Let's be fair: Rodgers was ready

[HarveyWallbangers]

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/0-4-110/Let-s-be-fair--Rodgers-was-ready.html?lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos2


Let's be fair: Rodgers was ready
Kevin Seifert, ESPN.com

Nothing seemed fair or right or particularly well-vetted during the summer-long saga that ended with Aaron Rodgers atop the Green Bay Packers' depth chart at quarterback. So why start now? In the spirit of apples and oranges, we present to you the key numbers for Rodgers and the man he replaced:

* Rodgers: 117.8 passer rating, 2-0 record
* Brett Favre: 104.1 rating, 1-1 record with the New York Jets

All summer, Packers general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy were asked why they thought the team was better off with Rodgers. But the question missed the point. To Thompson and McCarthy, the issue was moot: They were convinced their team could win with either quarterback.

Their publicly mangled stance drew criticism around the NFL. Two games don't make a season, but today it's only fair to point out the Packers couldn't have opened the season any better under Favre. Rodgers has made a near-flawless debut, in the process making Thompson and McCarthy look like football soothsayers.

On the eve of the season, here is how McCarthy articulated his sense of transition: "I definitely feel we will win with Aaron Rodgers." Speaking to the Green Bay Press-Gazette, McCarthy added:

"I guess I'm going to have to continue answering this question until we reach the point where it's evident to everybody that we made the right move, and I understand that. I don't disagree with everybody's concern, but that's the reality of the position. I think we have a quarterback that's taken advantage of a great opportunity to learn from a Hall of Fame quarterback in front of him. He's prepared for this opportunity, and it's time."

Now, it's much more evident for everyone after Rodgers completed 42 of his first 60 passes this season for 506 yards and four touchdowns. He has demonstrated a deep knowledge of the Packers' offense, an arm that can get the ball anywhere on the field and surprising agility outside of the pocket. In the quarterback-deficient NFC North, Rodgers has needed only two games to establish himself as the class of the division.

"We understand why people would have the questions," right tackle Mark Tauscher said. "He hadn't played yet. But we've always thought Aaron could do the job for us. We've seen it every day around here."

Most public concerns about Rodgers centered not on a perceived deficiency -- other than a name that doesn't rhyme with "Barve" -- but rather a lack of empirical evidence. The reality is no one had seen him play a full game since his final season at Cal in 2004. The only people with a true comfort level were Thompson, McCarthy and the rest of the Packers' staff. And they were essentially unanimous in the belief that if Favre didn't return for 2008, Rodgers could run their offense at a high level.

While they kept things relatively basic in the opener against Minnesota, the Packers noticeably took off the training wheels Sunday at Detroit, throwing 38 passes out of all kinds of personnel groupings. McCarthy, in fact, publicly linked Rodgers to his aggressive game plan.

"We kept pushing the envelope," McCarthy said, "and I think that speaks volumes about the coaches and everybody having confidence in Aaron to stay aggressive."

Rodgers is comfortable enough with the Packers' playbook that he has been able to improvise a touchdown out of a busted alignment on at least one occasion, displaying the instincts and moxie that made Favre so successful.

Early Sunday in Detroit, Rodgers walked to the line of scrimmage and noticed running back Brandon Jackson was lined up on the wrong side of the formation. He looked to the other side and saw tight end Donald Lee in the wrong spot and coming in motion.

The ball was at the Lions' 9-yard line. McCarthy had called a play Rodgers thought would work. The play clock was winding down, so rather than burn a timeout, Rodgers decided to run the play out of the wrong alignment.

As he told the story after the game, Rodgers saw Greg Jennings wide open in the end zone and fired the ball. Fellow receiver James Jones ran in front of Jennings and snagged the ball for the score.

To summarize: Wrong alignment. Unintended receiver. Touchdown. Some might call it lucky, but it stemmed from a cool and well-schooled quarterback making a snap decision you wouldn't expect from a first-year starter.

After watching him practice for three years, however, the Packers were among the few who knew he could pull it off.

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."

Now, that's fair to say.

[sheepshead]

This guys readin' my posts man!

[boiga]

While they kept things relatively basic in the opener against Minnesota, the Packers noticeably took off the training wheels Sunday at Detroit, throwing 38 passes out of all kinds of personnel groupings. McCarthy, in fact, publicly linked Rodgers to his aggressive game plan.

I liked this line. I wonder whether they are going to go even more advanced for game three? The Cowboys have a much more complicated defensive scheme to deal with. Will they trust Rodgers enough to let him identify defensive coverages and take risks? Or will they dial it back and tell him to "manage" instead of play?

And if they do let Rodgers loose, will he screw up at inopportune times like GB packers QB's always managed to do throughout this rivalry?

[Cheesehead Craig]

The Iggles really torched the Cowboys' defense with nobody WRs. I'm not one of those that think the D there is as good as billed. I think Rodgers does just fine next week

[Scott Campbell]

I wish the national media would stop trying to destroy PackerRats.

[mission]

While they kept things relatively basic in the opener against Minnesota, the Packers noticeably took off the training wheels Sunday at Detroit, throwing 38 passes out of all kinds of personnel groupings. McCarthy, in fact, publicly linked Rodgers to his aggressive game plan.

I liked this line. I wonder whether they are going to go even more advanced for game three? The Cowboys have a much more complicated defensive scheme to deal with. Will they trust Rodgers enough to let him identify defensive coverages and take risks? Or will they dial it back and tell him to "manage" instead of play?

And if they do let Rodgers loose, will he screw up at inopportune times like GB packers QB's always managed to do throughout this rivalry?

What QuarterbackS are you talking about?

[Tony Oday]

Why doesnt the national media have to put quotes at the start and end of all things they write good about the Pack...We all know they steal it from here!

[rbaloha1]

AR was ready last season.

Who knows -- maybe last season AR would have lead us to a superbowl win.

[RashanGary]

This is a monster game coming up. This is the type of game, on the biggest stage that Favre loved to chuck it up to the defense thinking he was goiong to win it by himself.

It will be interesting to compare the "run out wild with guns-a-blazin and hoping you don't get shot before you shoot them in thier bunker" approach compares to the "focus on what you do best and strategically try to exploit the opponents weaknesses" appraoch.

[rbaloha1]

[quote="JustinHarrell"]This is a monster game coming up. This is the type of game, on the biggest stage that Favre loved to chuck it up to the defense thinking he was goiong to win it by himself.

Agreed. Favre played too reckless and placed the Packers in a catch up mode.

Hopefully AR remains poised and continues with the proper reads.

[Scott Campbell]

Scott will now be abstaining from another thread.

[mission]

Scott will now be abstaining from another thread.

Ahhh, it's only JH, dont be such a pooper.

[oregonpackfan]

Rodgers quote of:

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."


reinforces the argument that rookie quarterbacks need to come into the NFL and sit, absorb, and learn the system and the new level of football before they assume a starting position.

There are too many rookie quarterbacks who have had to start in front of mediocre or lousy teams who have had their careers stunted because they were not ready to start. I am talking about the stunted careers of David Carr, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Tim Couch and so on.

Though he appears to be talented, the same stunted fate may happen to rookie QB Matt Ryan.

[Lurker64]

The problem is that a lot of teams end up drafting very high because of bad QB play, and so they (logically) pick a top college QB and teams aren't really generally willing to be bad for 2-3 years while their QB becomes ready for the NFL.

In reality, I think a lot of the successful QBs in this league are grown by teams who feel they are set at QB, draft value QBs, develop them behind their starter, and trade them away. Perhaps now that Thompson has put the overall roster in pretty good shape, we can start growing QBs for the rest of the league like Wolf did drafting guys to sit behind a young Favre (e.g. Hasselbeck, Brunell, Detmer, Brooks). I wonder if the dip in overall QB play for most teams has something to do with the fact that there aren't teams who grow QBs for profit like Wolf did.

[ahaha]

Rodgers quote of:

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."


reinforces the argument that rookie quarterbacks need to come into the NFL and sit, absorb, and learn the system and the new level of football before they assume a starting position.

There are too many rookie quarterbacks who have had to start in front of mediocre or lousy teams who have had their careers stunted because they were not ready to start. I am talking about the stunted careers of David Carr, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Tim Couch and so on.

Though he appears to be talented, the same stunted fate may happen to rookie QB Matt Ryan.

Most of those guys got chances, later in their careers, to sit on the bench and learn. Somehow they didn't develop their "talent" then. Maybe they just sucked. Maybe scouts aren't always right in their evaluation of QB's.

[GrnBay007]

Rodgers quote of:

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."


reinforces the argument that rookie quarterbacks need to come into the NFL and sit, absorb, and learn the system and the new level of football before they assume a starting position.



Rodgers is taking over at a prime time for the Packers. I'm extremely happy to see him playing so well. If he had struggled early on things could have gotten very ugly for the Packer nation.

What is especially refreshing to see, while he is doing so well coming out of the gate, is that he is being humble about it. Packer fans that doubted him will embrace this.

And, what is really nice, is that so early in his winning career, and at such a young age, he can be a model to Packer fans that don't seem to have the class he does.....


What they did was a slap in the face to the Vikings as if to say our garbage is obviously better than the best you have and we're going to make sure you don't get it so keep your nose out of our dumpster.

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=14735 ~ JH

[HarveyWallbangers]

If you need a quarterback, you probably shouldn't draft one
By Tim Keown, ESPN.com

There are many lessons to be learned from the dual sagas of Aaron Rodgers and Alex Smith, not the least of which is this: The best time to draft a quarterback is when you don't need one.

Carrying a clipboard was the smartest thing the Packers asked Rodgers to do.

Easier said than done, of course, since there are times when you don't think you need one until suddenly you discover you do. Still, the idea is solid. It's pretty much unquestioned that quarterback is the most important position in any team sport. Nothing else really compares -- not a big-time starting pitcher (significant only every fifth day) or even a LeBron James-type basketball player (though that one comes closest).

When you factor in how much football coaches expect a quarterback to learn and how quickly they expect him to learn it, there's no other position that deserves a place in the discussion. And if NFL offenses seem at times to be overly complicated -- maybe even artificially complicated -- well, you're not alone in that line of thinking. No matter, though, since wondering if all of that professorial, sleep-in-the-office stuff is necessary doesn't make it any easier to master.

There's no doubt Rodgers would have rather been playing in Green Bay -- or maybe somewhere else -- than standing on the sidelines in a ballcap waving in signs like a third-base coach. For three years he played behind Brett Favre, and it was the rare instance in football where nobody clamored for the backup.

It's also true that Rodgers' time as a backup to Favre couldn't have been better for the Packers. How good do they look now? They drafted him in 2005 knowing he wouldn't play right away, and now that he is playing he looks like a younger, more practical version of Favre. So far, he's Brett without all those lovable mistakes.

The theory on Rodgers is this: It wouldn't have happened if he started as a rookie. In fact, if he had started as a rookie, it might not have happened at all.

Which brings us back to Alex Smith. Taken by a quarterback-starved 49ers team with the first pick of the same draft, Smith was tossed into the grinder far too soon. He played poorly, got hurt and wandered through three different offensive coordinators in his first three years.

Who knows what Alex Smith could have done if he were not thrown into the fire so quickly?

Were the talent evaluators that far off on the respective talents of Smith and Rodgers, or did their circumstances dictate their futures? Rodgers has started only two games, so there's always the possibility this won't last, but no quarterback has hit the ground running like this guy in the past 10 years. And Smith, out for the year with another shoulder injury and ostensibly through as a 49er, is being discussed as the worst pick in the history of the NFL draft.

And right now, it would be hard to craft a compelling argument against that statement.

Assuming the talent evaluators had some level of competence, the difference is largely location. Smith was the great hope for 49ers fans hoping for a return to the team's quarterback-centric glory. After all, there's only so much Tim Rattay, Ken Dorsey and Cody Pickett that any dues-paying fan can take.

So what's a team to do? If you have the luxury, pick a quarterback high in the draft and wait it out. As a real-life example, think about how many years Peyton Manning has left at his current level. Four, maybe five? Assuming Jim Sorgi isn't a solution, there's only one option for the Colts: Look for a quarterback, now, with the idea of getting one of the top two in next year's draft. Pick your linebackers and wide receivers after the first round, and concentrate on the most important position first.

Either that, or choose this option: Sign Alex Smith. Give him the apprentice years he wasn't afforded in San Francisco. That way, we'd all get to see whether environment is the main factor in the development of a quarterback.

[Guiness]

Smith and Rodgers will forever be linked because of the way they were drafted, and the way it fell out. Although I sometimes wonder why Jason Campbell is never mentioned.

I wonder what will happen to Smith from here. A year on the IR - does his arm get back to full strength? If he goes elsewhere and has a chance to sit, will he succeed, or fail again like Carr/Harrington/Akili, etc? I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

[oregonpackfan]

Rodgers quote of:

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."


reinforces the argument that rookie quarterbacks need to come into the NFL and sit, absorb, and learn the system and the new level of football before they assume a starting position.

There are too many rookie quarterbacks who have had to start in front of mediocre or lousy teams who have had their careers stunted because they were not ready to start. I am talking about the stunted careers of David Carr, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Tim Couch and so on.

Though he appears to be talented, the same stunted fate may happen to rookie QB Matt Ryan.

Most of those guys got chances, later in their careers, to sit on the bench and learn. Somehow they didn't develop their "talent" then. Maybe they just sucked. Maybe scouts aren't always right in their evaluation of QB's.

Maybe by the time they had the chance to sit on the bench after early demoralizing years, these guys have lost their confidence. In addition, the coaches have lost confidence in the QB's abilities and don't want to give them needed coaching, practice reps, etc.

[Patler]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

[Zool]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

Trent Dilfer
Vinnie Testaverde
Along with Young, that makes 3 from Tampa. Good job down there.

Plunket did alright in Oakland after bouncing around
Plumber was good for Denver
Chris Chandler

Is is cheating to say Elway?

[Gunakor]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

Trent Dilfer
Vinnie Testaverde
Along with Young, that makes 3 from Tampa. Good job down there.

Plunket did alright in Oakland after bouncing around
Plumber was good for Denver
Chris Chandler

Is is cheating to say Elway?


Elway didn't exactly fail with his "original" Broncos teams. He didn't win any SB's, but at least he got his teams to a bunch of them. I don't think that would be considered failure in the context of Guiness' post.

[Scott Campbell]

Plumber was good for Denver



Jake was pretty good in AZ too.

[mraynrand]

I thought Rodgers was ready all along. But ready for what?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfHDJYvZPwg

[Guiness]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

Trent Dilfer
Vinnie Testaverde
Along with Young, that makes 3 from Tampa. Good job down there.

Plunket did alright in Oakland after bouncing around
Plumber was good for Denver
Chris Chandler

Is is cheating to say Elway?

Good list. Don't know how SY slipped my mind. Has any other modern era player made it into the hall after staring for so few years? I guess the SF lifestyle brought him out of his shell...I know Charles Haley enjoyed his presence.

I wouldn't say Dilfer failed in Tampa, or succeeded real well elsewhere. He did have one very good season in TB, making the Pro Bowl. He struggled for a bit, TB kicked him out because of his low ceiling, and he never went above that ceiling. And I don't want to hear about the SB.

The Snake was pretty good in AZ. I don't think they gave up on him so much as he wanted out, didn't he? I seem to remember him being a pretty hot commodity. A lot felt he would succeed in Denver, and he did not bad.

Testaverde is another good example (wasn't he drafted to replace Young?) I don't know Crystal or Plunkett's stories. Chandler did well in Atl, did he bounce around the league before that?

[Gunakor]

that article will be irritating to some so should be moved to the garbage can.

Why would anybody other than a Vikings fan, a Bears fan, or a Lions fan find this article irritating?

[Zool]

Crystal Chandelier played for 5 teams before ATL. He will always have a place in my heart for beating the 15-1 Vikings in the NFCC game.

Plunkett was a #1 overall for the Pats. Bounced around before landing in Oakland/LA.

Dilfer wasn't too bad in TB, but he did win a Superbowl after he left. Oddly enough, so did they.

Jake was good on some bad AZ teams, agreed. He was supposed to be the savior in Denver but that didnt really pan out. Even with the series of 1500yd RB's at their disposal.

I didn't pay attention to the failing on first team part. Mainly guys who played well on a different team when the team that drafted them picked them high.

[MOBB DEEP]

nfl season is a marathon, not a sprint...

[Lurker64]

Is is cheating to say Elway?

Elway didn't exactly fail with his "original" Broncos teams. He didn't win any SB's, but at least he got his teams to a bunch of them.

Yeah, but how did Elway do for the team who drafted him #1 overall (the Baltimore Colts)?

[mission]

nfl season is a marathon, not a sprint...

What does that have to do with Aaron Rodgers being a capable quarterback, Mr Irrelevant?

[Zool]

Is is cheating to say Elway?

Elway didn't exactly fail with his "original" Broncos teams. He didn't win any SB's, but at least he got his teams to a bunch of them.

Yeah, but how did Elway do for the team who drafted him #1 overall (the Baltimore Colts)?

Thats where I was headed with it. He sucked for the Colts. Never even got in a game.

[MOBB DEEP]

nfl season is a marathon, not a sprint...

What does that have to do with Aaron Rodgers being a capable quarterback, Mr Irrelevant?


means that, like josh howard, i dont celebrate the national athem

actually, it means i hope arod continues to shine when going against teams that have scouted him well as the season progresses. DAYUM, thats not rocket science


obama 08...

[Gunakor]

Is is cheating to say Elway?

Elway didn't exactly fail with his "original" Broncos teams. He didn't win any SB's, but at least he got his teams to a bunch of them.

Yeah, but how did Elway do for the team who drafted him #1 overall (the Baltimore Colts)?

He didn't play a single game for them. So one cannot say he failed on a Colts team because he never took the field with them. Elways initial team in the NFL was the Denver Broncos, as that was the first team in the NFL that Elway actually played for.

[Gunakor]

Is is cheating to say Elway?

Elway didn't exactly fail with his "original" Broncos teams. He didn't win any SB's, but at least he got his teams to a bunch of them.

Yeah, but how did Elway do for the team who drafted him #1 overall (the Baltimore Colts)?

Thats where I was headed with it. He sucked for the Colts. Never even got in a game.

He didn't suck for the Colts. He bitched about going to the Colts before he was even drafted. He said he'd just go play baseball if the Colts didn't deal him. He never even suited up for them, so you can't say he sucked for the Colts. He didn't PLAY for the Colts, and it had nothing to do with his ability as a QB. It was simply his unwillingness to wear a Colts uniform.

[Noodle]

How's about Rich Gannon?

I guess he wasn't all that highly touted coming out (4th round pick by the Pats, who wanted him to be a DB I think), but he did end up being a league MVP and a 3-time all pro with the Raiders after bouncing around with the Vikes, Chiefs, and Skins.

[Zool]

Is is cheating to say Elway?

Elway didn't exactly fail with his "original" Broncos teams. He didn't win any SB's, but at least he got his teams to a bunch of them.

Yeah, but how did Elway do for the team who drafted him #1 overall (the Baltimore Colts)?

Thats where I was headed with it. He sucked for the Colts. Never even got in a game.

He didn't suck for the Colts. He bitched about going to the Colts before he was even drafted. He said he'd just go play baseball if the Colts didn't deal him. He never even suited up for them, so you can't say he sucked for the Colts. He didn't PLAY for the Colts, and it had nothing to do with his ability as a QB. It was simply his unwillingness to wear a Colts uniform.

I swear my sarcasm output is broken. I thought I was being obvious.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

I dont' want to quibble, but let's not forget that he came to the Bucs after 2 years in the USFL. He was the first player taken in the supplemental draft..and after two years they drafted Vinnie..which pretty much told everyone what they thought of him.

However, while the Bucs may have viewed him as a bust..obviously the Niners didnt' think so..or the Bucs were very trade savvy..i'm inclined to think the former since the Bucs were so poorly run back then. The Niners gave up a 2nd and a 4th for him...that is a pretty hefty price to pay for a backup.

[Patler]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

I dont' want to quibble, but let's not forget that he came to the Bucs after 2 years in the USFL. He was the first player taken in the supplemental draft..and after two years they drafted Vinnie..which pretty much told everyone what they thought of him.

However, while the Bucs may have viewed him as a bust..obviously the Niners didnt' think so..or the Bucs were very trade savvy..i'm inclined to think the former since the Bucs were so poorly run back then. The Niners gave up a 2nd and a 4th for him...that is a pretty hefty price to pay for a backup.

Quibble? You are agreeing with me, aren't you?
Young was very highly tauted, and the Bucs paniced when he through a few interceptions his second season, so they jetisoned him.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

I dont' want to quibble, but let's not forget that he came to the Bucs after 2 years in the USFL. He was the first player taken in the supplemental draft..and after two years they drafted Vinnie..which pretty much told everyone what they thought of him.

However, while the Bucs may have viewed him as a bust..obviously the Niners didnt' think so..or the Bucs were very trade savvy..i'm inclined to think the former since the Bucs were so poorly run back then. The Niners gave up a 2nd and a 4th for him...that is a pretty hefty price to pay for a backup.

Quibble? You are agreeing with me, aren't you?
Young was very highly tauted, and the Bucs paniced when he through a few interceptions his second season, so they jetisoned him.

I just meant that it wasnt' really his first team.

The bucs...well everything they did sucked. Until Culverhouse died, very few players or coaches could succeed.

[Sparkey]

Rodgers quote of:

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."


reinforces the argument that rookie quarterbacks need to come into the NFL and sit, absorb, and learn the system and the new level of football before they assume a starting position.

There are too many rookie quarterbacks who have had to start in front of mediocre or lousy teams who have had their careers stunted because they were not ready to start. I am talking about the stunted careers of David Carr, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Tim Couch and so on.

Though he appears to be talented, the same stunted fate may happen to rookie QB Matt Ryan.

For Alex Smith, it was a triple jerk off for him. First he has gets thrown into a horrible O-line situation his rookie year and then has to deal with three successive OC changes and with it, differing offenses.

How the hell can a rookie QB learn an offense, learn to pickup the speed of the nfl game and learn to read defenses when he is constatnly having to learn an offensive scheme every year ?

[NewsBruin]

It's not just Rogers patiently waiting.

Going back to a story from a newspaper in a Midwest city whose name sort of rhymes with "Kill Hockey", Rogers spent the last few years creating coverage reports for the QB meetings and running the opponents'/Packers' plays on the scout team, then attended the 6-hour-a-day offseason QB meetings.

It was an opportunity for Rogers to work his ass off and prep mentally for taking real snaps. That's credit to MM for treating his backup as more than an afterthought. It also shows they had plans for him from a while back.

If Rogers had to cram for the weekly gameplan and play from the get-go, he would have flamed out.

[ahaha]

Rodgers quote of:

"I think some of my success can be attributed not only to my work ethic that I put in the offseason," Rodgers said, "but [also] really the three years of growth that I've been able to learn behind one of the greatest quarterback to ever lace them up. And to not really have any pressure on me for three years to learn the offense and also defenses. I think you're kind of seeing that by-product."


reinforces the argument that rookie quarterbacks need to come into the NFL and sit, absorb, and learn the system and the new level of football before they assume a starting position.

There are too many rookie quarterbacks who have had to start in front of mediocre or lousy teams who have had their careers stunted because they were not ready to start. I am talking about the stunted careers of David Carr, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Tim Couch and so on.

Though he appears to be talented, the same stunted fate may happen to rookie QB Matt Ryan.

Most of those guys got chances, later in their careers, to sit on the bench and learn. Somehow they didn't develop their "talent" then. Maybe they just sucked. Maybe scouts aren't always right in their evaluation of QB's.

Maybe by the time they had the chance to sit on the bench after early demoralizing years, these guys have lost their confidence. In addition, the coaches have lost confidence in the QB's abilities and don't want to give them needed coaching, practice reps, etc.

I can see why you bring up "confidence". That is what we hear from sports journalists every time a high pick QB flames out. What the hell do those guys know about it? Are they qualified psychiatrists examining each case closely? No, they're trying to make an excuse as to why the guy they thought would be good, really isn't.
Confidence can be gained.
Every single guy you mentioned got another chance with a different team. You can bet that every single new coach thought, "This guy has talent. He wasn't in the right situation. He could be a real diamond for us." They all had plenty of opportunities to show something. In the end they showed the real reason for their lack of success. They sucked! (except for maybe, Couch. His career ended through injuries.)

z

[Harlan Huckleby]

that article will be irritating to some so should be moved to the garbage can.

Why would anybody other than a Vikings fan, a Bears fan, or a Lions fan find this article irritating?


The post I made was deleted. (the single line of sarcasm that Gunakor replied to.)

It seems that censorship is now the way this forum will deal with any uncomfortable opinion.

[Scott Campbell]

It seems that censorship is now the way this forum will deal with any uncomfortable opinion.


It could be worse Harlan.



I like little boys.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Censorship and moving threads should be done as a last resort. Not as a way to demonstrate total authority. I guess this is RetailGuy on the loose?

[Patler]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

I dont' want to quibble, but let's not forget that he came to the Bucs after 2 years in the USFL. He was the first player taken in the supplemental draft..and after two years they drafted Vinnie..which pretty much told everyone what they thought of him.

However, while the Bucs may have viewed him as a bust..obviously the Niners didnt' think so..or the Bucs were very trade savvy..i'm inclined to think the former since the Bucs were so poorly run back then. The Niners gave up a 2nd and a 4th for him...that is a pretty hefty price to pay for a backup.

Quibble? You are agreeing with me, aren't you?
Young was very highly tauted, and the Bucs paniced when he through a few interceptions his second season, so they jetisoned him.

I just meant that it wasnt' really his first team.

The bucs...well everything they did sucked. Until Culverhouse died, very few players or coaches could succeed.

What do you mean it wasn't really his first team? What other NFL team did he play for before the Bucs? The USFL was not the NFL. Success in the USFL did not mean success in the NFL anymore than success at an elite NCAA school ensures success in the NFL. All it did was make him a great prospect.

[Scott Campbell]

Censorship and moving threads should be done as a last resort. Not as a way to demonstrate total authority. I guess this is RetailGuy on the loose?



Just be glad you're not a mod, and on the receiving end of a bunch of complaints about moron's like you and I screwing up the forum. And they have to be nice to everybody - including the people who really don't deserve it. I don't think it matters whether or not we agree with every little thing they do, but I at least appreciate they they do all the dirty work around here.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Patler,

The theme of the thread was failures with their first team...there was no mention of league.

So, i was just saying he wasn't a failure with his first team. He was a failure with his second team.

As for the USFL...that was a pretty decent league. They lured a ton of top talent. The problem wasn't the top talent...it was depth. That is what separated them.

For example young passed to NFL wr townsell on the express.

[Scott Campbell]

All it did was make him a great prospect.


And wealthy. They paid him in an annuity, and he still gets $1M/year from that old defunct USFL team.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Censorship and moving threads should be done as a last resort. Not as a way to demonstrate total authority. I guess this is RetailGuy on the loose?



Just be glad you're not a mod, and on the receiving end of a bunch of complaints about moron's like you and I screwing up the forum. And they have to be nice to everybody - including the people who really don't deserve it. I don't think it matters whether or not we agree with every little thing they do, but I at least appreciate they they do all the dirty work around here.

speak for yourself. I don't screw up the forum.

and I don't agree that deleting posts that are critical of censorship amounts to doing "dirty work" for the forum. I call it thin-skinned, and counter-productive.

[Patler]

Patler,

The theme of the thread was failures with their first team...there was no mention of league.

So, i was just saying he wasn't a failure with his first team. He was a failure with his second team.

As for the USFL...that was a pretty decent league. They lured a ton of top talent. The problem wasn't the top talent...it was depth. That is what separated them.

For example young passed to NFL wr townsell on the express.

Then no highly tauted draft pick qualifies because each and every one of them was a success with a major college team. After all, in your logic, the league doesn't count. How about the CFL, or NFL-E?

The USFL had some good players and some good teams, but it in no way shape or form compared to the NFL.

[Scott Campbell]

speak for yourself. I don't screw up the forum.


Well that's odd. I wonder why your post was deleted instead of mine then. Hmmmm. Maybe it was a clerical error.

[Harlan Huckleby]

speak for yourself. I don't screw up the forum.


Well that's odd. I wonder why your post was deleted instead of mine then. Hmmmm. Maybe it was a clerical error.

the forum can survive criticism. aggressive censorship screws-up a forum.

[Scott Campbell]

Then no highly tauted draft pick qualifies because each and every one of them was a success with a major college team. After all, in your logic, the league doesn't count. How about the CFL, or NFL-E?



Or pee wee team for that matter.


Were in a Packer forum. The default value should be the NFL.

[Scott Campbell]

the forum can survive criticism. aggressive censorship screws-up a forum.


Agreed, and agreed. I think both of those are allowed to flourish here. Mad gives you a lot longer leash than I would.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Patler,

The theme of the thread was failures with their first team...there was no mention of league.

So, i was just saying he wasn't a failure with his first team. He was a failure with his second team.

As for the USFL...that was a pretty decent league. They lured a ton of top talent. The problem wasn't the top talent...it was depth. That is what separated them.

For example young passed to NFL wr townsell on the express.

Then no highly tauted draft pick qualifies because each and every one of them was a success with a major college team. After all, in your logic, the league doesn't count. How about the CFL, or NFL-E?

The USFL had some good players and some good teams, but it in no way shape or form compared to the NFL.

College isn't a pro team.

CFL..canadian..not the same rules, and not set up to compete. E..minor leagues.

The USFL had tons of NFL players. On Young's 84 team..there were 29 NFL players. And, the best USFL teams could imho play with the worst NFL.

We can agree to disagree.

[HarveyWallbangers]

the forum can survive criticism. aggressive censorship screws-up a forum.

Agreed, and agreed. I think both of those are allowed to flourish here. Mad gives you a lot longer leash than I would.

I agree with Harlan here. Who the hell deleted his post? It was harmless. WTF!

[mission]

The only forums I've seen (since I started participating in 1997) die a slow, boring death were ones that had censorship.

The biggest ones that I am still a member of today are ones that, for the most part, let the contributors police the boards themselves.

Allowing personalities, strangely enough, is the heartbeat behind a forum. Content, contributions, etc ... that's what get people here in the first place. I've founded and ran some big ones when I worked at GameSpy (NBA-Live.com, Maddencentral.com, FOFCentral, all the PlanetWhatever.com's -- I think all our still huge and active ?) and that's a characteristic I've seen across the board.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't think there was anything sinister about it (unlike Harlan), but I think a mod made a mistake removing it. It was probably Zool. He has an itchy trigger finger.

[Scott Campbell]

I think I understand what's going on, but I'll leave things for Mad or the mods to explain. It's not my place.

[MOBB DEEP]

gayness/girlie bickering abounds on ths forum...

[Scott Campbell]

gayness/girlie bickering abounds on ths forum...



Well, if your here for the gayness part, I'll have to refer you to Harlan. But I always figured you for a straight guy.

[MadtownPacker]

the forum can survive criticism. aggressive censorship screws-up a forum.

Agreed, and agreed. I think both of those are allowed to flourish here. Mad gives you a lot longer leash than I would.

I agree with Harlan here. Who the hell deleted his post? It was harmless. WTF!I will agree that Harlan's post shouldn't have been deleted but why isnt he being "policed" by you or Mission for just trying to start shit??? Answer that fucking question.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I will agree that Harlan's post shouldn't have been deleted but why isnt he being "policed" by you or Mission for just trying to start shit??? Answer that fucking question.

Because we all know that's what Harlan is best at, and we don't want to take that away from him. Just like we know Bigguns likes to argue, Tank is a bit, and Bretsky is a tool.
:D

[SnakeLH2006]

I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

I think Steve Young falls into that category. He was highly touted, and Tampa Bay drafted him but gave up on him after two seasons, one as their starter. He sat for most of four seasons in SF, playing only as a backup until finally taking over for Montana and forging an 8 season career as their starter good enough to earn him a spot in the HOF

I dunno. Steve seemed to do pretty well in the USFL before the Bucs fiasco. Perhaps the Bucs really sucked bad. Hard to consider Steve a failure when their team motto in those dark years was "Let's not get shut out baby!"

[MadtownPacker]

I think I understand what's going on, but I'll leave things for Mad or the mods to explain. It's not my place.This is all my fault.

I recently expressed a lot of frustration with all that BS the last 2 months to RG and the other mods and he is trying to help me do what I dont have in me to do. The last two months have been the most miserable time in 2 1/2 years that PR has existed for myself. This forum is just now getting fun again. I dont see why people cant just argue and fight about the actual thread subject instead of shitting on everyone elses topic with some potshot BS.

I feel that I have tried my best to be hands off but when I started receiving complaints about it and I spent more time dealing with crap instead of talking about football there is something wrong. I tried to work things out with people and what happens?? They post my fucking PMs. How would anyone like it if someone posted their PRIVATE messages? I wouldn't allow it and they would likely get banned. But since it is me I can't do that and have to ride it out.

This place is only what we make of it and when we stop seeing good posters show up because they dont want to waste time writing a great post so some selfish bastard can smear feces all over it then again, there is a problem. I think that is resolved for the most part now so hopefully we can all just enjoy the great start to this season.

BTW - I am also shitting on this great thread by posting this.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Fair enough.

[MadtownPacker]

I will agree that Harlan's post shouldn't have been deleted but why isnt he being "policed" by you or Mission for just trying to start shit??? Answer that fucking question.

Because we all know that's what Harlan is best at, and we don't want to take that away from him. Just like we know Bigguns likes to argue, Tank is a bit, and Bretsky is a tool.
:DTrue, true.

[Zool]

I don't think there was anything sinister about it (unlike Harlan), but I think a mod made a mistake removing it. It was probably Zool. He has an itchy trigger finger.

Hey now fucker, I'll own up to anything I do. Hell I'll put something ridiculous in its place instead and tell the poster to like my taint.

What actually was deleted. I'm about 8 Jeager shots in tonight so I'm not thinking very clearly.

[HarveyWallbangers]

What actually was deleted. I'm about 8 Jeager shots in tonight so I'm not thinking very clearly.


that article will be irritating to some so should be moved to the garbage can.

[Zool]

What actually was deleted. I'm about 8 Jeager shots in tonight so I'm not thinking very clearly.


that article will be irritating to some so should be moved to the garbage can.

Ahh yes. Saw that earlier. Any reaction from me would be redundant.

Move along.

[Partial]

What actually was deleted. I'm about 8 Jeager shots in tonight so I'm not thinking very clearly.


that article will be irritating to some so should be moved to the garbage can.

Zooly you and I are like bros.

[Zool]

Partial brings up a good topic that goes over looked. Bro rape is the fastest growing segment of sexual assault in the US.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zvTRQr7ns8

[The Gunshooter]

I thought Rodgers was ready all along. But ready for what?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfHDJYvZPwg

That reminds me of the people who always said Favre gives GB the best chance to win now and I am thinking win what? The Seattle game? Whoop de do.

[SnakeLH2006]

Partial brings up a good topic that goes over looked. Bro rape is the fastest growing segment of sexual assault in the US.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zvTRQr7ns8

I hear ya, most of my bros that like Incubus and Jack Johnson are stoners and way too susceptible but girls beware of poster board dudes regardless of their charms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2aw72Zxmbk

But thanks to god we aren't turkeys. Gulp!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46eBCqT8b_k

[th87]

Smith and Rodgers will forever be linked because of the way they were drafted, and the way it fell out. Although I sometimes wonder why Jason Campbell is never mentioned.

I wonder what will happen to Smith from here. A year on the IR - does his arm get back to full strength? If he goes elsewhere and has a chance to sit, will he succeed, or fail again like Carr/Harrington/Akili, etc? I can't think of any examples of highly touted QB's that failed with their initial team, only to do well somewhere else. All the first round flameouts I can think of never had a resurgence.

Tommy Maddox to a lesser extent.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I will agree that Harlan's post shouldn't have been deleted but why isnt he being "policed" by you or Mission for just trying to start shit??? Answer that fucking question.

I was not trying to "start shit" as you say whenever you can't deal with specifics. I made an 8 word sarcastic comment about the stupidity of moving or censoring of threads just because they might be upsetting to someone. And your thin-skinned mod couldn't handle the criticism - a man after your own heart.

Maybe it was inappropriate for anyone to "police" my reasonable comment. Hope that answers your quesiton.

[retailguy]

This is all my fault.

Nope - it's mine. I hadn't been back to this thread since I deleted Harlan's post, or I'd have directly addressed this. MTP, I appreciate you having my back, I really do.

But, I deleted Harlan's post. I did it for a reason, a reason that I won't apologize for. I have a hunch that Gunakor was posting at about the same time I was moving Harlan's post and subsequently deleting it. Why? Thought you'd never ask.

If you go back and read the first page of posts, right down to Gunakor's query of Harlan, this was a GREAT thread. Football related, on topic, about a subject that many of us were concerned about over the offseason, and are pleasantly surprised with the outcome. It could have been a great "healing" thread, bringing opposing viewpoints together based on a players "performance" which is what this game is all about.

Then, out of the clear blue sky, here comes Harlan. ZING! Go reread his post. Anything harmful? Some say no. I disagree. It was designed to create dissention and take things off topic. I blew away the comment because I didn't want this thread to go off topic and into the gutter like so many others. Had I seen Gunakor's comment, I wouldn't have deleted it. It broke up the continuity of the thread and then the lack of continuity became the fulcrum that ruined a great thread. <sigh>

Harlan, if you'd learn to police yourself, no one would censor you. You won't, so I did. I'll do it again, if I have to. Your comment was designed to be divisive and off topic. It wasn't in any way shape or form related to this topic. That in itself is OK, but it had a sinister objective to it, and that wasn't ok, so I did something about it.

Mission - I respectfully disagree about the continuation of this forum. This forum is driving off good people, right now today, who have insight and might share, except, for worrying about how their post will be dissected and criticized and be another cause of dissention among us. Lots of forums don't put up with crap like harlan's post in this thread. They thrive just fine. Others thrive with a relatively small group of posters who have similar viewpoints and understand each others humor. It just depends. Both ways work. What drives me away are topics that don't have anything to do with the title that I wanted to read about.

So, that's that. I did it. It was the FIRST post I've ever deleted that was in a "multi post" thread. Hopefully it's the last. We'll see.



BTW - I am also shitting on this great thread by posting this.

As am I too. Where this topic has gone is what I was trying to avoid by removing the comment that I removed. Best laid plans...

[MadtownPacker]

I will agree that Harlan's post shouldn't have been deleted but why isnt he being "policed" by you or Mission for just trying to start shit??? Answer that fucking question.

I was not trying to "start shit" as you say whenever you can't deal with specifics. I made an 8 word sarcastic comment about the stupidity of moving or censoring of threads just because they might be upsetting to someone. And your thin-skinned mod couldn't handle the criticism - a man after your own heart.

Maybe it was inappropriate for anyone to "police" my reasonable comment. Hope that answers your quesiton.Yes you where trying to start shit so save it. Your comment (that had nothing to do wit this topic) hijacked this thread cuz look at what me and you are talking about. and continue to mess it up with.

Your crying ass should scroll up and read where I thought he shouldnt have deleted it before you run your mouth. As for your punk ass insult, if I did what was in my heart you would be long gone. Your very presence here defies what you argue for. You have received special treatment that no one else has (extra accounts, posting private messages). Guilty as hell if you ask me.

Maybe you need to call yourself a "lawyer". :wink:

[Harlan Huckleby]

i never posted private messages. and your "extra account" was an account I used for about a month two years ago when I just wanted to read the forum anonymously. big hairy deal.


hijacked this thread cuz look at what me and you are talking about. and continue to mess it up with.

hijacked the thread? if your trigger happy deputy hadn't deleted it, my side comment would have passed largely unnoticed.

And it was relevant - the original post was provocative, just like the other thread that got stupidly moved.

[Pacopete4]

I love Brett Favre

[Harlan Huckleby]

I love Brett Favre

stirring the pot, are you?

Retail, do your duty.

[mission]

I love Brett Favre

Im quitting the forum. Today.

[Pacopete4]

I love Brett Favre

Im quitting the forum. Today.


My plan finally worked! :lol:

haha loosen up everyone..

[mission]

I love Brett Favre

Im quitting the forum. Today.


My plan finally worked! :lol:

haha loosen up everyone..

:lol: