ARE WE GIVING AROD A FREE PASS ??????????????????

[pbmax]

New Theory: If my QB and game planning tended to put me in an early lead against almost all other teams, my goal would be to become an expert on holding that lead and minimizing the chances of a comeback. Outside of basics, I would not worry in the slightest about 4QC.

Anyone want to claim McCarthy and the team has that figured out yet? I do agree with Vince that the safest path is the low risk, low variance, time eating strategy. But I am not sure that is the most best way to close out the game with a win. Being a little riskier when you have all the advantages is probably warranted. The Seattle game might have been the worst example because the greatest edge you have is injured and can't play action.

McCarthy is successful and established enough to employ a strategy of eating clock and living with the consequences of that strategy when it doesn't work out. So he is not afraid to use a plan whose principle feature is to enhance the chances of winning rather than avoiding post-game criticism. If he were to switch to pushing aggressively when he has leverage at any point in the game, he is well positioned to survive whatever criticism might occur during the transition.

[yetisnowman]

There are five cases where Rodgers drove them into FG and a FG was attempted. That was precisely my point.

Interceptions to end games are precisely what the criticism is about, though in reverse of your claim. The theory about his comeback record that has been put forward is that he doesn't take enough risks at the end of the game when behind, when those risks are justified by the game situation.

So if you wish to claim that INTs are the reason he doesn't produce more 4th Quarter comebacks, then you need to explain why subsequent seasons, when his INT numbers have plummeted, the 4th Qtr comebacks are still not plentiful.

The "people who analyze QB play" are actually saying there should be more INTs in certain situations in order to increase the odds of making a 4th Quarter comeback.

Sigh..... I am saying that when you are trailing in the last minutes of the game and you turn the ball over or are unable to keep the drive going, you bear a good portion of that responsibility as a quarterback. I am not saying interceptions are THE reason he doesn't have more fourth quarter comebacks, but that obviously him throwing a game ending interception is an example of him failing to engineer one?
I only see 3 of the 8 examples involving us attempting a field goal. One we made, one we missed, and was blocked. The one that we made, there was still a game ending pick that Aaron threw after that sequence when we need a touchdown. The one we missed was a 52 yarder outside, and is never what you want or would you ever settle for a 52 yarder. The one that was blocked, Aaron did his job and special teams failed.

I love how you guys parse and beat quotes into the ground. Anyone with a logical brain can analyze qb play. I watch the damn games. Aaron has great numbers and has been good at beating the shit out of bad teams for the most part. But in close games, which against good teams you tend to find yourself in, he struggles. I actually thought he made great strides in regards to clutchness this season....the Miami game obviously, vs NE when Adams dropped what would have sealed the game as a td, and the Dallas game. But when the Seattle game took me back to those frustrating places, where you feel like he can't lead us to victory when we need it the most. I know his calf, wah wah. He hasn't played Seattle much better at full strength, so I just don't buy it. The excuse parade just never ends.

[yetisnowman]

It was so horrible winning 19 games in a row and a Super Bowl without a 4th quarter comeback. It was horrible going 17 wins in a row without winning a close game of 4 points or less.

Lol. Wow. Of course that would be great! Most of the 19 wins came after the Super Bowl win, and we were beaten in our first playoff game that year so yeah that was super fun. I would be happy if we beat every one by 30 points, but when two good teams play each other its usually close. And as a quarterback, close games in the fourth quarter is truly where you cement your legacy. Not beating Minnesota by 40 in October. He had two great games in the Superbowl run, and I will always cherish that run! It was awesome! But that was 4 years ago, and we have an elite qb in his prime, and I am hungry for more.

[th87]

My apologies for missing that. However, it raises a followup question; if the opponent matters, how are you differentiating between that and poor reaction to stress during a game?

Also, the list of authorities isn't impressive. Bob is just going by recent results. Besides Dilfer (and I would love to see a link to his comments), the rest are just bloviators who know less than we do.

Rodgers is not perfect and he could improve in several areas. But his team isn't perfect either, nor is his coach. And I think those factors plus the opponent, provide plenty of explanation about his playoff record without the need to speculate about his emotional state.

We just had a perfect example of how a team can conspire to lose a game its winning. A conservative approach, which vince has argued convincingly was perhaps the safest strategy, blew up in their face in all 3 phases. McCarthy failed to use his best leverage points to build up a bigger lead and the later to collect a first down. Those factors didn't depend on how well the QB reacted to stress.

My differentiation between quality of opponent and "internal" factors (e.g. stress) have to do with unforced errors. The interceptions, passes defensed, and sacks that are results of great defense are omitted from my admittedly imperfect analysis. The unforced errors - where an abnormally bad decision or pass is made (without the defense being a factor), relative to Rodgers' overall body of work - I attribute to the internal factors. Of course, Rodgers can make unforced errors in every game (he's human after all), but are the occurrences of unforced errors in playoff games higher than normal?

This is why I'm not really focusing on defensive rankings or passer ratings and such. I think those metrics are too high-level for this particular analysis, and would ideally prefer to look at individual plays and decisions (where it looks like the receiver is open and the protection is adequate) against similar plays throughout the season to see if there's variance. This would be a lot of work, of course.

The big assumption also is that these "unforced" errors aren't actually caused by facing a good defense that makes Rodgers generally uncomfortable, which indirectly results in "residual" inaccuracy.

As to your last paragraph, yes, everyone is responsible for this loss. It's justified to have threads about McCarthy's passivity, Slocum's incompetence, the sudden disappearance of the defense, and everything else. I think the Rodgers thing is just one factor of many.

[Pugger]

Perhaps it should be. What was needed was the winning TD, not the tieing FG, and he failed to deliver that. As was discussed for several days following the game, it can be argued that AR did not make the best choices in the final three plays after getting into FG range.

If you kick the FG to tie because you run out of time, that's one thing. But if you kick the FG to tie because the drive stalled, it's not much to brag about. GB still had plenty of time left.

So a QB is more clutch if his drive stalls and they kick a FG because they were down less than 3 points?

[Patler]

So a QB is more clutch if his drive stalls and they kick a FG because they were down less than 3 points?

Did I say that? Did I even hint at that?

My God.......

[Pugger]

a drive for a tie works both ways, obviously. "What was needed was the winning TD" - absolutely wrong: what was NEEDED was the tie. That keeps you alive. What was optimal, what you wanted, was the win. The tie is better than no points and a loss, and gives you a chance to win with a score on a subsequent drive. Yes a TD there probably wins and a TD in overtime wins, without having to depend on defense (assuming you get the ball). But it's a team game, and sometimes a QB has to depend on teammates to get him the ball. I seem to recall Brady needed his defense in 2001 - he tied and won with a collection of FGs in that post-season. But I guess that's not much to brag about, because he didn't win those with TDs.

And was Brady clutch in the SB on Sunday because he won even tho his defense had to win it for him?

[Pugger]

4th Qtr. Comebacks 'You say'. See my number !

I'm 'only' 5 behind Matthew Stafford.

I just flat out win !

I know you are trying to be cute but Rodgers wins a hell of lot more than Stafford.

[Pugger]

I only see one instance of that in the examples listed. I said that one is not on him with the blocked fg vs. Chicago. A stalled drive and a punt, or a interception to end the game....Aaron has to take a lot of blame for those. That is mostly what i am seeing. Missing a 52 yd fg is not a blunder or misshap. That happens. Even the last game, we didn't settle for a fg or run out of time....we were unable to get a first down to push for a win. And yes that is what we needed...I knew we would not win in OT.

And this is his first year as a starter. Most QBs don't set the world on fire in their first season as a starter.

[yetisnowman]

And was Brady clutch in the SB on Sunday because he won even tho his defense had to win it for him?

Obviously yes, my God. He was down 10 with 8 minutes left, and led his team to 2 consecutive touchdown drives. He made the most of his opportunities when he had the ball in his hands when his team needed him to do it. Are you arguing he wasn't clutch in that game?

[Pugger]

Did I say that? Did I even hint at that?

My God.......

Kinda. You made it sound like getting a game winning FG was more clutch than getting a game tying FG late in the game. Perhaps I misunderstood?

[Pugger]

Obviously yes, my God. He was down 10 with 8 minutes left, and led his team to 2 consecutive touchdown drives. He made the most of his opportunities when he had the ball in his hands when his team needed him to do it. Are you arguing he wasn't clutch in that game?

I'm talking about the last couple of minutes of the game. If Seattle would have come back and won that game nobody would be calling Brady clutch. Brady has won a hell of a lot of games with last minute heroics, that's for sure. But if Seattle wins Wilson is the hero and most likely MVP of that game.

[woodbuck27]

And was Brady clutch in the SB on Sunday because he won even tho his defense had to win it for him?

Before the score was NE 28 - Seattle 24...the Score was Seattle 24-NE 21.

When New England drove to get the go ahead TD 'of course' Tom Brady was clutch (if that's the buzz word now) leading that drive for the go ahead score..

[woodbuck27]

I know you are trying to be cute but Rodgers wins a hell of lot more than Stafford.

Since when is it 'cute' when all the facts in a post are founded or accurate?

[pbmax]

Sigh..... I am saying that when you are trailing in the last minutes of the game and you turn the ball over or are unable to keep the drive going, you bear a good portion of that responsibility as a quarterback.

1. You cannot talk about 4th Quarter comebacks and then only talk about the last drive with Rodgers. Thats apples to carrots. In your citing of QB observers and the other QBs who have more 4QC than Rodgers, you do not limit them to the last drive of the game for inclusion.

2. If a drive (not the last drive of a game) ends in a FG to tie or take the lead, the QB has likely done his job and his coach is satisfied with the result. Because unless I am mistaken, the coach calls out the FG unit, not the QB.