Will Aaron Rodgers Throw For Over 300 Sunday?

[Biggs]

12 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

When did the SF D “stop defending?” 

why would you “stop defending” when YOUR side was offsides?

think critically for a moment about what you are saying. 

They stoped thats what my eyes told me.

[T0mShane]

43 minutes ago, Claymation said:

Did that play not count?

By that logic, if you take Caleb's 15 incompletions, he would have 100% completion percentage for the best in the league.

Dudes were saying “he played great! Look at the YPA!” I was merely providing context. 

[slimjasi]

Just now, Biggs said:

They stoped thats what my eyes told me.

Maybe you saw that because it’s what you expected to see, but that’s not what happened, nor is it generally what happens (again - why would it?) 

when the QB draws the defense offsides, they don’t call it a “free play” because the defense suddenly stops trying (which would make no sense), they call it a “free play” because there is no longer any risk associated with making a mistake. Hence, the QB can aggressively throw the ball down field without any fear of throwing a pick or holding the ball too long and fumbling.  The play is now all reward/zero risk. When you have an accurate QB, that can lead to some huge plays down the field. None of this has any bearing on how hard the defense is trying. 
 

 

[slimjasi]

8 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Dudes were saying “he played great! Look at the YPA!” I was merely providing context. 

No, you were erasing a datapoint to make the data fit your preferred narrative. 

[T0mShane]

10 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

No, you were erasing a datapoint to make the data fit your preferred narrative. 

Ironic considering you bros are trying to recontextualize 61% completions for 160 yards 1/1 in a blowout loss to fit your narratives

[slimjasi]

9 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Ironic considering you bros are trying to recontextualize 61% completions for 160 yards 1/1 in a blowout loss to fit your narratives

Huh? 
 

I brought up that Rodgers had a good YPA and you responded with this nonsensical BS that we should start removing pass attempts that you consider “flukey” - that’s the only “recontextualizing” I’m aware of. 
 

FYI, if I got caught doing what you are trying to do here with actual scientific data in my line of work, I’d get fired and would possibly be in danger of having my degrees revoked. 

[RutgersJetFan]

Phil! It's me! Ned! Ryerson! From high school!

[jgb]

9 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Ironic considering you bros are trying to recontextualize 61% completions for 160 yards 1/1 in a blowout loss to fit your narratives

I think he didn’t play well but also don’t think ignoring data points is a statistically-valid way to demonstrate that.

But I will say I’m rapidly remembering why I left for 9 months. Debating on JN is like trying to convince my 3 year old that there are no monsters under her bed. 

[T0mShane]

Just now, slimjasi said:

Huh? 
 

I brought up that Rodgers had a good YPA and you responded with this nonsensical BS that we should start removing pass attempts that you consider “flukey” - that’s the only “recontextualizing” I’m aware of. 
 

FYI, if I got caught doing what you are trying to do with actual scientific data in my line of work, I’d get fired and would possibly be in danger of having my degrees revoked. 

Perhaps I am merging several conversation into this one, but my recollection was that The Narrative went as such

X: Rodgers 165 yards passing in a blowout where the team was non-competitive? That’s bad.

Y: Actually, he played well and had a good YPA. 
 

X: That YPA is inflated because of the short sample and he had the free play to Lazard when most of the defense pulled up. 

[T0mShane]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

I think he didn’t play well but also don’t think ignoring data points is a statistically-valid way to demonstrate that.

But I will say I’m rapidly remembering why I left for 9 months. Debating on JN is like trying to convince my 3 year old that there are no monsters under her bed. 

I don’t think it’s ignoring a data point, it’s just putting it into context and pushing back on those who were trying to elevate the one statistic to paper over the fact that Rodgers put up a Zach Wilson stat line. 

[jgb]

Just now, T0mShane said:

I don’t think it’s ignoring a data point, it’s just putting it into context and pushing back on those who were trying to elevate the one statistic to paper over the fact that Rodgers put up a Zach Wilson stat line. 

I hear you and agree with you. Just think there was a more artful way to go about it.

[T0mShane]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

I hear you and agree with you. Just think there was a more artful way to go about it.

Probably, but I paint with a sledgehammer like Gallagher. 

[T0mShane]

[FidelioJet]

Contextualize all you want. Free play, no free play.  Good YPA, bad YPA. 
 

Rodgers was bad Monday night.  The offense was stuck in the mud just about all night. I’ve been told over and over again this team is loaded with talent.   With this much talent it’s on the QB to put up points.  

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Probably, but I paint with a sledgehammer like Gallagher. 

Being an art critic is easy but I do like the general motif of your work 

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

3 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Contextualize all you want. Free play, no free play.  Good YPA, bad YPA. 
 

Rodgers was bad Monday night.  The offense was stuck in the mud just about all night. I’ve been told over and over again this team is loaded with talent.   With this much talent it’s on the QB to put up points.  

[jgb]

Just now, SomebodytoAnybody47 said:

Well, damn. I guess that’s settled, then.

[The Crusher]

21 hours ago, jgb said:

Loathe to go against T0m because he’s not only a mensch but also a vicious debater, but I do disagree with him here. One of the main reasons for bringing in a HOF QB is that he can suss out and capitalize on situations like blown coverages and free plays with elite situational awareness, which is what he did.

I remember Zach throwing balls out of bounds during free plays.

You  are silly brilliant bastard. If only we could get you  to use your powers for good. 

[slimjasi]

3 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Y: Actually, he played well and had a good YPA. 
 

 

I said he had a good YPA, which he did. 
 

4 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

 

X: That YPA is inflated because of the short sample and he had the free play to Lazard when most of the defense pulled up. 

But this argument doesn’t work - which is what I’m trying to get you to understand. 
 

1) first - why would the defense “pull up?” There’s no incentive to pull up. Is this what people think a “free play” means? It’s a “free play” because the risk of throwing an interception is suddenly ZERO when the defense is offsides, so the QB can afford to be aggressive without worrying about turning the ball over. Where does this idea that the defense “pulled up” come from?
 

2) much more importantly, you simply can’t take away plays you don’t like. If you can take away that play, someone else could say - “ok, let’s take away Lazard’s drop and the play where GW didn’t get his feet down in bounds and the play on 4th down where GW was interfered with - that’s 3 incompletions that shouldn’t count! His YPA was actually . . . X.” That doesn’t work. The solution isn’t to arbitrarily remove “flukey” plays, it’s to wait for more datapoints (a larger sample size), so that the YPA statistic is more meaningful and less prone to the misleading effects of “outliers” 

[funaz]

They stoped thats what my eyes told me.

Your eyes can’t be trusted if you saw the performance by arod and saw a bad qb.

He was the best jet player on the field, in a game where our two fan favorites breece and Wilson put the ball in the ground, caused an interception and couldn’t get a toe drag.

Arod is what we all hoped he was. The best qb in a jet uniform for 30 years.

He is not prime Arod, or prime Peyton manning but he is still much better than anything we’ve seen by several standard deviations.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Claymation]

14 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Perhaps I am merging several conversation into this one, but my recollection was that The Narrative went as such

X: Rodgers 165 yards passing in a blowout where the team was non-competitive? That’s bad.

Y: Actually, he played well and had a good YPA. 
 

X: That YPA is inflated because of the short sample and he had the free play to Lazard when most of the defense pulled up. 

What is the criteria of what counts and what doesn't? I just want to know the framework of this discussion and possibly future conversations.

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

You  are silly brilliant bastard. If only we could get you  to use your powers for good. 

Advancing the forces of American capitalism around the globe isn’t that?

[T0mShane]

7 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Contextualize all you want. Free play, no free play.  Good YPA, bad YPA. 
 

Rodgers was bad Monday night.  The offense was stuck in the mud just about all night. I’ve been told over and over again this team is loaded with talent.   With this much talent it’s on the QB to put up points.  

This is the bottom line, imo. The org has been signaling for five years that Saleh and Douglas would look better if they got merely good play from the QB position and the few times we’ve seen it—the occasional (and rare) decent Zach/Mike White game and the two games Rodgers has started here and they’ve lost pretty much every one of those. This last loss with Rodgers was as big a beatdown as I’ve ever seen this team produce. What loss in the past five years is close? That Colts loss in Saleh’s first year where Jonathan Taylor ran for 500 yards? The Pats immolation where Judon beat the piss out of Zach? Last Monday was as non-competitive a Jets team as the Luke Falk/Adam Gase squad. 

[T0mShane]

6 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

I said he had a good YPA, which he did. 
 

But this argument doesn’t work - which is what I’m trying to get you to understand. 
 

1) first - why would the defense “pull up?” There’s no incentive to pull up. Is this what people think a “free play” means? It’s a “free play” because the risk of throwing an interception is suddenly ZERO when the defense is offsides, so the QB can afford to be aggressive without worrying about turning the ball over. Where does this idea that the defense “pulled up” come from?
 

2) much more importantly, you simply can’t take away plays you don’t like. If you can take away that play, someone else could say - “ok, let’s take away Lazard’s drop and the play where GW didn’t get his feet down in bounds and the play on 4th down where GW was interfered with - that’s 3 incompletions that shouldn’t count! His YPA was actually . . . X.” That doesn’t work. The solution isn’t to arbitrarily remove “flukey” plays, it’s to wait for more datapoints (a larger sample size), so that the YPA statistic is more meaningful and less prone to the misleading effects of “outliers” 

Ok, I concede the point. Keep the play in, it’s fine, the EPA, YPA, and PFF grade all were good. However, Rodgers’ game on Monday was depressing and should fill us all with dread. 

[Biggs]

7 minutes ago, funaz said:

Your eyes can’t be trusted if you saw the performance by arod and saw a bad qb.

He was the best jet player on the field, in a game where our two fan favorites breece and Wilson put the ball in the ground, caused an interception and couldn’t get a toe drag.

Arod is what we all hoped he was. The best qb in a jet uniform for 30 years.

He is not prime Arod, or prime Peyton manning but he is still much better than anything we’ve seen by several standard deviations.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

I have cataract surgery scheduled for mid October.  Thanks for letting me know.

i thought he looked great.  Slow footed, nervous, timing was off but overall great.    22nd ranked QB after week 1.  Generational for the Jets.  Stupendous. Awesome.   For a Jets QB.

i didn't think he was bad.  He was ok.

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

This is the bottom line, imo. The org has been signaling for five years that Saleh and Douglas would look better if they got merely good play from the QB position and the few times we’ve seen it—the occasional (and rare) decent Zach/Mike White game and the two games Rodgers has started here and they’ve lost pretty much every one of those. This last loss with Rodgers was as big a beatdown as I’ve ever seen this team produce. What loss in the past five years is close? That Colts loss in Saleh’s first year where Jonathan Taylor ran for 500 yards? The Pats immolation where Judon beat the piss out of Zach? Last Monday was as non-competitive a Jets team as the Luke Falk/Adam Gase squad. 

They have a favorable schedule the next month so i think that’s the big litmus.  Can the offense look competent at tennessee, at home vs NE, denver and in England vs minny?  

[slimjasi]

1 minute ago, Claymation said:

What is the criteria of what counts and what doesn't? I just want to know the framework of this discussion and possibly future conversations.

That’s the issue. 
 

unless there was some measurement/observational error (e.g. the officials called it a 36 yard gain when we can clearly see on camera that it was actually only a 16 yard gain), I don’t see why we would not count the play. 

[slats]

11 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Contextualize all you want. Free play, no free play.  Good YPA, bad YPA. 
 

Rodgers was bad Monday night.  The offense was stuck in the mud just about all night. I’ve been told over and over again this team is loaded with talent.   With this much talent it’s on the QB to put up points.  

Jets only had the ball for about 20 minutes. The defense was unable to get off the field, giving up (at least?) eight straight scoring drives. The offense also had two turnovers that were both fantastic plays by the 49ers’ defense rather than offensive miscues. At the end of the day, Rodgers put up a middling performance against a great team on the road in his first full game since 2022. 
 
I don’t care if Rodgers throws for 300 or not on Sunday (I’d prefer 200 rushing yards), I just want to see much improved play from the defense, and more creativity and productivity from the offense. Really want to see more players involved offensively. Wilson and Breece are obviously the bread and butter, but you have to have more than Lazard working for you beyond that. 

[The Crusher]

4 minutes ago, jgb said:

Advancing the forces of American capitalism around the globe isn’t that?

 I didn’t mean real life, meant here. All I know about your real life is you live in Germany and learn shit quick for a living. Geesh! 

[Biggs]

2 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

That’s the issue. 
 

unless there was some measurement/observational error (e.g. the officials called it a 36 yard gain when we can clearly see on camera that it was actually only a 16 yard gain), I don’t see why we would not count the play. 

Of course it counts.  He was statistically mediocre with it.

[slimjasi]

Just now, Biggs said:

Of course it counts.  He was statistically mediocre with it.

Ok, fair enough 

[Augustiniak]

3 minutes ago, slats said:

Jets only had the ball for about 20 minutes. The defense was unable to get off the field, giving up (at least?) eight straight scoring drives. The offense also had two turnovers that were both fantastic plays by the 49ers’ defense rather than offensive miscues. At the end of the day, Rodgers put up a middling performance against a great team on the road in his first full game since 2022. 
 
I don’t care if Rodgers throws for 300 or not on Sunday (I’d prefer 200 rushing yards), I just want to see much improved play from the defense, and more creativity and productivity from the offense. Really want to see more players involved offensively. Wilson and Breece are obviously the bread and butter, but you have to have more than Lazard working for you beyond that. 

The offense was extremely vanilla and predictable and felt like a preseason game where they were practicing their basic plays w/o anything intended to fool the defense.  I hope the coaches realize they’re coaching for their jobs these next few games. 

[#27TheDominator]

36 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Phil! It's me! Ned! Ryerson! From high school!

KICKBOXER 8 MOTHER****ER!

[slimjasi]

10 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

This is the bottom line, imo. The org has been signaling for five years that Saleh and Douglas would look better if they got merely good play from the QB position and the few times we’ve seen it—the occasional (and rare) decent Zach/Mike White game and the two games Rodgers has started here and they’ve lost pretty much every one of those. This last loss with Rodgers was as big a beatdown as I’ve ever seen this team produce. What loss in the past five years is close? That Colts loss in Saleh’s first year where Jonathan Taylor ran for 500 yards? The Pats immolation where Judon beat the piss out of Zach? Last Monday was as non-competitive a Jets team as the Luke Falk/Adam Gase squad. 

Yea, Saleh has been a sh*tty head coach. 
 

In most likely scenarios, he and Douglas are toast in a few months. 

[FidelioJet]

6 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

That’s the issue. 
 

unless there was some measurement/observational error (e.g. the officials called it a 36 yard gain when we can clearly see on camera that it was actually only a 16 yard gain), I don’t see why we would not count the play. 

I think the issue is did you put up enough points to win the game?