Belichick needs Brady more than McCarthy needs Rodgers

[SpeightTheVillain]

18 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Just because you can show stats have occurred in a manner doesn't mean you should use them as evidence of an event.

Most recent instance the amount of pass yards given up this week. The Bears have put up much less yardage passing, while completely establishing a run game, controlling the clock, keeping a fresh defense and winning the game. Look at the Ravens/Steelers games. They are far more efficient run team. Yet the Packers completely shut down the run game, forced them into passing and it resulted in only 1 offensive touchdown, and a play at that which was a breakdown by assignment. Yet, we're on here complaining about that performance.

Say Rodgers played versus the Saints and put up Hundley's stats. Should Saints fans be pissed Aaron Jones ran all over them, while they kept us out of the end zone and shut down the most efficient scoring aspect we have? The answer is no. 

 

Exactly this. 

Capers and Company took away exactly what Chicago wanted to do. They averaged 131.1 rushing yards per game. They got 55 against our defense.

We put them in the uncomfortable place of having to actually throw the ball and it failed. Predictably. 

[Norm]

15 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

Exactly this. 

Capers and Company took away exactly what Chicago wanted to do. They averaged 131.1 rushing yards per game. They got 55 against our defense.

We put them in the uncomfortable place of having to actually throw the ball and it failed. Predictably. 

Yeah but yardzzz. It's like when they pick and choose between yards it points per game for whatever suits them.

[incognito_man]

2 hours ago, pollino14 said:

To be fair nobody has explained what the thread is meaning. It's coming off as a way to promote a groups agenda on here. 

I think it's clear that BB relies more on Brady for his success than MM has relied on Rodgers for his own.

Allow me to clear this up: edit impending.