OldSchoolSnapper

I'd be hard pressed to name a better one. Cuban is fun, but I appreciate Mark so much.

I don't think BR said he wasn't a good coach; they merely gave a mouthpiece to some folks who said talent carried him. One of things that I thought made the article pretty good was they got perspective from all over. They had some people saying Rodgers was too sensitive, and Ryan Grant saying his sensitivity made him good. They had multiple people saying they had nothing but respect for MM, and a couple that said he was a goon. I think he was and is a good coach. I think GB let him overstay a welcome by about six years. IMO nobody should coach anywhere that long unless your name is Bill Belichick. I think he can still be a good coach somewhere else. I hope he does, personally, just to stick it to Rodgers a little.

I guess I don't see what course of action you'd recommend. If someone from the GB Press Gazette runs this 12 months ago their credential is likely revoked. Nobody is really going to care about that besides them. 98% of the fans would side with the Packers on damn near anything, and the Packers could make their own kool-aid serving newspaper and nobody would really care. If the mayor of Green Bay did something there would be public outrage to help turn the tide, but if you're a Packer you can get away with pretty much anything. The Packers are such an entity here that nobody wants to hear anything bad.

That piece is kind of funny now. Jennings and Matthews drew no ire calling him sensitive back then. He does it now and he must be lying because he's salty. Peculiar.

Where was this(if you happen to recall)? I remember Rodgers actually saying on I think the Mike McCarthy show that he doesn't like it when people say that to him, but I never actually knew if or when that happened. In fact, I thought there was a segment where guys talked about Aaron and they talked about how sensitive he was and they even brought this up. I'm thinking it was Clay and another guy, but I don't remember exactly. What a stupid thing to worry about though. You're regarded as the most physically gifted person to play the position. Who cares if Bar guy #3 thinks you look taller on TV. Get over it. And I guess I'd counter with, why do you care that he cares? If somebody came up to you on the street and commented on something regarding your appearance or the way you look, do you have a right to react negatively to that? Yep. Does he lose that right because he's an athlete? I don't think so. He didn't slug the guy, he politely told him that he didn't appreciate it. Couldn't be less of an issue, IMO. I don't care beyond it making him seem not very relatable. It just makes him look a bit of a tool IMO. I'm bald and people make bald jokes all the time. Couldn't care any less about it. I was glad I didn't have to get haircuts or fix it when I left the house. And I'm just a guy. He is a superstar athlete praised all over the country and some joe blow fan says he looks smaller on TV and that gets under his skin? Just kinda pathetic.

The reason for that is cultural. You can burn some coach in NYC - he is small fish, not royalty. There are a hundred other things to write about that day about maybe 7% of the population cares. That is obviously not the case in Green Bay. Like I said, I think some of that is just life in GB. It's never going to change because that team is life. You can walk outside in NYC while the Yankees are playing in the World Series and have no idea it's even going on. I don't see any realistic way that stops being the case.

I saw him say that as well on likely the same show. But either shortly before or after, I saw it happen on a recording of one of those MACC fund events or something. The guy who said it was totally just a deer in headlights fan, he didn't mean anything insulting, and it really bothered Rodgers. I used to really prefer Rodgers to Favre because I thought he was a better guy. Over time I've just sort of accepted they're both different kinds of jerks. I love watching both play but I don't really like either guy.

Boy do I have sympathy for Matt LaFleur. If this team starts 0-2 he is going to feel the heat of Death Valley.

I've thought Rodgers was a bit of a nut for a few years now. The thing that swayed me was, I can't remember what it was, some kind of charity event where a fan shook his hand and said something like "Wow you look so much taller on TV" and Rodgers replied "I don't appreciate that." I just thought, god, this guy is really insecure and just kind of a twerp.

The first time Jennings said anything it came off as sour grapes. Almost everybody thought that. Now more things continue leaking out that are lending quite a bit of credibility to the stuff he says. I basically never see anyone say he's wrong either. They just say something about how he's salty. That strategy is usually used when you know there's truth in what someone's saying. I think you're missing the point of the 49ers story. That was the impetus for him as far as the moment he knew he wasn't being re-signed by GB. Which is the root of his beef with Rodgers, that he didn't fight to keep him in GB. He has admitted that publicly, which is a pretty transparent thing of him to do. The other weight of the story is that Rodgers would never allow such a joke to be made about him. Which is most likely 100% true.

Kind of a straw man there. Jennings never claimed he was abused and disrespected. His last comments, from yesterday, include him specifically saying he loved his time in Green Bay and it was one of the best times of his life. People seem to ignore when he says that stuff...

Finley is a dope that I think has some kind of vendetta. But I've listened to Greg Jennings speak on this stuff numerous times now, and his comments just don't come off with a lot of animosity or even really all that harshly critical. He's just a guy talking about what his experience was in GB. I think it hurts people that he has anything to say besides all roses. The way Packers fans react to him is more off-putting to me. He wasn't best pals with Rodgers and so the knee-jerk reaction is for nearly everybody to think he has some ax to grind. I just don't see it. He repeats over and over that Rodgers is incredible and even now, is saying he pins more of this on McCarthy than Rodgers. And at least his sticks his name on the stuff he says. The worst thing he says about Rodgers is basically that his head got big and he's too sensitive.

Jennings is the guy that heard the joke so the fact it stuck with him makes me think it was a lot more pointed than you seem to think it was. I think it's case of, in and of itself, he wouldn't be talking about it 7 years later, but it was more likely one of many things that points at those two not really getting along. I think if Rodgers deadpans a comment like that and walks back to the huddle, there's a little more to it than it just being a joke. Maybe Jennings is petty, but Rodgers definitely is. There's only one type of person who's upset about not being picked #1 overall 15 years after the fact, after $200 million and a championship. There's no reason for Rodgers to still care about Alex Smith, and yet he does. This is a person that needed self reflection probably 20 years ago and instead of confronting it has been getting angry at people since. There's something wrong with a person who won't talk to their parents unless they killed somebody or are meth addicts or something. One of these sour relationships is one thing. The amount of scorned people in Rodgers's past speaks for itself. You don't burn that many bridges by being reasonable.

Kinda expecting a hiccup series. Cubs have to start winning more than 20% of their games eventually and we've been abnormally lucky.

If fans want to ignore any bad thing about the Packers, that's on them. The media shouldn't have to. There has been a lot of bad stuff that has happened in sports. The Falcons doctors dispensing painkillers in quantities that were unlawful. Players commiting domestic violence. Dave Kingman being abusive to a female reporter. Ben Roethlisberger's history with women. Ryan Braun's PED suspension and the details around that. The list is very long. Teams shouldn't get to freeze out reporters who choose to write unflattering things about them. They shouldn't get to, but they do. I don't see a really clear alternative. The Packers rule Green Bay. Michael Cohen did write some pretty potent stuff about signing Letroy Guion. I happened to be on a bus that day and heard a group of guys talking about how much they hate Cohen. Just kind of how it rolls in GB. The Gunslinger book gets into this quite a bit about how far some guys went to deify Favre.

The problem is, it's a lot harder to enforce in sports. Someone like Rodgers wins most battles in the court of public opinion. The Packers are afforded the same treatment by the fans. When it's a politician, the expectation is that they answer to the media. Athletes aren't held to that standard.

Rodgers doesn't make throwaway jokes. Up and down the line of people who've personally known him, they'll tell you that everything the guy says is pointed. If he's giving someone doodoo, there's a reason he is doing so. I think it's pretty apparent those two had soured by 2012. You think Rodgers never saw his sister's remarks? And where do you think Rodgers thought she got those ideas? Is GJ petty? Yeah, it sounds like it. But so is Rodgers. Two petty, insensitive guys who couldn't co-exist.

They weren't scooped, the writer of this story covered the Packers for the JS. He saw and heard many of these things while working for them. There is a reason he published it now, and not then. He has nothing to lose writing for BR. The Packers would have revoked his credential for writing something like this 4 years ago.

I used to be in this camp, and it's not just the Packers. Same goes for Brewers/Bucks coverage. But I have come to know a couple sports reporters in recent years, and they have a good point. They do hear things, know things, etc. that are newsworthy but negative to player or coach. If they report that, word gets around and they get frozen out. If you can't do your job, you don't have a job. So it is a fine line. They shouldn't call themselves news organizations, then. Every tv sports department paints that team in such favorable light, it's ridiculous. I get it if you're WTMJ radio or the local Fox station that broadcasts their games. Those stations are "broadcast partners", who will never say a bad word about their business partners. But there are lots of media outlets and this is the smallest of small town teams. Nobody dared to speak of a feud that lots of people knew about? And it was only after McCarthy is gone and Rodgers is at the end of his career that one reporter felt comfortable telling this story? A sports team shouldn't be able to control the message this way for so long. It's a lot more nuanced than this. You can't just go running with every tidbit of information, even if you know it to be true. The really good ones build a relationship where they're able to get sources to understand that sometimes they have to run not so flattering stuff. You can't just bend over for them, but you can't throw slop at the wall either. Fans have this idea that you just gotta be tough and stand up to the team; it just doesn't work that way. That aside, I don't think the JS has been particularly as easy on the Packers as everybody around seems to think. I've read plenty of pieces over the years that are critical of all three major teams. Silverstein in particular has blasted them in columns more than a few times.

Maybe, I guess, but I'm not sure. Jennings was a 2nd round pick from Western Michigan. That is really hard to do. People thought he was a good player obviously, before Rodgers is even part of the picture. I think that is what bothers a lot of these guys, and frankly it would bother me too. He was also declining before he left. He started having injury problems and barely played his final year in GB, and prior to that he was already starting to get pushed out of favor by Jordy. I think being a 30+ WR had more to do with it. He was still a pretty productive player for Minnesota. This is all to say I think he would have done just fine in the NFL with or without Rodgers, but there is no way to ever know that. A lot of WRs came and went without making a squeak, with both Rodgers and Favre. It always bugged me a bit that they were "making" all these guys but they didn't "make" Derrick Mayes or Robert Ferguson or Ruvell Martin or any of these other burnouts. Some players, like Nelson, just live with that annoyance, but Jennings didn't want to.

Rodgers and Jennings are both intelligent. If he makes that joke and it's some dopey player, he'll laugh it off or it goes over his head. Like I said earlier, I think Jennings is actually more like Rodgers than he realizes. Both of those guys had intent behind the dialogue in the specific event at the 49er game. They both come off overly sensitive. Rodgers does not say stuff that isn't deliberate, I think everybody can agree on that. The root of GJ/AR thing I think really comes down to Jennings refusal to "get in line" and remain in Rodgers's shadow. Someone like Jordy Nelson goes along with it because he'd probably prefer to be left alone anyway. Jennings wanted people to see that he was responsible for his own success. I can imagine working your rear off your whole life to get in there and then having people say you're only there because of the QB gets pretty annoying if you let it bother you.

Forcing McGinn out would not make any sense for a struggling newspaper, which is just about all of them. That is pushing a whole lot of clicks out the door. McGinn's big thing was sources outside the team from a career of reporting, and film study. The bulk of his work really didn't rely on the Packers. So I can't see any logical reason they'd want him out. https://totalpackers.com/2017/05/bob-mcginn-heres-job-done/

McGinn didn't want to leave? Huh? The horse's mouth, McGinn's, spoke very adamantly that he left on his own terms. Martin Kaiser begged him to stay and he said no thanks. He wanted to do his own thing, which he's done. Unless I missed something else, he was very, very clear that it was his choice to leave the JS.

I think Finley is a dope. I think Jennings is not very willing to cede the spotlight to his QB but I think there is definitely merit to what he says. I think he worked his tail off and it bothered him that "Rodgers makes everyone great." From his perspective, I find that totally understandable. Not everyone is going to be Jordy or Cobb and deflect praise to the QB. The line about Rodgers telling the 49ers to get Jennings also struck me. Jennings seems a little bit oblivious to the fact that he and Rodgers are more similar than he would want to believe. They both come off to me as hypersensitive individuals. Rodgers is 35 years old; he is who he is. Expecting some kind of drastic self reflection that leads to bliss is just not going to happen. Just like McCarthy never "reined in Favre," contrary to a couple years of fluff reports, nobody is changing Rodgers. What you can do is get the right personalities in the room who know how to manage him without yielding too much power. Maybe they've done that, I don't know. But the article gets into how guys like BJ Raji and Charles Woodson didn't walk in his shadows. Constantly replenishing the roster with 22 year olds who were watching Rodgers dominate while in middle school is gonna have the result you think it is. Rodgers has some personality flaws and the team did not learn from the Favre mistakes. They extended his leash at every sign of conflict much like they did with Favre.

You can bet on Rodgers not taking this constructively.