Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Aaron Rodgers: Some rules trending in the 'wrong direction'

By Category

Aaron Rodgers: Some rules trending in the 'wrong direction'

-- Take it from the victim of his own rule: Aaron Rodgers is just as confused by the NFL's blatant complacency with the whole "roughing the passer" debacle as you are.

The Green Bay Packers quarterback got to experience this newfound privilege firsthand Sunday against the Minnesota Vikings. Linebacker Eric Kendricks tackled Rodgers -- just the way he was supposed to and the way most players are taught at the pee-wee level -- after Rodgers had released the ball, only to be cited for roughing the passer.

It was the first of two calls that afternoon, the latter being the more infamous of the pair.

A linebacker on the opposing side, Clay Matthews, took his shoulders to Vikings quarterback Kirk Cousins' mid-section after he released the ball as well, even putting his hand out to brace the fall to ensure his body weight doesn't land on Cousins and drive him into the ground.

Yet, Matthews was flagged and the Vikings were rewarded with new life along with a fresh set of downs.

"We enjoy the protection below the knee and above the shoulders, but I don’t know many quarterbacks who want those calls," Rodgers told on Wednesday. "There are very few opportunities in the game for us to show any type of toughness. We’re not getting hit every play."

Rodgers, who went 30-of-42 for 281 yards and a touchdown, doesn't believe Kendricks' hit on him should've been flagged either.

"There’s a goal to limit these hits, but they’re pretty obvious when you see them," Rodgers said. "A guy picking somebody up at full weight on them. What do you say to Clay? His head is out of it, his hand is on the ground; that’s not roughing the passer. Same thing with Kendricks, what do you say to him on that?

"I didn’t get up off the ground thinking, 'where’s the penalty?' I saw a late flag and couldn’t believe there was a penalty on the play"

The league's goal was to build some form of forcefield around quarterbacks -- not just Rodgers -- to keep them upright and prevent them from suffering unnecessary hits. However, this presents an almost impossible standard for most defenders.

A year ago, tackling mechanics such as ones portrayed by Kendricks and Matthews on Sunday would've been in a teaching tape for what to do. Now, the NFL is using them to teach what not to do.

Rodgers played Sunday after being questionable on the injury report with a left knee injury that, even throughout the course of this week, is still undergoing extensive rehab. 

Even with his own limitations, Rodgers plays the most premier position on the field. There's no surprise in the league's stance of protecting these players, but it was the seemingly inept handling of the entire ordeal.

"Some of the rules I think help, but some of the rules maybe are going in the wrong direction. I know they’re trying to think about the progress of the game and the safety and stuff, but it’s still a collision sport and those to me are not penalties, on Clay or on Kendricks."


Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (81) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Is that interview on video? Maybe the NFL should mail that one around to teams as an example.

dobber's picture


4thand1's picture

Yes he did it in front of his locker, just saw it a little while ago.

PAPackerbacker's picture

This is exactly why there needs to be a replay on penalty calls in the NFL. The football players need to make game changing calls not the refs. Change the idiotic rule and make a penalty that changes possession, nullifies a TD, or nullifies a first down reviewable and/or reversible. All the teams deserves nothing less than a fair and true evaluation of the game as it progresses. Replays are used to determine any other questionable call by a ref in the NFL. Why not have a penalty replay as well? It is not undermining the authority of the refs. It is making the game fair and justifiable to every player, every team, every coach, and every fan that loves the sport of football. Get it right NFL,

Turophile's picture

The officials after the game endorsed the penalty call on Matthews and said it would be used for training purposes. Replay would not have helped at all.

Refs need re-educating on what should be called and what should NOT be called. There will always be calls that could have gone either way, but this was clearly a form tackle.

It was not too high (above the collarbone), not too low (tackling the legs), not lifting and driving the opponent down (QB was coming up off his feet when the tackle arrived), not putting most of your weight on the QB when following through (he was torquing off the QB and bracing on the ground with his free arm).

Just read that last paragraph again, this is how difficult it is to make a tackle on the QB without getting a penalty......and when you DO tackle avoiding all of the STILL get a penalty. The Interpretation of the rules needs to be changed quickly, or two bad things will happen.

Firstly, if the rules continue to be applied this way you will get crazy stuff happening, like the Mike Daniels tackle where he had the QB in his grasp, and then just let him go.

Second, players will get so frustrated at being penalised, even for a form tackle, some are going to say "f*** it" and just smash into the QB anyhow, driving him into the dirt with a high tackle, low tackle, lift and plant, because if he is going to get a penalty anyway HE MIGHT AS WELL GET ONE HE DESERVES.

Matt Gonzales's picture

Except I believe the new rule also allows for ejections and fines for egregious hits.

dobber's picture

The fines were happening anyway.

Turophile's picture

@Matt Gonzales.
Even with ejections, given the lopsided importance of QBs these days, it's probably worth being ejected, if you knock any good or very good QB out of the game, or at least give him 'happy feet'. If the NFL gets to that stage, it has given itself needless extra problems.

I don't ever want to see the game get to the point where someone completely ignores the rules, because they feel even if they do things fairly, they will still be penalised. That way ends in a steady 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' (insert NFL for Roman).

dobber's picture

I don't want more replay. I think people all agree that they want games that move and flow. I want rules that can be appropriately and effectively implemented by human officials in real time.

Turophile's picture

Too much replay is a bad thing, while SOME replay helps correct mistakes. What you don't want, is refs on the field calling for validation on plays too often, just to avoid the resposibility of having to make a call themselves.

What I want is a 'natural' game, one where neutral fans watching the game would think it was pretyy fairly called. I'm not digging into the refs for 'wrong' decisions on close calls, that's a part of football, but they need to be allowed to make the 'natural' call, one that should be obvious to most fans who don't wear their own teams blinkers.

Doing this gives the refs MORE power, not less (as many would argue). They should be empowered to make the right call, not a bogus call because some officials behind the scenes have forced on them an unnatural emphasis, causing ridiculous results.

dobber's picture

Well-stated, Turo-

Tundraboy's picture

"What you don't want, is refs on the field calling for validation on plays too often, just to avoid the resposibility of having to make a call themselves."

I think that's heart of the problem. Refs need to be given the power to do their job which assumes that they are experienced and have clear-cut rules which is certainly not the case. Therein lies the problem with this overly cumbersome bureaucratic process, where the refs are constantly looking over their shoulders and of course they're going to abide by their employer even though they still have to endure the Wrath of the fans.

Bearmeat's picture

I think Belichick had it right (again) 8 years ago when the CBA was being negotiated. Let the head coach challenge literally anything 2x throughout the game. You get a 3rd if you get the 1st two right.

That would also have the side benefit of keeping MM and ARod from wasting timeouts.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Or, just reorganize commercial breaks and use the sponsor time to review any call they are likely to have F'd up. The amount of dead time in a 3.5 hour football game is enough to get most things right.

Tundraboy's picture

Exactly. Plenty of time.

Minniman's picture

Totally agree Bear.

The increases in camera image quality and viewing angles means that it can now easily support such a change - the NFL needs to embrace this via increased scope for coaches challenges or bunker advice to on-field referees.

They also need to incentivize a defender to play for the ball not the QB....... get thinking Rog..... that's why you get paid the big bucks!

Side comment: Aaron , you are now regrettably too expensive to test your toughness........ what a sad comment to have to make!

Lphill's picture

It's going to continue all season the NFL is slow to make adjustments, it will drag on , permission from the owners , the players association, put together a panel , no easy fix.

The TKstinator's picture

Lots of folks think the Minnesota game was fixed.

Rebecca's picture

Lot’s of folks.... oh my!

Tarynfor12's picture

This all sounds good from Rodgers, right up to the moment in a game when he gets sacked again as like with Kendricks or Matthews. Then looks for the flag and then everyone can scream why it wasn't and the Packers got robbed again.
How fast does a Goose forget about the Gander?
We may find out Sunday.

The TKstinator's picture

I remember when the Goose pitched for the Yankees and the Gander played second base for the Brewers.

dobber's picture

WINNER #2!!!

Coldworld's picture

So you are arguing that the NFL is correct?

His point is that sometimes one should look for a flag and not get it, specifically one should not be thrown under the circumstances he cited.

Seems like he believes that the QB should expect to be tackled within certain parameters. I for one applaud him for standing up and saying that.

While no one wants a star QB injured, few of us would care to watch a flag football league. I think Rodgers understands that football cannot move too far in that direction and maintain it’s allure.

Tarynfor12's picture

The parameters set by a QB to be sacked are fluid depending on the game situation.

Minniman's picture

A sad but true observation Tarynfor12

Rebecca's picture

“Parameters” in flux maybe.

Turophile's picture

Tarynfor, even knowing your reputation for silly comments, this one still manages to exceed the limits of my medication.........

dobber's picture

Even when protective rules were minimal, QBs taking hard or late hits were looking for flags and questioning the officials. What has really changed there?

RCPackerFan's picture

Except neither Cousins or Rodgers looked for flags after those hits..

That should be telling...

Rebecca's picture

You’re so cute!

Since '61's picture

It is good to see Rodgers speak out as he has. Maybe more players should do the same although I doubt that the league will listen anyway.

As long as the money is rolling in this league will do whatever they want. Thanks, Since '61

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Actually, each percentage point up or down in viewership and merchandise sales equals billions in revenue for both owners and players, and fan disgust over rules like this can cause a little shift in the market.

I recommend both the owners and players' union take Rodgers's words to heart. You never want your market--us--to be complaining in the breakroom at work about your product.

Happier customers equals safer revenue percentages.

Since '61's picture

ALP - you are correct that small percentage changes in viewership and sales will impact revenues either up or down. The NFL knows this and they have been and continue to transition their product to their current and future market segments.

To the NFL that means the FFL players and now the gambling segments, at least. Start them while they are young and impressionable before they appreciate the finer points of the game with high scores and big plays and then reel them in with FFL and legalized gambling and you probably have even a casual fan watching games for most of their lives. And they no longer need to stay at home to watch because they can watch on their tablets and smart phones, etc.

If they do not have loyalty to a particular team as we do with the Packers all they need is access to NFL Redzone where they can see all the big plays and scoring they want without understanding the ebb and flow of a game and what it actually requires to make the scoring plays. And that is all the league wants them to see. Big plays, scores, excitement, dancing in the end zone, Lambeau leaps, etc.

Yes, they may lose some of their viewership from older, traditional fans like myself but they have already made their billions off of me and the other fans like myself. They see their future money coming from the current and next generation of fans and they believe the game they are creating is what those fans want to see. They are doing what many other industries are doing and have done. They are transitioning to the market segments they hope will bring them their money for next 10-20 years.

Pete Rozelle did the same thing back in the late 50s and early 60s when he transitioned the league and its audience to TV when he realized that was where his audience was going, especially after the 1958 title game between the Colts and NY Giants. He realized that TV was the perfect medium for the NFL. He cashed in for the league big time with the network TV deals and then capitalized on instant reply when that started in the mid 60s. The difference is that Rozelle did not ruin the game or compromise the integrity of the game to make the transition. He let the players play. Now that approach has been flipped and the game is compromised for the "new" revenue streams.

I'm sure that the NFL has a SWOT analysis that includes the potential threat for lost fan participation but they can mitigate that threat with higher prices, more changes to the rules and/or safer equipment and other factors. The only things that I can see that can seriously hurt the NFL at this point are; 1- a long and bitter work stoppage maybe in 2021 over the next CBA, 2- less revenue from the next network TV negotiations but I doubt it, 3- a disastrous economic recession/depression making the current ticket prices and salaries unsustainable or 4 - some on field crisis over player safety. To me the most likely is a work stoppage crisis but anything can happen.

Until then fans like myself will become further disenfranchised until we leave altogether. Speaking for myself it's getting closer and closer to no loss anyway. Thanks, Since '61

cheesycowboy's picture

Fantastic analogy Since'61.
As the memories fade of the Black and Blue division, the neo NFL is the rise of saturation and cash flow.
When will the NFL Hall of Fame be taken down by PCness? Sincerely,,

Jamie Freier's picture

Talk about hitting the nail on the head. Thanks for the post. Also, why not have players wear the bigger pads like the ones from the 90s if they’re so concerned with player safety? But it’s like you wrote: it’s all about scoring, not hitting, defense, or toughness.

Guam's picture

The money will continue to roll in until 2023 when the TV contracts will be renegotiated. Viewership is down 18% and while a large chunk of that is due to the anthem protest, some of the decline started before then and that decline I suspect is associated with the decline in watchable football. I used to be a football junky and now only watch the Packer games. It is hard to watch games when they are determined not by the players but by the zebras.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Actually, viewership was surging until 2 years ago, but I agree the problem extends beyond the protests. While I agree with some rule changes, they're trying to micromanage the game.

That's less fun to watch. Tackling a QB shouldn't be a capital offense. Not all contact is pass interference. Jeez, sometimes it seems the NFL just wants to remove defenses from the field altogether.

One more issue I have: Records. How can we take seriously any of the current offensive records being set? What would Dan Fouts have done to defenses shackled by today's insane rules? How about Jerry Rice? Barry Sanders? Kellen Winslow?

It also goes the other way. How many sacks would Von Miller and Khalil Mack have under old rules? How many INT's would young studs like Jaire Alexander rack up without seeing them called back on ridiculous calls? This kid is like a wide receiver back there.

Might as well throw out the record books altogether. They're barely playing the same game anymore.

Since '61's picture

Without defensive play they are only playing half of the game.
Thanks, Since '61

Guam's picture

Actually ALP, viewership was growing until three years ago when it "unaccountably" dropped 2%. Then the anthem protest hit and viewership has declined by 18% in total from its peak. What I haven't seen is any demographic or age breakdown of where the decline is coming from. I suspect Since '61 is pretty close in his analysis that the league is losing older viewers in exchange for appealing to younger viewers. I have no facts or figures to back that up, but my business gut tells me that is a reasonable explanation.

It will be interesting to watch the NFL over the next few years as it reacts to the viewership decline and the rules bruhaha's.

Lare's picture

I would guess the opposite, I think the majority of NFL fans are older ones that grew up with football. Look at the fans in the stands at NFL games and you'll see a lot more older ones than younger ones.

Younger fans would much rather play Madden or other electronic football games that are decided without all the BS calls. The Baby Boomers have already started walking away from football, if that continues the NFL will have a lot bigger problem than they currently have.

Rebecca's picture

It’s also very expensive to go to games. People take their kids to baseball but not many to football. Of course baseball has like 81 home games.

Barazinho's picture

I'd like to see numbers that take total viewership into account, ie, including streaming. Broadcast viewing is going down across the board, but streaming is increasing exponentially.

Guam's picture

The problem for the league is how do you monetize streaming? They will eventually figure out a way, but right now I don't think they are getting much money from that source.

Handsback's picture

It seems that the NFL is in some sort of self-destruct mode. Their rules are way too subjective and trying to get it perfect, is making it worst. At the same time ignoring major improvements that could be implemented like challenging a PI call. Why shouldn't they be reviewable?
Maybe the NFL has run its course....

fastmoving's picture

why should they damage here own product. like every business they try to put the best product out there possible.

but there are a lot of restiction you have to be aware of. costs, safty, long term prospectives…….

there is no win win and you can do it right to everyone. they will make misstakes, like every business but its stupid to think they dont try to put the best product out there they can.
I understand the Nfl intensions too. so the idea of the rules change was to protect the qb better, because its less attractiv when the beste 7 Players are on IR every year and parents wont let here kids play because of CTE. the game is faster and moore athletic than ever before, the bodys are bigger and injury accure .

so there is a lot whats factors in in all that dessicions and how it would be handled, now and in the future. but there no easy fixes and thats a big challange for the NFL.

but in the end they try to earn Money, like everybody else, with the beste product they can put out there. no idea why thats something bad…..??

some changes will be bad and some not so much…..and even that depend on who you ask. and if there is something everyone agrees its just bad, you can be sure the try to rechange it. why should they choose not to do that.

the NFL is not so bad like most of the fans make them. and if some People feel so strongly that way, they can watch the new leage in 2020 and we will see where it goes from there.

like always...the market will deside. one way or another

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I am so proud of Rodgers for including the Kendricks play with Clay's play.

Everyone can whine about things not going their way, but it shows a lot of integrity to tell the world, "That play went my way, and it shouldn't have."

It's time for players, owners, fans, and media to speak as one voice, echoing Aaron's sentiments. If you don't hit low or high on the QB, then he's all yours.

As for "picking him up and throwing him down," or "driving him into the turf," those need to be blatant--no gray areas.

I understand that QB's are super-valuable to the game, and more defenseless because they're the only players scanning the field and aiming the ball elsewhere. But they're still football players, and a good tackle is a good tackle.

Well done, Aaron.

Jersey Al's picture

And well done, ALP.

Tarynfor12's picture

I even put up video of both sacks and saying they were equally flagged even if wrong. Regretfully, fans here only wanted to hear about the Matthews penalty. Always need something to cry foul for the performance while ignoring the other guy received same at a different moment of the game. I might still be getting dislikes for posting truth.

Lare's picture

I also think its important to note that NFL QB's have been getting hit and tackled for over 100 years. Sure, the defensive players are bigger, faster and stronger than they were in the past, but so are the QB's.

croatpackfan's picture

I have one suggestion to NFL rules committee...

I suggest they should tape all allowed football contacts and send the tapes to the teams, as educational tapes. All other type of contacts will be penalties. That is how we make things clear.

I understand need to make game more safe, but, by my opinion you can not do it like they are doing. Almost everybody involved with football said that penalty (both of them) were mistakes, now they are claiming that all those people, and some are true experts (e. g. Dean Blandino, Mike Perreira) knows shit about football... That is ridiculous...

I say Packers at Redskins 31-20... If Aaron plays...

pacman's picture

Three things will happen.

1. Penalties will be added to the review process. Details TBD.

2. QB will wear pull flags to stop play and it will be illegal to touch him anywhere else (just like punter).

3. Due to #2, NFL ratings will tank, money will dry up and league will fold and this all started the day the hit on Cousins became a teaching video of what not to do.

Bearmeat's picture

I hate to say this out loud, but I'm going to:

I am a much less passionate NFL fan than I was 10 years ago. I don't know how much of it is that I'm just much busier now than when I was in graduate school, and how much is that the way the league is run now is a gigantic turn-off.

I used to watch as many games as I possibly could. Now, I never watch TNF or MNF unless it's a divisional game, and I don't go out of my way to watch other teams during the 1-4 and 4-7 timeslots either. I turn SNF off at halftime usually and go to bed.

Just the Packers. The annual TV rating slides SHOULD be telling the owners something.

num1pakrfan's picture

Honestly, you're missing nothing about MNF. It has become nearly unwatchable. That current announcing team? Woof! I heard the other night's broadcast rating is the lowest it has ever been.

I pretty much stick to just Packer games too. The product has become so watered down to the point that watching one game is the same as watching another.

The NFL better get its collective crap together or it will find itself in a bad spot in the coming years.

Handsback's picture

Agree Bearmeat, I'll watch Cleveland tonight because my wife loves the Browns and we have time. Frankly we'll watch the 2nd thru the middle of 4th qtrs. Unless it's a great or tight game we'll switch over to Netflix or watch the Jack Ryan show on Amazon.

BoCallahan's picture

The NFL has weighed us (Traditionalists, which AR claims to be in the interview) and has decided to move on without us. They have made their $ and are now looking for younger pockets. We have become expendable. Our loyalty to the NFL has been repaid with a modern day Shunning.

Coldworld's picture

Maybe, or maybe they have just taken a wrong turn. Time will tell.

4thand10's picture

I don’t understand that, the younger (way younger ) people would watch it in a green room with VR goggles, and instead of the money going to the nfl and players it would go to Samsung and Sony....oh, joy.

PatrickGB's picture

I am even going to call out fantasy football. Different players different teams different positions. One doesn’t watch the game for drama and support, just for the points. That means less support for the actual game and the team. One can be a “winner” even when the team you once supported loses the game.

4thand10's picture

Agree, and instead of picking a truly good receiver, they pick receivers that get 60 % of their catches playing catch up in garbage time...

DenePhillips's picture

Bad Calls
1. Jimmy Graham arm got pulled by Minn defender-
killed a on 40-50 yard play.
2. Davante Adams and Minn both pushed off a little
but penalty called on Adams
killed a 15-20 yard pass completion.
3. Shove by Sheldon Richardson on Rogers before
half knocking him down NO CALL !!!!!
Also, later another pretty good Shove by S.
Richardson Rogers knocking him down again.
4. Lane Taylor I did see Taylor touch the defensive
players helmet and the referree
saw the defenders helmet go down. Questionable
call, but not phantom call.

5. I would say that the D. Adam catch in the end zone
was a TD. The 2nd defensive player hits D. Adams when he is already on the ground knocking the ball loose. But, it appeared to me D. Adams had possession of the ball. Tough Call !!!

Few good referree calls.

1. Roughing the passer on A. Rogers - against Minn
def. #54.....Good Call
2. Helmet to helmet - When 2nd Minn defender hits
Adams while up in air..Good Call

Bad Call for Minnesota
2. Referres made BAD CALL when GMO had one knee down and the defender did touch him while his knee was down which resulted in an extra 22 yard gain by GMO, but that play happened sooooo fast I know I couldn't have made that call either, unless I had instant replay.


Coaches should be able to get the opportunity to challenge penalties. Either by getting a seperate color flag OR if the the coach does win a challenge he gets to keep the flag to use for another challenge.
Why should a coach lose a challenge when he wins? Oh, he gets to keep his timeout..whoopie.

Just some notes:

Ty Montgomery looked great ! That great 1 handed catch Great first half!! He is patient behind his blocker and has become a much improved defender against the blitz !! The 2nd half the Packers- MM
Only gave him 1 pass to him which resulted in a 1st down due to a holding call on Minn. And, 1 running play for 4 yards, Not taking anything away
from J. Williams. Great hard runner between the blocks.Reminds me a little of Dorsey Levens. Can't wait to add Aaron Jones to the mix.

All the receivers did good !!! GMO is proving the Packer fans wrong about his inability to play or even make the team!! I believe he was 6 for 6 receiving and
you have to remember he has some good juke moves to get those YAC !!

Good Pressure by Gilbert on QB..when K. Cousins passed ball a little wobbly to Treadwell
for incomplete pass. C. Matthews played hard !! Good job.

In the defense of House he has not much played time and when you watch the instant replay
the other WR opposite of Diggs was a step ahead of our CB, so I can see why K. Brice went that way to help out over the top, however after a split second Diggs pulled ahead of D.House. It was a tough play that turned into a 75 yard TD.

Looking Forward for A.Rogers to heal up, Aaron Jones coming back against Washington and hope that J. Kumerow can come back and return to his preseason heroic form hopefully in week 8 or 9.

Dunno why Mercedes Lewis is not being used in passing situations, especially around inside the 30 yard line. Overall, I am happy with the offense.

I'm still a little upset Packers did not get K. Mack who has already 2 sacks, 2 FF, 1 interception and 1 TD in just 2 games, but the big key which is going unnoticed
is also having teams focus on him making the Bear defense look even better and remember
he is NOT even in football shape I don't believe he even played in summer camp or any pre-season games. He just came in by the seat of his pants. By week 8 K.Mack could be going nuts and up for 2018 Defensive Player of the year, but it's a long season, so
we will have to wait and see. Only time will tell now if it was a good or bad call by Gute.

JohnnyLogan's picture

Terrible call by Gute. Chance to get a likely future Hall of Famer at our greatest position of need for the next five years to play with Rodgers and solidify the D. Should have trumped the Chicago offer by sending them the two firsts and a second. Well worth it, even with the big contract. Gute flinched. Wolf didn't and got Favre and Reggie White. TT flinched often and wasted years of great offense by never using free agency while NE picked up veterans every year and won SBs. NE just picked up Gordon for a 5th. Well worth the risk for a potential #1 receiver. The risk reward is just to great to ignore. Now they have Gronk, Edelman, Gordon and Hogan. We could have had Adams, Cobb, Allison and Gordon. Again Gute flinched. I like what he's done so far with the team but he's still got to get rid of that TT influence before we win again.

4thand1's picture

It's not a good thing when all the talk shows and fans are discussing rules and officiating all the time.

DenePhillips's picture

Well, I'm sure the samet hing happened before we got instant replay. Now we need to extend it for wishy-washy bad calls by the referees. In their defense these players are flying around sooooooo fast. I know it's hard to make a call for these referees. But, the coaches and nfl need to definitely consider reviewing bad calls. This tie between Minn and Green Bay could cost one of us the division and possibly home field advantage during the playoffs, especially with the Bears a 1/2 game behind.

4thand10's picture

Instant replay and reversals was all over the place in the 80s, 90s....then at some point in the 2000s , I don’t remember exactly when...they decided to go with more no reviewable calls to speed up the game...and along with that speed, referees strikes, changes in officiating contracts, changes in’s went downhill steadily. Football used to be way more fair and consistent than it is today. Just ask those of us who have been watching for 30 years or more.

DenePhillips's picture

Bears defense ranks 1st in the nfl with 10 sacks. Just sayin....

dobber's picture

They're also 18th in passing yards allowed.

...and 1-1 as a team.

DenePhillips's picture

Actually #15 But Good point !!!!!

Packers are 7th !!!!!!!! Whoo-hoo

DenePhillips's picture

Packers are 15th against the run.
The Bears are 29th against the run.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Wut? Bears are giving up 3.6 yards per carry (6th best), and have allowed just 134 yards on the ground (4th in the NFL). And the Packers aren't 7th in passing yards allowed. One of us is using a different metric or something.

GB is giving up 4.6 yds per carry (not good - 24th) and are 18th having allowed 207 yards on the ground.

GB is 22nd allowing 69.7% completion rate. 26th yards per game. 23rd in passer rating allowed (101). 23rd in points/game at 26, which isn't a good number. GB gave up 24 points per game last year, after all.

Small sample sizes. The Defense looks better to me, even though the stats do not really correspond to my opinion.

4thand10's picture

McCaskey Was trying to buy a Super Bowl...sometimes it works, most times it doesn’t.

stockholder's picture

New Rule coming. = The QB will wear Flags. A Red shirt. NO-Touch Policy - (Like when a Kicker Punts) Play is dead.

DenePhillips's picture


Dave in Texas's picture

I would love to watch longer games that involve as many reviews as need be to get the calls as correct enough to not feel like I just wasted 3+ hours of to feel my team was jobbed. I’d gladly watch a game that extended over four hours as long as I thought each team received balanced consistent officiating.

Lare's picture

Yes, but then the NFL and their officials couldn't dictate the outcomes of games.

4thand1's picture

I don't want to go through the whole year making excuses for AR and an injury.We did it when he had the bad calf and the collar bones. Last year MM couldn't come up with a game plan to highlight Hudley's skills, which weren't many. A running will help to take heat off of a pass rush. We still need a WR to take the top off a defense.

4thand1's picture

The minny game should go down as kissing your cousin, cause hitting your cousin will get you flagged.

DenePhillips's picture

The Washington Redskin game might be a little tougher then I originally thought. Go Pack Go !!!!!!!!!!

4thand1's picture

Pack 31 Wash 17.

Christopher Gennaro's picture

Me too, I was floored that they are top defense especially through the air. While Smith is game manager, this game is no cake walk. Hopefully we see alot of 12 formations.

Coldworld's picture

It’s really early in the season to be making calls based on team stats. So much depends on which two teams one has played.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Don't be floored. Wash played Arizona, which has a pathetic offense. Washington held ARI to 6 points and LAR held them to zero. Arizona is averaging scoring all of 3 points per game.

Washington also played and lost to Indy, 21-9. Indy's offense is mediocre, and has yet to play a good defense, unless one thinks Washington's is good. Washington's defense has allowed teams to convert 3rd downs at a 41.7% clip (24th in the NFL) and to score TDs on 80% of red zone appearance (25th in the NFL). They're just not particularly good.

Washington's DEs (Hood and Iounidas) are nothing to write home about. NT D'ron Payne is a rookie, but a high pick. Jonathan Allen was a high pick in 2017, but didn't do too much before getting hurt last year after 5 games. 17th pick, so we'll see. Their LBs are okay with Kerrigan being a good player. CB Norman used to be good, but regressed and looks like one of the most expensive CBs/quality of play in some time. They are looking for a 2nd-year jump from CB Dunbar. Their 3 safeties aren't bad, but none are actually better than average starters.

If GB doesn't beat Washington, it will be a bad sign.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets, Ticket King


"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "