1st time?
I said before, you were never rong, just mistaken. But not this time. 
@ammo posted:For the 1st time ever Pakrz you are rong.
First time? I think Mrs Pakrz would be more than willing to open your eyes.
When it comes to Pakrz and Ms. Pakrz I keep my eyes wide shut. 
@CUPackFan posted:You have to ask yourself - can the Packers win a Super Bowl in 2023 or 2024 with Rodgers?
No
Packers need Rodgers to retire or trade him. Start Love and embrace the suck as long as it takes to get the cap back in line and rebuild. Watching these games today is glaringly evident the Packers aren't close.
@Pakrz posted:For the record and given the choice, I'd also opt to trade 12 this off season. I think he is still one helluva talent but I don't think GB can win a SB within the window he has left. That, and GB does need to figure out what they have in Love.
If GB decides to stick with 12 and ride it out, I'm good with that also.
If they don’t know what Love is capable of by now they need some new tallant evaluators.
You don’t even know how to spell talant.
I also think that it's tough to evaluate Love because GB has had more than 30 years of HOF talant at QB. Comparing Love to Rodgers every day is like comparing the Mona Lisa to a portrait by Aunt Ethel. Next to Rodgers, anyone is going to look like crap. And yes, Love did look like crap until this year with limited playing time. Coaches, the FO, and fans have to accept the fact that Love is not going to be Rodgers or Favre, especially in his first year starting, but that he might be a pretty good QB in 2024. Burrows had growing pains, Lawrence looked like crap until halfway through this year, etc. I don't know that Love will be as good as those guys, but it's time to lower our QB expectations a bit, get rid of Rodgers to cure the cap problems as soon as possible, and move on.
Rodgers didn’t play like a HOF QB his first full season either. The Packers were 2-6 midway through his first full season in 2008.
@Blair Kiel posted:You don’t even know how to spell talant.
Spelling looks rite too mee
Lots of great football in the past 30+ years. 2 titles and in the hunt nearly every year.
While it's not the summer of cheese, we may be heading to the summer of Love.
And, that may be the right thing to do.
But I wonder, as Packers fans are we willing to live through a 5-8 year span like '74-'81 to get a Superb Owl once every 8-10 years?
That may be the future of the NFLFU. Win at all costs and deal with the debt for 5-8 years before the window opens again with a top tier (top 8) QB on his rookie deal with a top 5 D?
I'd be fine with that.
@H5 posted:Lots of great football in the past 30+ years. 2 titles and in the hunt nearly every year.
But I wonder, as Packers fans are we willing to live through a 5-8 year span like '74-'81 to get a Superb Owl once every 8-10 years?
The Packers have been to one Super Bowl in the past 26 years and none the past 12 years.
If winning the NFC North most years over 3 crappy opponents that have been to a combined 1 SB over the past 36 seasons (a loss by the Bears 15 years ago) is sufficient success for the fan base, then by all means run it back with Rodge, enjoy the Murph retirement tour, give Gutey & all his boys further extensions, and keep all the coaches for as long as possible including Joe Barry.
But if getting to a SB sometime in the next 5 years is the actual goal of the organization then fundamental changes have got to be made … starting, but by no means ending, with moving on from the declining, soon to be 40 year old, prickly QB the Front Office signed to a huge extension just 10 months ago.
@SteveLuke posted:The Packers have been to one Super Bowl in the past 26 years and none the past 12 years.
If winning the NFC North most years over 3 crappy opponents that have been to a combined 1 SB over the past 36 seasons (a loss by the Bears 15 years ago) is sufficient success for the fan base, then by all means run it back with Rodge, enjoy the Murph retirement tour, give Gutey & all his boys further extensions, and keep all the coaches for as long as possible including Joe Barry.
But if getting to a SB sometime in the next 5 years is the actual goal of the organization then fundamental changes have got to be made … starting, but by no means ending, with moving on from the declining, soon to be 40 year old, prickly QB the Front Office signed to a huge extension just 10 months ago.
totally agree. trade rodgers now before the albatross becomes even bigger
The Favre and Rodgers championships came in their 1st five years w/GB, time is running out for Love.
@H5 posted:The Favre and Rodgers championships came in their 1st five years w/GB, time is running out for Love.
The big thing people sometimes forget about Rodgers is that they signed him to his second contract in the middle of a 6-10 season during his first year as a starter. He got a lot of money for a player who had started 7 games (as of October 31, 2008), but a lot less than if he'd have started and been successful for 2-3 years before that. The money they saved made the cap a lot easier to manage in 2009-2010.
Maybe they'll do the same thing with Love. Star QBs get about 50 million a year at this point. You could gamble and offer him something like 5 years and 125 million. Would Gutey do it? Would the Packers do it? That's basically what they did with Rodgers in 2008.
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/gr.../aaron-rodgers-3745/
OCT 31 2008 Signed a 6 year $63.52 million contract with Green Bay (GB)
Gutenkrust needs to turn the keys over to his guy.
I think he wants to but the situation is bigger than him, says 1265.
I’m a little surprised a teammate (or coach) would compliment/talk up another player on the team.
"and he's a great guy" reads a little too close to "and she's got a great personality".
After what Doubs said about Rodgers never meeting or having a get-together with WRs or team members, I gotta believe Doubs is campaigning for Love to be the QB next year.
He was directly asked about "hanging out with AR outside of the facility" and he responded he never did other than a Halloween party the team had..... you really took from that that Doubs was "campaigning for Love to be the QB"??? The mental gymnastics used around here to connect dots is impressive.
Just heard from a reliable source that Rodgers won't give candy to rookie receivers at Halloween
If "we" can get Love to play both offense and defense I say go for it.
https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/corys-corner-jordan-love-has-backing-of-teammates-530
"I think he'll be back," Jones said. "I think he wants to go out on his own. Like, if he's retiring, I think he wants to go out on his own, right? So, I definitely see him coming back and playing, and I hope definitely it's in Green Bay. He's a great leader for us, and, you know, a guy like that he brings a lot of people along."
-Aaron Jones, during same interview from above post in which he praises Jordan Love
Shocked players back other players on their team when asked.
This is a great article.
@YATittle posted:This is a great article.
The Chiefs have a really good HC who isn't afraid to fire assistants or trade players away.
That makes a difference.
Two things really stood out to me when it comes to Mahomes vs. Rodgers: the first is that Mahomes gathered all the new guys and they went over what to do, etc. Just think if Rodgers had actually done that. The second was this line: "Mahomes started the season saying that defenses wouldn't know where the ball was going, and he backed up that claim by trusting those new faces." Yes, Mahomes had more vets, but he still trusted them to catch the ball and he spread it around. Yesterday, seven different guys caught passes and two others were targeted. That's nine different guys Mahomes went to in only 27 attempts.
But I read it somewhere on X4 it is not Rodgers job to get the new guys up to speed. That is the job of the coaches.
@Fandame posted:The second was this line: "Mahomes started the season saying that defenses wouldn't know where the ball was going, and he backed up that claim by trusting those new faces." Yes, Mahomes had more vets, but he still trusted them to catch the ball and he spread it around. Yesterday, seven different guys caught passes and two others were targeted. That's nine different guys Mahomes went to in only 27 attempts.
I am on record as saying Rodgers should have been traded a year ago and I believe even more strongly today that he needs to be gone.
That said, the fact that Mahomes targeted 9 different receivers and connected with 7 of them yesterday is, in my opinion, more of an indictment of a front office that has failed to add talent at TE/WR than it is of Rodgers.
In support of my position, I harken back to a SB 12 long seasons ago, one in which the winning QB targeted 10 different receivers and connected with 8 of them in a game in which that QB's team defeated the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Mahomes is awesome and may well be better than Rodgers ever was, but when KC was forced to move on from Tyreek Hill last offseason for cap reasons it did not just rely upon rookie WRs and a long washed veteran nobody like Green Bay did.
And the Chiefs added 3 legitimate, veteran as well as a 2nd round WR despite the fact it had a hall of fame TE. Meanwhile, the Pack invited back a limited overachiever coming off an ACL to man the TE spot.
Rodgers deserves blame for a lot of different tings, but going into a season with a collection of JAGs or worse at TE, Alan Lazard as the #1 WR, Sammy Watkins, and Amari Rodgers is the responsibility of the guy who neglected to add talent at WR & TE for so many years not the QB.