Pat McAfee Is A BAMF!

the ravens organization has built better teams top to bottom. they have not had to rely on once in a generation qb play to stay relevant.

without rogers the packers are not even a playoff team.

who knows who would be playing qb for them had they not step in it and got rogers?

the reason i'm not saying the ravens should have more superbowls or more wins total...is because they don't have a qb like roger or farve to go with the rest of their team.

if they did and they sucked on defense or some other important component of the game then i would say their organization has failed to take full advantage of a great situation.

but that's not the case with the ravens.....

Ok you really arent comprehending the point here.

The Packers strength is QBs, the Ravens strength is Ds, both have led to 2 SBs, but one had led to more overall wins. Why are you baselessly declaring that the less succesful strength = better organization?

Better teams top to bottom, no. What you mean is better teams top to bottom MINUS the QB position. GB has built better teams top to bottom (Because the QB position counts) and we know so because of their results.

Ok so, having a great QB but deficient D is "not taking advantage of a great situation", but having a great D and deficient QB isnt?

Well, jee. How bout this. The Ravens have a bad organization because they can never put a good QB with their Ds, thusly, they have failed to take advantage of the great situation of having a great D. Your logic applied in reverse.

Without those Ds, the ravens arent even a playoff team! (Lol this is too easy buddy, your logic in reverse)

Who knows where they would be had they not stepped in it and gotten a great D! (Because player aquisition is luck to you apparently)

The reason im not saying the Packers should have more wins or SBs total, is because they don't have a great D to go with the rest of their team! (Again, your logic applied in reverse)

Your ENTIRE argument comes down to GBs not giving credit to GB for their strength (QB aquisition), whilst giving credit to BAL for their strength (Defensive aquisition).

We can put this aside, as it is beside the point..

But none of this actually applicable anyway, because GB has put up top 10 Ds to go with their QB, FAR more then BAL has put up top 10 QBs to accompany their D.

The Ravens suck at O, so i fail to see how then building great Ds = then being good at team building, but we can table that point for now...

The Packers strength is team building. QB is one part of the team. (See how easy this is?)

I am pointing out how the Ravens organization fails at fielding more then an average team in spite of having elite Defensive play for over two decades... regardless of how they obtained that defensive play. (Lol)

you picked the ravens and their defense not me, that's revisionist history and it's only been 45 minutes.

the ravens have had the league leading rusher more than once during the flacco era and they have had great receivers and special teams in that time. what they haven't had and have never had is a qb like farve or rogers...or manning or luck.

the steelers, seahawks, patriots and the coughlin era giants have had great qbs, though you could argue eli's greatness, yet somehow, in spite of having that great qb ,they were/are still able to field a team that can beat you in multiple ways and do it consistently.


i have not seen green bay come close to accomplishing this consistency....and why i feel they are a crap team and organization without erin rogers.

nothing you can type will change that perspective. for my perspective to change green bay has to field a legit team that doesn't fold like a wet blanket without rogers or their one other star player whoever it happens to be.....like when gordy neilson broke his leg a couple seasons ago .

Well, I'm glad we have an explanation for this disaster.