Skip to content

Olin Kreutz, B.J. Raji trading barbs

When the Packers and Bears get together Sunday for the second 2009 game of their annual series, an interesting subplot will play out when Chicago has the ball.

Green Bay nose tackle B.J. Raji and Chicago center Olin Kreutz will be pushing and shoving each other a bit harder, given the words they’ve already thrown back and forth at each other.

Raji got things rolling Thursday, explaining that Kreutz can’t match Raji’s raw strength.

“It’s nothing physical, it’s all technical,” Raji said, per Greg Bedard of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.  “I’m stronger than the guy.  I mean, that’s not really talking [smack]; he’s just fast.  That’s not his game, really, strength.  He’s more trying to out-leverage you, get around you.  Once I get the feel of that then the game will come a lot easier.

“It’s not going to take me a whole [game] to get used to him moving.  Football’s football.  He’s not going to change the way he plays because there’s a new nose on him.  He’s going to play the way he’s been playing.  So what I watch on film, it’s probably going to help me out the most, actually.”

Kreutz, who did not play when the Packers and Bears met in Week One, was asked about Raji’s comments on Friday.

Asked specifically if Kreutz is strong enough to face Raji, Kreutz said, “Is that his exact quote, or are you guys changing the quote a little bit?”

After being informed of Raji’s words, Kreutz said, “Is that his expertise after [10] games in the NFL?”

Kreutz later said that he’s not surprised by the comments.  “[T]hat’s the way young players are nowadays, they are all pretty much clowns,” Kreutz said.  “After 10 games, he probably thinks he’s the strongest guy in the NFL.”

Kreutz resisted any temptation to offer a specific comment regarding Raji’s skills. 

“I’m not going to talk about a rookie,” Kreutz said.  “This is too much attention for a rookie right here.”

Raji will likely be getting even more attention Sunday.  Whether it’s good attention or bad attention depends on whether he can back up his words.

Permalink 75 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Chicago Bears, Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
75 Responses to “Olin Kreutz, B.J. Raji trading barbs”
  1. hizzle1281 says: Dec 11, 2009 9:25 PM

    im getting some brain as i post this

  2. slipkid says: Dec 11, 2009 9:44 PM

    well while all this goes on, LBs will be swamping the cutlet, and the bear DL will continue taking the year off.

  3. xacvol says: Dec 11, 2009 9:45 PM

    @hizzle
    Tiger, is that you?

  4. bcdc26 says: Dec 11, 2009 9:47 PM

    ok, I’m all for seeing rookies come out in their first year and stepping up to make a name for themselves, but I can’t stand to hear one talk about how much better they are then some of the veterans. In a couple of years, yeah, Raji probably dominates in this match up but for this game, Kreutz comes out the winner. Bears will lose the game, but Kreutz wins the match up with Ben and Jerrys Raji.
    I’m assuming that’s what the B.J. stands for.

  5. hizzle1281 says: Dec 11, 2009 9:51 PM

    @xacvol
    not funny
    well kinda funny

  6. BlitzDorsey says: Dec 11, 2009 9:52 PM

    The last guy that called Kreutz soft got his face broken with a punch. Raji better watch out if his helmet comes off or something.

  7. SwedishMurderMachine says: Dec 11, 2009 9:52 PM

    Rajii should just shut his trap. Kreutz has been a pro-bowler for a long time and talking shit about him just sounds stupid.

  8. hizzle1281 says: Dec 11, 2009 9:57 PM

    go to nfl.com
    BREAKING NEWS……..Tom Brady arrested on cocaine charges

  9. nerd says: Dec 11, 2009 10:02 PM

    Kreutz will lose. The only thing Raji has more than strength is agility. Dude can flat out play.
    Woodson will get THREE pick 6′s. MVP, baby!

  10. Canned Heat says: Dec 11, 2009 10:03 PM

    As porous as that Bears O-Line has looked this year, I’m not so sure he can’t beat up Kreutz….for Raji being such a fat ass, he’s damn quick off the ball. For him to come out and talk openly about beating up a seasoned veteran after actually playing in 6 or 7 of those 10 games in his rookie year is more than a bit much. I guarantee he’s in Kreutz’s mind from now ’til Sunday. Watch for the chop blocks.

  11. PervyHarvin says: Dec 11, 2009 10:07 PM

    Raji should just STFU! Kreutz and Pat Williams have been in this war before. They also happen to be proven veterans. Raji couldn’t hold old Pat’s jock strap yet so he she just play and learn as he goes.

  12. Philtration says: Dec 11, 2009 10:19 PM

    No… you were wrong about what the B.J. stands for.

  13. Majik Man says: Dec 11, 2009 10:20 PM

    I love it when 2nd string players on 2nd rate teams talk trash, especially when it’s a rookie with 14 career tackles talking about one of the better centers in the game. Somebody stuff a triple Whopper in this kid’s mouth so he shuts up for a minute or two.

  14. refused1925 says: Dec 11, 2009 10:33 PM

    Raji is strong enough to push a double team straight back. Pound for pound, i think that Raji could beat the crap out of Kreutz.
    There is a reason that Kreutz has been in the league for a while, and we’ll see who comes out on top on Sunday.

  15. etronsman says: Dec 11, 2009 10:35 PM

    bcdc26:
    Raji never said he’s better than Kruetz, just that he has certain strengths and feels he can feel his way into the matchup. Never saw anything close to saying “Yeah, Kruetz is old and bad, I’m way better” He acknowledged Kruetz is techincally sound and quick.

  16. Gautam says: Dec 11, 2009 10:45 PM

    I love the reaction by Kreutz – “Is that his exact quote, or are you guys changing the quote a little bit?”
    you just cannot trust the scumbags in the media these days lol

  17. 1stngoal says: Dec 11, 2009 10:50 PM

    Raji has been establishing himself as a “playa” in the Packer D this season, but I think it was a dumb idea to give the Bears bulletin-board material, as all they have left to play for is pride.Damn rookie…

  18. IStateYourName says: Dec 11, 2009 10:58 PM

    Kreutz is too dumb to snap the shotgun and that’s why Bears QB suck since Sid Luckman.

  19. ACDC84 says: Dec 11, 2009 11:02 PM

    “but Kreutz wins the match up with Ben and Jerrys Raji.
    I’m assuming that’s what the B.J. stands for.”
    WOW. You are sooo funny. Ben and Jerrys. Comedy gold.
    NOT.

  20. Bob Nelson says: Dec 11, 2009 11:04 PM

    This is the first we’ve heard anything said by Raji.
    He must really be confident knowing he is going to have a good game.

  21. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Dec 11, 2009 11:13 PM

    Raji should just shut up. He hasn’t started a game yet. He needs to show a little respect and prove he can get it done before yapping about it. Hopefully he learns to keep his big mouth shut.

  22. DocBG says: Dec 11, 2009 11:49 PM

    Kreutz generally doesn’t come across as the smartest individual, but in this case, he’s right. This is way too much attention payed a worthless rookie. Raji is gonna bust out here in a year or 2, Kreutz will probably still be playing when Raji is back to selling discount tires, or whatever he did before football, probably comptitive eating.

  23. Cubano says: Dec 11, 2009 11:56 PM

    @ xacvol
    BEST comment of the day! Hands down LMAO

  24. GB3Pack4 says: Dec 11, 2009 11:57 PM

    Unh-unh- unh, BJ – discretion is the better part of staying alive -

  25. packers4life says: Dec 12, 2009 12:28 AM

    “Somebody stuff a triple Whopper in this kid’s mouth so he shuts up for a minute or two.”
    Someone should do the same to you, you bandwagoner.

  26. GB3Pack4 says: Dec 12, 2009 12:38 AM

    Unh-unh-unh, B.J. – discretion is the better part of staying alive.
    What you were saying was perfectly clear, just an analytical appraisal as you saw it, never meant for the bulletin board, but once said into a mike, it’s OUT there. Why (ever!) give your opponent a stronger incentive? Not smart.

  27. bearsfan says: Dec 12, 2009 12:53 AM

    “Kreutz, who did not play when the Packers and Bears met in Week One, was asked about Raji’s comments on Friday.”
    Kreutz has quite an impressive streak of starts … over 100 … he played in week one. It was Raji who couldn’t make it to the game. Still bitching about money or trying to get his fat ass in shape, one or the other. Kreutz definitely played and Raji did not, get your facts straight PFT/NBC.
    Hey Florio, I hope Kreutz breaks your jaw too.

  28. smokesome says: Dec 12, 2009 2:31 AM

    kreutz didn’t say anything back because he knows raji is right

  29. Schau3r says: Dec 12, 2009 3:32 AM

    @PervyHarvin…
    Youre a dumb clueless fool and I’m sick of hearing your shit on every damn article posted. Get a life dumbass.

  30. Schau3r says: Dec 12, 2009 3:52 AM

    This is the biggest piece of crap article I have EVER read. Go to PACKERS.COM and watch the B.J. Raji interview. It is nothing like you or the Chicago media makes it out to be. Is this their way of finding any motivation for a game cause they suck complete ass?

  31. Crazydiamond says: Dec 12, 2009 8:12 AM

    How is it that MajikMan is a “bandwagoner”? What bandwagon? He’s right by the way, BJ should shut up and play the game. Talking smack about a pro bowler and respected veteran is just stupid.

  32. zangy says: Dec 12, 2009 9:44 AM

    I think the bigger part of this story is that Pickett isn’t going to play. He made the transition well from 4-3 DT to 3-4 NT and has been playing lights out. As for Raji, he’s right. Kreutz is a mountain of a man out there and has to use his quickness to get leverage whereas Raji IS a lot stronger. The way I read the quote is that Raji feels his strength will win out once he get accustomed to how Kreutz plays. Forte’s YPC will be the biggest indicator of who wins the battle.

  33. jeff says: Dec 12, 2009 10:05 AM

    1stngoal says:
    December 11, 2009 10:50 PM
    Raji has been establishing himself as a “playa” in the Packer D this season, but I think it was a dumb idea to give the Bears bulletin-board material, as all they have left to play for is pride.Damn rookie…
    =================================
    Wrong they are still in it. its also Packers/Bears.
    They aren’t going to just roll over for the “mighty” Packers.

  34. bbq says: Dec 12, 2009 10:07 AM

    Just based on the responses to this article, I’ve deducted that Packers fans are complete douchebags.

  35. PervyHarvin says: Dec 12, 2009 10:23 AM

    @Schau3r- Seems I own you too. Seek counseling for the bashing
    I gave you fool,this site is for adults who can give and take,not fragile whiners like you!

  36. Mean D says: Dec 12, 2009 10:29 AM

    Blow Job needs to stay away from the media.

  37. bvanh16 says: Dec 12, 2009 10:34 AM

    FLORIO this is ridiculous. It amazes me when media outlets post clips of interviews just to make news. IF anyone really watched or listened to the Raji interview you would know that this is blown way out of context. The way it is being produced here is that a rookie is running his mouth, and that cannot be further from the truth. Sometimes you should use discretion on articles, or else you will be looked at like the National Inquirer. BJ Raji was merely pointing out the differences in their games. Why don’t you be fair and post the whole interview or even just the section Raji was talking about the Bears O line.

  38. bluestree says: Dec 12, 2009 10:59 AM

    BJ: If you’re gonna talk smack you gotta do better than this. Seriously, this is media BS. Obviously he’s comparing their games. I don’t see this as bulletin boad. Besides, Kreuz is not that popular in his own locker room.

  39. Calistin says: Dec 12, 2009 11:26 AM

    Jeff, I think you win your own award for thinking the Bears are still “in it.” Wow, just wow.

  40. zangy says: Dec 12, 2009 11:49 AM

    “Kreutz is a mountain of a man”
    That was meant to say isn’t.

  41. mixman34 says: Dec 12, 2009 11:53 AM

    They both suck

  42. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Dec 12, 2009 11:53 AM

    PervyHarvin says:
    December 12, 2009 10:23 AM
    @Schau3r- Seems I own you too. Seek counseling for the bashing
    I gave you fool,this site is for adults who can give and take,not fragile whiners like you!
    ——————————–
    He calls you a dumb ass so you own him? Nice logic, Pervis. By that standard you own half the regulars on this site.
    Dumb ass.

  43. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 12:56 PM

    Yes Ruvell, competing for the final wild card spot with what is essentially a 3 game deficit in the division race is considered 2nd rate, especially considering they were easily dispatched twice by one of the upper echelon teams. Also, first rate teams don’t lose to 0-8 teams by 10 points.
    And why are you so concerned over what was said between Brett and I? I thought you hated that traitor, so why the concern? I bet that 20 years down the road from now, you’ll be telling the next generation of youth how you watched Brett Favre play, and he was the best ever, and you will conveniently forget all the Favre bashing you have done the last 2 years, and tell them how he was always your favorite player ever.
    packers4life,
    How exactly am I a bandwagoner, toolbox? I have cheered for Brett Favre his entire career. When a douchebag GM decided he wanted to go in another direction (6-10), and let Favre go, I decided to root for the guy who wanted to win (Favre), instead of the arrogant prick that wanted to build his mediocre team his way, winning record be damned.
    And if I had to choose between being a bandwagoner, or an ignorant, never questioning, blind faith, accepting failure homer such as yourself, I would choose bandwagon every time.

  44. PervyHarvin says: Dec 12, 2009 1:13 PM

    Adam- Please quit stalking me unless you would like to talk something that relates to football. And no juice box sucker,I don’t mean soccer!

  45. footballrulz says: Dec 12, 2009 1:17 PM

    Raji jist needs to shut up & play some football.

  46. Adam-Chris Scheftersen says: Dec 12, 2009 3:18 PM

    PervyHarvin says:
    December 12, 2009 1:13 PM
    Adam- Please quit stalking me unless you would like to talk something that relates to football. And no juice box sucker,I don’t mean soccer!
    —————————–
    I guess I “owned you” then.

  47. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 3:54 PM

    Ruvell100 says:
    Your so f**king stupid you can’t see that you are the homer.
    ___________
    This is incredibly funny coming from a “Packer fan” who thinks that the ’95 Packers won a Super Bowl. The ’95 Packers lost to the Cowboys in the playoffs. The ’96 Packers won the Super Bowl, which was played in 1997. And by the way, genius, they never lost to the 0-10 Colts that year, or any Colts team, because they didn’t play them. People who clearly have learning disabilities shouldn’t call other people stupid.
    As for Thompson’s “great drafts”, he has yielded one Pro Bowler out of 44 draft picks between ’05-’08, which was Nick Collins, who was only drafted because Thompson let Darren Sharper walk.
    I find it convenient how you cut off Favre’s playoff wins to the last 12 years, and fail to acknowledge his Super Bowl win and multiple playoff wins when he had a GM in Wolf who actually put talent around him.
    But if you want to start counting playoff wins, how many does Aaron Rodgers have? Oh that’s right, he’s never played in one, because he took over a 13-3 team and led them to a 6-10 record.
    How many playoff games has a Thompson managed team won? What’s that, 1? Only 1 game? I thought a great GM like Thompson would have a slew of playoff victories under his belt. But he has one, and he got it with Brett Favre.
    And good luck getting a playoff win this year, even if they do sneak in, they will have to win on the road. Green Bay is 1-1 in its last 2 road games, against mighty Detroit and Tampa Bay. Playoff teams are a little tougher than Tampa.

  48. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 4:12 PM

    And Ruvell, I never once said I never question Favre. I was one of the first to say he played terribly last week against the Cardinals, he had a really bad game. And it’s not like I liked his indecision about returning, but I accepted it because it was understandable. I know full well he has flaws, his interception record proves it.
    But ultimately, Favre puts winning above all, and does everything in his power to win. It seems as if Thompson doesn’t, because if he did, Favre would still be in Green Bay, and he wouldn’t have offered him $25 million to stay away. I’m sure Ted wants to win, but it’s more important for him to have things done his way.
    When you blindly support Thompson, it just shows that you don’t mind that his ultimate goal isn’t to field the most talented team, but to build a team of “his” guys.

  49. Ruvell100 says: Dec 12, 2009 4:39 PM

    @MajikMan- http://www.packers.com. The Packers won the Super Bowl in ’95-’96. During that year, they lost to the 0-10 Colts. Fact.
    You’re right. Favre has won more playoff games than Rodgers and Thompson. TT has been a GM with the Pack for 4 whole years. Did GM a Seattle team to the Super Bowl. Rodgers has been a starter for 28 games.
    I assume my Grandfather has accumulated more wealth than I have over the course of his life. See if you can catch the point.

  50. Emoney says: Dec 12, 2009 5:00 PM

    When the Packers are up 30-0 against Chicago tomorrow, all you Bears fans will be talking shit about your own team and how pathetic they are. The defense sucks. Cutler and Forte suck. Your top two receivers on your team would be #4 or #5 receivers on another team, at best. Hester is not a receiver. He should stick to returning punts. That’s about all he can do.
    Reality sucks, doesn’t it Bears fans?

  51. footballrulz says: Dec 12, 2009 5:20 PM

    Ruvell-you might want to go check that again.
    Pack won the Super Bowl after the 96 season, played in ’97, they also played in the Super Bowl after the 97 season played in Jan 98, but lost that one,.
    http://www.packers.com/history/super_bowls_and_championships/
    Don’t really mean to get in between you & majik’s little brouhaha here but facts is facts man.

  52. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 5:30 PM

    Ruvell
    Wow. That last post couldn’t be more wrong.
    First, Thompson did not GM the Hawks to a Super Bowl. He never won a playoff game there in 5 years. The year Seattle went to the Super Bowl, Thompson was in Green Bay, ripping the team apart en route to 4-12.
    Second,the Packers did not go to the Super Bowl in 95-96. They didn’t play the Colts in the regular season, and they lost to the Cowboys in the playoffs, which is fact. Here’s the proof idiot. In the 2nd link, click the Super Bowl in the drop box under the postseason tab, the one that says Wildcard Weekend. I wouldn’t explain it so in depth to most, but you’re obviously quite slow, and probably need the extra direction.
    http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule?team=GB&season=1995&seasonType=REG
    http://www.nfl.com/schedules?seasonType=POST&season=1995
    The Packers won the Super Bowl in the ’96 regular season, ’97 Super Bowl. And they did not play the Colts that year either, idiot. This is also fact, and once again, here is proof. Once again, in the 2nd link, click the Super Bowl.
    http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule?team=GB&season=1996&seasonType=REG
    http://www.nfl.com/schedules?seasonType=POST&season=1996
    And I’m aware that Rodgers has only started 28 games. But he also took over a 13-3 team, returning 20 of 22 starters (Favre and Corey Williams). Thompson has been a GM since 2000, this is his 10th year between 2 teams, and he has 1 playoff win.
    It’s hard to believe your Grandfather has accumulated more wealth than that vast fortune you must have from your high paying Arby’s salary. Would you please go away now before you embarrass yourself and the rest of the world’s Packer fans anymore?

  53. jeff says: Dec 12, 2009 5:49 PM

    Calistin says:
    December 12, 2009 11:26 AM
    Jeff, I think you win your own award for thinking the Bears are still “in it.” Wow, just wow.
    ================================
    Mathmatically still in it…..Wow, just wow!

  54. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 6:01 PM

    footballrulz
    Thanks for helping to show Ruvell the truth, but he may be too ignorant to absorb it. Just another in the long line of idiot Pack fans. Intelligent fans like you are few and far between in the land of cheese, and it’s got to be embarrassing to see people like Ruvell giving you a bad rep.

  55. chickenfootishunglikeachicken says: Dec 12, 2009 7:22 PM

    majik man,
    everyone likes to win, but for you to say favre puts winning above all is rediculous. look at last year, he had half ripped off arm and admittedly played hurt. if his primary concern was winning, he would have taken himself out and let the quarterback with the most capability of winning the game play. he single handedly took the jets from playoff contention and cost his coach his job.
    second, if you still believe his only concern was winning, wouldn’t the qb that wants to win so badly have made his decision to retire – play – retire – play a little quicker? wouldn’t he have come to camp as soon as possible? any idiot could tell you that developing that chemistry asap gives you the best chance to win.
    lastly for you. say the vikings fade out this year (just like every other year in their 40+ year existance) and release favre in the offseason and the packers (probably without thompson since tt never would kiss favre’s ass like childo) bring him back to retire a packer like so many players before him, would you be a packer fan again? look we get it, you are a brett favre fan. what team do you cheer for when favre inevitably calls it quits? or will you ask brett who he wants you to cheer for? HOMER

  56. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 8:04 PM

    chickenfootishunglikeachicken
    Even with the injury, Favre gave the Jets the better chance to win over Kellen Clemmens. As for chemistry, Favre played in Green Bay long enough to have chemistry with everyone on the team. And judging by the 10-2 record, I’d say chemistry wasn’t an issue in Minny. And did it occur to you that maybe Favre really hadn’t decided to come back until Chilly begged him to?
    As for cheering for the Pack again, I never will as long as Thompson is there. After he’s gone, and Brett’s retired, I always kind of thought I would return to rooting for Green Bay. But after seeing some of the ungrateful, loud mouthed, ignorant Packer fans over the last year, I’m not so sure I want to be lumped in with such a group. Mock funerals, jersey burning ceremonies, changing street names, what a bunch of classless dirtballs. What an embarrassment to this great state.

  57. Majik Man says: Dec 12, 2009 8:05 PM

    chickenfootishunglikeachicken
    Even with the injury, Favre gave the Jets the better chance to win over Kellen Clemmens. As for chemistry, Favre played in Green Bay long enough to have chemistry with everyone on the team. And judging by the 10-2 record, I’d say chemistry wasn’t an issue in Minny. And did it occur to you that maybe Favre really hadn’t decided to come back until Chilly begged him to?
    As for cheering for the Pack again, I never will as long as Thompson is there. After he’s gone, and Brett’s retired, I always kind of thought I would return to rooting for Green Bay. But after seeing some of the ungrateful, loud mouthed, ignorant Packer fans over the last year, I’m not so sure I want to be lumped in with such a group. Mock funerals, jersey burning ceremonies, changing street names, what a bunch of classless dirtballs. What an embarrassment to this great state.

  58. packers4life says: Dec 12, 2009 8:34 PM

    “Just based on the responses to this article, I’ve deducted that Packers fans are complete douchebags.”
    I think you meant Viking fans.

  59. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 2:53 PM

    badfish69
    Thank you for proving my point.Don’t you have a Favre funeral or jersey burning to go to?

  60. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 3:19 PM

    Also, badfish, what you seem to forget is that Favre took over a 4-12 team, that was 0-2 when Brett took over, and led them tp 9-7. Rodgers took over a 13-3 team and led them to 6-10 with the same roster. Great decision.

  61. badfish69 says: Dec 13, 2009 4:14 PM

    Actually I found the jersey burning and funeral to be quite juvenile, but I guess lump everyone into that stupid radio promotion.
    As far as 13-3 to 6-10 goes, I guess Aaron Rodgers played defense last year too huh? I’m sure you can blame him for being #28 against the run and 29th overall. Epic fail on your part.

  62. badfish69 says: Dec 13, 2009 4:20 PM

    Also it must have been Rodgers fault Crosby missed a game winner at Minny and had a game winner blocked at Chicago. I guess it’s his fault to that he led the team on go ahead drives late in the 4th quarter against both Carolina and Houston only for the defense to break down and let them take the lead right back. I guess it was also his fault that he led them on a go ahead drive against the then undefeated Titans only to never see the ball again.
    Epic epic fail on your part.

  63. Ruvell100 says: Dec 13, 2009 4:37 PM

    Majik,
    Nice one. Got me on the ’95-96 thing. Keep in mind I hardly had pubes back then. But don’t think I don’t remember those years. That’s what got my love for Favre started. Then for me, and for probably 95% of actual Packer fans, his waffling and thinking he was bigger than the Packers got old.
    Did you watch any games last year? If you can blame 6-10 on Rodgers then Brett Favre truly is your God. Do you not see how pathetic it is to give up on your team because of one man?

  64. badfish69 says: Dec 13, 2009 4:47 PM

    Actually why do I even bother? Anyone who blames Rodgers for the record last year obviously didn’t watch the games anyway.
    It’s not like he threw 29 pics and they went 4-12. Oops better shut up. Might hurt some feelings with that one.

  65. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 4:56 PM

    Same defensive players, minus Corey Williams, that played in 2007. And weird, but I checked NFL.com, and it has them at 20th, not 29th, at 334 yds/ game in 2008. Epic lie on your part. Typical though, no actual evidence to support your opinion, so just make stuff up.
    2007, they were 11th, at 313 yds/ game. Not as dramatic a change as you would like to think. The difference was Rodgers, who went 0-8 with a chance to win or tie with under 5 minutes to go. If you don’t believe me, go check the game breakdowns of the 2008 season. I have, because, quite unlike yourself, I check facts before spouting off,

  66. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 5:04 PM

    Ruvell and badfish,
    Again, go check the 2008 Packers game breakdowns. 8 chances to win or tie with 5 minutes or under left. 8 failures by Rodgers, 4 game ending INT’s, and 8 losses.
    And I’m fully aware Brett threw 29 picks in 2005. His team was constantly trailing, because some jack ass of a GM came in, took over a 10-6 playoff team, got rid of 13 of 22 starters, and used his first draft pick on a player who wouldn’t see the field for 3 years. Favre tried to do way too much because his team was so bad. It’s no secret that Favre throws a lot of picks, but he also wins a lot of games.

  67. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 5:07 PM

    And by the way, impressive 7 point win against a terrible Bears team. Just be thankful that Cutler gift wrapped another win for you.

  68. badfish69 says: Dec 13, 2009 5:13 PM

    I don’t have to look at game breakdowns. I actually watched the games. The five games I mentioned above where Rodgers either had them leading late in the fourth or put them in a position to win only for the defense ore special teams to break down are part of that 0-8 number. 2 field goal and three defensive stops and that number is 5-3. Of course it is unfair to expect the defense to stop teams everytime, just like it is unfair to expect Aaron Rodgers to step in and win a Super Bowl. If I remember correctly it took your hero four years before that happened and that was with a GM that actually went out and signed players.
    Don’t you have a Favre blowup doll blowjob party to go to?

  69. Ruvell100 says: Dec 13, 2009 5:20 PM

    Here’s a fact you might want to check, unless you are too busy pretending you are Frank Winters without pants on. A nice, hot, excited, loving Brett right behind you. It is a breakdown of ’05…when with the 6th ranked D, the Packers went 4-12.
    http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=586

  70. badfish69 says: Dec 13, 2009 5:25 PM

    Week 9: at Tennessee Titans
    In the fourth quarter, the Pack tied the game with Crosby making a 38-yard field goal. However, in overtime, Tennessee emerged the victor as Bironas nailed the game-winning 41-yard field goal.
    With the loss, the Packers fell to 4-4.
    Week 10: at Minnesota Vikings
    In the fourth quarter, Crosby increased the Pack’s lead with a 40-yard field goal. However, the Vikings got the lead as RB Adrian Peterson got a 29-yard TD run. Green Bay tried to make a comeback, but Crosby’s 52-yard field goal attempt sailed wide right.
    With the last-second loss, the Packers fell to 4-5.
    Week 13: vs. Carolina Panthers
    In the fourth quarter, Green Bay took the lead as Rodgers hooked up with Jennings on 21-yard TD pass, yet Carolina replied with Williams scored on yet another 1-yard TD run. The Packers would regain the lead as Crosby nailed a 19-yard field goal, but the Panthers pulled away as Williams scored on his fourth 1-yard TD run.
    With the loss, Green Bay fell to 5-7.
    Week 14: vs. Houston Texans
    In the fourth quarter, the Packers took the lead as RB Ryan Grant got a 6-yard touchdown run. However, the Texans replied with Schaub completing an 11-yard touchdown pass and a 2-point conversion pass to wide receiver Andre Johnson. Green Bay would tie the game as Rodgers completed a 9-yard touchdown pass to wide recevier Jordy Nelson, yet Houston pulled away as Brown nailed a 40-yard field goal as time ran out.
    With the loss, the Packers fell to 5-8.
    Week 16: at Chicago Bears
    In the fourth quarter, Mason Crosby made a 28-yard field goal to extend the Packers lead to 17-10, but later in the quarter the Bears tied the game on a 3-yard run for a touchdown by Matt Forté.With less than a minute left, Mason Crosby attempted a field goal to take the lead 20-17 for the Packers but the kick was blocked by the Bears.
    In overtime, the Bears won the coin toss and moved the ball down inside field goal range and Bears kicker Robbie Gould converted a 38-yard field goal for the 20-17 over time win.
    With the loss, the Packers fell to 5-10.
    There it is five games where the Packers were either leading or tied in the fourth quarter only for the defense and special teams let them down. Totally Aaron Rodgers fault.

  71. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 5:42 PM

    I would go back and do the game by game, but you 2 homers aren’t worth the time doing it again. I’ve done it before, while arguing with yet another ignorant Pack fan, and it was kind of a lot of work, way too much to do again for a guy who thinks the ’95 Packers won the Super Bowl, and Ted Thompson was the Seattle GM when they went to the Super Bowl, and another guy who tries to prove his point by blatantly lying about the Packers defensive ranking. I’m done with you 2, but perhaps you 2 should get together for a true meeting of the minds and to plan the next jersey burning.

  72. badfish69 says: Dec 13, 2009 6:14 PM

    Yeah your done with us because you know your wrong about Rodgers being directly responsible for the Packs record last year.
    btw Ted Thompson was not Seattle’s GM when they went to the Super Bowl, yet the team that went to the Super Bowl was made up largely by Ted Thompson acquisitions. What do you think when a GM leaves they get rid of all of his players and get new ones?
    Who will be your favorite player after Brett retires? Drew Brees? Tony Romo? Jay Cutler? Chris Johnson? Tom Brady? Peyton Manning? Must be one of those guys because it sure as hell can’t be Aaron Rodgers.

  73. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 6:58 PM

    Ruvell
    It’s not the fact that you made the chronological mistakes (which is pretty embarrassing), but it’s that you were so adamant in defending your own ignorance. That’s what discredits anything and everything you say. That, and the fact that when you are pressed and antagonized because of your painfully obvious stupidity, you resort to childish name calling, cursing, and gay jokes. It’s pretty clear you have some deeper issues.
    As for the quotes you’re trying to me of saying, only one of those would ever be uttered by me, and that’s that Rodgers is largely to blame for 6-10. It’s there in black and white, 20 of 22 starters return, the defense performed almost equally to how they did in 2007, same coaching staff, 7 less wins.
    And I never once said everyone else is ignorant, just you and a few others, and your childish rants do nothing to disprove my opinion. I feel as if I owe Arby’s an apology for insinuating that they would stoop so low as to hire someone with your clear lack of intellect and ability to function as a normal, civil human being.

  74. Ruvell100 says: Dec 13, 2009 7:23 PM

    Sorry, Majik, I am not pressed for anything to say. I simply call you what you are. Thankfully, this is an internet forum where political correctness doesn’t really matter. I’m not in a business meeting or marketing my company. My wife is upstairs bitching about me not doing the laundry. She is a stay at home mom, so why should I do the laundry during the week?
    No deeper issues, no ignorance of fact, no childish rants. A man who turns his back on his state and it’s franchise to follow one fatally flawed man is, indeed, a complete piece of shit. Peyton Manning is one of the best the NFL has ever seen. Maybe you should follow him after Favre retires.

  75. Majik Man says: Dec 13, 2009 10:54 PM

    Ruvell
    It’s not the fact that you made the chronological mistakes (which is pretty embarrassing), but it’s that you were so adamant in defending your own ignorance. That’s what discredits anything and everything you say. That, and the fact that when you are pressed and antagonized because of your painfully obvious stupidity, you resort to childish name calling, cursing, and gay jokes. It’s pretty clear you have some deeper issues.
    As for the quotes you’re trying to me of saying, only one of those would ever be uttered by me, and that’s that Rodgers is largely to blame for 6-10. It’s there in black and white, 20 of 22 starters return, the defense performed almost equally to how they did in 2007, same coaching staff, 7 less wins.
    And I never once said everyone else is ignorant, just you and a few others, and your childish rants do nothing to disprove my opinion. I feel as if I owe Arby’s an apology for insinuating that they would stoop so low as to hire someone with your clear lack of intellect and ability to function as a normal, civil human being.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!