@Gargamel,
Gargamel wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Is there any remaining doubt about whether or not Ted Thompson is an idiot?
One fan said that when your child does something you don't like, you may not like it, but you still love him. Yep!
Seriously? You're
still calling Thompson an idiot and, in essence, Rodgers an inadequate replacement? Forget that when faced with actual stats on the previous page you opted to steer the discussion toward attendance and gear sales. (BTW, attendance down at Lambeau Field? Surely you're aware of the streak of 279 consecutive sellouts still intact as of Sept. 20, 2009? Please play fairly.)
A. I wouldn't call Rogers an inadequate replacement. He's doing a hell of a job, overall. That that gamble appears to be working out
doesn't excuse taking a gamble with a 13-3 team, poised for another Superbowl run.
Nor does it excuse an unproven rookie manager placing a greater value on his own ego than he does on the legend who is Brett Favre. I will never forgive him for driving a wedge between loyal Packer fans (like you) and the greatest Packer of them all. It's not like a presidential election, where half the people will hate the result, you know. I doubt more than a handful of Packer fans would have had any trouble forgiving him for bringing Brett back. I doubt that group would have included you. This very argument can be blamed on the idiot, Ted Thompson.
B. Ticket Sales
Attendance. And I am acutely aware of the Ticket Sale situation, having spent most of my life waiting my turn to buy some at face value. Consequently, I am aware of how difficult it is to find tickets to the games... and finally, I can see empty seats that would have been filled.
Gargamel wrote:If you mean to say that Ted Thompson is an idiot for not finding the personnel to protect the rising star that is the Green Bay quarterback, I agree. But with respect to the quarterback position itself, that's no longer a legitimate discussion, and it's one only you and I seem to be having. You feel that Thompson disrespected Favre by not reinstating him mere days before the beginning of the 2008 season, that some code of honor owed a legend like Brett had been brecahed--fine. While I disagree, there is enough subjectivity involved in that argument that I can leave it alone. But in terms of Rodgers' compentence, I must ask: were we watching the same game last night?
The kid's playing very well... but:
A. You simply cannot hold the ball that long in the NFL. Throw it away.
B. Sometimes there is no good throw to make and you have to take chances if you want to win. He's too protective of his numbers... and that's a lot of why he gets sacked too. That line isn't doing any worse than the lines Brett played behind in Green Bay. Welcome to the NFL... Defenses are good here.
Gargamel wrote:Favre was awesome, yes. Let's get that out of the way. I won't minimize his performance by dwelling on the fact that he had eons to sit in the pocket to wait for receivers to get open--it was a high pressure situation and he delivered.
Yes he did play awesome. But let me be clear here: If he was washed up... and not getting it done anymore... that still wouldn't excuse Thompson's idiotic decision. 16 years of dedicated service, he deserved to play in Green Bay for as long as he could still play. The chance at least. You seem to forget that Thompson decided Brett would be a back-up to an unproven kid as a condition of letting the most productive quarterback in NFL history continue to produce for Green Bay, after one of his most productive seasons! Huh? Mind-boggling idiocy. Rogers was under contract for the year anyway, and had no standing to object.
Gargamel wrote:But while Favre "tormented" the Pack, and other bullshit I'm seeing in the headlines today, what goes unmentioned is Rodgers' line: 26 for 37, 384 yds, 2 TD, 1 int. Oh, and let's not forget that dropped TD pass in the third quarter. All this in, really, his first "big" game, infused with the drama of a playoff match, and nationally televised. Played in a hostile environment, against a team that beat Favre 16 times in his career as a Packer. And, again, in spite of the non-existent pass protection he's enjoyed all year. 8 sacks last night, Bill.
Yep, Rogers gave a fine performance, numbers-wise. He threw some sharp balls and had some bad breaks too. I felt bad for him a few times. Must be tough wearing his shoes. He's developing into a fine quarterback and may one day be an elite if he ever learns to get rid of the ball and take some chances (risking those pretty numbers). He doesn't yet have Brett's passion... and he seems too afraid of failure... which, ironically enough, resulted in his tying Brett's losing season record in his very first year. ( a 13 and 3 team he led to defeat!)
Gargamel wrote:That makes 20 sacks on the year for Rodgers, 5 per game. I'm certainly frustrated that, at times, it seems Rodgers has the opportunity to throw the ball away but tucks it and takes a sack. But clearly he's not getting any protection. And yet he's thrown only one less TD than Favre this year and he's averaging 75 more yards per game. Interesting. Moreover, Rodgers wants to play for the Packers. He's desperate to continue to prove people like you wrong. He probably decided before the end of last season that he wanted to return. He went to training camp.
Wants to play for the Packers. That is just so much sillyness. A 38 year NFL Quarterback wavers on retirement... gasp. Who have you EVER seen more dedicated to helping his team win
during football season? (Be honest) Did you see the highlight reel from last week where Brett ran 40 yards up the field to deliver a bone-jarring block? This is a guy who should answer to you or anyone about his commitment? Utter nonsense. From bell to bell, few athletes in history have been more committed to playing their game. 16 years without ever once calling in sick, or hurt. I think his thousands of days in "training" left him adequately trained, with or without some mini-camps... and certainly more comfortable than the rookie at the helm of
his 13 and 3 Packers.
Gargamel wrote:Thompson actually looks like a genius. As made clear in my post one page back, there is no hole at QB. The Pack has an elite quarterback, in a league where teams are lucky even to get milquetoast at that position these days. Furthermore, he'll be around next season.
There need not be a hole at QB for Thompson's idiocy to be demonstrated. Rogers is incidental to Thompson's monumental error.
Any good GM would have simply stated that "the Packers are ready, with or without Brett Favre, but we're certainly hoping he comes back", and left it at that. Rogers is a good kid, and may one day be great... but you don't threaten to sit a hall of famer down behind an unproven kid to protect your own ego. No GM with half a brain in his head does that. Thompson is an idiot.
