Musings on the 2013 Packers without Rodgers compared to 2011 Colts

[OffensivelyPC]

I think even with Peyton the Colts would of failed to make the play offs in 2011. You were a pretty bad team, even if you lost a lot of close games.

 

I also think there was some front office truth to sucking for Luck.

?? So with Peyton, we would have been bad enough to be in the running for Luck, but because we lost him, it was a clear and cut case of tanking?  Are you on drugs?

 

Bottom line is, we either had a chance at Luck or we kept Peyton.  I don't know how you teach your kids in Boston, but it's not quite that stupid.

[amfootball]

Without Rodgers the Packers wouldn't win a game. Outside of Clay Matthews and Shields the Packers don't have that much talent. The wr's are good but not great, Rodgers makes them look better then what they really are. The Colts still had Freeney, Mathis, Wayne, Garcon, Saturday, Castonzo,Diem, Collie, Clark and Bethea. With just an average QB we would have won 8 games that year, a lot of the games were competitive. As bad as we were in 2011 we were still a much better team then the Packers without Rodgers.

Good post and I agree. Colts were a better team in 2011 but had no one at the helm. Packers are garbage outside of Eddie Lacy.

[JlynRN]

I think even with Peyton the Colts would of failed to make the play offs in 2011. You were a pretty bad team, even if you lost a lot of close games.

 

I also think there was some front office truth to sucking for Luck.

 

     

 

oh look it's **THIS** topic again  ROFL !!!

[smittywerb]

 

That whole anti-free agency plan the Packers run and using the draft every year to build on while giving mega contracts to useless players like A.J. Hawk has not done them any good.

 

Reminds me of a certain someone that used to be here.