From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I feel kind of bad as I guess I helped start this rabbit hole based on a comment I made a few pages back about the Packers investing more than any other team into the QB position over the last 10 years.
you made it a either, OR position, expensive QB, team can't build SB contender, cheap QB's like Mahomes means a team can become Kansas city, or the first contract Rodgers team , thing is, and I blame myself for not explaining myself better, but for the last 10 years as I said, most SB winners where paying a lot for there QB, maybe not what we've paid the last couple years, but still enough that GM's had to be creative with Cap to find FA's and pay second contracts to there star players, so my point is Rodgers cap # didn't hold this team back, poor draft picks did, finally now this defense has star caliber players at enough positions that it should be more consistent and hopefully reach top 5 or so ability, if Rogders walks where going to need it.
And yoop, of course the QB should mean more to a team's success of winning games than any other specific position. It is why so much resources are allocated to that position. And the Packers have allocated more cap to that position over the last 10 years than any other team in the league which means that position will need to carry the team more than others due to it being rewarded more than any other. That just comes with it.
The only thing I was incorrect about was the Saints allocated $120k more to Brees and Ryan was first.
What I will not be afraid of standing my ground on though is it is not unreasonable to expect more out of a position group of which the team uses more resources of investment into that group. So when it is stated that the Packers rely on their QB more than other teams do it is like...."well yeah".
I feel kind of bad as I guess I helped start this rabbit hole based on a comment I made a few pages back about the Packers investing more than any other team into the QB position over the last 10 years.
you made it a either, OR position, expensive QB, team can't build SB contender, cheap QB's like Mahomes means a team can become Kansas city, or the first contract Rodgers team , thing is, and I blame myself for not explaining myself better, but for the last 10 years as I said, most SB winners where paying a lot for there QB, maybe not what we've paid the last couple years, but still enough that GM's had to be creative with Cap to find FA's and pay second contracts to there star players, so my point is Rodgers cap # didn't hold this team back, poor draft picks did, finally now this defense has star caliber players at enough positions that it should be more consistent and hopefully reach top 5 or so ability, if Rogders walks where going to need it.
And yoop, of course the QB should mean more to a team's success of winning games than any other specific position. It is why so much resources are allocated to that position. And the Packers have allocated more cap to that position over the last 10 years than any other team in the league which means that position will need to carry the team more than others due to it being rewarded more than any other. That just comes with it.
The only thing I was incorrect about was the Saints allocated $120k more to Brees and Ryan was first.
What I will not be afraid of standing my ground on though is it is not unreasonable to expect more out of a position group of which the team uses more resources of investment into that group. So when it is stated that the Packers rely on their QB more than other teams do it is like...."well yeah".
don't blame it on my reading skills, you are notorious for making double meaning posts, so you can respond either way, do it all the time, in this case a expensive QB like Rodgers is the reason we havn't been able to build a better team, when actually it's the lack of cap creativity from our FO to aguire FA's and missing on so many defensive players, probably why we havn't used a high pick on a WR for 6 years.
my come back was most teams spend a lot on there QB to and still build a solid supporting cast and win SB's, you used Cap dollars to quantify your stance simply because it strengthened your position, and it does, but eventually the team has to pay that back loading, I guess we call that throwing in all the chips to win, point is the just because the team deverted contract Dollars there still paying a QB big bucks
my come back was most teams spend a lot on there QB to and still build a solid supporting cast and win SB's.
Your comeback was irrelevant because it was total career earnings which will skew towards players who played in the league longer.
For instance, Tom Brady is ahead of Aaron Rodgers, but Tom Brady also has 7 more seasons as a starting QB compared to Aaron Rodgers.
In addition, only the Giants and Steelers on your list have more SB's than GB. Pittsburgh won the first one on a rookie QB deal and let's face it with New York. They just struck lightening twice and knocked the Packers and Patriots out twice when they did it.
The Giants were 10-6 and 9-7 in their SB winning seasons.
Which again leads to my original point where I don't see the Packers being this inferior franchise being carried by a QB. They are in the tier below NE.
you made it a either, OR position, expensive QB, team can't build SB contender, cheap QB's like Mahomes means a team can become Kansas city, or the first contract Rodgers team , thing is, and I blame myself for not explaining myself better, but for the last 10 years as I said, most SB winners where paying a lot for there QB, maybe not what we've paid the last couple years, but still enough that GM's had to be creative with Cap to find FA's and pay second contracts to there star players, so my point is Rodgers cap # didn't hold this team back, poor draft picks did, finally now this defense has star caliber players at enough positions that it should be more consistent and hopefully reach top 5 or so ability, if Rogders walks where going to need it.
And yoop, of course the QB should mean more to a team's success of winning games than any other specific position. It is why so much resources are allocated to that position. And the Packers have allocated more cap to that position over the last 10 years than any other team in the league which means that position will need to carry the team more than others due to it being rewarded more than any other. That just comes with it.
The only thing I was incorrect about was the Saints allocated $120k more to Brees and Ryan was first.
What I will not be afraid of standing my ground on though is it is not unreasonable to expect more out of a position group of which the team uses more resources of investment into that group. So when it is stated that the Packers rely on their QB more than other teams do it is like...."well yeah".
don't blame it on my reading skills, you are notorious for making double meaning posts.
I can't help you yoop. I said what I said. I showed what I said and you think I have this underlying ulterior motive of an either OR situation of either having an elite QB or elite team (which isn't true because I keep bringing up the Packers had BOTH in 2011, 2014 and 2020). That was made up by you. Not me.
Contrary to belief, winning football arguments doesn't really bring me that much satisfaction. I am hereto talk and learn about football. Not show I can win an argument. It's football. This is entertainment.
I do however like to make sure that statements are made with substantive thought and backup. So no I don't think I make posts with double meanings so I can always be "right". In fact Raptor even showed I was wrong and I had no problem admitting to that.
Plus, based on me not being the only one who seems to have issues with you on this board, I would tend to lean toward the problem being more on you than on me.
What I will not be afraid of standing my ground on though is it is not unreasonable to expect more out of a position group of which the team uses more resources of investment into that group. So when it is stated that the Packers rely on their QB more than other teams do it is like...."well yeah".
as I said the Packers had to rely on Rodgers for most of his 16 seasons, or this team would have never even sniffed the playoffs, and you've complained plenty about his contract, or that Rodgers didn't do enough for us to win, never mind that the defense only once or twice in all these years was top 10 or better.
sure, the stars are depended upon more, but there where plenty of Years where we only had Rodgers and a few other star players, and the complaint was (maybe not you) that we couldn't afford more stars because Rodgers cost to much, you act as though I'am making this stuff up, not true, as I said before, there are members here that got a woody when Murphy made Rodgers the richest player in the league, (maybe not you)
sure, the stars are depended upon more, but there where plenty of Years where we only had Rodgers and a few other star players
I think our biggest riff between us is you like to use generalist terms and I like to be specific.
For instance, the WR arument you like to use is that Rodgers hasn't had WRs for years and years (you will reference 5 to 7 years) whereas I like to bring specifics to that statement where I state Rodgers started to see the WR slowdown starting in 2018 after the Packers moved on from Jordy and then Cobb after 2018 which significantly reduces the time length of when Rodgers was out of WRs.
For the "Packers had no good teams argument" you like to say "Plenty of years where we only had Rodgers and a few other star players" whereas I like to get specific and state that really this only pertains to 2015 - 2018. But this window of time also experienced significant injuries and the head coach and GM as a result of this run lost their jobs.
And even when you dig deeper into the 2015 - 2018 window, you will start to find that simply a lot of things just didn't go the Packers way. Especially in the area of injuries between Cobb, Nelson, Rodgers, the TE Group, Ty Montgomery and the secondary. Perhaps the most unfortunate thing about these injuries is it provided excuses for the Head Coach, DC and GM to stick around longer than they should have.
sure, the stars are depended upon more, but there where plenty of Years where we only had Rodgers and a few other star players
I think our biggest riff between us is you like to use generalist terms and I like to be specific.
For instance, the WR arument you like to use is that Rodgers hasn't had WRs for years and years (you will reference 5 to 7 years) whereas I like to bring specifics to that statement where I state Rodgers started to see the WR slowdown starting in 2018 after the Packers moved on from Jordy and then Cobb after 2018 which significantly reduces the time length of when Rodgers was out of WRs.
For the "Packers had no good teams argument" you like to say "Plenty of years where we only had Rodgers and a few other star players" whereas I like to get specific and state that really this only pertains to 2015 - 2018. But this window of time also experienced significant injuries and the head coach and GM as a result of this run lost their jobs.
And even when you dig deeper into the 2015 - 2018 window, you will start to find that simply a lot of things just didn't go the Packers way. Especially in the area of injuries between Cobb, Nelson, Rodgers, the TE Group, Ty Montgomery and the secondary. Perhaps the most unfortunate thing about these injuries is it provided excuses for the Head Coach, DC and GM to stick around longer than they should have.
sure I generalize some,, but off and on from 011 till 019 the defense was near void of talent at at least one position group every year, so excuse me for not being more specific, and you keep going back to this we had Cobb and Nelson, but while prior both had great chemistry with Rodgers, but after the injury's that chemistry was never really the same, which is common actually since they don't run the same, so the timing is off, I keep saying the last years or so with either receiver was a decline, we'd have been better off using a high pick and replacing them, we cut them a year later so it sort of proves my point, it was just like when Collins was hurt, a couple mid round picks later and we still have a hole where the safety position is, instead of using FA to fix a poor draft pick, we wait till the next draft, I think the fact that we didn't use higher then a 4th round pick on a WR for 6 years speaks to this issue the best.
Considering there are at least 21 other players (more with special teams) that go onto the field, I don't know if your 25% better idea floats.
If Z plays better...
If any number of other players plays better...
If coach doesn't take the ball from Aaron and settles for a figgy...
My statement assumes all else being equal.
Yes, but this is our QB we are talking about, the most consequential player of the 22 by a comfortable margin -- not to mention, the player who occupies a huge portion of our cap. Coach probably does not settle for a FG if Rodgers was on his game (alternatively, we may not have needed a TD there if he was).
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
Considering there are at least 21 other players (more with special teams) that go onto the field, I don't know if your 25% better idea floats.
If Z plays better...
If any number of other players plays better...
If coach doesn't take the ball from Aaron and settles for a figgy...
My statement assumes all else being equal.
Yes, but this is our QB we are talking about, the most consequential player of the 22 by a comfortable margin -- not to mention, the player who occupies a huge portion of our cap. Coach probably does not settle for a FG if Rodgers was on his game (alternatively, we may not have needed a TD there if he was).
Lafluer took the blame for the ending as well he should have, he abandoned the run once Jones left the game, either he didn't trust the dink and dunk or didn't have a player with short area quicks to rely on that more, why use up time to kick a FG when you still need a TD to win, minus a miracle finish ya basically just seal your fate, we blame Rodgers for these defeats when we should be blaming the play callers, Lafluer with Tampa, and McCarthy against the Seahawks.
Lafluer took the blame for the ending as well he should have, he abandoned the run once Jones left the game, either he didn't trust the dink and dunk or didn't have a player with short area quicks to rely on that more, why use up time to kick a FG when you still need a TD to win, minus a miracle finish ya basically just seal your fate, we blame Rodgers for these defeats when we should be blaming the play callers, Lafluer with Tampa, and McCarthy against the Seahawks.
Eh, I still blame Kevin King for everything, but...
Lafluer took the blame for the ending as well he should have, he abandoned the run once Jones left the game, either he didn't trust the dink and dunk or didn't have a player with short area quicks to rely on that more, why use up time to kick a FG when you still need a TD to win, minus a miracle finish ya basically just seal your fate, we blame Rodgers for these defeats when we should be blaming the play callers, Lafluer with Tampa, and McCarthy against the Seahawks.
Eh, I still blame Kevin King for everything, but...
I blame the refs...
Us reads viewers a fur. Thats guys a weeks shared reds.
Lafluer took the blame for the ending as well he should have, he abandoned the run once Jones left the game, either he didn't trust the dink and dunk or didn't have a player with short area quicks to rely on that more, why use up time to kick a FG when you still need a TD to win, minus a miracle finish ya basically just seal your fate, we blame Rodgers for these defeats when we should be blaming the play callers, Lafluer with Tampa, and McCarthy against the Seahawks.
Eh, I still blame Kevin King for everything, but...
My guess is Matt Ryan is the one player who may be higher than Rodgers in terms of earnings the past 10 years. The one thing I will say is that Rodgers was on a very team friendly deal from 2009 - 2014. It was also the period where the Packers missed their biggest opportunity and should have been the era of winning a few rings.
I was wrong by $120,000
I do find it interesting though that really only Brees and Rodgers on this list have had consistently successful teams until you get to the lower paid Brady. Pittsburgh is close too but definitely to a lesser extent.
The QB position must produce when they are paid at the high level or else your franchise is stuck in a purgatory or worse of performance.
and all most all SB winners the last decade have had very expensive QB's
Rodgers allowed many subpar front office talent evaluators to stay employed and continue to make money.
Wait but honestly. Who?
I genuinely, earnestly don’t know what you’re talking about.
The ONLY two people I can think of are Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy, each of whom probably outlasted their useful life by one to three years. But in the years where their performance dropped off, so too did the team. Rodgers May have carried the team a bit from 2016 to 2018, but he didn’t really carry them anywhere. He certainly didn’t buy McCarthy extra time.
I’m not trying to diminish Rodgers’ importance in our win streak and playoff runs. I’m just saying that we can all agree that 2005 - 2014 TT was not at all a subpar talent evaluator. And 2006 - 2015 McCarthy was not out of his coaching depth.
I can’t really reason that a single undeserving human kept their job in our front office or coaching staff because Rodgers kept them afloat. When the team got worse around Rodgers, he also got worse and so did the team’s record.
Dont just think of offensive talent, without Rodgers all the years of whiffs in the draft on the defensive side of the ball gets brought to the forefront, quickly. The scouts involved in those selections, maybe Gutey himself, maybe Ted earlier than he stepped down, certainly McCarthy, certainly Capers...without Rodgers the offense might have been able to be decent, but they would never overcome those years of what we brought to gameday on the defensive side of the ball. Accountability barely came for all those whiffs in the draft, without Rodgers..it would have come years ago. We would not be able overlook it without HOF level QB play. It also would have come for all the whiffs at TE post Jermichael and the bad WRs post Jennings, Cobb, and Jordy not named Davante.
Many people stayed employed bc Rodgers kept the team at a level where everyone could stay comfortable
Many people stayed employed bc Rodgers kept the team at a level where everyone could stay comfortable
There were a large segment of the population, me included, who said long term the 2015 and 2016 bullsh*t revivals of seasons was a bad thing for the Packers.
I remember being a quite Packer rooter againster those years. I hated it when we beat the Texans in 2016 t Lambeau. I then got more vocal about it on this board in 2018 on wanting to lose because I thought it was the best interest of the Packers.
Like Mason Crosby missing that kick vs Arizona was a bigger service than most players have given the organization.
Many people stayed employed bc Rodgers kept the team at a level where everyone could stay comfortable
There were a large segment of the population, me included, who said long term the 2015 and 2016 bullsh*t revivals of seasons was a bad thing for the Packers.
I remember being a quite Packer rooter againster those years. I hated it when we beat the Texans in 2016 t Lambeau. I then got more vocal about it on this board in 2018 on wanting to lose because I thought it was the best interest of the Packers.
Like Mason Crosby missing that kick vs Arizona was a bigger service than most players have given the organization.
You make a good point. I believe there were seasons where the Packers had worse rosters than majority of our opponents, or equally bad of rosters as our opponents outside of QB play...and Rodgers was the factor that helped us pick up wins against those bad to average teams. We played in a bad division, wins against bad teams were a viable option for us with a QB as smart as Rodgers, even when outside of Rodgers our roster was also bad.
Thats why I am surprised my original comment on the matter was so controversial, I believe without Rodgers, accountability comes a lot quicker for the people responsible for letting the roster deteriorate like it did..Rodgers covered their sins.
Of course, I am talking pre Lafleur, I dont think this is necessarily the case anymore.
Many people stayed employed bc Rodgers kept the team at a level where everyone could stay comfortable
There were a large segment of the population, me included, who said long term the 2015 and 2016 bullsh*t revivals of seasons was a bad thing for the Packers.
I remember being a quite Packer rooter againster those years. I hated it when we beat the Texans in 2016 t Lambeau. I then got more vocal about it on this board in 2018 on wanting to lose because I thought it was the best interest of the Packers.
Like Mason Crosby missing that kick vs Arizona was a bigger service than most players have given the organization.
You make a good point. I believe there were seasons where the Packers had worse rosters than majority of our opponents, or equally bad of rosters as our opponents outside of QB play...and Rodgers was the factor that helped us pick up wins against those bad to average teams. We played in a bad division, wins against bad teams were a viable option for us with a QB as smart as Rodgers, even when outside of Rodgers our roster was also bad.
Thats why I am surprised my original comment on the matter was so controversial, I believe without Rodgers, accountability comes a lot quicker for the people responsible for letting the roster deteriorate like it did..Rodgers covered their sins.
Of course, I am talking pre Lafleur, I dont think this is necessarily the case anymore.
McCarthy's brother died the week of the Seattle playoff game, and imho it affected his game prep and game decisions, we lost in part because our team was out coached, take away the sympathy for Mikes brother passing and most coaches would have been on the hot seat for that loss, possibly even fired, we had the talent to win that game, and we finished it crashing Lacy into a brick wall 4 times, we didn't even send out a receiver on the last down, and the seahawks had all 11 defenders on the los, it was beyond insanity, it surely was a firable offense, instead we stumble along almost 3 more years with McCarthy.
the answer isn't to tank for draft picks, rather it's time to change the guy that does the picking and hire a coach that can take advantage more of the talent he does have, as we finally did 3 years ago.
Thats why I am surprised my original comment on the matter was so controversial, I believe without Rodgers, accountability comes a lot quicker for the people responsible for letting the roster deteriorate like it did..Rodgers covered their sins.
It wasn't that controversial. It made perfect sense on its face but then I stopped to think about it, and questioned it.
I DO think that TT and MM stayed around too long. And I DO think that Rodgers carried a weak and declining team in 2016 much further than it otherwise would have gone. I just think that those guys were held accountable not long after that. It's tougher for a GM. We can point to 2015's draft and say "we should have gotten him out before then," but we didn't know how bad 2015's draft was until at least the end of 2016. But I don't think Rodgers helped Capers keep his job--that's MM's weird loyalty.
So yeah, Rodgers bought TT and MM an extra year, maybe, by playing out of his mind on a bad team in 2016--willing it further than we should have gone. But then Rodgers got hurt and played mediocre football in 2017 and played badly in 2018. I think Rodgers' injury in 2017 bought MM another year more than Rodgers' play did.
And I think TT was just given too much deference when it was known within the organization that his cognitive capacity was, indeed, diminishing (this was a constant rumor that I vehemently fought against because it felt like an unfair low blow until I found out from a real live high-quality insider that during the 2017 season scouts limited when and what they told TT because he would forget so much). That, to me, is unacceptable and has nothing to do with Rodgers. TT should have stepped down a year earlier, before the 2017 draft rather than before the 2018 draft. But I'm glad he stuck around to get us Kenny Clark (and even Martinez and Lowry) in 2016
Thats why I am surprised my original comment on the matter was so controversial, I believe without Rodgers, accountability comes a lot quicker for the people responsible for letting the roster deteriorate like it did..Rodgers covered their sins.
It wasn't that controversial. It made perfect sense on its face but then I stopped to think about it, and questioned it.
I DO think that TT and MM stayed around too long. And I DO think that Rodgers carried a weak and declining team in 2016 much further than it otherwise would have gone. I just think that those guys were held accountable not long after that. It's tougher for a GM. We can point to 2015's draft and say "we should have gotten him out before then," but we didn't know how bad 2015's draft was until at least the end of 2016. But I don't think Rodgers helped Capers keep his job--that's MM's weird loyalty.
So yeah, Rodgers bought TT and MM an extra year, maybe, by playing out of his mind on a bad team in 2016--willing it further than we should have gone. But then Rodgers got hurt and played mediocre football in 2017 and played badly in 2018. I think Rodgers' injury in 2017 bought MM another year more than Rodgers' play did.
And I think TT was just given too much deference when it was known within the organization that his cognitive capacity was, indeed, diminishing (this was a constant rumor that I vehemently fought against because it felt like an unfair low blow until I found out from a real live high-quality insider that during the 2017 season scouts limited when and what they told TT because he would forget so much). That, to me, is unacceptable and has nothing to do with Rodgers. TT should have stepped down a year earlier, before the 2017 draft rather than before the 2018 draft. But I'm glad he stuck around to get us Kenny Clark (and even Martinez and Lowry) in 2016
I agree with what you are saying, but i wasnt just talking about the legendary TT. I was talking about Capers and McCarthy, both who i think had their time extended by multiple years in GB due to Rodgers play that overshadowed their weaknesses in scheme and in game coaching.
But TT had a full team of scouts and guys under him to evaluate talent. Who was responsible for telling TT that Demaryous Randall or Quenton Rollins should be taken in the draft? etc etc. Accountability doesnt always mean whacking off the head of the top guy, especially when the top guy has well earned clout. It could be whacking some scouts or some guys who were tasked to help find talent in the specific areas where the team failed. I was talking about those kind of guys primarily. I believe the entire scouting and talent acquisition operation got to live very comfortably without having to look in the mirror or be held accountable for constant whiffs due to Rodgers covering a multitude of sins.
I am not just saying TT should have gone earlier. TT brought us Bahk, Aaron Jones, Kenny Clark, Adams, and other staples of the current team..I dont have a beef with him really. Im thinking more of the people under him. Rodgers put food on their table while they were underperforming at their jobs.
