Re: LOL! You keep making my point!

Quote
RFL

Quote
Speed_Kills
The eyeball test for me says he most certainly did not outperform Rodgers yesterday. The stats say they were very similar with the edge going to Goff. Also Rodgers is royalty so much of what people are saying today is due to that... its ok guys. Goff will get there when he earns it like Rodgers

I don't think many neutral fans would think Goff outplayed Rodgers. I have already had 4 conversations in my office this morning 2 Giant fans, a Browns fan, and Eagles fan. To a man they said... man Goff was shaky the first half until that final drive but he got it together in the second.

I don't get the impression that you have yet grasped my point. I am not trying to argue for which view of Goff is correct. I am saying that it is far more of a subjective judgment than most fans want to imagine. OF COURSE the 4 non-Ram fans you spoke with judged it that way. That is exactly what I would have predicted.

Now, you mention that A R is "a god." Indeed, he has a HOF track record. And it is entirely fair for that to be part of the assessment. Goff has not EARNED the sort of benefit of the doubt that Rogers has.

But then, insofar as track record influences one's perception, that is actually a subjective factor. And when I read your post, I see little else. Rogers had limited success yesterday. He faced moderate pressure and had some open WRs. This is not criticism. It's just saying that his production was limited. Certainly not A production by his lofty standards. So what's the difference?

Well, your "eyeball test" perceived that A R was never rattled but Goff was. Obviously, the eyeball test is always subjective. And it is influenced by things like aesthetic response. Rogers always has that cool, gunslinger demeanor. Goff always looks like Opie. NFL Nation will always "get the impression" of the one as a stone killer more than the other.

But when it comes down to it, what do the objective facts say? They had very similar days, with Goff finding pay dirt more often. If one believes that factual results have meaning, it seems damn hard to me to make a case for a widely divergent assessment. Not without resorting to track records, images, and eyeball tests.

Which is, again, my point. Your assumptions of what I want to establish about Goff are completely inaccurate. I am NOT claiming he is Rogers' equal or any of the rest of what your posts says. I am talking about subjective responses. And your post precisely proves my point.

And you know what? For athletes, competition has a pretty precise meaning. Did you beat me or did I beat you? It's a matter of results. Goff put up slightly better numbers and won the game. He beat Rogers yesterday, who had plenty of chances to have won the game before the fumble.

And as a Ram fan, my subjective responses is to cheer the fact that our guy won that match up. Let's see if he can do the same next week.