The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V2

OldMrBrennan83 · 28-12-2017 10:39PM

This post has been deleted.

Hococop · 28-12-2017 10:55PM

Am I right in saying that they have only one win since he left?

Paully D · 29-12-2017 03:02AM

Most of you have probably seen them by now, but a few good documentaries I've watched over the Christmas period. All are 30 for 30's, so quality is almost guaranteed. You'll find the full versions in the usual places, but synopsis' below.

1) What Carter Lost - In any other year, the 1988 team from Dallas' Carter High School would have gone down as one of the greatest in Texas football history, featuring 28 players who received college scholarship offers, eight of whom would eventually play professional football. Fighting off racial prejudice and a grades controversy — not to mention the team that would overshadow them in book and film (Odessa Permian) — Carter would claim the state title, only to be rocked to their core when six of their players were involved in an armed robbery that changed the community's reputation to this day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz0TER6ai88

2) Year of the Scab - During the 1987 players' strike, the Washington Redskins field a roster of replacement players that goes 3-0 and helps pave the way for the Redskins' Super Bowl victory. Thirty years on, those players bear the stigma of being dismissed as "scabs" by fans in general and Redskins management in particular:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHtYNjp4NWQ

3) Four Falls of Buffalo - A profile of the Buffalo Bills teams of the early 1990s, when the franchise became the first team to play in — and lose — four consecutive Super Bowls:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4MqPD2Yiro

4) Trojan War - A profile of the rise and fall of USC Trojans football during Pete Carroll's coaching tenure in the 2000s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrcj9iqG-UI

HigginsJ · 29-12-2017 03:07PM

Weepsie wrote: »

In case anyone is interested in Johnny Manziel (doubtful)

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/dec/28/johnny-manziel-cfl-comeback-hamilton-tiger-cats

Speaking of Browns busts, Trent Richardson had a short, very productive spell up in the CFL earlier this year. Cut short through injury however, which is a pity.

paulie21 · 29-12-2017 09:26PM

Devante Adams signing a multi year deal with the packers worth 14 million a year

OldMrBrennan83 · 29-12-2017 09:28PM

This post has been deleted.

Billy86 · 30-12-2017 11:34AM

I think he's got it in him to be a really good #1 - not explosive over the top like Jordy, but he's incredibly smart, has become excellent at getting open in even tiny windows, is strong in the catch and his hands have come on miles since his first year.

Monday can't come soon enough though. Absolutely has to be the end of Capers, McCarthy will be kept but I think I'd rather see him gone too -
he's been exposed with how badly he has done now both times he was left without the greatest performing QB in NFL history under centre.

I still cannot get over his lack of adaptability in terms of developing a running game when it was clear we might as well have been playing with no QB (and with a line better at run blocking than pass blocking, after the injuries set in), and his lack of carries to Aaron Jones who in limited action has looked like he could be a really explosive 1,200+ yard, 4.5ypc+ type of back is, well, fcuking infuriating. Williams is good but he's more of an unremarkable north/south pounder who is very important to have of course, but it's clear as day that Jones is the real star of the rookie RBs we picked up and is much better suited to our offense with Rodgers back.

Just look at this - in weeks 4-7, Jones had 62 carries for 346 yards (5.8ypc!) and 3 TDs behind a very banged up offensive line with the passing game offering no threat in the second two (again NO Hundley passed for 87yds while Jones ran for 131, that's embarrassing). Then for the remainder of the season he has had... 19 carries. All season. And is averaging over 5ypc on those 19 carries... but he's barely getting a sniff. Against Carolina, an excellent defense, he went unused for the whole first quarter, got two carries almost back to back (a failed Hundley pass in between) and picked up 43 yards off them in a game where we were struggling for anything. The next time he carried the ball there were 10 minutes left in the 4th quarter. In the interim Jamaal Williams had 4 carries for 12 yards and we had attempted 22 passes. That's pathetically unbalanced, and literally openly ignoring what was working. Rodgers was way, way off 100% and that got a lot worse after they noticed we literally were not even bothering to try to run the ball - he's way too much of a crutch McCarthy in the last 3-4 years especially.

I also never though about it much before, but think our habit of blowing 20 point leads and scraping out with a 4pt victory down the years is very much down to McCarthy and a lack of urgency/lackadaisical mentality that has crept into the team over the decade but has really ramped up in the last 2-3 seasons. Added to that, is it just me or ever since he decided to fix something that was never broken by handing off playcalling duties to Tom Clements, has McCarthy just completely lost 'the magic' in terms of unexpected plays and the general cohesion/flow of the offense? Even in the second half of last season, it looked more like a full on Rodgers clinic that was winning us game after game, and very little to do with bamboozling playcalling etc that I seem to remember much more of around 2009-11. Up by 20 points with 14:30 left in the game, most teams go for a nice 5-8 minute drive of short passes and mixing up run plays, instead we routinely seem more than happy to go right up the middle, wind up on 4th and 7, and put away... all the fecking time. It's another bad habit of ours in terms of playing down to the level of competition for teams we should be squashing.

A serious lack of accountability has crept in while the killer instinct in the team has depleted down to abut zero, the only way to effectively deal with that it a ruthless curb stomp in my mind, and that might mean getting rid of McCarthy... though that's not going to happen.

Billy86 · 30-12-2017 11:52AM

Also some defensive numbers from the last 2 seasons:
- 31st in TDs against (58, behind only Browns 61)
- 31st in passer rating against (98.0 behind only Browns 102.2)
- 30th in completion percentage (66.4%)
- 30th in yards per attempt (7.4)

And specifically from this season:
- 32nd in 3rd Down Completion %: 69.0%
- 30th in 3rd Down Conversions: 44.8%
- 30th in Scoring Efficiency: 40.3%
- 32nd in TD Efficiency: 23.5%
- 32nd in RZ Scoring Efficiency: 100%
- 31st in RZ TD Efficiency: 69.2%
- 32nd(T) in 5 Minute Drives: 26
- 30th in 10 Play Drives: 30

We've also been so bad on offense that teams have been running the clock out late in a lot of games, believe it or not only three teams (Broncos, Steelers, Texans) have had less pass plays called against them all season, yet we've given up the 11th most completions and 6th most passing TDs!

But hey, look on the bright side... let's be honest, I think we're all a little shocked to see that we're only 32th on 3rd down conversions and not 32nd. Woo... hoo?

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-12-2017 12:21PM

This post has been deleted.

raze_them_all_ · 30-12-2017 12:59PM

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There's a reason people are head hunting him tbh

PhilipsR · 30-12-2017 02:50PM

McCarthy should be fired and Capers sent with him. Underachieving to the max. One of the best QBs to ever grace the game and only one Superbowl appearance. The Seahawks championship game should have been enough to fire him.

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-12-2017 03:00PM

This post has been deleted.

30-12-2017 03:17PM

Sidney jones to make his debut for the eagles on Sunday. Should be interesting

Billy86 · 30-12-2017 04:25PM

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That is very true, and worse again is that I'm worried raze_them_all is spot on about him being targeted now. Sadly, it only takes one guy out of 25-28 defensive players to be a complete scumbag.

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

We've a lot more than one player. On offense I think we could use someone to break things open deeper - Jordy's legs are going but I think he's got another season left, kind of hard to look good when you've a QB who a) cannot spot quick openings (Nelson's hook and curls routes down the years with this with Rodgers is, or at least should be, legendary in terms of execution) and b) has less accuracy than the league's worst punter when going over 20 yards. Keeping Jared Cook may have been a big help there - though I honest to god don't think he'd have hit 30 catches or 300 yards with Hundley either... the guy is just terrible. Take away his scrambling and he's barely if even better than Jimmy Clausen in my opinion. We've a promising young trio of RBs though, and the upside to all the offensive line injuries at least is that we found out we do have depth there (Patrick, McCray, and especially Spriggs who struggled mightily as a rookie last season). My main worry here outside of a deep threat if Jordy is done there though, is imbalance and a lack of flow as has been the case for probably three full seasons now - even when Rodgers was on fire last year, it seemed far more him just doing the impossible and far less McCarthy/playcalling.

Defense however... those numbers from a few posts up are nothing short of amazing. So many missed tackles, so many blown coverages, so many examples of guys not knowing what they're meant to be doing, where they're supposed to be or seemingly what play is even being called at times. Meanwhile, we've got two ex-CBs who didn't look much if any better than the others when there were here, who are both deep in all pro contention - Casey Hayward for what would be the second year in a row, and Micah Hyde at Buffalo. We could use improvements, particularly among pass rushers, but the common denominator through the years is exactly what those numbers get at too - the coaching is terrible. Really, really terrible.

This is exactly why I was saying last year that it may have been better to miss the playoffs then to force a change. This year really needs to have been a brutal enough wake up call though, or I'd fear we'll see people begin to boycott the team.

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-12-2017 04:42PM

This post has been deleted.

Billy86 · 30-12-2017 05:06PM

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well yeah, QB is pretty much unlike any position in any sport there, at least that I'm aware of and having Brady or Rodgers should mean 11+ wins pretty much by default, but that also points to the problem being a lot more than just this year... over 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2016 we're averaging 11.25 wins a year, e.g. about the bare minimum. And that's after excluding 2013 and 2017 because of him missing time with injury. Even in 2011 when we won 15, if I recall our defense was setting records for how poor it was.

That said, you only need to look at the likes of the Jets this season to see that you can still produce something without a star QB, or even big name players in the rest of the offense. I might take a look in more depth, but wouldn't be surprised if we were the worst offense in the entire NFL as well as worst/second worst defense in the time Rodgers was out. McCarthy meanwhile, by his play calling looked like someone who had only discovered American football a few months ago. I'm not sure the guy actually knows what a running game even is anymore (and this stretches way back to last season where we'd have 3-4 running attempts ran in total coming into half time of some games).

The difference in terms of what is around Brady and around Rodgers is pretty remarkable, it's primarily on the defense but seems to have crept in as an overall team mentality now. Personally I think a lot of it lies on a mindset of "it's ok, Aaron will win us the game" and this year the moment he went down it seemed to shift to "well I guess we can't win this game, but let's try and keep it close" - even for the Browns a few weeks ago, who have managed to beat out last year's Browns as the worst team so far this century (in my opinion). We played scared. Against the Cleveland Browns... that's going to take a long time to get over, and I think it was a real watershed moment for how the coaching staff are viewed.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 30-12-2017 07:13PM

Billy86 wrote: »

The difference in terms of what is around Brady and around Rodgers is pretty remarkable, it's primarily on the defense

Defense? The Pats have the 26th ranked rush defense and 29th against the pass. No one made the Pro Bowl.

Brady has Gronk, but that's it in terms of offensive elite (the only two that had a shot and made the Pro Bowl - I don't count Devlin/FB). The rest, Brady has made names of due to SB success.

The difference between Brady and Rodgers might be remarkable given the success Brady has had, but not between what they have on the field.

Billy86 · 31-12-2017 12:59PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Defense? The Pats have the 26th ranked rush defense and 29th against the pass. No one made the Pro Bowl.

Brady has Gronk, but that's it in terms of offensive elite (the only two that had a shot and made the Pro Bowl - I don't count Devlin/FB). The rest, Brady has made names of due to SB success.

The difference between Brady and Rodgers might be remarkable given the success Brady has had, but not between what they have on the field.

Pats have also allowed the 26th fewest points - they were horrendous for the first few weeks where the Pats went 2-2, but over the last 11 games have only been giving up 13.8 points per game which is pretty fantastic. The yards given up have still been big but they've been very effectively running a 'bend, don't break' type of setup and have the fifth best redzone defense in the league, quite close to all but the Chargers who are a good 4% ahead of second placed Minnesota.

What's more is NE's defense quite consistently adjusts during a game and gets a lot better in the second half, while the opposite is often true of GB as Dom Capers has zero ability or interest in adjustments, ever. We've been shredded by this so many times down the years, to the point defenses seem to know even what play we're calling by default come late in the fourth quarter (due to Capers' stupid obsession with over complicating things by having different formations for seemingly every play, which ironically simplifies the offenses job a tonne). The differences between the first and second half of the Superbowl vs the first and second half of the NFC Championship game last year was a perfect example of the difference in coaching/playcalling/adjustments between both teams.

GB went into half time down 24-0, NE went in down 21-3...
- Falcons, NFC Championship game 2nd half: three straight TD drives, 17 plays total for 185 yards (10.9yds per play), then a punt late in the game since the game was dead.
- Falcons, Superbowl 2nd half: a 3-and-out, then an 85yd TD drive, then another 3-and-out, then a turnover on the third play of the next drive, then another three and out, then a punt after 6 plays, then a punt after 4 plays. They had 27 plays for 133 yards, though 101 of those yards came off three plays (two of which were on the non six play scoring drive) - the other 24 plays went for 32 yards.

This is the benefit Brady has of working with one of the greatest defensive minds of all time, as opposed to a dinosaur who hasn't made any real efforts to change with the time in a decade. Please let tomorrow bring the late Christmas present I've been waiting on for half a decade, PLEASE!

Both guys make the guys around them look a lot better on offense, but while Rodgers has had more depth at WR Brady has had Gronk and noticeably better running game around him on average, with both offensive lines fluctuating from pretty excellent at times to pretty woeful at others. There is however, zero question, who has had the better help from their defense.

mcgratheoin · 31-12-2017 02:44PM

Billy86 wrote: »

There is however, zero question, who has had the better help from their defense.

I think you'd be better replacing defense with coaching staff in that statement. It's a difficult assessment to make on individual players in disparate schemes and teams but it's hard to argue that the Pats have a significant talent surplus over the Packers. What they do with it is very different however. (More or less your point I guess)

eagle eye · 31-12-2017 03:38PM

Watching NFL countdown and Rex Ryan kind of stepped in it a bit suggesting he was ordered by the league to give players a start. He backed up a bit when asked to confirm it. He said he wanted to coach in the league again first and then said he received friendly suggestions about starting certain players but that he used them how he wanted to.
This could blow up into a really big thing.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 31-12-2017 03:45PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Pats have also allowed the 26th fewest points

True, but I think it's still not near some type of elite defense; 26th fewest, yet no one near Pro Bowl caliber. Having Brady lead the offense on long drives and setup leads to defend also helps them. With Rodgers out, the Packers fell away in terms of scoring pts, not helping the D. The Pats D would have been shown up a hell of a lot more if Brady was out.

Billy86 wrote: »

The differences between the first and second half of the Superbowl vs the first and second half of the NFC Championship game last year was...

Brady getting the offense clicking and the Falcons shooting themselves in the foot. The Pats D was shredded given the limited time (23mins) they were on the field. Hightower made a huge play, and then the Falcons somehow managed to screw up their FG chance to maybe bury the game. A ridiculous comeback that required elements from both sides.

Billy86 wrote: »

There is however, zero question, who has had the better help from their defense.

In terms of talent, I don't know if there is a gap. Certainly you could point towards the coaching. But Brady being Brady has helped his D out by not turning over the ball (even on his own poor streak at the moment) with 30 TDs and 8 INTs (Rodgers 16 TDs and 6 INTs) and Brady just being great yet again even at 40yrs.

The difference around them, on offense or defensive isn't remarkable in my eye. From SB LI, only Brady will make it into the HOF (on either side of the ball), not uncommon for Brady.

OldMrBrennan83 · 31-12-2017 03:55PM

This post has been deleted.

Billy86 · 31-12-2017 06:04PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

True, but I think it's still not near some type of elite defense; 26th fewest, yet no one near Pro Bowl caliber. Having Brady lead the offense on long drives and setup leads to defend also helps them. With Rodgers out, the Packers fell away in terms of scoring pts, not helping the D. The Pats D would have been shown up a hell of a lot more if Brady was out.

I don't know, the Pats have given up the least points in the entire NFL over the last two seasons, it's hard to argue that that is not elite. They do give up a lot of yards but find a way to not let the other team put them on the board, which is huge. A lot of this I put down to Belichick's game awareness and while it's too much bother to look into now I would love to compare the two teams' second half defenses at some point also.

In games Rodgers has started the last two seasons, GB average 26.95 points. In game Brady has started the past two season, the Pats have averaged 29.33 - that's only 2.38 points per game. However in those games, the difference in their defenses has been over five times that (more later in the post) - so can't agree that the difference has been down to offensive scoring at all, to be honest.

Brady getting the offense clicking and the Falcons shooting themselves in the foot.

Nope, if the Falcons get three straight TD drives to start the second half that game is over. That's not to take away from Brady who was amazing in the second half, but if you're down by 3+ TDs and the other team is scoring a TD on every single drive, you literally are not getting back in no matter what (save for recovering 3-4 onside kicks in a row). That was the difference.

The Pats D was shredded given the limited time (23mins) they were on the field. Hightower made a huge play, and then the Falcons somehow managed to screw up their FG chance to maybe bury the game. A ridiculous comeback that required elements from both sides.

In the second half, they were not shredded at all - yes they were in the first, but then Belichick managed to overcome that whereas Capers' unit flopped and disintegrated as per usual like pasta that's been on the boil for ten hours. In the entire second half, the Pats gave up 3 big plays, but then only 32 yards over 24 plays, which is ****ing ridiculous against what was one of the best offenses the league may have ever seen. That's 1.33 yards per play.

In the NFC game, GB were down by 21 at the half. In the SB, the Pats were down by 18. Both team's first drives were punts. NE managed to get the ball back, while GB conceded a nice long TD drive. But when the Pats got the ball back, Brady threw the pick six, so now GB are down by 31 and NE by 27. Now here's the difference... the Pats next 3 drives got 18 points, and they were only down by 9. GB's next 3 drives went for 21 points... yet they were still down by 23. The Packers then forced a punt but there was only 2:36 left in the game. NE also forced a punt at that point, had more time on the clock thanks to their defense (their offensive drives in the second half to this point took up more time than GB's), and a scoreline they could catch up on again thanks to their defense (who then saw the game through to OT, forcing another punt in the process).

Remember that bit about 1.67 yards per play outside of Atlanta's three big ones in the second half? Against GB there was a 73yd TD, a 23 yard play, and no others over 20 yards. Their other plays were getting exactly 6 yards per play, gliding down the field as they liked in their own time.

In terms of talent, I don't know if there is a gap. Certainly you could point towards the coaching. But Brady being Brady has helped his D out by not turning over the ball (even on his own poor streak at the moment) with 30 TDs and 8 INTs (Rodgers 16 TDs and 6 INTs) and Brady just being great yet again even at 40yrs.

The difference around them, on offense or defensive isn't remarkable in my eye. From SB LI, only Brady will make it into the HOF (on either side of the ball), not uncommon for Brady.

In terms of talent, on offense that's true, though on defense it's hard to tell because of how terrible GB's defense has been for so long (some Packers fans feel almost nobody on our entire defense deserve to be in the league). You could put that down to talent, but when we've been so poor at CB only to let two guys leave via free agency, one of whom went all pro immediately and might repeat this year, and the other of whom in his first year away from Capers might well be all pro this year also (Micah Hyde, BUF). It doesn't matter who is playing defense if the guy calling the shots cannot do his job competently, and there is no Bill Belichick to help either.

In terms of turnovers, this season and last isn't a great comparison because Hundley is simply not an NFL player, probably not even at backup level in my opinion. There are a lot of turnovers, bad field position, and time of possession issues that he has been responsible for (and McCarthy too by way of still trying to throw 70% of the time with a guy who cannot throw it). Mind you, in games Rodgers has played the last two years GB's defense has given up 545 points in 21 games (25.95 per game) while Brady's has given up 369 in 27 games (13.67 per game) - that's basically two full touchdowns in the difference.

Brady is throwing less interceptions per attempt over that time at 1% to Rodgers 1.5%, but that does not nearly bridge the gap as the Pats with Brady in the last two years have maybe the best defensive PPG record, while GB with Rodgers if I'm correct have the second worst behind only Cleveland (whose 2016 and 2017 teams are the #2 and #1 respectively as the worst teams I've seen in 16 years following the league). Funny enough, with Hundley under centre for 9 games this season throwing picks at 2.6% with a passer rating of 68.6, we were actually conceding less points per game at 22.88.

An interesting point I felt was late 2015/early 2016 when Rodgers was struggling vs early 2013 when Brady was also having a tough run. In 8 games, Rodgers had a passer rating of 82.5, was getting 6.22ypa, 59.6% accuracy, 13 TDs, 7 INTs and had an INT ratio of 2.3%... Green Bay went 4-4, giving up 23.88 PPG. In the first 8 games of 2013, Brady had a rating of 74.9, 5.95ypa, 55.7% accuracy, 9 TDs, 6 INTs and had an INT ratio of 1.9%

That's the thing with GB vs NE... with one, if the QB doesn't show or is contained up the defense will at the very least make life very difficult nearly always. With the other, if the QB doesn't show up or is contained you win the game.

Even looking at the start of last season, NE went 3-1 against teams with a combined winning schedule. Yes they had Garoppolo for 1.5 of those games, but were playing with an UDFA at QB for the other 2.5. GB went 3-6, and only from squeaking last second wins out against maybe probably the worst team in league history and a completely horrific mess of a Bucs team, and beating the Bears who have been poor all year and were exceptionally so at the time. Replace those with three competent (not even playoff level) teams and we're 0-9.

Belichick is the greatest head coach of all time and one of the greatest defensive minds in the history of the game, you could not find a better compliment to Brady than him. McCarthy meanwhile is an entirely offensive guy who has no idea how to run an offense when he doesn't have an all time great under center (proven in 2013 as well as 2017) while Capers is the worst defensive coordinator in the league, and the most inexplicable case of someone being in a job still in the NFL ever since Gus Bradley and Jeff Fisher got the boot from the Jags and Rams.

---

TLDR: I'm extremely jealous of your coaching situation, and on defense it absolutely is incomparably better than ours.

eagle eye · 31-12-2017 06:56PM

Patww79 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Yes

j8wk2feszrnpao · 31-12-2017 07:42PM

Billy86 wrote: »

I don't know, the Pats have given up the least points in the entire NFL over the last two seasons, it's hard to argue that that is not elite.

Last year they played a ridiculously soft set of QBs. It was mentioned numerous times in the Pats thread.
It's easy to argue they are not elite cause nobody has called them elite, and they are not in the conversation when you had recent defenses like Seattle and Denver that show what true elitism is.

Billy86 wrote: »

They do give up a lot of yards but find a way to not let the other team put them on the board, which is huge.

I do agree on this. It's been the Pats style of bend but don't break. They tend to do well in the red zone. But it's always easier to have that philosophy when Brady is putting up points at the other end.

Billy86 wrote: »

so can't agree that the difference has been down to offensive scoring at all

It plays a part, but so does the QBs the Pats faced in that time.

Billy86 wrote: »

Nope

Yip. The Pats started turning opportunities into points and the Falcons made a number of unforced errors which they didn't do against GB.
Hightower did make a big play, but the Falcons went down field with ease on their screwed up FG drive. Bads pens and a terrible sack taken by Ryan.
I'm not saying that the Pats D didn't play a part, but the Falcons screwed it up big time.

Look, I don't think they're been that great a difference in terms of the defenses when you factor in everything. Ultimately Brady is the greatest QB to have played the game; an enormous factor for both Bill Belichick and his defenses.

Billy86 · 31-12-2017 08:41PM

The Pats did have an easy run last year, but only only gave up 21 points to Palmer's Cardinals and 17 to Ben's Steelers as two example of good QBs last year. The Falcons did sputter but the Pats defense responded excellently, for over 40 minutes of the game they gave up only 7 points (not including the pick six as that obviously wasn't on them). With GB's defense, rather than being down by 9 near at the end, they'd have been down by 20+. I would absolutely put my life on it - no matter what happened, Capers defense would find a way to keep the Falcons alive as it always does.

This year the Pats have played Brees, Alex Smith, Cam Newton, Deshone Watson, Ryan, Carr, Rivers, Ben, and Cutler twice if you want to include him - and they've allowed the seventh least points in the league.

GB's defense by comparison is only two weeks of being ripped to shreds for most of the game by Deshon Kizer; we're a team that QBs use to pad their stats, whether it's an all pro, a career journeyman or a hapless rookie. Matt Stafford is currently ripping up a 325 yard, 3 TD game, 10+ ypa game on us as I type this............... scratch that, literally right as I type this he'd got TD #4. Trust me, there is not one GB fan in the entire world who is even vaguely surprised nor upset about this right now, it's just another Sunday as far as we're concerned.

We'll need to agree to disagree - on offense it's quite similar, but there's a massive difference between the defense that gave up the second most points in the league and the team that gave up the least, especially when that difference is almost 2 full TDs per game. I'd agree Brady is the GOAT due to longevity (though I'd edge peak performance to Rodgers), but he wouldn't be winning anything on this Packers team in recent years.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 31-12-2017 09:16PM

Billy86 wrote: »

This year the Pats have played Brees, Alex Smith, Cam Newton, Deshone Watson, Ryan, Carr, Rivers, Ben, and Cutler twice if you want to include him - and they've allowed the seventh least points in the league.

And ranked terrible in yards at the same time when that includes bad QBs for the Bills, Jets and Fins (where I include Cutler). If you want to give the edge to Pats D, then ok. But Brady is MVP to help them out, which the Packers D have not had.

Billy86 wrote: »

We'll need to agree to disagree

Yip, and that’s fine. Cause Brady IMO is GOAT based on stats, longevity, performances, regular season, playoff record, comebacks, SB appearances, SB wins, SB MVP....... He’s done it all and is still doing it.

I don’t think Rodgers is in that conversation when you have others like Manning, Montana, Elway. But he still has a number of years left before his legacy can be judged.