@Pikes Peak posted:Team lack of effort
FTFY
@"We"-Ka-Bong posted:Well, they were in perfect position for 13, except………..
special teams
And Marcedes Lewis' fumble on the second drive, too.
@Chongo posted:Gutey/Ballz are in a tough spot...they want to win, but don't have a viable QB on the roster to make 12 expendable.
TT knew what he had with 12 on the roster, and it allowed him to walk away from 4...he could deal with the PR flak. He knew they'd get to the level they needed him to be...he could have been wrong, but he wasn't...but he had the confidence to move forward with him.
FO doesn't have the confidence to give the keys to Love at this moment it seems. If they felt like Love could give them the chance to get into the playoffs, they'd trade 12 tomorrow.
I’m not sure that TT knew what he had in AR. He was willing to take the heat but IMHO there was no certainty about AR. I’m glad it worked out. I don’t think anyone here was super confident in the move. Many were sick of 4’s antics, but certain about AR? Not so much.
So what’s holding back Gutey from taking the same risk?
Rodgers was considered a #1 overall pick by some and it was discussed a lot pre-draft of Rodger or Smith going #1.
TT stated he was the top pick on the board. TT, like everyone else, didn't expect him to fall that far.
Rodgers fell, Love was a reach.
@Henry posted:6 points wins the game without ST fuck ups. Fact. Also, I don't see one person stating it was ST only. You only pick that up because of rebuttals to people arguing it's all Rodgers fault and Rodgers alone.
The whole idea of scrapping the best legit chance because Rodgers is a poopybutt doodyhead is fan bullshit. That's the emotional knee jerk some like to talk about.
Nope, I don't believe it was Rodgers' fault alone. I saw 45 guys out there all failing together. However, only one of those guys was taking 20% of the cap. This is my only issue with Rodgers. Well, that and his ridiculous refusal to use all his receivers. Politics on any job leads to know good.
I still fail to understand why people think Rodgers contract is a Packers only issue.
You and Pakrz have been shitting on Rodgers for a few years now. That's why you two clowns were legit in your long running beefs. I can respect that. Doesn't make others ball snibblers.
@PackerHawk posted:They aren't trading 69.
Dammit! I love 69. Wait! What are we talking about.
@PackerHawk posted:If they do give contracts with that kind of average to Rodgers and Adams their 2022 and 2023 cap figures won't be anywhere close to that. The piper will be paid eventually, but not during the prime SB window.
Yup!
@Henry posted:Rodgers fell, Love was a reach.
In my world he is worth a reach around.
Are you still quoting draftniks? Seriously, quit consulting with Packerjoe.
Dink.
I'm actually backing off my Love bashing until year 3 proves otherwise. I'm hoping for the proverbial light bulb even if I'm not overly hopeful.
@Goalline posted:The offense lead by the MVP was responsible for only 10 points. Let's stop pretending that this was remotely a special teams only problem. The side of the ball you all like to bash gave up 3 non-special teams induced points, and the MVP of the league still couldn't lead his team to a win. He was unable to score more than 13 points. Brutal!
100%. It's amazing how differently two sides view that game. There is absolutely no doubt that our special teams shit the bed, as they did throughout the year. It's a fact that they gave up 7 points directly and another three indirectly since there is no guarantee Crosby makes that kick given his late season swoon. But taking the blinders off, if anyone told you SF would score just 13 points and we had #12 healthy and playing at home, wouldn't you bet the farm that the Packers would win? Yes, the special teams gave up points. What if the defense gave up all 13 and we lost 13-10...everyone would be saying that the defense played lights out and AR blew the game. Somehow the fact that the special teams gave up points makes AR's poor performance excusable. How many memorable playoff games has he had since the Atlanta game and SB in 2010? The Dallas game and the throw to Jermichael Finley stand out for me, but not much else.
@RochNyFan posted:Somehow the fact that the special teams gave up points makes AR's poor performance excusable.
Who said it was excusable? ST gave up 10 of the 9ers 13 points. That is a fact.
@Henry posted:Who said it was excusable? ST gave up 10 of the 9ers 13 points. That is a fact.
That is true indeed. I think looking at the game objectively, Rodgers' performance was sub-standard, and that's a fact based on his regular season performance. I guess you are right in your point that the blame lies on many.
Rodgers stunk. Kelly stunk. Turner, meh. Guys dropping balls. The whole offense was just typical deer in headlights except for Jones.
Rodgers is Stafford at this point. That's still enough to build around for a couple more years. You came this far on contracts, etc. Just throw all the shit at the wall and see what happens.
And I say that completely bracing for the possibility of another completely fucked up playoff loss. Again, it seems like the rational thing to do but damn if I'm not fighting the rational.
@RochNyFan posted:100%. It's amazing how differently two sides view that game. .
It's the Mandela effect.
Wearing a rubber glove on your head will do that.
Who are we talking about again?
@RochNyFan posted:But taking the blinders off, if anyone told you SF would score just 13 points and we had #12 healthy and playing at home, wouldn't you bet the farm that the Packers would win?
I think anyone who expected that to be a high scoring game had their blinders ON. The 49ers are exactly the kind of team the Packers struggle with. This was ALWAYS going to be a defensive struggle. The main surprise was how bad the special teams were. We knew they were bad, but they went above and beyond in that game. What's more unusual, an offense only scoring 10 or a special teams unit giving up 10 all on its own? Tell us again who's wearing the blinders?
@Dr._Bob posted:I think anyone who expected that to be a high scoring game had their blinders ON. The 49ers are exactly the kind of team the Packers struggle with. This was ALWAYS going to be a defensive struggle. The main surprise was how bad the special teams were. We knew they were bad, but they went above and beyond in that game. What's more unusual, an offense only scoring 10 or a special teams unit giving up 10 all on its own? Tell us again who's wearing the blinders?
49ers have a good defense, but they are not the '85 Bears, or the '96 Packers. They gave up almost 22 points a game this year. We were playing them at home, with the league MVP at QB, the weather in our favor and on a field that most thought would slow down the pass rush. Their defense did not prevent Rodgers from ignoring a wide open Lazard on the last play, or Deguara throughout the game. To lay this loss at the feet of special teams alone, despite how abysmal they were, is wrong. It was a team effort, and that includes the coaches who decided to retool and offensive line that had been working effectively. No one's suggesting they expected a high scoring game. Scoring 17, 21, or 24 is not high scoring....but 10 is certainly beneath logical expectations.
It absolutely was a team loss. But again, which is more unusual, an offense scoring only 10 or special teams giving up 10. Everyone had a role in the loss but special teams had the biggest role. They failed in epic proportions. The Packers offensive coordinator was given a Head Coach position. The special teams coordinator was fired.
@Dr._Bob posted:I think anyone who expected that to be a high scoring game had their blinders ON. The 49ers are exactly the kind of team the Packers struggle with. This was ALWAYS going to be a defensive struggle. The main surprise was how bad the special teams were. We knew they were bad, but they went above and beyond in that game. What's more unusual, an offense only scoring 10 or a special teams unit giving up 10 all on its own? Tell us again who's wearing the blinders?
What's become usual is Rodgers putting up duds against the same defenses again and again, even though the blueprint has been there on how to approach it. A special teams meltdown could have easily been expected considering the way they anti-performed all season. The unit was neglected and the entire organization essentially crossed their fingers hoping it wouldn't bite them.No one denies they gifted SF those 10 points.
What's just as egregious is the offense and Rodgers having ball in hand after having spotted them 10 points and doing less than nothing to contribute to a win. Not even changing field position. Not even one first down, let alone points. SF won that game on two or three huge plays and the rest they won by attrition/field position. Had the GB offense simply gained two or three first downs and scored no points, it could very well have been enough to get the W.
So after all the offseason drama, after all the handwringing about keeping AR in the fold, it shouldn't be unusual to expect the main ingredient to at minimum move the chains and help the defense/ST secure the game. And we haven't even mentioned Rodgers' tunnel vision and willingly falling into the same trap against the same defensive set over and over. If you have issues with a defense disguising formation and moving personnel, you take wtf you know is being given to you. Is it unusual to expect the two time reigning MVP to be capable of that?
@Henry posted:Wearing a rubber glove on your head will do that.
Who are we talking about again?
The Mandela effect is rather interesting, if we can just push the real topic aside here for a moment. I just recently learned about this, but some of the examples blow my mind.
There never was a Jiffy peanut butter, it's always been Jif. There never was a Berenstein Bears. It was Berenstain. Curious George never had a tail. The show was Sex and the City, not Sex In the City. It's not Febreeze, it's Febreze. It's not Oscar Meyer, it's Oscar Mayer. C-3PO isn't all gold, he has a silver piece on his right leg in episode 4 and The Empire Strikes Back. The Flinstones isn't right. It's The Flintstones. It's not "Mirror, mirror on the wall," it's "Magic mirror on the wall." Darth Vader never said, "Luke, I am your father," he simply said, I am your father." Mr. Rodger's theme song never said, "It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood," it was, "It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood." That famous quote, "Lucy, you have some splaining to do" - Nope, it was really "Splain that if you can" or "Lucy, splain." It's not Smoky the Bear. It's Smokey Bear.
There are others, and there are interesting explanations behind some of it.
Except that Mr. Rodgers was Mr. Rogers, as was Roy.
But who will Mrs. Rodgers be? The world is on the edge of its axis.
@Henry posted:Dink.
I'm actually backing off my Love bashing until year 3 proves otherwise. I'm hoping for the proverbial light bulb even if I'm not overly hopeful.
Referring to him as a reach? That’s how you back off?😂😂😂
@Harry Manback posted:Wow, you're even slower than Packers.com with the news!
I posted that because of the last sentence. But thanks for your input.
@PA green & gold posted:I’m not sure that TT knew what he had in AR. He was willing to take the heat but IMHO there was no certainty about AR. I’m glad it worked out. I don’t think anyone here was super confident in the move. Many were sick of 4’s antics, but certain about AR? Not so much.
So what’s holding back Gutey from taking the same risk?
Seriously? Some people believe the tripe that TT knew that once Rodgers wasn't selected by the 10th pick or so that he would fall to the Packers. As if no teams would move up ahead of the Packers at some point in the 1st round. They believed that and some probably still do.
@Dr._Bob posted:But who will Mrs. Rodgers be? The world is on the edge of its axis.
Shailene Woodley And Aaron Rodgers Have Reportedly Split. So not her.
@artis posted:What's become usual is Rodgers putting up duds against the same defenses again and again, even though the blueprint has been there on how to approach it. A special teams meltdown could have easily been expected considering the way they anti-performed all season. The unit was neglected and the entire organization essentially crossed their fingers hoping it wouldn't bite them.No one denies they gifted SF those 10 points.
What's just as egregious is the offense and Rodgers having ball in hand after having spotted them 10 points and doing less than nothing to contribute to a win. Not even changing field position. Not even one first down, let alone points. SF won that game on two or three huge plays and the rest they won by attrition/field position. Had the GB offense simply gained two or three first downs and scored no points, it could very well have been enough to get the W.
So after all the offseason drama, after all the handwringing about keeping AR in the fold, it shouldn't be unusual to expect the main ingredient to at minimum move the chains and help the defense/ST secure the game. And we haven't even mentioned Rodgers' tunnel vision and willingly falling into the same trap against the same defensive set over and over. If you have issues with a defense disguising formation and moving personnel, you take wtf you know is being given to you. Is it unusual to expect the two time reigning MVP to be capable of that?
exactly. well stated and correct
@D J posted:Shailene Woodley And Aaron Rodgers Have Reportedly Split. So not her.
12 has a difficult time with relationships. Weird.
It was probably the corduroy suit. Or the mullet. Or his pompous personality.
False starts can be a problem. So I’ve heard.
@Pakrz posted:12 has a difficult time with relationships. Weird.
It was probably the corduroy suit. Or the mullet. Or his pompous personality.
Ever seen the bartender on Youtube, Anders Erickson? Looks a lot like Rodgers, and he is from Wisconsin. Moonlighting?
The Elk's Own is a great winter cocktail that Anders has sort of rediscovered.