Again no, that was not said by the "group" you are attacking either.
This isn't a black and white situation, where a player or group is either completely to blame or not to blame at all or only 1 player/position can shoulder the blame.
Moderators: NCF, salmar80, BF004, APB, Packfntk
Again no, that was not said by the "group" you are attacking either.
ya it was, you just don't like admitting it, why don't you go back and look at what you and others have said after PO losses, it's one thing to criticize a play, but it never stops there, people have used contract to say he has to play better, when thats the case with others to, hell the most expensive WR in the league drops a perfectly thrown TD pass, that gets less attention then Rodgers not seeing a open Lazard, as though other QB's never miss a open receivers, that is the crap I'am talking about.
NO ONE blamed just Rodgers. The biggest reason these arguments crop up over and over is because you continually assign positions to people here that NO ONE has ever taken. Please, realize, not a single poster here has ever blamed just Aaron Rodgers for a loss, just as no post here has ever dressed down Aaron Rodgers to prop up Jordan Love.Yoop wrote: ↑02 Mar 2023 14:45ya it was, you just don't like admitting it, why don't you go back and look at what you and others have said after PO losses
Well, since this is not reality, then it can't be the "real stickler." Not a person on this forum made a concerted effort, let alone even said the receiver situation was good. That NEVER happened. This again is the black and white concept that if a poster doesn't outright accept or deny something, they must be wholly for the opposite.the real stickler has been this concerted effort by you and others that the receiver situation was good, every time I brought up just how inadequate the situation was I faced backlash from you
it's no use to talk with someone that refuses to acknowledge things they've said, the receiver situation was never good enough, if it had been Adams wouldn't have gotten most of the targeted throws for 5 years straight, Rodgers wouldn't have developed tunnel vision with him, you keep defending a disfunctional situation, again I should expect it, this is my last reply to you on this subject.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑02 Mar 2023 15:09NO ONE blamed just Rodgers. The biggest reason these arguments crop up over and over is because you continually assign positions to people here that NO ONE has ever taken. Please, realize, not a single poster here has ever blamed just Aaron Rodgers for a loss, just as no post here has ever dressed down Aaron Rodgers to prop up Jordan Love.
Well, since this is not reality, then it can't be the "real stickler." Not a person on this forum made a concerted effort, let alone even said the receiver situation was good. That NEVER happened. This again is the black and white concept that if a poster doesn't outright accept or deny something, they must be wholly for the opposite.the real stickler has been this concerted effort by you and others that the receiver situation was good, every time I brought up just how inadequate the situation was I faced backlash from you
Let's recap:
No one is blaming Rodgers for things to lift up Love.
No one is blaming just Rodgers for losses.
No one ever said our receiver situation was good in the last several years. All saw the holes in it, but many also saw that is should be adequate to compete (less so 2022).
Unfortunately, we then get yet another rant bringing up pet topics that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
The issue being, I never said the things you are attributing. Your black and white view of the situation leads to you assigning one side or the other to others' viewpoint, when in reality their view is much more nuanced, ie... blaming Rodgers, the OL, and receivers all at the same time.
Just like above, it's the the black and white fallacy. No defending of the situation, but also not onboard with it either.you keep defending a disfunctional situation
I started to read the headline. My first thought was “sources” as in Schefter (not that he’s the only one). And the very first part says the info comes from Schefter.Labrev wrote: ↑02 Mar 2023 18:58Anyway a real update: Panthers came calling.
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/plat ... per-report
I'm sure he'd have a long talk with Brady before anything, and maybe BB would cut him some slack after life without a QB.Drj820 wrote: ↑02 Mar 2023 21:12While the patriots seems like an obvious fit based on “legendary coach acquires legendary qb” I really wonder if Rodgers would humble himself and fit into the “patriot way”. Would rodgers let’s bill rip him in the film room? Would Rodgers agree to the dink and dunk methodical “death by a thousand cuts” patriots scheme?
No brainer rodgers should want to go there if he wants a ring. But he may be too big of an individual to submit himself to the patriot brand