Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Will The Packers Get To 13-3 In 2016?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PackAttack12" data-source="post: 678852" data-attributes="member: 11933"><p>You're funny.</p><p></p><p>My theory is that Bradford probably didn't have a full playbook, probably kept things pretty simple for the most part. Also, did you not see the separation Diggs was getting from our corners? Compare that to how tight the coverages were on our receivers. It's pretty easy for a quarterback to look good if A) he has time to throw the football and B) he has receivers getting open. Diggs was picking our secondary to pieces. All of their guys really were doing a good job of getting open, but Diggs was basically a one man wrecking crew. You mean to tell me that if Rodgers was behind center for Minnesota in that game that he wouldn't have had at least as good of a game as Bradford? Please.</p><p></p><p>When you take two things into consideration for Green Bay - 1. Minnesota was playing a lot of press coverages that, in many instances, our receivers were not about to break free from, and then 2. the pressure that Minnesota was getting on Rodgers. If no one breaks open off of those routes in a timely fashion, what is Rodgers supposed to do when he has 6 guys flying at his face?</p><p></p><p>Now that wasn't the case for the entire game, but it certainly was on many occasions. If you want to say that we should have been doing a better job at calling plays to beat that press coverage and Rodgers should take some culpability for that, then I can get with that. </p><p></p><p>Again, I'm not insinuating that Rodgers had this incredible game. He flat out missed some receivers. Two of those could have been touchdowns when Adams and Jordy both had beaten their man (on the rare instance) and Rodgers overthrew them. There were a couple slant and crossing patterns where he threw it over the head of Cobb. But in those instances, he just flat out missed. What else do you want me to say? He had an off game throwing the football, and then when you consider the miscommunication breakdowns on top of that, along with the inability for receivers to consistently create separation, and THEN when you consider a laughably awful running game (by the way we need to get the hell rid of that damn toss play) you are going to have some problems.</p><p></p><p>Now whether or not I did a good enough job explaining why I feel like Bradford looked better than Rodgers to your liking, I'm not sure. But that's what I saw with my eyes. And this much I know for a fact. You swap the two quarterbacks in that game and Rodgers would have had the better statistical game.</p><p></p><p>I keep saying. Fine tuning, building cohesiveness. Rodgers himself says that the timing is just barely off right now and with the offense we run if the timing and communication is barely off, then it's going to look much worse than what it is and it's going to lead people to believe that we are much further off than what we really are.</p><p></p><p>And I have no reason to doubt Aaron Rodgers. Not about to start now either. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for a little while longer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PackAttack12, post: 678852, member: 11933"] You're funny. My theory is that Bradford probably didn't have a full playbook, probably kept things pretty simple for the most part. Also, did you not see the separation Diggs was getting from our corners? Compare that to how tight the coverages were on our receivers. It's pretty easy for a quarterback to look good if A) he has time to throw the football and B) he has receivers getting open. Diggs was picking our secondary to pieces. All of their guys really were doing a good job of getting open, but Diggs was basically a one man wrecking crew. You mean to tell me that if Rodgers was behind center for Minnesota in that game that he wouldn't have had at least as good of a game as Bradford? Please. When you take two things into consideration for Green Bay - 1. Minnesota was playing a lot of press coverages that, in many instances, our receivers were not about to break free from, and then 2. the pressure that Minnesota was getting on Rodgers. If no one breaks open off of those routes in a timely fashion, what is Rodgers supposed to do when he has 6 guys flying at his face? Now that wasn't the case for the entire game, but it certainly was on many occasions. If you want to say that we should have been doing a better job at calling plays to beat that press coverage and Rodgers should take some culpability for that, then I can get with that. Again, I'm not insinuating that Rodgers had this incredible game. He flat out missed some receivers. Two of those could have been touchdowns when Adams and Jordy both had beaten their man (on the rare instance) and Rodgers overthrew them. There were a couple slant and crossing patterns where he threw it over the head of Cobb. But in those instances, he just flat out missed. What else do you want me to say? He had an off game throwing the football, and then when you consider the miscommunication breakdowns on top of that, along with the inability for receivers to consistently create separation, and THEN when you consider a laughably awful running game (by the way we need to get the hell rid of that damn toss play) you are going to have some problems. Now whether or not I did a good enough job explaining why I feel like Bradford looked better than Rodgers to your liking, I'm not sure. But that's what I saw with my eyes. And this much I know for a fact. You swap the two quarterbacks in that game and Rodgers would have had the better statistical game. I keep saying. Fine tuning, building cohesiveness. Rodgers himself says that the timing is just barely off right now and with the offense we run if the timing and communication is barely off, then it's going to look much worse than what it is and it's going to lead people to believe that we are much further off than what we really are. And I have no reason to doubt Aaron Rodgers. Not about to start now either. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for a little while longer. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Half Empty
red4tribe
Latest posts
NFC North Predictions
Latest: OldSchool101
4 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2025 Roster - Semi Live Thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 2:11 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
First Round Pick #23 - Matthew Golden WR - Texas
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 2:09 PM
Draft Talk
Post Draft/UDFA/Off-Season Signings - Each Position Trade Block
Latest: Pkrjones
Today at 11:46 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2025 NFL Schedule Release
Latest: DoURant
Today at 10:06 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Will The Packers Get To 13-3 In 2016?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
