Seahawks Post Game

[humanrefutation]

Just a reminder that Aaron Rodgers was never "regressing."

That's just not true. During the second half of last season, he completed 58% of his passes, average 5.9 yards a completion, and had a QB Rating of 81. During the first four games of this season, the completion percentage and average yards per completion were pretty much exactly the same as they were down the stretch last season. And as much as you can point the finger at his receivers and at the playcalling, anyone watching the games could see that Rodgers was missing open guys and was missing passes he used to make in his sleep.

You don't count that as a regression from his norm? Because it was, and there shouldn't be any hesitance to acknowledge that fact as much as there is no hesitance to acknowledge he's been much more like the Rodgers of old since November.

[MikeIsGood]

Just a reminder that Aaron Rodgers was never "regressing."

That's just not true. During the second half of last season, he completed 58% of his passes, average 5.9 yards a completion, and had a QB Rating of 81. During the first four games of this season, the completion percentage and average yards per completion were pretty much exactly the same as they were down the stretch last season. And as much as you can point the finger at his receivers and at the playcalling, anyone watching the games could see that Rodgers was missing open guys and was missing passes he used to make in his sleep.

You don't count that as a regression from his norm? Because it was, and there shouldn't be any hesitance to acknowledge that fact as much as there is no hesitance to acknowledge he's been much more like the Rodgers of old since November.

Yes. All of this. For the better part of a full year he had clearly - visibly and by the stats - regressed. Just glad he's back on track, at least for now.

[JimmyTheKid]

Just a reminder that Aaron Rodgers was never "regressing."

That's just not true. During the second half of last season, he completed 58% of his passes, average 5.9 yards a completion, and had a QB Rating of 81. During the first four games of this season, the completion percentage and average yards per completion were pretty much exactly the same as they were down the stretch last season. And as much as you can point the finger at his receivers and at the playcalling, anyone watching the games could see that Rodgers was missing open guys and was missing passes he used to make in his sleep.

You don't count that as a regression from his norm? Because it was, and there shouldn't be any hesitance to acknowledge that fact as much as there is no hesitance to acknowledge he's been much more like the Rodgers of old since November.

Eh, people were comparing his fall from grace to that of one, Rick Ankiel. I look at "regression" as a decline in skills, something you don't ever get back. Just because Rodgers missed a few open WR's and wasn't playing at a best-QB-in-the-history-of-the-world level doesn't mean that he had regressed. He was still making great plays, just less frequently. Due to a multitude of reasons, Jordy, Davante hurt, play calling, and yes, Rodgers himself missing passes he normally makes. But that just means he was in a bit of a funk, not that his skills had actually regressed. To think Pats fans were calling for Garofalo to start over Brady after a string of bad performances. And Brady was what, 5, 6, 7 years older than Rodgers? Father time catching up with Brady was a real concern. But Rodgers' skills diminishing in the prime of his career? Hell no.

[humanrefutation]

Just a reminder that Aaron Rodgers was never "regressing."

That's just not true. During the second half of last season, he completed 58% of his passes, average 5.9 yards a completion, and had a QB Rating of 81. During the first four games of this season, the completion percentage and average yards per completion were pretty much exactly the same as they were down the stretch last season. And as much as you can point the finger at his receivers and at the playcalling, anyone watching the games could see that Rodgers was missing open guys and was missing passes he used to make in his sleep.

You don't count that as a regression from his norm? Because it was, and there shouldn't be any hesitance to acknowledge that fact as much as there is no hesitance to acknowledge he's been much more like the Rodgers of old since November.

Eh, people were comparing his fall from grace to that of one, Rick Ankiel. I look at "regression" as a decline in skills, something you don't ever get back. Just because Rodgers missed a few open WR's and wasn't playing at a best-QB-in-the-history-of-the-world level doesn't mean that he had regressed. He was still making great plays, just less frequently. Due to a multitude of reasons, Jordy, Davante hurt, play calling, and yes, Rodgers himself missing passes he normally makes. But that just means he was in a bit of a funk, not that his skills had actually regressed. To think Pats fans were calling for Garofalo to start over Brady after a string of bad performances. And Brady was what, 5, 6, 7 years older than Rodgers? Father time catching up with Brady was a real concern. But Rodgers' skills diminishing in the prime of his career? Hell no.

The bulk of the concerns about Rodgers didn't have to do with his physical ability. They had to do with his mind - he confidence wasn't there, his vision wasn't there, and his touch wasn't there in the same way it's been throughout his career. It's easy to say now that this wasn't a long term concern, but I don't ever recall Brady going through a "bit of a funk" that lasted nearly a whole season. And unlike a physical injury, there isn't a specific timeline present that gives you an idea when to expect improvement. He looks like he's progressed back to an elite form, which gives me relief.

[JimmyTheKid]

That's just not true. During the second half of last season, he completed 58% of his passes, average 5.9 yards a completion, and had a QB Rating of 81. During the first four games of this season, the completion percentage and average yards per completion were pretty much exactly the same as they were down the stretch last season. And as much as you can point the finger at his receivers and at the playcalling, anyone watching the games could see that Rodgers was missing open guys and was missing passes he used to make in his sleep.

You don't count that as a regression from his norm? Because it was, and there shouldn't be any hesitance to acknowledge that fact as much as there is no hesitance to acknowledge he's been much more like the Rodgers of old since November.

Eh, people were comparing his fall from grace to that of one, Rick Ankiel. I look at "regression" as a decline in skills, something you don't ever get back. Just because Rodgers missed a few open WR's and wasn't playing at a best-QB-in-the-history-of-the-world level doesn't mean that he had regressed. He was still making great plays, just less frequently. Due to a multitude of reasons, Jordy, Davante hurt, play calling, and yes, Rodgers himself missing passes he normally makes. But that just means he was in a bit of a funk, not that his skills had actually regressed. To think Pats fans were calling for Garofalo to start over Brady after a string of bad performances. And Brady was what, 5, 6, 7 years older than Rodgers? Father time catching up with Brady was a real concern. But Rodgers' skills diminishing in the prime of his career? Hell no.

The bulk of the concerns about Rodgers didn't have to do with his physical ability. They had to do with his mind - he confidence wasn't there, his vision wasn't there, and his touch wasn't there in the same way it's been throughout his career. It's easy to say now that this wasn't a long term concern, but I don't ever recall Brady going through a "bit of a funk" that lasted nearly a whole season. And unlike a physical injury, there isn't a specific timeline present that gives you an idea when to expect improvement. He looks like he's progressed back to an elite form, which gives me relief.

I agree that his confidence wasn't there. Not in his own ability, however, but his teammates'. Can you blame him? Last year his line wasn't playing near the level its playing this season. Jordy was sidelined. Montgomery out. Davonte was a shell of the guy he is this year. Couldn't get open or catch a damn thing. Janis running the wrong routes. James Jones and the tight ends unable to get any separation. The defense getting torched drive after drive until lately. Sure, his confidence was shaken.

[humanrefutation]

Eh, people were comparing his fall from grace to that of one, Rick Ankiel. I look at "regression" as a decline in skills, something you don't ever get back. Just because Rodgers missed a few open WR's and wasn't playing at a best-QB-in-the-history-of-the-world level doesn't mean that he had regressed. He was still making great plays, just less frequently. Due to a multitude of reasons, Jordy, Davante hurt, play calling, and yes, Rodgers himself missing passes he normally makes. But that just means he was in a bit of a funk, not that his skills had actually regressed. To think Pats fans were calling for Garofalo to start over Brady after a string of bad performances. And Brady was what, 5, 6, 7 years older than Rodgers? Father time catching up with Brady was a real concern. But Rodgers' skills diminishing in the prime of his career? Hell no.

The bulk of the concerns about Rodgers didn't have to do with his physical ability. They had to do with his mind - he confidence wasn't there, his vision wasn't there, and his touch wasn't there in the same way it's been throughout his career. It's easy to say now that this wasn't a long term concern, but I don't ever recall Brady going through a "bit of a funk" that lasted nearly a whole season. And unlike a physical injury, there isn't a specific timeline present that gives you an idea when to expect improvement. He looks like he's progressed back to an elite form, which gives me relief.

I agree that his confidence wasn't there. Not in his own ability, however, but his teammates'. Can you blame him? Last year his line wasn't playing near the level its playing this season. Jordy was sidelined. Montgomery out. Davonte was a shell of the guy he is this year. Couldn't get open or catch a damn thing. Janis running the wrong routes. James Jones and the tight ends unable to get any separation. The defense getting torched drive after drive until lately. Sure, his confidence was shaken.

No need to pivot to "why" his confidence was shaken. That's a different question. I'm just saying is that it's kind of silly now to pretend that none of those things were a problem or "regression" because he's doing well today.

[JimmyTheKid]

The bulk of the concerns about Rodgers didn't have to do with his physical ability. They had to do with his mind - he confidence wasn't there, his vision wasn't there, and his touch wasn't there in the same way it's been throughout his career. It's easy to say now that this wasn't a long term concern, but I don't ever recall Brady going through a "bit of a funk" that lasted nearly a whole season. And unlike a physical injury, there isn't a specific timeline present that gives you an idea when to expect improvement. He looks like he's progressed back to an elite form, which gives me relief.

I agree that his confidence wasn't there. Not in his own ability, however, but his teammates'. Can you blame him? Last year his line wasn't playing near the level its playing this season. Jordy was sidelined. Montgomery out. Davonte was a shell of the guy he is this year. Couldn't get open or catch a damn thing. Janis running the wrong routes. James Jones and the tight ends unable to get any separation. The defense getting torched drive after drive until lately. Sure, his confidence was shaken.

No need to pivot to "why" his confidence was shaken. That's a different question. I'm just saying is that it's kind of silly now to pretend that none of those things were a problem or "regression" because he's doing well today.

Not "pivoting" anything. Or "pretending" that those things were never a problem. They absolutely were huge factors in why Rodgers wasn't putting up his usual All-World numbers. My issue is simply with Packers' fans who thought Rodgers was regressing, and in the middle of some sort of fall from greatness, due to Olivia Munn or a decline in skills/ability, instead of acknowledging the glaring problems with the supporting cast. Maybe our little discussion here is nothing more than semantics. But the way some fans were talking, this "regression" wasn't something they expected to ever be reversed, despite Rodgers still being near the prime of his career.

[humanrefutation]

I agree that his confidence wasn't there. Not in his own ability, however, but his teammates'. Can you blame him? Last year his line wasn't playing near the level its playing this season. Jordy was sidelined. Montgomery out. Davonte was a shell of the guy he is this year. Couldn't get open or catch a damn thing. Janis running the wrong routes. James Jones and the tight ends unable to get any separation. The defense getting torched drive after drive until lately. Sure, his confidence was shaken.

No need to pivot to "why" his confidence was shaken. That's a different question. I'm just saying is that it's kind of silly now to pretend that none of those things were a problem or "regression" because he's doing well today.

Not "pivoting" anything. Or "pretending" that those things were never a problem. They absolutely were huge factors in why Rodgers wasn't putting up his usual All-World numbers. My issue is simply with Packers' fans who thought Rodgers was regressing, and in the middle of some sort of fall from greatness, due to Olivia Munn or a decline in skills/ability, instead of acknowledging the glaring problems with the supporting cast. Maybe our little discussion here is nothing more than semantics. But the way some fans were talking, this "regression" wasn't something they expected to ever be reversed, despite Rodgers still being near the prime of his career.

Most of the posters here specifically cited his supporting cast and some of the struggles there, so I'm not sure we're really the right audience for that criticism.

But by "those things," I didn't mean the supporting cast or the play-calling. I mean those things within his control. Independent of his supporting case and independent of the play-calling, Rodgers wasn't playing that well. That's not controversial. You can say that he had reasons why his confidence was shaken, or why his vision wasn't there, or why he was over/underthrowing receivers. But ultimately, those things are on him.

To be more specific - there's a difference between making great throws but having guys run the wrong routes or having them drop passes - which did happen certainly and is on the receiver - and making poor throws or poor reads, which happened too and was on Rodgers.

The latter point is where the regression was obvious during that nearly-season-long sample. I don't see the need to debate it. My only criticism of your post is that you denied that regression even existed.

[Mags FTW]

Read on Twitter

[jakecronus8]

Read on Twitter

Thank you for posting this. Makes it that much more satisfying.

[HKPackFan]

So someone said Olivia Munn cut her hair. The curse is over.

[JimmyTheKid]

No need to pivot to "why" his confidence was shaken. That's a different question. I'm just saying is that it's kind of silly now to pretend that none of those things were a problem or "regression" because he's doing well today.

Not "pivoting" anything. Or "pretending" that those things were never a problem. They absolutely were huge factors in why Rodgers wasn't putting up his usual All-World numbers. My issue is simply with Packers' fans who thought Rodgers was regressing, and in the middle of some sort of fall from greatness, due to Olivia Munn or a decline in skills/ability, instead of acknowledging the glaring problems with the supporting cast. Maybe our little discussion here is nothing more than semantics. But the way some fans were talking, this "regression" wasn't something they expected to ever be reversed, despite Rodgers still being near the prime of his career.

Most of the posters here specifically cited his supporting cast and some of the struggles there, so I'm not sure we're really the right audience for that criticism.

But by "those things," I didn't mean the supporting cast or the play-calling. I mean those things within his control. Independent of his supporting case and independent of the play-calling, Rodgers wasn't playing that well. That's not controversial. You can say that he had reasons why his confidence was shaken, or why his vision wasn't there, or why he was over/underthrowing receivers. But ultimately, those things are on him.

To be more specific - there's a difference between making great throws but having guys run the wrong routes or having them drop passes - which did happen certainly and is on the receiver - and making poor throws or poor reads, which happened too and was on Rodgers.

The latter point is where the regression was obvious during that nearly-season-long sample. I don't see the need to debate it. My only criticism of your post is that you denied that regression even existed.

And I still deny "regression" ever existed. Struggling, to me, due to a number of factors, is different than "regressing." Again, maybe this is just a semantics thing but did you personally think that Rodgers wouldn't get "it" back with a more stable supporting cast situation? Or did you think this supposed "regression" was the beginning of the end?

*Edit* - Just skimmed the "Whats Wrong With Aaron" thread that you created. I now see why you had an issue with my initial post. You were one of those Packer's fans putting his performance on his family situation. Yeah, I'm never going to come around to that line of thinking so I'll just end this discussion with agree to disagree.

[humanrefutation]

Not "pivoting" anything. Or "pretending" that those things were never a problem. They absolutely were huge factors in why Rodgers wasn't putting up his usual All-World numbers. My issue is simply with Packers' fans who thought Rodgers was regressing, and in the middle of some sort of fall from greatness, due to Olivia Munn or a decline in skills/ability, instead of acknowledging the glaring problems with the supporting cast. Maybe our little discussion here is nothing more than semantics. But the way some fans were talking, this "regression" wasn't something they expected to ever be reversed, despite Rodgers still being near the prime of his career.

Most of the posters here specifically cited his supporting cast and some of the struggles there, so I'm not sure we're really the right audience for that criticism.

But by "those things," I didn't mean the supporting cast or the play-calling. I mean those things within his control. Independent of his supporting case and independent of the play-calling, Rodgers wasn't playing that well. That's not controversial. You can say that he had reasons why his confidence was shaken, or why his vision wasn't there, or why he was over/underthrowing receivers. But ultimately, those things are on him.

To be more specific - there's a difference between making great throws but having guys run the wrong routes or having them drop passes - which did happen certainly and is on the receiver - and making poor throws or poor reads, which happened too and was on Rodgers.

The latter point is where the regression was obvious during that nearly-season-long sample. I don't see the need to debate it. My only criticism of your post is that you denied that regression even existed.

And I still deny "regression" ever existed. Struggling, to me, due to a number of factors, is different than "regressing." Again, maybe this is just a semantics thing but did you personally think that Rodgers wouldn't get "it" back with a more stable supporting cast situation? Or did you think this supposed "regression" was the beginning of the end?

I think there's a certain point where "struggling" becomes "regressing." I don't think you ever truly know when that transition occurs precisely except in hindsight, but I believe that when it spans two seasons, it becomes more than just "struggling."

To answer your other question - when errors are happening independent of the play-calling or supporting cast, it's impossible for you or for me to say that Rodgers would get "it" back with a more stable supporting cast. The Packers can have you, me, and MD running routes, but if Rodgers can't make the right reads or the right throws, it really doesn't matter.

[Mags FTW]

[HKPackFan]

Watch on YouTube

First game the absolute cheapshot hit. How this is not a 15 yard penalty I don't know.


http://www.seahawks.com/video/2016/12/11/jeff-janis-scores-end-around

Then comes this beautiful end around with Davante showing Sherman who's boss.




Just reliving one of the most satisfying victories we've had in a long time.


EDIT:

BAHAHAHA. Sherman tried to defend his cheapshot, saying it was a scramble drill, then gets schooled showing Rodgers never left the pocket. Love Finley calling out Sherman.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/12/richard-sherman-cheap-shot-tweet-deleted-green-bay-packers-davante-adams

[Mags FTW]

BAHAHAHA. Sherman tried to defend his cheapshot, saying it was a scramble drill, then gets schooled showing Rodgers never left the pocket. Love Finley calling out Sherman.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/12/richard-sherman-cheap-shot-tweet-deleted-green-bay-packers-davante-adams

Sherman blocked Finley on Twitter:

Read on Twitter

[HKPackFan]

BAHAHAHA. Sherman tried to defend his cheapshot, saying it was a scramble drill, then gets schooled showing Rodgers never left the pocket. Love Finley calling out Sherman.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/12/richard-sherman-cheap-shot-tweet-deleted-green-bay-packers-davante-adams

Sherman blocked Finley on Twitter:

Read on Twitter

WOW. For a guy that talks a lot of ****, he's sure thin skinned. Damn. What a little b****!

[chuckleslove]

I always knew Sherman was a bitch. Usually those that talk the most **** are.