Packers Huddle

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021 22:32

It's all $%@# stupid. 1 thing said about Rodgers that is a "criticism" and the $%@# knives comes out and we have to rehash how Rodgers was blameless or close to it in all the previous $%@# games and if you don't believe that you are $%@# Rodgers hater. It's $%@# tedious and $%@# stupid. For $%@# once, can we all agree that Rodgers is a very $%@# good QB and that very $%@# good QB has made $%@# mistakes... Then hopefully get on with seeing that this is arguably the best team in a decade.

Even stupider / more stupid is DC sports radio debating on whether Curtis Samuel is ready to play Sunday, or should he take a couple of weeks off.

So glad I'll be back living in WI after a 32 year hiatus starting with the 2021 opener on Sunday. How's that for Packers Huddle news? Go Packers.

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021 18:43

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021 15:32

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2021 13:13

I said deep playoff run. This team has been void of killer instinct under AR's leadership. I'll believe it when I see it.

boy people really do hate Rodgers, and will blame him for anything, when he's actually been the best player on the field in most of the PO games that we both won and lost, I guess the only QB we've had with KILLER instinct was Bart Starr, never mind that he was surrounded with HOF players.

never understood how fans can be so negative about this team.

The team is championship-caliber. Rodgers probably was the best player in many of those games. He also choked in some key games. The fact is that the Packers saw better results when AR was a youngin and there were veterans like Woodson and Driver in the locker room as the primary leaders.

NO player is perfect, not one, but Rodgers has been closer to it then anyone else we've had in the last couple decades, I agree he is not a vocal rah rah guy, it's not his make up, he'd rather lead by example, which is, work hard and study your opponent and know your responsibility's, however he has chastised a few players that fell short of those obligations.

we've been in short supply of vocal players that can inspire the team, at least that we can see, maybe Z. Smith, Amos, Bahk, etc. are locker room guys people aspire to, my point is though how much of that is needed, these players, specially the guys we have now are good enough that they do believe in themselves and have the personal confidence to play well and win, there coaches are the people responsible for lighting them on fire.

as I said, you really aught to take a closer look at how Rodgers has enabled this team to be over achievers so many seasons, heck in the last 10 years (or since the SB win in 2010) his defenses tend to be at best mediocre and can never hold a lead, specially in big games, and for half that time didn't have a quality RB on the roster, and for a 3 to 4 year resent stretch had one very good receiver and a bunch of mediocre backups, my point is the QB position has not been the reason we lose PO games, it's been more about the supporting cast, finally last year, and it looks like this season we have a more complete roster that can over come normal mistakes that always happen in every game, and will make less of them so it's not on the QB's shoulders to pull out miraculous last ditch drives to put us in position to win.

seriously you should consider that you may never see a Packer QB as good as the last two we've had, ever again, QB's often get to much praise for a win, and to much blame when we lose, there rarely seems to be a middle ground with opinions on this subject, enjoy the season Ben

Yoop wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2021 12:30

Packer fans should always expect to win a SB, anything less, and you should change your name to Sally,

Hate having to agree with Yoop, even a sarcastic Yoop, but...

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021 15:32

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2021 13:13

I said deep playoff run. This team has been void of killer instinct under AR's leadership. I'll believe it when I see it.

boy people really do hate Rodgers, and will blame him for anything, when he's actually been the best player on the field in most of the PO games that we both won and lost, I guess the only QB we've had with KILLER instinct was Bart Starr, never mind that he was surrounded with HOF players.

never understood how fans can be so negative about this team.

Because it often and spectacularly disappoints by not living up to expectations - sometimes seasonal expectations, sometimes the next five minutes.

I have been very thankful to be a packers fan in my life. Lots of great Sundays that turn into happy Mondays. Lots of bragging to my Bears fan cousin. Lots of respect around the league for one of the most iconic franchises in sports.

But it’s easy to understand why some fans are dissatisfied, we literally have had a top 3 QB on the planet for a span of 20 years and have 2 titles. It is a reasonable expectation for teams with that almost unheard of success as QB to have more, so it’s reasonable and makes sense.

Half Empty wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 08:39

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021 15:32

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2021 13:13

I said deep playoff run. This team has been void of killer instinct under AR's leadership. I'll believe it when I see it.

boy people really do hate Rodgers, and will blame him for anything, when he's actually been the best player on the field in most of the PO games that we both won and lost, I guess the only QB we've had with KILLER instinct was Bart Starr, never mind that he was surrounded with HOF players.

never understood how fans can be so negative about this team.

Because it often and spectacularly disappoints by not living up to expectations - sometimes seasonal expectations, sometimes the next five minutes.

thing is H E those expectations have often been to high, basically we should consider ourselves over achievers, not many teams go as far as we have minus at least a good defense, and running attack, and we have been without both for most of this decade, it has taken a HOF QB and at times great effort from our WR's to position us where we have been, and abnormal poor decisions by some coaches and players account for most of our disappointing losses.

Like always, the Packers is the same position as being a Colts, Saints, Falcons, Eagles, Seahawks etc. fan the last 20 years.

Lots of great play - especially at QB but oh so little to show for it.

Basically you're only happy if Tom Brady is your favorite QB. Even Eli Manning (Giants) fans have to feel somewhat weird because they ultimately know they didn't deserve their titles.

That's an unrealistic expectation that a great QB should mean you win Super Bowls. Football could be said to be the epitome of a team sport. 1 or 2 great players, even a great QB does not guarantee a Super Bowl. It helps, but a team needs much more than that.

https://stathead.com/tiny/OxBPO

Of the top 20 QBs by career AV, 7 have not won a Super Bowl.
14 of the next 20, top 21 to top 40, didn't win championships either.
And then the ratio drops from there.

Great teams win championships, not necessarily great QBs. We have a great QB, I think we have a great team. The expectation should be Super Bowl.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 09:18

That's an unrealistic expectation that a great QB should mean you win Super Bowls. Football could be said to be the epitome of a team sport. 1 or 2 great players, even a great QB does not guarantee a Super Bowl. It helps, but a team needs much more than that.

https://stathead.com/tiny/OxBPO

Of the top 20 QBs by career AV, 7 have not won a Super Bowl.
14 of the next 20, top 21 to top 40, didn't win championships either.
And then the ratio drops from there.

Great teams win championships, not necessarily great QBs. We have a great QB, I think we have a great team. The expectation should be Super Bowl.

What's painful is we did have great teams in that stretch. Teams that honestly should have won it.

Favre had probably 4 (maybe 5) teams that could realistically win it with 95, 96, 97, 07 (with 03 being the 5th)

Rodgers had anywhere from 5 to 8 great teams in his career that seriously could have won it all with 09, 10, 11, 13, 14, 19, 20, and 21

I mean that's a really powerful stretch of teams. Unfortunately the Rodgers era has unprecedented bad luck either due to injury or just weird missed plays in the postseason and therefore far more missed opportunity.

What baffles me is the way people try and connect the post SB run of the Favre era to the post SB run of the Rodgers era. The Favre era after 97 basically never got there again from a team standpoint. 98 - 2006 was pretty much a desert of middling teams always playing second fiddle to other powers in the NFC. But the Rodgers era had many years where the Packers were top 1/2 in the NFC (I still think people massively underrate how good that 2013 team could have been).

I think it makes sense to blame management for the post 97 Favre era. I don't think it makes as much sense to do so for the post 2010 Rodgers era. And yet Ron Wolf (didn't Wolf recommend Sherman for the GM job?) seems to get a complete pass while Ted and Gute are hammered constantly.

go pak go wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:05

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 09:18

That's an unrealistic expectation that a great QB should mean you win Super Bowls. Football could be said to be the epitome of a team sport. 1 or 2 great players, even a great QB does not guarantee a Super Bowl. It helps, but a team needs much more than that.

https://stathead.com/tiny/OxBPO

Of the top 20 QBs by career AV, 7 have not won a Super Bowl.
14 of the next 20, top 21 to top 40, didn't win championships either.
And then the ratio drops from there.

Great teams win championships, not necessarily great QBs. We have a great QB, I think we have a great team. The expectation should be Super Bowl.

What's painful is we did have great teams in that stretch. Teams that honestly should have won it.

Favre had probably 4 (maybe 5) teams that could realistically win it with 95, 96, 97, 07 (with 03 being the 5th)

Rodgers had anywhere from 5 to 8 great teams in his career that seriously could have won it all with 09, 10, 11, 13, 14, 19, 20, and 21

I mean that's a really powerful stretch of teams. Unfortunately the Rodgers era has unprecedented bad luck either due to injury or just weird missed plays in the postseason and therefore far more missed opportunity.

What baffles me is the way people try and connect the post SB run of the Favre era to the post SB run of the Rodgers era. The Favre era after 97 basically never got there again from a team standpoint. 98 - 2006 was pretty much a desert of middling teams always playing second fiddle to other powers in the NFC. But the Rodgers era had many years where the Packers were top 1/2 in the NFC (I still think people massively underrate how good that 2013 team could have been).

I think it makes sense to blame management for the post 97 Favre era. I don't think it makes as much sense to do so for the post 2010 Rodgers era. And yet Ron Wolf (didn't Wolf recommend Sherman for the GM job?) seems to get a complete pass while Ted and Gute are hammered constantly.

I think you remember the departing of Wolf wrong, first was the ego battle with Mike Holmgren over Mikes desire to be both coach and GM, and both Ron and Bob Harlan said we'd never have one guy do both jobs again, then Mike decided to take the Seattle job even before we'd finished the season, and naturally it leaked to the media and became a &%$@ storm, which obviously in even a small way affected our game with the Bronco's which we lost because we couldn't stop the run.

soon after both Harlan and Wolf gave both positions to Mike Sherman, who was a excellent OL coach, but sucked as both a HC and GM, yet he kept both titles till finally fired as GM and a year later as coach, he led to the decline of Favre the QB.

as to all those seasons that Rodgers was our QB, now correct me if I'am wrong but I don't think he ever had a top 10 defense after 2010 SB season, only had a PB caliber RB for 2 seasons with Lacy and the last two with Jones, and the offense lacked impact talent at WR for 5 seasons in that decade, so while you think this team was capable of winning it all 8 of Rodgers seasons I'd have to say it would have taken the fickled lady of luck to make that happen

Yoop wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:33

as to all those seasons that Rodgers was our QB, now correct me if I'am wrong but I don't think he ever had a top 10 defense after 2010 SB season

Last year we were 9th in yards allowed (13th in points allowed). In 2019 we were 9th in points allowed (18th in yards). So... sort of.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:44

Yoop wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:33

as to all those seasons that Rodgers was our QB, now correct me if I'am wrong but I don't think he ever had a top 10 defense after 2010 SB season

Last year we were 9th in yards allowed (13th in points allowed). In 2019 we were 9th in points allowed (18th in yards). So... sort of.

yep, and we owe it to Guty for that, gotta give the guy credit, he brought in a few key players and has drafted well, we still might be weak at ILB, but if Barnes, Campbell, Summers and Burk can step it up we could do even better there.

Yoop wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:33

as to all those seasons that Rodgers was our QB, now correct me if I'am wrong but I don't think he ever had a top 10 defense after 2010 SB season, only had a PB caliber RB for 2 seasons with Lacy and the last two with Jones, and the offense lacked impact talent at WR for 5 seasons in that decade, so while you think this team was capable of winning it all 8 of Rodgers seasons I'd have to say it would have taken the fickled lady of luck to make that happen

It all depends on how you define top 10.

But I would absolutely put 2009, 2010, 2014, 2019 and 2020 defenses at top 10 defenses.

Yoop wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:33

I think you remember the departing of Wolf wrong, first was the ego battle with Mike Holmgren over Mikes desire to be both coach and GM, and both Ron and Bob Harlan said we'd never have one guy do both jobs again, then Mike decided to take the Seattle job even before we'd finished the season, and naturally it leaked to the media and became a &%$@ storm, which obviously in even a small way affected our game with the Bronco's which we lost because we couldn't stop the run.

soon after both Harlan and Wolf gave both positions to Mike Sherman, who was a excellent OL coach, but sucked as both a HC and GM, yet he kept both titles till finally fired as GM and a year later as coach, he led to the decline of Favre the QB.

So this is supposed to somehow make Ron Wolf's legacy better than TT's and Gute's like I questioned in my suggested post?

I'm confused.

go pak go wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 11:20

I'm confused.

Perhaps I can clear this up for all of the fine & passionate posters here:

The past is over. Let it go

.

BSA wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 11:29

go pak go wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 11:20

I'm confused.

Perhaps I can clear this up for all of the fine & passionate posters here:

The past is over. Let it go

.

It looks very much like you're saying that tradition and history (and woulda/shoulda/coulda) don't, or shouldn't, mean anything to rabid sports fans. If so, I really have to think you are part of a very small group.

go pak go wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 11:20

Yoop wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 10:33

I think you remember the departing of Wolf wrong, first was the ego battle with Mike Holmgren over Mikes desire to be both coach and GM, and both Ron and Bob Harlan said we'd never have one guy do both jobs again, then Mike decided to take the Seattle job even before we'd finished the season, and naturally it leaked to the media and became a &%$@ storm, which obviously in even a small way affected our game with the Bronco's which we lost because we couldn't stop the run.

soon after both Harlan and Wolf gave both positions to Mike Sherman, who was a excellent OL coach, but sucked as both a HC and GM, yet he kept both titles till finally fired as GM and a year later as coach, he led to the decline of Favre the QB.

So this is supposed to somehow make Ron Wolf's legacy better than TT's and Gute's like I questioned in my suggested post?

I'm confused.

no, just clarifying some things, and No it doesn't make Ron better, what it does do is expose the hypocricy of both Bob and Ron saying one thing to Holmgren, and then doing the opposite 2 years later concerning Mike Sherman, I mean seriously, who here with the value of hindsight would chose Sherman to have total control of football operations over the much more qualified Holmgren, not me thats for sure.

and as good as the some of those 5 defenses where only 09 and 10 where top ten defenses according to league rankings, 014 was close, in fact PFF gave the secondary great reviews, but it was still ranked in the teens over all.

Wolf was a excellent GM, so was Ted in his early years, as has been Guty, don't know why you seem to think I was lifting one above another.

Half Empty wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2021 08:31

BSA wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 11:29

go pak go wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021 11:20

I'm confused.

Perhaps I can clear this up for all of the fine & passionate posters here:

The past is over. Let it go

.

It looks very much like you're saying that tradition and history (and woulda/shoulda/coulda) don't, or shouldn't, mean anything to rabid sports fans. If so, I really have to think you are part of a very small group.

The past very much informs the future (often). Its called tradition and organizational culture.

25 years ago doesn't do much informing. 10 years ago doesn't do much informing. Even 5 years ago doesn't do a heck of a lot of informing. Let's call a spade a spade, it is simply a way to drag up old gripes and narratives.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Sep 2021 09:00

25 years ago doesn't do much informing. 10 years ago doesn't do much informing. Even 5 years ago doesn't do a heck of a lot of informing. Let's call a spade a spade, it is simply a way to drag up old gripes and narratives.

so what, this is a forum where members discuss all things football, if you don't like the conversation no one is forcing you to partake of it.