Jump to content


Recent Topics




Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays

No members are celebrating a birthday today

Photo

PACKERS...arrogance or stupidity?


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Oswego Chris

Oswego Chris

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • Twitter:oswegochris23
  • LocationOswego, Illinois

Posted 05 November 2013 - 09:54 AM

As I woke up this morning trying to rid my head of the ridiculous, bombastic, stupifying football jargon spewed by one Jon Gruden last night, I kept coming back to one simple question....are the Packers arrogant or just stupid?

 

During the post game wrap( oh to able to resurrect Howard Cosell, or steal Brent Musberger from the college game...Gruden's idea of analysis is telling us how great a player is...after he makes a good play) the un-dynamic ESPN duo were discusing the plight of the Pack sans Rodgers.  Gruden stated something to the effect of "no team can afford to lose their QB more than the Packers."

 

Really? More than the other 31 teams in the league? Rodgers is a top 3 talent in the league yes...an extremely rare and valuable asset.  What do you do with valuable assets? Usually you insure them-would you drive a BMW blindfolded at night with no car insurance? Well, I think the transgression of the Packers is euivalent or worse...going into an important game and your back-up to Aaron Rodgers is Senecca Wallace?

A player who:

 

- has 21 career starts; 5-9 with Seattle, 1-6 with Cleveland for a 6-15 overall record.

- did not take a snap for the Packers in the preseason.

- was out of the game in 2012.

- has one career rushing TD, although he is known for his mobility.

 

If I were a Packers' fan I would be livid...and not just because I had to wear those God-awful colors.  The Packers' brass is viewed as one of the smartest in the league, how could this happen? Were they delusional after years of Favre and Rodgers never being hurt that they believed they had the only monopoly on indestructible quarterbacks? Mike McCarthy always seemd a bit arrogant to me...was I correct? Did they really believe they could survive a Rodgers injury with a player of Wallace's caliber?

 

I am betting they were living in denial...in a game where a seemingly normal tackle can break bones, or a non-thunderous collision can cause a concussion...they said; "It won't happen to us".

 

I am also betting that if Rodgers injury is significant, there will be try-outs this week in Green Bay.

 

I take no joy in Rodgers being hurt, he seems a like-able chap who is fun to watch throw the football...but sadisticly I am satisfied to see the Packers put in this position, and excited to see the Bears back in the race for the NFC North.

 

 

@BBCG105Reasons



#2 CubChymyst

CubChymyst

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts
  • LocationManhattan, Kansas

Posted 05 November 2013 - 10:26 AM

The step down form a top 3 QB to a back up is huge. Hell the step down from a top 3 quarterback to a starting quarter back on TB, Minnesota, Cleveland, Miami, Bills, and Jacksonville is huge. The point being there is not enough quality starting quarterbacks to go around the league 1 time little lone twice. Gruden hyperbola gets annoying but the NFL is a quarterback league and losing your starter is a dagger to a team 7 out of 10 times (no stats backing this up just guessing based off observations).

 

I was a great Bears win, however, I was a little troubled by the Bears run defense. They knew the packers where going to run and still got gashed a few times and the safeties missed several tackles.



#3 Oswego Chris

Oswego Chris

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • Twitter:oswegochris23
  • LocationOswego, Illinois

Posted 05 November 2013 - 11:22 AM

my point is not that Rodgers' injury is not a crushing blow to the team, it's that if the Packers had even a semi-competant back-up, who went through a preseason with them, they probably win that game...your point is true that a huge drop-off exists between a top 3 QB and a regular starter, but there is also a huge drop-off between a player like Jason Campbell and Senecca Wallace...

 

there are plenty of 3rd stringers, and guys sitting at home(Trent Edwards) better than Senecca Wallace...

 

The safeties made 2 criticial errors, Major Wright filled the wrong gap, leading to a long run, and Conte missed a tackle on the Starks TD...The blocked punt and the onside led to 2 short fields for the Pack...without those, I don't think they score TDs with Wallace...

 

as far as the Bears' run defense moving forward...let's hope the Jay Ratliff pick-up from Dallas helps



#4 hansman1982

hansman1982

    King Regent of The Calendar Trivia Empire

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,939 posts
  • Twitter:JoeHansman
  • LocationDes Moines, IA

Posted 05 November 2013 - 11:23 AM

Well, my already fucked fantasy football team just got invited to a gang bang.



#5 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,369 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 05 November 2013 - 11:55 AM

Well, my already fucked fantasy football team just got invited to a gang bang.


"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#6 CubChymyst

CubChymyst

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts
  • LocationManhattan, Kansas

Posted 05 November 2013 - 01:37 PM

The packers made a mistake not having a backup that was with them in the preseason. That would fall in to the arrogant or stupid category. I'll agree that there is a drop from Campbell to Wallance but it isn't near the drop from Rodgers to Campbell. The loss of Rodgers is a large blow that weakens the packers quite a bit. I



#7 Oswego Chris

Oswego Chris

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • Twitter:oswegochris23
  • LocationOswego, Illinois

Posted 05 November 2013 - 02:42 PM

Yeah...Rodgers would only have 2 or 3 comps...Brees, Brady, Manning...and none of them are in their prime like Rodgers...so he is probably one of the top 3 to 5 most irreplacable players...if I had more time this morning when I typed this up, I would have ranked the back-ups....

I am guessinig Wallace would be in bottom 5...

 

but that brings up an interesting point...the Vikings have 3 QBs better than Wallace, but they all should be back-ups...it just struck me as extremely un-Packer like for a team that used to always have a good back up



#8 MichiganGoat

MichiganGoat

    Give me a BEER

  • Moderators
  • 3,799 posts
  • Twitter:MichiganGoat
  • Facebook:michigangoat
  • LocationGrand Rapids, MI

Posted 06 November 2013 - 05:54 AM

Well, my already fucked fantasy football team just got invited to a gang bang.

Well... ain't that special.
Now should I be more concerned that somebody made this or that you about it?

MichiganGoat on Twitter

"There are a lot of guys who are respected but not liked" - Ron Santo


#9 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,369 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 06 November 2013 - 07:33 AM

 

 

Well, my already fucked fantasy football team just got invited to a gang bang.

Well... ain't that special.
Now should I be more concerned that somebody made this or that you about it?

Sounds like someone needs a rose. /s


"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#10 King Jeff

King Jeff

    King of all Cubs fans!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,478 posts
  • Twitter:@peaceknuckle
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 10 November 2013 - 10:09 PM

 Scott Tolzien is starting for them next week, which would be funny if it didn't look like Josh McCown was at least as good of a choice to start as Jay Cutler.  Josh fucking McCown.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).