Threads like these make me wonder what I've missed during my hiatuses from this site.

GB 16th on that list.

Rodgers has great pocket presence.

few things change tbh.

NFC East fans bicker back and forth.

Homers continue to homer.

Trolls continue to troll.

and people continue to get verbal'd on a daily basis. quite entertaining really

But it's not Eli.
14th is QB Rating with #1 O Line vs 16th Oline with #1 QB.




I just like to think that my bickering is constructive and informed. But I wouldn't know!

This post was edited by jro1221 on May 6 2013 12:18am

Just looked at it, Rodgers was sacked 2.5x more than Eli with almost double the hits and put up much much better stats.


There ya go Pack fans.

He's right, even with the clear evidence that's backed up with sources you still manage to come up with some ridiculous excuse to distort the statistics. " The only reason why the o-line looks good on the stat sheet is because of Eli's awesome pocket presence"
"Eli's completion % is low because the giants top 10 receiving corps can't get open so Eli had to evasively escape pressure and throw it away".
Your bias towards Eli is absurd.

All your counterarguments are ridiculous claims that can't be legitimately assessed by proof.
"Eli had the beat footwork in the NFL" wat.

OLine stats are almost impossible to look at because an elite QB or RB will have a huge affect on them. The Vikings could put out the worst line in the league, but because AP is running the ball, their run blocking stats will look good. Those numbers aren't something you can really analyze without watching the games alongside them.

Yes this is true. I was just trying to say to Noz that Eli's pocket presence isn't the reason the Giants were ranked 1.

No, but it could have bumped them well up from where they truly were. We know damn well the Packers' OL was nowhere near as good as 16th last year.