McGinn harshly criticizes Rodgers

  • Thread starter Deleted member 6794
  • Start date

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
2,326
Reaction score
733
MM may have had him on a tight leash at that point, but he played poorly And failed to put points on the board throughout the first half. The whole Favre issue is ridiculous. Favre was a great QB, Rodgers is headed to being considered in that league. The issue is he frequently has played poorly in big games (most notably this last one) and has better talent around him than Favre had.
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
571
Regarding the Spurs reponse to their devastating 2013 loss - the Packers can only wish their head coach was half as good as Gregg Popovich.

Regarding Favre vs. Rodgers... sure it's a breath of fresh air that Rodgers doesn't throw the game ending picks like Favre did. At least once Favre got into his prime (after those early Dallas losses), he always kept us in games until the very end. As good as Rodgers is at not making the huge mistake, he still gets blown out sometimes in the playoffs. His ability to not throw INTs hasn't translated into better success in the playoffs than Favre.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,969
Reaction score
1,244
So what does everyone propose we do with Rodgers? I mean if he isn't a QB that can get us over the hump so to speak we might as well trade him and move on right? John Fox had how many winning seasons in Denver and because John Elway didn't think he was the guy to take them all the way he let him go. Do we really want a QB for the next 5-7 years who will get us close but never be able to get us all the way there? Why waste more time on a guy who just can not get the job done? lets go out and get a QB who WILL win us Super Bowls. Tampa Bay would probably give us the #1 pick his year and maybe a few more. We could draft Mariota, or maybe trade down a few spots get even more picks and grab Winston then with all those high picks we fix the defense nad win 3 of the next 5 Super Bowls.

I used to be one of those fans who thought we could win another Super Bowl or even two with Rodgers but thankfully this McGinn guy set me straight. I now realize that with Aaron Rodgers any hope of being anything more than the NFC North champions is a pipe dream. I wan't a QB that will win every game not just regular season games so I say we trade Rodgers and go out and get that QB who will play lights out in every single game and win us a bunch of Super Bowl championships.
 

OCBP

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
377
Reaction score
28
So what does everyone propose we do with Rodgers? I mean if he isn't a QB that can get us over the hump so to speak we might as well trade him and move on right? John Fox had how many winning seasons in Denver and because John Elway didn't think he was the guy to take them all the way he let him go. Do we really want a QB for the next 5-7 years who will get us close but never be able to get us all the way there? Why waste more time on a guy who just can not get the job done? lets go out and get a QB who WILL win us Super Bowls. Tampa Bay would probably give us the #1 pick his year and maybe a few more. We could draft Mariota, or maybe trade down a few spots get even more picks and grab Winston then with all those high picks we fix the defense nad win 3 of the next 5 Super Bowls.

I used to be one of those fans who thought we could win another Super Bowl or even two with Rodgers but thankfully this McGinn guy set me straight. I now realize that with Aaron Rodgers any hope of being anything more than the NFC North champions is a pipe dream. I wan't a QB that will win every game not just regular season games so I say we trade Rodgers and go out and get that QB who will play lights out in every single game and win us a bunch of Super Bowl championships.
I love the banter related to Rodgers/Favre and the playoffs. Why can't "real" GB fans just be content that the team has been successful for a quarter of a century with two QB's and acknowledge that fact?

The Rodgers injury hurt in the Seattle game. He is a great player as was Favre. Stop the over analysis. I'll take #12 all day long over any other NFL QB.
 

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
2,326
Reaction score
733
I'm not advocating getting rid of Rodgers, but I think it is fair to point out he is just as responsible and Bostick, Dix, Burnett, MM, etc. For the loss, probably more so than any of them individually. What to do? Find ways to get Rodgers in a better position to succeed in the playoffs. Play calling may well be part of that. Him being healthier would help too but I'm not buying that as a total excuse this year, or last year for that matter. A lot of it has to do with #12 stepping up bigger in big games. If that happens I believe we will be in more Super Bowls with Rodgers, given the current GOOD state of the Packers and with reasonable drafts and injury fortune it's really that simple. The one positive I am finally starting to become able to take away from a truly embarrassing loss .... Is I think Green Bay has a better team than Seattle now and going forward. Keep doing what we're doing, and get Aaron Rodgers to play better in big games.
 

ThePerfectBeard

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 10, 2010
Messages
1,325
Reaction score
240
Location
Connecticut
So what does everyone propose we do with Rodgers? I mean if he isn't a QB that can get us over the hump so to speak we might as well trade him and move on right? John Fox had how many winning seasons in Denver and because John Elway didn't think he was the guy to take them all the way he let him go. Do we really want a QB for the next 5-7 years who will get us close but never be able to get us all the way there? Why waste more time on a guy who just can not get the job done? lets go out and get a QB who WILL win us Super Bowls. Tampa Bay would probably give us the #1 pick his year and maybe a few more. We could draft Mariota, or maybe trade down a few spots get even more picks and grab Winston then with all those high picks we fix the defense nad win 3 of the next 5 Super Bowls.

I used to be one of those fans who thought we could win another Super Bowl or even two with Rodgers but thankfully this McGinn guy set me straight. I now realize that with Aaron Rodgers any hope of being anything more than the NFC North champions is a pipe dream. I wan't a QB that will win every game not just regular season games so I say we trade Rodgers and go out and get that QB who will play lights out in every single game and win us a bunch of Super Bowl championships.


Holy Shhhhh! I marked this as funny because I hope it was sarcastic. WTF…
 

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
Gotta love how spoiled some of us can be as Packer fans. Have a soon to be 2 time league MVP with a SB under his belt and we'll find reasons to complain about him. As much as as we all want it winning the superbowl is damn hard n requires a lil luck. Ill agree we need to be less reliant on Rodgers but a bad game here n there in the playoffs is hardly condeming.

In fact most years the SB champs QB had a bad game in the playoffs along the way but got bailed out by their D or carried by their rushing attack for a game. We just need Rodgers at an MVP level n when we dont get it we havent been able to win but nobody bats 1000
 

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
2,326
Reaction score
733
whos getting spoiled? Just pointing out that Rodgers had as much if not more to do with the loss than many of the initial "culprits".... If GB is going to win it all (again), Rodgers is going to have to play better....
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Regarding Favre vs. Rodgers... sure it's a breath of fresh air that Rodgers doesn't throw the game ending picks like Favre did. At least once Favre got into his prime (after those early Dallas losses), he always kept us in games until the very end. As good as Rodgers is at not making the huge mistake, he still gets blown out sometimes in the playoffs. His ability to not throw INTs hasn't translated into better success in the playoffs than Favre.

Two of Rodgers playoff losses have been by two scores. But two of the other three have come in overtime and one on a FG with time running out.

On the other hand Favre lost six playoff games with the Packers by 10+ points.
 

yooperpackfan

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
1,460
Reaction score
146
Location
Upper Michigan
I've been wondering that for a week (especially the run play on 3rd and 16 ). Is it possible MM had him on a tight leash in that game to keep him from doing anything too risky, either game-wise or injury-wise?
I'm betting on the tight leash theory.
After all he had bad experiences with Favre's freelancing.
 

Vrill

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Messages
1,803
Reaction score
137
The game was an epic meltdown in the final 5 minutes. Think about it for a second. The Seahawks needed A LOT of things to go right and in their favor and they ALL happened. Luck played a role.

We thought we had the game in the bag after that Burnett INT. You could see it in our players and coaches faces. There was a sense of relief on our sideline. The "We are going to the Super Bowl" look. They were hugging each other. We won. In doing this, we let up and lost intensity. Seattle took advantage of this and grabbed the win from the jaws of defeat.

So on top of Seattle needing a lot of things to go right, they did it against a team that had zero intensity. It probably felt like the last preseason game for Seattle as far as resistance went.

So in the end, the perfect storm happened. Looking back, its not shocking anymore that it happened.

We lost as a team. I don't put that loss squarely on any single player. That was TRULY a team loss.

Also, that Spurs analysis doesn't work too well. Spurs lost in the NBA Finals. Its not like this loss was in the Super Bowl. It was just a playoff game that we lost. Yeah, it was a rough loss, but its not like we were five minutes away from winning our 5th Lombardi. We were just 5 minutes away from going to the Super Bowl. Meaning we still had another game to play.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
I think the entire premise for this article is a bunch of horse hockey. McGinn should be proud of himself as a bait and click journalist and extremely embarassed if that was was supposed to be some investigative and analytical journalism. Take stats, torture numbers and get them to say what I want. Great job.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
Regarding Favre vs. Rodgers... sure it's a breath of fresh air that Rodgers doesn't throw the game ending picks like Favre did. At least once Favre got into his prime (after those early Dallas losses), he always kept us in games until the very end. As good as Rodgers is at not making the huge mistake, he still gets blown out sometimes in the playoffs. His ability to not throw INTs hasn't translated into better success in the playoffs than Favre.

Two of Rodgers playoff losses have been by two scores. But two of the other three have come in overtime and one on a FG with time running out.

On the other hand Favre lost six playoff games with the Packers by 10+ points.

Why does EVERY Rodgers post have to turn into a Favre-Rodgers pi$$ing contest? Can't we just agree that both were great players? Comparing playoff victories/losses between the two is pointless and not even really accurate since they didn't play the same teams, with the same teammates, under the same rules.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
I think the entire premise for this article is a bunch of horse hockey. McGinn should be proud of himself as a bait and click journalist and extremely embarassed if that was was supposed to be some investigative and analytical journalism. Take stats, torture numbers and get them to say what I want. Great job.

I think for an article that's being written about one game, there's not much that's off with the analysis. Rodgers played poorly in a game that the Packers needed him to play exceptionally in. Rodgers didn't play well. He missed open receiver and had poor throws on his interceptions. Was he the only problem with the team that day? Nope. Was he one of the big problems? Yes. Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL, that doesn't mean he's immune to criticism when he plays poorly. He gets a TON of credit when the Packers are playing well, he should also get a sizable portion of blame when the team is playing poorly.
 

ExpatPacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,815
Reaction score
227
Location
A Galaxy Far, Far Away
I think the entire premise for this article is a bunch of horse hockey. McGinn should be proud of himself as a bait and click journalist and extremely embarassed if that was was supposed to be some investigative and analytical journalism. Take stats, torture numbers and get them to say what I want. Great job.

I don't know what you're talking about. If you listen to the latest podcast of McGinn and Dunne you will hear how carefully and meticulously they dissect the many Packer mistakes including Rodgers' bad throws and decisions.
 

MadCat

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
546
Reaction score
310
Rodgers may not have had a very good game, but all things considered, he played well enough for us to win the game, and it was ours for the taking. With five minutes left, he was given a three hand-off set to execute, and when our backs were to the wall and we needed the FG to tie he took us right down the field. While the author makes some valid points, the article as a whole is wrong because it doesn't take into account the calibur of teams (defenses especially) that are in the playoffs to begin with. Look at the dreadful game Wilson had, yet he walked off with a W. McGinn would have better hit the mark writing an article about the persistent inefficient game plan patterns that appear in our playoff games, and an imbalance on a team that unreasonably requires its MVP QB to personally overcome the very obstacles his organization puts in place.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Of course McGinn mentioned it as have many posters, but IMO Rodgers’ injury has been under-emphasized. I don’t remember him missing receivers as badly as he did after he got injured. That was very uncharacteristic of him. It was more than Rodgers just feeling ‘trapped in the pocket’, the injury definitely affected his passing. Ordinarily, QBs receive too much praise and not enough criticism IMO so I see nothing wrong with McGinn taking a hard look at Rodgers’ performances in playoffs, although again I don’t think he takes his injury into account as much as he should.

Of course we’ll never know but I’ll bet without the injury to Rodgers the Packers would have been far enough ahead to have survived any meltdown in the last minutes. A couple of sprints for first downs could have made all the difference. As well as a roll out or two on the goal line.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
how many receivers did he "miss badly"? The one INT on the miscommunication was "bad", the rest? Who else did he miss badly? The TD to Jordy? That's an extremely tough pass on the goal line and one that was missed by about 3 inches. It sucks, but that's about it. And Jordy was hardly clean coming out of his break and disengaging from the defender, but hey, Rodgers should have adjusted that timing route on the fly, LOL. The INT to sherman? A scenario they've taken advantage of 20 times or more this year and this time a ref didn't throw a flag for a neutral zone infraction.

a hard look is fine, being a critical monday morning bait and click journalist is another. He was hurt, and it was obvious. When he starts getting into his "analysis" from the comfort of his chair rather than the perspective of being in the middle of the Seattle defense with 1.5 legs is another. His dissection of the 3rd and 4 to Quarless is where I pretty much stopped. There was nothing wrong with the pass, nothing wrong with the play except he didn't complete the catch. It's a play lesser tight ends all over the league make on a weekly basis. It's a catch TE's are paid to make and all of a sudden since it didn't work, he should have been looking all the way over on the other side of the field, LOL. He threw high to Cobb, well Cobb still should have caught that ball, it was hardly uncatchable and there's a line to throw over, lanes to throw threw and linebackers to get the ball over. that middle of the field isn't a touch pass McGinn, just FYI. There's more to a play than the end result.

That was a very, very, very good defense he was facing and doing it on a leg and a half. had he been able to take off and run there were a lot of big plays he could have made with his feet alone. Moving half speed as everyone else is a sure way to get nothing, but hey, he just should have right?

there's a difference between being critical and then just piling on with zero perspective for the game. Every thing that didn't work, well that was Rodgers being bad. You can call it analysis, I call it junk.
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
571
Also, that Spurs analysis doesn't work too well. Spurs lost in the NBA Finals. Its not like this loss was in the Super Bowl. It was just a playoff game that we lost. Yeah, it was a rough loss, but its not like we were five minutes away from winning our 5th Lombardi. We were just 5 minutes away from going to the Super Bowl. Meaning we still had another game to play.

Also the Spurs were going up against the Heat, who had the MVP and greatest player of the game (and arguably best of all time), and gave up the game-tying three-pointer to possibly the best three-point shooter in history.

I wouldn't say the Seahawks have the "greatest" or "best" anything of all-time.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
how many receivers did he "miss badly"? The one INT on the miscommunication was "bad", the rest? Who else did he miss badly? The TD to Jordy? That's an extremely tough pass on the goal line and one that was missed by about 3 inches. It sucks, but that's about it. And Jordy was hardly clean coming out of his break and disengaging from the defender, but hey, Rodgers should have adjusted that timing route on the fly, LOL. The INT to sherman? A scenario they've taken advantage of 20 times or more this year and this time a ref didn't throw a flag for a neutral zone infraction.

a hard look is fine, being a critical monday morning bait and click journalist is another. He was hurt, and it was obvious. When he starts getting into his "analysis" from the comfort of his chair rather than the perspective of being in the middle of the Seattle defense with 1.5 legs is another. His dissection of the 3rd and 4 to Quarless is where I pretty much stopped. There was nothing wrong with the pass, nothing wrong with the play except he didn't complete the catch. It's a play lesser tight ends all over the league make on a weekly basis. It's a catch TE's are paid to make and all of a sudden since it didn't work, he should have been looking all the way over on the other side of the field, LOL. He threw high to Cobb, well Cobb still should have caught that ball, it was hardly uncatchable and there's a line to throw over, lanes to throw threw and linebackers to get the ball over. that middle of the field isn't a touch pass McGinn, just FYI. There's more to a play than the end result.

That was a very, very, very good defense he was facing and doing it on a leg and a half. had he been able to take off and run there were a lot of big plays he could have made with his feet alone. Moving half speed as everyone else is a sure way to get nothing, but hey, he just should have right?

there's a difference between being critical and then just piling on with zero perspective for the game. Every thing that didn't work, well that was Rodgers being bad. You can call it analysis, I call it junk.

Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL. There's no question of that. Rodgers shouldn't need people to make excuses for a poor performance. He had a bad game. So he was playing on an injured leg. Doesn't matter, the other team and the scoreboard don't care about the leg, the NFL doesn't care about the leg. Results are what matters and Rodgers missed a number of throws and reads that he normally makes.

Also, why is the fact that Rodgers thought there was a free play an excuse for the interception? Had he thrown a good pass then Adams scores a TD and it doesn't matter if it's a free play or not. Just because Rodgers thinks he has a free play doesn't mean he should be given a pass for missing a major throw.
 

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
Also the Spurs were going up against the Heat, who had the MVP and greatest player of the game (and arguably best of all time), and gave up the game-tying three-pointer to possibly the best three-point shooter in history.

I wouldn't say the Seahawks have the "greatest" or "best" anything of all-time.

Ughhh. Guys just because they arent completely identical situations doesnt mean they arent comparable. Crushing playoff defeats.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
how many receivers did he "miss badly"?
If you didn’t see him miss receivers much more than usual after he got injured – not just the NFC championship game – I don’t think you were watching very closely.
When he starts getting into his "analysis" from the comfort of his chair rather than the perspective of being in the middle of the Seattle defense with 1.5 legs is another.
So no one other than Rodgers can criticize Rodgers because he was the only one, “in the middle of the Seattle defense with 1.5 legs”? If that’s your standard you shouldn’t have much to post about going forward.

As I posted IMO McGinn should have emphasized Rodgers’ injury more but what he wrote is definitely “analysis”, even if you – or anyone else – doesn’t agree with it.
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Also, why is the fact that Rodgers thought there was a free play an excuse for the interception? Had he thrown a good pass then Adams scores a TD and it doesn't matter if it's a free play or not. Just because Rodgers thinks he has a free play doesn't mean he should be given a pass for missing a major throw.

Rodgers probably doesn't throw that ball if he doesn't think it's a free play.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
Hey Jack, put me on ignore??? just an idea.

I noticed he missed more after being injured much more so in the Detroit and 1st half of Dallas. Besides limited mobility he looked rather capable out there against Seattle.

and I asked in THIS game, besides the missed communication, who he missed badly?? your answer? "I don't think you've been watching closely", LOL,, ahhhh, OK.

and yes, that's exactly what I said, only Rodgers can criticize Roders, LOL Give me a break. Are you willfully obtuse, or just not able to derive context and meaning from words?

There's a key word in there, it's called perspective, and yes, if he's going to criticize from the perspective of his monday morning qb chair in front of a video screen and not that of an injured qb that can't run, in the middle of a very good defense, my statement stands. His analysis is crap. The pass to Quarless that didn't connect and his assertion he should have just come all the way back to the complete opposite side of the field is case and point. The fact he thinks Rodgers should be able to adjust his timing throw on a very difficult outside throw at the goal line for a receiver that didn't make a clean break is reaching and stupid. You can't hesitate on that throw, you do, it's picked and gone for 6 the other way. Apparently McGinn doesn't understand the team speed and angles of that throw.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
and I asked in THIS game, besides the missed communication, who he missed badly?? your answer? "I don't think you've been watching closely", LOL,, ahhhh, OK.
No. I posted, “I don’t remember him missing receivers as badly as he did after he got injured.” (post #42) Your first sentence in the next post was, “how many receivers did he "miss badly"?”, so you didn't post anything about THIS game, you were responding to my post about after the injury.
and yes, that's exactly what I said, only Rodgers can criticize Roders, LOL Give me a break. Are you willfully obtuse, or just not able to derive context and meaning from words? …
I can only interpret and respond to the words you post.

BTW dio, I have never put any poster on ignore and you certainly won’t be the first. But I can understand why you don’t want your posts challenged.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top