Glad to see the gunslinger playing well. Glad to see he has a decent running game, good ol-ine, good d-line and an excellent return man. Not sure how far they can go, but I'm glad to see him winning so he can stick it to TT. The good thing out of it is that we might get a 2nd rd out of the deal, but who knows, at this point we will waste that pick on an injury proned Oline. Bad season here in GB and could get worse with a loss to the Bears, but good to see the "Legend" winning
J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS ! we might be looking at a 2nd RD
- Thread starter packer98
- Start date
Re: J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS ! we might be looking at a 2nd RD
The biggest difference between the Jets and the Packers are the lines. Thomas Jones leads the AFC in rushing now and the Jets are very tough to run on. Brett played very well last night, but the Jets are a team that is getting it done at the line of scrimmage.
The biggest difference between the Jets and the Packers are the lines. Thomas Jones leads the AFC in rushing now and the Jets are very tough to run on. Brett played very well last night, but the Jets are a team that is getting it done at the line of scrimmage.
doughsellz
Cheesehead
Re: J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS ! we might be looking at a 2nd RD
Anybody notice how fast the ball is released by the old man? He took 3 sacks (one in OT) but for the better part of the game it was serious timing with his receivers. No hesitation.
A few times he created space for himself by moving out of the pocket & making plays (were you watching Mr. Rodgers?) that seemingly weren't designed roll-outs. That is a factor sorely lacking in the GB offense in '08.
Being a mobile QB (like Rodgers) & being an elusive QB (like the NAME) are not the same thing. Mobility helps but isn't always good for a QBs development (Vick).
A QB needs to keep his eyes on his receivers. GB's WRs get open regularly so just because your QB can gain positive yards on a scramble doesn't justify missing out on a bigger play that your hard-working WR deserves.
Cassell scrambled a lot last night & it makes the crowd happy when the chains move but it alienates receivers who are increasingly frustrated with their QBs inability to find them.
Rodgers is becoming too timid in the face of heavy pressure. He's taking his eyes off his receivers & focusing on the pass rush. Not all the time but more often than not. That's expected from a 1st-year starter. It's just painful to watch an old pro doing well for some other team & tuning in to watch our guy's OJT.
Anybody notice how fast the ball is released by the old man? He took 3 sacks (one in OT) but for the better part of the game it was serious timing with his receivers. No hesitation.
A few times he created space for himself by moving out of the pocket & making plays (were you watching Mr. Rodgers?) that seemingly weren't designed roll-outs. That is a factor sorely lacking in the GB offense in '08.
Being a mobile QB (like Rodgers) & being an elusive QB (like the NAME) are not the same thing. Mobility helps but isn't always good for a QBs development (Vick).
A QB needs to keep his eyes on his receivers. GB's WRs get open regularly so just because your QB can gain positive yards on a scramble doesn't justify missing out on a bigger play that your hard-working WR deserves.
Cassell scrambled a lot last night & it makes the crowd happy when the chains move but it alienates receivers who are increasingly frustrated with their QBs inability to find them.
Rodgers is becoming too timid in the face of heavy pressure. He's taking his eyes off his receivers & focusing on the pass rush. Not all the time but more often than not. That's expected from a 1st-year starter. It's just painful to watch an old pro doing well for some other team & tuning in to watch our guy's OJT.
Re: J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS ! we might be looking at a 2nd RD
And why is Rodgers doing this? The O-line needs to give him more time than he has been getting. I'm not saying ten seconds but at least 3 or so more on most plays would make a huge difference.
And why is Rodgers doing this? The O-line needs to give him more time than he has been getting. I'm not saying ten seconds but at least 3 or so more on most plays would make a huge difference.
doughsellz
Cheesehead
Re: J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS ! we might be looking at a 2nd RD
I agree. The O-line of the Packers has been less than stellar thus far. Still, play-calling can overcome the shortcomings of your blocking. Screens & quick slants will keep speed rushing & blitzing to a minimum once the D pays the price for leaving receivers uncovered.
The Patriots held nothing back from their point of attack against the Jets last night. It worked in the 3rd quarter after Belichik made the halftime adjustment. After a 24-6 start the Jets only gained a single 1st down in the 3rd quarter.
The way the Jets overcame the change of pace the Patriots employed in the 2nd half was the speed of the pass plays. Everything was short drops & quick release. The D didn't get a chance to force bad passes because the Jets dictated the pace with their play-calling.
Veretax said:
I agree. The O-line of the Packers has been less than stellar thus far. Still, play-calling can overcome the shortcomings of your blocking. Screens & quick slants will keep speed rushing & blitzing to a minimum once the D pays the price for leaving receivers uncovered.
The Patriots held nothing back from their point of attack against the Jets last night. It worked in the 3rd quarter after Belichik made the halftime adjustment. After a 24-6 start the Jets only gained a single 1st down in the 3rd quarter.
The way the Jets overcame the change of pace the Patriots employed in the 2nd half was the speed of the pass plays. Everything was short drops & quick release. The D didn't get a chance to force bad passes because the Jets dictated the pace with their play-calling.
Packer_Backer85
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS ! we might be looking at a 2nd RD
Yes yes, all us Packer fans are wishing we would've kept him.
But this is what you have to look at. Rodgers had one more year on his contract. Say he gets brought up like he did, Favre wants to come back a month before preseason as the starter, and MM say Yes, Favre, you're our starter.
If I was Rodgers, I wouldn't sign another year with GB.
With his struggles this year, I don't think ANY of the GB fans can doubt that they see greatness in the wings. He is going to be your bonified NFL QB. If Favre comes back as the starter this year, A-Rod probably would've been with someone else, and in two years when he's breaking records and starting in the Pro Bowl, we'd be sitting here talking about we could've had that guy.
I think it was a great decision on MM and TT's part. They obviously knew what he had. Favre is going to be great for the Jets, but for how much longer. I think he'll be done after this season.
Yes yes, all us Packer fans are wishing we would've kept him.
But this is what you have to look at. Rodgers had one more year on his contract. Say he gets brought up like he did, Favre wants to come back a month before preseason as the starter, and MM say Yes, Favre, you're our starter.
If I was Rodgers, I wouldn't sign another year with GB.
With his struggles this year, I don't think ANY of the GB fans can doubt that they see greatness in the wings. He is going to be your bonified NFL QB. If Favre comes back as the starter this year, A-Rod probably would've been with someone else, and in two years when he's breaking records and starting in the Pro Bowl, we'd be sitting here talking about we could've had that guy.
I think it was a great decision on MM and TT's part. They obviously knew what he had. Favre is going to be great for the Jets, but for how much longer. I think he'll be done after this season.
Similar threads
Members online
No members online now.
