Monday, November 24, 2008

First graders aren't the only thing giving me a stomachache.

Enough with the "Will Brett Favre be a better quarterback than Aaron Rodgers if he stayed?" question. It's moot. Flat out. Apples and Oranges.

I know what you're saying. The AFC East is a much tougher division than the NFC North. Favre's completing 70% of his own passes. The Jets have a chance at making the Super Bowl, right? Let me tell you something. There are several reasons why the Jets Packer comparison is moot and we can start with that whole "The AFC East has every team over .500" chestnut.

1. The AFC East has 8 winnable games.

They have a schedule that gives them half a season versus the AFC and NFC West, and while Arizona can be a challenge when Warner has his stride going, and if Denver has their shootout on (which hasn't happened much lately) they can get the duke, if this doesn't give you 6 wins? Your coach should be fired.

On the other hand? The Packers have the AFC and NFC South. The AFC South has two challenges and a third team that's dangerous at home. And the NFC South has been winning most of their winnable games. (Does that mean they are getting fat of the North? Perhaps. But there's only one gimme in the NFC North. Hi Detroit.)

By a comparison of scheduling by opponents records?
Green Bay 65-56
Jets 55-66-1

That's about 80 percentage points. Or a game or two in terms of real value. And both teams have pretty downy end of the season.

2. The Running Game.

Now while Ryan Grant has not been special like last year, he has been highly competent. But in comparison to the Jets? There has not been been much running done. The main guys have got about 4 yards per carry. The Jets? 4.6. And the Jets have 13 scores in comparison to the Packers 9. So what does this mean? The Jets quarterback just needs to be merely competent.

3. The Jets interior is highly superior.

In the back seven and the skill positions? The skill sets are roughly equal. But with the additions of Alan Faneca, Damien Woody, and Kris Jenkins? This team can dominate the ball on both sides of the line. And this means that when Favre is bad Brett? The Jets can still win games.

So what does it all mean? It means if the Packers decided to take Brett back? They would still struggle for consistency. They may be on the right side of .500, but then again? Bad Brett could have cost them versus Seattle or something.

Bye.

9 comments:

Simon said...

Greg Jennings & Donald Driver provide significantly better deep threats than Laveranues and Cotchery.

Bad Brett lost the Jets the Raiders and almost the Chiefs and kept the Bills game close.

Good Brett won the Patriots game.

Andrew said...

What I meant by skill positions?

Jones better than Grant
Richardson better than Hall/Kuhn
QB Push
Driver/Coles push
Jennings better than Cotchery when healthy.
Keller much better than Lee.

alan said...

QB push??????

Do you understand the game of football? Obviously not.

One thing you forgot to mention is that Rodgers came into the season inherited a 13-3 team. Favre inherited a 4-12 team. Rodgers has twice as many losses as last year and Favre has twice as many wins.

Anonymous said...

"One thing you forgot to mention is that Rodgers came into the season inherited a 13-3 team. Favre inherited a 4-12 team. Rodgers has twice as many losses as last year and Favre has twice as many wins."

So does that mean that Pennington is much better than Favre because he inherited a 1-15 team that is now 6-5 whereas Favre has only doubled the wins from last year? Bad point hombre.

Anonymous said...

"One thing you forgot to mention is that Rodgers came into the season inherited a 13-3 team. Favre inherited a 4-12 team. Rodgers has twice as many losses as last year and Favre has twice as many wins."

And under that logic, Matt Cassell is the worst QB in history because he has an infinite amount more losses than the previous year. Why on earth are the Patriots happy with him if your logic holds true?

Andrew said...

Anonymowned.

Andrew said...

But Alan, three other reasons why you're a moron.

1. Clifton has fallen off considerably in 2008. It may be injury, but he has.

2. The young guards have not improved from stopgap into something more.

3. Justin Harrell and Johnny Jolly have not combined to do anything more than jack squat.

It's kind of tough to maintain the lifestyle you're accustomed to when your left tackle's crappy/playing hurt and you cannot stop the run.

Anonymous said...

brett is a 100 times better then rodgers
this year the packers have lost 4 games by 4 or less points.........
in 3 of those 4 games rodgers has thrown a pick to end the game. (JUST LIKE TODAY AGIANST THE PANTHERS)
Rodgers sucks whe the game is on the line brett would all most all ways get the job done.

As PACKERS fans i think "We Want BRETT Back"

Andrew said...

Wow. You're stupid too.

In the Titans game? It was the defensive line that just let the Titans runs over them.

And the Vikings game? Mason Crosby missed a field goal. After Adrian Peterson finished the Packers off.

And as for the Falcons game? Yeah. An interception was key. But let's be honest. He probably should not have played that game.

And you notice how Mike McCarthy couldn't decide straight away whether to kick after he stupidly called a Jon Kuhn run on third down? It's because the defense is in shambles.

And if you want to talk about clutch quarterbackery? Who lost the game versus the Giants last year? Who threw 6 picks versus the Rams in a playoff game? Who lost 4th and 26? Who cost them the needed win versus Buffalo to make the playoffs in 2006?

There are a lot of issues with the Pack. None of them are named Aaron Rodgers.