Orton vs. Rodgers vs. Cutler

[pack4to84]

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

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

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

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

[Partial]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Partial]

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

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

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

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

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

[Joemailman]

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

[Lurker64]

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

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

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

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

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

[HarveyWallbangers]

That was a really solid post, lurker.

[pack4to84]

That was a really solid post, lurker.

I agree

[Joemailman]

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

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

[Waldo]

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

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

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

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

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

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

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

[sharpe1027]

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

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

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

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

Wist,

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

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

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

[pbmax]

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

Somebody get this man a gift card, Lurker wins thread. My reply to my previous challenge was at 3000 words and counting. Charts and graphs too. Glad you have saved everyone the trouble.

[packers11]

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

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

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

[pbmax]

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

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

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

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

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

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

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

Get Waldo a gift card as well. Maybe for some new specs for his monkey.

[3irty1]

Personally I blame refs.

[KYPack]

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

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

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

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

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

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

We traded the man on the cover of Madden.

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

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

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

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