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 just get so much joy watching Packers teams that aren't dependent on Aaron Rodgers.
We don’t know how dependent the team is on him until we see the team win games without him. We haven’t seen that since he became the starter.
While there's obvious truth to that, I'm not sure it's really true--particularly looking in the past.
I mean, backup QBs often stink. I know the Saints got through things, but look at the 49ers' roster, which people consider very strong, and how much they struggle over the past couple years without GARRAPOLO. He's not that good, but replacing starting QBs often makes good rosters look crappy. I don't know that we have ever learned anything about the rest of the roster from watching Hundley and Seneca Wallace run around and fail.
So while I agree with the future part--when the team has a new starting QB who is the planned starter, selected and trained for that role. But I certainly can't say that you can measure a QB's worth by the way the team performs with crappy backup QBs.
Amen.
I always find it funny when people say, "well we would be much worse without him!" and in my mind I'm thinking..."well that is dependent on how good or bad his replacement is"
All I know is the Packers have been pretty darned good when Favre, Rodgers and Flynn have been under center and have not been good with basically anyone else.
I just get so much joy watching Packers teams that aren't dependent on Aaron Rodgers.
We don’t know how dependent the team is on him until we see the team win games without him. We haven’t seen that since he became the starter.
While there's obvious truth to that, I'm not sure it's really true--particularly looking in the past.
I mean, backup QBs often stink. I know the Saints got through things, but look at the 49ers' roster, which people consider very strong, and how much they struggle over the past couple years without GARRAPOLO. He's not that good, but replacing starting QBs often makes good rosters look crappy. I don't know that we have ever learned anything about the rest of the roster from watching Hundley and Seneca Wallace run around and fail.
So while I agree with the future part--when the team has a new starting QB who is the planned starter, selected and trained for that role. But I certainly can't say that you can measure a QB's worth by the way the team performs with crappy backup QBs.
fair points, but my larger point was that Rodgers impacts games in ways that the stat sheet could never tell the full picture. Meaning that if its true statistically Rodgers is in the 7-13 range this year as far as QB stats, I believe his value is wayyy beyond the stats. From being a coach on the field, to getting the team into the right play, to making checks at the line...this offense loses ALOT more than what shows up on the stat sheet the day he is gone. I dont think all that stuff can be taken for granted.
And while i completely agree Lafleur and Gute get less shine because they have Rodgers, they should be careful what they wish for if they would like a life without Rodgers to see how good they are at their jobs.
Yeah and I questioned if I should write it yet too because it's early. I hate saying stuff too soon because this 2021 season can still go a variety of ways.
But what I find impressive or interesting about the Rodgers narrative is that he was a 10th to 13th rated QB in 2019. Top 3 QB in 2020. And probably a 7th to 12th rated QB so far this year again because like 2019, is struggling with his long ball accuracy.
I just get so much joy watching Packers teams that aren't dependent on Aaron Rodgers.
We don’t know how dependent the team is on him until we see the team win games without him. We haven’t seen that since he became the starter.
And let's hope we don't have to this year!
And I probably was a bit harsh on his 2021 QB'ing. He likely is more in that 5th to 7th range.
His completion % after week 1 has been insane.
I guess the root of our disagreement here is that you may think stats paint the full picture on what a QB brings to a team, I do not.
We don’t know how dependent the team is on him until we see the team win games without him. We haven’t seen that since he became the starter.
And let's hope we don't have to this year!
And I probably was a bit harsh on his 2021 QB'ing. He likely is more in that 5th to 7th range.
His completion % after week 1 has been insane.
I guess the root of our disagreement here is that you may think stats paint the full picture on what a QB brings to a team, I do not.
I think the root of our disagreement is I am attributing more of our 2019 and 2021 team success to the defense than you are which is significantly more independent of the QB's play; irregardless of stats.
But as I mentioned too, it's still early. There are lots of chances for this defense to show us who they really are and allow 30+ points game after game tonight through December.
I am of the mindset that if your defense can hold the opponent to 23 points or less, that is winning football. You should be able to, especially with our offense, rely on 24 points. And the defense has done that every game after week 1 except SF which was aided by a terrible DPI call and STs gaff (along with no IG call)
This is such a wild stat and I keep coming back to it mentally and I just wanted to shout it out.
(I'm watching Good Morning Football and they just did a long segment on the injuries in this game and literally did not mention anyone on the Packers besides Adams and Lazard and even made a reference to being down Davante and being down Watt may 'even things out' in the 'power rankings world of hot takes')
If there ever was a game to commit to the run, this is it. ARI is not good at defending it, and we want to control the ball/clock i.e. keep that offense on the bench rather than rely on our defense to keep us competitive against them.
I'm sure we will make a game of it, but I think we're too depleted to beat a hot good team. But yeah, nothing to lose, fun to watch. I'll have to stream it in-class though...
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
I almost feel like the JJ Watt news helps to energize them a little bit. It was starting to feel like there was some danger of them walking into this like we did in Week 1 against New Orleans.
Still, losing JJ Watt sure doesn't help their run defense, so I agree with others to pound the GD rock.
I almost feel like the JJ Watt news helps to energize them a little bit. It was starting to feel like there was some danger of them walking into this like we did in Week 1 against New Orleans.
Still, losing JJ Watt sure doesn't help their run defense, so I agree with others to pound the GD rock.
I mean maybe? But he was already out for the game; that wasn't a new development. They've known that for at least a few days.
But it really is strange seeing how the vibe of the board has gotten more optimistic as our news got worse, so maybe the same happens for them, too. Strange world.
Again, not a surprise. But a bum hammy, Stokes should hopefully be able to stick with him.
I would not have Stokes shadow Hopkins like we did Chase. They're such different players. Hopkins would waste Stokes' speed and is too savvy for Stokes' learning curve. Plus no one else on the team can limit the deep threats of Moore and Kirk besides Stokes.
We play plenty of zone, so I don't want to think about it in a solely matchup-based effort, but I certainly don't think Stokes can hang with Hopkins, whose strength is route running and at-the-point ball skills; that's the perfect combo to destroy Stokes, honestly.
If Douglas can build on his debut, a big physical DB is better, to me, for Hopkins.
Again, not a surprise. But a bum hammy, Stokes should hopefully be able to stick with him.
I would not have Stokes shadow Hopkins like we did Chase. They're such different players. Hopkins would waste Stokes' speed and is too savvy for Stokes' learning curve. Plus no one else on the team can limit the deep threats of Moore and Kirk besides Stokes.
We play plenty of zone, so I don't want to think about it in a solely matchup-based effort, but I certainly don't think Stokes can hang with Hopkins, whose strength is route running and at-the-point ball skills; that's the perfect combo to destroy Stokes, honestly.
If Douglas can build on his debut, a big physical DB is better, to me, for Hopkins.
I can see that. Stokes has been pretty sticky and has better skills to catch up if he does lose track of him. He's done a great job of keeping everything in front of him and has tackled extremely well. But I also get needing him on the faster/deep threats.
Hopefully we'll get enough pressure with 4 where it won't be a big deal anyway.
I can see that. Stokes has been pretty sticky and has better skills to catch up if he does lose track of him. He's done a great job of keeping everything in front of him and has tackled extremely well. But I also get needing him on the faster/deep threats.
Hopefully we'll get enough pressure with 4 where it won't be a big deal anyway.
Yeah, he's sticky but he's given up a ton of catches on 50/50 balls at the point of attack and that is exactly how Hopkins dominates.
Obviously, there will be plenty of times in the game where they match up, but I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to line that up.
I can see that. Stokes has been pretty sticky and has better skills to catch up if he does lose track of him. He's done a great job of keeping everything in front of him and has tackled extremely well. But I also get needing him on the faster/deep threats.
Hopefully we'll get enough pressure with 4 where it won't be a big deal anyway.
Yeah, he's sticky but he's given up a ton of catches on 50/50 balls at the point of attack and that is exactly how Hopkins dominates. And often when he loses, it's on the release; another strength of Hopkins'.
Obviously, there will be plenty of times in the game where they match up, but I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to line that up.
I can see that. Stokes has been pretty sticky and has better skills to catch up if he does lose track of him. He's done a great job of keeping everything in front of him and has tackled extremely well. But I also get needing him on the faster/deep threats.
Hopefully we'll get enough pressure with 4 where it won't be a big deal anyway.
Yeah, he's sticky but he's given up a ton of catches on 50/50 balls at the point of attack and that is exactly how Hopkins dominates. And often when he loses, it's on the release; another strength of Hopkins'.
Obviously, there will be plenty of times in the game where they match up, but I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to line that up.
I disagree and my reasoning goes well beyond this game. I feel like he is so close. The TD last week, perfect position, just didn’t get his head around quick enough.
I think even in failure, this game could go a long way in helping Stokes become the player we need him to be.
I almost feel like the JJ Watt news helps to energize them a little bit. It was starting to feel like there was some danger of them walking into this like we did in Week 1 against New Orleans.
Still, losing JJ Watt sure doesn't help their run defense, so I agree with others to pound the GD rock.
I mean maybe? But he was already out for the game; that wasn't a new development. They've known that for at least a few days.
But it really is strange seeing how the vibe of the board has gotten more optimistic as our news got worse, so maybe the same happens for them, too. Strange world.
It's the most classic fan thing to do. Early in the week you are the most rational. Then as the week goes along you're like...our 6th DB can hang with Hopkins!
We got fire! I think we are up to this!
And then the 1st quarter immediately brings you back to reality.
Not sounding good for MVS. EQ in a spot to make or break his career tonight. Credit to [mention]lupedafiasco[/mention] for basically saying the same.
But as most of us have said, this game should be on the backs of Jones and Dillon. Rodgers and the rest need to be just efficient enough to make them pay when the opportunities come.
