njbuff Posted May 16, 2020 Posted May 16, 2020 If Jordan Love is good in the NFL, I will be the most shocked man out there. When I saw him at Utah State, he was very unimpressive to me. The Packers had better hope that Rodgers can play till his 45. ?
Mr. WEO Posted May 16, 2020 Posted May 16, 2020 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Doc said: I said that since they drafted Love (and you don't draft a guy in the 1st unless you expect him to start within the next few years) and had a feeling it would piss ARod off, they must think that ARod is in decline, despite giving him a massive contract prior to the 2019 season (which will require them to eat at least $17M in dead money eventually). If that's their thinking, they should have traded what they could to get more draft picks/players ready for when Love is ready to start. They've basically conceded that their SB contending days are over and you should agree since you think a1st round pick wouldn't have helped them, so none of their other picks stand a chance. Nice try but all blowout playoffs losses are not equal. And a 36 year old QB back 15 years ago is different from one today. I know you know this but have to think otherwise. And I think you missed it, but Favre did indeed complain about them drafting Rodgers and said that it wasn't his job to train his replacement. There were tons of media reports about their frosty relationship. And again I doubt you'll find many, even inside GB (don't discount how much his signing with the Vikes and his attitude towards Rodgers turned many Packers fans off) would say Favre was the better QB. Did they think Favre was in "massive decline" in 2004? nah. Your simply saying that the scenarios were different will not make them so,. Blowouts a blowout. Favre needed help and got "I'm so much better than this Green Room Rodgers". Favre made it back the NFCC game after they drafted his replacement. Rodgers should have no problem then, right? So what's all the fuss? How is Favre at 36 different than Rodgers now, other than that he hadn't missed a start in almost 2 decades? Right now? I'm confident that the GB fans look more fondly upon Favre than Rodgers. There's no question who the better QB was/is--at least for the locals. Edited May 16, 2020 by Mr. WEO
Doc Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 (edited) 42 minutes ago, njbuff said: If Jordan Love is good in the NFL, I will be the most shocked man out there. When I saw him at Utah State, he was very unimpressive to me. The Packers had better hope that Rodgers can play till his 45. ? I agree about Love. We'll see, though. As for ARod, my bet is he'll be out of GB in a year, two years tops. 40 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Did they think Favre was in "massive decline" in 2004? nah. Your simply saying that the scenarios were different will not make them so,. Blowouts a blowout. Favre needed help and got "I'm so much better than this Green Room Rodgers". Favre made it back the NFCC game after they drafted his replacement. Rodgers should have no problem then, right? So what's all the fuss? How is Favre at 36 different than Rodgers now, other than that he hadn't missed a start in almost 2 decades? Right now? I'm confident that the GB fans look more fondly upon Favre than Rodgers. There's no question who the better QB was/is--at least for the locals. The Pack probably figured that, with Favre being at an age when most QB's have long since hung it up, having taken a beating for 13 years after not missing a game, having an opioid problem, and just having come off a blowout loss in a home wildcard game, that it was time to move on. Not an unreasonable position to take. Contrast that with ARod who lost on the road in the NFCCG with crap receivers and at an age now when many QB's are still playing. To me, that's not a reason to scrap everything, which they appear to be doing. But again, not my team or concern. We'll see where it all shakes out. Edited May 17, 2020 by Doc 1
Mr. WEO Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, Doc said: I agree about Love. We'll see, though. As for ARod, my bet is he'll be out of GB in a year, two years tops. The Pack probably figured that, with Favre being at an age when most QB's have long since hung it up, having taken a beating for 13 years after not missing a game, having an opioid problem, and just having come off a blowout loss in a home wildcard game, that it was time to move on. Not an unreasonable position to take. Contrast that with ARod who made it to the NFCCG with crap receivers and at an age now when many QB's are still playing. To me, that's not a reason to scrap everything, which they appear to be doing. But again, not my team or concern. We'll see where it all shakes out. In the 4 seasons before they drafted Rodgers, "end of his career" Favre's Packers went 12-4, 12-4, 10-6, 10-6---yet you're insisting that in 2005 the Packers had decided ":it was time to move on" from Favre to Rodgers......a guy who not start a single game for the 3 years he was on the roster with Favre? The more you post on this the less sense you make.
Doc Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 31 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: In the 4 seasons before they drafted Rodgers, "end of his career" Favre's Packers went 12-4, 12-4, 10-6, 10-6---yet you're insisting that in 2005 the Packers had decided ":it was time to move on" from Favre to Rodgers......a guy who not start a single game for the 3 years he was on the roster with Favre? The more you post on this the less sense you make. I've explained several times now why moving-on from Favre 15 years ago appeared to be a sensible move (and the Pack won a SB with ARod whereas Favre never won another) while it doesn't for ARod. There's really nothing more I can say and all we can do now is see what becomes of ARod and Love.
Mr. WEO Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 11 minutes ago, Doc said: I've explained several times now why moving-on from Favre 15 years ago appeared to be a sensible move (and the Pack won a SB with ARod whereas Favre never won another) while it doesn't for ARod. There's really nothing more I can say and all we can do now is see what becomes of ARod and Love. Should know by, say, week 8 or 10.
IgotBILLStopay Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 On 5/15/2020 at 8:21 PM, SirAndrew said: I get your point, but I don’t follow why Beasley would only be seeing 40% of snaps? I guess you’re saying that Beasley would be getting less playing time to make room for Davis? Three and four receiver sets are common these days. I don’t see a scenario where Beasley would be unhappy with his playing time, because Davis can get playing time along with Beasley. If Davis came out looking like an all pro early in the year, maybe I’d have some concerns about Beasley’s playing time. However, I don’t see Davis jumping Beasley on the depth chart. WR’s take a while to acclimate to the pro game. We have no idea if Davis can even play at the pro level. I’d be open to a Beasley trade if Davis and/or Hodgins proven they can. no in a best case for Beasley, I already assumed Davis will take snaps only from Duke and not from Beasley (though there is no indication the Bills are moving on from Duke). The bigger issue for Beasley is going to come from the snaps going to Diggs, who HAS to play at least 90% of the snaps. You can’t really play 3 WR sets on every snap - there is no room for surprise then.
Bookie Man Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 I'm not advocating for him, but you would have to think, Buffalo would be superbowl FAVORITES if they acquired him. I could see 14-2 or 15-1 type season. 1
GunnerBill Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 17 hours ago, Doc said: I said that since they drafted Love (and you don't draft a guy in the 1st unless you expect him to start within the next few years) and had a feeling it would piss ARod off, they must think that ARod is in decline, despite giving him a massive contract prior to the 2019 season (which will require them to eat at least $17M in dead money eventually). If that's their thinking, they should have traded what they could to get more draft picks/players ready for when Love is ready to start. They've basically conceded that their SB contending days are over and you should agree since you think a1st round pick wouldn't have helped them, so none of their other picks stand a chance. Nice try but all blowout playoffs losses are not equal. And a 36 year old QB back 15 years ago is different from one today. I know you know this but have to think otherwise. And I think you missed it, but Favre did indeed complain about them drafting Rodgers and said that it wasn't his job to train his replacement. There were tons of media reports about their frosty relationship. And again I doubt you'll find many, even inside GB (don't discount how much his signing with the Vikes and his attitude towards Rodgers turned many Packers fans off) would say Favre was the better QB. Your timing is off. That deal was given to him in 2018 before the coaching change. The Packers are in a bit of a mess because of the timing of the deal and the regime change. But Rodgers himself is partly to blame for that.
Doc Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Your timing is off. That deal was given to him in 2018 before the coaching change. The Packers are in a bit of a mess because of the timing of the deal and the regime change. But Rodgers himself is partly to blame for that. You are correct about the timing of the contract.
Recommended Posts