Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
3 Pages123>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
wpr  
#1 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 6:44:11 AM(UTC)
JSOnline said:
Having spent much of the week researching the long career of No. 2 quarterback Seneca Wallace, the guess here is that even if the Packers were to lose Aaron Rodgers early Monday night against the Chicago Bears they’d find ways to finish 11-5.


McGinn points to all the players GB has lost due to injury over the past 4 years and still won so they could do it if Rodgers went down for the rest of the season. THAT IS BECAUSE THEY HAD AARON FOR MOST OF THOSE GAMES BOB. They may stumble along and win against weaker teams because of their defense but they will be a shell of their former self with all the injuries they have already had this year AND losing Aaron they would not be a competitive team.
nerdmann  
#2 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:05:36 AM(UTC)
FACT. This team won most of it's Superbowls WITHOUT Aaron Rodgers.

Seneca is a career journeyman. But as McGinn points out, he's 11-10 against the spread, which controls for the shittiness of your team.

We've got enough weapons around him that we could still win. I know I always use this example, but it's true. Remember how everyone was wailing and giving up when Barclay got his first start last year? Well it turned out Barclay could get it done.

Keep in mind, we've also got that running game now. Seneca can turn and hand the ball to Eddie Lacy. Not a problem.

If anything, the offense would have to be scaled down, like it has been with all these receivers out. As we have seen, that forces Mike to adhere to FUNDAMENTALS. For example, instead of trying to score fast, so as to rack up as many stats as possible, they're cultivating time of possession. This keeps the defense fresh, wears down the OTHER defense (as we saw against the Queens) and has the added side benefit of preventing the other team from running nearly as many plays on offense.

Seneca's not gonna be passing up open guys, looking for the deep routes to get open. He's gonna be getting the ball out in 2.5.

Game manager.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#3 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:07:37 AM(UTC)
Anything is possible, but I doubt it.

The Packers O Line just doesn't give a QB much time to throw. Maybe Wallace could run for his life and throw on the run, but not anything like Aaron Rodgers. Also, Rodgers is disciplined way beyond anything I've seen from any other QB in terms of not making ill-advised throws. Maybe Wallace is a little bit that way too, but NOBODY is like Aaron Rodgers.

As for a running game, whenever the D of the other team knows it's coming, our line just can't seem to open any holes. Lacy is better than anything we have had in a long time, but he can't make something out of nothing like Adrian Peterson or Barry Sanders or O.J. or Jim Brown or Gayle Sayers (I see a little bit of that in the Badgers Gordon - but that's a different topic).

Without Rodgers, we would be sunk against any decent team. Probably the Bears still qualify as that.
nerdmann  
#4 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:27:16 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
Anything is possible, but I doubt it.

The Packers O Line just doesn't give a QB much time to throw. Maybe Wallace could run for his life and throw on the run, but not anything like Aaron Rodgers. Also, Rodgers is disciplined way beyond anything I've seen from any other QB in terms of not making ill-advised throws. Maybe Wallace is a little bit that way too, but NOBODY is like Aaron Rodgers.

As for a running game, whenever the D of the other team knows it's coming, our line just can't seem to open any holes. Lacy is better than anything we have had in a long time, but he can't make something out of nothing like Adrian Peterson or Barry Sanders or O.J. or Jim Brown or Gayle Sayers (I see a little bit of that in the Badgers Gordon - but that's a different topic).

Without Rodgers, we would be sunk against any decent team. Probably the Bears still qualify as that.


Bullshit.

Aaron doesn't make ill advised throws? Really? He won't throw a Hail Mary at the end of the half, because he's afraid of having an INT on his stat sheet. That's true. But did you see those TDs to Jordy last week? Dude wasn't open. Aaron zinged it right past the CB's helmet.

And yeah Seneca is a running QB. So much so, that he's actually played WR in the NFL. But he's also not gonna be holding the ball for 8.5.

As for Eddie Lacy, he's made something out of nothing many times. I still think Franklin is better at that. He's a little shiftier, he's just being taught a lesson about ball security.
wpr  
#5 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:41:24 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
FACT. This team won most of it's Superbowls WITHOUT Aaron Rodgers.

.

Totally and completely FALSE.
THIS team has won nothing with or without Rodgers when it comes to Superbowls. THIS team has not even made it to the playoffs yet. You can not look at 1960's and say because they won without Aaron the current team can win. The guys who played back then are too old now.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#6 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:07:32 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Bullsh!t.

Aaron doesn't make ill advised throws? Really? He won't throw a Hail Mary at the end of the half, because he's afraid of having an INT on his stat sheet. That's true. But did you see those TDs to Jordy last week? Dude wasn't open. Aaron zinged it right past the CB's helmet.

And yeah Seneca is a running QB. So much so, that he's actually played WR in the NFL. But he's also not gonna be holding the ball for 8.5.

As for Eddie Lacy, he's made something out of nothing many times. I still think Franklin is better at that. He's a little shiftier, he's just being taught a lesson about ball security.


I didn't say Rodgers is a machine that NEVER puts it up for grabs or whatever (those throws to Nelson certainly weren't an example of THAT).

As for Wallace running, I would rather have had Vince Young. Undoubtedly Wallace could escape and throw it sometimes, maybe even occasionally complete. The point is, our O Line, sadly, makes that necessary way too often. The point also is, NOBODY does it quite like Aaron Rodgers - not even close.

I like Lacy a lot - Franklin not so much, but without a great threat of a pass to set them up, the O Line just doesn't give them a chance - and that get hit in the backfield, bounce off 2 or 3 times, change direction and be off to the races thing just doesn't happen for either Lacy or Franklin like it does for those other guys I mentioned.

Wade  
#7 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:20:40 AM(UTC)
Never understood what people see in McGinn. IMO he's just another hack reporter/pseudo-journalist. But that's me bias.

I do know I don't like tempting fate this way. Rodgers better not go down. Just because the Packers can whip a hapless team like the Vikings doesn't make them a juggernaut without their all-world QB.

Rodgers goes down for any length of time and this team isn't going to be a one-and-done wild card team.







wpr  
#8 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:41:05 AM(UTC)
Wade said: Go to Quoted Post
Never understood what people see in McGinn. IMO he's just another hack reporter/pseudo-journalist. But that's me bias.

I do know I don't like tempting fate this way. Rodgers better not go down. Just because the Packers can whip a hapless team like the Vikings doesn't make them a juggernaut without their all-world QB.

Rodgers goes down for any length of time and this team isn't going to be a one-and-done wild card team.




I don't thin a screwball journalist wannabe can jinx a team or player. Otherwise every hack in the land would be writing/raving about the opposition's key player hoping to cause some sort of calamity. SI not withstanding.


Speaking of which- A few weeks ago they had the The Atlanta Braves' Upton brothers doing cheesecake pix with Kate Upton. One of the pix was the front cover. A reader wrote a letter to the editor telling them if Kate is injured and misses out on this year's photo shoots he will cancel his subscription to SI. I almost choked.
nerdmann  
#9 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:49:30 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
I didn't say Rodgers is a machine that NEVER puts it up for grabs or whatever (those throws to Nelson certainly weren't an example of THAT).

As for Wallace running, I would rather have had Vince Young. Undoubtedly Wallace could escape and throw it sometimes, maybe even occasionally complete. The point is, our O Line, sadly, makes that necessary way too often. The point also is, NOBODY does it quite like Aaron Rodgers - not even close.

I like Lacy a lot - Franklin not so much, but without a great threat of a pass to set them up, the O Line just doesn't give them a chance - and that get hit in the backfield, bounce off 2 or 3 times, change direction and be off to the races thing just doesn't happen for either Lacy or Franklin like it does for those other guys I mentioned.



Wallace is a pro's pro. Young is a headcase. The Randy Moss of QBs.

That said, they could bring him back in the offseason. Who knows how he'd look if he actually learned the offense. Wallace has a strong background in WCO (which is what he would be running, unlike Aaron's Run and Shoot.)

I hope to hell Aaron never goes down, but if he did I'd still tune in and watch, and I wouldn't even be shitting myself.
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#10 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 9:04:14 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Totally and completely FALSE.
THIS team has won nothing with or without Rodgers when it comes to Superbowls. THIS team has not even made it to the playoffs yet. You can not look at 1960's and say because they won without Aaron the current team can win. The guys who played back then are too old now.


This makes absolutely no sense, and Texas liking it proves the theorem. I know you guys are old, but Alzheimer's already?
gbguy20  
#11 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 9:20:06 AM(UTC)
terrible article idea, i hope the writer knocked on wood.
DoddPower  
#12 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:05:14 AM(UTC)
Nerdmann so dumb. But we all knew that, anyway. Lets Box! Lets Box!
sschind  
#13 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 4:01:15 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
This makes absolutely no sense, and Texas liking it proves the theorem. I know you guys are old, but Alzheimer's already?


I guess it depends on what Nerd meant by "this team" If he meant the Green Bay Packers then yes, he is right If he meant the current team then no, they have not won anything besides 5 games this season. All of them with Aaron Rodgers.

If Rodgers were to go down against the Bears I think Wallace could easily manage 4-5 even 5-4 against the remainder of the schedule. 4-5 might get a WC 5-4 would probably get a WC and might even get the division depending on the wins.

Could he win vs playoff caliber opponents? I think he could. Could he win the SB, again I think he could but I wouldn't bet on it.
wpr  
#14 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 4:30:40 PM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
I guess it depends on what Nerd meant by "this team" If he meant the Green Bay Packers then yes, he is right If he meant the current team then no, they have not won anything besides 5 games this season. All of them with Aaron Rodgers.

If Rodgers were to go down against the Bears I think Wallace could easily manage 4-5 even 5-4 against the remainder of the schedule. 4-5 might get a WC 5-4 would probably get a WC and might even get the division depending on the wins.

Could he win vs playoff caliber opponents? I think he could. Could he win the SB, again I think he could but I wouldn't bet on it.


Of course nerd meant the Packers organization as a whole which is a little silly. It doesn't matter what any other team did. Not even 2012 team which had so many of the current players on it. The team can only deal with the next game on their schedule not look backwards t years gone by in order to predict future victories.

If Wallace the full complement of starters he would have some chance of success but stripped as they are he will struggle because one thing is certain try as he might Wallace is no Rodgers and can not expect to have the same success Rodgers achieves.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#15 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:24:43 PM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Of course nerd meant the Packers organization as a whole which is a little silly. It doesn't matter what any other team did. Not even 2012 team which had so many of the current players on it. The team can only deal with the next game on their schedule not look backwards t years gone by in order to predict future victories.

If Wallace the full complement of starters he would have some chance of success but stripped as they are he will struggle because one thing is certain try as he might Wallace is no Rodgers and can not expect to have the same success Rodgers achieves.


I applauded wpr's post because I thought it was nice sarcasm. It's a big duh that WE won Super Bowls before Aaron Rodgers - before he was born. Oops, I said WE, and none of us were there blocking for or catching passes from Bart or Brett. At least I don't think so hahahaha.

To me, there's nothing sacred about the WCO. The scheme didn't make the personnel; The personnel made the scheme successful.
nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:33:22 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
I applauded wpr's post because I thought it was nice sarcasm. It's a big duh that WE won Super Bowls before Aaron Rodgers - before he was born. Oops, I said WE, and none of us were there blocking for or catching passes from Bart or Brett. At least I don't think so hahahaha.

To me, there's nothing sacred about the WCO. The scheme didn't make the personnel; The personnel made the scheme successful.


HISTORICAL FACT: Only ONE Superbowl winning team in the history of the league, had Aaron Rodgers on it.

It CAN be done.

Here's another fact: The WCO is a system that is based on the "modern football era" rules protecting the passing game. When the rules changed in 1970, teams began to experiment with the passing game, chiefly among them "Air Coryell." Well the WCO was derivative of that, and is based upon the fundamentals of high percentage passing, ball control and hogging time of possession.

High percentage is high percentage. Let's say you have shitty players. Well, high percentage plays with those shitty players are more likely to be successful than low percentage plays with those same players, no? Now let's say you have great players. Still, high percentage plays are more likely to be successful.

Before the rules were changed to protect the passing game, it was more advantageous to run the ball. You might have heard of the guy who mastered that. The Superbowl trophy was named after him.
olds70supreme  
#17 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 6:22:20 AM(UTC)
I'm guessing that Wallace might be able to split the final games, +/- 1. I don't think that would be good enough for the playoffs this year.

As for McGinn, I have to echo the question about him earlier in the thread. I've heard he is very well regarded among his peers, but I have trouble seeing it. I expect better than a complete homer for a beat writer, but he seems to either actively resent the team's success or is overcompensating in an effort to appear objective. The end result often is an article with really questionable logic.
wpr  
#18 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 6:36:46 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
HISTORICAL FACT: Only ONE Superbowl winning team in the history of the league, had Aaron Rodgers on it.

It CAN be done.

Here's another fact: The WCO is a system that is based on the "modern football era" rules protecting the passing game. When the rules changed in 1970, teams began to experiment with the passing game, chiefly among them "Air Coryell." Well the WCO was derivative of that, and is based upon the fundamentals of high percentage passing, ball control and hogging time of possession.

High percentage is high percentage. Let's say you have sh!tty players. Well, high percentage plays with those sh!tty players are more likely to be successful than low percentage plays with those same players, no? Now let's say you have great players. Still, high percentage plays are more likely to be successful.

Before the rules were changed to protect the passing game, it was more advantageous to run the ball. You might have heard of the guy who mastered that. The Superbowl trophy was named after him.


Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#19 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:05:23 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Historical fact: past results are never the basis for future success.

I am not saying the Wallace could never win games. I am saying it is very unlikely to have Super Bowl success with him in charge. Look at all the WCO teams that have not won the SB year in and year out. Some pretty skillful QBs have come up short. They have to have talent around them in order to succeed. Aaron has succeeded in the absence of a lot of talent. Wallace would most likely not. Why it is not because the WCO is a failure (and GB doesn't run a true WCO by the way.) it is because he is not talented enough and with all the injuries the team's talent level has dropped. Don't look at the success GB has had Rodgers at the helm and assume it will be exactly the same without him. Boykin and White will not look as good. Even Jones when he comes back and Jordy will see their numbers drop. All you have to do is look at Jennings in MN to know it is so.


Seems like I've been applauding you a lot lately.

You must have borrowed that past results/future success line from mutual funds disclaimers hahahaha.

I could learn to like Seneca Wallace real quick if he ever had to get on the field and did a decent job.

My Point in this whole thing is that the PROBLEM is Packer weakness in the O Line, as well as RB until this season, and to a great extent, our D also. Aaron Rodgers is like an addiction. He is so damn good that we have been able to win big time even with all those other weaknesses. Losing him would be like getting off of whatever meds somebody is taking - suddenly all those aches and pains and weaknesses would really come to the surface and we'd be in a world of hurt.

Yerko  
#20 Posted : Monday, November 4, 2013 9:26:52 AM(UTC)
Didn't even read the article because the title alone is dumb...just dumb.


Reading the article is probably like being inside one of nerdmann's dreams.

I'll pass. [laughing]
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
Porforis (6h) : Glad to have King back. And House. Packers need 'em.
Zero2Cool (9h) : Good! smack some posts in the forum right?!? :-) can't wait to read it
uffda udfa (11h) : No more clutter.
Cheesey (12h) : Go get him Uncle Ted!!
Zero2Cool (12h) : Former Packers pass-rusher Datone Jones is back on the market.
Zero2Cool (14h) : Good news for #Packers secondary: rookie CB Kevin King and vet CB Davon House (quad) both practiced. King has cleared concussion protocol.
Zero2Cool (14h) : Vince Biegel back on practice field!!
Zero2Cool (21h) : Maybe this little shout has no value if people gonna use it instead of the forum.
Zero2Cool (21h) : He's not writing. He's shouting, and its making the shout kind of without point with the clutter.
buckeyepackfan (18-Oct) : Just like last year at 4-6. The guy is just too funny!
buckeyepackfan (18-Oct) : GOOD news Uffda is already all but writing The Packers off for 2017!
uffda udfa (18-Oct) : Masturbation talk from Barfan? Nothing could make me COME back, quicker.
wpr (18-Oct) : Maybe the shout box needs to take a timeout. People keep using it. ;)
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : Why do this is in shout? So frustrating. Post in forums. Thanks
Barfarn (18-Oct) : Masterbation will relieve some of that nervous tension!
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Now, a guy they really liked and have groomed for 3 years is the guy. Tons of toys on O. Let's see how it runs with a great coach, now.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : The Flynn Patriots game has been used to say that he is. Seneca and Scott showed otherwise.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Hundley is going to settle the debate once and for all in whether Mike McCarthy is a great coach, or not.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Doesn't speak well to the talent acquired by the org, does it? Easy to say talent is great until Rodgers is gone and you have to see it wit
Porforis (17-Oct) : Could Sam Bradford come into the Packers and post a winning record from here on out? Are there any non-starters in the NFL that could?
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Teddy is replaceable. Aaron is not. Vikings have a really good defense. We do not. Understand??
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : You are wise enough to know the difference. Right?
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Here's one for you, Z. Vikes lose Teddy B. and go out and aggressively get Bradford. Packers lose 12 and go out and get a UDFA.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : :) Evans had a pre-draft visit with Packers.
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Put it in a topic. My lord why so difficult lol
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/jerod-evans?id=2558099
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/former-virginia-tech-qb-jerod-evans-issues-warning-after-going-undrafted-043017
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Oh, Jerod Evans formerly of Va Tech is our Hokie QB plan
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Was previously on Eagles PS
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Tweeted the below due to huge chip on his shoulder for going undrafted after leaving early.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Packers add Jerod Evans to PS. He went undrafted: https://twitter.com/rodfor6_/status/858382534274682884
Smokey (17-Oct) : NO a 6 point favorite to beat the Packers in GB .
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Yes!!!!!
Porforis (17-Oct) : "I said that too. Why don't you quote me?? I'm famous!" - Zero2Cool
Zero2Cool (16-Oct) : I said that too. Why don't you quote me?? I'm famous!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
22m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Oct / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / gotarace

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

17-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

Headlines