PDA

View Full Version : AARON RODGERS- LEGIT FIRST TALENT ?????????



Bretsky
04-23-2006, 07:51 AM
I've argued with many in JS about the fallacy that AROD was one of the top 5 players in last years draft and cited Nolan's remarks about how it was a smokescreen in case anybody liked AROD a lot and wanted to trade up. I truly hope I'm wrong; I like AROD the person but have never regarded him as a potential QB star or worthy of our first pick. An interesting article.

Call to arms
Thompson, Packers mull picking quarterback
By BOB McGINN
bmcginn@journalsentinel.com
Posted: April 22, 2006
Green Bay - It's just about a given that one or more of three quarterbacks widely viewed throughout the National Football League as substantially better than their own Aaron Rodgers will be available Saturday when the Green Bay Packers determine what to do with the fifth selection in the draft.

Packers General Manager Ted Thompson won't rule out taking a quarterback again.

How general manager Ted Thompson fares with his monumental and difficult decision should have a profound impact on the Packers' chances to regain the status of a contender over the next several years.

If Thompson evaluates Southern California's Matt Leinart, Texas' Vince Young and Vanderbilt's Jay Cutler as franchise quarterbacks and Rodgers as a distinct cut below, he will have to think long and hard about the almost unheard-of step of taking a quarterback in the first round for the second consecutive year.

"It's quite possible, yes, depending on how it falls," Thompson said late last week about what might be an agonizing decision. "But it doesn't necessarily eat at me because you can't predict what's going to happen. Ron (Wolf) taught me to prepare yourself for contingencies so that when it comes time you know what you're going to do."

Just as he has done for the past six months, Thompson wouldn't rule out taking a quarterback. Even Rodgers, the 24th pick last April, recognizes it's a possibility.

"I've been hearing rumors, and they could definitely take a quarterback with the fifth pick," Rodgers said on NFL Network last week. "I think that would mean my days in Green Bay are numbered. I hope that doesn't happen because I love the city."

Depending on Brett Favre's decision, the Packers either will need a starting quarterback this year or in a year or two. Thompson reiterated that Favre's plans cannot and will not influence what he does in the draft.

What will determine the Packers' course of action is the evaluation of Rodgers, Leinart, Young and Cutler by Thompson, new coach Mike McCarthy and, to a lesser degree, members of their staff.

If one or more members of the "Big Three" receives a final rating in the Packers' grading system higher than such rare prospects as defensive end Mario Williams of North Carolina State, linebacker A.J. Hawk of Ohio State and tight end Vernon Davis of Maryland, then Thompson might well take the quarterback.

"If anybody knows the value of the quarterback position, it's Green Bay," an executive in personnel for an NFC team said last week. "Maybe to a point they've been spoiled. The rest of us, you don't want to get in that hand-basket. They're going to have to pass a great positional player to do it. But you may only get one bite at the apple on these quarterbacks if you consider them franchise."

Earlier in the month, 18 personnel people representing 16 teams were asked to rank the quarterbacks in this draft as well as Rodgers on a 1-to-4 basis. Four points were awarded for a first-place vote, three for a second and so on.

The lack of regard for Rodgers was readily apparent.

Rodgers received one second-place vote, three thirds and 11 fourths, and three voters even placed him behind either Brodie Croyle of Alabama or Charlie Whitehurst of Clemson. Rodgers had 20 points, far behind Leinart (62), Young (48) and Cutler (45).

Leinart has far greater pedigree and size than Rodgers. Not only are Young and Cutler bigger, they're also better athletes with more upside.

"(Rodgers) doesn't have more great potential that doesn't show," Hall of Fame coach Bill Walsh said last fall. "The fear for Aaron Rodgers is he'll just plateau right at this kind of average level. You'd like to think that if you're spending a (first-round) pick you'd get someone special."

McCarthy spent months evaluating Rodgers a year ago and recommended that San Francisco draft Alex Smith instead with the No. 1 pick. There have been many instances where the hiring of a new coach turns out to be the kiss of death for a young quarterback.

If the Packers draft a quarterback, there would no reason for them to trade Rodgers. He and the newcomer would compete head-to-head for either the No. 1 or No. 2 job.

At some point, the Packers might trade one of them. They will need another quarterback this season, anyway.

While selecting a quarterback in the first round in consecutive years is highly unusual, it wouldn't be without precedent.

In 1989, Dallas coach Jimmy Johnson took Troy Aikman with the No. 1 pick and then gave up a first-round pick three months later to select Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. A year later, he foisted Walsh on New Orleans for first-, second- and third-round picks.

In the early 1960s, the Los Angeles Rams took Roman Gabriel, Terry Baker and Bill Munson in the first rounds of three consecutive drafts. Miami took Bob Griese in 1967 one year after taking Rick Norton. San Francisco drafted Earl Morrall and then John Brodie back-to-back in 1956-'57.

No matter who's on the board, there will be two or three players left at No. 5 regarded as exceptional by many teams. It should afford Thompson opportunities to trade down.

"Believe me, Ted will be doing amazing business if that's the case," Indianapolis President Bill Polian said of a scenario in which Leinart would be available. "Somebody is coming up to get him. Then you have to weigh what people are giving him versus what he may gain by taking a guy."

In five drafts for Seattle and one for the Packers, Thompson has traded down eight times and never traded up. He entered the '05 draft with seven picks and finished with 11.

Given the laundry list of voids on the roster, look for the Packers to turn their seven picks into a double-digit total once again.

"They need a corner, they need a safety, they need two linebackers, they need a defensive end, they need two inside offensive linemen, they need a running back, a No.1 wideout and, really, the jury's out at quarterback," a personnel director said Friday. "They don't have a kicker and they don't have a punter. Good luck. How many picks do they got?"

The scout said the Packers' depth chart had the makings of a 3-13 team.

If the scout's assessment turns out to be correct, the Packers would be in position to draft a top-rated quarterback such as Notre Dame's Brady Quinn and Michigan State's Drew Stanton in 2007.

Fritz
04-23-2006, 07:53 AM
Drew Stanton is a heck of a quarterback.

Scott Campbell
04-23-2006, 11:17 AM
I'm not sure why it's such a surprise that Rodgers would rank 4th out of those 4 QB's. The other 3 are expected to get drafted much higher. Wouldn't you expect them to get ranked higher?

Partial
04-23-2006, 11:24 AM
Well, I think if A-Rod doesn't pan otu we'll be at the top again to grab the franchise qb. I'd say draft the stud Hawk

Scott Campbell
04-23-2006, 11:31 AM
I've argued with many in JS about the fallacy that AROD was one of the top 5 players in last years draft and cited Nolan's remarks about how it was a smokescreen in case anybody liked AROD a lot and wanted to trade up. I truly hope I'm wrong; I like AROD the person but have never regarded him as a potential QB star or worthy of our first pick.


He didn't have to be a top 5 player last year to be worthy of our pick. We picked at 25. You don't get a top 5 pick at 25. If he was the top rated player on the board at the time, you pick him.

The fact that Brett is considering retirement this offseason should be all you need to justify picking a QB with the first pick last year. Without Rodgers, we wouldn't even have a QB on the roster right now.

MJZiggy
04-23-2006, 01:54 PM
But without Rodgers, wouldn't Nall have stuck around?

Scott Campbell
04-23-2006, 02:02 PM
But without Rodgers, wouldn't Nall have stuck around?

I don't think Nall was afraid of an open competition with Rodgers. I think Nall didn't want to sit behind Brett.

Guiness
04-23-2006, 02:24 PM
He didn't have to be a top 5 player last year to be worthy of our pick. We picked at 25. You don't get a top 5 pick at 25. If he was the top rated player on the board at the time, you pick him.


And there it is right there. The Pack didn't expect to be picking in the top 5 this year - no one (ok, maybe Houston) figures on that. They expected to be picking in their usual spot, somewhere in the 20's. And Rodgers was good value at that spot.

If they were at 25 again this year, they wouldn't get one of those three QB's. They would be looking at Brodie Croyle or Charlie Whitehurst, right?

edit: not to mention that all 3 of the big boys are highly regarded. If the same question was posed of these guys with Alex Smith added in, instead of Rodgers, I think he might also end up #4.

vince
08-28-2010, 12:15 PM
4 years later...

Interesting to see how wrong even Bill Walsh apparetly was about Rodgers.

Perhaps McCarthy doesn't yet get the credit he deserves for developing Rodgers into what he's become...

Scott Campbell
08-28-2010, 12:28 PM
I've argued with many in JS about the fallacy that AROD was one of the top 5 players in last years draft and cited Nolan's remarks about how it was a smokescreen in case anybody liked AROD a lot and wanted to trade up. I truly hope I'm wrong; I like AROD the person but have never regarded him as a potential QB star or worthy of our first pick.




:lol:
:shock:

Did B happen to be high on Jarret Bush at one time?

Lurker64
08-28-2010, 12:38 PM
Evaluating quarterback prospects is hard.

channtheman
08-28-2010, 01:07 PM
I wonder what Partial's opinion of Rodgers is now? Top 15 QB yet?

Scott Campbell
08-28-2010, 01:33 PM
Crazy. How can they not include Vince Young in there?

vince
08-28-2010, 01:34 PM
I wasn't trying to mock PackerRats posters by bringing this thread back, just to look at how lowly regarded Rodgers apparently was by a lot of scouts and experts after his first year in Green Bay.

I think McCarthy deserves a ton of credit for being instrumental in helping Rodgers develop into an arguably elite quarterback. By most accounts, he was a long way away from that initially.

It's also interesting to witness how far from grace Leinart has fallen.

pbmax
08-28-2010, 02:34 PM
I admire that Bretsky always sticks to his guns. Even four years later.

No one, especially after a horrible first pre-season, saw Rodgers as a lock in 2006. Drafting Leinart would have been interesting. He started as a rookie and seemed to show promise, but he has drifted since then. I think the Cards are kidding themselves if they think they are better served by Derek Anderson.

Young, obviously the game-changer in Partial-speak, would have been a no brainer. :lol:

Cutler has some serious gifts. In a different situation, I can see each of them succeeding. But I results trump what-ifs and Thompson made the wisest decision.

bobblehead
08-28-2010, 06:21 PM
4 years later...

Interesting to see how wrong even Bill Walsh apparetly was about Rodgers.

Perhaps McCarthy doesn't yet get the credit he deserves for developing Rodgers into what he's become...

Here is to hoping that Bill Polian is just as wrong about Bulaga.

I also recall the rumor mill at that time saying TT would take Vince Young if he were available at 5, but i kinda doubt it the way TT avoids head cases.

Lurker64
08-29-2010, 03:40 AM
Here is to hoping that Bill Polian is just as wrong about Bulaga.

Given the state of the Colts OL, I'm not sure that Mr. Polian is your #1 source for brilliant OL prospect evaluations. Outside of Jeff Saturday (who's getting up there in years) there's not a guy on their line you wouldn't be looking to upgrade (the other four starting OL are Charlie Johnson, Jamey Richard, Kyle DeVan, and Ryan Diem).

bobblehead
08-29-2010, 08:25 AM
Here is to hoping that Bill Polian is just as wrong about Bulaga.

Given the state of the Colts OL, I'm not sure that Mr. Polian is your #1 source for brilliant OL prospect evaluations. Outside of Jeff Saturday (who's getting up there in years) there's not a guy on their line you wouldn't be looking to upgrade (the other four starting OL are Charlie Johnson, Jamey Richard, Kyle DeVan, and Ryan Diem).

I hear ya, and I don't weigh too much on what others say...I kinda value TT's opinion on a guy more than anyone.

MichiganPackerFan
08-30-2010, 08:35 AM
Wow. A lot of flops were rated higher than our Pro-Bowler Aaron Rodgers!

I wonder how any of them would have flourished under the tutelage of Mike McCarthy?

MOBB DEEP
09-02-2010, 03:26 PM
AARON IS THE MOTHER F'N TRUTH

great call tt

imscott72
09-02-2010, 03:35 PM
Sure would be interesting to guess who our QB would be today if Ted had not made that pick.

superfan
09-02-2010, 06:52 PM
Sure would be interesting to guess who our QB would be today if Ted had not made that pick.

This sounds like a fun exercise.

Pulled up a mock draft from that year that had GB taking DL Shaun Cody, who ended up being taken by the Lions with the 5th pick of the 2nd round. We'll give GB Cody with their first round pick instead of Rodgers.

With the 26th pick in the 2nd round, GB took WR Terrence Murphy. Instead, let's say they took "Next Best Quarterback Available", which according to the draft results would be Charlie Frye, taken by the Browns in the 3rd pick of the 3rd round.

Ladies and gentleman, your starting QB for the 2010 "What If" Green Bay Packers - Charlie Frye.

ThunderDan
09-02-2010, 06:56 PM
Sure would be interesting to guess who our QB would be today if Ted had not made that pick.

I like it!!!!

I am trying to remember who our QBs were back then. My question is would we have then drafted a QB instead of Hawk the year we picked 5th?

falco
09-02-2010, 08:27 PM
Here's a better question. If we did take a QB with that #5 spot, and it was Leinart, how much better would he be after having rode the pine and learned under M3?