What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now? (2 Viewers)

sho nuff said:
zDragon said:
sho nuff said:
zDragon said:
sho nuff said:
That you heard and read it...does not make it a consensus. That is what I am disagreeing with.

I think they might be somewhat better...not "much" better at this point.
Winning record with shot at play-offs equals much better. That is what was traded for the future of the franchise. A few more weeks and the Pack can start looking forward to tommorow. Luckily for the Pack they'll be able to pad the W column with losing teams the rest of the way.
I don't know if they have a winning record with Favre right now.And, while its slim, with the Williams's suspension, they still have a longshot at the playoffs.

a 2 game swing is not "much" better.

Just like with your denying the defense is far worse...you are playing some semantics here and Im not going to keep doing it.

This thread seems to not be saying they would do much better with him by consensus at all.
See my post with data from Football outsiders. It shows the defense has improved according to the detailed stats at Football Outsiders and the Offense has went down in the rankings. This is adjusted
So you chose to believe that site when it supports your argument...but when it ranks Favre behind Rodgers that far you don't like it?How about these stats. I caught this while watching the NFL Network replay tonight of the Panthers/Packers game.

Aaron Rodgers is 4th in the NFL on 3rd down passing with a 106.8 rating. Also on 3rd down he has thrown 10 TDs which is best in the NFL.

Favre? Not sure on his rank on 3rd down...but his rating is 71.1. A large chunk worse than Rodgers.

Now again, I hate the rating number and its arbitrary, it has some uses but is not the end all be all stat at all.

But that is a crazy difference for those of you who think Rodgers and the offense have struggled so much keeping drives alive.

Favre has completed a bit higher percentage on 3rd down (something like 67% to Rodgers 64%) However, Brett's 4 TD to 7 INT ratio on 3rd down is far worse than Rodgers 10 TDs to 4 INTs on 3rd down. Rodgers also has the edge in yards per attempt on 3rd down at 8.2 to Favre's 6.5.

Now...another interesting rating stat.

When behind, Rodgers rating is 88.1.

Favre's is 80.3.

For all those that think Brett is just this come from behind master...Rodgers is outperforming him when his team has been behind and when his team is tied.

I actually did not think it would be like that til I started looking.
Never said it was wrong about Favre. I said having Peterson at 11 seemed an oddity especially with Mcllean ahead of him. Funny how you immediately try to discredit the site when it doesn't meet your needs.Once again your bring up Favre. Why when we are comparing Packers of last year to Packers of this year. To my knowledge Brett does not play for the Packers.

Again more Favre comparisons. You bounce around a lot in what your focusing on.

You stated the defense was MUCH worse than last year. Now for some reason your comparing Favre and Rogers which has nothing to do with the Packers offense and Defense.

If you want to compare Favre to Rodgers you'd need to see the differnce in the Jets offense from last year to this year.

Jets Team offense last year was ranked 24th and are 19th with Favre so far this year. So an improvement was made. I'll have to look at drive stats tommorow but I'm sure they are better also.
I did not discredit the site...nor did I give it any value when it ranked Rodgers ahead actually.Im comparing how the 2 QBs have played this season. If we are talking about how Favre might do...looking at how he has played might give some insight.

Again, since he is not with GB, its not the end all be all...but its a start.

Yes...I stated defense was much worse. The actual numbers bear that out. You denied it...said something along the lines of far worse would be going from 5th to 20th...of course you ignored after I posted that they went from 6th to 23rd in points allowed.

The difference in the Jets from last year to this year is not comparing Favre to Rodgers. Its comparing Favre to Pennington/Clemmens. Rodgers was not the QB of the Jets last year. The Jets have also made other moves besides Rodgers...your comparison is part of the equation...but not all of it.
The numbers showed overall they are a better defense. Please re-check. They are giving up more points but allowing fewer yards per drive. This tells us that just possibly the offense is not doing as well. Which the numbers show. The big difference on the defense is where it has had to start defending. For example the 3 and 29 yd line in the saints game.
The "adjusted" numbers on that site show that.The actual numbers do not agree.

Unless allowing 6+ points per game more, 40 rushing yards per game more, and 11 more rushing TDs through 12 game compared to all of last year is somehow better.

It also tells us that possibly special teams sucks hind end too.

Wow...shocking you found another reason to bump the 3 and 29.

How about these that you continue to ignore?

70 yard TD,

41 yard scoring drive (after a 24 yard punt)

76 yard scoring drive

20 yard scoring drive for a FG (after a 62 yard kickoff return).

80 yard scoring drive

Only one of those had much to do with the offense...but a 24 yard punt made it worse...and all of those happened prior to the 3 and the 29.

Quit excusing poor play by this defense.

Field position or not...40 yards per game more on the ground is not better.

6+ points per game is not better.

11 more TDs through 12 games as compared to 16 games last season is not better.

No amount of spin or adjusted stats is going to help you there.
Yes the adjusted numbers back up my point.Once again the 6 points per game can easily be found in the Saints game. Offense giving the ball to NO on the 3yd line. I use this because it's the one I remember because it is recent.

Why are you focusing on one game to make you point. Sure in that game everyone agrees the defense played bad but so did the offense. I have pointed out more games that the defense played good in that the offense did not.

Yes one number did have to do with the offense. Starting field position which was a huge drop and could easily account for the 6 point drop.

Once again you forget the impact that an offense that has dropped in EVERY category can have on a defense.

Hey I just found the site because someone posted it. I now realize how good the site is.

Check this out.

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

REGG EASTERBROOK, NFL.COM

Tuesday Morning Quarterback, September 7, 2004

"Football Outsiders is, by a huge margin, the Web's best independent football site.

BILL SIMMONS, ESPN.COM

"More Cowbell" blog, September 12, 2005

"After watching what happened Sunday, it's clear that (a) the NFC South is the best division in football, and (b) Tampa Bay is better than anyone thought except for the guys at Football Outsiders."

JASCHA HOFFMAN, BOSTON GLOBE

Pigskin Pythagoras, February 1, 2004

"By measuring each of the 40,000-odd plays made in a typical NFL season and evaluating them according to a complex array of situational factors, Schatz aims to do nothing less than revolutionize football writing and analysis."

So if they rank the GB team defense at 9th versus 16th last year. I'll take their number a little more seriously than posters on this board.

 
Thought Rodgers did a great job Sunday coming from behind against the Panthers. Consecutive 70yd+ drives whilst behind, the second a 79-yd, 9 minute, 16 play drive to take the lead. Only problem was that McCarthy didn't let him throw the ball at the line to win the game.

Can't blame Rodgers for Special Teams allowing a long return, and the secondary allowing a Delhomme Bomb (you don't hear that often, do you?)

 
Interesting article on McCarthy trusting Rodgers and the supposed conservative playcalling...

Favre in 2007 passed more often in goal-to-go plays than Rodgers has this season - 54% to 43.4% - but McCarthy has relied on Rodgers more in the most crucial of circumstances. On third downs in goal-to-go plays, Rodgers has passed on nine of 10 plays. Favre was asked to pass on just four of seven.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/35519619.html
When you take a closer look at those stats, they couldnt be more meaningless.I took a look at the play by play for GB games last year to find these situations. This is terrible use of stats, and I would be willing to bet they were handed down to the reporter from Mccarthy or another packers assistant.

The first glaring issue is Favre had only 7 all year. Rodgers already has 10. When you look at the first two games and see 4 TD passes on 2nd and goal by Favre you quickly realize why he had so few attempts at 3rd and goal. Especially when you see the high percentage of times he has passed in Goal to go situations, and the fact that the packers were scoring more points last year on offense.

Then you look at the individual plays.

3rd and goal at the 7, obvious passing down. They passed.

3rd and 2 where Wynn ran it in for a TD. It was the first drive of the game. 1st and goal at the 8 and they ran all three times.

3rd and goal from the 8. Favre was sacked.

3rd and goal at the 4, shotgun formation, draw to Ryan Grant for a TD.

3rd and goal at the 8, obvious passing down, they passed.

3rd and goal at the 8. they passed

3rd and goal at the 1. it was first and goal at the 6 again on the opening drive of the game and they ran all three times.

Two of the 3 non passing plays were on the first drive. Hardly crunch time. The only one it could even be argued where they could have passed was the Grant draw. Not knowing if it was an audible or what the situation was obviously it is pretty foolish to even bring it up.

Its nice to see that Mccarthy has faith in his QB. That is always a good thing. But those are some pretty random stats.

It also seemed to me that Rodgers troubles this year seem to be coming out of halftime. For whatever reason it looked(just from memory and at quick glance of the play by plays) like he struggled quite a bit in the 3rd qtr. Is there anywhere that these stats are easy to get at? I am not looking back at the play by plays again.

 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
 
Interesting article on McCarthy trusting Rodgers and the supposed conservative playcalling...

Favre in 2007 passed more often in goal-to-go plays than Rodgers has this season - 54% to 43.4% - but McCarthy has relied on Rodgers more in the most crucial of circumstances. On third downs in goal-to-go plays, Rodgers has passed on nine of 10 plays. Favre was asked to pass on just four of seven.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/35519619.html
When you take a closer look at those stats, they couldnt be more meaningless.I took a look at the play by play for GB games last year to find these situations. This is terrible use of stats, and I would be willing to bet they were handed down to the reporter from Mccarthy or another packers assistant.

The first glaring issue is Favre had only 7 all year. Rodgers already has 10. When you look at the first two games and see 4 TD passes on 2nd and goal by Favre you quickly realize why he had so few attempts at 3rd and goal. Especially when you see the high percentage of times he has passed in Goal to go situations, and the fact that the packers were scoring more points last year on offense.

Then you look at the individual plays.

3rd and goal at the 7, obvious passing down. They passed.

3rd and 2 where Wynn ran it in for a TD. It was the first drive of the game. 1st and goal at the 8 and they ran all three times.

3rd and goal from the 8. Favre was sacked.

3rd and goal at the 4, shotgun formation, draw to Ryan Grant for a TD.

3rd and goal at the 8, obvious passing down, they passed.

3rd and goal at the 8. they passed

3rd and goal at the 1. it was first and goal at the 6 again on the opening drive of the game and they ran all three times.

Two of the 3 non passing plays were on the first drive. Hardly crunch time. The only one it could even be argued where they could have passed was the Grant draw. Not knowing if it was an audible or what the situation was obviously it is pretty foolish to even bring it up.

Its nice to see that Mccarthy has faith in his QB. That is always a good thing. But those are some pretty random stats.

It also seemed to me that Rodgers troubles this year seem to be coming out of halftime. For whatever reason it looked(just from memory and at quick glance of the play by plays) like he struggled quite a bit in the 3rd qtr. Is there anywhere that these stats are easy to get at? I am not looking back at the play by plays again.
Good follow-up.
 
Yes the adjusted numbers back up my point.

Once again the 6 points per game can easily be found in the Saints game. Offense giving the ball to NO on the 3yd line. I use this because it's the one I remember because it is recent.

Why are you focusing on one game to make you point. Sure in that game everyone agrees the defense played bad but so did the offense. I have pointed out more games that the defense played good in that the offense did not.

Yes one number did have to do with the offense. Starting field position which was a huge drop and could easily account for the 6 point drop.

Once again you forget the impact that an offense that has dropped in EVERY category can have on a defense.

Hey I just found the site because someone posted it. I now realize how good the site is.

Check this out.

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

REGG EASTERBROOK, NFL.COM

Tuesday Morning Quarterback, September 7, 2004

"Football Outsiders is, by a huge margin, the Web's best independent football site.

BILL SIMMONS, ESPN.COM

"More Cowbell" blog, September 12, 2005

"After watching what happened Sunday, it's clear that (a) the NFC South is the best division in football, and (b) Tampa Bay is better than anyone thought except for the guys at Football Outsiders."

JASCHA HOFFMAN, BOSTON GLOBE

Pigskin Pythagoras, February 1, 2004

"By measuring each of the 40,000-odd plays made in a typical NFL season and evaluating them according to a complex array of situational factors, Schatz aims to do nothing less than revolutionize football writing and analysis."

So if they rank the GB team defense at 9th versus 16th last year. I'll take their number a little more seriously than posters on this board.
In the Saints game? They gave up 31 points prior to those two drives you are obsessed with. That right there is over their average given up this year by almost 7 points.Who is focusing on one game? You keep bringing up the 3 and 29 thing...I simply posted to you what happened before that point when the defense had already shown it was bad.

6 points per game is the season average...and its just over 6 points per game.

You take their advice better because Bill Simmons and Gregg Easterbrook like it? Are you serious using those testimonials as a reason to like it?

You like their numbers because they support your view...nothing more.

 
Phase of the Game said:
Boot said:
How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now?

Packers Mgmt = Relieved / Satisfied
I'm sure they are with that 5-7 record 30-30 overall and probably missing the playoffs for 3 years out of the last 4. Thompson is also ignoring the media. I'm sure they are satisfied! :popcorn:
You're being deliberately obtuse. Yes, Thompson has a ton of issues to deal with - but as FAR AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD - the trade of Favre to make way for Rodgers - I am sure management is more than satisfied. Talk about :)
The Packers should end up with a winning record. The teams they play down the stretch are terrible.
i would be thrilled, but I do not see the Packers going 4-0.
 
It also seemed to me that Rodgers troubles this year seem to be coming out of halftime. For whatever reason it looked(just from memory and at quick glance of the play by plays) like he struggled quite a bit in the 3rd qtr. Is there anywhere that these stats are easy to get at? I am not looking back at the play by plays again.
I agree here.3rd quarters have not been great.Actually, his 2nd half numbers are a bit worse than his first half numbers.Just look at his overall situationals on yahoo.
 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
So you want to bring up Favre if it helps you...but not when its not showing much?Make up your mind.And the biggest dropoff continues to be the defense and not QB position.Im not saying the offense has not dropped off.Im saying the defense has been bad. Despite your denial.Watch the games. You can analyze stats and adjustments and equations all you want.Simply watching the teams play is pretty simple.There is a reason that nobody who has watched the team play this year is even close to agreeing with you.
 
Yes the adjusted numbers back up my point.

Once again the 6 points per game can easily be found in the Saints game. Offense giving the ball to NO on the 3yd line. I use this because it's the one I remember because it is recent.

Why are you focusing on one game to make you point. Sure in that game everyone agrees the defense played bad but so did the offense. I have pointed out more games that the defense played good in that the offense did not.

Yes one number did have to do with the offense. Starting field position which was a huge drop and could easily account for the 6 point drop.

Once again you forget the impact that an offense that has dropped in EVERY category can have on a defense.

Hey I just found the site because someone posted it. I now realize how good the site is.

Check this out.

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

REGG EASTERBROOK, NFL.COM

Tuesday Morning Quarterback, September 7, 2004

"Football Outsiders is, by a huge margin, the Web's best independent football site.

BILL SIMMONS, ESPN.COM

"More Cowbell" blog, September 12, 2005

"After watching what happened Sunday, it's clear that (a) the NFC South is the best division in football, and (b) Tampa Bay is better than anyone thought except for the guys at Football Outsiders."

JASCHA HOFFMAN, BOSTON GLOBE

Pigskin Pythagoras, February 1, 2004

"By measuring each of the 40,000-odd plays made in a typical NFL season and evaluating them according to a complex array of situational factors, Schatz aims to do nothing less than revolutionize football writing and analysis."

So if they rank the GB team defense at 9th versus 16th last year. I'll take their number a little more seriously than posters on this board.
In the Saints game? They gave up 31 points prior to those two drives you are obsessed with. That right there is over their average given up this year by almost 7 points.Who is focusing on one game? You keep bringing up the 3 and 29 thing...I simply posted to you what happened before that point when the defense had already shown it was bad.

6 points per game is the season average...and its just over 6 points per game.

You take their advice better because Bill Simmons and Gregg Easterbrook like it? Are you serious using those testimonials as a reason to like it?

You like their numbers because they support your view...nothing more.
I'm done with the other argument as my point has been made.Why did you ignore these?

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

Discredit the site if you like but your really doing yourself a disservice if you do not check it out. I've been reading articles and stats on it since it was posted in this thread.

Very good work by these guys.

Sure it seems supports my point but it does so with very statistical analysis.

Once again your really doing yourself a disservice if you do not check it out

 
Phase of the Game said:
Boot said:
How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now?

Packers Mgmt = Relieved / Satisfied
I'm sure they are with that 5-7 record 30-30 overall and probably missing the playoffs for 3 years out of the last 4. Thompson is also ignoring the media. I'm sure they are satisfied! :rolleyes:
You're being deliberately obtuse. Yes, Thompson has a ton of issues to deal with - but as FAR AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD - the trade of Favre to make way for Rodgers - I am sure management is more than satisfied. Talk about :rolleyes:
The Packers should end up with a winning record. The teams they play down the stretch are terrible.
i would be thrilled, but I do not see the Packers going 4-0.
THey should...but I don't see it either...they will find a way to drop one of those games (probably Chicago...heck, they dropped 2 to them last year when they were clearly the better team).
 
Yes the adjusted numbers back up my point.

Once again the 6 points per game can easily be found in the Saints game. Offense giving the ball to NO on the 3yd line. I use this because it's the one I remember because it is recent.

Why are you focusing on one game to make you point. Sure in that game everyone agrees the defense played bad but so did the offense. I have pointed out more games that the defense played good in that the offense did not.

Yes one number did have to do with the offense. Starting field position which was a huge drop and could easily account for the 6 point drop.

Once again you forget the impact that an offense that has dropped in EVERY category can have on a defense.

Hey I just found the site because someone posted it. I now realize how good the site is.

Check this out.

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

REGG EASTERBROOK, NFL.COM

Tuesday Morning Quarterback, September 7, 2004

"Football Outsiders is, by a huge margin, the Web's best independent football site.

BILL SIMMONS, ESPN.COM

"More Cowbell" blog, September 12, 2005

"After watching what happened Sunday, it's clear that (a) the NFC South is the best division in football, and (b) Tampa Bay is better than anyone thought except for the guys at Football Outsiders."

JASCHA HOFFMAN, BOSTON GLOBE

Pigskin Pythagoras, February 1, 2004

"By measuring each of the 40,000-odd plays made in a typical NFL season and evaluating them according to a complex array of situational factors, Schatz aims to do nothing less than revolutionize football writing and analysis."

So if they rank the GB team defense at 9th versus 16th last year. I'll take their number a little more seriously than posters on this board.
In the Saints game? They gave up 31 points prior to those two drives you are obsessed with. That right there is over their average given up this year by almost 7 points.Who is focusing on one game? You keep bringing up the 3 and 29 thing...I simply posted to you what happened before that point when the defense had already shown it was bad.

6 points per game is the season average...and its just over 6 points per game.

You take their advice better because Bill Simmons and Gregg Easterbrook like it? Are you serious using those testimonials as a reason to like it?

You like their numbers because they support your view...nothing more.
I'm done with the other argument as my point has been made.Why did you ignore these?

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

Discredit the site if you like but your really doing yourself a disservice if you do not check it out. I've been reading articles and stats on it since it was posted in this thread.

Very good work by these guys.

Sure it seems supports my point but it does so with very statistical analysis.

Once again your really doing yourself a disservice if you do not check it out
Im not ignoring them...Im laughing at the others and using testimonials.Im not discrediting the site...I have not done that yet.

Id also have you check out nationalfootballpost.com for some good reading. Its not analysis and such but there are some great articles there.

 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
So you want to bring up Favre if it helps you...but not when its not showing much?Make up your mind.And the biggest dropoff continues to be the defense and not QB position.Im not saying the offense has not dropped off.Im saying the defense has been bad. Despite your denial.Watch the games. You can analyze stats and adjustments and equations all you want.Simply watching the teams play is pretty simple.There is a reason that nobody who has watched the team play this year is even close to agreeing with you.
I did not bring Favre into the conversation.I no longer care about the rest.Apparently statistical analysis backs up my side as Football outsiders shows so you last point is not a good one.
 
Yes the adjusted numbers back up my point.

Once again the 6 points per game can easily be found in the Saints game. Offense giving the ball to NO on the 3yd line. I use this because it's the one I remember because it is recent.

Why are you focusing on one game to make you point. Sure in that game everyone agrees the defense played bad but so did the offense. I have pointed out more games that the defense played good in that the offense did not.

Yes one number did have to do with the offense. Starting field position which was a huge drop and could easily account for the 6 point drop.

Once again you forget the impact that an offense that has dropped in EVERY category can have on a defense.

Hey I just found the site because someone posted it. I now realize how good the site is.

Check this out.

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

REGG EASTERBROOK, NFL.COM

Tuesday Morning Quarterback, September 7, 2004

"Football Outsiders is, by a huge margin, the Web's best independent football site.

BILL SIMMONS, ESPN.COM

"More Cowbell" blog, September 12, 2005

"After watching what happened Sunday, it's clear that (a) the NFC South is the best division in football, and (b) Tampa Bay is better than anyone thought except for the guys at Football Outsiders."

JASCHA HOFFMAN, BOSTON GLOBE

Pigskin Pythagoras, February 1, 2004

"By measuring each of the 40,000-odd plays made in a typical NFL season and evaluating them according to a complex array of situational factors, Schatz aims to do nothing less than revolutionize football writing and analysis."

So if they rank the GB team defense at 9th versus 16th last year. I'll take their number a little more seriously than posters on this board.
In the Saints game? They gave up 31 points prior to those two drives you are obsessed with. That right there is over their average given up this year by almost 7 points.Who is focusing on one game? You keep bringing up the 3 and 29 thing...I simply posted to you what happened before that point when the defense had already shown it was bad.

6 points per game is the season average...and its just over 6 points per game.

You take their advice better because Bill Simmons and Gregg Easterbrook like it? Are you serious using those testimonials as a reason to like it?

You like their numbers because they support your view...nothing more.
I'm done with the other argument as my point has been made.Why did you ignore these?

JIM SCHWARTZ, DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, TENNESSEE TITANS

"The most accurate insight on the Web into why teams really win and lose."

MIKE EAYRS, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, GREEN BAY PACKERS

"Your work is much more scientific than most articles and I like how you have worked to build context into your measures."

Discredit the site if you like but your really doing yourself a disservice if you do not check it out. I've been reading articles and stats on it since it was posted in this thread.

Very good work by these guys.

Sure it seems supports my point but it does so with very statistical analysis.

Once again your really doing yourself a disservice if you do not check it out
Im not ignoring them...Im laughing at the others and using testimonials.Im not discrediting the site...I have not done that yet.

Id also have you check out nationalfootballpost.com for some good reading. Its not analysis and such but there are some great articles there.
You did ignore them. Why not use testimonials to show what others think. Heck one is even a Packer.You have not discredited the site yet? does that mean your going to?

I have one RSS feed from them coming in and I enjoy reading it. Thanks for the insight though I'll go back and digg deeper as the one feed was given to me.

 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
So you want to bring up Favre if it helps you...but not when its not showing much?Make up your mind.And the biggest dropoff continues to be the defense and not QB position.Im not saying the offense has not dropped off.Im saying the defense has been bad. Despite your denial.Watch the games. You can analyze stats and adjustments and equations all you want.Simply watching the teams play is pretty simple.There is a reason that nobody who has watched the team play this year is even close to agreeing with you.
prior to these last two games i did not believe the defense was playing any different than last year. They were giving up a lot more rushing yards, but not that many more total yards. Teams dont win often when thye give up lots of rushing yards, but only because they get crushed on TOP. The Packers actually have a better TOP than last year. Scoring allowed was up, but when you factored in the TDs the defense was scoring it was more than a wash. But the loss of Barnett has been brutal these last two games. Hawk is a useless MLB. He has been so bad that one of the local radio talking heads actually said "I was wrong, wrong wrong wrong about AJ Hawk being better suited than Barnett at MLB." Linebackers these days seem to be much more of a product of the Dline and d-backs, but Hawk is proof of the harm somebody who is woefully inadequate at the position can do. I always hated Barnett's over pursuit, but at least he had speed to recover for lots of it. People think Hawk has regressed. I dont. I just think he is being exposed.
 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
So you want to bring up Favre if it helps you...but not when its not showing much?Make up your mind.And the biggest dropoff continues to be the defense and not QB position.Im not saying the offense has not dropped off.Im saying the defense has been bad. Despite your denial.Watch the games. You can analyze stats and adjustments and equations all you want.Simply watching the teams play is pretty simple.There is a reason that nobody who has watched the team play this year is even close to agreeing with you.
I did not bring Favre into the conversation.I no longer care about the rest.Apparently statistical analysis backs up my side as Football outsiders shows so you last point is not a good one.
Look at the first post in this string...and tell me again how you did not bring up Favre.And statistical analysis on one site supports you...congrats.
 
sho nuff said:
Phase of the Game said:
sho nuff said:
zDragon said:
sho nuff said:
zDragon said:
sho nuff said:
That you heard and read it...does not make it a consensus. That is what I am disagreeing with.I think they might be somewhat better...not "much" better at this point.
Winning record with shot at play-offs equals much better. That is what was traded for the future of the franchise. A few more weeks and the Pack can start looking forward to tomorrow. Luckily for the Pack they'll be able to pad the W column with losing teams the rest of the way.
I don't know if they have a winning record with Favre right now.And, while its slim, with the Williams's suspension, they still have a longshot at the playoffs.a 2 game swing is not "much" better.Just like with your denying the defense is far worse...you are playing some semantics here and Im not going to keep doing it.This thread seems to not be saying they would do much better with him by consensus at all.
See my post with data from Football outsiders. It shows the defense has improved according to the detailed stats at Football Outsiders and the Offense has went down in the rankings. This is adjusted
When behind, Rodgers rating is 88.1.Favre's is 80.3.For all those that think Brett is just this come from behind master...Rodgers is outperforming him when his team has been behind and when his team is tied.
This is another example of you spewing crap and spinning that will make you look like a complete fool once again. :rant: You truely are nuts!And you were never realize what an absurd comparision you are trying to use here which will again be entertainment for all to watch as you try to spin this even though you..."never spin".
Spewing crap and spinning.THose are the numbers...I simply posted them and prefaced it with its not the end all be all.Why is it an absurd comparison. All this talk of how Brett would have done this or that...yet Aaron Rodgers right now, this year is outperforming that QB in those situation.Of course its not all the same as they play for different teams. But its a bit of info.Its not spin...its the freakin QB rating.Just because you don't like the results does not make it spin.Grow up.
Put them in close to the same situation say with almost all the same talent around them and see how it looks. I good example might be the 2007 Packers offense vs the 2008 Packers offense. In that comparison according to the numbers I posted from Football outsiders the 2007 Packers had a better offense.
And here I was thinking the move to Rodgers was about the future. Thanks for making it clear all that matters is 2008. :rolleyes:
What does what you just posted have anything to do with this conversation?4. About a better comparison being Brett with the same personnel vs Aaron with the same peronnel (or as close as possible).
It has everything to do with your continuing to paint a picture that is not even remotely close to reality.
 
31 pages. THis thread is like an auto accident that you just can't take your eyes off of.
as much crap as people give sho nuff(myself included), I am very happy about this thread. This is a bad year for the pack so far. I have dissected them in more ways than I ever have, and thats due in no small part to this thread. Lots of articles, stats, thoughts, etc.
 
prior to these last two games i did not believe the defense was playing any different than last year. They were giving up a lot more rushing yards, but not that many more total yards. Teams dont win often when thye give up lots of rushing yards, but only because they get crushed on TOP. The Packers actually have a better TOP than last year. Scoring allowed was up, but when you factored in the TDs the defense was scoring it was more than a wash. But the loss of Barnett has been brutal these last two games. Hawk is a useless MLB. He has been so bad that one of the local radio talking heads actually said "I was wrong, wrong wrong wrong about AJ Hawk being better suited than Barnett at MLB." Linebackers these days seem to be much more of a product of the Dline and d-backs, but Hawk is proof of the harm somebody who is woefully inadequate at the position can do. I always hated Barnett's over pursuit, but at least he had speed to recover for lots of it. People think Hawk has regressed. I dont. I just think he is being exposed.
Agreed on Hawk at MLB.I think he played pretty well last year and started out this year nicely.Im not sure if his injury is what slowed him down...or thats just him.Im hopeful its just the injury and he gets right and gets back to it.Im also hopeful part of it is the effect of the play of the Dline too.
 
31 pages. THis thread is like an auto accident that you just can't take your eyes off of.
as much crap as people give sho nuff(myself included), I am very happy about this thread. This is a bad year for the pack so far. I have dissected them in more ways than I ever have, and thats due in no small part to this thread. Lots of articles, stats, thoughts, etc.
The analysis helps me try and forget the sucking on the field. :lmao:
 
sho nuff 421 :shrug: :unsure:

Phase of the Game 109

zDragon 105

Ookie Pringle 94

Challenge Everything 62

springroll 58

ScottyFargo 43

Stinger Ray 39

hauser42 35

phthalatemagic 31

 
31 pages. THis thread is like an auto accident that you just can't take your eyes off of.
as much crap as people give sho nuff(myself included), I am very happy about this thread. This is a bad year for the pack so far. I have dissected them in more ways than I ever have, and thats due in no small part to this thread. Lots of articles, stats, thoughts, etc.
The analysis helps me try and forget the sucking on the field. :unsure:
is there a thread on here for DVOA?
 
More on 3rd downs for those who like to bash the offense.

2007 GB converted 42.6% of its thrid downs (8th in the NFL)

2008 GB has converted 44.4% of its third downs (thats tied for 7th in the NFL)

defensively?

2007 GB allowed conversions on 33% of the third downs (3rd best in the NFL)

2008 GB has allowed conversions on 37.8% of the third downs (15th in the NFL)

:shrug:

That for the poster who thought Rodgers does not spread it out as much and makes it more predictable on 3rd downs. Yet they are converting more and he is now tied for 3rd in the NFL in QB rating on 3rd down (does not say everything for sure...that rating would not account for him throwing a 3 yard pass when they needed 4 yards...I realize this).

And I did not post it earlier because I had not looked...but 2007 Favre had a rating of 92.5% on third down. Rodgers is doing better than that...and the team is converting more 3rd downs than last year and giving up more conversions on third downs than they did last year.

 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
So you want to bring up Favre if it helps you...but not when its not showing much?Make up your mind.And the biggest dropoff continues to be the defense and not QB position.Im not saying the offense has not dropped off.Im saying the defense has been bad. Despite your denial.Watch the games. You can analyze stats and adjustments and equations all you want.Simply watching the teams play is pretty simple.There is a reason that nobody who has watched the team play this year is even close to agreeing with you.
I did not bring Favre into the conversation.I no longer care about the rest.Apparently statistical analysis backs up my side as Football outsiders shows so you last point is not a good one.
Look at the first post in this string...and tell me again how you did not bring up Favre.And statistical analysis on one site supports you...congrats.
That was in response to someone else posting Favre information comparing the two. More than likely in response to one of your posts. Once again I did not bring up Favre and just because of where the cut/reply came in means nothing.My points have always focused on Packers Offense vs Defense. Others bring up Favre.Good day.
 
Decided to see what type of improvement the Jets have had with Favre under center. I have to say it looks like a change for the better. Another point is that Favre is in a completely new system.2008 JetsYds/Drive 33.10 (11)Pts/drive 2.43 (3) TD/drive .276 (4)Drive Success Rate .729 (6)2007 JetsYds/Drive 28.50 (16) Pts/Drive 1.40 (23)TD/Drive .126 (29)Drive Success Rate .662 (19)
Why don't you look at Pennington's production and ask if he is the better QB.
Because that would be as pointless as what this was posted in response to. The only comparison that needs to be made in this thread is Favre with the Packer personnel last year to Aaron with the Packer personnel this year.
I posted their individual numbers...you did not seem to like that either.Your response was..."That does not show you how well Favre would have played with the Packers. "
Truthfully I'm not sure why Favre is in the conversation. He gets brought in as a defelector.The whole point was where the biggest drop off was on offense or defense. I could care less who's playing QB. Looking at the stats from FO backs the point that the defense really isn't worse and that the offense has dropped off. Is it really that bad of a thing that the offense dropped off? The more I browse that sight the more I realize how good the numbers are. The guys have put the due diligence in and have an outstanding sight. So I'm done with this since if you do not believe the analysis done there it is a waste of my time to argue it anymore.
So you want to bring up Favre if it helps you...but not when its not showing much?Make up your mind.And the biggest dropoff continues to be the defense and not QB position.Im not saying the offense has not dropped off.Im saying the defense has been bad. Despite your denial.Watch the games. You can analyze stats and adjustments and equations all you want.Simply watching the teams play is pretty simple.There is a reason that nobody who has watched the team play this year is even close to agreeing with you.
I did not bring Favre into the conversation.I no longer care about the rest.Apparently statistical analysis backs up my side as Football outsiders shows so you last point is not a good one.
Look at the first post in this string...and tell me again how you did not bring up Favre.And statistical analysis on one site supports you...congrats.
Yea me.
 
It has everything to do with your continuing to paint a picture that is not even remotely close to reality.
Once again this has nothing to do with what was posted and I don't even own a paintbrush.Bring facts to the table or relevant posts. I might disagree with Sho but he is putting data out to be considered.Thanks.
 
31 pages. THis thread is like an auto accident that you just can't take your eyes off of.
as much crap as people give sho nuff(myself included), I am very happy about this thread. This is a bad year for the pack so far. I have dissected them in more ways than I ever have, and thats due in no small part to this thread. Lots of articles, stats, thoughts, etc.
Agreed. Sho has brought data to the table for consideration. Take a look at the Football Outsiders site. The more I browse it the more impressed I am with it.
 
sho nuff said:
More on 3rd downs for those who like to bash the offense.2007 GB converted 42.6% of its thrid downs (8th in the NFL)2008 GB has converted 44.4% of its third downs (thats tied for 7th in the NFL)defensively?2007 GB allowed conversions on 33% of the third downs (3rd best in the NFL)2008 GB has allowed conversions on 37.8% of the third downs (15th in the NFL) :shrug: That for the poster who thought Rodgers does not spread it out as much and makes it more predictable on 3rd downs. Yet they are converting more and he is now tied for 3rd in the NFL in QB rating on 3rd down (does not say everything for sure...that rating would not account for him throwing a 3 yard pass when they needed 4 yards...I realize this).And I did not post it earlier because I had not looked...but 2007 Favre had a rating of 92.5% on third down. Rodgers is doing better than that...and the team is converting more 3rd downs than last year and giving up more conversions on third downs than they did last year.
Can you frame some of this for me. How many 3rd down attempts did the 2007 vs 2008 Packers have? How many 3rd down attempts have the two defenses had to defend?
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Well.... Ted has brought in some free agents. Actually he got good value in Woodson and Chillar. What he does not do is indulge recklessly in the market. That said, Wolfe was circumspect in that regard too, but he did make a splash occassionally. Who can say whether Thompson might as well.
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Oh, I don't know - Colledge is having a good year, Nick Collins led the NFL in INTs, (edited - Polumalu currently leads) Brandon Jackson is heating up, not to mention the starting quarterback - has TT had some misses? Sure, what GM doesn't? But his drafts have been pretty strong.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff said:
More on 3rd downs for those who like to bash the offense.2007 GB converted 42.6% of its thrid downs (8th in the NFL)2008 GB has converted 44.4% of its third downs (thats tied for 7th in the NFL)defensively?2007 GB allowed conversions on 33% of the third downs (3rd best in the NFL)2008 GB has allowed conversions on 37.8% of the third downs (15th in the NFL) :shrug: That for the poster who thought Rodgers does not spread it out as much and makes it more predictable on 3rd downs. Yet they are converting more and he is now tied for 3rd in the NFL in QB rating on 3rd down (does not say everything for sure...that rating would not account for him throwing a 3 yard pass when they needed 4 yards...I realize this).And I did not post it earlier because I had not looked...but 2007 Favre had a rating of 92.5% on third down. Rodgers is doing better than that...and the team is converting more 3rd downs than last year and giving up more conversions on third downs than they did last year.
Can you frame some of this for me. How many 3rd down attempts did the 2007 vs 2008 Packers have? How many 3rd down attempts have the two defenses had to defend?
08 they have faced 156 attempts on defense and given up 59 1st downs.07 it was 209 and they allowed 6908 they have faced 169 3rd downs and converted 75 of them. (some of that is that in 2001 they were the worst 3rd and 1 team I believe I remember...this year they are pretty good there)07 it was 202 and they converted 86
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Ryan Pickett, Charles Woodson, and Brandon Chillar would disagree with you that he does not sign free agents.Rodgers is a WR? Nick Collins? John Jolly?
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Oh, I don't know - Colledge is having a good year, Nick Collins led the NFL in INTs, (edited - Polumalu currently leads) Brandon Jackson is heating up, not to mention the starting quarterback - has TT had some misses? Sure, what GM doesn't? But his drafts have been pretty strong.
I would not say that Daryn Colledge is having a good year.
 
With this sho nuff fella on ignore there is not much going on, every post i see says this fellas name. Is posting in this thread his full time job? :rant: :hot:

 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Oh, I don't know - Colledge is having a good year, Nick Collins led the NFL in INTs, (edited - Polumalu currently leads) Brandon Jackson is heating up, not to mention the starting quarterback - has TT had some misses? Sure, what GM doesn't? But his drafts have been pretty strong.
2005Aaron Rodgers(1), Nick Collins(2), Terrence Murphy(2), Marviel Underwood(4),Brady Popinga(4), Junius Coston(5), Mike Hawkins(5), Craig Bragg(6), Kurt Campbell(7), Will Whitiker(7)2006AJ Hawk(1), Darryn Colledge(2), Greg Jennings(2), Abdul Hodge(3), Jason Spitz(3), Cory Rodgers(4), Will Blackmon(4), Ingle Martin(5), Tony Moll(5), Jonny Jolly(6), Tyrone Culver(6), Dave Tollefson(7)2007Justin Harrell(1), Brandon Jackson(2), James Jones(3), Aaron Rouse(3), Allen Barbre(4), David Clowney(5), Korey Hall(6), Mason Crosby(6), Desmond Bishop(6),Deshawn Wynn(7), Clark Harris(7)2008Jordy Nelson(2), Brian Brohm(2), Patrick Lee(2), Jerimichael Finley(3), Jeremy Thompson(4), Josh Sitton(4), Breno Giacomini(5), Matt Flynn(7), Brett Swain(7)I think 2005 was not a very good draft. Rodgers and Collins are both good picks, but they were 1st and 2nd rdrs. 2006 seems like a solid draft. I dont like the AJ Hawk pick, never did. It is hard to find fault in the other picks.2007 is average at best. Harrell is a bust. I dont care if he is injured. He was injured when we drafted him. Jackson hasnt done much, but he could still be ok, Jones seems like a quality #3 at best if he can stay healthy. 2008 is obviously too young, but once again he used a high pick on QB. Like it did with Rodgers for Favre, Brohm hurts Rodgers chances. Nelson seems like he has some promise, but nobody else is really inspiring here. Again way too soon to tell.Nothing here sticks out to me as TT being a great drafter. 2006 basically saves him.
 
Reasons for me why they should have kept Favre for at least one more year...1. The Packers were 13-3 last year.2. They were the second ranked offense3. They did this with constant shuffling around at RB and Oline for much of the season.4. Favre had just had his highest completion % ever5. Favre had the 3rd most yards he had ever had his highest YPA6. This was the youngest team in the NFL and had great chemistry.7. Favre was second in MVP voting.8. Rodgers was still under contract through 2009.9. The offense was returning all 11 starters.How would Favre have been able to stop people from getting injured?Obviously he can't stop people from getting injured. However if Favre was QB this year, every situation would have been different. The whole path would have been different. Players are not predestined to get injured. Injuries happen because of a players exact location on the field causing such an injury. Now of course other people could have been injured. We could have lost AJ Hawk for the year instead of Barnett. Or woodson instead of Harris for a while, or both of them, or neither. Lets also not forget about the injuries during Favre's super bowl year. Remember the riff raff we had at wr for a bunch of games that year? Thank god for Andre Rison being on the scrap heap. But I would say he handled that pretty well.How would Favre have helped the defense? Again obviously he cant make tackles. What he brings to the defense is attitude. I think Rodgers is starting to get that. Leroy Butler was on the radio last week and said he thinks Rodgers is showing signs of developing a bit of swagger and confidence. He said the defense always loved that about Favre. Made you want to play harder when you saw Favre tangling with the defense. This was mentioned on the Fox broadcast as well where the announcer showed all of these clips of Rodgers "acting like Favre". I thought it was lame, but it did back up what Butler had said. I think Favre and the defense always had each other's backs in spirit as well. If the defense screwed up a play, they had confidence Favre could bring them back. If Favre threw a bad pick, he had confidence the defense would hook him up.Again this is all hypothetical. Rodgers could still turn this thing around this year and take the Pack to the playoffs. I dont think it will happen, but it certainly could. The giants, steelers, and patriots are proof that getting in the playoffs is the first necessary step for some magic to come together. We look back at those teams and say well they were different, they proved to be great teams. Well nobody said that before they won it all.
Your reasoning is great. BUT Brett Favre said he was retired and told the Packers the same thing in June. He wanted back in after the team had moved on and the season was closing in.
 
Reasons for me why they should have kept Favre for at least one more year...1. The Packers were 13-3 last year.2. They were the second ranked offense3. They did this with constant shuffling around at RB and Oline for much of the season.4. Favre had just had his highest completion % ever5. Favre had the 3rd most yards he had ever had his highest YPA6. This was the youngest team in the NFL and had great chemistry.7. Favre was second in MVP voting.8. Rodgers was still under contract through 2009.9. The offense was returning all 11 starters.How would Favre have been able to stop people from getting injured?Obviously he can't stop people from getting injured. However if Favre was QB this year, every situation would have been different. The whole path would have been different. Players are not predestined to get injured. Injuries happen because of a players exact location on the field causing such an injury. Now of course other people could have been injured. We could have lost AJ Hawk for the year instead of Barnett. Or woodson instead of Harris for a while, or both of them, or neither. Lets also not forget about the injuries during Favre's super bowl year. Remember the riff raff we had at wr for a bunch of games that year? Thank god for Andre Rison being on the scrap heap. But I would say he handled that pretty well.How would Favre have helped the defense? Again obviously he cant make tackles. What he brings to the defense is attitude. I think Rodgers is starting to get that. Leroy Butler was on the radio last week and said he thinks Rodgers is showing signs of developing a bit of swagger and confidence. He said the defense always loved that about Favre. Made you want to play harder when you saw Favre tangling with the defense. This was mentioned on the Fox broadcast as well where the announcer showed all of these clips of Rodgers "acting like Favre". I thought it was lame, but it did back up what Butler had said. I think Favre and the defense always had each other's backs in spirit as well. If the defense screwed up a play, they had confidence Favre could bring them back. If Favre threw a bad pick, he had confidence the defense would hook him up.Again this is all hypothetical. Rodgers could still turn this thing around this year and take the Pack to the playoffs. I dont think it will happen, but it certainly could. The giants, steelers, and patriots are proof that getting in the playoffs is the first necessary step for some magic to come together. We look back at those teams and say well they were different, they proved to be great teams. Well nobody said that before they won it all.
Your reasoning is great. BUT Brett Favre said he was retired and told the Packers the same thing in June. He wanted back in after the team had moved on and the season was closing in.
WEIRD thing about YOUR reasoning is that the JETS did not have an issue with taking the aged Vet with the season closing in so quickly, and he wasn't even familiar with their offense. WEIRD!
 
How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now?

Packers Mgmt = Relieved / Satisfied
I'm sure they are with that 5-7 record 30-30 overall and probably missing the playoffs for 3 years out of the last 4. Thompson is also ignoring the media. I'm sure they are satisfied! :bow:
You're being deliberately obtuse. Yes, Thompson has a ton of issues to deal with - but as FAR AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD - the trade of Favre to make way for Rodgers - I am sure management is more than satisfied. Talk about :lmao:
So you are happy the management is more than satisfied with a 5-7 start with Rodgers..0-7 when down at halftime and 0-4 when trying to win the game in crunch time. Good to know you are happy that the GB management is satisfied with that. :rolleyes:
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Ryan Pickett, Charles Woodson, and Brandon Chillar would disagree with you that he does not sign free agents.Rodgers is a WR? Nick Collins? John Jolly?
I should have said outside of receivers and Rodgers. Sure Collins and Jolly are decent, but they aren't anything phenomenal either. I realize he does sign free agents. I was using hyperbole. He just does not sign many free agents that are going to be "impact" players like the original poster said. Other than Charles Woodson, he has not signed an impact free agent.
 
2005

Aaron Rodgers(1), Nick Collins(2), Terrence Murphy(2), Marviel Underwood(4),Brady Popinga(4), Junius Coston(5), Mike Hawkins(5), Craig Bragg(6), Kurt Campbell(7), Will Whitiker(7)

2006

AJ Hawk(1), Darryn Colledge(2), Greg Jennings(2), Abdul Hodge(3), Jason Spitz(3), Cory Rodgers(4), Will Blackmon(4), Ingle Martin(5), Tony Moll(5), Jonny Jolly(6), Tyrone Culver(6), Dave Tollefson(7)

2007

Justin Harrell(1), Brandon Jackson(2), James Jones(3), Aaron Rouse(3), Allen Barbre(4), David Clowney(5), Korey Hall(6), Mason Crosby(6), Desmond Bishop(6),Deshawn Wynn(7), Clark Harris(7)

2008

Jordy Nelson(2), Brian Brohm(2), Patrick Lee(2), Jerimichael Finley(3), Jeremy Thompson(4), Josh Sitton(4), Breno Giacomini(5), Matt Flynn(7), Brett Swain(7)

I think 2005 was not a very good draft. Rodgers and Collins are both good picks, but they were 1st and 2nd rdrs.

2006 seems like a solid draft. I dont like the AJ Hawk pick, never did. It is hard to find fault in the other picks.

2007 is average at best. Harrell is a bust. I dont care if he is injured. He was injured when we drafted him. Jackson hasnt done much, but he could still be ok, Jones seems like a quality #3 at best if he can stay healthy.

2008 is obviously too young, but once again he used a high pick on QB. Like it did with Rodgers for Favre, Brohm hurts Rodgers chances. Nelson seems like he has some promise, but nobody else is really inspiring here. Again way too soon to tell.

Nothing here sticks out to me as TT being a great drafter. 2006 basically saves him.
I bolded the guys who are starters or have played significant rolls.Some (like Colledge, should not be starters)

Look at that 2006 draft...it might make you like the Hawk pick more. In the top 15, outside of Ngata and Cutler...there have been some major disappointments there. At least with Hawk they got a solid player (not a stud like you might expect at #5 by any means). And with that draft...Ill take a solid player over a complete bust.

Harrell is about a bust. I have not totally given up yet as he has been contributing now. If he gets over the injuries and can play next year...we will see.

Yes, he was injurred when we drafted him, but a completely unrelated injury.

I think Jones is a quality #3 with the upside to be #2. As a rookie he played the #2 role just fine while Jennings was out. So I don't agree with the label #3 "at best".

I don't think Brohm hurts any chances. He was drafted in the 2nd round as it was hard to pass him up there. We don't know how long he will even be on the team. If Flynn keeps winning the camp battles, we could very well turn Brohm into a nice trade.

It shows to me TT is a solid drafter. Several hits with the later misses that are pretty much expected. You draft alot of guys and hope about a third of them pan out.

1st rounders have not been great...though, look at the Packer history of first rounders even with Wolf...its kind of ugly.

 
With this sho nuff fella on ignore there is not much going on, every post i see says this fellas name. Is posting in this thread his full time job? :wall: :popcorn:
I have yet to see you bring any ounce of discussion into this topic other than bringing up me.
just when you thought you were out! They sucked you back in.let the personal stuff roll off your back. What did you think about the draft info I posted? I would like to hear your thoughts on the draft classes.
 
How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now?

Packers Mgmt = Relieved / Satisfied
I'm sure they are with that 5-7 record 30-30 overall and probably missing the playoffs for 3 years out of the last 4. Thompson is also ignoring the media. I'm sure they are satisfied! :wall:
You're being deliberately obtuse. Yes, Thompson has a ton of issues to deal with - but as FAR AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD - the trade of Favre to make way for Rodgers - I am sure management is more than satisfied. Talk about :popcorn:
So you are happy the management is more than satisfied with a 5-7 start with Rodgers..0-7 when down at halftime and 0-4 when trying to win the game in crunch time. Good to know you are happy that the GB management is satisfied with that. :rolleyes:
He said they are satisfied with Rodgers...not with the record. I don't see where he even implied they were satisfied with the overall record.Good thing that management realizes that the reason for the record is not all about trading Brett Favre.

 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Ryan Pickett, Charles Woodson, and Brandon Chillar would disagree with you that he does not sign free agents.Rodgers is a WR? Nick Collins? John Jolly?
I should have said outside of receivers and Rodgers. Sure Collins and Jolly are decent, but they aren't anything phenomenal either. I realize he does sign free agents. I was using hyperbole. He just does not sign many free agents that are going to be "impact" players like the original poster said. Other than Charles Woodson, he has not signed an impact free agent.
Quick name me the impact free agents the Colts have signed over the past 10 years? Can you do it?Pickett had an impact last season as well.And Collins had been playing more than decent and is still on many analysts pro-bowl lists to start for the NFC.
 
With this sho nuff fella on ignore there is not much going on, every post i see says this fellas name. Is posting in this thread his full time job? :wall: :popcorn:
I have yet to see you bring any ounce of discussion into this topic other than bringing up me.
just when you thought you were out! They sucked you back in.let the personal stuff roll off your back. What did you think about the draft info I posted? I would like to hear your thoughts on the draft classes.
I put it in there.I agree there is not as many "wow" hit a homerun there picks. But how many drafts do you see that with by GMs?Jennings is one...and Rodgers looks like he could be.I look at a guy who has drafted some solid players and hit pretty well in that regard. (with the obvious failures in drafting Oline).As for the personal stuff...I do let it roll off me...but I laugh at a guy like this who has provided nothing in this thread coming in to do nothing but bash me (like a few others have).At least you and challenge and some others discuss the topic.
 
How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now?

Packers Mgmt = Relieved / Satisfied
I'm sure they are with that 5-7 record 30-30 overall and probably missing the playoffs for 3 years out of the last 4. Thompson is also ignoring the media. I'm sure they are satisfied! :thumbup:
You're being deliberately obtuse. Yes, Thompson has a ton of issues to deal with - but as FAR AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD - the trade of Favre to make way for Rodgers - I am sure management is more than satisfied. Talk about :wub:
So you are happy the management is more than satisfied with a 5-7 start with Rodgers..0-7 when down at halftime and 0-4 when trying to win the game in crunch time. Good to know you are happy that the GB management is satisfied with that. :rolleyes:
Where did I say that? Oh, that's right, I didn't.
 
At this point I hope the Packers finish strong. I am ambivilent about them making the playoffs, which seems unlikely. Were they to make the playoffs I do not see them having success. I guess, rather than one and done I would prefer to see them lick some wounds, get healthy, feel angry, and draft high. I would prefer the organization have time to construct a good off season plan. I would prefer they have extra time to address thier free agency needs and to take care of their surgeries early. I would prefer then that they consider the free agency crop and spend the extra time scouting and prepping for the draft.Ultimately I do not think this team is far away from being a legit contender. If they can get healthy early, maybe get an impact D-lineman in F.A. and then add some help on the O-line in the draft and some youth at D.B. this team could be very competitive. their skill positions are fine. I believe they are close, but I actually believe making the playoffs this year would set them back.I am somewhat disappointed in this year, but I feel a down year occassionally is sometimes necessary to take a step forward. I generally like the direction of the club.
It would be great if the Packers did that in the offseason, but you have to remember, Ted does not sign free agents. Hopefully he drafts some decent players, although outside of wide receivers, I don't think he has done that great with the draft either.
Oh, I don't know - Colledge is having a good year, Nick Collins led the NFL in INTs, (edited - Polumalu currently leads) Brandon Jackson is heating up, not to mention the starting quarterback - has TT had some misses? Sure, what GM doesn't? But his drafts have been pretty strong.
I would not say that Daryn Colledge is having a good year.
He's had a bad play here and there (like down on the goalline against the Panthers) but overall, his play has been excellent in pass protection, and he's improving in the run game. Overall, I def think he's having a good year - a much better year than anyone else on the interior of the line. (Which, admittedly, is not saying much...)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top