Mr Bad Example

"This is a 10-6 team" gets two reactions - either you're wildly disrespecting the franchise by suggesting their 13-3 record this season might've been due to some luck OR you're a wild optimist because they'll go 0-16 and not score a point. No one does manic/depressive like the GB fanbase.

Five elite seasons is my benchmark, so that isn't a "con" to me. I hate to shine a light on OJ Simpson, but look at his career.

I like him for a 55-800-7 stat line.

I always do love the people who defend QBs because "his WRs drop some passes!" - I think Jameis was the primary beneficiary of it this season - and it is usually "yes, no other QB's WRs drop passes or run the wrong route, just YOUR GUY."

Not much point. We apparently have a wildly different definition of what a "cannon" arm is.

Yes, clearly. Watching Brett Favre for 15 yrs gave me no idea of what a "cannon arm" is.

Nah. You're overrating his arm. It is by no means bad, but he was more of a timing/touch guy. I feel like people think deep passes indicate arm strength, and to me it's more how quickly they can fire a quick slant or zip a deep out. I'd probably, in his prime, rate him in the top 1/3 at best (and considering we're in peak QB, that's not a bad place to be).

A "cannon arm" is one of those traits that seems to exist solely to get GMs/coaches fired. Let's start by listing QBs who DIDN'T have cannon arms - not in their prime, not ever: - P Manning - Brady - Montana - Staubach ....these guys certainly didn't have BAD arms, by any means; I think people overestimate the use of an eye-popping trait (say, a cannon arm or a blazing 40 time) and forget that a LOT of NFL players may not have had an amazing (quality x), but they had *enough* of it...Montana didn't have a cannon arm, but he had enough of an arm to make all the throws; Jerry Rice wasn't a burner but he had enough speed to get past DBs; Walter Payton wasn't the biggest or fastest back, but he had enough size and speed to complement his off-the-charts intangibles. Etc.

It's amazing to me that Staubach seems to be underrated if not downright forgotten these days. Best QB of the 70s, just edging out Ken Anderson and Tarkenton.

Good overview of his career. I thought he was going to be a player who could've had a steady diet of 8-15 carries (depending on game situation) and 4-8 catches per game, easy, after those first couple weeks. But his production hasn't really matched what he flashed in his debut.

Even the supporting casts are fairly even, if different - KC had somewhat better frontline talent, GB had better depth.

None of his philosphies make sense to me. I don't think he has any, I think he just does what sounds like a good idea, and if it works, he does that until it doesn't then casts about for the next thing that sounds like a good idea.

Trump isn't leading - I don't think he has that in him - but they are definitely following. Problem is hardcore Trumpists aren't as easy to find as they used to be.

But the stats aren't THAT much bulkier - Mahomes had 350 more yds, and 5 more tds. And it took 80 more att to get there. It's probably just nicer, rounder numbers - 5000/50 looks nicer than 4600/45. Rodgers also sat in week 15, where Matt Flynn threw for 480 yds and 6 tds vs the Lions. If Rodgers is near his per game avg of 310 yds and 3 tds (and Flynn's performance suggests that hitting those numbers shouldn't have been an issue), Mahomes bulk edge is even less Also, since both of them are mobile, I figured I'd see if rushing might swing it one way or the other; nope, equal as can be - Rodgers 60-257-3, Mahomes 60-272-2. Mahomes fumbled 9 times to Rodgers' 4; Rodgers was sacked 36-219 (6.7% sack pct) vs 26-171 (4.3%) for Mahomes. So the only real difference I'm seeing is Rodgers was a quite a bit better with ball security (though it isn't as though Mahomes was terrible) but a lot more likely to take a sack. I mean, either way, I'm not pissed off if my team gets "stuck" with the person who finishes #2 in this poll. It's a razor thin margin that I'd chalk up to personal preference, as they were both playing QB as well as you can play it over an entire season.

I am the person who tries to remind everyone that "the other team is getting paid too" but letting someone convert a 4th and 26 is inexcusable. That game, along with the '07 and '14 NFCCGs, are the more frustrating losses in my fandom. Not to mention, earlier in the game, Sherman decided not to go for it on a 4th and 1 after failing on an earlier 4th and 1; and Favre's idiotic int in OT. I feel like GB has left at least a handful of playoff wins on the table in the past 25-ish yrs. And I'm not talking stuff where they ran into a better team or a close one didn't go their way, but games where the win was RIGHT THERE and they just did the worst thing(s) possible to lose it.