NFL: Packers fired Mike McCarthy

[m9]

Rodgers is the most skilled QB of all time, but he isn't the goat. That's Brady. I would take Rodgers over Brees though.

Rodgers has the best skillset, Brady has the best resume.

If I'm starting a team from scratch I'll take Rodgers, but he's not near the discussion for the best of all-time.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

For obvious reasons can never happen. They don't put numbers in record books based on what might have been if only this and that had happened instead of what actually did happen.

But here's the thing, even if you could somehow miraculously gift him those missing seasons he'd STILL be off the pace. He just plain and simple doesn't produce GOAT volume numbers. His average passing season as a starter is 3788 yards. Brees average season is 4335. Manning's is 4231. Brady's is 4100.

And you think my point is "****ing stupid." LOL

Are you going to acknowledge the stadium/weather factor or are we going to just pretend we don't see it.

 

[Roboturner913]

LOL at counting seasons where he's missed over half the season. He's never thrown for less than 3,821 yards in a season where he plays at least 15 games. His average in those seasons is 4,245.

That's a fair point, if you want to remove or prorate those seasons in the calculations that's fine. But adding more time to the "missing time" argument just bogs you down in even more hypotheticals and as I've already pointed out, record books aren't really written on extrapolation.

I just don't think he has the time left. It's just math, nothing personal.

 

[Roboturner913]

Are you going to acknowledge the stadium/weather factor or are we going to just pretend we don't see it.

Sure, but if you concede that, then the flip side of it has to be true as well, ie Rodgers has had more opportunities to win games and "be great" because his defense has it easier playing on grass instead of trying to defend opposing offenses on a fast track in controlled climates.

But besides that, playing in the elements hasn't prevented Brady from putting up GOAT numbers.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

Sure, but if you concede that, then the flip side of it has to be true as well, ie Rodgers has had more opportunities to win games and "be great" because his defense has it easier playing on grass instead of trying to defend opposing offenses on a fast track in controlled climates.

But besides that, playing in the elements hasn't prevented Brady from putting up GOAT numbers.

That makes no sense. The Packers playing outside doesn't make their defense any more likely to win games than the Saints. Their defense struggling to stop teams in the dome just further inflates Brees numbers, but it doesn't make him any more or less likely to win a game. If you arguing that the Packers had a better actual defense, that's a different argument.

Inside outside is a bigger deal than you are allowing for.


Brees inside
127 GP 295 TD 113 INT 69.58% 104.2 rate
Outside
124 GP 205 TD 107 INT 64.85% 91.4 rate

Rodgers inside
26 GP 54 TD 11 INT 67.51% 109.0 rate
Outside
130 GP 266 TD 66 INT 64.29 % 101.9 rate

As for Rodgers and Brady, Rodgers numbers are right in line with Bradys, he just hasn't been doing it as long.

Rodgers 154 starts 42006 yds 334 tds 79 int 64.8%
On a per start basis, that's 272 yds 2.17 TD .51 Int

Brady 263 starts 69501 yds 508 tds 168 ints 64.1 %
Per start basis, 264 yds 1.93 tds .64 ints

You keep mentioning Rodgers numbers as if they aren't even close when the truth is they just aren't close because of the number of years he's played.

 

[Roboturner913]

You keep mentioning Rodgers numbers as if they aren't even close when the truth is they just aren't close because of the number of years he's played.

No, what I'm saying is that, regardless of the reason, he just doesn't have the time left to put up GOAT volume stats. He's 35 and turns 36 next season and has taken a hell of a beating over the years.

if you want to believe otherwise, you're believing in something that no other QB in NFL history has done to this point. Can Rodgers do the impossible? Maybe. But he's not going to do it unless he turns things around really fast, starting next season, and manages to play at an extremely high level for another 7 years without getting injured again.

The Packers playing outside doesn't make their defense any more likely to win games than the Saints.

Then how come NFL point totals are 9% lower outdoors, across the board, as compared to indoor games?

 

[Sports Enthusiast]

Who will want to work with a narcissistic elitist? That team has more issues than the coach and QB relationship. They have no heart. They were like a 13 point favorite Sunday and barely scored. Rodgers is also on the back end of his career.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

No, what I'm saying is that, regardless of the reason, he just doesn't have the time left to put up GOAT volume stats. He's 35 and turns 36 next season and has taken a hell of a beating over the years.

if you want to believe otherwise, you're believing in something that no other QB in NFL history has done to this point. Can Rodgers do the impossible? Maybe. But he's not going to do it unless he turns things around really fast, starting next season, and manages to play at an extremely high level for another 7 years without getting injured again.



Then how come NFL point totals are 9% lower outdoors, across the board, as compared to indoor games?

I'm not saying Rodgers is the GOAT. That's Brady. Rodgers isn't going to put up the volume stats, there's no question. However, you were using seasons averages suggesting Rodgers numbers weren't on par and thats not the case, especially when accounting for outdoor/indoors.

Indoor games are absolutely more high scoring, we are in agreement. But your original statement seemed to suggest it was easier to win for Rodgers compared to Brees because his team plays outside, which doesn't make sense. Bree's games will be higher scoring, but playing inside vs outside (that alone) doesn't make one more likely to win or lose.

 

[Roboturner913]

But your original statement seemed to suggest it was easier to win for Rodgers compared to Brees because his team plays outside, which doesn't make sense.

It is easier for a defense to prevail in any given situation in a lower scoring game. This is just common sense.

You were trying to make the point that QBs who play indoors have an inherent advantage when it comes to putting up numbers. I am simply pointing out the flip side of that, which is that QBs who play outdoors have an inherent advantage of not having to score as many points (or throw for as many yards, etc) to win a given game.

They're either both true, or they're both false. But you can't have one be true and the other not be true.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

It is easier for a defense to prevail in any given situation in a lower scoring game. This is just common sense.

You were trying to make the point that QBs who play indoors have an inherent advantage when it comes to putting up numbers. I am simply pointing out the flip side of that, which is that QBs who play outdoors have an inherent advantage of not having to score as many points (or throw for as many yards, etc) to win a given game.

Ok, I see where you are going now. But it's a wash with regards to Wins and Losses.

It's harder for Rodgers to score outside and it's harder for Rodgers opponents to score outside. It's easier for Brees to score inside and it's easier for Brees opponents to score inside. But in terms of who is more likely to win the game, Rodgers outside or Brees inside, it has no bearing. The only thing for sure is that the scoring and passing numbers are going to be higher inside.

 

[Roboturner913]

But it's a wash with regards to Wins and Losses.

I'm not so sure about that. The law of diminishing utility says that success in a given situation is less likely when more factors are needed in one's favor to overcome the oppositional force.

anyway, this is way OT

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I'm not so sure about that. The law of diminishing utility says that success in a given situation is less likely when more factors are needed in one's favor to overcome the oppositional force.

anyway, this is way OT

That doesn't apply at all.

Take 2 identical teams and have them play outside. Team A and team B each have a 50% chance of winning the game (they are identical teams). Now play the game inside. Team A and B chance of winning the game is still 50%, but there in all likelihood going to be more stats and more scoring. The chances of any given team winning don't change.

(Can someone else weigh in on this so I know I'm not crazy, lol).

 

[Roboturner913]

That doesn't apply at all.

Take 2 identical teams and have them play outside. Team A and team B each have a 50% chance of winning the game (they are identical teams). Now play the game inside. Team A and B chance of winning the game is still 50%, but there in all likelihood going to be more stats and more scoring. The chances of any given team winning don't change.

(Can someone else weigh in on this so I know I'm not crazy, lol).

You are correct in this vacuum hypothetical where both teams are identical, sure. But teams tend to tailor their rosters to fit their home field advantage.

It would be impossible to explore this without getting into some really specific stats going back a way, and tbh I'm lazy and got too many other things to do to worry with it right now.

But my suspicion is that an elite QB with lesser personnel on offense, but the advantage of better defensive play behind him is more likely to win games that an elite QB with better offensive personnel but with a lesser defense, since the elite QB is likely to be able to get the lesser offensive personnel to play at a higher level but cannot impact the defense in any meaningful way.

 

[Roboturner913]

Apparently Pete Carmichael is a leading candidate.

 

[Blitzkrug]

Rodgers has the best skillset, Brady has the best resume.

If I'm starting a team from scratch I'll take Rodgers, but he's not near the discussion for the best of all-time.

I disagree. He's easily top 10 all time just for his statistics.

His peak was arguably better than the likes of Favre. He's got just as many MVP's and Super Bowls, but a way better statistics

If you want a top 10, he's def in it; Marino, Brady, Montana, Manning, Elway, Brees, Rodgers, Favre, Unitas, Young (in no specific order obviously)

 

[m9]

I disagree. He's easily top 10 all time just for his statistics.

His peak was arguably better than the likes of Favre. He's got just as many MVP's and Super Bowls, but a way better statistics

If you want a top 10, he's def in it; Marino, Brady, Montana, Manning, Elway, Brees, Rodgers, Favre, Unitas, Young (in no specific order obviously)

I agree with all of this and he's still not near the discussion for best all-time. You can put him whatever number you want, but he's not #1.

 

[Sports Enthusiast]

Who the f*** would want this job if some unknown outside linebacker coach can get fired for calling out everyone including the overrated God Aaron Rodgers by saying losing stucks and everyone should be held to the Lombardi standard? Theres also no owner thats a buffer between you and God Rodgers who might be the richest man in Wisconsin(depending on how much money Paul Ryan is hiding or not)

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Worst take man is back with more unhinged garbage takes that make no sense. Urban Meyer is a good guy.

 

[WeThreeKings]

As a Green Bay fan.. on third down, the other teams bring pressure and his line can't hold up. He's taking a lot of sacks because they don't run the ball in the second half of games and the defender is in his face immediately.

 

[Terry Yake]

how could anyone say rodgers is nowhere near the conversation for best QB ever?

334 TDs with only 79 picks. 103.4 career QBR which is #1 by a good amount. you could easily make an argument that rodgers is the greatest

 

[Sports Enthusiast]

how could anyone say rodgers is nowhere near the conversation for best QB ever?

334 TDs with only 79 picks. 103.4 career QBR which is #1 by a good amount. you could easily make an argument that rodgers is the greatest

Hes also played in an era where if you sneeze on the QB its a penalty, it doesn't hurt. I still think guys like Elway and Marino are better if you consider how the game got played and they could actually be hit.

 

[Sports Enthusiast]

As a Green Bay fan.. on third down, the other teams bring pressure and his line can't hold up. He's taking a lot of sacks because they don't run the ball in the second half of games and the defender is in his face immediately.

Brady has a shit line and makes it work....Gets the ball out quick.

 

[m9]

how could anyone say rodgers is nowhere near the conversation for best QB ever?

334 TDs with only 79 picks. 103.4 career QBR which is #1 by a good amount. you could easily make an argument that rodgers is the greatest

Because there's another guy with over 500 TDs and 5 Super Bowls?

If Rodgers spends his next 5 years continuing to put up good stats and wins a couple more Super Bowls, then we have a conversation. But if their careers ended today? Not really close.

 

[Terry Yake]

Because there's another guy with over 500 TDs and 5 Super Bowls?

If Rodgers spends his next 5 years continuing to put up good stats and wins a couple more Super Bowls, then we have a conversation. But if their careers ended today? Not really close.

ahhh yes, the super bowls argument. which is actually irrelevant here considering rodgers has a ring

you do realize that brady was a starting QB for 7 seasons before rodgers took over for favre right? obviously he's going to have more TD passes and yards than rodgers.

 

[Sports Enthusiast]

Because there's another guy with over 500 TDs and 5 Super Bowls?

If Rodgers spends his next 5 years continuing to put up good stats and wins a couple more Super Bowls, then we have a conversation. But if their careers ended today? Not really close.

Brady isnt even the best and I HATE the SB argument. Almost al of their SB's have been one possesion games, often they were lucky and had the ball last or in the case of Seattle they screw up on the goal line. It is a team game, the defense stole the Seattle SB. The first 2 or 3 the defense is why they won beause the offense was not at all good. Only one of the 3 did they even score 30 and that was because in the 2nd half the game with the Panthers randomly broke out from a defensive show to a slugfest.