It’s now OFFICIAL!!! Rodgers has been traded to the Jets.

[Pokerbrat2000]

Lol, only you Cpt!

Or maybe the next time someone posts that ARs issues were because of a lack of receivers you can post, "Mahommes won a SB with receivers at the same level as Rodgers had."

It is funny that I post numbers on a Pro Bowl TE like Kelce and Mahomes rushing numbers and someone equated that to bashing Rodgers. Kelce's numbers were independent of Mahomes rushing abilities. I was merely stating that the Chiefs may have had equal numbers for their WR's as the Packers did, but their TE was far superior. Throw in a QB like Mahomes that can get it done through the air and with his feet and you have a much more dynamic offense.

Really incredible how sensitive some have become when it comes to Rodgers, always feeling like they have to defend him. Kelce would have been an excellent TE for Rodgers to have, but it wouldn't have changed Rodgers rushing numbers.

 

[Schultz]

Now I do not want to let oldschool down so I am going to disagree with you. IMO Rodgers rushing numbers would have changed. They would have gone down.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Now I do not want to let oldschool down so I am going to disagree with you. IMO Rodgers rushing numbers would have changed. They would have gone down.

Another, that missed the point.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Or maybe the next time someone posts that ARs issues were because of a lack of receivers you can post, "Mahommes won a SB with receivers at the same level as Rodgers had."

First of all the Chiefs' receivers were significantly better than the Packers' last season. But you completely ignore the impact Travis Kelce has on that team because it doesn't fit your narrative.

It is funny that I post numbers on a Pro Bowl TE like Kelce and Mahomes rushing numbers and someone equated that to bashing Rodgers. Kelce's numbers were independent of Mahomes rushing abilities. I was merely stating that the Chiefs may have had equal numbers for their WR's as the Packers did, but their TE was far superior. Throw in a QB like Mahomes that can get it done through the air and with his feet and you have a much more dynamic offense.

Really incredible how sensitive some have become when it comes to Rodgers, always feeling like they have to defend him. Kelce would have been an excellent TE for Rodgers to have, but it wouldn't have changed Rodgers rushing numbers.

What's the point of bringing up Rodgers not being as mobile as Mahomes if you just want to point out that Kelce is a far superior tight end? Everybody here knows the only reason you did that was to take another shot at Rodgers. At least stand up to it when being called out upon.

 

[AmishMafia]

First of all the Chiefs' receivers were significantly better than the Packers' last season. But you completely ignore the impact Travis Kelce has on that team because it doesn't fit your narrative.

That is correct, Kelce does not fit the narrative because he is a TE and the conversation was about Wide Receivers.

 

[Schultz]

Which one of the 42 conversations in this thread are we talking about?

 

[tynimiller]

Which one of the 42 conversations in this thread are we talking about?

This is also correct LOL

 

[OldSchool101]

Everybody here knows the only reason you did that was to take another shot at Rodgers.

Interesting. No one dare talk about Aaron Rodgers mobility (or lack thereof) being a factor. It’s becoming like dictatorship in here!

I worked for a Company where the owner once had us in his office for a meeting. He was telling about all his ambitions as I sat with another Manager listening. I’ll never forget how he said he was going to eventually run for Mayor and then that concluded with “I’m going to OWN this town one day!” He was serious (in his mind). I’ll never forget the amazed look on the face of the other guy next to me!

The other Manager said to me after the meeting. “Chuck sure is ambitious.. before you know it we’ll be saluting him and calling him “Supreme Potentate””
I don’t know why that had me rolling but my gut hurt when I stopped laughing. Your comment had a little bit of the spirit of Chuck in it. I need to thank you for the Chuck-le

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Interesting. No one dare talk about Aaron Rodgers mobility (or lack thereof) being a factor. It’s becoming like dictatorship in here!

I worked for a Company where the owner once had us in his office for a meeting. He was telling about all his ambitions as I sat with another Manager listening. I’ll never forget how he said he was going to eventually run for Mayor and then that concluded with “I’m going to OWN this town one day!” He was serious (in his mind). I’ll never forget the amazed look on the face of the other guy next to me!

The other Manager said to me after the meeting. “Chuck sure is ambitious.. before you know it we’ll be saluting him and calling him “Supreme Potentate””
I don’t know why that had me rolling but my gut hurt when I stopped laughing. Your comment had a little bit of the spirit of Chuck in it. I need to thank you for the Chuck-le

Amazing that someone would even think that Rodgers mobility or lack thereof, adds a dynamic to the offense like Mahomes does. Stats don't lie, I suggest those who think it was me ripping on Rodgers, to go look at the stats and put a cork in it.

I swear, if I said Rodgers poop stinks, there would be a couple of posters here that would go batshit crazy. The nerve of me, to point out the obvious.

 

[pacmaniac]

Amazing that someone would even think that Rodgers mobility or lack thereof, adds a dynamic to the offense like Mahomes does. Stats don't lie, I suggest those who think it was me ripping on Rodgers, to go look at the stats and put a cork in it.

I wasn't paying attention to that part of this thread. He was saying Rodgers' lack of mobility was not a factor? How strange, given that he frequently pointed out Rodgers' lack of mobility as one of the reasons for why the Packers lost in the 2014 NFC Championship game to Seattle.

I swear, if I said Rodgers poop stinks, there would be a couple of posters here that would go batshit crazy. The nerve of me, to point out the obvious.

I honestly don't know why they are still here and haven't converted into being Jets fans now.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That is correct, Kelce does not fit the narrative because he is a TE and the conversation was about Wide Receivers.

You need to consider Kelce's impact on the stats of the wide receivers though. Him being targeted a total of 152 times results in the WRs getting significantly less thrown to.

Interesting. No one dare talk about Aaron Rodgers mobility (or lack thereof) being a factor. It’s becoming like dictatorship in here!

It's absolutely fine to mention Rodgers has lost mobility over the course of his career. It would be insane to suggest otherwise.

What's the point of bringing it up when talking about Kelce being a superior tight end over everyone on the Packers' roster though?

I wasn't paying attention to that part of this thread. He was saying Rodgers' lack of mobility was not a factor? How strange, given that he frequently pointed out Rodgers' lack of mobility as one of the reasons for why the Packers lost in the 2014 NFC Championship game to Seattle.

Well, I never mentioned anything about Rodgers' lack of mobility not being a factor.

I honestly don't know why they are still here and haven't converted into being Jets fans now.

That's a pretty sad statement but perfectly sums up the way a lot of posters interact around here. For some strange reason posters that dare to not approve every single move of the team's front office are deemed to be less of a fan because of it.

 

[Mondio]

If I had to choose between Mobile Rodgers of 10 years ago and move Mahomes' 20 yards per game to Rodgers or add Travis Kelce to this roster, I think it's an easy decision. and Tom Brady at his fastest was still slower than me at 48. He has the mobility of a slug and never seemed to affect his ability to get the ball to an elite TE or 2 in his career.

if I had to choose old slow Rodgers and Travis Kelce last year or Mahomes and our TE's last year, I also think that's an easy decision.
as for Jets or Packers fans, I agree. There are a few that bring more Jets articles and Rodgers on this board than anyone else and then are taken aback that people respond to it LOL.

 

[AmishMafia]

You need to consider Kelce's impact on the stats of the wide receivers though. Him being targeted a total of 152 times results in the WRs getting significantly less thrown to.

No. No you don't.

But if you insist, then you should consider also:

1. The 87 extra passes thrown by Chiefs, this in itself entirely makes up for the difference Kelse made
2. The 115 targets to Jones and Dillon took passes away from our WRs
3. Simply, if the Chiefs WR were better, they would have gotten those targets.

 

[Mondio]

all I know is we had 20 less plays in our very last game because of 3rd down balls dropped by RB, TE, and WR. Having a reliable target like Kelce is a pretty big deal for the entire team.

 

[longtimefan]

all I know is we had 20 less plays in our very last game because of 3rd down balls dropped by RB, TE, and WR. Having a reliable target like Kelce is a pretty big deal for the entire team.

Not one was a bad throw?

 

[Mondio]

Not one was a bad throw?

They weren't all perfect, but none were passes I don't see caught with regularity every single sunday in this league and a couple were absolute dimes, the only thing missing was the catch to make a highlight reel.

But that's kind of my point, Travis Kelce doesn't need all perfect passes. He helps his team in all sorts of ways including his QB at times when he has to.

 

[Schultz]

No. No you don't.

But if you insist, then you should consider also:

1. The 87 extra passes thrown by Chiefs, this in itself entirely makes up for the difference Kelse made
2. The 115 targets to Jones and Dillon took passes away from our WRs
3. Simply, if the Chiefs WR were better, they would have gotten those targets.

As far as #3. Are you asking the Chiefs WRs to be better than Kelce?

 

[AmishMafia]

It's absolutely fine to mention Rodgers has lost mobility over the course of his career.

Thank you for allowing this.

That's a pretty sad statement but perfectly sums up the way a lot of posters interact around here. For some strange reason posters that dare to not approve every single move of the team's front office are deemed to be less of a fan because of it.

There is a certain amount of blind loyalty dedicated to Rodgers that is uncalled for. "Every single move"? How about an occassional one in support? Should you shed your hero a worship for even one moment and give an honest look at Aaron Rodgers it would be a first.

 

[AmishMafia]

As far as #3. Are you asking the Chiefs WRs to be better than Kelce?

No, they dont have to be better than Kelce to run better routes, get open more and receive more targets.

 

[Schultz]

Is it possible they are open sometimes when a pass is thrown to Kelce?

 

[tynimiller]

Is it possible they are open sometimes when a pass is thrown to Kelce?

Yes, if that concept fits your narrative....absolutely not if it doesn't....unless it may, then it depends LOL

 

[OldSchool101]

This next part really isn’t a poke at Rodgers. However I am curious how the MLF Offense will run with a new QB. Obviously each QB has their own nuances, but one would think we’ll see a closer reflection of the intended play design without as much improvisation.
Will we throw to the TE more?
Will we evert get past this 4,000 passing yards area plateau?

 

[BrokenArrow]

That's a pretty sad statement but perfectly sums up the way a lot of posters interact around here. For some strange reason posters that dare to not approve every single move of the team's front office are deemed to be less of a fan because of it.

Bottom line: Rodgers is a Jet. You're still obsessed with him. Why not go to Jetsville for a while and sing his praises for the natives there?

 

[Dantés]

On the topic of Rodgers exerting influence on the offense in the direction of his preferences, Stenavich today said that being able to use Love more under center will help the offense.

Why would they be able to go under center more? Because Rodgers didn't like playing under center.

 

[tynimiller]

On the topic of Rodgers exerting influence on the offense in the direction of his preferences, Stenavich today said that being able to use Love more under center will help the offense.

Why would they be able to go under center more? Because Rodgers didn't like playing under center.

Stop it, they didn't adjust anything for Rodgers...Rodgers influenced nothing - and meant everything...except when he didn't, which was always never his fault....LOL