Analysts predicting us to SB and media hype

NYPacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,583
Reaction score
36
I love & defend Rodgers to the death almost, but I agree with you.
Greatness is measured in the playoffs IMO.

He was great in his one playoff game, except the first pass he threw (terrible int) and his last play (took too long, fumbled). In between, he was Tom Brady in the post-season out there.

It's time we start racking up some playoff wins though.
I want 3 of them this season, culminating with a win here in Dallas, in which I would be at the game if we made it!!!!!!!!

Please, God....

Thank You!
 

nleidigh319

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Location
iowa
looking into the season i think we win around 12 games and win the division hopefully, the vikings have never been consistently good and never have done anything in the playoffs and i think green bay will be at minnesotas level this season. we managed to be a playoff team last year with a horrid o-line and pass defence. i think both will improve. this is also the second season in the 3-4 and we will have a great second year with it. our special teams will improve with the return of blackman as well. this could be a very special year for us but it all depends on what the team puts on the field
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
so what QB in their first 2 seasons as a starter had a better start to their career?
Ben Roethlisberger. Although he does not have the stats Rodgers did his first 2 years he went 22-3 in the regular season and went 5-1 in the playoffs including a Super Bowl. But if you want the stats......
 
OP
OP
PackersRS

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Ben Roethlisberger. Although he does not have the stats Rodgers did his first 2 years he went 22-3 in the regular season and went 5-1 in the playoffs including a Super Bowl. But if you want the stats......
I agree with that. Though he didn't play well in the SB, he did play very well in the regular season (not stats like Rodgers, who was the center of his team, but very efficient stats. He helped his team win, rather than just being carried by them) AND won a lot, so that's better than just playing very well and not winning.

Roethlisberger winning more than Rodgers in his first 2 years just means that his team was much better than Rodgers', but that team probably wouldn't have won if he wasn't there. We can't fault him for being in an excelent position to suceed...
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
I agree with that. Though he didn't play well in the SB, he did play very well in the regular season (not stats like Rodgers, who was the center of his team, but very efficient stats. He helped his team win, rather than just being carried by them) AND won a lot, so that's better than just playing very well and not winning.

Roethlisberger winning more than Rodgers in his first 2 years just means that his team was much better than Rodgers', but that team probably wouldn't have won if he wasn't there. We can't fault him for being in an excelent position to suceed...
The team Rodgers took over was 13-3 the year before he became the starter. All I heard from Packer fans was how many starters were returning from that 13-3 team. So what you are saying then is that 13-3 team was not as good as the Steelers 6-10 team that Ben took over in 2004.
 
OP
OP
PackersRS

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
The team Rodgers took over was 13-3 the year before he became the starter. All I heard from Packer fans was how many starters were returning from that 13-3 team. So what you are saying then is that 13-3 team was not as good as the Steelers 6-10 team that Ben took over in 2004.
What?????

How many starters on D from 2007 played in 2008? KBG didn't, Cullen Jenkins didn't, Corey Williams didn't, Barnett missed a lot of time, Harris missed a lot of time, Bigby missed a lot of time...

No, but it was surely Rodgers' fault that the D that was #11 in 2007 fell to #20 in 2008, and #14 in Rush D fell to #26 in 2008...

The 2005 Steelers (#4 in total D, #5 in rush O) was way better than the 2008 Packers (.#20 in total D, #17 in rush O). The 2005 Steelers was #25 in Passing O. Roethlisberger, as I said, was important to their win, but with a lesser team, he wouldn't have won anything. GB was #8 in passing O. Sure, a dropoff from #2 a year ago, but if you believe that was the reason, with Rodgers' ratings, you gotta be a complete fool.

It doesn't matter what the team did in the prior year, teams change a lot from one season to another. It matters what kind of team the QB had IN THAT YEAR. Unless you think the QB can play DE, CB, DT, ILB, RB, OT...

Looking at wins and losses without putting team performance into context is ridiculous.

If you remember correctly, Roethlisberger was plain AWFUL in that SB, with 0 Tds and 2 ints, completing a whopping 9 passes for 123 yards.

Like I said, in the regular season, he was very good, and in the playoffs he was good too. But you're kidding yourself if you trully believe he was the reason they won the SB, which is the measurement for a great QB.

The Ravens and the 2005 Steelers won the SB with Dilfer and Roethlisberger. The Broncos and the Colts won it BECAUSE of Elway and Manning. (In 2008, Roethlisberger was as important to their win as that incredibly dominant D, so then it's another discussion. But one can make a serious case that you change the 06 Manning for the 08 Roethlisberger in 06 and the Colts don't win it, while the reverse wouldn't be true).
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
What?????

How many starters on D from 2007 played in 2008? KBG didn't, Cullen Jenkins didn't, Corey Williams didn't, Barnett missed a lot of time, Harris missed a lot of time, Bigby missed a lot of time...

No, but it was surely Rodgers' fault that the D that was #11 in 2007 fell to #20 in 2008, and #14 in Rush D fell to #26 in 2008...

The 2005 Steelers (#4 in total D, #5 in rush O) was way better than the 2008 Packers (.#20 in total D, #17 in rush O). The 2005 Steelers was #25 in Passing O. Roethlisberger, as I said, was important to their win, but with a lesser team, he wouldn't have won anything. GB was #8 in passing O. Sure, a dropoff from #2 a year ago, but if you believe that was the reason, with Rodgers' ratings, you gotta be a complete fool.

It doesn't matter what the team did in the prior year, teams change a lot from one season to another. It matters what kind of team the QB had IN THAT YEAR. Unless you think the QB can play DE, CB, DT, ILB, RB, OT...

Looking at wins and losses without putting team performance into context is ridiculous.

If you remember correctly, Roethlisberger was plain AWFUL in that SB, with 0 Tds and 2 ints, completing a whopping 9 passes for 123 yards.

Like I said, in the regular season, he was very good, and in the playoffs he was good too. But you're kidding yourself if you trully believe he was the reason they won the SB, which is the measurement for a great QB.

The Ravens and the 2005 Steelers won the SB with Dilfer and Roethlisberger. The Broncos and the Colts won it BECAUSE of Elway and Manning. (In 2008, Roethlisberger was as important to their win as that incredibly dominant D, so then it's another discussion. But one can make a serious case that you change the 06 Manning for the 08 Roethlisberger in 06 and the Colts don't win it, while the reverse wouldn't be true).

Didnt you know? The defense played harder for Brett Favre than Aaron Rodgers because they loved him more. In fact the fans cheered louder, the cheese was cheesier, the tailgating was longer, and Wisconsin as a whole was better when Brett Favre played for the Packers because Brett Favre is an inspiration to everyone.

LOL
 

NYPacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,583
Reaction score
36
Didnt you know? The defense played harder for Brett Favre than Aaron Rodgers because they loved him more. In fact the fans cheered louder, the cheese was cheesier, the tailgating was longer, and Wisconsin as a whole was better when Brett Favre played for the Packers because Brett Favre is an inspiration to everyone.

LOL

Uh oh, let's not start one of these "debates" all over again.
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
What?????

How many starters on D from 2007 played in 2008? KBG didn't, Cullen Jenkins didn't, Corey Williams didn't, Barnett missed a lot of time, Harris missed a lot of time, Bigby missed a lot of time...

No, but it was surely Rodgers' fault that the D that was #11 in 2007 fell to #20 in 2008, and #14 in Rush D fell to #26 in 2008...

The 2005 Steelers (#4 in total D, #5 in rush O) was way better than the 2008 Packers (.#20 in total D, #17 in rush O). The 2005 Steelers was #25 in Passing O. Roethlisberger, as I said, was important to their win, but with a lesser team, he wouldn't have won anything. GB was #8 in passing O. Sure, a dropoff from #2 a year ago, but if you believe that was the reason, with Rodgers' ratings, you gotta be a complete fool.

It doesn't matter what the team did in the prior year, teams change a lot from one season to another. It matters what kind of team the QB had IN THAT YEAR. Unless you think the QB can play DE, CB, DT, ILB, RB, OT...

Looking at wins and losses without putting team performance into context is ridiculous.

If you remember correctly, Roethlisberger was plain AWFUL in that SB, with 0 Tds and 2 ints, completing a whopping 9 passes for 123 yards.

Like I said, in the regular season, he was very good, and in the playoffs he was good too. But you're kidding yourself if you trully believe he was the reason they won the SB, which is the measurement for a great QB.

The Ravens and the 2005 Steelers won the SB with Dilfer and Roethlisberger. The Broncos and the Colts won it BECAUSE of Elway and Manning. (In 2008, Roethlisberger was as important to their win as that incredibly dominant D, so then it's another discussion. But one can make a serious case that you change the 06 Manning for the 08 Roethlisberger in 06 and the Colts don't win it, while the reverse wouldn't be true).
KGB started 2 games in 07, Williams was traded, Jenkins started the first 4 games. Harris missed 4 games, Bigby was in and out. Ben had 6 different starters on offense from 04 - 05. So in the aspect of looking at the team, yeah it's important. But the Packers did not change much from 07-08. I'll give Ben this, he had a hell of a coach.

And as to Elway being the reason the Broncos won two Super Bowls, I would think it had a lot to do with Davis' 157 yards rushing and 3 tds in the first one and the 4 interceptions the Broncos D had in the second one. but I could be wrong. After all, Elway's passing number in those to games were stellar.

Elway's combined passing for the two Super Bowls wins.

30 of 51, 459 yards, 1 TD and 2 Interceptions. Rating: 78.8

But he did run for a couple of TD's.
 

pluto

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
65
Reaction score
3
Location
somewhere south of heaven
TRUST ME, I want Rodgers to win a SUPERBOWL! I can't stand BIG BEN


i also want rodgers to win a superbowl or two or twelve. but he needs to put up his yearly stats for a few more years before being proclaimed a great qb. marino never won a superbowl but was a better than average qb.

armand34 why is it that you don't like big ben? did he RUB you the wrong way. lol. i'm sorry about the joke at your expense but i couldn't resist.
 
OP
OP
PackersRS

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
i also want rodgers to win a superbowl or two or twelve. but he needs to put up his yearly stats for a few more years before being proclaimed a great qb. marino never won a superbowl but was a better than average qb.

armand34 why is it that you don't like big ben? did he RUB you the wrong way. lol. i'm sorry about the joke at your expense but i couldn't resist.
Marino was a GREAT, HOF QB. Don't make mistakes.

I don't put him with the top 5 of all time because he IMHO lacked intangibles (never won a SB in his entire career, despite having great teams). But he was trully great.

Even if I only got to watch him when he was already old, it was awesome. During the regular season, he was in a league of his own. Best regular season qb of all time, no doubt.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top