My skepticism remains.
And another article from the same publication hardly qualifies as more evidence. It's just piling on from the same group of journalists who share a mindset.
They sit around interviewing each other, and quoting each other, and mouthing the same company line as the others.
Rodgers' diva act is well known. But, damn..... the guy is either the best or perhaps shares that honor with Brady as the best QB in football.
It's the rest of it that I just don't buy...... at least I don't buy it in the exaggerated sense it is being reported by B/R......and after Googling it, apparently no one else.
When an organization with high expectations under performs for 2 or 3 years, there are always eventual recriminations among certain players with big mouths and little self-restraint.
It's very hard to stay on top in this league (which is why we may never see the likes of the Pats for a very long time again once Bellicheck and Brady retire). And some teams handle that better than others. And players who are let go often see themselves as the scapegoats (and at times they are) and so are resentful of it.
It's why ethical journalists (the few, any more) understand that getting a story from a jilted girlfriend or disgruntled fired employee is not usually a balanced or reliable source.
Might there be some underlying kernal of truth in the B/R's articles about Green Bay? Sure. It's the over the top conclusions and assumptions that lose credibility in my eyes. And since we really don't hear anyone else talking about it (at least I haven't), it makes me all the more skeptical.
I hate this age of guilty unless proved innocent that we've entered. Get a big stage, shout it loud enough, and it must be the truth. No way.
