Really? Answer me this Frankie boy...three dropped passes.. what is Rodgers QB rating if those are caught? One was a big gainer. Honest to God. Rodgers failed to throw a ball away a few times and failed to make a few throws and you are going to debate Aaron Rodgers playoff results and make a thread to question it? CLUE-LESS. He's human-yes... but no need to work so hard to make something more out of this loss.

Dude I'm not Frank, I'm Powarun.

Second I am on Rodgers side, if you read my previous posts I mentioned that Rodgers was the lesser of problems in our loss, and this discussion is about how we feel about Rodgers post season play, which after losing 2/3rds of them we are a bit upset since we are caught in the moment. I honestly feel Rodgers is our best bet of winning football period. This loss was a little tough to swallow since there are a lot of ifs and might of beens since it was close and our defense did above expectations.

I don't think Manning could of done any better than Rodgers did, since our O-line was a bit flaky. Brady I don't think could of done what Rodgers did on his pass to Cobb that he escaped. And Brees would of been swallowed by the 49ers D. Not to mention it was NOT good football throwing weather. The only QB that won was Kapernick and it was because he capitalized on our D's mistakes, he couldn't lead our offense through his team's defense since he would be sacked or intercepted

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Rodgers put the Packers in a position to win on Sunday. One defensive stop/int on the last series and Rodgers and co. would have been poised to take us to victory.

Sorry again but that was a pretty good showing by our defense I thought on Sunday. We went toe to toe with one of the NFL best and gave as good as they did. The O-line didn`t really show up. I`ve thought like everybody how crap our defense has been at times this year, but they played on Sunday.

 

[profile_removed]

Even with the Superbowl Aaron is now 5-4.

 

[profile_removed]

lmao....oh my god you two are hilarious! holding onto the ball too long and not being willing to take what the defense gives are two different things!!! Yes...three exclamations!!! It's really not that confusing. I agree he could throw the ball away more but NO - HE DOES NOT OFTEN PASS UP OPEN RECEIVERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If he did-HELLO- LOOK AT HIS STATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob McGinn? lol.... Bob McGinn?!!!!! I had the "pleasure" of talking to him last year and questioning him about yet another of his idiotic articles. I forgot more about the game of football than Bob McGinn ever knew. To Bob's credit, when you talk to him he admits to not being a student of the game. He appears to be a good guy. He's quick to tell you he writes his articles on feedback he gets but seldom gives any sources.

lmao- DID YOU EVEN READ THE QUOTE YOU POSTED EINSTIEN??!??!??! "Rodgers was at least partially responsible for three of the four sacks. At times, he had receivers open but thought better of it and decided not to take the chance downfield" .

He's saying he had guys open DOWNFIELD but didn't want to risk the pick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yep... that's Rodgers...conservative to a fault but that says NOTHING about passing up receivers running short!!!!!!!!!

I noticed myself and yelled it quite loudly at the TV that Aaron was holding the ball to at LEAST 5 banana when the ball should be out between 2.5 and 3.8 banana. Then again this isn't new, he was doing this in 2008.

 

[longtimefan]

I would like to remind everyone that Rodgers led a 5 minute, 10 play, 61 yard drive that resulted in the game-tying field goal with 5 minutes left on the clock. This drive featured the "how did he do it" big play to Cobb (even if the "how" was clearly the uncalled hold by EDS). So what's being said here? He did not burn enough clock? He must score a TD in that situation else all is for naught?

That says less about Rodgers and more about one's confidence in the defense ever making a key late stop against playoff caliber offenses.

I don't know about anybody else, but it was my spoken opinion at the time that SF would score and the game would boil down to how much time Rodgers would have to answer. The defense has proven itself in recent years to be of "last team with the ball wins" caliber when playing decent teams in close games.

We needed a Td at the end..We all knew the defense would not hold them

Rodgers did not have a Rodgers type game, but we only want to blame the defense.

 

[NOMOFO]

We needed a Td at the end..We all knew the defense would not hold them
Rodgers did not have a Rodgers type game, but we only want to blame the defense.

I agree. There have actually been a few games this year that we all blame the defense and over-look that the O did little to win the game. No argument there.

I also agree that Rodgers didn't have a Rodgers type game, but the guy certainly played well enough to win it for us and if I had to list all of the players and coaches (Mac's play calling), Rodgers would be about 20th on my list of guys that let us down.

 

[NOMOFO]

Even with the Superbowl Aaron is now 5-4.

"Aaron" is 5-4 huh? Not the "Packers"? The Pack scored like 590 points against the Cards in that game a few years ago but that loss was on Rodgers huh? What would we be saying right now had Jones not dropped those passes or if Hyde had made that pick?

Any Packer fans that even want to hint that Aaron Rodgers is the issue really...and I mean REALLY needs to have his head examined.

As far as all these latest ramblings about him holding onto the ball too long...yes he does at times... but listen to Jaws or any former NFL QB talk about Rodgers and they say that's one of the things that makes him great. As Jaws says, unlike most QBs in the league, Rodgers head is scanning the field every second he drops back and he doesn't look down. Take the good....no... take the GREAT with the bad.

 

[mor4les]

Do you guys think if the Dolphins fire Philbin, can the Packers bring him back as the OC?

 

[NOMOFO]

Do you guys think if the Dolphins fire Philbin, can the Packers bring him back as the OC?

Why would we think we'd need or want him back? The Packers offense may have not dominated all season (mostly due to Rodgers not being there), but I would consider it very well coordinated. I watch some other NFL teams all year long and it's clear some teams are not very well coordinated. I wouldn't change much on the O-side.

 

[FrankRizzo]

Rodgers Career Playoff Results:

Here are some interesting facts I see looking at Rodgers playoff numbers.

9 games
5-4 record
4-0 in the 2010 playoff run
1-1 vs Joe Webb Vikings
0-4 vs the others

in domes:
3 300-yard games

in outdooor games:
0 300-yard games

Had 4 touchdown passes in playoff loss at Arizona -in dome.
Has 4 touchdown passes total in last 3 playoff games, outdoors, vs SF, Min, @SF

His rating against the NYG, SF, and SF have been 78, 91, 97.
Not horrible, but those are pedestrian, and this is a team that everyone says has a chance to win because of him.
We all know the defense ain't going to lead us to the promised land. It has to be #12, an outdoors and against good defenses, it hasn't happened.

He was great, legendary, vs Atlanta and Pittsburgh, both in domes. He was sensational in Arizona, except for the first interception he threw that day, and the OT miss of Jennings deep, and then the pause-fumble-game over finish.

Can, will he be great again in the playoffs?
Can he be outdoors in our freezing climate, or are we better off playing wildcard games where the road takes us to domes like Atlanta and New Orleans again?

Shouldn't we just put a damn dome up over Lambeau quickly?

 

[NOMOFO]

Rodgers Career Playoff Results:

Here are some interesting facts I see looking at Rodgers playoff numbers.

9 games
5-4 record
4-0 in the 2010 playoff run
1-1 vs Joe Webb Vikings
0-4 vs the others

in domes:
3 300-yard games

in outdooor games:
0 300-yard games

Had 4 touchdown passes in playoff loss at Arizona -in dome.
Has 4 touchdown passes total in last 3 playoff games, outdoors, vs SF, Min, @SF

His rating against the NYG, SF, and SF have been 78, 91, 97.
Not horrible, but those are pedestrian, and this is a team that everyone says has a chance to win because of him.
We all know the defense ain't going to lead us to the promised land. It has to be #12, an outdoors and against good defenses, it hasn't happened.

He was great, legendary, vs Atlanta and Pittsburgh, both in domes. He was sensational in Arizona, except for the first interception he threw that day, and the OT miss of Jennings deep, and then the pause-fumble-game over finish.

Can, will he be great again in the playoffs?
Can he be outdoors in our freezing climate, or are we better off playing wildcard games where the road takes us to domes like Atlanta and New Orleans again?

Shouldn't we just put a damn dome up over Lambeau quickly?

News flash Frank. It's not shocking that 300 plus yard passing games in January in Wisconsin are less frequent than 70 degree indoor turf games... for ANY QB. Having said that, I do think that Rodgers is such a better passer than a Kapernuts or a Cutler and most QBs in this league that I do think it's a decent question. Would the Packers be better off on the road in a dome (or warm weather city) than at home in the elements in January? Depends on the team and dome I suppose.

 

[Forderick]

This team isn't built to play in weather. The offence was for the most part built for domes and warm weather. Drafting Lacy has started to change that but for the most part the packers were not built to be a cold weather team. which seems absurd considering were they play their home games. Nor is this team built to be able to consistently beat physical teams, they can't seem to get it done.

 

[Chicocheese]

We needed a Td at the end..We all knew the defense would not hold them

Rodgers did not have a Rodgers type game, but we only want to blame the defense.

Sorry, but the defense was half-a-finger from a pick that would have shown the world what a scrub Kaepernick is. I thought the defense did ok, not great when all was said and done.

As far as Rodgers goes, his O-Line was TERRIBLE. If Rodgers got a decent pocket and time to throw we would have but up 33 points.

 

[NOMOFO]

This team isn't built to play in weather. The offence was for the most part built for domes and warm weather. Drafting Lacy has started to change that but for the most part the packers were not built to be a cold weather team. which seems absurd considering were they play their home games. Nor is this team built to be able to consistently beat physical teams, they can't seem to get it done.

What exactly does that even mean? People say that all the time but what do you mean? In today's NFL the game is designed around scoring points. The rules skew extremely heavily in favor of passing.

It would be idiotic for any team to even attempt to be a "run first" team these days. Look at the teams in the playoffs and the top teams in the league these days. Seldom are the top teams not heavy passing teams. The Packers offense is not all about throwing the ball deep. I would consider our receiving corps as very capable of being possession receivers when we need them to be.

I just have no idea what a team would look like that's "built for cold weather". Would they have penguin feet and look like eskimos?