What's this? An Aaron Rodgers fan that isn't giving him a pass for yesterday's loss?



But seriously, I totally agree with you. Though we do seem to be in the minority.

1st and goal from the 6 = Rodgers incompletion
2nd and goal from the 6 = Rodgers incompletion
3rd and goal from the 6 = Rodgers incompletion
4th and goal from the 6 = FG


1st and goal from the 8 = Rodgers incompletion
2nd and goal from the 8 = Rodgers incompletion
3rd and goal from the 8 = Rodgers incompletion (it looked like he could have ran for at least 5 yards, if not scored)
4th and goal from the 8 = FG


After the Packers defense forces a 4th quarter turnover down by 5:

1st and 10 = Rodgers incompletion
2nd and 10 = Rodgers 5 yard pass
3rd and 5 = Rodgers sacked for a 10 yard loss
4th and 15 = punt


After the Packers defense forces their SECOND 4TH QUARTER TURNOVER down by 5:

1st and 10 = Rodgers "sacked" for a 0 yard loss
2nd and 10 = Rodgers incompletion
3rd and 10 = Rodgers incompletion
4th and 10 = punt

I have no idea how anyone with even a trace amount of objectivity could look at those facts and reach the conclusion that Rodgers shouldn't hold a share of the blame for the loss.

Cole Beasley said he broke his fibula in Week 16: “Take a few meds & suck it up.” Said it hurt vs Colts & somewhat less vs Ravens. Said it didn’t bother him vs KC. “There was no way I was gonna miss a playoff game.”
Ummm...wow. #Bills

Kim Jones  (@KimJonesSports) January 25, 2021

Nate "I use to play football" Burleson's first sentence today about the Bucs/Packers game:

"Looking at Aaron Rodgers after that game, it makes me sad as a player...."

This season the Bucs are the most balanced team to make the post season. Top 10 offense, top 10 defense.

Bucs have scored at least 30 points in all 3 of their post season games and in the last 6 they lead the league in scoring (more than 5pts a game higher than the Chiefs). Brady has 861 yards and 7 TDs in the post season so far. Not sure putting up 30+ points a game means your defense is "bailing you out". But that's a matter of opinion.

The defense is giving up 26 pts per game, which is a lot higher than their season average, but it's enough. They also have 7 take-a-ways and 7 sacks in their 3 post season games.

The Bucs lost their first game to the Chiefs 27-24. They started that game by fronting the Chiefs a 17-0 lead in the first quarter, which included 75 and 44 yard TDs. The Bucs came back within 3 but then the Chiefs managed to clock kill the last 4 minutes.

60% of the Chiefs yards came in the 1st quarter.
Brady threw 2 picks, and was slow to get rolling.
But the defense forced a 3 and out after each interception (much like they did with GB yesterday).

If they don't have a defensive collapse like that first quarter, and if Tom can be typical post season Tom, they have a great chance to come out with a win. Much higher than people are initially giving them from what I have seen today.

To be honest that was a pathetic look, especially in his press conf.

Buck up, get better and try again. I understand his frustration but lets not portray sulking in a loss.

If I had to pick a theme of the Packers since their last SB is that Rodgers has to play perfect God mode or they're likely to lose. If he has an "average" game there's a real risk of a loss.

The defense is better than they had been under Dom Capers and Ted Thompson but not good enough to be reliable when Rodgers isn't having a perfect game. If all we can get out the offense is 20 something points there's no way we come out with a win. I've said multiple times in the NFL threads on here Rodgers has to put up 30 or even 35+ to win games with this team.

Special teams has been lackluster to outright bad most of the last 10 years. Even yesterday they gave up a big return late in the game.

Since the SB win the Packers have played in 4 NFCCG's. The opposing teams scored 28, 44, 37, and 31 points for an average of 35. Thats a big ask to put on your QB to "beat" constantly IMO.

I'm conflicted.  My head is telling me the chiefs are a better team with better stars and should get the win.   But I can't escape the feeling that somehow the GOAT will play just good enough to allow his defense to get the win.   Or ball out and have a career day and get the win.

Aaron Rodgers choked!

Edit: For much the same reasons that HK mentioned above. Failing in the red zone repeatedly. Didn't even bring up the failed production after the turnovers.

Against the 2016 Falcons the Packers scored 15 points before a garbage time TD and they had 2 turnovers.

Against the 2019 49ers the Packers scored 7 points heading into the 4th quarter and they had 3 turnovers.

And then is the game yesterday.  Down by 5 in the 4th quarter the Packers defense forced two Brady INTs.  How did Rodgers and the offense respond to this?  They went 3 and out both times gaining a total of NEGATIVE 5 yards against a team missing both their starting safeties.

I'm NOT saying the offense is more to blame than the defense, but to put it all on the defense is just silly, IMO.

I'm not going to watch that, but let me guess: Stephan A Smith gave Rodgers a pass and instead blamed it on LaFleur for not letting "that bad man" throw for it on 4th and goal from the 8 after Rodgers already had 3 shots and threw an incompletion all 3 times?

Rodgers had 1 interception and Tampa scored a TD off of it.

Brady had 3 interception and Rodgers went 3 and out on 2 of them.

Rodgers forced an incomplete pass on 3rd and goal that he most likely could have run it in.

The great ones get it done when it counts. The defense did their part in the second half. Offense is their greatest weapon but the coach took that away and put it on the defense. What's even worse is if GB did go for it on fourth at least Tampa would be stuck deep in their own territory if they didn't make it...point is a lot of fault to go around including Aaron.

Exactly.  In fact, I posted this after the Packers went 3 and out after Brady's 3rd INT with about 8 mins left in the 4th:


If the Packers offense had been able to turn just one of the 4th quarter INTs into a TD (or gotten two FGs) then on that final drive they wouldn't have been down by 8 needing a TD and conversion to tie.  They would have been down by 1 or 2 points needing only a FG to take the lead.

My point completely sailed over your head.

Yes Rodgers could have played better but that is the point. He has to play perfectly to win because the defenses he has have given up an average of 35 points in 4 NFCCG's since 2010/11. He hasn't been on a team where can play an average game and still come out with a win.

For post season stats this year he is 2nd in passer rating, 3rd in QBR, T2 for TD's, 3rd in total yards (1st and 2nd played 3 games to his 2), 2nd in yards/game and 2nd longest completion out of 14 playoff starting QB's. People acting like he played poorly are just making things up at this point. There is no way he can do what Brady did which is throw 3 picks with a 55% completion rate yet still win. In fact Brady has the 2nd lowest completion rate of 14 starting QB's this post season yet here he is in the SB.

I didn't expect this in my feed:

This plastic surgery journey breakdown has been highly requested :
- Rhinoplasty/ nose job
- veneers
-  Hair grafting
- Fillers and Botox
-  Jawline/ chin wrap around implant https://t.co/YvHLkD1sJE

PLASTIC SURGERY CONSULTANT  (@KosmeticKrys) January 25, 2021

This truly shows the progression of the tweaks he made.

Looks like year 4 he got a subtle rhinoplasty& veneers. Notice year6 the perimeter of his hairline is thinning. Year 7, hairline fully restored.
Jawline is tricky. Can’t  tell when he switched from fillers to the implant pic.twitter.com/mjsoeYFsvj

PLASTIC SURGERY CONSULTANT  (@KosmeticKrys) January 25, 2021

When and how you throw picks matter. Tom's 1st pick was a bad pass, but at least it was in Packers territory. 2nd pick was caught at the goal line off his receivers hands. 3rd pick was on 3rd down and was just as good as a punt.

All 3 of them came while his team had the lead.

And Brady's comp% may have taken a hit. But his 3rd down efficiency is very high and his yards per attempt in the first half were higher than the league leader in the regular season.

As posted yesterday, his first half performance (based on EPA) was the single best half he has had in the post season since 2004. That's the best first half in the last THIRTY SIX playoff games.

You want to talk about his post season stats, when compared to the regular season his yards per game would be 5th best in the NFL, his TDs per game would be 5th best in the NFL, his total QBR would be 4th best in the NFL... All versus playoff opponents, all on the road.

Brady played well enough to win. His interceptions didn't matter. And more importantly he plays well WHEN IT MATTERS. 3 first half TDs in the championship game. And the last two possessions in the 4th quarter resulted in points and running out the clock.

You can make all the excuses for Rodgers you want. But the hate on Brady is misplaced and erroneous.

I did the math on how many points the defenses Brady has played with have given up in conference championship games he has played in since 2010. That average is 18.8 points vs. an average of 35 for Rodger's defenses. A 16 point difference The high score against a Brady team is lower than the average points against a Packers defense

Average score of the winning team of the NFCCG over the last 21 years (since 2000): 30.6 points
Average score of the winning team of the AFCCG over the last 21 years (since 2000): 29.9 points

The Packers average in Rodgers' 4 losses? 22.3

Hate to break it to you. You have to score 30+ points to win. Period. And you don't have to be perfect to do it.


As you can see, Rodgers has not come anywhere close to the avg score of a winning Conference Championship team. Even in his one victory in 2010 he only put up 21 points. A full 10 points lower than the NFC average.

You can blame it on the defense until you're blue in the face, but the offense is not putting up the points required.

Edit: Average score of the winners of every playoff game this year. 29 points. 30 gets you wins. Rodgers hasn't been able to get to 30. Period.

You're still not getting it.

You're trying to blame the defense by pointing out how many points they give up and saying "that's a big ask to put on your QB" while not applying that same standard to the offense.

Against the 2016 Falcons the Packers scored 15 points before a garbage time TD and they had 2 turnovers.

Against the 2019 49ers the Packers scored 7 points heading into the 4th quarter and they had 3 turnovers.

That's a big ask for a defense to win a game with their offense performing like that too.

WTH?
I thought I saw the end of the Bucs, Saints game last week, and the saints won? What did I miss?

The packers should be able to score 30+ points a game with that offense.

^^^ I'll have some of what he's having ^^^

Bucs tied the game up in the 3rd, took the lead with 10 minutes left in the 4th, never gave it up.

So that GB FG situation, here is how I see it.


Score is 31-23. 4th & goal from the 8, they've missed all three attempts prior. There was a drive earlier where they got stopped at the goal line and were forced to kick as well. There are 2 some minutes left in the game.

Option A: Go for it.
- 1. Success: Score goes to 29-31. Now you need the 2pt conversion to tie the game.
--- 1a. 2pt Success: Tie game. Now you need to prevent TB from scoring to ride it out into OT, or you need to get the ball back and score 1 more time. Onside kick is a possibility but would be a pretty crazy choice.
--- 1b. 2pt Fail: Still need another score, so you need a defensive stop and the ball back, a defensive score, or you could go for the onsides kick.

- 2. Fail: Score is still 23-31. Now you need a miracle stop on D. You still need to get the ball back to score (offense or defense) a TD + 2pt to simply tie the game. Onsides kick is a more viable option in this scenario.

Option B: Kick the FG.
- 1. Success: Score goes to 26-31. You need a defensive stop and another scoring possession (hail mary could seal the game), a defensive score, or you can onsides kick.

- 2. Fail: 23-31 is still the score, you're in the exact same spot as failing to convert for the TD.

So, in every scenario GB needs a defensive stop of some sort. In fact, as they were making that drive I messed up the math in my head (thinking the score was 24-31) and I was thinking to myself "they're going to score too quickly, they're going to kick it back to TB12 with enough time for him to have a last minute comeback." Of course then I realized I messed up and that GB actually needed that time on the clock if they wanted any chance at winning in regulation. If they want to win in regulation they needed the defensive stop and some points regardless, failing to convert the 4th down would mean you need those same exact things except it only leads to OT, and OT might work out but it's Brady they're playing and a single coin flip could easily mean they don't see the field again.

Looking over these scenarios and "paths" to victory, I don't think the FG decision itself was necessarily a mistake, it really depends on how you evaluate the teams play at that point in time . In the 2nd half this is how TB's drives ended. TD, INT, INT, INT, FG. 3 out of 5 drives ended in turnovers. In fact, if the refs continue to not throw DPI flags then GB would have indeed forced TB into 4th and 4 from their own 37 yard line. It's possible TB goes for it (and gets it) in that scenario, but I'm not sure they would. It appears to me ML trusted his defense to do their job (and then for the offense to do theirs when they get the ball back), and for the most part in the 2nd half I can understand how they had earned that trust. His only other options were to take one more stab at a pass play to convert that 4th and goal, which they had failed to do 100% of the tries (which were probably plays he considered best for that scenario) previously, or to kick the FG and then follow it up with another aggressive call which would be an onside kick with a less than 10% chance of recovery. I feel like he split the difference in those choices, and I think his trust in the defense to make one more stop is the pivotal reason for making his choice. If you don't trust them, you're essentially forced to go for it. The real question here might be "should he have trusted the defense?" instead of "should he have kicked the FG?" We've seen teams with strong defenses make end of game choices that put the game on the defenses back, but GB's defense doesn't really compare to those. Despite that, they had forced 3 turnovers that half. How do we weigh that out? How do weigh that versus the 3 failed attempts at a goal line conversion? It's a lot to evaluate in the seconds that you have to make the choice.

That said, I wouldn't have been pissed if he had went for it on 4th down. I wasn't expecting 4th down magic, but I wouldn't blame the guy for going all out and putting that trust on the offense/Rodgers, and I don't blame people for having the opinion that he should have trusted the offense/Rodgers more in that situation. Again, I wasn't seeing anything that made me think "oh they can convert this time.." but it is still Aaron Rodgers and the leagues #1 offense, so I can understand if you take the shot regardless. However, if he failed there I'd still bet he would get questioned on the decision. Especially if GB gets the defensive stop, Rodgers throws a hail mary TD, and they fail to convert the 2pt for the tie. Everybody would be saying "if he had just kicked the FG instead of going for it on 4th after TB shut them down 3 times in a row..."

I dunno, if you think differently on the decision that's fine I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I just wanted to ramble on about it for a bit instead of just looking at some win percentage stat and acting like anybody even understand how it's calculated. Decisions like this, and really just the strategy and tactics/technique of football in general, is really what I love about the sport. The athleticism, the "story lines", etc. are all nice additions, but the strategy of even a simple run play is superb. It doesn't come across the same way in a stat from some algorithm, and I don't think the conversation around a decision is as engaging if all you want to look at is that stat. And FWIW, I don't even know what that stat is for this decision I just assume it's out there and people are arguing over some number like "7%"

Brady has won 5 conference games in his career scoring less than 30 points. Bunk argument there.

Conference winning games of less than 30 points: 24, 24, 21, 23, 24

He's won 10 conference games in his career so a full half of them he won scoring a high of 24

You're not wrong, but neither is HK.

For every point you made, Rodgers does need to play perfect, and he only played well yesterday. HK is also right in that he shares the blame. It may not be the largest portion of the blame, but it is shared.

I don't care if the dude wants plastic surgery or not, but that evidence isn't very convincing to me.

Exactly.

And if you remove the garbage time scores then it's closer to 17 points per game.

Under 20 points in a conference championship against a team with a good offense (3 of the 4 times it was a top 3 offense).  Good luck.

And when you combine with his other 5 wins? 30.6

Tom Brady has averaged 30 points per game in conference championships.
Aaron Rodgers has averaged 22 points per game in conference championships.

And as I said, every post season winner this season combines to... 30 points.

The argument is valid. You're just denying it because it doesn't fit your narrative/opinions.

Maybe he was watching a replay of one of the regular season games.

Can't believe I even wasted my time on this to continue to prove a plainly obvious point. The average score of the winning team for every playoff game in the last 10 years. EVERY, SINGLE, ONE. 111 games (Super Bowl will be 112th).

29.1 points.

I repeat... If you want to win. Score 30. PERIOD.

Edit: Tompa Bay's scores this post season? 31, 30, 31. Win, Win, Win.

Shit, I bet it was.

Thank you gents.

Of course. I've been making the point for years that Rodgers had to play a god mode perfect game to win. If he plays average then they will lose a majority of the time. Other teams can win with a QB who plays average or does things like throw 3 picks and have a 55% completion rate. Rodgers will not get that luxury when aside from the SB year they give up an average of 35. He has no room for error in his play to make up for the other parts of the team.

So yes he shares some of the blame. I just think its people taking cheap shots because "Aaron Rodgers" had an average game when they didn't like the dude to begin with so they get their 10 minutes to throw some dirt on him.

You realize that football is a team sport and that Rodgers clearly outplayed Brady yesterday right?

Correct me if I'm wrong but the only Rodgers interception came off of Tampa Bay holding. Holding that continuously wasn't called all game until 3rd and 4 when the bookies needed some magic.

The Buccaneers won in large part because their DL was able to get to Rodgers all game long and the referees let them hold the Packers receivers all game.

Everyone talking about the GB  field goal instead of going for the TD.

Oddly nobody is mentioning the (atypical for Arians) Tampa 4th and 4 go for it that lead to a touchdown on the very next play.  Which was basically the Tampa lead at the end of the game.

Given how close that game was, it does make you wonder what would've happened if Green Bay had spent their first draft pick on something other than a third string quarterback.

Well, 1 out of 3 so far...I wouldn't say going to the superbowl is a whimper...

That's obviously some of what is going on, but it's just part of losing for guys at that level. They have haters and they want their 15 minutes to dance on the grave.

The facts are still the facts though, good or bad. And there is both in play here.

Well that's just fucking crazy talk.

In the 4th quarter Rodgers went 3 and out twice. He failed to convert at the goal line on 3 straight chances with the game on the line. Which he also did in the first half. It was his 3rd worst AY/A of the entire season. He had 0 rushing yards (averages 17 per game). In the redzone he was 4/12.

Wisconsin fans be nuts yo.

That was a great decision, and I was honestly shocked they had Brady go back to the sidelines in the first place. It felt like they had the opportunity and ability to put in the dagger and they were walking away from it.

Then Brady turned around and put that dagger in while GB was wondering WTF happened. Play/decision of the game IMO.

Should they, though?

The 2020 Packers had an elite QB. They had an elite O-line... until it they lost their All Pro tackle. They had one elite WR. They had two good RBs. They had a serviceable TE. And... that's about it.

When you take away Bakhtiari, the RBs can't find space at the line, and Rodgers is taking pressures and getting sacked 5 times waiting for someone to get open, scoring 30+ points was not going to be easy.

We can play what-if games on GB's red zone trips, or whatever, but the Packers got screwed by their own front office in the off-season. Three of the four teams playing yesterday made major moves to put talent around their QBs last spring. The Packers didn't do a damn thing.

What the Packers did last spring might have been worse than nothing. Their 1st and 2nd round draft picks look very iffy in a vacuum, and they don't make any sense at all when you consider the known needs of the team going into the 2020 season.

2020 had maybe the best WR draft class in history. 8 WRs were taken between GB's 1st round pick and the end of the 2nd round, and some of those guys look really promising. Not only did GB not take one in that span, they didn't get one anywhere in the draft.

THAT'S the what-if for GB's 2020 season, and it's likely the what-if for Rodgers's entire career.

Interestingly, I broke my fibula my freshman year while running cross country. Never really heard or felt it break, but I just got to the point where I couldn't run anymore. Went to the coach and told him it was hurting quite a bit, and he told me to do laps on a grass field. After a lap or two I said, "screw this" and went back to the coach, telling him I just couldn't do it anymore. He took one look at me and said, "You're not a complainer, must be something really wrong" and took me to the hospital. X-rays confirmed: broken fibula.

Points per game in the post season (wins and losses) for the last 10 years of high profile QBs.

Tom Brady, wins: 33.3
Tom Brady, losses: 18.3

Aaron Rodgers, wins: 31.0
Aaron Rodgers, losses: 22.8

Drew Brees, wins: 28.6
Drew Brees, losses: 24.3

Peyton Manning, wins: 23.4 (yikes, now THAT is being carried by a defense)
Peyton Manning, losses: 18.7

Ben Rofl, wins: 22.0 (further validating all my arguments, carried to all his success)
Ben Rofl, losses: 25.3 (scores more when he loses, poor Ben)

Russell Wilson, wins: 25.0 (that elite defense his first 4-5 years)
Russell Wilson, losses: 23.0

Well... They did lead the league in scoring in the regular season at 31.8 ppg...

The question I would ask after that would be was their regular season success inflated due to schedule? And it looks like the answer is... Not really. If anything, just SLIGHTLY.

VS NFC North opponents: 35.7 ppg
VS teams with losing records: 32.6 ppg

So they were pretty consistent overall no matter who they faced. But I will say they certainly faced a lot more losing teams during the regular season than winning teams.

Did Nelson Mandela die in prison in your timeline?

Technically the argument presented is flawed, IMO.

The argument presented is "you need to score 30+ pts avg to win a championship game" and the evidence used to support that argument is an average of the average winning score above 30 for the teams who won the championship game. If every single team who won the championship game didn't have 30+ pt avg then the statement that you "need" to that to win is false. On top of that, the average postseason scoring for losers of the championship games was not presented. Is there a losing team with a average above 30? The data set presented is incomplete to draw the conclusion provided.

If David has the time, I'd love to see the individual stats laid out by year for winners and losers, instead of an average of averages. I'd do it myself but I don't have the time at the moment.

Not sure what averages you're looking for. Looking for the average for each QB, on the season, for the year they won/lost?

Edit: And the argument with the final numbers of every playoff game for the last 10 years, showed the average winning score is 30 points. 111 game sample size.

Yes, saying bluntly, "30 points will win" is wrong. But the law of averages still holds true. I'll look up the numbers for 30 point losers and such.

He spent some time in Dallas, apparently some Jason Witten rubbed off on him.

Out of every playoff game in the last 10 years, only 11 teams scored 30+ points and lost. So 9.9% of losers, or 1 in every 10 losing playoff teams.

So if you score 30. You win 90% of the time in the playoffs (for the last 10 seasons). Edit: I think 90% is enough to throw out a general, you need 30 to win statement.

The Mahomes era Chiefs usually score the majority of their points in one quarter.  They still win.

So you're saying ensure they don't score more than once per quarter?

I'll take that as a normal winning strategy for most games since that would put them under the 30 number I'm preaching.