OT: Rodgers still wants out

Chicago Staleys

Realist
Joined:
Sep 24, 2012
Posts:
13,305
Liked Posts:
8,695
Reading the last couple of lines of the statement with George McCaskeys voice...

it’s like he stole it from the Bears presser on keeping Nagy and Pace.
 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,088
Liked Posts:
11,480
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
Adams had under 70 yards in both playoff games and they lost. They likely lose to the Rams if Donald was healthy and Goff wasnt such a putz. Good defenses can contain a single WR. Adams was doubled a ton and had Ramsey and Davis shadowing him and was bottled up. The end result was MVS and others dropping critical passes.
and yet they still won? i don’t know what your point is? they “would have lost” if donald wasn’t healthy and Goff wasn’t a putz, the packers can’t control that. they beat the team in front of them.

Davante Adams, or his supposed lack of production in the NFFCG, was not the reason they lost. he still had a TD reception the same as MVS did, who actually out produced Adams as they shifted coverage to Adams. that’s why this offense works so well, you can’t stop their run game and pass game at the same time.

if you want to use hypotheticals as some basis for your argument i can do the same. the Packers were firmly in control of that game until King got burnt before half time. that completely changed the game. You could make the same argument they don’t lose if King wasn’t a putz you could for Goff.
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 12, 2013
Posts:
9,238
Liked Posts:
7,029
Location:
Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
and yet they still won? i don’t know what your point is? they “would have lost” if donald wasn’t healthy and Goff wasn’t a putz, the packers can’t control that. they beat the team in front of them.

Davante Adams, or his supposed lack of production in the NFFCG, was not the reason they lost. he still had a TD reception the same as MVS did, who actually out produced Adams as they shifted coverage to Adams. that’s why this offense works so well, you can’t stop their run game and pass game at the same time.

if you want to use hypotheticals as some basis for your argument i can do the same. the Packers were firmly in control of that game until King got burnt before half time. that completely changed the game. You could make the same argument they don’t lose if King wasn’t a putz you could for Goff.
You have completely derailed the original topic into your own topic. Once again…..the topic was offensive weapons. Rodgers would have benefited with having more weapons but his FO refused to help him out. Do you not agree with that?
 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,088
Liked Posts:
11,480
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
You have completely derailed the original topic into your own topic. Once again…..the topic was offensive weapons. Rodgers would have benefited with having more weapons but his FO refused to help him out. Do you not agree with that?
no the post i responded actually included more than just weapons. it included goff and donald talk, which i did not bring up, so maybe take your complaint up with remy?

sure i agree with your point about his weapons, of course they obviously would help, but more than reinforcing his defense would have helped him, i don’t agree with. there is a salary cap and limited draft picks which is the point im making.
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 12, 2013
Posts:
9,238
Liked Posts:
7,029
Location:
Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
no the post i responded actually included more than just weapons. it included goff and donald talk, which i did not bring up, so maybe take your complaint up with remy?

sure i agree with your point about his weapons, of course they obviously would help, but more than reinforcing his defense would have helped him, i don’t agree with. there is a salary cap and limited draft picks which is the point im making.
The defense has nothing to do with offensive weapons though.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
61,017
Liked Posts:
39,294
and yet they still won? i don’t know what your point is? they “would have lost” if donald wasn’t healthy and Goff wasn’t a putz, the packers can’t control that. they beat the team in front of them.

Davante Adams, or his supposed lack of production in the NFFCG, was not the reason they lost. he still had a TD reception the same as MVS did, who actually out produced Adams as they shifted coverage to Adams. that’s why this offense works so well, you can’t stop their run game and pass game at the same time.

if you want to use hypotheticals as some basis for your argument i can do the same. the Packers were firmly in control of that game until King got burnt before half time. that completely changed the game. You could make the same argument they don’t lose if King wasn’t a putz you could for Goff.

They won despite their other WRs not because of them. You were provided a metric that Pack WRs dropped more yards than any other team.

I love how you are bragging a guy single covered because Adams is double covered happened to catch passes as if that is not his job. The problem is he doesnt do it consistently enough hence again why Pack WRs lead the NFL in dropped yards.

The Pack have the equivalent of Miller as a 2nd WR. It wasnt good enoughfor the Bears so not sure why it should be good enough for the Packers.
 

bamainatlanta

You wake him up, you keep him up
Staff member
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Aug 10, 2013
Posts:
37,339
Liked Posts:
34,551
Location:
Cumming
Tom is fucking his shit up
 

bamainatlanta

You wake him up, you keep him up
Staff member
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Aug 10, 2013
Posts:
37,339
Liked Posts:
34,551
Location:
Cumming
They won despite their other WRs not because of them. You were provided a metric that Pack WRs dropped more yards than any other team.

I love how you are bragging a guy single covered because Adams is double covered happened to catch passes as if that is not his job. The problem is he doesnt do it consistently enough hence again why Pack WRs lead the NFL in dropped yards.

The Pack have the equivalent of Miller as a 2nd WR. It wasnt good enoughfor the Bears so not sure why it should be good enough for the Packers.

Mental gymnastics
 

iueyedoc

Variant Also Negotiates
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
21,248
Liked Posts:
26,247
Location:
Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Indiana Hoosiers
Holy cringeworthy. Sporting the "see my hair is totally long enough" ultra mini man bun and acting like he is singing a Taylor Swift song he has clearly never heard. He's like a dad trying to be cool with his 14 yr old daughter. He just needs a hena tattoo and a few hair beads to complete the look.

 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,088
Liked Posts:
11,480
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
They won despite their other WRs not because of them. You were provided a metric that Pack WRs dropped more yards than any other team.

I love how you are bragging a guy single covered because Adams is double covered happened to catch passes as if that is not his job. The problem is he doesnt do it consistently enough hence again why Pack WRs lead the NFL in dropped yards.

The Pack have the equivalent of Miller as a 2nd WR. It wasnt good enoughfor the Bears so not sure why it should be good enough for the Packers.
who cares if they didn’t win “because” of their WRs, plenty of teams have great receivers and don’t win shit. it is in an inconsequential position when it comes to wins and losses. see Denver, Carolina, and Atlanta as examples. nobody said it is or should be “good enough” for the bears or the packers, I AM saying that the several holes on their defense are way more important to wins and losses than WR, and are not part of a #1 ranked unit in football.

also it’s not like they ignored WR, they took one in the third round, i think ignoring your shit defense that clearly held you back to add to your #1 ranked offense is foolish. if you disagree with that basic premise this discussion isn’t worth having as we simply have a difference of opinion on how they should have allocated their assets.
 

SlickWilly

Team Ignore Member #2
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Posts:
5,294
Liked Posts:
4,524
Location:
Dakotaland
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. Detroit Pistons
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. North Carolina Tar Heels
i remember the good old days when rodgers’ excuse for losing in the playoffs was he DIDNT have a run game.

why is it always everybody else but rodgers every time he fails?

I'm no fan of Rodgers, but I've never heard him complain about not having a running game after a playoff loss.
 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,088
Liked Posts:
11,480
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
I'm no fan of Rodgers, but I've never heard him complain about not having a running game after a playoff loss.
i meant that was the excuse made for him, not that he made that excuse himself. i should have been more clear on that.
 

Leomaz

Pissing people off the right way!
Donator
Joined:
Jul 15, 2012
Posts:
14,948
Liked Posts:
6,826
Location:
In the stratosphere
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Indiana Hoosiers
  2. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
Your erin rodger's biggest fan. Are you saying that you wouldn't put it in his hands on 4th down?
No. It doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different. The 3rd down play was a fuck up by Rodgers.....wouldn't you agree?
 
Last edited:

PrideisBears

Jordan Sigler’s editor
Staff member
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '21
Joined:
Jun 20, 2010
Posts:
39,228
Liked Posts:
28,887
Location:
In the mod forum planning your ban
No. It doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different. The 3rd down play was a fuck up by Rodgers.....woul8you agree
It was but how often does Rodgers fuck up? I'd trust him %100 of the time
 

Top