Younger players

[billv]

Just read another column about how the Packers will have to play Aaron R. instead of Favre if losing continues in order to give him experience. I just wonder why aren't these columnists as concern about playing Moll and Colston at offensive tackles, Bush and Dendy at cornerback and Humphrey at tight end to give them experience.

 

[DePack]

Their names don't sell.

 

[kmac]

Their names don't sell.

DING DING DING

Thread over :lol:

 

[skylerjheav]

Their positions aren't as pivotal as the quarterback position.

 

[agopackgo4]

Because everyone is quick to rush out Favre. And not our O line.

 

[billv]

"Their positions aren't as pivotal as the quarterback position"


Tell that to our running backs when they can't find any holes or when Favre is scrambling under heat that the offensive line positions aren't as pivotal.

 

[NDPackerFan]

Wow...that must be why the Ravens won the Super Bowl that year....Trent Dilfer.

 

[GakkofNorway]

Why?

Because most QBs need some time as a starter to catch on, maybe a season, and if we're going to have another losing season we got nothing to lose by putting A-rod in.

Also because QB probably is the hardest position to find a good player at and the most important.

 

[PackerLegend]

Dont want A-Rod to start yet, buti want a-rod to start if we are not doing good towards the end of the season just because it makes more sense i think to try and look ahead and have more winning seasons if you can find a good qb right away, rather then just keeping Favre in there for a 1 or 2 more and hoping we do good. I like Favre but in a way he is holding the team back from moving forward. Also if we are in the running for a very high pick i dont want to win the last game like we did last year if we would have lost we would have been 3-13 and could have picked like 2nd or 3rd depend on the strength of schedule, that means we could have had a chance at Reggie Bush.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Dont want A-Rod to start yet, buti want a-rod to start if we are not doing good towards the end of the season just because it makes more sense i think to try and look ahead and have more winning seasons if you can find a good qb right away, rather then just keeping Favre in there for a 1 or 2 more and hoping we do good. I like Favre but in a way he is holding the team back from moving forward. Also if we are in the running for a very high pick i dont want to win the last game like we did last year if we would have lost we would have been 3-13 and could have picked like 2nd or 3rd depend on the strength of schedule, that means we could have had a chance at Reggie Bush.

Losing leads to losing. Winning leads to winning. That is the key!

This is a very young, inexperienced team with a rookie HC that needs to learn how to win together. Favre gives the team the best chance to win, everyone knows that. Benching Favre sends a message to the whole team that this team has given up on the season. If the team has given up, then why should the players work hard for a win each week?

Year after year most of the same teams pick in the top 10 of the draft. They get the best choices and go on to lose again next season. Sure there are teams that break out, but it is very difficult and takes time.

GB has been used to winning for a long time now. If we want to get that back, then this team needs to win. In order to do that, we need to put the best players out there to give us a chance to win each week.

GO PACK GO!!!

 

[Heatherthepackgirl]

THis topic is getting to old, IMO this is NOT going to happen, they wont put Rodgers in,,,they need Favre in there if there is any hope on us winning any games this season..why take Favre out?? How do you guys know if he will retire next year?? I just dont believe he will...

 

[BearPerspective]

THis topic is getting to old, IMO this is NOT going to happen, they wont put Rodgers in,,,they need Favre in there if there is any hope on us winning any games this season..why take Favre out?? How do you guys know if he will retire next year?? I just dont believe he will...

Point is you're not winning any games this season anyway and most likely not next year either, so why not develop a QB? The rest of the team is developing, and Brett is regressing. There will be no playoff push. Its rebuilding. Aging vets dont help.

 

[DePack]

THis topic is getting to old, IMO this is NOT going to happen, they wont put Rodgers in,,,they need Favre in there if there is any hope on us winning any games this season..why take Favre out?? How do you guys know if he will retire next year?? I just dont believe he will...

Point is you're not winning any games this season anyway and most likely not next year either, so why not develop a QB? The rest of the team is developing, and Brett is regressing. There will be no playoff push. Its rebuilding. Aging vets dont help.

AHHHH another bear fan wanting Favre out of there.....imagine that!

 

[Timmons]

As indicated above (by the number and focus of the replies), mentioning playing Rodgers means sitting Favre and no matter how much people say this is a worn out subject, obviously it's not. That's why writers write about it.

 

[billv]

The topic wasn't if we should sit Favre, but why isn't there discussion about sitting all the other veterans.

As far as a young quarterback needing experience, Phillip Rivers is 3-1 with San Diego in his third year on the team but his first year as a starter. That's exactly will be Rodgers' degree of experience if he doesn't start this year.

 

[DePack]

The topic wasn't if we should sit Favre, but why isn't there discussion about sitting all the other veterans.

As far as a young quarterback needing experience, Phillip Rivers is 3-1 with San Diego in his third year on the team but his first year as a starter. That's exactly will be Rodgers' degree of experience if he doesn't start this year.

I agree bill. I don't see anybody suggesting we sit Donald Driver so we can see what we have in Ruvell Martin.

 

[Anubis]

The topic wasn't if we should sit Favre, but why isn't there discussion about sitting all the other veterans.

As far as a young quarterback needing experience, Phillip Rivers is 3-1 with San Diego in his third year on the team but his first year as a starter. That's exactly will be Rodgers' degree of experience if he doesn't start this year.

Don't tell them that, Billv. There are too many people on here that hate the facts getting in the way of their own self-serving opinions. :roll:

 

[TOPackerFan]

Right but Philip has something that A-Rod does and will not have, namely LaDanian Tomlinson and Antonio Gates (not to mention a solid D featuring Shawne Merriman).

 

[Buckeyepackfan]

With young players , there need to be someone to help them learn how to win. This is where your veterans come in.

On offense there is Brett, DD, Tauscher and Clifton. The problem this year is they are learning a new system also, but the improvement is starting to show, the O-line played much better last Sunday, each week they have shown improvement.

On defense it seems that Kampman and Barnett are the only ones showing any leadership. Woodson and Manual were brought in to lead the db’s but along with Harris IMHO they have been very disappointing in this aspect.

Young teams need to learn how to win, the close losses the first 5 weeks, hopefully will become close wins in the coming weeks, but there has to be some leadership from the vets on D. Someone{maybe even a coach) needs to get in these guys faces and see if they actually have what it takes to put another team away.

 

[Anubis]

Right but Philip has something that A-Rod does and will not have, namely LaDanian Tomlinson and Antonio Gates (not to mention a solid D featuring Shawne Merriman).

I watched the Chargers/Pittsburgh game on Sunday night. Rivers showed some very good decision making and looked very good behind center. A good D, RB and receiving corps can win you games, but only the QB can look good in the pocket, assuming the oline provides him with one.