: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:19 pm  

Ian [77] wrote:

How on earth do you come to that conclusion? I haven't checked the stats but Rodgers isn't up with Cutler? Is he?

Check this quote from NFL.com Senior Writer Vic Carrucci:-



I'm interesting to hear why you place Rodgers on the same plane as Cutler.

Firstly A-Rod IMO is at a better level at this stage of his starting career compared to Cutler when he started. They both, still, have alot of potential to develop into elite QB's.

As for stats.

Rodgers has a better completion percentage (63.6 to 62.3)
More touchdowns (28-25)
Less interceptions (13 to 18.)
Better QB rating (93.8 to 86.0)
Better average yards per completion (7.5 to 7.3)
More deep throws (16 passes of 40 yards or more compared to 7)

Rodgers was one of the only stars of our season.

Ian [77] wrote:

Sorry Conners, but that's up there with your all time best pearlers:-

- 5 receiver sets in the snow
- Jim Sorgi is better than Dan Marino because SB rings are all that matter

Come on mate. Elements are a consideration in sport. You must agree with that, surely?

Of course elements are a consideration but in relation to the special teams i don't think as much, if anything it would play into Chicago's hands more than against them.

Such elements are prevelant at virtually all games outdoors. We play in the snow and cold. NY it snows and is cold. Pittsburgh it rains. Miami can be hurricane weather.

Oh, and my name isn't Conners.

: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:28 pm  

Really want to get to a game at Lambeau when the fins play, think its next year they do (2010 season). Closest i have been to that sort of weather was either in Chicago or Buffalo during a blizzard...

: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:36 pm  

Firstly A-Rod IMO is at a better level at this stage of his starting career compared to Cutler when he started. They both, still, have alot of potential to develop into elite QB's.

As for stats.

Rodgers has a better completion percentage (63.6 to 62.3)
More touchdowns (28-25)
Less interceptions (13 to 18.)
Better QB rating (93.8 to 86.0)
Better average yards per completion (7.5 to 7.3)
More deep throws (16 passes of 40 yards or more compared to 7)

Rodgers was one of the only stars of our season.

Are they just stats for the 2008 season? How do the stats compare for the entirety of their careers? Actually, don't answer. We all know that Cutler is a much better QB, it's only you being a bit silly and one eyed as usual. I'll take Vic Carruci's view over yours.

Of course elements are a consideration but in relation to the special teams i don't think as much, if anything it would play into Chicago's hands more than against them.

Then why did you use the phrase, and these are your words, 'elements are no consideration'? I take it you will concede that was a stupid thing to say. Special Teams involve the ball being kicked high into the air - as a result it will massively be affected be weather you clown.

Oh, and my name isn't Conners

I suspect it's not St Conroy either so no need to get shirty. Sydney Roosters shirty...

: Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:45 pm  

Ian [77] wrote:

Are they just stats for the 2008 season? How do the stats compare for the entirety of their careers? Actually, don't answer. We all know that Cutler is a much better QB, it's only you being a bit silly and one eyed as usual. I'll take Vic Carruci's view over yours.

Well as Rodgers has only started this season it would be pretty difficult to get any meaningful stats for the entirety of his career.

Rodgers was better than Cutler for this season and this is the only season we can base it off.

I really rate Cutler as a QB but i also rate Rodgers highly, that isn't one eyed. It's not like i'm saying Cutler is crap.

I'm sure i can find quotes from people who say Rodgers is a great QB etc.


Of course you are allowed to come and says "Rodgers isn't up there with Cutler" and then completely move the goalposts when i prove your actually wrong.

Ian [77] wrote:

Then why did you use the phrase, and these are your words, 'elements are no consideration'? I take it you will concede that was a stupid thing to say.

Yes, potentially a stupid thing to say.

Ian [77] wrote:

Special Teams involve the ball being kicked high into the air - as a result it will massively be affected be weather you clown.

Yes of course, and i've said if anything conditions would help the special teams of Chicago more than hinder it. Therefore conditions aren't the reason that Chicago as a special teams unit aren't "the best in the NFL".

Ian [77] wrote:

I suspect it's not St Conroy either so no need to get shirty. Sydney Roosters shirty...

Yes i have a Roosters shirt. Fantastic, you know what i wear and what i look like.

My name is Conroy but not Conners.

: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:12 pm  

Plaxico Burress has been released, no surprise tbh

: Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:42 am  

DAR130 wrote:

Your wrong there.It's not called the windy city for nothing,if it isn't blowing a gale it's snowing during football season.

*Pedantic mode on* The fact that Chicago is nicknamed the windy city has nothing to do with the weather they get there

: Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:42 am  

When push comes to shove, Chicago went 9-7 without a QB and with an average defense while Green Bay went 6-10 with an apparently top notch QB and offense. For what its worth if Chicago can pick up one or 2 toys for Cutler id pen them in as serious contenders.

If the Rams had the choice of Cutler or Rodgers i would prefer Cutler. Hes got that nasty streak in him and carried the Broncos last year. But then again i would pretty much take anyone ahead of Bulger.

: Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:48 am  

El Pac Carnegie wrote:

When push comes to shove, Chicago went 9-7 without a QB and with an average defense while Green Bay went 6-10 with an apparently top notch QB and offense. For what its worth if Chicago can pick up one or 2 toys for Cutler id pen them in as serious contenders.

If the Rams had the choice of Cutler or Rodgers i would prefer Cutler. Hes got that nasty streak in him and carried the Broncos last year. But then again i would pretty much take anyone ahead of Bulger.

A little harsh on Bulger - he was a quality QB, and on form was one of the top 5 QB's in the league in my opinion but his confidence has been destroyed over the past 3 or so seasons with no line to speak of. I can't even recall when we last went through a season without a big injury/several injuries on the offensive line. I don't think he'll ever get back to the form of a few years ago but I hope I'm proven wrong.

As far as Rodgers vs Cutler is concerned, at the moment I would take Cutler but he has the more experience than Rodgers, although you could argue that Cutler didn't have the luxury of sitting behind Favre for a couple of seasons. Either way they're both better than Cassell, but that's another argument altogether....the words rude awakening do spring to mind as regards that though

: Sat Apr 04, 2009 6:34 am  

There is nothing better than a good old dick measuring contest, jeez ST CONROY you'll be telling us Favre is better than Brady next.

: Sat Apr 04, 2009 8:16 am  

Tom Brady wrote:

There is nothing better than a good old dick measuring contest, jeez ST CONROY you'll be telling us Favre is better than Brady next.

No, but Damon Huard is better than Brett Favre though, as he has more superbowl rings