rajncajn Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 There is asterisks to be made about these stats. Brees and the Saints were open about going for the record and clearly passed more in the past few games. That doesn't take Brees out of the race by any means, but the stats mean more for Aaron Rodgers because they ran their regular gameplan and didn't even play him the last week to pad his stats. That was something the Saints clearly felt they had to do for Brees to get the MVP, whether they admit it or not. I personally think about these 2 MVP candidates in terms of overall success, and I think Rodgers takes it. He has less than half the interceptions and some of the things he was doing have been unprecedented. Watching him master his offense has been beyond impressive. For Brees, I hate to say it's "business as usual." He's damn good. But Rodgers has been untouchable and 15-1. Breakdown of attempts per game for each game during the season by week: 1) 49 2) 37 3) 44 4) 44 5) 45 6) 45 7) 35 8) 44 9) 36 10) 43 11) BYE 12) 38 13) 36 14) 47 15) 40 16) 39 17) 35 That's an average of just over 41.5 attempts per game. Note that only in week 14 did they break that average after the bye in week 11 and that week was a really tight game vs the Titans that the Saints had to come from behind and came down to the wire. Also note that twice after the bye Brees sat in the 4th quarter rather than try to pad his stats in order to break the record. If he'd played all the way through in those two games then nobody would ever sniff that record again. You can debate whether the MVP should go to Rodgers or Brees... I've got no issue there & as I stated before, I think they are both deserving of it. But you can take your "asterisk" and put it where the sun don't shine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkhorse1251 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 You can debate whether the MVP should go to Rodgers or Brees... I've got no issue there & as I stated before, I think they are both deserving of it. But you can take your "asterisk" and put it where the sun don't shine. Good job trying to seem UNbiased, but the only way Brees gets it is if it's a co-MVP. Definitely not outright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Good job trying to seem UNbiased, but the only way Brees gets it is if it's a co-MVP. Definitely not outright. You really should check your facts before posting. Below is my response from earlier in this thread. Personally, I think they should be CO-MVP. Both of them have had outstanding seasons and both of them have their negatives. Truthfully though, I think Rodgers will get it & I have little problem with that. If the only personal negative you can find is the game this week then you are drastically underselling Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkhorse1251 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 You really should check your facts before posting. Below is my response from earlier in this thread. Good for you, way to keep an open mind. Personally, I'm not goona go checking what someone said 20+ comments before, but good for you. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 C'mon - Brees in a LANDSLIDE! Only kidding. Actually, I'd say Brees by a slim margin. They are both valuable to their respective teams, obviously. But I actually think that Brees makes his "teamates" around him better than Rodgers does. No stats, but a very subjective take on it. In fact, if stats of each respective team even would lead to Rodgers (I have not researched this), I think that Brees elevates the talent level of the players more than Rodgers. One more thing...I know that taz was only kidding while mentioning Peyton Manning, but it's amazing at just how valuable he is to that team. It's too stat driven, and it'd be way too wacky, but I'd really like to see him, or another guy, like Fred Jackson, get votes on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Good for you, way to keep an open mind. Personally, I'm not goona go checking what someone said 20+ comments before, but good for you. lol Good luck in this forum then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 Does strength of schedule factor in? Rodgers' schedule was easier than Brees' when you look at average QB fantasy points against their opponents. http://www.fftoolbox.com/football/strength...dule.cfm?type=e Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 AROD had 4 fumbles to brees none. Bring up picks and ill bring up fumbles! How many did he lose? Also in Rodgers favor - he ran for 257 yds and 3 tds to Brees' 21-1. Total tds 48 for Rodgers in 15 games, 47 for Brees in 16 games, if you want to dumb it down to bulk numbers. Not to mention that even IF Rodgers lost all 4 of his fumbles he'd still have four fewer turnovers than Brees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 How many did he lose? Also in Rodgers favor - he ran for 257 yds and 3 tds to Brees' 21-1. Total tds 48 for Rodgers in 15 games, 47 for Brees in 16 games, if you want to dumb it down to bulk numbers. Not to mention that even IF Rodgers lost all 4 of his fumbles he'd still have four fewer turnovers than Brees. don't forget to factor in sack yards too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 don't forget to factor in sack yards too I'll leave comparison of the respective QBs sacks to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 I'm kinda surprised that Puddy hasn't received more support. I prefer to look at the bright side. I've got as many as Tebow and "other" combined. Oh and I vote for Rob Gronkowski!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 It isn't crazy, could Rodgers have passed for 357+? Yes he could have. Is it a guarantee that he would have? No, and it has nothing to do with Flynn...all that I was pointing out was that just because Flynn/or any other QB did something doesn't mean another will...and there was a bit of previous history to suggest that hitting 357 might be difficult to do. I am in no way disparaging Rodgers or what he did, but if a player (Rodgers or other) doesn't play in a game, there is no way to know exactly what they would have done had they played. ..Heck if Jared Allen had 22.5 sacks thru 15 games, and then sat out week 17, and Brian Robison and his replacement combine for 4 sacks that doesn't mean you can say that had Allen played he would have definitely broken the sack record. I wouldn't say he would have definitely done as well as Flynn, but you said you cannot assume it then ran off a list that seemed to say "in fact there's no way he would have done it". That is what I considered crazy. I've yet to watch that game (recorded yesterday on NFL replay), so maybe I'm missing how great Flynn was. But that one game (with nothing to play for by the Packers, and Lions already a lock for 5/6 seed) seems to have people saying Flynn is as good as or better than Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 The argument "If rodgers had thrown as many times as brees he would have gianed more yards" IS AWFUL. The fact he didn't need to throw as many times is an argument for why he is not as valuable to his team as BRees. The only reason Aaron has a shot at MVP is because he won the super bowl last year. All of his stats are worse. QB rating isn't a stat! And as far as picks go its not even rly that big of a stat either way. Aaron had 4 more fumbles then brees!!!!!!!!!!!!11 So basically you just ignore the stats that are in Rodgers favor and say they are nto stats, or really that big of a stat. I guess games won are not a stat either, or games lost. The fact that you think Rodgers is only has a shot because he won the SB last year says it all. YOU ARE CLUELESS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonGhost Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) Rodgers had an easier SOS. Rodgers has a better supporting cast. Like i said consolation will be watching the butt packers get butt hurt in the playoffs. I don't believe picks are important because of how flukey they can be. Half the time the pick isn't even the QBs fault. Edited January 5, 2012 by CrimsonGhost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Rodgers had an easier SOS. Rodgers has a better supporting cast. Like i said consolation will be watching the butt packers get butt hurt in the playoffs. I don't believe picks are important because of how flukey they can be. Half the time the pick isn't even the QBs fault. That's right. Brees lost to the two most roughest, toughest teams on his incredibly hard schedule: the Bucs and the Rams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Rodgers had an easier SOS. Rodgers has a better supporting cast. Like i said consolation will be watching the butt packers get butt hurt in the playoffs. I don't believe picks are important because of how flukey they can be. Half the time the pick isn't even the QBs fault. What is it you lack, what need is it you fulfill by being purposefully offensive while being tired and derivitive in your insults? Actually no matter. I am certain you are not sufficiently self aware that I could learn anything from your response, just as there is nothing to learn from your previous postings other than that it is possible for an alimentary canal to exist unincumbered by supporting systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) What is it you lack, what need is it you fulfill by being purposefully offensive while being tired and derivitive in your insults? Actually no matter. I am certain you are not sufficiently self aware that I could learn anything from your response, just as there is nothing to learn from your previous postings other than that it is possible for an alimentary canal to exist unincumbered by supporting systems. Dude! Oh no you didn't just compare him to an alimentary canal! BOOM goes the dynamite! Edited January 5, 2012 by tosberg34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) That's right. Brees lost to the two most roughest, toughest teams on his incredibly hard schedule: the Bucs and the Rams. And Kansas City is such a powerhouse. Enough with the wins & losses argument. There's a heck of a lot more that goes into a win or loss than the QB play. Had New Orleans been able get in on that last drive or had Colston not fumbled early in the game then we would likely have the same record. Edited January 5, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I just think that Brees is a bit more deserving...and say what you want about him only having more yards, but the fact is that Brees has more TDs When Rodgers gets to the 1 he hands it to Kuhn. When Brees gets to the 1 he throws it to Graham, Colston, Sproles etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) Interesting statistic & I'm not sure yet how this fits in.... This is total team offensive statistics: Saints Rushing plays - 431 Passing plays - 472 Total - 903 That's a difference of 39 plays in favor of the pass. However... One of the integral parts of the Saints offense, and I've discussed this before, is the screen & swing pass to the RBs. The Saints actually consider this as a running play. So it is a tad misleading saying the Saints pass more and the receptions by Saints RBs should confirm that. Green Bay Rushing plays - 395 Passing plays - 376 Total - 771 First off I'm a bit surprised that GB ran it more than they passed, but what really shocked me the most was the fact that they ran over 130 less plays than the Saints did. It may not seem like much in that context, but consider Green Bay only ran 64 total in it's win over Detroit. That's over two games worth of plays ran folks. It does make some sense because GB has a better down field threat with Jennings, but what those numbers also tell me, or rather somewhat confirms, is that the Saints, despite the ridiculous passing numbers, actually play more ball-control offense than most people give them credit for. What it also tells me that a lot of Rodgers numbers are coming after the catch. Edited January 5, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 What it also tells me that a lot of Rodgers numbers are coming after the catch. I could see that. The same was true with the 49'ers of yesteryear. Rice et al had a ton of short crossing routes that went for big yardage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I know that you can't compare era's, as it is unfair to do so. However, over time it does happen. I find it amazing that we might look back at this timeframe in the NFL as the time when 4 QB's were playing that are in the argument for the best QB's of all-time. What Brady, Manning, Brees & Rodgers are doing is simply unreal. They are in a class by themselves and there is a big distance to the next tier. It is actually quite fun to watch these guy play the position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) Interesting statistic & I'm not sure yet how this fits in.... This is total team offensive statistics: Saints Rushing plays - 431 Passing plays - 472 Total - 903 Green Bay Rushing plays - 395 Passing plays - 376 Total - 771 . You and kegz....you want to argue stats but seem to keep getting basic ones wrong: Saints: Rushing plays - 431 Passing plays - 686 (662 att + 24 sacks; 472 was the # of completions) Total - 1117 Same mistake on GB Rushing plays - 395 Passing plays - 593 Total - 988 Still about a 130 play differential. Of course, another bit is that the rush vs pass ratio isn't QUITE correct as I'm guessing the vast majority of QB runs on both teams were scrambles. And without looking at ACTUAL YAC #s, I don't think you can say that Rodgers is necessarily benefiting more from it than Brees is - I know that on several of his td throws, Rodgers hit Nelson waaay downfield. As a matter of fact, this table of the top 20 WRs in YAC has 3 Saints and zero Packers. This table is showing Brees with 400 more YAC from his receivers than Rodgers had from his. Care to revise your argument? Edited January 5, 2012 by Chavez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadDawg Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I actually think that Brees makes his "teamates" around him better than Rodgers does. No stats, but a very subjective take on it. In fact, if stats of each respective team even would lead to Rodgers (I have not researched this), I think that Brees elevates the talent level of the players more than Rodgers. I view the MVP with this same perspective ... applying a "subjective" based (personal viewpoints) assessment over an "objective" based (stats derived) evaluation. This is how the voters (sportswriters) have processed their votes a number of times in the past when the player chosen had less impressive stats than one or two of the runner-ups but, was still selected in respect to his overall emphasis to the "team". Some of the examples where stats were clearly not the emphasis past MVP selections are detailed in a recent article written in one of my daily "fish wraps". This particular sportswriter was selected as one of the 50 that will soon have to make that decision (announced SB eve) and describes his personal back and forth deliberation.The MVP choice with no wrong answer Subjectively ... I'd pick Brees as the player that most compliments his teammates and his team. But, as pointed out in the article ... "there is no wrong answer". . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) Interesting statistic & I'm not sure yet how this fits in.... This is total team offensive statistics: Saints Rushing plays - 431 Passing plays - 472 Total - 903 That's a difference of 39 plays in favor of the pass. However... One of the integral parts of the Saints offense, and I've discussed this before, is the screen & swing pass to the RBs. The Saints actually consider this as a running play. So it is a tad misleading saying the Saints pass more and the receptions by Saints RBs should confirm that. Green Bay Rushing plays - 395 Passing plays - 376 Total - 771 First off I'm a bit surprised that GB ran it more than they passed, but what really shocked me the most was the fact that they ran over 130 less plays than the Saints did. It may not seem like much in that context, but consider Green Bay only ran 64 total in it's win over Detroit. That's over two games worth of plays ran folks. It does make some sense because GB has a better down field threat with Jennings, but what those numbers also tell me, or rather somewhat confirms, is that the Saints, despite the ridiculous passing numbers, actually play more ball-control offense than most people give them credit for. What it also tells me that a lot of Rodgers numbers are coming after the catch. Player Team [b][color=#9932CC]Avg Pass Length[/color][/b] [b][color=#0000FF]Avg Pass Length, Completions[/color][/b] [color=#FF0000][b]Avg YAC [/b][/color]RatingAaron Rodgers GB [b][color=#9932CC]9.08[/color][/b] [b][color=#0000FF]7.7[/color][/b] [b][color=#FF0000]5.84[/color][/b] 122.4Drew Brees NO [b][color=#9932CC]7.52[/color][/b] [b][color=#0000FF]6.5[/color][/b] [b][color=#FF0000]5.2[/color][/b] 110.6 Edited January 5, 2012 by keggerz 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.