Cory's Corner: Appreciate Aaron Rodgers

I remember I wrote this back in 2017 and it's resurfacing again. 

The Packers are taking Aaron Rodgers for granted. 

I have heard that, "Aaron Rodgers will never lead the Packers to another Super Bowl because he's too inconsistent." My quick response to that is that we will never know because he hasn't been outfitted with enough weapons. 

Rodgers turns 36 in December. He has thrown 12 interceptions the last three years, has averaged 3,373 passing yards the last three (which includes an injury-riddled 2017) and he has been sacked an average of 35 times in that span — a stat that has gone down in recent years. 

I get it, coach Matt LaFleur was sending a message. He wants to run his system. He is afraid. He doesn't want to give Rodgers too much authority before seeing it blow up in his face like Mike McCarthy eventually did. However, there is also something to be said about level of talent. 

And many people think that this receiving corps will come together because of Davante Adams. Adams was a second round pick out of Fresno State. He had an iffy catch percentage his first two seasons and I know there were many that didn't want him around after that second year. However, he blossomed in the offseason before his third year and he had his breakout campaign with 997 yards and 12 touchdowns. 

Marquez Valdes-Scantling, Jake Kumerow and Allen Lazard are entering their third seasons. The one guy that has the most promise is Lazard because you don't see a future Hall of Fame quarterback asking to get him on the field. He's very raw, but his ceiling is incredible. 

Even after the Jordan Love pick, I think Rodgers has four great years left. And I don't want a sliding scale of what "great" is. I'm not measuring Rodgers against himself, which often puts No. 12 behind the eight ball. He has four years of top five quarterback play. 

The Packers realize that. They know that Rodgers can still pull games out of the fire, as evidenced by his eight game-winning drives the last three years. He had three last year alone, but what stands out to me is Detroit. The Packers needed Rodgers to orchestrate game-winning drives vs. the Lions twice last year. In case you forgot, the Lions went 3-12-1 last year and were outscored by 82 points. The Lions were absolutely dreadful last year and the Packers still needed Rodgers to pull a rabbit out of his hat. 

Rodgers is the best passer I've ever seen. He can make effortless throws and his accuracy on the run is unparalleled. 

What we don't know is what goes on outside of the white lines. We've all heard that Rodgers can be cantankerous, but now that Michel Jordan is pulling back the curtain in "The Last Dance," so is the greatest athlete I've ever seen. All successful athletes will wear teammates out. They are borderline obcessive compulsive. Look at Tom Brady on the sidelines whenever his offense gets stopped on third down. He is barking at everyone. On the surface, that may seem like he's yelling at his team, but that's also a proven winner trying to will his team over the finish line. 

Rodgers' biggest flaw is that he tries to be Superman when he can complete the five-yard pass and move the chains. If Rodgers had more help — offensively or defensively — he may not feel the need to put the cape on just about every time he's out there. 

LaFleur drafted Love because he wanted someone to operate his run-first system. The Packers are evolving into the 49ers, which makes sense because the 49ers destroyed the Packers twice last year.

And Rodgers doesn't evade blame either. There were numerous times last year that he didn't find the open man, threw it at the receiver's legs or just threw it away. Is he doing those things because he knows that this squad isn't good enough? 

The reason Brady is still around is because he gets the ball out quick and he takes what the defense gives him. If Rodgers does those things, why can't he have a shiny new toy?

 

-------------------

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

NFL Categories: 
2 points

Comments (51)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Bearmeat's picture

May 09, 2020 at 07:12 am

Corey:

1. No NFL Head Coach is "afraid" of their QB. If they were, they would not be hired, nor around long. You don't just hire a high school HC to an NFL HC. They go through years of training to get that job.

2. Your two paragraphs about the WRs don't even make sense. What are you trying to say?

3. Aaron Rodgers has not played like a top 5 QB since he hurt his right collarbone. I'm not comparing him to himself of yore either. Top 5 compared to other QBs right now.

4. The Lions being -82 in point differential points toward a 6-10ish team. They were unlucky last year, just like the Packers point differential points toward a 10-6ish team.

5. MLF didn't draft Love. Gute did. And they drafted him because they like him, not because they can control him.

6. Rodgers isn't tanking the team on purpose. He's not spraying balls at WRs feet or not moving the chains because he's angry. He's doing it because he's lost a (several?) step athletically. It happens.

7. I don't hate the Love pick. What bothers me is (still) round 2/3 and the value of those picks. They could have gotten both players a round later in all probability. That said, I do understand that MLF is pushing Rodgers to play within the offense and to get the ball out quick. 22 personnel should help with that.

+ REPLY
6 points
13
7
Coldworld's picture

May 09, 2020 at 08:59 am

Good points. My reaction to this piece was that it inherently assumes stasis. Rodgers will be a Hall if Fame QB and deservedly so. That said, whether he is at this moment in time is far less certain. Only hindsight will speak to that, but the assumption that he is permeates everything in this piece.

It is really hard to judge Rodgers. We have been through over half a decade of roster decline so significant that we had to retool not only our pipeline of talent but the top of the roster in various positions. I would argue that that continues. As a result, we have to play less proven players due to the need to draft and are close to the cap.

In addition, MMs scheme and it’s just beat your man philosophy is totally unsuited to a weak roster and also has started to look stale: predictable. Teams were anticipating successfully.

Through all this, Rodgers has played well and helped us remain contenders. He deserves credit for that. However, there are reasons to be concerned. His aversion to the middle of the field and the stats about missing open receivers are not good signs. No doubt the lack of talent helps explain these in part as do schematic failings, however, they do not go the whole way. An elite QB finds open receivers. Rodgers used to be the best in the league at that. Arguably he was one of the worst last year based on stats ( I think that overstated it).

It could be attitude: risk aversion, but attitude isn’t an excuse. If it hampers you’re efficacy, it is just as detrimental as a loss of physical prowess if uncorrected. Rodgers is not as elusive as he was. Hardly surprising at his age. At some point his arm will decline. It’s possible the struggles hitting MVS are indicative of that. If he is risk averse one might assume that would deter him from that option. It could be MVS. We have no way of knowing.

What we do know is that decline will set in and that it’s usually not clear when till after. We do know that Rodgers isn’t hitting open receivers and it looks pretty clear that he is less elusive, which suggests some decline.

He is still a darn good QB. I increasingly think that a bit of a shake up and a system that helps players get open will be good for him. A bit of a reset might freshen things up. That said, clinging to a belief that he is untouchable will only blind the believers. Father Time touches all. He is Darn Good Man not Superman now most likely and we need to be aware of that. I don’t think this piece recognizes that or that the Good Man phase is somewhere ahead.

This change in approach by the team, though I didn’t favor it, is likely to help Rodgers not hinder him. If he will let it. A less predictable system that attempts to scheme players open and doesn’t rely on big passing plays out of necessity as opposed to opportunity helps his teammates and thus should help him. The more I look at what they are trying to do, the more I think it’s actually a boon for Rodgers as much as it would be for any successor.

+ REPLY
4 points
6
2
Archie's picture

May 09, 2020 at 06:51 pm

I agree with all your points yet I still say it makes no sense to give somebody the richest contract in NFL history and then draft his replacement with 4 years to go on that contract. Especially when the team needs impact players now to get back to the big show. I love Rodgers, I have the highest hopes for Love and I am ecstatic that TT/MM are gone and they are transitioning to a new offensive scheme yet I still say the timing of adding Love makes no sense. Now if in a year or two, the Pack can unload 12 for two #1 picks, then maybe this all works out. In the meantime, I'm going to enjoy watching Rodgers run a run-first offense with 21 and 12 personnel formations. If Adams remains a top 5 WR in this offense, it will mean the Pack offense and Rodgers by extension, had a helluva year.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Leatherhead's picture

May 10, 2020 at 07:58 pm

1. HCs and star players have to have a good relationship or the team isn’t going to win in any sport. It’s usually cheaper to eat the coach’s contract but we just fired the coach and his replacement has the leverage in the relationship after 14-4 and getting Love on the roster. If Rodgers pouts like Favre did in 2005 we’ll have a bad year, but if Rodgers is the guy I hope he is we’ll have a real powerful offense this season.

3. Rodgers is a veteran who is very good at protecting the ball and executing in the red zone. Those are important qualities. He’s not going to nut up in the clutch and throw the season away. He’ll make a good throw most of the time and an exceptional throw in the clutch every now and then.

4. How long have you followed the NFL? “The Lions were unlucky “??? They are the Lions. They’ve been unlucky since I can remember. Because their front office isn’t very good, ever. They waste talents like Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson and Donkeykong Suh. Luck is when preparation meets opportunity, and the Lions are never prepared when opportunity arrives.

7. I want you to take a Tardis to two years from now. Love under center (Jenkins). Dillon, Deguara, Sternberger, plus some free agents we’ll be able to afford. Wagner and Turner. Maybe Lazard or one of the others. That’s the offense...no Rodgers, no Jones, noAdams, no Bakhtiari. Younger, cheaper guys or FAs will replace them. We’ll pound and throw play action. We’ll block people, the offense will work, and this draft is going to be the one where we got three good starters at the skill positions.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
CoryJennerjohn's picture

May 09, 2020 at 07:46 am

Hey Bearmeat,

Remember when Mike Sherman was the coach? He gave Favre too much autonomy before ultimately getting fired. LaFleur is afraid of losing that delicate balance, so Brian Gutekunst and LaFleur opted to go all-in for the future. Of the three receivers entering their third season, Lazard has the best chance to succeed because his quarterback trusts him.

Love was the first offensive player taken in the first round since Derek Sherrod in 2011, and then Bryan Bulaga in 2010. I agree about rounds 2 and 3, but seven wide receivers were also taken before them in the second round alone. They could've traded down, got another pick in the third round and added more skill help.

I like Love. His traits are fantastic. However, he is going to take some seasoning, and since the Packers traded up to get him, is it warranted for him to sit for nearly three years? And if a quarterback needs to sit that long, are they really worth a first round pick?

+ REPLY
-2 points
8
10
Bearmeat's picture

May 09, 2020 at 08:04 am

Mike Sherman inherited a QB in his prime and (somewhat understandably but ultimately tragically) pandered to him, while still controlling the team. Ahman Green and that power running attack in the early 00's was the calling card of MS's offenses. While Mike was a travesty as a GM, what cost Mike was Favre choking in the playoffs (shocker) 3 times during his tenure.

And what makes you assume that MLF is like Mike Sherman? Where's the evidence? You have to let these things play out. You can fairly judge Sherm (although I think your conclusions are wrong) because that book was finished long ago. MLF's book is yet to be written. Unless you have evidence that no other fans have?

+ REPLY
2 points
5
3
Coldworld's picture

May 09, 2020 at 09:06 am

I have said before that I have yet to be convinced that LaFleur is the man to take us forward. That said, the very reason that he is unproven makes it impossible to ground any of the asserted comparatives with Sherman as you point out Bear.

At that point I started to dismiss this as an emotional struggle to find justifications for something that suggests that an end if an era is coming. It reminds me very much of reasoning used by those who could not come to terms with Favre not being our QB.

Fortunately, in this case, it’s likely premature.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

May 09, 2020 at 10:47 am

I give credit to LaF for his ability to bring his locker room together after the lousy end to 2018 and all the 2019 off-season press. He had the benefit of a couple strong, unifying personalities being added as FAs...maybe it was the perfect storm for him that way. Certainly there was a better will and spirit with this team in 2019. They were resilient enough to pull out a bunch of close games. That's only part of the equation, but it seems a good start.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
MWendlandt's picture

May 09, 2020 at 01:10 pm

This is one of the more accurate takes I've read on any article since the Draft. So many are scared of a future without Rodgers similar to the fear that permeated the base from 2005-2008 when Favre was wrapping up his Packers career. For so many, Rodgers is all they know as the Packers QB, and cannot handle the idea that it will eventually be somebody else under center. I'm sure New England fans are going through the same emotions.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
LambeauPlain's picture

May 09, 2020 at 09:09 am

I don’t understand the comment ML “is afraid”, either. He has taken a very aggressive path to becoming a head coach and he is nothing but courageous for wanting to change the offense to run more to open up opportunistic passing for Aaron.

MM always gave lip service about the run game then passed 70% of the time out of predictable formations.

I actually think this new approach will help #12. Instead of carrying the team, he can now lead it as the Field General and not have to take all those body blows.

No new toys for #12? He will have Dillon, Deguara, a healthy Sternberger, Funchess and Begelton as well as a healthy ESB to play with. Taking Graham and Allison off the field and replace them with the above and 3 good RBs makes the O better, doesn’t it?

Lastly saying having a a first round QB sit for 3 years makes one wonder if he was worth it...how long did Aaron Rodgers sit after drafted late first round? Was he worth it?

+ REPLY
9 points
11
2
dobber's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:23 am

"LaFleur is afraid of losing that delicate balance, so Brian Gutekunst and LaFleur opted to go all-in for the future."

So what you're saying is that a team that won 13 games in 2019--whether you believe them to be of 13-win quality or not--has been deemed a loser in the short term and the "all in" mentality that seemed to drive the FA acquisitions of 2019 has been shit-canned for the long term? You've got to tell me whether Dillon is a short or long-term building block. Is Deguara? The real issue is the quagmire of messages being sent by the front office. If anything is going to dump this team, it's a lack of consistency in approach and player acquisition.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
jannes bjornson's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:14 pm

Absolutely true, just about to get around to this guy. Moved from the high school ranks to the Canadian League last I heard , then shit-canned before the 2019 season started. Just a sham how that guy was elevated to a HC job in the NFL much less given GM duties. That's on Wolf.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

May 09, 2020 at 08:25 am

LaFleur drafted Love because he wanted someone to operate his run-first system? What?? Gutey drafted Love to get #12s salary. No other reason. Somebody opened a old wound. The wound of #4! And Gutey was in on TTs decision.( Being he was around.) { Scout First, in my opinion.} In Gutey I don't Trust. He just doesn't Think come draft time. His picks won't make all-pro. He's a man goes against the experts. Based on underwear first. So in truth, the sooner Gutey is gone the better the draft. He has this club on edge now. Pettine will be gone by seasons end. And the rebuild will start. Blame the coach all you want. MM got another job. So will LeFluer. But are GMs get this pickle up their rear, and we suffer. It's "lets make a deal" with Gutey. It was the draft first with TT. Why can't we just stop the Drama in Green Bay. Hirer somebody who puts the packers First. That can Fill Holes, Shows Respect, demonstrates class, and puts Winning First! Gutey failed to use his Power and AUTHORITY: PROPERLY! He's changed this team into a maybe. Based on Breaks, Chance and Budget. Refusing to go all in isn't what winners Do.

+ REPLY
-10 points
6
16
Coldworld's picture

May 09, 2020 at 09:29 am

Murphy hired LaFleur. It raised eyebrows at the time because of it being him not the GM. Here is a representative summary from Demovsky on Sept 4 2019.

“ Murphy introduced LaFleur on Jan. 8 after a whirlwind weekend of interviews. Several of the 10 candidates -- LaFleur included -- thought the Packers would narrow the field to a few finalists, according to sources close to more than one of the interviewees. Instead, after Murphy, general manager Brian Gutekunst and executive vice president/director of football operations Russ Ball concluded the last of those interviews with LaFleur in Nashville, Tennessee, Murphy made up his mind before the wheels of their private jet touched down at Green Bay's Austin Straubel International Airport.”

Gute had identified LaFleur as a candidate as he had all the 10 listed. Ball was also present and involved. Once Murphy had made that decision he moved fast.

“ "I was anticipating having to come up here and meet with more people," LaFleur said.

That turned out to be unnecessary.

"I think there might be an advantage in a second interview," Ball said. "I don't know that it's a requisite."

But before Murphy offered LaFleur the job, he had quarterback Aaron Rodgers call him, which was an indication to LaFleur that he was the guy.

Later that day, Murphy offered the job to LaFleur.

"One of the questions was if we didn't think we interviewed the right candidate yet or we could've brought people back for second interviews, but I think we just felt strongly enough about Matt that we found the right person. Let's move ahead of it," Murphy said.

Perhaps in retrospect what we all missed despite it being referenced several times is perhaps best summed up by a comment from Ball: “"I see a confidence in him that was in the interview," Ball said. "It's not an arrogance, but it's a quiet confidence that he has a plan."

Murphy hired LaFleur because he had a vision. I heard that but did not appreciate its significance. We are very clearly starting to see the outlines of what that plan involves and the degree of support Murphy gave him to bring it in. It was a large part of why he was hired so suddenly. If you think Gute is driving LaFleur and that a Love type pick was driven by Gute (beyond the identity of the individual), I think you completely miss the significance of why LaFleur was hired and by whom and what that means. I know I did at the time, despite it being in plain sight.

Everything after that is Gute and Ball trying time give flesh to what LaFleur was hired to do.

+ REPLY
3 points
5
2
stockholder's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:20 am

No I didn't miss it. It wasn't an attack on LeFluer at all. Nor do I believe Gutey is backing Le Fluer. It's Gutey! The Gary pick, etc. You can't say he's getting LeFluer what he needs! when Gary wasn't needed. LeFluer only needs #12 to play like #12. .

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
Coldworld's picture

May 09, 2020 at 02:53 pm

I think it’s pretty obvious Pettine loved Gary as much as LaFleur loved Deguara and Dillon. Don’t think there is much doubt about whose plan they are following. As Ball commented, it was that plan that convinced Murphy LaFleur was the man. Gute is drafting to LaFleur’s design in my opinion.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
flackcatcher's picture

May 10, 2020 at 12:30 pm

I've always been amused by the Murphy spin on the hiring of LaFleur. Demovsky's and Wilde later reporting cast doubt on who had actually signed off on the LaFleur hiring. Well, this is Gute's team. He is the final Boss on all decisions in the front office. We have not seen this level of control since Ron Wolf was the GM in the 90s. At least we'll know whom to blame if the team goes south this season. (IF there is a season)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nate-1980's picture

May 13, 2020 at 08:32 pm

I agree with most of your post stockholder and I don’t think most on here think Rodgers has enough pass catchers of quality.. it’s kinda like last year where we’re hoping this guy or that guy steps up at receiver, and it really hurt our offense in season, and the championship game.. When your’e down by multiple scores and running out of time that’s when you need good receivers to close the gap quickly.. That’s what Kc did in the Super Bowl(plus a good game plan on defense late), but I don’t see this offense being that capable, I guess we’ll see.. That’s why I thought this was a good year to draft a wr early, because everyone says they take time to grasp it at this level.. Now we’ll be another year behind if there’s no jumps.. That’s on Gute, and I’m not sure I trust him either..

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PatrickGB's picture

May 09, 2020 at 08:27 am

I understand why MLF wants to change the offense. It’s why we hired him. For good or bad he is the coach and Gutie is tasked with helping to make his system happen. So there will be changes. But Aaron freaking Rodgers is still the quarterback and one of the greatest in the history of the league. Yes it’s a shame that he does not have the cast of WRs that he had in the past. There is no doubt in my mind that top tier WRs would improve our offense but with Rodgers current contract we cannot afford them. This team will have to make due with what we have. And yes, it’s a shame. Yet my hope and expectation is that he will elevate the play of others. I, for one, will always consider and appreciate Rodgers as the face of the Green Bay Packers.

+ REPLY
6 points
7
1
Since'61's picture

May 09, 2020 at 09:29 am

I’m not sure that the premise of this article is accurate. When you are paying someone the amount of money that Rodger’s is currently you are not taking them for granted. Rodgers deserves every penny he receives based on how well he has played for the Packers and the pounding that he has taken over the years.

However, the Packers are beginning to turn the page on Rodgers. They drafted Love and then they drafted players who fit into the offense that Love will be running within 2-3 seasons. They want Love to watch Rodgers operate in MLFs offense not the MM/Rodgers offense which they are moving on from. They want Love to learn MLFs offense while he is holding the clipboard.

Rodgers will work within the offense because he is a professional, he is a competitor who wants to win and given the WR corps his doesn’t really have a choice. Even with taking Love in the 1st round they could have taken a WR to give Rodgers another weapon but they took the players MLF wants to move on.

I would have taken OLs earlier to build the new offense but they went with 2nd level skill players who may get clobbered behind the current right side of the OL. They could have taken a defensive player or 2 to help stop the run but they added to the pile of question marks.

Rodgers will be well paid for running MLFs offense and who knows if Love goes bust Rodgers could spend 4 more seasons in Green Bay. Either way the early selections of Dillon and Deguara are the leading indicators to where the Packers offense is headed. If Rodgers stays healthy he gets traded for picks. If he gets injured Love will get on the job training.

Rodgers is the most talented player to ever play QB in the NFL. His accuracy throwing on the run separates him from his predecessors and his contemporaries. I for one will miss him whenever it is that he moves on. Have the Packers taken advantage of Rodgers? Probably but no more so than any team or any business for that matter takes advantage of their best players or employees. Rodgers has been well paid for his extraordinary services. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
8 points
12
4
dobber's picture

May 09, 2020 at 10:45 am

"When you are paying someone the amount of money that Rodger’s is currently you are not taking them for granted. "

That's a winning statement right there, '61.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Since'61's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:11 am

Thanks Dobber! Stay well. Since ‘61

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Leatherhead's picture

May 09, 2020 at 10:03 am

I like Rodgers and think he’s a pretty good QB, but my days of idolizing sports figures have been over for a long time.

Weapons? Nunchucks are weapons in the hands of a person who knows how to use them. Rodgers has had weapons, and he still does. How he uses them is a reflection on him, not the weaponry.
we
I will say that Rodgers has had a top defense only three times....2010, 2014, and 2019. Each year we were in the Championship game.

+ REPLY
3 points
5
2
flackcatcher's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:55 am

I would add the 2015 defense carried the team that year. (Strange season, losing so many skill position player's, leaving the Packers to JANIS!... :-)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
taarons420's picture

May 09, 2020 at 10:23 am

Jones, Williams, Dillon, Sternberger, DeGuara, Adams, Lazard, Funchess, and a talented/deep OL should be more than enough for a $30+ m/yr QB to get things done.

Change is hard.
Even when it's the right thing to do.
And I'm not talking about the offense.
I'm talking about QB.
There's no such thing as a graceful way to transition from an old HOF QB to his successor.
Emotions muddy the waters.
Packers fans should be thrilled that the team has established a post-Rodgers plan while keeping the team competitive at the same time.
Yet they b*tch because "the contracts don't line up".
Pff... any play can be a player's last.
The people complaining about drafting Love would be the same ones to complain if the Packers didn't have a successor in place when Rodgers is done... "The Packers should have seen this coming! They failed to plan for this!"

Can't win.

Enough with the worrying about Rodgers crap.
He's a big boy.

+ REPLY
14 points
17
3
dobber's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:05 am

"Change is hard.
Even when it's the right thing to do.
And I'm not talking about the offense.
I'm talking about QB."

I agree. Pro sports is a cold business. It's not about loyalty, it's about money and winning football games. Jordan Love was drafted because the front office believes that at some point in the next 2-3 years, he'll give the team as least as good an opportunity to win on a weekly basis as ARod and for less money. Not because they think he's better right now. At some point, the ledger tips against a veteran player. You can honor a player after he retires, but hanging on shouldn't happen.

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
Since'61's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:33 am

Sorry, can’t agree with your opening statement. After Jones and Adams the rest of the skill players that you mentioned are nothing more than question marks or JAGS at best. Dillon and Deguara haven’t even taken a snap in an NFL game and you are apparently assuming that they will become quality NFL players because the Packers drafted them.

As for the OL which you describe as deep and talented, where is talent after Bak and Jenkins? Linsley is a good center but we have also seem him be pushed around by better DLs. Turner is a turnstile at RG and Wagner can only be considered a question mark at this point. Behind them are a bunch of question marks and JAGS. Again the draft picks have yet to take a snap in the NFL and may not even make the team.

The performance of most of these players just don’t back up your assumption that they are more than enough for any 30+ year old QB.

Yes, change is difficult but it becomes even more difficult when you build it upon unsubstantiated assumptions, hype and hope versus solid players who have performed well in the past. If Jones and Adams go down, what is there left for the QB to work with and more importantly succeed with?

As for Rodgers expect him to play well unless injured and if or until Love is ready to take over. He knows the deal, he has accepted the deal and no one is worrying about him. He is a big boy and has proven it over his career. The question will become is Love a big boy and will he be able to deal with what comes as an NFL QB.
Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
0 points
3
3
taarons420's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:54 am

"After Jones and Adams"...
Those are 2 all-pro level players (I know Jones wasn't all-pro... but he's at that level).
Most teams would KILL to have 2 players at that level.
But Rodgers needs more?
Why?

Lamar Jackson just won MVP - does he have an all star cast around him?
Drew Brees... Kamara, Thomas, and ???? (Sanders is 40).
Watson... had Hopkins... and ?????
Wentz... trash
Wilson... way less skill talent than GB
Brady had less last year.

An all pro WR and an all pro RB is more than enough.
Can't have 5 all pro skill position guys.
There is a salary cap.

"Dillon and Deguara haven’t even taken a snap in an NFL game and you are apparently assuming that they will become quality NFL players because the Packers drafted them."

But a ROOKIE wr would have made everyone happy.
Got it.

The OL is top 1/3 in the league.
If you're arguing that the OL is lacking because it only has 3 STUDS, not 5... then you must not watch the rest of the NFL.

The "30+" I referenced was in regard to his SALARY, not his age.
You want to know why the Packers can't have a collection of all-pro skill position players?
BECAUSE THEIR QUARTERBACK TAKES UP 1/4 OF THE TOTAL SALARY CAP.
Can't get paid that much money and then pout that everyone around you isn't "good enough".
Looks bad.
Either you deserve all that money (by being able to do more with less than an average QB would need) or you don't (because you can no longer raise the level of play of the people around you).
Man up... be the superstar you're supposed to be... or get out of the way for the younger cheaper player.
That's the NFL.

+ REPLY
0 points
3
3
Since'61's picture

May 09, 2020 at 04:58 pm

Well at least you conveniently avoided the question of what happens to the offense if Adams, Jones or both go down? Do we still have more than enough? And the deep/talented OL suddenly became an OL with 3 studs? Not very deep and talented are we. I’ll give you 21/2 studs. We are going to miss Bulaga, especially during the first half of the season. As for other NFL OLs the 49ers have 5 studs and we saw what happened when we played them. So yes, I watch the NFL and for 58 seasons so far.

You seem to think that salary is going to give you a certain level of performance but you want that level of performance to move out of the way for the younger, cheaper guy who has yet to take a snap in the NFL. Ok, that’s logical somewhere.

It’s not Rodger’s fault that the Packers re-signed him to such a huge contract. They put themselves in the position of not being able to move on him now rather than later. Rodger’s can’t move out of the way even if he wants to which he doesn’t.

Beyond that the Packers went 13-3 last season. Another WR could be the player who puts them over the top but we won’t know that unless we sign another WR before the season begins. Rodgers is the last player we need to worry about manning up. As for some of that talent you mention they may not make it to the field never mind worrying about manning up.

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
taarons420's picture

May 09, 2020 at 06:27 pm

Yes - they would be in trouble if both Adams and Jones went down.
Duh.
Tell me which team wouldn't be in trouble if their star wr and rb went down.
So you want the Packers to have multiple Adamses and multiple Joneses.

Good luck.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
canadapacker's picture

May 10, 2020 at 08:48 am

So if they had taken a receiver or a D lineman or a linebacker the team would have been better even before they had taken a snap. It works both ways. Adams took 3 years to excel. Our guys are better than anyone in the draft when we were picking now. And they've shown upside.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

May 10, 2020 at 10:58 am

"So if they had taken a receiver or a D lineman or a linebacker the team would have been better even before they had taken a snap."

They key idea is that the Packers would be PERCEIVED to be better...by fans and the media. As it stands, I don't think the Packers look WORSE than they did four weeks ago. I don't think there's much more to say about it than that.

Right now the Vikings are perceived to be much better than they were pre-draft because they took a bunch of guys that fans and draftniks project to be good players who fill lineup needs. They look better on paper than they did four weeks ago. I don't think there's much more to say about it than that.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

May 09, 2020 at 10:57 am

"Rodgers turns 36 in December. He has thrown 12 interceptions the last three years, has averaged 3,373 passing yards the last three (which includes an injury-riddled 2017) and he has been sacked an average of 35 times in that span — a stat that has gone down in recent years. "

You're misrepresenting numbers here a bit, Cory. You do mention an injury-shortened 2017, but did you extrapolate ARod's 22 sacks in 7 games in 2017 out to 16 games? That's 50 sacks over 16 games. The last 3 seasons then are (50 + 49 + 36)/3 = 45 sacks per 16 game season or almost 3 sacks per game. Yes, the sack numbers decreased in recent year (singular), but the OL is a-changing. Likewise, you could adjust the passing and int numbers on a per-game basis to give a better feel for what he's been.

But I'm going to disagree with you on his having 4 years as a top 5 QB. You'll have to specify what metric you're using, but he hasn't been a top QB over a season since 2016...and that was carried by his legendary run over the last 8 games of that season.

+ REPLY
6 points
8
2
Leatherhead's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:50 am

Agree. But there is one very important metric in which he’s the best ever.....,protecting the ball. He doesn’t hurt the team with turnovers, and that’s hugely important. The six teams will th the fewest turnovers all made the playoffs last season.

If I wanted to put an offense on the field built to grind out 20-25 point per game, he’d be my guy.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
canadapacker's picture

May 10, 2020 at 09:45 am

AR has been taking way too many sacks - I agree. He has also thrown the ball away way too many times. There is a problem with an over the top risk aversion - that is too many sacks and too many throw aways. I would just prefer him to do more of taking the earlier and easier throws than waiting for the big play. Waiting for the big play also has the consequence of making the defense keep on coming - they know that he holds the ball - this leads to more holding penalties and also to some of his injuries. He needs to be more like Brady - who does not take the hits as he gets the ball out. I hope that Lafleur gets Sternberger and Degura into the mix more as well as use Lazard as more of slot receiver to get the ball out as well as using Jones out of the backfield. All of this will still lead to less interceptions, less sacks and less throwaways and keep AR healthy.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

May 10, 2020 at 10:45 am

"AR has been taking way too many sacks - I agree."

When a young QB throws the ball away or tucks it in and takes a sack, that kind of risk aversion is deemed "smart" and "playing team ball". When ARod does it, it's wasting a down. I agree that we want ARod to make things happen every time drops back...that's who he's been in the past. I agree that he leaves throws on the field. ..that's also who he's been in the past.

"Waiting for the big play also has the consequence of making the defense keep on coming - they know that he holds the ball - this leads to more holding penalties and also to some of his injuries."

In 2019, the Packers had 22 holding penalties called against them. Tied for 20th most (or 12th fewestI) in the league.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:00 am

Alternatively, when a 36 year old representing 18% of out cap and the undeniable fulcrum of the team and season does it when he could have taken a dump off or throw away ....

Your comment (true) and my instant reaction above may have just convinced me that there is more wisdom in what they are doing than I had given credit for hitherto.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:36 am

Bonus points for your use of the word "hitherto" in an NFL blog, Coldworld! ;)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
taarons420's picture

May 09, 2020 at 11:27 am

"He has four years of top five quarterback play. "
Holy smokes.
Yeah... um... no.

He hasn't been in the top 5 in about 4 years.
So you think he can IMPROVE his play while he hits ages 38-39-40?

That's crazy.

+ REPLY
2 points
7
5
fastmoving's picture

May 09, 2020 at 02:15 pm

...its not the weapons. Nothing wrong with them.
And I would argue that MVS and St.Brown have a way higher ceiling than Lazard.

+ REPLY
0 points
6
6
dobber's picture

May 10, 2020 at 10:53 am

The big difference between Lazard and MVS or ESB is that Lazard had three college seasons that were on par with or better than MVSs or ESBs best seasons. In other words: consistent production in a power conference. Even as a college freshman, Lazard's least productive season, he caught 45 passes. That's remarkable. I think he came to the Packers more prepared, he just doesn't have the athletic pedigree of MVS or ESB...who we should expect to come along slowly.

Lazard doesn't have the ceiling that ESB and MVS have, it's just that his floor is so much higher.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:05 am

I think Lazard is perhaps more mature as an individual. We overlook how much that factors into whether and how fast football careers develop.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Since91's picture

May 09, 2020 at 05:29 pm

Weapons??!! That is all I hear about! And I am tired of it!
We have A-Rod, A Jones, Adams and Bak. That’s a pretty good cast. Two solid back up RBs a developing TE and decent or solid WRs. How many teams would kill to have this lack of weapons on offense?
I watched Brett Favre throw to Terry Mickens, MarkIngram and Anthony Morgan in the NFC Championship game vs Dallas yesterday. Wow stellar all pro hall of fame cast there!
You can’t have an all star at every position peeps
We have plenty on this team right now

+ REPLY
4 points
6
2
HankScorpio's picture

May 10, 2020 at 07:45 am

"I watched Brett Favre throw to Terry Mickens, MarkIngram and Anthony Morgan in the NFC Championship game vs Dallas yesterday."

That game was played 20+ years ago. Times are different. Not to mention they lost that game. They proved last year they had enough weapons to lose in the NFC CG. I'd like to win the Lombardi.

Like you, I've watched some historical games recently from the last decade. It didn't watch every game but a fair few from a sample of years. They were dangerous on offense when they had 2 legit WRs. They were not dangerous on offense when they had less than that.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
canadapacker's picture

May 09, 2020 at 06:18 pm

I said this last year and I will say this again this year - we have enough receivers for AR - we had it last year and they performed well when Davante had his turf toe. We now have some better options with Sternberger healthy and with Funchess. We would have had to develop any first year receiver. and it would be unlikely that even a first rounder would be a big time impact player. It took Adams into his 3rs year to show it true potential. Will people please just admit that AR and Lafleur had some issues if not personality wise because of a new coach - or just because of a new system - with relatively little practice time. So if there was an issue with the draft it might be because we did not take an ILB. We got rid of both Fackrell and Martinez and I was not happy with their play because of their lack of speed and failure to be the beasts that we need on the inside. Those guys are few and far between as far as impact beasts inside. Now Gute made a pretty good draft IMO - and we will find out. I hate these prognosticators who evaluate drafts before the players even play a preseason game. Your draft should only be evaluated after years 2 and 3. Year 2 lets you know if you have made any big blunders ( ie if you cut anybody year 2 above round 3 - you blew it). Jason Spriggs drafted ahead of both Fackrell and Martinez. From the looks of it our 2017 and 2018 drafts look good and our 2016 was a bust except for Clark. I expect that we will have a much better season passing wise this year as long as AR responds correctly - ie he hits the open guys rather than waiting for the big play ( and therefore throwing it away to avoid the INT. And if he has done the offseason work that he used to do in order to be in the best shape of his career. I believe that part of his issue last year was that he was not perfect in both his mental and physical shape and it showed up with his missed easy throws. I appreciated #4 - even when we didnt have a good team he tried and played and he didnt care about the INT's and his reputation about that. I got frustrated with his offseason / will he retire antics and especially his agent towards the end. Will I be frustrated with AR? Not sure there were times when I get frustrated with his waiting too long for the open big play and with him taking sacks instead of getting the ball out and taking the easy shorter routes. Only this season will tell.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Lphill's picture

May 09, 2020 at 06:43 pm

Rodgers career will be prolonged this season because everyone the Packers play are gonna be running all over the Packers Oren Burks lead defense , Rodgers will be on the sidelines nice and safe.

+ REPLY
-3 points
2
5
Coldworld's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:08 am

You need therapy. Oren Burks is not worthy of this kind of obsession!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:42 am

More and more I find myself hoping that Burks takes the job by the horns and runs with it (excuse my mixed metaphors) in 2019. It could be pivotal for this defense and, really, I just hope SOMEONE does, but it would be poetic if it turned out to be Burks.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

May 10, 2020 at 10:28 am

Two things...AR was given a contract that was market driven with the thought that it would keep him a Packer for his entire career. It was the richest in history, as it should have been, but it was destined to be eclipsed by whatever QB came next. Heck, I bet Dak will get more $s. We paid pretty much the going rate at that time. There really were no other options than to give him a big contract, and in a salary-capped league that means less money for others. So you can’t say it doesn’t make sense to give him the money and then not spend commensurately on surrounding talent.

Second, the coaching choice and subsequent direction of the team was made AFTER the contract. The contract was a sunk cost, and you make your decisions looking forward. With the pivot away from the MM offense, the brass is reloading to give MLF what he needs to execute his vision. The next few years and AR’s swan song in GB will be determined by how well he can play within the new system. The ship is sailing and I bet he gets onboard.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Coldworld's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:13 am

As to the contract, I think that you are probably right, or before the ramifications of the plan that got LaFleur hired had sunk in. They needed security also at that time amidst the turmoil.

It looks like a possible mistake at this point. That said, if he plays a couple more years as starter, maybe a storm in a teacup. If you take them at their word, that’s the plan.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
mnbadger's picture

May 14, 2020 at 08:10 pm

I hope AR gets on board. Hes the most talented thrower of a FB in the history of the NFL.
With good health, his best years could be ahead of him if he commits to the new offense and stays sharp physically and mentally.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.