NewEra Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 7 minutes ago, Bermuda Triangle said: some of the takes in this thread are horrific. Yeah. It was the most memorable thread of 2020 for me. I bring this up because I remember @Mr. WEO saying “we shall see” regarding the packers season. What’s the point of saying “we shall see” if we don’t bring it up again, am I right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bermuda Triangle Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, NewEra said: Yeah. It was the most memorable thread of 2020 for me. I bring this up because I remember @Mr. WEO saying “we shall see” regarding the packers season. What’s the point of saying “we shall see” if we don’t bring it up again, am I right? no doubt. That's what makes it fun. I'd rather someone offer an opinion and be shown to be wrong, than say nothing at the time, and then pound their chests months/years later, and say "I TOLD YOU SO!!!" (we already have one of those here). I'll say this, you are consistent:" he has 1 weapon and a couple jags."🤪 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 31 minutes ago, NewEra said: Yeah. It was the most memorable thread of 2020 for me. I bring this up because I remember @Mr. WEO saying “we shall see” regarding the packers season. What’s the point of saying “we shall see” if we don’t bring it up again, am I right? If we bumped a thread every time WEO is wrong then we'd bump every thread he posted in.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimeTime101 Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 bumping threads like this should go in the same category as calling someone out in a new thread. Same as someone posting something 5 months ago then refreshing there own post 5 months later saying "I told you so" Bottom line... Most of us were wrong about a great many of things about history before we were right about one thing. Haha you were wrong... Haha you were right. Has the feel of a locked thread up and coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChans Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 1 hour ago, NewEra said: aaron Rodgers is a very good game manager and clearly on the decline 👍🏻 Clearly. 2019 wasn’t 2014, but 2020-21 sure looks like it the packers were comparable to the Jacksonville AFCCG team. We are seeing right now. 13 wins and better than last season. For last year being their absolute best shot, they sure are faking this year pretty well when is the last time a team drafted a QB to let him sit and learn for 3+ years? 2005. It’s not how anyone does it anymore. Literally no one does it. Mahomes sat one year. Allen was supposed to sit one year. Watson, a couple games, herbert, a couple games, burrow, started week 1, Lamar, 1/2 season, RW, a few games, Tua, a few games, lock, a few games, baker, a few games, Darnold, starter day 1, trubisky, a few games. who is drafting a qb to sit for a few years? No one. MVP Aaron rodgers is under contract til 2023. He is playing the best ball of his career and certainly doesn’t have the look of have 1 more year left after this season. Their team looks to be the best in football. Not bad for a team that had their absolute last shot last season. that said, I understand that why they drafted Love. I disagreed with it because I thought they should be going all in to win more Super Bowls with their current team. If they win the SB AND used their 1st rd pick on a guy that will sit for a few year, more power to them. I disagreed with their strategy and the thought of not going all in with a GOAT type QB was baffling to me. go bills! This hurts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 41 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said: If we bumped a thread every time WEO is wrong then we'd bump every thread he posted in.. Nah, WEO knows his stuff, that’s why I enjoy going back and forth with him. Trying debate with some of these other guys is just a waste of time and not worth it. WEO is a worthy adversary in my book. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 24 minutes ago, FireChans said: This hurts Lol. Yeah, you’ve got a few other ones in here too but I took it easy. that said.....my take can also be a bad one if the packers win the SB. Considering they were able to get little or nothing from any of their draft picks and still win the SB while also drafting their potential starting QB....win win win for the packers FO. I just didn’t think Rodgers was done and was still capable of winning Super Bowls (plural). His contract runs through 2023 and I don’t see any situation in which love is better than Rodgers by the year 2023, rendering him and his rookie contract useless. most teams nowadays draft a qb and play him, while trying to win a super bowl while their young stud qb is getting paid pennies and learns the game. Having that qb sit for a few years hasn’t been done since Rodgers. The packers are a different type of FO though. They stick to their plan, which is great considering they’re a successful franchise, but imo, 2 Super Bowls solute between favre and Rodgers isn’t good enough for the talent they had under center. Up til Mahomes and Allen, Rodgers was easily the most talented qb to walk the planet and is playing better than both of these 24-25 kids this year....with less playmakers around him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 (edited) Aaron's been great this year. Back to his best. Haven't changed my mind about the fact that the clock on his time in Green Bay beginning to tick or the strategy behind the Jordan Love pick one iota. Still a move I'd make every time. If you love a guy (no pun intended) and your Quarterback is 37 you take him. EDIT: The one thing I was unsure about - whether Rodgers and LaFleur would ever really mesh.... well they absolutely have this year. Aaron is way more comfortable in this offense in 2020 than he was in 2019. Edited January 18, 2021 by GunnerBill 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Horseheads Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 On 7/29/2020 at 1:35 AM, rayray808 said: my cousin said that he is opting out of this season to really put the pressure on GB Your cousin have any other 🔥 takes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 2 hours ago, NewEra said: aaron Rodgers is a very good game manager and clearly on the decline 👍🏻 Clearly. 2019 wasn’t 2014, but 2020-21 sure looks like it the packers were comparable to the Jacksonville AFCCG team. We are seeing right now. 13 wins and better than last season. For last year being their absolute best shot, they sure are faking this year pretty well when is the last time a team drafted a QB to let him sit and learn for 3+ years? 2005. It’s not how anyone does it anymore. Literally no one does it. Mahomes sat one year. Allen was supposed to sit one year. Watson, a couple games, herbert, a couple games, burrow, started week 1, Lamar, 1/2 season, RW, a few games, Tua, a few games, lock, a few games, baker, a few games, Darnold, starter day 1, trubisky, a few games. who is drafting a qb to sit for a few years? No one. MVP Aaron rodgers is under contract til 2023. He is playing the best ball of his career and certainly doesn’t have the look of have 1 more year left after this season. Their team looks to be the best in football. Not bad for a team that had their absolute last shot last season. that said, I understand that why they drafted Love. I disagreed with it because I thought they should be going all in to win more Super Bowls with their current team. If they win the SB AND used their 1st rd pick on a guy that will sit for a few year, more power to them. I disagreed with their strategy and the thought of not going all in with a GOAT type QB was baffling to me. go bills! wow---look at you! Yeah, I was wrong when I said that the Packers weren't a 1st round pick away from the SB. They are actually better this year compared to last without a rookie 1st rounder in the Offense! If Love is a bust in a few years from now....so what? No negative impact at all this season. Zero point zero. Maybe as the last team to do it, the Packers felt it was ok to do it again. The point was then and still is that the Packers did not suffer one bit by drafting Love instead of whoever you had in mind. All that BS about "he has no weapons!!" turns out was just that...BS. After "wasting" their 1st round pick and not drafting a "weapon", Rodgers has not declined----instead he's been shot out of a cannon, and is the NFL MVP, with the guys on the roster. Without that new weapon..........they became the #1 scoring Offense in the league! Maybe the Packers FO knew more than you about what they had and still felt they were "all in", after the draft. Turns out, without question, they were right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 9 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: wow---look at you! Yeah, I was wrong when I said that the Packers weren't a 1st round pick away from the SB. They are actually better this year compared to last without a rookie 1st rounder in the Offense! If Love is a bust in a few years from now....so what? No negative impact at all this season. Zero point zero. Maybe as the last team to do it, the Packers felt it was ok to do it again. The point was then and still is that the Packers did not suffer one bit by drafting Love instead of whoever you had in mind. All that BS about "he has no weapons!!" turns out was just that...BS. After "wasting" their 1st round pick and not drafting a "weapon", Rodgers has not declined----instead he's been shot out of a cannon, and is the NFL MVP, with the guys on the roster. Without that new weapon..........they became the #1 scoring Offense in the league! Maybe the Packers FO knew more than you about what they had and still felt they were "all in", after the draft. Turns out, without question, they were right. I’m just having fun with it....but I don’t understand how you can say they didn’t suffer one bit by taking trading up for love over another position that may have played full time? How can you say that their team wouldn’t be better if they had Patrick Queen? Or Antoine Winfield jr, jeremy chinn or Julian Blackmon? It makes zero sense. Each of those players made their defenses better.....without them, they wouldn’t be as good as they this year.....hence suffering if they didn’t have them. Sorry WEO, but this take is just off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 1 minute ago, NewEra said: I’m just having fun with it....but I don’t understand how you can say they didn’t suffer one bit by taking trading up for love over another position that may have played full time? How can you say that their team wouldn’t be better if they had Patrick Queen? Or Antoine Winfield jr, jeremy chinn or Julian Blackmon? It makes zero sense. Each of those players made their defenses better.....without them, they wouldn’t be as good as they this year.....hence suffering if they didn’t have them. Sorry WEO, but this take is just off. Because of their result this year. And better then...what? The Packers D went from 18th to 9th. I'm looking at their actual results, not imaginary results. Queen was then only 1st rounder picked after Love in your list. The other guys came in later rounds (45th, 64th and 84th picks--if you want to make the argument that the Packers should have taken AWJr or Blackmon as their 2nd pick, ok) so they wouldn't be part of a Love/no Love discussion. So what do you imagine the Packers would be right now with a rookie like Queen? 14-2 and headed to the NFCC game? 15-1? 16-0 and headed to the NFCC game? Queen walked onto a top 3 D in points allowed and turned them into....a top 3 D in points allowed (while surrounded by a stud roster). I guess we can imagine anything. But the results are what they are. The evidence doesn't support your contention that the Packers are worse off for not picking a guy like Queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Because of their result this year. And better then...what? The Packers D went from 18th to 9th. I'm looking at their actual results, not imaginary results. Queen was then only 1st rounder picked after Love in your list. The other guys came in later rounds (45th, 64th and 84th picks--if you want to make the argument that the Packers should have taken AWJr or Blackmon as their 2nd pick, ok) so they wouldn't be part of a Love/no Love discussion. So what do you imagine the Packers would be right now with a rookie like Queen? 14-2 and headed to the NFCC game? 15-1? 16-0 and headed to the NFCC game? Queen walked onto a top 3 D in points allowed and turned them into....a top 3 D in points allowed (while surrounded by a stud roster). I guess we can imagine anything. But the results are what they are. The evidence doesn't support your contention that the Packers are worse off for not picking a guy like Queen. Better than they are this season. Would we be worse if we didn’t have Gabriel Davis and Tyler Bass? Would the Vikings we worse without Justin Jefferson? Would Washington be just as good if they didn’t have Chase young! I know you’re a smart guy. You can’t be THIS oblivious to the fact that adding an additional 1st rd talent could make them a better team THIS year. it’s all about THIS year. This has nothing to do with last season. Swapping Queen for Love WOULD make this years Packers team better than it is this year, hence giving them a better chance to win a super bowl this year. The packers would be a better team THIS season if they had Brandon Aiyuk instead of Jordan Love. I’m not sure how can say that adding a 1st rd talent wouldn’t make them a better team. it doesn’t matter what I imagine they to be. They would be better. No one can put a number on how much better they’d be. But they would be better. They would help. Not sure how this is so hard to grasp. Love added zero to this team. A 1st rd pick could have Edited January 18, 2021 by NewEra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 35 minutes ago, NewEra said: Better than they are this season. Would we be worse if we didn’t have Gabriel Davis and Tyler Bass? Would the Vikings we worse without Justin Jefferson? Would Washington be just as good if they didn’t have Chase young! I know you’re a smart guy. You can’t be THIS oblivious to the fact that adding an additional 1st rd talent could make them a better team THIS year. it’s all about THIS year. This has nothing to do with last season. Swapping Queen for Love WOULD make this years Packers team better than it is this year, hence giving them a better chance to win a super bowl this year. The packers would be a better team THIS season if they had Brandon Aiyuk instead of Jordan Love. I’m not sure how can say that adding a 1st rd talent wouldn’t make them a better team. it doesn’t matter what I imagine they to be. They would be better. No one can put a number on how much better they’d be. But they would be better. They would help. Not sure how this is so hard to grasp. Love added zero to this team. A 1st rd pick could have You see changing the topic by dropping names of guys not taken in the 1st round after Love. Aiyuk was already gone. M V-S was more productive with an insane 21 YPC to go with his 6 TDs. Aiyuk got most of his targets when Kittles went out. Still took nearly 100 targets to get under 750 yards. Also, you seem to discount the fact that many 1st rounders have little impact their rookie years (if at all). Did the Giants or Jets get much better after their picks? Jax? Raiders? Titans? Falcons? Did the Packers get better this year vs. 2019? yes, they did. that's all we know. the rest is speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 35 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: You see changing the topic by dropping names of guys not taken in the 1st round after Love. Aiyuk was already gone. M V-S was more productive with an insane 21 YPC to go with his 6 TDs. Aiyuk got most of his targets when Kittles went out. Still took nearly 100 targets to get under 750 yards. Also, you seem to discount the fact that many 1st rounders have little impact their rookie years (if at all). Did the Giants or Jets get much better after their picks? Jax? Raiders? Titans? Falcons? Did the Packers get better this year vs. 2019? yes, they did. that's all we know. the rest is speculation. Sure thing, whatever you say my man. Adding 1st rd talent players usually makes the team at least just a little bit better than they would be without them. Most would agree. You don’t. I get it. I listed several players selected after Love. I could sit here and rattle off 20 more players secured after him but it won’t change anything. The point is, adding 1st rd talents usually make the team at least just a little bit better. Jordan love didn’t make the team better at all. He’s not even 2nd string yet. And packers traded up for Love too, trading away another draft pick that could’ve hell the team win a super bowl this year. Anyway. You were wrong about the packers. Continue to think in your strange and methodical ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 10 minutes ago, NewEra said: Sure thing, whatever you say my man. Adding 1st rd talent players usually makes the team at least just a little bit better than they would be without them. Most would agree. You don’t. I get it. I listed several players selected after Love. I could sit here and rattle off 20 more players secured after him but it won’t change anything. The point is, adding 1st rd talents usually make the team at least just a little bit better. Jordan love didn’t make the team better at all. He’s not even 2nd string yet. And packers traded up for Love too, trading away another draft pick that could’ve hell the team win a super bowl this year. Anyway. You were wrong about the packers. Continue to think in your strange and methodical ways. lol I’m hardly alone thinking there’s a legit method to the Packers’ madness. Google it. True, listing more 2nd and 3rd rounders won’t help your argument..I can’t disagree there lol. ive listed several teams that didn’t improve with 1st round picks this year. Happens every year. News to you.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChans Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 27 minutes ago, NewEra said: Sure thing, whatever you say my man. Adding 1st rd talent players usually makes the team at least just a little bit better than they would be without them. Most would agree. You don’t. I get it. I listed several players selected after Love. I could sit here and rattle off 20 more players secured after him but it won’t change anything. The point is, adding 1st rd talents usually make the team at least just a little bit better. Jordan love didn’t make the team better at all. He’s not even 2nd string yet. And packers traded up for Love too, trading away another draft pick that could’ve hell the team win a super bowl this year. Anyway. You were wrong about the packers. Continue to think in your strange and methodical ways. Again bro, no one has ever argued the Packers took Love to help win a Super Bowl this year. You won’t win this argument until Love proves he’s a bust. 5 hours ago, NewEra said: aaron Rodgers is a very good game manager and clearly on the decline 👍🏻 Clearly. 2019 wasn’t 2014, but 2020-21 sure looks like it the packers were comparable to the Jacksonville AFCCG team. We are seeing right now. 13 wins and better than last season. For last year being their absolute best shot, they sure are faking this year pretty well when is the last time a team drafted a QB to let him sit and learn for 3+ years? 2005. It’s not how anyone does it anymore. Literally no one does it. Mahomes sat one year. Allen was supposed to sit one year. Watson, a couple games, herbert, a couple games, burrow, started week 1, Lamar, 1/2 season, RW, a few games, Tua, a few games, lock, a few games, baker, a few games, Darnold, starter day 1, trubisky, a few games. who is drafting a qb to sit for a few years? No one. MVP Aaron rodgers is under contract til 2023. He is playing the best ball of his career and certainly doesn’t have the look of have 1 more year left after this season. Their team looks to be the best in football. Not bad for a team that had their absolute last shot last season. that said, I understand that why they drafted Love. I disagreed with it because I thought they should be going all in to win more Super Bowls with their current team. If they win the SB AND used their 1st rd pick on a guy that will sit for a few year, more power to them. I disagreed with their strategy and the thought of not going all in with a GOAT type QB was baffling to me. go bills! The Pats drafted Jimmy G and he sat for four years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 13 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: lol I’m hardly alone thinking there’s a legit method to the Packers’ madness. Google it. True, listing more 2nd and 3rd rounders won’t help your argument..I can’t disagree there lol. ive listed several teams that didn’t improve with 1st round picks this year. Happens every year. News to you.... And I can list several teams where it did help. The one thing we know for sure..... love didn’t help at all. We know this we can talk about it. A first rd talent MAY have helped. Even if it were just a 30% chance that another player would make this years team more formidable, it’s better than what Jordan love did for this team. There is a chance. There is no chance that love can bring them closer to a super bowl this year. that has been the point of this last exchange. You said that they didn’t suffer one bit by taking Love. You can’t say that without not knowing who that player may have been and how they may have helped. You don’t know if the player they would’ve taken turned out to be a huge contributor. That is what we’ve been talking about.....please don’t try and do the WEO swerve 7 minutes ago, FireChans said: Again bro, no one has ever argued the Packers took Love to help win a Super Bowl this year. You won’t win this argument until Love proves he’s a bust. The Pats drafted Jimmy G and he sat for four years. I realize that. That’s not what I’m talking about. Thanks though No, I win this argument if the packers don’t win the super bowl this year or another with Rodgers in general. If you don’t understand, then you still don’t understand my premise. I’m not surprised. you were both already wrong. That’s a fact 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChans Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 3 minutes ago, NewEra said: And I can list several teams where it did help. The one thing we know for sure..... love didn’t help at all. We know this we can talk about it. A first rd talent MAY have helped. Even if it were just a 30% chance that another player would make this years team more formidable, it’s better than what Jordan love did for this team. There is a chance. There is no chance that love can bring them closer to a super bowl this year. that has been the point of this last exchange. You said that they didn’t suffer one bit by taking Love. You can’t say that without not knowing who that player may have been and how they may have helped. You don’t know if the player they would’ve taken turned out to be a huge contributor. That is what we’ve been talking about.....please don’t try and do the WEO swerve I realize that. That’s not what I’m talking about. Thanks though No, I win this argument if the packers don’t win the super bowl this year or another with Rodgers in general. If you don’t understand, then you still don’t understand my premise. I’m not surprised. you were both already wrong. That’s a fact So the Pats would’ve been wrong drafting Jimmy G if they didn’t win the Super Bowl that year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 50 minutes ago, FireChans said: So the Pats would’ve been wrong drafting Jimmy G if they didn’t win the Super Bowl that year? I’ve been talking about the packers giving themselves the best chance to win the super bowl this year. That’s all I’m talking about. That’s all I’ve been talking about. You can’t discuss whatever you like. I won’t be discussing this. Chilling with my wife, making some dinner, watching some tv 56 minutes ago, FireChans said: So the Pats would’ve been wrong drafting Jimmy G if they didn’t win the Super Bowl that year? You were talking about how aaron Rodgers is a good game manager. You were talking about the abounding evidence proving that a Rodgers isn’t the same player and how others were thinking it was 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts