Sharky's NFL play of the week

[Three]

In a time period of 3 hours and 13 minutes (post 404 and 409) you went from saying Rodgers was the better QB in that game, to now saying that Brady was. (Check it out)

yeah, I noticed he just liked to argue and eroded his credibility by flip flopping his position to suit whatever he is arguing about too. I have gotten messages from others that noticed the same thing.

Put this info along with what Tthree provides in a later post and there's no way you can say Brady is the better QB now (and maybe not ever)

Yeah anybody that can look at the stats for each QBs history side by side from year 1 and can't admit Rodgers is better and will likely surpass everything Brady has done if he plays as long as Brady. If he doesn't does that make him less of a QB. Maybe to a stat junky but to football efficianados it doesn't. A QB's greatness does not hinge on a long career. You can see the ability of a great QB in games not over stats spanning more than a decade. People that can't spot talent must use stats like that and to them a player is not great unless he has a long career. Long careers come in large degree by luck. Football is a tough sport and few players get to play long careers due to injuries. If a QB doesn't have a long career does that mean he isn't as good as your eyes tell you he was. Well to a stat junky it does but Muff and I are not stat junkies.

Sure, he's won more SBs at this point but he's played longer and as you indicate yourself, the total team quality factors in big time when talking wins vs. losses.

Now here is someone that knows the difference between a great QB and a good QB that played for a great team. Career stats are for comparison with retired QBs and they must be taken with a grain of salt as rules change, the number of games in a season change , officiating changes etc. A great QB is a team leader, he steps up when the game is on the line playing his best in clutch situations. Brady has played his entire career for a very good to great team but has his playoff career been as good as some think? He stepped into a number 1 system and didn't play well in many of the playoff games in his early career but NE won anyway. Brady, or should I more accurately say the Patriots given his stats in many of those games, went 10-0 in his first 10 playoff appearances.

In 2001 post season Brady played 3 games and played poorly yet the Patriots won the SB:
2001: 3 GS, 60/97, 61.9%, 5.9 yds/att, 191 yds/gm, 1 TD, 1 INT, 1 fumble, RTG 77.3 (that is for all 3 game). Won SB

Another sub par QB performance in 2003 post season. The Patriots made the SB despite the poor play by Brady.
2003: 3 GS, 75/126, 59.5%, 6.29 yds/att, 264 yds/gm, 5 TDs, 2 INT, 0 fumbles, RTG 84.5. Won SB

In 2004 post season Brady played great. The Patriots won the SB. This time Brady earned his ring.
2004: 3 GS, 55/81, 67.9%, 7.25 yds/att, 196 yds/gm, 5 TDs, 0 INT, 1 fumble, RTG 109.4. Won SB

In 2005 he didn't play as well.
2005: 2 GS, 35/63, 55.6%, 8.6 yds/att, 271 yds/gm, 4 TDs, 2 INT, 2 fumbles, RTG 92.2. Lost to DEN

After this Brady struggled by being turnover prone, both throwing INT and fumbling.
After his 4th year as a starter in the pros Brady would not win another SB and would go 8-9 in the post season after the Patriots won in his first 10 post season appearances.

2006: 3 GS, 70/119, 58.8%, 6.1 yds/att, 241 yds/gm, 5 TDs, 4 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 60.2, RTG 76.5. Lost to IND

2007: 3 GS, 77/109, 70.6%, 6.8 yds/att, 246 yds/gm, 6 TDs, 3 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 61.5, RTG 96.0. Lost to NYG

2009: 1 GS, 23/42, 54.8%, 3.7 yds/att, 154 yds/gm, 2 TDs, 3 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 4.2 (is that possible?) RTG 49.1. Lost to BAL

2010: 1 GS, 29/45, 64.4%, 6.6 yds/gm, 299 yds/gm, 2 TDs, 1 INT , 1 fumble, QBR 8.7 (I guess it is), RTG 89.0. Lost to NYJ

2011: 3 GS, 75/11, 67.6%, 7.9 yds/gm, 293 yds/gm, 8 TDs, 4 INT, 0 fumbles, QBR 74.8, RTG 100.4. Lost to NYG

2012: 2 GS, 54/94, 57.4%, 7.1 yds/att, 332 yds/gm, 4 TDs, 2 INT, 0 fumbles, QBR 57.3, RTG 84.7. Lost to BAL

2013: 2 GS, 37/63, 58.7%, 7.5 yds/att, 238 yds/gm, 1 TD, 0 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 70.0, RTG 87.7. Lost to DEN

So it seems that Brady's career was made on his first 4 years as a starter and he has not done any where near as well since. For the first years of his career we have already compared Stats to Rodgers. Rodgers wins hands down. There is no disputing it. Those stats are for playing against many defenses. Wins are a team effort but the passing stats are more individual but still an offensive team effort. Rings don't mean anything on an indivisuall basis. But Rodgers clutch playoff game ratings are:

2009: 121.4 (1 game) Notice that is better than any post season year in Brady's career but the Packers still lost 45-51

2010: 108.8 (4 games) Won the SB.

2011: 78.5 (1 game)

2012: 97.6 (2 games)

2013: 97.8 (1 game)

As you can see while Rodgers is clearly the better QB wins are more of a team indictor as Muff has said. Obviously team record and post season results are not a good indicator of the best QB despite the media trying to brainwash weak minds into believing this to help the NFL marketing. If you know football you can see talent on a losing team. If you can't you fancy rings and wins. Rodgers is the best QB to hit the NFL in decades. Rodgers is the only QB in NFL history to have a career rating (min 1500 Attempts) over 100 (106.7). The top of the list is all post rule change QB's and Brady is number 6 on the list. Don't get me wrong, Brady is a very good QB. There are just better QBs out there that haven't had the good fortune of playing on such a good team a the Patriots.

So I hope this has made Muffs point that Brady has played for a better team and played longer and that not his talent is the only reason anyone would argue Brady is better than Rodgers. But does that make a QB better? Of course not it just gets him more wins and more chance to grow his career stat numbers toward milestones that some need to be hit in order to see greatness.

Look at Elway The media pushed that he wasn't that good because he didn't have a ring. He won one and many of the same people said he only had one and didn't belong with the elites. So Elway got back to back rings. Now all the sudden this elite QB whose talent was obvious to many his entire career was elite to the crowd that can't judge QB talent unless they are on a good team. They were Elway's last 2 seasons. A lot of people couldn't see his greatness until his last 2 season back to back SB victories. Now think about how these same idiots would view Brady after winning 3 SBs in his first 4 seasons. He was anointed the greatest while not even having played that well in most of the 3 post seasons that ended in SB wins. Brady has played 9 seasons since and not won another SB. Does that mean he has lost it? Of course not. Elway proved that elite QBs can play on bad teams and not get a ring when he had some early post season success but missed the playoffs for so many years in a row only to win 2 SB in his last 2 years. What if he had retired 2 years earlier? Would Elway have not been elite then? He is ranked number 3 on some all time QB lists. Those idiots that bring wins and post season success into the discussion of how good a QB is just can't judge QB talent on its own and loss my respect.

[Math Demon]

I'm trying out a new *NOT YET forward-tested* numerical analysis method. I have:

1. BAL winning over JAX by 21-23. BAL - 13.5
2. KC winning over OAK by 17-18. KC - 10
3. CAR winning over TB by 8-10. CAR - 3
4. PHI winning over DAL by 7-10. PHI - 3
5. IND winning over HOU by 10-11. IND - 6.5
6. TEN winning over NYJ by 1-2. TEN + 3
7. NYG winning over WAS by 9-10. NYG - 6.5
8. SEA winning over SFO by 13-14. SEA - 9.5
9. NE winning over MIA by 9-11. NE - 7.5
10. CLE winning over CIN by 3. CLE - 1
11. PIT winning over ATL by 1. ATL + 2
12. GB winning over BUF by 3. BUF + 4
13. DEN winning over SD by 5. DEN - 4
14. NO winning over CHI by 2. CHI + 3
15. DET winning over MIN by 7. DET - 8
z. ARZ winning over STL by 1-3. ARZ+6. Already happened.


Anyone care to agree or disagree with the picks?


I'm still in the process of analyzing picks for Week 15 based on "Week 14 method".

The above-mentioned numerical method has *NOT* been forward-tested. But back-tested, it achieved 12-4, 8-8, 9-6 in previous weeks.


This post is just to initiate discussion. Don't base your bets on this one yet. This is different from http://www.oddsshark.com/nfl/computer-picks

1. I get a MOV of 14 to 16 points for BAL. Of course that must be adjusted for matchups and injuries etc.
BAL at home tends to blow out the other team as a big home favorite (2-1-0 ATS). (line: -10.5 MOV +14, -6.5 MOV +22 and -1).
JAX is 0-3-1 ATS as a big away dog. (line: +13.5 MOV -20, +12.5 MOV -19, +10 MOV -17 and -10). If your numbers support the play I would go for it despite the big spread. My numbers don't. It is tempting but no play. These 2 tendencies marry well.


2. I get KC by 9-13 points.
KC is 2-0-0 ATS as a big home favorite nut seem to have folded lately. (line: -8.5 MOV +14, -7 MOV +27)
OAK is 1-1-0 ATS as a big away dog. (line: +14 MOV -7, +13.5 MOV -16)
KC may want revenge to losing to OAK for OAK's only win this year a couple games ago. KC's playoff hopes are fading fast. Both teams are pretty beat up physically.


3. I get CAR by 2-5 points but that must be adjusted for injuries etc. Cam Newton being out could be a big factor. I got TB +6 before the news moved the line. I am thinking about going for a middle with CAR -3. Those bookends are sweet numbers for MOV frequency.
Neither teams has a good record at this spread.


4. I get PHI by 1-7 points. I think this is conservative. The DAL O to PHI D matchup looks pretty predictable but PHI run game looks to do better than usual. PHI has a very good record as a home favorite but as a small home favorite they are 2-1-0 ATS with MOVs very close to the lines in general. DAL has no games as a small away dog.


5. I get IND by 2-4 points on my first look scores that need to be adjusted for specifics. The pressures on this score range seem to favor HOU but these division rivalries are unpredictable.
IND is 3-0-0 ATS as a big home favorite with huge MOV in every game (+20, +22, +24)
HOU hasn't been such a large away dog all year but are 2-0-0 ATS in games were they get more than barely covering +5 and winning outright by 16 getting 4 points.
I am leaning a pick on HOU but these trends make me question that.


6. I get NYJ by 1 to TEN by 3. With Mettenberegr out as TEN QB and Locker in NYJ would be the team that is predicted to win but you never know how a backup will do when given the chance to show he should be the starter. We do know what Locker did earlier this year which makes him look like a downgrade at QB. He will be without both starting tackles. Missing the starting blindside tackle is huge. Teams are lucky to have a good starting LT but the backup is almost certainly not up to protecting the QB from the blind side. You may be a touch conservative on NYJ by 1-2 points.


7. I get the NYG by 3-6 points. Injuries may push that higher.
NYG have never been such a big favorite. As a small home favorite they are 2-1-0 ATS with large MOV for the winner in all 3 games.
WAS is 3-1-0 ATS as an away dog getting 5 or more points getting blown out in the loss and keeping the game close in the other 3.
These don't support convincingly either team at this spread.


8. I get SEA by 6-12 points. Injuries pressure this toward SEA but 4 of 4 emotional factors are on SF side. Ther atchups really favor SEA. SF is a team falling apart internally. Heads may roll after this season so some may be playing to save anothers job while others may want them to leave.
SEA is 2-2-0 in home games giving up 7 or more points.
SF is 1-1-0 as an away dog. (line: +5.5 MOV +3, +6.5 MOV -25)


9. I get NE by 7-9 points. MIA is really beat up on defense. There is a huge injury cluster in MIA D-backfield. This is probably very conservative. Brady should be able exposing and exploiting weaknesses in the secondary.
NE is 2-2-0 ATS as a home favorite this year. (Lines: -14 MOV +7, -9.5 MOV +2, -7 MOV +23, -6 MOV +28)
MIA has never been such a big away dog but is 1-2-0 ATS as an away dog. ( Line: +1 MOV -19, +3 MOV +13 and -4)


10. I get CLE by 3 to 5 but there are some big factors to be considered after generating the initial look scores. CLE is starting a new rookie QB in Manzel. In their last meeting in CIN Dalton had a rating of 2 or something unbelievable like that. A small injury cluster in the secondary for CLE. Two depth players at CB are out and starting safety Gipson is out. CIN has a lot of D-backs nursing injuries but most are depth players. Injuries pressure the initial score starting point toward CIN but matchups and other factors push it toward CLE.
CIN is 3-1-0 ATS as an away dog. (Line: +1 MOV +7, +2.5 MOV +9, +3 MOV -27, +8.5 MOV +17).
CLE is 1-2-1 ATS as a home favorite. (Line: -1 MOV +1, -4 MOV -14, -6.5 MOV +10, -7 MOV +5).


11. I get PK and ATL by 3 for my first take score analysis. ATL looks to be a little more beat up than PIT. Matchups look pretty well predicted by the score model.REd zone performance slightly favors PIT.
PIT is 2-2-0 ATS as an away dog. The winning team had huge MOV in every game. Bets on PIT lot in small away dog spreads and won in large ones. The 2 losses came from divisions rival BAL and CLE.
ATL is 1-3-0 as a home favorite. (Line: -2.5 MOV -2, -3.5 MOV -14, -6 MOV -13, -6.5 MOV +42)


12. Surprisingly I get PK to BUF by 3 for my initial look score analysis. BUF will be missing their starting safety and their place kicker will be kicking with a groin injury. Also a big sack and pressure presence in DE Watkins has not been participating in practice. GB is also dealing with a few injured D-backs. In balance this slightly favors GB. The matchups are unpredictable. Top GB O against a very strong BUF D. BUF gets a lot of INT which would be a problem for many top QBs but Rodgers doesn't throw hardly any. I think Rodgers will win this mis-matched stat. But on the other side the matchup should be pretty well predicted by the stats.
GB is 2-1-0 as an away favorite. (Line: -1.5 MOV +3, -2 MOV +21, -7.5 MOV +3)
BUF hasn't been a home dog yet. They are 1-1-0 as a home favorite giving up 1 point MOV +19 and -15.


13. Another surprise. I get PK to SD by 3. SD main injury is their starting punter is out. DEN on the other hand has a long injury report. Most of the players are depth players. I am not putting much weight on injuries. Personally I think DEN will win but that's not what the stats say.
DEN is 2-1-0 as an away favorite. (Line: -3 MOV -22, -9 MOV -15, -9.5 MOV +14, -12.5 MOV 24)
SD is 1-1-0 as a home dog. (Line: +4 MOV -9, +5 MOV +9)
Nothing to hang your hat on there.


14. I get PK to NO by 2 in my first look score prediction. The only unpredictable part of the matchups is CHI run vs NO run D. NO needs to get a quick start or stop the run to neutralize the run threat (I can't believe I am saying that about CHI). The red zone production slightly favors NO. No injury report yet but the Saints look healthy and CHI is still dealing with injuries on defense. Their place kicker has not been participating in practice. NO has kind of broken all the traditional tendencies for them this year.
CHI is 0-2-0 ATS as a home favorite. (Line: +2 MOV -21, +4 MOV -13)
NO is 2-0-0 ATS as an away dog this year. (Line: +1.5 MOV -1, +3.5 MOV +3)
This sure seems to favor NO.


15. I get DET by 6.
DET is 5-2-0 ATS as a home favorite. 3-0-0 ATS as a big home favorite.
MIN is 3-3-0 ATS as an away dog. They are 0-2-0 as a big away dog.


16. I had STL by 1-3 points.

Thanks Tthree! Do you have any strong picks? Any OU picks?

I'd been out the whole day, and will probably pass on the games if I don't get enough analysis done by the 1 PM games.
__

I'm just curious if "Week-15 method" works for ATS.

For last week and TNF:
"Week-14 method" was 4-0 in actual OU bets, 6-0 in OU picks (including 2 no-plays); just 5-4 in actual ATS bets, 7-7 in ATS picks (including 5 no-plays); 1-0 in actual ML +135 bet, 2-0 in ML picks (ML +135, ML +110).

[Three]

Week 15 picks:
1) PHI -3 over DAL Home team usually losses in this series. I hope this one goes te other way.
2) HOU +7.5 @ IND
3) BUF +5.5 over GB
4) ATL +3 over PIT
5) PIT/ATL under 56


Results for 2014 season:
Week 4: 5-2-0
Week 5: 2-1-0
Week 6: 2-4-0
Week 7: 4-2-1
Week 8: 1-3-0
Week 9: 4-3-0
Week 10: 2-2-0
Wee 11: 6-7-0
Week 12:1-6-0
Week 13: 0-0-0
Week 14: 5-2-0
Season: 32-32-1

[Math Demon]

The only game that I can see DAL losing is against IND at home. DAL is just 3-4 at home.

With ten days to rest, practice, and prepare to play at PHI, the game against the Eagles will be a closer affair, probably ending up with a DAL win. They will win the season-finale at WAS, probably ending 8-0 on the road.

I'm trying out a new *NOT YET forward-tested* numerical analysis method. I have:

1. BAL winning over JAX by 21-23. BAL - 13.5
2. KC winning over OAK by 17-18. KC - 10
3. CAR winning over TB by 8-10. CAR - 3
4. PHI winning over DAL by 7-10. PHI - 3
5. IND winning over HOU by 10-11. IND - 6.5
6. TEN winning over NYJ by 1-2. TEN + 3
7. NYG winning over WAS by 9-10. NYG - 6.5
8. SEA winning over SFO by 13-14. SEA - 9.5
9. NE winning over MIA by 9-11. NE - 7.5
10. CLE winning over CIN by 3. CLE - 1
11. PIT winning over ATL by 1. ATL + 2
12. GB winning over BUF by 3. BUF + 4
13. DEN winning over SD by 5. DEN - 4
14. NO winning over CHI by 2. CHI + 3
15. DET winning over MIN by 7. DET + 8
z. ARZ winning over STL by 1-3. ARZ+6. Already happened.


Anyone care to agree or disagree with the picks?

The above-mentioned numerical method has *NOT* been forward-tested. But back-tested, it achieved 12-4, 8-8, 9-6 in previous weeks.


This post is just to initiate discussion. Don't base your bets on this one yet. This is different from http://www.oddsshark.com/nfl/computer-picks

I get PHI by 1-7 points. I think this is conservative. The DAL O to PHI D matchup looks pretty predictable but PHI run game looks to do better than usual. PHI has a very good record as a home favorite but as a small home favorite they are 2-1-0 ATS with MOVs very close to the lines in general. DAL has no games as a small away dog.

Week 15 picks:
1) PHI -3 over DAL Home team usually losses in this series. I hope this one goes te other way.
2) HOU +7.5 @ IND
3) BUF +5.5 over GB
4) ATL +3 over PIT
5) PIT/ATL under 56

1) PHI -3 over DAL

Home team usually losses in this series. I hope this one goes the other way.

I will pass betting on this contest. I want to enjoy watching the game free from monetary considerations.


The game stats favor PHI, but ...

a. Aside from that trend that you mentioned, there's the matter of the ...

b. mini-bye (10 days rest since 12-04 TNF) to rest, game plan, regroup, practice, and recuperate.

c. PHI is just 6-1 (5-2 ATS, 5-2 OU) at home; while DAL is 6-0 on the road (5-1 ATS, 5-1 OU) this year; at home (3-4 SU, 2-5 ATS, 2-4-1 OU).

d. For 2014, teams are 4-8 S/U and 3-9 ATS after a game against SEA. For the last 7 games with SEA (win or lose), the team loses its very next game 0-7 S/U and 0-7 ATS. They refer to the effect on the teams as being "Beast Moded."

The last team that did NOT get "Beast Moded"? DAL.

__

Dang!! I accidentally convinced myself ... recalculating ...

Update:

DAL @ PHI Over 54
Dallas Cowboys ML +155
.

[Exoter175]

yeah, I noticed he just liked to argue and eroded his credibility by flip flopping his position to suit whatever he is arguing about too. I have gotten messages from others that noticed the same thing.


Yeah anybody that can look at the stats for each QBs history side by side from year 1 and can't admit Rodgers is better and will likely surpass everything Brady has done if he plays as long as Brady. If he doesn't does that make him less of a QB. Maybe to a stat junky but to football efficianados it doesn't. A QB's greatness does not hinge on a long career. You can see the ability of a great QB in games not over stats spanning more than a decade. People that can't spot talent must use stats like that and to them a player is not great unless he has a long career. Long careers come in large degree by luck. Football is a tough sport and few players get to play long careers due to injuries. If a QB doesn't have a long career does that mean he isn't as good as your eyes tell you he was. Well to a stat junky it does but Muff and I are not stat junkies.

Now here is someone that knows the difference between a great QB and a good QB that played for a great team. Career stats are for comparison with retired QBs and they must be taken with a grain of salt as rules change, the number of games in a season change , officiating changes etc. A great QB is a team leader, he steps up when the game is on the line playing his best in clutch situations. Brady has played his entire career for a very good to great team but has his playoff career been as good as some think? He stepped into a number 1 system and didn't play well in many of the playoff games in his early career but NE won anyway. Brady, or should I more accurately say the Patriots given his stats in many of those games, went 10-0 in his first 10 playoff appearances.

In 2001 post season Brady played 3 games and played poorly yet the Patriots won the SB:
2001: 3 GS, 60/97, 61.9%, 5.9 yds/att, 191 yds/gm, 1 TD, 1 INT, 1 fumble, RTG 77.3 (that is for all 3 game). Won SB

Another sub par QB performance in 2003 post season. The Patriots made the SB despite the poor play by Brady.
2003: 3 GS, 75/126, 59.5%, 6.29 yds/att, 264 yds/gm, 5 TDs, 2 INT, 0 fumbles, RTG 84.5. Won SB

In 2004 post season Brady played great. The Patriots won the SB. This time Brady earned his ring.
2004: 3 GS, 55/81, 67.9%, 7.25 yds/att, 196 yds/gm, 5 TDs, 0 INT, 1 fumble, RTG 109.4. Won SB

In 2005 he didn't play as well.
2005: 2 GS, 35/63, 55.6%, 8.6 yds/att, 271 yds/gm, 4 TDs, 2 INT, 2 fumbles, RTG 92.2. Lost to DEN

After this Brady struggled by being turnover prone, both throwing INT and fumbling.
After his 4th year as a starter in the pros Brady would not win another SB and would go 8-9 in the post season after the Patriots won in his first 10 post season appearances.

2006: 3 GS, 70/119, 58.8%, 6.1 yds/att, 241 yds/gm, 5 TDs, 4 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 60.2, RTG 76.5. Lost to IND

2007: 3 GS, 77/109, 70.6%, 6.8 yds/att, 246 yds/gm, 6 TDs, 3 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 61.5, RTG 96.0. Lost to NYG

2009: 1 GS, 23/42, 54.8%, 3.7 yds/att, 154 yds/gm, 2 TDs, 3 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 4.2 (is that possible?) RTG 49.1. Lost to BAL

2010: 1 GS, 29/45, 64.4%, 6.6 yds/gm, 299 yds/gm, 2 TDs, 1 INT , 1 fumble, QBR 8.7 (I guess it is), RTG 89.0. Lost to NYJ

2011: 3 GS, 75/11, 67.6%, 7.9 yds/gm, 293 yds/gm, 8 TDs, 4 INT, 0 fumbles, QBR 74.8, RTG 100.4. Lost to NYG

2012: 2 GS, 54/94, 57.4%, 7.1 yds/att, 332 yds/gm, 4 TDs, 2 INT, 0 fumbles, QBR 57.3, RTG 84.7. Lost to BAL

2013: 2 GS, 37/63, 58.7%, 7.5 yds/att, 238 yds/gm, 1 TD, 0 INT, 1 fumble, QBR 70.0, RTG 87.7. Lost to DEN

So it seems that Brady's career was made on his first 4 years as a starter and he has not done any where near as well since. For the first years of his career we have already compared Stats to Rodgers. Rodgers wins hands down. There is no disputing it. Those stats are for playing against many defenses. Wins are a team effort but the passing stats are more individual but still an offensive team effort. Rings don't mean anything on an indivisuall basis. But Rodgers clutch playoff game ratings are:

2009: 121.4 (1 game) Notice that is better than any post season year in Brady's career but the Packers still lost 45-51

2010: 108.8 (4 games) Won the SB.

2011: 78.5 (1 game)

2012: 97.6 (2 games)

2013: 97.8 (1 game)

As you can see while Rodgers is clearly the better QB wins are more of a team indictor as Muff has said. Obviously team record and post season results are not a good indicator of the best QB despite the media trying to brainwash weak minds into believing this to help the NFL marketing. If you know football you can see talent on a losing team. If you can't you fancy rings and wins. Rodgers is the best QB to hit the NFL in decades. Rodgers is the only QB in NFL history to have a career rating (min 1500 Attempts) over 100 (106.7). The top of the list is all post rule change QB's and Brady is number 6 on the list. Don't get me wrong, Brady is a very good QB. There are just better QBs out there that haven't had the good fortune of playing on such a good team a the Patriots.

So I hope this has made Muffs point that Brady has played for a better team and played longer and that not his talent is the only reason anyone would argue Brady is better than Rodgers. But does that make a QB better? Of course not it just gets him more wins and more chance to grow his career stat numbers toward milestones that some need to be hit in order to see greatness.

Look at Elway The media pushed that he wasn't that good because he didn't have a ring. He won one and many of the same people said he only had one and didn't belong with the elites. So Elway got back to back rings. Now all the sudden this elite QB whose talent was obvious to many his entire career was elite to the crowd that can't judge QB talent unless they are on a good team. They were Elway's last 2 seasons. A lot of people couldn't see his greatness until his last 2 season back to back SB victories. Now think about how these same idiots would view Brady after winning 3 SBs in his first 4 seasons. He was anointed the greatest while not even having played that well in most of the 3 post seasons that ended in SB wins. Brady has played 9 seasons since and not won another SB. Does that mean he has lost it? Of course not. Elway proved that elite QBs can play on bad teams and not get a ring when he had some early post season success but missed the playoffs for so many years in a row only to win 2 SB in his last 2 years. What if he had retired 2 years earlier? Would Elway have not been elite then? He is ranked number 3 on some all time QB lists. Those idiots that bring wins and post season success into the discussion of how good a QB is just can't judge QB talent on its own and loss my respect.

My credibility T3? I've exposed you for using bullshit statistics to argue your point.

I've pointed out where you went OUT OF YOUR WAY to quote my quote within a quote you used, while you had me on your ignore list, and you CONTINUE to make posts in reference to MY comments, woven into quotes directed at other people. This post is EXACTLY that point, because Muff doesn't CARE about what you just posted, but YOU care for me to read it because you want to be right, but you aren't.

Here's the thing T3, you simply do NOT understand the game, and you ONLY look at statistics and NOTHING else for your "answers". And that's WRONG because you cannot simply look at a QB rating and decide the entirety of the argument right there.

First, lets get to the meat of the flawed QB Rating system. According to the QB rating system, and "average" game is right around the 80 Passer rating mark. Generally it fluctuates on the whole, between 77-82, but for sake of argument and ease, we'll make these simple numbers, and call it 80. An "above average" game, is considered to be a 90 Passer rating. At 100 Passer rating you have a "superb" mark, and anything above 120 is "excellent".

So lets dissect your argument real quick, shall we?

1A. Before we get any further beyond ourselves, understand that you must play and WIN games to GET to the playoffs to be ABLE to WIN a super bowl in the first place. In doing so, T3, you're facing the "BEST" the NFC or AFC has to offer you in terms of competition. These aren't regular season games where you play game to game hoping for a win, this is the end-all-be-all game of the year. This is it, where legends are made. The offense and defense of the opposing team will had to have played top notch to get here, so you must play your best against THE BEST to win it.

1B. Super Bowl XXXVI- Tom Brady faced the 3rd best defense in the NFL, and the #1 Offense in the NFL with the #1QB (passer rating QB), and were 14 point underdogs in this game. The TOP was heavily skewed in favor of STL 33:30 to the Pats 26:30 he finished with a QB rating of 86.18

2. Super Bowl XXXVIII- Tom Brady faced the Panthers in a "worst to first" super bowl attempt, spurred by one of the best rushing attacks in the business that year. Tom Brady earns a nice passer rating of 100.52 in that game, which was a back and forth slugest the entire way, and won by a Brady drive that scored a field goal with 4 seconds left in the game after Carolina gave them great field position to start with, after tying the game, again.

3. Super Bowl XXXIX- Tom Brady faces arguably the most "offensive" team in the league not named the Patriots, and certainly "the best" the NFC has to offer. McNabb in the best season of his career with a support cast with names like Brian Westbrook, Terrel Owens, Dorsey Levins, Jevon Kearse, and Brian Dawkins. Whoooooooo was that a good team. Brady and the Pats win it in another back and forth slugest 24-21, QB rating of 110.16.


What we've seen here, is aside from one outlier, Brady plays "big" in "big" games like this. In fact, that "outlier" is his first real year getting time with the offense, he wasn't even a "starter" at that point, he was playing for an Injured Drew Bledsoe who had actually, almost died that year to internal bleeding, there was a great 30 for 30 episode or OTL report that came out this year leading up to the Brady vs. Manning bowl right before the game kicked off that they actually interviewed Drew and talked about him losing his job to Brady.


Point is, you're looking at arbitrary statistics to make your argument. YES T3, Rodgers puts up great numbers in 6 games against NFC North opponents who have been GARBAGE since he came to the NFL with the only real competition being Chicago, who every now and then has an above 500 season. Whereas Brady came into the league facing the Jets who were RED HOT and the Miami Dolphins who were much like Chicago, floaters around that .500 mark, and then the Bills who were more cardiac kids than anything. Then you consider the weather they play in, which favors Rodgers considerably due to the wind not being nearly as much of a factor in his divisional games like they are for Brady (LOL BUFFALO). Not to mention on average, Brady saw better divisional defenses since he came to the league than Rodgers has.

And you can talk all you want about Brady not winning ANOTHER super bowl since 2004, the guy already had 3 rings, was the reaosn his team had won the 2nd and 3rd rings, as evidenced by the SUPER BOWL MVP HONORS, and then, he STILL goes back to the super bowl and puts on a show, getting beat by his arch rival, Eli Manning and the AMAZINGLY GOOD DEFENSIVE FRONT 7 that is no longer in New York, which by the way had a REALLY good secondary as well.



So, as we can see, Rodgers is CLEARLY not better than Brady, as you claim, or he'd have more post season appearances, wins, and super bowl victories as Brady does, and as you can CLEARLY see, Brady plays big in Big games because that's what Brady does, he's captain come back. He doesn't care about his statistics, he'll throw for 100 yards in one game, then 500 yards in the next if you ask him to, but he just WINS you games. This is an indisputable fact that the entirety of the FANDOM and LEAGUE of the NFL agrees upon without a shadow of a doubt, argue against it at your own will, but you're just spouting ignorance at that point.

Need proof?

Most 4th quarter comebacks, this is the stuff that truly makes or breaks the "greats".

#1: Peyton Manning: 41
#2: Dan Marino: 36
#3: John Elway: 33
#4: Tom Brady: 32
#5: Joe Montana: 31
#6: Brett Favre: 30
#10: Eli Manning: 26
#12: Ben Roethlisberger: 25
#17: Tony Romo:23
#21: Matt Ryan: 20
#25: Phillip Rivers: 19
#41: Jay Cutler: 17
#64: Alex Smith: 14
#72: Matthew Stafford/Joe Flacco: 13
#99: Mark Sanchez: 10
#109: Andrew Luck/Russel Wilson: 9
#123: Cam Newton, Kyle Orton, Matt Cassel, Colin Kaepernick, Andy Dalton: 8
#141: Aaron Rodgers, Rex Grossman, Ryan Fitzpatrick: 7


Not only are EVERY single NFC North "starters" above Rodgers on the career 4th quarter comeback list (Cassel, Cutler, and Stafford), but there's a TON of guys YOUNGER than Rodgers on that list.

Now, you can talk all you want about the statistics, you can talk all you want about passer ratings, but those don't get you WINS, and WINS are all that matter at the end of the day. WINS get you into Canton, WINS get you into the super bowl, WINS make or break the legacy of your career.

WINNING when the game is on the line, is what makes for the "GREATS" of this game.

The top 12 on that list are all HoF QB's or WILL be HoF QB's.

Even Rodgers' "look-a-like" QB, Alex Smith, has TWICE as many 4th quarter comebacks as Rodgers does.

Argue all the ignorance you want, and the bullshit box score statistics all you want T3, you will NEVER win this argument, ever. And my STANCE hasn't flip flopped at any one point in this thread in regards to Rodgers and Brady. Brady is the hands down better QB, always has been, always will be, and is currently the GOAT at the position, followed closely by Manning, Montana, and Marino.

PS, John Elway isn't in the HoF because he had good numbers, because trust me he didn't, he's in the HoF because he got two super bowl rings in large part because of a GREAT running game, but more importantly because his teams won in "crunch time" coming from behind or whent he game was tied. He engineered drives that you couldn't even DREAM up in your head, and I know this as a Chiefs fan, I watched it year after bloody fucking Elway year, and it was frustrating. I never liked the guy and statistically speaking, he's as overrated as they get, 79.9 Passer Rating, 300-226 TD/INT ratio.

Now please, do yourself a favor and stop arguing with me about football, you're clearly barking up the wrong tree and are in WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY over your head since all you seem to care about are box score statistics and not the "reality" of these games.

[Three]

I will pass betting on this contest. I want to enjoy watching the game free from monetary considerations.


The game stats favor PHI, but ...

a. Aside from that trend that you mentioned, there's the matter of the ...

b. mini-bye (10 days rest since 12-04 TNF) to rest, game plan, regroup, practice, and recuperate.

c. PHI is just 6-1 (5-2 ATS, 5-2 OU) at home; while DAL is 6-0 on the road (5-1 ATS, 5-1 OU) this year; at home (3-4 SU, 2-5 ATS, 2-4-1 OU).

d. For 2014, teams are 4-8 S/U and 3-9 ATS after a game against SEA. For the last 7 games with SEA (win or lose), the team loses its very next game 0-7 S/U and 0-7 ATS. They refer to the effect on the teams as being "Beast Moded."

The last team that did NOT get "Beast Moded"? DAL.

__

Dang!! I accidentally convinced myself ... recalculating ...

I honestly almost picked DAL because of all the trends you mentioned despite the analysis favoring PHI. I am uneasy on this but over the years have learned to trust my analysis. After a bad year last year and this year being bland I may stop doing that.

[Three]

d. For 2014, teams are 4-8 S/U and 3-9 ATS after a game against SEA. For the last 7 games with SEA (win or lose), the team loses its very next game 0-7 S/U and 0-7 ATS. They refer to the effect on the teams as being "Beast Moded."

The last team that did NOT get "Beast Moded"? DAL.

The Ravens and Steelers used to be the teams that beast moded teams. I made a lot of hay out of that trend. They just physically beat a team up really bad. The Steelers are no longer the beast and the Ravens are not as fierce as they once were for opponents chances the following week but to a lesser degree they are still beasts.

[Gamblor]

1-3 last weak, I do suck towards the end of the regular season. 28-30-3. Lines get tight.

Oak +11 vs KC - KC is still tanking, a lot of points for a rivalry game against KC, not a high flying offense.
CAR -3 vs tb - The backup Car QB did ok, don't think they are missing much. Have to figure Car is outright better than TB.
Den -4.5 vs SD - Peyton hasn't been having great games the last two games, but he was facing bad matchups for him. SD's D is a better matchup for him.
Mia +9 vs NE - A meh pick, but rivalry, Mia is built to try to stop Brady and NE.

[Sharky]

So all good things must come to an end, including my 8 game winning streak… I last lost when Cousins got pick 6’d with 30 remaining in the game to lose my bet…last week I had a TD overturned and a very suspicious fumble (overturn) call – a real rarity, while in FG position to at least tie the game…yet without even showing a replay of the fumble???

The SAINTS, reeling at home having lost 4 straight, and overall – lost 4 of last 5, should right the ship on MNF against a QB happy “Misses” of the Midway Chicago D….Romo, Rodgers, and Brady have feasted on this D for 41, 55 and 51 points, respectively…Brees should have a field day, too....take NEW ORLEANS -3 for this week’s play.

GOOD LUCK!

Sharky

Last week: 0-1
Season: 11-5

[Math Demon]

Too busy to complete any analysis for Sunday's 1 PM (and maybe even 4 PM) games. Passing on the 1 PM (and 4 PM) games.

To everyone, good luck on all your picks!



* Still curious whether "Week 15 method" provides a short-cut for ATS initial filtering.

[Exoter175]

So all good things must come to an end, including my 8 game winning streak… I last lost when Cousins got pick 6’d with 30 remaining in the game to lose my bet…last week I had a TD overturned and a very suspicious fumble (overturn) call – a real rarity, while in FG position to at least tie the game…yet without even showing a replay of the fumble???

The SAINTS, reeling at home having lost 4 straight, and overall – lost 4 of last 5, should right the ship on MNF against a QB happy “Misses” of the Midway Chicago D….Romo, Rodgers, and Brady have feasted on this D for 41, 55 and 51 points, respectively…Brees should have a field day, too....take NEW ORLEANS -3 for this week’s play.

GOOD LUCK!

Sharky

Last week: 0-1
Season: 11-5

As a fan of that team from last week, I was piiiiiiiiiiissssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssed, that first call reversal was a 14 point swing, followed by what should have been a catch and down by contract call with a 62% likelihood of a touchdown on that drive, and a 93% likelihood of at least a field goal to tie.

Unfortunately, their playoff chances went right out the window in that game.

I'm liking your confidence in that New Orleans pick, you gotta feel like Brees is going to rally his team down the stretch here. W/L record means nothing if you've got a shot at your division still.

[Math Demon]

Too busy to complete any analysis for Sunday's 1 PM (and maybe even 4 PM) games. Passing on the 1 PM (and 4 PM) games.

To everyone, good luck on all your picks!


* Still curious whether "Week 15 method" provides a short-cut for ATS initial filtering.

* TNF and 1 PM games W-L = 7-3 ATS

[Three]

1. BAL winning over JAX by 21-23. BAL - 13.5
2. KC winning over OAK by 17-18. KC - 10
3. CAR winning over TB by 8-10. CAR - 3
4. PHI winning over DAL by 7-10. PHI - 3
5. IND winning over HOU by 10-11. IND - 6.5
6. TEN winning over NYJ by 1-2. TEN + 3
7. NYG winning over WAS by 9-10. NYG - 6.5
8. SEA winning over SFO by 13-14. SEA - 9.5
9. NE winning over MIA by 9-11. NE - 7.5
10. CLE winning over CIN by 3. CLE - 1
11. PIT winning over ATL by 1. ATL + 2
12. GB winning over BUF by 3. BUF + 4
13. DEN winning over SD by 5. DEN - 4
14. NO winning over CHI by 2. CHI + 3
15. DET winning over MIN by 7. DET + 8
z. ARZ winning over STL by 1-3. ARZ+6. Already happened.

1) Loss 12-20 (BAL -13.5)
2) Won 13-31 (KC -10)
3) Loss 17-19 (CAR -3)
4) Pending
5) Won 10-17. (IND -6.5).
6) Pending
7) Won 13-24 (NYG -6,5)
8) Pending
9) Won 13-41. (NE -7.5). Would you have actually made this bet at such a slim margin?
10) Loss 30-0. (CLE -1). Would you have actually made this bet at such a slim margin?
11) Loss 27-20 (ATL +2). Would you have made this bat at such a slim margin?
12) Won 13-21 (BUF +4).
13) Pending
14) Pending
15) Pending
16) Won 12-6 (AZ +6)

I get 6-4 ATS with lines you may not bet bringing it to 6-2 or 5-2.