Why McGinn Retired: His Memory Is Gone

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/06/13/t...fl-beat-writer

Quote:

---

The MMQB: You documented how fortunate it was that Aaron Rodgers didn’t have to play the first couple of years—he just wasn’t ready.

McGinn: “He was a very poor player here for his first two summers and regular-season practices. Fortunately for him, and he knows that down deep, he didn’t have to play early. His delivery was a mess, bad body language, he didn’t know how to deal with teammates. He learned so much from Brett Favre on how to in some ways be one of the guys and relate, and he became much more of a leader. He was really poor and how many great players have ever had a start like that? Not that many. A lot of scouts look at that exhibition tape those first two years and he was a little bit better the third year, but not to any degree, and then he just really developed. He lost a lot of close games in ’08, but by ’09 he was playing great and by 2010 he was maybe the best in the business. And then there have been a lot of playoff disappointments and poor performances. It’s a quarterback league and all the rules are designed for that quarterback to dominate, and he hasn’t done it in the most important times since 2010.

---

There are at least 3 factual inaccuracies in this paragraph. One complete logical fallacy as well.

There are also two not frequently remembered factoids in there.

Can you spot them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/06/13/t...fl-beat-writer



There are at least 3 factual inaccuracies in this paragraph. One complete logical fallacy as well.

There are also two not frequently remembered factoids in there.

Can you spot them?

---

Not to get into the inaccuracies, but a light has suddenly turned on. McGinn hid it well, but obviously he held a grudge against TT for ditching Favre. He tried to give Favre credit for Rodgers success, when by all counts Brent did everything he could to sandbag Rodgers.

1. I can't be sure but it sounds like McGinn remembers Rodgers being Favre's backup for just two years and then Favre-a-palooza in his third camp. Actually it was his fourth (2005-08).
2. I don't have numbers or any other evidence, but my recollection is that Rodgers was not unequivocally bad during his first two years. And his performance in the Dallas game in '07 is what made most of us feel that he was the legit heir to Favre.
3. Great QBs who had lowly beginnings: Bradshaw, Fouts, Steve Young, hell it took Favre four full years (counting his first one in Atl) to gain Holmgren's trust and perform at his 1995-98 level.
4. logical fallacy: learning to be one of the guys and leadership are not the same thing.

McGann...McGinn....name rings a bell, but I just can't place the guy. Milwaukee politician? Actor?

Rodgers was pretty bad when he arrived. He had to retool his mechanics. Other Tedford guys flamed out. Rodgers was lucky to have time and a QB guru who knew what they hell he was doing.

So he had to change how he held the ball, bfd. Rodgers is much better athlete than his Tedford predecessors. To sY n he stunk (or didnt) based on what we fans see of preseason is silly

Rodgers was far from great when he arrived in GB. That is the only thing correct in that article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoosier

So he had to change how he held the ball, bfd. Rodgers is much better athlete than his Tedford predecessors. To sY n he stunk (or didnt) based on what we fans see of preseason is silly

---

I probably used a little hyperbole there. You have to remember that Crusty gets $.01 every time I get a hit on my blog or twitter feed. That extra $.23/week comes in handy.

Still, Rodgers was in no way a finished product when he arrived in GB. The contribution of Mr. McCarthy was as QB guru and offensive genius. The scheme and the retooling did help Rodgers. No doubt Rodgers himself had a lot to do with his success. It's debatable how much Favre contributed other than dealing out a wedgie or two in the locker room.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleft Crusty

McGann...McGinn....name rings a bell, but I just can't place the guy. Milwaukee politician? Actor?

Rodgers was pretty bad when he arrived. He had to retool his mechanics. Other Tedford guys flamed out. Rodgers was lucky to have time and a QB guru who knew what they hell he was doing.

---

Agreed. Rodgers had the luxury of time; something I thought organizations would learn from - they draft talented kids, but don't give them time to develop, and many of them flunk out.

But that comment is in no way a criticism of Rodgers; it's an indictment of football culture today.

I do think Rodgers learned a lot from Favre, both what to do and what not to do, but he learned by standing back and paying attention, not because kindly ol' Brent took the kid under his wing.

Having Favre around probably helped Rodgers cultivate the ever-present chip on his shoulder. In that way I don't doubt he benefited from 4's presence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/06/13/t...fl-beat-writer



There are at least 3 factual inaccuracies in this paragraph. One complete logical fallacy as well.


There are also two not frequently remembered factoids in there.

Can you spot them?

---

Hazy memories but remember his 3rd year in preseason. He led a drive all the way down the field and then forced in a very low pass that the receiver was expecting and caught for a touchdown. Had not seen much from him before but that showed he had figured it out. Thought Packers would get a good draft pick for him the next year when Favre came back. Dallas game was later that year IIRC.

Other than his draft, the most enduring memory I have of Rodger's early years with the Packers was when he came into a game against the Patriots to replace an injured Favre...and he promptly broke his foot and missed the rest of the season. I remember at that time doubting he would ever be the Pack's starting QB.

First item in the wrong column, if Favre did any teaching about teammates, it was what not to do with a team younger than you. Favre had his own office and was not in the locker room much. He did no media there and was scarce most of the time. Rodgers made it a point to get to know each of the new players, vets or rookies. And he has been doing it each year since. Every year some new player has a story about a personal detail Rodgers remembers or a question he asked the new guy.

Favre had his buddies, Rodgers wasn't one of them (see Perlman's book), and he stuck to himself. Fritz was very close on this one.

First item in the correct department, Rodgers had a come to Jesus meeting with his coaches about his demeanor on the field when a play did not go as planned or someone screwed up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

First item in the wrong column, if Favre did any teaching about teammates, it was what not to do with a team younger than you. Favre had his own office and was not in the locker room much. He did no media there and was scarce most of the time. Rodgers made it a point to get to know each of the new players, vets or rookies. And he has been doing it each year since. Every year some new player has a story about a personal detail Rodgers remembers or a question he asked the new guy.

Favre had his buddies, Rodgers wasn't one of them (see Perlman's book), and he stuck to himself. Fritz was very close on this one.

First item in the correct department, Rodgers had a come to Jesus meeting with his coaches about his demeanor on the field when a play did not go as planned or someone screwed up.

---

I do remember though reading an article after Favre had left Green Bay in which Rodgers was asked what he learned from from playing with Favre. He said Favre stressed the importance of how he conducted himself on the field both in practice and games because everyone is watching the starting QB. So I think there were those moments. I don't know how frequent they were. Favre and Rodgers seemed to get along pretty well in 2007, so it may have been an evolving situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fritz

Agreed. Rodgers had the luxury of time; something I thought organizations would learn from - they draft talented kids, but don't give them time to develop, and many of them flunk out.

But that comment is in no way a criticism of Rodgers; it's an indictment of football culture today.

---

There are precious few HC jobs, so if you are say, John Fox, and you want to coach again and Chicago is your best option, then you go there knowing that they don't have a franchise QB. That sucks, relative to what other coaches have to work with like MM, Belichick, Tomlin, etc.

Those are two very different situations by which to come into a head coaching job. Fox may likely be on the treadmill that many of these head coaches are on. Once they finally draft the guy they have tabbed as the "franchise QB", the team is desperate for a turn-around, and you almost have to cast your lot with the young guy, unless you can get a stop-gap vet, which also may not work out. I'm not sure what took the Rams so long to try and find one, but by that point, Fisher had no shot of a turn-around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fritz

Agreed. Rodgers had the luxury of time; something I thought organizations would learn from - they draft talented kids, but don't give them time to develop, and many of them flunk out.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carolina_Packer

Those are two very different situations by which to come into a head coaching job. Fox may likely be on the treadmill that many of these head coaches are on. Once they finally draft the guy they have tabbed as the "franchise QB", the team is desperate for a turn-around, and you almost have to cast your lot with the young guy, unless you can get a stop-gap vet, which also may not work out. I'm not sure what took the Rams so long to try and find one, but by that point, Fisher had no shot of a turn-around.

---

No doubt many QBs would benefit from the beginning Rodgers was afforded. Obviously it's not a magic bullet and doesn't mean they'd all end up viable NFL QBs, but it would greatly help many.

Hardly a new question, but what would of happened with Rodgers if he had gone #1 overall to the 49ers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

I do remember though reading an article after Favre had left Green Bay in which Rodgers was asked what he learned from from playing with Favre. He said Favre stressed the importance of how he conducted himself on the field both in practice and games because everyone is watching the starting QB. So I think there were those moments. I don't know how frequent they were. Favre and Rodgers seemed to get along pretty well in 2007, so it may have been an evolving situation.

---

Indeed. But that lesson was not the one Bobbo was highlighting in his mini rant.

Rodgers has taken this a step further too. He is always at OTAs, Favre was a ghost for his last few years. And he usually required some kind of agreement with the coach over reps to show up at mini camp. Rodgers gets to reinforce the idea of being present to learn the scheme and be accountable PLUS he and his veterans, after being at OTAs, get excused from minicamp. Very team focused. Some might call it leadership.

He clearly learned some things from Favre including perhaps the most important lesson that sometimes you need to throw on the move, from a bad setup/footwork and with odd arm angles. Rodgers has practiced and perfected many of these.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guiness

No doubt many QBs would benefit from the beginning Rodgers was afforded. Obviously it's not a magic bullet and doesn't mean they'd all end up viable NFL QBs, but it would greatly help many.

Hardly a new question, but what would of happened with Rodgers if he had gone #1 overall to the 49ers?

---

The fact that this is not done more often is another argument for the fact that some teams are not actually trying their best to be the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

The fact that this is not done more often is another argument for the fact that some teams are not actually trying their best to be the best.

---

that and not looking at Kaepernick? :huh::satan: lol

I wouldn't say teams are not doing their best, but that it's hard for the coaching staff/GM to take the long view. If Favre had retired, say, after the 4-12 season you can be pretty sure Rodgers is under center week 1 of 2005.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guiness

that and not looking at Kaepernick? :huh::satan: lol

I wouldn't say teams are not doing their best, but that it's hard for the coaching staff/GM to take the long view. If Favre had retired, say, after the 4-12 season you can be pretty sure Rodgers is under center week 1 of 2005.

---

The long view is what leadership in the front office and ownership should be providing. I agree 5 year contracts and 3 year windows of judgement make that tough.

Did McKenzie get to sit Carr for a year?

What is funny is that the sit for a year chorus died out (despite having Dan Marino and sort of John Elway on its side) as QB contracts soared early in the draft.

That did not stop teams from draft QBs high and playing them right away.

The 2011 CBA stopped the ever escalating contracts but the QB acquisition and playing time model has not yet adjusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guiness

Other than his draft, the most enduring memory I have of Rodger's early years with the Packers was when he came into a game against the Patriots to replace an injured Favre...and he promptly broke his foot and missed the rest of the season. I remember at that time doubting he would ever be the Pack's starting QB.

---

That was my first game at Lambeau with my wife. It was really cold, like high of 15 in,late Nov/early Dec. Pats won 35-0.

No one in our section at the end of the game, I made my wife,stay until the end because it was my 1st game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThunderDan

That was my first game at Lambeau with my wife. It was really cold, like high of 15 in,late Nov/early Dec. Pats won 35-0.

No one in our section at the end of the game, I made my wife,stay until the end because it was my 1st game.

---

I was there. However, the awfulness of the game may have made it seem colder to you than it really was. It was 41, but kinda windy.

Not so fun fact: Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers were a combined 9-27, 105 yards, 0 TD's, 0 INT's, 5 sacks. Passer rating 46.1.

McGinn clearly has some kind of nostalgia for the old days that makes him blind to the present. Will miss his draft coverage and game ratings but not his opinion pieces at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

I was there. However, the awfulness of the game may have made it seem colder to you than it really was. It was 41, but kinda windy.

Not so fun fact: Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers were a combined 9-27, 105 yards, 0 TD's, 0 INT's, 5 sacks. Passer rating 46.1.

---

Wasn't this one of the first games to build evidence against the Patriots leading to Spygate?

Bad fact #2

By 3rd year, he was better than awful but still struggling.

His numbers in regular season in 2007: 20 or 28, 71%, 1 TD, 0 int, adjusted yards per attempt 8.5 (which is very good) and 3 sacks.

He outplayed Favre versus Dallas. There were a number of occasions that Brett was on his own agenda and looked afraid and unwilling. He did not rediscover the iron man until after Ted shipped him off.

Correct fact #2, if you allow for negative lessons, Rodgers learns from Favre not to have an independent agenda and allow Michael Flipping Strahan to sack him and make poor Bubba Franks look bad. What a weasel move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

Bad fact #2

By 3rd year, he was better than awful but still struggling.

His numbers in regular season in 2007: 20 or 28, 71%, 1 TD, 0 int, adjusted yards per attempt 8.5 (which is very good) and 3 sacks.

He outplayed Favre versus Dallas. There were a number of occasions that Brett was on his own agenda and looked afraid and unwilling. He did not rediscover the iron man until after Ted shipped him off.

Correct fact #2, if you allow for negative lessons, Rodgers learns from Favre not to have an independent agenda and allow Michael Flipping Strahan to sack him and make poor Bubba Franks look bad. What a weasel move.

---

I think Bob was off by a year. The way I remember it:

2005: Bad
2006: Better but not really good.
2007: Looked ready to start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

I think Bob was off by a year. The way I remember it:

2005: Bad
2006: Better but not really good.
2007: Looked ready to start.

---

I remember 2006 as being very encouraging, but that might be for improvement alone. He wasn't Mr. August Hasselback until 2007.

His mechanics were fine in 2007. Took McCarthy basically one season to iron it out. And I am not convinced the high carry was that big a deal.

McGinn was an amazing writer and a NFL draft stud. I'll miss him a ton

Things are about ready to get way more boring at the JS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bretsky

McGinn was an amazing writer and a NFL draft stud. I'll miss him a ton

Things are about ready to get way more boring at the JS

---

I agree. Can't tell the other guys apart. I sometimes disagreed with McGinn, but he spurred more debate here than all the other beat writers put together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

I agree. Can't tell the other guys apart. I sometimes disagreed with McGinn, but he spurred more debate here than all the other beat writers put together.

---

Most writers and boring matter of factoid dude's with no personality in their writing.

I have no clue whose interesting articles I will post for others to nitpick to death anymore :)

Bad fact #3

Quote:

---

he was a little bit better the third year, but not to any degree, and then he just really developed.

---

In the Winter ahead of Rodgers' 4th year, the Packers put Favre on a timetable for a decision. A timetable he had not, since yearly Hamletizing became a thing in 2000, adhered to previously. This was before OTAs or camp and before FA and the draft. They had time to restock if they needed to.

When they got back word he was retiring, they made exactly zero moves away from Rodgers from the late spring to camp. If McGinn thinks that scouts or Packer coaches couldn't see that Rodgers was going to be the future, he really does believe in miracles and unicorns.

Shorter version: at the end of Rodgers year 3, the Packers thought he was the future and were mad enough about cold Brett to send him packing. The entire holdout/unretire deal doesn't happen if the head coach doesn't think Rodgers is the better choice.

I just finished Gunslinger, and it brought back all those bad memories of Brent retiring and then hemming and hawing and unretiring. Bad times, and the book did not give any insight that made Favre look any better or give at least some deeper understanding.

His brother made a good point: Brent needed to suck in order to convince himself it was time to retire; that's why that last awful year with Minny was so important. Favre was apparently emotionally incapable of going out on top.