Is It SB or Bust for the rest of Rodgers Career here?

[Packer Brother]

In other words, win the SB or the season is a failure?

I remember Steelers players saying that the season is a failure, and they're no better than the Brown's, after being eliminated by the Jags.

Is this organization to that point? I've been for awhile.

 

[armand34]

It will evolve to that. As this is the first season in a while that they went "all in" to improve this team.

 

[thequick12]

In other words, win the SB or the season is a failure?

I remember Steelers players saying that the season is a failure, and they're no better than the Brown's, after being eliminated by the Jags.

Is this organization to that point? I've been for awhile.

Every teams season is a failure if they don't win the Superbowl that's how it works. But even more so when you have the best qb in the league. And since the Packers have had the best qb in the league for the last 25 seasons essentially this organization has been to that point for quite awhile

 

[Jerellh528]

As a fan I’ll still enjoy every game. But I’m not sure what you’re asking though. What would qualify it being bust? Everyone’s job on every team is already on the line every day and could get the axe for a player, coach, or exec who outperforms them. I understand the way the nfl goes, every team in the nfl has the best in the world from top to bottom and are all competing for the same thing so I just enjoy the competition and the games, a super bowl is awesome but not winning one doesn’t constitute a bust imo.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Personally I think the title is a bit misleading or misconstrued here. Obviously (assuming our organization plays its cards right and Rodgers desires to retire as a Packer) every season no matter the stage of his career is Superbowl or bust. I do think now that we're headed across age 35, the sense of urgency to get at least one maybe two more Lombardis home under AR is growing.

I'm thinking the OP is asking whether or not that means Mike McCarthy's rope is shortening to which I'd say .... Yes and no.

MM's rope has shortened in that he definitely has to get the team back in the top 8 Superbowl finalists again with all the moves we've made plus getting Rodgers back this offseason. I also think expectations gotta be raised with getting rid of Van Pelt and bringing Philbin back.

I feel in some ways, MM takes some flack for things he runs in this offense that I've seen other teams run and are no less predictable. Yes some years production is a little worse than others, but there is a reason Rodgers found his success getting reared in his offense and a reason it's constantly been a high-ranking scoring machine.

To me, the only two major sins MM has staining him are:

1. Keeping Capers and Whitt employed as long as he did. He definitely has to hope the move to get Pettine didn't come too late.

2. Being too soft on awful backup QBs and not using Holmgren's level of toughness that he exhibited when he told Favre one more interception meant he'd call run plays the rest of the game, and tossing Rubley off the team for ******** up a pass. MM definitely has a bad grade for not being tough enough on Hundley.

 

[gbgary]

should have been every year.

 

[sschind]

In other words, win the SB or the season is a failure?

I remember Steelers players saying that the season is a failure, and they're no better than the Brown's, after being eliminated by the Jags.

Is this organization to that point? I've been for awhile.

A lot of fans consider every year you don't win the SB a failure, Aaron Rodgers or not.

 

[ExpatPacker]

To answer the OP's question, yes and no. If your team doesn't make it to the SB and win, then they have fallen short of the ultimate goal. But getting there can still produce a lot of great games and a great season. The problem with the Packers is that when they have lost in the playoffs, they have lost bad. Against the Giants in 2011, Kaepernick running all over them the next year and the year after that, the monumental choke job in Seattle, they way they were outplayed by Atlanta (although that one wasn't quite as awful as the others). Those losses have left a bad taste in my mouth. Now someone might say, it doesn't matter if you lose good or bad in the playoffs. I don't agree.

 

[Half Empty]

My position begins with expectations. That's one reason I didn't mind the Gory Years as much as some - I knew, going in, that they weren't going to win it all, probably not their division or even the playoffs, maybe not even a winning season. Hence, every game was interesting and wins were appreciated, regardless. Since the early '90s, this team has been very rarely not been mentioned in the discussion of top SB contenders, so one win in the '90s and one in 2010 is failure in my estimation. From here on out, it would obviously be more of a waste of a generational QB if they just have years that most of the rest of the league would like to have. Even getting AR back this year hasn't raised my bar back up to the top, though, as he's coming off the injury and is another year older, there's no proven RB, the receivers are questionable after the top, the new D, et. al. I'm almost inclined to give them this year off from SB-or-bust to see how all the new pieces fit.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It's been Super Bowl or bust since 2010. The Packers have had the best QB in the NFL over that span and have played in one of the worst divisions in the NFL as well. While the NFC North is better 2-4 than the AFC East, it's not by much. When Rodgers' career is over fans will look back and wonder how the organization could have squandered so many years of his career. I mean, think about it. The Packers won the Super Bowl in 2010 on the back of a great defense; Rodgers wasn't yet the best QB in NFL history (2011 is when he really took off). Since Rodgers has been the best, the Packers haven't even made it to the Super Bowl. That speaks volumes about the front office and coaching staff.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Personally I think the title is a bit misleading or misconstrued here. Obviously (assuming our organization plays its cards right and Rodgers desires to retire as a Packer) every season no matter the stage of his career is Superbowl or bust. I do think now that we're headed across age 35, the sense of urgency to get at least one maybe two more Lombardis home under AR is growing.

I'm thinking the OP is asking whether or not that means Mike McCarthy's rope is shortening to which I'd say .... Yes and no.

MM's rope has shortened in that he definitely has to get the team back in the top 8 Superbowl finalists again with all the moves we've made plus getting Rodgers back this offseason. I also think expectations gotta be raised with getting rid of Van Pelt and bringing Philbin back.

I feel in some ways, MM takes some flack for things he runs in this offense that I've seen other teams run and are no less predictable. Yes some years production is a little worse than others, but there is a reason Rodgers found his success getting reared in his offense and a reason it's constantly been a high-ranking scoring machine.

To me, the only two major sins MM has staining him are:

1. Keeping Capers and Whitt employed as long as he did. He definitely has to hope the move to get Pettine didn't come too late.

2. Being too soft on awful backup QBs and not using Holmgren's level of toughness that he exhibited when he told Favre one more interception meant he'd call run plays the rest of the game, and tossing Rubley off the team for ******** up a pass. MM definitely has a bad grade for not being tough enough on Hundley.

Also costing the Packers home field advantage in the playoffs in 2014 (worst play calling I've ever seen from ANY coach in the Bills game that year), conservative to a fault, and took him half a decade to modernize the offense.

 

[PackAttack12]

Any time you have the best QB in the game, it's about winning the Super Bowl.

So yes.

 

[pacmaniac]

MM's rope has shortened in that he definitely has to get the team back in the top 8 Superbowl finalists again with all the moves we've made plus getting Rodgers back this offseason. I also think expectations gotta be raised with getting rid of Van Pelt and bringing Philbin back.

I'd say top 4.

Also wonder if Murphy is trying to protect MM by moving him from under the GM to under himself? That means Gute can't fire MM. Maybe we're stuck with MM forever.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I'd say top 4.

Also wonder if Murphy is trying to protect MM by moving him from under the GM to under himself? That means Gute can't fire MM. Maybe we're stuck with MM forever.

Ehhh, I don't really think Brian G had any plans to fire MM anyway. Plus, everything I've ever heard Rodgers say would indicate he's not behind such a move anyway.

Thing is too there've been coaches who've done worse than Mike McCarthy and kept their jobs. Case in point being Payton down in New Orleans going 7-9 three years in a row WITH the 3rd best QB in the league as close to Brady and Rodgers as you can get.

AND

Not one of those three 7-9 seasons he had ever featured the hottest garbage QB in NFL history on his field. That alone was going to give MM a mulligan for last year.

Just thank God TT went out the door cuz he definitely failed bad by sitting on his hands and not doing his job calling up veteran FA QBs and trying to get MM a competent one to work with once it was proven his half-baked experiment failed.