0-16

Tech Report Fantasy Sports League and general sports discussion.

Moderator: Captain Ned

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:50 am

PRIME1 wrote:Look I don't think he's that bad. I just think Farve would have given GB a better season.

Compare Favre's stats from 2007 to Rodgers' in 2008. Pretty much the exact same. Rodgers was not the reason GB went 6-10.
Being right doesn't matter if no one listens.
Kevin
Administrator
 
Posts: 6592
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:17 pm

The best part of all of this? It is becoming very clear that the Jets' players wanted someone else to be fired; Brett Favre. Here's the thing, NFL players all feel they're on the same level when out on the football field. You're talking a competitive nature nearly unmatched in people you see in everyday life. They don't care if you're a first ballot member to Canton, they care about what you're doing for the team now. Brett Favre was losing games for the Jets' and because of ego, because of records, because of management he would have never been pulled. You think Donovan McNabb being benched was a big deal? Can you imagine the blow back from benching Favre? Hit; it would have made this off season look normal.

That is the biggest issue with having "legendary" players who are past their prime on your team. At some point their name, their legend becomes bigger than your team and holds you back. Favre needs to retire. He needs to do it for himself but more importantly he needs to do it for the Jets' organization and his team mates. It might be tough letting go, but at some point you have to step away. It's clear he won't do this on his own, he's waiting to see who the coach replacement is. That is ego, management will pick a coach to please him without a care for the long term. That. Is. Stupid.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:49 pm

IAmGhostDog wrote:What I know is that Favre had 6 fewer TD's and 9 more INT's than Rodgers.

Rodg had better receivers playing against worse teams and still could not lead his team to even a winning record. How long did Rodgers have to learn the GB offense compared to Favre learning the Jets offense?
What I know is that the Jets started 8-3 and were a "lock" for the play offs until Favre led them 1-4 in their last five.

6-10 vs 9-7....hmmmm What was Green Bay's record last year? The Lions even had a better record last year. In fact what was the Jets record last year?
What I think is that Detroit doesn't go 0-16, they win their last game, if Favre was playing for Green Bay.

Yeah because the last time Detroit beat Farve in GB was 1991 :roll:
What I know is that now Favre can jerk around the Jets as to whether he's coming coming back like he did to the Packers for all those years.

While Rodgers plays hurt all next season. 6-10 may be a bit high for them.

Look, I'm not saying he's that bad a QB. I do agree that the defense fell short this year. I just don't see him as the second coming or even the savior. GB may actually be in for a few rebuilding seasons so we may not know how good of a QB Rodgers is for years. It's really not that big a deal to me.
Image
"Give me a scotch. I'm starving" ~ Tony Stark
PRIME1
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:07 pm
Location: , location

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:06 pm

IAmGhostDog wrote:
PRIME1 wrote:I just think Farve would have given GB a better season.

What I know is that Favre had 6 fewer TD's and 9 more INT's than Rodgers.
What I know is that the Jets started 8-3 and were a "lock" for the play offs until Favre led them 1-4 in their last five.
What I think is that Detroit doesn't go 0-16, they win their last game, if Favre was playing for Green Bay.
What I know is that now Favre can jerk around the Jets as to whether he's coming coming back like he did to the Packers for all those years.


What I know is GB was in the NFC championship last year with the same team. Oh, wait they did change QBs...
License to kill gophers.
MethylONE
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Orlando

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:16 pm

Oh, yes, they had exactly the same team with only one transaction all off-season.

And they're all exactly the same age and played exactly the same teams with the same rosters.

You, sir, are being belligerent.

Yeah because the last time Detroit beat Farve in GB was 1991

Nitpick: Pretty sure he was still in Atlanta in 1991.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21407
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:42 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:Nitpick: Pretty sure he was still in Atlanta in 1991.

He was, so I guess the Lions have never beaten him at home.

played exactly the same teams with the same rosters

True. GB had the benefit of playing a 0-16 Lions team twice this year, while the Jets had to face a playoffs bound Miami twice.
Image
"Give me a scotch. I'm starving" ~ Tony Stark
PRIME1
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:07 pm
Location: , location

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:31 pm

Do you COMPLETELY ignore numbers right in your face like this all the time? Rodgers. Had. A. Good. Year. A great year in fact, if you replaced his name with Favre's on Green Bay with the same defense you'd be singing how the old man still has it but the defense let it down. Your bias is annoying. Face the facts.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Fri Jan 02, 2009 10:24 am

Image
"Give me a scotch. I'm starving" ~ Tony Stark
PRIME1
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:07 pm
Location: , location

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:15 pm

It's just too bad Rodgers doesn't play D, too, so you'd have a legitimate way to blame him for the poor record.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21407
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:55 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:It's just too bad Rodgers doesn't play D, too, so you'd have a legitimate way to blame him for the poor record.

Who said I'm not blaming the D? NO crushed the shizzle outta em.
Image
"Give me a scotch. I'm starving" ~ Tony Stark
PRIME1
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:07 pm
Location: , location

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:32 pm

Well you're saying that Favre would have been so much better than Rodgers as to make the Packers playoff-worthy. For being 6-10 they SOMEHOW managed to outscore their opponents by 30+ points. So I'd say their offense was fine, because when they did win, they were doing so in blow-out fashion. They NEVER scored less than 14, IIRC, and I bet you could count on one hand the number of times they scored less than 20.

edit: nevermind, you can probably read:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/t ... b/2008.htm

They outscored their opponents by 39, not 30, and I was right - they never scored less than 16 and only scored less than 20 4 times. The defense let them down, giving up 24ppg. Even if you take the 51 from the Saints out, you still end up with 22ppg. Bad news, end of story.

Now for something amusing:

In baseball, there's a very good way to figure an expected number of wins that seems to work quite well based on the number of runs scored/against. If we applied PECOTA's pythagorean theorem, you get:

(419^2)/(419^ + 380^2) which is 175561/319961, or an expected winning percentage of .548, or a 9-7 record which is what the Jets had.

The Jets numbers also point to a 9-7 team. 164025/290761 = .564, which also rounds out to 9-7. The Lions SHOULD have been 3-13.

The NFL is a small sample size, though. If they played twice as many games, this would be closer to accurate.

Passer rating is a better indication of who's better than who, and Rodgers posted a 93. Favre hit 81. In team sports, wins are king, but when we're talking about individuals, the bigger deal is individual numbers. And while I said the NFL was all about small sample sizes, but this year is pretty average by Favre's standards. We'll see over time about Rodgers.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21407
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:50 am

Kevin wrote:Instead, he promoted two of Millen's underlings to run the show. Expect more of the same, Lions fans. Sure, much of the coaching staff is gone, but the front office needs to go as well.


This bugs me more then going 0-16.
You might be surprised to hear how many Lions fans I know WANTED 0-16 to happen in hopes there would be a major shakeup. They need someone with experience running the entire show, and empowered to make all changes they want without the Ford's interference. Maybe. Or maybe it's silly to assume there's any hope whatsoever. :-?
FroBozz_Inc
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7303
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 9:35 am
Location: Hockeytown, MI

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:07 pm

Yet you've gotten basically nothing. The coach fired and some of his staff. The owner is the problem for the Lions. Just like Al Davis in Oakland and soon how Jerry Jones is in Dallas.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:54 am

So the Lion's coach is headed to the Bears. :lol:
Image
"Give me a scotch. I'm starving" ~ Tony Stark
PRIME1
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:07 pm
Location: , location

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:17 am

PRIME1 wrote:So the Lion's coach is headed to the Bears. :lol:
It's not like he's going as a head coach. Even if he sucks in that role, he got the job in the first place for being good as an assistant. Probably a good move by the Bears.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15761
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 0-16

Postposted on Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:37 pm

After being forced to watch Bears games most Sundays, I can say this: their D line was much much less than the sum of its parts. They were awful, a new coach can't hurt
YOU CAN RUPTURE SOMEONE'S SPLEEN WITH A WATER BALLOON!!!!
idchafee
His Holy Gerbilness
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 13880
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 8:39 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Previous

Return to TR Sports

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests