Anthony!":zc0orzk4 said:
Your opinion, however by stating you not a fan of Lacey you make it obvious that it is an opinion of emotion not fact. Lacey is a top 10 Rb (7th in yards and has 9 tds and avg a higher YPA than Lynch.
Just cause I'm not a fan of Lacy, that's all based on emotion lol? I' m not saying he sucks, but I definitely don't think he's that great either. Lynch is a far superior player to Lacy imo and actually they have the same YPC/YPA (4.7). That being said, you can't base everything on stats alone. Context plays a HUGE part also (and that's the thing, it can be subjective). I mean Jamaal Charles is #11 in rushing and Lacy has him beat in almost every stat category aside from YPC, and pretty much anyone not a homer would obviously take Charles > Lacy.
Anthony!":zc0orzk4 said:
Also GB Wr are very very good and have shown it even without Rodgers. Last year both Wrs had several great games even without Rodgers as their QB as did Lacey. Lacey Avg over 80 YPG while Rodgers was out and as a rookie. Nelson Avg over 60 ypg while Rodgers was out(that would give him over 1000 yards in a season), Jones who was on the team last year avg over 53 YPG while Rodgers was out. So sorry the RB and those Wr are really good with or without Rodgers and in the case of the WR way better than anything we have.
When Rodgers was out, Packers went 2-5-1, when he wasn't out, they went 6-2. That's a pretty big discrepancy and that alone shows he definitely has great importance (can't compare anything to Wilson obviously since he's started every game for the past 3 seasons), but we can go into more player stats. When Rodgers was out Lacy was about the same (4.1YPC, 80YPG as you say, some terrible games,and some really good games) and with Rodgers out I would expect him to get a bigger load, that's fine though. No change for Lacy and sure top 10 RB, but definitely some space between him and say the likes of Lynch,McCoy,Peterson,Murray,Charles,Foster, etc. could even argue Bell (#2 rushing), Hill, Morris, Forte, etc.
Again, context is very important. You argue James Jones had 50 YPG after Rodgers was out, well there's a very good explanation for that. When Rodgers was still playing, Jones was the #3 receiver behind Cobb and Nelson, when Rodgers went out Cobb also went out which elevated Jones to #2. That explains the rise in his stats because obviously he he had a bigger role in the offense as the #2 receiver.
Now we can keep going. Again, I want to make sure it's understood I NEVER SAID THESE PLAYERS ARE BAD. I'm just saying Rodgers has great importance on the success to the team. Can Nelson still put up a decent game without Rodgers, sure, but can he but up better stats with Rodgers? I believe so.
Nelson avged 60 YPG in the 8 game span that Rodgers was out. That's alright. I'll keep it simple to show that Rodgers definitely elevates the play.
8 Games Rodgers was out, Nelson WR yards: 504
8 Games Rodgers was in: Nelson WR yards: 810, and that's 100YPG.
Would like to reiterate, again, I want to make sure it's understood I NEVER SAID THESE PLAYERS ARE BAD. I'm just saying Rodgers has great importance on the success to the team. (Rodgers was out, Packers went 2-5-1, when he wasn't out, they went 6-2)
Anthony!":zc0orzk4 said:
Yes our defense helps but to make a point about field position GB avg starting field position this year is 28 yard line, ours 31 yards line, so our great defense is getting us 3 more yards of field position than GB. You see you are forgetting GB has a better kick and punt returner than we do. So sorry Rodgers is great, but it is easy to be when you have that much talent around you. Imagine if Wilson had those Wrs, and that oline and that offense.
I did acknowledge that GB has a good KR/PR game, mentioned that I didn't know much about Packers ST beside from Cobb being a good KR/PR (and even you can agree that when we had Tate like in 2013, our field position game was stupid crazy). The role of a defense doesn't only play a part on field position, the defense does many things for a team and it would be naive to think that field position is all they do (and even then SEA still has it better). SEA's was on historic levels allowed significantly lower PPG,YPG,etc.
You can't seriously diminish what this defense means to this team and at the same time expect me to believe all this defense is good for is 3 yards better in starting field position compared to the Packers. Cmon now, we all know it means a lot more than that.