Rodgers in GB ( old article)

[GunnerBill]

Tee Higgins has been a good pick for Cincy. He had 908 yards (good for 3rd among rookies) and 6 touchdowns. So he is about a 250 yard improvement on Valdes-Scantling. Different type of receiver, I get it but I am sure he'd have done well in Green Bay. I liked Higgins more than most coming out folks will recall - more than Aiyuk, Reagor and Jefferson who all went ahead of him - oh well 2/3 ain't bad.

 

But I don't know that I value that additional yardage as so critical to an increased Superbowl chance that you should willing to pass on a guy who you think (as the Packers front office obviously does) can be a potential franchise QB when your guy is 36. It equates to 15 yards a game... basically one play. Now I know some NFL games come down to a single play and MVS's catch % is not great so it could in theory be a single play he fails to make. But to me a much bigger risk is passing on the guy you think has a chance to be the heir apparent. The Quarterback position is just that darn important. If you don't have one you are nowhere. 

[FireChans]

46 minutes ago, NewEra said:

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 

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 

The Packers were not going all in on winning a ring this year. 
 

And there’s no guarantee that whoever they would have picked besides Love would have helped.

 

And you’re cheating by using hindsight, where at the time Love was picked, Rodgers could have easily gotten hurt and missed a stretch and guess who would have been helpful then?

Edited January 19, 2021 by FireChans

[NewEra]

18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Tee Higgins has been a good pick for Cincy. He had 908 yards (good for 3rd among rookies) and 6 touchdowns. So he is about a 250 yard improvement on Valdes-Scantling. Different type of receiver, I get it but I am sure he'd have done well in Green Bay. I liked Higgins more than most coming out folks will recall - more than Aiyuk, Reagor and Jefferson who all went ahead of him - oh well 2/3 ain't bad.

 

But I don't know that I value that additional yardage as so critical to an increased Superbowl chance that you should willing to pass on a guy who you think (as the Packers front office obviously does) can be a potential franchise QB when your guy is 36. It equates to 15 yards a game... basically one play. Now I know some NFL games come down to a single play and MVS's catch % is not great so it could in theory be a single play he fails to make. But to me a much bigger risk is passing on the guy you think has a chance to be the heir apparent. The Quarterback position is just that darn important. If you don't have one you are nowhere. 

 

I understand your stance.  
 

my stance is they should’ve used resources to help them win a super bowl this year.

 

they said that they couldn’t win a super bowl this year, so it would be a waste

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

The Packers were not going all in on winning a ring this year. 
 

And there’s no guarantee that whoever they would have picked besides Love would have helped.

 

And you’re cheating by using hindsight, where at the time Love was picked, Rodgers could have easily gotten hurt and missed a stretch and guess who would have been helpful then?

Obviously.  
 
thanks again.

[Doc]

28 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Tee Higgins has been a good pick for Cincy. He had 908 yards (good for 3rd among rookies) and 6 touchdowns. So he is about a 250 yard improvement on Valdes-Scantling. Different type of receiver, I get it but I am sure he'd have done well in Green Bay. I liked Higgins more than most coming out folks will recall - more than Aiyuk, Reagor and Jefferson who all went ahead of him - oh well 2/3 ain't bad.

 

But I don't know that I value that additional yardage as so critical to an increased Superbowl chance that you should willing to pass on a guy who you think (as the Packers front office obviously does) can be a potential franchise QB when your guy is 36. It equates to 15 yards a game... basically one play. Now I know some NFL games come down to a single play and MVS's catch % is not great so it could in theory be a single play he fails to make. But to me a much bigger risk is passing on the guy you think has a chance to be the heir apparent. The Quarterback position is just that darn important. If you don't have one you are nowhere. 

 

Rodgers was the one clamoring for more WR help.  But his team got decimated by the 49'ers' run game in the NFCCG and as it turned out, Rodgers' receiving corps has been fine this year.  I think a pick used on defense would have been wiser.

 

Now if the Packers don't win the SB, and we'll know that is a few weeks, drafting Love was a mistake.  If Love doesn't prove to be a good QB and/or Rodgers keeps playing well and keeps Love on the bench a la Brady and Jimmy G and Love is traded or leaves, it will have been a wasted pick.  All we know right now is that Jordan Love will not help the Packers this season.  If they do win the SB, then the pick wasn't needed to help the team this year.

Edited January 19, 2021 by Doc

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, NewEra said:

 

I understand your stance.  
 

my stance is they should’ve used resources to help them win a super bowl this year.

 

 

They might win a Superbowl regardless.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

Rodgers was the one clamoring for more WR help.  But his team got decimated by the 49'ers' run game in the NFCCG and as it turned out, Rodgers' receiving corps has been fine this year.  I think a pick used defense would have been wiser.

 

Now if the Packers don't win the SB, and we'll know that is a few weeks, drafting Love was a mistake.  If Love doesn't prove to be a good QB and/or Rodgers keeps playing well and keeps Love on the bench a la Brady and Jimmy G and Love is traded or leaves, it will have been a wasted pick.  All we know right now is that Jordan Love will not help the Packers this season.

 

While if it fails it can be classed as mistake it is a mistake you should always make because the alternative mistake is a thousand times worse. Strategically, taking a guy you think can be a franchise QB is never the wrong decision. Even if the talent evaluation is off.

 

Rather than focussing on the Love pick people in my mind should be analysing the number of picks they have blown in recent years on the secondary trying to fix that unit. Could they not have got Rodgers his offensive weaponry with those picks? 

 

[NewEra]

13 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

They might win a Superbowl regardless.

They might.  
 
If they don’t, you don’t think that’s there’s any chance that the two picks they used on Love could’ve helped them win a title this year?  
 

If we win the super bowl, Gabe Davis and Tyler bass would have played big roles on a championship team.  Take Davis off of this team.....do we beat the colts?  Can’t be proven, but he made HUGE plays that led to our scores.  Take away one score and we lose. Season over. Bass made his FGs.  The colts rookie missed. If we didn’t have bass we could’ve lost that game. Season over.  
 

The packers traded used two picks in Love.  2 players that could’ve made big plays en route to a title. 
 

that’s all.  Either you get it, or you don’t.  Nothing else to discuss, other than others saying that the packers were finished and wouldn’t win this year  

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, NewEra said:

They might.  
 
If they don’t, you don’t think that’s there’s any chance that the two picks they used on Love could’ve helped them win a title this year?  
 

If we win the super bowl, Gabe Davis and Tyler bass would have played big roles on a championship team.  Take Davis off of this team.....do we beat the colts?  Can’t be proven, but he made HUGE plays that led to our scores.  Take away one score and we lose. Season over. Bass made his FGs.  The colts rookie missed. If we didn’t have bass we could’ve lost that game. Season over.  
 

The packers traded used two picks in Love.  2 players that could’ve made big plays en route to a title. 
 

that’s all.  Either you get it, or you don’t.  Nothing else to discuss, other than others saying that the packers were finished and wouldn’t win this year  

 

There is a chance. Yes. I don't think it is a very high chance bases on the comparative production rates. But some games come down to one play and there is a chance they end up losing to Tampa or in the Superbowl to one play that MVS or Alan Lazard don't make that Higgins could have done. I just think the chance of becoming irrelevant quickly if you don't have a QB in the building to be the heir to the thrown is greater. In fact it is 99%. We have seen it this year in our division. Kings to paupers. And that is with the best defensive mind in the history of football coaching them.

 

You play the percentages and ask which of these strategic decisions is more likely to hurt me.

[NewEra]

13 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

There is a chance. Yes. I don't think it is a very high chance bases on the comparative production rates. But some games come down to one play and there is a chance they end up losing to Tampa or in the Superbowl to one play that MVS or Alan Lazard don't make that Higgins could have done. I just think the chance of becoming irrelevant quickly if you don't have a QB in the building to be the heir to the thrown is greater. In fact it is 99%. We have seen it this year in our division. Kings to paupers. And that is with the best defensive mind in the history of football coaching them.

 

You play the percentages and ask which of these strategic decisions is more likely to hurt me.

 

I hear y.  I understand why you feel the way you do.  I just don’t agree with it when you have a 37 year old Aaron Rodgers who is still playing at an incredibly high level.  A GOAT, with less Super Bowls with Eli Manning. Equal to Trent dilfer in the ring category.  They FO is 💯 responsible for him only having 1 title.  I would make it my mission to win more with him because I thought he was still an elite QB and clearly not a very good game manager. 
 

I’d rather try and win super bowl with my GOAT level QB as opposed to drafting his replacement. I know you see my point. You just disagree with it.  And that’s ok

[Doc]

39 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

While if it fails it can be classed as mistake it is a mistake you should always make because the alternative mistake is a thousand times worse. Strategically, taking a guy you think can be a franchise QB is never the wrong decision. Even if the talent evaluation is off.

 

Rather than focussing on the Love pick people in my mind should be analysing the number of picks they have blown in recent years on the secondary trying to fix that unit. Could they not have got Rodgers his offensive weaponry with those picks?

 

What is the alternative mistake?  Not taking a QB when you already have a HOFer who took the team to the NFCCG the year before and who can play many more years?  Love is more likely to bust than boom given his draft position and the fact that the odds of the Packers replacing one HOFer with another were low, much less doing it 3 times in a row.

 

If they fail to win the SB, it's a huge mistake because they could have used that 1st rounder on a difference-maker.  Like a defender to prevent getting run-on again in the NFCCG.

 

[Mr. WEO]

12 hours 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

 

 

I can't think of any team, let alone, the most potent Offense in the NFL going to a conf championship game, that got significantly better as a result of a 1st round rookie non QB.

 

Anyway, where does your logic terminate? If the Packers make it to the SB, do you still say they errored in picking Love?  If the win the SB, was it still a mistake?

Edited January 19, 2021 by Mr. WEO

[Mr. WEO]

9 hours ago, Doc said:

 

What is the alternative mistake?  Not taking a QB when you already have a HOFer who took the team to the NFCCG the year before and who can play many more years?  Love is more likely to bust than boom given his draft position and the fact that the odds of the Packers replacing one HOFer with another were low, much less doing it 3 times in a row.

 

If they fail to win the SB, it's a huge mistake because they could have used that 1st rounder on a difference-maker.  Like a defender to prevent getting run-on again in the NFCCG.

 

 

 

like who?

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

I can't think of any team, let alone, the most potent Offense in the NFL going to a conf championship game, that got significantly better as a result of a 1st round rookie non QB.

 

You don't think Davis and Bass are responsible for us going to the AFC Championship? If you take either out of the Colts game there's a decent chance we wouldn't have made it past the wildcard round. Playoff games often come down to a couple plays. If the Packers end losing one of the 2 remaining games by one score it's definitely possible the Love pick cost them a Super Bowl. Also Rodgers doesn't look anywhere close to retirement. He's playing the best football of his career at age 37.

 

Not only did they draft Love, they drafted Dillon in the 2nd round when they already have Aaron Jones. Just about any other draft picks would have helped the Packers more this year. If Rodgers was on the cusp of retirement I would get it.

[HappyDays]

On 4/28/2020 at 1:59 PM, HappyDays said:

 

When you have one of the greatest QBs to play the game on your roster you should be doing everything possible to win a Super Bowl while he's still in his prime. Not planning for his retirement. It's far more likely they win a Super Bowl with Rodgers in the next 3 years than they are to ever win a Super Bowl with Love on the team. They wasted a 1st round pick on a player that doesn't help them in their Super Bowl window. Plus the rest of their draft was god awful.

 

Yeah I'm gonna stick with the take I had back in April. It's going to be at least 3-4 years before Love even thinks about seeing the field. Their Super Bowl window is going to close. I feel bad for Rodgers. Wasted 10 years of his career with Mike McCarthy and then the team doesn't do everything they can to help him win another Super Bowl before it's too late.

[Bermuda Triangle]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I can't think of any team, let alone, the most potent Offense in the NFL going to a conf championship game, that got significantly better as a result of a 1st round rookie non QB.

 

Anyway, where does your logic terminate? If the Packers make it to the SB, do you still say they errored in picking Love?  If the win the SB, was it still a mistake?

Edwards-Helaire, despite missing 3 games, was far & away the Chiefs leading rusher.  I'd say the he made the Chiefs "significantly better"

[GunnerBill]

11 hours ago, Doc said:

 

What is the alternative mistake?  Not taking a QB when you already have a HOFer who took the team to the NFCCG the year before and who can play many more years?  Love is more likely to bust than boom given his draft position and the fact that the odds of the Packers replacing one HOFer with another were low, much less doing it 3 times in a row.

 

If they fail to win the SB, it's a huge mistake because they could have used that 1st rounder on a difference-maker.  Like a defender to prevent getting run-on again in the NFCCG.

 

Why is the presumption that the only way to get a difference maker with that 1st round pick? Why couldn't they have signed a free agent? There is no more important use of a first round pick than a guy you think can be a franchise Quarterback. 

[Mr. WEO]

28 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

You don't think Davis and Bass are responsible for us going to the AFC Championship? If you take either out of the Colts game there's a decent chance we wouldn't have made it past the wildcard round. Playoff games often come down to a couple plays. If the Packers end losing one of the 2 remaining games by one score it's definitely possible the Love pick cost them a Super Bowl. Also Rodgers doesn't look anywhere close to retirement. He's playing the best football of his career at age 37.

 

Not only did they draft Love, they drafted Dillon in the 2nd round when they already have Aaron Jones. Just about any other draft picks would have helped the Packers more this year. If Rodgers was on the cusp of retirement I would get it.

 

 

Good picks, but no.  Bass is a solid replacement for Hauschka.  Davis a solid replacement for Brown (who they need to test the market with at this point).   Neither was enough to credit with being "responsible" for the AFCC game appearance.

 

The topic is who the Packers would have picked in the first instead of Love,  not downdraft picks they could have made regardless of who they picked in the first round.  So your claim that, if it comes down to losing by one score, then that means it's "definitely possible" the Packers should have selected some-other-1st-round-pick-you-may-be-thinking-of instead of Love....yeah, that's ridiculous.  

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I can't think of any team, let alone, the most potent Offense in the NFL going to a conf championship game, that got significantly better as a result of a 1st round rookie non QB.

 

Anyway, where does your logic terminate? If the Packers make it to the SB, do you still say they errored in picking Love?  If the win the SB, was it still a mistake?

They errored if they don’t win a super bowl.  I’ve stated that.  

 

it’s not about a 1st rd non Qb making the team significantly better.  
 

That player (actually 2 players. They traded a 1st and a 4th rd pick to move up). could contribute to them winning games this year...like Gabe Davis and Tyler Bass helped us beat the colts. Without them, our season could be over right now.  Davis’ amazing catches let directly to points. Bass made clutch kicks, while the colts kicker missed. If we win the SB, one could say that we wouldn’t have won without Gabe Davis making those catches vs the colts.  Our season could’ve been over that game if not for his catches.  
 

Jordan Love contributed zero.  
 

My point has always been about the their FO mindset of building for the future instead of trying to win when the iron is hot.  They made the NCCCG.....the iron was hot, yet they drafted their GOATs replacement instead of drafting players that could potentially help them win another SB.  

 

My point has always been that AR having only 1 SB is a result of the FO failing him and the team.  Their philosophy has never wavered, I give them credit for sticking to what they do, but I also believe that they would have more championships if they veered from what is their norm from time to time.  Championships > everything 

 

Every packers fan I know....7 to be exact, agreed with me 💯.  They saw an opportunity to win another SB in 2021. I did too.  You were sure that they had no chance to make it back to the NCFCG.  

Thousands, probably more along the lines of millions of people agreed with me.

 

To your first point in quotes:  it’s not just about 1st round non QBs rookies making an impact on a championship caliber team.  It’s about rookies in general.  They gave up a 1 and a 4th.  
To be specific:

Do the Rams win the SB without Torrey Holts?  7-109-1.  Do they even make it to the SB without him?

Do the pats win the SB without Sony Michel, who had a record 6 TDs in 3 games. 94 yards and the games only Td.

Do the redskins win the super bowl without Timmy smith?  204-2

 

Do the Ravens win the super Bowl without a Jamal Lewis? 102-1.  

Do the eagles win the super bowl without Corey Clement? 4-100-1

 

Yes, Rookies can have a direct impact on a team winning a super bowl.

[Mr. WEO]

33 minutes ago, Bermuda Triangle said:

Edwards-Helaire, despite missing 3 games, was far & away the Chiefs leading rusher.  I'd say the he made the Chiefs "significantly better"

 

They are the SB champs and are back in the AFCC game, despite not having E-H.  They are a team that hardly runs (23rd), and are mediocre at that (26th in yards).  E-H had a nice season, but in 7 of his 13 games, he had under 50 yards rushing.  That's not a "significantly better" team.

[NewEra]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

They are the SB champs and are back in the AFCC game, despite not having E-H.  They are a team that hardly runs (23rd), and are mediocre at that (26th in yards).  E-H had a nice season, but in 7 of his 13 games, he had under 50 yards rushing.  That's not a "significantly better" team.

You keep using the term “significantly better”.......when that player doesn’t have to make them significantly better.  They just have to make them better.  They have to contribute to the team winning games.  Winning games in the playoffs.  Winning a super bowl.  Jordan love does none of the above for them in 2020, 2021 and likely 2022.....3 years in which the packers have great chance to win the SB.  Or is their window already closed like you have stated?