Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 198 of 211 FirstFirst ... 98148188196197198199200208 ... LastLast
Results 2,956 to 2,970 of 3162
  1. #2956
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Wang View Post
    That is not Rodgersí sticking point. He isnít asking to be some kind of de facto GM, he is upset with GB front office for their mishandling of the roster and trading up for a project QB that will eventually replace him, instead of taking someone that can help them win right away.
    Not all true.
    He got mad not only because of bad drafting.
    But he wanted to extend his contract to where he would get paid more than 45 mil a year!!!!
    He was asked to restructure his contract because they wanted to sign more defensive players and more offensive weapons. And Rodgers was furious that they would ask him to do so(I have a friend of mine who is a hardcore gb fan). Even if he got here, he wants an extension where he makes 45 mil plus a year. At least mahommes restructured his so he would only be a 9 mil cap hit this year. Rodgers wonít restructure

  2. #2957
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    13,585
    Quote Originally Posted by krsonekth View Post
    I can guarantee we won't go 8-8 this year.
    So what are you saying...8-8-1???

  3. #2958
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe-Raider View Post
    I hear that argument often. Adams to me is one of the best wide receivers in the league, 18 touchdowns in 14 games last season. I would think that alone would trump any first round receiver. Traditionally, the Pack have had above average receivers even though they were not first rounders. They've had good running backs, very good tight ends, and their line was good. They have had all of the ingredients to win.
    Brady: Evans, Godwin, Gronk
    Mahommes: Hill, Watkins, Kelce
    Rogers: Adams

    How is this similar? Rogers has one great receiver. Thatís it. And unfortunately for Rogers, his only great receiver is injury prone.

    And... you said it yourself...the packers receivers have over performed, even though they werenít high draft picks. Even Adams was the ninth receiver taken in his draft. You wonder what the common denominator is? Rogers. He makes good receivers great. Makes average receivers good. Look at Rogers stats... if he was on the bucs, with those weapons, you think he would have had a better season than brady? He already did with worse talent.

    Might be you keep hearing that argument often because... itís valid.

  4. #2959
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,316
    Quote Originally Posted by krsonekth View Post
    I can guarantee we won't go 8-8 this year.
    True. We will win more.

    Biggest problem was our 30th ranked d.
    We improved at de(Ingaque). Improved at cb(Douglas and Hayward). Improved at dt(Thomas, Jefferson). Improved at fs(moehrig).

    Improved on o with brown(who was an actual two time 1k wr And drake).

    How do we not win more games?

  5. #2960
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    13,140
    Quote Originally Posted by RaiderLakersA's View Post
    So what are you saying...8-8-1???
    Touche!!!!!

  6. #2961
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    13,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Megatron View Post
    True. We will win more.

    Biggest problem was our 30th ranked d.
    We improved at de(Ingaque). Improved at cb(Douglas and Hayward). Improved at dt(Thomas, Jefferson). Improved at fs(moehrig).

    Improved on o with brown(who was an actual two time 1k wr And drake).

    How do we not win more games?
    I agree with what you just said.

    However, I was being funny because teams can't go 8-8 anymore with 17 games now.

  7. #2962
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,316
    True. Your either a winning team now or have a losing record.

    Unlessss 8-8-1 lol. Still wonít make the playoffs. Unless your in the nfc.

  8. #2963
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,587
    11-6......regardless who the QB may be. You heard it here first.

  9. #2964
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Raider Nation
    Posts
    16,153
    Quote Originally Posted by FarOutIos View Post
    Brady: Evans, Godwin, Gronk
    Mahommes: Hill, Watkins, Kelce
    Rogers: Adams

    How is this similar? Rogers has one great receiver. Thatís it. And unfortunately for Rogers, his only great receiver is injury prone.

    And... you said it yourself...the packers receivers have over performed, even though they werenít high draft picks. Even Adams was the ninth receiver taken in his draft. You wonder what the common denominator is? Rogers. He makes good receivers great. Makes average receivers good. Look at Rogers stats... if he was on the bucs, with those weapons, you think he would have had a better season than brady? He already did with worse talent.

    Might be you keep hearing that argument often because... itís valid.
    I didn't say Rodgers isn't great or that he doesn't help his WRs become very good. It's true, so no I don't wonder what the common denominator is. My point being, some of those guys are better than people think with or without Rogers. Scantling is a pretty good WR. He's had quality TEs for awhile. They have had really good RBs as well. It is not as bad there as some make out. Certainly not so bad to turn into a handful of sand in GBs speedo. people make it sound like GB is surrounding Rodgers with the bad news bears. Not the case. You can't load every position with greatness, some of them just have to be good or better than average and some average (NFL standard). You also have to fix other weeknesses with the limited picks you have.
    Look at Pittsburgh. Some of those WRs came out of nowhere and are pretty damn good. Brown was Super Great for some time...6th round. Management felt building the line over the last two years was important. GB drafted a WR in the 3rd this year, a good round to find a very good WR.

    "...prone to stoogery.".

  10. #2965
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Raider Nation
    Posts
    16,153
    Quote Originally Posted by Megatron View Post
    True. We will win more.

    Biggest problem was our 30th ranked d.
    We improved at de(Ingaque). Improved at cb(Douglas and Hayward). Improved at dt(Thomas, Jefferson). Improved at fs(moehrig).

    Improved on o with brown(who was an actual two time 1k wr And drake).

    How do we not win more games?

    Yeah man! I am with you.

    "...prone to stoogery.".

  11. #2966
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe-Raider View Post
    I didn't say Rodgers isn't great or that he doesn't help his WRs become very good. It's true, so no I don't wonder what the common denominator is. My point being, some of those guys are better than people think with or without Rogers. Scantling is a pretty good WR. He's had quality TEs for awhile. They have had really good RBs as well. It is not as bad there as some make out. Certainly not so bad to turn into a handful of sand in GBs speedo. people make it sound like GB is surrounding Rodgers with the bad news bears. Not the case. You can't load every position with greatness, some of them just have to be good or better than average and some average (NFL standard). You also have to fix other weeknesses with the limited picks you have.
    Look at Pittsburgh. Some of those WRs came out of nowhere and are pretty damn good. Brown was Super Great for some time...6th round. Management felt building the line over the last two years was important. GB drafted a WR in the 3rd this year, a good round to find a very good WR.
    Again, GB doesnít have bad receivers. But theyíre not great. Does Rogers weapons compare to bradys? Mahommes? Donít you think tee higgins, claypool or Pittman would have been great with Rogers? Maybe closed the gap on talent level of the receivers?

    And yes, you canít load up on every position (except if youíre Brady or mahommes). Which is why Rogers is upset they loaded up on QB. THATS the exact point! Even if they went with another position of need, at least they would have had a better shot at a super bowl.

  12. #2967
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,587
    GB had the best record in the conference. So what, when the playoffs started, their receiver corps suddenly sucked?
    Rogers should stick to QBing and let the owner run the team.

  13. #2968
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    13,585
    Quote Originally Posted by dbacknick View Post
    11-6......regardless who the QB may be. You heard it here first.
    We can only hope for that or better. This is the year that Jon gets his "Raiders Redux" winning percentage to .500.

  14. #2969
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,587
    Quote Originally Posted by RaiderLakersA's View Post
    We can only hope for that or better. This is the year that Jon gets his "Raiders Redux" winning percentage to .500.
    I'm concerned about the first few games. Let's hope Bradley can put it all together, and the guys that we have high expectations can deliver.

  15. #2970
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,450
    Quote Originally Posted by dbacknick View Post
    I'm concerned about the first few games. Let's hope Bradley can put it all together, and the guys that we have high expectations can deliver.
    Thatís funny. I just read a story about how the ravens want to take advantage of the soft schedule early. Hope Jon saw that... bulletin board is looking a little bare.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •