Aaron Rodgers

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby DavidSollender » Mon May 03, 2021 12:15 am

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Ah, okay...the salary cap....that's good info....I first thought that if there was going to be a trade to Denver it would happen before the Broncos made their first pick and Green Bay would end up with that pick as part of the deal....

As for McCarthy being fired after two losing seasons -- If I remember right they still could have won out and finished 8-7-1 if they had won out. which oddly would have tied them with Minnesota at 8-7-1 and duplicated the two teams being tied with that exact same record in the late 1970s....although Minnesota won the division that year and it wouldn't have been good enough to make the playoffs in 2018. Just kind of a fun fact. Not debating the point that McCarthy seemed to have lost control of the mindset of the team and underacheived in the last two seasons. I do, however, think that the Sports Illustrated article that came out really created the situation that the new, inexperienced GM felt compelled to make a change immediately, and perhaps based more on public perception of trying to keep Rodgers happy than really having a plan. That's only my own theory however, based on what I've witnessed in watching NFL teams go through cycles of change over the years.

What I meant by it being an irresponsible hire is that you're giving two inexperienced people the keys to a franchise with one of the greatest quarterbacks in history going into a time in his career when a couple of similar standing quarterbacks (Elway, Brady) won Super Bowls. The Packers went with the "trend" or "new line of thinking" and copied the Rams and went that direction. A responsible hire is bringing in a GM and coach with real playoff success, people with significant track records that players are forced to respect, people who know how to handle tricky situations of great players playing out their careers and how to maintain a multi-generational winning franchise as the Packers have done for a long time. Instead, they brought in a couple of young, inexperienced people with literally no NFL playing or coaching experience. Expecting them to properly handle the window closing on one of the best quarterbacks in history is, again in my opinion, highly irresponsible. And really, it's unfair to Rodgers and it's somewhat unfair to the GM and coach who are given a situation that, unless they're both prodigies, they really can't be expected to handle something like that. Rebuilding a team with young talent? Sure, give them a chance. In this situation, bring in someone with longtime NFL experience for both positions.

13-3 is a great regular season record, yes. Getting to the NFC Championship two years in a row -- fantastic. But for those of us who have followed the Packers for a long time, I think it's pretty clear to see the difference between the desire and will of this team compared to those of the teams that won championships for the Packers. Also, the level of the details. Communication is clearly an issue, as is often the case with inexperienced people running the ship. Rodgers is apparently upset because of not being told about the Jordan Love choice and what their plans were. Also, he said that he threw the 3rd down pass at the end of the NFC Championship away because he figured, like a lot of us, that they'd go for it on fourth if they didn't make it.

Expanding this thread a bit, some reporters are speculating that Rodgers might just retire and then later sign with or get a trade to another team later. He wouldn't be the first player to do that. Claude Humphrey did that, I believe. In his "A Football Life" Aikman said he retired in part because he feared his legacy was at stake. He also has said that he almost came back to the Dolphins. Anybody else in that category? I notice someone's already mentioned Rolf Bernischke -- Rodgers could go the game show route as well.



1) The inexperienced GM did not fire McCarthy. Mark Murphy (CEO) took that authority upon himself when he hired Gutekunst and changed the structure of the organization to where the coach, GM, and Director of Football Operations (Russ Ball) each answer to Murphy.

2) I don't see where the experience level of the current GM and coach differs significantly to that of Thompson and McCarthy when they were hired, or Holmgren when he was hired. Ron Wolfe was the exception, but the organization was in real trouble at that time - if not for Wolfe, we may be talking about the Milwaukee Packers by now. Thompson and McCarthy had the Packers within one game of the Super Bowl in McCarthy's second year and they were serious contenders at least through 2014. (I consider the disaster in Seattle the unofficial end of the McCarthy era, at least as legit Super Bowl contenders.)

3) I was skeptical of the LaFleur hiring and wasn't completely on board after 2019 - I felt that might have been the worst 13-3 team in the history of the league. However, they were legitimate championship contenders last year and I can no longer discount the coach's contributions.

4) Drafting Love last year was not the reason the Packers didn't beat Tampa Bay in the NFC Championship. The game was their's for the taking. While Rodgers wasn't the reason the Packers lost, he also wasn't the reason the Packers won. And he could have been. I wasn't on board with kicking the Field Goal at the end of the game, but maybe a different decision is made if it's a more reasonable fourth down distance. There were plenty of opportunities for plays to be made prior to the last two minutes of that game.

As a Packer fan that lived through the Favre drama, I'm getting tired of diva QBs. The Packer organization is not faultless, but I'm at a point to where I'm fine if Rodgers comes back and I'm fine if he doesn't (as long as he doesn't end up in Minnesota or San Francisco). Gutekunst's tenure as a Packer GM will be defined by the Jordan Love pick and I'm interested in watching how LaFluer grows into his role as a head coach.
DavidSollender
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:04 pm

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Jay Z » Mon May 03, 2021 3:42 pm

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Ah, okay...the salary cap....that's good info....I first thought that if there was going to be a trade to Denver it would happen before the Broncos made their first pick and Green Bay would end up with that pick as part of the deal....

As for McCarthy being fired after two losing seasons -- If I remember right they still could have won out and finished 8-7-1 if they had won out. which oddly would have tied them with Minnesota at 8-7-1 and duplicated the two teams being tied with that exact same record in the late 1970s....although Minnesota won the division that year and it wouldn't have been good enough to make the playoffs in 2018. Just kind of a fun fact. Not debating the point that McCarthy seemed to have lost control of the mindset of the team and underacheived in the last two seasons. I do, however, think that the Sports Illustrated article that came out really created the situation that the new, inexperienced GM felt compelled to make a change immediately, and perhaps based more on public perception of trying to keep Rodgers happy than really having a plan. That's only my own theory however, based on what I've witnessed in watching NFL teams go through cycles of change over the years.

What I meant by it being an irresponsible hire is that you're giving two inexperienced people the keys to a franchise with one of the greatest quarterbacks in history going into a time in his career when a couple of similar standing quarterbacks (Elway, Brady) won Super Bowls. The Packers went with the "trend" or "new line of thinking" and copied the Rams and went that direction. A responsible hire is bringing in a GM and coach with real playoff success, people with significant track records that players are forced to respect, people who know how to handle tricky situations of great players playing out their careers and how to maintain a multi-generational winning franchise as the Packers have done for a long time. Instead, they brought in a couple of young, inexperienced people with literally no NFL playing or coaching experience. Expecting them to properly handle the window closing on one of the best quarterbacks in history is, again in my opinion, highly irresponsible. And really, it's unfair to Rodgers and it's somewhat unfair to the GM and coach who are given a situation that, unless they're both prodigies, they really can't be expected to handle something like that. Rebuilding a team with young talent? Sure, give them a chance. In this situation, bring in someone with longtime NFL experience for both positions.

13-3 is a great regular season record, yes. Getting to the NFC Championship two years in a row -- fantastic. But for those of us who have followed the Packers for a long time, I think it's pretty clear to see the difference between the desire and will of this team compared to those of the teams that won championships for the Packers. Also, the level of the details. Communication is clearly an issue, as is often the case with inexperienced people running the ship. Rodgers is apparently upset because of not being told about the Jordan Love choice and what their plans were. Also, he said that he threw the 3rd down pass at the end of the NFC Championship away because he figured, like a lot of us, that they'd go for it on fourth if they didn't make it.

Expanding this thread a bit, some reporters are speculating that Rodgers might just retire and then later sign with or get a trade to another team later. He wouldn't be the first player to do that. Claude Humphrey did that, I believe. In his "A Football Life" Aikman said he retired in part because he feared his legacy was at stake. He also has said that he almost came back to the Dolphins. Anybody else in that category? I notice someone's already mentioned Rolf Bernischke -- Rodgers could go the game show route as well.


Few if any coaches or GMs have playing experience anymore. John Lynch is about the only player. A smattering of head coaches that played at all, that's it. The league as a whole isn't following your drummer.
Jay Z
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 7:42 pm
Location: Madison WI

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Sonny9 » Mon May 03, 2021 4:51 pm

rhickok1109 wrote:To turn the question on its head: How often has a coach with a well-established QB been fired?

Sticking with Hall of Fame QBs
Jurgensen/Otto Graham Hogskins was fired after 1968

Unitas/Ewbank Colts fired after 1962
Sonny9
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:57 pm

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby GameBeforeTheMoney » Tue May 04, 2021 12:17 am

You're right with both of those....and you reminded me that Buck Shaw was fired with YA Tittle at the helm.
GameBeforeTheMoney
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2021 3:21 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Brian wolf » Tue May 04, 2021 12:18 am

Though he wasnt fired, I still couldnt believe Holmgren would leave Favre. It seemed obvious that Wolf was still upset with the Packers losing to the Broncos but was Holmgren just wanting more power as GM and HC or just wanting to get away from Wolf ?

You would think he would want to keep winning championships in GB but maybe he felt Favre was to the point of being uncoachable or still capable of losing himself in addiction or alcohol, though that never kept him from playing on sundays. Maybe Holmgren was thinking he could lead two QBs to championships with Hasselbeck and he came close but who knows ? Is Holmgren a HOF coach ?
I think so but it takes alot of cojones to leave a great QB ...
Brian wolf
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Brian wolf » Tue May 04, 2021 12:25 am

Shaw and Graham were in the same boat ... they had established QBs but werent winning enough. Tittle couldnt win the tough western division, while Jurgensen struggled to win more than seven games a year ... Shaw won with Albert but couldnt beat Cleveland in the AAFC but won it all with Brocklin in 1960.
Brian wolf
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Jay Z » Wed May 05, 2021 3:04 am

Brian wolf wrote:Though he wasnt fired, I still couldnt believe Holmgren would leave Favre. It seemed obvious that Wolf was still upset with the Packers losing to the Broncos but was Holmgren just wanting more power as GM and HC or just wanting to get away from Wolf ?

You would think he would want to keep winning championships in GB but maybe he felt Favre was to the point of being uncoachable or still capable of losing himself in addiction or alcohol, though that never kept him from playing on sundays. Maybe Holmgren was thinking he could lead two QBs to championships with Hasselbeck and he came close but who knows ? Is Holmgren a HOF coach ?
I think so but it takes alot of cojones to leave a great QB ...


Holmgren wanted more power. Wanted to show he could do it all himself. Yes, I think the Packers win more than one title if he stays.

The Packers had Wolf. They had gone through decades of giving lots of power to Bengtson, Devine, Starr, Gregg and having it not work. They were not going to make Holmgren GM and coach. Holmgren left.

Favre was not known to be a discipline problem, particularly, under Holmgren. Favre continued to play well, played well in the 1998 playoff loss at SF. I suppose that could have changed, but it didn't under Holmgren. Wolf brought in Ray Rhodes to be a veteran, "win now" type. Rhodes acted gruff, but was the second coming of Scooter MacLean. Favre and others took advantage.

Wolf fired Rhodes after a year, and brought in Mike Sherman, who didn't have much of a rep. Sherman was a considerably better coach than Rhodes, at least in the regular season. But he couldn't rein in Favre, and Favre's meltdowns started increasing. Then Wolf retired, was allowed to name his own replacement, and named Sherman as GM as well, the very situation the Packers were trying to avoid. Sherman was spread too thin, a lousy GM, and the organization suffered. Bad playoff losses added up, and Sherman was let go after a 4-12 season in 2005.

Sherman had been replaced a season earlier as GM by Ted Thompson. Thompson brought in McCarthy, and they attempted to restore order with Favre, get him to do more film study. Favre did so somewhat grudgingly.

It's no accident that Wolf is in the HOF while Holmgren waits. I think Holmgren is seen as arrogant for leaving GB and a great situation, and only coming up with one SB loser in 10 years in Seattle. Plus he contributed little in his front office stint in Cleveland.
Jay Z
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 7:42 pm
Location: Madison WI

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby 7DnBrnc53 » Wed May 05, 2021 5:43 am

They had gone through decades of giving lots of power to Bengtson, Devine, Starr, Gregg and having it not work. They were not going to make Holmgren GM and coach. Holmgren left.


Yeah, especially Starr. He seemed to have contempt for his scouts.

1979 was the major example, when Starr ignored Red Cochrane. Then, in 81, he took Rich Campbell. Lloyd Eaton, their West Coast scout, came out and said that he couldn't play (this was after they met with Ronnie Lott):

https://www.packers.com/news/packers-co ... y-17265930
7DnBrnc53
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Brian wolf » Wed May 05, 2021 12:07 pm

Imagine Montana throwing to Lofton and Coffman. Packers needed a defense, however ...
Brian wolf
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am

Re: Aaron Rodgers

Postby Bryan » Wed May 05, 2021 1:33 pm

7DnBrnc53 wrote:1979 was the major example, when Starr ignored Red Cochrane. Then, in 81, he took Rich Campbell. Lloyd Eaton, their West Coast scout, came out and said that he couldn't play (this was after they met with Ronnie Lott):


Rich Campbell was so bad he never even saw the field. IIRC, he has the fewest career pass attempts (68) of any QB selected in the 1st round, and it's not like Campbell was taken at the end of the round. He was the 6th overall pick. How often has a team drafted a QB in the 1st round and the guy ends up never starting a game?
User avatar
Bryan
 
Posts: 1654
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:37 am

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests