What if???

[RUnuts]

Ok, it's 2006 and Berp Fart is leaving the local Misissippi trailer park/whore house in his moonshine truck and lightning strikes, hitting his usual beverage load, and blows his ass up.. Ya think Aaron would be this good having to start immediately??

[gbgary]

probably!

edit: i took your question as would he be as good today. as in...had he started immediately back then would he have been able to survive the beating and the mental toll (confidence) that he surely would have had to endure.

[billy_oliver880]

I think Rodgers has played like he has something to prove...that kind of player is dangerous. I think he would have been successful starting right away.

[packerbacker1234]

Not sure he would be this good immediately. It's fun to speculate it, but he wasn't completely mechanically sound coming out of college, and that is part of the reason he dropped in the draft to begin with. I think him playing backup was KEY to him being so good right now. He got to learn by watching first hand one of the best to ever play, and watching and learning how he prepares to play and how he studies film. Say what you want, but you can't undervalue what you can learn from a HoF player when you site behind him. Also, Favre seemed to be a bit open to Aaron Rodgers on the sidelines during games, which tells me that they at least communicated about football stuff. Who knows what Rodgers learned from that.

Then, you have MM, who is arguably one of the best QB coaches in the league. He had time to work with AR, inprove his mechanics, and help him make good decisions and see the field better. If thrusted to start, you lose valuable time like that. Sure, some can jump in, start right away, and still be good (Joe Flacco, Sam Bradford so far, Matt Ryan, Mark Sanchez), but AR is better than ALL of them, and I think it's because he was given proper time to adjust to the NFL, and improve how he plays the position before being thrusted onto the field.

[Smeefers]

There's a ton of assumptions there. If we didn't have Favre in 2006 and we had A-rodge, MM might have been run out of town. Without MM guiding him I'm not sure he turns out as well as he is now. All that aside:

I'm happy with the way things went. I honestly believe that a QB gets much better sitting behind a veteran QB than if he's starting. There are always the rare (Once in a generation) ones that can start right off the back and become one of the best quarterbacks in the league within 5 years of being drafted but most times I think starting retards the maturation proccess of a QB instead of speeding it up. The way I look at it is this. Would Matt Flynn be as good as he is today if he started his rookie year? Good God no.

Thinking about it and looking at the numbers, I'm not even sure we realize the talent that we have on our team. People were impressed with his first year and the mumbling began, even though it was a 6-10 season. *HIS SECOND YEAR STARTING* was filled with "yeah, but he hasn't won a playoff game" after the Cardinal's loss of all things (absolutely monster game). This year people refused to call him Elite until the Falcon's game, but once he had that signature game, everyone jumped on this boat so fast it almost sank to the bottom.

[Guiness]

I come from the school of thought that college QB's generally need a bit of time to learn the NFL game, and let it slow down.

Look back to comments from Rodger's first TC. Release point was off, balls were sailing high, happy feet. All of those things would've gotten him killed in a game. The time spent improving those issues was invaluable, and if he'd been thrown in right away, he would have been too busy fighting fires to get those things down.

[swede]

...but once he had that signature game, everyone jumped on this boat so fast it almost sank to the bottom.

I think we're gonna need a bigger boat.

http://bluerootblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/jaws_swims_behind_chief_brody-1.jpg

[Fritz]

That's what the Vikings said when they were on Lake Mankato!

[bobblehead]

I come from the school of thought that college QB's generally need a bit of time to learn the NFL game, and let it slow down.

Look back to comments from Rodger's first TC. Release point was off, balls were sailing high, happy feet. All of those things would've gotten him killed in a game. The time spent improving those issues was invaluable, and if he'd been thrown in right away, he would have been too busy fighting fires to get those things down.

+1 I have always felt a QB benefits from at least a year on the bench and an offseason program. Ok, I never heard of an MM type offseason QB school before MM, but it makes sense that a lot of improvement happens in that first offseason.

[mission]

There's a ton of assumptions there. If we didn't have Favre in 2006 and we had A-rodge, MM might have been run out of town. Without MM guiding him I'm not sure he turns out as well as he is now. All that aside:

I'm happy with the way things went. I honestly believe that a QB gets much better sitting behind a veteran QB than if he's starting. There are always the rare (Once in a generation) ones that can start right off the back and become one of the best quarterbacks in the league within 5 years of being drafted but most times I think starting retards the maturation proccess of a QB instead of speeding it up. The way I look at it is this. Would Matt Flynn be as good as he is today if he started his rookie year? Good God no.

Thinking about it and looking at the numbers, I'm not even sure we realize the talent that we have on our team. People were impressed with his first year and the mumbling began, even though it was a 6-10 season. *HIS SECOND YEAR STARTING* was filled with "yeah, but he hasn't won a playoff game" after the Cardinal's loss of all things (absolutely monster game). This year people refused to call him Elite until the Falcon's game, but once he had that signature game, everyone jumped on this boat so fast it almost sank to the bottom.

Real nice post!

I tend to agree that Rodgers starting from day 1 probably would have created a situation where MM would still not be around today. There would have been a lot more pressure on AR and the Brett Favre situation would have left an all-together different taste in the mouth(s) of fans.

Everything happens for a reason (and all that)

[Guiness]

+1 I have always felt a QB benefits from at least a year on the bench and an offseason program. Ok, I never heard of an MM type offseason QB school before MM, but it makes sense that a lot of improvement happens in that first offseason.

I just think there are too many examples of guys who weren't sound, but HAD to start day 1...and failed. Guys like Couch and Carr. Alex Smith. If they'd been given a chance to sit for a while, things might've been different for them. Making the situation worse, of course, is that these guys are picked at the top of the draft, so they're going to a bad team to begin with. It's hard to learn on the job with 300lb linemen in your face!

[Bretsky]

No Way; AROD was terrible as a rookie and needed time to develop, mentally and physically.\

I listed to an interview by Phil Simms yesteray on the NFL Network.

He's been to each Packer TC since AROD was drafted, watching, observing, and interviewing Packer employee for his reports. GREAT intervies. These were his thoughts.

AROD as a rookie...he was terrible. Terrible form, bad delivery, looked completely lost. That showed in the preseason

AROD in year two...he looked slightly better, but still very bad. His bias was this kid is not going to make it. Noted some in personell dept were very worried he was a bust

AROD in year three...drastic change in Delivery and drastic improvement. Arod's throws and form starting to look good. Simms said he went up to AROD and said...don't take this personal, but your form looks a lot better this year and your throws are zipping in there pretty good. AROD noted coaches really have worked on some new things with him and he used the offseason to improve on them

AROD in year four....he could tell AROD had turned the corner and was going to be a player

[SkinBasket]

AROD in year four....he could tell AROD had turned the corner and was going to be a player

Most of the time I read statements like this and the first thing that comes to mind is that the guy making these judgments just can't admit he was wrong. Instead, it was the player who magically improved. I don't know. What's the value in trying to judge developing players if you can't determine if they're going to be "players" or not until after they've made it abundantly clear they already are?

[vince]

Most of the time I read statements like this and the first thing that comes to mind is that the guy making these judgments just can't admit he was wrong. Instead, it was the player who magically improved. I don't know. What's the value in trying to judge developing players if you can't determine if they're going to be "players" or not until after they've made it abundantly clear they already are?
Agreed. Andrew Brandt has a different take on what the Packer brass thought of Arod in the first years.
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Andrews-answers-Tuesdays-mailbag-5325.html

From the moment he arrived, he was popular with the players and staff. He showed off-the-charts intelligence, a wry sense of humor and an aptitude to not take the all-consuming nature of football too seriously, a trait that would serve him well in 2008. The best way to describe him may be simply "northern California cool."

On the field, I am not a scout but it was easy to notice arm strength, easy progression reads, accuracy, mobility, calm, etc. On the first practice of his first minicamp practice in 2005, Aaron easily moved away from pressure and hit Donald Driver in stride 45 yards downfield. My eyes caught those of Ted Thompson, who gave as expressive a look as I've seen him give. Aaron was going to be the guy.

Aaron prepared to be the starter over the couple of off seasons where Brett was deciding whether to retire (Brett didn't decide to return until late April in 2006). We all saw it and liked what we saw.