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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Jennings getting frustrated...SURPRISE

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Murgen, Oct 14, 2009.

  1. Quientus

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Ratings:
    +3

    Rodgers has the talent to be among those - yes, however ... he is NOT there yet ... - If you mention those and Rodgers, you will also have to mention Romo ... - and we all know how the media and fans have been all over him as being a "choker", yet not much is different in terms of capability and talent ...

    Only reason being ... Romo is "held" accountable much more than Rodgers is and probably ever will ...

    Right now Rodgers is being overrated and his stats, while impressive fail the most important stat of them all ... - Wins ...

    Jennings voicing his ambitions and "concerns" seem to "support" this ... as I'm sure Jennings isn't the only player who has ambitions on that team (all pro football players are ambitious) ...

    More so, I think one of the reasons that Jennings is voicing his concerns is because it would seem that Rodgers doesn't seem to have "enough" confidence in his receivers in regards to passing to them and trusting his receivers to make the plays ... - Granted, given past history, fans might understand why, but the "fact" remains ... - as it would seem one of the reasons the o-line and receivers are "struggling" is because their quarterback tends to hold on to the ball a little longer than necessary looking for the "big play", while not wanting to throw the interception ...

    That mentality may get you impressive stats ... however as last season showed and thus also 4 games into this season would suggest ... impressive stats doesn't benefit the team as a whole, because it doesn't result in a win ...

    One has to wonder how the o-line would look, if the check-downs were utilizied ... And how the fans would see the same o-line if you subtract half the sacks (and fumbles) ...

    Again, Jennings (and Woodson) voicing their concerns openly when they are usually among the more quiet players on that team, suggest that the issue is larger than what it appears to be ...
     
  2. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Rodgers wasn't accounted as Romo was because Dallas was the 8th best D in the league last year... GB's was the 20th.

    Again, 20th defense. Show WHEN Rodgers was responsible for the loss. He rallied to get the lead in the 4th quarter in some games, only to have the D fail to keep the lead. And he was basically in his rookie season.
    So you're saying Rodgers should just throw the ball to the air and hope his receivers get the ball, instead of waiting for them to actually get open?
    One int and one fumble lost against 7 TDs. That helps you win, no matter how you put it.
    You're saying half the sacks are his responsability? So show it. OL Perception/Reality l Packers Lounge He does have the blame, but the OL is plain bad, and that's a fact. I'd take a sack over an INT anytime.
    Yes it is a larger issue. But the issue is the Coaches, not Rodgers.
    Woodson speaks - JSOnline
     
  3. Quientus

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Ratings:
    +3

    I wasn't aware that Rodgers or Romo playing Defense ? We are discussing O-Lines ... not D-Lines here ?



    I never said Rodgers was responsible for any loses ... Those are YOUR words, not mine ...

    What I have said all along is that Rodgers in fact is PART of the blame ... And I've consistently argued that it isn't his fault entirely ... however blaming it all on the O-Line isn't correct either ... Now if we are talking Defensive Lines that's a whole other discussion ...



    Nope, that isn't what I'm saying, again ... you are twisting my words ... in order to best suit your OWN arguement ... - I was asking "how much" time is enough ? - I've also said that there were numerous opportunities to use the check-downs, however some how some way Rodgers just doesn't seem to see them ...



    You do realize that what you just said there means its the team that wins ... and as such ... it's the team, and ALL the players in it ... Either you blame the team or you blame the player ... but you do it both ways ... not just when it only suits your arguement ...



    Fact: When a quarterback throws and its intercepted - the quarterback gets blamed ... but when the quarterback gets sacked, the o-line gets blamed ...

    While it may be so in most cases, there are also numerous cases where it is not true ...

    If we take the latest game vs. The Vikings ... there were numerous opportunities to check-down, especially on the play leading to the fumble and also on the play leading to the safety sack ...



    Let me ask you this then ... How is it that all were talking Super Bowl during the off season and pre-season ? - I don't seem to remember people or posters being all that worried about the coaching and pretty much everyone was pretty psyched about Capers and the new defensive scheme of the Packers ... - Again, defensively - that's another discussion.

    We are discussing the o-line and the apparent weakness of that, all I'm saying is that it's not entirely the o-lines fault ...


    In summary, if you are going to quote me, atleast do me the courtesy of replying to what I said, instead of twisting my sentences ... :)
     
  4. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    We're discussing wins. You are saying Rodgers isn't accounted, and I'm saying it's because he has played very well. Unlike Romo, that despite his team having a great D, and a good OL and very good RBs, can't win when it matters, because he has played poorly at the end of the season, unlike Rodgers.



    But you DID say he should be accounted for them. And I'm saying no, when it's not his fault. It's only his fault if you were expecting him to play in the level of Brett Favre in his prime. Not Brett favre in his early seasons, in his prime.
    I've said that he's part of the blame. But the way you put it is like he was as guilty as the OL (saying that half the sacks are his fault), when it's clearly not the case.



    I'm not twisting anyone's word. There's a difference is saying that Rodgers could improve, and that he's not playing elite football, than saying Rodgers isn't playing well, and that he's responsible for our losses, which is what you've implied.

    It's the team that wins and loses, alright, but REASON is another issue. It's not just black or white, you win you're good you loose you're bad. Unless you're willing to accept that Trent Dilfer was better than Dan Marino and that Shaun Hill is better than Aaron Rodgers and Jay Cutler.



    I've talked about the checkdown before, and I've said it is his fault. But no matter how you put it, 20 sacks DOES MEAN that the OL is the main culprit.



    You mentioned Woodson. Woodson was complaining about MM and TT about Smith, and Capers about the scheme. It's not who said we were elite or whatnot, it's about players being dissatisfied now.

    That's exactly what I did, or at least attempted to do. I interpreted, maybe wrongly, that you're saying Rodgers is a problem, and that he is just not very good, when to me it's clearly not the case. Players at the level of Rodgers will get you the wins, but players at the level of our OL and ILBs will ultimately hurt you.

    Basically what I understood is that I'm saying Rodgers is a stud, and that will surely develop into an elite qb, despite not being there yet, but he RIGHT NOW gives us the possibility to win every game, and that you said that he's not a good enough qb to lead our team anywhere.
     
  5. Quientus

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Ratings:
    +3

    Again ... you don't seem to "want" (?) to put anything on Rodgers ?




    Actually that was NOT what I said ... but if you are going to credit anyone for a win then you should also credit / blame them when there are loses ... something which it doesn't seem you are doing ... - You are only pointing at the "upsides" when it comes to Rodgers ... where as not doing the same for the o-line ... and vice versa ... What I asked and said was "consistency" ...



    Nope, again you are reading way more into words than what was written ... I've said in a few other posts (in other threads) that Rodgers is without a doubt a talented and gifted quarterback, however ... he is still lacking ... and some of those "short-comings" are in areas where he should be improving by now imho ...





    I've never said Rodgers was responsible for Packers loses ... - Again ... you are reading way more into words ... Read my posts again please ...




    We both agree that the o-line needs improvement ...




    I would say that 8 of the sacks could be "put on" Rodgers shoulders, so you are "correct" that's less than half ... >.<

    In each of the the plays in the matchup against the Vikings, Rodgers was given 3 plays (with options) ... - Manning (for example) audibles alot at the line of scrimmage ... At this point, Rodgers is probably the most mobile quarterback in the league ... So the question remains ... Why are they (all of the o-line, including Rodgers, not adjusting when they can see their current setups and matchups at the line of scrimmage are NOT working ?)




    My words were "that there might be more to this than meets the eye" ...

    For two relatively silent players to be that concerned and seemingly frustrated would indicate that it's not something "new" ...



    Let me "paraphrase" then:

    Rodgers is PART of the problem ...

    Rodgers is a TALENTED player, but needs to make the TRANSITION into a "full-fledged" "Star Player" ... (in my opinion) he hasn't done that yet with his overall play ...

    IF what you are saying is true, that players like (currently) Rodgers will get Packers the wins, I'm asking, how much more time does he need ?



    Rodgers can evolve into a "stud", but at this point, I'm saying that he isn't as good as his stats indicate or as good (great) as alot of people seem to think ...

    I never said that Rodgers isn't "good enough" to lead the Packers, however, what I am saying is that he still needs to show "this leadership" ...
     
  6. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,115
    Ratings:
    +1,063
    Precisely Skol guy. Exactly. I guess you're not such a bad Vikie fan afterall. ;)
     
  7. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    How long does he need to do what? Win games? Like against the Bears? Or win championships? Or overcome a TERRIBLE OL, Wr drops, lack of pass rush, penalties by galore and have a 158.3 passer rating every game?

    Again, it's not him the problem. You seem to think that a qb wins the game by himself. You didn't understand what I meant about players as good as Rodgers. NO QUARTERBACK WITH THE PROBLEMS WE HAD ON PROTECTION AND IN THE PASS RUSH WILL WIN AGAINST GOOD OPPONENTS. Now give Rodgers a medium OL, play some D, and we win.

    Football is not about one person, and no one wins or loses alone. BUT both n wins and losses there's allways some more responsable than others. Rodgers, Jolly, Jenkins and the secondary IMO were the most responsibles for our win against Chicago. Against the Bengals, almost the whole team melted down, except for Woodson. Rodgers too, but he had to overcome drops and bad protection. Rams, Rodgers played well, but IMO it was more on Driver. Against the Vikings, Rodgers was one of the few brigth spot on our team.

    I have no problem in holding him accountable for losses. But it needs to be detailed. WHEN was he one of the most responsibles for our losses?
     
  8. Quientus

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Ratings:
    +3

    - I'm not questioning the talent of Rodgers ...



    I agree - to some extent, however, he is PART of the problem (as I see it)

    I am pretty confident that if he (for one) is able to adjust better and start getting the ball out a little faster when the pocket collapses, that there will be a tremendous improvement overall as well in regards to the o-line.



    I've never said that football is about one person ... again you seem to read way too much into what is written ...

    I'm not sure how much or how many posts you actually read before you reply, however, as much as the offensive line needs reinforcements, most of the Packer fans probably know that it will not happen (highly unlikely) by (big) moves on the FA market - a window that will be closed come Sunday ... - That means you will have to adjust and "cope" with what you have at hand ...

    Going over transcripts, I think you can agree that the coaching staff actually had "planned" for a hightened pressure coming on the offensive line, however the line (including the quarterback) didn't execute ... (yes that means all players ...)



    In a "team-game" as much as you would like it, it's actually pretty hard to "factually" determine a "sole" culprit, because hindsight is always 20/20 ...

    If a "big" play is made and it is succesful, it's most often labeled as a "stroke of genious" etc etc, where as if the same play doesn't have a "positive" outcome it will be labeled as a "fault" on <insert playername here> ...

    My point being, you are "accusing" me for thinking that football is about "single players", while in the same breath you seem to only be looking at (fantasy) stats ? when determining whether or not some players can be determined as responsible ?


    In fact I've stated in various other posts that I agree that the offensive line is in HIGH need of reinforcements and improvement, and has been playing poorly, but also that the ENTIRE blame is not SOLELY on the o-line alone ...

    Because if you blame it on the offensive line alone, then you (not you perce) shouldn't be faulting the coaching really ...


    I like and enjoy football discussions, because where I'm from football is not something that most people watch ...
     
  9. Skol guy

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings:
    +1
    Thanks but I hope Packer RS guy or longtimefan doesn't see that post. They don't like me too much I am guessing:yu: they might have an issue with your post. LOL
     
  10. Skol guy

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings:
    +1
    pretty good debate going with PackerRS and Quentis on here. good input by both. It is nice to see the passion of true fans. Since I am an outsider I will leave this thread but believe me as seeing Gus Ferotte, T Jackson, Brad Johnson, daunte Culpepper, Randall cunninham and jeff george over the last 10 years or so you guys have it good with Aaron Rodgers if you ask me.
     
  11. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    It's nothing personal and you know that... I just don't like anyone that wears puke purple, or that ugly *** orange and DARK blue (don't disgrace the name of the Navy by associating it with that team) for the matter ;) :jester:
     
  12. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    I disagree with some of that, because I don't see how he can adjust when the Wrs keep dropping the ball and we got no running game. I agree in some plays he has retained the ball way too long, but you can't ask him to be perfect. Against the vikings, per example, that fumble was very avoidable, but he compensated with the pass to Finley. However, that int just killed us, because he just trusted the Wr would be there, and did not pay attention to Winfield, that was just staring at him.


    and the Bears just traded for Gaines Adams to better their pass rush... I've usually supported TT when he decided to stick with what he had, but this time is pretty clear that what we have won't do it.
    That part I don't know... You can only read so much in transcripts... It's usually pad levels and fundamentals with MM...


    To me, quarterback rating is pretty good in determinating wheter a QB is playing well or not. It does not show how he reads Ds and how he changes plays, that much I agree. I'm not just looking at yards. TD to INT ratio. Pass completion. That's not fantasy football. I don't even play that, because I don't like to cheer for anyone other than the Packers (I enjoy a lot seeing other games, but actually rooting, I don't)

    Well, neither am I. I'm just putting the majority of the blame on them and the pass rush, as I greatly believe that football is ultimately won in the trenches.
    You and me both...
     
  13. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,676
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    Just dont like when ALL of your post of sarcastic in nature..Bring football talk to the forum and not scum bag :jester: Viking fan mentality :happy0005:
     
  14. Skol guy

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings:
    +1
    I hear ya there. The only thing I like green is grass & money. That is just the way we roll in the NFC North I guess:jester:
     
  15. ThinkICare

    ThinkICare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    711
    Ratings:
    +15
    Only things worthy of being purple are the Grimace and platypi.
     
  16. Skol guy

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings:
    +1
    yeah I have been accused of being a wise *** a few times but the vkings sux and all that garbage talk just brings it out of me. all in fun and you would know that if you knew me. I would go to the Viking forums but alot of the same talk goes on there and it just seems so childish. I like talking football and not garbage. I have been watching the Packers Vikings since the days of Bart Starr so I guess I am too old for that.:stinker:
     
  17. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,115
    Ratings:
    +1,063
    I had no idea that platypi were purple. Hmpf ... learn something new every day. :wow:
     
  18. ThinkICare

    ThinkICare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    711
    Ratings:
    +15
    The beanie baby kind are.
     
  19. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,115
    Ratings:
    +1,063
    Hahahahahahaahahahahahaha.... you didn't need to elaborate. I was taking your word for it. :)
     
  20. ThinkICare

    ThinkICare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    711
    Ratings:
    +15
    UGHH I felt like I had to clarify. Whatever.
     
  21. Skol guy

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings:
    +1
    Boy do I feel old because besides the beanie babies i have no idea what we are talking about
     
  22. ThinkICare

    ThinkICare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    711
    Ratings:
    +15
    The Grimace was apart of the McDonald's gang along with the Hamburglar and Ronald McDonald. I think there was one other member, but I'm not sure.
     
  23. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,676
    Ratings:
    +2,977

    the fry guys, that little yellow bird thing


    [​IMG]
     
  24. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    a Birdie Girl. Lol.
     
  25. ThinkICare

    ThinkICare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    711
    Ratings:
    +15
    Yeah, so there you go skol guy.
     

Share This Page