Rodgers isn't even having best year among QB's, Watt is MVP· Page 9

Rockmolder
Honored Member

10 years ago

The award doesn't go to the best quarterback, it goes to the most valuable player of the season and that nearly always is a quarterback and the quarterback who has been the most efficient was Romo. This isn't rocket science. Wait, yes it is and I'm a rocket scientist!!! (looks at paystub, ...no ... no i am not).

Several times I've pointed out the bias, yet you folks seem to keep ignoring it, just validating how strong your bias truly is. Nothing wrong with that. As I have also said, if I'm told I can have any single player, I would without question take Aaron Rodgers over any other player and it has nothing to do with his stats this season or the prior season but rather his body of work throughout his career and because he wants to "Pump you up!".

That "freakish" OL? Oh, so cute you mention their OL but not the Packers? Again, BIAS. Face it. You do not want to be objective. And it is okay!! Goodness.

You'd put Andrew Luck over Romo, again, more bias seeping through! lol

You can only be shown the door, you have to choose to open it.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Then come with something yourself. All you're saying is that I'm biased and can't see the truth, yet, offer nothing substantial to back up your point.

Rodgers carries the Packers offense. Romo had to do the same in years past. This year, Romo played more towards a game manager role than before.

Again, what does most efficient mean in your eyes?

And if you think that our O-line is as good as the one them essembled in Dallas, you're the one begin biased. We're deeper at most positions, but there's a reason that 3/5th of their starting O-line is going to the Pro Bowl and are on the All-Pro team (with Frederick going 2nd All-Pro).

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#82

Then come with something yourself. All you're saying is that I'm biased and can't see the truth, yet, offer nothing substantial to back up your point.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder

You tell the person who created the topic with his opinion and his reasons for said opinion that he should come with something himself. Brilliantly obtuse. [palm]

Are you bias, in my opinion and on this very subject, yes. Is that an insult, no sir. You wanna talk about bias, ask me about Barry Sanders. [rockon]

I gave my opinion and my reasons and if your'e going to ignore what I've stated already, then responding to you is basically ... 😣

yooperfan
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#83

If you are going by numbers, Romo has Rodgers beat for having a better quarterback season.

Oh, you say Romo is more efficient only because of his running back who racked up 1,800 yards rushing with 13 touchdowns?

What about Rodgers running back who had over 1,100 yards rushing and scored 13 touchdowns as well? What about the two receivers who caught over 90 passes with over 1,200 yards and each caught at least 12 touchdowns?

No, I do not want a Cowboys player to get any award over a Packers player, but when if are objective, --- which these awards are NOT (which is the point of this whole thread-thanks for noticing) --- Romo has actually been the most efficient QB this regular season. However, in my opinion, J.J. Watt is the most deserving of the Most Valuable Player award at a position the NFL deems (predicating that by the rules) is not that valuable.

Yes, Aaron Rodgers will win it.
Yes, Romo has had the better season statistically.
Yes, Watt is whom has most earned the award.

Romo will not win it because of his past failures, and that is wrong. Watt will not win it because everyone and their unborn grandchildren know QB is head and shoulders the most important position in the NFL, regardless of his insanely great season.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Watt! Watt!
That's heresy.
You should be banned from posting on this forum!😆 😆 😆

beast
Select Member

10 years ago

#84

Romo will not win it because of his past failures

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Romo will not win it because he's not the MVP of his own team... and if you're not the MVP of your own team, then you can't be the NFL MVP.

I think in 2001, QB Kurt Warner won the MVP when it was said Marshall Faulk was the MVP of that offense that year, but that was close to being a tie between the two and QB spot (maybe unrightfully) got Warner over.

But Tony Romo and DeMarco Murray aren't closed to tied... maybe on paper they are but watching the season it looked like the running game lead the team and the running game opened up the passing game. Murray should get more MVP votes than Romo and that's why Romo shouldn't win it.

I think the bigger question is why are some focused on Romo instead of the Cowboys MVP Demarco Murray for NFL MVP?

A RB won it just two years ago... a RB could do it again.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#85

Tony Romo is absolutely the MVP of his team, come on now, lol. You remove him and they are 8 - 8 at best. Again, the quarterback position is over important due to the rules. You put Brandon Weeden in there and you're going to see 10 man box and that will stop DeMarco Murray.

I came across this stat and wanted to share it. Aaron Rodgers has thrown 7.2 deep-ball TDs for every pick, a rate twice that of the next quarterback on the list,Tony Romo. That is insane crazy awesome, yes?

earthquake
Member

10 years ago

#86

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/17229/going-deep-with-packers-qb-aaron-rodgers

It states that Rodgers is basically the best in the league when it comes to the deep ball over the past few years, with Brees second.

blank

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

#87

Originally Posted by: beast

I'm not going to say Murray is over rated because he is a great RB but he does not stand out above the crowd as much as some people think he does. They look at his yardage total and the fact he had almost 500 yards more than the next RB and think WOW dominating at his position. Yes he had 1800 yards this season but he had almost 400 carries. The only other back to have over 300 carries was McCoy and he was still 80 carries behind. The third (Bell) and 4th (Lynch) both had more than 100 fewer carries than Murray and they had the same average. Give these guys 100 more carries and who knows maybe Murray finishes third in yards. Obviously the number of carries he gets is not Murray's fault and I am certainly not down grading him for it but several other backs have been just as productive with the chances they got. The cowboys leaned on Murray and he came through but IMO Murray should not be in the conversation as NFL MVP. Romo, I could see, I don't agree but I can see it.

gbguy20
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#88

I'm still trying to figure out how someone can compare Romo's and Rodgers' stats and conclude that Romo had the better season.

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

#89

I'm still trying to figure out how someone can compare Romo's and Rodgers' stats and conclude that Romo had the better season.

Originally Posted by: gbguy20

Part of it is because he had a higher average per attempt and a higher QB rating. He also had a higher completion percentage and his TD/INT rate would be best in the league if not for Rodgers phenomenal rate.

Looking at pure numbers no it may not seem close but when you have a team that throws the ball a quite a bit less than the other you would expect their overall passing numbers to be less.

If you want to give an award for the best stats period that is fine and in that case it is relatively easy to say this guy is much better than that guy but if you want to look at effectiveness it gets a lot closer.

Case in point no one would argue the Matt Stafford is a better QB then Rodgers but in the past he has put up much better stats in certain categories. Does better stats automatically mean better year? I don't think so.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#90

Didn't feel like starting a new thread but here's what I think will happen, although I would like J.J. Watt to win MVP.

MVP - Aaron Rodgers
D-MVP - J.J. Watts
O-MVP - Marshawn Lynch

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Martha Careful (3h) : meh

Zero2Cool (7h) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (7h) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (7h) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (10h) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (10h) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (13h) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (13h) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24