1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Aaron Rodgers won't have as good of a season as he did last year

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by ivo610, Jun 1, 2012.

  1. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    A few months back we were asked to predict the stats from Rodgers in 2012. I was one of the few that said he will have a noticeable decline in stats, and took some heat for it. I pointed out that historically this is almost always the case, and I just came across an article summarizing the very argument.

    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl-qu...-40-plus-touchdown-passes-013800472--nfl.html

    If he doesn't have as good of a season I'm sure the fingers will be pointed at everyone from Greg Jennings to Ted Thompson to Brett Favre. But maybe we can just blame history instead?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    Or recognize just how special his 2011 season really was.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,123
    Ratings:
    +1,065
    Bring home the Lombardi and no one will care.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  4. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,046
    Ratings:
    +3,131
    In the likely event Rodgers doesn’t duplicate those stellar stats from last year, I would “blame” it on a statistical concept called “reversion to the mean” (or “regression to the mean”).

    Here’s Rodgers’ line from the 2011 regular season. He started 15 games:

    Passing: 343/504 for a 68.3% completion rate. 4,643 total yards passing for 9.2 yds/attempt average and a 122.5 QB rating. 45 TDs, 6 INTs.

    Rushing: 60 rushes for 257 yards for a 4.3yd average, 3 TDs.

    Here are his stats for his four seasons as a starter. He has averaged 15.5 games/season over that time:

    Passing: 336.5/513.5 for a 65.5% completion rate. 4,259 total yards passing for 8.3 yds/attempt average and a 105.2 QB rating. 33 TDs, 9 INTs. (I just averaged the passer rating for the four years.)

    Rushing: 59.5 rushes for 284 yards for a 4.8yd average, 4 TDs.

    Because 2008 dragged his mean stats as a starter down some and because he and the players surrounding him are more experienced in the offense or more in sync with him, I expect his reversion to the mean to exceed the numbers above. So if he completes 66-68% of his passes for over 4,300 yards for a QB rating of more than 105 and he throws for more than 35 TDs or so with 8-10 INTs, I’m just going to have to learn to live with that, even though it would fall short of last years’ numbers!
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. SpartaChris

    SpartaChris Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,042
    Ratings:
    +965
    I for one am expecting a bit of a regression. When you're the very best at what you do, and you play out of your skull and put up the kind of numbers he did last season, it's only logical to expect to see some sort of decline. I predict he'll throw for more than 4,000 yards and 30+ TD's, but I won't be surprised to see him throw for a few more picks this season, and probably fewer yards per attempt. The performance he put up last season was otherworldly, and would be very difficult to repeat.

    Unfortunately the idiot fans won't be able to understand this kind of logic, and will instead find a way to pin any regression on Ted for trading Favre.
     
  6. GeeDogWarrior

    GeeDogWarrior 0 - 0

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Messages:
    386
    Ratings:
    +139
    The Defense plays way better in 2012, We'll probably run the football more in the 2nd half and the backup qb will probably take over in the 4th qt... So Rodgers will probably have around 4,200 yards/hover around 35 TDs.
    then again, if Coach wants to Run up the score for some reason, Rodgers could go for 5,000 some yards and 45 + TDs.
     
  7. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    Stafford peaked last year too.
    So did Brees.

    Last year the ball was juiced.

    Rodgers will win more rings though I believe.
     
  8. okcpackerfan

    okcpackerfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    720
    Ratings:
    +179
    Hard to have as good a season when he just came off one of the most efficient seasons ever in NFL history.
     
  9. armand34

    armand34 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,861
    Ratings:
    +280

    If Rodgers stays healthy he is going to pack on serious stats every season, If he can get a RUNNING-GAME-presence ....oh man, it will be more fun to watch the Packers then it was to watch them in 2011
     
  10. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    A running game will slow down our offense. Why would we want that?
     
  11. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    LOL!
    Good point but the fact of the matter is the ice cold January weather already does that too.
    But the bigger reason is if we had a dangerous running game, it would mean the opposing DEs and OLBs wouldn't 100% be trying to tee-off on Aaron with reckless abandon.
    Make them pay with some big runs, some draws for touchdowns.... that will slow down the edge rushers sometimes.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    I personally blame it on the dropped passes, not the cold weather.

    I see the appeal for fans to want a fun to watch run game I just don't buy into that it would make us a better team. But hey that's just me. I know alot of fans who disagree with me
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Vltrophy

    Vltrophy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,760
    Ratings:
    +391
    We'd have to be up by at least 21 pts. & about 10 min. to go in the game. Even then Rodgers might be like Brady & not want to come out of the game
     
  14. 60six

    60six DIE HARD

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    250
    Ratings:
    +65
    I always felt that in 2011, Rodgers numbers went hand-in-hand with how the Defense played. If they can return to a top 10 D, ARs numbers will decline from last year but, it will have nothing to do with a dropoff of his talent.
     
  15. Rocky11

    Rocky11 Superbowl bound Pack

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    231
    Ratings:
    +61
    Another thing to consider is his ability to maintain his focus. I think it is tough to remain that highly focused all the time. His stats I believe will always be good since he is such a good athlete. It's harder to maintain a high level of that mental toughness all the time. You are subject to daily ups and downs all the time and that all has an affect on your focus and attention. You know that they say that "you can't keep it hard all the time" and I think that is true. I'm agreeing or disagreeing that he will not have as good of year as last. There are many good thoughts throughout this thread. So many things can and will affect his output.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    Because when you dominate time of possession, it limits your opponent's scoring opportunities and keeps your defense fresh...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    We can do that with the passing game too.

    The goal is to our score them. As long as the WRs aren't dropping passes it doesn't seem to be a prob.
     
  18. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    Sure- I'm just explaining the conventional wisdom behind running the ball. Think Wisconsin football under Barry Alvarez: ball control is a powerful advantage. I'm not saying the Packers should try to retool in what has largely become a passing league but I respect the thinking behind a balanced attack. I like that McCarthy doggedly continues to dial up rushing plays despite the fact that our passing game is far more lethal- keeps opposing defenses honest and buys extra rest for ours.

    Ball control offense isn't usually associated with the passing game because receivers drop passes or get forced out of bounds.

    There are numerous game situations where scoring 3 points with 9:00 minutes off the clock is more valuable than scoring 7 points with 2:00 minutes off the clock...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Vltrophy

    Vltrophy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,760
    Ratings:
    +391
    Also ivo610 w/o a running game the D knows your gonna pass. You have to have a at least decent running game to open up the passing game. Like jaybadger82 said it controls the t.o.p. (time of possession).
     
  20. P-E-Z

    P-E-Z Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2011
    Messages:
    342
    Ratings:
    +91
    Smaller numbers would not be a regression...
     
  21. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    And the badgers will never win a national title with the offense they have run pre Wilson. It's outdated. It works for them bc of the expectations and the talent we recruit. We can't recruit like Miami or Texas.

    I've seen this offense grind out long drives, you act like they can't or haven't already.
     
  22. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    The entire league knew all season we weren't going to do much running. It wasn't a secret. So in spite of not "opening up the passing game" we put up the 2nd highest scoring offense in NFL history.

    Time to evaluate the concept of "keeping the D honest" bc Rodgers does that in more ways than one. Deep ball, short ball, or take off from the pocket.

    Rodgers is such an elite talent he changes what was traditionally held in high praise.
     
  23. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,695
    Ratings:
    +2,979
    We have another we need a running game argument? I thought winning the SB cured that?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  24. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,173
    Ratings:
    +4,100
    But but but Ted screwed everything up by not grabbing Lynch!!!!
     
  25. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +387
    Sure. But this isn't a conversation about UW or college football. I mentioned the Badgers as an example of a possession style football team in my previous post.

    Substitute the 2011 San Francisco 49ers instead.

    Not sure where I ever suggested that the Packers couldn't or haven't had a long drive... but there's nothing wrong with acknowledging the objective reality that Green Bay isn't built to play possession offense on a consistent basis.

    FWIW, I think the stats bear me out: the Packers finished eleventh in the league in average time of possession last year despite possessing one of the league's most efficient offenses and finishing second in the NFL in turnovers (i.e., plenty of extra possessions). This is the portrait of an offense that scores fast and scores repeatedly. It's a bit flip to say that a team built this way can shift gears on a whim and begin grinding out eight minute drives. I don't see that happening with a short passing game...

    As stated above, I have no complaints about the Packer offense. The only reason I jumped in this thread was to respond to someone that asked why we would want to slow down our offense by pointing out that there are strategically cogent reasons for slowing down an offense.
     

Share This Page