McGinn harshly criticizes Rodgers

[Mondio]

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. 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.

oh you're funny. Every example and every instance in my post, was about the game against Seattle, you interpreted that to mean every game before LOL

Like I said, Willfully obtuse? or just incapable?

I don't find you so much a "challenge" as someone that likes to play around with words then find that final moment, you can say "ah ha!"

You haven't really challenged anything i've said, but I'm sure you have found it challenging. So I can understand your confusion

 

[TJV]

Again, you were responding to my comment. Or can't you even admit that?

Some fans just can't stand to read any criticism of their heroes.

 

[Mondio]

Willfully obtuse? or incapable?

oh, and he's not my hero. But if it makes you feel better to think he is, feel free.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

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

Why not? Adams was open on the throw. If Rodgers doesn't throw that pass on ANY play then he's not doing his job. Maybe his leg had to do with the poor pass or maybe he was concerned about targeting Sherman and waited a split second too long to make the throw...who knows, for whatever reason it was a badly thrown pass that should have (and normally would have) been a TD.

 

[HardRightEdge]

http://m.jsonline.com/sports/packer...gers-didnt-deliver-b99431306z1-289705111.html

We did not need to be told Rodgers did not have a good game by his standards.

But there are a few things in McGuin's take that require a closer examination:

1. McGuin says, "In Rodgers' six postseason victories, his passer rating of 111.8 is 38.4 points higher than the opposing quarterbacks. In his five defeats, Rodgers' rating of 89.4 is 9.1 points lower than the opposition."

So, in the victories the opponent passer rating was 73.4. In the losses it was 98.5. That latter opponent rating would be well above 100.0 when excluding Wilson's epically bad first half which was exploited for a 16-0 lead. Certainly arguments can and have been made there should have been more points on the board at the break, but it was 16-0 nonetheless.

The general conclusion would be that in losses the pass D had one great quarter statistically while the other 7 combined were quite poor.

2. Rodgers threw 13 incompletions and 2 INTs in the game. McGuin critiqued 9 incompletions, the 2 INTs and the free play. Had Rodgers made none of those "mistakes" he'd have been 31 of 35 against an outstanding defense. Too many trees, not enough forest.

3. That Rodgers has performed below his average against the best defenses in the league in recent playoff defeats should not be entirely unexpected.

4. He points out Rodgers scoring on 7 straight possessions against AZ in 2009 but tags the failure on the game ending fumble, failing to mention the uncalled face mask on Rodgers or that Warner shredded the defense in what could be argued to be among the greatest games ever played by a QB. WTF?

4. McGuin compared and contrasted the Seattle game to Rodgers' Superbowl performance which he called "brilliant". In that game the Packers jumped out to 21-3 first half lead, exploiting Polamalu's bum Achilles; thereafter, the momentum gradually swung to the Steelers like a Chinese water torture as the game seemed to be slipping away. The difference makers in this game were (1) Matthews forcing the Mendenhall fumble with Pittsburgh in position to tie or lead in the 4th. and (2) shutting down Roethlisberger with 2 minutes to go and a 5 point lead.

Rodgers failed to complete 15 passes in that game just as he had in the Seattle game. Had the Packers lost that game, would "brilliant" have been reinterpreted as a laundry list of second half failures?

5. Favre played a worse game in his Superbowl win. But the defense was outstanding and the kick returner won the MVP with a KO TD and long punt return.

I highlight those passages above for the obvious compare and contrast to the Seattle game...without the defensive and special teams plays the Packers don't win those other games.

To repeat, Rodgers' did not have a good game by his standards. But the story begins and ends with McGuin's 6th. paragraph:

"One could identify the head coach, the special-teams coach, the defensive coordinator and 15 or more of their players and charge them all with gross negligence, dereliction of duty and other heinous acts against Packers fans here, there and everywhere."

No sh*t. So, as the headline says, Rodgers "didn't deliver". But what he did not deliver was an insurmountable lead. Good luck expecting that 19 or 20 games per season.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why not? Adams was open on the throw. If Rodgers doesn't throw that pass on ANY play then he's not doing his job. Maybe his leg had to do with the poor pass or maybe he was concerned about targeting Sherman and waited a split second too long to make the throw...who knows, for whatever reason it was a badly thrown pass that should have (and normally would have) been a TD.

Take a look at the play once again. Adams wasn't wide open on the throw, actually that was textbook coverage by Sherman.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Take a look at the play once again. Adams wasn't wide open on the throw, actually that was textbook coverage by Sherman.

Admas had Sherman on the inside and a pass to Adams toward the sideline, away from Sherman, would have been an easy catch. Not to mention that Adams was actually more open earlier and Sherman was only that close because Rodgers hesitated on the throw.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Admas had Sherman on the inside and a pass to Adams toward the sideline, away from Sherman, would have been an easy catch. Not to mention that Adams was actually more open earlier and Sherman was only that close because Rodgers hesitated on the throw.

That is a pretty tough throw to make with Sherman taking away the inside route for Adams with no safety help over the top (Tramon should've taken notice of it).

I watched the play once again on the all-22 cam, don't agree with you at all that Adams was wide open at any point during it.

 

[pacmaniac]

As good as Seattle's D is, we had receivers open in the game and Rodgers overthrew or threw behind them on multiple occasions. He's got to make those throws, and he didn't.

 

[HardRightEdge]

He's got to make those throws, and he didn't.

He sure does if everybody else eventually goes into full-blown collapse. He doesn't if everybody else approximates doing their job to the gun.

Some people might think that the purpose of a $20 million per year QB is to play at his best and build an insurmountable lead in advance of knowing that his teammates will make mistakes on nearly every play when trying to close out a close game.

Those people would be mistaken.

 

[Vrill]

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.

I'd say that Seahawk defense is ranked top 5 or top 10 all time. What they have done over this two year span is impressive.

 

[pacmaniac]

He sure does if everybody else eventually goes into full-blown collapse. He doesn't if everybody else approximates doing their job to the gun.

The defense did their job for most of the game. The only reason the Packers offense scored 16 points through 3 quarters is because the defense gave them the ball in great field position on so many possessions.

The truth is that if the defense didn't get all those turnovers, the Packers would have scored maybe 3 points all game the way Rodgers was playing.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The defense did their job for most of the game. The only reason the Packers offense scored 16 points through 3 quarters is because the defense gave them the ball in great field position on so many possessions.

The truth is that if the defense didn't get all those turnovers, the Packers would have scored maybe 3 points all game the way Rodgers was playing.

Seattle gained about 50 yds. in offense the first half, more from Seattle emptying their revolver in the process of shooting themselves in the foot. Make that feet. That became about 350 yds. in the second half + OT.

Given the constitution of this team and in consideration of their play over the entire sweep of the season as a picture of who they are, then Rodgers' chief sin was failing to provide an insurmountable lead.

 

[yooperpackfan]

Seattle gained about 50 yds. in the first half and about 350 yds in the second half + OT. Given the constitution of this team and in consideration of their play over the entire sweep of the season as a picture of who they are, then Rodgers' chief sin was failing to provide an insurmountable lead.

I don't believe that was Rodger's sin.
That was IMHO McCarthy's sin.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I don't believe that was Rodger's sin.
That was IMHO McCarthy's sin.

Yeah, there's always that possibility. Or how about failing to run the ball successfully down at the goal line? We might as well blame the O-Line and the running backs for failing to make critical plays.

 

[melvin dangerr]

Hard to blame this loss on the defense with 5 take aways and holding the other team to 22 PTs

The offense didn't make enough plays, but the 8pts that the decided the game was on the "D" side 2pt conversion lapse and the deep OT bomb for a TD, both of these should not have happened other than that the D was solid.....

 

[HardRightEdge]

The offense didn't make enough plays, but the 8pts that the decided the game was on the "D" side 2pt conversion lapse and the deep OT bomb for a TD, both of these should not have happened other than that the D was solid.....

In the final 5 minutes of play including OT, the defense surrendered three TD drives of 69, 57 and 87 yards, including a 2 point conversion.

And we're supposed to embrace the McGinn slant that Rodgers failing to go 31 of 35 was the culprit?

I think McGuin and others got a little dizzy after being spun around in the swirling circle of mistake after mistake at the end of regulation and OT. If finding something else to look at provides relief from the vertigo then at least it's serving some purpose.

 

[Mondio]

Our offensive line has it's liabilities too. I've been very critical of them in the past and have always thought it was an area that needed upgrading across pretty much all the positions other than Sitton. That said, they played much much better this year. I'd say they are a very good pass blocking o-line bordering on excellent. I'm not going to get too excited one way or the other what words people use to describe their pass blocking.

Our run blocking is another matter. In that regard I think they are just average. Maybe it's our blocking scheme, maybe we aren't strong enough up front I don't know. If you take into account our complete offense they're pretty good, but a lot of that I think is a function of having a very good running back and a very explosive passing game from the QB to the receivers. It looks better than it is sometimes because we can play matchups and usually win.

But when it's a run, and the other team is playing the run, we don't seem to win a lot of those. Not against average and above defense

 

[PackerDNA]

Good points, Mondio. I think this line has improved dramatically. The pass blocking is very good, overall among the best. I think finally having an elite back in Lacy and the threat of a big time passing game does account for a good percentage of their success in the run game. They also win a lot with smarts.
The biggest problem in the run game is they often don't get a lot of push. Possibly a product of not being one of the bigger lines?

 

[PackerXLV]

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....

I still think a healthy Rodgers gets us through that game. Not making excuses, but look how close we came with an injured Aaron. Does that throw to Adams get picked off still if he's healthy? Who knows, but my money would be on "no."

I think the problem is that Aaron didn't get a single shot to put the game away with 5 minutes to go. I see both sides of that situation, but it's Aaron Rodgers. If he can't get us through, then we don't deserve it.

Plenty of chances elsewhere to win, and sure, Aaron didn't play grade A football, but we had a shot with an 80% mobile at-best Aaron Rodgers. 100% could have meant a completely different outcome.

 

[longtimefan]

The offense didn't make enough plays, but the 8pts that the decided the game was on the "D" side 2pt conversion lapse and the deep OT bomb for a TD, both of these should not have happened other than that the D was solid.....

Not saying you are wrong, but I cant graps this..Blaming the def for given up 8pts at the end, but why cant the offense be blamed for only getting 6 points and not at least 10 in the begining?

 

[GoPGo]

My point is the same. If the Packers can't put this behind them, it's going to haunt them until they win a title or forever. It's not Rodgers fault, it's not the defense's fault, it's not Bostick's fault. It was the TEAM'S fault. The Pack can learn a thing or 2 from the Spurs, get over it and come back next year better and stronger than ever.

And I see no reason why they can't/won't. We don't stand to lose anyone of great importance in the off-season (Cobb and Bulaga will be re-signed, along with Guion) and this team got better as the season wore on to the point that they clearly outplayed the champs at their place for 55 minutes. All this team needs to do is fix what happened in the last 5 minutes and that's a matter of mindset. This is a fairly young team overall and I expect continued maturation by next season. Depending on what happens in the off-season I can see anything from 12 to 15 wins next year. Perhaps as low as 11 if the injury bug bites hard again.

 

[AKCheese]

Anyone who doesn't see that Rodgers very poor play in this game was a major part of the loss is delusional. First step in correcting a problem is recognizing its existence.

 

[PackerXLV]

Anyone who doesn't see that Rodgers very poor play in this game was a major part of the loss is delusional. First step in correcting a problem is recognizing its existence.

I don't think anyone is discounting his lack of a stellar performance as a contribution to the loss. What I don't appreciate, is him getting thrown under the bus when he single handedly brought us back on one and a half legs against Dallas.

He faced a much more fierce opponent in a far more hostile environment in the NFC Title, once again, on a hobbled leg. Had one of any number of specific plays happened in our favor rather than in theirs, we come out on top.

Aaron also gave us a chance to win with a great final drive in regulation with only 1:30 left to work with. He's hero if we receive that kick in OT and take the ball down to the endzone for the win. His performance was not the sole reason we lost that game, it was far from it. That game was lost as a team through a culmination of events that only happened because the will to win was totally vacant on too many occasions.

 

[Jdeed]

Rodgers played Hurt and Played Poorly and GB lost.

Had Rodgers not been hurt and played even decent GB would have won the game.

The Major factor in the loss was Rodgers not playing like Rodgers.

The other 17 things that had to happen perfectly for Seattle to win wouldn't have mattered at all.