Packers Huddle

NCF wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:11

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 11:21

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 11:15

I would say above average, but had he not won SB III as an AFL team, he would have had a hard time getting in the HOF in my opinion.

That is a huge “if” haha. Calling his shot and achieving victory in New York absolutely affects whether he was average, above average, or great imo.

Also gotta look at the era…I believe Vince Lombardi called Namath “the best purer passes he had ever seen” or “an almost perfect passer”

His stats and highlights of SB III paint a different picture.

It was a different game back then. Stats then are hard to compare now. Il take Vince Lombardis word for it

go pak go wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:21

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:12

Labrev wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 09:12

My statement is less about who is the better QB and more to say that we are in the exact same situation with Rodgers as we were with Favre, and moving on from Favre that year was objectively the correct move.

I see similarities but I think there are a few differences. When TT drafted Rodgers, Favre had already been talking about retirement for the previous few offseasons, if memory serves. The Rodgers pick could have been viewed as a response on the part of the Packers to Favre's annual drama.

On the other hand, BG's decision to trade up for Jordan Love preceded any retirement talk we heard from Rodgers. To many it felt like disruption for disruption's sake, rather than a measured move from the front office. It really was a bad decision for multiple reasons, all of which have already been discussed many times on this forum. Even if Love were to end up being great, to waste those picks on a backup QB when your starter had multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank and a roster on the cusp of being championship caliber was a huge setback.

I agree with everything here except the multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank statement.

At the time, we had to be real with ourselves that we had no idea what was left with Rodgers. We brought in MLF to specifically reincarnate #12 but it did also look like they were hedging their bets a bit.

I think the biggest miscalculation the Packers did was not believe how good #12 could be in 2020 and 2021 while also not being enough in January to get it done.

ya know why we don't get along? because you twist reality into your little fantasy's, Rodgers has done more with less then any QB in the league, &%$@ defense, &%$@ ST's, minimal impact offensive players, and tons of high round draft misses has imho limited Rodgers ability.

you and other bring up a missed Lazard in a PO game as though that doesn't happen to the other great QB's, you don't mention dropped passes, and blame every loss on him, and over look these reality's I just mentioned, your a person who people say doesn't play with a full deck.

At this point I don't care if he stays, is traded, or retires, but he's still got enough game to out play Love for the next 2 or 3 years, but just keep spouting your nonsensical opinions, your so wrapped up in cap numbers, there are always ways now to keep kicking contracts back, we have talent, and just need to fix the OL and this defense, maybe get another receiver, I want to win NOW, and in the next couple seasons, and until Love shows me different I'am going with Rodgers.

your agenda has to many question marks.

I know 2023 Rodgers should be better than 2022 Love

But I don’t think 2023 Rodgers will win a Super Bowl in GB so I’d rather move on and see what we can do with Love. Find out who Love is.

The goal in title town is Super Bowls.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:22

BF004 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 09:36

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 09:04

average QB's Pugger are not good enough,.

Well A) I believe you are agreeing with Pugger, at least you aren’t disagreeing with her premise. And B) looking at Brock Purdy, Jalen Hurts, Stafford, Garrapolo, Goff, Nick Foles, Matt Ryan.

The Super Bowl (+Brock Purdy) is littered with a above average QB’s, he’ll even a few average and below average. She is right you don’t need a HOF QB.

No one is saying we don’t want one. She is saying Jordan doesn’t have to be that, because he doesn’t.

every QB Pugger listed has played above average, some way above it, this is what happens when people rely on stats to form a opinion, Stabler was a great QB, as was Namath, the guy had a fast release, was accurate and had a rifle arm, and if I felt like it could comement on others, just because a very good QB has a great supporting cast doesn't take awayfrom the great ability, it just means it wasn't needed as much.

course we wouldn't know that as Packer fans, we've had to rely on Rodgers super ability to make up for a weaker supporting cast.

why you folks can't or wont come to grips with these reality's is something I will never understand.

What reality? Pugger said you need above average or better to win. Love doesn’t need to be a HOF guy. You responded with average QBs are not good enough. So it seems like you agree.

Still can’t understand how your brain goes from that, to the exact same copy and paste talking points you’ve said 1000 times by now. Then take shots at the person you think you are disagreeing with, even though you are not disagreeing.

go pak go wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:21

At the time, we had to be real with ourselves that we had no idea what was left with Rodgers. We brought in MLF to specifically reincarnate #12 but it did also look like they were hedging their bets a bit.

I have to tag this comment because IMHO it is totally flawed GPG, we switch coaching because not only was McCarthy stubborn because he liked the long game versus the short wco, and he didn't have the receivers to make that kind of offense work any longer.

so many thing where wrong, whats Gute ) and I'am sure Murphy too) do, demote Ted, which was a couple years over do ( I love Thompson as much as anyone, just stating my opinion) then Fire McCarthy, hire Lafleur, a short WCO style coach, then he drafts the 3 stooges, 3 very raw receivers that basically fit the fired McCarthys deep passing schemes.

in side of a year, they took away a coach with the right personal and Rodgers, who between those two guys had basically carried the defense and ST's units to every playoff game we ever got to, and then proceeded to lose mostly because there wasn't enough talent and coaching to cover a chicken fried steak.

here it is about 8 years later and all our GM could think about was drafting a replacement for Rodgers,

why any Packer fans are so foolish to support this &%$@ show ascapes me, draft after draft you defend the GM, I don't get it.

BF004 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:56

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:22

BF004 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 09:36

Well A) I believe you are agreeing with Pugger, at least you aren’t disagreeing with her premise. And B) looking at Brock Purdy, Jalen Hurts, Stafford, Garrapolo, Goff, Nick Foles, Matt Ryan.

The Super Bowl (+Brock Purdy) is littered with a above average QB’s, he’ll even a few average and below average. She is right you don’t need a HOF QB.

No one is saying we don’t want one. She is saying Jordan doesn’t have to be that, because he doesn’t.

every QB Pugger listed has played above average, some way above it, this is what happens when people rely on stats to form a opinion, Stabler was a great QB, as was Namath, the guy had a fast release, was accurate and had a rifle arm, and if I felt like it could comement on others, just because a very good QB has a great supporting cast doesn't take awayfrom the great ability, it just means it wasn't needed as much.

course we wouldn't know that as Packer fans, we've had to rely on Rodgers super ability to make up for a weaker supporting cast.

why you folks can't or wont come to grips with these reality's is something I will never understand.

What reality? Pugger said you need above average or better to win. Love doesn’t need to be a HOF guy. You responded with average QBs are not good enough. So it seems like you agree.

Still can’t understand how your brain goes from that, to the exact same copy and paste talking points you’ve said 1000 times by now. Then take shots at the person you think you are disagreeing with, even though you are not disagreeing.

heres what Pugger said I disagreed with, and still and always will

If you build a really good team around him you can win with an average QB, sorry Pugger I disagree.

how can ya call a QB average that week after week wins, gets in the PO's and wins, and then also wins a SB, greatness isn't just passing stats, or Bart Starr wouldn't be considered one of the best to ever play, he was a great field general, new what plays to call and when, this stuff isn't measured on a stat sheet.

bring up Namath, or any of those QB's to claim there average based on stats is simply false, they all played a key roll in those victory's.

same with Brock Purdy,.

Love will have to be well above average to win, and thats if we get the rest of this team squared away

everything I said seems accurate, we rate QB's on win/lost record, or passing stats, and none of that actually says enough about a QB to form a valid opinion, pass pro, talent of receivers, talent on defense, and coaching schemes determines the ability of a QB.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:35

go pak go wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:21

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:12

I see similarities but I think there are a few differences. When TT drafted Rodgers, Favre had already been talking about retirement for the previous few offseasons, if memory serves. The Rodgers pick could have been viewed as a response on the part of the Packers to Favre's annual drama.

On the other hand, BG's decision to trade up for Jordan Love preceded any retirement talk we heard from Rodgers. To many it felt like disruption for disruption's sake, rather than a measured move from the front office. It really was a bad decision for multiple reasons, all of which have already been discussed many times on this forum. Even if Love were to end up being great, to waste those picks on a backup QB when your starter had multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank and a roster on the cusp of being championship caliber was a huge setback.

I agree with everything here except the multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank statement.

At the time, we had to be real with ourselves that we had no idea what was left with Rodgers. We brought in MLF to specifically reincarnate #12 but it did also look like they were hedging their bets a bit.

I think the biggest miscalculation the Packers did was not believe how good #12 could be in 2020 and 2021 while also not being enough in January to get it done.

ya know why we don't get along? because you twist reality into your little fantasy's, Rodgers has done more with less then any QB in the league, &%$@ defense, &%$@ ST's, minimal impact offensive players, and tons of high round draft misses has imho limited Rodgers ability.

you and other bring up a missed Lazard in a PO game as though that doesn't happen to the other great QB's, you don't mention dropped passes, and blame every loss on him, and over look these reality's I just mentioned, your a person who people say doesn't play with a full deck.

At this point I don't care if he stays, is traded, or retires, but he's still got enough game to out play Love for the next 2 or 3 years, but just keep spouting your nonsensical opinions, your so wrapped up in cap numbers, there are always ways now to keep kicking contracts back, we have talent, and just need to fix the OL and this defense, maybe get another receiver, I want to win NOW, and in the next couple seasons, and until Love shows me different I'am going with Rodgers.

your agenda has to many question marks.

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:12

I see similarities but I think there are a few differences. When TT drafted Rodgers, Favre had already been talking about retirement for the previous few offseasons, if memory serves. The Rodgers pick could have been viewed as a response on the part of the Packers to Favre's annual drama.

On the other hand, BG's decision to trade up for Jordan Love preceded any retirement talk we heard from Rodgers. To many it felt like disruption for disruption's sake, rather than a measured move from the front office. It really was a bad decision for multiple reasons, all of which have already been discussed many times on this forum. Even if Love were to end up being great, to waste those picks on a backup QB when your starter had multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank and a roster on the cusp of being championship caliber was a huge setback.

We could suppose the same with Favre, that if we spent our 2005 1st on a player that contibuted in some capacity rather than a QB riding pine, that it would have put us over the hump in the NFCCG we lost to the Giants.

I do not accept that idea, not in 2005, and not in 2020. Favre did not throw that pick to Webster because another good WR would have made him play better; he threw it because he was a choke artist. It was not the first time his INTs cost us a season, it was like the fourth or fifth time.

And the exact same is true for Rodgers, just change INT to INC.

Hence, below.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:12

no offense, where you 14 or 15 when Favre pulled his antics? not sure how I felt about much when I was that age, when I was 20 Lombardi moved on, like most Packers fans I hoped as you are now that continued success was right around the next bend, but that ended up to false hope for over 20 years, over half my life at that point lived on a hope and a prayer that we'd be a championship caliber team again.

Yeah, and if we had followed this illogical, fear-driven line-of-thinking in 2008, we would have missed out on ~12 good years of QB play from Rodgers to get 2 good years of Favre, just because we were scared and Favre made us less scared.

The NFL is not for cowardly chickens. It's for stone-cold killers who *trust* their ability to go out and beat the guy across from them, and that goes from the players all the way up to the GMs.


We would have missed out on a QB who you yourself say turned out better than the guy ahead of him at the time:

Favre was never as good a QB as Rodgers, don't take my word for it, ask anyone with a football IQ

.... We are MORE LIKELY to end up in the situation you warn about if we cling to Rodgers, get no picks (can be used to get a QB or a cast that will make one look good), and be burdened with way more cap debt, probably lose Love and then have to replace Rodgers with a QB given less time to get ready... than if we move on now and avoid all those things.

Just like we would have been way more likely to be the 70s/80s Packers if we stuck by Favre to the end and let Rodgers walk.

FWIW, don’t underestimate the value of a 1st round pick QB as backup.

I know we always lament the time when a guy like Love is warming the bench because the starter isn’t hurt or retiring yet. But let’s look at two possible scenarios for 2023.

First, Rodgers plays. It’s assumed he will start. If he gets hurt and misses more than one game, we will see the value of a quality backup. (As if we didn’t see that last year already.)

Second, if Rodgers retires (or is traded away), Love starts. If Love gets hurt and misses significant time, then we will immediately know if we have a quality backup QB or not.

Those two scenarios are different. But they can in-combination be drawn from real life experiences and show the value of Love being QB2 in 2023. Yeah, he would hate it. And we would say that the Pack is “wasting” a round 1 pick. But the fact is, arguing that Love is turning into a starter quality QB, that we ARE getting value out of Love in either scenario.

It's kind of an interesting comparison at this point. Favre in about 2004-2005 first hinted at retirement. Know that father time is undefeated the Packers chose to draft Aaron Rodgers in 2005. 1 year later he has his best season in more than a decade. Aaron Rodgers, while not hinting at retirement for the last 3 seasons, has more than hinted at his discontent and shown that he may not be as committed to football as he once was. Packers draft Jordan Love in 2020 because of this possible discontent/lack of commitment. Rodgers from 2018 t0 2019 was a not just average from him, he was an average NFL starting QB for those 2 seasons. https://stathead.com/tiny/WTz2p The reasoning behind drafting Love was as solid as the reasoning behind drafting Rodgers. I, personally, did not like the move and still don't as I believed it was too early for such a move, even though the reasoning was solid. Low and behold Rodgers comes back from NFL QB mediocrity, just as Favre did in 2007. Favre retires for a few months, wants to come back, but we have moved on in 2008. In 2022, we post a poor season after making it to the NFCCG 2 years running. We moved on from 1 HOF QB right after an MVP type season, it is time to move on from a HOF QB after an average NFL starting QB season. It is best for both the team and Rodgers.

Labrev wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 16:13

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:12

I see similarities but I think there are a few differences. When TT drafted Rodgers, Favre had already been talking about retirement for the previous few offseasons, if memory serves. The Rodgers pick could have been viewed as a response on the part of the Packers to Favre's annual drama.

On the other hand, BG's decision to trade up for Jordan Love preceded any retirement talk we heard from Rodgers. To many it felt like disruption for disruption's sake, rather than a measured move from the front office. It really was a bad decision for multiple reasons, all of which have already been discussed many times on this forum. Even if Love were to end up being great, to waste those picks on a backup QB when your starter had multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank and a roster on the cusp of being championship caliber was a huge setback.

We could suppose the same with Favre, that if we spent our 2005 1st on a player that contibuted in some capacity rather than a QB riding pine, that it would have put us over the hump in the NFCCG we lost to the Giants.

I do not accept that idea, not in 2005, and not in 2020. Favre did not throw that pick to Webster because another good WR would have made him play better; he threw it because he was a choke artist. It was not the first time his INTs cost us a season, it was like the fourth or fifth time.

And the exact same is true for Rodgers, just change INT to INC.

Hence, below.

Rodgers was considered by many as the best prospect in that draft class, why because he was the smartest QB prospect, his football IQ was high, and he was accurate, it's possibly that he came off condescending, and thought to be hard to coach ( guessing) at least I remember hearing those remarks.

what held Rodgers from starting sooner imo didn't have much to do with him, Favre was still good, just needed some talent and a new coach, and he improved as soon as that happened, his retirement and confusion, forced the team to move forward with Rodgers, Ted drafted two others QB and a few UDFA I recall to hedge his decision.

this is different in that Rodgers has only spoke of retirement in several flippy statements, mostly in a bargaining sense, never had the impression he didn't want to play a few more years, and Love has had so little exposure, looked good against the Eagles though, so who knows what will happen, but so far the team has left it up to him, and the reason for that is that a lot of untested QB's just like Love fail after more playing time, so there is that doubt, if there ready to take that chance Rodgers has said he's fine with a trade, but I can see why there anxious.

The Packers got shafted again by the Hall of Fame voting results. How may championships did Air Coryell win?

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 11:21

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 11:15

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 09:39

Joe Namath, Broadway Joe…the hall of famer.,.Joe Namath..was…average???

I would say above average, but had he not won SB III as an AFL team, he would have had a hard time getting in the HOF in my opinion.

That is a huge “if” haha. Calling his shot and achieving victory in New York absolutely affects whether he was average, above average, or great imo.

Also gotta look at the era…I believe Vince Lombardi called Namath “the best purer passes he had ever seen” or “an almost perfect passer”

Namath could sling it, no doubt, and his passes looked effortless. The thing that sours me is he just wasn't as efficient as his contemporaries:

Player, Comp%, TD%, Int%, YPA
Namath = 50.1%, 4.6%, 5.8%, 7.4
Unitas = 54.6%, 5.6%, 4.9%, 7.8
Tittle = 55.2%, 5.5%, 5.6%, 7.5
Starr = 57.4%, 4.8%, 4.4%, 7.8
Dawson = 57.1%, 6.4%, 4.9%, 7.7
Jurgenson = 57.1%, 6.0%, 4.4%, 7.6

Edit: Forgot Tarkenton = 57%, 5.3%, 4.1%, 7.3

Labrev wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 16:13

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 12:12

I see similarities but I think there are a few differences. When TT drafted Rodgers, Favre had already been talking about retirement for the previous few offseasons, if memory serves. The Rodgers pick could have been viewed as a response on the part of the Packers to Favre's annual drama.

On the other hand, BG's decision to trade up for Jordan Love preceded any retirement talk we heard from Rodgers. To many it felt like disruption for disruption's sake, rather than a measured move from the front office. It really was a bad decision for multiple reasons, all of which have already been discussed many times on this forum. Even if Love were to end up being great, to waste those picks on a backup QB when your starter had multiple MVP caliber years left in the tank and a roster on the cusp of being championship caliber was a huge setback.

We could suppose the same with Favre, that if we spent our 2005 1st on a player that contibuted in some capacity rather than a QB riding pine, that it would have put us over the hump in the NFCCG we lost to the Giants.

I do not accept that idea, not in 2005, and not in 2020. Favre did not throw that pick to Webster because another good WR would have made him play better; he threw it because he was a choke artist. It was not the first time his INTs cost us a season, it was like the fourth or fifth time.

And the exact same is true for Rodgers, just change INT to INC.

Hence, below.

I think there are some key differences that you aren't mentioning here.

After that 2004 season, the Packers were preparing to undergo a rebuild. The team made the playoffs but looked awful in the infamous Randy Moss mooning game. Mike Sherman was on thin ice, if not a dead man walking. It wasn't as if we had already hired McCarthy to resurrect Brett Favre, the way we had already done with MLF for Aaron Rodgers.

Also, for all of the complaining about Rodgers not showing up to mini camp (or OTA's or whatever it was), Favre is the one who wouldn't even show up to training camp.

Ultimately, they are both divas and I do believe one is less of a diva than the other was, but it's definitely not a hill that I'm trying to die on. My sincere gripe is with the Love pick. For all of the contentious forum discussion that TT inspired, I have to give credit where credit is due. He made his vision clear from the outset and stuck to it. He was a draft and develop GM to his core and there was never any doubt about that. If BG has a vision, I still have not seen the blueprint. The Love move reminded me of Yogi Berra's funny saying, "when you come to a fork in the road, take it." You can't decide that you're going to hire a coach to whip your HOF QB back into shape and then after 1 season veer off course and try to draft his replacement. I don't believe that you can have it both ways as a leader. Commit to a vision and see it through- no guts, no glory. TT had guts, BG flinched and the result was discombobulated confusion.

No one saw the TT vision until 2011, almost 6 years after Rodgers was drafted.

I did not like the Love pick. It was discussed in this forum, and I accepted, that it would be a year or two too early based on his contract. I also felt that Rodgers, with MLF's guidance/scheme, his risk-averse style, his years of experience, that we would see him age into a QB that wins on his wits, or like Game Manager+.

In hindisght, I now think the timing was perfect. His contract situation has been fluid, so that's whatever. But more than that, Rodgers's game has not aged well. Half the time, he does play like Game Manager+, and I would be all for sticking with and keep trying to run it back with that QB. Yet the other half of the time, he tries to play like it's the 2010s, even though his legs, arm, and coach's scheme no longer fit that playing style.

Davante Adams made that work with his ESP with Rodgers. Take that away though and you're left with a frustrating QB and middling production.

This is just about the perfect time to move on from Rodgers. Last year may have been better but moving on from a QB that just won an MVP is unheard of, and Love still needed a little more work. Now the buzz is Love looks like a QB1, he has had plenty of time to prep, and Rodgers's game is declining.

And our options at QB in the draft after the Love pick are significantly worse, assuming we finish the same every year.

2021, it's Trevor Lawrence, who we had no shot at, and then nobody else has panned out yet.

2020, Pickett looks okay-ish, but was gone before our pick, maybe we can trade up a bit to get him but that's a way less talented passer than Love, and then again nobody who has shown anything other than Brock Purdy.

This coming draft, the QBs are very low-floor/high-ceiling. Trying to start a rookie out of this bunch would be a huge gamble. And at 15 overall, we don't pick all that high.

In Love's own draft, one argues that we should have taken Jalen Hurts. Hurts went ahead of our 2nd, so we'd have to trade up, so it's not like you save an extra pick, you may even give up a higher one than 4th. It's really the difference between AJ Dillon and whoever you want in the 1st (Tee Higgins?), and switch the QBs. To date, that's the -only- guy we had some shot at who may have been a better option.

So we are potentially looking at Love being the second or third best option of ALL players at his position that we had a chance at drafting.

Labrev wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 20:37

And our options at QB in the draft after the Love pick are significantly worse, assuming we finish the same every year.

2021, it's Trevor Lawrence, who we had no shot at, and then nobody else has panned out yet.

2020, Pickett looks okay-ish, but was gone before our pick, maybe we can trade up a bit to get him but that's a way less talented passer than Love, and then again nobody who has shown anything other than Brock Purdy.

This coming draft, the QBs are very low-floor/high-ceiling. Trying to start a rookie out of this bunch would be a huge gamble. And at 15 overall, we don't pick all that high.

In Love's own draft, one argues that we should have taken Jalen Hurts. Hurts went ahead of our 2nd, so we'd have to trade up, so it's not like you save an extra pick, you may even give up a higher one than 4th. It's really the difference between AJ Dillon and whoever you want in the 1st (Tee Higgins?), and switch the QBs. To date, that's the -only- guy we had some shot at who may have been a better option.

So we are potentially looking at Love being the second or third best option of ALL players at his position that we had a chance at drafting.

Welcome to the world of trying to draft a QB without a top 10 draft pick.

Labrev wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2023 20:37

And our options at QB in the draft after the Love pick are significantly worse, assuming we finish the same every year.

2021, it's Trevor Lawrence, who we had no shot at, and then nobody else has panned out yet.

2020, Pickett looks okay-ish, but was gone before our pick, maybe we can trade up a bit to get him but that's a way less talented passer than Love, and then again nobody who has shown anything other than Brock Purdy.

This coming draft, the QBs are very low-floor/high-ceiling. Trying to start a rookie out of this bunch would be a huge gamble. And at 15 overall, we don't pick all that high.

In Love's own draft, one argues that we should have taken Jalen Hurts. Hurts went ahead of our 2nd, so we'd have to trade up, so it's not like you save an extra pick, you may even give up a higher one than 4th. It's really the difference between AJ Dillon and whoever you want in the 1st (Tee Higgins?), and switch the QBs. To date, that's the -only- guy we had some shot at who may have been a better option.

So we are potentially looking at Love being the second or third best option of ALL players at his position that we had a chance at drafting.

Hurts is the only better option lol Love has had one terrible start.

We should have just waited until Rodgers was done. Swap love for Higgins boom done.