zombieslayer
13 years ago
And Finny, your graph kind of proves my point. Elite D is #1. Elite QB is 2nd. Elite RB? Of the top 5, only one made the Playoffs. SB winner had the 29th RB.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
DakotaT
13 years ago

...I think people enjoy fvcking with you just as much as me..

"vikesrule" wrote:




While screwing with Z2C has provided much pleasure and entertainment over the past 5 years or so,
when you showed up, it brought messin' with a cheesehead to a whole new level.

I mean, that in your case, there is such an unending amount of material to work with.
A dufus of your caliber is pretty much a once in a generation type thing.

"DakotaT" wrote:



to you slapnuts.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

And Finny, your graph kind of proves my point. Elite D is #1. Elite QB is 2nd. Elite RB? Of the top 5, only one made the Playoffs. SB winner had the 29th RB.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



And the #1 RB in the playoffs.

I'd say the same things about Walter Payton as Barry Sanders, minus the FB thing because I didn't see him play without one. And Walter would add another dimension, that you don't get with Barry Sanders.

Walter Payton could catch and was a threat doing so. I actually would say Walter Payton is worth more to your offense than Barry Sanders because of the dual threat. Barry couldn't catch that well, or maybe wasn't thrown the ball enough, either way, no one was really scared of him catching the ball.

One reason I think Elite QB is more important than Elite RB would be longevity. QB's last longer than RB's thus your window for championships is wider.

You can win a Super Bowl with an average QB and an Elite RB, problem is, there's just not that many Elite RB's out there. I think the closest would be Adrian Peterson. Elite to me is doing it year in year out, consistently and I feel he's done that. The prick.

Again, I think having an Elite QB increases your chances more than having an Elite RB as I've said before.

But Barry Sanders/Walter Payton (I'd even say LaDanian Tomlinson or Jim Brown in there too) is always going to be taken over Dimitri Nance by any GM who wants their job the next day. I'd love to see a poll on that so you'd have your facts.

I mean, DIMITRI NANCE, give me a break. That's insanely disrespectful to the Elite RB's mentioned. I'm offended for them being in the same post together. At least you could have used Ryan Grant, someone who's started a meaningful game and put him at a lower salary.

The whole 10 million elsewhere is a win win for you because if you don't open your mind up to the possibilities, of course it looks great on paper, but its not like the salary cap is 80 million dollars either.

No, I'm done this is just too annoying- I tried man, I really tried seeing it like you painted it. I just... I can't believe anyone in their right mind would argue to justify DIMITRI NANCE over BARRY SANDERS or WALTER PAYTON and I tried to rationalize it myself.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

I think an elite QB can make up for a so-so running game. As we saw with the Packers this past season. A great QB can use short passes to get the gains a RB would get, and has the ability to go downfield for the big play.

If all you have is a great RB, a defense can key on that and stop your offense dead.

Barry Sanders.......he was awesome. But how many of you remember when the Packer D held him to i believe minus one yard for an entire game? The Lions did nothing that game, cause the Packers keyed on Sanders.
I can only imagine what Sanders could have done with a decent QB.

"Cheesey" wrote:



Yep, as I said earlier, it's easier to stop the run than it is the pass. I agree with that, partially because I'm cocky enough to think I could out throw any defense, but no way could I out run them. 🙂
UserPostedImage
Greg C.
13 years ago

And Finny, your graph kind of proves my point. Elite D is #1. Elite QB is 2nd. Elite RB? Of the top 5, only one made the Playoffs. SB winner had the 29th RB.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



And the #1 RB in the playoffs.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



That's because the Packers played more playoff games (4) than any other team this year. Starks had one excellent game. He didn't produce a whole lot in the other three.

I agree that Zombie's example of Dimitri Nance is a bit over the top. I think you need a decent RB to have enough of a rushing threat to keep the defense honest. Grant and Starks are both plenty good enough. Brandon Jackson--probably not.
blank
zombieslayer
13 years ago
Yeah, Nance might be extreme then. OK, let's go with B-Jack then. Similar salaries, and Jackson can get 60 yards on 15 carries. Nance maybe not.

I really do believe with an elite D and an elite QB, the importance of a good RB goes way down. We could have easily won the SB with Jackson. Heck, next year, hypothetically speaking, our receivers are healthy and actually catch the ball, can we win it all with Jackson? I'd say yes.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

Yeah, Nance might be extreme then. OK, let's go with B-Jack then. Similar salaries, and Jackson can get 60 yards on 15 carries. Nance maybe not.

I really do believe with an elite D and an elite QB, the importance of a good RB goes way down. We could have easily won the SB with Jackson. Heck, next year, hypothetically speaking, our receivers are healthy and actually catch the ball, can we win it all with Jackson? I'd say yes.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



A - Elite QB + Brandon Jackson at 750k
B - Average QB + Barry Sanders @ 10 million.

Assuming everything is the same, I think the option A would have a more likely chance of winning a championship. You have no clue how hard that was to write.

Same team, with a starter from the draft, I'd say yes we could win next season with Brandon Jackson, because he's not a 60+ threat (yes, 71 long) but he's a threat to keep getting first downs (Urlacher?) and he's a threat out of the backfield.

I like Ryan Grant, but if I got his salary an incentives understood, I'd rather us move him, go with Brandon/James draft a RB.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

And the #1 RB in the playoffs.

"Greg C." wrote:



That's because the Packers played more playoff games (4) than any other team this year. Starks had one excellent game. He didn't produce a whole lot in the other three.

I agree that Zombie's example of Dimitri Nance is a bit over the top. I think you need a decent RB to have enough of a rushing threat to keep the defense honest. Grant and Starks are both plenty good enough. Brandon Jackson--probably not.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



But the numbers are what matter!! 😉

Really though, James Starks did make it less difficult for the Packers to win it all. Not saying it couldn't have been done without him, just saying he took a load off the passing game.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
13 years ago
Wow. Took 3 pages but it looks like we're all pretty much in agreement then. :thumbright:
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
macbob
13 years ago

Macbob - Maybe I'm not stating my point very well. Rushing success is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you're the #1 rushing team or the #20. Your chances of winning the SB are exactly the same. Yes, you still need to hand the ball off. But you don't need to be good. Is that more clear?

Also, I went as far as saying an elite RB actually hurts the team by taking too many passes away from the offense. Also, he ends up asking for too much money where you're better off spending that money on a LB, DL, or DB.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



Zombie-I do understand what you're trying to say. It just doesn't make sense to me, logically. It's like saying 3 > 4.

If I hand the ball off to a RB, and he runs 90 yds for a TD, next time it looks like I'm going to hand it off to him the safetys are going to be coming up to stuff the box. Only it's a play action fake, and I've got Jennings streaking down the field, 1-on-1 with his defender and no help over the top. If the first run got stuffed for 0, then the play action wouldn't attract as much attention and there's likely a safety over the top.

So running successfully will attract the defense's attention more than running less successfully. Running successfully has GOT to be more relevant than simply running. And if running successfully is irrelevant, running in general is even more irrelevant.

To me, it appears the point you're trying to make is that running success was insignificant (e.g., irrelevant) to determining the SB winners. The statistics tend to not support that argument.

The SB winners over the last 20 years ranked 8th in rush attempts and 10th in rushing yardage during the regular season--both significantly toward the top of the league in both categories. And during the SB itself, the team with more rushing attempts has won 10 of the last 11 (with this year being the sole exception).

I agree with your comment that an elite RB can hurt you if it causes your offensive coordinator to skew too far to the running game.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (1h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (2h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (5h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (5h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (8h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (9h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (19h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.