• 5 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 26th, 2023

help-circle








  • I’d say more similar than people realize.

    Rodgers had better stats relatively speaking. But it was also somewhat inconsistent. He had some big games and bad games.

    Rodgers probably had more arm talent. He made some wow throws, particularly deep, that we haven’t seen as much of from Love.

    The knock on Rodgers though was that he didn’t have the “it” factor that Favre had. He wasn’t seen as a gamer. A lot of his stats were viewed as empty calories as they came once the game was already lost.

    Basically, everybody judged him based on how he wasn’t Favre, instead of valuing him for what he was. Much like people are doing to Love now.

    But yeah, Rodgers did look really good his first year. But anybody saying everybody saw it and believed in him is lying through their teeth. Most fans thought the packers made a huge mistake moving off Favre and that Rodgers would never live up to him.



  • By some, absolutely.

    He is leading an offense which is extremely shorthanded. From a salary cap perspective, the Packers’ top paid offensive players outside of Love are as follows:

    1. Aaron Rodgers (40.3M) - not on the team

    2. David Bahktiari (21.3M) - on IR, and only played 1 game.

    3. Aaron Jones (8.2M) - Injured most of the season, mostly limited in all but about 2 games.

    4. Elgton Jenkins (6.7M) - Injured and limited for first 2/3 of season.

    5. Christian Watson (2.1M) - Missed 1/3 of season and arguably limited for the rest.

    That’s almost 79M of cap space dedicated to offensive players who have not been able to contribute fully, and 62.6M that have had basically no contribution. On the one game that both Bahk and Jones were available Love posted 3 TD / 0 Int 123 passer rating (admittedly not being his cleanest game).

    Even if we include the limited players (Jenkins, Watson, Jones), the Packers salary cap spending on offense is basically 43M, and if we discount those players then we’re somewhere between there an 26M. And it’s not like the numbers are artificially low because we’ve just signed big name players to extensions. This really hammers home the lack of proven, veteran talent on this offense relative to what many other teams in the league are working with.

    I find it funny that people would blame (insert QB name) shortcoming on the FO failing to provide them with a good enough WR2-3, and yet at the same time think that Love should be putting up consistent excellent numbers with this level of lack of proven talent.

    Now, I dont’ think that Love has been perfect by any means, and he certainly has room to improve. But I dont’ think there’s a single QB in the entire league that you could argue has been able to do more with less around him.








  • It all really depends how the draft falls. If you have valid short to long term concerns at QB and there’s a real talent available to take it almost always makes sense to roll the dice, simply because QB is so damned important in this league. I’d have no qualms with the Packers taking a QB in the first or second if there’s a guy there, even if they broadly want to keep with Love and hope he succeeds. Remember packers also took Brohm in the 2nd first year Rodgers was the starter.

    Now if there isn’t a guy there, and whoever is available the packers have a worse grade or don’t see upside beyond Loves, well then probably doesn’t make sense and they probably won’t take him. But that doesn’t mean it’s a philosophical departure of the original point of taking good QB prospects when they are available.



  • Honestly, I think that the main reason they didn’t bother overturning is because in addition to the initial ruling they also blew the play dead prior to the recovery by GB.

    So even if they did agree that it was a fumble, the result would have still been Steelers maintaining possession at the spot of the fumble, since I believe if they blow a play dead on a loose ball then the original team keeps it.

    There is an exception where the opposing team recovers immediately after the inadvertent whistle, however I’m not sure how they govern the immediacy of it. My understanding was that it had to be like one continuous motion, while in this case Gary took a second after the ball was called dead before reaching down and picking it up, so I’m not sure this would have applied. I could be entirely wrong though.

    What’s not in question is that even if they ruled GB ball, they definitely couldn’t advance it further. So definitely no touchdown.

    I think in this case, rather than getting into that entire bag of worms caused by them admitting they got the initial call on the field wrong, they just decided to double down on letting the original call stand.

    Blah