Rodgers now has a 10-13 overall record.  Out of his 10 wins 2 came against teams with winning records at the time we played them (colts 3-2, bears 5-4, not exactly earth shattering).  He continues to put up stats once a defense lays off because he can't generate enough offense to keep games close at the start.  Just look at the minnesota game.   After the score became 24-3 he finally was able to get it going against a laid back defense.  The game became 24-20 and rodgers as usual was unable to mount anything with the game on the line.  The QB for the other team took his team not once but twice to scores to expand on his teams leads.  Rodgers failed twice at 24-20 and 31-25.  Rodgers is not clutch and looks like he never will be.

Whle I don't agree with the conclusion of the post, it does raise some interesting questions. 

How much of Rodgers' league leading QB rating comes from being down so much that teams go into prevent mode?

So far this season, two of the seven games have lent evidence to the notion.  How is it that in both games he's able to get the team back within a score and then fails to convert with the go ahead or tie score?

allmvpbaby34 wrote: This post isn't intelligent.

why?  it has a conclusion surrounded by fact.  if you have a different conclusion, please share with facts.

Allmvp, stop with the personal shot!

As to the topic...

Rodgers is doing just fine with what he has to work with and with his experience,  Yes, he has some issues to take care of, but the real problems are the offensive line not run or pass blocking like they should, and receivers not getting open and some running junk routes.  Add poor play calling and bad coaching on offense and you have major issues that people tend to point toward the QB.  He will be fine once the line starts doing their job properly.

I'll get to the topic later, but for now....

Why can't I say "This post isn't intelligent". I've read the rules briefly. I know my first post was personal, but then I changed it from a personal shot to just a shot at the post itself.


So again, to Packerbacker:

This post isn't intelligent.

From the official scout.com guidelines

** Attack The Post, Not The Poster **

Our # 1 rule. NEVER make it personal. Period. "I think that post sucks" is acceptable. " I think you suck for posting that" is not. Personal attacks that are intended to cause unwanted attention, embarrassment, or harm will not be tolerated.  Repeat offenders are subject to bans. If we ask you to refrain, please do so.  The offending post will be deleted and bannings may occur.

Our valued community is our most precious amenity. It is our home.

Packer Report reserves the right to ban anyone at anytime for any reason.

So, like I said, I'll attack this post itself later

Packerbacker: This post sucks

OK, but tread lightly! - Gimpy 

Gimpybutt wrote:

Allmvp, stop with the personal shot!

 

As to the topic...

 

Rodgers is doing just fine with what he has to work with and with his experience,  Yes, he has some issues to take care of, but the real problems are the offensive line not run or pass blocking like they should, and receivers not getting open and some running junk routes.  Add poor play calling and bad coaching on offense and you have major issues that people tend to point toward the QB.  He will be fine once the line starts doing their job properly.

most NFL QB's do fine when the line does well.  it;s the special ones that can win when times are tough.  rodgers has been around long enough to me show he is nothing special.  I disagree that he will be fine, he is unable to beat good teams, and unfortunatly we don't play the lions more.

having the best quarterback rating this year...and having a great year last year obviously is a sign that he isnt a bust...with absolutely no running game or offensive line teams know the packers must pass so they can defend the pass easily but rodgers still seems to pull through. and due to the line inabilty to block, fewer receivers run routes because we are forced to max prtect on a simple 4 man rush

allmvpbaby34 wrote:

I'll get to the topic later, but for now....

Why can't I say "This post isn't intelligent". I've read the rules briefly. I know my first post was personal, but then I changed it from a personal shot to just a shot at the post itself.


So again, to Packerbacker:

This post isn't intelligent.

 

From the official scout.com guidelines

 

** Attack The Post, Not The Poster **

Our # 1 rule. NEVER make it personal. Period. "I think that post sucks" is acceptable. " I think you suck for posting that" is not. Personal attacks that are intended to cause unwanted attention, embarrassment, or harm will not be tolerated.  Repeat offenders are subject to bans. If we ask you to refrain, please do so.  The offending post will be deleted and bannings may occur.

Our valued community is our most precious amenity. It is our home.

Packer Report reserves the right to ban anyone at anytime for any reason.

 

 

So, like I said, I'll attack this post itself later

 

Packerbacker: This post sucks

 

 

depends on your point of view.  if you live in fantasy football land rodgers is great.  in the real world not so much.  remember 2 wins against winning teams and both of those at home. fluff stats when the team is down. stat whore!!!!!

JPCA223 wrote:

having the best quarterback rating this year...alot of his stats are when we are down by many points or playing against weak teams.  and having a great year last year 6-10 is not a great year, espically after going 13-3 the year before. obviously is a sign that he isnt a bust...with absolutely no running game or offensive line teams know the packers must pass so they can defend the pass easily but rodgers still seems to pull through. he is 10-13 with 2 wins against winning teams, thats not pulling through. and due to the line inabilty to block, fewer receivers run routes because we are forced to max prtect on a simple 4 man rush

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Rodgers is not clutch and looks like he never will be.

Are you going to give us another one of your expert 13-3 to 6-10 analysis rants again?

Um, cool. 

12TimeWorldChamps wrote:

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Rodgers is not clutch and looks like he never will be.

 

Are you going to give us another one of your expert 13-3 to 6-10 analysis rants again?

 

Um, cool. 

I think you are oversimplifying his post while at the same time avoiding the points being made.

12TimeWorldChamps wrote:

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Rodgers is not clutch and looks like he never will be.

 

Are you going to give us another one of your expert 13-3 to 6-10 analysis rants again?

 

Um, cool. 

I know the truth hurts.  but I was going to stick with 2 wins against winning teams. either way it dosen't look very promising.

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

  exactly!  BUT Rodgers has some issues to clean up too! - Gimpy

Here's the thing though--

The Packers have played three good teams this year: the Bears, the Vikings, and the Bengals. The only game in which the Defense gave up less than 30 points was against the Bears, which was also the game the Packers won.

While its reasonable to say Rodgers hasn't done that much so far, I think you need to relax before calling him a bust. Yesterday, he looked overwhelmed in the first half. But many QBs get overwhelmed, and it was a big positive to see Rodgers come out in the Second half and get the offense working against a great Defensive unit.

This year, Rodgers has began to show some increidbly promising intangibles for a future Franchise QB.

1. He's scored a game-winner against a good team

2. He's bounced back and played a good 2nd-half after struggling early twice (Chicago, a win, and Minnesota 2, a loss)

3. He's been extremely tough and has played well even after being knocked around

And most importantly--

4. His teammates trust and respect him fully as a leader

Really, who cares about 1-3. The teammates who play with him know him best, and they clearly believe in him. As long as that is there, I think Rodgers is going to be successful.

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

I haven't seen the Packers play much this year, but what I saw was a mediocre Offensive line that has placed a Good Young QB in an almost untenable position.   How many times do we have to say the game is won in the trenches and the Vikings D line had the best of it most of the game.  If he had Colts, Steelers, or even Minnesota's line, all the AR criticism would be out the window.   Half the time, he had to roll out to buy time to find an open guy, which cuts the field pretty much in half.   Had the Packers not made adjustments to give him time in the second half, including using the TE that could be out in patterns to help with blocks, he would have very probably been carried off the field with an injury.

And had it not been for poor second half tackling by the Vikings, the Packer Offense could have easily been turned into a one dimension offense earlier.   The kids got guts to take the beating he did.   You better hope this line doesn't get him injured much worse than the sprains he had after last night.   Favre would have been long gone by now.

It is my opinion that it is time to take this thread (and argument) out back, shoot it, bury it, and salt the earth so nothing ever grows there ever again.

LoveMD wrote: No, you may say some of his stats are in garbage maybe in the first viking meeting but he brought his team back to within 4 and didnt have any garbage time yesterday. When you are within one score with 6 minutes to play it is not garbage time. So, one game in seven. I think your living in china if you dont think Rodgers can play.

The problem is we have to overrely on Rodgers as the sole emphasis of our offense. We can only pass the ball and have success offensively. We can not rely on running the ball to have success. So its Rodgers or bust.

Considering that we dont protect him and we dont pose a threat in running the ball, I think its amazing he has done as well as he has. How many times do we allow the opposing team to tee off knowing its a pass? Knowing we have leaky pass protection.

At 24-3 the Vikings CLEARLY shifted the focus of their defense...just as in the first game at 30-14.  It didn't happen much at all last year however, so two games is hardly a trend.

LoveMD wrote: No, you may say some of his stats are in garbage maybe in the first viking meeting but he brought his team back to within 4 and didnt have any garbage time yesterday. When you are within one score with 6 minutes to play it is not garbage time. there was mostly garbage to get back since minnesota was playing not to lose.  but you are correct that he brought the team back to within one score.  this was the biggest problem, he comes close and minnesota clamps down and he fails again.So, one game in seven. I think your living in china if you dont think Rodgers can play.

The problem is we have to overrely on Rodgers as the sole emphasis of our offense. not if he would get rid of the ball to his playmakers and let them run after the catch. how many times have you been watching the game and yelling at the TV   THROW THE BALL?We can only pass the ball and have success offensively. We can not rely on running the ball to have success. So its Rodgers or bust.

Considering that we dont protect him and we dont pose a threat in running the ball, I think its amazing he has done as well as he has. How many times do we allow the opposing team to tee off knowing its a pass? Knowing we have leaky pass protection.  Thats why he needs to unload the ball to playmakers. get rid of the ball. this in itself will slow down the pass rush.  i think the problem is he has trouble reading the defense and does not know what to do.

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

You are delusional if you think that comparing Rodgers (23 starts, 25 years old) to Favre in 2007 ( 16 seasons, 250+ NFL starts) is fair.

Anyone remember Favre after 23 games?  1993 was filled with an awful lot of instances where Holmgren seriously considered putting him on the bench.

We will be OK.

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

I am not sure what your criteria is for "a bust", but I tend to believe it is being molded around to make sure Rodgers fits into the category.

Please give us your definition of what a bust is, because from what I have seen so far Rodgers has done his part of the bargain, but other parts of the team have failed him. You can only make so many "adjustments" to your play to make up for a poor like. I actually like that Rodgers isn't afraid to hold onto the ball and wait for the play to develop instead of just flinging the ball out of his hand as fast as he can to avoid sacks.

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Rodgers now has a 10-13 overall record.  Out of his 10 wins 2 came against teams with winning records at the time we played them (colts 3-2, bears 5-4, not exactly earth shattering).  He continues to put up stats once a defense lays off because he can't generate enough offense to keep games close at the start.  Just look at the minnesota game.   After the score became 24-3 he finally was able to get it going against a laid back defense.  The game became 24-20 and rodgers as usual was unable to mount anything with the game on the line.  The QB for the other team took his team not once but twice to scores to expand on his teams leads.  Rodgers failed twice at 24-20 and 31-25.  Rodgers is not clutch and looks like he never will be.

This argument is completely fallacious in two ways:

1.  Aaron Rodgers is not 10-13 overall.  The Green Bay Packers with Aaron Rodgers (as its QB) is 10-13 overall.  This is like saying Jake Allen is 0-1. 

2.  Aaron Rodgers was clutch vs. Chicago (Game 1).  Therefore, he will never not be clutch.  One exception falsifies a generalization.

Ridiculous thread dead.   

I'll tell you what, we'll take him off your hands and give you a 1st round pick to boot.

You'll never get a better offer than that for a bust..

Roxette wrote:

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

I am not sure what your criteria is for "a bust", but I tend to believe it is being molded around to make sure Rodgers fits into the category.

 

Please give us your definition of what a bust is, because from what I have seen so far Rodgers has done his part of the bargain, but other parts of the team have failed him. You can only make so many "adjustments" to your play to make up for a poor like. I actually like that Rodgers isn't afraid to hold onto the ball and wait for the play to develop instead of just flinging the ball out of his hand as fast as he can to avoid sacks.

 

Roxette, you are correct, and at the risk of being accused of attacking the poster, I will merely say that the only contributions that the author of this post have made here in the past two years have been on one point and one point alone - that Aaron Rodgers is a failure and the main (if not only) reason that Green Bay has lost games.

Some people would call that trolling. I'll let others be the judge

Houston Huskies wrote:

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

You are delusional if you think that comparing Rodgers (23 starts, 25 years old) to Favre in 2007 ( 16 seasons, 250+ NFL starts) is fair.

 

Anyone remember Favre after 23 games?  1993 was filled with an awful lot of instances where Holmgren seriously considered putting him on the bench.

 

We will be OK.

the only one comparing him to favre is you.  I want to know why rodgers can't win games against winning teams?

socalgng wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

I am not sure what your criteria is for "a bust", but I tend to believe it is being molded around to make sure Rodgers fits into the category.

 

Please give us your definition of what a bust is, because from what I have seen so far Rodgers has done his part of the bargain, but other parts of the team have failed him. You can only make so many "adjustments" to your play to make up for a poor like. I actually like that Rodgers isn't afraid to hold onto the ball and wait for the play to develop instead of just flinging the ball out of his hand as fast as he can to avoid sacks.

 

Roxette, you are correct, and at the risk of being accused of attacking the poster, I will merely say that the only contributions that the author of this post have made here in the past two years have been on one point and one point alone - that Aaron Rodgers is a failure and the main (if not only) reason that Green Bay has lost games.

 

Some people would call that trolling. I'll let others be the judge

at this time in his career he is a bust.  did anyone expect a 10-13 record with 2 wins against winning teams after the 2007 season?  if you did, than shame on you for such low expectations.

Houston Huskies wrote:

 

packerbacker1818 wrote:

 

Roxette wrote:

You act like Rodgers is the only player on the team.

 

I think anyone can objectively see that Rodgers has done much better than anyone anticipated. He is still learning and growing and is doing a very good job in the process. The real problem is the running game and oline.

he is the one major difference from 2007.  good QB's adapt. the biggest problem we have is rodgers inability to read a defense accurately and quickly.  he needs to change his philosophy and get rid of the ball much quicker. I know the line is terrible, this is the reason rodgers needs to adapt.  until he does he will just continue to be another first round bust.

You are delusional if you think that comparing Rodgers (23 starts, 25 years old) to Favre in 2007 ( 16 seasons, 250+ NFL starts) is fair.

 

Anyone remember Favre after 23 games?  1993 was filled with an awful lot of instances where Holmgren seriously considered putting him on the bench.

 

We will be OK.

Exactly.  But the question is.....was packerbacker calling Favre a bust at the same point in his career?

IF I COULD PICK ONE PLAYER TO BUILD A NEW FRANCHISE AROUND...........AARON RODGERS!