OT - "Rodgers Is The Problem"

[Run the ball]

Why would u want to join that group? U like me so much u have me in your sig.

 

[Rodneyr38]

Im pretty sure u can use the ignore feature also.

 

[onebud34]

That's the spirit...you now have a logical rebuttal for all of his posts

 

[Run the ball]

Im pretty sure u can use the ignore feature also.

 

[Jester]

Please, all these Obama pics are making me queasy.

 

[onebud34]

Please, all these Obama pics are making me queasy.

 

[PrideisBears]

lol this thread turned Special person quickly. The Packers loss and despite a good performance by Rodgers and yes he should share some of the blame

 

[Jailbreak]

that's an improvement, haha

 

[BearWest54]

No. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about(again). 120+=great is an absurdly Special person high threshold for that stat given the context of stat over NFL history. By your standard there have been a whopping two "great" seasons by an NFL QB in league history.

It was clear I was talking about one single game, not a season. Served.

 

[FirstTimer]

It was clear I was talking about one single game, not a season. Served.

And again, Rodgers performance against New Orleans wasn't "great" by your standards? LOL.

Either way you fail.

A 120 QB rating is fucking crazy high. Launching that as your threshold for a "great" game is stupid. I've seen QB's play "great games" with ratings in the 90's. Even still, why is 120+ "great" for a single game, yet the threshold is lower for a season?

 

[PrideisBears]

yep this thread is dead.

 

[Midway Fields]

Really, FT is at the top of his game. I never seen such a transparent and blatant baiting. And holy ****, its working.

Basically all dude has to do is pull out the shotgun, lock and load, and bust loose with a single Rodgers > Cutler post.

And then its /thread

Kind of amazing, really.

I think the irony is lost on most. This thread was about laughing about how dumb the people on the fudgie board are. And here is FT making folks look equally as fucktarded. I mean, wow.

Its like some zen shit.

What it really comes down to is the ***** is butt hurt about his team's below .500 record.

 

[FirstTimer]

What it really comes down to is the ***** is butt hurt about his team's below .500 record.

Who is hurt about what?

 

[SUPERFAN]

Packers are falling down hard, that is all that matters. I relish watching "Angry Aaron Rogers" at press conferences.

 

[Midway Fields]

Who is hurt about what?

Get salty........

 

[Midway Fields]

Packers are falling down hard, that is all that matters. I relish watching "Angry Aaron Rogers" at press conferences.

Can the guy whine about refs a little more?

 

[BearWest54]

And again, Rodgers performance against New Orleans wasn't "great" by your standards? LOL.

Either way you fail.

A 120 QB rating is fucking crazy high. Launching that as your threshold for a "great" game is stupid. I've seen QB's play "great games" with ratings in the 90's. Even still, why is 120+ "great" for a single game, yet the threshold is lower for a season?

Nope, cutoff is 120 because I said so. 120 is great for a single game and there are plenty of games where QBs throw for 120+--plenty, i.e. it's not fucking crazy high unless you define "fucking crazy high" as something that happens quite often in the league. Regardless, I can define it however I want to because it's a subjective threshold (just like you made with "fucking crazy high). If you don't like the threshold, you can disagree with it--that's your prerogative.

If you can't answer that last question, I can't help you.

I didn't realize the single-game QB rating was calculated differently from the season QB rating. I guess I've been served by BearWorst54.

You think "maximum" is the same as "mean"? I wasn't talking to you either, so I'm not sure why you use "I've" unless...

 

[BearWest54]

I didn't realize the QB rating maximum/mean could be different for a game than a season. I guess that would be mathematically impossible, but you have "proven" otherwise.

You are like Einstein.

I'm not surprised, but you entirely missed the point. Keep trying, I'm sure you'll get it eventually.

 

[FirstTimer]

Nope, cutoff is 120 because I said so.

Yeah, I know. That's the issue. I'm basically pointing out that by putting it at 120...you're showing you have no clue about the context of the stat.

 

[BearWest54]

Yeah, I know. That's the issue. I'm basically pointing out that by putting it at 120...you're showing you have no clue about the context of the stat.

There were at least 46 "great" games from QBs last year (9%) based on my criteria--the top 9% seems like a reasonable approximation of greatness to me.