2011 NFL Regular Season - Thread 4

[Bronn Stone]

To continue the discussion from the last one.

Yeah, every time Brett opens his mouth, the legacy gets smaller and smaller.

[Lord O' Bones]

I don't know about that. What Favre has actually done can't change. Yes, he sounds more like an asshole eating up his own fame when he opens his mouth.

But he can't act like enough of an asshole to erase the fact that he was world famously good at one point,

[Selmy]

I don't know about that. What Favre has actually done can't change. Yes, he sounds more like an asshole eating up his own fame when he opens his mouth.

But he can't act like enough of an asshole to erase the fact that he was world famously good at one point,

In his case, could vicodin be a performance enhancing drug?

[Spaceman Hobbes]

Everytime we seriously discuss Farve, he sends someone a picture of his junk while considering coming out of retirement. He was a great QB who didn't know how to quit gracefully and the Pack is as good better off without him. Seriously Farve, STFU.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I don't know about that. What Favre has actually done can't change. Yes, he sounds more like an asshole eating up his own fame when he opens his mouth.

But he can't act like enough of an asshole to erase the fact that he was world famously good at one point,

True, but he really wore out his welcome in Green Bay at the end. Sitting out training camp 3 seasons running, showing up halfway through the preseason, playing the primadonna QB whilst hiding behind that "Aw shucks, I'm just a simple country boy" persona. It was mildly surprising that their management put up with him as long as they did. He made it a lot easier for them to pull the trigger.

[Kalbear]

Ben Roethlisberger does not qualify at all.

He's got only one thing going for him: He's a freakishly large man and defensive players refuse to correctly tackle him.

This is really, truly incorrect. Aside from the fact that being a large man who can extend plays significantly is in itself a hugely valuable ability to have, he has a great ability to improvise, a strong arm, good rapport with his receiving corps and does a fairly good job on reading defenses. His defense absolutely won him the first superbowl they got to, but their offense was absolutely great in the second superbowl - and Ben was a very large part of it.

Much like Manning, one thing that Ben does is make you forget how atrociously bad the Steeler OLine actually is, especially at pass blocking. A lesser QB would just get obliterated back there. It's astonishing that he doesn't more than he already does.

[Arlingzen Bill]

Favre's last few years in Green Bay gave Rodgers a chance to develop into the QB he is today. Rodgers throwing mechanics sucked his first couple years. He then fixed them, and flashed potential against Dallas when Favre went down. Management knew they could drop Favre after that. Rodgers taking over in his rookie year would have been Alex Smith or worse...

[Reposado]

This is really, truly incorrect. Aside from the fact that being a large man who can extend plays significantly is in itself a hugely valuable ability to have, he has a great ability to improvise, a strong arm, good rapport with his receiving corps and does a fairly good job on reading defenses. His defense absolutely won him the first superbowl they got to, but their offense was absolutely great in the second superbowl - and Ben was a very large part of it.

Much like Manning, one thing that Ben does is make you forget how atrociously bad the Steeler OLine actually is, especially at pass blocking. A lesser QB would just get obliterated back there. It's astonishing that he doesn't more than he already does.

this is true, or has been true in the past. In his early years the line was excellent, and the sacks were mostly his fault for holding onto the ball too long. He improved as the line declined and over he past 3-4 years, yes, he mitigated a lot of the line's deficiency. l

Going forward, I think he may be at the point where he's taken too many hits and will never be the player that we saw during Ben's peak.

[Rockroi]

Okay so, let it never be said that I passed up an opportunity to openly mock Brett Favre and his stunning arrogance. The arrogance that still made him think he could play football; the arrogance that made him think his retiring and unretiring was important; the arrogance that made him destroy at least one franchise (Minnesota) and think it was everyone else's fault; the arrogance that made him send pictures of his junk to women; the arrogance that made him who he became not on the field but off it.

And it was his arrogance that could have permanently stunted the growth of two QBs who are, currently, tearing the joint up in the NFL.

Exhibit A is Favre and Rodgers- a few years ago, Favre made it clear that he would only play for Green Bay if he was the presumptive starter and would not need to compete for his job- and just a reminder this was the FIRST time his career ended with his last pass being and INT... in a playoff game. Phase in Green Bay. The Pack had made it clear that they knew that the future of their franchise was this young guy named Aaron Rodgers- unproven, raw and a work-in-progress. In other words JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER QB WHO HAS EVER BEEN IN THE NFL EVER! (its complete nonsense to say, "Well, when Rodgers was a rookie his throwing mechanics/defensive reads/ check-downs/ porn-stache sucked so it was a good idea that Favre was there. Uhhh... THAT'S ALL OF THEM! Every rookie QB has X. Y and/or Z thinks wrong with them [unless you are Ryan Leaf in which case you start far earlier in the alphabet]. Its not some important idea to keep him permanently bottled up behind Brett the Unretired). This caused a "QB controversy" where there was absolutely no controversy. None. The Packers had chosen Rodgers and made it clear to everyone. Favre wanted back in and there was engineering to make that happen. Favre mom COINCIDENTALLY (*wink*) does a radio interview stating that after all her son has done for the Packers ... they should keep him as the starter. Then, Master BRett's brother did a similar interview talking about how much Brett sacrificed for the Packers. Seriously- that happened. The sabotage of Rodgers was done for Brett's benefit.

Did Brett EVER consider "You know what? Maybe its better for the Pack that Rodgers start. And maybe Aaron is better than I am"? I doubt it. All Bret thought was "How can I possibly remain in the public eye, front and center, if I am a back-up?" So, off to the largest sports market in the US- New York and the Jets.

Ugh... anyway the point here is that for that entire time Favre never- not once -took a serious mentor role for Rodgers. To Brett, Rodgers was a back-up and would never develop properly. I mean, He's Brett Favre, bitch! He made it perfectly clear that he was the starter and the back-ups had to learn on their own. He was not helping anyone; least of all his teammates.

And there was precedent for this.

Exhibit B is Matt Hasselbeck, the Super-bowl starting QB who got his "Escape from Seattle" card punched during the off season and landed in the complete shit-show known as Tennessee. The Titans lost- this past season -their #1 and #2 QBs (both are now backups) and their head coach. Their #1 RB is basically a non factor and last week the Titans lost for the season their #1 WR. The results so far? Ho-hum, 3-1 (three in a row) and Matt's numbers? Meh- only 1,152 yards in 4 games, a 66.7 completion %, 8 TDs (v only 3 INTs) and a QB rating of 104.7 (4th in the NFL behind three Superbowl winning QBs- Eli, Brady, and the aforementioned Rodgers).

Matt started his career with Green Bay. When the brass approached Farve a few years into Matt's career, they asked Favre to mentor Hasselbeck because he was the future of the team. Favre response? NOPE! I refuse to help groom my replacement, even if its a benefit to the team. I am not going to help younger players make it in the league. Not my problem. In fact, Matt's not even as good as me because, well, I'm Brett Favre! (And I remember this because the story was "leaked" to ESPN and Tom "Fuck-the-Non-Player" Jackson said "Good for Brett." ). When Holmgren left he took Matt with him to the Seahawks and the result was Seattle's only Superbowl appearance.

Since 1997, the last season Favre made it to the Superbowl, Brett's playoff record is 4-7 with 23 TDs v. 22 INTs, two games with 4 or more INTs, and he is universally know for throwing absolutely mind-numbing INTs to end the game, including the spectacular final plays to ruin the Packers in 2007 and the Vikings in 2009.

So then flash forward to Brett Favre saying, in all seriousness, that Aaron Rodgers should have succeeded earlier. Earlier than what, asshole? For starters, you're All-time INT leading ass was in the league as a starter for 5 seasons before you won you're title - and good for you. Rodgers did it in his 3rd. Again, the reason he could not have done it sooner was that your geriatric, "Me-First" carcass was taking up space. Favre's desire to bad-mouth, poo-poo and downplay every other accomplishment of his contemporaries- especially former teammates of his -is astounding. This latest broadside to Rogers is childish, selfish and petty.

But if there were more apt words to describe Brett Favre other than those last three, I am not sure what they could be. Childish (not child-like) in its need to be reveered and centered upon; selfish in putting himself above all others; and petty in his need to find room always to slip in his own inflated and flabby ego.

And all the while, that army of yes-men and publicists will trot out that same false-image: that of the "good ol' boy "gunslinger" who speaks his mind and lets it all hang loose. The fraud of it.

And that's where his image will suffer the most. In the past, the television pundits and writers, reporters and experts would look the other way at the INTs and the "me first" attitude. They made excuses. Well, that works when YOU are the main attraction; mot so much when you are in the past and the next best thing is on top... and especially when he could be developing into something truly special. Suddenly, people will slide in, "You know, after 97, Brett struggled in the playoffs" and "He threw a lot of INTs" and then my personal favorite, "You know, after 1999, Favre sucked balls in the playoffs (some on Cris Collingsworth- just say it ONCE!)."

The image change when you attack you're own. That's a no-no. Favre's been doing it for 20 years. He's getting called on it, at long last, right now.

[awesome possum]

Laughable. That is like suggesting that the Packers might be what they are today with Smith had that draft gone the other way around.

If Smith had three years to mature on the bench, and the same roster? They might not be what they are today, but the team is set up to succeed. Having a great QB is a major part of it, but I think almost any starting-caliber NFL QB would succeed on the Packers. As much success? That's impossible to say, but probably unlikely.

[Kalbear]

Laughable. That is like suggesting that the Packers might be what they are today with Smith had that draft gone the other way around.

When we did see Rodgers in limited play when favre was there he looked completely confused. Before...well, becoming concussed. So it's not that laughable.

[Arlingzen Bill]

The thing with the Packers and QBs is that Green Bay has had a string of good QB coaches. Brunnell, Hassleback, and Rodgers benefited from getting that coaching, not from the mentoring of Favre. I won't say Smith would be on Rodger's level, but he would be a better QB today if he had worked in GB for a few years before being a regular starter.

[Sivin]

This is really, truly incorrect. Aside from the fact that being a large man who can extend plays significantly is in itself a hugely valuable ability to have, he has a great ability to improvise, a strong arm, good rapport with his receiving corps and does a fairly good job on reading defenses. His defense absolutely won him the first superbowl they got to, but their offense was absolutely great in the second superbowl - and Ben was a very large part of it.

Much like Manning, one thing that Ben does is make you forget how atrociously bad the Steeler OLine actually is, especially at pass blocking. A lesser QB would just get obliterated back there. It's astonishing that he doesn't more than he already does.

I have to disagree here. Yes, he has a strong arm, but it's not anything special. I've never seen him make a deep throw that a half-dozen players in this league might not be able to produce. And the report with his receivers? I'm sorry, no.

Half of Roethlisbergers' completions come when he's standing beside the left sideline, and the defensive backs forget that they aren't supposed to stop covering the guys running around waiting to catch a pass.

Yes, that o-line is god-awful. But even when he gets time, I've never seen Roethlisberger make any throws that are more than average.

And that awesome offense to win superbowl against the Cardinals? That's just wrong. That Cards' defense was 18th in the league. With their pass defense being particularly victimized by several teams. Including Jake Delhomme. You know, that Jake Delhomme.

Back to the physical for a moment (and shame on me for dismissing Brady's smile earlier); Smith can't send a missile into coverage on the dot the way that Rodgers can.

Yes he can.

He does it all the time. The problem is, Alex Smith is either throwing the ball around like he owns the field, or he's throwing the ball around like he owns the other team. Those brilliant throws are literally the only reason why the league hasn't quite given up on him. He's like Tony Romo on crack. Except he doesn't have the offensive talent of either Tony Romo or Aaron Rodgers.

Am I saying that Alex Smith is a better quarterback than Aaron Rodgers? Hell no.

But if I was sitting in the "war room" for a team in 2005 and had the offensive loadout that thePackers have, I know who I would pick. And it wouldn't be Rodgers.

There is no denying that Alex Smith greatly suffered from disruptive first years in the league, and that Rodgers, conversely, did not.

(The Brett Favre debacle is not the kind of disruption that I'm talking about here.)

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

He does it all the time. The problem is, Alex Smith is either throwing the ball.

No, he doesn't. FTFY.

[Kalbear]

I have to disagree here. Yes, he has a strong arm, but it's not anything special. I've never seen him make a deep throw that a half-dozen players in this league might not be able to produce. And the report with his receivers? I'm sorry, no.

It's okay. You can be wrong. The fact is that standard stats, advanced stats, scouts and other teams all disagree with you. If he can make throws half a dozen other QBs can make in this league that puts him in the top 10 just for that. He creates huge matchup problems.

And why do you think defenders forget to cover players magically with Ben? Because his receivers improvise in ways that Ben expects them to. Because they get open for him in a way that is quite good. Because he extends plays so that they last 4-6 seconds. This is a big deal; it is basically impossible to cover an NFL quality receiver for more than 4-5 seconds at best.

I personally loathe Ben. I think he's a waste of a human being with a poor work ethic and atrocious values. I hope only for the worst for him. But he's undeniably one of the better QBs in the league, and saying that it's only because he's hard to tackle? That's just flat out wrong.

Yes, that o-line is god-awful. But even when he gets time, I've never seen Roethlisberger make any throws that are more than average.

So I'm guessing you didn't watch the Packers/Steelers game a couple years back then? Or the superbowl and the throw to Santonio Holmes? Just because you're not particularly observant does not make this a fault of Ben.

[Rockroi]

Yes, he has a strong arm, but it's not anything special. I've never seen him make a deep throw that a half-dozen players in this league might not be able to produce.

First of all, please, do not take this the wrong way: if you want to bash Ben Raperberger, by all means, continue onward and upwards.

Second, I am not sure I disagree with your points.

Third, however, is that the above quoted statement is not really a strike against "Bathroom" Ben. The fact is great QBs really do not need "laser-rocket" arms; yes it helps- look at Marino and Manning. But arm strength is by no means the most important factor in a great QB- in fact much of the time its not even that important (don't get me wrong; they have to have more of an arm than Chad Pennington- but there is never a requirement that they need to be Favre-like). Accuracy, precision, quick release, pocket awareness, ability to read defenses, etc. The fact that Ben doe snot have a "special" (as opposed to what?) arm is really not THAT big of a deal.

Look, don't get me wrong: the guy is overrated. He contributed NOTHING to the Steelers' 2005 Superbowl victory; the 2010 one was won, basically, on one play (Harrison's INT for a TD). He has never taken over a game (that I can recall). At the same time, he's surprisingly evasive for a guy that fat big no, fuck it, I mean fat; he has tremendous accuracy; he has a good release; he reads defenses well. I readily admit he holds onto the ball wayyyyy too long. And he has raped Wayyyyy too many women. But I don't think his arm strength is a strike against him.

[Kalbear]

He has never taken over a game (that I can recall).

Best example was the aforementioned game against the Packers where he basically willed them to victory. There have been others along the way, I suspect - but that's a big one I can remember.

To put this in context, Rockroi - Sivin asked what other than his ability to not get tackled makes him anything decent. I named half a dozen things that do so. While I agree he doesn't get enough blame for his mistakes and gets credit for things like two superbowl wins when one at best is worthy, he's clearly one of the better QBs in the league. Given that he's had a very short career so far and has accomplished a great deal, it's kind of insane to knock him.

[arrowfan]

Late check in (westeros.org is doing odd things) on the Rodgers thing ...

I think the debate really needs to be broken down:

Skills - Rodgers looks to be as good as the greats in terms of skills, arm, touch, intelligence, awareness, etc. This is Madden Playstation QB come to life.

(Youtube changed a bunch of stuff, could only find this, vid quality sucks, but you know this precision pass)

Legacy - Well he's in his 4th year as a starting QB. Winning the SB and getting the SB MVP in your 3rd year is a pretty good start. Of course, measuring up to the elite/legacy QB's (Montana, Brady, Manning and plenty of others) is a tough job. I can only hope Rodgers eventually enters that pantheon. Time will tell.

[Maithanet]

I know a lot of people have already pounced on this post, but there were a couple of gems here that haven't been mentioned.

And that awesome offense to win superbowl against the Cardinals? That's just wrong. That Cards' defense was 18th in the league. With their pass defense being particularly victimized by several teams. Including Jake Delhomme. You know, that Jake Delhomme.

The Cardinals defense was not very good in the regular season, but (like the Colts in thier Super Bowl year) it played much much better in the postseason. They got three turnovers and a key 4th quarter safety against the Falcons in the wildcard round. They got 3 turnovers against the Eagles in the NFC championship game. And the Panthers game?! I can't believe you brought that up as a poor defensive performance. They got six turnovers and held the Panthers to 13 points. The defense singlehandedly won that game. Jake Delhomme's stats were among the worst by a playoff quarterback ever:

17/34, 205 yards, 1 touchdown, 5 interceptions.

If that is getting torched, I have no idea what a good defense would do.

The Steelers needed their offense in that second super bowl, and the Cards defense that they scored on in the end was no joke.

Am I saying that Alex Smith is a better quarterback than Aaron Rodgers? Hell no.

But if I was sitting in the "war room" for a team in 2005 and had the offensive loadout that thePackers have, I know who I would pick. And it wouldn't be Rodgers.

Ummm...what? Are you saying that the 49ers made the right call given the information they had? Or that if you were the Packers, and you had the 1st pick, you would take Smith. Because that is ridiculous. Rodgers has already won them a super bowl, and looks poised to win more. What is the best case scenario here for Smith, such that it would be better than that? Could he win the Super bowl in 2009 and 2010? Do you think that is realistic? The Packers D was not good in 2009 and the loss to the Cardinals was certainly not on Rodgers.

[Rockroi]

To put this in context, Rockroi - Sivin asked what other than his ability to not get tackled makes him anything decent. I named half a dozen things that do so. While I agree he doesn't get enough blame for his mistakes and gets credit for things like two superbowl wins when one at best is worthy, he's clearly one of the better QBs in the league. Given that he's had a very short career so far and has accomplished a great deal, it's kind of insane to knock him.

For starters, I can accept the Green Bay game as being a game where Ben just took over; like I said- I simply didn't recall any.

And I agree- its really not accurate to not give the guy his due for being one of the "better" QBs; he;s definitely in the Top Ten, if not Top 6. And for a variety of reasons. My major point (aside from wanting to watch Big Ben: Fratguy's name get dragged through the mud) was that even if we say his arm strength is not THAT great, that's not a very good measuring stick. I mean, I think his arm is fine- not Manning-level, but fine. I just think that there are about half-a-dozen other attributes that are more indicative of a good QB and Ben possesses many of them.

Regardless, if the guy was caught with six kilos of blow I would laugh uproariously.