Orton vs. Rodgers vs. Cutler

[Joemailman]

In 2008, Kyle Orton threw 18 TD passes on 465 attempts for a TD% of 3.9 while throwing to an average at best group of WR's. He'll now be throwing to Brandon Marshall and Royal.

In 2008, Cutler threw 25 TD passes on 616 attempts for a TD% of 4.1 while throwing to Brandon Marshall and Royal. He'll now be throwing to Devin Hester and company.

In 2008, Rodgers threw 28 TD passes on 536 attempts for a TD% of 5.2 while throwing to Jennings and Driver. He'll be throwing to the same guys.

Which of these 3 will have the most TD passes in 2009?

[hoosier]

I voted Arod in large part because the Packers offense is pass-first and the Bears have historically been run-first. That will change somewhat, but I don't expect Cutler to throw as many times as he did last year, and probably not as many times as Arod. While I would rate them as about equal right now, I also have a hunch that Arod will turn out to be the better overall QB and team leader in the long run.

[BF4MVP]

Rodgers thew more TD passes than Cutler when Cutler was throwing to Marshall and Royal. Rodgers will have more TD passes than Cutler while Cutler is throwing to the Bears' running backs and tight ends.

[gbpackfan]

A-Rod no doubt. People are making too big of a deal about Cutler. He's a solid QB but good Lord, he isn't the second coming of Brett Favre. He's a punk kid who will get eaten alive behind that crappy O line. The feast will start Sept. 13th!

[Bretsky]

AROD no doubt

And that doesn't mean he is better than Cutler

I think if Orton starts a good poll would be Cutler or Orton due to offensive talent

[sheepshead]

Orton wont be a starter, Simms will be so he's out.

[RashanGary]

AROD no doubt

And that doesn't mean he is better than Cutler

I think if Orton starts a good poll would be Cutler or Orton due to offensive talent

Brett's whole career he made the whole offense go, and now that he's gone, the offense is so great that they are carrying Rodgers.

It just shows that no matter what Rodgers does, some will never give him credit for what he does.

Brett's name was never brought up in the "best ever" arguement when he retired (like Elway, Montana and now Brady have been), so he's not completely overrated. Within Packer nation though, he is.

[wist43]

I still don't trust that ARod can stay upright... he did it for one season, and nobody was more shocked than I was that he actually performed fairly well - his inability to close games out notwithstanding.

Still, ARod looks like he could be okay... don't see a SB in our future though.

Cutler may be in a better situation long term, assuming he grows up... Chicago has a defensive mentality, and while they were junk on defense last year, I'm sure they will address it.

In short, Cutler doesn't have to be as good as Rodgers... Chicago will look to run first, and play solid D; GB puts everything on their QB.

[Lurker64]

In short, Cutler doesn't have to be as good as Rodgers... Chicago will look to run first, and play solid D; GB puts everything on their QB.

But the question at hand is "who's going to throw more TD passes" not "who's going to do the best because of the solid running game and defense".

Simply because Green Bay is a pass-first mentality, while the Bears are a running team, and that Rodgers's targets are a lot better than Cutler's this year, there really should be no contest.

[wist43]

In short, Cutler doesn't have to be as good as Rodgers... Chicago will look to run first, and play solid D; GB puts everything on their QB.

But the question at hand is "who's going to throw more TD passes" not "who's going to do the best because of the solid running game and defense".

Simply because Green Bay is a pass-first mentality, while the Bears are a running team, and that Rodgers's targets are a lot better than Cutler's this year, there really should be no contest.

IF Rodgers stays healthy, I'd imagine Rodgers... to answer the question :)

[Partial]

AROD no doubt

And that doesn't mean he is better than Cutler

I think if Orton starts a good poll would be Cutler or Orton due to offensive talent

Brett's whole career he made the whole offense go, and now that he's gone, the offense is so great that they are carrying Rodgers.

It just shows that no matter what Rodgers does, some will never give him credit for what he does.

Brett's name was never brought up in the "best ever" arguement when he retired (like Elway, Montana and now Brady have been), so he's not completely overrated. Within Packer nation though, he is.

Are you kidding me? The offense is 2007 was MUCH more potent than 2008, despite the same players at virtually every position outside of QB. Most of them were young players expected to take a huge step forward!!

You tell me, big guy.

Rodgers is starting his tenure off with the most talented Packers receiver since SS, and probably the best, deepest receiving corps the Packers have fielded since FA began.

They have a running back who has shown that he can be the real deal as he was very good in 2007.

We have a very good tight end who has shown that he can be a game breaker -- when given the opportunity. He was a huge part of the offense in 2007 that the coaching staff elected to ignore in 2008 -- probably because they didn't trust Rodgers with risky throws over the middle of the field

In 2007, Favre had a dynamite roster around him, and the results were very evident in his legendary, mvp-in-any-normal-nfl-year performance.

In 2008, with every player being the same outside of the QB, they went from SPECIAL to second class.

Oh, and Brett's name is definitely with the best ever. You're a blind hater. This post is looney.

Coming in 1st 3 times for MVP and 2nd a 4th is just insane. The only other player to even come close is Peyton. Is Peyton overrated?!? He only has one ring too. And nearly identical playoff statistics and success as Brett. Go figure. Take your BS elsewhere.

[Lurker64]

Considering that, on a per snap basis, Backup QBs replacing injured starters get injured dramatically more often than starting QBs, and that Rodgers did manage to play through the pain of a partially separated shoulder for much of the year I wonder at what point we'll start considering that Rodgers's "fragile" reputation may, in fact, be undeserved.

[BZnDallas]

I still don't trust that ARod can stay upright... he did it for one season, and nobody was more shocked than I was that he actually performed fairly well - his inability to close games out notwithstanding.

Still, ARod looks like he could be okay... don't see a SB in our future though.

Cutler may be in a better situation long term, assuming he grows up... Chicago has a defensive mentality, and while they were junk on defense last year, I'm sure they will address it.

In short, Cutler doesn't have to be as good as Rodgers... Chicago will look to run first, and play solid D; GB puts everything on their QB.


It has been well noted that AR didn't do well with 4th quarter comebacks last year... and i would agree up to a point... but 'CAN I GET A WITNESS?':

Week 9 vs. Tennessee, GB down 16-13 AR leads GB down the field to tie the game with 5:30 remaining in the 4th qtr(TN wins in OT)

Week 10 vs. Minnesota, GB down 28-27 with 2:22 remaining in the 4th qtr. (after GBs defense just gave up 69 yards on 7plays for a TD) AR takes GB down the field for a 52 yard fg attempt that goes wide right with seconds left

Week 13 vs. Carolina, GB tied 28-28 and with 1:57 left in the 4th qtr GB kicker Mason Crosby kicks field goal to take a 31-28 lead (offensive series lead by one AR) only to lose the game 27 seconds later on a td run by deangelo williams

Week 14 vs. Houston, GB down 21-14 AR leads a TD scoring drive and hits Jordy Nelson for a game tieing TD with 5:56 remaining in 4th qtr (GB loses on a 40 yard field goal by Kris Brown with 0:00)

Week 15 vs. Jacksonville, GB down 14-13 AR leads the team on a FG scoring drive to take a 16-14 lead in the 4th qtr (GB loses 21-16 on a jones-drew td with under 2 mins left)


now there are 5 instances where AR lead his team in the 4th quarter and put them in a position to win or not lose... doesn't matter if the defense gives it up, or the kicker misses an indoor field goal, or whatever, AR gets the blame for blowing it... i find this somewhat commical... but thats just one mans opinion...

[BZnDallas]

sorry wist... not trying to point the finger at you, just using ur quote as a basis for my research... :oops:

[wist43]

Thats kind of the point about Rodgers... he not only has to do more, he has to do it all. Can't count on the defense and ST's at all. Cutler won't be asked to win games in the same way.

The GBP put everything on their QB... even if Rodgers is better than Cutler, he's going to have to be. Green Bay isn't going to beat anybody with defense, except maybe Detroit.

Luckily, or unluckily :), everyone in the division is so flawed that none of them really has a legit shot at the SB... if Chicago can rebuild their D in the next couple of years, I'd give them a better shot moving forward than GB, simply b/c I have zero faith that the Packers can build a championship calibur defense.

[Bretsky]

AROD no doubt

And that doesn't mean he is better than Cutler

I think if Orton starts a good poll would be Cutler or Orton due to offensive talent

Brett's whole career he made the whole offense go, and now that he's gone, the offense is so great that they are carrying Rodgers.

It just shows that no matter what Rodgers does, some will never give him credit for what he does.

Brett's name was never brought up in the "best ever" arguement when he retired (like Elway, Montana and now Brady have been), so he's not completely overrated. Within Packer nation though, he is.


Funny how certain people always need to make this about Brett and AROD

I never even fathomed that thought when I posted this.

Expanding on my first point, the Bears offense is terrible at the receiver position.

Orton is below average as a starter; he has talent at WR but he's simply sub par so no way he beats Rodgers numbers.

AROD is above average as a starter.
Cutler is above average as a starter.

The talent level on offense between the Bears and Packers at receiver is not even close

From #1-#5 this is the deepest group at WR in Green Bay I can remember.
Jennings is hands down the most talented WR we've had since Sterling Sharpe.

Why does this always have to be about Favre ?? :?: :?: :?:

[RashanGary]

This relates to Favre because for the last few years I heard how Favre made Driver, and then was making Jennings.

As soon as Favre retired, we heard how great Jennings was and how average Rodgers was for having a similar season to Favre.

I don't get it. Two years ago, Favre was the greatest Packer ever, having one of his greatest years and now Rodgers is above average having a similar year with a similar offense.

It seems like you are very biased, Bretsky and Favre is a big part of that bias. That is why this relates to Favre. His strange connection clouds vision.

[Bretsky]

This relates to Favre because for the last few years I heard how Favre made Driver, and then was making Jennings.

As soon as Favre retired, we heard how great Jennings was and how average Rodgers was for having a similar season to Favre.

I don't get it. Two years ago, Favre was the greatest Packer ever, having one of his greatest years and now Rodgers is above average having a similar year with a similar offense.

It seems like you are very biased, Bretsky and Favre is a big part of that bias. That is why this relates to Favre. His strange connection clouds vision.


so I see you are back to stirring up shit again

This thread had nothing to do with Favre yet you need to make it that way

Well good to know

Here I thought some could get over this Favre stuff; you must not be in that group

[RashanGary]

Huh, I don't consider talking about biases to be stirring shit. I no longer debate whether Rodgers is a a probowl caliber QB. I believe he is, I believe he's better than the guy we had before (95-98 withstanding).

I'm at a point where I agree to disagree and focus more on why we agree to disagree, not on changing anyones opinion. The reason we agree to disagree, as I see it, is because some love Favre so they can't accept Rodgers had a great season as soon as he left (with zero games started to boot). People who see Favre as a hero see having no drop off as effecting their belief system and will not accept it no matter the evidence.

When I hear people talk down Rodgers accomplishments, I remember how much they exaggerated the guy before and I make that connection. If that's stirring shit, well, I think that is overly sensitive and further evidence of the irrationality that comes with having a hero.

[Bretsky]

changing the focus of a thread to a topic that most are sick of..and over with, IMO is stirring up shit

So going back to my post........if you wanted to discuss the topic

What part of my post did you disagree with, if any ?

[RashanGary]

I disagree with the whole thing, but I don't know if I've argued the merits of Rodgers in a long time and don't have any urge to start now.

He had one of the all time great Packers seasons at QB. I don't see it as a fluke. I don't think anyone carried him. I don't care to argue why because for every reason there is a counter. People, in this case, can believe whatever they want to believe and there is evidence to both sides. I can't convince you of anything, and I don't really care to.

Instead of focusing on a never ending, fruitless debate, I just say, "hey, we agree to disagree. I think we agree to disagree because you love Favre and therefor cannot fully appreciate Rodgers".

[Bretsky]

I disagree with the whole thing, but I don't know if I've argued the merits of Rodgers in a long time and don't have any urge to start now.

He had one of the all time great Packers seasons at QB. I don't see it as a fluke. I don't think anyone carried him. I don't care to argue why because for every reason there is a counter. People, in this case, can believe whatever they want to believe and there is evidence to both sides. I can't convince you of anything, and I don't really care to.

Instead of focusing on a never ending, fruitless debate, I just say, "hey, we agree to disagree. I think we agree to disagree because you love Favre and therefor cannot fully appreciate Rodgers".


I'll try this again. Here was the post you referred to.

AROD no doubt

And that doesn't mean he is better than Cutler

I think if Orton starts a good poll would be Cutler or Orton due to offensive talent_________________




You disagree with tis whole thing ?

Then you shift the focus of the thread and then turn psychologist on why I feel the way I do. I'm not going to go there; it doesn't accomplish much if I give my view on why you might have a slanted bias in some of your views.

I'm actually a bit disappointed that you don't understand me better. I'm a AROD Fan and think he has a chance to be a very good QB. I also think Cutler is a very good QB. Both are IMO top 12 or so QB's.

If I have a bias that would sway my views, most would know it in here and that person is completely separate from BF or AR.

[Packnut]

This relates to Favre because for the last few years I heard how Favre made Driver, and then was making Jennings.

As soon as Favre retired, we heard how great Jennings was and how average Rodgers was for having a similar season to Favre.

I don't get it. Two years ago, Favre was the greatest Packer ever, having one of his greatest years and now Rodgers is above average having a similar year with a similar offense.

It seems like you are very biased, Bretsky and Favre is a big part of that bias. That is why this relates to Favre. His strange connection clouds vision.

Similiar season? 13-3 vs 6-10 I take it math is not your strong suit now is it? When are you people gonna learn? It's about WINS PERIOD! NOTHING else matters.

To compare the season Favre had with what Rodgers did is sheer STUPIDITY!

I never believed in the "alien among us" theory but you have to be outta this world cause some of the shit you spout is off the wall!

[Gunakor]

This relates to Favre because for the last few years I heard how Favre made Driver, and then was making Jennings.

As soon as Favre retired, we heard how great Jennings was and how average Rodgers was for having a similar season to Favre.

I don't get it. Two years ago, Favre was the greatest Packer ever, having one of his greatest years and now Rodgers is above average having a similar year with a similar offense.

It seems like you are very biased, Bretsky and Favre is a big part of that bias. That is why this relates to Favre. His strange connection clouds vision.

Similiar season? 13-3 vs 6-10 I take it math is not your strong suit now is it? When are you people gonna learn? It's about WINS PERIOD! NOTHING else matters.

To compare the season Favre had with what Rodgers did is sheer STUPIDITY!

I never believed in the "alien among us" theory but you have to be outta this world cause some of the shit you spout is off the wall!

Stop it Packnut. You are making the mistake many on here make, that being that you are comparing team success between Favre and Rodgers when the argument JH tried to make was specifically comparing Rodgers and Favre (not Rodgers' team to Favre's team). Speaking to individual success alone, and not concerning ourselves with the litany of injuries on the defensive side of the ball for Aaron's season or the serious lack of a pass rush during Aaron's season, Brett's and Aaron's seasons looked very similar.

The QB alone is not solely responsible for wins. Remember that. 53 players, a coaching staff, a training staff, a scouting department... All of these groups have an affect on wins and losses. Not just the quarterback.

[BZnDallas]

Thats kind of the point about Rodgers... he not only has to do more, he has to do it all. Can't count on the defense and ST's at all. Cutler won't be asked to win games in the same way.

The GBP put everything on their QB... even if Rodgers is better than Cutler, he's going to have to be. Green Bay isn't going to beat anybody with defense, except maybe Detroit.

Luckily, or unluckily :), everyone in the division is so flawed that none of them really has a legit shot at the SB... if Chicago can rebuild their D in the next couple of years, I'd give them a better shot moving forward than GB, simply b/c I have zero faith that the Packers can build a championship calibur defense.


all i'm trying to say is that Rodgers has shown he can lead a team to a comeback win/tie in the 4th quarter... he hasn't gotten any credit for doing it 5 times last year... all we hear about is how AR doesn't have what it takes to lead this team... i disagree... he lead them alot last year and the D gave it up alot last year aswell... can we put to rest the part about AR in the 4th quarter now?... thats all i'm askin... :?:

[RashanGary]

2007 Packers

#9 combined defense and ST's


2008 Packers

#23 combined defense and ST's

Missed two game winning FG's.



I think the blaming the QB thing can pretty much go out the window, but nothing will stop the worshipers/haters. Time will prove Rodgers right and I'll be here to continue the conversation. So keep talkin. You're digging a hole where your opinions will become less and less valid with every shovel, or post in the case of many here.

[Joemailman]

Orton wont be a starter, Simms will be so he's out.

I'd thought about that, but Simms hasn't played football for 2 years. I think Orton will be the starter initially. Whether he can keep the job is another matter.

[Bretsky]

I think it's sad that you deem yourself to be fighting the good fight when nearly everybody likes AROD and cheers for him. Has anybody in this thread implied he's a bad quarterback ?

Calling others worthipers/haters accomplishes nothing but dividing people.

Isn't it enough to have those who like TT versus those who dislike TTT ?

[red]

i don't think orton should even be anywhere near the poll

cutler and rodgers are legit starters, and both look like they'll have very good careers

orton is just something the bears had that was better then the rest of the shit they had. he's a career backup that had to start do to shear stupidity

[RashanGary]

Bretsky, the same people who fought tooth and nail in Favre's corner during last years fiasco are the same people who are constantly saying Rodgers lost the games last year and the same people saying his supporting cast are what made him. If you can't connect those two dots, we're living in a different world.

It's completely unfair to Rodgers and none of you used to say that before Rodgers was QB. It was always, "the QB is making this team" then it went to, "The QB is made by the offense" as soon as Rodgers took over. BS.

The great thing is, time gets to prove people right and wrong and when time comes, all you hear is whining because one group is always wrong and then cries about it.

[Bretsky]

Bretsky, the same people who fought tooth and nail in Favre's corner during last years fiasco are the same people who are constantly saying Rodgers lost the games last year and the same people saying his supporting cast are what made him. If you can't connect those two dots, we're living in a different world.

It's completely unfair to Rodgers and none of you used to say that before Rodgers was QB. It was always, "the QB is making this team" then it went to, "The QB is made by the offense" as soon as Rodgers took over. BS.



I can think of about two people who fit the profile you are describing...not including pacopete...who I don't think is around anymore.

I guess that's why I just think you are stirring the pot

[RashanGary]

Nope. I don't like when the same people who said, "the QB makes the offense" now discredit Rodgers for having a big time year and seem to be ready to discount him if he has another and another.

Rodgers was near the top of the league in yards in the air. Let's remember that. He's not just tossing it short and letting his guys run like we're used to. He gets all the credit for his big year. He'd be good in the Bears offense or any offense because he throws a catchable, accurate ball and knows where to go with the ball. He'd probably be perfect for the Bears because he's a strong leader, very ball secure and would mesh perfectly into a championship D/ST/Run game. He plays the game like a champ, not like a glory hound, chump.

[Bretsky]

Nope. I don't like when the same people who said, "the QB makes the offense" now discredit Rodgers for having a big time year and seem to be ready to discount him if he has another and another.

Rodgers was near the top of the league in yards in the air. Let's remember that. He's not just tossing it short and letting his guys run like we're used to. He'd be good in the Bears offense or any offense because he throws a catchable, accurate ball and knows where to go with the ball. He'd probably be perfect for the Bears because he's a strong leader, very ball secure and would mesh perfectly into a championship D/ST/Run game. He plays the game like a champ, not like a glory hound, chump.


clearly your going to be a drama dude about this so I'll let it go and not encourage you to spat your generic jargon any more.

I read through the thread once again and you were the one who shifted the topic into this crap again that the forum read about for much of last year If I knew were Pacopete was I'd encourage you to continue the discussion with him.

Once again feel free to go back and disagree with anything specifically that I wrote in this thread.

[pack4to84]

Not only did Rodgers have a great season for a QB he has similar stats to the MVP of the league. If it wasn't for the D letting us all down Rodgers would have been MVP.

[Partial]

Not only did Rodgers have a great season for a QB he has similar stats to the MVP of the league. If it wasn't for the D letting us all down Rodgers would have been MVP.

Is this a joke?? :shock: MVP? More like PYT.

[esoxx]

Nope. I don't like when the same people who said, "the QB makes the offense" now discredit Rodgers for having a big time year and seem to be ready to discount him if he has another and another.

Rodgers was near the top of the league in yards in the air. Let's remember that. He's not just tossing it short and letting his guys run like we're used to. He gets all the credit for his big year. He'd be good in the Bears offense or any offense because he throws a catchable, accurate ball and knows where to go with the ball. He'd probably be perfect for the Bears because he's a strong leader, very ball secure and would mesh perfectly into a championship D/ST/Run game. He plays the game like a champ, not like a glory hound, chump.

6-10 as a first year starter. Let's hope for better things as the maturation prcocess occurs.

If you want to slam Favre, you're just a pot stirrer and your motives are clear. Hooray for you.

[Lurker64]

Last year the Packers were in a lot of games that they lost where if somebody would have made a play, they would have won. Rodgers didn't make that play, neither did anybody else.

The year before that, the Packers were in a lot of games where they won because somebody made a play. Favre didn't make all those plays, neither did anybody else.

QBs are like any other head honcho, they get too much credit when things go well and too much blame when they don't. I don't think anything more needs to be said on this topic, possibly ever.

[pack4to84]

Not only did Rodgers have a great season for a QB he has similar stats to the MVP of the league. If it wasn't for the D letting us all down Rodgers would have been MVP.

Is this a joke?? :shock: MVP? More like PYT.

Rodgers stats
341/536 63.6% 4,038 yds 28 TD 13 INT 93.6 rate
MVP
P.Manning
371/555 66.8% 4002 yds 27 TD 12 INT 95.0 rate

If the D and Crosby didn't let us down the Packers would have been 11-5. That would have been good enough to win our division something Payton didn't do.

[Partial]

Not only did Rodgers have a great season for a QB he has similar stats to the MVP of the league. If it wasn't for the D letting us all down Rodgers would have been MVP.

Is this a joke?? :shock: MVP? More like PYT.

Rodgers stats
341/536 63.6% 4,038 yds 28 TD 13 INT 93.6 rate
MVP
P.Manning
371/555 66.8% 4002 yds 27 TD 12 INT 95.0 rate

If the D and Crosby didn't let us down the Packers would have been 11-5. That would have been good enough to win our division something Payton didn't do.

WHAT? The D and Crosby lost us 5 games?!? This must be a joke.

[pbmax]

Instead of insults and wearing out your question marks, why don't folks make a factual case that Favre had the superior season as the Packers QB to Rodgers when comparing 2007 to 2008?

Unlike some, I am unwilling to simply look at the wins and losses, remember the QB was the most visible change and conclude the QB must be the sole cause of failure. I can get this type of ESPN analysis from Mike and Mike. If I am going to spend time on this topic, why not look below the superficial?

Because the answer lies in the performance of the whole team. Part of it was Rodgers, but a small fraction. He has room to improve, but the areas are quite specific. Other members of the team had far worse seasons than Rodgers, and that is the reason we are drafting ninth, not Rodgers.

The lengths folks are going to ignore the obvious is remarkable. Everyone wants to note that most starters returned from 2007 except for Favre. And therefore, Rodgers must be the difference; the reason for 7 fewer wins. But if you compare their seasons, Rodgers and Favre are very close. There are certain areas where one shines above the other, but overall very even.

And then there are areas of the football team that performed pathetically. We never seem to hear about these folks. The only observation made about the rest of the team was the number of returning starters. No one asks how they performed. Just because you returned doesn't mean you didn't stink. Not everyone is McCarthur.

[cpk1994]

Not only did Rodgers have a great season for a QB he has similar stats to the MVP of the league. If it wasn't for the D letting us all down Rodgers would have been MVP.

Is this a joke?? :shock: MVP? More like PYT.

Rodgers stats
341/536 63.6% 4,038 yds 28 TD 13 INT 93.6 rate
MVP
P.Manning
371/555 66.8% 4002 yds 27 TD 12 INT 95.0 rate

If the D and Crosby didn't let us down the Packers would have been 11-5. That would have been good enough to win our division something Payton didn't do.

WHAT? The D and Crosby lost us 5 games?!? This must be a joke.

Oh thats right, Partial says it was all Rodger's fault. God you are an idiot.

[Lurker64]

WHAT? The D and Crosby lost us 5 games?!? This must be a joke.

Well, when you think about it, the defense and special teams are 2/3 of a football team. Aaron Rodgers is one of 11 starters on the offense, which is 1/3 of the football team. Statistically speaking, it's a lot more probable that any particular loss can be pinned on the 2/3 than on the 1/11th of 1/3.

[Partial]

Who said anyhting about 1/11th?

[3irty1]

WHAT? The D and Crosby lost us 5 games?!? This must be a joke.

Well, when you think about it, the defense and special teams are 2/3 of a football team. Aaron Rodgers is one of 11 starters on the offense, which is 1/3 of the football team. Statistically speaking, it's a lot more probable that any particular loss can be pinned on the 2/3 than on the 1/11th of 1/3.

That's obviously an over simplification. Rodgers is 1/11 of the offensive personnel on the field but he's playing the most important position.

Saying the Defense and Crosby lost games for us is just shifting blame around. The Defense and Crosby had the opportunity to win us 5 more games but its not like they single-handedly lost anything. But point taken, Rodgers had a comparable year statistically to the league MVP. In an average season though Peytons MVP numbers would be weak.

[Partial]

There is so much more to it than numbers. Let's not forget that we CRUSHED the Manning led team early in the season. Do you think we would have been within 30 points of them week 12-13? Hell no.

[pack4to84]

Crosby missed game winning field goals vs MIN(52yrd 31 sec left) and CHI(38yrd 25 sec left)
now just with those two as wins bears finish 8-8 Vikings 9-7 Packers 8-8

Packers take lead with under 2min to play vs Panthers. Panther score a TD in 3 plays to win.

Packers pinned the Texans at the 3 yard line with 1:49 left. Texans drive the length of the field to kick the winning field goal. If D stops them. The Packers was sure to be in field goal range to win it.

5:40 left vs Jags the Packers take the lead, only to have the D give up a TD.

[Partial]

Not only did Rodgers have a great season for a QB he has similar stats to the MVP of the league. If it wasn't for the D letting us all down Rodgers would have been MVP.

Is this a joke?? :shock: MVP? More like PYT.

Rodgers stats
341/536 63.6% 4,038 yds 28 TD 13 INT 93.6 rate
MVP
P.Manning
371/555 66.8% 4002 yds 27 TD 12 INT 95.0 rate

If the D and Crosby didn't let us down the Packers would have been 11-5. That would have been good enough to win our division something Payton didn't do.

WHAT? The D and Crosby lost us 5 games?!? This must be a joke.

Oh thats right, Partial says it was all Rodger's fault. God you are an idiot.

Actually.. since I didn't say that ever... I'd say you're the idiot for putting words in peoples mouths.

[Partial]

Crosby missed game winning field goals vs MIN(52yrd 31 sec left) and CHI(38yrd 25 sec left)
now just with those two as wins bears finish 8-8 Vikings 9-7 Packers 8-8

Packers take lead with under 2min to play vs Panthers. Panther score a TD in 3 plays to win.

Packers pinned the Texans at the 3 yard line with 1:49 left. Texans drive the length of the field to kick the winning field goal. If D stops them. The Packers was sure to be in field goal range to win it.

5:40 left vs Jags the Packers take the lead, only to have the D give up a TD.

Naturally those games are all the defenses fault. Talk about looking at something in black or white! :P

[Joemailman]

Under 2 minutes, the defense has a big advantage because they know the other team has to throw the ball. Successful 2 minute drills, especially where a TD is needed, are not all that common. The Packers 4th quarter defense last year was as bad as I can remember seeing.

[Lurker64]

Very few outcomes in football are any one person's fault. If you have a potentially game-winning FG that's just barely missed, you could blame the kicker for barely missing the kick. However, you could also blame the coach for calling three straight running plays once you get into FG range, you could blame the RB for picking the wrong hole on one of those plays, or not breaking a tackle, or not doing something else that would have gotten them more points. You could blame anybody on the OL for any bad block on any one of those running plays. You could blame the defense for giving up enough points that the FG was necessary to win. You could blame any one player on the defense for failing to make a play to end any one of the other team's scoring drives. You could blame a WR for dropping a pass that would have been a sure TD back in the second quarter. You could blame the QB for not throwing a slightly more catchable ball back then in the second quarter.

The fact of the matter is that football is not an individual sport. You win as a team, and you lose as a team. A losing effort is everybody's fault, since no matter how well any player or any unit played in that game, they could have played better thus sealing the win (you can't lose the game if the defense doesn't give up any points, after all.)

A win can be had because of one player or one unit's excellence, or key play at a key moment in the game; but a loss is just due to the sum total of everybody's cumulative inadequacies and mistakes over the course of the game.

People are right when we they said "we would have won more games last year if the defense and special teams played better." People are also correct when they say "we would have won more games last year if the Quarterback played better." Neither statement is really all that useful, since we ought to be more concerned with "how to win more games next year" rather than the slinging of blame. In terms of "winning more games in 2009", it's going to be a lot easier to make the defense and special teams play better (each unit was near the bottom in NFL rankings, and most of the relevant coaches have been replaced) than to get the QB to play better (Rodgers was near the top of the NFL in every significant individual statistic, despite his shoulder injury). We certainly would win more games next year if Rodgers throws 10 more TDs next year than he did last year, but 38 TD years are rare (nobody did it last year.) It's going to be easier to win more games if we get Grant into the endzone more (only 4 rush TDs last year). Easier still, it would be easier to win more games if the defense doesn't give up 380 points. In football, it's a lot easier to make something "bad" into something "adequate" than to make something "very good" into something 'exceptional".

It's a team game. Win as a team, lose as a team. Don't blame one player, or one unit, and don't give too much credit to one player or one unit. But when you're losing close games... please just get somebody or some unit to play better, that turns those into wins.

[HarveyWallbangers]

That was a really solid post, lurker.

[pack4to84]

That was a really solid post, lurker.I agree

[Joemailman]

In terms of "winning more games in 2009", it's going to be a lot easier to make the defense and special teams play better (each unit was near the bottom in NFL rankings, and most of the relevant coaches have been replaced) than to get the QB to play better (Rodgers was near the top of the NFL in every significant individual statistic, despite his shoulder injury). We certainly would win more games next year if Rodgers throws 10 more TDs next year than he did last year, but 38 TD years are rare (nobody did it last year.) It's going to be easier to win more games if we get Grant into the endzone more (only 4 rush TDs last year). Easier still, it would be easier to win more games if the defense doesn't give up 380 points. In football, it's a lot easier to make something "bad" into something "adequate" than to make something "very good" into something 'exceptional".

This is why I'm fairly optimistic about this season. It wouldn't take much for the Packers defense to be improved enough to turn some of last minute losses into wins. A more consistent running game could also go a long way to help "ice" some of those games where the Packers had a late lead. The 2 minute drill is also an area where Arod did not exactly excel last year. I'd be surprised if he doesn't show more patience this year, which he sometimes lacked last year. The Packers are in a great position to surprise people who think a 6-10 record is indicative of the talent level here.

[Waldo]

We had the statistically best 4th quarter offense in the NFL in 2008 (we scored more 4th qtr points than anybody else), and the statistically worst 4th quarter defense (we gave up more 4th quarter points than anybody else).

We were one of 5 teams in the history of the NFL to score 400+ pts on the season and not finish at least .500 (8-8).

We were one of the rare teams to have a positive pts. differential (our offense averaged more PPG than our defense gave up) and have a losing record.

We were one of the rare teams to dominate the turnover battle (>+10) and not have a winning record.

We were losing 3 games all season with 5:00 to go in the game, yet finished 6-10.

We played the most 8-8 teams or greater of any team in the NFL last year, we played the most 9-7 or greater teams in the NFL last year, we played the most 10+ win teams in the NFL last year, we had the hardest schedule in the NFL last year.

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

[sharpe1027]

I still don't trust that ARod can stay upright... he did it for one season, and nobody was more shocked than I was that he actually performed fairly well - his inability to close games out notwithstanding.

Still, ARod looks like he could be okay... don't see a SB in our future though.

Cutler may be in a better situation long term, assuming he grows up... Chicago has a defensive mentality, and while they were junk on defense last year, I'm sure they will address it.

In short, Cutler doesn't have to be as good as Rodgers... Chicago will look to run first, and play solid D; GB puts everything on their QB.

Wist,

I would have thought that you would have called this in favor of Rodgers by a wide margin. According to numerous posts you believe that the Packer's offense requires a HoF caliber QB to be successful. The offense was pretty good at scoring points and racking up yards, the defensive struggles notwithstanding. So doesn't that mean that you think Rodgers played damn near HoF caliber football last year? :wink:

p.s., in anticipation of your response: I realize that they didn't win enough games, but the offense still didn't fall flat on its face as you seem to suggest would happen due to the need for outstanding QB play to be successful.

Give Rodgers his due, if he was only "OK" the offense should have been abysmal...it was not.

[pbmax]

People are right when we they said "we would have won more games last year if the defense and special teams played better." People are also correct when they say "we would have won more games last year if the Quarterback played better." Neither statement is really all that useful, since we ought to be more concerned with "how to win more games next year" rather than the slinging of blame. In terms of "winning more games in 2009", it's going to be a lot easier to make the defense and special teams play better (each unit was near the bottom in NFL rankings, and most of the relevant coaches have been replaced) than to get the QB to play better (Rodgers was near the top of the NFL in every significant individual statistic, despite his shoulder injury). We certainly would win more games next year if Rodgers throws 10 more TDs next year than he did last year, but 38 TD years are rare (nobody did it last year.) It's going to be easier to win more games if we get Grant into the endzone more (only 4 rush TDs last year). Easier still, it would be easier to win more games if the defense doesn't give up 380 points. In football, it's a lot easier to make something "bad" into something "adequate" than to make something "very good" into something 'exceptional".
Somebody get this man a gift card, Lurker wins thread. My reply to my previous challenge was at 3000 words and counting. Charts and graphs too. Glad you have saved everyone the trouble.

[packers11]

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

THE JINXXX!!! It took down both Favre and the GB team!

Lets hope no packer is on the cover for the next 20 years... :lol:

[pbmax]

We had the statistically best 4th quarter offense in the NFL in 2008 (we scored more 4th qtr points than anybody else), and the statistically worst 4th quarter defense (we gave up more 4th quarter points than anybody else).

We were one of 5 teams in the history of the NFL to score 400+ pts on the season and not finish at least .500 (8-8).

We were one of the rare teams to have a positive pts. differential (our offense averaged more PPG than our defense gave up) and have a losing record.

We were one of the rare teams to dominate the turnover battle (>+10) and not have a winning record.

We were losing 3 games all season with 5:00 to go in the game, yet finished 6-10.

We played the most 8-8 teams or greater of any team in the NFL last year, we played the most 9-7 or greater teams in the NFL last year, we played the most 10+ win teams in the NFL last year, we had the hardest schedule in the NFL last year.

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.
Get Waldo a gift card as well. Maybe for some new specs for his monkey.

[3irty1]

Personally I blame refs.

[KYPack]

We had the statistically best 4th quarter offense in the NFL in 2008 (we scored more 4th qtr points than anybody else), and the statistically worst 4th quarter defense (we gave up more 4th quarter points than anybody else).

We were one of 5 teams in the history of the NFL to score 400+ pts on the season and not finish at least .500 (8-8).

We were one of the rare teams to have a positive pts. differential (our offense averaged more PPG than our defense gave up) and have a losing record.

We were one of the rare teams to dominate the turnover battle (>+10) and not have a winning record.

We were losing 3 games all season with 5:00 to go in the game, yet finished 6-10.

We played the most 8-8 teams or greater of any team in the NFL last year, we played the most 9-7 or greater teams in the NFL last year, we played the most 10+ win teams in the NFL last year, we had the hardest schedule in the NFL last year.

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

I was aware of several of these points. All of 'em together are incredible.

The net net of this is we were an amazing team last year and had every break go the other way at crunch time to dig up the 6-10 record.

Really I think we had the two fluke seasons back to back. We had it all go our way to go 13-3. Then we caught all bad breaks to wind up 6-10. We weren't that good in '07. we weren't that bad in '08.

I used to like some of the data on "Football Outsiders". Last year, I lost a lot of faith in the site 'cause they kept rating us and the Eagles so highly. At seasons end, we were still quite highly rated on there. During the year, we were one of the top teams. Actually, they were probably pretty accurate, we just couldn't get the results in the 'ol W-L column.

[Fritz]

Waldo's amazing post contains information that surely Thompson has; this information might be the basis for TT's seeming inactivity during the offseason. Thus, TT's biggest offseason acquisitions might've been Capers and Slocum.

If the defense and special teams, as Lurker points out, can even become average, then the chances are that this team's record will be much, much better - as long as injuries do not mount.