Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 964485" data-attributes="member: 10086">Yeah. I try to remain objective (hard to do these days) and give posts like that the benefit of the doubt that it came out from another angle that we’re not seeing.I literally just read an article that came out in the last 48 hours that mentioned what a “terrible year” last season was for The Packers. I think they meant how it finished?I fully agree. Us being a #1 seed isn’t terrible by any standard. However there’s a segment of people out there that put that ST debacle onto the QB. The truth is those were horrible weather conditions for a QB to win a game passing the ball (on both sides). I guess what I’m saying is that these fan zealots consider the disappointment after high expectations a total failure. It’s a strange way of looking at it, but that’s my take on it because I just read similar sentiment and it was not at all an article meant to bash the Packers. That said, I can’t pick on Rodgers because I’m called to Let it go completely. I would’ve liked to have seen Rodgers make an effort to be present in GB earlier. It’s my opinion it would’ve displayed Rodgers commitment level and possibly inspired other teammates to consider it also. You’ll notice that Matt really wanted him there when asked, but he wisely didn’t want to start any friction so he downplayed it some.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 318 (members: 0, guests: 318)