Amari Rodgers Training Video

[Yoop]

And the funny thing is: Even if you give MVS a fair treatment, and consider those valid reasons, without stooping to yoop's stat-abusing ways, it's still clear MVS's catch rate and performance was not that of a good player.

smartest thing you've said concerning this topic

[Yoop]

Again. I very strongly believe the number one independent variable explaining the dependent variable (catch rate) is simply the distance the catch point was from the Line of Scrimmage. The deeper the pass, the lower the likelihood of the catch. Especially because we know often when a play is "lost" that Rodgers will just heave it up to MVS with no real hope of it being completed (his version of a throw-away).

can you prove that the long pass is less likely a reception then the 20 yarders or shorter that we see not caught often, I don't think thats significantly true.

also Rodgers didn't just throw up for grab passes to Scantling, he did it with others as well, and often they where completed, again if the route isn't run the same, then Rodgers is left to guess how much to lead the receiver, for god sakes it seems as though I'am talking to grade school kids, ya'all know what I'am saying makes sense, but you refuse to allow me to be right, to funny.

[Pckfn23]

Who cares about the nuances?! Holy hell, that's an important part if you want to know where the catch point should be.

That MVS had a catch rate of just over 52% for 2 of his 4 years does not automatically point to poor route running. There are many factors that go into it including deep routes are harder to complete. There are many valid reasons why MVS had a lower catch rate.

more BS, deep routes are completed just as much if not more then the short routes as long as the receiver consistently runs his routes the same

Absolutely false. Another completely made up Yoop statement.

just go back and look how well Rodgers connected with Nelson, Jones, Jennings Cobb, Adams, the list goes on, it doesn't happen with guys like Scantling because they fail to consistently run those routes, common freaking knowledge to anyone that actually watches games, what radio station do you usually listen to?

Do any one of those guys have a better or same catch rate on deep routes as they do short routes? Nope.

and Scantling only toped the 50% catch rate once, with a 50.3% rate according to ESPN, the other 3 years he hovered around 40%

He caught over 50% of his targets his 1st and 3rs year... he never hovered around 40%, he was never below 46...

you nit pick and ask impossible to answer questions because that is all you got, you refuse to accept what is common knowledge amongst most people connected to the game, it's impossible to build chemistry with a receiver that can't consistently run his routes, because Rodgers never knows how much to lead him or where to throw the ball, and I'd bet plenty that is the situation for why Scantling only touched 50% of targeted throws.

I ask the impossible because you claim the impossible. There are many reasons MVS had close to 50% catch rate.

thats just not simple enough for a complicated person like you to understand, with almost all conversations with you it's the same BS, you resort to twisting the simple comments which are easily understood by most into a argument of terminoligy, yes words do matter, but not to the extremes you make them to be, drops, missed targeted throws, come to one conclusion, Scantling did not catch the pass, thats it, and thats all that really matters, yet here we are 3 pages later arguing over semantics, wtf is wrong with you people?

NFL football is complicated. You can't continue to say one thing and then come back a day later and claim something different. You constantly are doing this.

[go pak go]

Again. I very strongly believe the number one independent variable explaining the dependent variable (catch rate) is simply the distance the catch point was from the Line of Scrimmage. The deeper the pass, the lower the likelihood of the catch. Especially because we know often when a play is "lost" that Rodgers will just heave it up to MVS with no real hope of it being completed (his version of a throw-away).

can you prove that the long pass is less likely a reception then the 20 yarders or shorter that we see not caught often, I don't think thats significantly true.

also Rodgers didn't just throw up for grab passes to Scantling, he did it with others as well, and often they where completed, again if the route isn't run the same, then Rodgers is left to guess how much to lead the receiver, for god sakes it seems as though I'am talking to grade school kids, ya'all know what I'am saying makes sense, but you refuse to allow me to be right, to funny.

I absolutely can show that it is statistically significant that long passes have a lower completion rate than short passes.

But I thought that was common knowledge that didn't need to be proven. I'm not wasting my time and energy doing that.

[YoHoChecko]

Man, this really has meandered through the Packers WR debates of old. Adams' targets, MVS' catch rate....

Yeah, so... anyway, Amari Rodgers was in "horrible" shape last year, weight 216-218, couldn't finish his first conditioning workout with his private trainer, and now is down to 202 and feels physically himself. Plus he's absorbing the playbook and not having to think as much.

Sounds like a really nice offseason workout plan, but also like a really underwhelming conditioning and diet routine entering the NFL. Always interesting to me that these sorts of things come from outside sources rather than strength and conditioning departments in-house.

[Realist]

You people continue to go back and forth with Yoop non stop. What is the end game?

[Yoop]

Again. I very strongly believe the number one independent variable explaining the dependent variable (catch rate) is simply the distance the catch point was from the Line of Scrimmage. The deeper the pass, the lower the likelihood of the catch. Especially because we know often when a play is "lost" that Rodgers will just heave it up to MVS with no real hope of it being completed (his version of a throw-away).

can you prove that the long pass is less likely a reception then the 20 yarders or shorter that we see not caught often, I don't think thats significantly true.

also Rodgers didn't just throw up for grab passes to Scantling, he did it with others as well, and often they where completed, again if the route isn't run the same, then Rodgers is left to guess how much to lead the receiver, for god sakes it seems as though I'am talking to grade school kids, ya'all know what I'am saying makes sense, but you refuse to allow me to be right, to funny.

I absolutely can show that it is statistically significant that long passes have a lower completion rate than short passes.

But I thought that was common knowledge that didn't need to be proven. I'm not wasting my time and energy doing that.

yes probably true for receivers like Scantling, but I have my doubts with guys like Nelson, Jones, or other better receivers.

I sure would like to see stats concerning completion % according to length of pass, till you bring them I'll assume that your full of &%$@.

[go pak go]

Man, this really has meandered through the Packers WR debates of old. Adams' targets, MVS' catch rate....

Yeah, so... anyway, Amari Rodgers was in "horrible" shape last year, weight 216-218, couldn't finish his first conditioning workout with his private trainer, and now is down to 202 and feels physically himself. Plus he's absorbing the playbook and not having to think as much.

Sounds like a really nice offseason workout plan, but also like a really underwhelming conditioning and diet routine entering the NFL. Always interesting to me that these sorts of things come from outside sources rather than strength and conditioning departments in-house.

It's funny because nobody ever admits they are out of shape at the time. Like it was bragged about how physical Rodgers was in the spring/summer 2021. It's always the next year when they have this "new program" and obviously last year was a poor year and anomaly.

Like suddenly Lazard is leaner and faster too. Why wasn't he that for that last three years?

I think a lot of it is just trying different things and finally getting connected with a right person like most things in life. You try, you try again, you try again and sometimes you hit it earlier than others. And sometimes your efforts just don't materialize.

[Yoop]

Time to Android it!

Brandon has been banned for a week

Should have banned myself 2 days ago and I wouldn't have been led down the rabbit hole.

just stop your nonsense, you led yourself exactly where you wanted to go, and blame others for going there, your wagging the tail and you know it.

[YoHoChecko]

you led yourself exactly where you wanted to go, and blame others for going there

Genuine wisdom here. Yoop = Confucius?

[Pckfn23]

Man, this really has meandered through the Packers WR debates of old. Adams' targets, MVS' catch rate....

Yeah, so... anyway, Amari Rodgers was in "horrible" shape last year, weight 216-218, couldn't finish his first conditioning workout with his private trainer, and now is down to 202 and feels physically himself. Plus he's absorbing the playbook and not having to think as much.

Sounds like a really nice offseason workout plan, but also like a really underwhelming conditioning and diet routine entering the NFL. Always interesting to me that these sorts of things come from outside sources rather than strength and conditioning departments in-house.

It's funny because nobody ever admits they are out of shape at the time. Like it was bragged about how physical Rodgers was in the spring/summer 2021. It's always the next year when they have this "new program" and obviously last year was a poor year and anomaly.

Like suddenly Lazard is leaner and faster too. Why wasn't he that for that last three years?

I think a lot of it is just trying different things and finally getting connected with a right person like most things in life. You try, you try again, you try again and sometimes you hit it earlier than others. And sometimes your efforts just don't materialize.

I honestly think they get bad advice from pre-draft advisors.

[Yoop]

Man, this really has meandered through the Packers WR debates of old. Adams' targets, MVS' catch rate....

Yeah, so... anyway, Amari Rodgers was in "horrible" shape last year, weight 216-218, couldn't finish his first conditioning workout with his private trainer, and now is down to 202 and feels physically himself. Plus he's absorbing the playbook and not having to think as much.

Sounds like a really nice offseason workout plan, but also like a really underwhelming conditioning and diet routine entering the NFL. Always interesting to me that these sorts of things come from outside sources rather than strength and conditioning departments in-house.

probably true, but it doesn't explain why Lacy went from stealth 225 or so to 260 lbs two years later, our trainers allowed that to happen, he put on about 10 to 15 lbs his first off season, I would have expected the staff to put him on a strict diet and monitor it.

I also remember reading a article, but can't speak to it's accuracy that the staff wanted Amari to put on a few lbs to handle the rigors of running routes in traffic, so imo the staff in some respect is also culpable.

[Yoop]

you led yourself exactly where you wanted to go, and blame others for going there

Genuine wisdom here. Yoop = Confucius?

it's down right chaotic

[Pckfn23]

Brandon has been banned for a week

Should have banned myself 2 days ago and I wouldn't have been led down the rabbit hole.

just stop your nonsense, you led yourself exactly where you wanted to go, and blame others for going there, your wagging the tail and you know it.

You're right, I did. I shouldn't have. You are wrong so often and fabricate things so often, I should just let it go. Its tough for me not to put those in their place that are so confidently wrong.

[salmar80]

can you prove that the long pass is less likely a reception then the 20 yarders or shorter that we see not caught often, I don't think thats significantly true.

also Rodgers didn't just throw up for grab passes to Scantling, he did it with others as well, and often they where completed, again if the route isn't run the same, then Rodgers is left to guess how much to lead the receiver, for god sakes it seems as though I'am talking to grade school kids, ya'all know what I'am saying makes sense, but you refuse to allow me to be right, to funny.

I absolutely can show that it is statistically significant that long passes have a lower completion rate than short passes.

But I thought that was common knowledge that didn't need to be proven. I'm not wasting my time and energy doing that.

yes probably true for receivers like Scantling, but I have my doubts with guys like Nelson, Jones, or other better receivers.

I sure would like to see stats concerning completion % according to length of pass, till you bring them I'll assume that your full of &%$@.

image.png (25.63 KiB) Viewed 219 times

https://www.thespax.com/nfl/estimating- ... n-the-nfl/

[Labrev]

You people continue to go back and forth with Yoop non stop. What is the end game?

Dunno, folks seem to really want to get through to yoop with something. Personally, I just engage him for my own entertainment, and to appreciate the gems that his wondrous mind conjures up.

[Pckfn23]

I absolutely can show that it is statistically significant that long passes have a lower completion rate than short passes.

But I thought that was common knowledge that didn't need to be proven. I'm not wasting my time and energy doing that.

yes probably true for receivers like Scantling, but I have my doubts with guys like Nelson, Jones, or other better receivers.

I sure would like to see stats concerning completion % according to length of pass, till you bring them I'll assume that your full of &%$@.

image.png

https://www.thespax.com/nfl/estimating- ... n-the-nfl/

[Yoop]

I absolutely can show that it is statistically significant that long passes have a lower completion rate than short passes.

But I thought that was common knowledge that didn't need to be proven. I'm not wasting my time and energy doing that.

yes probably true for receivers like Scantling, but I have my doubts with guys like Nelson, Jones, or other better receivers.

I sure would like to see stats concerning completion % according to length of pass, till you bring them I'll assume that your full of &%$@.

image.png

https://www.thespax.com/nfl/estimating- ... n-the-nfl/

Rodgers is known to be accurate with deep throws when he has quality receivers to throw to, go look at vids of seasons prior to 2016.

I stand corrected, completions go down with deeper throws

[Pckfn23]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/249 ... ep-passers

Even Aaron Rodgers in 2013 & 2014 had a 15 percentage point drop in completion percentage on deep passes. He was historically great, but even that greatness on deep passes does not equal the completion percentage of shorter passes.

His 2020 completion percentage on deep passes was really good too: https://www.nfl.com/_amp/next-gen-stats ... ds-at-no-4

[APB]

I stand corrected...

That's twice now in these past few pages you've typed those words and each time they were regarding the major points you were basing your entire argument off of.

Perhaps there is a lesson to be gleaned from this conversation...?