Barfarn
8 years ago

This displays a common irrational bias towards performance in the fourth quarter.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



WOW! It's not a "confirmation irrational bias"...It's the reality of playing a 60 minute game against a human opponent.

In the first 2.5 quarters in Seattle champ game The O built a 16 point lead; Seattle in the last 1.5 Quarters to react to that deficit. Had the O had built that lead from middle of 2nd Q to end of 4th, it would have been impossible Seattle to react to the deficit.

Every week teams come back from 14 point deficits in 1st Q; rarely are 14 pt deficits made up in the 4th Q.

Closers dont make more money than middle relievers in baseball because 30 baseball GMs have a confirmation irrational bias of getting the final 3 outs in a game.

The play at the end of the game is ALWAYS more important than the play in the beginning....ALWAYS!
Barfarn
8 years ago

If you paid any attention to my body of posts, I put conscious effort into giving due criticism whenever I'm "defending" Rodgers, or any other aspect of the team. You clearly have an obsession with Aaron Rodgers and take every opportunity possible to blame him for a situation. Yes I was being facetious, but my point was that you're coming off as if this is a very emotional or personal issue for you, as your blame and rage is singularly focused on one player.
....
My main point is, blaming complex situations on a 53 man football team in the NFL where every week we play someone new with different coaches and officiating on a single player is positively ridiculous.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



I read your posts much more carefully than you read mine. Just because we disagree does mean I'm acting with an "emotional personal rage."

I predicted Rodgers would play well in Atl and my comments are his overall play are POSITIVE. But that is not what this thread is about, it is about whether Mike can "seal the deal." My argument is Mike can seal the deal, the problem is his QB and then I EMPIRICALLY support my argument.

I describe errors by Allison and Tretter that assisted in ending the first 2 2nd half drives, doesn't sound like an emotional rage to me.

I state Rodgers absolutely choked on the last drive; again not an ad hominem attack, it's an empirical scholarly judgment. I lay out each play to support my argument; but rather than address the plays, or my conclusion from the plays, you call me irrational, emotional, raging, personal. I assure you there is no "rage" against Rodgers. And if you make a good argument I will listen and change my mind. But, you dont make a counter argument because you know you cant; but also you cant psychologically come to grips with Rodgers sucking at times; so you resort to an ad hominem logic error.

I said Rodgers is a bad teammate and he's scarred of pass rush and that affects his ability to "seal the deal. And again I provide an empirical argument to support that position. If you disagree then address the argument.

Trying to get some of you to get off your statistical biases, like the D giving up 32 points means they sucked or if Rodgers gets 300 yards means he played great. Sure, usually that is the case, but not all the time. Our coverage and pass rush was quite good, just about every play we had 4 rushers pushing their guys back into Ryan's lap and DBs within a yard of the receivers. Better coverage or guys rushing harder wouldn't have changed a thing because Ryan was unreal. So who had to play better for the win, the D, Nelson, Adams, Jackson? of course not, there is only one possible answer: Rodgers needed to play really well not in 6 of 9 drives; but in at least 7 of 9. And to win 3-4 PO games in a row, he needs to "seal the deal" more consistently. 6 of 9 might work in 1 or 2 games, but not in 3 or 4 in a row.
DoddPower
8 years ago

Trying to get some of you to get off your statistical biases, like the D giving up 32 points means they sucked or if Rodgers gets 300 yards means he played great.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



I'm confused, where are people saying that Rodgers played "great" because he "gets" 300 yards? I have read some posts (including my own) that said he played good enough to win. That's a long shot from "great." He did play well; of course he could have played better. I'm sure he wishes he did and I'm sure he tried his best. The point is that if the rest of the Packers played equally as well as Rodgers, the outcome of this game would have been much different. But it's the same old song and dance with the Packers. If Rodgers doesn't truly play "great" or dominate a game, the Packers are very unlikely to beat a good-to-great team with a franchise QB. It doesn't have to be that way, but I don't see that changing any time soon.

Zero2Cool
8 years ago
I believe Mike has been married twice, therefore, he most certainly CAN seal the deal.
TheKanataThrilla
8 years ago

I'm confused, where are people saying that Rodgers played "great" because he "gets" 300 yards? I have read some posts (including my own) that said he played good enough to win. That's a long shot from "great." He did play well; of course he could have played better. I'm sure he wishes he did and I'm sure he tried his best. The point is that if the rest of the Packers played equally as well as Rodgers, the outcome of this game would have been much different. But it's the same old song and dance with the Packers. If Rodgers doesn't truly play "great" or dominate a game, the Packers are very unlikely to beat a good-to-great team with a franchise QB. It doesn't have to be that way, but I don't see that changing any time soon.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



I totally agree he played good enough to win, but our D wasn't there. HOWEVER, he still had the chance to put us in a position to pull out the win and did not. He is not a comeback kid and that absolutely sucks.

Zero2Cool
8 years ago
The timeout that was lost because of Jordy Nelson's injury really hurt the Packers trying to go the 50 or so yards to get into field goal range in :31 seconds. Instead of having the middle of the field and sideline available, the defense knew we were going to run out patterns. But hey, let's not take into account FOOTBALL and let's juts blast the Packers, you know, the team we CLAIM to be a fan of.

I wouldn't mind seeing how things would have been if we had at least two of our top three CB's and also Clay Matthews. I wonder if the defense could have stopped the Falcons on that last drive. It just sickening to know we relied on Demetri Goodson as one of the two starting CB's against the NFL's number one scoring offense.



1st and 10 at GB 25
(0:26 - 4th) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass short left to J.Janis ran ob at GB 32 for 7 yards

2nd and 3 at GB 32
(0:20 - 4th) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep left to J.Nelson

(0:20 - 4th) Timeout #2 by GB at 00:20.

3rd and 3 at GB 32
(0:14 - 4th) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to G.Allison (C.Goodwin)

4th and 3 at GB 32
(0:09 - 4th) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep right to D.Adams
Porforis
8 years ago

Trying to get some of you to get off your statistical biases, like the D giving up 32 points means they sucked or if Rodgers gets 300 yards means he played great. Sure, usually that is the case, but not all the time. Our coverage and pass rush was quite good, just about every play we had 4 rushers pushing their guys back into Ryan's lap and DBs within a yard of the receivers. Better coverage or guys rushing harder wouldn't have changed a thing because Ryan was unreal. So who had to play better for the win, the D, Nelson, Adams, Jackson? of course not, there is only one possible answer: Rodgers needed to play really well not in 6 of 9 drives; but in at least 7 of 9. And to win 3-4 PO games in a row, he needs to "seal the deal" more consistently. 6 of 9 might work in 1 or 2 games, but not in 3 or 4 in a row.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



Way to dumb my argument down to "32 BAD. 300 GOOD. GRUNT GRUNT" when I spend an inordinate amount of time and effort to assign blame across the board and describe these problems as complex. Okay buddy.
DoddPower
8 years ago

I totally agree he played good enough to win, but our D wasn't there. HOWEVER, he still had the chance to put us in a position to pull out the win and did not. He is not a comeback kid and that absolutely sucks.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 



He had like 30 seconds and two timeouts to drive for a field goal, and lost one timeout on an injury. That's asking a lot. It's more reasonable to ask the defense to play a little better than to ask Aaron Rodgers to constantly bail them out and generate some heroics. Mike Daniels said it well. The Packers scored enough points to win. None of those points were scored by the defense. Aaron Rodgers played well enough for the Packers to win. The Packers defense has to be better against franchise QBs, or they will never win another Super Bowl under this administration.
Barfarn
8 years ago

Way to dumb my argument down to "32 BAD. 300 GOOD. GRUNT GRUNT" when I spend an inordinate amount of time and effort to assign blame across the board and describe these problems as complex. Okay buddy.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



Sometimes if a team loses, there is no one person responsible, because as Captain Obvious would say when a team loses there is ALWAYS a combination of things that many players did wrong.

But, when we say Player X cost us the game, we are saying that BUT FOR his failure to perform up to his contractual value X’s team would have won. To analyze this, you dont assign blame across the board, you evaluate each play, counting the number of plays a player sabotaged and the affect/timing of those sabotages. Yes Randall failed to follow Fitz across the middle, so an argument could be made he cost us the AZ game; something that could not be said if it occurred in the 1st Q or if someone else screwed up in a way that caused us not to win in regulation.

Let’s use an example less emotionally charged for Packer fans. Bears beat Vikes because the OTs sucked. Sure Bradford missed a TD and a few other throws, yes the D gave up 20; but had the OTs been serviceable, Minny would have won. And actually if the OTs did their job, I bet Bradford doesn’t miss all those throws and the D doesn’t give up 20. Norv Turner quit because he knew he could not execute his offense once the trade deadline passed.

Did the OTs do some things correctly? Of course they did, each actually successfully blocked a lot more than they failed. So do we look at the 60-65% of the plays where they did their job and say, get off their case? Of course not, given their contract/draft capital status they should have performed on at least 90% of plays.

Now, if we apply these very principles to Rodgers’ play in Atl; then you’ll be in the proper position of understanding. Ask what % of plays can we afford our 22M QB to screw up before it costs us a game; in Atl Rodgers hit that mark! Other guys did do things wrong; but only 1 name fills in this blank:
Had _____________ performed up to his contractual value, GB would have “sealed the deal” v. Atl.
Porforis
8 years ago

Let’s use an example less emotionally charged for Packer fans. Bears beat Vikes because the OTs sucked. Sure Bradford missed a TD and a few other throws, yes the D gave up 20; but had the OTs been serviceable, Minny would have won. And actually if the OTs did their job, I bet Bradford doesn’t miss all those throws and the D doesn’t give up 20. Norv Turner quit because he knew he could not execute his offense once the trade deadline passed.

Did the OTs do some things correctly? Of course they did, each actually successfully blocked a lot more than they failed. So do we look at the 60-65% of the plays where they did their job and say, get off their case? Of course not, given their contract/draft capital status they should have performed on at least 90% of plays.

Now, if we apply these very principles to Rodgers’ play in Atl; then you’ll be in the proper position of understanding. Ask what % of plays can we afford our 22M QB to screw up before it costs us a game; in Atl Rodgers hit that mark! Other guys did do things wrong; but only 1 name fills in this blank:
Had _____________ performed up to his contractual value, GB would have “sealed the deal” v. Atl.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



I'm not applying different standards out of some sort of emotional connection to the Packers. Your logic is so laughably easily used to counter your own conclusion I'm not even sure how to approach this.

Bears beat Vikes because the the defense sucked. Sure Bradford missed a TD and a few other throws, yes the OTs suck and put the D in a position to win; but had the defense been serviceable, Minny would have won. And actually if the defense did their job, I bet Bradford scores more points because they get better field position and are controlling the clock.

Now, I'm not pretending there's different degrees of blame. Yes, the OL shoulders more blame than any one component of the team. But yet again, you're laser focused on ONE person who you choose to assign all the blame on. Sure, when people repeatedly hammer you for it you'll give a "Yeah I suppose other people could have played better but RODGERS RODGERS RODGERS". Are you one of those guys that complains about legitimately bad calls in the 3rd quarter and say it cost your team the game? No, it didn't. Yes, they got screwed. Yes, it probably cost points. But if you want to win in this league you need to be able to get beyond these issues because they happen every single week.

Rogers should have played better which would have made it easier on the defense and his receivers
The RBs should have played better which would have made it easier on Rodgers and the WRs
McCarthy should have called better plays and run the ball more to make it easier on the offense
The offense as a whole should have played better so the defense wasn't on the field as much
The defense should have played better which would have made it easier on the offense

You want to nitpick about percentages? Fine. You want to say it's 80/5/5/5 blame? I don't necessarily agree but I'm not going to not respect your reasoning because of it and I'll be more interested in what you have to say. But yet again, you're fixating on one singular player and in some cases, twisting things to make it appear to be entirely or almost entirely one player's fault when your logic can easily be turned around to counter your own conclusions. I don't get it. You keep going back to his salary every time you start trying to justify why anything that's even partially his fault is entirely his fault. Yes, if you're talking about his value to his team he's relevant. But if you're talking about what makes teams win and lose individual football games, that's not the way that works.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : uh oh
Martha Careful (1-Apr) : Too bad camera's can't spot the ball as well.
Mucky Tundra (1-Apr) : So will the chain gang be gone completely or will they still be around as a backup or whatever?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : The method for measuring first downs in the NFL will switch from chain gangs to camera-based technology in 2025, the league announced.
Martha Careful (1-Apr) : A big step in the right direction. Just put in the college system is very very good.
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : NFL has passed a rule that allows both teams to possess the ball in OT during the regular season
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : Touchbacks on kickoffs will now bring the ball to the 35-yard line.
beast (31-Mar) : It might of gotten more popular recently, but braiding hair (even men) in certain cultures goes back for centuries.
Martha Careful (30-Mar) : Is men braiding their hair a new style thing? Watching the NCAA men's tournament many players have done
Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Ha. Well, it'd be nice for folks to reset their own password. Via validated email 😏
beast (29-Mar) : Monopoly was supposed to be an educational game, that show how evil capitalism was and how we should avoid it
beast (29-Mar) : Lol, I was thinking username would be better, as then I wouldn't have to keep an email up to date lol 😂
beast (29-Mar) : Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
wpr (29-Mar) : sure is
Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Monopoly is a rip off of The Landlord's Game
wpr (27-Mar) : 28 days until the draft
earthquake (27-Mar) : Which seemed strange to my 9 year old self, that you could be a fan for a team other than the one you play for
earthquake (27-Mar) : Nothing eventful happened, other than it being clear that he was a bengals fan
earthquake (27-Mar) : And we went and hung out with him one afternoon, I must have been 9 or so
earthquake (27-Mar) : That’s wild, when I was a kid my friend lived in the same apartment complex in De Pere
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : Only career highspot was a 200 yard rushing game while playing for the Cardinals
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : He is a former Packer. Drafted out of Northern Illinois. Didn't do much in GB.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Despicable
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Former NFL. I think Packers too
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : NFL RB Leshon Johnson has been charged in a massive dog fighting operation, with the FBI seizing over 190 Pit Bulls
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Some real irony of a QB as short as Wilson playing for the Giants
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Giants country, let's be the tall beings of lore!
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Russell Wilson signs with the Giants.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
wpr (25-Mar) : I don't think there is a significant difference. I use a user name for many. Others email.
Martha Careful (25-Mar) : email
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : would it be better to use EMAIL or USERNAME to log into a site?
wpr (25-Mar) : Thanks Zero
Zero2Cool (24-Mar) : New forum has the ability to Thank a post now.
beast (24-Mar) : And the only time they have won the Championship in an even year, was the first time they did, in 2006.
beast (24-Mar) : Since 2007, there have been 10 odd numbered years, Wisconsin Women have won the Championship in 7 of those 10 odd numbered years.
buckeyepackfan (24-Mar) : Congratulations Lady Badger Hockey Team. NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : I don't think it's completed yet. it was just announced last month, right?
dhazer (23-Mar) : did netflix ever release the Packers documentary
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : And it is glorious!
beast (21-Mar) : Unsigned FA QB Rodgers is supposedly in the Steelers building
Martha Careful (19-Mar) : But I don't own a car! So can I still use it in my apartment?
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : btw, new site auto updates
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : Woohoo!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / dfosterf

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

25-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

24-Mar / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

24-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

21-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.