WhiskeySam
14 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stevetarded
14 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Can you ever take a quote from somebody in context or is this just an issue you have? I never said "Taking a sack is a minimal cost" Jesus Christ you are irritating.
blank
WhiskeySam
14 years ago

Yep, you missed the point of his asking completely. You're taking a few words out of a whole thought and stretching it, big time.

I'm out of that discussion. You're too off key for me to continue this one with.

I'm sure because of that though I'm wearing green and gold goggles and think Rodgers is supreme, right?

:) (thats right, im smiling at you!)

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Then why did Rodgers ask about the QB rating? You can't pick and choose from the comments he made. It's obvious he thinks QB rating has some bearing on whether high sack totals are negative. I didn't mean to make it sound like you were wearing the Green and Gold glasses specifically because you're typically balanced. However, there are more than a few posters who do come off that way at the slightest hint of criticism of Rodgers' decision-making. You can give him a great line, and he'd still be holding the ball too long. Look at Roethlisberger. He gets away with it because of his size.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stevetarded
14 years ago

Yep, you missed the point of his asking completely. You're taking a few words out of a whole thought and stretching it, big time.

I'm out of that discussion. You're too off key for me to continue this one with.

I'm sure because of that though I'm wearing green and gold goggles and think Rodgers is supreme, right?

:) (thats right, im smiling at you!)

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Then why did Rodgers ask about the QB rating? You can't pick and choose from the comments he made. It's obvious he thinks QB rating has some bearing on whether high sack totals are negative. I didn't mean to make it sound like you were wearing the Green and Gold glasses specifically because you're typically balanced. However, there are more than a few posters who do come off that way at the slightest hint of criticism of Rodgers' decision-making. You can give him a great line, and he'd still be holding the ball too long. Look at Roethlisberger. He gets away with it because of his size.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



If you are referring to me I have no issue with you criticizing Rodgers at all. I only have an issue with you taking his quotes completely out of context to try and make your argument stronger. If you have something to say do it fairly without "cheating".
blank
WhiskeySam
14 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Can you ever take a quote from somebody in context or is this just an issue you have? I never said "Taking a sack is a minimal cost" Jesus Christ you are irritating.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Yes, I am irritating because I'm not going toe the company line and blow sunshine up Rodgers' butt. Considering the original quote itself had to qualify the circumstances that made a sack okay, I think it's you who isn't taking it in context. The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many? Why aren't they calling better plays? Why aren't they moving the pocket? Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can? We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.
Nemo me impune lacessit
IronMan
14 years ago


He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Taking a sack is not minimal cost. You have to very narrowly define the circumstances as taking a sack on third down when no other option that would have gained positive yards was available, throwing the ball away wasn't possible, and he gets back to the line of scrimmage on the play for it to be minimal cost. 193 yards lost, two fumbles, and him missing practice all week from getting slammed around on the turf is not minimal cost.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



Can you ever take a quote from somebody in context or is this just an issue you have? I never said "Taking a sack is a minimal cost" Jesus Christ you are irritating.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Yes, I am irritating because I'm not going toe the company line and blow sunshine up Rodgers' butt. Considering the original quote itself had to qualify the circumstances that made a sack okay, I think it's you who isn't taking it in context. The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many? Why aren't they calling better plays? Why aren't they moving the pocket? Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can? We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.

"Stevetarded" wrote:


Another +1. You are on a roll today. You should post more often.

Part of the problem is we have a coach that doesn't know what he's doing.
WhiskeySam
14 years ago

Another +1. You are on a roll today. You should post more often.

Part of the problem is we have a coach that doesn't know what he's doing.

"IronMan" wrote:



Thanks, I stopped posting last year when things got toxic between the pro and anti Favre crowds. It's cleared up this year, and I do think there are good, insightful discussions here.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many?
Why aren't they calling better plays?
Why aren't they moving the pocket?
Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can?
We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:


Why? No running game. Grant runs with his head down. Pussy. lol

Calling better plays sure would help. I'd like to see us go back to a quick three step offense on the majority of plays if we haven't already. I don't get the luxury of seeing the whole field on replays.

Rodgers does need to learn to go through his progressions and either run or throw it away, in my opinion that's his weakest attribute.

I think they are CAPABLE of adjusting, but refuse to. I think Mike McCarthy is too stubborn to adjust. This team is FULL of confidence, paper confidence, if you ask me. I don't want to hear my 4 - 3 team have nearly every player say in their interviews they have confidence. Fuck confidence, give me grit, heart, your all, and give me wins!
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
14 years ago

The question everyone should be asking is, if Rodgers says they don't want to be taking sacks then why is he taking so many?
Why aren't they calling better plays?
Why aren't they moving the pocket?
Why isn't he doing little things like throwing the ball away when he can?
We're seven games into the season, and they have yet to show any indication that they get it and are trying to adjust. That says to me they don't think it's a problem, or they are incapable of adjusting. Neither of those instills confidence.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:


Why? No running game. Grant runs with his head down. Pussy. lol

Calling better plays sure would help. I'd like to see us go back to a quick three step offense on the majority of plays if we haven't already. I don't get the luxury of seeing the whole field on replays.

Rodgers does need to learn to go through his progressions and either run or throw it away, in my opinion that's his weakest attribute.

I think they are CAPABLE of adjusting, but refuse to. I think Mike McCarthy is too stubborn to adjust. This team is FULL of confidence, paper confidence, if you ask me. I don't want to hear my 4 - 3 team have nearly every player say in their interviews they have confidence. Fuck confidence, give me grit, heart, your all, and give me wins!

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



I agree with this. I think McCarthy's undoing is going to be his refusal to change. The QB decision we have with a bad line is: experienced, immobile player who can get the ball out quicker to the right read (think late career Marino), or mobile, young player who can move to buy time (think Romo replacing Bledsoe). We took the latter option, but the time he's buying is not being used productively. If you're going to roll out and still take the sack, what does it matter?

If I come across as sounding like Rodgers is the primary problem, then that's my mistake. #1 the offensive line sucks. #2 the running backs scare no one. #3 the defense looks great against bad teams, but not too hot against good ones. I'd have Rodgers holding the ball below those and behind the special teams. I'm just trying to point out that some of Rodgers' decisions have hurt the team, and it needs to be corrected. That it doesn't change week after week really chaps my hide since I've seen other teams make adjustments to hide bad protection with less talent than we have. I have no confidence in the running game improving this year because that's a personnel problem, but the passing game could be better executed.
Nemo me impune lacessit
porky88
14 years ago
This entire regime is the most stubborn regime I've ever seen. From Murphy to Thompson to McCarthy to some of the position coaches like Winston Moss.

Rodgers is always going to be sacked a lot because he's always going to keep the play alive as long as possible. Eventually, he'll learn to throw the ball away on certain situations, but Rodgers' philosophy is simple....

1. Keep the play alive as long as possible.

2. A sack is better than an INT.

3. We can always get the yards back on the next play.

He'll improve to a point where it's acceptable, but I never expect to see Rodgers sacked less than 25-30 times in a season. He needs to learn to avoid hits though when he rolls out. He's taken some shots already this season that he shouldn't take.

Now with that said, I've seen the offensive lineman get beat in one and one matchups far more than I've seen Rodgers take an unnecessary sack. The offensive line is a huge problem. It's effecting the passing game and let's not forget the running game too.
http://www.row12.com/ 
UserPostedImage
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (10h) : USFL MVP QB Alex McGough moved to WR. So that's why no WR drafted!
    earthquake (13h) : Packers draft starters at safety ever few years. Collins, Clinton-Dix, Savage
    beast (16h) : Why can't the rookies be a day 1 starter? Especially when we grabbed 3 of them at the position
    dfosterf (18h) : Not going to be shocked if Gilmore goes to the Lions.
    dfosterf (19h) : I hear you dhazer, but my guess would be Gilmore Colts and Howard Vikings from what little has been reported.
    Mucky Tundra (30-Apr) : S learn from McKinney who learns from Hafley who learns from the fans. Guaranteed Super Bowl
    Zero2Cool (30-Apr) : could*
    Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Safeties should learn from Xavier.
    dhazer (29-Apr) : And what about grabbing a Gilmore or Howard at CB ? Those are all Free Agents left
    dhazer (29-Apr) : out of curiosity do they try and sign Simmons or Hyde to let these young safeties learn from, they can't be day 1 starters.
    Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : I miss having Sam Shields.
    Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Not that he's making excuses, just pointing it out
    Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : That's for dang sure. Make our erratic kicker have no excuse!
    packerfanoutwest (28-Apr) : having a great long snapper is gold
    Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : LaFleur looking like he had some weight. Coachin will do that lol
    Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : Thanks Mucky and whomever created topcos for each pick!
    Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : Insane about Kingsley
    dfosterf (28-Apr) : Putring it here so Mucky sees it. He was our guy!
    dfosterf (28-Apr) : Bowden long snapper Wisconsin. Consensus best LS in college.
    dfosterf (28-Apr) : We got Peter Bowde
    dfosterf (28-Apr) : I personally interpret that as a partial tear that can be recovered from with rehab
    dfosterf (28-Apr) : MLF said Kingsley Enagbare did NOT tear his ACL and did NOT require surgery, and that he is "looking good" for the 2024 season!
    beast (28-Apr) : T.O. son signs with the 49ers
    Mucky Tundra (28-Apr) : damn those vikings
    beast (27-Apr) : UDFA Vikings sign TE – Trey Knox, South Carolina
    beast (27-Apr) : Kitchen was all high from Miami, he was more lucky than talented in 2022 and it showed in 2023
    beast (27-Apr) : Reportedly Packers have UDFAs Jennings and Jones
    beast (27-Apr) : OL – Donovan Jennings, USF OT – Trente Jones, Michigan
    TheKanataThrilla (27-Apr) : Interesting draft. A bit shocked that we didn't select an early CB. Definitely have Safety help. Pretty happy overall.
    dhazer (27-Apr) : wow the last 2 picks are really stupid and probably will be special teams players Top 10 draft pick next year book it
    TheKanataThrilla (27-Apr) : I think he ended up with a terrible RAS score
    dhazer (27-Apr) : Anyone know what went on with Kitchens from Florida? At 1 point he was to be the Packers 1st round and he is way down the board now
    Martha Careful (27-Apr) : Z, could you please combine my thread with yours please. I obviously did not see it when I Created it
    Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Re: 'Kool-Aid' McKinstry. Other than Icky Woods, has there ever been a good NFLer with a childish nickname?
    Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Packers looking to trade up
    Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Flag?
    Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Sag?
    Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : It rhymes with "bag."
    beast (26-Apr) : Family? That's Deadpool's F word
    Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : Not THAT f-word.
    Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : fuck
    beast (25-Apr) : 49ers are Cap Tight
    beast (25-Apr) : Fuck
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Kanata, I will be when I'm on my lunch later
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Love you NSD
    Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Huh. I guess the F-word is censored in this fan shout.
    Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Anyone who doesn't hang out in the chat probably smokes pole.
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : GoPackGo Thinking CB is the pick tonight
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Anyone hanging out in the chat tonight?
    Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : whoa...49ers have had trade conversations about both Deebo Samuel and Brandon Aiyuk
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    38 - 20
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    24 - 25
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    18 - 17
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    20 - 34
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    13 - 17
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    17 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    10 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    20 - 3
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    19 - 23
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    23 - 20
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    29 - 22
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    27 - 19
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    22 - 24
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    20 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    33 - 30
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    33 - 10
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    17 - 9
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    48 - 32
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    21 - 24
    Recent Topics
    6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

    21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21h / Packers Draft Threads / dfosterf

    30-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    29-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Zero2Cool

    29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

    29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

    29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

    28-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

    28-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

    28-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Martha Careful

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.