NFC North QB Race 2009

[Rastak]

Back for it's 3rd year, the bottom of the week 1 list looks uglier than normal.



1. Favre 93.5
2. Rodgers 92.0
3. Cutler 43.2
4. Stafford 27.4


Those last two make Tarvaris Jackson's usual ratings look good!

[Badgerinmaine]

I didn't see any of the Lions' loss to New Orleans, but Stafford's day had to have been absolutely brutal. Jay Cutler threw four picks and is well ahead of him.

[FritzDontBlitz]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats. Still, the list would end up the same way....

I kinda felt sorry for Cutler. His first game at Lambeau Feiild and he obviously wasn't ready for the intensity but I wonder how he would have fared if he had an OC who had enough sense to make his TE's work the middle of the field instead of using them as wideouts most of the time. Great throw to Jennings by Rodgers at the end.

[Fritz]

Let the fun begin!

Stafford missed a lot of throws. Some say it's just him being a rookie. Some hearken back to his reputation coming into the draft as being a bit scattershot.

[boiga]

The problem with QB ratings is that they correlate with both run proficiency and defensive stats. So they are a metric of team-wide play that doesn't take the opposition into account.

If any other QB in the NFCN were given AP and the Bengals as an opponent, they'd have at least as high a QB rating as Favre had this week. They can all hand it off with the best of them and throw 8 yard dump offs. [/rant]

[Bossman641]

The problem with QB ratings is that they correlate with both run proficiency and defensive stats. So they are a metric of team-wide play that doesn't take the opposition into account.

If any other QB in the NFCN were given AP and the Bengals as an opponent, they'd have at least as high a QB rating as Favre had this week. They can all hand it off with the best of them and throw 8 yard dump offs. [/rant]

8 yards? You give the man way too much credit.


Favre threw 21 passes Sunday, targeting a running back or a tight end on almost 60 percent of them. Only four of his passes traveled more than 5 yards in the air.

[MOBB DEEP]

The problem with QB ratings is that they correlate with both run proficiency and defensive stats. So they are a metric of team-wide play that doesn't take the opposition into account.

If any other QB in the NFCN were given AP and the Bengals as an opponent, they'd have at least as high a QB rating as Favre had this week. They can all hand it off with the best of them and throw 8 yard dump offs. [/rant]

Yeah, the Bengals played the Broncs AND the Vikes yesterday; tough work day...

[MOBB DEEP]

8 yards? You give the man way too much credit.



:roll:




Just messn w/u Bossy. But dont act like Favre didnt throw long JUST earlier this year w/Jets; Chilly is being smart to remain conservative during Vikes extended preseason V. Browns, Lions, and 9ers no? In due time Favre will NEED to open things up but why if ther's no need? RUN THAT BALL....i wish we could do that with grant dont u?

[Dabaddestbear]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats. Still, the list would end up the same way....

I kinda felt sorry for Cutler. His first game at Lambeau Feiild and he obviously wasn't ready for the intensity but I wonder how he would have fared if he had an OC who had enough sense to make his TE's work the middle of the field instead of using them as wideouts most of the time. Great throw to Jennings by Rodgers at the end.

I was thinking the same thing about the TE's. But Olsen did drop two that hit him right in his mitts over the middle I believe.

[SMACKTALKIE]

The problem with QB ratings is that they correlate with both run proficiency and defensive stats. So they are a metric of team-wide play that doesn't take the opposition into account.

If any other QB in the NFCN were given AP and the Bengals as an opponent, they'd have at least as high a QB rating as Favre had this week. They can all hand it off with the best of them and throw 8 yard dump offs. [/rant]

8 yards? You give the man way too much credit.


Favre threw 21 passes Sunday, targeting a running back or a tight end on almost 60 percent of them. Only four of his passes traveled more than 5 yards in the air.

The offense looked out of sync all around.

But.....

34 points! Dump offs, 110 yards passing, and sacks galore for 34 points and no turnovers.

I'll take that every game. :)

[MOBB DEEP]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats.

EXACTLY; but you know folk on either side of the Favre/Aaaron comparison will be chompn at the bit to throw numbers out there as if we're talkn about pro tennis and not the ultimate TEAM game of fball....

Favre is 90 yrs old and Aaaron IS the man of the moment and future...prety simple really

[HarveyWallbangers]

The offense looked out of sync all around.

But.....

34 points! Dump offs, 110 yards passing, and sacks galore for 34 points and no turnovers.

I'll take that every game. :)

Can't argue with a win, but they won't play Ohio State every week. Just the first three weeks.
:D

[Zool]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats.

EXACTLY; but you know folk on either side of the Favre/Aaaron comparison will be chompn at the bit to throw numbers out there as if we're talkn about pro tennis and not the ultimate TEAM game of fball....

Much like many will do if Favre has a monster game this season. You're not helping the situation with shit like this Mobb.

[SMACKTALKIE]

The offense looked out of sync all around.

But.....

34 points! Dump offs, 110 yards passing, and sacks galore for 34 points and no turnovers.

I'll take that every game. :)

Can't argue with a win, but they won't play Ohio State every week. Just the first three weeks.
:D

True, but the offense will not be out of sync every week either.

And.......... AD.

[MOBB DEEP]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats.

EXACTLY; but you know folk on either side of the Favre/Aaaron comparison will be chompn at the bit to throw numbers out there as if we're talkn about pro tennis and not the ultimate TEAM game of fball....

Much like many will do if Favre has a monster game this season. You're not helping the situation with shit like this Mobb.

I disagree Z; i dont recall people who still support favre engaging in any mean-spirited gloating last year when he played well. Do you? Remember evrything was kept in one thread and no Favre supporters EVER bashed aaron if i remember correctly. NO WAY you can say my post was stirring pot either.... :evil: . I simply said I agree that numbers arent as important in sports like fball


DAYUM...axe to grind?

[channtheman]

The problem with QB ratings is that they correlate with both run proficiency and defensive stats. So they are a metric of team-wide play that doesn't take the opposition into account.

If any other QB in the NFCN were given AP and the Bengals as an opponent, they'd have at least as high a QB rating as Favre had this week. They can all hand it off with the best of them and throw 8 yard dump offs. [/rant]

8 yards? You give the man way too much credit.


Favre threw 21 passes Sunday, targeting a running back or a tight end on almost 60 percent of them. Only four of his passes traveled more than 5 yards in the air.

Yeah I fast forwarded the Vikings game and only watched the offense. I counted that stat as well. Only 4 passes that were more than 5 yards, and not really anything that I thought warranted 12 million dollars.

[Zool]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats.

EXACTLY; but you know folk on either side of the Favre/Aaaron comparison will be chompn at the bit to throw numbers out there as if we're talkn about pro tennis and not the ultimate TEAM game of fball....

Much like many will do if Favre has a monster game this season. You're not helping the situation with shit like this Mobb.

I disagree Z; i dont recall people who still support favre engaging in any mean-spirited gloating last year when he played well. Do you? Remember evrything was kept in one thread and no Favre supporters EVER bashed aaron if i remember correctly. NO WAY you can say my post was stirring pot either.... :evil: . I simply said I agree that numbers arent as important in sports like fball


DAYUM...axe to grind?

Yes I do. Its funny how when you agree with someone how you dont see it as gloating. Go talk to a Bears fan today.

[packerbacker1234]

Yeah I fast forwarded the Vikings game and only watched the offense. I counted that stat as well. Only 4 passes that were more than 5 yards, and not really anything that I thought warranted 12 million dollars.

Early in the season I doubt your going to see the value they saw in Favre, or any reason they got him. He needs some extended "preseason" work and in the meantime, he can just hand to AP 3/4 downs like they did last year and still score a lot of points and win.

It's when they need a game winning drive, or face a team that can bottle up AP, that you will see "why they got him". They will turn to him to win football games when they have to, and those are the games they got #4 for. They didn't even have a single PA Deep look last game... because they didn't need it.

Give it time. Right now, what matters is W's and both Favre and Rodgers got them this weekend.

[HarveyWallbangers]

They didn't even have a single PA Deep look last game... because they didn't need it.

Actually, it sounds like they had a few, but Favre got sacked on most of them.

[MOBB DEEP]

I judge the QB's based on games won, not personal stats.

EXACTLY; but you know folk on either side of the Favre/Aaaron comparison will be chompn at the bit to throw numbers out there as if we're talkn about pro tennis and not the ultimate TEAM game of fball....

Much like many will do if Favre has a monster game this season. You're not helping the situation with shit like this Mobb.

I disagree Z; i dont recall people who still support favre engaging in any mean-spirited gloating last year when he played well. Do you? Remember evrything was kept in one thread and no Favre supporters EVER bashed aaron if i remember correctly. NO WAY you can say my post was stirring pot either.... :evil: . I simply said I agree that numbers arent as important in sports like fball


DAYUM...axe to grind?

Yes I do. Its funny how when you agree with someone how you dont see it as gloating. Go talk to a Bears fan today.

OK, I will do my best to not engage in any of that foolishness this year...

Cool?

Still disagree that my post today could hurt the situation though

[MOBB DEEP]

Yeah I fast forwarded the Vikings game and only watched the offense. I counted that stat as well. Only 4 passes that were more than 5 yards, and not really anything that I thought warranted 12 million dollars.

Early in the season I doubt your going to see the value they saw in Favre, or any reason they got him. He needs some extended "preseason" work and in the meantime, he can just hand to AP 3/4 downs like they did last year and still score a lot of points and win.

It's when they need a game winning drive, or face a team that can bottle up AP, that you will see "why they got him". They will turn to him to win football games when they have to, and those are the games they got #4 for. They didn't even have a single PA Deep look last game... because they didn't need it.

Give it time. Right now, what matters is W's and both Favre and Rodgers got them this weekend.

QFT...

When teams start bringing LBs up a lil to shut down AD look for the crossing routes behind the LBs and those INs that favre is good at...

Favre was brought in for 3rd down conversions (Minny's achiles) and redzone play, not probowl "numbers." Imagine if aaron had that OLine: DEF mvp 5,000 yrds

[Dabaddestbear]

lets keep it honest.

[Rastak]

After week 2.....


1. Favre 110.2
2. Rodgers 87
3. Cutler 71.5
4. Stafford 40.5


Favre getting some big time help from his running game and a dink and dunk offense employed to counter the constant blitzing teams are doing against the Vikings.

[Scott Campbell]

After week 2.....


1. Favre 110.2
2. Rodgers 87
3. Cutler 71.5
4. Stafford 40.5


Favre getting some big time help from his running game and a dink and dunk offense employed to counter the constant blitzing teams are doing against the Vikings.


With a big tip of the hat to the schedule.

[MOBB DEEP]

I would imagine teams will start tryna make favre beat them with more than dinks, etc...but then u risking alot with BB and Harvin's blazn speed

[MOBB DEEP]

Kornheiser just said that if favre continues to be 23 for 27 the queens win the SB

He needs to be puttn up bigger numbers imho tho....stop managing the game like the two-decade player that he is, ala Elway at the end! :evil: Needs to make a bigger impact

ALL that loot he's gettn....?

[Deputy Nutz]

After week 2.....


1. Favre 110.2
2. Rodgers 87
3. Cutler 71.5
4. Stafford 40.5


Favre getting some big time help from his running game and a dink and dunk offense employed to counter the constant blitzing teams are doing against the Vikings.


With a big tip of the hat to the schedule.

Favre doesn't love you anymore.

[Dabaddestbear]

After week 2.....


1. Favre 110.2
2. Rodgers 87
3. Cutler 71.5
4. Stafford 40.5


Favre getting some big time help from his running game and a dink and dunk offense employed to counter the constant blitzing teams are doing against the Vikings.


With a big tip of the hat to the schedule.
They take them (games) as they are dished out. The Bengals was supposed to be one of the easiest spreads this week, but the Packers allowed a major upset. That upset was the largest of this weekend according to the Vegas odds. Go ahead and check it out SC, and then go mute as usual... :roll:

Thanks to the Packers choke against lesser talent (on paper) my pockets enjoyed a sweet financial gain. :twisted:

[Rastak]

He is right though.....you sort of didn't address point baddest. He was discussing Favre and it's been a weak schedule to start the season.

[Dabaddestbear]

He is right though.....you sort of didn't address point baddest. He was discussing Favre and it's been a weak schedule to start the season.
The Point was addressed in regards to the Pack getting Cincy but failing to come away with a win. The Packers were bigger favorites than the Vikings were against the Lions. And the Bears were the only team that was considered an underdog amongst the three. Yet Rodgers and his WR's failed to produce against what many have perceived a weak defense.

So once again, is it the other teams fault that even when you do get an easy team on your schedule and you still don't pull it out? What will the excuse be if they can not pull one out against the lowly Rams?

[MOBB DEEP]

Cant believe a cat with THAT avatar shut you cats up!

[MOBB DEEP]

Favre has league-leading 77.1 completion %

Oh, the schedule... :roll:

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Cant believe a cat with THAT avatar shut you cats up!

He didn't do it, we just stopped because he refuses to talk about the point.

We are talking QB ratings and he is talking about winning games.

Favre has indeed had an easy schedule that has allowed him to accumulate a good qb rating..regardless of wins. Wins isn't the issue we were discussing.

Case in point....Arod has a better qb rating than jamarcus russell....yet both are 1-1.

It is entirely possible to have a very pedestrian qb rating and be part of a winning team.

[MOBB DEEP]

Whats the latest ranking?

[Dabaddestbear]

Whats the latest ranking?
I dont know, but can we start to include 4th quarter comebacks into that equation since Brett and Jay both did it today in tight games.

[packerbacker1234]

Whats the latest ranking?
I dont know, but can we start to include 4th quarter comebacks into that equation since Brett and Jay both did it today in tight games.

Plus Arod in game 1. Be good to measure that as well, along with ratings.

When I saw the 1 int number for favre I thought "he's back", then I saw it and realized that he was just a tipped/dropped ball that flew up in the air. Favre did miss on some passes today, but like Rodgers in week 1 he came up big at the end.

So yeah, lets see the numbers. Favre i think is somehwere in hte 90's again. Rogers should be as well.

[GrnBay007]

Rastak is probably still out celebrating. :D

[pbmax]

I'll give a hint, the order has changed.

[boiga]

1. Rodgers 97.2
2. Favre 94.5
3. Cutler 86.2
4. Stafford 57.0

And order is restored to the universe...

[channtheman]

1. Rodgers 97.2
2. Favre 94.5
3. Cutler 86.2
4. Stafford 57.0

And order is restored to the universe...

All improved except Favre (which is expected since it was so high). This division definitely has 3 good QB's and Cutler looks to be improving also. :lol: No, Stafford looks like he may be coming along nicely as well.

[pbmax]

1. Rodgers 97.2
2. Favre 94.5
3. Cutler 86.2
4. Stafford 57.0

And order is restored to the universe...
Why steal Ras' thunder?

[boiga]

1. Rodgers 97.2
2. Favre 94.5
3. Cutler 86.2
4. Stafford 57.0

And order is restored to the universe...
Why steal Ras' thunder?

oops, my bad ras.

I didn't realize this was proprietary.

[Gunakor]

This division definitely has 3 good QB's and Cutler looks to be improving also. :lol:

:lol:

That's a good one :D

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.

[packers11]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
4. Rodgers -- because I hate him

Fixed it for you... go to bed drunky

[pbmax]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

[Gunakor]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.

If Rodgers is injured they have to put him on the injury report. So we'll know on Wednesday. They aren't going to hide that with the NFL currently investigating the Brett Favre deal from last season.

In any case, while Cutler looks to be much better than the showing he gave the Packers, I couldn't rate him #1 in the NFCN. 6/5 TD to INT ratio leaves something to be desired. I'd rate Favre at #1 at this point. Cutler and Rodgers I'd have about even. Give the nod to Rodgers because he won the head to head matchup.

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.

If Rodgers is injured they have to put him on the injury report. So we'll know on Wednesday. They aren't going to hide that with the NFL currently investigating the Brett Favre deal from last season.

In any case, while Cutler looks to be much better than the showing he gave the Packers, I couldn't rate him #1 in the NFCN. 6/5 TD to INT ratio leaves something to be desired. I'd rate Favre at #1 at this point. Cutler and Rodgers I'd have about even. Give the nod to Rodgers because he won the head to head matchup.

I don't buy that teams always put there injured players on the report and are completely truthful about it. Case in point: Brady was listed as questionable every week in 2007 or 2006.

[Gunakor]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

What type of injury do you suppose he has? Watching him on the field, I didn't notice anything unusual. His arm strength seems to be fine, several of his misses the past 2 weeks were overthrows. He still is pretty good with his legs too. Did you see something out of the ordinary that looked like a minor injury?

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

What type of injury do you suppose he has? Watching him on the field, I didn't notice anything unusual. His arm strength seems to be fine, several of his misses the past 2 weeks were overthrows. He still is pretty good with his legs too. Did you see something out of the ordinary that looked like a minor injury?

Even on the deep passes without pressure he's throwing it long or short. Perhaps its just a conspiracy theory in my head but I think he's hurt.

[Gunakor]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.

If Rodgers is injured they have to put him on the injury report. So we'll know on Wednesday. They aren't going to hide that with the NFL currently investigating the Brett Favre deal from last season.

In any case, while Cutler looks to be much better than the showing he gave the Packers, I couldn't rate him #1 in the NFCN. 6/5 TD to INT ratio leaves something to be desired. I'd rate Favre at #1 at this point. Cutler and Rodgers I'd have about even. Give the nod to Rodgers because he won the head to head matchup.

I don't buy that teams always put there injured players on the report and are completely truthful about it. Case in point: Brady was listed as questionable every week in 2007 or 2006.

And Bill Belicheat is your example? I already know that guy is a fucking liar. Please tell me you have a better example than that.

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.

If Rodgers is injured they have to put him on the injury report. So we'll know on Wednesday. They aren't going to hide that with the NFL currently investigating the Brett Favre deal from last season.

In any case, while Cutler looks to be much better than the showing he gave the Packers, I couldn't rate him #1 in the NFCN. 6/5 TD to INT ratio leaves something to be desired. I'd rate Favre at #1 at this point. Cutler and Rodgers I'd have about even. Give the nod to Rodgers because he won the head to head matchup.

I don't buy that teams always put there injured players on the report and are completely truthful about it. Case in point: Brady was listed as questionable every week in 2007 or 2006.

And Bill Belicheat is your example? I already know that guy is a fucking liar. Please tell me you have a better example than that.

I don't have any evidence. I think he's injured. Let's hope so because he has looked a lot better in the past.

[MOBB DEEP]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
4. Rodgers -- because I hate him

Fixed it for you... go to bed drunky

lol, b/c i hate him

[Rastak]

1 Rodgers 97.2
2 Favre 94.5
3 Cutler 86.2
4 Stafford 57

Race is tightening up a bit.

[Sparkey]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

[ThunderDan]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

You forgot the part where we aren't cool either!

It must be so delightful to live in a made-up world and scream that everyone is a jerk for pointing out reality.

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

Actually, not what I'm saying at all. Fine, he's not hurt, he's just bad. He looks worse than average this year. He is the reason the offense has struggled majorly since he is the QB and teams only go as far as a QB will carry them. Cut the crap.

I personally think he is inured because he looks like crap. If he's not injured, then he is just a poor excuse of a quarterback. He has led an inept offense for two games and led an okay one for one game against a highschool JV team. Sure, he hasn't made any mistakes, but he has only made one play. Cutler has made more plays in three games than Rodgers has in 19 now in the NFC north. Sad.

[Bossman641]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

Actually, not what I'm saying at all. Fine, he's not hurt, he's just bad. He looks worse than average this year. He is the reason the offense has struggled majorly since he is the QB and teams only go as far as a QB will carry them. Cut the crap.

It's shit like this that you say that makes people jump all over you. Worse than average? Really? He is the reason? Not the OL whiffing on blocks? Or the receivers dropping numerous balls? Or the running game still getting on track?

Can Rodgers play better? Yes. It is hardly all on him though.

[Zool]

Look people, i know some of us like to argue, but can't you just start ignoring Partial and argue amongst yourselves?

[pbmax]

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.
Partial, you can't accept a kind of evidence (accuracy of throws) and then just throw out the results that don't agree with your conclusion.

He had some funky high throws last year too. In the game coverage, he mentions that he rushed the overthrow to a wide open Driver in the end zone.

[pbmax]

Look people, i know some of us like to argue, but can't you just start ignoring Partial and argue amongst yourselves?
Sure I see this after I respond. :roll:

[ThunderDan]

Look people, i know some of us like to argue, but can't you just start ignoring Partial and argue amongst yourselves?

My time out was up. I just can't stand the idiotic spew. I really wish we had an ignore feature.

[Zool]

I know its tough. I've had my share of relapses. He just says such stupid things sometimes. If we band together, we can stop this addiction once and for all.

Maybe we need an intervention?

[Tarlam!]

I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

[Charles Woodson]

I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.
See but the problem is that his "strong opinions" are always flawed in which us, the kind people of PR, point that out which makes him even more irate

[ThunderDan]

I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

Wrong! On the whole last play by the Packers vs Bengals, he was wrong. Jordy Nelson wasn't open. The bump by the Bengal player was 3 yards down the field. And the coach of the Packers said they should have been able to run a play down the middle and get another play off.

Yet P argued every point. I really wish I had the endzone stills for that play to show the breakdown.

[Tarlam!]

I saw that discussion, Dan. From what I recall, P tried to remain on topic despite being personally attacked.

[ThunderDan]

I saw that discussion, Dan. From what I recall, P tried to remain on topic despite being personally attacked.


So it's OK to "lie" for the whole thread and not expect to get people mad??? This is why we need the ignore feature!

[Zool]

He does it for effect people. He likes the role.

[Tarlam!]

I don't know when he lied. I know he argued his point about the last play quite vigorously and was personally attacked.

I am not innocent of not having it in for one, two posters here, so I can undertand your emotion on this.

[Tarlam!]

He does it for effect people. He likes the role.

Well, I've hung out with him and he really is as passionate in real life as he is in his opinions here.

[Tarlam!]

I want to apologize to Ras and the other Rats for taking this thread so off topic. I'm very sorry.

[Gunakor]

I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

Maybe if he wasn't so stubborn in his "I'm right, everybody else is wrong, I'm smart, you're an idiot, and I'm gonna make a point about it" type attitude it would be easier. Speaking from my own personal experience with him, when I do keep focused on topic and argue just the facts presented this is what I get:


I love how you ignore the question I answered and make more excuses. You lose. Game set match mother fucker.

He loves how I ignored a question he answered (which I didn't ignore, by the way, I just didn't agree with) and made more excuses (because I didn't agree with his answer, anything I say is going to sound like an excuse to him).

At least where the arguments between he and I are concerned, he's the one to make things personal. Maybe if he didn't make things personal when we are focused on debating the topic, we wouldn't respond personally, and this might be a friendlier place.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Maybe some of you all need a an "Official Partial Opinion & Rebuttal Thread" so we can keep some of these threads on topic!!!

[sheepshead]

Look people, i know some of us like to argue, but can't you just start ignoring Partial and argue amongst yourselves?

My time out was up. I just can't stand the idiotic spew. I really wish we had an ignore feature.

Join the club. It's constant moronic drivel that really garbage's up the forum and, in my opinion keeps some from contributing in a constructive way. I think his mom works here because any one who calls him out gets slammed.

[ThunderDan]

I don't know when he lied. I know he argued his point about the last play quite vigorously and was personally attacked.

I am not innocent of not having it in for one, two posters here, so I can undertand your emotion on this.

I was going to respond but instead I will let this thread go back to its originally intended purpose.

[SkinBasket]

Pip.

[Fritz]

How 'bout that Aaron Rodgers?

[Partial]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

Actually, not what I'm saying at all. Fine, he's not hurt, he's just bad. He looks worse than average this year. He is the reason the offense has struggled majorly since he is the QB and teams only go as far as a QB will carry them. Cut the crap.

It's shit like this that you say that makes people jump all over you. Worse than average? Really? He is the reason? Not the OL whiffing on blocks? Or the receivers dropping numerous balls? Or the running game still getting on track?

Can Rodgers play better? Yes. It is hardly all on him though.

This guy has more excuses made for him than anyone else in the NFL.

His supporting cast hasn't been great, but he is playing far below last year. I think he is injured because his deep ball is really inaccurate compared to what we have seen in the past. If he is not injured, then he has clearly regressed imo and that is a scary topic in and of itself.

OL Whiffing? Throw the ball away.

Receiver dropping balls? Throw a more catchable ball. I'm don't recall the same fleet of guys have dropsies for the HOFer. Drops are never just the receivers fault as its a two person exchange.

Running game? Make some plays and make the defense be honest.

It is on him. He's the quarterback. That is the nature of the beast. He and the coaching staff are responsible. Is it fair? Not really, but he chose to be a quarterback. That's why he makes 10 mil+ a year.

He was terrible for most of the Bears game. We did nothing offensively. He was terrible through all of the Cinci game. We did nothing offensively. We had one good quarter against the Rams. Of all fricking teams, the Rams.

[Partial]

I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

Wrong! On the whole last play by the Packers vs Bengals, he was wrong. Jordy Nelson wasn't open. The bump by the Bengal player was 3 yards down the field. And the coach of the Packers said they should have been able to run a play down the middle and get another play off.

Yet P argued every point. I really wish I had the endzone stills for that play to show the breakdown.

1. Just because Nelson only had one step on the receiver instead of 3 at the point of release does not mean he wasn't open. It could very well mean Rodgers made a poor decision and didn't wait long enough for the play to develop. This fact is ignored.

2. I don't see a bump from the footage you posted. You tell me where. Even so, impossible to ignore that Rodgers very well could have waited a fraction of a second longer for the play to develop. This fact is ignored.

3. Of course the coach is going to stand up for his quarterback. The QB is an extension of the coach. Is he going to say "Boy, the player really fucked up?" No, because coaches don't do that. There was enough time to get a play off, I agree, but not an organized, cohesive play with a huddle up that would have been doable TWICE had they gone to the sidelines or even thrown the ball away. Instead, it was chaotic madness and as a result they lost the game. Had they gone down the sideline they would have either score, or had time to huddle up twice and take two organized shots at the end zone. This fact is ignored.

I'm not wrong. You're not wrong. My team would take the statistical approach and multiple attempts. Your team would hope for a miracle of madness on a team rushing to get a play off. My team would win far more often than yours as a result of the decisions we make.

It bothers me greatly when people don't consider all of the possibilities. Any way you slice it, the decision that was made did not work out. There were obviously ones that would given a higher percentage of opportunity for success. That is all I have said all along, yet somehow this is a wrong, irrational approach to some posters here. I call it sound it math.

[Partial]

He does it for effect people. He likes the role.

Actually, I don't. I think it's unfair and ridiculous. I would love to sit down face and face to and talk football without anyone knowing who I am and most here would agree with me on most topics.

People are homers by nature. It's okay. It's a natural reaction. I try to look at things objectively. People don't like it when someone doesn't agree with there opinion. They attack me for looking at cold hard facts like losses, etc.

[Partial]

I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

Maybe if he wasn't so stubborn in his "I'm right, everybody else is wrong, I'm smart, you're an idiot, and I'm gonna make a point about it" type attitude it would be easier. Speaking from my own personal experience with him, when I do keep focused on topic and argue just the facts presented this is what I get:


I love how you ignore the question I answered and make more excuses. You lose. Game set match mother fucker.

He loves how I ignored a question he answered (which I didn't ignore, by the way, I just didn't agree with) and made more excuses (because I didn't agree with his answer, anything I say is going to sound like an excuse to him).

At least where the arguments between he and I are concerned, he's the one to make things personal. Maybe if he didn't make things personal when we are focused on debating the topic, we wouldn't respond personally, and this might be a friendlier place.

I don't think I'm always right. I wouldn't argue or debate if I didn't think I was though, and neither would you, so in essence, everyone debating in this forum thinks they're right. So please stop with that bs story.

You ignored the question. I asked you for an organized, concise list of plays Grant has made. You did not provide this. Since you did not provide evidence to counter the evidence I provide, you lost the argument.

I apologized to you for overreacting. I'm sorry. It was out of line. My blood was boiling for being attacked for having a differing opinion.

[Bossman641]

Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

Actually, not what I'm saying at all. Fine, he's not hurt, he's just bad. He looks worse than average this year. He is the reason the offense has struggled majorly since he is the QB and teams only go as far as a QB will carry them. Cut the crap.

It's shit like this that you say that makes people jump all over you. Worse than average? Really? He is the reason? Not the OL whiffing on blocks? Or the receivers dropping numerous balls? Or the running game still getting on track?

Can Rodgers play better? Yes. It is hardly all on him though.

OL Whiffing? Throw the ball away.

Receiver dropping balls? Throw a more catchable ball. I'm don't recall the same fleet of guys have dropsies for the HOFer.

Running game? Make some plays and make the defense be honest.

It is on him. He's the quarterback. That is the nature of the beast. He and the coaching staff are responsible.

He was terrible for all but one play of the Bears game. He was terrible through all of the Cinci game. We had one good quarter against the Rams. Of all fricking teams, the Rams.

I don't know why I'm even trying.

Throw a more catchable ball? If the WR gets 2 hands on the ball he should catch it. I don't care if it's a duck fallin out of the sky, he still should catch it. And that's completely ignoring the fact that Rodgers throws a very nice ball.

The running game has been mostly stuffed up with 7 in the box. What do you want, 6 in the box?

[packerbacker1234]

1 Rodgers 97.2
2 Favre 94.5
3 Cutler 86.2
4 Stafford 57

Race is tightening up a bit.

Nice seeing Favre and Rodgers neck and neck there. Makes a even better matchup for next week.

[SkinBasket]

He does it for effect people. He likes the role.

Actually, I don't. I think it's unfair and ridiculous. I would love to sit down face and face to and talk football without anyone knowing who I am and most here would agree with me on most topics.

People are homers by nature. It's okay. It's a natural reaction. I try to look at things objectively. People don't like it when someone doesn't agree with there opinion. They attack me for looking at cold hard facts like losses, etc.

What you don't understand is that no one wants to sit down and talk football with someone like you in person. You don't have any idea what you're talking about and when someone presents detailed arguments and evidence that contradicts your confabulated notions, you simply ignore them or insult the other person's intelligence by claiming they're a homer. You may as well be arguing that unicorns shit purple mushrooms filled with cherry jam for how far your football arguments fall from any kind of educated subjective opinion or objective fact.

Case in point: Nelson being "open" at the end of the CIN game. Not only does your position demonstrate your lack of understanding of some basics of the game (most notably defense, offense, and coaching), but you also continue to argue in direct opposition to the reality that the video clearly shows to anyone who isn't you.

Your arguments aren't smart enough to turn you into the controversial straight talker you are trying so hard to be. There's plenty to accurately criticize about this team. There's no need to continue to make things up just to get attention.

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.

[Zool]

I'm gonna marry Skin some day.

[SkinBasket]

I'm gonna marry Skin some day.

We aren't already? What was all that consummation business about then you dirty whore?

[Tarlam!]

I'm gonna marry Skin some day.

No, I'm Spartacus!

[Zool]

I'm gonna marry Skin some day.

We aren't already? What was all that consummation business about then you dirty whore?

Thats just what we call pillow talk baby. I thought we talked about this already.

[falco]

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.

I hope you never ate soup at his house.

[Rastak]

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.

I hope you never ate soup at his house.


You went to school with David Carradine!

[MOBB DEEP]

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.

Thats some funny as shyt...stitches

[superfan]

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.

And thus we know a little more about our friend Deputy Nutz. :lol:

[Partial]

Here is yet another example of more personal attacks, most of which were completely unprovoked. Justify it however you want....




I'm gonna marry Skin some day.

We aren't already? What was all that consummation business about then you dirty whore?

How is this helping the harrassment?

12.


I'm gonna marry Skin some day.

Please do not encourage him and his personal attacks against me. How is this helping the problem?

11.





He does it for effect people. He likes the role.

Actually, I don't. I think it's unfair and ridiculous. I would love to sit down face and face to and talk football without anyone knowing who I am and most here would agree with me on most topics.

People are homers by nature. It's okay. It's a natural reaction. I try to look at things objectively. People don't like it when someone doesn't agree with there opinion. They attack me for looking at cold hard facts like losses, etc.

What you don't understand is that no one wants to sit down and talk football with someone like you in person. You don't have any idea what you're talking about and when someone presents detailed arguments and evidence that contradicts your confabulated notions, you simply ignore them or insult the other person's intelligence by claiming they're a homer. You may as well be arguing that unicorns shit purple mushrooms filled with cherry jam for how far your football arguments fall from any kind of educated subjective opinion or objective fact.

Case in point: Nelson being "open" at the end of the CIN game. Not only does your position demonstrate your lack of understanding of some basics of the game (most notably defense, offense, and coaching), but you also continue to argue in direct opposition to the reality that the video clearly shows to anyone who isn't you.

Your arguments aren't smart enough to turn you into the controversial straight talker you are trying so hard to be. There's plenty to accurately criticize about this team. There's no need to continue to make things up just to get attention.

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.



This is out of line. You're again making assumptions and being a jerk. This is inappropriate and harrassment.

10.



Pip.

How is this positively contributing to the thread?

10.





Look people, i know some of us like to argue, but can't you just start ignoring Partial and argue amongst yourselves?

My time out was up. I just can't stand the idiotic spew. I really wish we had an ignore feature.

Join the club. It's constant moronic drivel that really garbage's up the forum and, in my opinion keeps some from contributing in a constructive way. I think his mom works here because any one who calls him out gets slammed.

What is with the personal attack? This is completely out of line. I have asked you time and time again to not respond to my posts yet you insist. This is harrassment.

9.






I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

Maybe if he wasn't so stubborn in his "I'm right, everybody else is wrong, I'm smart, you're an idiot, and I'm gonna make a point about it" type attitude it would be easier. Speaking from my own personal experience with him, when I do keep focused on topic and argue just the facts presented this is what I get:


I love how you ignore the question I answered and make more excuses. You lose. Game set match mother fucker.

He loves how I ignored a question he answered (which I didn't ignore, by the way, I just didn't agree with) and made more excuses (because I didn't agree with his answer, anything I say is going to sound like an excuse to him).

At least where the arguments between he and I are concerned, he's the one to make things personal. Maybe if he didn't make things personal when we are focused on debating the topic, we wouldn't respond personally, and this might be a friendlier place.

Again, I have never once said I'm right and everyone else is wrong.

If you're going to make such a claim, please cite a source. If you cannot, then I do not appreciate you making these statements. I'm a very understanding person but this is completely unacceptable and should not be tolerated.

8.


He does it for effect people. He likes the role.

Awfully presumptuous. I do not like it at all. I find this extremely offensive. Please do not talk about what I do and do not like as you have demonstrated that you do not know anything about me.

7.



I saw that discussion, Dan. From what I recall, P tried to remain on topic despite being personally attacked.


So it's OK to "lie" for the whole thread and not expect to get people mad??? This is why we need the ignore feature!

I'm lying now? Where? I'm entitled to my opinion and you're entitled to yours. This is inappropriate to call me a liar. Please take your concerns to PM or to the admin if you have them instead of attacking and defiling my character.

6.




I just can't stand the idiotic spew.

Maybe, but just about everybody baits him to death around here. Sure he has strong opinions and oftentimes they aren't widely shared, but I respect him for showing the backbone to stand his ground and stick up for himself.

I can't think of a flame war that he started since coming back. He has every right to defend himself when he's attacked and he has a right to his opinion.

So, if we focussed on debating him when we disagree instead of going out of our way to personally attack him, this might be a friendlier place.

Wrong! On the whole last play by the Packers vs Bengals, he was wrong. Jordy Nelson wasn't open. The bump by the Bengal player was 3 yards down the field. And the coach of the Packers said they should have been able to run a play down the middle and get another play off.

Yet P argued every point. I really wish I had the endzone stills for that play to show the breakdown.


You're entitled to your opinion (which resulted in the team losing) and I'm entitled to mine. It doesn't make it dumb, it makes it different. I've addressed this one numerous occasions and you still ignore several facts.

You wouldn't say this to my face, so don't say it here. Take it up over PM if you have some beef. This is out of line and inappropriate.

5.



I know its tough. I've had my share of relapses. He just says such stupid things sometimes. If we band together, we can stop this addiction once and for all.

Maybe we need an intervention?

Was it necessary to insult me twice when I have not addressed you?

Who are you to call me stupid? Please step off your high horse and address your issues with me over PM instead of attacking me in a crowd.

4.




Look people, i know some of us like to argue, but can't you just start ignoring Partial and argue amongst yourselves?

My time out was up. I just can't stand the idiotic spew. I really wish we had an ignore feature.

Is this contributing to the topic at hand, or is this spam. Have you ever PM'd me your concerns? No, instead you were a jerk about it.

Would you say this to my face ever? I highly doubt it. Is this appropriate? No, it is not.

3.





[quote=Partial]Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

You forgot the part where we aren't cool either!

It must be so delightful to live in a made-up world and scream that everyone is a jerk for pointing out reality.
ade up world? No. Does it make you a jerk to insult me without me saying anything to you? Absolutely.

2.




[quote=Partial]Right now I would rate them:

1. Cutler
2. Favre
3. Rodgers -- because I think he is injured
4. Stafford looks like he could be a gamer too.
If he is injured, would he have gotten MORE accurate deep as the game went on?

Irrelevant. I still think he is hurt. He is very accurate typically, even last year, and he looks off this year to me. Vastly different from PS and even last year.

Translation:

I don't care if the vast majority of people disagree with me because I am the smartest person I know and I am always right! Also, listen to me more. I am smart and educated while you idiots are just sidewalk fodder for us intellectuals to abuse as we(I) they fit.

Is this really called for and necessary? Did I even say anything to you to this point? Where did I say anything pertaining to what you're bringing up?

Completely out of line.

1.

[falco]

Partial - do you have any idea what it would look like if someone took 5 minutes to dredge up "partial's greatest hits?"

[Fritz]

All I know is that in the court of Packerrat opinion, Skin makes me laugh my ass off.

"You may as well be arguing that unicorns shit purple mushrooms filled with cherry jam for how far your football arguments fall from any kind of educated subjective opinion or objective fact."

But I thought unicorns did shit purple mushrooms filled with cherry jam. I mean, there is this creature called a civet which eats coffee beans and shits them. Then they are "harvested" (like grapes? Like human organs?) and made into the most expensive coffee in the world.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I knew a guy in college who's mother slapped his balls with a metal spoon to stop him from touching himself as a small child. Twenty years later, he would masturbate by slapping himself in the balls with a metal spoon. Sometimes I wonder what your metal spoon was.

And thus we know a little more about our friend Deputy Nutz. :lol:

Nice!

[Zool]

P enough of this BS self righteousness. You've always been an instigator in my eyes and all you're doing right now is being a polite asshole.

I can say whatever the fuck I want to Skin and him back to me. Trust me when I say it will continue despite your objections.

[Zool]

Also:

penis

[SkinBasket]

I think someone's trying to get himself banned tonight. I applaud nutz for his valiant effort on said person's behalf. Even if he did violate the privacy of my smelly vagina.

[Rastak]

Through the first quarter of the season.


1. Favre 104.6
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

Favre & Rodgers rising. Cutler solid and Stafford not so much.

[MadScientist]

Through the first quarter of the season.


1. Favre 104.6
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

Favre & Rodgers rising. Cutler solid and Stafford not so much.

I'd say Stafford is rising quickly. He's gone from 27 to 40 to 57 to 65. Not too bad for a rookie starting for a team that was 0-16 last year. The last two weeks he was a very solid 87.8 and 89.6. He just dug a hole the first 2 weeks.

This is the first year I can remember that none of the teams in the division has to field a sorry excuse for a QB, and it's living up to the pre-season expectations so far.

[Guiness]

Through the first quarter of the season.


1. Favre 104.6
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

Favre & Rodgers rising. Cutler solid and Stafford not so much.

I'd say Stafford is rising quickly. He's gone from 27 to 40 to 57 to 65. Not too bad for a rookie starting for a team that was 0-16 last year. The last two weeks he was a very solid 87.8 and 89.6. He just dug a hole the first 2 weeks.

This is the first year I can remember that none of the teams in the division has to field a sorry excuse for a QB, and it's living up to the pre-season expectations so far.

Agreed that Stafford is looking not bad, but man should someone in Detroit be shot for trotting him out onto the field week 1.

I don't care if he 'gave them the best chance to win' or some such crap.

[MOBB DEEP]

Through the first quarter of the season.


1. Favre 104.6
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

Favre & Rodgers rising. Cutler solid and Stafford not so much.

Didnt know brett passed aaron; yardage-wise it cant be close tho

[Rastak]

Through the first quarter of the season.


1. Favre 104.6
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

Favre & Rodgers rising. Cutler solid and Stafford not so much.

Didnt know brett passed aaron; yardage-wise it cant be close tho


Yardage isn't how the NFl ranks QB's. I'm sure Rodgers has more yards though.

[packerbacker1234]

yardage right now I am sure is tight, but Brett has one more game then Aaron, so keep that in mind.

[channtheman]

No offense to anyone, but how about instead of just guessing how close the yardage is we just post their stats?

Rodgers 127 attempts, 77 completions 1098 yards

Favre 149 attempts, 103 completions 1069 yards

Favre has a game up on Rodgers and still has fewer yards.

[Rastak]

We could post yards, comp %, picks, wins/losses but the NFL ha created a formula for this stuff so that's what we use....

and here it is.....

1. Favre 104.1
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

[Zool]

No offense to anyone, but how about instead of just guessing how close the yardage is we just post their stats?

Rodgers 127 attempts, 77 completions 1098 yards

Favre 149 attempts, 103 completions 1069 yards

Favre has a game up on Rodgers and still has fewer yards.

Is that 6 yards and a cloud of rubber AstroTurf balls up in the dome? I guess if I had Chester and Harvin to throw to I would screen and crossing route teams to death.

[MichiganPackerFan]

No offense to anyone, but how about instead of just guessing how close the yardage is we just post their stats?

Rodgers 127 attempts, 77 completions 1098 yards

Favre 149 attempts, 103 completions 1069 yards

Favre has a game up on Rodgers and still has fewer yards.

Rodgers could obviously benefit from some shorter passes AR 14.3 YPA, BF 10.4 YPA

[MadtownPacker]

Last I checked the quarterback race in the NFC North was all White.

[gex]

Last I checked the quarterback race in the NFC North was all White.

Thanx Mad, I fell outta my chair with that one. :lol:

[channtheman]

No offense to anyone, but how about instead of just guessing how close the yardage is we just post their stats?

Rodgers 127 attempts, 77 completions 1098 yards

Favre 149 attempts, 103 completions 1069 yards

Favre has a game up on Rodgers and still has fewer yards.

Rodgers could obviously benefit from some shorter passes AR 14.3 YPA, BF 10.4 YPA

I think you mean YPC, yards per completion. Rodgers YPA is actually 8.6 and Bert's is 7.2. I think we need to continue to use the screen pass. It seemed to work quite well against Minnesota. And since our line is so shitty, you don't even have to tell them to not block cause they already don't. Should be easy enough for them to master.

[MJZiggy]

Last I checked the quarterback race in the NFC North was all White.

Thanx Mad, I fell outta my chair with that one. :lol:

Good God I didn't get that until this post. I gotta start drinking coffee again.

[MichiganPackerFan]

No offense to anyone, but how about instead of just guessing how close the yardage is we just post their stats?

Rodgers 127 attempts, 77 completions 1098 yards

Favre 149 attempts, 103 completions 1069 yards

Favre has a game up on Rodgers and still has fewer yards.

Rodgers could obviously benefit from some shorter passes AR 14.3 YPA, BF 10.4 YPA

I think you mean YPC, yards per completion. Rodgers YPA is actually 8.6 and Bert's is 7.2. I think we need to continue to use the screen pass. It seemed to work quite well against Minnesota. And since our line is so shitty, you don't even have to tell them to not block cause they already don't. Should be easy enough for them to master.

I stand corrected on the terminology.

[Guiness]

We could post yards, comp %, picks, wins/losses but the NFL ha created a formula for this stuff so that's what we use....

and here it is.....

1. Favre 104.1
2. Rodgers 101.1
3. Cutler 89.3
4. Stafford 65.5

Well put.

Of course, we could use yards per step per drop. That would give the statisticians something to do.

"Well, that was a 7 step drop, and it was a completion of 8 yards..."

[Dabaddestbear]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/6985/mike-sandos-mvp-watch-4 MVP Race

[MOBB DEEP]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/6985/mike-sandos-mvp-watch-4 MVP Race

Frickn wow!

[packerbacker1234]

Yeah, Favre has been pretty solid, and he definitely helped his cause this week.

Can't wait till after chicago to see the new ratings.

[Rastak]

Been too busy to update this.

After week 6 we have.....


1. Favre 109.5 (Yikes!)
2. Rodgers 104.1
3. Cutler 86.8
4. Stafford 65.9 (Not sure who to put here!)

[MadScientist]

As an experiment, I wanted to see what the numbers would be if you added in the sacks (treated like an incomplete pass) and sac yardage:

Favre 99.7
Rodgers 87.0
Culter 81.0
Stafford 59.0

The reason for doing this is to get an idea of the total effectiveness of the passing game (it could be argued that the QB rushing should be added in, but how do you figure that into the attempts / completions and you also need to remove the designed runs - kneel down and sneaks).

As expected Rodgers takes the biggest hit, going from outstanding to a bit above average, which is more in line with the effectiveness of the Packers passing game this season.

[packerbacker1234]

Been too busy to update this.

After week 6 we have.....


1. Favre 109.5 (Yikes!)
2. Rodgers 104.1
3. Cutler 86.8
4. Stafford 65.9 (Not sure who to put here!)

Favre has just been scary good, definitely looking like his 2007 form all over again. Now that he has a dome, if they keep winning playoffs could be mostly in good weather, which is perfect for #4 at age 40.

Rodgers is doing what he did last year: Putting up the stats but does not have all the W's to back it up.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Been too busy to update this.

After week 6 we have.....


1. Favre 109.5 (Yikes!)
2. Rodgers 104.1
3. Cutler 86.8
4. Stafford 65.9 (Not sure who to put here!)

Favre has just been scary good, definitely looking like his 2007 form all over again. Now that he has a dome, if they keep winning playoffs could be mostly in good weather, which is perfect for #4 at age 40.

Rodgers is doing what he did last year: Putting up the stats but does not have all the W's to back it up.

Yeah, being above 500 with an incredibly weak line and average defense is definitely a black eye for Arod.

We should have never have signed him to the extension. Another bad move for TT.

[MOBB DEEP]

sigh

[SnakeLH2006]

As an experiment, I wanted to see what the numbers would be if you added in the sacks (treated like an incomplete pass) and sac yardage:

Favre 99.7
Rodgers 87.0
Culter 81.0
Stafford 59.0

The reason for doing this is to get an idea of the total effectiveness of the passing game (it could be argued that the QB rushing should be added in, but how do you figure that into the attempts / completions and you also need to remove the designed runs - kneel down and sneaks).

As expected Rodgers takes the biggest hit, going from outstanding to a bit above average, which is more in line with the effectiveness of the Packers passing game this season.

Snake agrees with your logic Mad. Arod's sacks are hurting the bottom line. I really like Arod, but the dude takes some crazy sacks without throwing it away that REALLY hurts the team. Big sacks (like 10 yarders). Don't call Snake a Brett apologist, but that was my fav. thing about Brett (still is) that he has some pocket savvy to elude a rush (throw it away...sometimes a long pick..but like a punt). ARod pads his mystical QB rating that way. QB rating is usually spot on, but in ARod's case, it's a joke with those sacks. when you face 2nd and 22. Favre never did that shit. His RARE sacks were for 3-4 yards. Dismiss/bag on it all you want, but that is why Favre won/wins with lesser QB rating in a nutshell. Guys with ARod's stats should win most games. Sacks DO NOT come into the equation. Dude has very little pocket awareness (or doesn't want bad stats and takes a HUGE sack). Whatever though. That's in a nutshell why Favre at 40 is better than Arod at 26.

[packerbacker1234]

As an experiment, I wanted to see what the numbers would be if you added in the sacks (treated like an incomplete pass) and sac yardage:

Favre 99.7
Rodgers 87.0
Culter 81.0
Stafford 59.0

The reason for doing this is to get an idea of the total effectiveness of the passing game (it could be argued that the QB rushing should be added in, but how do you figure that into the attempts / completions and you also need to remove the designed runs - kneel down and sneaks).

As expected Rodgers takes the biggest hit, going from outstanding to a bit above average, which is more in line with the effectiveness of the Packers passing game this season.

Snake agrees with your logic Mad. Arod's sacks are hurting the bottom line. I really like Arod, but the dude takes some crazy sacks without throwing it away that REALLY hurts the team. Big sacks (like 10 yarders). Don't call Snake a Brett apologist, but that was my fav. thing about Brett (still is) that he has some pocket savvy to elude a rush (throw it away...sometimes a long pick..but like a punt). ARod pads his mystical QB rating that way. QB rating is usually spot on, but in ARod's case, it's a joke with those sacks. when you face 2nd and 22. Favre never did that shit. His RARE sacks were for 3-4 yards. Dismiss/bag on it all you want, but that is why Favre won/wins with lesser QB rating in a nutshell. Guys with ARod's stats should win most games. Sacks DO NOT come into the equation. Dude has very little pocket awareness (or doesn't want bad stats and takes a HUGE sack). Whatever though. That's in a nutshell why Favre at 40 is better than Arod at 26.

Thats just it. I made a small post and the first remark was mocking me, and how were above .500. We are barely above .500, and the only decent team we beat is Chicago. Not only are they the only decent team, it took a long pass play at the end, and 4, count it, 4 Cutler picks for us to even get the win. We then lost to Cincinati, and Minnesota. Two good teams. We Struggled a lot during the rams game before putting them away, and we beat the Lions... which never really means much. Especially with all their injuries, and no Stafford. And hell, we couldn't really blow them out either. Yeah we had a shut out, but the offense continuously shot itself in the foot time and time again.

So, tell me this, how is his stats this year, and his "one game above .500" really a good defense at this point? The Packers have literally beaten nobody, and have looked like crap against the teams they did beat.

I like Rodgers, and when you get the stats he does generally you will win, but he just doesn't have what #4 has. Yeah, the line is bad, and yeah he is going to take hits. He doesn't need to take this many sacks. On pace for 80 on the year? He has noted, so has MM, that some of the sacks are his fault... and it may be more then some.

THe pass protection for #4 in minnesota has been pretty shitty, in case no one noticed, and he takes the hits but not nearly the amount of sacks AR does. Couple negatives I note that we are missing at the QB position

- Pocket Awareness
- Slant Pass

On the later, it's always argued that teams "take it away", but how come in 16/17 seasons, what 18 now, not one team was able to take it away from #4? To me, saying that is a cop out. Many teams throw the slant on a regular basis, and if it could be stopped on a regular basis no one would do it, but it can't. It's a really damn hard pattern to do a lot about. You go man, the WR can work you. You go zone and windows open up. They clog the middle you fake slant go long, or go back outside. I have brought it up before and people seemed to dismiss it, but it's a big part of the WCO, and we are completely missing it. Considering all these WR's currently have been catching the slant (it was the biggest reasons for the YAC yards) the only change is QB. It's a quick play, needs minimal protection.

I just don't think AR is comfortable throwing in traffic, which is what a slant is at times. It needs to be crisp, on target, without the fear. It needs to be seen, when to hit the first window, when to wait to the second, and when to look off to another receiver. AR is a good QB, but those two key components do hurt the offense. No more slants, and bad pocket awareness.

This isn't a revelation with the pocket awareness either: He struggled with it last year too, and it stand sout more now because this year he has even more pressure on him. Yes, the line can play better, and in the same breath, AR can prevent the 10 yard sacks.

[pbmax]

On the later, it's always argued that teams "take it away", but how come in 16/17 seasons, what 18 now, not one team was able to take it away from #4?
The reason this statement is false is because the premise is ludicrous. Many teams took away the slant from the 90's Packers, and depending on the level of skill of the defense or the DBs, they either still completed it or they adjusted their routes and went outside or the TE down the middle.

You do recall the TE down the middle? On of the reasons that is effective is that to stop the slant, you must either have phenomenal DB play with inside technique or commit a LB or S to get in the short passing lanes. That leaves TEs in single coverage or zone with a seam deep down the middle.

You also may recall that Sherman/Rossley did not throw nearly as many slants as Holmgren. You might also recall that throwing to the middle of the field was Favre's singular strength. Rodgers throws deep and outside better than Favre.

Right now, part of the issue is that we have a mismatch on OL and QB strength. Rodgers clearly can throw to the middle and to the checkdown (remember all mouth breathers thought that he was a checkdown artist for three years) but prefers to go up top or deep outside. When he waits, or goes outside the progression, he is getting into trouble. But this doesn't happen every play, nor is it solely a function of the play call. The Packers don't run a play called Everyone Slant very often (they did do it in the five wide). So while you are blaming the play calling, some of what you are seeing is the QB making a decision about whom to throw to.

Please also remember that Favre had no functional internal clock until the second half of the 1994 season. Two and one half years as a starter. Patience.

[bobblehead]

As an experiment, I wanted to see what the numbers would be if you added in the sacks (treated like an incomplete pass) and sac yardage:

Favre 99.7
Rodgers 87.0
Culter 81.0
Stafford 59.0

The reason for doing this is to get an idea of the total effectiveness of the passing game (it could be argued that the QB rushing should be added in, but how do you figure that into the attempts / completions and you also need to remove the designed runs - kneel down and sneaks).

As expected Rodgers takes the biggest hit, going from outstanding to a bit above average, which is more in line with the effectiveness of the Packers passing game this season.

Actually I like this, and it is very relevant. Way back when we were bickering about BF I said I believed it was time for him to go, but I would probably regret it once in awhile when Arod held the ball too long and took sacks like most guys do early in their career.

I will also say this adjustment favors cutler (as it should). He seems to have a very fast release, not quite Marino like, but still enviable. Its about the only part of his game I really like.

[bobblehead]

ARod pads his mystical QB rating that way. QB rating is usually spot on, but in ARod's case, it's a joke with those sacks. when you face 2nd and 22.

Ok, but one thing...if you pass on 12 straight first downs without even pretending to run and have an empty backfield often....you will see too many 2nd and 22's. That being said, its still on ARod to fire it into the 3rd row at Lambeau.

[bobblehead]

Thats just it. I made a small post and the first remark was mocking me, and how were above .500. We are barely above .500, and the only decent team we beat is Chicago. Not only are they the only decent team, it took a long pass play at the end, and 4, count it, 4 Cutler picks for us to even get the win.

I don't mean to discount your post, but I would point out that the 2 teams that beat us have been extremely good this season....so it goes both ways. And the truth is we are about like that. I would say we are a 10-12 team in the league right now. Top 1/3. We are not a top 5 team, which minnesota and it is appearing cincinatti are.

I'll take it a step further. We were about 2 seconds from having a shot at tying cincinatti and Minnesota had 2 GREAT onside recoveries from Rice to make sure we didn't win that game. We also ran the ball a combined 30 times in those 2 games.

Unless we improve or get worse we will beat the average/below average teams and lose to most of the other top 10 teams. Good news is we only play 2 such teams the rest of the way and we get Minn IN GB next time. Hell, we MIGHT still end up with 10-11 wins.

[packerbacker1234]

ARod pads his mystical QB rating that way. QB rating is usually spot on, but in ARod's case, it's a joke with those sacks. when you face 2nd and 22.

Ok, but one thing...if you pass on 12 straight first downs without even pretending to run and have an empty backfield often....you will see too many 2nd and 22's. That being said, its still on ARod to fire it into the 3rd row at Lambeau.

That just means the play is predicitable. It's just as precitable in a 2 minute drill as well. You know he's going to pass, so it's not an excuse. As you said, throwing it into the 3rd row, or some how making a play, is what needs to happen regardless. No excuse for 2nd and 22.

[bobblehead]

ARod pads his mystical QB rating that way. QB rating is usually spot on, but in ARod's case, it's a joke with those sacks. when you face 2nd and 22.

Ok, but one thing...if you pass on 12 straight first downs without even pretending to run and have an empty backfield often....you will see too many 2nd and 22's. That being said, its still on ARod to fire it into the 3rd row at Lambeau.

That just means the play is predicitable. It's just as precitable in a 2 minute drill as well. You know he's going to pass, so it's not an excuse. As you said, throwing it into the 3rd row, or some how making a play, is what needs to happen regardless. No excuse for 2nd and 22.

It certainly is an excuse...especially when you knock the guy for getting sacked on first down. First down should be a run about 70% of the time. We don't...the D is pinning the ears back and bringing the heat. I defy ANY LT in the game, including Jon Ogden, to stop Jared Allen from the QB if he doesn't even THINK about the run.

As I have stated, some of this falls on Arod, some on the OLine, and some on MM. Early in Berts career he was really good at taking sacks, and tossing picks. Will Arod progress? Will the OLine and MM help him?? I can't say for sure, but we at least have reason to believe it may be the case.

[Zool]

2 things

1. Leave Ras's thread alone. There are 6000 threads with Arod/Farve bs. Be courteous and use them.

2. Do we really need to keep rehashing this same shit? Honestly?

[bobblehead]

2 things

1. Leave Ras's thread alone. There are 6000 threads with Arod/Favre bs. Be courteous and use them.

2. Do we really need to keep rehashing this same shit? Honestly?

Apologies. I didn't mean to involve BF in this at all when I started, I was merely responding to the sacks adjustment which I did say was relevant. I only mentioned BF one time that I can think of and that was saying even when I was glad we were moving on, there was something I would miss...his experience in getting rid of the ball. I hardly think that qualifies as ARod/Favre BS.

Should I refrain from discussing Cutlers lighting release as well?? I'm not sure where I can go and what is taboo anymore. I thought I was discussing NFC north QB's, their ratings, and another poster's sack adjustments. That is what this thread is about right? Please PM me the accepted topics of discussion so we can get our daily posts on this site down even more.

Now that I think of it, that kinda ticks me off. Honestly, was I outta line??

[Zool]

It was meant for everyone Bobble not you. I like Ras's QB ratings thread to be clean. I would be happy if the only person posting in this was Ras himself every Tuesday. We can beat the other crap to death in other threads. I like stat threads.

[GrnBay007]

I think it's kinda odd for anyone to be dictating what is posted in a thread. I mean really, there is enough complaining about regulation...u want more? If Rastak is offended I'm sure he will speak up. Discussion doesn't hurt his thread IMO.

[Zool]

I disagree. I like to look back week to week to see who's making what progress and be lazy about it. Plus these are the same discussions that are in multiple threads already.

[packerbacker1234]

Cincinatti is about the same range we are, they are not a top 10 team, and pretty doubtful they go anywhere if they do get in the playoffs. It was a equal caliber team in terms of how they are playing and we are. So, that game is there.

Even with Minnesota's loss, I think most will keep them top 5. It was a tough game on the road and they had chances to win it late, against a really good team. In see parts of the game, the teams looked pretty much equal. SO, doubt they drop too much. #4 team in the league I still feel, but we'll see.

Anyways, Favre's worst day of the year so far and the int wasn't even his fault. If this is the "bad brett" the vikes get for the year they they are going to win a lot more games. Bad Brett is still better then the other QB's they have. Plus they have All Day.

ANyways, good day for rodgers, as it should be against that team. Pretty sure he is either deadlocked with favre or slightly ahead.

Good to see the numbers panned out after were done today.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

:lol:

[HarveyWallbangers]

The reason for doing this is to get an idea of the total effectiveness of the passing game (it could be argued that the QB rushing should be added in, but how do you figure that into the attempts / completions and you also need to remove the designed runs - kneel down and sneaks).

IMHO, it would be quite silly to add in the sacks but not add in the rushing yards. That would be biased towards Favre. ARod takes more sacks because he can make plays with his feet. You are hurting his stats by taking this into account, but not rewarding him when those plays turn into positive yards.

[channtheman]

The reason for doing this is to get an idea of the total effectiveness of the passing game (it could be argued that the QB rushing should be added in, but how do you figure that into the attempts / completions and you also need to remove the designed runs - kneel down and sneaks).

IMHO, it would be quite silly to add in the sacks but not add in the rushing yards. That would be biased towards Favre. ARod takes more sacks because he can make plays with his feet. You are hurting his stats by taking this into account, but not rewarding him when those plays turn into positive yards.

I really don't think that our passing offense is hurt by the sacks that much. I think this season the drops have been a much bigger factor in our passing offense.

[packers11]

Ras whats the update? Cutler must have fell a bit :)

[PlantPage55]

Rodgers is #1 in yards per attempt and #2 in QB rating.

In the NFL.

[channtheman]

Rodgers is #1 in yards per attempt and #2 in QB rating.

In the NFL.

Yup, always willing to put up the stats but not come through with the wins that asshat.

But no seriously! :shock: I would have thought Peyton or Brees would be ahead in YPA, that's really good.

[Rastak]

After week 7:


1. Rodgers - 110.8 (amazing)
2 Favre - 102.2
3. Cutler 82.9
4. Stafford - 65.5

[packerbacker1234]

After week 7:


1. Rodgers - 110.8 (amazing)
2 Favre - 102.2
3. Cutler 82.9
4. Stafford - 65.5

Haha, pretty much the same number Favre had last week for a rating. One average game will drop that rating in a hurry.

ANyways, big matchup this week. I think both offenses you know what you get, and thus it will be which defense plays better.

[Scott Campbell]

I think both offenses you know what you get, and thus it will be which defense plays better.


PIT might beg to differ, because one of these two offenses coughed up 14 4th quarter points for the opposition this week.

[get louder at lambeau]

After week 7:


1. Rodgers - 110.8 (amazing)
2 Favre - 102.2
3. Cutler 82.9
4. Stafford - 65.5

And of course, even funnier-
Orton - 100.1
Cutler - 82.9

[packerbacker1234]

I think both offenses you know what you get, and thus it will be which defense plays better.


PIT might beg to differ, because one of these two offenses coughed up 14 4th quarter points for the opposition this week.

Yeah but they were both pretty fluke plays. The backup RB drops a screen pass, not just drops it, but tips it up in the air to be picked: the other the guy barely got his hand on the ball, but just enough.

It was fluke plays. You forget: Both of those plays the vikes were driving the field. You know what you get, and sometiems the ball doesn't bounce your way.

[The Shadow]

I think both offenses you know what you get, and thus it will be which defense plays better.


PIT might beg to differ, because one of these two offenses coughed up 14 4th quarter points for the opposition this week.

Yeah but they were both pretty fluke plays. The backup RB drops a screen pass, not just drops it, but tips it up in the air to be picked: the other the guy barely got his hand on the ball, but just enough.

It was fluke plays. You forget: Both of those plays the vikes were driving the field. You know what you get, and sometiems the ball doesn't bounce your way.

Of course........

[packerbacker1234]

I think both offenses you know what you get, and thus it will be which defense plays better.


PIT might beg to differ, because one of these two offenses coughed up 14 4th quarter points for the opposition this week.

Yeah but they were both pretty fluke plays. The backup RB drops a screen pass, not just drops it, but tips it up in the air to be picked: the other the guy barely got his hand on the ball, but just enough.

It was fluke plays. You forget: Both of those plays the vikes were driving the field. You know what you get, and sometiems the ball doesn't bounce your way.

Of course........

Vikes had a TD, on the possesion of the fumble return, that got called back. You needed to actually watch the game to understand really how close that game was, and how lucky pitt was it got the bounces. The vikings had them beat/tied game twice in the last 6 minutes. One got called back, the other took a bad hop (the pick) off the reciever's hands when they were already in FG range to tie.

Just saying, gotta watch the game. I would say the same thing if it happened to us.

[Scott Campbell]

MN had their fair share of luck in that game. You conveniently left out Mendenhall's fumble inside the 5 on a drive that would have sealed it.

Like you said - you had to watch the game.

[get louder at lambeau]

I think both offenses you know what you get, and thus it will be which defense plays better.


PIT might beg to differ, because one of these two offenses coughed up 14 4th quarter points for the opposition this week.

Yeah but they were both pretty fluke plays. The backup RB drops a screen pass, not just drops it, but tips it up in the air to be picked: the other the guy barely got his hand on the ball, but just enough.

Yep. Good thing Favre threw it a foot over Taylor's head from 5 yards away for no reason. I don't think it was even a screen pass. Looked like Favre got nervous because of the left end and checked it down to the RB behind the line of scrimmage, even though there was no real pressure.

Personally, I blame Percy Harvin for Brent's INT. If he wouldn't have scored a TD on the kickoff return, the game would have already been over from Brent's lost fumble for TD. Stupid Percy. :x

[Scott Campbell]

It makes you question if that was the kind of chemistry thing Taylor and Favre could of worked out if Brett hadn't played training camp hooky.

[Scott Campbell]

Yeah but they were both pretty fluke plays. The backup RB drops a screen pass, not just drops it, but tips it up in the air to be picked: the other the guy barely got his hand on the ball, but just enough.

It was fluke plays. You forget: Both of those plays the vikes were driving the field. You know what you get, and sometiems the ball doesn't bounce your way.


I almost forgot the kick return touchdown. Yeah, I don't see how you think the Vikings were any more unlucky than PIT was in that game.

I get that you watched the game, but next time try watching without your number 4 jersey on.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.

[The Shadow]

The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.

Or a silly Swedish schoolgirl.

[Bretsky]

The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.


You are absolutely right on point 1; that pick is on Favre. Catchable, but very poor throw and reality is your "Bert" had more time to sit back there and let somebody get open but he got happy feet.

I don't see many posters forgetting the non tackle. Because one does not rip in him, does that mean they forget a bad play ? Or are they just not in the good gang that rips him for it ? If we don't mention all of Erin's bad plays does that mean we forget them as well ?

[Scott Campbell]

You are absolutely right on point 1; that pick is on Favre. Catchable, but very poor throw and reality is your "Bert" had more time to sit back there and let somebody get open but he got happy feet.

I don't see many posters forgetting the non tackle. Because one does not rip in him, does that mean they forget a bad play ? Or are they just not in the good gang that rips him for it ? If we don't mention all of Erin's bad plays does that mean we forget them as well ?


Very classy Tank.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.

Or a silly Swedish schoolgirl.

Who is better? Copenhagen soccer players or swedish schoolchildren?

[MJZiggy]

Swedish fish.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.


You are absolutely right on point 1; that pick is on Favre. Catchable, but very poor throw and reality is your "Bert" had more time to sit back there and let somebody get open but he got happy feet.

I don't see many posters forgetting the non tackle. Because one does not rip in him, does that mean they forget a bad play ? Or are they just not in the good gang that rips him for it ? If we don't mention all of Erin's bad plays does that mean we forget them as well ?

The amount of glorification in this forum was 10 fold more than the posts about the flop. Hence, "forgetting." Forgetting is a kind way of saying selective use of Favre.

P.S. What has Aaron done to deserve Erin? We know what Bert did. But, to attack your own QB. Pretty low for a packer fan.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Swedish fish.

Interestingly, Ty ate a bag of those yesterday. Ty loves the swedish fish. Ty is a big fan of the jelly/gummi family of candies.

[MJZiggy]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

http://www.candyfavorites.com/Jelly-Nougats-Brachs-pr-137.html

We are finding a shared interest. YES!!!!

[The Shadow]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

I live about a mile away from Helen Brach's mansion. Helen disappeared without a trace years ago. She owned several dogs. Her houseman/butler, a former convict, purchased a professional-grade meat grinder a short time before she went missing.
What was this thread about?

[pbmax]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

I live about a mile away from Helen Brach's mansion. Helen disappeared without a trace years ago. She owned several dogs. Her houseman/butler, a former convict, purchased a professional-grade meat grinder a short time before she went missing.
What was this thread about?
:whaa:

[MJZiggy]

What was this thread about?
:whaa:

We forgot...Oh. Right. QB rankings. Rodgers in lead. Carry on.

[pbmax]

The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.


You are absolutely right on point 1; that pick is on Favre. Catchable, but very poor throw and reality is your "Bert" had more time to sit back there and let somebody get open but he got happy feet.

I don't see many posters forgetting the non tackle. Because one does not rip in him, does that mean they forget a bad play ? Or are they just not in the good gang that rips him for it ? If we don't mention all of Erin's bad plays does that mean we forget them as well ?

The amount of glorification in this forum was 10 fold more than the posts about the flop. Hence, "forgetting." Forgetting is a kind way of saying selective use of Favre.

P.S. What has Aaron done to deserve Erin? We know what Bert did. But, to attack your own QB. Pretty low for a packer fan.
Bretsky might be OK with Erin. I think that was the Doubting Thomas' nickname for Rodgers, in reference to his fragility, in the offseason 2008. Before the QB known occasionally as Brent or Bert was made famous.

Gung ho Rodgers supporters had been going with Air-Rod, etc.

[bobblehead]

I see Zool demands a lot of respect from you all....at least I stuck to NFC central quarterbacks to get my "scolding".

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I see Zool demands a lot of respect from you all....at least I stuck to NFC central quarterbacks to get my "scolding".

Respect has nothing to do with it.

Ty has noted several times about redundant threads, keeping threads on topic, etc...and been routinely chastised.

[Partial]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Nice thought, but it is gonna be real hard overlooking Brees, Peyton, Palmer/Benson, etc.

[Gunakor]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Nice thought, but it is gonna be real hard overlooking Brees, Peyton, Palmer/Benson, etc.

It'll be easier if the Packers keep on winning.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Nice thought, but it is gonna be real hard overlooking Brees, Peyton, Palmer/Benson, etc.

It'll be easier if the Packers keep on winning.

Sure. But so will the the saints, colts,bengals, gmen, vikes, etc.

I think this is Brees' to lose, maybe peyton.

[Brandon494]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Nice thought, but it is gonna be real hard overlooking Brees, Peyton, Palmer/Benson, etc.

It'll be easier if the Packers keep on winning.

Sure. But so will the the saints, colts,bengals, gmen, vikes, etc.

I think this is Brees' to lose, maybe peyton.

Its def. between Brees and Peyton right now with the slight lead going towards Brees right now. As much as I like AR's game its no way he'll win the MVP this season, even though I believe he is the 2nd best QB in the NFC behind Brees.

[Gunakor]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Nice thought, but it is gonna be real hard overlooking Brees, Peyton, Palmer/Benson, etc.

It'll be easier if the Packers keep on winning.

Sure. But so will the the saints, colts,bengals, gmen, vikes, etc.

I think this is Brees' to lose, maybe peyton.

The difference is that those teams and those players are supposed to keep winning. It'll look like a bigger accomplishment if Rodgers puts up similar stats and a similar record as Payton and Drew. I mean, Rodgers is already beloved by the media, and that's half the battle right there.

[Brandon494]

The difference is that those teams and those players are supposed to keep winning. It'll look like a bigger accomplishment if Rodgers puts up similar stats and a similar record as Payton and Drew. I mean, Rodgers is already beloved by the media, and that's half the battle right there.

You think Rodgers is beloved by the media? Rodgers is like a red hair step child compared to Peyton and Drew.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Nice thought, but it is gonna be real hard overlooking Brees, Peyton, Palmer/Benson, etc.

It'll be easier if the Packers keep on winning.

Sure. But so will the the saints, colts,bengals, gmen, vikes, etc.

I think this is Brees' to lose, maybe peyton.

The difference is that those teams and those players are supposed to keep winning. It'll look like a bigger accomplishment if Rodgers puts up similar stats and a similar record as Payton and Drew. I mean, Rodgers is already beloved by the media, and that's half the battle right there.

Gun,

You can "write" a story for each one. Peyton's story would be along the lines of vet leads young and new team. Without his former coach. Leading a rookie coach to success. Without his top WR harrison. Gonzalez hurt.

Brees. The Vick angle. The leaving San Diego. Getting the Saints back into the playoffs after years of disappointments. The no name supporting cast (aside from Bush..which if you are football fan only makes Brees look better), the incredible passing #s..on track for 45 plus tds. Symbol of the city's resurgence, etc.

As for "beloved" in what respect and by whom? Are you suggesting he is more beloved than Peyton? Surely you jest. Believe me, living in AZ, nobody nationally is more enamored of arod than brees and peyton.

[Gunakor]

The difference is that those teams and those players are supposed to keep winning. It'll look like a bigger accomplishment if Rodgers puts up similar stats and a similar record as Payton and Drew. I mean, Rodgers is already beloved by the media, and that's half the battle right there.

You think Rodgers is beloved by the media? Rodgers is like a red hair step child compared to Peyton and Drew.

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

[Gunakor]

Gun,

You can "write" a story for each one. Peyton's story would be along the lines of vet leads young and new team. Without his former coach. Leading a rookie coach to success. Without his top WR harrison. Gonzalez hurt.

Brees. The Vick angle. The leaving San Diego. Getting the Saints back into the playoffs after years of disappointments. The no name supporting cast (aside from Bush..which if you are football fan only makes Brees look better), the incredible passing #s..on track for 45 plus tds. Symbol of the city's resurgence, etc.

As for "beloved" in what respect and by whom? Are you suggesting he is more beloved than Peyton? Surely you jest. Believe me, living in AZ, nobody nationally is more enamored of arod than brees and peyton.

I know each would have a story, that's why they have a vote. Rodgers story would be replacing a legend, the weight put on his shoulders right from the beginning if not by the team than by it's fans. Substandard running game and awful pass protection. Youngest team in the NFL. There's a story there too.

Beloved: Even Terry Bradshaw said something to the effect of "Is there anybody playing better right now?" This the same Terry Bradshaw that last year placed the blame for the Packers record last season solely on the switch from Favre at QB to Rodgers (I know he wasn't blasting Rodgers directly, but the implication was there). You can turn on NFL Countdown or NFL Total Access and they're feeling Rodgers too. Loads of respect from every media outlet out there. Now, Manning and Brees get that same respect, and I'm not trying to compare Rodgers to them in this regard. But if all things are equal at the end of the season, both wins and numbers, then I think Rodgers has as good a shot as either of them. Because he has a story too, and it's a good one.

[Brandon494]

Gun,

You can "write" a story for each one. Peyton's story would be along the lines of vet leads young and new team. Without his former coach. Leading a rookie coach to success. Without his top WR harrison. Gonzalez hurt.

Brees. The Vick angle. The leaving San Diego. Getting the Saints back into the playoffs after years of disappointments. The no name supporting cast (aside from Bush..which if you are football fan only makes Brees look better), the incredible passing #s..on track for 45 plus tds. Symbol of the city's resurgence, etc.

I wouldnt really say he has a no name supporting cast with Marques Colston, Jeremy Shockey, Pierre Thomas, Lance Moore, Reggie Bush, and a very underrated O-line.

[Brandon494]

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

I know you never compared him to those guys, Im just saying even though the media does talk about Rodgers they talk about Brees and Manning 10 times more because they are both undefeated. IF Rodgers finishs the season with the best record in his conference which it looks like the Colts and Saints will do and he puts up similiar numbers than yes I believe he should be considered. I'm not arguing AR is not a good QB, I'm been on of his biggest fans and supported starting him over Favre last season, just saying he is not quite in the MVP discussion yet.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Gun,

You can "write" a story for each one. Peyton's story would be along the lines of vet leads young and new team. Without his former coach. Leading a rookie coach to success. Without his top WR harrison. Gonzalez hurt.

Brees. The Vick angle. The leaving San Diego. Getting the Saints back into the playoffs after years of disappointments. The no name supporting cast (aside from Bush..which if you are football fan only makes Brees look better), the incredible passing #s..on track for 45 plus tds. Symbol of the city's resurgence, etc.

I wouldnt really say he has a no name supporting cast with Marques Colston, Jeremy Shockey, Pierre Thomas, Lance Moore, Reggie Bush, and a very underrated O-line.

That is why it is a "story."

PT and Moore arent' "names" like Q and Bolden or even jennings and driver. Shockey...it is almost like he has been forgotten...and, his production has never matched his hype or his talent. Seriously, his name is rarely talked about...it is almost like he dropped off the planet...or just he stopped playing in a major media market.

Colston ain't a "name" either. You are confusing production with being a name. A name is somebody everybody knows...like LT with SD, even though true fans know sproles has more of an impact.

Names are pro bowlers or close to it.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Gun,

You can "write" a story for each one. Peyton's story would be along the lines of vet leads young and new team. Without his former coach. Leading a rookie coach to success. Without his top WR harrison. Gonzalez hurt.

Brees. The Vick angle. The leaving San Diego. Getting the Saints back into the playoffs after years of disappointments. The no name supporting cast (aside from Bush..which if you are football fan only makes Brees look better), the incredible passing #s..on track for 45 plus tds. Symbol of the city's resurgence, etc.

As for "beloved" in what respect and by whom? Are you suggesting he is more beloved than Peyton? Surely you jest. Believe me, living in AZ, nobody nationally is more enamored of arod than brees and peyton.

I know each would have a story, that's why they have a vote. Rodgers story would be replacing a legend, the weight put on his shoulders right from the beginning if not by the team than by it's fans. Substandard running game and awful pass protection. Youngest team in the NFL. There's a story there too.

Beloved: Even Terry Bradshaw said something to the effect of "Is there anybody playing better right now?" This the same Terry Bradshaw that last year placed the blame for the Packers record last season solely on the switch from Favre at QB to Rodgers (I know he wasn't blasting Rodgers directly, but the implication was there). You can turn on NFL Countdown or NFL Total Access and they're feeling Rodgers too. Loads of respect from every media outlet out there. Now, Manning and Brees get that same respect, and I'm not trying to compare Rodgers to them in this regard. But if all things are equal at the end of the season, both wins and numbers, then I think Rodgers has as good a shot as either of them. Because he has a story too, and it's a good one.

Sorry. But you are just flat out wrong. And, there is really no point is arguing this as you and i both know the chance of the pack and Arod having the same wins as either brees, peyton, palmer/benson, or an X factor is between small and none....small just left the building.

[Gunakor]

Gun,

You can "write" a story for each one. Peyton's story would be along the lines of vet leads young and new team. Without his former coach. Leading a rookie coach to success. Without his top WR harrison. Gonzalez hurt.

Brees. The Vick angle. The leaving San Diego. Getting the Saints back into the playoffs after years of disappointments. The no name supporting cast (aside from Bush..which if you are football fan only makes Brees look better), the incredible passing #s..on track for 45 plus tds. Symbol of the city's resurgence, etc.

As for "beloved" in what respect and by whom? Are you suggesting he is more beloved than Peyton? Surely you jest. Believe me, living in AZ, nobody nationally is more enamored of arod than brees and peyton.

I know each would have a story, that's why they have a vote. Rodgers story would be replacing a legend, the weight put on his shoulders right from the beginning if not by the team than by it's fans. Substandard running game and awful pass protection. Youngest team in the NFL. There's a story there too.

Beloved: Even Terry Bradshaw said something to the effect of "Is there anybody playing better right now?" This the same Terry Bradshaw that last year placed the blame for the Packers record last season solely on the switch from Favre at QB to Rodgers (I know he wasn't blasting Rodgers directly, but the implication was there). You can turn on NFL Countdown or NFL Total Access and they're feeling Rodgers too. Loads of respect from every media outlet out there. Now, Manning and Brees get that same respect, and I'm not trying to compare Rodgers to them in this regard. But if all things are equal at the end of the season, both wins and numbers, then I think Rodgers has as good a shot as either of them. Because he has a story too, and it's a good one.

Sorry. But you are just flat out wrong. And, there is really no point is arguing this as you and i both know the chance of the pack and Arod having the same wins as either brees, peyton, palmer/benson, or an X factor is between small and none....small just left the building.

You're arguing the chances of it happening now. That wasn't the argument anyway. The argument was IF wins and stats are equal, IF, then... Now your argument is that it's just not possible for that to happen, so I am flat out wrong. Huh. That wasn't the argument, but okay. You're probably right. Now, pretend you're wrong and join the debate we're actually having. IF the wins and numbers are equal, then why is Rodgers excluded from the conversation?

[Gunakor]

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

I know you never compared him to those guys, Im just saying even though the media does talk about Rodgers they talk about Brees and Manning 10 times more because they are both undefeated. IF Rodgers finishs the season with the best record in his conference which it looks like the Colts and Saints will do and he puts up similiar numbers than yes I believe he should be considered. I'm not arguing AR is not a good QB, I'm been on of his biggest fans and supported starting him over Favre last season, just saying he is not quite in the MVP discussion yet.

He's halfway there. He's putting up MVP numbers. Hell, his numbers were identical that of the MVP's last year. And he's proving this year that his performance last year was no fluke. The only stat that wasn't nearly identical to Mannings was the tally in the win column. As soon as the team starts posting MVP type numbers in the win column he's going to be a significant part of that discussion.

[Brandon494]

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

I know you never compared him to those guys, Im just saying even though the media does talk about Rodgers they talk about Brees and Manning 10 times more because they are both undefeated. IF Rodgers finishs the season with the best record in his conference which it looks like the Colts and Saints will do and he puts up similiar numbers than yes I believe he should be considered. I'm not arguing AR is not a good QB, I'm been on of his biggest fans and supported starting him over Favre last season, just saying he is not quite in the MVP discussion yet.

He's halfway there. He's putting up MVP numbers. Hell, his numbers were identical that of the MVP's last year. And he's proving this year that his performance last year was no fluke. The only stat that wasn't nearly identical to Mannings was the tally in the win column. As soon as the team starts posting MVP type numbers in the win column he's going to be a significant part of that discussion.

Brees just brought his team back from down 21 points on the road, when AR starts to have those type of games then he'll be in the MVP discussion.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Stats don't make an MVP. Wins contribute greatly. And yes, performances, like Brees' on sunday certainly do, but don't forget, his defense came up big there too.

There's reliable and there's mvp's. I'd like to see AR be approaching the former and evolving to the latter, but that's just as premature as if my name was Justin. (get it? HA!!!)

[channtheman]

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

I know you never compared him to those guys, Im just saying even though the media does talk about Rodgers they talk about Brees and Manning 10 times more because they are both undefeated. IF Rodgers finishs the season with the best record in his conference which it looks like the Colts and Saints will do and he puts up similiar numbers than yes I believe he should be considered. I'm not arguing AR is not a good QB, I'm been on of his biggest fans and supported starting him over Favre last season, just saying he is not quite in the MVP discussion yet.

He's halfway there. He's putting up MVP numbers. Hell, his numbers were identical that of the MVP's last year. And he's proving this year that his performance last year was no fluke. The only stat that wasn't nearly identical to Mannings was the tally in the win column. As soon as the team starts posting MVP type numbers in the win column he's going to be a significant part of that discussion.

Brees just brought his team back from down 21 points on the road, when AR starts to have those type of games then he'll be in the MVP discussion.

Favre's got 3 MVP awards and the biggest comeback he ever had was 14 points which he just achieved against Seattle in the playoffs in 07. Before that Favre's biggest comeback was 11 points. One doesn't have to bring back a team from 21+ points to be in the discussion. Of course, it does help.

[Brandon494]

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

I know you never compared him to those guys, Im just saying even though the media does talk about Rodgers they talk about Brees and Manning 10 times more because they are both undefeated. IF Rodgers finishs the season with the best record in his conference which it looks like the Colts and Saints will do and he puts up similiar numbers than yes I believe he should be considered. I'm not arguing AR is not a good QB, I'm been on of his biggest fans and supported starting him over Favre last season, just saying he is not quite in the MVP discussion yet.

He's halfway there. He's putting up MVP numbers. Hell, his numbers were identical that of the MVP's last year. And he's proving this year that his performance last year was no fluke. The only stat that wasn't nearly identical to Mannings was the tally in the win column. As soon as the team starts posting MVP type numbers in the win column he's going to be a significant part of that discussion.

Brees just brought his team back from down 21 points on the road, when AR starts to have those type of games then he'll be in the MVP discussion.

Favre's got 3 MVP awards and the biggest comeback he ever had was 14 points which he just achieved against Seattle in the playoffs in 07. Before that Favre's biggest comeback was 11 points. One doesn't have to bring back a team from 21+ points to be in the discussion. Of course, it does help.

Well Favre does have the most 4th quarter comebacks, I believe AR has only 1. That was my point, not that you have to bring a team back from 21 down.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Well Favre does have the most 4th quarter comebacks, I believe AR has only 1. That was my point, not that you have to bring a team back from 21 down.

Technically, Rodgers has 3. And Gunakor is correct. He didn't say Rodgers would be the MVP right now. He said that if Rodgers maintains his guady stats and the Packers finish with a record close to the other top contenders, he'll be a favorite to win it. Right now, he wouldn't be. If those things happened though, he would be.

[channtheman]

Never compared Rodgers to Payton and Drew. Those two have established themselves far more than Rodgers has. I just said that he's beloved by the media, and you can't watch an episode of Fox NFL Sunday or NFL Countdown or SportsCenter without hearing those guys singing his praise. I call that being beloved by the media, what would you call it?

Do you think that even if Rodgers puts up identical stats and the Packers finish with an identical record that there's no way Rodgers would get the same consideration as Payton and Drew? If so, why? And how does he get that respect if winning and numbers aren't enough? What would he have to do in your opinion?

I know you never compared him to those guys, Im just saying even though the media does talk about Rodgers they talk about Brees and Manning 10 times more because they are both undefeated. IF Rodgers finishs the season with the best record in his conference which it looks like the Colts and Saints will do and he puts up similiar numbers than yes I believe he should be considered. I'm not arguing AR is not a good QB, I'm been on of his biggest fans and supported starting him over Favre last season, just saying he is not quite in the MVP discussion yet.

He's halfway there. He's putting up MVP numbers. Hell, his numbers were identical that of the MVP's last year. And he's proving this year that his performance last year was no fluke. The only stat that wasn't nearly identical to Mannings was the tally in the win column. As soon as the team starts posting MVP type numbers in the win column he's going to be a significant part of that discussion.

Brees just brought his team back from down 21 points on the road, when AR starts to have those type of games then he'll be in the MVP discussion.

Favre's got 3 MVP awards and the biggest comeback he ever had was 14 points which he just achieved against Seattle in the playoffs in 07. Before that Favre's biggest comeback was 11 points. One doesn't have to bring back a team from 21+ points to be in the discussion. Of course, it does help.

Well Favre does have the most 4th quarter comebacks, I believe AR has only 1. That was my point, not that you have to bring a team back from 21 down.

Well that's true and I also agree with that. I do think Rodgers has the numbers to be an MVP winner though. He probably won't really be in the discussion for a year or two at least. Or until he gets the Packers to the playoffs and wins a few games. But I think it is realistic to think that Rodgers will win an MVP sometime in his career.

[Waldo]

I believe AR has 2 4th quarter comebacks on his resume.

It is a flawed stat. Detroit last year counts as one.

Brett has less than 10 come from behind victories on his record with less than 5:00 to play, and his with less than 2:00 to play I believe his victories can be counted with 2 fingers.

[channtheman]

I believe AR has 2 4th quarter comebacks on his resume.

It is a flawed stat. Detroit last year counts as one.

Brett has less than 10 come from behind victories on his record with less than 5:00 to play, and his with less than 2:00 to play I believe his victories can be counted with 2 fingers.

4th quarter comebacks really need to be defined better. I think they even count overtime. So your team could be leading the whole game but your poor play at QB or an INT lets the other team come back to tie the game. Then the opposing team fumbles the OT kickoff and your team recovers and kicks the game winner. That counts as a game winning drive or comeback (I think) and you really did nothing for it. In fact, your play almost cost the team the game.

I've always rolled my eyes when they showed the stat of Favre's 4th quarter comebacks with 2 minutes to go as I don't recall ever seeing a comeback by Favre in the 4th quarter with 2 minutes to go. I'm a younger fan and started watching with my dad in 2000. He agreed with me that the stat was BS because we rarely if ever saw Favre come back in the last 2 minutes.

[Brandon494]

Well Favre does have the most 4th quarter comebacks, I believe AR has only 1. That was my point, not that you have to bring a team back from 21 down.

Technically, Rodgers has 3. And Gunakor is correct. He didn't say Rodgers would be the MVP right now. He said that if Rodgers maintains his guady stats and the Packers finish with a record close to the other top contenders, he'll be a favorite to win it. Right now, he wouldn't be. If those things happened though, he would be.

I know he didnt say Rodgers would be the MVP right now, what Im saying that even if Rodgers did put up similiar numbers and wins as both of them why would he be the favorite over them? The media has way more hype over Brees and Manning then they do over Rodgers. Rodgers just isnt going to win it because he is a Packers. They are going to remember those big time games like the one Brees just had other the Fins to make their decisions.

[channtheman]

Well Favre does have the most 4th quarter comebacks, I believe AR has only 1. That was my point, not that you have to bring a team back from 21 down.

Technically, Rodgers has 3. And Gunakor is correct. He didn't say Rodgers would be the MVP right now. He said that if Rodgers maintains his guady stats and the Packers finish with a record close to the other top contenders, he'll be a favorite to win it. Right now, he wouldn't be. If those things happened though, he would be.

I know he didnt say Rodgers would be the MVP right now, what Im saying that even if Rodgers did put up similiar numbers and wins as both of them why would he be the favorite over them? The media has way more hype over Brees and Manning then they do over Rodgers. Rodgers just isnt going to win it because he is a Packers. They are going to remember those big time games like the one Brees just had other the Fins to make their decisions.

He wouldn't necessarily be above them but that is why it's a vote. I suppose if Rodgers keeps up the numbers and the Packers win 12 games this year we would find out where the media puts Rodgers. I think a lot of them would see him as replacing Favre and give him a lot of credit for that. There is no way to know this right now though. It would take a lot for Rodgers to be placed above Brees and Manning, but it's surely possible.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I know he didnt say Rodgers would be the MVP right now, what Im saying that even if Rodgers did put up similiar numbers and wins as both of them why would he be the favorite over them? The media has way more hype over Brees and Manning then they do over Rodgers. Rodgers just isnt going to win it because he is a Packers. They are going to remember those big time games like the one Brees just had other the Fins to make their decisions.

This is where I disagree. I think that Rodgers has become a media darling. People are rooting for him to do well after what he went through. People like the underdog or the guy who hasn't gotten a fair shake. He mostly gets glowing reports from the media. In fact, I'd say he would be the favorite to win a three man race with Manning and Brees if (and it's a HUGE if) he had similar stats and a similar won/loss record. Actually, I think he and Brees would be the favorites. Neither has won the award before and voters tend to downgrade previous winners. It's probably why only two players have ever won the award three times.

[SnakeLH2006]

Didn't Brady finish with a 115 in the best season ever? If ARod goes a few more weeks with that sort of rating and the Pack keep winning he could be MVP.

Dude has to win something first.....or get to the playoffs big P, no? A 10-12 career record to date doesn't make it likely at this point....just sayin' though. I'd be happy with 10-6 and wildcard. Wildcard QB's do not a MVP QB make. :lol:



The pick falls squarely on Bert's shoulder. The throw was early and over his head. Try standing 5 yards from someone and have them throw it over your head and turn around just as its thrown and see if you can catch it.

Certain posters want to conveniently forget Bert's non tackle. Mere weeks after Bert is being glorified for running down the field and laying a hit, Bert flails and flops like some sorta soccer player from Copenhagen.

Or a silly Swedish schoolgirl.

Yeah, Brett flubbed that tackle bad. They had 2 timouts left, and could have tackled/got in the way to prevent the game-winning TD by the Pitt. D, but, alas, back to important ass things like Swedish schoogirls...........hmmmm.....yummzorz! Giggity giggity.

http://pissedofftreerat.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/swedish-girls.jpg

[HarveyWallbangers]

Dude has to win something first.....or get to the playoffs big P, no? A 10-12 career record to date doesn't make it likely at this point....just sayin' though. I'd be happy with 10-6 and wildcard. Wildcard QB's do not a MVP QB make.

What he did last year has no bearing on this year's MVP race. The argument was if Rodgers put up stats like Manning and Brees and his team finished with a similar record, would he be a frontrunner for MVP. I'd say yes. He has a lot of good will with the media.

[SnakeLH2006]

Dude has to win something first.....or get to the playoffs big P, no? A 10-12 career record to date doesn't make it likely at this point....just sayin' though. I'd be happy with 10-6 and wildcard. Wildcard QB's do not a MVP QB make.

What he did last year has no bearing on this year's MVP race. The argument was if Rodgers put up stats like Manning and Brees and his team finished with a similar record, would he be a frontrunner for MVP. I'd say yes. He has a lot of good will with the media.

That's fine. Doubt we get a #1 or #2 seed this year....If we do, yes, put him up there, but historically, MVP winners are from the top 4 NFL teams that year.

Snake loves the Pack. Snake loves ARod. But.....Snake doubts picking the Packers (in lots of NFL pick'em, NFL spread, NFL suicide/elimination pools.....and still alive at the top, no BS, in all of them...and I win at those pools) weekly. Why? I bet smart on the winners. ARod hasn't proven to be a winner...yet. He may be eventually, though.

We (the Packers) haven't beat anyone great yet to be a top team. Arod if he wins out or does enough to be 11-5 at the least, will be an MVP contender.

I love his stats (but underwhelmed with leadership, aka wins, thus far....and his propensity to take huge sacks which don't affect his QB rating and kill drives and wins, thus far). But, if he straightens that out, he's good to go.

An MVP is a winner/beast....ala Manning, Brady, etc. ARod has a lot to prove to get into that echelon of winners/MVP candidates IMO.

[MJZiggy]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

http://www.candyfavorites.com/Jelly-Nougats-Brachs-pr-137.html

We are finding a shared interest. YES!!!!

Sorry, dear, I only have a crush on one person at a time. Sort of a one-Rat woman.

[RashanGary]

The amazing part is that we're seeing pass defenses on 1st and 2nd down because we have Ryan "ordinary" Grant.

And they're seeing 8 in the box on 1st and 2nd down because they have Adrian "All Day" Peterson.

And our QB is having the better year.



Us seeing pass defense is fact. Them seeing 8 in the box is fact. Watch a Packer game and read Chilly's quote on how teams defend their offense.

[Scott Campbell]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

http://www.candyfavorites.com/Jelly-Nougats-Brachs-pr-137.html

We are finding a shared interest. YES!!!!

Sorry, dear, I only have a crush on one person at a time. Sort of a one-Rat woman.


Which Jonas Brother is it?

[MJZiggy]

I thought it was kinda obvious who Spartacus was. :?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

What were those white brachs things with the little blobs of jelly in them? Sounds disgusting, I know, but yum.

http://www.candyfavorites.com/Jelly-Nougats-Brachs-pr-137.html

We are finding a shared interest. YES!!!!

Sorry, dear, I only have a crush on one person at a time. Sort of a one-Rat woman.

You aren't sorry, you heartless bitch. You are my internet Beatrice.

[Partial]

The amazing part is that we're seeing pass defenses on 1st and 2nd down because we have Ryan "ordinary" Grant.

And they're seeing 8 in the box on 1st and 2nd down because they have Adrian "All Day" Peterson.

And our QB is having the better year.



Us seeing pass defense is fact. Them seeing 8 in the box is fact. Watch a Packer game and read Chilly's quote on how teams defend their offense.

Both QBs are having great years but without a doubt in my opinion Favre has been better. Why? Because he was the primary play maker in the slaughtering against the Pack (it was not a close game, please do not come back and say that is was, they took their foot off the gas big time), they have a better record, and they look like a much more dangerous team to me.

[RashanGary]

The amazing part is that we're seeing pass defenses on 1st and 2nd down because we have Ryan "ordinary" Grant.

And they're seeing 8 in the box on 1st and 2nd down because they have Adrian "All Day" Peterson.

And our QB is having the better year.



Us seeing pass defense is fact. Them seeing 8 in the box is fact. Watch a Packer game and read Chilly's quote on how teams defend their offense.

Both QBs are having great years but without a doubt in my opinion Favre has been better. Why? Because he was the primary play maker in the slaughtering against the Pack (it was not a close game, please do not come back and say that is was, they took their foot off the gas big time), they have a better record, and they look like a much more dangerous team to me.

Check the records again in 12 hours. There is no championship given out to the best team after 6 weeks. You should know that by now.

[RashanGary]

IMO Rodgers is the better QB right now. He makes all of the passes Brett makes and more. He's more mobile and he's a better teammate.

There is a schism that will open when these Vikes start losing. brINT has a long way to go.

[Scott Campbell]

Brett has played lights out up until the 4th quarter of last week. Let's hope that his massive choke job against PIT is a sign of his usual impending late season collapse.

[pbmax]

The amazing part is that we're seeing pass defenses on 1st and 2nd down because we have Ryan "ordinary" Grant.

And they're seeing 8 in the box on 1st and 2nd down because they have Adrian "All Day" Peterson.

And our QB is having the better year.



Us seeing pass defense is fact. Them seeing 8 in the box is fact. Watch a Packer game and read Chilly's quote on how teams defend their offense.
I don't think they saw as much 8 in the box as you might surmise given their rushing totals versus the Packers last time. To wit Chilldress:


"They played nickel against our two-tight end sets last time. They played Woodson (in the nickel) and just elected to play it that way, probably because of (Visanthe) Shiancoe and his ability to get up the field. They didn’t want to get a linebacker in coverage necessarily. But … they could play their five-linebacker thing (Big Okie) that we thought we would see that they played the week before against St. Louis. That could be the flavor of the day this week. So, you have to prepare for all."

[Partial]

The amazing part is that we're seeing pass defenses on 1st and 2nd down because we have Ryan "ordinary" Grant.

And they're seeing 8 in the box on 1st and 2nd down because they have Adrian "All Day" Peterson.

And our QB is having the better year.



Us seeing pass defense is fact. Them seeing 8 in the box is fact. Watch a Packer game and read Chilly's quote on how teams defend their offense.

Both QBs are having great years but without a doubt in my opinion Favre has been better. Why? Because he was the primary play maker in the slaughtering against the Pack (it was not a close game, please do not come back and say that is was, they took their foot off the gas big time), they have a better record, and they look like a much more dangerous team to me.

Check the records again in 12 hours. There is no championship given out to the best team after 6 weeks. You should know that by now.

I agree, but that is NOT what YOU stated. He may have a better arm but he doesn't have the game down as well mentally.

[Partial]

Hey Harrell, after that abysmal first half are you sure you still believe that?

You were at the game so I'm hoping you were up high enough so you could really observer the QB play. Favre was dominant. Guy is lights out.

[packerbacker1234]

IMO Rodgers is the better QB right now. He makes all of the passes Brett makes and more. He's more mobile and he's a better teammate.

There is a schism that will open when these Vikes start losing. brINT has a long way to go.

Care to retract that a little? I never understood how Brett was a bad teammate, number one. Hell, the dude was right there, nealing by Jennings and talking to him, making sure he was ok and cracking jokes when he got up, and he's not even on his team anymore. Everyone on that vikings team (save most likely jackson and ronsenfels) like brett. Hell, he was actually talking with his wr's after the first drive they had to show him what he was seeing on there.

Brett has never been a bad teammate, so I hate this montra that now Rodgers is magically a better one. Also, he can't make all the passes brett can make yet, that was obvious. He doesn't have the experience or mindset of a favre. He is slow in making reads and decisions, and doesn't have nearly the quick release that Favre has.

So no, he can't make all the throws favre can. He can throw a better deep ball, and naturally can run with it. Favre showed yesterday, and really all season, that there are just things he does that are clear cut better then Rodgers.

It's not AR's fault. Favre is one of the best in the history of the game to play his position. It's not even fair to try and compare Rodgers after 1 and half seasons to that. Even at 40, Favre has never looked better.

[retailguy]

Hey Harrell, after that abysmal first half are you sure you still believe that?

You were at the game so I'm hoping you were up high enough so you could really observer the QB play. Favre was dominant. Guy is lights out.

he won't be back here for a while. he's no where to be found when they lose. check his archives....

[MJZiggy]

Hey Harrell, after that abysmal first half are you sure you still believe that?

You were at the game so I'm hoping you were up high enough so you could really observer the QB play. Favre was dominant. Guy is lights out.

he won't be back here for a while. he's no where to be found when they lose. check his archives....

All things considered, maybe that's for the best...

[retailguy]

Hey Harrell, after that abysmal first half are you sure you still believe that?

You were at the game so I'm hoping you were up high enough so you could really observer the QB play. Favre was dominant. Guy is lights out.

he won't be back here for a while. he's no where to be found when they lose. check his archives....

All things considered, maybe that's for the best...

agree with you. I met the guy at the same time you did, thought he was a really nice guy. don't know what happened since then, but am baffled. the guy hates me. don't have a clue what i did, other than disagree with him...

[packerbacker1234]

NFC North QB Ratings through week 8.

Aaron Rodgers: 110.4 It is the highest in the league overall.
Brett Favre: 106.0 Old man still has it, 4th best in the league only trailing Brees, Manning, and our man AR.
Jay Cutler: 80.8 Just seems to be having a hard time adjusting.
Lions: IT DOESN"T MATTER.

[g4orce]

anyone got the numbers?

[packerbacker1234]

Brett Favre: 106.0 - Notably only .1 behind the league leader, Drew Brees. Stat wise now that most QB's are even at 8 games - Favre has possibly the best overall stats at the QB position out of everyone in the top 5.

Aaron Rodgers: 103.3 - 7 point dip from this last game, not good. With a game against dallas one would think his rating wont be rising. Had a very favre like game on a bad day.

Jay Cutler: 83.8 - Who really knows what is going on with the bears. They may be the only team that is more up and down then we are.

Matthew Stafford: 55.8 - Not a lot of talent around him. But hell, at this point he may beat the pack on thanksgiving.

[MOBB DEEP]

Favre has possibly the best overall stats at the QB position out of everyone in the top 5.


:?: huh? how's that?

[packerbacker1234]

Favre has possibly the best overall stats at the QB position out of everyone in the top 5.


:?: huh? how's that?

Best TD to Int Ratio in the top 3 (Brees, Manning, Favre... no one else is really close to these guys right now) - He is behind in yards. Not "majorly" so, but again thats a product of the team. He has just as many big plays as the other two, and actually is big a reason for them being 7-1.

Stat wise, it's mostly TD to Int ratio's at this point. 16 TD's to 3int's I believe is the best ratio in the entire NFL.

[Rastak]

After week 10......


1. Favre 107.5 ( Never would have believed it)
2. Rodgers 103.3 (Outstanding)
3. Cutler 76.0 (yikes, Bears fans gotta be pissed)
4. Stafford 59.5 (Poor rook, took a pounding today)

[MichiganPackerFan]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

[denverYooper]

Glad you're back at the helm of this thread Ras 8-) .

[MOBB DEEP]

Kinda weird that many talkn heads are down on aaron lately. I mean, he's balling despite shaky o-line....If he were in Minny or NE he would break marino's record imo...and he's ONLY 25

[mngolf19]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

Honestly, Favre looks just like '07 to me. Seemed like he hit everything during that regular season.

[Smidgeon]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

Honestly, Favre looks just like '07 to me. Seemed like he hit everything during that regular season.

Including 5 more passes to the other team at this point in the season... :roll:

[bobblehead]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

Honestly, Favre looks just like '07 to me. Seemed like he hit everything during that regular season.

Your memory fails you. Favre had several stinker games early that season....several great ones in the middle, and was average at best from Dallas to the end of the season.

IMO, this is the best BF I have ever seen. If he could have thrown this few interceptions for us during the Ahman era we would have another 2 Super Bowl titles to our credit. My only gripe with his play right now is WHO he is playing for.

[Smidgeon]

IMO, this is the best BF I have ever seen. If he could have thrown this few interceptions for us during the Ahman era we would have another 2 Super Bowl titles to our credit. My only gripe with his play right now is WHO he is playing for.

I agree. I was complaining to my brother not too long ago, during Favre Bowl I, that he never played this controlled with GB.

[mngolf19]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

Honestly, Favre looks just like '07 to me. Seemed like he hit everything during that regular season.

Your memory fails you. Favre had several stinker games early that season....several great ones in the middle, and was average at best from Dallas to the end of the season.

IMO, this is the best BF I have ever seen. If he could have thrown this few interceptions for us during the Ahman era we would have another 2 Super Bowl titles to our credit. My only gripe with his play right now is WHO he is playing for.

I think some of that could be based on his team now vs. his team then. Yeah I think your right on him having a couple stinkers then now that I think about it. But I remember against the Vikes he seemed to fit tight throws in and hit alot that almost seemed impossible to defend. His stats though are definitely the best I think he has posted.

[Freak Out]

Kinda weird that many talkn heads are down on aaron lately. I mean, he's balling despite shaky o-line....If he were in Minny or NE he would break marino's record imo...and he's ONLY 25

If he has a little more time and gains confidence in his line he's going to be lights out.

[MJZiggy]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

Honestly, Favre looks just like '07 to me. Seemed like he hit everything during that regular season.

I know Seven likes Favre, but I highly doubt they look anything like each other.

[Freak Out]

Heard some talk today on ESPN radio about Cutlet getting benched if he doesn't start performing a little better....a couple of the analysts thought Lovie had the stones to do it if need be. Who the hell is their #2?

[MJZiggy]

Caleb Hanie, 2nd year kid out of Colorado State.

[mngolf19]

Never expected to see that high out of #4, #12 is higher than I expected too.

Honestly, Favre looks just like '07 to me. Seemed like he hit everything during that regular season.

I know Seven likes Favre, but I highly doubt they look anything like each other.

I can only get in trouble by commenting on this. :)

[Rastak]

1. Favre 112.1 (I was told he set a Vikings single game completion percentage record. He also turned the game over to T-Jack late in the 3rd quarter after torching the Hawks into submission.)

2. Rodgers 102.5 (Puts up a 108 against the Niners, not bad)

3. Cutler 74.5 (Another home loss for the Bears)

4. Stafford 66.9 ( Will he pass Cutler before the year ends?)

[MOBB DEEP]

1. Favre 112.1 (I was told he set a Vikings single game completion percentage record. He also turned the game over to T-Jack late in the 3rd quarter after torching the Hawks into submission.)

2. Rodgers 102.5 (Puts up a 108 against the Niners, not bad)

3. Cutler 74.5 (Another home loss for the Bears)

4. Stafford 66.9 ( Will he pass Cutler before the year ends?)

Thanks Ras

Is Favre leading the league now?

[MichiganPackerFan]

I think in the pre-season, there were a lot of people looking forward to the competition between the four. It's really only been between two, both of which are having good to great seasons. Stafford seems to be on the way up (he IS just a rookie) and Cutler, is, well Cutler.

[mngolf19]

1. Favre 112.1 (I was told he set a Vikings single game completion percentage record. He also turned the game over to T-Jack late in the 3rd quarter after torching the Hawks into submission.)

2. Rodgers 102.5 (Puts up a 108 against the Niners, not bad)

3. Cutler 74.5 (Another home loss for the Bears)

4. Stafford 66.9 ( Will he pass Cutler before the year ends?)

88%, that's a crazy number. And I felt some of those others should have been caught.

[Scott Campbell]

And I felt some of those others should have been caught.


Now you sound just like Bert.

[MOBB DEEP]

And I felt some of those others should have been caught.


Now you sound just like Bert.

:lol:

[mngolf19]

And I felt some of those others should have been caught.


Now you sound just like Bert.

Don't have the drawl. I'm from northern MN.

[MOBB DEEP]

Where's Rastak?

[Rastak]

After week 12

1. Favre 112.1 (Another masterpiece)
2. Rodgers 104.9 (3rd best in NFL)
3. Cutler 74.4 (Vikes had the ball 40 minutes to 20)
4. Stafford 62.4 (Rookie or not, that is bad)

[TennesseePackerBacker]

After week 12

1. Favre 112.1 (Another masterpiece)
2. Rodgers 104.9 (3rd best in NFL)
3. Cutler 74.4 (Vikes had the ball 40 minutes to 20)
4. Stafford 62.4 (Rookie or not, that is bad)

Do you find it weird having to cheer for the old man?

I mean, of course winning erases everything, but he was the hated rival for years. I'm sure 99% of the Vikings fans I could ask would tell me it doesn't matter and that it's all about now. But I feel like you might give a better answer(if there is one).

Does the magnitude(or lack thereof) of the ending of Favre's story write him as a Viking hero and savior?

Hollywood must be licking at their chops with the all the posibilities of a drama like this. A better movie could not be written. I'm excited for the climax of this story. How can it get any better? Maybe that is right up Hollywood's alley. A great story with a lackluster ending.

[Rastak]

After week 12

1. Favre 112.1 (Another masterpiece)
2. Rodgers 104.9 (3rd best in NFL)
3. Cutler 74.4 (Vikes had the ball 40 minutes to 20)
4. Stafford 62.4 (Rookie or not, that is bad)

Do you find it weird having to cheer for the old man?

I mean, of course winning erases everything, but he was the hated rival for years. I'm sure 99% of the Vikings fans I could ask would tell me it doesn't matter and that it's all about now. But I feel like you might give a better answer(if there is one).

Does the magnitude(or lack thereof) of the ending of Favre's story write him as a Viking hero and savior?

Hollywood must be licking at their chops with the all the posibilities of a drama like this. A better movie could not be written. I'm excited for the climax of this story. How can it get any better? Maybe that is right up Hollywood's alley. A great story with a lackluster ending.

I'm used it now but it was pretty damn odd at first, I'll give ya that. I was luke warm on the idea all summer but was warming towards it when he said he was staying retired. So then it was a little disappointment as I had talked myself into believing it was a good move.

When he showed up it was just pain odd rooting for the guy, but he was a year removed from Green bay which helped the transition from a fans perspective. There are still some Viking fans that hate the guy, which is pretty stupid IMHO. It's like had the Packers signed Moss. There would have been a few die hards in Green bay not liking the guy but once he started hauling in passes it would be all good. It's the nature of being a fan.

[Smidgeon]

After week 12

1. Favre 112.1 (Another masterpiece)
2. Rodgers 104.9 (3rd best in NFL)
3. Cutler 74.4 (Vikes had the ball 40 minutes to 20)
4. Stafford 62.4 (Rookie or not, that is bad)

Do you find it weird having to cheer for the old man?

I mean, of course winning erases everything, but he was the hated rival for years. I'm sure 99% of the Vikings fans I could ask would tell me it doesn't matter and that it's all about now. But I feel like you might give a better answer(if there is one).

Does the magnitude(or lack thereof) of the ending of Favre's story write him as a Viking hero and savior?

Hollywood must be licking at their chops with the all the posibilities of a drama like this. A better movie could not be written. I'm excited for the climax of this story. How can it get any better? Maybe that is right up Hollywood's alley. A great story with a lackluster ending.

I'm used it now but it was pretty damn odd at first, I'll give ya that. I was luke warm on the idea all summer but was warming towards it when he said he was staying retired. So then it was a little disappointment as I had talked myself into believing it was a good move.

When he showed up it was just pain odd rooting for the guy, but he was a year removed from Green bay which helped the transition from a fans perspective. There are still some Viking fans that hate the guy, which is pretty stupid IMHO. It's like had the Packers signed Moss. There would have been a few die hards in Green bay not liking the guy but once he started hauling in passes it would be all good. It's the nature of being a fan.

It's also a well-known psychological process that everyone goes through called "cognitive dissonance". It's where you have an internal conflict about something (hating Favre and loving the Vikings) that can't stay in conflict because they go hand in hand (Favre is a Viking). Therefore, since you prioritize being a fan of the Vikings first, the lesser of the two (hating Favre) dissipates and you come to find yourself cheering for him (good ol' Psych 280).

[TennesseePackerBacker]

After week 12

1. Favre 112.1 (Another masterpiece)
2. Rodgers 104.9 (3rd best in NFL)
3. Cutler 74.4 (Vikes had the ball 40 minutes to 20)
4. Stafford 62.4 (Rookie or not, that is bad)

Do you find it weird having to cheer for the old man?

I mean, of course winning erases everything, but he was the hated rival for years. I'm sure 99% of the Vikings fans I could ask would tell me it doesn't matter and that it's all about now. But I feel like you might give a better answer(if there is one).

Does the magnitude(or lack thereof) of the ending of Favre's story write him as a Viking hero and savior?

Hollywood must be licking at their chops with the all the posibilities of a drama like this. A better movie could not be written. I'm excited for the climax of this story. How can it get any better? Maybe that is right up Hollywood's alley. A great story with a lackluster ending.

I'm used it now but it was pretty damn odd at first, I'll give ya that. I was luke warm on the idea all summer but was warming towards it when he said he was staying retired. So then it was a little disappointment as I had talked myself into believing it was a good move.

When he showed up it was just pain odd rooting for the guy, but he was a year removed from Green bay which helped the transition from a fans perspective. There are still some Viking fans that hate the guy, which is pretty stupid IMHO. It's like had the Packers signed Moss. There would have been a few die hards in Green bay not liking the guy but once he started hauling in passes it would be all good. It's the nature of being a fan.

It's also a well-known psychological process that everyone goes through called "cognitive dissonance". It's where you have an internal conflict about something (hating Favre and loving the Vikings) that can't stay in conflict because they go hand in hand (Favre is a Viking). Therefore, since you prioritize being a fan of the Vikings first, the lesser of the two (hating Favre) dissipates and you come to find yourself cheering for him (good ol' Psych 280).

Haha I'm a Psych major. I don't think you could have used a better example for cognitive dissonance if you tried.