WhiskeySam
14 years ago

Who wanted to know about passer ratings and when was this?

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Are you asking about what I'm referring to in the article?

When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

Who wanted to know about passer ratings and when was this?

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Are you asking about what I'm referring to in the article?

When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



I guess I am missing the point of why you mentioned it.
UserPostedImage
Stevetarded
14 years ago

His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



That isn't his attitude so you don't have to be bothered.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



You might want to read this line again: You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

If your only option is taking a sack or throw the ball up for grabs, then yes take the sack. Too many times this year, Rodgers has had other options that hurt the team less and doesn't take them.

I haven't even touched on the fact he wanted to know about passer ratings which goes back to the point RedSox has been making in multiple threads about QBs needing to sacrifice their ratings for the benefit of the team.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



You might want to reread the whole thing and make an effort to try to understand what he was saying rather than just reading what you want to and making stuff up about it.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that he was referring to taking sacks on 3rd down when it doesn't bring you out of FG range.

"And Rodgers argues there are times a sack has minimal cost, namely, on third downs if it doesnt take the team out of field-goal range."

You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.
blank
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

Who wanted to know about passer ratings and when was this?

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Are you asking about what I'm referring to in the article?

When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



That's about sacks, not just QB ratings. If you throw for fewer interceptions and higher QB rating, you do know that NORMALLY that does translate into wins, right? I think that's the point he's trying to get at.

Or I could believe it like you and think that Rodgers is playing NFL like I play Madden, gimmie some stats!! :)


When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.

Were they bad teams or protection issues? Rodgers said. Or were they Randall Cunningham, where hes an athletic guy, the second all-time single-season rushing yards for a quarterback? Was he trying to make plays, or was it schematic? We dont want to get sacked. Im trying to make a conscious effort, but trying to play at the same time the way Ive always played.


UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
14 years ago

His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



That isn't his attitude so you don't have to be bothered.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



You might want to read this line again: You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

If your only option is taking a sack or throw the ball up for grabs, then yes take the sack. Too many times this year, Rodgers has had other options that hurt the team less and doesn't take them.

I haven't even touched on the fact he wanted to know about passer ratings which goes back to the point RedSox has been making in multiple threads about QBs needing to sacrifice their ratings for the benefit of the team.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



You might want to reread the whole thing and make an effort to try to understand what he was saying rather than just reading what you want to and making stuff up about it.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that he was referring to taking sacks on 3rd down when it doesn't bring you out of FG range.

"And Rodgers argues there are times a sack has minimal cost, namely, on third downs if it doesnt take the team out of field-goal range."

You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



And he's still wrong. He's acting like there's no option but take a sack or throw a pick. What about throwing it away? What about checking down as was shown in another thread where he ignored multiple open receivers in front of him? How about scrambling? What about the risk of fumbling when taking these sacks? How about injury since he hasn't practiced all week? Taken with how he's playing, his comments indicate to me that he thinks as long as the QB has a high rating and isn't throwing picks, it's okay to take sacks. It's not that simple. That list is pretty damning in that great QBs do not pile up huge sack totals, and a lot of people here like to make Rodgers out to be a great QB. I guess I forgot to put on my Green and Gold glasses before posting here again. Let me do that. "Oh yeah, Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the league, and possibly the best ever. There is no grounds for criticizing anything he does or says." Better?
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stevetarded
14 years ago

His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



That isn't his attitude so you don't have to be bothered.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



You might want to read this line again: You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

If your only option is taking a sack or throw the ball up for grabs, then yes take the sack. Too many times this year, Rodgers has had other options that hurt the team less and doesn't take them.

I haven't even touched on the fact he wanted to know about passer ratings which goes back to the point RedSox has been making in multiple threads about QBs needing to sacrifice their ratings for the benefit of the team.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



You might want to reread the whole thing and make an effort to try to understand what he was saying rather than just reading what you want to and making stuff up about it.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that he was referring to taking sacks on 3rd down when it doesn't bring you out of FG range.

"And Rodgers argues there are times a sack has minimal cost, namely, on third downs if it doesnt take the team out of field-goal range."

You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



And he's still wrong. He's acting like there's no option but take a sack or throw a pick. What about throwing it away? What about checking down as was shown in another thread where he ignored multiple open receivers in front of him? How about scrambling? What about the risk of fumbling when taking these sacks? How about injury since he hasn't practiced all week? Taken with how he's playing, his comments indicate to me that he thinks as long as the QB has a high rating and isn't throwing picks, it's okay to take sacks. It's not that simple. That list is pretty damning in that great QBs do not pile up huge sack totals, and a lot of people here like to make Rodgers out to be a great QB. I guess I forgot to put on my Green and Gold glasses before posting here again. Let me do that. "Oh yeah, Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the league, and possibly the best ever. There is no grounds for criticizing anything he does or says." Better?

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



He didn't say he thinks it's good to get sacked he said there are certain times where getting sacked is a minimal cost. Getting sacked on 3rd down is indeed a minimal cost. His first move on 3rd downs if the protection breaks is to scramble and buy time for guys to get open for the first down. If he throws it away in that situation it's 4th down, if he takes a sack while trying to extend the play it's 4th down = minimal cost.

Now go ahead and find some more of his quotes to take out of context and complain about.
blank
Zero2Cool
14 years ago
Why are some claiming that others are claiming Rodgers is the best QB in the league? He's not, and I haven't seen anyone state he was. Is that a little over reaction on some replies to posts?

Rodgers has his ups and his downs. Luckily for us, more ups than downs. So far.

As I've said for WEEKS, he needs to hit his check downs and if there are none, the coach needs to call some plays he does have them.

Rodgers has missed some open guys, but not as many as most think and he's not the only QB in the league that does it. All of them do it from time to time.
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
14 years ago

Who wanted to know about passer ratings and when was this?

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Are you asking about what I'm referring to in the article?

When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



That's about sacks, not just QB ratings. If you throw for fewer interceptions and higher QB rating, you do know that NORMALLY that does translate into wins, right? I think that's the point he's trying to get at.

Or I could believe it like you and think that Rodgers is playing NFL like I play Madden, gimmie some stats!! :)


When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.

Were they bad teams or protection issues? Rodgers said. Or were they Randall Cunningham, where hes an athletic guy, the second all-time single-season rushing yards for a quarterback? Was he trying to make plays, or was it schematic? We dont want to get sacked. Im trying to make a conscious effort, but trying to play at the same time the way Ive always played.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



The reason I brought up the rating again is because this is the third thread now it's been relevant to. Why does Rodgers want to know what the QBs' ratings were? Why is that at all relevant? The QB rating does not factor in sacks so rating has no bearing on if sack totals are too high.

Let's run through the math again just as an example of how the QB rating is not as great an indicator of QB play as it is made out to be. The QB rating takes into account 4 things: completion %, yards per attempt, TDs per attempt, and INTs per attempt. Right now Rodgers has a rating of 110.4 based on 147 completions, 225 attempts, 1989 yards, 14 TDs, and 2 INTs. He also has taken 31 sacks for 193 yards lost with two fumbles and a safety. For the sake of this argument, let's assume every sack he had the option of throwing the ball away (I know this isn't true, but we're using this assumption to show how the rating formula works). If he throws the ball away 16 times, his attempts go up to 241, and his rating falls to 103.2. If he throws the ball away all 31 times, his attempts go up to 256, and his rating falls to 97.3. A QB with a 97.3 rating who has taken 0 sacks, lost 193 fewer yards, hasn't fumbed or taken a safety is a better QB than one who has but has a 110.4 rating.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Zero2Cool
14 years ago
Yep, you missed the point of his asking completely. You're taking a few words out of a whole thought and stretching it, big time.

I'm out of that discussion. You're too off key for me to continue this one with.

I'm sure because of that though I'm wearing green and gold goggles and think Rodgers is supreme, right?

:) (thats right, im smiling at you!)
UserPostedImage
IronMan
14 years ago
+1 WhiskeySam
Fan Shout
dfosterf (14h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (14h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (16h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (18h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (18h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (21h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (22h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (28-Mar) : 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 / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Mar / 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 / 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.