Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Driver weighs in on Jennings/Rodgers
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
strat1080


Joined: 16 Apr 2010
Posts: 1849
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spilltray wrote:
Pugger wrote:
Yes, but the year we went 15-1 because of Rodgers' otherworldly play our defense wasn't so wonderful. A lot of the warts were camouflaged by turnovers. When the offense had a bad day against the Gmen in the playoffs we were sunk.


That 2011 defense wasn't nearly as bad as they are made out to be. People look at the yardage and say it was an all time bad type of defense, but really, tied for 1st in takeaways, 11th in sacks, 19th in PPG, it was a middle of the road defense that allowed alot of soft yards.


Yes it was that bad. The offense had two off days all season. We lost both of those games. That's a bad defense.

All year long, the Packers jumped out to HUGE LEADS and forced the opposition to be one dimensional. Rodgers was so good that year he dictated the terms to the other team and forced them to get into a passing shootout with him. That is why they had so many picks.

They relied on turnovers to get stops. As we saw against the Giants and Chiefs, when Rodgers and the offense couldn't get going, they couldnt' make a play to save their life.

The Giants game was despicable. Don't try to sugarcoat it. Just look at Nicks two TDs in that game. Go ahead and try to tell me that that wasn't a bad defense. They gave up big plays all season long.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Uncle Buck


Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 14904
Location: Viking Country
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willink wrote:
From the Woodson interview:

Quote:
I would say this: Theres been times throughout my career there when defensively we put a [inappropriate/removed]-poor product on the field, and weve been in games and won ballgames solely on the arm of Aaron Rodgers and the legs of Aaron Rodgers and what hes been able to do throwing a ball to a Greg, a Donald, a Jermichael, Woodson said. A couple years ago, we were 15- 1, and if we have any other quarterback other than Aaron Rodgers, were 7-9


Quote:
I mean, Gregs not even there anymore. Hes a Minnesota Viking. They paid him a lot of money to be there. You dont have any worries. He should be just fine. He should leave all things Packers alone. He should keep that to himself and if he wants to take it out on (Rodgers), do it the week they play. Im just not understanding all these attacks on A-Rod.


This is where Woodson loses credibility. While I agree that Rodgers had an incredible season that year, there is no way that any of a handful of other QB's could have led the Pack to at least 10-11 wins that year.

Woodson is right about all the attacks on A-Rod. If it were just Finley (a knucklehead) and Jennings (now a Viking), you could write them off as nothing. When Driver seems to back up some of what Jennings said, it starts to make you wonder, because Driver has, or should have no agenda, and he is a player of great character. When you get that many players making comments, well, where there's smoke, there is probably at least a little fire.
_________________

Elisha Cuthbert - Yet another hottie who loves wearing purple and white. Very Happy Go Vikings!

Big props to gopherwrestler for this awesome sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
ramonesfan


Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 1650
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
Willink wrote:
From the Woodson interview:

Quote:
I would say this: Theres been times throughout my career there when defensively we put a [inappropriate/removed]-poor product on the field, and weve been in games and won ballgames solely on the arm of Aaron Rodgers and the legs of Aaron Rodgers and what hes been able to do throwing a ball to a Greg, a Donald, a Jermichael, Woodson said. A couple years ago, we were 15- 1, and if we have any other quarterback other than Aaron Rodgers, were 7-9


Quote:
I mean, Gregs not even there anymore. Hes a Minnesota Viking. They paid him a lot of money to be there. You dont have any worries. He should be just fine. He should leave all things Packers alone. He should keep that to himself and if he wants to take it out on (Rodgers), do it the week they play. Im just not understanding all these attacks on A-Rod.


This is where Woodson loses credibility. While I agree that Rodgers had an incredible season that year, there is no way that any of a handful of other QB's could have led the Pack to at least 10-11 wins that year.

Woodson is right about all the attacks on A-Rod. If it were just Finley (a knucklehead) and Jennings (now a Viking), you could write them off as nothing. When Driver seems to back up some of what Jennings said, it starts to make you wonder, because Driver has, or should have no agenda, and he is a player of great character. When you get that many players making comments, well, where there's smoke, there is probably at least a little fire.
Yes, but those quarterbacks weren't on the team. Harrell wasn't going to do it, and as much as I like Flynn, he wasn't going to do it. No credibility lost.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GoPackGo


Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 3203
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
Willink wrote:
From the Woodson interview:

Quote:
I would say this: Theres been times throughout my career there when defensively we put a [inappropriate/removed]-poor product on the field, and weve been in games and won ballgames solely on the arm of Aaron Rodgers and the legs of Aaron Rodgers and what hes been able to do throwing a ball to a Greg, a Donald, a Jermichael, Woodson said. A couple years ago, we were 15- 1, and if we have any other quarterback other than Aaron Rodgers, were 7-9


Quote:
I mean, Gregs not even there anymore. Hes a Minnesota Viking. They paid him a lot of money to be there. You dont have any worries. He should be just fine. He should leave all things Packers alone. He should keep that to himself and if he wants to take it out on (Rodgers), do it the week they play. Im just not understanding all these attacks on A-Rod.


This is where Woodson loses credibility. While I agree that Rodgers had an incredible season that year, there is no way that any of a handful of other QB's could have led the Pack to at least 10-11 wins that year.


Come on buck, read between the lines. Woodson isn't saying "we'd be 7-9 with Tom Brady." When people say things like that, they mean available players. Guys on our roster like Flynn or Harrell. We'd have been 7-9 with those two. Worse with Graham. Any available street free agent would not have led GB to the playoffs.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Uncle Buck


Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 14904
Location: Viking Country
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GoPackGo wrote:
Come on buck, read between the lines. Woodson isn't saying "we'd be 7-9 with Tom Brady." When people say things like that, they mean available players. Guys on our roster like Flynn or Harrell. We'd have been 7-9 with those two. Worse with Graham. Any available street free agent would not have led GB to the playoffs.


That's not how I understood it initially, but if he did mean that, it's not like there aren't quite a few playoff teams that would be in the same situation if they lost their starting QB. If he meant that, he isn't really proving anything. Again, I agree that Rodgers was incredible that year. I just don't think he carried the rest of the team that much.
_________________

Elisha Cuthbert - Yet another hottie who loves wearing purple and white. Very Happy Go Vikings!

Big props to gopherwrestler for this awesome sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Ketchup


Joined: 13 May 2009
Posts: 13682
Location: Milwaukee, WI
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
Come on buck, read between the lines. Woodson isn't saying "we'd be 7-9 with Tom Brady." When people say things like that, they mean available players. Guys on our roster like Flynn or Harrell. We'd have been 7-9 with those two. Worse with Graham. Any available street free agent would not have led GB to the playoffs.


That's not how I understood it initially, but if he did mean that, it's not like there aren't quite a few playoff teams that would be in the same situation if they lost their starting QB. If he meant that, he isn't really proving anything. Again, I agree that Rodgers was incredible that year. I just don't think he carried the rest of the team that much.
Our defense was the 19th scoring defense and the 32nd ranked D in YPG. Our running game averaged a terrible 3.9 yards per carry and if you take out Rodgers contributions to that, it would go down.

Yes, he DID carry that team that much.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Uncle Buck


Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 14904
Location: Viking Country
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ketchup wrote:
Uncle Buck wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
Come on buck, read between the lines. Woodson isn't saying "we'd be 7-9 with Tom Brady." When people say things like that, they mean available players. Guys on our roster like Flynn or Harrell. We'd have been 7-9 with those two. Worse with Graham. Any available street free agent would not have led GB to the playoffs.


That's not how I understood it initially, but if he did mean that, it's not like there aren't quite a few playoff teams that would be in the same situation if they lost their starting QB. If he meant that, he isn't really proving anything. Again, I agree that Rodgers was incredible that year. I just don't think he carried the rest of the team that much.
Our defense was the 19th scoring defense and the 32nd ranked D in YPG. Our running game averaged a terrible 3.9 yards per carry and if you take out Rodgers contributions to that, it would go down.

Yes, he DID carry that team that much.


Well, I guess I'll take your word for it you guys. I don't want to start an argument over the whole thing. It does make sense if you have a lousy defense, no running game, and then throw a lousy QB in on top of it all I suppose.

One thing I will say is that I think your defense doesn't get enough love for their performance in the Super Bowl. They played a big role in the Packers winning that game.

Anyway, peace to all, and good luck this year. Smile
_________________

Elisha Cuthbert - Yet another hottie who loves wearing purple and white. Very Happy Go Vikings!

Big props to gopherwrestler for this awesome sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Ketchup


Joined: 13 May 2009
Posts: 13682
Location: Milwaukee, WI
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
One thing I will say is that I think your defense doesn't get enough love for their performance in the Super Bowl. They played a big role in the Packers winning that game.
Yes it did. Rodgers played some incredible games in the SB run, especially in Atlanta. That said, we don't win that SB if our defense wasn't playing the way it was. Tray was playing some elite cover CB. Raji had by far his best run as our NT at that point. Clay was beasting. Nick was all over the field. So many playmakers. Guys like Bishop and Jenkins too.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
carolinapacker1


Joined: 09 Dec 2012
Posts: 343
Location: North Carolina
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Macc_Aviv wrote:
I know the media has a job to do and everything, but really, who cares? Wish they would stop talking about this.


The media has always been out to try and make player releases the Packers fault. I mean I thought we all knew this when a certain purple traitor QB got released
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RashaanSalaami


Global Moderator
Most Valuable Poster
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 29843
Location: Jersey
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
Ketchup wrote:
Uncle Buck wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
Come on buck, read between the lines. Woodson isn't saying "we'd be 7-9 with Tom Brady." When people say things like that, they mean available players. Guys on our roster like Flynn or Harrell. We'd have been 7-9 with those two. Worse with Graham. Any available street free agent would not have led GB to the playoffs.


That's not how I understood it initially, but if he did mean that, it's not like there aren't quite a few playoff teams that would be in the same situation if they lost their starting QB. If he meant that, he isn't really proving anything. Again, I agree that Rodgers was incredible that year. I just don't think he carried the rest of the team that much.
Our defense was the 19th scoring defense and the 32nd ranked D in YPG. Our running game averaged a terrible 3.9 yards per carry and if you take out Rodgers contributions to that, it would go down.

Yes, he DID carry that team that much.


Well, I guess I'll take your word for it you guys. I don't want to start an argument over the whole thing. It does make sense if you have a lousy defense, no running game, and then throw a lousy QB in on top of it all I suppose.

One thing I will say is that I think your defense doesn't get enough love for their performance in the Super Bowl. They played a big role in the Packers winning that game.

Anyway, peace to all, and good luck this year. Smile


We had the 2nd best defense in football that year (to Pittsburgh). Not just the Super Bowl and not just the playoffs where it was ridiculous.

It doesn't get as much play because Rodgers had arguably the best postseason in history capped off with some of the greatest throws (and cools shots captures on film) in the biggest game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
GoPackGo


Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 3203
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
Come on buck, read between the lines. Woodson isn't saying "we'd be 7-9 with Tom Brady." When people say things like that, they mean available players. Guys on our roster like Flynn or Harrell. We'd have been 7-9 with those two. Worse with Graham. Any available street free agent would not have led GB to the playoffs.


That's not how I understood it initially, but if he did mean that, it's not like there aren't quite a few playoff teams that would be in the same situation if they lost their starting QB. If he meant that, he isn't really proving anything. Again, I agree that Rodgers was incredible that year. I just don't think he carried the rest of the team that much.


But that's like saying the Vikings would've been a playoff team last year without Adrian Peterson. Minnesota has an above average defense, but no way they make it anywhere near 10 wins without AP's superman performance last year.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CactusPackFan


Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 758
Location: AZ
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How many times have you seen Rodgers take responsibility for his play? I see it in every press conference. I have not seen him throwing receivers under the bus. Most of the time I hear him praising and encouraging them. I am quite sure he pulls them aside in practice or off the field to deal with them when they are just not "getting it, " because that's the kind of guy he is. We really do not know just how good we have it with Aaron at the helm. Favre was great for many years, but my God, how many of his 3, 4, 5 or 6 interception performances dis he truly take ownership for? I can succinctly remember MANY times I would practically vomit when Favre would talk about protections or receivers running the wrong route, or he and the receiver not being on the same page. It was almost never, "I screwed up, I had a bad game, I can play a hole lot better than I did today." To question A-ROD's leadership over what two guys say, one who would have preferred to stay with the Packers but at the wrong price, and the other, who recently retired. I would be much more suspect of THEIR motivations than Rodgers. He's the best thing that happened to GB in YEARS.
_________________


Special Thanks To Jordyzzz for the awesome sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LftCoastPackFan


Joined: 30 Apr 2010
Posts: 743
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
Willink wrote:
From the Woodson interview:

Quote:
I would say this: Theres been times throughout my career there when defensively we put a [inappropriate/removed]-poor product on the field, and weve been in games and won ballgames solely on the arm of Aaron Rodgers and the legs of Aaron Rodgers and what hes been able to do throwing a ball to a Greg, a Donald, a Jermichael, Woodson said. A couple years ago, we were 15- 1, and if we have any other quarterback other than Aaron Rodgers, were 7-9


Quote:
I mean, Gregs not even there anymore. Hes a Minnesota Viking. They paid him a lot of money to be there. You dont have any worries. He should be just fine. He should leave all things Packers alone. He should keep that to himself and if he wants to take it out on (Rodgers), do it the week they play. Im just not understanding all these attacks on A-Rod.


This is where Woodson loses credibility. While I agree that Rodgers had an incredible season that year, there is no way that any of a handful of other QB's could have led the Pack to at least 10-11 wins that year.

Woodson is right about all the attacks on A-Rod. If it were just Finley (a knucklehead) and Jennings (now a Viking), you could write them off as nothing. When Driver seems to back up some of what Jennings said, it starts to make you wonder, because Driver has, or should have no agenda, and he is a player of great character. When you get that many players making comments, well, where there's smoke, there is probably at least a little fire.
WR's, most of them are straight up Diva's, they all want the ball. All this is, is a bitter Jennings who rolled the dice on a big contract but got hurt, and a beloved old warrior in Driver who still thinks he can play but was phased out in favor of younger talent (Cobb).

Jennings gets hurt and doesn't get Vincent Jackson $$, and Driver is invisible and never gets the ball; they both had agendas.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HUDSONandGRUDEN


Joined: 11 Jan 2012
Posts: 86
Location: Lafayette, Colorado
PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Woodson is right about all the attacks on A-Rod. If it were just Finley (a knucklehead) and Jennings (now a Viking), you could write them off as nothing. When Driver seems to back up some of what Jennings said, it starts to make you wonder, because Driver has, or should have no agenda, and he is a player of great character. When you get that many players making comments, well, where there's smoke, there is probably at least a little fire.


I don't know A-rod. I don't know Jennings. But I do know myself, and my hunch is that Rodgers might have issues in huddle. There can be a positive to pointing out mistakes in game, and there can be a negative: walking that line can be difficult. Some guys understand some guys don't. Not saying anyone's right or wrong, just saying.

Also see a clear dichotomy between who these guys have thus far caught balls from in their careers. Probably just a matter of personal preference, and for us fans: both leadership styles have brought home a ring. My opinion one 'style' will bring home a few more, without those dudes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group