Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Poll on Rodger's Pocket Presence
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PackersRS" data-source="post: 366092" data-attributes="member: 1429"><p>Again, I had this same discussion at Acmepackingcompany.com, it's borderline assinine to correlate sack totals with pocket presence.</p><p></p><p>To do that, you have to completely disregard the quality of OL, the conditions in which every sack was made, who was responsible for every sack, if taking the sack was the best solution in that moment or not.</p><p></p><p>Favre took way less sacks than Rodgers, but he also threw way more picks.</p><p></p><p>Tom Coughling was quoted saying that Eli Manning was a big reason why they didn't take many sacks, but that he was wrong in doing so, because that was also the big reason why his INT totals soared.</p><p></p><p>It's idiotic to take number of sacks and determinate if the QB has good pocket presence or not. What Aaron Rodgers did against Atlanta, you can't do that if you are not ELITE at pocket presence and avoiding sacks.</p><p></p><p>And this isn't evaluating Rodgers' career or year regarding his pocket presence. It's evaluating it <strong>NOW. </strong>The last 7 or so games, he was elite. <strong>NOW, </strong>he's elite. It's not cherrypicking, I'm not just selecting a few games, it's a STRETCH of games, the most recent stretch of games, against the best pass rushing teams in the NFL.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PackersRS, post: 366092, member: 1429"] Again, I had this same discussion at Acmepackingcompany.com, it's borderline assinine to correlate sack totals with pocket presence. To do that, you have to completely disregard the quality of OL, the conditions in which every sack was made, who was responsible for every sack, if taking the sack was the best solution in that moment or not. Favre took way less sacks than Rodgers, but he also threw way more picks. Tom Coughling was quoted saying that Eli Manning was a big reason why they didn't take many sacks, but that he was wrong in doing so, because that was also the big reason why his INT totals soared. It's idiotic to take number of sacks and determinate if the QB has good pocket presence or not. What Aaron Rodgers did against Atlanta, you can't do that if you are not ELITE at pocket presence and avoiding sacks. And this isn't evaluating Rodgers' career or year regarding his pocket presence. It's evaluating it [B]NOW. [/B]The last 7 or so games, he was elite. [B]NOW, [/B]he's elite. It's not cherrypicking, I'm not just selecting a few games, it's a STRETCH of games, the most recent stretch of games, against the best pass rushing teams in the NFL. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
PackerDNA
Latest posts
Packers to Play in Brazil
Latest: DoURant
44 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Breaking Down the NFC North, 2024
Latest: Calebs Revenge
58 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
I had This Nightmare
Latest: Calebs Revenge
Today at 11:47 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Transfer portal and NIL Money, how they have changed college sports".
Latest: Heyjoe4
Today at 9:02 AM
College Sports
The Jordan Love Era Begins
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 9:00 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Poll on Rodger's Pocket Presence
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top