BillScottCanRake

If your dividing line is Oshkosh to Stevens Point (Hwy 10) rather than Green Bay to Wausau (Hwy. 29), we may be hitting the "painting with too fine a brush" portion of the discussion. As someone who has spent more than half of his life in communities between Hwy. 10 and Hwy. 29, I tend to go with Hwy. 29 as the dividing point. If I had ever lived significantly further north than that, I may have a different boundary line. I am not arguing against HWY 29, or really for or against any other landmark. I just answered the question that was asked. I use HWY 10 because my dad and I fished muskie, and the DNR used it to divide the state into north south zones which was important to those fishermen.

I always used HWY 10 because it divided the state into northern and southern zones for people who fish for muskies. Wisconsin DNR Musky Fishing

Hopefully this image of Sterling Sharpe after catching a 14-yard pass in 1989 makes up for him not appearing in this thread earlier.

#CrewIn6

3T0 and BF.net legend, with 18 HR and just over 10,000 career posts. http://i.imgur.com/Qvlc3YH.jpg

All time free-swinger. http://i.imgur.com/EhVMGqM.jpg

My house has been empty tonight, so I watch a few Bucks related videos, one called "Finding Giannis", one being a recap of the Finals, and the other about Game 6. I can say 20+ days later I am still enjoying the heck out of this. It is still a bit surreal to watch and realize they really did win it. Giannis talks in the video about him (which I think was from 2019) he is afraid he is going to wake up and him being an NBA player will just be a dream. I totally understand that; there was this little part of me that was worried when watching the Finals recap maybe they didn't really win it. Which made the highlights from game 3, 4, 5, and 6 just a bit sweeter. My childhood sports experience was built around the 1982 Brewers and the late 1970s and 1980s Packers. I remember thinking after the World Series that losing wasn't a big deal because the Brewers would play in one again. As I got older, and the Brewers didn't return to the WS, and I watched the Packers mired in mediocrity or worse, I began to realize 1982 was a big deal. I was 23 in 1996 and enjoyed that whole season, especially the playoffs and the Super Bowl. I must have watched Super Bowl 31 three times a week through March, not quite believing it actually happened. 2010 was similar, though it was probably around the New England game before I thought it could happen again. But this Bucks team, given everything that has taken place the last several years, might be the sweetest one I've been around. It sort of makes me wonder just how great it will be when the Brewers break through someday.

There is a lot to try to unpack from his presser. I am not sure I've got the the energy to convey all of my feelings on the topic, because I think there is a lot of gray in the differences between Rodgers and the front office. As a Packer fan, there is plenty of blame to go around. One thing I noted is Rodgers seemed genuinely sad at times when he spoke today, and I think he does care about the Packers. Rodgers has always been an impressive speaker, and since I don't have a personal relationship with him I can't speak to why he was sad. Maybe it was because he didn't get his way, or maybe because he really does deeply care about the team and he's sad he can't impact them in the way he'd hoped. Or maybe it is because he really did want to play his entire career in Green Bay and he now knows that is unlikely. Whatever the reason and wherever the truth lies, I think the sadness was real.

Because Badger Basketball would be in between the Packers and Bucks. Also, I am not sure the basketball team will win their second championship in three years. If that happens we'll be talking about the Gard Dynasty and people will be saying "Bo who?" Seriously, I am really excited to have a semi-normal college football and basketball season this fall. I think the football team is going to be really good, but OSU is still OSU. It could be a fun fall.

Why not the Brewers in October, the Badgers in January, the Packers, and then the Bucks again?

That is amazing... Winning tonight is about the perfect way to end this run.

If we can agree on a couple of things, I think Davante Adams would do OK in Green Bay in 2022 whether the quarterback is Rodgers or Love. We just need to agree: 1. Adams can get open against anyone. 2. Matt LaFleur's offense does a better job getting the ball to their playmakers than Mike McCarthy's. 3. Jordan Love is better than Brett Hundley. I realize the jury is still out on Love, but if his floor is "better than Brett Hundley", Adams can do damage with Love playing quarterback. Adams caught 45 for 545 and 5 touchdowns in 8 games catching passes from Brett Hundley in Mike McCarthy's offense. I could see Adams playing the Sterling Sharpe role Sharpe played for Favre when he was getting his feet wet in '92-'94. If that's the case, he's going to catch a lot of passes for a lot of yards and score a lot of touchdowns.

Buying new clubs won't make you better, but replacing older or otherwise ill-suited clubs with equipment more suited to you will help play to your true skill level. I am not a good golfer, but tweaking my equipment has limited my badness and made the game more enjoyable. The two best purchase I made are my Sterling single length irons and getting fitted for my putter. Having single length irons has helped my practice and simplified my iron play. Hitting my 5 iron is the same as my 7i iron or my wedge, so when I practice with an iron I am essentially practicing with 8 of my 14 clubs. My best shots, when I hit the center of the club, aren't any better, but I have eliminated 2-3 demoralizingly bad shots and replaced them with mediocre ones. Hitting less crap shots isn't the same as hitting more good shots, but it has still helped. The other thing that helped was getting fit for my putter. I had always played a bladed putter of 35", and the putter that came out of my fitting is a 33.5" TaylorMade Spider. The shorter shaft put my eyes more over the ball, and the mallet head plus the alignment line have all helped me start the ball more online. I am putting better and holing more putts. A few weeks ago I found a Triple Track ball and used it on the last few holes of my round and holed two longer putts. I still am pretty bad at golf, but for three holes I felt like I couldn't miss a putt. It was really fun.

[sarcasm]Don't make us ban you for such a blatant voilation of forum rules. You know you can't avoid the swear filter by using obvious replacements like this.[/sarcasm]

The Cubs scored 7 runs in the top of the 1st inning today...and lost 15-7. They are the 2nd team in modern MLB history (since 1900) to score 7+ runs in the 1st inning and lose by 7+ runs. On April 26, 1976, the Giants scored 7 in the 1st inning and also lost 15-7. https://t.co/06q7ZXH9cI Since this is an optimism thread, I read this as the Brewers are the second team to win a game by 7+ runs after giving up 7 or more runs in the first, and the first team to do so in 45 years. This one was nice.

You can tell effort from reading the box score? Which column is that? [sarcasm]I found it. It could be a work in-progress, tho.[/sarcasm]

I don't think it is though. There are people who are making a big deal out of Rodgers decline in order to justify the way the Love pick went down. I think that there's really not one part of the whole that's a separate discussion. Each part makes up individual pieces of the puzzle, but they all tell small pieces of the whole story. I'm not sure how I can explain this in a way that makes sense. It makes sense to me, but that doesn't do anyone else any good. I work in software, which I know isn't the NFL, but a huge part of my job is making sure our current software does what it needs to do while also making sure long-term development goals are met. At points, it isn't possible to do both, and that is when "hard" decisions need to be made. When we have our retrospectives, we try to evaluate things at two different levels: Decision and Result. Was the decision a good decision based upon the information at the time? Would you make the same or a similar decision because it was the right thing to do? And was the result desirable? We have had instances of making the right decision with the result being undesirable, and some instances where the wrong decision was made but we got lucky with a positive result. We can live with good decision, bad result because more good decisions lead to fewer bad results than good results coming in spite of poor decisions. So when I look at what happened in 2018 and 2019, I didn't see a "bad" Aaron Rodgers, but I did see one that, for all the reasons you mentioned and more, appears to be declining. Based upon the information available after the 2019 season (his age, his trends, his ability to use his incredible physical gifts to get him out of bad situations), I feel the decision to add a quarterback the team can look to be effective as a long-term starter if required was solid. If Love turns out to be a bust, that means the team picked the wrong player, but I don't fault them for the decision to move in that direction. I do understand it isn't that simple, because the Packers picked a specific quarterback in part because of their evaluation of Love, so that factors into the "decision" part of the equation. Personally, I have not seen enough of Love to know what I think. I am excited to see him this pre-season and hope he plays a lot regardless of what happens with Rodgers because I will be able to make some decisions based upon my own observations. I'm not sure it is fair to categorize all fans OK with drafting a quarterback as having changed their narrative. I am sure it is true for some, but I equally sure there are lots of people who just feel like having a plan in place, even if it is rather loose and fluid, is better than not having one. And for those people the narrative hasn't really changed. Personally, I still want Aaron Rodgers to be amazing and a Packer, and I want Jordan Love to be amazing and a Packer. I am sensitive to change management and I know trying to live in both the present and the future is messy, but the best thing for the Packers is for both those guys to remain a Packer and both be amazing if they can make that work. I agree with everything here. I hope you are wrong about Love, but I don't have anything to challenge your opinion.

Yeah.... People are rewriting the narrative to make it sound like 18/19 Rodgers was Jay Cutler bad, (straw man!) But he was still 'really good' instead of one of the top 3 QBs in the league. While I think perhaps some are exaggerating Rodgers play in 2018/19, there was/is enough real uncertainty about Rodgers to justify drafting a quarterback. I think all of these statements are true: 1. Rodgers 2018 and 2019 seasons were not as good as his previous seasons, suggesting he may have entered a period decline. 2. Rodgers 2018-2019 was still good, (still very good in 2018) but not a an MVP level guy. 3. Rodgers is talented enough he could play at a high level for a number of years, but old enough he might not (See Favre, Brett, 2005-2010). 4. Rodgers current contract gives the Packers an out after 2021, and expires after 2023, when he will be 40. 5. At the time Love was drafted, there was less certainty about the future of the QB position in Green Bay than there had been since 2008. 6. Love was drafted to have a player management liked and projected to be a long term answer at the position if/when that is what was required. 7. Love does not have to replace an effective Rodgers. 8. Rodgers could outlast Love in Green Bay or price himself out of Green Bay if he plays well enough. Trying to predict how well Rodgers is going to play year-to-year gets harder and harder every year because Father Time is still undefeated. Having a plan if things go south, especially one you can pivot away from if Rodgers plays like an MVP until he's 40, seems like a decent idea. How the Love pick was executed (trading up, making that player Love, etc) is a different discussion. Yes, the drafting a quarterback and drafting Love specifically are intertwined, but if Love isn't who management thought, we can look back on 2020 and say "Picking a quarterback was a good decision, but they got the wrong guy" or something.

I'll go with 16-10 with one rain out to be re-scheduled after July 1.

To add to what Snapper and others have said, Rodgers was 24-39 for 304 yards and 3 touchdowns for a rating of 111.5 in Super Bowl 45 against the NFLs best defense. However, this doesn't account for a number of drops which either killed drives or took points off the board. Dusty Everly at Cheesehead TV did a story on those drops and what it could have done for Rodgers. I won't spoil too much from the article, but Everly estimates Rodgers lost at a minimum 5 completions and about 80 yards. If you want to take the best results from each drop, he could have added as many as 150 yards and 2 touchdowns. 29-39 for 381 and 3 TDs is a 130 rating 28-37 for 451 and 5 TDs is a 154 rating All in all, Rodgers did his part and more.

Well assuming you have a 50/50 shot of converting the 4th, then a 50/50 shot of converting the 2, then a 50/50 shot of keeping Brady from driving into FG range, then a 50/50 shot of winning in OT, that only leaves you with a 6.25% chance of all 4 happening. Obviously those are just rough estimates and there are other small possibilities and variables but it illustrates how many things you still need to go right to win a game down 8 and what I meant by there were no good options. Yeah, my comment was more about having 4th and goal from the three-ish was a better position to try to score 8 points and 4th and goal from the 8+. But you are right, even getting the game to even leaves them a ways to go. The Seattle game from 2014 shows that.

Every team has a selection of four or five plays in their game plan to use on 2-point conversions, plays they will have practiced during the week and are put in for that opponent. I am sure they could have used one of those plays on 4th down and then another to go for 2 with a reasonable chance of converting.

Baseball was dropped after the 1991 season. I went to their last home game, and all I remember was it was cold and gloomy and rainy and no one at the game seemed to actually care about the game. Suzy Favor was there (I think her future husband was on the baseball team) and she was getting far more attention than the game was. In addition to the Title IX and revenue issues, Wisconsin (the university) doesn't have much of a baseball tradition. Their last conference championship was in 1950, and if this list is accurate, not many alumni made the majors. A lot has changed within the athletic department since 1991, and maybe a new baseball team would be more successful than it was before. But starting up a sport which will probably be at best revenue neutral no matter how successful on the field probably will never happen. EDIT: The original list might not be accurate. Baseball-Reference has this list, which includes HOFer Addie Joss.