The amount of "Brady wins because he always has a defense" people on Twitter shitting on the Packers for drafting a ton of defensive players in the first round in the last decade is humorous, to say the least.
Yeah, humorless I know.At least we know it’s about the packers now.
It would also put he/them ahead of the franchise whose coach the trophy was named after if you exclude the years they won when he was the coach.Speaking of reminders - just those three trophies would tie the late-career Bradies with Denver, Washington and the Raiders for fourth on the all-time Lombardis list, ahead of the Colts, Ravens, Dolphins and 20 other franchises.
He already auditioned as a guest host.I haven’t followed this that closely. Is Aaron Rodgers thinking about hosting Jeopardy?
That seems like a fun random thing like an SNL appearance. Was he really good or something?He already auditioned as a guest host.
People here seemed to really like him. I thought he was a bit robotic.That seems like a fun random thing like an SNL appearance. Was he really good or something?
Would be such a bizarre twist.
He was much better than I thought he would be. That said, I don't really think Jeopardy would choose him over other options. As PW points out though, I think the larger point is that he's made clear that he can make money from TV one way or the other (game show hosting, commentary, etc.), so it is absolutely plausible that he would retire rather than play in a situation he doesn't particularly enjoy.That seems like a fun random thing like an SNL appearance. Was he really good or something?
Would be such a bizarre twist.
He won Celebrity Jeopardy, so not randomThat seems like a fun random thing like an SNL appearance. Was he really good or something?
Would be such a bizarre twist.
It took an internet campaign to even get Burton a guest hosting shot. My guess is they don't want to go with someone that old, even though I think he'd be awesome.I will be stunned if LaVar Burton doesn't get the Jeopardy gig, so I think Rodgers should be looking for a different game show.
I think it'll be Jennings. They want someone who is the Jeopardy host, not someone who is famous and also hosts Jeopardy.It took an internet campaign to even get Burton a guest hosting shot. My guess is they don't want to go with someone that old, even though I think he'd be awesome.
We can go to the Jeopardy thread with this, but, yes I completely agree with you. As long as Jennings stays out of controversy, I bet it will be him.I think it'll be Jennings. They want someone who is the Jeopardy host, not someone who is famous and also hosts Jeopardy.
If you think he was bad, catch Bill Whittaker this week.Rodgers was IMO decidedly not great hosting jeopardy. Wooden. Boring. Zero personality.
Lifelong Jeopardy watcher. I am inclined to agree. Jennings run guest hosting was masterful. He maintained a very similar tone and style to Alex. I think LeVar could have an outside shot. He’s warm and friendly and nonoffensive, and an entire generation of kids learned to read with him. I thought Rodgers was better than I expected. He was decent. That said, he’s not really right for the core jeopardy demo, old nerds who know jack about sports. Here’s one of my favorite jeopardy moments from a couple years ago with the category “Talkin Football”We can go to the Jeopardy thread with this, but, yes I completely agree with you. As long as Jennings stays out of controversy, I bet it will be him.
I think folks are missing that, unlike football, it doesn't matter how good Rodgers is, it matters how much of an audience he brings with him. His ratings for his guest stint weren't as good as Jennings (Jennings went first), but I think they would be much, much better if he retired to take the gig full-time.He was much better than I thought he would be. That said, I don't really think Jeopardy would choose him over other options. As PW points out though, I think the larger point is that he's made clear that he can make money from TV one way or the other (game show hosting, commentary, etc.), so it is absolutely plausible that he would retire rather than play in a situation he doesn't particularly enjoy.
I could see a Carson Palmer / Bengals situation where he sits out a few games to show them he's serious.All the Jeopardy talk is interesting, but Rodgers isn't retiring. He'll be playing football this season, just don't know where.
I kind of think that there would be diminishing returns as the novelty wears off. I saw some clips and agree that he was pretty stiff and robotic. There was a great opportunity for humor when someone mentioned the playoff game ending and he kind of whiffed at it.I think folks are missing that, unlike football, it doesn't matter how good Rodgers is, it matters how much of an audience he brings with him. His ratings for his guest stint weren't as good as Jennings (Jennings went first), but I think they would be much, much better if he retired to take the gig full-time.
This is well done.The thread title should read: "It is thought by many that the odds are low that this long-time Green Bay Packers quarterback will remain with the team in 2021."
Good call.I could see a Carson Palmer / Bengals situation where he sits out a few games to show them he's serious.
The same Terry Bradshaw who refused to work with any Steelers QB who was drafted when he was a starter and who ended his career spitting fury at Chuck Noll for having the audacity to understand that he needed to move on from Bradshaw? (And who later celebrated in public when Noll was fired and then refused to go to his funeral decades later after noting that he hated playing for Noll?)Terry Bradshaw chimes in with his disapproval. Somehow I don't think Rogers cares.
And here’s Bradshaw, still talking about him as recently as two weeks ago:”I will not talk about him after this interview, OK?" Bradshaw said. "Did I respect him? Of course I did. Like him? No, I didn't like him."
In short, fuck Terry Bradshaw.”The first 10-15 years after (my retirement) I was pissed, I’m not going to lie to you,” Bradshaw said. “He is no longer with us on this earth and there are so many wonderful things that Chuck did for me. But he did not know how to handle me.”
He's deeply bitter that he played in an era where he didn't get paid.Is it me or does Bradshaw whine about QBs more than any talking head out there?
I think that's just an example to point out his issue, which is that he thinks the GM isn't good, and that his opinion should be valued. So to him, that he comes out and praises a WR only to have the GM cut him the next day is a sign that the GM doesn't have any interest in what his HOF QB thinks. It's not about Kumerow, it's about process and respect to Rodgers.An Athletic article said one move "that drove Rodgers nuts" was the release of WR Jake Kumerow, 1 day after Rodgers praised him.
That's a weird hill.
Yes, the 1970's was the era of the running back, the rules had not yet changed to open the game for the wide-open passing we see today. I don't think that would necessarily have favored Bradshaw.He's deeply bitter that he played in an era where he didn't get paid.
Also that people generally don't think of him as an elite QB despite his rings
And I don't quite get that. Even though I am generally sympathetic to Rodgers side here, he has won only one ring and has come up short in big situations in the playoffs multiple times. Peyton redux.Theres no player in the league that holds more leverage than Rodgers.
Has Rodgers come up short in the playoffs? Or has he just had worse teams? I mean, his playoff stats for his career are better than Brady's. Completed a higher percentage of his passes for higher NY/A and ANY/A, higher TD%, lower INT%.... he's one of the best QBs ever to play, and his not having rings has a lot more to do with the teams he's been on and coaching staffs than with him coming up short.And I don't quite get that. Even though I am generally sympathetic to Rodgers side here, he has won only one ring and has come up short in big situations in the playoffs multiple times. Peyton redux.
Seems Brady should hold more leverage than any QB in history and maybe he now has it in Tampa, but it was always a power-sharing situation in New England.
Depends on you define success, but if you define it by winning, then yes. The stats are great, but on their own empty. I realize football is very much a team game where success involves many factors, but we have just spent several months leading up to the draft talking about how QB is the signature franchise need for dominance in the modern era. Certain players, such as Brady or Russell, just always seem to, somehow, someway, come out on top. They just win. Maybe it's luck, maybe it's something more.Has Rodgers come up short in the playoffs?
I mean... Brady basically is alone though, Rodgers hasn't done worse than other elite QBs. And if you're a team, you look at elite QBs like Rodgers and say "I would have not fucked up that defense so bad", and there is an obvious parallel... Manning left the Colts when he was moderately washed and went to 2 SBs because they surrounded him with a better supporting cast.Depends on you define success, but if you define it by winning, then yes. The stats are great, but on their own empty. I realize football is very much a team game where success involves many factors, but we have just spent several months leading up to the draft talking about how QB is the signature franchise need for dominance in the modern era. Certain players, such as Brady or Russell, just always seem to, somehow, someway, come out on top. They just win. Maybe it's luck, maybe it's something more.
The perception of Brady as a side-car on the Belichick chariot, at least early on, may be undergoing revision in light of what he did in Tampa.
What does Russell win that was more than Rodgers? GB was in the NFL Championship game two years in a row. They did not play Seattle in either game. But guys like Russell, they just win. In fact, in the Super Bowl Russell won, he definitely carried the team and basically won the game by himself.Depends on you define success, but if you define it by winning, then yes. The stats are great, but on their own empty. I realize football is very much a team game where success involves many factors, but we have just spent several months leading up to the draft talking about how QB is the signature franchise need for dominance in the modern era. Certain players, such as Brady or Russell, just always seem to, somehow, someway, come out on top. They just win. Maybe it's luck, maybe it's something more.
The perception of Brady as a side-car on the Belichick chariot, at least early on, may be undergoing revision in light of what he did in Tampa.
Yeah, there's a national notion that Russell Wilson is somehow a great pressure QB. He's not. He won a single super bowl on one of the best defensive teams ever.What does Russell win that was more than Rodgers? GB was in the NFL Championship game two years in a row. They did not play Seattle in either game. But guys like Russell, they just win. In fact, in the Super Bowl Russell won, he definitely carried the team and basically won the game by himself.
Rodgers has had great playoff performances and his defense basically gives up 35 points and he loses. Rodgers is great. Historically great. But he's never had good management. And management matters.
Not really. The Seahawks led 29-0 after the second half kickoff -- a lead that including that TD return, a pick-6 and a safety. His two touchdown passes came after that lead was built.In fact, in the Super Bowl Russell won, he definitely carried the team and basically won the game by himself.
I am being sarcastic. That game was over on the first snap when it went over Manning's head.Not really. The Seahawks led 29-0 after the second half kickoff -- a lead that including that TD return, a pick-6 and a safety. His two touchdown passes came after that lead was built.
He had a really good game, but in no way won that game by himself. The defense did this to the Broncos in their first seven drives -- safety, punt, INT, INT, downs, punt, fumble.
Worse still if he'd just tucked the ball in he could have walked into the endzone and scored the game winner. His decision to throw into the scrum was just outright awful.Yeah, there's a national notion that Russell Wilson is somehow a great pressure QB. He's not. He won a single super bowl on one of the best defensive teams ever.
He threw an interception the other time it was on the line. He also keeps losing in the playoffs every year. It's not that he's not good (he's really good) but there's Brady and then there's everyone else. Rodgers is a significantly better QB that Wilson.
Yeah, Russell mostly escaped criticism for his part in being on the wrong side of the greatest play of all time, largely because:Yeah, there's a national notion that Russell Wilson is somehow a great pressure QB. He's not. He won a single super bowl on one of the best defensive teams ever.
He threw an interception the other time it was on the line. He also keeps losing in the playoffs every year. It's not that he's not good (he's really good) but there's Brady and then there's everyone else. Rodgers is a significantly better QB that Wilson.
You? Sarcastic?I am being sarcastic. That game was over on the first snap when it went over Manning's head.
Whether or not he’s a dunce, the line about him not being able to spell cat if you spotted him the c and the t is an all-timer.Yes, the 1970's was the era of the running back, the rules had not yet changed to open the game for the wide-open passing we see today. I don't think that would necessarily have favored Bradshaw.
Noll generally gets a lot more credit for the four SB championships than Bradshaw, who was more often than not portrayed (unfairly) as a dunce. Terry's schtick has always been the clown, but underneath he's pretty mean and unhappy, imho.