tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post1473333201781912438..comments2023-11-05T04:16:44.937-05:00Comments on Advanced Football Analytics (formerly Advanced NFL Stats): McCarthy Makes New OT MistakeUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger69125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-59825765587416567792013-12-01T00:35:51.046-05:002013-12-01T00:35:51.046-05:002008
====
I know you don't want to believe it...2008<br />====<br /><br />I know you don't want to believe it because you're a "fan" (see what I think of those above), but prior to this<br /><br />http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jets/jets-fined-125-000-for-not-listing-favre-s-injury-1.1454530<br /><br />Favre was 8-3 and having a career year. <br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Favre#New_York_Jets_.282008.29<br /><br />So after 11 games, Favre beat an as yet undefeated team and had a 6 TD game. YES, THAT IS BETTER THAN 6-10. My guess is that you didn't watch or follow any Jets games because you're a "fan" of GB. You obviously don't know what you're talking about when it comes to Favre's 2008 season and just how well he was doing before becoming injured.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-26486623747853286632013-11-30T22:23:19.605-05:002013-11-30T22:23:19.605-05:00The conspiracy comment was sarcasm. You know, sin...The conspiracy comment was sarcasm. You know, sinister forces with ulterior motives and things not being what they appear. The Soviets/Cubans/CIA/Mafia killed JFK. That sort of thing. You tinfoil hat types take everything too literally. <br /><br />You keep accusing them of being inept and wrong to make the switch and cite Ari Fleischer and the fact that the team went 6-10. I already addressed the 6-10 record and the points scored/points allowed expected win-loss record. I don't feel like looking up DVOA, but that shows whatever it shows. But let's take your claim that it was a bad decision substantively. <br /><br />Why were they wrong? They decided (correctly) that it was time to make Rodgers the starter. They decided (correctly) that Favre backing up Rodgers would have been a recipe for disaster. The organization was far too worried about the PR fallout of parting ways with a legend. As I've said many times now, they should have dealt him to the Vikings if that's where he wanted to go as a courtesy, even if not in the best interests of the organization -- which is probably an "incompetent" sentiment on my part as opposed to a rather cold-blooded calculation that it was best for the Packers organization to send him to the AFC. <br /><br />You never did address whether the Niners were inept when they exiled Montana, arguably the greatest QB in the history of the game, to KC or whether the Colts were inept when they decided in the middle of last season to Suck for Luck and try and trade Manning. And that's because those were the correct decisions. <br /><br />As your Christl link points out, someone (probably some rich guys on the board who are RNC donors that were overly sensitive about getting flak at the country club for dumping Favre) hired a PR flack to spin an ugly situation. Favre really was considered a do-no-wrong legendary figure in Wisconsin. At the time, public opinion backed the old guy who had won a Super Bowl -- not the unproven young backup. None of which has much to do with what happens on the field. If the football guys didn't think Rodgers could play, I'm sure they would've tolerated yet another unretirement. But they thought he could play and they knew they needed to find out empirically whether their observations of the guy in practice/preseason were correct or not. If Rodgers couldn't play, they would have needed to draft or sign a QB anyway regardless of whether Favre was welcomed back that year. <br /><br />Also, do you really think Favre had a better 2008 than Rodgers did? 22 interceptions wasn't acceptable. Because that's really the crux of your argument (if you had an argument, rather than pointing to the sinister PR guy behind the curtain and shouting about 6-10 and ignoring the 380 points the GB defense gave up and the 419 points the offense scored that year). Favre might have been good Brett instead of bad Brett had he stayed with the Packers -- but when you look at the last three years of his career, it's hard to say 2008 and 2010 were good years. <br /><br />The facts are that Rodgers had a better year than Favre every year from 2008 onward with the exception of 2009. And Rodgers/GB/Thompson won a Super Bowl. I'm sure most organizations hope they can one day attain this level of incompetence before they are fired.<br /><br />I liked Favre too. He was my favorite player. I wanted him back in 2008 to take another shot with the Packers. When he wound up with the hated Vikings in 2009, I still wanted him to beat the Saints and at least get to the Super Bowl one last time. Would have been great to see him be the first guy to win Super Bowls with two different teams. But like most GB fans, I'm glad they had the stones to make the difficult decision. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-13158778908649163062013-11-30T21:42:59.291-05:002013-11-30T21:42:59.291-05:00I'm not a "fan" of any team. Leave ...I'm not a "fan" of any team. Leave that for the people that want to emulate teenage girls following pop stars. That's what most "fans" act like. That's what YOU act like.<br /><br />I don't "follow" ESPN or any other news organization. Sure, I'll glean information from them and I'll even use them as references. But the so-called "news" is often not fair, nor is it likely to be balanced. So don't be a sucker. Simply admit the Packers are led by self-indulging dimwits that signed Senaca Wallace and Scott Tolzien because they thought that they didn't really need a backup QB and instead wanted to get "inside information" on the 49ers. Granted, that is an improvable assertion, but also the obvious and simplest explanation for those two QBs to be signed in the week prior to playing the 49ers. There were a ton of QBs that could have been signed. Matt Hasselbeck, Kevin Kolb, and Ryan Fitzpatrick were all signed earlier in the year and in all likelihood any of them would have proven adequate for the past 5 weeks with GB (among others).<br /><br />Don't let the front office off the hook because their GOD got hurt. They didn't have a back up plan. They were caught with their pants down and they should pay for it.<br /><br />In addition, Rodgers didn't just get hurt because "that's the way it goes sometimes". He got hurt because they play a high stakes game and they lost. Most teams don't try to win by blowing out the other team with a $120 million QB, who they have running around the field at high risk. Rodgers got hurt because of their (and HIS) style of play. So whether its McCarthy's decision or Rodgers' decision to run out of the pocket because they can't afford to give up the ball, these past few weeks are on THAT decision and it's THEIR fault. So these losses should be chalked up to THEM. Not some fluke. Live by the sword, die by the sword.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-83093570839090250852013-11-30T20:33:51.551-05:002013-11-30T20:33:51.551-05:00"Fleischer conspiracy article by Cliff Christ..."Fleischer conspiracy article by Cliff Christl "<br /><br />This was no conspiracy. The fact that they hired him is well documented. Are you implying that they hired him to clean their pool or something? You stupid do you have to be to not see why they hired him?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-36605565915806208412013-11-30T20:30:55.502-05:002013-11-30T20:30:55.502-05:00"Your irrational hatred of Thompson, McCarthy..."Your irrational hatred of Thompson, McCarthy, Rodgers and the Packers is really odd. "<br /><br />I never said that I hated them. I just think they're inept (except for Rodgers who I said more than once had nothing to do with it). YOU can't seem to admit that they were wrong. Mainly because you refuse to admit that "drama" is a pretty lame excuse to part ways. You want to pretend it was something else.<br /><br />There's no reason for me to explain anything else if you can't agree to the obvious.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-44211558466724075112013-11-30T20:23:18.849-05:002013-11-30T20:23:18.849-05:00If incompetence means winning a Super Bowl, then y...If incompetence means winning a Super Bowl, then yes,,, I suppose Thompson is incompetent. As noted above, Green Bay didn't handle the divorce very well. Once they decided to move on, they should have just cut a deal with the Vikings if that is where Favre wanted to go and not worry so much about the PR in the short term. I said that earlier, and your Fleischer conspiracy article by Cliff Christl actually says the same thing that I did. Procedurally, not handled as well as it should of been. But substantively it was obviously the right move. But I guess you think letting Manning go and drafting Luck was also "incompetent". Your irrational hatred of Thompson, McCarthy, Rodgers and the Packers is really odd. (Which was why I assumed your were a Vikings guy, by the way. Vikings fans aren't terribly rational when it comes to the Packers.) <br /><br />By the way, if you actually read all of Christl's article you would have noticed that his real target was the executive committee. As he points out at the end of the article, the front office should have just made the change, articulated why they went with the younger guy and not worry so much about the PR. Some of the guys on executive committee, many of whom are prominent locals, were concerned about bad press along the lines of "How could you stand by while they traded away Brett Favre?" What this has to do with the competence of the head coach to kick/go for it on fourth down or the GM to build a football team isn't readily apparent. <br /><br />Just curious which organizations you think are "competent". If the current regime in Green Bay doesn't fit the definition, you must have a really short list of competent organizations. Maybe you are a Lion fan. If so, enjoy the season. Cutler and Rodgers got hurt and the Vikings thought Christian Ponder was the answer. So even the Lions shouldn't be able to screw it up this year. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-89322831163679500792013-11-30T19:24:08.661-05:002013-11-30T19:24:08.661-05:00"the drama was created when favre..."
Y..."the drama was created when favre..."<br /><br />You are such an idiot. Did you even read the link that was posted?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-41578521230366957492013-11-30T19:21:30.011-05:002013-11-30T19:21:30.011-05:00"That was favres third retirement and that sp..."That was favres third retirement and that spring the organization took him at his word that he really meant it and moved on."<br /><br />Straight from Ari Fleischer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-12590790291703329982013-11-30T17:31:28.420-05:002013-11-30T17:31:28.420-05:00In a nutshell, you could be quoted as saying, &quo...In a nutshell, you could be quoted as saying, "Our incompetence is better than their incompetence, so therefore ours is good." What a joke.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-79986107434704027662013-11-30T17:22:45.974-05:002013-11-30T17:22:45.974-05:00Actually it was a decision to see if the 25 year o...Actually it was a decision to see if the 25 year old guy could do what they thought he was capable of or whether they needed to find someone else in the draft. That was favres third retirement and that spring the organization took him at his word that he really meant it and moved on. The drama was created when favre and cook said they wanted to start or be released. Packers thought having him as a backup would be a distraction (and of course it would have been). The pissing contest was because they didn't want to deal him in Minny. They should have done that and moved on instead of the circus that sent him to the jets because it would have been the right thing to do even if not to the packers advantage. That front office is far from incompetent however. Chi minn det dall banners eagles Snyder's redskins are six examples of incompetence from only 2 of 8 divisions. Plenty more out there. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-39494480482475244932013-11-30T11:42:53.422-05:002013-11-30T11:42:53.422-05:00http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/66600162.htm...http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/66600162.html<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-70503671660555131772013-11-30T11:35:57.656-05:002013-11-30T11:35:57.656-05:00This isn't about Rodgers vs Favre. You can go...This isn't about Rodgers vs Favre. You can go ahead and have your favorite player.<br /><br />But you insistence that going 6-10 was a good decision, especially in hindsight, is plain stupid. It's never a good decision to weaken your team. <br /><br />The fact that you bought into Ari Fleischer's propaganda speaks volumes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-5108813414260708482013-11-30T11:31:12.201-05:002013-11-30T11:31:12.201-05:00The discussion in 2008 wasn't about football. ...The discussion in 2008 wasn't about football. It wasn't even about money. And Aaron Rodgers wasn't even a part of it. It was all about "how we (Packers) just can't deal with the drama anymore."<br /><br />How fricken stupid is THAT! When a football team creates a media storm around drama, you know one of two things are happening. (1) They are the most inept decision makers because they take "drama" into account, or (2) They have a hidden agenda.<br /><br />This whole discussion started because I pointed out that the Packers have incapable leadership. They can't make the right game-time decisions (4th and 2 in OT) and they can't make the right personnel decisions as evidenced with the biggest blunder of that type (Favre).<br /><br />The fact that Rodgers is a good player shouldn't keep anyone from realizing that conclusion. But it does. Because people have been duped and when people are duped, they have a hard time seeing it, even in hindsight.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-78059244110781717972013-11-30T11:25:48.908-05:002013-11-30T11:25:48.908-05:00You are correct. I screwed up Rodgers playoff rec...You are correct. I screwed up Rodgers playoff record and should have looked it up. He won 3 on the road in 2010 as I recall. (Hell, I was at the Eagle game when Vick threw it away on the final drive and Reid decided it was all David Akers fault and threw him under the bus instead). Which probably makes Rodgers postseason record look more impressive than Favre's. 3 road wins vs. 2 in a much longer career. 1 home loss vs. 3 in a much longer career. 1-1 vs 1-0 in Super Bowls. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-29317180405602792162013-11-30T11:20:13.659-05:002013-11-30T11:20:13.659-05:001) Choosing Rodgers over Favre was "dumb"...1) Choosing Rodgers over Favre was "dumb" in 2008 the same way in which choosing Luck over Manning was "dumb" in 2012.<br /><br />2) You do realize that the Packers offensive line is terrible the last few years. Have you actually watched them play the last couple of years? They aren't very good. (While I agree with a lot of what Josh Sitton had to say about the Lions -- they are a dirty team, he and his mates haven't played well enough the last couple of years to be talking). <br /><br />3) As I said before, at the time I preferred staying another year with Favre. I was wrong. The organization knew what they had and made the right decision for the long term. Thompson deserves credit for that.<br /><br />4) No guarantees they win against the Vikings, Bears, Eagles if Rodgers was playing, of course it is an assumption. Just like you "assume" that GB would have made a championship run in 2008 with Favre as the QB and a defense that gave up 380 points. <br /><br />5) The point about Favre riding a tractor is that Thompson isn't playing fantasy football. He's running a real football team and has to balance the short term with the long run. Just like the Colts did. Just like the Niners did with Montana, by the way. Tough, painful decisions. Sometimes they don't work out, but as Branch Rickey once said "Better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late". <br /><br />6) The only one on his knees is you in front of Favre. No one is elevating Rodgers to the level of a Unitas or Montana. He's a very good QB, one whose name can reasonably be part of a discussion of the top 5 guys in the game today, he's won a Super Bowl and he's put up numbers if either of those are important. That's all. For what it's worth, I'd wager a beer that Rodgers will have the more impressive resume than Favre when its all done, if only because Favre's career from the Bronco's game onward was kind of frustrating for Packer fans in the postseason. But who knows. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-7058249123079216002013-11-30T11:19:39.796-05:002013-11-30T11:19:39.796-05:00Who cares where Rodgers craps away games? He stil...Who cares where Rodgers craps away games? He still craps them away.<br /><br />Do I like Rodgers? Yes, but I don't kneel down in front of him. I can give a fair assessment. The problem is that most GB fans have bought into Ari Fleischer (Remember that Ari Fleischer was paid big bucks by TT to get you to believe Rodgers was a GOD. See my previous post.) that they haven't the ability to be objective. They believe 6-10 was a good idea. They think Rodgers was in high demand in 2008. Well, I hate to tell ya, but Rodgers was cheap in 2008 and 6-10 was NOT necessary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-72299726570484663922013-11-30T11:15:43.548-05:002013-11-30T11:15:43.548-05:00Oh yeah, then at Chicago for NFC championship.Oh yeah, then at Chicago for NFC championship.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-48048862900197303162013-11-30T11:10:46.246-05:002013-11-30T11:10:46.246-05:00Rodgers has won at least one road playoff game, th...Rodgers has won at least one road playoff game, the smack down in Atlanta the super bowl year. Straight fact.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-91644409730630622932013-11-30T11:03:07.576-05:002013-11-30T11:03:07.576-05:00""And then he crapped it away in OT at h...""And then he crapped it away in OT at home vs. the Giants in the NFC Championship game."<br /><br />As Rodger's did in 2009, 2011, 2012, and the next time he's in the playoffs."<br /><br />Get your facts straight. Rodgers has only lost one home playoff game, the game to the Giants in the 15-1 year. Like Favre's last game, GB shouldn't have lost that game. Giants were a bad matchup for them because of the NYG running game, GB lack of running game and GB soft run defense in both years. Still a bad loss. <br /><br />I'll help you out -- the criticism of Rodgers in the playoffs is that he's lost one home game and hasn't won on the road yet. Your man Favre beat the Niners on the road twice during the Super Bowl years. After that, he lost 3 playoff games at home: Falcons, Vikes and Giants. Both lost to Giant teams that wound up knocking off the Pats and winning the Super Bowl. The Falcons and Vikings losses were bad losses at home to teams that weren't that good.<br /><br />So Favre had 2 road wins, 3 home losses and 1-1 in the Super Bowl. Thus far, Rodgers has 0 road wins, 1 home loss and 1-0 in the Super Bowl. Still time for Rodgers to have either a better or worse playoff record. Right now, pretty comparable once you adjust for fewer seasons for Rodgers -- and not exactly the lede for either's case as great QB which rests more on regular season success and the one Super Bowl that validates both in the eyes of many.<br /><br />By the way, the 6-10 year you are so hung up on: GB went 1-7 in games decided by less than 7 points. Since you frequent this site, I assume you are familiar with concepts such as regression to the mean and the notion that bad teams have better records in close games than they do in games decided by a greater margin. That year, GB was 5-3 in games decided by more than a TD, 1-7 in games decided by less. Rather than indicating some sort of character flaw -- more likely it was a small sample size fluke. <br /><br />You might also be familiar with pythageorean concepts. GB scored 419 points and gave up 380 that year. So they were +39. (Favre/Rodgers had little to do with the 380 points allowed which was nearly 100 points more than they allowed in 2007 or 2009). GB's expected record that year was 9-7 (per football reference). <br /><br />As has been noted above, there are some valid criticisms of Thompson -- but deciding that enough was enough when Favre "retired" for the final time isn't one of them. You may not like Rodgers, to each his own. Hell, one can construct arguments "proving" that Manning or Brady are currently overrated based on postseason results in the case of Manning and postseason results since the third Super Bowl in the case of Brady. Each of them could QB my team. Although neither of those guys could win a Super Bowl in Minnesota either. That franchise is cursed. The Eagles or the Cardinals will win one before the Vikings do. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-24045804239659292352013-11-30T10:47:15.895-05:002013-11-30T10:47:15.895-05:00For the idiot that makes assumptions and pretends ...For the idiot that makes assumptions and pretends they're true. (Like I'm a Viking guy among others.)<br /><br />"If you want to rip Thompson, rip him for letting the team go 0-4-1 with Rodgers out. (ASSUMPTION #1: You're giving him those wins, huh?)<br /><br /> If they miss the playoffs this year, it'll be because of the lack of a competent veteran backup who could have beat the Eagles, Vikings and Bears. (ASSUMPTION #2, But the lack of a backup was glaring and stupid.)<br /><br />...<br /><br />zero wins against the soft part of the schedule has demonstrated the value of Rodgers. (ASSUMPTION #3. See my post on sacks. The Packers were pounded with sacks. No reason to believe Rodgers would be better. Probably same or worse.)<br /><br />Meanwhile, Favre is coaching high school ball and riding his tractor. I think it's pretty clear that the organization made the right call on that one. (DUMBASS ASSUMPTION: Joe Montana is also not playing. Has nothing to do with a dumb decision in 2008)"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-12063883514679032842013-11-30T10:39:12.538-05:002013-11-30T10:39:12.538-05:00Just for fun, let's look at drive killers, als...Just for fun, let's look at drive killers, also known as sacks. You know, those things that often make your defense or other part of your team look bad because they ARN'T taken into account when computing the QB rating:<br /><br />Favre<br />====<br />2002 26<br />2003 19<br />2004 12<br />2005 12<br />2006 21<br />2007 15<br /><br />Rodgers<br />======<br />2008 34<br />2009 50<br />2010 31<br />2011 36<br />2012 51<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-44581092300833754592013-11-30T10:30:25.759-05:002013-11-30T10:30:25.759-05:00The Viking guy who keeps babbling about losing sea...The Viking guy who keeps babbling about losing seasons under Thompson needs some perspective. (A Viking fan should be quite familiar with topic of losing seasons).<br /><br />In 2005, the Packers did go 4-12. You'll recall that Sherman was stripped of his GM duties and essentially a lame duck coach that year. Thompson took over as GM. And Favre threw 29 interceptions. Think about that for a minute. We killed Michael Vick in Philadelphia for far less. Nearly 2 picks a game!<br /><br />I guess that's Thompson's fault because they drafted Rodgers that year and a rookie who fell through the first round was responsible for a HOF vet throwing 29 picks because he was looking over his shoulder? Or it was just Favre reverting to form because he was running the team at that point and he didn't have a strong coach (Holmgren) reining him in from his worst tendencies? Charitably, he was probably forcing balls and trying to do too much on a team that was retooling and just made it worse that year.<br /><br />And the other losing season was the transition year to Rodgers which other posters above have discussed.<br /><br />If you want to rip Thompson, rip him for letting the team go 0-4-1 with Rodgers out. If they miss the playoffs this year, it'll be because of the lack of a competent veteran backup who could have beat the Eagles, Vikings and Bears. That's on the front office. Much like the Colts 2-14 demonstrated the value of Manning, this last month of zero wins against the soft part of the schedule has demonstrated the value of Rodgers. Meanwhile, Favre is coaching high school ball and riding his tractor. I think it's pretty clear that the organization made the right call on that one. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-20131885742397642172013-11-30T10:20:27.178-05:002013-11-30T10:20:27.178-05:00Pick and chose what you want. Nobody is saying he...Pick and chose what you want. Nobody is saying he sucks, he just isn't the GOD that you make him out to be. You need to get up off your knees in front of Rodgers.<br /><br />http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2013-09-23/aaron-rodgers-not-clutch-fourth-quarter-comeback-failures-5-17-close-games<br /><br />http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9711636/nfl-why-aaron-rodgers-not-truly-great<br /><br />http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/aaron-rodgers-needs-work-on-his-clutch-b99101874z1-225119782.html<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-68888631878210508452013-11-30T10:17:59.431-05:002013-11-30T10:17:59.431-05:00"And then he crapped it away in OT at home vs..."And then he crapped it away in OT at home vs. the Giants in the NFC Championship game."<br /><br />As Rodger's did in 2009, 2011, 2012, and the next time he's in the playoffs. And the times that he DIDN'T crap it away, he played guys like Joe Webb and Caleb Hanie.<br /><br />So there's no reason to think Favre couldn't do better. He DID do better. Of course, you seem to think that if he doesn't do better for the next century, then they made the right decision. GET REAL!<br /><br />Also, You seem to think Rodgers is some sort of god and has no faults at all. No Packer weakness can be attributed to Rodgers. I hate to tell you pal, but when Favre was going to the NFC Championship game for the 2nd time in 3 years, you were crying about the officiating in Arizona and how Rodgers fumble that lost the game shouldn't have counted.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-35080576632182021942013-11-30T10:15:28.436-05:002013-11-30T10:15:28.436-05:00Did you actually READ this article:
http://thebi...Did you actually READ this article:<br /><br /> http://thebiglead.com/2013/09/24/espn-says-aaron-rodgers-is-not-clutch-due-to-5-24-record-when-trailing-in-4th/<br /><br />Or do you just rely on Big Lead headlines? I'm not going to spend a day verifying the math, but a 2 minute scan of the article you cite contains these nuggets:<br /><br />"So, while Rodgers is down at the bottom of the list, if Green Bay had maintained leads at the same rate as the other elite quarterbacks, he would be ahead of Rivers, and a lot closer to Romo, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees. Some of maintaining the lead can fall on the QB – like picking up a key third down with the lead and not turning it over. A lot of it involves other factors like the defense, coaching, and luck.<br /><br />How has Rodgers played late in close games? Here is a summary (from the pro-football-reference play finder) of the numbers for each of the eleven quarterbacks in the article, since 2008 (when Rodgers became the starter), in the final five minutes of a game when trailing by 8 or less, or tied.<br /><br />[there is a chart here that has Rodgers second in QB rating, and with stats comparable or better than his peers]<br /><br />That list is sorted by passer rating, and Rodgers is second. The poor record in close games is shocking given his overall caliber of play in the final five minutes compared to other elite quarterbacks. What are we missing? Ordering of plays and a few key moments, special teams and field position, running game contribution, luck, and the defense.<br /><br />So far, while Rodgers’ close game record has not been great, it also involves a lot more than him. If his teams were holding leads like New England has for most of Brady’s career, we probably would not be reading about him today."<br /><br />You Viking/Favre trolls are entertaining cretins. I was a big Favre fan, but go look at his home playoff losses some time. <br /><br />Anyway, this thread was supposed to be about whether or not going for it or kicking the FG on the first possession gave GB the best chance to win that game. You've turned it into a referendum on whether switching from Favre to Rodgers and suffering through a 6-10 season in exchange for a Super Bowl in 2010 and a 15-1 season since was a bad decision. I suppose you think a 44 year old Favre would still be leading the Packers into the playoffs every year. Most intelligent observers would agree that Peyton Manning has been a better QB than Luck the last year and a half. Yet those same people generally recognize that the Colts had to take Luck and let Manning walk (especially because of the way Manning's contract was structured). Do you really think the Colts should have kept Manning and traded Luck? Whether Rodgers should/should not have more come from behind wins and whether or not Luck makes the playoffs this year (or whether either of them in fact turned out to be good QBs or not) is just ex-post 20/20 hindsight. At the time, both decisions by front offices were the right decisions. And the Packers have a ring to show for it and the Colts have a future. The Vikings, on the other hand, are in the process of wasting a HOF player's career except for those two years when Favre took them to the playoffs. Be thankful you were able to ride the coattails of a Green Bay QB to at least have some meaningful games in January. Seriously, your QBs were Tarkenton, Cunningham, Favre. I guess we'll give you credit for developing Tarkenton, even though he was reacquired from the Giants. But when your home grown talents are Tommy Kramer and Wade Wilson, I'm not sure we should worry too much about your assessment of great QB play. Viking fans exposure to great QB play happens when the Viking defense is on the field. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com