OT- Pats Packers | Page 2 | The Boneyard

OT- Pats Packers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheeky said:
It's ridiculous to call him the GOAT in 2014, and another 8 great regular seasons is not going to change that. Give him a few years to win in the playoffs, and I think he's got a great shot, however, to vie for that title.
Expand ...

I guess we just value different things.
 
superjohn said:
If the only thing you are holding out on is that he doesn't have enough Super Bowls
Expand ...
Yeah man, this is the THIRD time you did this. That is not what I wrote, argued, or suggested. I wrote that his post season play has not been GOATY. He won the SB once - well done. After that, he is 1 and 4.
It's not # of Super Bowls - that would be a ridiculous single measure of post season performance. It's a career's body of work in the post season. His career body of work in the post season probably isn't top 20.

Anyway - enjoyed the conversation - gotta get work done. I give the Packers a 65% chance of winning it all, and they're a likable team, so I'll be rooting for them.
 
Fishy said:
We weren't talking, really. I was talking.

Straight talent on their best day.

Now, I guess, we're talking.
Expand ...
Well we're talking but you didn't really answer the question: straight talent on their best day now or straight talent on their best day of their total career?
 
superjohn said:
I'm the furthest thing from a Packers fan but I do recognize greatness and Rodgers has it. I go by the eye test and Rodgers can do all the things the greatest QB's could do but he also does things the others can't. Brady and Manning are two of the best ever and probably two and three right now even at their relatively old ages but they simply can't do some of the things Rodgers can and they never could at a younger age. When you also factor in that Rodgers has the best #'s ever at this stage in his career you realize how absurd his level of play has been. If the only thing you are holding out on is that he doesn't have enough Super Bowls well he will have a lot of time to get another couple, he's going to win another MVP this year. Cheeky, just curious who you think is the best quarterback ever? Guessing it's Montana and Bradshaw but not sure, best NBA player must be Russell.
Expand ...

I don't think Rodgers stacks up to Manning or Brady. I wouldn't put Rodgers in the same class as Manning, Brady, Elway, Marino, Montana or Unitas. He's a step below those guys which is still really really good. Just not on the same level. That's my 2 cents.
 
.-.
@Cheeky you're Syracuse analogy is not a good one. The problem you and others have in discussions like these is the failure to recognize that football is a team sport. That Brady won three super bowls does not make him a better all-time quarterback than Manning or Rodgers. There is a certain degree of research you have to do when assessing these things; why did Brady's team win? How did he play in the games that resulted in Super Bowls being won? How did the context of the roster influence what he was/wasn't asked to do?

Brady might well be the GOAT, or at least higher on the list than Manning and Rodgers. But I think that warrants a more comprehensive breakdown than "this guy won and this guy didn't". I mean, are you seriously arguing that Rodgers can't be in the discussion because he's only won one Super Bowl? When in fact his individual performances in the playoffs have typically been spectacular, and actually better than Brady or Manning? It's not Rodgers' fault that the Packers can't defend the read option, it isn't his fault that his defense gave up 52 points in his playoff debut, and it isn't his fault that they gave up 37 points to the Giants the year he won the MVP.

It's obviously nonsensical to attribute Brady's success to a system, but at the same time, you can't dismiss the inextricable career trajectories of he and Belichick. If on one hand you're going to argue that Brady's never had receiving talent and Peyton has, on the other you have to consider Brady has played his entire career for arguably the greatest coach of all-time while Peyton is on coach four or five now.

Again, I'm not taking a side here. I just think these conversations are always reduced to the most convenient iterations of the latest talk show narratives.
 
Cheeky said:
Yeah man, this is the THIRD time you did this. That is not what I wrote, argued, or suggested. I wrote that his post season play has not been GOATY. He won the SB once - well done. After that, he is 1 and 4.
It's not # of Super Bowls - that would be a ridiculous single measure of post season performance. It's a career's body of work in the post season. His career body of work in the post season probably isn't top 20.

Anyway - enjoyed the conversation - gotta get work done. I give the Packers a 65% chance of winning it all, and they're a likable team, so I'll be rooting for them.
Expand ...
This post is entirely different than anything else you said in this thread, you can't keep changing the goal posts. You have now told me I don't think Brady is good despite me saying he's one of the best ever. You said it's all about winning which I took to mean winning Super Bowls, so it's post season play and numbers don't matter at all? It's tough having a back and forth with someone when they keep changing the parameters. I've been consistent with what I've said, in my opinion Brady is one of the best I've ever seen and Rodgers is the best. As for giving the Packers a 65% chance of winning it all, that seems just a tad high, lol.
 
Both are great quarterbacks but what separates them is Rodgers is able to move out of the pocket and throw accurately on the run while Brady is pretty much a pocket passer. Number of Superbowls or playoff wins in pretty meaningless since these are team accomplishments. As a pure passer in their prime Manning and Marino were probably a shade better.
 
.-.
mauconnfan said:
You can actually mix up Manning, Rogers and Brady and be happy with any of them. But watching each play and depending on the line they have, Rogers could easily be the best of all 3 at this point this year. He's moving around making plays the other 2 can't but again, anyone can argue for any of the 3 and win.
Expand ...

I'm a Brady guy, and prefer him on my team for a potential super bowl run, but the above post is fact.
 
Such a weird conversation.

Brady - 3 Championships. Really hard to trump that from a pure best of all time conversation.
Manning - He will hold all the passing records after next year and has a championship. Really hard to trump from a pure best of all time conversation.
Rogers - Best all time ratings in several categories and has a championship. 7 years more stats to get to Brady/Manning age (and if he can still excel at that age). Really hard to trump form a pure best of all time conversation.

At this point - if you're talking best of all time, Brady > Manning , Rogers getting an incomplete with Montana and Marino and Bradshaw all raising their hands.
 
I think this comment comes off as homerish: "Brady is one of the best ever but a lot of his greatness is predicated on the system. He doesn't have the arm strength down the field and can't run a lick but he is a master at dinking and dunking and his accuracy and mental game are off the charts."

These are things you said that downgrade Brady.

1. Brady's greatness is predicated on the system.

Rebuttal: what great QB doesn't have a system? Manning has one, Montana had one, Rodgers plays a variant of a pretty famous one in GB.

2. Brady doesn't have arm strength to throw downfield.

Rebuttal: Where did you come up with this? Most NFL experts and scouts see Brady as having a very strong arm. When Mayock had the ESPN Sports science guys measure velocity at all spots of the field, no one had a stronger arm than Brady.

3. Dinking and dunking.

Rebuttal: This was true of Brady when he was young, his first 2 or 3 years. But in his 4th year, he jumped to the top of the league in long throws, and YPA and YPC, and he has stayed there his whole career. In recent years, his long bombs have gone way down, but this also coincided with the fact that he hasn't had one single WR threat downfield post-Randy Moss. How was Brady's downfield arm when Randy Moss was around? Pretty damn good.

Although this wasn't a completion, have a look at the video and look at his arm strength:

65 yards downfield on a line, pinpoint accuracy, and also thrown across the field which probably makes it an 80 yarder.

Just wondering you're old enough to have watched vintage early 1980s Dan Marino? Because if you're ooing and ahhing at Rodgers release and accuracy and arm, I don't think he's nearly as good. Then again, no one was as good as Marino. Not Manning, not Brady, not Montana. But the other 3 guys had elements to their game that Marino didn't. Marino, for instance was easily flustered.

As for running out of the pocket, it's a great weapon in the arsenal. It is just one weapon however. There are other parts of the game that are just as useful. Like pocket awareness. Brady and Marino are the two best I've ever seen when it comes to that. Then there's quick release. Marino is the best. Then Manning and Brady and Rodgers. Montana and Brady share a trait that Manning doesn't have, and which Marino possessed little of. Rodgers hasn't been in enough pressure situations to know how he'd it'll play out. Montana and Brady were capable of collecting themselves when things were going bad, and they knew when to press and when to take a sack, when to make a big play, and hen they needed to keep their teams in the game. Manning has simply gone haywire and done stupid stuff way too many times in his career. He is not nearly as bizarre as Favre, but Manning is up there when it comes to that.

I believe in the other Patriot thread we already had a discussion about stats, so I am not impressed by the fact that Rodgers has all these numbers early in his career. The NFL changed in 2006 and prevented all the jamming and grabbing that was going on 10 yards downfield. Everyone's numbers went up, not just Rodgers's. In fact, you can compare all the QBs from that point on and Rodgers's numbers don't jump out at you. But I'm not big on QB stats regardless since they tend to miss the biggest picture of all, like scoring points and touchdowns. QB stats don't account for the QBs part in that.

At the end of the day, the fact that you think Brady is a product of the system, that Brady is a dinker and dunker, that Brady has a weak downfield arm, tells me that you were mightily impressed by the fact that he was drafted in the 6th round, and no matter what the guy did or does, he could never rise to the highest level in your eyes.
 
Brady is a "system" QB only in as much as he is the system. Ball-control to high-flying and all those in between have been the Pats system in the Brady era.
 
.-.
Not sure Randy Moss catching a bomb is a good answer. When was that?

As we speak today there is no reason for anyone to speak of the 3 mentioned above and have a problem with anyone having any order. If you like Rodgers better then you have an argument. If you think Brady is now more of a short passer, well he is but that's what the offense wins with. He has a strong arm still. PManning's numbers have been from a good dinner game too.

I would give Rodgers the edge on them all simply because he moves a ton better than either and throws on the run better than either as we speak today!
 
mauconnfan said:
Not sure Randy Moss catching a bomb is a good answer. When was that?
Expand ...

It was a very long time ago. It's been 5 years since that time. Brady hasn't had a downfield WR since that time. Not one. Edelman, Welker, Gronk and Hernandez. Not a single one is a downfield burner.

LaFell is their first good WR import in years, and the guy is doing great, but at Carolina he was not known to have good speed.

Belichick has missed on his 4 WR draft picks in that post Moss era (Taylor Price 3rd round, Josh Boyce 3rd round, Brandon Tate 2nd round, Aaron Dobson 2nd round). That's a lot of wasted draft picks. Fortunately, the Patriots have done well with Gronk (2nd round) and Edelman (7th round).
 
He throws peas when he needs to and you need arm strength for that. He's still excellent. LaFell is a find - he's been super. The TD yesterday behind the shoulder was like they played together for years!
 
Brady still has good arm strength, but his accuracy deep hasn't been great the last few years.
 
upstater said:
I think this comment comes off as homerish: "Brady is one of the best ever but a lot of his greatness is predicated on the system. He doesn't have the arm strength down the field and can't run a lick but he is a master at dinking and dunking and his accuracy and mental game are off the charts."

These are things you said that downgrade Brady.

1. Brady's greatness is predicated on the system.

Rebuttal: what great QB doesn't have a system? Manning has one, Montana had one, Rodgers plays a variant of a pretty famous one in GB.

2. Brady doesn't have arm strength to throw downfield.

Rebuttal: Where did you come up with this? Most NFL experts and scouts see Brady as having a very strong arm. When Mayock had the ESPN Sports science guys measure velocity at all spots of the field, no one had a stronger arm than Brady.

3. Dinking and dunking.

Rebuttal: This was true of Brady when he was young, his first 2 or 3 years. But in his 4th year, he jumped to the top of the league in long throws, and YPA and YPC, and he has stayed there his whole career. In recent years, his long bombs have gone way down, but this also coincided with the fact that he hasn't had one single WR threat downfield post-Randy Moss. How was Brady's downfield arm when Randy Moss was around? Pretty damn good.

Although this wasn't a completion, have a look at the video and look at his arm strength:

65 yards downfield on a line, pinpoint accuracy, and also thrown across the field which probably makes it an 80 yarder.

Just wondering you're old enough to have watched vintage early 1980s Dan Marino? Because if you're ooing and ahhing at Rodgers release and accuracy and arm, I don't think he's nearly as good. Then again, no one was as good as Marino. Not Manning, not Brady, not Montana. But the other 3 guys had elements to their game that Marino didn't. Marino, for instance was easily flustered.

As for running out of the pocket, it's a great weapon in the arsenal. It is just one weapon however. There are other parts of the game that are just as useful. Like pocket awareness. Brady and Marino are the two best I've ever seen when it comes to that. Then there's quick release. Marino is the best. Then Manning and Brady and Rodgers. Montana and Brady share a trait that Manning doesn't have, and which Marino possessed little of. Rodgers hasn't been in enough pressure situations to know how he'd it'll play out. Montana and Brady were capable of collecting themselves when things were going bad, and they knew when to press and when to take a sack, when to make a big play, and hen they needed to keep their teams in the game. Manning has simply gone haywire and done stupid stuff way too many times in his career. He is not nearly as bizarre as Favre, but Manning is up there when it comes to that.

I believe in the other Patriot thread we already had a discussion about stats, so I am not impressed by the fact that Rodgers has all these numbers early in his career. The NFL changed in 2006 and prevented all the jamming and grabbing that was going on 10 yards downfield. Everyone's numbers went up, not just Rodgers's. In fact, you can compare all the QBs from that point on and Rodgers's numbers don't jump out at you. But I'm not big on QB stats regardless since they tend to miss the biggest picture of all, like scoring points and touchdowns. QB stats don't account for the QBs part in that.

At the end of the day, the fact that you think Brady is a product of the system, that Brady is a dinker and dunker, that Brady has a weak downfield arm, tells me that you were mightily impressed by the fact that he was drafted in the 6th round, and no matter what the guy did or does, he could never rise to the highest level in your eyes.
Expand ...
For the fifth time, how can I be a homer when I don't like the Packers? I could care less what round Brady was drafted in but it's quite amazing he turned out to be one of the best quarterbacks being drafted so late, same goes for Montana. You are saying QB stats should be irrelevant since 2006 and Rodgers numbers don't jump out at you, this is just silly considering he has the best stats since then. When you say, "But I'm not big on QB stats regardless since they tend to miss the biggest picture of all, like scoring points and touchdowns. QB stats don't account for the QBs part in that." I have no clue what you're talking about with this statement. Sure it's always hard comparing guys from different generations but when comparing contemporaries I have no clue how you can say stats don't matter, they aren't everything but they sure mean a lot. As for Brady dinking and dunking I do think a lot of his career this is a pretty fair description, this seems to be a big part of what they do, I guess you could say it's based on personnel but I just don't consider Brady to be too accurate with the long ball. You're right though when Moss was with the Pats Brady aired it out way more, who wouldn't with the second best receiver and possibly greatest deep threat of all-time to throw to. Again, Brady is one of the best I've ever seen and Rodgers is the best I've seen, don't know why this is getting peoples panties in a bunch and making them put words in my mouth.
 
superjohn said:
For the fifth time, how can I be a homer when I don't like the Packers? I could care less what round Brady was drafted in but it's quite amazing he turned out to be one of the best quarterbacks being drafted so late, same goes for Montana. You are saying QB stats should be irrelevant since 2006 and Rodgers numbers don't jump out at you, this is just silly considering he has the best stats since then. When you say, "But I'm not big on QB stats regardless since they tend to miss the biggest picture of all, like scoring points and touchdowns. QB stats don't account for the QBs part in that." I have no clue what you're talking about with this statement. Sure it's always hard comparing guys from different generations but when comparing contemporaries I have no clue how you can say stats don't matter, they aren't everything but they sure mean a lot. As for Brady dinking and dunking I do think a lot of his career this is a pretty fair description, this seems to be a big part of what they do, I guess you could say it's based on personnel but I just don't consider Brady to be too accurate with the long ball. You're right though when Moss was with the Pats Brady aired it out way more, who wouldn't with the second best receiver and possibly greatest deep threat of all-time to throw to. Again, Brady is one of the best I've ever seen and Rodgers is the best I've seen, don't know why this is getting peoples panties in a bunch and making them put words in my mouth.
Expand ...

Should read HATER not HOMER. Wonder if my autocorrect changed that.

You're running away from what you wrote. You wrote he had a weak arm. He doesn't. There's lots out there actually measuring his velocity. You wrote he's a dinker and dunker. Yet he throws more passes in the intermediate range than the vast majority of the league (15-30 yards). His YPA is high up there, as is YPC.

The QB stats leave out rushing TDs in their calculation. It's a huge hole in the formula.

Matt Stafford has great stats too. Brady and Manning's stats skyrocketed after 2006.

So when you compare the first years of Rodgers' career to Manning's or Brady's it's such a phony comparison.

When Brady had Deion Branch (is he one of the greatest WRs of all time?) his long ball was deadly accurate. This is what good receivers tend to do, adjust to your ball downfield. if you ever watched the top QBs trying to throw a ball into a trash can 40-50 yards downfield, as at the QB skills competition, it is very hard to do, so much of it is WRs. The QBs job is to recognize the WR getting open and to make sure the ball isn't intercepted.
 
.-.
superjohn said:
How am I a Brady hater? I think he's one of the best ever, I just think Rodgers is better. Bringing up Jordan is just a terrible analogy in every way possible. Rodgers just does things Brady and Peyton can't do. How did he not appear clutch today? Thought both qb's played pretty well, Rodgers was just better.
Expand ...

Is Rodgers better right now? Sure, but Brady is ancient.

At their respective peaks they're pretty equal in my eyes, with Brady's obsessive competitiveness putting him over the top.
 
upstater said:
Should read HATER not HOMER. Wonder if my autocorrect changed that.

You're running away from what you wrote. You wrote he had a weak arm. He doesn't. There's lots out there actually measuring his velocity. You wrote he's a dinker and dunker. Yet he throws more passes in the intermediate range than the vast majority of the league (15-30 yards). His YPA is high up there, as is YPC.

The QB stats leave out rushing TDs in their calculation. It's a huge hole in the formula.

Matt Stafford has great stats too. Brady and Manning's stats skyrocketed after 2006.

So when you compare the first years of Rodgers' career to Manning's or Brady's it's such a phony comparison.

When Brady had Deion Branch (is he one of the greatest WRs of all time?) his long ball was deadly accurate. This is what good receivers tend to do, adjust to your ball downfield. if you ever watched the top QBs trying to throw a ball into a trash can 40-50 yards downfield, as at the QB skills competition, it is very hard to do, so much of it is WRs. The QBs job is to recognize the WR getting open and to make sure the ball isn't intercepted.
Expand ...
"The QB stats leave out rushing TD's in their calculation. It's a huge hole in the formula." This is one of the most bizarre statements I've read on this board and I have no clue what you're talking about when it comes to stats. Why would you bring up Matt Stafford? His stats suck compared to Rodgers, Manning and Brady. You are the biggest Rodgers hater/homer I've ever seen because you won't say he's the best ever. See what I did there, it's what you keep insinuating I think of Brady. Your last sentence is very true about the QB's job is recognizing the WR is open and to make sure the ball isn't intercepted. Rodgers is by far the best in the history of the NFL at getting the ball to his wide receivers without it getting intercepted, it's just one of the things he's the best at.
 
superjohn said:
"The QB stats leave out rushing TD's in their calculation. It's a huge hole in the formula." This is one of the most bizarre statements I've read on this board and I have no clue what you're talking about when it comes to stats. Why would you bring up Matt Stafford? His stats suck compared to Rodgers, Manning and Brady. You are the biggest Rodgers hater/homer I've ever seen because you won't say he's the best ever. See what I did there, it's what you keep insinuating I think of Brady. Your last sentence is very true about the QB's job is recognizing the WR is open and to make sure the ball isn't intercepted. Rodgers is by far the best in the history of the NFL at getting the ball to his wide receivers without it getting intercepted, it's just one of the things he's the best at.
Expand ...

If you can't understand the QBs role in scoring TDs period (whether passing or rushing) let's end this discussion, because you're the only person I've ever met (and quite possibly on the entire planet) who can't understand that a formula that totally leaves out rushing TDs (and therefore the QBs part in rushing TDs) is totally flawed.
 
upstater said:
If you can't understand the QBs role in scoring TDs period (whether passing or rushing) let's end this discussion, because you're the only person I've ever met (and quite possibly on the entire planet) who can't understand that a formula that totally leaves out rushing TDs (and therefore the QBs part in rushing TDs) is totally flawed.
Expand ...

The idea of passer rating or QBR is to measure what the QUARTERBACK does, not the offense. Sure, the quarterback can have a role in rushing tds for his team, but then you're going to have guys like Mark Sanchez with inflated numbers as a result.

Adding a rushing touchdown component would make passer rating like the win statistic in baseball.

My guess is you're advocating for this because it would prop up Brady's numbers, although he'd probably still be well behind Rodgers overall.
 
upstater said:
If you can't understand the QBs role in scoring TDs period (whether passing or rushing) let's end this discussion, because you're the only person I've ever met (and quite possibly on the entire planet) who can't understand that a formula that totally leaves out rushing TDs (and therefore the QBs part in rushing TDs) is totally flawed.
Expand ...
Yeah no point in continuing this any further, if you think passer rating is a useless stat because running back totals aren't factored into it I don't know what to tell you. I learned a long time ago there is no point arguing with crazy.
 
johnhuskies95 said:
The idea of passer rating or QBR is to measure what the QUARTERBACK does, not the offense. Sure, the quarterback can have a role in rushing tds for his team, but then you're going to have guys like Mark Sanchez with inflated numbers as a result.

Adding a rushing touchdown component would make passer rating like the win statistic in baseball.

My guess is you're advocating for this because it would prop up Brady's numbers, although he'd probably still be well behind Rodgers overall.
Expand ...

Man, I hate fantasy football. Just hate it.

A team can have 5000 passing yards, 1500 rushing yards, 35 passing TDs, 25 rushing TDs, and yet the QBR will tell you that the QB of another team with 4500 passing yards, 1200 rushing yards, 40 passing TDs, 7 rushing TDs, same amount of INTs--the second QB had the better year statistically. I'm not even talking about how many of the rushing TDs were run by the QB himself, but the fact that a QB is running for TDs should indeed ALSO be considered when he is rated.

That's a huge flaw right there.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,640
Messages
4,587,431
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom