The path for Aaron Rodgers to become the GOAT

[SoonerPack]

Although I mostly agree, AR needs to show that he can deliver a truly great game in crucial playoff situations. He has to some degree, but poor playoff performances in 2011 (the debacle against the Giants), and the 2nd half against Seattle in 2015 (he was injured, however) did not help his case. On the other hand, his performances last year in the 2nd half of the season and in the first 2 playoff games was stellar, as was his performance against Dallas in the playoffs 2 years ago.

Brady may have had better defenses, but still when a player is in the situation he has to deliver. Brady has done that in enough cases.

If the Packers consistently had the same level of defenses the Pats have had, do you think AR would only have 1 ring?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If the Packers consistently had the same level of defenses the Pats have had, do you think AR would only have 1 ring?

Maybe on one hand, the other hand would be full.

 

[PackAttack12]

Although I mostly agree, AR needs to show that he can deliver a truly great game in crucial playoff situations. He has to some degree, but poor playoff performances in 2011 (the debacle against the Giants), and the 2nd half against Seattle in 2015 (he was injured, however) did not help his case. On the other hand, his performances last year in the 2nd half of the season and in the first 2 playoff games was stellar, as was his performance against Dallas in the playoffs 2 years ago.

Brady may have had better defenses, but still when a player is in the situation he has to deliver. Brady has done that in enough cases.

So all you're really saying is that Rodgers is human and is less than perfect on occasion.

When Rodgers isn't playing by his all time great standards, which happens at times, it would be wonderful for him to have a defense to rely upon to help get a win. Brady has had the benefit of a top 10 defense almost every single year in the playoffs. In 34 playoff games his defense has given up 30 or more points just 3 times, yet you look at Rodgers and his defense is averaging giving up over 36 points per game in playoff losses.

You're focusing on the wrong issue. Rodgers has better numbers across the board. There is simply no debate about that. The deciding factor is, and always has been, the defense not stepping up often enough to get us to a Super Bowl.

The one time they picked Rodgers up in a playoff game that we won when he wasn't playing his best? The NFCCG against the Bears. We won the SB that year. Go figure.

 

[SoonerPack]

Although I mostly agree, AR needs to show that he can deliver a truly great game in crucial playoff situations. He has to some degree, but poor playoff performances in 2011 (the debacle against the Giants), and the 2nd half against Seattle in 2015 (he was injured, however) did not help his case. On the other hand, his performances last year in the 2nd half of the season and in the first 2 playoff games was stellar, as was his performance against Dallas in the playoffs 2 years ago.

Brady may have had better defenses, but still when a player is in the situation he has to deliver. Brady has done that in enough cases.

You need look no further than the HOU/NE game from this previous years playoffs. Brady went 18/38 for 287 yards with 2 TD's and 2 INT's. He was brutal the entire game...and the Pats won 34-16 because of their D. The Pats picked BO 3 times and played out of their minds most of the contest. Could you imagine AR having a game like that and the team still winning by 18 points? Honestly.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You need look no further than the HOU/NE game from this previous years playoffs. Brady went 18/38 for 287 yards with 2 TD's and 2 INT's. He was brutal the entire game...and the Pats won 34-16 because of their D. The Pats picked BO 3 times and played out of their minds most of the contest. Could you imagine AR having a game like that and the team still winning by 18 points? Honestly.

Reminds me a bit of a game I was at last year, Packers beating the Seahawks 38-10. While Rodgers didn't play too bad, he didn't have the kind of game that you would think he would to put up 38 points. The score was lopsided because of the 6 turnovers by the Seahawks (0 by Packers). Funny thing is, the defense played ok that day, but I would "credit" the lopsided win and at least half of those turnovers to Russell Wilson and the Seahawks not playing well that day.

I guess my point is, even when the Packer offense is having an "average day", if turnovers or the defense can pick up the slack, AR doesn't have to be near perfect every outing for the Packers to win. While you can't rely on that kind of turnover margin to win games, it would be nice to have a defense we could rely on every week, especially against playoff caliber teams, where AR may not be able to carry the team due to playing against a solid defense.

 

[Mondio]

Reminds me a bit of a game I was at last year, Packers beating the Seahawks 38-10. While Rodgers didn't play too bad, he didn't have the kind of game that you would think he would to put up 38 points. The score was lopsided because of the 6 turnovers by the Seahawks (0 by Packers). Funny thing is, the defense played ok that day, but I would "credit" the lopsided win and at least half of those turnovers to Russell Wilson and the Seahawks not playing well that day.

I guess my point is, even when the Packer offense is having an "average day", if turnovers or the defense can pick up the slack, AR doesn't have to be near perfect every outing for the Packers to win. While you can't rely on that kind of turnover margin to win games, it would be nice to have a defense we could rely on every week, especially against playoff caliber teams, where AR may not be able to carry the team due to playing against a solid defense.

The only difference between that game and the 2014 game was the offense scoring TD's instead of FG's. That 2014 game was an *** kicking, until it wasn't and they had the biggest choke job i've ever seen until the Falcons took the top spot last year

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The only difference between that game and the 2014 game was the offense scoring TD's instead of FG's. That 2014 game was an *** kicking, until it wasn't and they had the biggest choke job i've ever seen until the Falcons took the top spot last year

Agreed. FG's instead of TD's and add to that the fact that the Packers had 2 turnovers (Seattle 5) in the NFCCG against the Seahawks and it was a much closer game than it should have been, even before that final 5 minute meltdown. But let's not relive that game....again LOL

What I am hoping for is an improved defense, one that the Packers can rely on, especially if the Offense isn't playing extremely well that day. The Packer offense will most likely be able to put up big points each week in 2017, but they are going to run into games where they don't and for once I would like to be able to see the defense win those games for us.

 

[PackAttack12]

Agreed. FG's instead of TD's and add to that the fact that the Packers had 2 turnovers (Seattle 5) in the NFCCG against the Seahawks and it was a much closer game than it should have been, even before that final 5 minute meltdown. But let's not relive that game....again LOL

What I am hoping for is an improved defense, one that the Packers can rely on, especially if the Offense isn't playing extremely well that day. The Packer offense will most likely be able to put up big points each week in 2017, but they are going to run into games where they don't and for once I would like to be able to see the defense win those games for us.

If that's the case, we get ring #2 in the Rodgers era.

 

[Carl]

You need look no further than the HOU/NE game from this previous years playoffs. Brady went 18/38 for 287 yards with 2 TD's and 2 INT's. He was brutal the entire game...and the Pats won 34-16 because of their D. The Pats picked BO 3 times and played out of their minds most of the contest. Could you imagine AR having a game like that and the team still winning by 18 points? Honestly.

To be fair, the Texans were quarterbacked by Osweiler and had a terrible offense against most anyone.

 

[rodell330]

2 more rings imo.

 

[PackAttack12]

To be fair, the Texans were quarterbacked by Osweiler and had a terrible offense against most anyone.

"Most anyone" wouldn't include the putrid defense of the Green Bay Packers. That's the whole point.

And please don't give me the game at Lambeau in the snow last fall.

 

[Carl]

"Most anyone" wouldn't include the putrid defense of the Green Bay Packers. That's the whole point.

And please don't give me the game at Lambeau in the snow last fall.

I didn't know snow automatically discredits a defensive performance.

Anyway, picking a game in which the Patriots shut down a bad offense does not help this discussion regarding the Pats' defense vs. the Packers' defense.

What about the wildcard game when the Packers shut down a similarity bad, but better offense than the Texans, in the Giants in the wildcard round?

From weeks 12 to 17 last season, the defense actually played well other than an awful 4th quarter in Chicago.

Come playoff times, the Packers defense has been struggling with good offenses like Dallas and Atlanta last season. To say the Packers couldn't have stopped the awful Texan offense in the playoffs is an exaggeration.

 

[PackAttack12]

Picking a game in which the Patriots shut down a bad offense help this discussion regarding the Pats' defense vs. the Packers' defense.

What about the wildcard game when the Packers shut down a similarity bad, but better offense than the Texans, in the Giants in the wildcard round?

From weeks 12 to 17 last season, the defense actually played well other than an awful 4th quarter in Chicago.

Come playoff times, the Packers defense has been struggling with good offenses like Dallas and Atlanta last season. To say the awful Texan offense would have scored a bunch on the Packers last playoffs is an exaggeration.

The Texans scored 16 on a much better defense than the Packers. So lets go ahead and get one thing out of the way. It's highly plausible that the Green Bay Packers defense give up at least 20 points to the Texans. How much would they need to score if Rodgers goes 18-38 with two picks? Bet the Packers don't score 34 in that scenario. So Rodgers is off. Has a terrible game. He isn't leaning on the running game because the Packers had no running game. He isn't relying on special teams because they rarely make a spectacular play that leads to a score. He's not relying on his defense to get a score.

The Patriots in that game also had a 98 yard kick return for a touchdown from Dion Lewis.

I mean, lets be real here.

I'm not necessarily saying that the Packers would have lost that game, nor am I saying that the defense would have given up 30. What I am saying is that Rodgers has very rarely had the luxury of a defense that could withstand a 18-38 game from him with 2 turnovers.

 

[rmontro]

Maybe the Texans offense stunk, but how many times have we watched the GB defense make the opposing quarterback look like he was Johnny frigging Unitas out there? Often times when it was a backup.

 

[Poppa San]

FWIW Rodgers has been selected as the first overall player in PFF's foundation draft, in which analysts select players to start a franchise around.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/ne...aft-who-would-you-choose-to-start-a-franchise

I find it hard to believe that one of the 30 best players to build a team around was a college freshman from the American Athletic Conference. Personally I'd have taken Wilson over Luck and a coin toss between him and Rodgers based on their parameters.

 

[SoonerPack]

I didn't know snow automatically discredits a defensive performance.

Anyway, picking a game in which the Patriots shut down a bad offense does not help this discussion regarding the Pats' defense vs. the Packers' defense.

What about the wildcard game when the Packers shut down a similarity bad, but better offense than the Texans, in the Giants in the wildcard round?

From weeks 12 to 17 last season, the defense actually played well other than an awful 4th quarter in Chicago.

Come playoff times, the Packers defense has been struggling with good offenses like Dallas and Atlanta last season. To say the Packers couldn't have stopped the awful Texan offense in the playoffs is an exaggeration.

My whole point was TB having a dud of a game yet they still won big. I know what you're saying though as HOU wasn't exactly an offensive juggernaut. Essentially the Pats held them to their season average but the point is the D had to carry them and carry them they did.

 

[SoonerPack]

Different point here but I'm all kinds of jacked up knowing AR is going to have Marty B and Lazer Kendricks at his disposal this year. Moving the chains and capitalizing in the red zone is going to be better and longer, more sustained drives should allow the D to get a bit more rested. Marty is going to be a huge asset I believe. Huge.

Ok, back to the topic at hand...

G P G!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packer offense will most likely be able to put up big points each week in 2017, but they are going to run into games where they don't and for once I would like to be able to see the defense win those games for us.

Unfortunately I don't believe the defense improved enough this offseason to be capable of winning games for the Packers once the offense struggles.

Anyway, picking a game in which the Patriots shut down a bad offense does not help this discussion regarding the Pats' defense vs. the Packers' defense.

What about the wildcard game when the Packers shut down a similarity bad, but better offense than the Texans, in the Giants in the wildcard round?

From weeks 12 to 17 last season, the defense actually played well other than an awful 4th quarter in Chicago.

Come playoff times, the Packers defense has been struggling with good offenses like Dallas and Atlanta last season. To say the Packers couldn't have stopped the awful Texan offense in the playoffs is an exaggeration.

The Patriots defense has performed at a decent level against elite offenses in the playoffs as well though, something the Packers unit hasn't been able to over the past six seasons.

Maybe the Texans offense stunk, but how many times have we watched the GB defense make the opposing quarterback look like he was Johnny frigging Unitas out there? Often times when it was a backup.

The Packers defense has mostly shut down inferior offenses during Capers tenure but has struggled mightily against elite ones.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Unfortunately I don't believe the defense improved enough this offseason to be capable of winning games for the Packers once the offense struggles.

Oh I agree with you and fully expect about the same results this year as last. A team that relies on AR to win games, if he is a bit off, or the Packers face a solid defense, they won't get the W that day.

If the Packers want to win while AR is still around, they have to secure a better defense. At this point, I would be fine with not going "all in" on a few defensive FA's in 2018, but at least see TT wake up and say "we need some difference makers on defense (which he did on offense with Bennett) to take us to the next level, let's spend some cash!". I hope I am wrong on the current defense, but my optimism for it to be improved enough to win the SB, isn't very high.

 

[Packer Brother]

While it's possible that Capers could have done a better job of adjusting to losing Shields in week 1 there's no doubt the team lacked talent in the secondary last season.



You replied to a post about injuries not being a valid excuse for the Packers coming up short and now that you run out of arguments refer to the thread being about a different topic. Classy.



While it's true that Rodgers holding on to the ball too long occasionally leads to him being sacked you have to realize that a lot of these plays result in huge gains for the Packers as well.



Actually if you didn't eliminate the seven games Rodgers missed in 2013 the mumbers are a little skewed in his favor. I absolutely agree with your overall premise that he is taking care of the football better than any other quarterback in the league though.



Rodgers has thrown 210 touchdowns and only 40 interceptions for a TD/INT ratio of 5.25 since the start of the 2011 season.



I understand it's a common theme among Thompson supporters around this forum when they're out of reasonable arguments to ridicule other posters who dare to criticize the general manager but in this case I would love to hear your explanation for who else is mainly to blame for the Packers not being able to field a top 10 defense in any of the past six seasons???



It doesn't matter at all as it didn't happen that way though.

To your second last paragraph, I am blaming the GM. Goes without saying he's responsible. I blame Murphy for allowing it to go on too.

 

[Packer Brother]

It was a gamble Thompson took last season though as the defense struggled in 2015 during the four games Shields missed as well. Considering the four reported concussions Sam had suffered entering the 2016 season not having a viable backup plan backfired.



Matthews and Perry form a formidable starting tandem at edge rusher but I'm extremely worried about a lack of quality depth at the position.

Unless CMIII has a great season, I'd be shocked is he's not released after the season.

 

[Packer Brother]

As always, have to also consider that the Pats were two once-in-a-lifetime catches away from being 4-0 in those same Super Bowls.

Yeah they could easily be 7-0 since 01 too. Shows how thin the error for margin is.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

At this point, I would be fine with not going "all in" on a few defensive FA's in 2018, but at least see TT wake up and say "we need some difference makers on defense (which he did on offense with Bennett) to take us to the next level, let's spend some cash!".

I agree there's no need for the Packers to go all in on free agents to upgrade the defense but it's a necessity to finally improve obvious positions of need on that side of the ball.

To your second last paragraph, I am blaming the GM. Goes without saying he's responsible. I blame Murphy for allowing it to go on too.

I wholeheartly agree that Thompson is the one to blame. It seems Capers scheme works pretty well against offenses that finish outside of the top 10 in scoring as the Packers have only allowed an average of 18.0 points in 84 games against such opponents. There's no way to overcome a lack of talent against elite opponents though with the team having given up 27.5 points per game in 44 such contests since 2009.

Unless CMIII has a great season, I'd be shocked is he's not released after the season.

The Packers aren't keen on releasing players before the end of their contracts by any means, even underperforming ones.

 

[PackAttack12]

Yeah they could easily be 7-0 since 01 too. Shows how thin the error for margin is.

They could also very easily be 2-5 if Pete Carroll gives the football to Lynch at the goal line, if Atlanta doesn't choke up a 25 point lead, and if Vinatieri misses one of those kicks in the first three super bowls.

They have had some misfortune, but they have also had TONS of fortune.

 

[Packer Brother]

They could also very easily be 2-5 if Pete Carroll gives the football to Lynch at the goal line, if Atlanta doesn't choke up a 25 point lead, and if Vinatieri misses one of those kicks in the first three super bowls.

They have had some misfortune, but they have also had TONS of fortune.

Very true. Although I give them credit for doing everything possible to increase the odds of winning another championship. Unlike another organization...cough