Cheese Curds - News Around The League 2022

[Yoop]

I posted last spring the data of SB teams (conference champs) the last 20 years and what they have in common.

It showed that SB teams usually had a top 5 unit, either offense or defense and the other side of the ball was generally top 10 but occasionally top 15 unit.

Top offenses had more cushion for the defense to be top 15 whereas top defenses generally needed closer to a top 10 offense and especially a good STs unit. However, more SB teams had top 3 defenses than top 3 offenses...meaning top 3 offenses didn't make the big game as often as a top 3 defense did.

The overwhelming theme was SB teams didn't have a liability. Usually the other side wasn't lower than top 15 in any of the categories.

that could be, being good on both sides of the ball obviously is the goal, but that article I brought in the other thread shows that in the last 3 or 4 years the best defenses in the league didn't even make it past the WC round, couple that with the resources used to produce those defenses, and it went to waste.

just look what we've spent to get what we have this year, defense is to inconsistent to rely on year to year, and our team is a great example of that, and actually our team is sorta the norm, one year to the next is almost impossible to predict concerning defense.

Interestingly to me at least, the 1996 Packers D was ranked #1. And the 2010 Packers D was ranked #2. The 1997 Packers D was ranked #5 (Denver's 1997 Defense was ranked #6).

yet Denver ran over that #5 rated Packer defense, didn't Davis have over 100 yrds? I can't remember ( I'll have to go look it up now) but neither defense held the score below 20 pts

I realize we have to spend to have the best defense possible, thing is there are few defenses that can hold any offense to under 20 pts and offenses average more then that.

yep, Davis ran for 157 yrds with 3 TD's, our defense couldn't make a goal line stand, 3, 1 yrd TD's

[Raptorman]

Is that your way of telling us you don’t think the Vikings have a chance?


SF and Buffalo, the Super Bowl in the 90’s we all wanted but never got.

Well, unless our defense steps up...........not a chance. Also, if Green Bay ever had another good defense.............But then people think it was all Brady in New England.

NO PEOPLE DONT, NE's defenses where very good, but so was Brady.

and the Vikes are where they are this season mostly do to very good offense, and the Niners have been winning because of there offense, your idea that your team can't dance because the defense isn't as good as it use to be is false, offense wins more trophy's then defense ever has, offenses rely on defense to hold a lead and they fail miserably at it, often the last team to have the ball goes home with the Lombardi, and thats because the last team to score beats that defense.
and please spare me the stats that the winning teams hold opponents to less then 20 points a game, or 17 pts, or whatever it is, I respect those numbers, thats great, but minus the offense those numbers don't mean much

Compare Brady's wins to Rodger's based on how many points per game the team gave up. I think you might get a different opinion of the so-called GOAT. FWIW, I think Rodgers is the better of the two. Let's just say if Rodgers had Brady's defense the last 15 years, the Packers would have at least 4 more trophies if not 5. Remember the Defense Rodgers had when they won the Super Bowl? Brady had that almost every year in New England.

You should also take a good look at how Lombardi's Packers won. It's a easy to win when your defense is only giving up 12 ppg. Or whatever it was.

[Raptorman]

To give you an idea of what Brady had that Rodgers didn't. This is the top 9 defenses Brady had in New England, With the 2010 Packers thrown in for comparison.

Code: Select all

                                                                                           PF    PA  
2019	NFL	New England Patriots*	12	4	0	1st of 4	Lost WC    420	225	195	Belichick	Brady
2006	NFL	New England Patriots*	12	4	0	1st of 4	Lst Cf     385	237	148	Belichick	Brady
2003	NFL	New England Patriots*	14	2	0	1st of 4	Won SB     348	238	110	Belichick	Brady
2010	NFL	Green Bay Packers*	10	6	0	2nd of 4	Won SB     388	240	148	McCarthy	Rodgers
2016	NFL	New England Patriots*	14	2	0	1st of 4	Won SB     441	250	191	Belichick	Brady
2004	NFL	New England Patriots*	14	2	0	1st of 4	Won SB     437	260	177	Belichick	Brady
2001	NFL	New England Patriots*	11	5	0	1st of 5	Won SB     371	272	99	Belichick	Brady
2007	NFL	New England Patriots*	16	0	0	1st of 4	Lost SB    589	274	315	Belichick	Brady
2009	NFL	New England Patriots*	10	6	0	1st of 4	Lost WC    427	285	142	Belichick	Brady
2017	NFL	New England Patriots*	13	3	0	1st of 4	Lost SB    458	296	162	Belichick	Brady

[Scott4Pack]

We could have that chat, Raptor, about what Brady does better than Rodgers and vice versa.

Brady is “steady Eddie” almost all the time. He reads defenses as well as anybody, including Rodgers. So he has an advantage in what to do with the ball that other QBs don’t have. But he doesn’t do physically outstanding plays. He is the epitome of steadiness. And for a very long time.

Rodgers is likely the best thrower of a deep pass ever. But he doesn’t do much for inspiring his teammates perhaps. He WANTS to deviate from steadiness so that he can make more impact plays.

We could celebrate much or gripe about some things from both. In a sense, they are equally good/great. But I think that is so because both, in their own ways, have performed with excellence for a long duration of time. If Brady gets the edge over Rodgers it’s because his teams have been to and won so many Super Bowls. If Brady doesn’t get that edge over Rodgers, funny enough, it might be because his teams have LOST so many Super Bowls, but not because Rodgers has won a number of them. Kind of a funny argument.

This argument will never be settled.

[Labrev]

I don't care what the stats say, if you can't see the way that Brady comes through and makes the play on O when his team needs it most, then I am very sorry for you.

Defense put him in good position plenty if times sure, but in the end it was up to him and his side of the ball to come through on many occasions, and he was hands-frickin-down the best at QB to consistently come through in all those situations. This whole "nah bro it's just the defense"-thing is nothing but Copium at this point.

In truth I would say it was not even Brady + "good defenses." It was: ... GOAT QB + GOAT (D-minded) HC. Period, end of convo.

[Raptorman]

I don't care what the stats say, if you can't see the way that Brady comes through and makes the play on O when his team needs it most, then I am very sorry for you.

Defense put him in good position plenty if times sure, but in the end it was up to him and his side of the ball to come through on many occasions, and he was hands-frickin-down the best at QB to consistently come through in all those situations. This whole "nah bro it's just the defense"-thing is nothing but Copium at this point.

In truth I would say it was not even Brady + "good defenses." It was: ... GOAT QB + GOAT (D-minded) HC. Period, end of convo.

Yeah, keep believing that.

Games, Game winning Drives, and percentage of games with GWDs

Code: Select all

Player	Games	GW drives	
Brady	331	56	17%
Cousins	134	27	20%
Rodgers	219	30	14%

Do you know how to beat Brady? Score more than 33 points. He sucks at winning when you score more than 33 points against him. He becomes shall we say, pedestrian. 80% of all his wins in NE his defense gave up less than 18 ppg. But he's the GOAT. &%$@, Brady didn't do anything Brock Purdy isn't doing in San Fran right now.

[Pckfn23]

Every QB sucks at winning when the other team scores 33+... I would also believe most QBs have a large percentage of their wins against a team that scored less than 18...

You both are arguing different sides of the same coin...

Although Raptor that last sentence is asinine in the extreme.

[Pckfn23]

Why do you have Brady as games played and Cousins as games started? Also GWDs include playoffs, FYI.

[Raptorman]

Why do you have Brady as games played and Cousins as games started? Also GWDs include playoffs, FYI.

So that would make Brady's numbers even worse.

I did it in a hurru.

[Yoop]

Why do you have Brady as games played and Cousins as games started? Also GWDs include playoffs, FYI.

So that would make Brady's numbers even worse.

I did it in a hurru.

your team just demonstrated that once a offense figures out the weak spots of a defense it's off to the races.

as to Brady and Rodgers, for most of there careers they played in completely different systems, we featured WR's and deep passing, they featured TE's and slot receivers, Rodgers was a great deep passer, while Brady was excellent with up tempo, both of these QB's are/where great, and capable of performing well in any scheme.

of course having a great defense would help any offense, but Brady would have excelled just as Rodgers has without one, He just wouldn't have one as many games.

[NCF]

your team just demonstrated that once a offense figures out the weak spots of a defense it's off to the races.

And there are so many examples of that... right?

[Yoop]

your team just demonstrated that once a offense figures out the weak spots of a defense it's off to the races.

And there are so many examples of that... right?

yes the list is endless, obviously not to the record setting example of last nights Vikes come back rally, but we see multiple games each week where offenses find or create plays to take advantage of weak defensive positions, target those positions and win games, heck we've been watching it happen to us all season.

Even very good defenses will get blown out if the offense schemes up something they can't adjust to stop in a given time frame, we see that happen as well.

[Labrev]

I don't care what the stats say, if you can't see the way that Brady comes through and makes the play on O when his team needs it most, then I am very sorry for you.

Defense put him in good position plenty if times sure, but in the end it was up to him and his side of the ball to come through on many occasions, and he was hands-frickin-down the best at QB to consistently come through in all those situations. This whole "nah bro it's just the defense"-thing is nothing but Copium at this point.

In truth I would say it was not even Brady + "good defenses." It was: ... GOAT QB + GOAT (D-minded) HC. Period, end of convo.

Yeah, keep believing that.

Games, Game winning Drives, and percentage of games with GWDs

Code: Select all

Player	Games	GW drives	
Brady	331	56	17%
Cousins	134	27	20%
Rodgers	219	30	14%

You can't just straight up divide game-winning drives by games played that only works if the opportunity presents itself in each game for the QB to *lead* a game-winning drive.

Hazarding a guess, Brady's percentage (using your defective methodology) is probably lower because he didn't NEED to win on the last drive as often....

LOL REPTAR!

Do you know how to beat Brady? Score more than 33 points. He sucks at winning when you score more than 33 points against him.

Ah right, just score 34 points or more against an NFL team (coached by Belichick, no less)—piece of cake!

Patriots Dynasty wasn't simply the work of GOAT QB, it was the work the GOAT Head Coach, Belichick, who kept games within reach, and Brady, who was (yes) the GOAT at delivering points in the most high-stakes situational football.

You're not scoring 34 or more on Belichick. You can still beat the Brady-Belichick Patriots, you just need to play smart, sound football to win. See: Green Bay v. New England 2014 (won without scoring 33+).

But he's the GOAT. &%$@, Brady didn't do anything Brock Purdy isn't doing in San Fran right now.

Brady = Purdy ... this $%@# guy.

[Labrev]

Reminds me of this gold mine:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=931&p=86721

[Scott4Pack]

that could be, being good on both sides of the ball obviously is the goal, but that article I brought in the other thread shows that in the last 3 or 4 years the best defenses in the league didn't even make it past the WC round, couple that with the resources used to produce those defenses, and it went to waste.

just look what we've spent to get what we have this year, defense is to inconsistent to rely on year to year, and our team is a great example of that, and actually our team is sorta the norm, one year to the next is almost impossible to predict concerning defense.

Interestingly to me at least, the 1996 Packers D was ranked #1. And the 2010 Packers D was ranked #2. The 1997 Packers D was ranked #5 (Denver's 1997 Defense was ranked #6).

yet Denver ran over that #5 rated Packer defense, didn't Davis have over 100 yrds? I can't remember ( I'll have to go look it up now) but neither defense held the score below 20 pts

I realize we have to spend to have the best defense possible, thing is there are few defenses that can hold any offense to under 20 pts and offenses average more then that.

yep, Davis ran for 157 yrds with 3 TD's, our defense couldn't make a goal line stand, 3, 1 yrd TD's

Correct. The Packers had no answer for Davis. He literally controlled the game, more than Elway. And we couldn’t score enough to keep up.

[NCF]

[Ghost_Lombardi]

The betting line in DAL v PHI moved 3 pts BEFORE it was public knowledge that Hurts had any injury whatsoever.

[BF004]

The betting line in DAL v PHI moved 3 pts BEFORE it was public knowledge that Hurts had any injury whatsoever.

[Labrev]

So Stafford was asked on his wife's podcast if he will retire, and his answer was a firm "No."

[Realist]

So Stafford was asked on his wife's podcast if he will retire, and his answer was a firm "No."

Not many men listen to Mrs Staffords podcast so that is info that I did not know. Any other nuggets?