Excellent Analysis on Rodgers

[Spaulding]

You guys are nuts. Trash article because it makes valid points where a journeyman compares favorably to Rodg?

C'mon, dude hasn't shown anything except 6-10 w/ a big arm and a knack for throwing the game away when its all on the line.

So what you're saying if we use hoops analogy is that a guy hits the three with under a minute left to give his team the lead or a tie and then the other team drives for an easy lay up to retake the lead - it negates the prior shoot because the shooters final half court attempt misses?

Don't buy it.

Most deep passes in the league: Not surprised, Jenning is a stud and Rodgers throws a nice deep ball. They play it safe, and don't throw balls over the middle of the field. Our offense defined vanilla this year.

So Cutler throwing to Marshall isn't the same?

Losing record: Sure, Cutler has a losing record, but he's shown that when his team is in the game, he can close. That is an important quality that A-Rod has so far not displayed.

How'd that work for him when they lost their last three games of the season? Last I recall the Broncos went oh for three.

Makes excellent point of Rodgers still be injury prone. We'll see how that turns out. Hopefully he'll stay healthy. The article just makes a point that Rodgers shouldn't be annoited the king of Wisconsin yet, as we're not even close to knowing what we have in him as a long term starter. A lot of players look good throwing the ball to a Jennings entering his prime. How many QBs did Moss put in the pro bowl and MVP races??

Injury prone? As a backup he got dinged but wasn't expected to play anyways behind Favre. As a first year starter he played all but part of one game. Didn't have an injury history at Cal either that I know of.

He's not the King of Wisconsin nor should he be given being a one year starter but as of right now his future is bright and he looks to have the leadership/moxie, arm, accuracy, and chemistry with his team to take us into the playoffs.

Naturally, anything that you don't agree with is garbage, and Bedard is an ass clown. Right . It's refreshing to see someone who can see A-Rod for what he is. A 5th year player who hasn't been better than the 12th best person at his position in the league.

So he's dinged now for sitting behind Favre for four years? Makes no sense. Call him for what he is, a first year starter whose numbers are better than your boy Cutlers.

Right or wrong, homer or objective, my money is on Rodgers.

[Partial]

Do you actually read the posts? I said IF he was needed in the previous two seasons, there is a good amount of time when he couldn't go.

Is Justin Harrell not injury prone because he's never missed a start?

What about Will Blackmon? Walking injury waiting to happen, but has never missed a start as a result.

[cpk1994]

Do you actually read the posts? I said IF he was needed in the previous two seasons, there is a good amount of time when he couldn't go.

Is Justin Harrell not injury prone because he's never missed a start?

What about Will Blackmon? Walking injury waiting to happen, but has never missed a start as a result.

NOw I have read it all. I am now convinced. You are a mentally retarded tool.

[Partial]

Answer the question I posed instead of being a cock. It's a valid question. Are those players not injury liabilities because they never missed a start?

[cpk1994]

Answer the question I posed instead of being a cock. It's a valid question. Are those players not injury liabilities because they never missed a start?

Ok asshole. They are liabilites becuase they never played in most of those games at ALL. Rodgers has played every game he was asked to. And you are still a retard.

[Partial]

I don't see the difference. A-Rod happened to make it one complete season thus far. He was even hurt and less effective for much of this one.

How exactly am I an asshole? You're callling names, ignoring questions, etc. Essentially flaming a conversation, because you're not bringing any debate or points to the table.

[3irty1]

I don't see the difference. A-Rod happened to make it one complete season thus far. He was even hurt and less effective for much of this one.

You say that like its a bad thing. Everyone gets hurt in the NFL that's not what makes you injury prone. Favre was always hurt but he was man enough to play through it.

[Spaulding]

Do you actually read the posts? I said IF he was needed in the previous two seasons, there is a good amount of time when he couldn't go.

Is Justin Harrell not injury prone because he's never missed a start?

What about Will Blackmon? Walking injury waiting to happen, but has never missed a start as a result.

I read the posts - thanks for the jab.

Harrell is injury prone, no argument but how is that the same as Rodgers? Blackmon on a lesser scale. Both were given opportunities to start if they produced. Until this past year, Rodgers was ALWAYS slated to be the backup behind Favre. He broke his foot in the NE game and yet managed to play the game out - tough kid. He got injured in the Dallas game but likely would have played the next week if needed just as he did after the Tampa game last year. He just wasn't ASKED to do so as Favre was the unquestioned starter.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion but you get respect for posts with substance and facts, not personal opinions that appear to be unfounded.

[Lurker64]

1993 - HOF QB
1994 - HOF QB
1995 - HOF QB
1996 - HOF QB
1997 - HOF QB
1998 - HOF QB
1999 - HOF QB
2000 - HOF QB
2001 - Not HOF QB
2002 - HOF QB
2003 - Not HOF QB
2004 - HOF QB
2005 - HOF QB
2006 - HOF QB
2007 - HOF QB
2008 - Not HOF QB
2009 - HOF QB

The thing I think you're missing here is that a lot of guys are going to the hall of fame and became superstars precisely because they won a superbowl. Nobody was talking about Brady being a hall of famer when the Pats won their first superbowl... hell, nobody was really talking about it after they won their second. Only after the Pats won their third superbowl was the "Brady to HoF" talk really jump started.

Ben Roethlisberger, despite poor individual numbers, is being touted as a potential hall of famer *if* he keeps this up simply because he's won superbowls. The same logic could put Eli Manning in the superbowl if he goes on to win 2-3 more over the course of his career. Ben's individual numbers aren't really any better than Eli's.

I also note that you have Warner in the hall of fame, when many don't. The argument for Warner in the hall of fame is largely that despite his poor career numbers, he managed to get his team to the superbowl three times and he won one, while playing well in all three games.

I'd say of the list you mentioned, only Elway, Favre, P. Manning, Young, and Aikman were hall of famers outside of their success winning one or more championships.

[Partial]

1993 - HOF QB
1994 - HOF QB
1995 - HOF QB
1996 - HOF QB
1997 - HOF QB
1998 - HOF QB
1999 - HOF QB
2000 - HOF QB
2001 - Not HOF QB
2002 - HOF QB
2003 - Not HOF QB
2004 - HOF QB
2005 - HOF QB
2006 - HOF QB
2007 - HOF QB
2008 - Not HOF QB
2009 - HOF QB

The thing I think you're missing here is that a lot of guys are going to the hall of fame and became superstars precisely because they won a superbowl. Nobody was talking about Brady being a hall of famer when the Pats won their first superbowl... hell, nobody was really talking about it after they won their second. Only after the Pats won their third superbowl was the "Brady to HoF" talk really jump started.

Ben Roethlisberger, despite poor individual numbers, is being touted as a potential hall of famer *if* he keeps this up simply because he's won superbowls. The same logic could put Eli Manning in the superbowl if he goes on to win 2-3 more over the course of his career. Ben's individual numbers aren't really any better than Eli's.

I also note that you have Warner in the hall of fame, when many don't. The argument for Warner in the hall of fame is largely that despite his poor career numbers, he managed to get his team to the superbowl three times and he won one, while playing well in all three games.

I'd say of the list you mentioned, only Elway, Favre, P. Manning, Young, and Aikman were hall of famers outside of their success winning one or more championships.

Umm... Tom Brady has put up some the best statistics and winning percentages and is one of the most talented QBs ever. Of course nobody was talking about the HOF until he won his first super bowl, he was a 2nd year player. Brady is a lock even if he loses all 3 super bowls with the sort of numbers hes put up alone.

Roethlisberger has poor individual numbers? Since when? And what about the horrendous offensive line. Dude is the 4th best qb in the NFL imo.

Warner is an absolute lock for the HOF imo. Dude has put up spectacular numbers and is the 5th best QB in the NFL right now.

Good quarterbacks for the most part result in good teams. We could go back and forth and say the chicken or egg and which came first, but take a look at the evidence, and you'll note a definite pattern of stud QBs and super bowl wins.

[Gunakor]

Do you actually read the posts? I said IF he was needed in the previous two seasons, there is a good amount of time when he couldn't go.

Prove that it was a doctor's call to put him on IR when he got hurt backing up Favre. I suggest he probably could have gone if needed, but the coaches decided to shut him down for the season to let the injuries heal properly. The guy has shown a tremendous ability to play through pain. I suggest that perhaps the coaches decided he wasn't needed, and that's why he was shut down for the season. Coaches call, not a doctors call. Might have missed a few weeks had he been the starter, but certainly wouldn't have missed the rest of the season. Now prove me wrong.

[PackerTimer]

I don't see the difference. A-Rod happened to make it one complete season thus far. He was even hurt and less effective for much of this one.

How exactly am I an asshole? You're callling names, ignoring questions, etc. Essentially flaming a conversation, because you're not bringing any debate or points to the table.

A-Rod's performance suffered when he was hurt? News to me - I thought he played pretty admirable while hurt.

You're point that he would have missed starts if called upon is utterly ridicolous. There is absolutely no way you can say that. He wasn't ever expected to play. We have no way of knowing if he would have played through those injuries.

Every player is injury prone - by the end of the year they are all hurt. How many can play through it. Favre did. What we've seen of Rodgers indicates the same thing.

[Bossman641]

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.

Partial, I asked you this in another thread and you never responded to it. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you never saw the question. Here's what you said in that thread.

Partial wrote:
I think the main reason for the INT difference is that Cutler is playing using the entire field, where as A-Rod didn't use the middle of the field until late in the season, and even then it wasn't often.

My response.

Whoa Partial, back the train up. I thought Rodgers is what he is though and won't improve at all? You just pointed out here one thing that he can and will improve on with more playing time and experience. Or is Rodgers always gonna be a quarterback who doesn't use the whole field?

You seem to be contradicting yourself. You've said over and over again how Rodgers is what he is and doesn't have room to grow. So which is it? Are there things he can improve on or not?

[Partial]

I didn't see it, but I don't understand it either in this context.

He will improve some imo, but for the most part he is what he is. By the 5th year most players are what they are going to be outside of a few rare exceptions. Let's hope Rodgers is one of those.

Cutler still has another year or two to learn and grow. Here's hoping he does not do that.

Believe me, I'd rather be wrong about Cutler and Rodgers than correct!!!

[mraynrand]

That's why I'm an advocate of the "If he's not a super duper star, move on" theory at QB.

Move on to what? How many 'Super Duper Star QBs are there available? Dammit Partial, arguing about QBs with you is like arguing with a three year old having a tantrum.

"I'm sorry Partial, but all we have right now is a QB with a 93 rating, 4,000 yards passing, 200 rushing, and 28 TDs"
"No! NO! NO! I WANT A SUPER DUPER STAR!!!"