Thursday, January 01, 2009

Please, for the love of all that is holy, retire already

And I'm not talking about Favre, I am talking about Wojo.

Just kidding. I am talking about both of them.

Let's add another chapter to the "It's more than numbers, it's about heart. And wins" book of idiocy. This chapter's title? "2008 Aaron Rodgers SUCKS when compared to 2008 Favre."

Rodgers: 3807 YDS/28 TD: 13 INT/93.8 QB Rating

Jeans monger: 3259 YDS/22 TD: 22 INT/81.0 Rating

Pretty cut and dry, right? I mean, what could possibly put Favre ahead of Rodgers when comparing their seasons?

But sorry, there won't be any retractions. Just because Rodgers had a better statistical season doesn't mean the Packers were a better team without Favre.

So: worse QB = better team performance. Dan Orlovsky's phone must be ringing off the hook!

First of all, the numbers don't always make the man.

Never do.

If they did, then six of the top 10 quarterbacks by passing yards and six of the top 10 by touchdowns wouldn't be done with their seasons. But they are, including Rodgers and Favre.

Great, wonderful misuse of "stats."

Those ten by yards: Rivers, Pennington, Warner, Brees, Manning, Rodgers, Schaub, Romo, Garcia, Cassel.

Schaub, Brees and Rodgers were out. But the rest of those missed the playoffs on the last fucking game of the season. Seriously. The Patriots, Bucs and Cowboys were eliminated on the last day of the season.

Rodgers played well this season. He played hurt. He played in the blinding light of the post-Favre era and did so with poise and heart. If he stays healthy (he played much of the season with a shoulder injury), the Packers have themselves a quarterback.

But Favre played well, too -- not as often as Rodgers did,

Doesn't that undermi ... aw forget it.

but well enough that the Jets were 8-3 after beating the then-undefeated Tennessee Titans on the road.

All because of Favre. Football is not a team game played by two seperate 11-man units. It is a game of quarterbacks. Just good, American, white quarterbacks. Gunslingin' and havin' a ball out there.

Thomas Jones, who led the AFC in rushing (the other part of offense that is not throwing) with 1312 yards and 13 TDs, had nothing to do with the Jets being good during one random stretch of the season.

Also, in that wonderful game against the Titans, Favre threw for 224 yards, two TDs and a pick. A typical Favre game. But the Jets won 34-13. How can that be? Without Favre throwing four TDs, kicking every PAT and picking off two passes while playing cornerback?

Leon Washington ran for 82 yards and two TDs on eight (!) carries and Jones had over 100 total yards (96 rushing) and a rec. TD. That's how. They ran for 192 yards.

You remember: That was the same week the Packers got beat 51-29 by New Orleans to drop to 5-6 and start a five-game losing streak. Weird. I don't remember getting any "Favre's washed up" e-mails then.

I know it's hard for you to believe Wojo, but luck is an element in sports. A big one. One that the Packers had a lot of the bad variety this season. Look at their losses:

16-27, 21-30, 24-27, 16-19, 27-28, 29-51, 31-35, 21-24, 16-20, 17-20.

That's a crazy five games decided by three points or less. Two by four-seven and three by seven points or more. That sucks. I would be pissed if I was a Packers fan.

Now, of course, the Jets' losses:

10-19, 29-48, 13-16, 17-34, 14-24, 3-13, 17-24.

One by three or less. One by four-seven and five by seven or more.

This all means the Packers could have easily been 11-5 if they win a few more of the really close ones and one or two of the kind of close ones. The Jets, meanwhile, are pretty much where they should be.

The mistake people make is trying to compare Rodgers' season with Favre's. ... But do wins count for anything?

No. They count for everything.

Favre's Jets had nine compared to the Packers' six.

See above long-winded loss breakdown.

They beat three playoff-bound teams; the Packers defeated one. Favre's Jets gagged away their division lead in the last month, but they still had a chance at the playoffs. The Packers were officially eliminated with two weeks remaining in the season.

I'll give you the division thing, but counter with the AFC East played the AFC and NFC West. Those teams are garbage.

And the Pack beat the Vikings and Colts. That equals two playoff teams, not one.

Anyway, the move from the Packers to Jets doesn't absolve Favre from throwing a league-leading 22 interceptions. Some of those INTs were killers. But the same goes for Rodgers, whose late-game interceptions in Week 14 against Houston and Week 15 against Jacksonville ended comeback attempts. In fact, Rodgers was 0-8 in comeback situations this season.

But he also only threw 13 INTs and 6 more TDs than Favre. And what the fuck are "comeback siutations" anyway? Does being down 7-0 in the first quarter count? I bet it does.

I'm not blaming Rodgers for the mess. He wasn't perfect, but he also wasn't the problem -- just like Favre wasn't the main problem with the Jets. I see why Thompson was willing to make a leap of faith with Rodgers, but Favre's departure could have -- and should have -- been handled better by Packers management.

What I don't see is why it had to end this way, with some Packers fans reveling in the Jets' failures and Favre's injury and struggles. It's as if they can live with a 6-win season as long as Favre and the Jets suffer, too.

I could live with a six-win season too, as long as at least 70% of those 10 losses were winnable games. Oh, and my quarterback wasn't a 40-year-old dude with a TD to INT ratio of 1:1.


Just like this ... well you get it.


Kerry Dolan said...

I said numerous times that he should've gone out with his head held high last year. But now there is this 1 season with the jets. Boo-urns.

JamesAbroad said...

My first thought when I saw this headline on espn was '..come on' I'm glad you got right on this. Farve sucks. He's pretty much the Roger Clemens of football(pre-Mitchell report). He's loved unconditionally by a wide majority of the sports media who spent an estimated 1000 hours of combined coverage on their 'pre-comeback, on-the-fence, where-will-he-end-up' bullshit for each of them in the past two years. No one seems to care that they are terrible team players (shocking since they're usually the same writers who put such a heavy value on synergy and team chemistry)or that they;re only concerned with his own records (Farve's lookin' to really put the INT one out of reach). He gets a free pass for EVERYTHING. When rumors started that he could return to football again, everyone talked about him like he was the Farve from Madden '97, and that the Packers were the biggest idiots/ingrates for not re-signing him, due in part to concerns over his age. But when his body broke down over the season, no one said anything about Farve staying on too long, or the Packers making a smart decision. The guy complained of arm fatigue during the preseason for christ's sake. I think Wojo sums up their (his) point of view best: "His critics say he looked old. Duh -- he's 39."

I'm glad Farve stayed on for another year so people could see that he shouldn't have. Thank you Thomas Jones for saying what I, and many more thought already. The Jet's lost 4 of their last 5 but it really should've gone 5/5 if the Bills didn't absolutely GIFT WRAP that bullshit win.

Bottom line is Farve is washed-up. Jets missed the playoffs. You owe me $10.

Jason Cook said...

I was ridin' high on our bet when they were 8-3. But I will gladly pay up. They did not deserve to make it.