Page 116 of 130
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 15:20
by go pak go
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:03
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 09:53
I’ve always been against Rodgers in this series of events because he’s just been openly whiny, self obsessed, and arrogant for all to see, so I can understand that there’s probably even more of that behind the scenes. I just don’t see this current war of words as the massive inconsistency or conflict that everyone else does.
to me the whiny popped up the year after Nelsons acl, the receiver group lost the capabilities needed for McCarthy's spread vertical passing attack to work as well as they had prior, with hind sight I don't think his angst during the 017 season was with McCarthy so much, rather Ted for not adding a receiver, and that boiled over in 018, what Rodgers expected from Gutes first season as GM was a ready to play UFA vet, or a high floor draft pick, instead he got 3 mid rounders that as we saw weren't ready for this level of play.
He did though. Jimmy Graham was a direct swap of Jordy Nelson. Jimmy Graham was a big 2018 offseason splash sign. It just didn't work out.
For everyone to take for granted of the Smith's signing success, you also have the Jimmy Graham signings. Some work. Some don't. It's one thing to say the signing was bad. It's another thing to say the Packers never tried.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 15:24
by Pckfn23
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 15:26
by YoHoChecko
To be clear, I don’t care when or why the whining popped up. Or what his perceived or real grievances were.
He’s been a public menace to the organization, openly dragging his employer, for three years. You put up with that when a guy is winning 13 games and MVPs. The second he lays an egg with his play, which he undeniably did last year, and allegedly stepped back in his preparation and commitment, especially at age 39, you put your foot down.
And when you’re evaluating which person is more likely to be believed and which person’s casting of themselves as a victim is likely exaggerated, he has publicly answered that question for years.
Whether you agree with him or not, the evidence is all out in the open: he thinks he’s a victim; he bears no personal accountability for his play or performance or his relationship with the organization; and he has much broader and deeper interests in his life than winning football games. Those things are just true. And that’s ok. But there’s no counterpoint to those issues in my mind.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 15:29
by Labrev
Let's also let the record show that Rodgers LOVED Jimmy Graham. I vividly remember Rodgers saying in post-game pressers how they need to get the ball to Jimmy Graham more. I remember it because I remember thinking "WHY????" every time he would say it.
It makes more sense when you realize that Jimmy Graham was in the Rodgers Buddies Club. I remember Rodgers mentioning he and Graham hung out off-field, I seem to remember them going on helicopter rides.
But facts and reality are no match for yoop's headcanon.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 15:36
by Yoop
go pak go wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:20
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:03
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 09:53
I’ve always been against Rodgers in this series of events because he’s just been openly whiny, self obsessed, and arrogant for all to see, so I can understand that there’s probably even more of that behind the scenes. I just don’t see this current war of words as the massive inconsistency or conflict that everyone else does.
to me the whiny popped up the year after Nelsons acl, the receiver group lost the capabilities needed for McCarthy's spread vertical passing attack to work as well as they had prior, with hind sight I don't think his angst during the 017 season was with McCarthy so much, rather Ted for not adding a receiver, and that boiled over in 018, what Rodgers expected from Gutes first season as GM was a ready to play UFA vet, or a high floor draft pick, instead he got 3 mid rounders that as we saw weren't ready for this level of play.
He did though. Jimmy Graham was a direct swap of Jordy Nelson. Jimmy Graham was a big 2018 offseason splash sign. It just didn't work out.
For everyone to take for granted of the Smith's signing success, you also have the Jimmy Graham signings. Some work. Some don't. It's one thing to say the signing was bad. It's another thing to say the Packers never tried.
a field stretching TE is not the same as a excellent deep threat receiver, actually one of each is preferred, to bad Graham didn't pan out, never understood why Ted cut Cook loose.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 15:53
by Yoop
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:26
To be clear, I don’t care when or why the whining popped up. Or what his perceived or real grievances were.
He’s been a public menace to the organization, openly tagging his employer, for three years. You put up with that when a guy is winning 13 games and MVPs. The second he lays an egg with his play, which he undeniably did last year, and allegedly stepped back in his preparation and commitment, especially at age 39, you out your foot down.
And when you’re evaluating which person is more likely to be believed and which person’s casting of themselves as a victim is likely exaggerated, he has publicly answered that question for years.
Whether you agree with him or not, the evidence is all out in the open: he thinks he’s a victim; he bears no personal accountability for his play or performance or his relationship with the organization; and he has much broader and deeper interests in his life than winning football games. Those things are just true. And that’s ok. But there’s no counterpoint to those issues in my mind.
I would have called Guty out too, the guy snubbed Rodgers from day one, what do you think Murphy giving him that extension in Feb of 018 was about? don't make waves was one comment I remember.
did we spoil Rodgers by giving him a great receiver cast starting with Greg Jennings and ending with Tae Adams in 014? maybe so, but look at the fire power that cast of players had, I would have acted the same as Rodgers when all of those players where gone injured or declined and the replacements where the 3 very raw mid rounders that never became better then #4 till year 3, Rodgers had every right to expect better, I bet he wish now that he'd have left instead of taking Murphy's hush money, any where he'd have went would have treated him better then we have, the jets will make sure he has a great cast of receivers.
I don't see the declining Rodgers that you do Yoho.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 16:12
by Acrobat
Captain_Ben wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 14:59
Acrobat wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 09:42
The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.
No it doesn't.
ok.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 16:17
by wizard 87
Acrobat wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 09:42
The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 16:40
by Captain_Ben
wizard 87 wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 16:17
Acrobat wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 09:42
The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.
So if one of them is telling the truth and the other is lying or remembering incorrectly, how can it be concluded that the truth "always lies in the middle?"
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 16:42
by Acrobat
Captain_Ben wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 16:40
wizard 87 wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 16:17
Acrobat wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 09:42
The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.
So if one of them is telling the truth and the other is lying or remembering incorrectly, how can it be concluded that the truth "always lies in the middle?"
Because generally, people tell their side of the story with bias and the need to look like the good guy and/or victim, which creates a natural grey area, known as the middle.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 18:35
by Scott4Pack
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:26
To be clear, I don’t care when or why the whining popped up. Or what his perceived or real grievances were.
He’s been a public menace to the organization, openly dragging his employer, for three years. You put up with that when a guy is winning 13 games and MVPs. The second he lays an egg with his play, which he undeniably did last year, and allegedly stepped back in his preparation and commitment, especially at age 39, you put your foot down.
And when you’re evaluating which person is more likely to be believed and which person’s casting of themselves as a victim is likely exaggerated, he has publicly answered that question for years.
Whether you agree with him or not, the evidence is all out in the open: he thinks he’s a victim; he bears no personal accountability for his play or performance or his relationship with the organization; and he has much broader and deeper interests in his life than winning football games. Those things are just true. And that’s ok. But there’s no counterpoint to those issues in my mind.
Yes, he does convey himself as a victim. He is very tactful about it. And now he has “nothing but love and appreciation” for “everybody in the Packer organization”. Even so, he paints one side of the story and leaves out some details. Conveniently.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:21
by BF004
Yes, the ‘ol im not a victim, but here’s a 15 minute rant on how I’m a victim speech.
Guess I’d just appreciate it more if he’d come out and just say he’s hurt and spiteful we took a qb. I’d agree. No need to be so pc for someone who despises pc things.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:22
by Crazylegs Starks
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:36
a field stretching TE is not the same as a excellent deep threat receiver, actually one of each is preferred, to bad Graham didn't pan out, never understood why Ted cut Cook loose.
The way I heard it, Cook's agent tried to play hardball without actually having any leverage.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:25
by BF004
Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 19:22
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:36
a field stretching TE is not the same as a excellent deep threat receiver, actually one of each is preferred, to bad Graham didn't pan out, never understood why Ted cut Cook loose.
The way I heard it, Cook's agent tried to play hardball without actually having any leverage.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:25
by go pak go
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:36
go pak go wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:20
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:03
to me the whiny popped up the year after Nelsons acl, the receiver group lost the capabilities needed for McCarthy's spread vertical passing attack to work as well as they had prior, with hind sight I don't think his angst during the 017 season was with McCarthy so much, rather Ted for not adding a receiver, and that boiled over in 018, what Rodgers expected from Gutes first season as GM was a ready to play UFA vet, or a high floor draft pick, instead he got 3 mid rounders that as we saw weren't ready for this level of play.
He did though. Jimmy Graham was a direct swap of Jordy Nelson. Jimmy Graham was a big 2018 offseason splash sign. It just didn't work out.
For everyone to take for granted of the Smith's signing success, you also have the Jimmy Graham signings. Some work. Some don't. It's one thing to say the signing was bad. It's another thing to say the Packers never tried.
a field stretching TE is not the same as a excellent deep threat receiver, actually one of each is preferred, to bad Graham didn't pan out, never understood why Ted cut Cook loose.
Seriously buddy I don't know what to tell ya.
MVP and All Pro WR1 : Check
Field Stretching former All Pro TE: Check
Field Stretching speed demon WR: Check
Fantastic Oline and draft and FA investment: Check
There is a LOT of good there that the Packers attacked. When your only grievance is not enough pursuit on a number 2 WR...you're stretching it. I don't buy the Rodgers is a victim. Like at all. He had plenty to work with.
As for Cook, it's been documented on that. Cook's agent tried to screw us and got bit. It was lose - lose for everyone.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:25
by Crazylegs Starks
BF004 wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 19:25
Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 19:22
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:36
a field stretching TE is not the same as a excellent deep threat receiver, actually one of each is preferred, to bad Graham didn't pan out, never understood why Ted cut Cook loose.
The way I heard it, Cook's agent tried to play hardball without actually having any leverage.
No, I'm talking about
leverage, not leverage!
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:28
by go pak go
Yoop wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:53
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 15:26
To be clear, I don’t care when or why the whining popped up. Or what his perceived or real grievances were.
He’s been a public menace to the organization, openly tagging his employer, for three years. You put up with that when a guy is winning 13 games and MVPs. The second he lays an egg with his play, which he undeniably did last year, and allegedly stepped back in his preparation and commitment, especially at age 39, you out your foot down.
And when you’re evaluating which person is more likely to be believed and which person’s casting of themselves as a victim is likely exaggerated, he has publicly answered that question for years.
Whether you agree with him or not, the evidence is all out in the open: he thinks he’s a victim; he bears no personal accountability for his play or performance or his relationship with the organization; and he has much broader and deeper interests in his life than winning football games. Those things are just true. And that’s ok. But there’s no counterpoint to those issues in my mind.
I would have called Guty out too, the guy snubbed Rodgers from day one, what do you think Murphy giving him that extension in Feb of 018 was about? don't make waves was one comment I remember.
did we spoil Rodgers by giving him a great receiver cast starting with Greg Jennings and ending with Tae Adams in 014? maybe so, but look at the fire power that cast of players had, I would have acted the same as Rodgers when all of those players where gone injured or declined and the replacements where the 3 very raw mid rounders that never became better then #4 till year 3, Rodgers had every right to expect better, I bet he wish now that he'd have left instead of taking Murphy's hush money, any where he'd have went would have treated him better then we have, the jets will make sure he has a great cast of receivers.
I don't see the declining Rodgers that you do Yoho.
The great cast of receivers you keep talking about the Jets having is worse than the cast of receivers the Packers had in 2020 and 2021.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 19:43
by BF004
I am in the camp of it’s a race to see who doesn’t have the least leverage.
But the jets sure seem to help us out anytime any of them open their mouths.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 21:56
by wallyuwl
BF004 wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 19:43
I am in the camp of it’s a race to see who doesn’t have the least leverage.
But the jets sure seem to help us out anytime any of them open their mouths.
Gute and Murphy do the same thing for the Packers.
Re: Rodgers Watch 2023
Posted: 28 Mar 2023 22:07
by go pak go
wallyuwl wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 21:56
BF004 wrote: ↑28 Mar 2023 19:43
I am in the camp of it’s a race to see who doesn’t have the least leverage.
But the jets sure seem to help us out anytime any of them open their mouths.
Gute and Murphy do the same thing for the Packers.
Gutes pretty good with words. He's good with his words in public.
But lord have mercy on Mark Muprhy when an Aaron Rodgers topic comes up...
