Rodgers is looking infinitely better

[Partial]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

[mraynrand]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

With this kind of improvement, we can look forward to a 6,000 yard passing season.

[rbaloha1]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

[Partial]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

That's quite the stretch.

[Administrator]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Wow. that's an optimistic prediction!

I'm happy with 4000 yards and a +65% completion percentage! Your prediction would be amazing. :P

[Rastak]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.


Based on all the evidence I'd say you are right.....wait, which evidence are you referencing in your point?

[rbaloha1]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.


Based on all the evidence I'd say you are right.....wait, which evidence are you referencing in your point?

Young talent, improving defense, lack of interceptions and a better team/organization player.

[Lurker64]

With this kind of improvement, we can look forward to a 6,000 yard passing season.

If he's looking infinitely better, he's going to throw for ∞ yards and ∞ TDs with 0 INTS, and a 100% completion percentage. I'll take that.

[sheepshead]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

Its preseason, take a pill. or maybe we are now allowed to just ignore your useless ramblings as the product of a fatherless ADD doughboy basement living moron.

But the real point is, it is preseason. He hasnt played against men yet. Hasnt played anyones first team for 60 minutes. So, no, you dont get to cover your ass in August. Stick to your convictions, otherwise--stop taking up space on here and let someone much more interesting and sane contribute.

[Partial]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

Its preseason, take a pill. or maybe we are now allowed to just ignore your useless ramblings as the product of a fatherless ADD doughboy basement living moron.

Gee, one might read my post citing saying its way too early.

Don't know what the rest of your post is about. You seem like a huge douche, though.

[sheepshead]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

Its preseason, take a pill. or maybe we are now allowed to just ignore your useless ramblings as the product of a fatherless ADD doughboy basement living moron.

Gee, one might read my post citing saying its way too early.

Don't know what the rest of your post is about. You seem like a huge douche, though.

Jesus Man, do you have any idea how much pixel space you've taken up ripping the living shit out of Aaron Rodgers and NOW you want to back peddle? Give us a little break-please.

[packrat]

Crow tastes better when you eat it before the season rather than afterwards. My brother used to say, "When they are running you out of town, get in front and act like you are leading the parade" So, just step right up front there, Partial. :wink:

[sheepshead]

Crow tastes better when you eat it before the season rather than afterwards. My brother used to say, "When they are running you out of town, get in front and act like you are leading the parade" So, just step right up front there, Partial. :wink:

'xactly

[MichiganPackerFan]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

That's quite the stretch.

We'd love for that to be the case, but that's a leap. Especially with the modern NFL parody. Need a lot of things to go right to win, and it takes more than a top qb to win: it's a team game.

[Patler]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Until he wins one, he is on track to do no such thing.
This is a big season for Rodgers. Is he a leader, or just a stats generator?

[Scott Campbell]

I wouldn't care if his stats fall off a little if were able to pound it on the ground more effectively, and put up lots of points.

[sheepshead]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Until he wins one, he is on track to do no such thing.
This is a big season for Rodgers. Is he a leader, or just a stats generator?

The least of our problems last year was the QB. As long as we stop comparing him to Brett Favre highlight videos, he'll be fine.

[Patler]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Until he wins one, he is on track to do no such thing.
This is a big season for Rodgers. Is he a leader, or just a stats generator?

The least of our problems last year was the QB. As long as we stop comparing him to Brett Favre highlight videos, he'll be fine.

I'm not suggesting there was anything wrong with Rodgers last year, or that there is likely to be anything wrong this year. But Rodgers wasn't (I hope) a finished product last year. There is another level to get to, and I am hopeful that he can get there. With a top level QB who you might be able to ride to multiple Super Bowls, the offense especially and sometimes the whole team becomes "about him". That is what I want Rodgers to become, because in a lot of ways it makes it easier for other players to just play. The focus, both good and bad is directed at him. He gets both more credit and more blame than he should, sometimes much more.

Others are just stats generators who don't really lead their teams anywhere. Last year Rodgers genreated impressive stats, but didn't lead his team anywhere (I'm not suggesting it was his fault). Until he does lead them somewhere, he has only generated stats.

[oregonpackfan]

One of the hurdles Rodgers have to overcome last year was the continual comparison to Brett Favre. Not only were sportswriters and fans comparing him to Favre's accomplishments in past years but they were comparing him to Favre's current achievements with the New York Jets.

When Favre "retired" from the Jets this past spring I thought to myself, "Now Rodgers does not have the cloud of the present day Favre hanging over him."

Man, was I wrong!

Now, Rodgers will continue to be contrasted with Favre playing for the Vikings!

Rodgers handled last year's comparisons with Favre with remarkable poise and maturity. I hope he can do that again this year.

[sheepshead]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Until he wins one, he is on track to do no such thing.
This is a big season for Rodgers. Is he a leader, or just a stats generator?

The least of our problems last year was the QB. As long as we stop comparing him to Brett Favre highlight videos, he'll be fine.

I'm not suggesting there was anything wrong with Rodgers last year, or that there is likely to be anything wrong this year. But Rodgers wasn't (I hope) a finished product last year. There is another level to get to, and I am hopeful that he can get there. With a top level QB who you might be able to ride to multiple Super Bowls, the offense especially and sometimes the whole team becomes "about him". That is what I want Rodgers to become, because in a lot of ways it makes it easier for other players to just play. The focus, both good and bad is directed at him. He gets both more credit and more blame than he should, sometimes much more.

Others are just stats generators who don't really lead their teams anywhere. Last year Rodgers genreated impressive stats, but didn't lead his team anywhere (I'm not suggesting it was his fault). Until he does lead them somewhere, he has only generated stats.

Frankly, I think he's already there in that regard, which is another testament to his leadership and maturity.

[MadtownPacker]

With a top level QB who you might be able to ride to multiple Super Bowls, the offense especially and sometimes the whole team becomes "about him". That is what I want Rodgers to become, because in a lot of ways it makes it easier for other players to just play. The focus, both good and bad is directed at him. He gets both more credit and more blame than he should, sometimes much more.Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

[Patler]

With a top level QB who you might be able to ride to multiple Super Bowls, the offense especially and sometimes the whole team becomes "about him". That is what I want Rodgers to become, because in a lot of ways it makes it easier for other players to just play. The focus, both good and bad is directed at him. He gets both more credit and more blame than he should, sometimes much more.Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:

[Patler]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Until he wins one, he is on track to do no such thing.
This is a big season for Rodgers. Is he a leader, or just a stats generator?

The least of our problems last year was the QB. As long as we stop comparing him to Brett Favre highlight videos, he'll be fine.

I'm not suggesting there was anything wrong with Rodgers last year, or that there is likely to be anything wrong this year. But Rodgers wasn't (I hope) a finished product last year. There is another level to get to, and I am hopeful that he can get there. With a top level QB who you might be able to ride to multiple Super Bowls, the offense especially and sometimes the whole team becomes "about him". That is what I want Rodgers to become, because in a lot of ways it makes it easier for other players to just play. The focus, both good and bad is directed at him. He gets both more credit and more blame than he should, sometimes much more.

Others are just stats generators who don't really lead their teams anywhere. Last year Rodgers genreated impressive stats, but didn't lead his team anywhere (I'm not suggesting it was his fault). Until he does lead them somewhere, he has only generated stats.

Frankly, I think he's already there in that regard, which is another testament to his leadership and maturity.

I don't think he is there yet, but I think the way he handled everything last year he showed that he can get there. I don't think that MM put him in that category last year either, because he was unwilling to put it all in Rodgers' hands at the end of several games when he should have. Once MM shows enough faith to rely on Rodgers to get another first down rather than playing for a game-winning 52 yard FG, and when he concedes that Rodgers throwing the ball is a better scoring option than bullheadedly trying to run the ball at times, then Rodgers will have achieved the level I want for him.

[MadtownPacker]

Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:Fair enouigh. Thing I dont like is that he threw for 4K last season. Is he now gonna be expected to do that or more yearly? If anything he needs to throw a few less yards because it means the D played better and the run game was strong. The fact that two WRs had 1000yds while grant had 1200 doesnt set right with me. The 6-10 records seems to agree.

[Patler]

Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:Fair enouigh. Thing I dont like is that he threw for 4K last season. Is he now gonna be expected to do that or more yearly? If anything he needs to throw a few less yards because it means the D played better and the run game was strong. The fact that two WRs had 1000yds while grant had 1200 doesnt set right with me. The 6-10 records seems to agree.

No one should expect, or necessarily even want Rodgers to throw for over 4k yards this season. The yardage production last year by the offense shows an offense good enough for a team to have a much better record. The issues then become:

- Timeliness of the offensive production, and I don't just mean at the ends of games. Putting a team away early is important in the final record too. First drives of a half can be nearly as important, to make the opponent immediately play catch-up. For all their offensive production in '08, the Packers were bad in first drives of the halves. An improvement in this alone could change the final results.

- Defensive play,

- Special Teams play.

- Coaching decisions.

[Scott Campbell]

Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:Fair enouigh. Thing I dont like is that he threw for 4K last season. Is he now gonna be expected to do that or more yearly? If anything he needs to throw a few less yards because it means the D played better and the run game was strong. The fact that two WRs had 1000yds while grant had 1200 doesnt set right with me. The 6-10 records seems to agree.

No one should expect, or necessarily even want Rodgers to throw for over 4k yards this season. The yardage production last year by the offense shows an offense good enough for a team to have a much better record. The issues then become:

- Timeliness of the offensive production, and I don't just mean at the ends of games. Putting a team away early is important in the final record too. First drives of a half can be nearly as important, to make the opponent immediately play catch-up. For all their offensive production in '08, the Packers were bad in first drives of the halves. An improvement in this alone could change the final results.

- Defensive play,

- Special Teams play.

- Coaching decisions.


........grinding out a clock killing drive in the 4th quarter to protect a lead. Rodgers shouldn't have to throw the ball at all in that situation. Just feed the rock to Grant and Co.

[Scott Campbell]

Though I'm now thinking about the 07 Pats and their juggernaut offense. Brady's production didn't seem to drag that team down.

[HarveyWallbangers]

No one should expect, or necessarily even want Rodgers to throw for over 4k yards this season. The yardage production last year by the offense shows an offense good enough for a team to have a much better record. The issues then become:

- Timeliness of the offensive production, and I don't just mean at the ends of games. Putting a team away early is important in the final record too. First drives of a half can be nearly as important, to make the opponent immediately play catch-up. For all their offensive production in '08, the Packers were bad in first drives of the halves. An improvement in this alone could change the final results.

- Defensive play,

- Special Teams play.

- Coaching decisions.

While I agree with your premise that Rodgers isn't a finished product, I also tend to think people are nitpicking Rodgers first year as a starter. The team was good offensively, scored points, scored in the 4th quarter. However, Rodgers isn't getting a lot of breaks. Green Bay struggled in first drives of halves and at the very end of games after the defense let yet another team take the lead with under 6 minutes left. Conversely, they were very good at scoring and taking the lead in the first 9 minutes of the 4th quarter and they must have been very good after the first drives of halves to amass the scoring and yardage totals they did. You get the feeling that if Rodgers stats were the same, but they scored more on their first drives in halves, people would complain that they didn't do more on their second drives. We should just look at it as Rodgers had a hell of a first year as a starter. It would be nice to have better starts to halves (and maybe it will help that McCarthy trusts Rodgers more), he can improve his pocket awareness slightly, and he'll need to win more games at the end (it will help if the defense is more stout in the 4th quarter). However, he showed a great arm, accuracy, leadership, mobility, toughness, and the ability to bring the team back several times in the middle of the 4th quarter.

[sheepshead]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

Until he wins one, he is on track to do no such thing.
This is a big season for Rodgers. Is he a leader, or just a stats generator?

The least of our problems last year was the QB. As long as we stop comparing him to Brett Favre highlight videos, he'll be fine.

I'm not suggesting there was anything wrong with Rodgers last year, or that there is likely to be anything wrong this year. But Rodgers wasn't (I hope) a finished product last year. There is another level to get to, and I am hopeful that he can get there. With a top level QB who you might be able to ride to multiple Super Bowls, the offense especially and sometimes the whole team becomes "about him". That is what I want Rodgers to become, because in a lot of ways it makes it easier for other players to just play. The focus, both good and bad is directed at him. He gets both more credit and more blame than he should, sometimes much more.

Others are just stats generators who don't really lead their teams anywhere. Last year Rodgers genreated impressive stats, but didn't lead his team anywhere (I'm not suggesting it was his fault). Until he does lead them somewhere, he has only generated stats.

Frankly, I think he's already there in that regard, which is another testament to his leadership and maturity.

I don't think he is there yet, but I think the way he handled everything last year he showed that he can get there. I don't think that MM put him in that category last year either, because he was unwilling to put it all in Rodgers' hands at the end of several games when he should have. Once MM shows enough faith to rely on Rodgers to get another first down rather than playing for a game-winning 52 yard FG, and when he concedes that Rodgers throwing the ball is a better scoring option than bullheadedly trying to run the ball at times, then Rodgers will have achieved the level I want for him.

I'll give you that one.

[gbgary]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

With this kind of improvement, we can look forward to a 6,000 yard passing season.


http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:forums.corvetteforum.com/get/images/smilies/lol.gif he's not the only one looking good. the whole first team looks fantastic (knocking on wood). i can't remember seeing them so fired-up for a friggin preseason game.

[bobblehead]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

That's quite the stretch.

We'd love for that to be the case, but that's a leap. Especially with the modern NFL parody. Need a lot of things to go right to win, and it takes more than a top qb to win: it's a team game.

I disagree...New England has done it on a solid team and exceptional QB play for how many years?? Same goes for Indy. Its still the QB's league and they still need some talent around them.

Not that I'm arguing the original point of winning a bunch of super bowls...I'm not predicting that, but its within the realm of reason.

[bobblehead]

Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:Fair enouigh. Thing I dont like is that he threw for 4K last season. Is he now gonna be expected to do that or more yearly? If anything he needs to throw a few less yards because it means the D played better and the run game was strong. The fact that two WRs had 1000yds while grant had 1200 doesnt set right with me. The 6-10 records seems to agree.

No one should expect, or necessarily even want Rodgers to throw for over 4k yards this season. The yardage production last year by the offense shows an offense good enough for a team to have a much better record. The issues then become:

- Timeliness of the offensive production, and I don't just mean at the ends of games. Putting a team away early is important in the final record too. First drives of a half can be nearly as important, to make the opponent immediately play catch-up. For all their offensive production in '08, the Packers were bad in first drives of the halves. An improvement in this alone could change the final results.

- Defensive play,

- Special Teams play.

- Coaching decisions.


........grinding out a clock killing drive in the 4th quarter to protect a lead. Rodgers shouldn't have to throw the ball at all in that situation. Just feed the rock to Grant and Co.

I still maintaint that 2 such clock killing drives were ruined by phantom holding calls last year....and both times the announcer (aikman once, forget the other) saw the replay and stated "you could call that on every single play in the NFL"

[MichiganPackerFan]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

That's quite the stretch.

We'd love for that to be the case, but that's a leap. Especially with the modern NFL parody. Need a lot of things to go right to win, and it takes more than a top qb to win: it's a team game.

I disagree...New England has done it on a solid team and exceptional QB play for how many years?? Same goes for Indy. Its still the QB's league and they still need some talent around them.

Not that I'm arguing the original point of winning a bunch of super bowls...I'm not predicting that, but its within the realm of reason.

Put Brady or Manning on the Lions and they arent winning shit. The Patriots are well coached and are at least better than average at every position and that's why they won. For every Peyton Manning you give me, I'll show you an Eli Manning.

[Freak Out]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

That's quite the stretch.

We'd love for that to be the case, but that's a leap. Especially with the modern NFL parody. Need a lot of things to go right to win, and it takes more than a top qb to win: it's a team game.

I disagree...New England has done it on a solid team and exceptional QB play for how many years?? Same goes for Indy. Its still the QB's league and they still need some talent around them.

Not that I'm arguing the original point of winning a bunch of super bowls...I'm not predicting that, but its within the realm of reason.

Put Brady or Manning on the Lions and they arent winning shit. The Patriots are well coached and are at least better than average at every position and that's why they won. For every Peyton Manning you give me, I'll show you an Eli Manning.

A Manning or Brady run lions offense wins you some games. Not the Superbowl but their leadership and skills makes that offense work pretty well.

But were talking about Rodgers......he appears to have all the skills needed to get this thing going but as Patler pointed out it's about more than stats. That said........the future looks bright. 8-)

[MichiganPackerFan]

Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:Fair enouigh. Thing I dont like is that he threw for 4K last season. Is he now gonna be expected to do that or more yearly? If anything he needs to throw a few less yards because it means the D played better and the run game was strong. The fact that two WRs had 1000yds while grant had 1200 doesnt set right with me. The 6-10 records seems to agree.

No one should expect, or necessarily even want Rodgers to throw for over 4k yards this season. The yardage production last year by the offense shows an offense good enough for a team to have a much better record. The issues then become:

- Timeliness of the offensive production, and I don't just mean at the ends of games. Putting a team away early is important in the final record too. First drives of a half can be nearly as important, to make the opponent immediately play catch-up. For all their offensive production in '08, the Packers were bad in first drives of the halves. An improvement in this alone could change the final results.

- Defensive play,

- Special Teams play.

- Coaching decisions.


........grinding out a clock killing drive in the 4th quarter to protect a lead. Rodgers shouldn't have to throw the ball at all in that situation. Just feed the rock to Grant and Co.

I still maintaint that 2 such clock killing drives were ruined by phantom holding calls last year....and both times the announcer (aikman once, forget the other) saw the replay and stated "you could call that on every single play in the NFL"

Overall, I think the quality of the officiating league wide was really atrocious last season. Usually I'm impressed by how many calls the officials get right, last year they got a ton embarrassingly wrong.

[Patler]

While I agree with your premise that Rodgers isn't a finished product, I also tend to think people are nitpicking Rodgers first year as a starter. The team was good offensively, scored points, scored in the 4th quarter. However, Rodgers isn't getting a lot of breaks. Green Bay struggled in first drives of halves and at the very end of games after the defense let yet another team take the lead with under 6 minutes left. Conversely, they were very good at scoring and taking the lead in the first 9 minutes of the 4th quarter and they must have been very good after the first drives of halves to amass the scoring and yardage totals they did. You get the feeling that if Rodgers stats were the same, but they scored more on their first drives in halves, people would complain that they didn't do more on their second drives. We should just look at it as Rodgers had a hell of a first year as a starter. It would be nice to have better starts to halves (and maybe it will help that McCarthy trusts Rodgers more), he can improve his pocket awareness slightly, and he'll need to win more games at the end (it will help if the defense is more stout in the 4th quarter). However, he showed a great arm, accuracy, leadership, mobility, toughness, and the ability to bring the team back several times in the middle of the 4th quarter.

I don't disagree with any of that. The only comment I would make, and I don't know if it applies to Rodgers or not, another year or two will tell; is that performance when the spotlight is brightest can be a different thing than performing in a regular spotlight. This could explain early fourth quarter success and struggles in the last drives of the 4th quarter. In Rodgers defense, there were games in which he DID get it done in his last meaningful possession, only to have the defense and ST fail after him.

That is why I think 2009 will be very meaningful for Rodgers in defining what type of a QB and leader he is. If MM shows the confidence in him that all great QBs get, and if Rodgers has any success at all, the media will forget about their "complaints" from 2008. Shortly after the media forgets, the rank and file of NFL fans will, too.

[pbmax]

The Magical Mystery Tour of the Patriots in 07 featured a tremendous passing offense, but it was Brady's eighth year in the league and only the second time he was called upon to throw that much (the previous instance was 2002's 9-7 campaign) and carry the offense in that manner. Their previous Super Bowl wins featured better running attacks (03 might be the exception).

Given how they were winning, it remains an open question why Belicheck continued to throw like they did at the end of games.

I think the QB stats in the 4th quarter of close games are meaningful, as Patler said, performing with the spotlight on you late is a different animal for some people. But it is not the end all be all of Quarterbacking. Having the lead and maintaining possession is the trait I want to see the team develop. I am not interested in developing skills at coming from behind. I would be stunned if they worked on anything specific to late game situations (other than clock and kicks) with the offense as a whole and would expect they worked instead on sustaining drives and keeping field position on your side.

Rodgers said Brady told him to work on one or two things in the offseason and Rodgers choose two kinds of throws he wanted to make better. But the best news is that he seems to have better footwork in the pocket and a better developed sense of when and where pressure is coming from.

[sharpe1027]

In every game that is lost a QB on the losing team necessarily fails the last meaningful drive that there is still a chance at winning the game. Either the cause of every single losing team can be pinned primarily on the QB, or this whole analysis leaves something to be desired...

[mission]

In every game that is lost a QBs on the losing team necessarily fails the last meaningful drive that there is still a chance at still winning the game. Either every single losing team can be pinned primarily on the QB, or this whole analysis leaves something to be desired...

I guess that's true ... :idea:

[sharpe1027]

Operator error. :oops:

[packerbacker1234]

It's ok nitpick players, even Rodgers. We nitpicked Favre even back when he was playing awesome, including the 2007 seasons before the pick in the playoffs.

Folks just say this: At least we don't have Alex Smith. Poor 49ers.

[Patler]

In every game that is lost a QB on the losing team necessarily fails the last meaningful drive that there is still a chance at winning the game. Either the cause of every single losing team can be pinned primarily on the QB, or this whole analysis leaves something to be desired...

How so? If a QB drives to the go ahead score the last time he has the ball, yet loses without ever having possession again, how did he fail in his last meaningful drive?

[sharpe1027]

In every game that is lost a QB on the losing team necessarily fails the last meaningful drive that there is still a chance at winning the game. Either the cause of every single losing team can be pinned primarily on the QB, or this whole analysis leaves something to be desired...

How so? If a QB drives to the go ahead score the last time he has the ball, yet loses without ever having possession again, how did he fail in his last meaningful drive?

Ya got me. Still, not many games are lost when a team goes ahead in their last drive, and I hope that you can still understand my point.

[cheesner]

In every game that is lost a QB on the losing team necessarily fails the last meaningful drive that there is still a chance at winning the game. Either the cause of every single losing team can be pinned primarily on the QB, or this whole analysis leaves something to be desired...

How so? If a QB drives to the go ahead score the last time he has the ball, yet loses without ever having possession again, how did he fail in his last meaningful drive?

Ya got me. Still, not many games are lost when a team goes ahead in their last drive, and I hope that you can still understand my point.

Or the QB puts the ball in the WR hands for a sure TD and he drops it.

Or the RB is going in for a score and fumbles the ball away.

Or the Center forgets the snap count and hikes it while AR is looking the other way.

Or the OL messes up and a DL comes free to sack him.

Its a team sport. I understand what you are sayint, the QB is the most influential player on the team; usually the leader; and his play is critical to a successful team. But it still takes a team effort.

[MOBB DEEP]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

child please....

[Gunakor]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

child please....

By my count, Favre has led the Packers to just ONE Super Bowl Championship during his 16 years as a Packer. Please explain to me why you feel that Rodgers can't do better.

[Tarlam!]

Please explain to me why you feel that Rodgers can't do better.

Because he's not Michael Vick, Donavan McNabb, Vince Young, Jason Campell, Tarvaris Jackson.... :cry:

[Gunakor]

Please explain to me why you feel that Rodgers can't do better.

Because he's not Michael Vick, Donavan McNabb, Vince Young, Jason Campell, Tarvaris Jackson.... :cry:

Hold on a second, I need a moment to calculate the number of Super Bowls those quarterbacks have won.

...

...

...

Done. Zero. And I don't think any of those guys have a better chance than Rodgers at winning even one ring. Those teams have about the same talent level as ours does. Which brings us to the very point of my argument - TEAMS win Super Bowls, not quarterbacks. Which is why I feel Rodgers has a very good chance of surpassing Favre in total rings won.

[Tarlam!]

It's clear to one poster, Gun. Have a little think about it.

[Gunakor]

It's clear to one poster, Gun. Have a little think about it.

My apologies if I've offended you. That rant wasn't directed at you. I only quoted you because your post doesn't sound too far from the truth from the perspective of those I intended that rant for. No hard feelings.

[Tarlam!]

No, Gun. I apologize and absolutely no hard feelings towards you!

My post was sarcastic. There are some posters that believe race is as important as skill in being successful. My list of QBs was a potshot at that belief, or at least, at the provocations.

I believe Rogers is a pro bowler in the making. Will he earn 3 league MVP titles? I'd be happy if he wins one. But the discussion is his # of SB wins. This depends IMO largely on the team around him in any given season. "Will QB be a missing piece as long as he's working the shift?" might be a more pertinent question. I don't believe so. Then again, in how many seasons with Favre under centre was QB a weakness?

I think the discussion is flawed, but hey, what do I know?

Sorry again for the initial misunderstanding, BTW. Nothing against you, Mate.

[Gunakor]

No, Gun. I apologize and absolutely no hard feelings towards you!

My post was sarcastic. There are some posters that believe race is as important as skill in being successful. My list of QBs was a potshot at that belief, or at least, at the provocations.

I believe Rogers is a pro bowler in the making. Will he earn 3 league MVP titles? I'd be happy if he wins one. But the discussion is his # of SB wins. This depends IMO largely on the team around him in any given season. "Will QB be a missing piece as long as he's working the shift?" might be a more pertinent question. I don't believe so. Then again, in how many seasons with Favre under centre was QB a weakness?

I think the discussion is flawed, but hey, what do I know?

Sorry again for the initial misunderstanding, BTW. Nothing against you, Mate.

But if race were a factor, why would they be pimping Favre over Rodgers? I think, to them, it has more to do with celebrity. In fact, I think it has almost everything to do with celebrity. Rodgers isn't famous yet, he isn't the face of the league, so he can't possibly win the big game twice. That's what I took from it anyway.

[Tarlam!]

This just in from NFL.com: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8121ed6e&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true

I liked Smith better than Rogers coming out, but I think picking splinters out of his behind for 3 seasons certainly helped him in the long run. If I'm Rogers, the long wait in the Green Room back then seems a lot less painful now.

[Gunakor]

I think Aaron's mentors, one on the field and one on the sideline, have been the biggest factor in his becoming a star caliber quarterback. McCarthy, especially, has a history of getting maximum production out of his quarterbacks. This goes all the way back to Aaron Brooks in New Orleans, and extends all the way to Matt Flynn in Green Bay. Kinda makes you wonder what's going on in Brian Brohm's head, why he doesn't quite get it yet.

[Sparkey]

Sounds like you want him to be the next Favre. :D

...or Montana, or Bradshaw, or Brady. You know, a future Hall of Famer. Is that asking too much? :lol: :lol:Fair enouigh. Thing I dont like is that he threw for 4K last season. Is he now gonna be expected to do that or more yearly? If anything he needs to throw a few less yards because it means the D played better and the run game was strong. The fact that two WRs had 1000yds while grant had 1200 doesnt set right with me. The 6-10 records seems to agree.

No one should expect, or necessarily even want Rodgers to throw for over 4k yards this season. The yardage production last year by the offense shows an offense good enough for a team to have a much better record. The issues then become:

- Timeliness of the offensive production, and I don't just mean at the ends of games. Putting a team away early is important in the final record too. First drives of a half can be nearly as important, to make the opponent immediately play catch-up. For all their offensive production in '08, the Packers were bad in first drives of the halves. An improvement in this alone could change the final results.

- Defensive play,

- Special Teams play.

- Coaching decisions.

I agree with you.

A line of 10-17 for 186 yards with 2 TDs and the running game goes 39 carries for 180 yards and a TD with the defense getting three sacks and 2 turnovers and allowing under 300 total yards of offense would win many games.


I think the thing that impresses me more than anything else, in regards to Aaron Rodgers play last year, was the fact that he did not throw a single interception in the red zone. 64-39 for 268 yds 20 TD 0 int in 2008. That shows a composure and confidence in his and his teams abilities.

"Aaron Rodgers, like Ryan, threw 64 red zone passes last year. Of those he completed 39 – 20 of which went for touchdowns. If that wasn’t enough, he was the only QB with 50 or more attempts in the red zone not to throw an interception."

http://www.ffmastermind.com/fantasy-football-red-zone-analysis.php

[MOBB DEEP]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

child please....

By my count, Favre has led the Packers to just ONE Super Bowl Championship during his 16 years as a Packer. Please explain to me why you feel that Rodgers can't do better.

child please = where's the proof that he's "on track?" and why the heck is that relevant?

ppl need to stop thinkn pro rodgers = anti favre and visa versa; we should just be happy we had a great replacement for favre ala montana and young...u think every time young had a good game folk were minimizing what joe did for the franchise?

and yes, charlie batch is on track to win mor SBs than rodgers and lord favre

[Gunakor]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

child please....

By my count, Favre has led the Packers to just ONE Super Bowl Championship during his 16 years as a Packer. Please explain to me why you feel that Rodgers can't do better.

child please = where's the proof that he's "on track?" and why the heck is that relevant?

ppl need to stop thinkn pro rodgers = anti favre and visa versa; we should just be happy we had a great replacement for favre ala montana and young...u think every time young had a good game folk were minimizing what joe did for the franchise?

and yes, charlie batch is on track to win mor SBs than rodgers and lord favre

Okay, then stop looking at it as Favre vs. Rodgers. I'm not, and I thought I made that much clear by now. Favre didn't win any Super Bowls, and Rodgers isn't going to. The PACKERS won Super Bowls, and the PACKERS are going to again.

Why is Rodgers on track for more rings as a Packer than Favre has? Because he has more weapons around him than Favre ever had. Think about it. In what year during Favre's Packer career did he have a deeper WR corps than Rodgers has now? How bout his RB's? Finley and Lee could be Chumura and Jackson - Finley, especially, looks to be the most athletic and toughest to cover of all of them. This offense is primed to be better over the next few years than it has been over the past couple of decades. If we can get half the defensive production of Shurmur's squads we're poised to win many more Super Bowls than we had during the Favre era. The team is just plain better.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Why is Rodgers on track for more rings as a Packer than Favre has? Because he has more weapons around him than Favre ever had. Think about it. In what year during Favre's Packer career did he have a deeper WR corps than Rodgers has now? How bout his RB's? Finley and Lee could be Chumura and Jackson - Finley, especially, looks to be the most athletic and toughest to cover of all of them. This offense is primed to be better over the next few years than it has been over the past couple of decades. If we can get half the defensive production of Shurmur's squads we're poised to win many more Super Bowls than we had during the Favre era. The team is just plain better.

I respectfully and wholeheartedly disagree. The Packers of the late 90's were some of the best squads in the history of the league, ranking near or in first place offensively and defensively. The current edition has won two pre-season games, and while things look hopeful (who's doesn't in the preseason (Lions, Browns, Chiefs not so fast)), they haven't accomplished anything or performed in a game yet.

[Gunakor]

Why is Rodgers on track for more rings as a Packer than Favre has? Because he has more weapons around him than Favre ever had. Think about it. In what year during Favre's Packer career did he have a deeper WR corps than Rodgers has now? How bout his RB's? Finley and Lee could be Chumura and Jackson - Finley, especially, looks to be the most athletic and toughest to cover of all of them. This offense is primed to be better over the next few years than it has been over the past couple of decades. If we can get half the defensive production of Shurmur's squads we're poised to win many more Super Bowls than we had during the Favre era. The team is just plain better.

I respectfully and wholeheartedly disagree. The Packers of the late 90's were some of the best squads in the history of the league, ranking near or in first place offensively and defensively. The current edition has won two pre-season games, and while things look hopeful (who's doesn't in the preseason (Lions, Browns, Chiefs not so fast)), they haven't accomplished anything or performed in a game yet.

Depth. I'm talking depth. Like, Ryan Grant could go down and we plug in Jackson and keep chugging. Driver goes down and we plug in Jones or Nelson and keep chugging. God help any defense that has to worry about all of them on the field at once. 1-5 at WR, 1-3 at RB, the TE tandem, ALL better overall than Favre had to work with.

This isn't about 2 preseason games. I thought they were well on their way to being a better offense even last season.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

[Chevelle2]

I really think Finley has the potential to be the best TE in Green Bay history, if not second to Coffman.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I really think Finley has the potential to be the best TE in Green Bay history, if not second to Coffman.

Keith Jackson was a Hall of Fame TE. Finley has a long ways to go.
Chmura was a Pro Bowl caliber TE. Lee's not at that level.

[Gunakor]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.

I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

[Packman_26]

Boy, I thought I was excited about this year. WOW. I hope this team goes down as one of the greats but how can anyone compare it favorably to the mid 90's teams? Those were some of the best teams ever. These guys went 6-10 last year and have won 2 preseason games. I agree that they have looked great but some are jumping the gun a little bit.
As to Rodgers winning more Super Bowls than Favre. I pointed out in another thread that only 10 (if I remember right) QBs in the history of the league have won more than one. I find it hard to believe that anyone could be considered to be "on pace" to join them.

[retailguy]

Boy, I thought I was excited about this year. WOW. I hope this team goes down as one of the greats but how can anyone compare it favorably to the mid 90's teams? Those were some of the best teams ever. These guys went 6-10 last year and have won 2 preseason games. I agree that they have looked great but some are jumping the gun a little bit.
As to Rodgers winning more Super Bowls than Favre. I pointed out in another thread that only 10 (if I remember right) QBs in the history of the league have won more than one. I find it hard to believe that anyone could be considered to be "on pace" to join them.

You just need another dose of kool-aid and some special rose colored goggles. They don't get issued until you have 100 posts so you've got a ways to go! Keep at it.

Just remember, "Ted can do no wrong". :wink:

[Gunakor]

Kool-Aid is delicious in the summertime. Try it.

Look, this isn't just about this year anyway. Rodgers can't win 2 Super Bowls in one season no matter how good this team is. Look 3 years down the line. 5 years. The youthful stars we have now will be elite veterans. Thompson has shown a willingness to renew contracts, so I expect the vast majority of them will still be here.

Which brings up another difference between Favre's tenure here and the beginning of Rodgers career - Favre's weapons were a rotating door, while Rodgers is likely to have the same core offensive players around him for a very long time. Imagine what Favre's career could have looked like had Sterling Sharpe not been forced into early retirement. Knock on wood, but I expect Rodgers to Jennings to be around these parts for another decade. Grant is only, what 26 or 27? Jackson is even younger. Finley is in just his second year. Imagine each of them in 3 or 4 years, having played in our system and having mastered their timing, their route running, and all the other nuances that only get mastered through experience. I'd hate to be the one trying to come up with a defensive gameplan against that.

I'm sure this year's team isn't going to be better than those in the mid 90's. But this team's future is certainly brighter. I can't predict what will happen, but the foundation is here for even greater things than Wolf's Pack of the 90's had accomplished. These next couple of years are going to be fun to watch.

[The Leaper]

Keith Jackson was a Hall of Fame TE. Finley has a long ways to go. Chmura was a Pro Bowl caliber TE. Lee's not at that level.

Keith Jackson was hardly a HOF caliber TE in Green Bay...the guy was at the end of his career.

Chmura was a very good TE...but he wasn't elite. The Packers have had plenty of other TEs that I would consider superior to Chmura. Chmura simply was fortunate to get paired with Favre in his prime.

Finley has the opportunity to become a game changing TE in the mold of Gonzalez or Sharpe...not saying he will be that good, just that he has the speed and size to be a nightmare in the middle of the field. That is especially true when you have such threats at WR as Jennings, Driver and the rest. LBs and SSs will be forced to cover Finley...good luck chaps.

[MOBB DEEP]

Kuselias agrees with me that aaron BEAST rodgers is the 2nd best QB in conference behind Brees.

I'm pleasantly surprised STILL that he's such a stud; fits perfectly into our system. Is he top 5 in nfl? Will he make probowl this year?

[Partial]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

[KYPack]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.
I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

I'd strongly disagree with the bold-ed portion of this post. Keith Jackson was definitely a deep threat and a real bitch to cover in any part of the field. He'd been playing TE since 4th grade and could read D's like a QB. He knew when to sit down and could read a seam route as good as any TE I've ever seen. Chew was an average route runner and receiver, but was a devastating blocker. The combo of the two players was truly complimentary. KJ was great after the catch. Wasn't a safety in the league that wanted to tackle that big boy in the open field.

Lee can't block as good as Chew and Finley doesn't have Keith's experience or skill running routes. Finley is still pretty one dimensional. He has improved, but he's still just beginning to learn how to block.

[cheesner]

Keith Jackson was a Hall of Fame TE. Finley has a long ways to go. Chmura was a Pro Bowl caliber TE. Lee's not at that level.

Keith Jackson was hardly a HOF caliber TE in Green Bay...the guy was at the end of his career.

Chmura was a very good TE...but he wasn't elite. The Packers have had plenty of other TEs that I would consider superior to Chmura. Chmura simply was fortunate to get paired with Favre in his prime.

Finley has the opportunity to become a game changing TE in the mold of Gonzalez or Sharpe...not saying he will be that good, just that he has the speed and size to be a nightmare in the middle of the field. That is especially true when you have such threats at WR as Jennings, Driver and the rest. LBs and SSs will be forced to cover Finley...good luck chaps.

Good points. Finley has the opportunity (physically) to achieve a very elite status. But then so do other guys, usually a couple a year. Why don't more get there? Because it takes a huge amount of work and dedication. What has me excited about Finley is, he has made such a big jump in his second year that he must have put in the work. If he continues to work at it, there is a good chance he will achieve that elite level.

As far as the 96 offense goes, two of their best assets were a dominating defense that gave them the ball often and with shorter field; and great special teams play. We had over 1000 return yards that season, thats just like adding a feature back production. The defense was amazing and scored a fair share of points themselves. I thought the offense was very good. Not great. Just very good, but they got helped so much by the defense and special teams, they achieved much more than they were capable of.

[sharpe1027]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.

I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

Well, bythat standard the Lions offense last year was better than the offense that won the Packers' first superbowl. Honestly. I have no doubt that the guys on the Lions team are way more talented than even the best teams back then, offenses in general have gotten way better as have the player's skill levels. We're talking bigger, stronger and faster, by a lot.

IMHO, your relative rank compared against the teams you play in that year is the more important factor.

Yes, Levens was not the homerun guy, but he seldom lost any yards and was a better receiver and at picking up the blitz. IMO, the combination of Levens and Bennett was better than Grant and Jackson, but that could change (and may have as much to do with the linemen as anything).

[green_bowl_packer]

He's good enough to get this comparison, which is good enough for me.


http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Pick-your-poison-Manning-vs-Rodgers.html

Pick your poison: Manning vs. Rodgers


The NFP’s “Pick your Poison” fantasy series resumes today with the spotlight on the quarterback position.

We’ve got a heavyweight matchup in store for you on this fine Wednesday as the up-and-coming Aaron Rodgers takes on future Hall of Famer Peyton Manning. Some of you may have already made up your minds after reading the story’s title, but I assure you, this matchup is a lot closer than people think.

Without further ado, let’s go to Harold Lederman (OK, Jim!) with the Tale of the Tape:

TALE OF THE TAPE

Peyton Manning Aaron Rodgers
Height 6-5 6-2
Weight 230 220
Years Pro 11 4
’08 Comp. % 66.8% 63.6%
’08 Yards 4,002 4,038
’08 TDs 27 28
’08 INTs 12 13
’08 Fantasy Rank 6 2

The case for Manning

One of the most accomplished fantasy football quarterbacks of all time, Manning enters his 12th season in the NFL with a very impressive resume.


The Colts’ signal caller has thrown for 4,000-plus yards in nine of his 11 professional seasons, has tossed 27 or more touchdowns seven consecutive years and has attempted 515 or more passes nine times since turning pro.

In addition, Manning is exceptional at avoiding mistakes. He’s thrown more than 12 interceptions only one time in the past six years and boasts a 94.7 career passer rating.

Manning’s got a multitude of weapons at his disposal, including Pro Bowlers Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark, not to mention up-and-coming wideout Anthony Gonzalez. The Indy backfield has two capable rushers in Joseph Addai and rookie dual-threat Donald Brown.

The Colts are going to come out slinging again this season, meaning Manning should finish his 2009 campaign at the top of the charts one more time.

The case against Manning

It’s not easy trying to find flaws in one of the greatest quarterbacks ever, but I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least try.

The big question in Indianapolis is, how will the Colts fare now that head coach Tony Dungy has retired? Longtime assistant Jim Caldwell takes over the team, and with him come some new ideas and philosophies. Keep in mind that Manning‘s favorite target, Marvin Harrison, is no longer with the team, and while Peyton is certainly used to playing without Marvelous Marvin because of injuries he battled over the past few years, this will be the first true season Reggie Wayne will go 16 games as the Colts’ No. 1 wideout.

In addition, Manning is currently being selected in the third round (at the latest) of almost every fantasy mock draft I’ve participated in. Sure, you can pull the trigger on Manning by the third and land one of the games’ top fantasy quarterbacks, but could you find better value elsewhere? That question leads us to…

The case for Rodgers

The strategy in Green Bay paid off as the Packers selected Rodgers in the first round of the 2005 NFL Draft, sat him behind Brett Favre for three seasons and then unleashed him on the NFL -- with outstanding results.


Rodgers came onto the scene in a big way last season, finishing his first year as an NFL starter ranked No. 2 among fantasy quarterbacks in standard scoring formats. The former California Golden Bear threw for an impressive 4,038 yards (fourth in the NFL) and 28 touchdowns (also fourth).

Rodgers has an impressive lineup of talent surrounding him on offense this season with wide receivers Greg Jennings and Donald Driver as well as running back Ryan Grant. What could be a big benefit to the fifth-year pro is the new defensive scheme the Packers are implementing this season.

Green Bay hired defensive coordinator Dom Capers this offseason and is making the switch from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4. This type of change generally takes some time to implement, meaning the Packers could struggle trying to slow down their opponents, opening the door for Rodgers and the offense to keep their foot on the gas for four quarters.

In addition, NFP writer Michael Lombardi is always preaching that quarterbacks entering their second year as NFL starters almost always tend to take a big step forward. For a guy who threw for more than 4,000 yards in 2008, that could mean big things for fantasy owners in 2009.

Keep in mind, fantasy owners are targeting Rodgers somewhere between the end of the third round and the end of the fourth. With the numbers he’s capable of putting up in 2009, wouldn’t you rather wait an extra round (instead of drafting Manning) and find the same production for a better price?

The case against Rodgers

He has to get better at closing out games in the second half. Check out Rodgers’ production in the first half of games vs. the second half in 2008:

Touchdowns Interceptions Completion % QB Rating Sacks

First Half 16 5 66.5% 100.5 15
Second Half 12 8 60.7% 87.0 19

I know I don’t need to explain this to Packer Nation. They watched it firsthand last season.


The key to keep in mind when considering Rodgers over Manning in this debate is whether you are prepared to spend a relatively high draft pick on one year of success in the NFL.

Fantasy owners pay a premium for a quarterback like Peyton Manning because he has proven over the course of his career that he is reliable and consistent. 4,000+ yards and 27+ touchdowns is pretty much a lock.

But with Rodgers, owners are now being asked to invest a fourth round (or sometimes higher) draft pick on a quarterback who has only produced one noteworthy NFL season.

Is it worth it?

The potential deal breaker

Manning has the luxury of playing 11 games indoors this season. Yes, Lukas Oil Field, as well as some other NFL stadiums (Arizona, Houston), has a retractable roof, but it will only be open if the weather is nice.

Unfortunately, Aaron Rodgers won’t be so lucky. The Packers play 11 games outdoors. To make matters worse, Green Bay will play four of its final five games possibly in inclement weather (two in Green Bay, at Chicago, at Baltimore).

EDGE: Manning

The fantasy playoff schedule

The Colts’ final four games: Denver, at Jacksonville, New York (Jets), at Buffalo

The Packers’ final four games: at Chicago, at Pittsburgh, Seattle, at Arizona

Edge: Manning

The Tipper’s take

I don’t care what the schedule says, I’m taking Aaron Rodgers. The Green Bay quarterback averaged 260.6 yards passing with six touchdowns and three interceptions in three late-season outdoor games last year. No disrespect intended toward Manning, but I like the fact I could possibly land a better QB option one round later by drafting Rodgers rather than pulling the trigger on Manning in the third or before.

[Gunakor]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.
I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

I'd strongly disagree with the bold-ed portion of this post. Keith Jackson was definitely a deep threat and a real bitch to cover in any part of the field. He'd been playing TE since 4th grade and could read D's like a QB. He knew when to sit down and could read a seam route as good as any TE I've ever seen. Chew was an average route runner and receiver, but was a devastating blocker. The combo of the two players was truly complimentary. KJ was great after the catch. Wasn't a safety in the league that wanted to tackle that big boy in the open field.

Lee can't block as good as Chew and Finley doesn't have Keith's experience or skill running routes. Finley is still pretty one dimensional. He has improved, but he's still just beginning to learn how to block.

Jackson was a deep thread before coming to Green Bay. While he was here he was at the end of his career and was no longer a deep threat. Though I agree, for the majority of his career he was definitely a threat from anywhere on the field, I'm only counting the year he spent in the Green and Gold. Chewy made his living in the RZ his entire career. He was never a deep threat.

Finley is getting better at his blocking, but is already a more lethal weapon in the passing game than Chewy ever was or Jackson was as a Packer. He'll continue to improve, but I don't expect he'll ever be considered an elite blocking TE. It's not his game. His game is creating mismatches, beating coverage over the middle, moving the chains and scoring points. And maybe no TE in recent GB history has been better at that than Finley projects to be.

In today's NFL that's much more important than the guy that can throw a mean block but cant get separation in the passing game or can't catch a football. Bubba Franks was an excellent blocking TE, but I'd rather have Finley a hundred times over before I'd want Bubba back. I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people who feel differently.

[sheepshead]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

You are an idiot, you really are. How can you do a 180 on ARod after a few possessions in pre-season? The question is, what the hell we're you basing your mediocre assessment of him on over the last few years? Why should anyone read anything you have to say? Are your opinions derived from how guys perform on your video games? Where and how do you come up with your garbage? Maybe you just type shit on here for the sake of typing.

[SkinBasket]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right.

He's certainly no Vince Young.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Skin, what the hell is up with your signature?

[Partial]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

You are an idiot, you really are. How can you do a 180 on ARod after a few possessions in pre-season? The question is, what the hell we're you basing your mediocre assessment of him on over the last few years? Why should anyone read anything you have to say? Are your opinions derived from how guys perform on your video games? Where and how do you come up with your garbage? Maybe you just type shit on here for the sake of typing.

I'm an idiot? Please see the bolded text in your own post. Pwned?

Please explain to me where there is a 180. I would love to hear this.

As for the rest of your post, pure garbage. Please take it elsewhere, bro.

[Partial]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right.

He's certainly no Vince Young.

This thread isn't about Vince Young, but I think given a fresh start on a talented team, he could do just fine. The Titans would be a good place to start since they have such a good OL, but he needs to just get out of there, sit on the bench for a year as a nobody, then compete for a starting job. I'm still confident that he will be an extremely good player.

[sheepshead]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

You are an idiot, you really are. How can you do a 180 on ARod after a few possessions in pre-season? The question is, what the hell we're you basing your mediocre assessment of him on over the last few years? Why should anyone read anything you have to say? Are your opinions derived from how guys perform on your video games? Where and how do you come up with your garbage? Maybe you just type shit on here for the sake of typing.

I'm an idiot? Please see the bolded text in your own post. Pwned?

Please explain to me where there is a 180. I would love to hear this.

As for the rest of your post, pure garbage. Please take it elsewhere, bro.

what are you talking about?

[Partial]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

You are an idiot, you really are. How can you do a 180 on ARod after a few possessions in pre-season? The question is, what the hell we're you basing your mediocre assessment of him on over the last few years? Why should anyone read anything you have to say? Are your opinions derived from how guys perform on your video games? Where and how do you come up with your garbage? Maybe you just type shit on here for the sake of typing.

I'm an idiot? Please see the bolded text in your own post. Pwned?

Please explain to me where there is a 180. I would love to hear this.

As for the rest of your post, pure garbage. Please take it elsewhere, bro.

what are you talking about?

Your incoherent dribble is awful, dude. I don't know what you're talking about with the rest. Please address the topic at hand, or stay outta the thread. Better yet, please leave.

[Administrator]

Both of you should knock this off now. If you want to talk issues, fine, if you want to keep insulting each other do it elsewhere.

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

[sheepshead]

I'm happy to leave it alone. I was just trying to ascertain how he comes to his conclusions. He's unable or unwilling to answer the questions, so be it.

[Tarlam!]

Both of you should knock this off now. If you want to talk issues, fine, if you want to keep insulting each other do it elsewhere.

It's pretty clear that one side started with the personal attacks. You make the rules and I'll hold you to them. Partial defended himself. Read the threa and you'll see that for yourself. And, unless you throw people off after they personally attack other posters, we have a right to defend ourselves.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

I think you're right on, Rodgers couldn't give two shits what Favre thinks. He like almost everyone one the team has moved on. It's a new team and it's Rodger's team. Going to be fun to watch!

[Patler]

Finley is getting better at his blocking, but is already a more lethal weapon in the passing game than Chewy ever was or Jackson was as a Packer.

I have to disagree with this. Finley "is already" nothing but a somewhat disappointing rookie. His performance in two preseason games going into his second year earns him no comparison at all to the likes of Chmura, Jackson, Kramer, Flemming, Franks, Coffman or West. He has not yet earned any such comparison. What has he REALLY done yet? Nothing.

It's only preseason.

[Fritz]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

I think you're right on, Rodgers couldn't give two shits what Favre thinks. He like almost everyone one the team has moved on. It's a new team and it's Rodger's team. Going to be fun to watch!

I feel like I'm on some perverted food network show.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

I think you're right on, Rodgers couldn't give two shits what Favre thinks. He like almost everyone one the team has moved on. It's a new team and it's Rodger's team. Going to be fun to watch!

I feel like I'm on some perverted food network show.

Damn! I totally missed that. Guess that's why my subconscious triggered my response!

[sheepshead]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

I think you're right on, Rodgers couldn't give two shits what Favre thinks. He like almost everyone one the team has moved on. It's a new team and it's Rodger's team. Going to be fun to watch!

It's even more than that, when you see guys like Cutler and Crabtree etc acting like dumbasses without the Favre preasure, you really have to hand it to Rodgers for his leadership and maturity.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

I think you're right on, Rodgers couldn't give two shits what Favre thinks. He like almost everyone one the team has moved on. It's a new team and it's Rodger's team. Going to be fun to watch!

It's even more than that, when you see guys like Cutler and Crabtree etc acting like dumbasses without the Favre preasure, you really have to hand it to Rodgers for his leadership and maturity.

That's part of what sold me on him last off season: the maturity level. If he can keep his cool with THAT pressure, a 250 lb linebacker flying at him is nothing!

[Partial]

Both of you should knock this off now. If you want to talk issues, fine, if you want to keep insulting each other do it elsewhere.

I didn't insult anyone. I questioned the validity of his claims, which I deem to be ridiculous.

[KYPack]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.
I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

I'd strongly disagree with the bold-ed portion of this post. Keith Jackson was definitely a deep threat and a real bitch to cover in any part of the field. He'd been playing TE since 4th grade and could read D's like a QB. He knew when to sit down and could read a seam route as good as any TE I've ever seen. Chew was an average route runner and receiver, but was a devastating blocker. The combo of the two players was truly complimentary. KJ was great after the catch. Wasn't a safety in the league that wanted to tackle that big boy in the open field.

Lee can't block as good as Chew and Finley doesn't have Keith's experience or skill running routes. Finley is still pretty one dimensional. He has improved, but he's still just beginning to learn how to block.

Jackson was a deep thread before coming to Green Bay. While he was here he was at the end of his career and was no longer a deep threat. Though I agree, for the majority of his career he was definitely a threat from anywhere on the field, I'm only counting the year he spent in the Green and Gold. Chewy made his living in the RZ his entire career. He was never a deep threat.

Finley is getting better at his blocking, but is already a more lethal weapon in the passing game than Chewy ever was or Jackson was as a Packer. He'll continue to improve, but I don't expect he'll ever be considered an elite blocking TE. It's not his game. His game is creating mismatches, beating coverage over the middle, moving the chains and scoring points. And maybe no TE in recent GB history has been better at that than Finley projects to be.

In today's NFL that's much more important than the guy that can throw a mean block but cant get separation in the passing game or can't catch a football. Bubba Franks was an excellent blocking TE, but I'd rather have Finley a hundred times over before I'd want Bubba back. I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people who feel differently.

Keith Jackson played 2 seasons in GB. (Only 9 games in '95). He was a threat to score anywhere on the field in his last season. He scored the most TD's of his career than season (10) and had a long score from 51 yards. He made the Pro-Bowl and it wasn't for his Red Zone antics alone. I dunno if you watched that season, but KJ was re-vitalized in GB. Holmy used the guy to perfection. Kieth retired after the season, but could have still played a few yeards. He was fast his whole career.

Let's keep arguing.

Nobody is paying any attention to us anyhow

[SkinBasket]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right.

He's certainly no Vince Young.

This thread isn't about Vince Young, but I think given a fresh start on a talented team, he could do just fine. The Titans would be a good place to start since they have such a good OL, but he needs to just get out of there, sit on the bench for a year as a nobody, then compete for a starting job. I'm still confident that he will be an extremely good player.

If his game is Jenga! then I would agree with you. I think his elite level skillset would translate well.

[Partial]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right.

He's certainly no Vince Young.

This thread isn't about Vince Young, but I think given a fresh start on a talented team, he could do just fine. The Titans would be a good place to start since they have such a good OL, but he needs to just get out of there, sit on the bench for a year as a nobody, then compete for a starting job. I'm still confident that he will be an extremely good player.

If his game is Jenga! then I would agree with you. I think his elite level skillset would translate well.

I don't see him having the dexterity or more skills to pull off jenga. That game is harder than it looks.

[mraynrand]

Both of you should knock this off now. If you want to talk issues, fine, if you want to keep insulting each other do it elsewhere.

It's pretty clear that one side started with the personal attacks. You make the rules and I'll hold you to them. Partial defended himself. Read the threa and you'll see that for yourself. And, unless you throw people off after they personally attack other posters, we have a right to defend ourselves.

The last I heard, Harlan was making the rules. Apparently, he is up to page 986 of the 'Packerrats Rules for Conduct' guidebook.

[MichiganPackerFan]

If his game is Jenga! then I would agree with you. I think his elite level skillset would translate well.

I don't see him having the dexterity or more skills to pull off jenga. That game is harder than it looks.

It totally is. Played that in a swim-up bar in Jamaica while enjoying my (and a couple other people's) fair share of unlimited booze. I did NOT fair well. I could however get a pint of beer all the way across the pool on a pool float though without spilling a drop. You win some, you lose some I guess. :alc: :glug:

[SkinBasket]

If his game is Jenga! then I would agree with you. I think his elite level skillset would translate well.

I don't see him having the dexterity or more skills to pull off jenga. That game is harder than it looks.

It totally is.

Believe me I agree. I have thick fingers. But don't underestimate Vince's intimacy with wood.

[sheepshead]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

You are an idiot, you really are. How can you do a 180 on ARod after a few possessions in pre-season? The question is, what the hell we're you basing your mediocre assessment of him on over the last few years? Why should anyone read anything you have to say? Are your opinions derived from how guys perform on your video games? Where and how do you come up with your garbage? Maybe you just type shit on here for the sake of typing.

I'm an idiot? Please see the bolded text in your own post. Pwned?

Please explain to me where there is a 180. I would love to hear this.

As for the rest of your post, pure garbage. Please take it elsewhere, bro.

what are you talking about?

Your incoherent dribble is awful, dude. I don't know what you're talking about with the rest. Please address the topic at hand, or stay outta the thread. Better yet, please leave.

I have always been known for my dribble. My crossover move was killer back in the day. Hardaway had nothin' on me.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If only your hate filled speed would relegate you obscurity like hardaway.

[Fritz]

Keith Jackson did NOT look like a tight end. He looked more like an accountant with a creepy yellow jacket.

But he was a heckuva announcer.

Fu-u-u-u-m-m-m-m-b-b-le!

[sheepshead]

If only your hate filled speed would relegate you obscurity like hardaway.

Golly Gee Whiz, we missed you.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If only your hate filled speed would relegate you obscurity like hardaway.

Golly Gee Whiz, we missed you.

Another non youtube link posting, my god, you must be exhausted. Pace yourself.

[woodbuck27]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

Its preseason, take a pill. or maybe we are now allowed to just ignore your useless ramblings as the product of a fatherless ADD doughboy basement living moron.

But the real point is, it is preseason. He hasnt played against men yet. Hasnt played anyones first team for 60 minutes. So, no, you dont get to cover your ass in August. Stick to your convictions, otherwise--stop taking up space on here and let someone much more interesting and sane contribute.

What are you ? A gangster? A thug? Feeling impotent sheepshead?

Your post is outrageously uncalled for. Way beyond pointless and nasty. Lighten up and act somehow with some decency or find some other vehicle to express your anger.

OK. As I read through this thread to gain some insight that is related to football and the fortunes of having Aaron Rodgers as our QB I see that your getting your deserved criticisms sheepshead. I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

[sheepshead]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

Its preseason, take a pill. or maybe we are now allowed to just ignore your useless ramblings as the product of a fatherless ADD doughboy basement living moron.

But the real point is, it is preseason. He hasnt played against men yet. Hasnt played anyones first team for 60 minutes. So, no, you dont get to cover your ass in August. Stick to your convictions, otherwise--stop taking up space on here and let someone much more interesting and sane contribute.

What are you ? A gangster? A thug? Feeling impotent sheepshead?

Your post is outrageously uncalled for. Way beyond pointless and nasty. Lighten up and act somehow with some decency or find some other vehicle to express your anger.

OK. As I read through this thread to gain some insight that is related to football and the fortunes of having Aaron Rodgers as our QB I see that your getting your deserved criticisms sheepshead. I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

Sorry, i dont like bullshit for the sake of bullshit. Keep your lecture to yourself. Its unwelcome and uncalled for.

[cheesner]

Sorry, i dont like bullshit for the sake of bullshit. Keep your lecture to yourself. Its unwelcome and uncalled for.

You can't fight stupidity with stupidity.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I'm well known as a Rodgers detractor here, but I think he has a chance to be a pretty good, top 1/3rd QB in the league right now. He looks really good this preseason. His footwork and pocket presence look light years better. I believe this is a combination of another year of experience and the new found nastiness of the offensive line.

It's still really early obviously, but I will give credit where credit is due. It's like watching two different players and lines to this point.

Keep it up, A-Rod.

Its preseason, take a pill. or maybe we are now allowed to just ignore your useless ramblings as the product of a fatherless ADD doughboy basement living moron.

But the real point is, it is preseason. He hasnt played against men yet. Hasnt played anyones first team for 60 minutes. So, no, you dont get to cover your ass in August. Stick to your convictions, otherwise--stop taking up space on here and let someone much more interesting and sane contribute.

What are you ? A gangster? A thug? Feeling impotent sheepshead?

Your post is outrageously uncalled for. Way beyond pointless and nasty. Lighten up and act somehow with some decency or find some other vehicle to express your anger.

OK. As I read through this thread to gain some insight that is related to football and the fortunes of having Aaron Rodgers as our QB I see that your getting your deserved criticisms sheepshead. I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

Sorry, i dont like bullshit for the sake of bullshit. Keep your lecture to yourself. Its unwelcome and uncalled for.

My god, the irony.

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

[Fritz]

Ah, the old English professor joke:

A freshman wandering the campus at Harvard walked up to a senior and said "Say, excuse me, but can you tell me where the library is at?"

The senior looked down his nose at the kid, and haughtily replied, "I say, at Harvard we don't end sentences with prepositions."

"Oh, said the freshman, and thought for a second. "Can you tell me, then, where the library is at, asshole?"

[SkinBasket]

I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

That's actually really demeaning to Partial. Your insinuation that he needs to be the beneficiary of "human decency" rather than defend his own argument, which he did, is akin to placing him in some special class reliant upon our goodwill to maintain an equal intellectual playing field. I think Partial should kick you in the balls. Hard.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

That's actually really demeaning to Partial. Your insinuation that he needs to be the beneficiary of "human decency" rather than defend his own argument, which he did, is akin to placing him in some special class reliant upon our goodwill to maintain an equal intellectual playing field. I think Partial should kick you in the balls. Hard.

Actually i think it shows that Woody is a specist. As if human decency is greater than species decency.

Ty is not going to stand for this type of blatant specieism.

[SkinBasket]

I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

That's actually really demeaning to Partial. Your insinuation that he needs to be the beneficiary of "human decency" rather than defend his own argument, which he did, is akin to placing him in some special class reliant upon our goodwill to maintain an equal intellectual playing field. I think Partial should kick you in the balls. Hard.

Actually i think it shows that Woody is a specist. As if human decency is greater than species decency.

Ty is not going to stand for this type of blatant specieism.

What species are we? Mammal?

[SkinBasket]

Mammerian..

[SkinBasket]

mammary

[SkinBasket]

I am a boolean cube.

[SkinBasket]

My neighbor told me once he was a cubist. I think he was just a homo. Not that the two are mutually exclusive, but really, what are the chances? Probably pretty high.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

That's actually really demeaning to Partial. Your insinuation that he needs to be the beneficiary of "human decency" rather than defend his own argument, which he did, is akin to placing him in some special class reliant upon our goodwill to maintain an equal intellectual playing field. I think Partial should kick you in the balls. Hard.

Actually i think it shows that Woody is a specist. As if human decency is greater than species decency.

Ty is not going to stand for this type of blatant specieism.

What species are we? Mammal?

We are Devo!

[HowardRoark]

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

Someone once told me that when the first English grammars were recorded in writing, the early English grammarians tried to force the English language into a Latin grammar model. As a Germanic language, however, English refuses to fit neatly into the grammar rules for Latin and its related languages. But, those first English grammarians still tried. And, since Latin could not have sentences that ended with prepositions, neither could English. Students have since been tortured for years with the irrelevant grammar rule "do not end sentences with prepositions."

He probably didn't know what he was talking about.

[HowardRoark]

I don't know if someone mentioned this or not I skimmed most of this thread, but I think Aaron Rodgers released the pressure valve that was put in place with the Favre fiasco last summer. I think the fact that Favre blew him off, refused to talk to him in the off season this past year put things in perspective for him. He truly isn't trying to be the next Favre, he has decided to step out of that shadow for good. He acts like he could give two squirts of piss that Favre is camped out in Minnesota. This is his team now, he knows it, and more importantly he is owning it.

I think you're right on, Rodgers couldn't give two shits what Favre thinks. He like almost everyone one the team has moved on. It's a new team and it's Rodger's team. Going to be fun to watch!

I think this point is the silver lining in this Favre fiasco. The entire organization, the players the coaches the fans haved moved on over night. I grew up in the 70s and all we ever heard about was the Lombardi years. It took 20 years to move on.

[Fritz]

I mean really man. Knock it off and demonstrate some human decency.

Give Partial a break.

That's actually really demeaning to Partial. Your insinuation that he needs to be the beneficiary of "human decency" rather than defend his own argument, which he did, is akin to placing him in some special class reliant upon our goodwill to maintain an equal intellectual playing field. I think Partial should kick you in the balls. Hard.

Actually i think it shows that Woody is a specist. As if human decency is greater than species decency.

Ty is not going to stand for this type of blatant specieism.

What species are we? Mammal?

Manimal.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

Someone once told me that when the first English grammars were recorded in writing, the early English grammarians tried to force the English language into a Latin grammar model. As a Germanic language, however, English refuses to fit neatly into the grammar rules for Latin and its related languages. But, those first English grammarians still tried. And, since Latin could not have sentences that ended with prepositions, neither could English. Students have since been tortured for years with the irrelevant grammar rule "do not end sentences with prepositions."

He probably didn't know what he was talking about.

Fooish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

[HowardRoark]

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

Someone once told me that when the first English grammars were recorded in writing, the early English grammarians tried to force the English language into a Latin grammar model. As a Germanic language, however, English refuses to fit neatly into the grammar rules for Latin and its related languages. But, those first English grammarians still tried. And, since Latin could not have sentences that ended with prepositions, neither could English. Students have since been tortured for years with the irrelevant grammar rule "do not end sentences with prepositions."

He probably didn't know what he was talking about.

Fooish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

Someone once told me that when the first English grammars were recorded in writing, the early English grammarians tried to force the English language into a Latin grammar model. As a Germanic language, however, English refuses to fit neatly into the grammar rules for Latin and its related languages. But, those first English grammarians still tried. And, since Latin could not have sentences that ended with prepositions, neither could English. Students have since been tortured for years with the irrelevant grammar rule "do not end sentences with prepositions."

He probably didn't know what he was talking about.

Fooish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Playing gotcha...or even commenting on the grammar issue is just so worthless.

[th87]

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

Someone once told me that when the first English grammars were recorded in writing, the early English grammarians tried to force the English language into a Latin grammar model. As a Germanic language, however, English refuses to fit neatly into the grammar rules for Latin and its related languages. But, those first English grammarians still tried. And, since Latin could not have sentences that ended with prepositions, neither could English. Students have since been tortured for years with the irrelevant grammar rule "do not end sentences with prepositions."

He probably didn't know what he was talking about.

Fooish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Playing gotcha...or even commenting on the grammar issue is just so worthless.

I don't know man, that was an interesting fun fact that I will make a note of (ha).

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I don't like posters who end sentences with prepositions.

Someone once told me that when the first English grammars were recorded in writing, the early English grammarians tried to force the English language into a Latin grammar model. As a Germanic language, however, English refuses to fit neatly into the grammar rules for Latin and its related languages. But, those first English grammarians still tried. And, since Latin could not have sentences that ended with prepositions, neither could English. Students have since been tortured for years with the irrelevant grammar rule "do not end sentences with prepositions."

He probably didn't know what he was talking about.

Fooish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Sometimes you are so intent of catching shit, that you dont' even realize when someone is fucking around.

Playing gotcha...or even commenting on the grammar issue is just so worthless.

I don't know man, that was an interesting fun fact that I will make a note of (ha).

The koran speaks against poor grammar as well. Ty will proceed with the fatwah.

[SnakeLH2006]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

I dunno...Favre's longevity/consistency speaks for itself, yet I suspect ARod will have a better passer rating THIS year than ANY year Brett has had...maybe not long term, but damn....ARod looks the part. He looked like a mix of Manning and Steve Young (footwork, longballs, accuracy, rushing) tonite. His preseason stats look like something out of playing Madden 10 on Rookie. I'm impressed.

[Partial]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

I dunno...Favre's longevity/consistency speaks for itself, yet I suspect ARod will have a better passer rating THIS year than ANY year Brett has had...maybe not long term, but damn....ARod looks the part. He looked like a mix of Manning and Steve Young (footwork, longballs, accuracy, rushing) tonite. His preseason stats look like something out of playing Madden 10 on Rookie. I'm impressed.

To be fair, they're different types of players. Rodgers isn't the gun slinger but he has shown this preseason that he is looking like a much more complete player than last. His pocket presence, which was my biggest criticism was his skittish play in the pocket, is much better.

That said, I don't think Favre ever had this offensive level of talent around him, either. No need to compare as Favre is one of the best ever, and Rodgers looks to be one of the better QBs this year.

[RashanGary]

Just comparing Rodgers to Favre. . . If Rodgers ever had the #1 defense and #1 ST's with the offense from 1996, I have no doubt we'd win the SB.


I have a lot of excitement for this Packer team. I see this group marching on to a championship this year, with chances for many more.

[RashanGary]

And snake has some points. I think Rodgers could break every one of Favre's single season records this year. The way Rodgers is throwing the ball is better than I ever remember a Packer QB throw. He's calmer under pressure. He's harder working. He's more humble and coachable. He's more likable.

I think he is a truly great QB. He'll need longevity to make the HOF, but right now, I think he's better than any QB I've watched in Green Bay.

[Partial]

Just comparing Rodgers to Favre. . . If Rodgers ever had the #1 defense and #1 ST's with the offense from 1996, I have no doubt we'd win the SB.

Pointless speculation.


I have a lot of excitement for this Packer team. I see this group marching on to a championship this year, with chances for many more.

Don't jinx the team.

[Scott Campbell]

Just comparing Rodgers to Favre. . . If Rodgers ever had the #1 defense and #1 ST's with the offense from 1996, I have no doubt we'd win the SB.

Pointless speculation.



As opposed to what? :lol:

[sheepshead]

A-rod may never have the stats of Favre but is on track to win more super bowls than #4.

I dunno...Favre's longevity/consistency speaks for itself, yet I suspect ARod will have a better passer rating THIS year than ANY year Brett has had...maybe not long term, but damn....ARod looks the part. He looked like a mix of Manning and Steve Young (footwork, longballs, accuracy, rushing) tonite. His preseason stats look like something out of playing Madden 10 on Rookie. I'm impressed.

To be fair, they're different types of players. Rodgers isn't the gun slinger but he has shown this preseason that he is looking like a much more complete player than last. His pocket presence, which was my biggest criticism was his skittish play in the pocket, is much better.

That said, I don't think Favre ever had this offensive level of talent around him, either. No need to compare as Favre is one of the best ever, and Rodgers looks to be one of the better QBs this year.

You are a piece of work.

[hoosier]

Sheep Shed just can't help himself. :lol:

[SkinBasket]

To be fair, they're different types of players. Rodgers isn't the gun slinger but he has shown this preseason that he is looking like a much more complete player than last. His pocket presence, which was my biggest criticism was his skittish play in the pocket, is much better.

That said, I don't think Favre ever had this offensive level of talent around him, either. No need to compare as Favre is one of the best ever, and Rodgers looks to be one of the better QBs this year.

To be fair, this preseason, the OL has done a much better job protecting the QB. While you're entitled to your opinion, I don't think Rodger's game has changed much, if at all, this off-season. Where you saw "skittishness" I saw a guy avoiding rushers who were often in his face much quicker than they should have been last season. I see a QB displaying his inherent talent as the team around him solidifies and gains experience while you seem to see a QB benefiting from skill at other positions. If that's all it took, there would be a lot fewer teams looking for a franchise QB to "complete the puzzle."

To say this offensive team is any more talented than the 1996 iteration seems a little hyperbolic however.

[gex]

I would have to say A-rod is looking the part so far this preseason. Someone else pointed out how sweet his deep balls are and I would agree. Man, those things just softly layed down in the recievers hands.
I thought he kind of had happy feet in the pocket a few different plays, but on a couple where he looked like he was gonna take off, he stopped himself and found an open WR.
The record breaking and all? He will have to make it thru an entire season again and I wouldn't doubt he misses 1 or more games with some injuries. Most do.

[CaptainKickass]

Someone else pointed out how sweet his deep balls are


.



Sorry Gex -

Captain Context read that and thought it was hilarious.


.

[Partial]

To be fair, they're different types of players. Rodgers isn't the gun slinger but he has shown this preseason that he is looking like a much more complete player than last. His pocket presence, which was my biggest criticism was his skittish play in the pocket, is much better.

That said, I don't think Favre ever had this offensive level of talent around him, either. No need to compare as Favre is one of the best ever, and Rodgers looks to be one of the better QBs this year.

To be fair, this preseason, the OL has done a much better job protecting the QB. While you're entitled to your opinion, I don't think Rodger's game has changed much, if at all, this off-season. Where you saw "skittishness" I saw a guy avoiding rushers who were often in his face much quicker than they should have been last season. I see a QB displaying his inherent talent as the team around him solidifies and gains experience while you seem to see a QB benefiting from skill at other positions. If that's all it took, there would be a lot fewer teams looking for a franchise QB to "complete the puzzle."

To say this offensive team is any more talented than the 1996 iteration seems a little hyperbolic however.

I think those both are fair assessments. The O has extremely good talent, either way. It's tough to say which is better obviously, but we are solid to spectacular at all of the offensive spots it looks now. RB would be the weak point imo.

[MJZiggy]

Someone else pointed out how sweet his deep balls are


.



Sorry Gex -

Captain Context read that and thought it was hilarious.


.

Thank you Cap'n. :lol: