Admit there is a problem...

That is Step One, according to coldhardfootballfacts.com:http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Ar...bout_the_front-running_Green_Bay_Packers.html
This article addresses some of the arguments put forth by some forum members in response to their previous article on Rodgers.

4th quarter comebacks are exciting.
Favray had a lot of them in his regular seasons, but none that I can recall in a playoff game.

I will take more of the same from Rodgers and this team as long as it means a few more Super Bowls leading from start to finish.
We don't have to fall behind to satisfy the number-crunchers.

I thought everyone agreed the most telling stat of a QBs efficiency was the QBR. It is a more personal stat of a QB than wins/losses and TDs/yards. Rodgers is #1 all time regular season and post season (and he owns the NFL all time record for a single regular season). Any other stat that argues his effectiveness is playing with numbers.
When you're that efficient as a QB isn't that enough? I'm okay if he never gets that label as a "clutch" performer, just keep being the best on any given Sunday.

Eh. Anyone that watched the 2008 season knows that Rodger's did a pretty good job. The defense really let him down several times late in games that season. That's not something the stats are going to easily show, but anyone that watched every play of the season saw Rodger's make several scoring drives late in games only for the defense or special teams to surrender another score. Sometimes Rodger's did not even get another chance. I'm not alleviating Rodger's of blame, but the defense deserves a lot of the blame, at least in 2008. Beyond that, I'll go with the argument that he could obviously be better, but I thought Rodger's more than did his part in 2008.

Some of the claims of arguments being "shot-down" weren't very convincing either. Perhaps if one was only looking at the statistics. Unfortunately, numbers just don't always tell the whole story. Hater's gonna hate, as they say. No player is perfect, but I'll gladly take Rodger's over anyone else currently playing. He just needs a little more help from his defense.

No QB is perfect, even though Rodgers at times made me question that idea last year.

I want to see these detailed fourth-quarter stats for every starter in the league, then we can start making real assumptions.

I'll take the guy who doesn't get stuck in clutch situations over the guy who only wins on the seat of his pants. Thanks for the info though

Frank.... need any 'Roofing' done?

I think we do admit there is a problem and it isn't Rodgers like the article posits. It's the defense stupid! If you get ahead of another team and can't stop them, you lose.

How long has that writer been standing out in left field?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Agreed

Fun with numbers.

But consider - the Packers have had consistency problems in the past. They lost several close games while they gathering the talent they have now. But they vaulted quickly from the borderline to dominating. Over the last two years combined, the Packers have either been tied or ahead for 83% (65% ahead, 18% tied) of the clock. It's pretty hard to "come from behind to win a close one" when you're ahead by two touchdowns for the better part of two years. So if you put up certain stats while up and coming, and then vault so high that you don't have chance to create offsetting stats because you're winning by 2.5 TD's on average, it's specious to then point out a "problem". The Packers have been the best team in the league over the last three years combined, tied with the Saints for the best playoffs provided, with a championship. That's all that really matters. If the inconsistency bug comes back, it will rest with Rodgers and MCCARTHY to do something about it. Thompson provides enough potency, it's on MCarthy to provide consistency, and if Rodgers appears to be the center of it the it's up to McCarthy to work on it.

Your Making Me the great Lunchboxer very mad.... You dont wanna fight with the Lunchboxer..

Putting your link which has nothing to do with the topic on multiple threads is going to get you banned pretty quickly. Stop.

Also it wasn't like our Special Teams were of any help since Rodgers started. Also we probably have discussed this during the season last year too, its not like we were OMG we are going to go undefeated, no we thought we would be NFC North Champs and that was about it. The Packers play as an offensive juggernaut that relies on their defense to make a turnover. I still think the loss in Arizona in the 2009 wildcard game is the best definition of how the Packers played. Our offensive problems is we need to improve the O-Line, and have the lineup be consistent, our running backs need to break out and run, our receivers need to catch the ball, and need to develop a back up quarter back. As for Rodger's mythical comeback stat in the clutch goes, our offense and special teams needs to step up during crunch time. A games versus the Falcons, Cardinals, Steelers, Lions, Dolphins, Patriots (more or less ST), Redskins losses and many wins which I forgot comes to mind when our defense and special teams blew the game.

Also if we are far enough ahead, I don't think its a bad thing to give our back ups playing time because like in the 2010 season, we may need them, and that helps bring down stats.

GH, what's your thoughts on the topic?

I post my own useless article:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-most-clutch-players-in-the-nfl-today/page/25

I e-mailed the author and he could not offer any remedy to the articles argument. Good statistics could not overcome the most important statistic of all , wins. Yes the view from the bleachers is pretty good, so is the beer and peanuts. It is a whole other story down on the field where the victories are won.