Sunday, February 06, 2011
The Game
No real dog in this fight: The New York football teams were a combined 1-3 against the Packers and the Steelers in the past season (Jets, 1-1 against Pittsburgh, 0-1 vs. Green Bay and the Giants were 0-1 against the Pack). So, I'm going with a gut feeling that Green Bay is slightly better -- in particular, faster -- than Pittsburgh (aside from hoping that Ben Roethlisberger gets his ass handed to him).
So, let's call it GB 31, Pitt 28.
UPDATE: So, I got the Green Bay number, but missed the Steelers by one field goal (the 52-yarder they missed). Great game, however. As well as Aaron Rodgers played (and he did: If the Pack's receivers didn't have multiple cases of the dropsies, A-Rodg would have probably had close to 400 years), the decisive factor in Super Bowl XLV was Green Bay's defense. Considering what they did to the Jets earlier in the season (9-0, at home), I can't say that was such a surprise. However, that the Packers still managed to hold off Pittsburgh, despite losing both Charles Woodson and Sam Shields midway through the second quarter was quite impressive. And, in the battle of the defensive "hair-iors," Clay Matthews of the Pack clearly outplayed Troy Polamalu.
Oh well, congrats to MVP Rodgers who managed to help everyone forget about Brett Favre, Ben Roethlisberger, Michael Vick and all the other soap operatic mini-narratives that fueled the past season. How great that a great arm and a good work ethic can push all the other BS to the side.
|
So, let's call it GB 31, Pitt 28.
UPDATE: So, I got the Green Bay number, but missed the Steelers by one field goal (the 52-yarder they missed). Great game, however. As well as Aaron Rodgers played (and he did: If the Pack's receivers didn't have multiple cases of the dropsies, A-Rodg would have probably had close to 400 years), the decisive factor in Super Bowl XLV was Green Bay's defense. Considering what they did to the Jets earlier in the season (9-0, at home), I can't say that was such a surprise. However, that the Packers still managed to hold off Pittsburgh, despite losing both Charles Woodson and Sam Shields midway through the second quarter was quite impressive. And, in the battle of the defensive "hair-iors," Clay Matthews of the Pack clearly outplayed Troy Polamalu.
Oh well, congrats to MVP Rodgers who managed to help everyone forget about Brett Favre, Ben Roethlisberger, Michael Vick and all the other soap operatic mini-narratives that fueled the past season. How great that a great arm and a good work ethic can push all the other BS to the side.
Labels: Green Bay Packers, Pittsburgh Steelers, Super Bowl
Monday, December 25, 2006
The Best Packer Quarterback
When I did my post about "The Best Quarterback of All Time" back in September, I was not expecting to still be getting comments on it in December, but I am.
One thing that struck me in the comments was people claiming Brett Favre as the best of all time. But I don't even consider him the best Green Bay Packer quarterback. That would be Bart Starr.
Using the same criteria I used to determine the best quarterback of all time, Starr is very close to Favre, even considering the different eras in which they each played. Starr's numbers are on the left, with Favre's numbers as of last season:
Completion Percentage: 57.4% vs. 61.5%
Average Gain per Attempt: 7.85 vs. 7.04
Touchdown Percentage: 4.8% vs. 5.2%
Interception Percentage: 4.4% vs. 3.4%
NFL/Super Bowl Championships: 5 vs. 1
Average Rushing Yards per Carry: 5.3 vs. 3.5
Passer Rating: 80.5 vs. 86.0
Those are similar numbers considering the different passing nature of the eras involved. The yards per pass attempt explain a lot. In Starr's era, the passes were generally thrown farther than in the "west coast" era of Favre. This also explains why Favre's completion percentage was higher, although Starr's 57% completion percentage was the NFL career record when Starr retired. Finally, with Starr typically throwing the ball farther than Favre, Starr naturally threw more interceptions per attempt.
But for a true comparison on game management, let's add fumbles to interceptions per game. Favre turned the ball over 1.57 times per game. Starr turned the ball over 0.93 times per game.
But the number that stands out is the championships, where Starr holds a 5-1 advantage. Adding in the facts that Starr was a better runner and game manager than Favre, and Starr is clearly the better Packer quarterback.
|
One thing that struck me in the comments was people claiming Brett Favre as the best of all time. But I don't even consider him the best Green Bay Packer quarterback. That would be Bart Starr.
Using the same criteria I used to determine the best quarterback of all time, Starr is very close to Favre, even considering the different eras in which they each played. Starr's numbers are on the left, with Favre's numbers as of last season:
Completion Percentage: 57.4% vs. 61.5%
Average Gain per Attempt: 7.85 vs. 7.04
Touchdown Percentage: 4.8% vs. 5.2%
Interception Percentage: 4.4% vs. 3.4%
NFL/Super Bowl Championships: 5 vs. 1
Average Rushing Yards per Carry: 5.3 vs. 3.5
Passer Rating: 80.5 vs. 86.0
Those are similar numbers considering the different passing nature of the eras involved. The yards per pass attempt explain a lot. In Starr's era, the passes were generally thrown farther than in the "west coast" era of Favre. This also explains why Favre's completion percentage was higher, although Starr's 57% completion percentage was the NFL career record when Starr retired. Finally, with Starr typically throwing the ball farther than Favre, Starr naturally threw more interceptions per attempt.
But for a true comparison on game management, let's add fumbles to interceptions per game. Favre turned the ball over 1.57 times per game. Starr turned the ball over 0.93 times per game.
But the number that stands out is the championships, where Starr holds a 5-1 advantage. Adding in the facts that Starr was a better runner and game manager than Favre, and Starr is clearly the better Packer quarterback.
Labels: Bart Starr, Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers
