Rodgers And His Interception %

[gwh11]

Anyone in full possession of their faculties knows Rodgers is playing lights out right now. Part of that is reflected in his low interception rate. He is currently the All-Time NFL leader in career interception % with a ridiculously low 1.9%.
I took a look at past modern-era Packers QBs (starters) and their career interception rates:
Brett Favre 3.3%
Don Majkowski 3.5%
Bart Starr 4.4%
Randy Wright 5.1%
Scott Hunter 5.1% (6.7% with just the Packers, however)
David Whitehurst 5.2%
Lynn ****ey 5.7%
I was a little surprised to see Starr below Favre & Majik in this regard. Perhaps a reflection on how the (passing) game has changed.

 

[Bensalama21]

I was a little surprised to see Starr below Favre & Majik in this regard. Perhaps a reflection on how the (passing) game has changed.

Your right. Football used to be all about the running game. Quarterbacks would throw less than 20 times a game. Because of that, they had less attempts to lower that percentage if they did throw an interception

 

[Eric87]

Rodgers also is the all-time leader in passer rating. His rate stats benefit from not having played during his developmental years.

I would guess Starr's 4.4% INTs is very very low for his time. I know he retired with something like 57% completions, and that was an all-time record. Nobody retired with 60% completions until Joe Montana. The biggest dividing line is 1978 when the five-yard chuck rule, and maybe some other pro-passing rules went into effect.

Favre's 3.3% INTs isn't bad either. His total INTs looks bad, but I think he had 10,000+ passing attemtps.

 

[gwh11]

Rodgers also is the all-time leader in passer rating. His rate stats benefit from not having played during his developmental years.

I would guess Starr's 4.4% INTs is very very low for his time. I know he retired with something like 57% completions, and that was an all-time record. Nobody retired with 60% completions until Joe Montana. The biggest dividing line is 1978 when the five-yard chuck rule, and maybe some other pro-passing rules went into effect.

Favre's 3.3% INTs isn't bad either. His total INTs looks bad, but I think he had 10,000+ passing attemtps.

That's right. In Starr's time only a few have a better rating, such as Bill Munson and Roman Gabriel.

 

[Wood Chipper]

After watching favre for so many years, I half expect rodgers to throw an int or two a game.

 

[Forget Favre]

After watching favre for so many years, I half expect rodgers to throw an int or two a game.

I have two theories why BrINT messed up so much.
1) His addiction to pills.
Yeah, he was treated for it and all that stuff. But he could have relapsed and been stoned while playing.
2) Never took the game seriously enough. Just out there to have fun and that's it.
We'd be rich if we had a dime every time one of the announcers would say, "Look at Favre. He's like a kid out there having fun! I love it!"
That was part of the problem. He just wants to play and didn't really give a damn if he won or lost. I also doubt that he did as much preparation and had any focus anywhere near what Aaron has. (See #1.) Training camp. Need I write more?
Watch those videos where he's mic'd up. You'll hear him joking all the time! Nothing wrong with joking around, but the way he does it makes it seem like he doesn't really have his head in the game.
I think BrINT thought he could get by just on talent alone.
But Aaron knows better. He prepares and is focused and is why he is doing so well.
And I think Aaron actually has much, much better accuracy than Favre did.
Which could also explain his low INT stats.

 

[gwh11]

I have two theories why BrINT messed up so much.
1) His addiction to pills.
Yeah, he was treated for it and all that stuff. But he could have relapsed and been stoned while playing.
2) Never took the game seriously enough. Just out there to have fun and that's it.
We'd be rich if we had a dime every time one of the announcers would say, "Look at Favre. He's like a kid out there having fun! I love it!"
That was part of the problem. He just wants to play and didn't really give a damn if he won or lost. I also doubt that he did as much preparation and had any focus anywhere near what Aaron has. (See #1.) Training camp. Need I write more?
Watch those videos where he's mic'd up. You'll hear him joking all the time! Nothing wrong with joking around, but the way he does it makes it seem like he doesn't really have his head in the game.
I think BrINT thought he could get by just on talent alone.
But Aaron knows better. He prepares and is focused and is why he is doing so well.
And I think Aaron actually has much, much better accuracy than Favre did.
Which could also explain his low INT stats.

I have to disagree with those theories. There's no evidence Favre was playing stoned after his treatment (although it may have looked like it at times). He also gave up drinking after 1999.
He did joke around a lot, but he believed that if the team was loose, they would play better. As a matter of fact, I've seen quotes from teammates that back that up.
Acting like a kid having fun is not mutually exclusive from having your head in the game.
To say he never took the game seriously enough and was just out there to have fun completely contradicts what teammates, coaches and opposing players said about him for years. Countless guys that have played with and against him routinely commented on and admired his competitiveness. That's a fact. And that's one of the reasons Ron Wolf went after him in the first place.
Rodgers has been very smart with the ball, and, I think, has witnessed in Favre what not to do in terms of forcing things.

 

[Bogart]

Back in Starr's day it was a whole different ball game.

Terry Bradshaw was a great quarterback, and the best for Pittsburgh but he also had high interceptions. As did Roger Staubach some early years.

Back then you didn't really have a team that threw the ball all the time like we have today. I'm pretty sure the Bengals with Ken Anderson and Bill Walsh as the offensive coordinator started the trend of heavy passing, then of course the west coast offense 49ers was only the beginning. You had the Run and Shoot come later on. But even in the 80's quarterbacks had high interception numbers.
There was a rule that you couldn't throw the ball out of bounds if no one was open you had to force it out there which also is what many people say when it comes to Marino's heavy interceptions in his 1984 career season.

Oakland/L.A. Raiders are still using their original game plan for the 70's. Run and Gun, they are one of the only teams that never gave up their dependence on a running game. The run is the back bone of ALL their offenses over the years. Other than Stabler you never hear of them having elite quarterbacks, yet they have a history of damn good rbs.

 

[gwh11]

I found some of the yearly variance in Starr's INT% a bit strange. For example:
1961-5.4%
1962-3.2
1963-4.1
1964-1.5 (wow)
1965-3.6
1966-1.2 (wow again)
1967-8.1
Perhaps injuries played a role in that. Regardless, 1.5 and 1.2 were phenominal for the time.

 

[longtimefan]

I have two theories why BrINT messed up so much.
1) His addiction to pills.
Yeah, he was treated for it and all that stuff. But he could have relapsed and been stoned while playing.
2) Never took the game seriously enough. Just out there to have fun and that's it.
We'd be rich if we had a dime every time one of the announcers would say, "Look at Favre. He's like a kid out there having fun! I love it!"
That was part of the problem. He just wants to play and didn't really give a damn if he won or lost. I also doubt that he did as much preparation and had any focus anywhere near what Aaron has. (See #1.) Training camp. Need I write more?
Watch those videos where he's mic'd up. You'll hear him joking all the time! Nothing wrong with joking around, but the way he does it makes it seem like he doesn't really have his head in the game.
I think BrINT thought he could get by just on talent alone.
But Aaron knows better. He prepares and is focused and is why he is doing so well.
And I think Aaron actually has much, much better accuracy than Favre did.
Which could also explain his low INT stats.

As much as I dont like what Brett did and how he did it, #1 is plain goofy....no way in hell could someone play loaded on vic

I think your 2nd one is a little bit better..I recall him saying he didnt even know what a nickle back was and he said that in his prime?? Or very close to it..

He took chances to make a play..Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didnt..I think if Holmgren made him stick to the play and be more careful he wouldnt have been as successful as he was.

 

[Kitten]

Interceptions are a two way street. Not only is Aaron capable of throwing complete passes, it also helps to have receivers who are able to catch them without the pass getting intercepted by a defender in the process. Interceptions are not always the fault of the QB, but the mark always goes against him.

 

[Powarun]

Interceptions are a two way street. Not only is Aaron capable of throwing complete passes, it also helps to have receivers who are able to catch them without the pass getting intercepted by a defender in the process. Interceptions are not always the fault of the QB, but the mark always goes against him.

Agreed, though sometimes its the QB's fault for not throwing the best throw. Kind of like that tipped one in the Denver game, or they are just plain FREAKY like the one that bounced off DD's foot in the NFC game. Seriously football God WTH.

 

[Aaron rodgers is god]

Rodger's decision is amazing. He is the perfect blend of aggressiveness and being conservative. He is not scared to go down field, but when he does he allows his receiver to make a play and no one else.

 

[Raptorman]

I found some of the yearly variance in Starr's INT% a bit strange. For example:
1961-5.4%
1962-3.2
1963-4.1
1964-1.5 (wow)
1965-3.6
1966-1.2 (wow again)
1967-8.1
Perhaps injuries played a role in that. Regardless, 1.5 and 1.2 were phenominal for the time.

Yeah, but go to his first 5 years. 6.8, 4.7, 7.6, 5.2, 4.7. I think it may have to do with some of plays put in by the new coach and the players that were around him. Not sure who joined the team back then but it would be interesting to see. Maybe tom if I have time I will look it up.

 

[whoartthou]

amazing

 

[TJV]

Comparing Starr to modern day QBs is just one example of why it’s difficult to compare players from different eras. The biggest differences with regard to INT percentage IMO is when Starr played, both QBs and receivers got legally beat up play after play. And that was the pre-west coast offense era in which the passing game was not used as a substitute for running by using shorter, safer passes. That’s a stark contrast to what goes on today. Even so, look at how Starr took care of the ball in the most important games. After losing the first playoff game in which he appeared, the Starr QB’d (and Lombardi coached of course) Packers were 9-0 in playoff games. In the playoffs, Starr threw 3 INTs in 213 attempts for an INT rate of 1.41% and a 104.8 playoff passer rating. Favre threw 30 INTs in 791 attempts for a rate of 3.79% and an 86.3 playoff passer rating and was 13-11 in the playoffs. Of course football is a team game but Favre saved some of his most foolishly careless passes for the playoffs. Don’t get me wrong, Favre was a very exciting player and of course a certain HOFer. But he could have been much better IMO if he would have just taken better care of the ball throughout his career and particularly in the playoffs.

I have two theories why BrINT messed up so much.

Here’s my theory on why Favre was so careless with the ball: In spite of the myths perpetrated by his adoring fans and advanced by Favre himself, he became a selfish player. It was all about him; at some point he became a “me” guy, not a “team” guy. For example, on his last play in his last playoff game all he had to do was make a few yards rushing and go out of bounds to give his team a chance at a FG which would have sent his team to the Super Bowl. But what glory is there in that? Instead he threw an unnecessarily dangerous pass and the rest is history. In January of 2004 at Philadelphia instead of taking a sack or throwing the ball away he threw up an unnecessarily dangerous INT in overtime that resembled a punt more than a pass and the rest is history. In his last NFC championship game at Lambeau Field on a play in which Ryan Grant was wide open right in front of him, he threw an unnecessarily dangerous pass and the rest is history. IMO it is no coincidence all of that happened after Favre was out from under Holmgren’s disciplining presence: The absence of Holmgren allowed Favre's selfishness to flourish.

Look at his annual dance with retirement. Some Packers fans don’t realize that nonsense began in the summer of 2002, a couple of years before Thompson became GM. Why did Favre do it if not for the attention? It looked many times like he wanted to be begged to return, consider for a moment his motivation for that. Of course Favre isn’t the only one at fault for this; he’s just mostly responsible. Some reading this post were among Packers fans who proclaimed ‘Favre is the Green Bay Packers’ or similar sentiments which ignored the great and long history of the Packers. And IMO one of Sherman’s great failings as HC was how he catered to Favre’s selfishness, allowing him to skip off-season sessions altogether which would have allowed him to get up to speed with newcomers, even if he didn’t participate in all the drills. Even worse, Sherman permitted him to have a separate locker/dressing area apart from his teammates. What message did that send to Favre?

The 2007 regular season was an example of what could have been for Favre and the Packers after Holmgren left. How many championships would the Packers have challenged for with that Favre at QB in the playoffs? But even then for some reason toward the end of his career, he just couldn’t do it for an entire season and post season. IMO the main reason was he just couldn’t resist the selfish instincts that were so ingrained for so long. He had to make the spectacular play because IMO he had long ago become a “me” guy and sadly he remains so today.

 

[ivo610]

Will be interesting to see what his final numbers read, but I really just want to see how many titles he brings to titletown.

 

[Mushroom]

As much as I dont like what Brett did and how he did it, #1 is plain goofy....no way in hell could someone play loaded on vic

Id have to disagree with that. I was taking vics or oxy's for kidney stones for quite a while. It got to the point where you were just used it to. I'd play softball just fine op'ed outta my gourd. Could run just as well and field/hit the ball as well as I could 100% sober.

But yeah, ForgetFavre is again being pretty goofy in his assessment(s) of things.

 

[BoilerUp]

I have two theories why BrINT messed up so much.
1) His addiction to pills.
Yeah, he was treated for it and all that stuff. But he could have relapsed and been stoned while playing.
2) Never took the game seriously enough. Just out there to have fun and that's it.
We'd be rich if we had a dime every time one of the announcers would say, "Look at Favre. He's like a kid out there having fun! I love it!"
That was part of the problem. He just wants to play and didn't really give a damn if he won or lost. I also doubt that he did as much preparation and had any focus anywhere near what Aaron has. (See #1.) Training camp. Need I write more?
Watch those videos where he's mic'd up. You'll hear him joking all the time! Nothing wrong with joking around, but the way he does it makes it seem like he doesn't really have his head in the game.
I think BrINT thought he could get by just on talent alone.
But Aaron knows better. He prepares and is focused and is why he is doing so well.
And I think Aaron actually has much, much better accuracy than Favre did.
Which could also explain his low INT stats.

Classless post is classless

 

[Forget Favre]

Classless post is classless

Just throwin a couple of ideas out there.
If you don't like 'em, that's fine.

 

[Kitten]

I have two theories why BrINT messed up so much.
1) His addiction to pills.
Yeah, he was treated for it and all that stuff. But he could have relapsed and been stoned while playing.
2) Never took the game seriously enough. Just out there to have fun and that's it.
We'd be rich if we had a dime every time one of the announcers would say, "Look at Favre. He's like a kid out there having fun! I love it!"
That was part of the problem. He just wants to play and didn't really give a damn if he won or lost. I also doubt that he did as much preparation and had any focus anywhere near what Aaron has. (See #1.) Training camp. Need I write more?
Watch those videos where he's mic'd up. You'll hear him joking all the time! Nothing wrong with joking around, but the way he does it makes it seem like he doesn't really have his head in the game.
I think BrINT thought he could get by just on talent alone.
But Aaron knows better. He prepares and is focused and is why he is doing so well.
And I think Aaron actually has much, much better accuracy than Favre did.
Which could also explain his low INT stats.

I think we should consider these theories, even if they seem unlikely and unprovable. I've noticed something, I'm going to draw up a Favre/ Rodgers comparison. Granted this is all hearsay and not even circumstantial evidence, but give it a consideration. Favre did have an unusually high percentage of INTs. So much that he was pretty much notorious for them. All QBs will have INTs at some point, it's part of the game, no matter how good you are.

Rodgers seems focused and driven when he is playing. Stone cold. He seems to think with his head.

Favre always seemed to me to be a bit unpredictable. Like he was all over the place. I'm not saying Favre wasn't a great QB, that would be a false statement on my part, I'm just saying he was unreliable. Inconsistent. IF he was on pills of any kind, not saying he was, but we are entertaining a theory, this would contribute to his lack of focus, the INTs for sure as well as his lack of seriousness for the game.

I emphasize there is no proof anywhere that he was playing under the influence of anything. I just think we should take Forget Favre's theories into consideration as we have with theories much more abstract than these.

 

[Forget Favre]

I think we should consider these theories, even if they seem unlikely and unprovable. I've noticed something, I'm going to draw up a Favre/ Rodgers comparison. Granted this is all hearsay and not even circumstantial evidence, but give it a consideration. Favre did have an unusually high percentage of INTs. So much that he was pretty much notorious for them. All QBs will have INTs at some point, it's part of the game, no matter how good you are.

Rodgers seems focused and driven when he is playing. Stone cold. He seems to think with his head.

Favre always seemed to me to be a bit unpredictable. Like he was all over the place. I'm not saying Favre wasn't a great QB, that would be a false statement on my part, I'm just saying he was unreliable. Inconsistent. IF he was on pills of any kind, not saying he was, but we are entertaining a theory, this would contribute to his lack of focus, the INTs for sure as well as his lack of seriousness for the game.

I emphasize there is no proof anywhere that he was playing under the influence of anything. I just think we should take Forget Favre's theories into consideration as we have with theories much more abstract than these.

Thank you.

I dunno. I guess I was under the impression that he was playing on pain meds because he was in pain?

Regardless I think we can agree that Favre was more reckless with the ball than Mr. Rodgers is.

 

[Mushroom]

Why is it, that a person with the handle "ForgetFavre" mentions him in about 85% of their posts?

 

[realcaliforniacheese]

Why is it, that a person with the handle "ForgetFavre" mentions him in about 85% of their posts?

I had some Shrooms once...Or at least I think I did. It's hard to remember for sure, but I had a great time with Jim, Jimi and Jerry.

 

[Mushroom]

LOL, :feelsgoodman:

Im a Morel hunter, but all mushrooms are interesting