keggerz Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 don't you have some stats to disprove me? Ummm, Mendy had one hell of a 1st half but you don't really think that the Steelers won that game because they ran it when they had to do you? More like they hit the passes when they had to. Mendy 1st half: 17-95 1TD 5.6 YPC and he was running beastly 2nd half 10-26 0 TD 2.6 YPC not exactly what I would call running it when you need to considering that the Steelers let the Jets back into the game...and if you want to back out his final 3 carries in the last series because the Jets "knew" he would be running that would still leave him at 7-21 3.0 YPC in the second half. And fwiw, I never said that Mendy wasn't a very good back, he is and I actually like him...but what I posted before were stats that disproved your statement that the Steelers had a more dominant rushing attack...and fwiw, I was actually shocked at some of the numbers that I dug up on Mendy congrats on the win but just remember that it was the D that scored your last TD that was the difference in the final score Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithjam Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 (edited) Packers = -2.5 Over/Under = 46 Edited January 24, 2011 by smithjam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 More like they hit the passes when they had to. Yeah, all 2 of them For the life of me, I can't figure out why Pitt had a FB in in the 1st half and just gashed the Jets up the middle then did'nt go back to it ONCE in the 2nd half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?s=&a...t&p=3372720 ok so I missed by 1. Thats still enough to ge rich on. ANyhow it is well known around here that the only thing I'm good at is picking superbowls. I've missed twice in my modern era. In my ridiculously uncomplex formula this is a sure thing. Of course you have the elite qb variable since Warner and Manning are the only 2 qbs to ever buck the formula, but at this point in his career Rogers isn't there. He is an incredible talent but I don't believe his individual skill level and surrpunding players can pull it off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 Ummm, Mendy had one hell of a 1st half but you don't really think that the Steelers won that game because they ran it when they had to do you? More like they hit the passes when they had to. Mendy 1st half: 17-95 1TD 5.6 YPC and he was running beastly 2nd half 10-26 0 TD 2.6 YPC not exactly what I would call running it when you need to considering that the Steelers let the Jets back into the game...and if you want to back out his final 3 carries in the last series because the Jets "knew" he would be running that would still leave him at 7-21 3.0 YPC in the second half. And fwiw, I never said that Mendy wasn't a very good back, he is and I actually like him...but what I posted before were stats that disproved your statement that the Steelers had a more dominant rushing attack...and fwiw, I was actually shocked at some of the numbers that I dug up on Mendy congrats on the win but just remember that it was the D that scored your last TD that was the difference in the final score I'm just poking you with a stick. There is no scientific formula that justifies my predictions. I think its because I used to chew on paint chips. But it does work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Yeah, all 2 of them For the life of me, I can't figure out why Pitt had a FB in in the 1st half and just gashed the Jets up the middle then did'nt go back to it ONCE in the 2nd half. yes, but they were big and the last one was really not when you would expect a team, especially one that can run the ball when they have to, to pass the ball...but hey, let me tweak polk for a little bit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 ok so I missed by 1. Thats still enough to ge rich on. I like you too much to comment on that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Living the Dream Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 they are both elusive in different ways. ben is a bigger, stronger qb. rodgers is much more evasive. while he doesn't shuck them off, you aren't going to convince me that rodgers hasn't avoided as many sacks as ben. and while i think ben has grown into being a good qb, i think it is easier to do so with the type of team he was a part of. Why do you think GB won today. do you think it had much to do with Rodgers or the GB defense. Is it also a coincidence GB is where they are today, because they learned to play defense since last yrs first round exit. Granted Ben has always had a great defense, except maybe last yr. But he has made plays that should have put him elite status in the last SB. But because he doesnt put up huge stats, he isnt given the credit he is due. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 they are both elusive in different ways. ben is a bigger, stronger qb. rodgers is much more evasive. while he doesn't shuck them off, you aren't going to convince me that rodgers hasn't avoided as many sacks as ben. and while i think ben has grown into being a good qb, i think it is easier to do so with the type of team he was a part of. Let me try to explain y thoughts a dab better. Rogers is really good at scrambling out of the pocket when things break down. When Rogers run he is very good and throws accuratly from the run. BUT because of this and like every other qb I've ever watched in the nfl there is a loss of what I will call "potential pass time" (PPT). Ben is able to use all of the PPT. Rogers has to give up on the play maybe 1/2 to 1 second earlier than Ben to be effective at scrambling. Ben is able to use all of the PPT in the pocket and then sprint out. This is the edge in extending plays and what separates him imo. As far as surrounding talent you will have to go to great lengths to convince me that Ben has always has superiror talent of O. DOn't forget their last win featured the now unemployed WIllie Parker and a turbull oline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Living the Dream Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Ummm, Mendy had one hell of a 1st half but you don't really think that the Steelers won that game because they ran it when they had to do you? More like they hit the passes when they had to. Mendy 1st half: 17-95 1TD 5.6 YPC and he was running beastly 2nd half 10-26 0 TD 2.6 YPC not exactly what I would call running it when you need to considering that the Steelers let the Jets back into the game...and if you want to back out his final 3 carries in the last series because the Jets "knew" he would be running that would still leave him at 7-21 3.0 YPC in the second half. And fwiw, I never said that Mendy wasn't a very good back, he is and I actually like him...but what I posted before were stats that disproved your statement that the Steelers had a more dominant rushing attack...and fwiw, I was actually shocked at some of the numbers that I dug up on Mendy congrats on the win but just remember that it was the D that scored your last TD that was the difference in the final score With the strength of the NYJ defense, it makes sense to use the run, to set up the pass. Pitt did that. And this could happen again in their next game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 Why do you think GB won today. do you think it had much to do with Rodgers or the GB defense. Is it also a coincidence GB is where they are today, because they learned to play defense since last yrs first round exit. Granted Ben has always had a great defense, except maybe last yr. But he has made plays that should have put him elite status in the last SB. But because he doesnt put up huge stats, he isnt given the credit he is due. fwiw I am horrible at picking winners in games like the nfc title game. Unless one team employs the "I" my philosophy is a little shaky. I picked the pack today because they have a more dynamic offense overall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 I like you too much to comment on that! lol, and I rarely gamble and NEVER on the spread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bier Meister Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Why do you think GB won today. do you think it had much to do with Rodgers or the GB defense. Is it also a coincidence GB is where they are today, because they learned to play defense since last yrs first round exit. Granted Ben has always had a great defense, except maybe last yr. But he has made plays that should have put him elite status in the last SB. But because he doesnt put up huge stats, he isnt given the credit he is due. you may have missed some of what i wrote. i believe that, like brady in many ways, his situation more than talent led to his early success. excellent d/st and a strong rush attack alleviates a lot of pressures at the position of qb. gb has a very good defense (tried to get them when i could in leagues this year), but no rushing attack (or at least not one that dc's are worried much about). so believe today's win had to do with rodgers and the defense. if we look at pit's win, i believe it lies more with defense and mendy. you love to look at rings. i don't think that you can ignore that in ben's 1st sb (vs sea), pit won in spite of ben rather than because of him. Let me try to explain y thoughts a dab better. Rogers is really good at scrambling out of the pocket when things break down. When Rogers run he is very good and throws accuratly from the run. BUT because of this and like every other qb I've ever watched in the nfl there is a loss of what I will call "potential pass time" (PPT). Ben is able to use all of the PPT. Rogers has to give up on the play maybe 1/2 to 1 second earlier than Ben to be effective at scrambling. Ben is able to use all of the PPT in the pocket and then sprint out. This is the edge in extending plays and what separates him imo. As far as surrounding talent you will have to go to great lengths to convince me that Ben has always has superiror talent of O. DOn't forget their last win featured the now unemployed WIllie Parker and a turbull oline. do you think that has anything to do with the defensive schemes against gb and pit? teams tend to have more players in coverage vs gb (there are good lessons to be learned by watching the jets vs indy, and the jets vs nep). rb's have shorter careers for a reason. lose a 1/2 of a step and that can be it. regarding offensive talent...i believe that gb had better wr's, while pit had better rb's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.