Excellent Analysis on Rodgers

[Gunakor]

How many QBs did Moss put in the pro bowl and MVP races??

Not Andrew Walter, that's for sure.

[Patler]

Sorry, I just have to bring up another of Bedard's rather strange supporting arguments that almost made me laugh out loud.

Rodgers did so well because he played in an offense in place in GB basically since Holmgren which minimizes mistakes.

Favre played in that offense and threw more interceptions than any QB ever.

MY GOD! How many interceptions would Favre have thrown if not for the offense that minimizes interceptions????

[bobblehead]

Re: Excellent Analysis on Rodgers

Bedard did a really nice write up on Rodgers yesterday.

Whether you agree with it or not, its worth a read and brings up good points.

Just yesterday I read somewhere on this board that someone was comparing Rodgers' season to Peyton Manning's. I'm sorry, but that is simply hysterical. Like the 2007 Packers offense, the Colts offense attacks you. It's a down the field big play offense quarterback-predicated offense, not the dink and dunk receiver based offense the Packers run now. Hopefully this article opens a few eyes to see how average his year was.*

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/42530467.html

He basically says this:

- Stats don't tell the whole story when the offense is vanilla and designed to minimize mistakes and be efficient.

- Plenty of players have gotten more done with less ability and less talent around them

- Rodgers estimated trade value is probably no where near Jay Cutlers, because he hasn't shown nearly as much on the field

- Rodgers had 4 game killing interceptions last year, and he will not be looked at as a closer until he learns how to win

* I normally don't like Bedard, but this was a pretty good piece. I tend to agree that Rodgers has a lot of potential to be very good, but he needs to capitalize on that. I'm not confident that he will.

4 game killing interceptions?? Do you mean 4 times after he gave us the lead and the defense blew it in the closing minutes he was forced to make desperate throws and got picked off? 90% of QB's do that. The other 10% have names like Montana and Brady. In time ARod will get to 50/50 in late comebacks where half the time we win and half the time he gets picked. I would say that puts him on par with other very good (not great) QB's like Favre and Marino.

My only hope is that we have a better team and he doesn't get put in that position too often. One record I don't cherish is being behind in the 4th so often that people talk about your huge number of 4th quarter comebacks....although with a good D (and a good kicker) Rodgers would already have a few of those. (maybe even five)

[Partial]

Ok, you win Bossman, Rodgers is every bit as good as Peyton Mannning. He's the 2nd best player in the NFL

The stats say so!

Good come back.

My ex girlfriend did the same thing when she had nothing of substance to say... she'd roll her eyes, say something like "ok, you're right, you're always right" or "you win, tony" ... very similar. Im sure you've had a girlfriend who did the sa---ahhh, probably not, sorry.

Not really. Some joker the other day literally compared Rodgers to Peyton Manning. Not even joking. I literally had projectile pepsi max launching from my mouth when I read that.

[Dylan McKay]

Holy crap this forum is still arguing about the whole Favre split from the Packers? I like the second post from this thread. I think if you all are really Packer fans you will get over Favre leaving and not being allowed to return, and realize that the Packers starting QB is Aaron Rodgers.

Rodgers had a good statistical season, He did a lot better than a lot of us could imagine regardless if he had the talent built around him our not. It was his first year starting. Sure is pocket presence wasn't all that great and he took sacks when maybe a veteran QB wouldn't but lets get off this guys ass. To judge a guy either way after one season, a season which he did lead the team to a 6-10 record. Ron Wolf said it best I will paraphrase, but Wolf said something to the effect that Rodgers was in a very difficult position but statistically he did very well, but the object of the game of football is to win football games, and 6-10 wasn't very good.

2008 was a tough year for Rodgers, he did a lot better than most under the circumstances and Rodgers is not a total package yet. I think he only gets better.

Favre is retired, he won't be playing in 2009. His career is over, and it was a great career but this time was coming, move on.

[Partial]

I certainly entertain the thought that he's not as good as his numbers indicate but I don't buy the criticism that he craps his pants at the end of games or somehow has bad nerves. He's been at his best in some of the biggest games of his life.

I definitely don't buy the injury prone criticism either. That was unwarranted from the beginning. You can't call someone injury prone until they at least miss a start. If anything he's shown that he'll play through pain. This talk is only brought up to provide contrast with Brett Favre. Everyone is injury prone compared to Brett.

Injury prone is definitely just at this point. He's missing potential playing time, and in the event we needed him, he wouldn't have been there. That is essentially missing a start imo.

That would be the same as saying Harrell isn't injury prone because he's never missed a start -- because he's never been a starter

[Partial]

How many QBs did Moss put in the pro bowl and MVP races??

Not Andrew Walter, that's for sure.

Agreed, but he made average QBs like Johnson, Moon, etc look pretty decent.

I tend to believe that Greg Jennings emergence was one of the big reasons Favre looked so good in '07 too. He wasn't nearly as sharp in weeks 1 or 2 before Jennings returned from injury.

Dude is a straight up stud. Let's hope he stays healthy.

[Gunakor]

MY GOD! How many interceptions would Favre have thrown if not for the offense that minimizes interceptions????

My guess is he'd have far less INT's over his career if he stayed in Atlanta, but only because he'd be out of the league in another year or two. I mean, after all, Brett threw his first NFL interception before he completed his first NFL pass to his own teammate while playing in the Falcons mistake prone offense...

[Partial]

Sorry, I just have to bring up another of Bedard's rather strange supporting arguments that almost made me laugh out loud.

Rodgers did so well because he played in an offense in place in GB basically since Holmgren which minimizes mistakes.

Favre played in that offense and threw more interceptions than any QB ever.

MY GOD! How many interceptions would Favre have thrown if not for the offense that minimizes interceptions????

I agree that that was a pretty dumb statement. I don't think one could argue, though, that the offense from '08 was anything more than a small subset of the '07 attack.

As Nutz and I have posted so many times, they really kept things pretty simple for A-Rod, and didn't use the entire field to make his life easier.

[Dylan McKay]

I will say this, where is all this Favre hate coming from. The way some of you talk on this forum, it is like Favre was a below average player for the 17 years he was in Green Bay.

I guess if the only way you all can feel better about Favre being gone is to trash the guy and fail to remember him or speak of the good things he did on and off the football field then all means carry on, otherwise to argue against Partial(?) or who ever by trashing Favre is just a bit disappointing.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I think it's funny that Bedard acknowledges that Fielder had 4 years of an elite defense but holds that it's mostly due to Fielder as to who should get the credit for the victories.

Miami scored an avg of 21 ppg during that time with Fielder while opponents scored 17 ppg. (rounding to the closest number)

Green Bay scroed an avg of 26 ppg and opponents scored 24 ppg (rounding to the closest number)

I find this argument of Bedard laughable in regards to Fielder vs Rodgers. You put that defense Fielder had with the Packers A-Rod led offense and you would have easily have had a 11 win season. This essentially would have been the same point differential that the Giants this season had and they went 12-4.

[Gunakor]

I certainly entertain the thought that he's not as good as his numbers indicate but I don't buy the criticism that he craps his pants at the end of games or somehow has bad nerves. He's been at his best in some of the biggest games of his life.

I definitely don't buy the injury prone criticism either. That was unwarranted from the beginning. You can't call someone injury prone until they at least miss a start. If anything he's shown that he'll play through pain. This talk is only brought up to provide contrast with Brett Favre. Everyone is injury prone compared to Brett.

Injury prone is definitely just at this point. He's missing potential playing time, and in the event we needed him, he wouldn't have been there. That is essentially missing a start imo.

That would be the same as saying Harrell isn't injury prone because he's never missed a start -- because he's never been a starter

I alluded to this a long time ago, but I think that Rodgers' injury history while Favre's backup wasn't as bad as some think. First, there was no reason to rush him back. Ironman was here ahead of him on the depth chart, so any minor nagging injury to Rodgers and MM/TT would shut him down for the season whether the injury warranted it or not. I don't believe that they were season ending injuries necessarily. It was probably a coaches call, not a doctors call. They were protecting their investment in a future franchise QB. That's what I think anyway. I mean, he played an entire half on a broken foot for us a few years ago, and played over half the season with a partially separated shoulder last year. The guy has proven able to play through pain and injury. I'm very comfortable with him as our starter in that regard. I wouldn't label him injury prone.

[Patler]

I will say this, where is all this Favre hate coming from. The way some of you talk on this forum, it is like Favre was a below average player for the 17 years he was in Green Bay.

I guess if the only way you all can feel better about Favre being gone is to trash the guy and fail to remember him or speak of the good things he did on and off the football field then all means carry on, otherwise to argue against Partial(?) or who ever by trashing Favre is just a bit disappointing.

This is the second time you mentioned it. What are you talking about? Favre hate? In this thread? Where?

[3irty1]

I certainly entertain the thought that he's not as good as his numbers indicate but I don't buy the criticism that he craps his pants at the end of games or somehow has bad nerves. He's been at his best in some of the biggest games of his life.

I definitely don't buy the injury prone criticism either. That was unwarranted from the beginning. You can't call someone injury prone until they at least miss a start. If anything he's shown that he'll play through pain. This talk is only brought up to provide contrast with Brett Favre. Everyone is injury prone compared to Brett.

Injury prone is definitely just at this point. He's missing potential playing time, and in the event we needed him, he wouldn't have been there. That is essentially missing a start imo.

That would be the same as saying Harrell isn't injury prone because he's never missed a start -- because he's never been a starter

After starting for a full season and playing through pain its still just? I think the obvious difference is that Harrell doesn't miss holding a clipboard when he gets injured. There is a big difference between deactivating a backup QB and deactivating a starting QB. You have to give the guy a chance to play through the pain and so far he has.

[Partial]

Maybe not injury prone so much, but certainly not iron man status either. I think he'll probably get dinged up and miss a few games this year. Surprised he didn't last.