Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Truth be told, I believe you're underselling the Packers running game a bit. During the 6 game win streak, Ty has been pretty darn good, and the Packers running game as a whole hasn't been too bad in general. Over 100 rushing yards a game and a 5.5 rush average [tied With Atlanta in that regard btw] isn't as bad as you're tying to spin it. I mean, it wasn't great by any stretch of the word, but it wasn't bad either.So nah, Rodgers isn't nearly compensating for his running game much as you're saying he is.Ryan's running game is better, sure, but Matty Ice's passing game is surely helping Freeman and those boys out a bunch.
Alright. Let's look at the stats:
vs. Lions: Rodgers had 42 rushing yds. 153 total rushing yds. No 100+ yd rusher.
vs. Vikings: Rodgers had 13 yds, 1 TD. 93 total rushing yds.
vs. Bears: Rodgers had 19 rushing yards. 226 total rushing yds [Montgomery and Michael, mostly].
vs. Seahawks: 93 total rushing yds.
vs. Texans: Rodgers had 16 rushing yards. 109 total rushing yds. No 100+ yd rusher.
vs. Eagles: Rodgers had 26 rushing yards. 74 total rushing yds.
Against the Lions, the Packers would've managed 111 without Rodgers, and there was no 100+ yd rusher. Against the Vikings, they didn't even get to 100. Same goes for the game against the Seahawks. Versus the Texans, the Packers would've gained 93 rushing yds had it not been for Rodgers propelling the total yards to 100+. Playing the Eagles, they managed only 74 rushing yds.
The only reason they average over 100 yards a game during those six is due to the fact that they rushed for 226 against an incredibly vulnerable and weak Bears defense. Had it not been for Rodgers, they would've only been able to surpass 100 yards rushing in one more game.
That is not the equivalent of an effective running attack, imho.
Meanwhile, the Falcons averaged 120 rushing yards per game during the season, ranking 5th in the league. The Packers ranked 20th, with 106 yards per game, a ranking that would actually be even lower if not for Rodgers. He had 369 rushing yards and 4 TD's on 67 attempts. How many rushing yards and rushing TD's did Matt Ryan rush for during the season? 117 yards on 35 attempts.
As for the lack of consistent seperation, mind posting any actual emperical evidence for this rather then the sometimes faulty "eye ball" test?Either way, Devante and Jordy are damn good receivers regardless.
Well, the only evidence I can provide are links to Aaron Rodgers highlights. I think that the fact that Rodgers takes more than 4 seconds on average to get rid of the football [in a lot of cases quite a bit more, actually] is as good indication as any that the WR's haven't been able to separate from the DB's and thus Rodgers has needed to move around in the pocket, evading a couple defenders here and there on a consistent basis until a receiver finally gets open. It's not very hard to notice, tbh, and it's trend that's been going on since the second half of the 2015 season.
LMAO. It may not be something he has to "directly" compensate for his defense, but the pressure of dealing with a 30 points or lose, situation for a QB, and the entire offense, is indeed a great one indeed. You feel you MUST score every time you get the ball, and you try to complete throws and plays you normally wouldn't. Hence the higher risk throws and the unessecary extending of plays.Despite it all, Matt Ryan still remained the most efficient QB in the NFL, per all major metrics by a rather comfortable amount.
Yes, well, Rodgers had the exact same problem and had to compensate for the exact same thing for a large chunk of the regular season, so. Ryan doesn't get the edge over Rodgers on this one. The point is, Rodgers effectively compensates for weaknesses Ryan doesn't need to compensate.
He wasn't very good vs Vikings, Dallas, or Jax. Early on, his yards per dropback was rather awful, and his accuracy was off because he wasn't setting his feet when he threw. Sure as a whole he has been awesome, but those bad games he had, some via his own mental mistake and miscues, was absent for Matt Ryan pretty much the entire year.
They weren't as absent as you claim. Ryan wasn't very good against Denver, San Diego, Philly or Kansas. So yeah, neither of them had 17 perfect games. What's the point? People expect so much of Rodgers that him playing at a very good level and averaging a 90+ QBR doesn't cut it, but the truth is he's been consistently brilliant throughout the season as a whole, as you very accurately pointed out.
On that note, let's take a harder look at those games in which Ryan wasn't very good. Two of them boast a couple of the best defenses in the NFL. The opponents the Falcons faced during the season are overall weak on the defensive side of the ball. TB [2], Oakland, NO [2], Green Bay, San Francisco, Panthers [this year], Rams, San Diego and the Eagles. Not one of those teams ranks in the top 10 defensively. The only truly good defense he managed to beat handily this year was the Seahawks'.
Rodgers, on the other hand, managed quite well against the Giants [twice]--who were ranked 1st in points allowed--the Texans, Seahawks and Vikings, all top 10 defenses.
Texans are simply a product of their environment. They're the tallest midget in a garbage division; mainly why out of their decision their record is rather horrible, sorry if I'm not all that impressed with them.
That's fair, I'm not very impressed with them as a team overall, either. However, you can't be unimpressed with their defense. Only one team managed to score 30+ on them the entire year, and they ranked 1st in total yards allowed and 2nd is passing yards allowed for the entire season. Offensively handling this team isn't an easy feat.
Detroit really isn't all that good either. They prolly beat, like 1-2 over .500 ball this entire year, if even that, and their rankings as a whole reflect on that.
Yeah, Detroit isn't very good. We can easily agree on that.
As for Vikings, much of their vaunted defenses stats comes from the first half of the season, specifically, the first 5 games. After they went on their second half decline, they have consistently given up 20+ points in games, including getting their rears handed to them by the Colts, before Aaron got a hold of them. They were hardly that much of a challenge, given the circumstances. I honestly forgot about the Seahawks, and they are indeed good, but they have been inconsistent as hell this year.
Actually, Minnesota allowed only 2 30+ games all year, and against very prominent offenses at that [Green Bay and Indianapolis].
After their initial 5 games, they still held 5 more opponents to 20 points or less, including the Cowboys. It's easy to think that their final defensive ranking is a product of their insane first 5 games but, in retrospect, it's not exactly the case.
As for the Seahawks, I agree that they've not been consistent this year, but their defense is still top notch. Even with all their problems, they rank in the top 8 in every single defensive category this year.
Adding the Giants to the list of good/great defenses Green Bay has beaten, it's honestly very impressive.
And Matt Ryan is better in almost every other meaningful stat. Yards, Yards per attempt, completion percentage, QBR, Total QBR, INT percentage, etc.
Both Rodgers and Ryan threw 7 INT's this season. And sure, Ryan is a viable MVP candidate, and I wouldn't throw a tantrum if he wins it. He's been damn good this year. I simply am of the opinion that 6 more TD's should be valued higher than all those other stats, and if you also take into account the fact that nobody's been playing better than Rodgers for the last 7 games, that he's been more productive offensively, a more valuable weapon for his team and that he's faced and defeated more daunting and powerful defenses than Ryan has, there's no reason why Rodgers shouldn't win it instead.
Coming into the season, Atlanta was only a decently talented offense, no more, no less. Matt Ryan took that offense, and did something absolutely historic with it.
The Falcons have had significant offensive prowess for a while now. I wouldn't consider their offense only decent prior to this year. Anyway, that's merely subjective.
You've made some points, so we might as well agree to disagree. [/B]
Oh shit. I wish I read this sooner. Sorry for that.
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Well Petrus, from a Cowboys fan to you, a Packers fan, I wish you good luckBecause ya'll are gonna most certainly need it. 🙂
Hey, I didn't know you were a Cowboys fan, DS. I wish you good luck, as well.
One thing's for certain: it's going to be a hell of a game. Or at least a very entertaining one.
Originally posted by Deronn_solohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFZrM38mf7Y
Wow, the KMC Battle page is filled with nothing but troll threads. I knew this site was in the dumps, but now it has reached a point of no return, and little to no, actual worth while discussion are going on.Not even my superior skills could save this place from ruin.
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Wow, the KMC Battle page is filled with nothing but troll threads. I knew this site was in the dumps, but now it has reached a point of no return, and little to no, actual worth while discussion are going on.Not even my superior skills could save this place from ruin.
😂 😆
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Wow, the KMC Battle page is filled with nothing but troll threads. I knew this site was in the dumps, but now it has reached a point of no return, and little to no, actual worth while discussion are going on.Not even my superior skills could save this place from ruin.
KMC is CV dystopian future. Accept it. There is no hope.