NFL Scouts Rank Rodgers 19th in NFL

[Partial]

According to a survey of several of NFL executives who have been in scouting for more than 10 years, they have ranked Aaron Rodgers as the 19th best starting quarterback in the NFL. I would post the article, but its a little too dirty and can be found in the trash bin where it belongs.

With that said, maybe that Partial asshole was pretty spot on with his assessment, as it matches dead on balls with what the experienced NFL scouts say, versus what the arm-chair homer on this board says!

[Partial]

Not only that, but 12 quarterbacks, ironically enough most of the 12 *I* mentioned were unanimously chosen by these NFL executives to be much better players.

Very nice telling quote:

"I don't know how much of a big-play guy he is. And I don't know that he can put stuff together when you need it as opposed to accumulating stats. To me, the key is whether a guy can go out and win a game. He hasn't done that. Even Favre, as a young guy, he'd (mess) stuff up, but when it came down to the end he'd find a way. Like Steve McNair, he may play awful but would make plays when they needed to win the game. Even Vince Young is 18-11 as a starter."

Like I've said all along, he is playing like Chad Pennington this year! I personally believe he has potential to be more, but right now he is playing it very conservative and minimizing risks. Chad Pennington to the T!

The article is loaded with great quotes. It really is a great read for the homers. Seriously, tons of famous NFL talent evaluators, including Bill Walsh (Steve Young, Joe Montana) saying they think he is maxed out or near maxed out, etc.

[LL2]

Yeah, and a lot of scouts eat horseshit.

[Bossman641]

Scouts also thought Mandarich was a can't miss prospect, Driver would never make it, Brady sucked, Ryan Leaf was unstoppable, Marques Colston wasn't good, Reggie Bush would light up the league like he did at USC...

I think you get my point

[Patler]

The article is loaded with great quotes. It really is a great read for the homers. Seriously, tons of famous NFL talent evaluators, including Bill Walsh (Steve Young, Joe Montana) saying they think he is maxed out or near maxed out, etc.

Well, since Bill Walsh has been dead since July 2007 I'm not sure how valid is opinion is for the Aaron Rodgers we saw this season, or even the Aaron Rodgers we saw in pre-season 2007, or the Aaron Rodgers we saw replacing Favre against the Cowboys in 2007..

[Sparkey]

Very nice telling quote:

"I don't know how much of a big-play guy he is. And I don't know that he can put stuff together when you need it as opposed to accumulating stats. To me, the key is whether a guy can go out and win a game. He hasn't done that. Even Favre, as a young guy, he'd (mess) stuff up, but when it came down to the end he'd find a way. Like Steve McNair, he may play awful but would make plays when they needed to win the game. Even Vince Young is 18-11 as a starter."

Like I've said all along, he is playing like Chad Pennington this year! I personally believe he has potential to be more, but right now he is playing it very conservative and minimizing risks. Chad Pennington to the T!

The article is loaded with great quotes. It really is a great read for the homers. Seriously, tons of famous NFL talent evaluators, including Bill Walsh (Steve Young, Joe Montana) saying they think he is maxed out or near maxed out, etc.

Well, since Bill Walsh has been dead since July 2007 I'm not sure how valid is opinion is for the Aaron Rodgers we saw this season, or even the Aaron Rodgers we saw in pre-season 2007, or the Aaron Rodgers we saw replacing Favre against the Cowboys in 2007..

It just may be that they held a seance to get Bill's updated and informed thoughts on Rodgers.

[Partial]

[Partial]

Scouts also thought Mandarich was a can't miss prospect, Driver would never make it, Brady sucked, Ryan Leaf was unstoppable, Marques Colston wasn't good, Reggie Bush would light up the league like he did at USC...

I think you get my point

It's a lot harder evaluating a college player versus someone who has played in the ranks of the NFL, don't you say? Once you see and have footage of how someone matches up with real world NFL players, its a heck of a lot easier to judge,

Do you agree?

[Bossman641]

Scouts also thought Mandarich was a can't miss prospect, Driver would never make it, Brady sucked, Ryan Leaf was unstoppable, Marques Colston wasn't good, Reggie Bush would light up the league like he did at USC...

I think you get my point

It's a lot harder evaluating a college player versus someone who has played in the ranks of the NFL, don't you say? Once you see and have footage of how someone matches up with real world NFL players, its a heck of a lot easier to judge,

Do you agree?

I agree to a point. 14 starts and a few mop-up appearances prior to that is not enough to project a career, especially for a guy like Rodgers who appears bright, hard-working, and willing to learn. He has enough playing time to where we can critique where he is at right now, but not enough for us to point out his weak tendencies or the things he will always struggle with.

In the article, how the hell did scouts rank VY ahead of Rodgers as of right now? Really? They'd rather have the guy who has contemplated quitting football multiple times and asked to be taken out of the game? Maybe in the future when he rededicates himself, but right now, no way.

[PackerTimer]

The problem with this is that they say winning games is all that matters. Winning games is obviously important. But you can't look at a teams win/loss record and simply say, "wow they have a great QB," or "their QB is certianly winning them games." What if their QB isn't doing anything to win games. What if they run for 200 yards a game and their defense is superb. Vince Young and Kerry Collins are perfect examples of why the QB wins games logic is somewhat faulty.

Young did very little to win a lot of those games. Tennessee has an amazing defense and many times they won games despite all the mistakes and 50 percect competion rate of Vince Young. So yeah he won some games but how many times did the Tennessee defense give up a late score to negate what he did like the Packers defense has done this year.

There is no way Vince Young is better than Aaron Rodgers. NO POSSIBLE WAY. I don't care what this article says. The fact that it says it, makes it completely worthless and the scouts who said it completely worthless.

[run pMc]

With that said, maybe that Partial asshole was pretty spot on with his assessment, as it matches dead on balls with what the experienced NFL scouts say, versus what the arm-chair homer on this board says!

I didn't see the article.
I'm beginning to get the picture -- you don't like Rodgers.
Fine. Do we have any other answers at QB? FA QBs are usually overpriced or washed up. Besides, somewhere Rick Pitino is saying "Brett Favre isn't walking thru that door..." LOL

I'm curious -- where do they have Grossman, Orton, Frerotte, Jackson, Orlovsky and Culpepper?

VY is talented, but I wonder about what's between his ears. I also wonder what the criteria was for how QB's were ranked.
I think Rodgers has played decent -- not great -- just slightly better than I expected. I also expected Grant to be more help, and the defense to be able to tackle a RB. I'm not a hater, but I'm not totally on the bandwagon either...I need to see how he plays next season to see if he's learned & improved from this year.

[denverYooper]

The problem with this is that they say winning games is all that matters. Winning games is obviously important. But you can't look at a teams win/loss record and simply say, "wow they have a great QB," or "their QB is certianly winning them games." What if their QB isn't doing anything to win games. What if they run for 200 yards a game and their defense is superb. Vince Young and Kerry Collins are perfect examples of why the QB wins games logic is somewhat faulty.

Eli Manning is helped out quite a bit by the Giants running game and good line play also.

As much as I like Romo, he has yet to show he can win a big game to get the Cowboys to the show.

[sheepshead]

Partial, since the stats don't back you up-why cant you find the article? Anything on newsprint is also on the web?
Is it through 15 games? why would anyone get that many scouts together after 15 games?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I trust Jaws more than most of those scouts when it comes to judging QBs. Also, he doesn't have an agenda. Some of these scouts may have advised their team not to draft Rodgers in the top half of the first round when he came out. Scouts are fine, but they are often stubborn. They wouldn't want to change their evaluation on a guy because it makes it look like they missed on their initial evaluations.

Pete Dougherty column: Jaworski sees bright future for Rodgers

The Green Bay Packers have their long-term answer at quarterback. The Chicago Bears don’t.

That’s the opinion of Ron Jaworski, the former NFL quarterback who now provides color commentary for ESPN’s telecasts of Monday night football.

Jaworski’s expertise is that of a full-time scout’s when it comes to evaluating NFL quarterbacks. He studies film extensively each week in preparation upcoming games. He played quarterback for 16 years in the NFL, including starting for the Philadelphia Eagles for 10 straight seasons.

He’s watched the videotape of every Packers game this season and has seen every pass by the Packers’ Aaron Rodgers and the Bears’ Kyle Orton. With Rodgers, he sees a quarterback with all the traits to be a top performer.

“I think they’ve got a quarterback for 10 years,” Jaworski said in an interview this week. “They’ve got a lot of areas to address, but they’ve got the quarterback.”

It’s hard to accuse Jaworski of blowing smoke. His public evaluation of Rodgers coming out of college was far different, and this week when asked if Orton is the Bears’ quarterback for the long haul, he offered this candid response:

“No. I think he’s a solid quarterback, but I don’t see him as the long-term answer in Chicago. It’s no disrespect for him. The guy can play 10 or 12 years in this league, but I just don’t see the — unless there’s an epiphany, and from what I’ve seen of late, I just don’t see it. If you’d have asked me this earlier in the season, I’d have said, ‘Yeah, I think the guy’s playing pretty well, he trusts his receivers, he’s making some terrific throws.’ He made a throw against Atlanta which may have been the throw of the year, except Atlanta came back and Matt Ryan took ’em right down the field (for the win). But I thought he was playing much more confident back then.”

Rodgers and Orton, who will face off Monday night for the second time this year, have been the two best quarterbacks in the NFC North Division this season. But if determining the better of the two was a close call early in the season — two of three scouts this column interviewed in early November chose Orton — it doesn’t look as close now. Though Orton has more wins — Chicago has eight, the Packers five — Rodgers looks like the better player.

Jaworski rated Rodgers better in the three major categories a scout can glean from tape (leadership skills aren’t apparent watching game tape alone): Arm talent, mobility and decision making.

“(Rodgers) has an amazing skill set. I think he’ll play very well for a long period of time,” Jaworski said.

Rodgers and Orton are part of a 2005 draft class that in retrospect looks lean at quarterback. The current starters from the class are Rodgers (first round, No. 24 overall), Washington’s Jason Campbell (first round, No. 25 overall), Orton (fourth round, No. 106), Cleveland’s Derek Anderson (sixth round, No. 213), New England’s Matt Cassel (seventh round, No. 230) and Cincinnati’s Ryan Fitzpatrick (seventh round by St. Louis, No. 250). Cassel, Anderson and Fitzpatrick all were backups who became starters this season because of injuries, and of those three only Cassel is a likely future starter.

After four years in the NFL, Rodgers and Cassel look like the cream of that class, and most of the rest of the 14 quarterbacks drafted in ’05 have washed out. That starts with the top pick overall from that draft, Alex Smith of the San Francisco 49ers, who has struggled when he’s played and had a series of injuries to his throwing shoulder that landed him on injured reserve this year. He won’t be back with the 49ers next year unless he takes a gigantic pay cut, and even then he might be inclined to start over somewhere else.

Three other quarterbacks in the ’05 class had a shot at starting earlier in their careers, lost the job and now are backups: Charlie Frye (third round by Cleveland, No. 67), who now is Seattle’s No. 3 quarterback; Andrew Walter (third round, No. 69), Oakland’s backup; and Dan Orlovsky (fifth-round by Detroit, No. 145 overall), who has been on the Lions’ starting-quarterback merry-go-round this season.

The other four are out of the NFL: David Greene (third round by Seattle, No. 85), who’s not in football right now; Stefan Lefors (fourth round by Carolina, No. 121), a backup for Edmonton in the CFL; Adrian McPherson (fifth round by New Orleans, No. 152), who was cut by Grand Rapids of the AFL last spring; and James Kilian (seventh round by Kansas City, No. 229 overall), who’s not in football either.

Jaworski didn’t recall the order he rated the top quarterbacks coming out in ‘05 but he remembers downgrading Rodgers and doubting his ability to be a top-tier quarterback because of his arm strength — Jaworski didn’t see enough good deep throws on Rodgers’ game videotape at California.

Rodgers, on the other hand, remembers well Jaworski’s ratings in 2005. He said Jaworski rated Smith as the best quarterback in the class, Campbell second and him third. Rodgers also remembers Jaworski’s 30-second TV spot evaluating him as not having a good enough deep arm, and deploring his high ball carriage while dropping back, which Jaworski said cost Rodgers’ throwing strength.

Rogers said he respects Jaworski’s work because the color man watches videotape extensively and had a long and successful career as an NFL quarterback, but he was dumbfounded by the evaluation and called it “probably the worst 30-second piece in history of evaluation of a quarterback pre-draft.

“He said me, I held the ball way up here,” Rodgers added, holding his hands above his right ear, “and lost velocity and wasn’t efficient. I said, ‘I just threw for 66 percent.’ I didn’t understand his evaluation.”

Nearly four years later, Jaworski thinks differently. He now sees a young quarterback with great promise even though the Packers have lost six of their last seven games, and even though Rodgers hasn’t won in the six comeback attempts he’s had after getting the ball back with less than 5 minutes to play and the chance for a go-ahead score. Rodgers ranks ninth in the NFL in passer rating (91.8 points) and No. 10 in average gain per pass (7.45 yards), which is one the better indicators of passing efficiency.

“I think he’s played terrific, I really do,” Jaworski said. “Some of the problems he’s had are symptomatic of a young quarterback on the field. Obviously he’s had a few years to learn, but he’s still basically a rookie on the field. So you see some bad decisions. What I see from him lately is trying to make plays that aren’t there, which is probably pressing like a lot of the guys (on the Packers) seem to be. When you get in the tailspin they’re in you try to make everything perfect, and in this league you can’t do that. He’s kind of, as of late, trying to force plays, and sometimes you end up being embarrassed by that. He’s pressed a little bit. But overall, the body of work has been outstanding.”

Here’s how Jaworski rated Rodgers’ skills:

Arm strength: “When I evaluated him coming out of Cal, I did not see the number of deep throws that projected him to be an upper-echelon NFL quarterback. I saw a good quarterback but not enough of the deeper throws. When I saw him at training camp (this year), obviously he had improved dramatically, the arm strength, the ability to throw the ball down the field accurately, and it’s kind of played out through the season. His arm strength is outstanding.”

Mobility and pocket sense: “That part has gotten better, which I kind of thought it would, feeling the pressure, moving, he’s been very good at that. He’s been very good with play action, his quarterback rating is one of the best in the league off play action, which as an inexperienced quarterback is difficult because there’s a blind spot. You make that play-action fake, you turn your back to the defense, you turn your head to the defense, and you snap around and identify people quickly, is a very good asset to have. He’s very good at that.”

Decision-making: “It’s very good. Some of the mistakes he made, I think he was pressing, trying to make every play, and at times the offensive line has let him down a little bit, they have struggled with a good firm pass protection. Clearly when a quarterback is throwing out of a man hole it makes it a lot more difficult.”

Jaworski also rated Orton:

Arm strength: “It’s above average, not a great arm. Certainly Aaron has a much stronger arm.”

Mobility and pocket sense: “He needs help, he needs protection. He’s not a guy that’s going to move around a lot, has a tendency to stare down receivers.”

Decision making: “Normally (the Bears’ tight-end oriented offense) is not a progression read for him, it’s an inside-out, and at that point the ball’s out. I don’t think at this point in his career he’s very proficient at going through that progression.”

[BallHawk]

The article is loaded with great quotes. It really is a great read for the homers. Seriously, tons of famous NFL talent evaluators, including Bill Walsh (Steve Young, Joe Montana) saying they think he is maxed out or near maxed out, etc.

Well, since Bill Walsh has been dead since July 2007 I'm not sure how valid is opinion is for the Aaron Rodgers we saw this season, or even the Aaron Rodgers we saw in pre-season 2007, or the Aaron Rodgers we saw replacing Favre against the Cowboys in 2007..

This is a key example of showing how ridiculously foolish and ignorant Partial is.....quoting a dead man.

God, you really enjoy talking out of your ass, don't you, P?