|
|
| Pro Football Discuss professional football. |
07-19-2006, 04:29 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
Pro Bowler
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,490
Reputation: 27
|
The Rodgers pick was fine. Favre is screwing the Packers by staying.
__________________
Designs by Thule
|
|
|
|   Sponsored Advertisement |
|   Remove Ads By Signing Up for an Account! |
|
07-19-2006, 05:05 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roidrunner
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravens1991
wasn't some guy named Teford(probably have the name completly wrong o well) Rogers Offensive coordinator, he did coach Boller and Akili Smith, both hasn't produced like a 1st rounder, and some people think that the offensive system doesn't get them ready for the NFL, if he follows the pattern it will be a bad pick.
|
If that is the case, All Penn State RB should fail because all past Penn State RB failed, Until Larry Johnson came out of Penn State. Just because Prior People have failed does not mean all will fail in the future.
|
Except QB is a different position. At RB the system isn't that huge as most top RBs can get by on vision and natural ability while at QB the mental prep needed is much greater.
|
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 06:04 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
All-NFLDC
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Shoryuken
Posts: 13,703
Reputation: 406607
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jonathan_VIlma
The Rodgers pick was fine. Favre is screwing the Packers by staying.
|
mmm...how? by letting them keep their best pos QB?
__________________

What do the vikings and marijuana have in common? Every time you put them in a bowl
they get smoked.
2010-2011 Super Bowl Champions
Hint:Not the Bears.
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 06:51 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
Pro Bowler
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,988
Reputation: 55721
|
Rodgers was one of the top players in the draft (scott had him #1 overall) and could have easily been the #1 pick. the packers had an ageing QB who would likely be gone after the season. how could you justfy not takeing him at #24? they didn't expect to be picking high the next year and didn't expect a good QB to be avalible. also takeing a QB then gave Rodgers time to learn. if they waited untill next year the QB wouldn't be ready to play and they would have to bring in another QB for a year to learn. Rodgers was the best pick they could have made and it was the right time.
__________________
Sig thanks to mockalicious
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 06:55 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
All-NFLDC
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On my backside
Posts: 13,997
Reputation: 93764
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TitleTown088
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jonathan_VIlma
The Rodgers pick was fine. Favre is screwing the Packers by staying.
|
mmm...how? by letting them keep their best pos QB?
|
Yup, I mean, what were the Packers thinking in wanting to win? Some crazy mumbojumbo goin' on there, huh?
__________________
SKOL VIKINGS!
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 07:00 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
|
well I'll put it this way, what would I rather have
rodgers with 2 years of training
AJ Hawk
Matt Leinart with 1 years of traing
mike patterson
My pediction, Matt turns out to be a wee bit better in the long run but AJ Hawk becomes the conerstone that farve was 10 years ago and mike patterson is just another good starter, I'd take the first one, plus Rodger will be way more ready by the time next year
|
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 07:00 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
Pro Bowler
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,988
Reputation: 55721
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jonathan_VIlma
The Rodgers pick was fine. Favre is screwing the Packers by staying.
|
Favre returning does not hurt the Packers or Aaron Rodgers. him staying around helps the packers win this year, and they'll do better with Favre than with Rodgers. him staying around also helps Rodgers. the Packers will have to learn a new offence and another year will give rodgers more time to learn it.
__________________
Sig thanks to mockalicious
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 07:36 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
Pro Bowler
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Natalie Portman: now thats a MILF
Posts: 2,748
Reputation: 10412
|
post date this thread to 5 years time and we'll know the answer. Any QB this year - Vince, Matt or Cutler would be sitting behind Favre and if they grabbed Quinn next year he'd be atleast 1 year away from anything good. They made the right decision at the time.
__________________
me want to kill you? hahaha Bonekrusher you complete me
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 09:11 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
Team Leader
Legend
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: You would know about being more in tune if you were MORE IN TUNE
Posts: 21,274
Reputation: 3286264
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Simms2Clayton
Several scouts, including Scott, had Aaron Rodgers as the best QB in that class.
Getting him where GB did was an absolute steal.
|
yes, but I'm glad that we got JP Losman instead of anyone in that class. That doesnt say much good for that class
|
|
|
07-19-2006, 10:05 PM
|
(permalink)
|
|
Pro Bowler
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nashville Tennessee
Posts: 2,421
Reputation: 364499
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Staubach12
Cutler would have been perfect to sit under Favre IMO.
|
I think so too cutler and brett are somewhat similar, but rodgers was still a good pick i voted it was just a little bit too early 1 year early.
__________________

Sig by BoneKrusher
Quote:
Originally Posted by killxswitch
Bill Polian is cancer wrapped in AIDS delivered in an XXL enema so please don't expect me to disagree with you.
|
Gamertag: IX VelvetSun XI
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:36 PM.
|