# 2009 Pro Bowl Selections **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 16, 2008, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471 "2008-12-16T22:54:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471/21 "2008-12-17T19:47:34Z")
Aaron Rogers had a pretty solid first season starting, I doubt they’re regretting the Favre thing much (especially since it means Rogers will be there long term, rather than 1 more year of Brett) - their defense regressed more than the QB position. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471/22 "2008-12-17T19:57:35Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Yeah, how’s that working out for you, Packer fans? Unless Brett can play on the D Line and stop the run, or cover a back out of the backfield as a linebacker, or not bite on double moves, he wouldn’t make much difference. I’ll assume you haven’t seen many games, because we’re not losing because we don’t have Brett, or his league leading 17 interceptions, anymore. Out of his last 10 games, he’s thrown more picks than TDs in a whopping 7 of them. ---
**Author:** ![VarlosZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d78d45/32.png) [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471/23 "2008-12-17T19:58:23Z")
> [@Hi\_Neighbor](#): > > Portis is a HORRIBLE selection! He has not scored a touchdown since week 7, and other than week 12, has not topped 77 yards rushing in the past 6 games. You’re using the stats wrong, IMO. The main reason Portis’ raw stats have dropped off is not that he’s playing worse, it’s that the \*Redskins \*are playing worse. You point that he’s only topped 77 yards once in the last six games, but that’s mainly a function of the Redskins’ being 1-5 over those six games – they’ve been mostly playing from behind, hence the lack of rushing opportunities (and, of course, the lack of scoring opportunities). In their lone victory in that stretch, a close win over Seattle, Portis ran 29 times for 143 yards. In the five losses, OTOH, he’s gotten 13, 15, 11, 11, and 25 rushes. Granted, he wasn’t very efficient with those rushes, but neither was he terrible, and much of the downgrade has to be attributed to the struggles of the team as a whole (the offense is averaging 11 points per game over the past 11). Portis isn’t a bad selection. If I were going to make a change at RB, I would swap out Turner for D. Williams. The 2008 Fantasy Football MVP has put up huge numbers mostly by by getting a ton of carries. Don’t get me wrong, he’s played pretty well, and the ability to stay healthy enough to play pretty well over 332 carries (and counting) is very valuable. And he’s far from being a terrible pick. It’s just that, at the end of the day, he’s been good while Williams has been great. ---
**Author:** ![Taber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ac91a4/32.png) [@Taber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Taber)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471/24 "2008-12-17T20:16:19Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Or Aaron Rodgers. How did he not make the Pro Bowl? I thought he was the chosen one, the Golden Boy sent to get the Pack over that 13-3 hump from last year. Didn’t they spend the last 5 years or so running a Hall of Famer out of town so that he could lead the Pack to victory? > > Yeah, how’s that working out for you, Packer fans? You want Brett back so bad you want to scream it from the mountaintops, but you can’t because that would require you to swallow your pride and admit that you were wrong. > > Packers > 2007: 13-3 > 2008: Choking like dogs > > Jets > 2007: 4-12 > 2008: 9-5 > > It would almost be a shame if it hadn’t been self-inflicted. > > Anyway, it is for that reason that I don’t see Favre as an unjustified choice. His value to the Jets this year has been immeasurable. The same cannot be said about Rivers. Farve G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck 14 14 305 451 67.6 3,052 6.8 21 17 26 Rodgers G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck 14 14 296 466 63.5 3,470 7.4 23 12 30 These are really similar statlines, but I’d say Rodgers’ is a little better, as even with the lower completion percentage, Rodgers has a higher average yards per throw and is less likely to throw to the other team. This is ignoring that Rodgers has also run for 213 yards this year, averaging 4 yards a carry. As a Chargers fan, I’d say Rivers and Scifres should be in, but I’m not sure Gates played a pro bowl year this year. ---
**Author:** ![VarlosZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d78d45/32.png) [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471/25 "2008-12-17T20:21:57Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Yeah, how’s that working out for you, Packer fans? You want Brett back so bad you want to scream it from the mountaintops, but you can’t because that would require you to swallow your pride and admit that you were wrong. > > Packers > 2007: 13-3 > 2008: Choking like dogs > > Jets > 2007: 4-12 > 2008: 9-5 > > It would almost be a shame if it hadn’t been self-inflicted. > > Anyway, it is for that reason that I don’t see Favre as an unjustified choice. His value to the Jets this year has been immeasurable. The same cannot be said about Rivers. You’ve got to try to account for other important variables, of which there are many. [For example](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/sports/football/23score.html?_r=1&ref=sports): > [@Aaron Schatz](#): > > The true movers behind the Jets’ turnaround are the offensive and defensive linemen, in particular two veterans who arrived with numerous Pro Bowl appearances on their résumés: guard Alan Faneca and defensive tackle Kris Jenkins. > > The Jets suffered greatly when contract squabbles forced them to deal the veteran left guard Pete Kendall before the 2007 season. His replacement, Adrien Clarke, was a disaster. . . > > . . . In the off-season, the Jets’ brain trust of Mike Tannenbaum and Eric Mangini recognized their greatest need, and signed Faneca away from the Steelers. It was the perfect marriage of free agent and team need. . . > > . . . The difference is obvious in the running game and pass protection. Running back Thomas Jones is gaining 4.5 yards a carry, up from 3.6 yards last season. Jets quarterbacks took 53 sacks in 2007; this year, Favre is on pace for 30. > > The Jets’ other major off-season need was a big, talented nose tackle who could absorb blockers in Mangini’s 3-4 defense. Enter Jenkins. . . > > . . . With the 349-pound Jenkins stuffing the middle, the Jets have improved their ability to stop the run as much as they have improved their ability to run the ball. In 2007, the Jets allowed 4.2 yards a carry, close to the league average. This year, it’s just 3.4 yards a carry, the fourth-best figure in the N.F.L. > > Jenkins’s numbers show how important he has been. On running plays, Jenkins is the only starting nose tackle in any of the league’s 3-4 defenses who makes his average tackle after a gain of less than a yard. Last year’s starting nose tackle, Dewayne Robertson, made his average tackle on running plays after a gain of 2.7 yards. At least as important, consider this: last year the Jets faced the hardest schedule in the league according to DVOA. This year, they’ve faced the \*easiest \*schedule to date: they get to play the two putrid, awful Western divisions, as well as six games against the AFC East, a collection of mediocre teams that happen to have winning records because they get to play (by far) the two worst divisions in football. The Packers, meanwhile, have gone from the 4th easiest schedule last year to the 6th toughest (so far) this year. And, for whatever it’s worth, they’ve played extremely well for a 5-9 team (or, put another way, their record is abnormally bad for a team that has played as well as they have). Rodgers hasn’t played as well as Favre did last year, but, of course, neither has Favre. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2009-pro-bowl-selections/477471.md?page=1)