Rodgers wants out

[go pak go]

I don't know how any sane person could claim that Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers.

I mean what in the sam hell kind of a statement is that. And coming from a man who complains about lack of WRs.

The 2011 offensive line and TE/WR corps might be a serious contender for being the best and deepest passing game support group in NFL history.

Yoop. You literally complained last week that Randle Cobb didn't get enough reps because the WR group was too deep.

Randle Cobb was literally the #5 WR and had a KR TD and catching TD his first game.

And how did the offense do in 2011 when Rodgers didn't play in the game?

Oh just setting Packers records.

[Yoop]

I don't know how any sane person could claim that Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers.

I mean what in the sam hell kind of a statement is that. And coming from a man who complains about lack of WRs.

The 2011 offensive line and TE/WR corps might be a serious contender for being the best and deepest passing game support group in NFL history.

Yoop. You literally complained last week that Randle Cobb didn't get enough reps because the WR group was too deep.

Randle Cobb was literally the #5 WR and had a KR TD and catching TD his first game.

And how did the offense do in 2011 when Rodgers didn't play in the game?

Oh just setting Packers records.

well those receivers needed the ability a QB like Rodgers brought

now I'am insane because I believe Rodgers was the most important player concerning our success in the 2011 season, the defense ranked dead last in the league, If thats insanity, whats actually sane???? I also don't run out and read up before I make a comment to know every little stat, what I do know is the defense sucked, we couldn't run the ball, and Rodgers and the receivers carried the team, is that better, WTF.

I also referred to Cobb in the 2014 I think season, when he and Nelson produced 2600 yrds, with the help of Rodgers throwing them open

why bring up a game Rodgers didn't play in 2011, as though I should remember that, who cares, he still played excellent, what do you think the record would have been with any other QB, or Love? soooooo funny.

[lupedafiasco]

I don't know how any sane person could claim that Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers.

I mean what in the sam hell kind of a statement is that. And coming from a man who complains about lack of WRs.

The 2011 offensive line and TE/WR corps might be a serious contender for being the best and deepest passing game support group in NFL history.

Yoop. You literally complained last week that Randle Cobb didn't get enough reps because the WR group was too deep.

Randle Cobb was literally the #5 WR and had a KR TD and catching TD his first game.

And how did the offense do in 2011 when Rodgers didn't play in the game?

Oh just setting Packers records.

Rodgers absolutely carried that 2011 team. That defense was atrocious. One of the worst defenses historically at the time. For as great as the passing game was the run game was just 27th in the league. Terrific receivers for sure and the Oline was very good but if Rodgers didnt lead a shootout in many of these games they dont have nearly as good a record as they did. Even when they made it to the playoffs that team showed its true colors. The offense let the team down in that one with drops and fumbles.

[go pak go]

well those receivers needed the ability a QB like Rodgers brought

now I'am insane because I believe Rodgers was the most important player concerning our success in the 2011 season, the defense ranked dead last in the league, If thats insanity, whats actually sane???? I also don't run out and read up before I make a comment to know every little stat, what I do know is the defense sucked, we couldn't run the ball, and Rodgers and the receivers carried the team, is that better, WTF.

I also referred to Cobb in the 2014 I think season, when he and Nelson produced 2600 yrds, with the help of Rodgers throwing them open

why bring up a game Rodgers didn't play in 2011, as though I should remember that, who cares, he still played excellent, what do you think the record would have been with any other QB, or Love? soooooo funny.

Because it's the whole thing like YoHo said. You are trying to have it both ways.

When Rodgers has a great statistical season, it's all because of him. And when Rodgers doesn't win the SB, it's because the team let him down.

Making a statement that Aaron Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers is absolutely absurd. That team was insanely good. Maybe not to the level of the 2014 Packers due to the Nick Collins injury (the 2014 defense toward the end of the year was a top level unit), but it was about as good as they come. The WR corps was deeper than the 98 Vikings or the 99 - 2001 Rams.

So to dish blame in 2020 because Rodgers so sorely lacked a slot WR but then claim Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers and the FO let him down again even though they supplied Rodgers likely the best and deepest offense in the history of the league is a ridiculous statement and trying to again have it both ways.

I brought up Matt Flynn's game because the 2011 Packers offense was so good that our backup QB threw for 480 yards and 6 TDs. And that was with our #1 WR, Greg Jennings, being a healthy scratch and Cobb being injured. They were that good.

Honestly...I believe the 2011 Packers with another modest/competent QB would have been 12-4 or better. The defense would have likely been better ranked than 32nd in the league. Keep in mind the 2011's defense was constantly playing with triple score leads so opponents had no choice but to keep up with our offense.

[go pak go]

I don't know how any sane person could claim that Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers.

I mean what in the sam hell kind of a statement is that. And coming from a man who complains about lack of WRs.

The 2011 offensive line and TE/WR corps might be a serious contender for being the best and deepest passing game support group in NFL history.

Yoop. You literally complained last week that Randle Cobb didn't get enough reps because the WR group was too deep.

Randle Cobb was literally the #5 WR and had a KR TD and catching TD his first game.

And how did the offense do in 2011 when Rodgers didn't play in the game?

Oh just setting Packers records.

Rodgers absolutely carried that 2011 team. That defense was atrocious. One of the worst defenses historically at the time. For as great as the passing game was the run game was just 27th in the league. Terrific receivers for sure and the Oline was very good but if Rodgers didnt lead a shootout in many of these games they dont have nearly as good a record as they did. Even when they made it to the playoffs that team showed its true colors. The offense let the team down in that one with drops and fumbles.

No the passing offense carried the 2011 team. Again. If we are going to have thread after thread of b*tching about the lack of WRs for Rodgers since 2017, then we have to give credit for the absolute glut of wealth that Rodgers had in WRs in 2011.

It was an absolutely insanely packed passing attack.

There is this cycle of arguments that:

1. If Rodgers is good = he carries team.
2. If Rodgers is not good = Packers management don't provide him good offense

Having said ALL that.

For 2021, Rodgers has the following:
1. A coach with a great offensive scheme
2. An offense with a great Oline, running attack, WRs (including that coveted slot guy)
3. A decent enough defense. Likely a top 5 to top 10 unit
4. A multiple faceted group of TE's an other players that brings confusion

Literally the 2020 and 2021 roster is basically EXACTLY what people have been crying for the last 10 years. The 2021 roster has it if people say 2020 didn't have the slot. This is it. The team is there.

And Aaron Rodgers is holding out.

Yeah. I'm mad about that.

[Yoop]

well those receivers needed the ability a QB like Rodgers brought

now I'am insane because I believe Rodgers was the most important player concerning our success in the 2011 season, the defense ranked dead last in the league, If thats insanity, whats actually sane???? I also don't run out and read up before I make a comment to know every little stat, what I do know is the defense sucked, we couldn't run the ball, and Rodgers and the receivers carried the team, is that better, WTF.

I also referred to Cobb in the 2014 I think season, when he and Nelson produced 2600 yrds, with the help of Rodgers throwing them open

why bring up a game Rodgers didn't play in 2011, as though I should remember that, who cares, he still played excellent, what do you think the record would have been with any other QB, or Love? soooooo funny.

Because it's the whole thing like YoHo said. You are trying to have it both ways.

When Rodgers has a great statistical season, it's all because of him. And when Rodgers doesn't win the SB, it's because the team let him down.

Making a statement that Aaron Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers is absolutely absurd. That team was insanely good. Maybe not to the level of the 2014 Packers due to the Nick Collins injury (the 2014 defense toward the end of the year was a top level unit), but it was about as good as they come. The WR corps was deeper than the 98 Vikings or the 99 - 2001 Rams.

So to dish blame in 2020 because Rodgers so sorely lacked a slot WR but then claim Rodgers carried the 2011 Packers and the FO let him down again even though they supplied Rodgers likely the best and deepest offense in the history of the league is a ridiculous statement and trying to again have it both ways.

I brought up Matt Flynn's game because the 2011 Packers offense was so good that our backup QB threw for 480 yards and 6 TDs. And that was with our #1 WR, Greg Jennings, being a healthy scratch and Cobb being injured. They were that good.

Honestly...I believe the 2011 Packers with another modest/competent QB would have been 12-4 or better. The defense would have likely been better ranked than 32nd in the league. Keep in mind the 2011's defense was constantly playing with triple score leads so opponents had no choice but to keep up with our offense.

Lupe nailed it, the defense ranked 32 in the league, the run game 27th, and according to you the team was loaded, we had a decent OL some great receivers and a really great QB, yes Flynn played great, he had worked with this McCarthy offense for several years and had chemistry with the receivers, he had the system down pat, a different QB would have needed time to develop that, and it's possible Flynn took NE by surprise, whatever, you make it sound as though McCarthy could have turned any QB into Aaron Rodgers.

thing is Aaron at his worst ( any year) was better then most QB's, minus Rodgers we don't make the playoffs near as often as we have, and yes a slot receiver would have made our offense even better last year, as well as every year since Cobb's departure, and once our receivers declined, McCarthy's offense became a liability, how many people have you heard say, the offense became hard to have success, course we know this, we watched as Rodgers was forced to extend plays and eat the ball, sure at times it was his fault, I never said he was perfect, thing is we saw very little of that when he had that 2011 group of receivers, or in 2014 when he had Lacy and defenses had to worry about him allowing more space for Nelson and Cobb to be open on schedule.

point is this, for McCarthy's offense to work Rodgers needed more then just one receiver with or near the ability of Adams, and a good RB, so that defenses had to focus on stopping more then just Adams, or we needed a new coach, and that was obvious since 016, it took this FO 3 more years to come to grips with that, 3 years where minus Rodgers we would have been drafting top 10 or even top 5.

maybe the point Rodgers is trying to make is we could have had what we have now 3 years earlier if the FO had pulled there head out of there ass and retooled the coaching and GM after the 2015 PO game with the Seahawks when McCarthy was out coached and we lost a game we should have easily won, water over the bridge now, I know.

as I said I supported McCarthy and Thompson for the first 8 or 9 years, after that McCarthy's offenses like Capers defenses lacked innovation and became stale, and Ted was not stocking the team with talent as he had earlier, and Rodgers had become frustrated, I would have to in his shoes, again, the actions he took now could be tied to how pissed and upset he was back then, making a statement that he basically carried this team for years, then ya finally fix it, and then draft my replacement, thats how you show a player you appreciate what they given to this team. just guessing.

[Yoop]

Literally the 2020 and 2021 roster is basically EXACTLY what people have been crying for the last 10 years. The 2021 roster has it if people say 2020 didn't have the slot. This is it. The team is there.

And Aaron Rodgers is holding out.

Yeah. I'm mad about that.

no one here has wanted this team more the Rodgers, who here after the FO said we wouldn't trade him thought Rodgers wouldn't play this year? seriously. and lots of fans are mad at Rodgers, I imagine he's really broken up about that.

[go pak go]

Literally the 2020 and 2021 roster is basically EXACTLY what people have been crying for the last 10 years. The 2021 roster has it if people say 2020 didn't have the slot. This is it. The team is there.

And Aaron Rodgers is holding out.

Yeah. I'm mad about that.

no one here has wanted this team more the Rodgers, who here after the FO said we wouldn't trade him thought Rodgers wouldn't play this year? seriously. and lots of fans are mad at Rodgers, I imagine he's really broken up about that.

If that were true, he would be part of the team from the beginning and play. He would be all in for the 2021 season.

but he's not.

[go pak go]

[mention]Yoop[/mention] , I am not going to quote that long winded-response due to the length and I couldn't really find a relavent piece to respond to.

I am not arguing that Rodgers isn't a great quarterback that you continue to defend (like you keep saying would a backup do as well as a replacement). What a ridiculous thought. Rodgers is a better QB than Favre and is the best QB to ever play for the Green Bay Packers. I think it's harder to argue not having Rodgers in the top 5 all time than it is to argue he is top 5 all time.

What I am arguing is the language that so casually gets used of "carried the team on his back" when that language is not deserved. The 2011 team was insanely good. It was basically the 2010 squad except healthy. I believe our only real FA loss that year was Cullen Jenkins. So we had an ascending offense and a defense who lost two players in Collins and Jenkins.

Yards wise the defense struggled. The defense also led the league with 38 takeaways (31 of them being interceptions) which is not shocking at all. Again, our offense was ridiculous. We are talking greatest of all time caliber here. Like same conversation as "greatest show on turf". So when the Packers are up 3+ scores by the 2nd quarter, the opponent needs to pass and be aggressive which leads to lots of yards and lots of turnovers. And the data backs that up. The Packers defense ranked 32nd in the league in yards allowed and ranked 1st in the league with 31 interceptions. The 2nd highest defense nabbed 23 interceptions.

I'm not going on a tangent about McCarthyism or Caperism. I'm not interest in shifting blame to make Rodgers look better or worse.

All I am saying is language is important and word usage is important. And using the term "carried the team on his back" to describe the 2011 Packers and Rodgers simply because of his high stats is absolutely absurd. That Oline was insane. The WRs were even more insane and we had JFin at TE. It was a lethal perimeter that was bred to kill teams through the air.

Drew Brees has passed for over 5,000 yards 5 times in his career. Tom Brady in 2011 passed for over 5,200 yards. Peyton Manning threw for almost 5,500 yards in 2013 with Denver. Rodgers by the way has never done that. All of those seasons resulted in no rings too and yet I don't think this forum would use the term "carried the team on their back" when describing the QB's and their respective teams during those eras. Instead it was, the Saints, Patriots and Broncos had great teams surrounding the QB. Luck just wasn't on their side that season.

The 2011 Packers were no different.

[Yoop]

@Yoop , I am not going to quote that long winded-response due to the length and I couldn't really find a relavent piece to respond to.

I am not arguing that Rodgers isn't a great quarterback that you continue to defend. What a ridiculous thought. Rodgers is a better QB than Favre and is the best QB to ever play for the Green Bay Packers. I think it's harder to argue not having Rodgers in the top 5 all time than it is to argue he is top 5 all time.

What I am arguing is the language that so casually gets used of "carried the team on his back" when that language is not deserved. The 2011 team was insanely good. It was basically the 2010 squad except healthy. I believe our only real FA loss that year was Cullen Jenkins. So we had an ascending offense and a defense who lost two players in Collins and Jenkins.

Yards wise the defense struggled. The defense also led the league with 38 takeaways (31 of them being interceptions) which is not shocking at all. Again, our offense was ridiculous. We are talking greatest of all time caliber here. Like same conversation as "greatest show on turf". So when the Packers are up 3+ scores by the 2nd quarter, the opponent needs to pass and be aggressive which leads to lots of yards and lots of turnovers. And the data backs that up. The Packers defense ranked 32nd in the league in yards allowed and ranked 1st in the league with 31 interceptions. The 2nd highest defense nabbed 23 interceptions.

I'm not going on a tangent about McCarthyism or Caperism. I'm not interest in shifting blame to make Rodgers look better or worse.

All I am saying is language is important and word usage is important. And using the term "carried the team on his back" to describe the 2011 Packers and Rodgers simply because of his high stats is absolutely absurd. That Oline was insane. The WRs were even more insane and we had JFin at TE. It was a lethal perimeter that was bred to kill teams through the air.

Drew Brees has passed for over 5,000 yards 5 times in his career. Tom Brady in 2011 passed for over 5,200 yards. Peyton Manning threw for almost 5,500 yards in 2013 with Denver. Rodgers by the way has never done that. All of those seasons resulted in no rings too and yet I don't think this forum would use the term "carried the team on their back" when describing the QB's and their respective teams during those eras. Instead it was, the Saints, Patriots and Broncos had great teams surrounding the QB. Luck just wasn't on their side that season.

The 2011 Packers were no different.

doesn't matter how many interceptions we had in 2011, the defense still ranked last in the league because it couldn't consistently stop opposing offenses either against the pass or the run.

and our high powered offense was ONE dimensional, and our great OL could not block well enough to allow Rodgers to connect with his great receivers in a scheme that required he have time for them to clear on the deep routes, two teams decided the way to beat us was to use a deep cover shell, and use heavy rush packages to eliminate the time Rodgers needed for them to clear, we lacked a short game, so why even worry about that, and we lost.

I don't even know what your getting at when speaking of other QB's that surpassed 5000 yrds, when Rodgers had , what 4700 in 15 games, what the hell does that have to do with anything?

I said carried the team, you take that a step further with carried the team on his back, as usual you twist what others say into the extremes you accuse me of, reality is this, minus Rodgers and that 2011 and 2014/15 team doesn't even wiff the playoffs, unless Bree's or one of the other top QB's in the league at that time is our QB, and even then it's debatable that either team is as good as it was with Rodgers.


quote
What I am arguing is the language that so casually gets used of "carried the team on his back" when that language is not deserved. The 2011 team was insanely good. It was basically the 2010 squad except healthy. I believe our only real FA loss that year was Cullen Jenkins. So we had an ascending offense and a defense who lost two players in Collins and Jenkins.

my response
every year is a new team, regardless of personal changes, and the 2011 team was a good example of that, except for the passing attack everything else declined.

lastly you love the way Guty has finished building this team, yet defend what went on here between 015 and 019 when Murph, Ted and Mac where running a 3 stooges act, and for the life of me I can't figure out why, and I doubt Rodgers was able to figure that out either, and it's possible thats why he's making this statement by sitting out and asking to be traded, which by the way I don't blame him for, but never actually believed it though either, Rodgers problem to me is that he is not confrontational, me, I'd have asked for a trade by 2017.

[APB]

Why the capital F are you guys going on and on about who carried the 2011 team when it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the current Rodgers situation? We’re talking 10 years ago! I mean, what point regarding who carried what would justify (or not) Rodgers’ current actions or point to discernible FO failure that figures into anything relevant today?

Two players remain from that team - Rodgers (say it ain’t so) and Crosby. The coaching staff is entirely different. The current FO, the few who were actually employed by the Packers in 2011, had next-to-zero say in decision making back then.

Yet here we are, arguing multiple pages over which individual or unit carried that 10 years past roster because a certain poster creates straw man after straw man when his relevant points are shown to be overstated or outright falsehoods.

Holy smokes. It’s the same rabbit hole tactics used a million times over when arguments are shown to lack merit.



/rant over

[Half Empty]

Without an 'ignore' feature, I'd like to suggest we borrow a page from the COVID playbook and 'self-ignore'. There is one major target and just a couple of persistent shooters, and, as I'm sure most have realized, it's no fun to argue is nobody will spit back. I realize this would probably result in an 80% reduction in posts, but perhaps those that did appear would be worthwhile. When one finds themself in a running argument with another poster, and nobody else is joining in, either call it a day or go to private messaging.

[YoHoChecko]

Look, I know how much of a turnoff it can be when there's a long back and forth between a couple posters and you don't feel like reading it all. I know sometimes there is merit to letting things go and walking away, but...

..it's July. There's absolutely nothing going on in football news. BSA, myself, and others bring little insights to the Joe Barry defense when we see it and post it in the thread. Waldo is running the rank the roster, which has good involvement. NCF and Paco and others seem to consistently bring things to the General Packers News thread. Salmar and others keeps the cheese curds around the league news fresh.

If there's anything else going on, human interest stories, underdog profiles, interesting tidbits in the team website Insider Inbox, feel free to bring them along and discuss.

But, for the most part, while there is obviously a TON of redundancy in a 99-page thread, I quite enjoy working through the disagreements and differences in perspective. I feel like I'm honestly gaining insight into how various people view fandom and whatever. I also really, genuinely appreciate the time and energy Yoop dedicates to the forum, even though we argue constantly about myriad things.... we also agree about many others; he's also getting better about bringing and finding evidence for non-Rodgers topics; he's active and makes this place more active and current in the slow times. I would be bored if this forum didn't have yoop. And I like watching a lot of these conversations play out.

So yeah, self ignore if you want--for most, the "Rodgers Wants Out" thread is probably worth ignoring and considering a big dead horse. But if myself and go pack go and packfan23 want to go at it with yoop and occasionally lupe about why we're here, how we got here, and where to point fingers, feel free to self-ignore that, as well. If there's real news, we'll all know it. It'll be on every media outlet everywhere, as they report everything about this situation newsworthy or not.

If there are things going on in football that you wish to see discussed rather than these long, epic, fruitless back-and-forths, feel free to bring them. But I'm not going to stop the discussions just because they are tedious for others. It's July. My workload at work is slow, football news is slow, and I like stopping in here throughout the day and throwing in my two cents about the current state of the never-ending topic.

When there's more going on, or threads are getting sidetracked by this stuff, I'm all there with you--call it a day, move on. But when it's on-topic (ish) and there's nothing else going on? I'm gonna have my fun. And honestly, I'm a little annoyed by the passive aggressive anti-yoop stuff, because at least he's participating and having fun along with us. I appreciate it.

[Yoop]

something to pass the time, and a subject dear to many of us, yet disturbs others, as though they have another topic this one stops them from discussing, lets see now, the topic of the thread is Rodgers wants out, seems any part of Rodgers career is pertinent, specially so of the last 5 or so years.

feel free to ignore, or even chime in with a opinion, but quit shutting down conversation in this forum APB, every time you chastise me the whole forum goes dead for hours, just stop.

I also love all the stuff Yoho and others bring to read, I brought some stuff aboiut defense myself, but we could all use more supportive topics to hash over, I know I'am also to blame for being confrontational at times, but for god sakes all the smart aleck one line responses are destroying this forum just as much as any back and forth arguments are

I checked another forum and they have 150 pages on the same topic,

well said Yoho



So yeah, self ignore if you want--for most, the "Rodgers Wants Out" thread is probably worth ignoring and considering a big dead horse. But if myself and go pack go and packfan23 want to go at it with yoop and occasionally lupe about why we're here, how we got here, and where to point fingers, feel free to self-ignore that, as well. If there's real news, we'll all know it. It'll be on every media outlet everywhere, as they report everything about this situation newsworthy or not.

[NCF]

I also really, genuinely appreciate the time and energy Yoop dedicates to the forum, even though we argue constantly about myriad things.... we also agree about many others; he's also getting better about bringing and finding evidence for non-Rodgers topics; he's active and makes this place more active and current in the slow times. I would be bored if this forum didn't have yoop. And I like watching a lot of these conversations play out.

I feel like you have, somehow, concisely summarized the already very concise arguments and helped pull [mention]Yoop[/mention] ever so slightly off his stance. You should consider that a major accomplishment. I think there are four or five of us that would give it up if Yoop would move an inch. We all have our opinions. It is my position, however, that we know WAY less than we collectively think we do and, therefore, I think the best posts on the forum show that sense of humility and leave room for the gray area. We all know who the black and white guys are and arguing with them is often pointless when it exists in between extremes. But, the few times that an argument produces some kind of concession is entirely rewarding.

[Drj820]

Look, I know how much of a turnoff it can be when there's a long back and forth between a couple posters and you don't feel like reading it all. I know sometimes there is merit to letting things go and walking away, but...

..it's July. There's absolutely nothing going on in football news. BSA, myself, and others bring little insights to the Joe Barry defense when we see it and post it in the thread. Waldo is running the rank the roster, which has good involvement. NCF and Paco and others seem to consistently bring things to the General Packers News thread. Salmar and others keeps the cheese curds around the league news fresh.

If there's anything else going on, human interest stories, underdog profiles, interesting tidbits in the team website Insider Inbox, feel free to bring them along and discuss.

But, for the most part, while there is obviously a TON of redundancy in a 99-page thread, I quite enjoy working through the disagreements and differences in perspective. I feel like I'm honestly gaining insight into how various people view fandom and whatever. I also really, genuinely appreciate the time and energy Yoop dedicates to the forum, even though we argue constantly about myriad things.... we also agree about many others; he's also getting better about bringing and finding evidence for non-Rodgers topics; he's active and makes this place more active and current in the slow times. I would be bored if this forum didn't have yoop. And I like watching a lot of these conversations play out.

So yeah, self ignore if you want--for most, the "Rodgers Wants Out" thread is probably worth ignoring and considering a big dead horse. But if myself and go pack go and packfan23 want to go at it with yoop and occasionally lupe about why we're here, how we got here, and where to point fingers, feel free to self-ignore that, as well. If there's real news, we'll all know it. It'll be on every media outlet everywhere, as they report everything about this situation newsworthy or not.

If there are things going on in football that you wish to see discussed rather than these long, epic, fruitless back-and-forths, feel free to bring them. But I'm not going to stop the discussions just because they are tedious for others. It's July. My workload at work is slow, football news is slow, and I like stopping in here throughout the day and throwing in my two cents about the current state of the never-ending topic.

When there's more going on, or threads are getting sidetracked by this stuff, I'm all there with you--call it a day, move on. But when it's on-topic (ish) and there's nothing else going on? I'm gonna have my fun. And honestly, I'm a little annoyed by the passive aggressive anti-yoop stuff, because at least he's participating and having fun along with us. I appreciate it.

Same reason another thread is being dominated by a debate on whether people would trade there current life for the life of a man with more money and chromosomes than them...its july.

[Gunzaan]

No offense yoho- but that was just a long post that basically was one excuse after another.

And I don’t think the anti-yoop stuff is passive aggressive. He’s been called out specifically multiple times. I’ve had posts deleted saying to stop feeding the troll.

Just because you enjoy reading this insane crap doesn’t mean everyone does. I logged on yesterday to see what people thoughts were of NFL exec’s ranking Jaire Alexander the #6 CB overall - instead, the same 3 people are arguing about useless &%$@ - AGAIN - for the 90th day in a row.

[go pak go]

The foundation of the argument that is happening and has been happening for years is there is a battle between the legend of Rodgers and ineptitude of the Packers.

Those who support and adore Rodgers to the ends of the earth and view him god-like status have a major reconciling item in front of them because Rodgers is not in the 2+ Ring club. This is inconceivable because Rodgers is a god and the greatest to ever and will ever live.

To explain this low production in rings, Rodger adoreres must point the finger at the organization because they supply Rodgers with a completely inferior team and the only reason the GM and head coach earned a living was on the back of Rodgers who "fell in the Packers lap"

That is the foundation of the argument and no matter how many turns a conversation goes...it always ends up back to this foundation when things get emotional on whenever explaining a lack of SBs or why Rodgers wouldn't want to be a Packer.

I find this foundational thought to be incredibly misguided and wrong. I feel the Packers over the last 14 years (since the 2006 rebuild) has been a top 5 franchise (collectively during the time) with putting together SB worthy rosters 8 to 9 times (07, 09, 10, 11, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21). In my eyes, that is a very good ratio and success as a team. Very few teams outside of NE can laugh at those numbers and success. Maybe Pittsburgh and Baltimore. The one major black eye I will say the Packers cannot figure out is fielding a competent defense on a consistent basis. And they do deserve blame as an organization for never getting that formula right.

But even with just a competent average QB starter, those teams I listed above are likely playoff teams. (often times examples of backup as replacements of Rodgers is used which is not a fair comparison)

Late November 2015 - October 2017 is the one outlier time frame where the Packers won games when their roster was not deserving and this time period skews viewpoints and pushes a narrative that combats that successful period of the Packers I listed above. And that is my primary issue and problem.

All of that has come to head now because Rodgers doesn't want to be a Packer. Rodgers adoreres state "well obviously. The team has been a laughing stock for forever" and I just cannot understand that argument.

[Drj820]

Yoop is hilarious to me and great fun. When I see topics i am not interested in, i dont engage in the convo. Its July on a football forum.

[YoHoChecko]

No offense yoho- but that was just a long post that basically was one excuse after another.

And I don’t think the anti-yoop stuff is passive aggressive. He’s been called out specifically multiple times. I’ve had posts deleted saying to stop feeding the troll.

Just because you enjoy reading this insane crap doesn’t mean everyone does. I logged on yesterday to see what people thoughts were of NFL exec’s ranking Jaire Alexander the #6 CB overall - instead, the same 3 people are arguing about useless &%$@ - AGAIN - for the 90th day in a row.

Post the article yourself, then you'll see what people think about it. My ESPN+ for some reason isn't functioning right and I can't see all of these exec rankings. I'm incredibly frustrated by it, honestly. Each time I click the link, it shows me the "Get ESPN+" button and cuts off the article two paragraphs in. I click the button and it says "you're already a member" and logs me in. And then I STILL can't access the article. Same process, on repeat. I'm very interested in what the rankings are, but as I don't have the access, I haven't been able to post about it. But the ESPN exec rankings would be an excellent topic to start.

Take responsibility and make your own reality. If there's something you want to discuss and you don't see it discussed, post it and discuss it. It's a public forum. It requires public participation. If you see something missing, there's no better person than you to add it.