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!
    Dismiss Notice

Honest question... With our current roster, without Rodgers over/under on 5 wins in a full season

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by 98Redbird, Nov 11, 2013.

?

Without Rodgers Over/Under 5 wins

  1. Over 5

    42.9%
  2. Under 5

    57.1%
  1. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,862
    Ratings:
    +845
    What team isn't?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Bensalama21

    Bensalama21 Ben

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,571
    Ratings:
    +607
    Not at all... I even appreciate it when he throws a 2 yard pass because it's a better play than half the QB's in the league can do
     
  3. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    This team would win 5 games without Roders for the season. People are overreacting over the loss of Rodgers. The Oakland Raiders have won 3 games already this year for goodness sakes!
     
  4. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013

    what three games..the two teams they have beat are the Steelers and the Chargers. Neither one of those teams will be in the playoffs.
     
  5. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,799
    Ratings:
    +2,665
    Teams with better defenses than this. One that comes to mind is Arizona.

    Chicago doesn't have that good of a defense and they beat us at home with a 3rd. tier (or worse) journeyman.

    There would be other examples if, for instance, Wilson or Kaepernick were to be injured.

    The point is this...this is not, on balance, a particularly good football team beyond the first string QB position. That's not a bad thing given the alternatives. NE, IND and NO are pretty much in the same boat where elite QB play makes the defense look better than it is.
     
  6. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    Not every team the Packers play during the year is a playoff team. We've got a few cupcakes on our schedule as well. Vikings twice, Falcons and we play the Steelers as well. So, just looking at this season, those would be four games we should win without Rodgers. Then Packers should be able to win one of the Ravens, Browns or Giants. This is assuming health for the rest of the team outside Rodgers (though I think even this beat up team should be able to win against those first four and the Giants).
     
  7. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    Are you an insane person? 13 points w/ three turnovers against the Giants and 13 points w/ three turnovers against the Eagles. Not to mention an 0-3 record.
     
  8. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    If these last three games don't demonstrate Rogers' value to the team, you should just stop watching football. With Rodgers, the Packers are a Super Bowl contender. Without Rodgers, the team is unwatchable. Without Rodgers, this is a bad team.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    You can't replace Rodgers or compare any other team (outside of New England, Denver and New Orleans) to the Packers situation.
     
  10. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    UNDER 5, sadly.
    BusCook here was right.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,834
    Ratings:
    +2,674
    Either we need Rodgers or a QB with more wins under his belt.
    Putting in green kids just ain't gonna do it for us with the "team" that we have.
    That or have Tolzien throw it a heck of a lot more when the run is stopped.

    W/out Air-Run? Fogedaboutit.
     
  12. melvin dangerr

    melvin dangerr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    407
    Ratings:
    +105
    With out A-Rod 6-10 offense seems to be waiting on Lacy to score 4TD'''s Defense waiting for season to end..
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    Yeah I can. The Packers field a better overall roster than the Raiders do even without Rodgers. We're also talking about a hypothetical season so we can assume that all the current unjuries would not be as large a factor. And why in a discussion about winning at least five games would three teams that will probably hit double digit wins matter?
     
  14. Bagadeez04

    Bagadeez04 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    381
    Ratings:
    +133
    I gotta believe we're good for six wind without AR...just have to think that. If management.coaches had a better plan at backup QB I think we'd have won one of last three games?
     
  15. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    Rodgers is great. Rodgers greatness hides things such as an average offense line (weak at both tackle spots) and below-average defense. You could compare the situation to Peyton Manning and the Colts two years ago. With Manning, the Colts were a Super Bowl contender. Manning's quick release hid the offensive line's bad play and the horrible defense they played each year. Without Manning, the Colts won two games. TWO GAMES

    Getting to your second point, look at every Packers season since 2009. When are "unjuries" not prevalent for the Packers?
     
  16. DOCTORAPK

    DOCTORAPK Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    137
    Ratings:
    +25
    Defense: 2 DTs who basically can plug the middle but not rush the QB. Clay is like Urlacher, run right at him and sooner or later he's hurt. Hawk is a journeyman, yet a #5 overall pick. Many teams, if not most teams can match or beat our DBs. The OL is fair at best. Lacy has got it, but he can't make the holes. We've lost 4 receivers in 12 months, Cobb, Jennings, Finley (probably for good) and Driver.
    The ONE GUY WHO MADE THIS A BETTER THAN POOR TEAM WENT DOWN.
    A few weeks ago the Pack was supposed to be heading into the "weak" part of their schedule. Now, they've succeeded in making goofy teams like the Eagles and Giants look good. If they're not careful, they're goona lose to the Vikes, who only have one win ...
    but also a QB ccarousel, which is still better than Green Bay's.
     
  17. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    Not comparable. The Packers have better WRs and RBs than that Colts team (Colts basically had Reggie Wayne and Pierre Garcon and that's it). The question was "with our current roster" and so we can assume a healthy TE and Cobb since you want to compare them to the 2011 Colts who were, outside Manning, relatively healthy. As much flack as people want to throw at our defense, our defense this year is 15th in points per game despite the massive amount of injuries. The Colts in 2011 gave up the fifth most points in the NFL. This team minus Rodgers is much better than the Colts team in 2011.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  18. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,829
    Ratings:
    +1,059
    Rodgers makes up a large percentage of the salary cap. If he's out for a whole year, we're essentially trying to field a whole team (including replacing the best player in the game at the game's most important position by far) with a lot less money than a full cap.

    I can't give an exact number of wins, but I can say those two in combination would be very hard to overcome.
     
  19. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    You're not even close. The Colts/Packers comparison is completely legit. Both teams were close to identical to the team they had the previous year minus a Hall of Fame QB.

    We could circle back to defense point with the same, old argument... No Rodgers means less offense which means more defense which means more points by the other team. Imagine the number of points given up by the Packers with Rodgers out all year.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2013
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  20. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    You did not address much of what I said in explaining the difference in the two teams. You simply said, "You're wrong". Rather than making an empty statement that has no possibility of convincing me that what I said was incorrect, try explaining to me how the points I made are incomparable. Just making a blanket statement about how ex-Rodgers our defense is on the field longer doesn't hold up. Our defense, in the last three games minus Rodgers and missing a number of players, has held the last three opponents to 0.1 points more than that Colts team allowed over the entire season. Put a healthy Hayward, Shields, CM3, Perry, Worthy, etc. and I think most would agree that the defense would be much better.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  21. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    Even if we were healthy i think the defense would struggle. Rodgers and the offense carried the defense and i don't know if it's just the scheme and play calling by Capers but even when we had all those guy's healthy the defense still looked bad at times. We had a really really good group of guy's when we gave up all those points and yards against Kurt Warner in 09 but Rodgers and the offense kept it close or else we woulda got blown out. When he offense struggled last year we lost games because the defense was garabge..in fact that has been the case the last couple playoff loses smh.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  22. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    That's why I made the "you're wrong" statement. You can't just trade Rodgers' injury for the rest of the injured players on the team. It's not like Rodgers being injured affected injuries to Hayward and Worthy (injured before the season even started), Perry (injured for two straights seasons) and CM3 (freak broken finger).

    You're wrong because we're seeing what the Packers are without Rodgers. Without Rodgers and THE CURRENT ROSTER, the Packers are 0-2 against sub-.500 teams (at the time GB played them) and 0-1 against a division rival. Just like the Colts w/o Peyton Manning, the team isn't the same without their star.
     
  23. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    THANK YOU!

    Your 2009 playoff point is perfect. Defenses never seem too terrible when the offense scores 45 points.
     
  24. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,260
    Ratings:
    +463
    Our injured players are on the current roster. The question posed was if this team could win 5 games over an entire season. This being a hypothetical I chose this to mean a completely new season (since this season has already begun and therefore can't be used for the question). In a hypothetical season, this current roster would not have the exact same injuries. Just a different way of interpreting it. Yes, in a hypothetical season in which 5-8 of your best players in addition to Rodgers were injured, we would struggle to win 5 games. So would any other team in the NFL. There isn't a team that could withstand that level of injuries.

    If we insist on using our current injuries along with the Rodgers injury to speculate on wins, then the question is pointless. ANY TEAM would struggle to five wins with as many players injured as the Packers have had. Take Wilson, Harvin, any two of Seattle's terrible oline, Sherman, Earl Thomas, Bruce Irvin and Walter Thurmond off the Seattle roster and they will also struggle to five wins.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    Hate to be jerk, but Harvin has played one game all season and Bruce Irvin was suspended the first four games. Russel Okung, the team's starting LT, played two games then went on short-term injury reserve. The Seahawks compete because their quarterback is healthy.
     

Share This Page