PDA

View Full Version : Booing Rodgers



hawkeye
07-25-2008, 11:16 AM
Looks like Ted will get his way and shove Brett into permanent retirement or to a team that won't give us trouble in the regular season. It has been well chronicled on here about what makes a true Packer fan. I make no bones about my hatred for TT and never liked the Rodgers pick to begin with (although I understand why we took him). I've been a Packer fan since the Lombardi era and cried like a baby when Starr retired. I rooted for the entire list of scum that followed him until the great Ron Wolf grabbed #4.

Although living in Chicago my entire life, I still made the pilgramage to football Mecca to watch the Pack during dismal times in the 70's and 80's. The team would get booed on occasion and deserved it - there were some God-awful teams. That said, I will root for Rodgers to perform well. If he fails, we fail and miss the playoffs or have an early exit. All that said, Rodgers is going to get hammered by the fans with every slight miscue. If Favre can be booed at times, you better be prepared for a hometeam guy to get booed louder than anyone in the history of the franchise. My point being that the booing will not be directed at Rodgers as much as it will be at Ted Thompson. Should this team come up short of last year's performance, TT must go and we'll have to move Rodgers.

I have never felt sorry for Rodgers as he collects millions for holding a clipboard while having the best seat in the house, but this young man is in an absolutely impossible and no-win situation should he not go at the very least, deep into the playoffs. I personally think he'll do ok and that he's a very tough-minded guy, but he has the toughest act to follow in the history of the game. You can argue about the guys that replaced other legends, but none of them had to go thru the scrutiny of every single snap like Rodgers will.

When he throws a pic, he will be slaughtered by the fans. Just remember those that are booing are boing more so at the GM and are still great fans. I'm just so pissed at Brett and TT for the whole mess. I'm pissed at TT for the way he handled this nighmare, his drafts for the most part, and his inactivity in FA. What I really struggle with Brett is the last 3 years of not being able to make up his friggin mind. Really Brett, what is there to think about each year? You're a football player, you love the game itself, and you get rewarded with millions and adoration. If I had the ability that Favre had, they would have to drag me off the fied if I was still performing at a high level. If his performance was poor, then I could understand the wavering. The guy can still flatout play, there should NEVER have been indecisiveness on his part. It is an honor to play in the NFL and to have been BLESSED with the kind of talent and arm he has, again there should have been no wavering the last 3 years. He's a football player. Play football and stop trying to play GM.

There truely is a bottomline to this situation and that is for both men to swallow some pride and ego and have #4 return for 2 more years. Rodgers is in for a long, long, haul and it really isn't his fault that he will be crucified with every mistake - big or small. Man this is UGLY!

Martz
07-25-2008, 12:02 PM
There is no way for a positive outcome in this whole mess. And i don't think the fans will jump on him in week one. Ted has built a pretty good recieving corps, that i could step in there and probably produce better then what the Bears have at QB. And if he does fail, we got a young stud behind him in Brohm. Also, our offense is built around the concept of 3 or 5 step drops and sling it on that last step. It's not a 7 to 9 step drop back...take your time and sling it 40 yards down field. We had that offense when Favre was at his worst. When Favre bought into the shorter passing game, look what happened. 1 positive year, and one amazing year. On top of that, our defense was tremendous last year and only will get better this year. Rodgers won't have put the team on his shoulders. He can pretty much just sit back and be a game manager, and have successful numbers.

I really feel that Rodgers would have to be the worst QB in the history of the game to step in now and not succeed.

And besides Hawkeye, if he does fail, you get to say i told you so. :D

Packerbacker
07-25-2008, 12:02 PM
Good Post, I hope Rodgers realizes that the boo's aren't all directed towards him. If he takes the boo's to heart then he will lose alot of confidence and never really be able to succeed in this league

beast
07-25-2008, 12:21 PM
There is no way for a positive outcome in this whole mess.

Maybe, there is. Maybe if Favre files the papers, comes back to the Packers, and Rodgers and Favre compete to be the starter.

Martz
07-25-2008, 12:36 PM
Maybe, there is. Maybe if Favre files the papers, comes back to the Packers, and Rodgers and Favre compete to be the starter.

Be serious? You really think there would be a competition? You can say "open competition" all you want, but you think in Aaron Rodgers mind that he thinks he could dethrone Favre.

uncfan44
07-25-2008, 12:59 PM
Be serious? You really think there would be a competition? You can say "open competition" all you want, but you think in Aaron Rodgers mind that he thinks he could dethrone Favre.

no there would be no competition, but point is it shuts ppl up that say last season was a fluke. It shows favre is willing to work for it and is no longer wishy washy on commin back. good ol competition breeds good play.

beast
07-25-2008, 12:59 PM
Be serious? You really think there would be a competition? You can say "open competition" all you want, but you think in Aaron Rodgers mind that he thinks he could dethrone Favre.

I don't know what's in Rodgers mind, but it doesn't matter because right now Rodgers has the spot.

So the question should be, "Can Favre dethrone Rodgers as the starter?"

I think the answer is duh, yea he could....

But that also leaves the question, "Will he be able to do it?"

beast
07-25-2008, 01:02 PM
no there would be no competition, but point is it shuts ppl up that say last season was a fluke. It shows favre is willing to work for it and is no longer wishy washy on commin back. good ol competition breeds good play.

I don't think the play was a fluke, maybe 13-3 was because we could of lose a couple of the close games if we didn't have a lucky day.

The Eagles and Redskins might of gone another way, with out some luck.

Martz
07-25-2008, 01:07 PM
no there would be no competition, but point is it shuts ppl up that say last season was a fluke. It shows favre is willing to work for it and is no longer wishy washy on commin back. good ol competition breeds good play.

I don't think it was a fluke either. I just think he's had a better supporting cast and a much better game plan then he's had in years

uncfan44
07-25-2008, 01:09 PM
I don't think the play was a fluke, maybe 13-3 was because we could of lose a couple of the close games if we didn't have a lucky day.

The Eagles and Redskins might of gone another way, with out some luck.


I don't think it was a fluke either. I just think he's had a better supporting cast and a much better game plan then he's had in years

what i meant by that was there is a ton of ppl like espn's steven a smith that say his season was a fluke bc of the 2 prior years, but fail to realize that the team was inferior to last years team.

uncfan44
07-25-2008, 01:09 PM
i by no means think it was, or have never seen ne one n hear claim that it was.

beast
07-25-2008, 01:28 PM
what i meant by that was there is a ton of ppl like espn's steven a smith that say his season was a fluke bc of the 2 prior years, but fail to realize that the team was inferior to last years team.

Ok, yeah, I don't think it was a fluke we were that good. IMo the main problem last year, was mainly the health of the DL. Jolly and Cole had season ending injury, Pickett, Kampman and KGB got banged up late in the season, Jenkins was banged up the whole year. I think everyone knows about Harrell. That was the biggest change though out the season.

The DL and the pressure they were suppose to get.

hawkeye
07-25-2008, 01:29 PM
I don't think the play was a fluke, maybe 13-3 was because we could of lose a couple of the close games if we didn't have a lucky day.

The Eagles and Redskins might of gone another way, with out some luck.

13-3 was very fortunate. With Rodgers it would have been .500 at best. Those young recievers never would have progressed like they did without Favre. I don't expect you to agree, but then most NFL personnel do see it this way.

Martz
07-25-2008, 01:45 PM
13-3 was very fortunate. With Rodgers it would have been .500 at best. Those young recievers never would have progressed like they did without Favre. I don't expect you to agree, but then most NFL personnel do see it this way.

I credit the coaching staff more then i credit favre for reciever development.

beast
07-25-2008, 01:46 PM
13-3 was very fortunate. With Rodgers it would have been .500 at best. Those young recievers never would have progressed like they did without Favre. I don't expect you to agree, but then most NFL personnel do see it this way.

I agree with the bold, if you add a "most likely" behind the word, "recievers".

The rest is all speculation, and guesses.

And I agree with this.


I credit the coaching staff more then i credit favre for reciever development.

socalpkrbkr
07-25-2008, 01:50 PM
what i meant by that was there is a ton of ppl like espn's steven a smith that say his season was a fluke bc of the 2 prior years, but fail to realize that the team was inferior to last years team.

The guys a douche bag who doesn't no **** about the Packers or football.

beast
07-25-2008, 01:51 PM
The guys a douche bag who doesn't no **** about the Packers or football.

Does he know any sport other than Basket ball?

socalpkrbkr
07-25-2008, 01:57 PM
Does he know any sport other than Basket ball?

Good question. The guy makes me sick with his smart *** attitude and know it all comments.

servais77
07-25-2008, 01:58 PM
Does he know any sport other than Basket ball?

He doesn't know **** about basketball either.

hawkeye
07-25-2008, 02:11 PM
I credit the coaching staff more then i credit favre for reciever development.

So, they would have had the same success with Rodgers?

Ryan Diesel
07-25-2008, 02:35 PM
Yeah Stephen A. Smith doesn't know basketball either. He was just on TV a month ago swearing up and down the Lakers were going to win the title. He talks to the players so he's the first to know when they sign a contract, but thats about it. He's arrogant and ignorant and I can't believe ESPN lets him talk about football or baseball. He makes Skip Bayless look intelligent, and that says a lot.

hughest4
07-25-2008, 03:20 PM
Nice post Hawkeye. I'm not sure that this is definitely a no win situation for Rodgers, but its going to be extremely difficult for him. I think if he comes out week 1 against the Vikings and plays great then he will gain some support. Starting off on a bad note against our rival team would not be good for him IMO

Martz
07-25-2008, 03:58 PM
So, they would have had the same success with Rodgers?

You asking if they would have the same stats with ARod or the same progression. I KNOW without a doubt there stats wouldn't be the same...but I know they would have the ability to put up those numbers. Our coaching staff is that good.

beast
07-25-2008, 04:01 PM
Yeah Stephen A. Smith doesn't know basketball either. He was just on TV a month ago swearing up and down the Lakers were going to win the title. He talks to the players so he's the first to know when they sign a contract, but thats about it. He's arrogant and ignorant and I can't believe ESPN lets him talk about football or baseball. He makes Skip Bayless look intelligent, and that says a lot.

lol :)

Martz
07-25-2008, 04:22 PM
Yeah Stephen A. Smith doesn't know basketball either. He was just on TV a month ago swearing up and down the Lakers were going to win the title. He talks to the players so he's the first to know when they sign a contract, but thats about it. He's arrogant and ignorant and I can't believe ESPN lets him talk about football or baseball. He makes Skip Bayless look intelligent, and that says a lot.


:clap::clap::clap:

hawkeye
07-25-2008, 04:54 PM
You asking if they would have the same stats with ARod or the same progression. I KNOW without a doubt there stats wouldn't be the same...but I know they would have the ability to put up those numbers. Our coaching staff is that good.

You're reaching farther than the fat, one-armed, always injured kid from Tennesee does for a doughnut with that statement.

Martz
07-25-2008, 05:39 PM
You're reaching farther than the fat, one-armed, always injured kid from Tennesee does for a doughnut with that statement.

^^^Debbie downer...........always so negative about our players.

Driver isn't a pro bowler without Favre? or an elite qb?

So you don't think Jennings is capable of having 1000 yard receiving year without Brett Favre or another elite QB? Jennings is a stud....and will do that many times in his career with or without Favre.

Your saying that James Jones without Favre or an elite QB will not reach 676 yards again??? And lets not forget, Jones trailed way off at the end of the season. If Favre was that big of an influence in the WR's, was it because of Favre that he degressed? No...the rookie wall.

But I don't think Favre was the reason for any of these.

Brooke
07-25-2008, 05:50 PM
Stephen A Smith shouldn't even talk about football, he needs to stick to basketball. Him and his idiotic rantings got old a long time ago

favre_4life
07-26-2008, 11:01 AM
Pretty sure Stephen A Smith knows more about sports then all of us. Pretty sure he is employed by espn, while we are all *****ing at eachother on a Packers forum. Not saying i like the guy but come one.

socalpkrbkr
07-26-2008, 01:51 PM
Pretty sure Stephen A Smith knows more about sports then all of us. Pretty sure he is employed by espn, while we are all *****ing at eachother on a Packers forum. Not saying i like the guy but come one.

Just because hes employed by BSPN doesn't mean ****. I will put my knowledge of this franchise up against his any day of the week. The guy is nothing more than a loud mouth buffoon.

BrewCityBuck
07-26-2008, 03:49 PM
I just feel that Aaron Rodgers is in a position where he can't fail. He just has so many targets. How many young QB's walk into a situation with so many able pass catchers? Imagine if Jordy Nelson can walk in and provide a James Jones-esque rookie year? Same with Jermichael Finley who is an accomplished pass-catcher?

The only way Aaron Rodgers will dissapoint in my opinion is if our offensive line gets decimated by injury or if he gets injured.

I think he'll do a fine job.