I'm sorry, but after watching each game of the playoffs, and several of the other games from the last few weekends, GB most certainly does not have a terrible OL. And if their OL is considered terrible, then the Bears' OL is absolutely criminal. More often than not, Rodgers has plenty of time to throw the ball. And several times a game he is sitting in the pocket unmolested for several seconds. The former happens much more frequently than it does for the Bears, and the latter virtually never happens.

 

I agree that Rodgers has something Cutler doesn't, whatever it is, but I am sick of seeing this false comparison to Green Bay as if their OL is as bad as Chicago's OL. No way.

The Packers oline is brutal. One of the worse in the league. The line is almost as bad as the Bears oline. Rodgers is hit as much (if not more) then Cutler.

The Packers oline is brutal. One of the worse in the league. The line is almost as bad as the Bears oline. Rodgers is hit as much (if not more) then Cutler.

Depending on which stat set you use, Rodgers was hit just about as much as the Bears QB's or more than the Bears QB's. They gave up more sacks, had more tackles for a loss, and had a weaker running game.

Careful now boys, we wouldn't want to make Cutler accountable for his play now would we?

Agreed. On top of that, his hits are not brutal... Unlike those taken by Jay.

 

Rodgers' OL isn't terrible. He just likes to stand back and take his time. Occasionally that results in sacks. He rarely ever only has 1-2 seconds to throw the ball.

 

I noticed ex-Bears Corey Graham starting for the Ravens and doing a damn fine job, always liked him and wish he was still with us although hard to see how he could supplant either of our excellent CB's....

 

Also noticed ex-Bears Brandon Lloyd with the Patriots, wouldn't mind having him back at all...

Rodgers' OL isn't terrible. He just likes to stand back and take his time. Occasionally that results in sacks. He rarely ever only has 1-2 seconds to throw the ball.

 

Thank you. The comparisons to the Bears' OL are just not legit. As I've said a million times, simple stats like hits and sacks don't paint the entire picture. Watch a game and you can plainly see that Rodgers, more often than not, has plenty of time to throw the ball.

I don't know if the Packers line is better or worse than the Bears, but I do know they are not good, and they not been very good for most of Rodger's career.

I don't know if the Packers line is better or worse than the Bears, but I do know they are not good, and they not been very good for most of Rodger's career.

They are better. Rodgers gets to run his full arsenal of plays. Bears can only run deep routes when the D is geared for the run or in max protect.

I'm sorry, but after watching each game of the playoffs, and several of the other games from the last few weekends, GB most certainly does not have a terrible OL. And if their OL is considered terrible, then the Bears' OL is absolutely criminal. More often than not, Rodgers has plenty of time to throw the ball. And several times a game he is sitting in the pocket unmolested for several seconds. The former happens much more frequently than it does for the Bears, and the latter virtually never happens.

 

I agree that Rodgers has something Cutler doesn't, whatever it is, but I am sick of seeing this false comparison to Green Bay as if their OL is as bad as Chicago's OL. No way.

 

That's correct whereas it seemed on each play one of our Olinemen would mess up their assignment the Packers could more often string together several good plays. They had protection issues but it wasn't consistent on every play like Cutler faced. Cutler always knew there would be a breakdown he just never knew where it was coming from. I do think some of that stabilized the last few games of the season (i.e. Scott was better than Carimi at RT) but by then it was too late.

Come on boston now ur starting to show ur age. I feel old being here since pixote showed me the way back in 05

 

haha, it has been a while hasn't it. I cant remember if we had an OLine back then either

To the people who say GB OL = CHI OL, of the week 17 starters on both lines, which Bears' OL would you take over which GB OL, spot by spot? I'd MAYBE take Garza. That's it.

To the people who say GB OL = CHI OL, of the week 17 starters on both lines, which Bears' OL would you take over which GB OL, spot by spot? I'd MAYBE take Garza. That's it.

Yup! That's it...

To the people who say GB OL = CHI OL, of the week 17 starters on both lines, which Bears' OL would you take over which GB OL, spot by spot? I'd MAYBE take Garza. That's it.

 

Case closed, your honor.