The Green Bay Packers have given up 31 sacks this season, the most in the league. But as they prepare for Sunday's game against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, they think they have the right pair of offensive tackles in place.
Chad Clifton and Mark Tauscher worked with the first-string offense in Wednesday's practice, and it appears that they'll be the starters Sunday against the Buccaneers.
"Mark Tauscher had a lot of work today with the (No.) 1s, so (we're) looking at Mark at the right tackle position. He took the majority of the reps, and Chad Clifton looked healthy," Packers coach Mike McCarthy said after Wednesday's practice. "So really (we'll) see how Chad responds tomorrow from today's practice. Hopefully, they'll both go through the padded practice tomorrow, and we'll see where they are."
Heading into this season, Clifton had been one of the Packers' most reliable players, starting all but two games in the last six years. But this year he's been plagued by a sprained ankle and played just three games.
Tauscher has also been a reliable starter for the Packers for years, but he hasn't played at all this season while recovering from knee surgery. With Tauscher and Clifton hobbling, the Packers have used four different offensive line combinations this season. They're hoping that with Tauscher and Clifton back in the starting lineup, the fifth combination will take them through the rest of the season.
Chad Clifton, Mark Tauscher likely to start
Posted by Michael David Smith on November 5, 2009 10:37 AM ET
Permalink
57 Comments 
Latest stories in: Green Bay Packers, Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives - Rumors, Top Stories
Latest stories in: Green Bay Packers, Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives - Rumors, Top Stories
Their best line right now would be Clifton, Lang, Spitz, Sitton, Tauscher. Wells top backup.
Either way the Pack need to draft 2 tackles very high in 2010 draft & find a running back who can catch the ball and break tackles.
These guys may be a day late and a dollar short when it comes to an already injured and banged up Aaron Rodgers.
Still I am sure they both will be welcomed with open arms...
As the thing that sits above Merrill Hodges head, I don't think this will help anything...Pack should plan on finishing 7-9 with a mid first round pick and will use it to draft a CB.....
The Pack ain't back with Mike Mac
Oh Boy, this should turn things around for Green Bay.
Tauscher hasn't played in a real game since December of last year and Clifton can't walk to the shower without his old broken down body falling apart. What's the over and under on Tampa getting a win and six sacks ?
may as well bring the whole 2003 team back and tell Brett in January that Brian Dawkins plays for the Eagles.
Hope it works out for you guys. Start winning. I want Favre vs. Pack III in the playoffs. Be hard though with Steelers,Ravens,Cowboys, Cardinals,49ers and in Chicago in the future.
"You mean this sucker's nuclear?!?"
"No! This sucker's electrical, but I need a nuclear reaction to produce the 1.21 gigawatts of power needed!"
They should have played last week.!
@jamesz23
Agree with you but I hope it's a better pick than Barbre's turned out to be.. I'm afraid TT &MM are just sticking their fingers in the Dyke with this move. Doubt either one of thopse guys holds up for the rest of the season.
@MHtoupee
The Pack ain't back with Mike Mac
You might just be on to something but I'd rather see TT go. Espiecially if there is not drastic improvement in 2010.
@ Fan_of_ Four
If for one minute I felt like you had any integrity I'd be glad to take you up on that bet.
Fan_Of_ Four says:
November 5, 2009 11:10 AM
Oh Boy, this should turn things around for Green Bay.
Tauscher hasn't played in a real game since December of last year and Clifton can't walk to the shower without his old broken down body falling apart. What's the over and under on Tampa getting a win and six sacks ?
------------------------------
First of all, you can't put an over and under on a prop bet like that. You could put the over/under on the number of sacks Tampa will get, but you can't package it together with a boolean outcome like win/loss.
Secondly, if you want to bet someone that Tampa will win the game AND get 6 sacks, I'll take some of that action. Just let me know and I'll provide an email address.
I'm thinking I won't hear from you, though.
Ugh..when the Pack beat this terrible terrible bucs team its going to give their fans back that inflated sense that they are actually good..kinda like how the pack fans kept talking about how good their D was after playing Clev and Det...yeah...and i'm sure if the line holds up against a terrible D like the bucs the pack fans will proclaim the line is fixed and they will go on a playoff run..until they meet up with Pitt and Baltimore..those two teams will take them back down to earth
Why have they not contacted Jon Runyan? He's just as old, but he's still solid. He could help them more than the people that they have now.
Tauscher, then Green. I guess if another wr goes down, we will be calling Freeman.
It just dawned on me that the Viking fans that are predicting that the Packers cannot make the playoffs because of how bad they are, are using flawed logic. I have seen it written numerous times that the Packers have not beaten anybody worthwhile, while maintaining that the Vikings are nearly ready to walk on water. Who have they beaten? If the Packers are crap, that's two crap victories, and the wins over the Rams, Lions, and Browns are the same wins the Packers have, and in similar manners. The Packers lost to Cincinnati and the Vikings lost to Pittsburgh, but Pittsburgh lost to Cincinnati, so that is even up. And they totally lucked out against Baltimore and San Francisco, so tell me....what's so special? Right now they are the best of the worst. Big deal. The Packers played poorly against them. Stuff happens. There's plenty of time to get back in this (if and when the Vikings really prove if they are legit or not.)
I still not convinced Clifton is ready to go.. and Lang hasn't done a bad job over there.. I would stick with Lang another week and have a healthier Clifton for the Pokes..
Tauscher, even with rust has to be a better option than Barbre.. while he has improved from week one it is very apparent that he isn't ready for NFL ball yet.
"may as well bring the whole 2003 team back"
should have just listened to Brett to begin with, but Thompson had to have it be "his" team.
If they would have listened to Favre to begin with, I doubt it would have been any worse.
Favre proved his point, he's now with a team that wants to win! That's all he wanted all along and it fell upon deaf ears.
so tampa has a great shot a win, thats what I'm understanding from this post.
How is b.j. (bust in waiting) raji working out for you folks? Loadholt (a 2nd rounder btw) is working just great for us. thank god you passed up all those OT's right? especially with such a high draft pick, you'd think they would have done better. oh well, you'll probably get a mid or high 1st round pick again this year, maybe TT can pull a davis and blow it on a kicker....
Right....I always make a point of making wagers with people on the Internet. On second thought, why don't you toss out your email for everyone to see moron.
Have to disagree on their best possible line.
You have to keep Colledge at LG. He's played well and Lang needs to be developed solely at LT as he will likely be starting there next season.
I agree I like Spitz better at C, but he isn't getting healthy and may see himself on IR within the next couple of weeks if he doesn't turn the corner with his injury.
So, this week it will be Clifton, Colledge, Wells, Sitton, Tauscher.
If they play decently, we should try to keep this line intact for the rest of the year. We need continuity.
I think my previous post can make a case that either the Packers are not as bad as everyone is saying, or the Vikings aren't as good...one or the other, you can't have both (not yet anyway.)
Another 6-10 finish is extremely likely. This is a dreadful team. The only differences I see between Rodgers and Majkowski is Aaron was a first round pick while the Magik Man was so far down the list, he would have been an undrafted free agent in today's NFL.
Of course the other difference is Majkowski actually had some success winning close games(for a short period of time).
Rodgers hasn't performed well in close games and we may never know how he'll perform in "big" games because the packers won't see any until he's gone.
Both TT and MM will, or at least should be gone after this season. They destroyed a 13-3 team that was one play away from making it to the SuperBowl. Great rebuilding process isn't it?
I think TJ Lang is either a guard or a right tackle, I don't think he's the Pack's LT of the future. And Darryn Colledge had his 1st good game of the season on Sunday - otherwise he is a close 2nd behind Barbre for worst performer on the line this season. He's a FA after the season, I would definitely let him leave.
Bob McGinn this week even said in his article grading Sunday's game that Darryn Colledge saved his job for now with a good game as there has been talk of benching him for poor performance.
merrillhodgestoupee says: "...Pack should plan on finishing 7-9 with a mid first round pick and will use it to draft a CB....."
That is a stupid statement. Ted Thompson will trade away the mid 1st round pick for a 2nd and a 5th, then use the 2nd round pick at a position the Packers do not need a starter -- like QB or WR -- then wait until the 5th round for an OT.
Or he'll just pick another D lineman or LB. That's all they've drafted in round one the past four years (AJ Hawk, Justin Harrell, BJ Raji, Clay Matthews).
Why did Matt Millen get ridiculed for doing that, but not Ted Thompson? When you use four consecutive 1st round picks in the same area (defensive front seven) you better be dominant there, not just solid.
You're saying the packers finishing the season 2-7 is "extremely likely"? If you don't like the Pack, that's fine... but get serious.
One thing i noticed from the pack/vikings game is you just dont fear aaron rodgers in crunch time...you just know/feel it. You know they arent going to score..something is going to go wrong. Its like the opposite of Favre. Growing up I would fear the Vikings scored too soon and Favre would lead the pack for the winning drive...most memorable for me was when Moe Williams scored too soon and Favre marched the pack down the field ftw
It's amazing how many wonderful memories Vikings fans have of facing Farve...The Packers need to start drafting OL with higher picks and actually break down ad spend some money and bring in at least one FA for the line.
Fan_Of_ Four says:
November 5, 2009 12:15 PM
Right....I always make a point of making wagers with people on the Internet. On second thought, why don't you toss out your email for everyone to see moron.
-----------------------------
Oh, trust me.. I was going to create special email account just for the occassion. I'm not dumb enough to put a real email account out there. But I'll bet I could guess what your account is.
Let's see... Iblowbrett@hotmail.com. Maybe Hard4Favre@gmail.com.. I'd find it sooner or later.
Anyway, I assume from your response that you don't want to put your money where your mouth is? You just want to talk big (like normal) and not follow it up?
I'm starting to think a new kicker is needed as well. The Pack would have been 8-8 last year (2 games better) if they had a kicker who could make FG's when we really need them.
The only thing Crosby is great at is onside kicks, and 20-40 yard FG's when the conditions are good.
Osterhouse says:
November 5, 2009 1:23 PM
One thing i noticed from the pack/vikings game is you just dont fear aaron rodgers in crunch time...you just know/feel it. You know they arent going to score..something is going to go wrong. Its like the opposite of Favre. Growing up I would fear the Vikings scored too soon and Favre would lead the pack for the winning drive...most memorable for me was when Moe Williams scored too soon and Favre marched the pack down the field ftw
-----------------------------
Nice job, Osterhouse. That's a well-reasoned analysis. Here's the supporting facts.
Rodgers' situational stats:
Last 2 minutes of half - 102.9 passer rating
When trailing - 122.6 passer rating
4th quarter - 110.5 passer rating
4th quarter within 7 points - 108.1 passer rating
Yeah, I wouldn't want him in crunch time. He's terrible. Meanwhile, west of the border...
Favre's situational stats:
Last 2 minutes of half - 91.2 passer rating
When trailing - 83.6 passer rating
4th quarter - 111.5 passer rating
4th quarter within 7 points - 112.1 passer rating
So Favre was too old and washed up while Tauscher and Green are ready to rock... um.... yeeeeah. Good luck on that ace...
@BleedGreen
You actually think Runyan would agree to residing in GB?! HAHA I wouldn't bet the cheese on it if I were you.
One more situational stat for Rodgers
1 Win, 8 Losses with a chance to win or tie with 5 minutes or less left in the game.
Pretty sure this is what Oster was referring to.
Those obese washed up offensive lineman in Greenbay are going to scuttle a new CBA.
If the Union decertifies it will never come back.
Majik Man says:
November 5, 2009 2:17 PM
One more situational stat for Rodgers
1 Win, 8 Losses with a chance to win or tie with 5 minutes or less left in the game.
Pretty sure this is what Oster was referring to.
-----------------------------
If you're going to measure it that way, be sure to count how many times he DID lead the team down and take the lead, only to watch the defense give it up on the next possession.
I don't understant why Teddy stopped signing those big free agents after Tauscher and Green. I hear Bill Shcroeder is on the market. Better yet, Adam Timmerman was in Green Bay last week. Come on TT! Keep those big bucks coming!
yes the pack d basically blew chunks last year. and the ol isnt getting it done this year. 31 sacks aside, there is no running game.
the vikes are a better team but i wouldnt bet on them to win a 3rd game vs the pack.
just remember, favre dithered and the pack simply didnt agree to that for the 5th (or 6th or 7th) straight year.
at least rodgers wanted to be there.
lets see how rag arm barf fart looks in another month.
I really have no interest in beating the Pack when they're down, but I honestly am not sure I like any of their O-linemen. On separate occasions in the games I've watched, they have all looked lousy. Just think how different that team would look with even two above average O-linemen? Boy did Jason Wittlock of Fox trash TT today.
"...afraid TT &MM are sticking their fingers in the Dyke..." - True or not, I don't think this is the place to talk about that. Packers are trying to patch the dike. Green is scarcely playing a huge role. Tauscher would not have been let go except for the fact that they knew he would not be able to play until late October at best. If they can cobble together a decent O line, if Capers starts to get a little more aggressive, and if Finley and Nelson come back strong (and yeah, that's a ton of ifs) this will not be a team that anyone would want to have to face in the playoffs.
WHERE IS MY COMMENT...WAS HILARIOUS? LET ME KNOW WHY YOU HAVE NOT POSTED YET.....THERE ARE ALOT OF COMMENTS THAT ARE INAPPROPRIATE WHY IS MY COMMENT NOT ON HERE YET...IS THIS NOT WHY YOU HAVE A COMMENT AREA??? I NEED EXPLAINATION
@BaySay
I appreciate the fact that the Pack is trying to cobble together an O-line & like I said I hope it holds. Too bad Barbre & Land didn't turn out to be more NFL ready. Not sure Barbre ever will be.
Clifton is washed up a penalty machine, I'd rather keep Lang there. Just because a dude can't go against the best DE in the league consistently, doesn't make him a bad lineman. Like most others in the league (including Clifton), he looked pretty decent at LT until Jared Allen showed up across from him.
As for Tauscher, the injury is a concern. However, I believe if he can still stand up, he's already better than Barbre. Everything else after that, like blocking, is just window dressing. Only on a team run by Ted Thompson would someone as terrible as Barbre be considered for anything more than the practice squad, LET ALONE a starting position. Thanks again Ted.
Nonetheless, this is still mostly good news. What we have is clearly not working. Credit McCarthy for having the guts to admit his mistakes and try to fix the problem. It's not his fault a certain egotist who DOESN'T admit his mistakes can't seem to get him the talent he needs to be successful.
Beer Cheese Soup (lol),
I look forward to a succesful finish to the first half of the season and the continuing development of the 2009 Green Bay Packers. It seems you look forward to potential losses that would potentially get Thompson fired( but doubtful) given the money owed to him. please explain your fanhood. I am embarrased that you are a Packer fan. You are a NFL know nothing like the rest of us.
Beer Cheese,
An old boss you to say to us " Do not come to me with a problem unless you have a solution" So please, Beer Cheese, explain to us all, without hindsight, what YOU would do to improve a 4-3 team at this point IN DETAIL. If you do not provide a answer I will consider it your concession to knowing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WITHOUT HIND SIGHT! I eagerly await your response
Majik Man,
I am embarrased for you with that last comment. What a lack of knowledge.
Ambrose -
Seriously, do you actually watch football or is your knowledge based simply on what you read on blogs? I guess you're not sure if Indianapolis is a good team either, since the only team they've beaten is an up and down Cardinals team. Watch the games, you may learn something.
The Vikings have played five games against teams that had a winning record at the time they played them, winning four. Out of the eight games they've played the Vikings held leads of 17,17,16,28,17 & 11 in the fourth quarter, winning all of them.
The "lucky" wins you and so many others have proclaimed, are perhaps not as "lucky" as you think. How "lucky" is it to dominate a game four 50 minutes as the Vikings did against Baltimore. With only a handful of big plays, albeit huge impactful plays, one could consider Baltimore "lucky" to even have a chance at winning that game. One could also say San Francisco got a "lucky" break on the blocked field goal when it bounced nicely into the hands of Nate Clements. The 49ers were "lucky" to be in that game, so statistically dominated by the Vikings in almost every catagory. The final drive by the Vikings seemed to be made up more of skill than luck. The final TD pass from Favre to Lewis was thrown exactly were it needed to be and caught securely, accompanied by an excellent job of getting his feet inbounds. What exactly was "lucky" about that? The fact that it was done at the end of the game? Are all great throws and catches lucky? Lucky is the catch that made Denver a winner over Cincy in week one.
Are the Vikings a good team as of now? - Yes! Will they make the playoffs or do well if the do get there? Who knows? A lot can happen over the next eight games. Are the Packers a good team? Hard to tell, but based on what I've seen I would say they've got some serious issues that don't bode well when playing against some of the tougher teams. Thus Dallas, Baltimore, Zona, Pitt & Chicago away will be hard to get Ws.
AC Scheft & Super -
I give to you the last game as a prime example of Rodgers missing his oppurtunity in the fourth quarter.
With just over eight minutes to go, after the Pack D forced a Viking punt, and down by five, Rodgers & his offense start at their own 19 & stall at the Viking 33, despite being aided by a bogus 15 yard roughing the passer penalty. Results - zero points after the missed 51 yard field goal attempt and good field position for the Vikes final TD drive. How is that the defenses fault again?
He later gets the ball back with just under four minutes left and down by 12. A TD followed by an onside kick gives them a glimmer of hope. He manages to move his team from the 26 to the 27 yardline. Wow! One whopping yard! They did have a penalty move them back, but still, ONE YARD? That GB defense really hurt the Pack there!
He's not totally to blame for the loses his team has incurred, but he is also not blameless.
Tompadre,
I guess I am not sure what your point is. Soe drives stall. Some drives are TD drives (Rodgers has plenty of both) He should not get all the credit for the TD drives nor should he get all the blame for the stalled drives. Its a team game. Please explain yourself.
Suck says:
Beer Cheese Soup (lol),
Please explain your fanhood. I am embarrased that you are a Packer fan. You are a NFL know nothing like the rest of us.
____________________________________
OF COURSE I'm an NFL know nothing. That's why I don't work in the NFL. In fact, I am of the mind that EVERYONE who doesn't know a damn thing about the NFL should be barred from working in the league (or at least not allowed to run my favorite team). The fact that you disagree with that philosophy contradicts many of your previous statements.
As for my fanhood, we've been over this, but you clearly need a simplified refresher. Here goes. I am a Green Bay Packers fan. I want the Green Bay Packers to win every game they play. I realize that is not possible, but I still want it to happen.
Ted Thompson, your god, is quite the skilled accountant, but he is a piss-poor GM when it comes to helping the Packers win (which is, again, all I really want). You can defend him however you see fit, but when it comes down to it "you are what your record says you are"-Parcells, and his ain't pretty.
I do not want to lose games just to get rid of him. I do not want to lose ANY more games period. That's why I want him gone now, not at the end of the season. In fact, I wanted him gone Monday. Clearly, that is not going to happen, so I'll take the next best option.
What it boils down to, is who is the better fan: the one who doesn't want, but can live with, ONE more losing season in exchange for fixing the root problem and quickly returning the franchise to prosperity; or the one who is perfectly willing to accept MULTIPLE losing seasons and humiliating losses to division rivals just to maintain the current status quo and not have to admit they were wrong. You tell me.
Oh yeah, and since you say it all the time, I'll "consider it your concession" if you don't respond within the hour, translate your entire post into three other languages, or hereafter refer to Ted as anything other than 'the devil'. Douchebag.
Beer Cheese,
Why dont you come over here to 200 Main Street La Crosse Wisconsin and call me a douchebag to my face. i will consider your non arrival as your concession of being a NFL nobody and a fearless keyboard warrior that is clearly frustrated by being owned and told he is a NFL nobody. YOU and I are not qualified to judge who is a bad GM and who isnt. How many times must I explain that. IF you were qualified you would be in a position drawing a salary from a NFL franchise. We do not know anything. None of us do. We do not know what a day in the life of a GM is. You are frustarted by being swept by Minnesota. If we were 4-3 and had swept Minnesota you wouldnt be hating Thompson. You have no ability it seems to look at the big picture. your opinions are based upon emotion. Not a good idea. I myself have become alot better over the years at simply counting to ten. Not in the literal sense but you know what I mean. I will not consider your argument that Thompson sucks as valid simply because you have no insight. You dont know what goes on. All I know is we are 4-3. Not great. But we arent even half way finished. Can you "count to ten" and let the season play out before calling for Thompson's head? Him "being gone now" isn't going to change anything. Thompson may not be the problem. It may be McCarthy. But again...WE don't know. Someone I believe it was Ambrose said it perfectly yesterday that the way to determine if it was personnel or coaching after a regimes demise is to see how many of the GMs players are still in the league 5 years down the road. But we won't know until then. And this regime is just fine right now. Count to ten and look at the big pictue.
Tompadre...I wasn't trying to focus on the "luck" factor, but I keep reading about how the Packers "should" have lost to the Bears, as though their timely good fortunes aren't as legit as the Vikings timely good fortunes. A win is a win is a win, right? So, the only point I was trying to make was if the Packers suck, then two of the Vikings wins don't amount to anything. And the AFC loss they have matches up pretty well with the AFC loss the Packers have. The other wins are no different than the Packers wins..and the Packers defeated those same foes just as impressively as the Vikings did.
So...either the Packers aren't as bad as one might think, or the Vikings aren't as good. Which is it? Because it can't be both, not yet. And the bottom line is...I think the Packers will make the playoffs because they may not be as good as the Vikings, but they can compete.
Tompadre says:
November 6, 2009 8:06 AM
AC Scheft & Super -
I give to you the last game as a prime example of Rodgers missing his oppurtunity in the fourth quarter.
With just over eight minutes to go, after the Pack D forced a Viking punt, and down by five, Rodgers & his offense start at their own 19 & stall at the Viking 33, despite being aided by a bogus 15 yard roughing the passer penalty. Results - zero points after the missed 51 yard field goal attempt and good field position for the Vikes final TD drive. How is that the defenses fault again?
---------------------------
And what was it that killed that drive? Oh yeah. Jared Allen came (inexplicably) UNBLOCKED. Yep, it's Rodgers fault. He should've blocked Jared Allen in addition to completing the pass. The man only has about 8 sacks against your team in two games.. Maybe, I don't know.. Block him?
--------------------------
Tompadre says:
November 6, 2009 8:06 AM
He later gets the ball back with just under four minutes left and down by 12. A TD followed by an onside kick gives them a glimmer of hope. He manages to move his team from the 26 to the 27 yardline. Wow! One whopping yard! They did have a penalty move them back, but still, ONE YARD? That GB defense really hurt the Pack there!
-----------------------------
And he actually completed passes for 26 yards on that one yard drive. It's just that they suffered a 10 yard holding penalty. That holding penalty negated a 15 yard completion to James Jones and the resulting walk-off gave up 10 of the 11 yards they gained when Rodgers completed passes to Driver and Lee.
Again, what killed the drive? The O-line.
------------------------------
Tompadre says:
November 6, 2009 8:06 AM
He's not totally to blame for the loses his team has incurred, but he is also not blameless.
------------------------------
I agree whole-heartedly. He's not blameless. He made mistakes, not the least of which is holding onto the ball too long in some instances. But these two drives you've chosen are pretty piss-poor examples if you want to make that case that Rodgers is either not a great QB or that he can't perform in the clutch.
Brett Favre also never did well while being sacked or while travelling backwards due to the penalties of other players. Go figure.
Suck-
REAL smart, posting your address on this site. Sorry though, I don't live anywhere near WI, and I have better things to do than buy plane tickets just to dignify your insecurity. Not happening.
I have said time and again, I fully agree that I am nothing more that a keyboard warrior with no inside knowledge. You can quit saying that now, it's not much of an argument when I agree with it. "Consider this my concession" all you want.
"Another 6-10 finish is extremely likely. This is a dreadful team."
So, wait. The Packers are 'dreadful' just for losing to the Vikings? and what is so 'dreadful' about the Packers? Please list because just saying they are 'dreadful' doesn't prove crap.
We have a top 5 passing offense, a much improved run defense, and still sitting at 4-3. One loss doesn't make them dreadful. Plus, it isn't like the Vikings are a dominant team either. Their pass defense is not very good at all.
So next time, please post with actual intelligence instead of typing random crap in the computer thinking it's intelligent.
Super -
My point is Packer fans on this site continue to only blame the defense for all of its fourth quarter failings while giving Rodgers a free pass. Case in point - check out AC Scheft's response to my post. He now has included the O-line in his blame game. While they are an easy & accurate target he seems to miss Aaron's shortcomings.
Ambrose -
For those catagorizing the Packers as a bad team I have only one word - Please! Take a look at the dregs in the league and get back to me. I just don't think they are quite there yet as a playoff team, but they could prove me wrong. The difference though between Cincy & Pitt is Cincy still has a lot to prove and the game was in GB, while Pitt is the world champs and the game was on the road for the Vikes.
AC Scheft -
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think there were more plays in that drive other than the Allen sack. The sack left GB with a third and eight - not an overly daunting distance to overcome, I'm sure he's done it before in a less stressful situation. Now let me give you the four plays that sandwiched the holding penalty on the last possesion - incomplete, incomplete, penalty, incomplete, incomplete. Perhaps you were at the fridge when Rodgers was bouncing passes off the ground. Maybe Rodgers should, you know, complete a pass when the game is on the line.
Funny you should mention everyone's favorite whipping boy Favre. I've watched him this year overcome sacks, penalties & even a few third and 15+ to extend drives and even eventually score, and even in the fourth quarter.
So actually my examples are pretty damn good if you're an objective person. Rodgers isn't a great quarterback, not yet anyways, but he is very good; not a bad accomplishment with just a year and a half of starting under his belt. As far as him being clutch - he needs to prove that by winning games, regardless of the circumstances. The jury is just still out on that one.
I have noticed something about Rodgers that I felt was leading him to hold onto the ball. I just haven't seen enough of his games to know if it's really an accurate observation, so I will throw it out to you Packer fans on another post to get your input.
Beer Cheese,
Nothing was dignified except the fact that you are finally acknowledging that you knwo nothing (as do I) and our opinions mean squat. Thank you for admitting your a NFL know nothing.
Tompadre says:
November 7, 2009 6:17 AM
My point is Packer fans on this site continue to only blame the defense for all of its fourth quarter failings while giving Rodgers a free pass. Case in point - check out AC Scheft's response to my post. He now has included the O-line in his blame game. While they are an easy & accurate target he seems to miss Aaron's shortcomings.
------------------------------
Yeah, we're blaming the defense.. Right. We're blaming the offensive line and by extension, the running game.
The defense is much improved over last season. If you see people blaming the defense for anything, it's in responses to the nimrods trying to blame last year's 6-10 record on Rodgers... While passing for 4,000 yards and a better than 2-to-1 TD to INT ratio.