Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages<12

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Glorydays  
#21 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 9:50:16 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
How can you think he couldn't win a High School game when he had double digit win total in College?

I believe losing Jermichael Finley and Greg Jennings would hurt, but not as much as some may think. I think Andrew Quarless and D.J. Williams can fill in admirably for Finley and also Randall Cobb, James Jones and Jordy Nelson can eat up the catches Jennings will not get. I also think that Jarrett Boykin fella is gonna contribute a couple dozen receptions too.


My concern is if we lose a starter or two at WR. That makes a huge dropoff in talent. As far as Harrell goes, he hast displayed ANYTHING that would inspire confidence if Aaron Rodgers went down. His stumble bum play on the one yard line was agonizing to watch. Could that happen to anyone? Sure. Its still uninspiring. He's no daisy!
QCHuskerFan  
#22 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:55:38 AM(UTC)
Ok. So as long as we get a monster at DE or LB or S, we will make the playoffs with Harrell at QB for 16 games?

Every team needs new players and depth. The Super Bowl champs in Baltimore currently have major issues at LT, MLB (2), WR and Safety. Everyone has needs. Packers are no different in that regard.

The point is that I personally have no faith in this team making the playoffs if Aaron Rodgers goes down for any serious time. Any other player can go down and I think we can survive. It was proven this year. But Harrell has no experience and, so, we have no evidence to suggest that we have an adequate backup.

We are not like everyone else. Things worked out ok for 49ers with their 'backup'. Seattle has experience. Washington looks like it did well last year with both rookie QB's. Atlanta has experience. Many teams have a veteran (castoff) at backup QB. We have novices.

Favre and Rodgers have spoiled us. I don't think we place enough value on a backup QB in today's NFL, because, frankly, the backup in Green Bay has not been relied on in 20 years. Our time is coming.
Pack93z  
#23 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:07:35 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post


We are not like everyone else. Things worked out ok for 49ers with their 'backup'. Seattle has experience. Washington looks like it did well last year with both rookie QB's. Atlanta has experience. Many teams have a veteran (castoff) at backup QB. We have novices.


What about the Champs.. the Ravens? Tyrod Taylor would give you confidence?

I agree.. Rodgers goes down, we have lost a ton. Probably will not be a playoff contender. But just as Flynn was an unknown and shined.. the same could happen with Harrell as well. Harrell has shown positives (along with negatives) in preseason.. but to discard him because of a single snap? He has been in the system for a couple of years and the staff has confidence in him.

Sorry.. this is a product of the NFL of today.. when you commit the type of money these franchise QB's are getting.. committing dollars to retain proven backups isn't always available.

The examples you are citing are teams with either young starters and highly drafted backups because both are just proving themselves and are relatively cheap or they are midline starting QB's with the future in the wings.

Now.. compare players in Rodgers pay bracket. Go look up the Brady, Brees, Manning(s), Rivers, Cutler camps. What do they all have.. a clear frontline starter collecting large money with inexperience behind them for the most part.

We are no different. Are we spoiled.. absolutely.

Would I love to have an upgrade.. absolutely.. but I have one end game in mind. The Lombardi.. I see more pushing needs in the starters of this roster than a backup QB. I have more important rotational players in mind than a backup QB.

Plus I think QB's as a whole.. the position is overrated. They are not the end all be all of a complete football team.
play2win  
#24 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:32:46 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post
Ok. So as long as we get a monster at DE or LB or S, we will make the playoffs with Harrell at QB for 16 games?


Maybe. You don't know. No one does. Let's just hope that doesn't happen. I don't want to see Rodgers go down.

All I know, is we need to bolster our D. Is there really any question about this? Did you watch any of those games? Add to that more emphasis with running the ball, and maybe some players there to upgrade our rushing ability. Who is to say Harrell or Coleman wouldn't be able to make the playoffs? Who is to say that they wouldn't improve with more #1 reps?

These defensive upgrades are necessary for Green Bay to become a better team. If we fail to make them, again, we may not make the playoffs, WITH Rodgers. But, I doubt highly that we would go anywhere without being able to stop the run, and stop TEs roaming free across the middle of our D.

You are arbitrarily picking just one player, Rodgers, in a hypothetical scenario where he becomes injured, and saying the backup for his position will not be able to help us win. Try picking Raji, or Pickett... what do you think would happen differently? Me, I think those defensive losses would take us out of any kind of playoff running faster than the loss of Rodgers. At least with Harrell and Coleman, we'd still have a chance with a run heavy offense installed.

We have no depth on our front 7, and many holes at front 7 starter positions. Pick should be a backup by now, at his age. There is a giant sucking sound coming from the front 7 of our D... Who is it on our defense that other teams are always having to gameplan around, besides Matthews? Oh, that's right! NO ONE.
QCHuskerFan  
#25 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:13:13 PM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
Maybe. You don't know. No one does. Let's just hope that doesn't happen. I don't want to see Rodgers go down.

All I know, is we need to bolster our D. Is there really any question about this? Did you watch any of those games? Add to that more emphasis with running the ball, and maybe some players there to upgrade our rushing ability. Who is to say Harrell or Coleman wouldn't be able to make the playoffs? Who is to say that they wouldn't improve with more #1 reps?

These defensive upgrades are necessary for Green Bay to become a better team. If we fail to make them, again, we may not make the playoffs, WITH Rodgers. But, I doubt highly that we would go anywhere without being able to stop the run, and stop TEs roaming free across the middle of our D.

You are arbitrarily picking just one player, Rodgers, in a hypothetical scenario where he becomes injured, and saying the backup for his position will not be able to help us win. Try picking Raji, or Pickett... what do you think would happen differently? Me, I think those defensive losses would take us out of any kind of playoff running faster than the loss of Rodgers. At least with Harrell and Coleman, we'd still have a chance with a run heavy offense installed.

We have no depth on our front 7, and many holes at front 7 starter positions. Pick should be a backup by now, at his age. There is a giant sucking sound coming from the front 7 of our D... Who is it on our defense that other teams are always having to gameplan around, besides Matthews? Oh, that's right! NO ONE.


So we can't live without Raji? Hope he doesn't get hurt and miss any games. Oh wait. He did. So did Woodson and Matthews. All of our supposed studs on defense missed games in 2012. Did we give up yards? Yes. Win games anyway? Yes.

Of course the D needs to get better. So does the O. So do Special Teams. I doubt Mike McCarthy is satisfied with any of them.

But Aaron Rodgers covers up for a lack of running game, injured receivers, porous line. Think Harrell can?
Pack93z  
#26 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:23:33 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post


But Aaron Rodgers covers up for a lack of running game, injured receivers, porous line. Think Harrell can?


So how about fixing the real issue of a sluggish running game, a porous line and better depth at receiver in place of committing more dollars (in which a FA QB will cost) or consuming a higher pick on a QB whereas that pick can be used on more immediate return. Or better yet.. build an ass kicking take no prisoners type of defense..
play2win  
#27 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:27:20 PM(UTC)
You have to admit, your hypothetical situation is shifting... you were talking 16 games with Harrell. I'm saying, over the course of 16 games, we would lose more with the loss of those other players I mentioned. Maybe not. Who knows? I know damn well what Rodgers does for our team.

We gave up at least 100 yds in 7 of our last 9 games of the 2012 season, including the playoffs. We averaged 132 opponent rushing yds per game by our D in 2012. We let a rookie torch us for 444 yds in his first playoff game.... we gave up 323 yds rushing in that one game. 579 total yds of offense given up.

NFL record for most rushing yds given up to a QB. That's horrendous, and unacceptable.

Woodson's comments after that game: "They're a deep team, they're a big team, they're a fast team, they're well-coached," he said. "I look at us and maybe we've got to be bigger and faster."

We gave up 409 yds rushing to AP in just two games against MIN... Ridiculous. We spent time working on tackling drills. AP had 189 yds AFTER CONTACT in just one game.

Our last 3 playoff losses we gave up 51, 37 and 45 points. This SCREAMS we need help on D.

Conversely, we never rushed for more than 100 yds away from home last year. This SCREAMS we better learn how to run the fucking football.

Two major points of emphasis for 2013 I would say...
nerdmann  
#28 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 3:01:25 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post
So we can't live without Raji? Hope he doesn't get hurt and miss any games. Oh wait. He did. So did Woodson and Matthews. All of our supposed studs on defense missed games in 2012. Did we give up yards? Yes. Win games anyway? Yes.

Of course the D needs to get better. So does the O. So do Special Teams. I doubt Mike McCarthy is satisfied with any of them.

But Aaron Rodgers covers up for a lack of running game, injured receivers, porous line. Think Harrell can?


One could argue that Aaron is more likely to abandon the run game and audible into too many deep passes down the field. Harrell would not be prone to stat whore, but would be forced to work within the system and maintain solid fundamentals.

With Harrell as your QB are you gonna abandon the running game? I don't think so. You're going to have balance. And he's not gonna be passing up open guys waiting 8+ seconds for something to develop deep.

Remember in '99 when Trent Green went down in the preseason? Rams fans thought their season was over. Up steps the next guy, you might have heard of him. Dude named Kurt Warner.

Is Harrell as good is Kurt Warner? Unlikely. But the Packers offense is stacked with talent, especially if we get Sherrod/Datko and Bulaga back. Dude's gonna have plenty of targets coming open.
QCHuskerFan  
#29 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 3:23:01 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
With Harrell as your QB are you gonna abandon the running game? .


Please smile when you read this because I am when typing. "Didn't know we had a running game to abandon..." [grin1]

QCHuskerFan  
#30 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 3:37:55 PM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
You have to admit, your hypothetical situation is shifting... you were talking 16 games with Harrell. I'm saying, over the course of 16 games, we would lose more with the loss of those other players I mentioned. Maybe not. Who knows? I know damn well what Rodgers does for our team.

We gave up at least 100 yds in 7 of our last 9 games of the 2012 season, including the playoffs. We averaged 132 opponent rushing yds per game by our D in 2012. We let a rookie torch us for 444 yds in his first playoff game.... we gave up 323 yds rushing in that one game. 579 total yds of offense given up.

NFL record for most rushing yds given up to a QB. That's horrendous, and unacceptable.

Woodson's comments after that game: "They're a deep team, they're a big team, they're a fast team, they're well-coached," he said. "I look at us and maybe we've got to be bigger and faster."

We gave up 409 yds rushing to AP in just two games against MIN... Ridiculous. We spent time working on tackling drills. AP had 189 yds AFTER CONTACT in just one game.

Our last 3 playoff losses we gave up 51, 37 and 45 points. This SCREAMS we need help on D.

Conversely, we never rushed for more than 100 yds away from home last year. This SCREAMS we better learn how to run the fucking football.

Two major points of emphasis for 2013 I would say...


12 months ago, we were all screaming about the need to shut down the pass. We had given up historic numbers in passing yardage. We were opposing QB's fantasy games. 15-1 record but lots of hand wringing after a depressing loss in the playoffs. So lots of defensive players drafted. Much improvement in Pass D. Still won a lot of games. Gave up some embarrassing rushing yardage though. Funny how even when things change, they stay the same.


wpr  
#31 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 3:40:47 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post
Ok. So as long as we get a monster at DE or LB or S, we will make the playoffs with Harrell at QB for 16 games?

Every team needs new players and depth. The Super Bowl champs in Baltimore currently have major issues at LT, MLB (2), WR and Safety. Everyone has needs. Packers are no different in that regard.

The point is that I personally have no faith in this team making the playoffs if Aaron Rodgers goes down for any serious time. Any other player can go down and I think we can survive. It was proven this year. But Harrell has no experience and, so, we have no evidence to suggest that we have an adequate backup.

We are not like everyone else. Things worked out ok for 49ers with their 'backup'. Seattle has experience. Washington looks like it did well last year with both rookie QB's. Atlanta has experience. Many teams have a veteran (castoff) at backup QB. We have novices.

Favre and Rodgers have spoiled us. I don't think we place enough value on a backup QB in today's NFL, because, frankly, the backup in Green Bay has not been relied on in 20 years. Our time is coming.


I like your passion QC. Keep it up. ThumpUp that said you are nuts. [grin1]

I think it is safe to say if Aaron Rodgers goes down for the full year GB will struggle. It doesn't matter what you do they will struggle. A couple of years ago, 2010, we had a thread where we listed the top 10 players on GB that the Packers would miss if they were injured. I put Aaron down 10 times. To paraphrase Denzel Washington as Coach Herman Boone, "You can't replace an Aaron Rodgers".

You put "backup in quotes for SF. You know that Kaepernick is the real starting qb not Smith. He is most gone. Going to KC. 1. Do you think Smith would have gotten them to the SB? I don't. Their defense may have with Smith riding along as the QB but he would not have don it. (Think 85 Bears. Mc Muffin was fortunate to be in the right place to get to the big game. They were going to be a dynasty but it didn't happen because the defense couldn't carry the whole load every single year.)

If Kaepernick goes down will Tolzien get SF back to the big game? No.

Did Atlanta, DC or Seattle make it? No.

You keep saying they need someone but I don't see you telling us WHO.

Do you want to draft Geno Smith, Mike Glennon, Matt Barkley, Tyler Wilson, E.J. Manuel or Tyler Bray? This year's draft is pretty weak at QB. None of them will stand up for a full 16 game schedule.

FA's- Matt Moore, Jason Campbell, David Garrard, Chase Daniel, Drew Stanton are Rotoworld's top 5 QBs. Most are trying to land a starting job. They won't want to come and sit on the bench behind Rodgers. Even if they were other teams are considering offering them starting qb money. That leaves GB out.

What about a trade? Who do you want? How much do you think GB would have to give up to give them? I don;t see anyone I really really want to have at this time.

Quite frankly I would love to have a Pro Bowler backed up by 2 more PB at every single position. It ain't going to happen. So there has to be some weaker spots. Behind Rodgers is going to be one of them. Because with Rodgers they don't need a #2.


nerdmann  
#32 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 3:59:11 PM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I like your passion QC. Keep it up. ThumpUp that said you are nuts. [grin1]

I think it is safe to say if Aaron Rodgers goes down for the full year GB will struggle. It doesn't matter what you do they will struggle. A couple of years ago, 2010, we had a thread where we listed the top 10 players on GB that the Packers would miss if they were injured. I put Aaron down 10 times. To paraphrase Denzel Washington as Coach Herman Boone, "You can't replace an Aaron Rodgers".

You put "backup in quotes for SF. You know that Kaepernick is the real starting qb not Smith. He is most gone. Going to KC. 1. Do you think Smith would have gotten them to the SB? I don't. Their defense may have with Smith riding along as the QB but he would not have don it. (Think 85 Bears. Mc Muffin was fortunate to be in the right place to get to the big game. They were going to be a dynasty but it didn't happen because the defense couldn't carry the whole load every single year.)

If Kaepernick goes down will Tolzien get SF back to the big game? No.

Did Atlanta, DC or Seattle make it? No.

You keep saying they need someone but I don't see you telling us WHO.

Do you want to draft Geno Smith, Mike Glennon, Matt Barkley, Tyler Wilson, E.J. Manuel or Tyler Bray? This year's draft is pretty weak at QB. None of them will stand up for a full 16 game schedule.

FA's- Matt Moore, Jason Campbell, David Garrard, Chase Daniel, Drew Stanton are Rotoworld's top 5 QBs. Most are trying to land a starting job. They won't want to come and sit on the bench behind Rodgers. Even if they were other teams are considering offering them starting qb money. That leaves GB out.

What about a trade? Who do you want? How much do you think GB would have to give up to give them? I don;t see anyone I really really want to have at this time.

Quite frankly I would love to have a Pro Bowler backed up by 2 more PB at every single position. It ain't going to happen. So there has to be some weaker spots. Behind Rodgers is going to be one of them. Because with Rodgers they don't need a #2.




If Rodgers went down FOR THE YEAR during the preseason, I highly suspect Ted would bite the bullet and make some sort of a trade for Flynn.

Either way, the organization would not be folding up their tent and giving up on the season. If they went with Harrell, I think people might be surprised. Teams have been known to win Superbowls with non-HoF calibur QBs.



Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
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
steveishere (34m) : Funny how you were apparently fine with seeing guys who abuse women or do/sell drugs out there but god forbid they kneel lol
steveishere (36m) : you had 1 foot out the door since Favre left anyways... bye
dhazer (1h) : well so much for watching Packer games, I saw the 3 sitting on the bench and i turned the channel to the race, No more NFL games for me
beast (15h) : Who are the longshots? Jags? Saints? Redskins? and who?
SINCITYCHEEZE (15h) : Buckeye closing in on 4 Longshots in Pickem today....Son you need to hook me up we could make a killing on some parlays next weekend. Lol
beast (17h) : Bears ran it 60% of the time...
beast (20h) : Bears tried hard to give it away, but Steelers couldn't take it
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Lot of injuries :(
Zero2Cool (22h) : OUT for the Packers: WR Randall Cobb S Kentrell Brice CB Davon House LB Jake Ryan LB Nick Perry T David Bakhtiari DT Mike Daniels
beast (22h) : Ravens/Jags must be a FF nightmare, as ol' TEs who never score, had 4 of the 6 TDs
beast (22h) : Bears beating Steelers at halftime.
beast (23h) : https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/yp89dj/stephen-a-smith-points-out-nfls-paid-patriotism-problem
beast (23h) : I just read that it wasn't until the NFL started getting paid by the DoD (in 2009), that players were on the sidelines for the Anthem. (I ca
Zero2Cool (23h) : apparently it was comon to stay in lockeroom years ago
Zero2Cool (23h) : i couldn't find anything confirming its against the rules
beast (23h) : Is it against the rules to be in the lockerroom for the Anthem?
yooperfan (24-Sep) : Prolly some fines coming down.
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : it is? this could be interesting
yooperfan (24-Sep) : It's against league rules for a team not to be on the field during the National Anthem.
Nonstopdrivel (24-Sep) : Chat room posting to the top instead of bottom again.
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : Jordy Nelson IN. Randall Cobb OUT.
Nonstopdrivel (24-Sep) : Where is everybody? There's plenty of football to talk about!
yinzer (24-Sep) : what??
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : Today's Birthdays: mi_keys (29)
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : Steelers Will Remain In Locker Room During National Anthem
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : thanks
buckeyepackfan (24-Sep) : Good Morning Packer Fans! Gameday! GO! PACK! GO!
buckeyepackfan (24-Sep) : Happy Belated Birthday Z2C!
beast (24-Sep) : Happy Birthday
wpr (23-Sep) : Hope you had a great day Z.
uffda udfa (23-Sep) : Happy Birthday, Z.
macbob (23-Sep) : Z2C-Hope you had a wonderful birthday! Thanks for providing us a great place to hang out.
Smokey (23-Sep) : Anyone watching the Utah vs Arizona tonight .
Cheesey (22-Sep) : No..."Fired FROM the forge!"LOL!
Smokey (21-Sep) : A "Forged in Fire" wash out ? LOL
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
4m / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / RainX

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

22-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

22-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

21-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

21-Sep / Around The NFL / Cheesey

21-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

20-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

Headlines