nick wrote:Rodgers is the sole reason they win!?! Lacy, Nelson, Cobb, you guys, nothing, all Rodgers
Nelson and Cobb aren't as good as their numbers, their numbers are inflated due to, ya know, playing with the greatest QB ever.
They're solid WRs, but not as good as their numbers suggest.
Hell, look at their schedule this year, not sure what more proof you need. It's basically Rodgers plays great they win, and in all of their losses he was bad, pretty uncanny almost. If they were as good as you claim outside of Rodgers, you'd think that wouldn't be as lopsided as it is.
You can also look at last Sunday, Rodgers doesn't play well but Wilson was horrible...and Seattle still won.
Or, maybe, Rodgers is so good because he has two elite WRs to throw to
To say Cobb and Nelson aren't as good as their numbers is laughable.
S14: N Texas 7-1
S15: Wake 8-5
S16-21: Washington 9-4, 10-3, 8-5, 9-4, 7-6, 6-7
S22: Ohio 8-5
S23: ECU 12-2
S24-26: Kentucky 8-5, 5-7, 5-7
Career: 102-61
Btw, in 2011 when Rodgers had the best QB season ever played, Cobb wasn't even on that team. Greg Jennings was the 2nd best WR, how's he done at making QBs elite since he left?
Nelson is roughly slightly better than Hartline when playing without Rodgers. Hmm....
I guess the Packers have just coincidentally had a bunch of elite WRs only when Rodgers plays. Very odd.
Whittness10 wrote:The term "elite" has been used pretty loosely around here lately.
I'd like to know if Jason thinks Greg Jennings is elite, he was just as good as Cobb for a few seasons. I wonder an elite WR who made Rodgers so good randomly was never heard from again after he left GB.
jsence2 wrote:Or, maybe, Rodgers is so good because he has two elite WRs to throw to
To say Cobb and Nelson aren't as good as their numbers is laughable.
Yes, clearly, it's Nelson/Cobb behind this entire operation.
One of the funnier things I've read in quite some time.
I was showing how absurd your comment was. It's just as easy to throw it the other way, that one's stats are solely based on the other. But you obviously missed it.
When the reality is, it's a combination. An elite QB can make mediocre WRs good, but he usually can't make them elite. Vice versa, an elite WR can make a mediocre QB look good, but can't make him look elite. You can have elite WR and elite QB on same team--see Montana and Rice, Aikman and Irvin, etc--and tell that both are elite. Nelson and Cobb are terrific at getting open, and Rodgers is terrific at getting it to them. But to say those two aren't as good as their numbers is just dumb. If that were true, they wouldn't have given Nelson the deal they did, and be looking at giving Cobb a similar deal.
S14: N Texas 7-1
S15: Wake 8-5
S16-21: Washington 9-4, 10-3, 8-5, 9-4, 7-6, 6-7
S22: Ohio 8-5
S23: ECU 12-2
S24-26: Kentucky 8-5, 5-7, 5-7
Career: 102-61
Whittness10 wrote:The term "elite" has been used pretty loosely around here lately.
I'd like to know if Jason thinks Greg Jennings is elite, he was just as good as Cobb for a few seasons. I wonder an elite WR who made Rodgers so good randomly was never heard from again after he left GB.
Of course you key on the one example that fits your argument. Shel Tactics 101
And no elite WR is going to be good if Matt Flynn is throwing to them. But keep missing the point.
S14: N Texas 7-1
S15: Wake 8-5
S16-21: Washington 9-4, 10-3, 8-5, 9-4, 7-6, 6-7
S22: Ohio 8-5
S23: ECU 12-2
S24-26: Kentucky 8-5, 5-7, 5-7
Career: 102-61
jsence2 wrote:I was showing how absurd your comment was. It's just as easy to throw it the other way,
Not if you've ever watched Rodgers play, it isn't.
jsence2 wrote:When the reality is, it's a combination.
One is an all time great, best ever statistically, the other are good WRs, but you think it's an equal give and take? That makes no sense.
jsence2 wrote: But to say those two aren't as good as their numbers is just dumb.
Does anyone else on this board, journalists, anyone out there think those BOTH of the 2 WRs are as good as their numbers and elite? I doubt it. And before you come back with the usual "I don't care what anyone else thinks", remember your go to move is to defend your opinions is to point out how many writers/journalists and others agree with you?
I don't think I've ever heard any talk about BOTH of them being top 5, not sure anyone else has ever said they're both elite, but the number of people thinking that is awfully small if not just you, I'm sure of that.
Whittness10 wrote:The term "elite" has been used pretty loosely around here lately.
I'd like to know if Jason thinks Greg Jennings is elite, he was just as good as Cobb for a few seasons. I wonder an elite WR who made Rodgers so good randomly was never heard from again after he left GB.
Of course you key on the one example that fits your argument. Shel Tactics 101
And no elite WR is going to be good if Matt Flynn is throwing to them. But keep missing the point.
Wooo, you went out of your way to avoid that one.
Is Greg Jennings elite?
What's the difference between Jennings and Cobb? Similar stats with Rodgers and Nelson.
How old is Jennings again? 32? 31? With a rookie QB who can't throw more than 15 yds downfield? Ok then. Again, apples and oranges
An elite QB can't do anything if his WRs aren't getting open. Cobb and Nelson get open quite often.
An elite WR can't do anything if his QB can't get him the ball. Rodgers can get his guys the ball
How hard is it for you to understand that elite QBs and elite WRs can be on the same team? God I think you just look for things to argue about sometimes, just so you can argue...
S14: N Texas 7-1
S15: Wake 8-5
S16-21: Washington 9-4, 10-3, 8-5, 9-4, 7-6, 6-7
S22: Ohio 8-5
S23: ECU 12-2
S24-26: Kentucky 8-5, 5-7, 5-7
Career: 102-61
Was Jennings elite when he played with GB? Yes or no
jsence2 wrote:An elite QB can't do anything if his WRs aren't getting open
Ok, I'm sure you've never watched Rodgers play, I thought it couldn't get more absurd but this is laugh out loud funny to think that elite QBs don't throw covered WRs open, it's a pretty common concept in football, I'm surprised you've never seen or heard of it.
jsence2 wrote:God I think you just look for things to argue about sometimes, just so you can argue...
Say wha? I made the original statement on my own, I wasn't replying to you. YOU came back with a different opinion, so you started the argument. Do you not realize that?
Me: I'm not sure how good Nelson/Cobb are
Jsence: I disagree...YOU LOVE TO ARGUE EVERYTHING!!!!
"Nelson and Cobb aren't as good as their numbers, their numbers are inflated due to, ya know, playing with the greatest QB ever."
First of all, you can't just say "Rodgers is the best all time due to stats" without remembering that the numbers QBs put up today are inflated due to the offenses that exist, the rules in place, etc. Comparing them on pure statistics doesn't mean he's the greatest QB ever. Is he in the conversation? Sure. But are you seriously saying you'd take him over Manning in his prime, Marino in his prime, etc simply based on stats? I never said Rodgers wasn't elite, I was simply using your logic that because one is elite, the other can't be, because other player is only elite because of who he plays with.
So again, I ask you--was Rice not elite, or was Montana not elite? Or maybe Rice made Young and Montana elite? Because when Montana went to another team, HIS numbers took a big dip.
As for Jennings, the years before he left for Minnesota, he 67 catches in 13 games in 2011, and a total of 36 catches in 8 games in 2012.
In those same years, 2011 and 2012:
Nelson had 68 catches in 16 games in 2011, and 49 catches in 12 games in 2012.
Cobb had 26 in 15 games his rookie year of 2011, and had 80 (in 15 games) in 2012.
So not sure you can say Jennings was "elite" w his numbers, esp compared to his teammates. Jennings highest total of catches in his career was 80, and only topped 70 twice in his career. Cobb has 80 and 91 the last two full seasons (and had 31 the year between before being hurt in game 6), and Nelson has 98 and 85 the last two seasons.
S14: N Texas 7-1
S15: Wake 8-5
S16-21: Washington 9-4, 10-3, 8-5, 9-4, 7-6, 6-7
S22: Ohio 8-5
S23: ECU 12-2
S24-26: Kentucky 8-5, 5-7, 5-7
Career: 102-61
Weasel wrote:I disagree that 2 psi difference is barely noticeable. Id argue that if any of us had the two side by side to compare a 13 psi ball to an 11 psi ball there would be a marked difference. That shit is almost 20%!
Also, theres no chance anyone actually read that last post on balls from seeit, right?
You're totally right, if you knew there was a difference, and you were comparing, you'd be able to pick it.
When you assume they're all the same (after all, they were measured), and you're wearing gloves (it was cold) and you're just throwing into a play and spotting it, you're not likely to notice 2 psi. It's not like it's overly deflated or anything or squishy. The scenario wasn't "grab these two balls and tell me which one has less air" (yes, I said grab 2 balls), it was assumed to be business as usual.
Weasel wrote:I disagree that 2 psi difference is barely noticeable. Id argue that if any of us had the two side by side to compare a 13 psi ball to an 11 psi ball there would be a marked difference. That shit is almost 20%!
I disagree that "that shit is almost 20%." I'd argue that if any of us had the two posts side-by-side to compare your post's gorilla math to Seeit's post, there would be a marked difference. It's almost 25% away from being almost 20%!
