Aaron Rodgers V2022

[Yoop]

Sullivan made special note that it's easy to pick Rodgers apart using all 22 to do so.

Rodgers on most plays had to keep a eye on the pass rush because he rarely had a clean pocket, and as always Adams was the #1 read on most passing plays.

we didn't hire Clements to help Love, we hired him to help Rodgers, seriously our front office must be a bunch of stooges, first they give him a kings ransom for refusing to throw to checkdowns just prior to giving McCarthy a 1 year prove it deal, which Rodgers had to be fuming over, then do it again now after he almost single handidly lost another play off game this off season, instead of sending him packing they get rid of his partner in the fiasco who purposely ran into double team coverage constantly.

lis, if ya want Rodgers to spread the ball around then get receivers Rodgers actually can build respect for, when ya have a guy like Adams, and after him the rest are at best #3 or 4 receivers, who don't get open on schedule it doesn't take a genius to know who Rodgers will be throwing to.

as Sullivan said some of those receivers people think where open where to close to call, the [pocket was collapsing, Rodgeras doesn't have a arial view that sullivan has, more blame game, could Rodgers have played better, sure, but that can be said for half the team.

Wow, Yoop.

You've got a former Packers QB, who simply, undoubtedly, definitely knows how to analyze tape better than you. They're putting in the work for long form and deep analysis you NEVER get on the networks.

And your response is redundant, prideful parroting of yourself, which actually makes you look like you know nothing. You've now lost me on this topic. AR is to blame.

I stand by what Sullivan said, some of what he saw was to close to call, as he said, often the pocket was collapsing, as I said he could have played better, but he wasn't the reason we lost that game.

I wish to hell we had traded Rodgers, every article you and others bring is to slam him, I hope I'am around to listen to you !@#$ and moan when he is gone

then this bull s hit


You've got a former Packers QB, who simply, undoubtedly, definitely knows how to analyze tape better than you.

wtf is that all about Salmar? when have I ever trashed J T Sullivan, you took everything I said sooo personal

[salmar80]

Sullivan made special note that it's easy to pick Rodgers apart using all 22 to do so.

Rodgers on most plays had to keep a eye on the pass rush because he rarely had a clean pocket, and as always Adams was the #1 read on most passing plays.

we didn't hire Clements to help Love, we hired him to help Rodgers, seriously our front office must be a bunch of stooges, first they give him a kings ransom for refusing to throw to checkdowns just prior to giving McCarthy a 1 year prove it deal, which Rodgers had to be fuming over, then do it again now after he almost single handidly lost another play off game this off season, instead of sending him packing they get rid of his partner in the fiasco who purposely ran into double team coverage constantly.

lis, if ya want Rodgers to spread the ball around then get receivers Rodgers actually can build respect for, when ya have a guy like Adams, and after him the rest are at best #3 or 4 receivers, who don't get open on schedule it doesn't take a genius to know who Rodgers will be throwing to.

as Sullivan said some of those receivers people think where open where to close to call, the [pocket was collapsing, Rodgeras doesn't have a arial view that sullivan has, more blame game, could Rodgers have played better, sure, but that can be said for half the team.

Wow, Yoop.

You've got a former Packers QB, who simply, undoubtedly, definitely knows how to analyze tape better than you. They're putting in the work for long form and deep analysis you NEVER get on the networks.

And your response is redundant, prideful parroting of yourself, which actually makes you look like you know nothing. You've now lost me on this topic. AR is to blame.

I stand by what Sullivan said, some of what he saw was to close to call, as he said, often the pocket was collapsing, as I said he could have played better, but he wasn't the reason we lost that game.

I wish to hell we had traded Rodgers, every article you and others bring is to slam him, I hope I'am around to listen to you !@#$ and moan when he is gone

then this bull s hit


You've got a former Packers QB, who simply, undoubtedly, definitely knows how to analyze tape better than you.

wtf is that all about Salmar? when have I ever trashed J T Sullivan, you took everything I said sooo personal

As you said yourself, RODGERS COULD HAVE PLAYED BETTER.

AR is not THE reason we lost that game. But his below ideal play sure as hell was ONE reason that combined with other failures that led to the loss. That's literally ALL I've been saying all this time. If you call that "blaming Rodgers", well, I can't help you.

It's funny that it's you who have been pushing me to be more critical of AR than anyone else on the forum. I LOVE him as Packers QB, but your obsession with everything being Somebody Elses Fault is so wrong and so infuriating, I come across as Rodgers hater. Unlike you, I do not wish we had traded AR. I just wish he and others had played better when it really mattered.

What I actually hate today is you trying to violently twist and distort a great video to fit your personal agenda of Immaculate Aaron Rodgers when that's simply not what O'Sullivan's analysis pointed towards. You could've learned from that video. Instead you chose your ego and learned nothing. Your loss. I hope others were wiser.

[Yoop]

Wow, Yoop.

You've got a former Packers QB, who simply, undoubtedly, definitely knows how to analyze tape better than you. They're putting in the work for long form and deep analysis you NEVER get on the networks.

And your response is redundant, prideful parroting of yourself, which actually makes you look like you know nothing. You've now lost me on this topic. AR is to blame.

I stand by what Sullivan said, some of what he saw was to close to call, as he said, often the pocket was collapsing, as I said he could have played better, but he wasn't the reason we lost that game.

I wish to hell we had traded Rodgers, every article you and others bring is to slam him, I hope I'am around to listen to you !@#$ and moan when he is gone

then this bull s hit


You've got a former Packers QB, who simply, undoubtedly, definitely knows how to analyze tape better than you.

wtf is that all about Salmar? when have I ever trashed J T Sullivan, you took everything I said sooo personal

As you said yourself, RODGERS COULD HAVE PLAYED BETTER.

AR is not THE reason we lost that game. But his below ideal play sure as hell was ONE reason that combined with other failures that led to the loss. That's literally ALL I've been saying all this time. If you call that "blaming Rodgers", well, I can't help you.

It's funny that it's you who have been pushing me to be more critical of AR than anyone else on the forum. I LOVE him as Packers QB, but your obsession with everything being Somebody Elses Fault is so wrong and so infuriating, I come across as Rodgers hater. Unlike you, I do not wish we had traded AR. I just wish he and others had played better when it really mattered.

What I actually hate today is you trying to violently twist and distort a great video to fit your personal agenda of Immaculate Aaron Rodgers when that's simply not what O'Sullivan's analysis pointed towards. You could've learned from that video. Instead you chose your ego and learned nothing. Your loss. I hope other were wiser.

I learned that you didn't bother to listen to JT when he said some of these clips are to close to call, and JT was right, they where, and it isn't so easy to read a pass rush and also read a route tree, yes some of the decisions to throw to Adams no matter the coverage where wrong.
Rodgers doesn't alone scheme this offense, and no one including Sullivan can say if Rodgers audibled out of called plays, shouldn't Lafluer get some of the blame for making Adams first read so often, ( he even admited that 85% of the pass schemes are Adams #1.

this has been a class act screw up ever since 2016, Rodgers has developed tunnel vision with Adams, WHY? it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this crap out, BECAUSE HE DOESN'T TRUST jags like Lazard etc to be where there suppose to be when he reads the routes, WHY? simple, because they very rarely are.

we see Lazard singled and open, and obviously thats where the pass should have went on that given play, but where was Lazard for the other 59 minutes, he was targeted twice, caught one for 6 yrds
seriously I have nothing against Sullivan, he only really dinged Rodgers on several plays, which he could do with Brady or any other QB in just about every game.

I've been saying for years we needed to compliment Adams with more then very raw draft picks and UDFA, Rodgers had to resent that, course he'd never come out and say it, maybe that also leads to his lack of trust with these guys.

It's always Rodgers fault, QB's that make that kind of money are not allowed to be less then perfect, nothing changes, never mind that we have one of the crappiest WR groups in the league, our starting TE is 38 yrs old, and if it hadn't been for Jones 130 yrds we'd have been blown out early.

[BF004]

I find it funny that every still only sees what they already thought in that video.

[Yoop]

I find it funny that every still only sees what they already thought in that video.

I neglected to thank SAlmar for bringing the article, and JT does a good job of illustrating his perception of the play, but I don't need anyone explaining what I see, I've been watching this game long enough to know that what we see is not the same as what Rodgers see's and anyone can pick a QB's game apart, everyone is a arm chair QB.

[Pckfn23]

It's a horrible excuse to say that a QB isn't playing his best because he "can't trust the JAGs." That's especially true when a team has arguably the best receiver in the game. Great QBs should be able to play within an offense and take what the defense gives them. There are countless examples of JAGs having big games because great QBs are willing to throw to the open man. Let's start with the Packers this century:
Terry Glenn
Marquez Valdes-Scantling
Allen Lazard
Richard Rodgers
Geronimo Allison
Bill Schroeder
Jeff Janis

That said, let's talk about what OSullivan actually said, not what we may want him to say. He said there was one play where Neumann got destroyed that was the close call. Even on that one he mentioned that should he have not locked in on Adams as much he may have been able to get it out to avoid the rush. He also mentions throughout that it is easy to break it down with the clicker. That's very very true, but one would also expect Rodgers, being the great he is, so step up in a big spot. Lastly, the line was not good. They struggled, but not so much that we couldn't make plays. None of this is to say Rodgers was bad or he can't miss plays or that he is THEE reason we lost, it's just pointing out the reality that was that 1 game.

[go pak go]

Thanks for the insight yoop. I was on the fence if every issue of the Packers is because we haven't had a good #2 WR for the last 12 years.

Glad you clarified that for me.

I really hope this gets brought up in the Packers Countdown Thread and other threads.

[bud fox]

Hate to do this, but gotta appreciate when a person who actually knows his stuff does a deep dive like this:

Ridiculous video - guy trying to get clicks.

I made it to blocked field goal. Play before critiquing Rodgers going to Jones for what should be a td because he didn't go to Adams on a shallow. Rodgers saw Jones when he would've went to Adams that's why he is Rodgers and this is Jt Sullivan.

The next the sack before the field goal. He says why not go back shoulder. The wr was clearing out safety and wasn't looking back shoulder. Just throw back shoulder when he doesn't expect it into cover 3 brilliant idea.

I stopped after that. Some bum trying to critique the back to back all time greatest for clicks. Save me the time.

[williewasgreat]

I find it funny that every still only sees what they already thought in that video.

Yes, even when presented with evidence, some people only see what they already believed to be true. Or they criticize the guy doing the critiques. Kind of makes thoughtful discussion a waste of time.

[go pak go]

I find it funny that every still only sees what they already thought in that video.

Yes, even when presented with evidence, some people only see what they already believed to be true. Or they criticize the guy doing the critiques. Kind of makes thoughtful discussion a waste of time.

It is getting really old.

There can be no isolated or thoughtful conversation on this forum. Thou shalt not attack the golden boy.

Seriously. He didn't do anything wrong when the offense scored 13 points.

[Yoop]

thoughtful conversation is when a poster says he doesn't agree with parts of the critique and the OP doesn't degrade the poster, I didn't deserve the comments Salmar made, and I sure as H dont deserve your smart ass sarcasm GPG, thoughtful conversation is a two way deal, your childish crap of acting soooo offended because I wont cave to the opinions of any blogger or YOU isn't thoughtful conversation, it's bully bull &%$@, get this straight, if I want to disagree YOU or anyone else here that is my right, and if you don't like it then go find another forum to spill your punk ass bull &%$@

I stand by what I said, Rodgers under pressure can't see every open receiver, and he was under pressure most of the game, and as Bud said, he can't just heave it at the back of a unsuspecting player.

I have several times said Rodgers didn't have a great game, I guess I didn't yell it loud enough, but this never ending blame game with Rodgers is what is getting old, it's been the same ol bull &%$@ with every PO loss, two years ago we had about 6 dropped passes, yet it was Rodgers fault we lost that game too.

the reason the defense improved had more to do with better talent then our new DC, anyone with half a brain knows that, well it's the same thing with the WR position, yet till last year all we bring aboard is very raw recruits, it's no wonder Rodgers throws mostly to Adams, he can't depend on or even expect the others to get open, cause they rarely do, and if they should happen to on occasion it's Rodgers fault for not getting them the ball.

Pckfn 23: jags do have great games, but i mo most often it's because of poor coverage, or you would see the Jags become stars and have great games more often, theres no plan for them not to succeed, and Rodgers isn't black balling these receivers, they simply aren't very good thats why there good games are far and few between, and that my friend describes guys like MVS, Lazard, Brown and all the other jags that have rotated out from our team, this will be Lazards last years as a Packer, bank on it'

[BF004]

That video had a little bit of something for everyone in there to get a few ruffled feathers.

-He looked at Adams too long
-He held onto the ball too long
-He could have maybe felt that pressure
-The WR needs to push this route harder
-A play design like this might have been better
-The OL got beat
-I am not sure what the OL was doing schematically there
-What an amazing throw
-A throw only Aaron Rodgers can make

[BF004]

The next the sack before the field goal. He says why not go back shoulder. The wr was clearing out safety and wasn't looking back shoulder. Just throw back shoulder when he doesn't expect it into cover 3 brilliant idea.

I stopped after that. Some bum trying to critique the back to back all time greatest for clicks. Save me the time.

Albeit that is a tough throw against an ILB that Aaron multiple times has pointed out as one of the best he's ever played against. But Cobb certainly does seem to get his head around pretty quick and is opening wide enough an flaring out a bit for possible back shoulder there.

He is a QB making a QB video, so only so much he can say about the WR's an OL and what they did and didn't do, he is talking about the QB.

And this shouldn't need to be said again, but sadly it does. Just because he states 'maybe Aaron could have done this a little different or better on this play'. That is mutually exclusive to, the WR's were open and OL did a good job, it was the QB's fault.

[Yoop]

I like the JT O Sullivan game critiques, but this was click bait stuff designed to get clicks plane and simple, it's been 6 months since the game and the all 22 has been available to him for almost as long, so why now bring all this back up, simple it's a slow time and he needs to create interest and followers, and thats it, he even took a break midway asking watchers to sign up for his blog reports.

[go pak go]

thoughtful conversation is when a poster says he doesn't agree with parts of the critique and the OP doesn't degrade the poster, I didn't deserve the comments Salmar made, and I sure as H dont deserve your smart ass sarcasm GPG, thoughtful conversation is a two way deal, your childish crap of acting soooo offended because I wont cave to the opinions of any blogger or YOU isn't thoughtful conversation, it's bully bull &%$@, get this straight, if I want to disagree YOU or anyone else here that is my right, and if you don't like it then go find another forum to spill your punk ass bull &%$@

I have several times said Rodgers didn't have a great game, I guess I didn't yell it loud enough, but this never ending blame game with Rodgers is what is getting old, it's been the same ol bull &%$@ with every PO loss, two years ago we had about 6 dropped passes, yet it was Rodgers fault we lost that game too.

I stand by my comments too. I cordially and thoughtfully discussed for years and the same argument, misinformation and made up facts, with us having to prove them wrong is tiring. Every thread gets detoured to the same topic which is "we lost every SB because we didn't have a #2 WR and Rashan Gary was a waste of a pick". Even though we lost seasons where we had great #2's, #3's, and #4 WRs. We all get it that we don't have a good #2 WR. But 13 points? (I give the offense credit of 3 points for the missed FG. They did their part). I can understand if we can't put up 27 points. But I think the expectation of a GOAT putting up 17+ points is not unreasonable. At all.

Let's be objective here. Using extreme language is not a good conversation. Using terms like "he didn't have a great game but isn't the reason we lost" is the same thing as a Trump supporter saying, "sure he may have said some bad things but....". (this isn't political. it's more the science of choosing words for an argument) It's completely bias language and instantly results in a poor conversation.

Let's call it what it is in our last 3 playoff losses.

2019 - Rodgers played a poor game. We never had a chance.
2020 - Rodgers played a good game. Not a great game. But a good game. Good enough to win. Not great enough to cover other team falters.
2021 - Rodgers did not play a good game. You can't put up 13 points with 3 of those points coming off a broken play and it be considered a good game.

Rodgers wasn't THE reason we lost. No player is ever THE reason a team loses. There are too many plays and too many variables to ever label a player as THE reason.

Rodgers f*cked up plays.
Lancaster f*cked up a play.
Our Long Snapper f*cked up a play.
Our Oline f*cked up plays.
AJ Dillon wasn't in the game.
Mercedes Lewis f*cked up a play.
Aaron Jones didn't just turn on the jets.

You combine those and you get the recipe for a loss even when the defense was absolute bonfire for the exception of the defense did get bailed out because the 49ers offense/receivers also f*cked up plays. We just had one more than they did. And you can point at any of the above situations as A reason.

So much energy is expensed to make sure we don't pin a loss on Rodgers that we can't even do it indirectly. I don't understand the need for people to view heroes as infallible.

[Yoop]

I stand by my comments too. I cordially and thoughtfully discussed for years and the same argument, misinformation and made up facts, with us having to prove them wrong is tiring. Every thread gets detoured to the same topic which is "we lost every SB because we didn't have a #2 WR and Rashan Gary was a waste of a pick". Even though we lost seasons where we had great #2's, #3's, and #4 WRs. We all get it that we don't have a good #2 WR. But 13 points? (I give the offense credit of 3 points for the missed FG. They did their part). I can understand if we can't put up 27 points. But I think the expectation of a GOAT putting up 17+ points is not unreasonable. At all.

what SB have we lost in Rodgers tenure?

and the reason the topics get derailed is do to YOU and others blaming Rodgers for every PO loss, you refuse to accept common sense explanations for anything Rodgers does that you don't agree with, then you belittle the person you don't agree with as though there stupid.

and while Rodgers had a quality receiving core during several playoff losses, that offense had to over come lousy defenses and ST's units, and you know that was the case, yet YOU and others here blamed Rodgers for not over coming that, and it's been the same with the receivers, constantly defending the FO and blaming Rodgers for not making a bunch of scab raw recruits better, we had no weapons last year, and 4 or 5 plays from Sullivan doesn't change that, yes maybe a couple plays should have produced better results, but Sullivan could do this with any PO QB, expecting perfection from Rodgers is rediculous.

[go pak go]

I stand by my comments too. I cordially and thoughtfully discussed for years and the same argument, misinformation and made up facts, with us having to prove them wrong is tiring. Every thread gets detoured to the same topic which is "we lost every SB because we didn't have a #2 WR and Rashan Gary was a waste of a pick". Even though we lost seasons where we had great #2's, #3's, and #4 WRs. We all get it that we don't have a good #2 WR. But 13 points? (I give the offense credit of 3 points for the missed FG. They did their part). I can understand if we can't put up 27 points. But I think the expectation of a GOAT putting up 17+ points is not unreasonable. At all.

what SB have we lost in Rodgers tenure?

and the reason the topics get derailed is do to YOU and others blaming Rodgers for every PO loss, you refuse to accept common sense explanations for anything Rodgers does that you don't agree with, then you belittle the person you don't agree with as though there stupid.

and while Rodgers had a quality receiving core during several playoff losses, that offense had to over come lousy defenses and ST's units, and you know that was the case, yet YOU and others here blamed Rodgers for not over coming that, and it's been the same with the receivers, constantly defending the FO and blaming Rodgers for not making a bunch of scab raw recruits better, we had no weapons last year, and 4 or 5 plays from Sullivan doesn't change that, yes maybe a couple plays should have produced better results, but Sullivan could do this with any PO QB, expecting perfection from Rodgers is rediculous.

Losing a SB in my language is the same as not winning a SB. A Divisional Round loss is losing a SB.

Everything else is the same recycled discussion that I specifically wrote against. Extreme language (expecting perfection), we only blame Rodgers (when literally I placed blame on 6 players specifically as variables) and all we do is defend the FO. (never even brought up the FO and we absolutely criticize the FO when necessary...the 2018 draft was horrible outside of one selection and 2020's first round gamble appears to be looking like a mistake).

You're either not reading the posts you are responding to or your only thinking of how to promote your own ideas and opinions. Both of them are bad. And it's why I'm speaking out against it more. Respect is a two way street. Start reading what people are actually saying and stop resorting to extreme arguments or misinformation and I will happily have a respectful conversation.

Expecting a 17 to 24 point output from a league MVP at home is not expecting perfection.

[Yoop]

Losing a SB in my language is the same as not winning a SB. A Divisional Round loss is losing a SB.

how many times have I been confused with your language, seriously why even say losing a SB when in fact we have not been to one in a freaking decade, talk plain English

[Pckfn23]

[bud fox]

The next the sack before the field goal. He says why not go back shoulder. The wr was clearing out safety and wasn't looking back shoulder. Just throw back shoulder when he doesn't expect it into cover 3 brilliant idea.

I stopped after that. Some bum trying to critique the back to back all time greatest for clicks. Save me the time.

Albeit that is a tough throw against an ILB that Aaron multiple times has pointed out as one of the best he's ever played against. But Cobb certainly does seem to get his head around pretty quick and is opening wide enough an flaring out a bit for possible back shoulder there.

He is a QB making a QB video, so only so much he can say about the WR's an OL and what they did and didn't do, he is talking about the QB.

And this shouldn't need to be said again, but sadly it does. Just because he states 'maybe Aaron could have done this a little different or better on this play'. That is mutually exclusive to, the WR's were open and OL did a good job, it was the QB's fault.

If the play design isn't back shoulder you don't just throw the ball back shoulder in to the end zone with two deep safety. Cobb turns his head inwards which would indicate it wasn't. If he throws back shoulder its basically impossible for Cobb to catch it and could go straight to the safety.

Problem was the speed of the rush with the 4 man.