Interpret This
Article:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/don_banks/10/25/vikes.packers.insider/index.html
The description of the story on SI's NFL page, before you reach the article via the "full story" reads... "The Packers win over the Vikings was more than a Farve-fueled coup. It validated Aaron Rodgers and helped Green Bay take a Lamblow leap forward in the NFC North," according to Don Banks.
SI NFL homepage: check story description
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/?eref=sinav
My question is: How in the Hell did this win validate Aaron Rodgers? Please Packer Trolls help me understand how the 2 INT's and the multiple (back shoulder I'm still confused from a concussion) throw away's validated Aaron Rodgers?
I'm struggling to understand this logic from SI
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
2 INT > 3 INT+PICK 6?
In all honesty, Rodgers did enough to get the win but he wasn’t stellar, Maybe he’s not used to having that much time in the pocket. The key is however, that he made less big mistakes than Favre.
This doesn’t “validate” Rodgers by any means, but what it does for the Packers is finally being able to say they defeated Favre, and that he won’t be undefeated against the Packers and he won’t be undefeated at Lambeau field as the opposition.
But as usual with the media, the QB gets too much blame and too much credit.
It got a monkey off of his back.
That’s pretty big. You can get it off in a pretty way, or an ugly way, but once you give it a banana, you can move on. I think this allows him to move on.
Yeah I commented on that last night
I actually think Aaron Rodger is a very good quarterback — except possibly in handling pressure when game is on the line — but last night was not one of his better games.
That is actually a compliment to him, that he is capable of much better than that.

by 























