Packers Huddle

go pak go wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 06:29

And coaching salary isn't necessarily private. It's more about nobody cares to report what a positional coach or STs coordinator makes.

sure seems privy to me, sport trac and others post HC salaries, players salaries, but mums the word it seems for cords and assistants.

since Rizzi was thought of as one of the best ST's cords and got 1.5 I'd expect the average salary for a ST cord to be around 700K to 1 mil. (uneducated guess) imo that seems low considering there task is teaching some players that make more then them.

which brings me to another point, sports is the only place where the students make more then the teachers, some guy with a sub zero IQ makes more molla then his coach with plus 100 brain activity, talk about cart in front of the horsies

So give Bisaccia was thought to have done a good job as interim HC, interviewed for two HC jobs already, how long do we think he might stick around for? He wouldn't be interviewing for HC jobs if he wasn't interested in climbing that corporate ladder.

So do you think there is anything to read into this about Packers desires to bring back Aaron and look to be winning in a very short term window again?

Perhaps if you really believe you are moving away from Aaron, you look to find a ST coordinator who can be groomed into the roll and who you may expect to still be there in 5 years.


Or does this just mean nothing relative to that?

Half Empty wrote: ↑

05 Feb 2022 14:44

BF004 wrote: ↑

05 Feb 2022 13:28

Drj820 wrote: ↑

05 Feb 2022 13:17

Things can change when a unit cost you a super bowl

There was zero credible evidence the Packers skimp on coordinator pay. Tangible evidence has pointed to the exact opposite.

Nothing is changing, this isn’t a different approach.

Don't know that they've skimped, but curious about the evidence they didn't. What's that?

Life, things that actually happened. Not 'reports from sources'. Only evidence we skimp is on Rizzi and there is an equally conflicting report report that he was simply leveraging GB to get more money elsewhere. Don't think you can give that report any validity one way or the other.


But I do know we hired Dom Capers and made him, at one point, the highest paid coordinator in the NFL. Replaced him with Mike Pettine, also a big name with an impressive resume. Followed by Joe Barry, and also experienced big name.

Packers hired Joe Philbin x2 to be OC (even with an offensive minded HC) in 2018. The next year, with an offensive minded HC, they go with a bigger name again in Nathaniel Hackett.

They brought former NFL DC and College HC in Ron Zook to coach special team. Mike Stock was a very experienced ST coordinator. John Bonamego was an already experienced NFL ST Coordinator.


And it should be said, there aren't a plethora of former HC's who are looking for ST Coordinator roles like they do OC and DC.


We have also gone the other route several times and promoted from within. Right down to Adam Stenavich, Shawn Slocum, Maurice Drayton, Joe Philbin x1.


They don't really seem to have a pattern, other than they explore all options. But to imply we skimp on coaches, is simply undeniably false.

And they certainly have tried, they are not afraid to fire ST coordinators, they are not afraid to hire big names or hire from within. They are not afraid to draft ST centric players including long snappers. They trade for players.

They have certainly tried, a lot, and a lot of different ways. They just simply failed, miserably, at that.


Hiring the biggest ST name in some years will not magically fix out special teams. I think we are certainly all excited about it. But this isn't a new approach for us.

paco wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 11:05

Gotta say he would pass my first question I’d ask him.

Based on what happened to us this year it seems the ST coach has to have an acute attention to detail. Maybe Drayton just never had enough reps with the guys because it sure seemed like the opposing ST coach was able to identify our weaknesses. It's possible he coached it right and guys didn't rep it enough to be ready on game day.

I would expect with Bisaccia's experience he has seen it all by now and should know the proper way to prep the players. Steve Tasker always said ST's is a mind set. You have to want it on every snap. Hopefully Bisaccia will find the guys that "want it" and willing to play like it.

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 15:32

So give Bisaccia was thought to have done a good job as interim HC, interviewed for two HC jobs already, how long do we think he might stick around for? He wouldn't be interviewing for HC jobs if he wasn't interested in climbing that corporate ladder.

So do you think there is anything to read into this about Packers desires to bring back Aaron and look to be winning in a very short term window again?

Perhaps if you really believe you are moving away from Aaron, you look to find a ST coordinator who can be groomed into the roll and who you may expect to still be there in 5 years.


Or does this just mean nothing relative to that?

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:38

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 15:32

So give Bisaccia was thought to have done a good job as interim HC, interviewed for two HC jobs already, how long do we think he might stick around for? He wouldn't be interviewing for HC jobs if he wasn't interested in climbing that corporate ladder.

So do you think there is anything to read into this about Packers desires to bring back Aaron and look to be winning in a very short term window again?

Perhaps if you really believe you are moving away from Aaron, you look to find a ST coordinator who can be groomed into the roll and who you may expect to still be there in 5 years.


Or does this just mean nothing relative to that?

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:38

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 15:32

So give Bisaccia was thought to have done a good job as interim HC, interviewed for two HC jobs already, how long do we think he might stick around for? He wouldn't be interviewing for HC jobs if he wasn't interested in climbing that corporate ladder.

So do you think there is anything to read into this about Packers desires to bring back Aaron and look to be winning in a very short term window again?

Perhaps if you really believe you are moving away from Aaron, you look to find a ST coordinator who can be groomed into the roll and who you may expect to still be there in 5 years.


Or does this just mean nothing relative to that?

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

I know my goodness.

Would it kill to like, at least once think objectively about the specific topic we are talking about?

Wouldn't hurt to keep your personal bias out of the occasional conversation.

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:38

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 15:32

So give Bisaccia was thought to have done a good job as interim HC, interviewed for two HC jobs already, how long do we think he might stick around for? He wouldn't be interviewing for HC jobs if he wasn't interested in climbing that corporate ladder.

So do you think there is anything to read into this about Packers desires to bring back Aaron and look to be winning in a very short term window again?

Perhaps if you really believe you are moving away from Aaron, you look to find a ST coordinator who can be groomed into the roll and who you may expect to still be there in 5 years.


Or does this just mean nothing relative to that?

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:38

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Is this organization run now the way it was run in 1973, your comments are borderline crazy, in what way does Aaron Rodgers resemble the broken down John Hadl, or this front office resemble the bunch of city businessman that ran the team back then, your opinions are so irrational they lack any amount of common sense.

with every post your polorizatin concerning your hate for Rodgers is clear, you've made many, we all get it, now can we put this &%$@ to rest.

GREEN BAY - The Green Bay Packers remain the front-runners for former Las Vegas Raiders interim coach Rich Bisaccia, but as of Monday evening, the club had not announced a deal for him to become special teams coordinator and several sources with connections to Bisaccia said they had not heard a decision was final.

Coach Matt LaFleur and his staff were returning Monday from Las Vegas, where they had coached the NFC in the Pro Bowl on Sunday and LaFleur had likely met with Bisaccia.

Sources told the Journal Sentinel late last week that LaFleur had targeted Bisaccia as his replacement for fired Maurice Drayton and was talking to him about joining his staff.

Since then, the other team widely reported to be interested in hiring Bisaccia, the Chicago Bears, hired Richard Hightower to coach special teams, leaving the Packers as the apparent leaders in the clubhouse.

Several agents and coaches around the league have said they have been told the Packers were prepared to make Bisaccia the highest-paid special teams coach in the league at around $2 million per year, which would be much more than most teams would pay.

A source said the San Francisco 49ers, who fired Hightower after their playoff loss to the Los Angeles Rams, had reached out to Bisaccia about becoming their special teams coach. It’s not known if he has shown interest in joining them. The 49ers have another critical position they must fill after offensive coordinator Mike McDaniel left to become Miami Dolphins head coach, so they may not be in a rush to hire a special teams coach.

Bisaccia has a strong connection to the Packers. He coached with defensive coordinator Joe Barry at Tampa Bay, and Barry is the son-in-law of Bisaccia’s best friend, Rod Marinelli, who is the Raiders’ defensive line coach.

If the Packers can’t reel in Bisaccia, a good alternative has arisen: former Baltimore Ravens special teams coach Jerry Rosburg, who along with head coach John Harbaugh made the Ravens one of the league’s best on special teams from 2008-19.

Rosburg, a source said, is trying to get back into the league after retiring in ’19 to spend more time with his family. The Ravens ranked in the top five in special teams in each of his final seven years.

this Rosberg would seem to be the better choice, long track record of success, either way it sounds like we are offering top dollar for our new ST's cord whomever it is.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:38

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Are you seriously using Hadl as your argument? Even if we keep Rodgers we aren't giving up a slew of draft picks and Rodgers is LIGHTYEARS better than Hadl. smh

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:38

I don't see why he would come to GB if Rodgers is coming back. For what? To get bounced in the first playoff game again followed by 5 years of 2-15 seasons while the Packers work off the dead cap Rodgers woes? "Bunch of Losers" will be applied to everyone. Keep in mind that a team in salary cap hell probably can't afford a top kick returner, a top kicker or any other really good ST specialists.

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Always have such a hard time following you. Are you comparing us to the Cowboys or Vikings in that trade scenario? Are we being the Vikings and going all in on someone (by offering a fair market contract to a player at his position) or could we be like the Cowboys by getting a lot of picks??


We aren't in salary cap hell, so to speak. Packers currently have the 6th most cap space in 2023 (101 million in space), which would actually go up by about another 10 million if take the dead cap hits for Rodgers, Crosby and Cobb in 2022.


In terms of 2023 FA's, there is a group that you fully expect to have figured out well before then (Rodgers, Smith, Smith, Amos.

You'll Jaire and Elgton Jenkins as the only big headliners, Gary and Savage will be on 5th year options.


Long story short, we aren't in any type of cap hell, in a general sense. We aren't at risk of losing Jaire, Elgton, or Gary, even if we hold onto Davate and Aaron.

BF004 wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 08:56

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Always have such a hard time following you. Are you comparing us to the Cowboys or Vikings in that trade scenario? Are we being the Vikings and going all in on someone (by offering a fair market contract to a player at his position) or could we be like the Cowboys by getting a lot of picks??


We aren't in salary cap hell, so to speak. Packers currently have the 6th most cap space in 2023 (101 million in space), which would actually go up by about another 10 million if take the dead cap hits for Rodgers, Crosby and Cobb in 2022.


In terms of 2023 FA's, there is a group that you fully expect to have figured out well before then (Rodgers, Smith, Smith, Amos.

You'll Jaire and Elgton Jenkins as the only big headliners, Gary and Savage will be on 5th year options.


Long story short, we aren't in any type of cap hell, in a general sense. We aren't at risk of losing Jaire, Elgton, or Gary, even if we hold onto Davate and Aaron.

Good point. This is what I have been saying in the debate of going "all in". I think the convo gets hairy because if one says the team didnt go "all in" that implies they didnt try to win it all. I dont believe that either. I also think the way we did it is probably the smartest and wisest way to do it. We are in a very tough spot cap wise for 2022, but then it quickly gets better and we still have all of our draft picks for the future. Meaning, the future is not THAT bleak as long as we have a decent QB.

We could have risked the future, wrekt the cap for years, and entered 2022 with no draft picks in order to go "all in". However, that would have been pretty dumb unless it worked and we actually won it all. What we ended up doing is giving it our best shot, while not completely leveraging the long term future. This is because we are not a desperate org and we are a well run organization. Smart.

Pugger wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 08:24

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

Packfntk wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2022 16:52

Damn that is some doom and gloom type &%$@ right there. Do you really believe that?

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Are you seriously using Hadl as your argument? Even if we keep Rodgers we aren't giving up a slew of draft picks and Rodgers is LIGHTYEARS better than Hadl. smh

OMG, we ARE giving up a slew of draft picks to keep Rodgers! The consensus is that Rodgers is worth 2 1st round draft picks. Some people say more. These are draft picks the Packers will NEVER get if they keep Rodgers. What part of this do you not understand???

Now as to the argument that Hadl was not a good QB: He led both the AFL and NFL in yards passing. He was a pro bowl MVP. In his last year with San Diego, he went to the Pro Bowl. However he was 34 years old and age and accumulated injuries had robbed him of his foot speed and passing accuracy. He knew this, San Diego knew this but the Packers coach, Dan Devine, apparently did not.

Now lets discuss Aaron Rodgers. How old is he? 38, 4 years older than Hadl - an eternity in the NFL. Only 1 QB in the history of the NFL has been effective at age 38, Brady. But Brady doing the almost impossible does not mean that Rodgers can duplicate this, what the people wanting to keep Rodgers are asking is STILL VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE. Can we discuss that FACT that Rodgers has lost foot speed - that he got caught from BEHIND by a Dlineman in the playoff game a couple of weeks ago? No way in hell he gets caught from behind 2 years ago by a Dlineman after he has a step on him. Can we discuss the obvious fact that he missed MVS time and time again last season when MVS was open? It is obvious if you watch the games that Rodgers' arm has lost accuracy and distance. Now lets discuss intellectual quickness. Go back and watch the game again. With the game on the line he threw to a double covered Adams and the pass was broken up. Adams never had a chance of catching that ball. Meanwhile Lazard was wide open. Even if Lazard does not score, he puts the Packers in FG range, and a FG wins that game. No way in hell Rodgers messes up that badly 2 years ago.

You can argue that Rodgers was a better QB than Hadl, and I will not disagree. What you cannot say unless you live out of reality is that Rodgers has not hit the age wall in 2022 just as Hadl hit it in his last year with San Diego. The Packers are now in the same place as San Diego, if someone is dumb enough to give them a slew of draft picks for a washed up QB they should accept. Is Rodgers washed up? Only time will answer that question with certainty, but he certainly looked it vs San Francisco.

SMH

washed up Rodgers is about to win his second MVP in a row guys

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 13:24

Pugger wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 08:24

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Are you seriously using Hadl as your argument? Even if we keep Rodgers we aren't giving up a slew of draft picks and Rodgers is LIGHTYEARS better than Hadl. smh

OMG, we ARE giving up a slew of draft picks to keep Rodgers! The consensus is that Rodgers is worth 2 1st round draft picks. Some people say more. These are draft picks the Packers will NEVER get if they keep Rodgers. What part of this do you not understand???

Small, but important distinction, those are not our picks, so we would not be giving them up. Ignoring that important distinction though, the Packers gave up 1st and 2nd round picks in consecutive years for Hadl. Much more than what is being talked about for Rodgers.

However he was 34 years old and age and accumulated injuries had robbed him of his foot speed and passing accuracy. He knew this, San Diego knew this but the Packers coach, Dan Devine, apparently did not.

Another important distinction here, Aaron Rodgers is currently on the Packers so we would have first hand knowledge of whether he is drastically declining or not. The Rams had even benched Hadl during the 74 season.

38, 4 years older than Hadl - an eternity in the NFL. Only 1 QB in the history of the NFL has been effective at age 38, Brady. But Brady doing the almost impossible does not mean that Rodgers can duplicate this, what the people wanting to keep Rodgers are asking is STILL VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

This isn't true. Here is an extensive list of QBs who were effective at age 38 or older: https://stathead.com/tiny/y27VM

So, far from impossible. This isn't 1960 or 1970 anymore when that did seen impossible.

What you cannot say unless you live out of reality is that Rodgers has not hit the age wall in 2022 just as Hadl hit it in his last year with San Diego.

We can say Rodgers' play has changed or declined in some ways, but we definitely can't say he has hit the age wall Hadl-style.

I agree with some of the other things said, to an extent.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 13:34

washed up Rodgers is about to win his second MVP in a row guys

that washed up QB will ride off into the sunset eventually, but I wouldn't be surprised if he wins another MVP with Adams in Denver, or here with or without Adams, two years ago with Hill and the other scat slot type receiver who's name doesn't come to mind, Lafluer used a lot more jet sweep and mis direction, and Rodgers was able to spread the ball around more, sure as hell wasn't missing Tonyan, this stuff that Rodgers is racing on the down slope of his career will be put to the test soon enough where ever he intends to play, rumor is he'll be made the highest paid player in the league.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 13:24

Pugger wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 08:24

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2022 04:52

The last time the Packers put all their eggs into a basket carried by an aging QB was John Hadl. I remember that. This resulted in 15 years, not 5, of bad or mediocre teams. If they do it again, it will happen again.

You might also look up the Herschel Walker trade and what it did to the Cowboys and Vikings.

Yes, I really believe that. Except it could be worse than 5 years.

Are you seriously using Hadl as your argument? Even if we keep Rodgers we aren't giving up a slew of draft picks and Rodgers is LIGHTYEARS better than Hadl. smh

OMG, we ARE giving up a slew of draft picks to keep Rodgers! The consensus is that Rodgers is worth 2 1st round draft picks. Some people say more. These are draft picks the Packers will NEVER get if they keep Rodgers. What part of this do you not understand???

Now as to the argument that Hadl was not a good QB: He led both the AFL and NFL in yards passing. He was a pro bowl MVP. In his last year with San Diego, he went to the Pro Bowl. However he was 34 years old and age and accumulated injuries had robbed him of his foot speed and passing accuracy. He knew this, San Diego knew this but the Packers coach, Dan Devine, apparently did not.

Now lets discuss Aaron Rodgers. How old is he? 38, 4 years older than Hadl - an eternity in the NFL. Only 1 QB in the history of the NFL has been effective at age 38, Brady. But Brady doing the almost impossible does not mean that Rodgers can duplicate this, what the people wanting to keep Rodgers are asking is STILL VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE. Can we discuss that FACT that Rodgers has lost foot speed - that he got caught from BEHIND by a Dlineman in the playoff game a couple of weeks ago? No way in hell he gets caught from behind 2 years ago by a Dlineman after he has a step on him. Can we discuss the obvious fact that he missed MVS time and time again last season when MVS was open? It is obvious if you watch the games that Rodgers' arm has lost accuracy and distance. Now lets discuss intellectual quickness. Go back and watch the game again. With the game on the line he threw to a double covered Adams and the pass was broken up. Adams never had a chance of catching that ball. Meanwhile Lazard was wide open. Even if Lazard does not score, he puts the Packers in FG range, and a FG wins that game. No way in hell Rodgers messes up that badly 2 years ago.

You can argue that Rodgers was a better QB than Hadl, and I will not disagree. What you cannot say unless you live out of reality is that Rodgers has not hit the age wall in 2022 just as Hadl hit it in his last year with San Diego. The Packers are now in the same place as San Diego, if someone is dumb enough to give them a slew of draft picks for a washed up QB they should accept. Is Rodgers washed up? Only time will answer that question with certainty, but he certainly looked it vs San Francisco.

SMH

You think Rodgers is washed up, don't you? Yes, Rodgers is 4 years older now than Hadl was when we got him but AR is about to win consecutive MVPs and is still playing at a high level - better than Hadl ever did in his career. AR will be a first ballot HOFer. Hadl? Not so much. Hadl was passed his prime but Dan Devine thought all he needed was a QB, any QB. Evidently he wanted Archie Manning but when that fell thru Devine panicked and called the Rams. Devine never told anyone before this little transaction either. That trade was one of the reasons the Packers fired him at the end of the 1974 season. Devine sent first-, second-, and third-round picks in the 1975 draft and first- and second-round picks in the 1976 draft to Los Angeles for Hadl. That disastrous trade crippled this franchise for years.

I get it. Rodgers didn't play well in that playoff game. But if it wasn't for his elite play during the regular season we don't even sniff the postseason let alone get the #1 seed. BTW, Rodgers didn't play very well the first time he played in a NFCC game. But because we won that game nobody cared.