Rodgers: No Change
By Alex on Jul 05, 2010 with 13 Comments
Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers is opposed to an extended season of any kind. Although I was aware of this about a week ago, I haven’t really addressed the subject until now.
In a recent conversation, a fan asked Aaron what he thought of an expanded season? Rodgers reply was quick and to the point.
From a pure fan’s point of view it’s a hard pill to swallow. Now we have perhaps my favorite Packer voting against something I would love to see happen. Games that count and are on national television are a big part of what I crave as a fan, and knowing that a stand up guy like Rodgers is opposed to the idea leads me to believe it never will happen.
I’m no expert by any means but I understand both sides of the argument, and both sides have valid reason’s for their points of view. It’s sad sometimes how complicated everything has become. I get 80 plus games of basketball, 160 plus baseball games, and I can’t even get two more Packer games? It’s a sad state of affairs.
I’d say more, but sometimes you should just leave well enough alone.
Filed Under: Featured
Comments (13)
Leave a Reply
Cheesehead TV- Packers Defense Faces Pistol Formation on First Public Practice Snap of the Year
- “Never Say Never” on Green Bay Super Bowl
- Railbird Central Podcast: Talkin’ Packers OTAs with Chris Terlop
- Packers Looking to Expand Mike Neal’s Role
- Packers Calendar: OTAs Continue in Green Bay
- Quick Takes from Week 1 of Packers OTAs
- Little Concern About Bulaga’s Hip as He Makes Switch to Left Tackle
- Rookie Offensive Lineman J.C. Tretter Suffers Early Injury
- Only Bears Spend Less Than Packers on UFAs
- Jarrett Bush Open to Playing Safety
I understand that the scheduling system we have currently is really quite perfect with the rotation of teams. Everything fits so well at 16 games. Plus, the NFL is arguably the toughest on a player’s body so I can see why so many players are against the expanded season but I am all for it. They are really only adding one and a six quarters of competitive football since they play half of the last preseason game or more anyway. Regardless, I have yet to hear a viable scheduling program that would allow for an eighteen game season.
I am for it, but can see why it really doesn’t appear to be feasible.
If the dollar signs appeal to the owners, the players’ union, and the sponsors, it is going to happen wither AR wants it or not.
It doesn’t sway my opinion at all…and I totally understand why many are opposed to it. But if it takes a couple thousand names off the waiting list, it helps both the Packers and the fans.
I agree with Aaron. Football is different than baseball. In football, you don’t even have the benefit of a designated hitter, and 18 games just increased the chances for injury.
Each year, teams already have the chance of earning 18 games if they do two things: make it to the playoffs and win.
I would be in favor of eliminating two pre-season games and moving the schedule up two weeks. Therefore, we can have a Superbowl in January again.
Love me some #12. But, he’d better start getting comfortable with the idea.
Goodell has a hard-on to get this done so I gotta believe it will happen; one way or another. As a fan, I love it. More meaningful Football, what’s not to like? They will have to address roster size, IR, possibly a 2nd Bye and compensation, but once the kinks are worked out and a couple years of an 18 game season have passed, I think everyone will see the benefits (increased $$$ for both sides never hurts).
GBP 4 LIFE
[...] Packers Lounge on Aaron Rodger’s recent Twitter comments about an extended season. [...]
[...] is against the NFL’s proposed enhanced schedule notes Alex Tallitsch of Packers Lounge. Tallitsch goes on to write, “From a pure fan’s point of view it’s a hard pill to swallow. Now we have perhaps my [...]
The players are already tired and wore down at the start of the post season. Two more games would mean more players on IR and more players with performance robbing injuries.
The thought of an expanded roster is intriguing, but ultimately it does seem like 2 more chances for your best players to get hurt.
One of the problem with the expanded season is that while games will mean more, they will be decided by more scrubs. The expanded roster proposal is no doubt a reaction to even more sitting of superstars and starters on the bench than we have now so that the best of the best are primed for the playoff run.
Two of the biggest complaints I’ve heard about the NFL is the sitting of starters before the playoffs and how boring it is to watch scrubs play in preseason games. If you expand the schedule, those are the two things you will see more of, not more quality football.
[...] Charles Woodson and Aaron Rodgers, perhaps the Packers’ two most influential players, have said they’re against adding [...]
I wouldn’t expect any starting player to be in favor of the expanded schedule. What’s in it for them? More money, of course, but they already make a lot of money. And the increased chance of injury with an expanded schedule actually jeopardizes their chances of making money.
As a fan, I’m not in favor of it because 16 weeks is enough for me. I like it that the NFL has thus far kept the length of its season and the size of its playoff field at reasonable levels, unlike the NBA and NHL.
More Packers games makes me happy. Even if the quality of play is a little diminished. I think I’m allowed to think like a thinkless fan.
Get rid of the fourth preseason game, add it to the regular season and add an extra bye wk,every ones happy.