Draft Countdown Forums

Go Back   Draft Countdown Forums > Draft Countdown Forums > Pro Football

Pro Football Discuss professional football.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 05-29-2012, 05:26 PM    (permalink
Pro Bowler
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,793
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.

Originally Posted by Sportsfan486 View Post
I'm pretty sure I said Colston would be GB's #3. And yes, Finley would still be ahead of him for targets. And the fact that you even mentioned Colston and Jennings in the same sentence is, to be brutally honest, ignorant. Also, how does Rodgers make his receivers good yet Brees doesn't do the same? Way to fail at making a point.
I never said Brees didn't make Colston, the point is that neither are on a Megatron, Fitz, Dre etc. level. I'd put them in both in that 2nd tier of WRs, still viable #1 options but not elite.

So yea, they kind of are in the same breath.

I don't know that Finely would be ahead of Colston in terms of targets. Finley was targeted 92 times this year while Colston was targeted 107 times, fairly even.

However, even if Colston was #2 to Jennings, Nelson even edged Finley in targets this year. I would argue that Colston would get more targets as the #2 WR than Nelson and Colston undoubtedly has more reliable hands than Finley.

Still, now we are just arguing hypotheticals which can never be proven right or wrong

The Pats and Packers have the better QBs. Like I said. I suppose you could argue Brees is better than Brady but there isn't a coach or GM that would take Brees over Rodgers right now. Are you really going to argue that?
I love the, "GMs would do (insert statement here) so I am clearly right" argument.

You have NO idea what GMs would do, nor do I, so this is a pointless argument.

Yards. What do yards get you, exactly? They broke YARDAGE records. I'm sorry but who cares? They didn't break scoring records and, frankly, their passing attack is based extensively on what are effectively long handoffs.
Yardage gets you closer to the goal line to score.

I did point out earlier that an argument could be made for the Pats the year they broke the passing record. Still, a record is a record.

And they had a whooping 400 more passing yards than the Packers, even with the Packers letting off the gas consistently in games they were blowing out on route to 15-1.
They also had one more passing TD than the Pack, either way you look at it, they were better than the pack this year.

Stats aren't everything.
I believe I stated the same thing earlier, but you can't ignore a record breaking season by saying stats don't matter.

The Packers are clearly the superior passing team (do I have to explain that one?

Please tell me under what logic that the pack had a better passing attack.

Brees had a better completion percentage and yards per game average.

They were very close this year, but the fact is that this particular year, the Saints passing attack was better.

They have the best QB and the best overall passing weapons and they scored more PPG with much less of a running game.
The passing attack of NO scored more ppg than the packs passing attack... so yea.

I won't even dignify your best QB comment with a response. RODGERZZZZZ is very good, he may be the best in the league... last year, Brees was better, just the way that it is.

Don't really get how the receiving corps is better for the pack, specifically this year. Nelson was the only receiver to break 1,000 yards, after that they only had 4 other guys break 400 yards.

The Saints had TWO players break 1,000 yards with 5 more breaking 400 yards.

Again, stats aren't everything but the saints have a large number of 2nd and 3rd tier WRs they can go to, GB has one 2nd tier guy and a few 3rd tier guys.

The Patriots and Saints are close, more 2a and 2b, but Gronkowski is obviously better than Graham (as excellent as Graham is,) and the receiving core is better.
How do you figure this one? Yea, Gronk trumps Graham. After that I would probably have to go with the Saints WRs if you were to make lists in descending order.

And for your stats.. go rewatch Packers games towards the middle of the 3rd quarter and Saints games at the end of the 4th. Notably blowouts. The difference? Packers pulled Rodgers early in every blowout while the Saints kept Brees in. Yet still scored more points.
A. Brees had more passing TDs than Rodgers, so I really don't get why it matters that the pack scored more points overall since we are talking about passing attacks here.

B. Thats fine and well, we could postulate that Rodgers would have had a better season if he had stayed in, but he didn't and all we can make judgments on are known quantities, i.e. Brees having a better season than Rodgers.

The Packers had 5 more passing touchdowns than the Saints and 6 less INTs. Despite above factual. They scored more POINTS PER GAME than the Saints despite a clearly inferior rushing game (again, anyone going to argue that?) Yes. They're a better aerial attack.
Still, Rodgers had less passing TDs than Brees, I don't care what your backup QB can do for you.

I'll agree that the Saints and Pats are 2a and 2b. The Packers are clearly superior.
Clearly, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.

As for the Saints last year not being top 5... again, you're stuck on stats. Rule changes have catered to offensive number explosion, most notably in the passing game. You can't compare stats from now and 10 years ago; apples and oranges. You have to compare within the framework of the other offenses of the time.
The Pats and Colts being some of the main opponents to the Saints teams, also had the same benefits. Furthermore, the Rams, 49ers, and Vikings teams being mentioned also benefited from the 5 yard rules etc. that were already being imposed around or before their time.

Some of those Niners and Rams teams, the Pats in 2007. You have to have them top 5. Ditto for the Packers last year.
LOL, you must be some kind of homer if your putting a passing attack that wasn't even the best passing attack this year in the same conversation as the 07 Pats, niners and Rams.

At least there is an argument for the Saints.

BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.