I have to lead with your final point because it kind of highlights just how little of a leg you stand on, and for someone that likes to nitpick about logical fallacies, you seem to make a ton of them yourself and seem to love warping the facts around your opinion rather than using them to form a coherent argument with a basis in reality versus your feelings.
Fourth, Rodgers QBR over the last 4 years is 60.7 minus his play 2nd half of '16 [63.1 including it]. Cutler's QBR was better in his prime. This really pisses me off, because Rodgers is 1000x better than Cutler any day; as long as he feels like playing great.
Originally Posted by: Barfarn
Could you cherry pick statistics any more than you did right here? You choose QBR (not to be confused with the much more widely used quarterback rating), choose an arbitrary timeframe that happens to provide the data you're looking for with no statistical or logical value and compare it to the best of Cutler's career as if it means something. And use an undefined term like "in his prime" to further erode any value in your statement. What specific timeframe of Cutler's career are you referring to and why was he in his prime at that time?
If we compared apples to apples here, and since you seem to like QBR for some reason I'll bite and use that - For any continuous timeframe from 1 year to 3 wherein the QB was a starter, comparing Rodgers best or worst QBR over that period to Cutler's best or worst, Rodgers always comes out way ahead. In the interest of not spending an hour on this, I didn't go further but if you'd like to accuse me of cherry picking data, go ahead and prove me wrong.
Best - Rodgers/Cutler (average/year)
1 - 84.5/70.9
2 - 77.85/64.75
3 - 74.97/60.87
Worst - Rodgers/Cutler (average/year)
1 - 54.4/23.2
2 - 59.4/34.4
3 - 64.2/42.9
And just in case you object to my methodology, here's for seasons of 10+ games started since there's way more outliers in seasons where the QB didn't start the vast majority of the games for obvious reasons:
1 - 54.4/45.6
2 - 67.05/50.7
3 - 68.1/55
So basically, Rodgers at his best has consistently had at least a +13.1 QBR over Cutler's best, and at his worst, has had at least +8.8 QBR over Cutler's worst. And as I'll get into below, Cutler's not as horrible as you seem to be making him out to be.
Asserting Rodgers is elite because of one elite performance is a logical error identified as "proof by example." Com'mon man, even in delirium we gotta process like adults: Cutler had some great games too; but he still sucked, we all agree on that, right?
Originally Posted by: Barfarn
Not really, he was average. Just because he sucked overall against the Packers doesn't mean he sucked - Career passer rating of 85.3 (Just shy of Brett Favre's 86.0), 227 TDs to 160 INTs at a 1.42 ratio (Again, not that far short of Brett Favre at 508/336, 1.51 ratio). His skills and stats were above average, where he was below average is in taking charge of games, and while there's tons of factors involved in this both with Cutler and the rest of his team, where he's below average is his win-loss record of 74-79.
Second, when the Baldwin article came out. What the hell did you think would happen? LOL. Of course this prick is going to have to prove Baldwin wrong. So instead of playing like Rodgers of old; he plays the highlight hero bitch, and probably comes on these websites to masturbate to the singing of his sycophants. This performance on one hand gave me some wood, so many magical throws and a solid win, it's exhilarating. But it pisses me off, because it once again confirms that Rodgers still has it, his problem is not age. His problem is he's just an uncoachable its-about-me asshat between the ears.
Originally Posted by: Barfarn
For someone that likes pointing out logical fallacies, you sure seem to make a lot of them. This is called confirmation bias - you've convinced yourself that Rodgers is a stubborn mule who is happy to take the team down with him unless the coach treats him like a god and lets him do whatever he wants. But is so sensitive to criticism - but only in the media, not from his coach or the locker room, and then again only certain select articles such as this one and not the 10,000 others that are written all season long for some reason - that he goes ahead and decides to prove people wrong and throws a 153.8 game.
Why did he only care about this article? Media personalities have been saying stuff like this for years. It was all over the place a couple years ago, and Rodgers didn't react like this. Why is this article special? How do you get your staggering insight into Rodger's psyche?
Third, I posted a while back here blaming the fans for Rodgers's suck. His reaction to Baldwin's article evidences that if GB fandom shunned his statistical performance and collectively criticized his bad decision making; we'd get performances like this week after week. But, the GB fan-dumb is what it is, so we all must suffer. Please endeavor to separate from the fan-dumb even if winning with grace is especially challenging 😂.
Originally Posted by: Barfarn
Again, why is Baldwin's article special? People write critical articles about him all the time. There've been some doozies by prominent people and most aren't followed up by career performances.