Colin Cowherd ridicules the idea that Aaron Rodgers is comparable to Tom Brady

PATS16N0 said:

Rodgers is 0-24 when down by 9 points or more.

Like seriously.

Click to expand...

Here's the article ICAMI:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Clutch Encounters: Week 9

Side note: Looks like Kacsmar has joined FootballOutsiders.

Edit: Looks like Kacsmar has been with FootballOutsiders for a good while now. [Carsenio voice]I did not know that.[/Carsenio voice]

Deus Irae said:

First, your post said the following, which I quoted:



That would be years 2012-2014. 2010 and 2011 would have nothing to do with it.

Second, I didn't say that Rodgers is nothing but gaudy numbers. You're making the classic Peyton Manning defense, which is to try and equate the 'opponent' argument of "It's about more than numbers" with "Numbers are meaningless". So, from there....

Just for example, even leaving Brady out of the conversation, Peyton and Rodgers each won the MVP in the past 3 seasons. In the one season that neither won, 2012, Manning was the runner up to AdP. So you're swimming upstream with regards to the MVP, right there, and that's not ignoring numbers: it's taking them in a slightly larger context.

Rodgers is great. He's not better than Brady, and he hasn't been. There's no shame in that. That puts him in company with every other QB in the NFL.

Click to expand...

When I said for two, perhaps 3 seasons I didn't mean the last 2 or 3, I meant since he became a starter, which was 2008. If you are saying that in no year was Rodgers better than Brady, I disagree. If you are saying overall, Rodgers is not better than Brady, I agree. Which is what I thought I was trying to say.

As for your other point, you were the one who said Rodgers has put up the gaudiest numbers but he hasn't been the best QB. You are using the Peyton Manning argument against Rodgers actually.

What you are basically saying is that the numbers lie or are misleading. I would say the reverse: what you are not taking into account is the mediocre to poor defenses of the Packers from 2011 until now. They have never had a defense anywhere close to what they had in 2010, and the performance of Rodgers and the offense has unfortunately tended to cover that up, until this year. And when the offense didn't play well, the defense could not win games for the Packers.

ExpatPack said:

When I said for two, perhaps 3 seasons I didn't mean the last 2 or 3,

Click to expand...

Your post implied a cherry picked block of the most recent years, not a cherry picked block of select individual seasons.

ExpatPack said:

As for your other point, you were the one who said Rodgers has put up the gaudiest numbers but he hasn't been the best QB. You are using the Peyton Manning argument against Rodgers actually.

Click to expand...

Yes, and you were using the Manning supporters' basic response, which has played out quite badly for them. That's the point. If I wanted to go after Rodgers via numbers, I could. The numbers on his inability to come from behind, and his lousy playoff record outside of 2010 are easy targets, for example.

ExpatPack said:

What you are basically saying is that the numbers lie or are misleading.

Click to expand...

No... What I'm saying is that numbers don't tell the full tale. Statistics need context.

ExpatPack said:

I would say the reverse: what you are not taking into account is the mediocre to poor defenses of the Packers from 2011 until now. They have never had a defense anywhere close to what they had in 2010, and the performance of Rodgers and the offense has unfortunately tended to cover that up, until this year. And when the offense didn't play well, the defense could not win games for the Packers.

Click to expand...

And Brady took a Godawful defense to the SB in 2011, a trainwreck of an offense (and, by playoff time, a M*A*S*H* unit of an entire team) to the AFCCG in 2013, etc...

"Expatpack"? To quote the good knight from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, "You have chosen rather poorly."

Deus Irae said:

Your post implied a cherry picked block of the most recent years, not a cherry picked block of select individual seasons.



Yes, and you were using the Manning supporters' basic response, which has played out quite badly for them. That's the point. If I wanted to go after Rodgers via numbers, I could. The numbers on his inability to come from behind, and his lousy playoff record outside of 2010 are easy targets, for example.



No... What I'm saying is that numbers don't tell the full tale. Statistics need context.



And Brady took a Godawful defense to the SB in 2011, a trainwreck of an offense (and, by playoff time, a M*A*S*H* unit of an entire team) to the AFCCG in 2013, etc...

Click to expand...

Cherry picking? Right. If you don't recognize what I was trying to say, I'm not gonna even respond to that one.

What Brady did in those years you mentioned was outstanding. Kudos to him. But do you want to know which team had the worst defense in 2011? It wasn't the Patriots. Do you know which team has been near the top during the years 2010-2015 for starters missing the most games? GB ranked ahead of NE in 2013 ranking 30th. Only the Giants had more, GB had the most in 2012. In 2014 GB's health was much better, unfortunately one very critical player was injured and hobbled in the playoffs: Rodgers.

A team has to play the hand its dealt, and injuries are what they are--part of the game. But one of the points I made was the Packers defense since 2010 has been consistently poor. If you look since 2011, in terms of scoring, the Patriots defense has ranked higher than the Packers defense every single year. The only exception is 2012, when they virtually identical.

Wordsmyth said:

"Expatpack"? To quote the good knight from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, "You have chosen rather poorly."

Click to expand...

And I was supposed to choose. . . ?

Listen gang, I really appreciate the discussion here I've been having and I agree with some or many of the points raised about Rodgers -- his lack of playoff success since 2010, his lack of come from behind victories -- although that's a cherry picking stat too because often times the Packers have had the lead in the 4th quarter, and he almost engineered an incredible comeback against the Panthers when the Packers were down by 23. The last play was a terrible disappointment, and Rodgers was more critical of himself than I've seen him in a long time. But he was getting smashed all game long too.

Still this idea that Rodgers cannot be considered as the top QB over the last 5 years, that there is no argument for him being that, that he's overrated, ball-washed, shows no leadership, is a stat-whore (look on other boards and that's exactly what they say about Brady--I could care less. What's a stat-whore anyway?), etc. etc.

Simply No.

At the end of this NFL season if the Pats have succeeded in winning the SB and Brady wins his 5th ring, I will be the first to come here and congratulate you all and will call Brady the GOAT hands down. If somehow the Packers get out of their rut, if Rodgers turns it around making some much needed adjustments to play, attitude and the like, and the Packers do something special this year, I won't expect the same from you.

till then.

ExpatPack said:

And I was supposed to choose. . . ?

Click to expand...

Figure it out...?

Brady has a much higher winning percentage record in the regular season as well as the playoffs.

Brady 78.1%
Rogers 68.5%

Rogers is very good 5th among starting NFL QB's, but pales in comparison to Brady. BTW the other QB's ahead of Rogers are Staubach, Montana and Manning.

Interesting to me is that 4 of the top 7 winning % QB's are active today. Perhaps the salary cap makes the QB even more essential to the team's success.

ExpatPack said:

Rodgers -- his lack of playoff success since 2010, his lack of come from behind victories -- although that's a cherry picking stat too because often times the Packers have had the lead in the 4th quarter, and he almost engineered an incredible comeback against the Panthers when the Packers were down by 23.

Click to expand...

How exactly is that cherry-picking, Chuckles? You get Rodgers down two scores, you win. Every time. 24 times now. (That is what the 9-point margin indicates. A two-score lead.) Say what you want about Manning (and I've said plenty), but that dude came back from two, three, four scores in huge spots to win (2006 AFCCG comes to mind).

And in terms of your "almost win" there? How about "don't let your team go down 23 by going three-and-out the entire first half." Congratulations on moving the ball against a 3-man rush the entire second half. Good stuff. Hell, your defense tried to win it for you, and Rodgers still threw the soul-crushing game-losing pick --- with his #1 WR wide open in the endzone for the game winner.

Once is unlucky, twice is coincidence, twenty-four times is a trend.

Another week, another chance for Rodgers to come back from a 9 point 2-half deficit, and another failure.

Meanwhile Brady came back from a 10 point 2-half deficit against NYG even after having lost his #1 receiver earlier in the game. Brady GOAT!

Well he did lead them back. The kicker missed the fg. Packers offense just doesn't look good.

Nehalem said:

Meanwhile Brady came back from a 10 point 2-half deficit against NYG even after having lost his #1 receiver earlier in the game. Brady GOAT!

Click to expand...

Brady had to adjust to losing Jules during the game too while Rodgers has had 9 games to figure something out after losing his #1 reciever.

ExpatPack said:

overrated, ball-washed, shows no leadership, is a stat-whore (look on other boards and that's exactly what they say about Brady--I could care less. What's a stat-whore anyway?), etc. etc.

Click to expand...

Who says that? Even the haters don't say it. If they can't admit to Brady's greatness, they'll go on about "cheaterz" and what not, but come on.

At the end of this NFL season if the Pats have succeeded in winning the SB and Brady wins his 5th ring, I will be the first to come here and congratulate you all and will call Brady the GOAT hands down.

Click to expand...

I doubt it.

If somehow the Packers get out of their rut, if Rodgers turns it around making some much needed adjustments to play, attitude and the like, and the Packers do something special this year, I won't expect the same from you.

Click to expand...

Because you don't know us. So you're leaving now?

Brady doesn't lose to the lions

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

PatriotsPimp136 said:

Well he did lead them back. The kicker missed the fg. Packers offense just doesn't look good.

Click to expand...

Did the kicker miss the two point conversion pass too?

meatface said:

Did the kicker miss the two point conversion pass too?

Click to expand...

In the end the kicker missed the fg to win it. Rodgers got them into a position to win.

Nikolai said:

Who says that? Even the haters don't say it. If they can't admit to Brady's greatness, they'll go on about "cheaterz" and what not, but come on.



I doubt it.



Because you don't know us. So you're leaving now?

Click to expand...

You know friend, and thanks for the good-bye, the reason why I stopped posting here on this thread is because this is a Patriots board, and I didn't think an extended discussion about Aaron Rodgers really belonged here. So respecting that, I thought it was best to be done with it for now. I'll post on Pats issues from time to time.

I mentioned the stat-whore thing as an example of stupid things other people say, and that is used to describe Rodgers. And yes, the haters do say it about Brady. The point I was making is, it's stupid.

Rodgers and the Packers are having huge problems now, that's obvious. Rodgers is way, way off but he's far from the only reason why the Packers look terrible. If the Packers lose at Minnesota next Sunday, which is a real good possibility, that could be it for this season. Enough of that. Game against the Giants was fun to watch, enjoyed it a lot. Really good game. Hope I see more games like that...

If excuses were gold ingots, Ex would be Croesus.