Rodgers is looking infinitely better

[Chevelle2]

I really think Finley has the potential to be the best TE in Green Bay history, if not second to Coffman.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I really think Finley has the potential to be the best TE in Green Bay history, if not second to Coffman.

Keith Jackson was a Hall of Fame TE. Finley has a long ways to go.
Chmura was a Pro Bowl caliber TE. Lee's not at that level.

[Gunakor]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.

I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

[Packman_26]

Boy, I thought I was excited about this year. WOW. I hope this team goes down as one of the greats but how can anyone compare it favorably to the mid 90's teams? Those were some of the best teams ever. These guys went 6-10 last year and have won 2 preseason games. I agree that they have looked great but some are jumping the gun a little bit.
As to Rodgers winning more Super Bowls than Favre. I pointed out in another thread that only 10 (if I remember right) QBs in the history of the league have won more than one. I find it hard to believe that anyone could be considered to be "on pace" to join them.

[retailguy]

Boy, I thought I was excited about this year. WOW. I hope this team goes down as one of the greats but how can anyone compare it favorably to the mid 90's teams? Those were some of the best teams ever. These guys went 6-10 last year and have won 2 preseason games. I agree that they have looked great but some are jumping the gun a little bit.
As to Rodgers winning more Super Bowls than Favre. I pointed out in another thread that only 10 (if I remember right) QBs in the history of the league have won more than one. I find it hard to believe that anyone could be considered to be "on pace" to join them.

You just need another dose of kool-aid and some special rose colored goggles. They don't get issued until you have 100 posts so you've got a ways to go! Keep at it.

Just remember, "Ted can do no wrong".

[Gunakor]

Kool-Aid is delicious in the summertime. Try it.

Look, this isn't just about this year anyway. Rodgers can't win 2 Super Bowls in one season no matter how good this team is. Look 3 years down the line. 5 years. The youthful stars we have now will be elite veterans. Thompson has shown a willingness to renew contracts, so I expect the vast majority of them will still be here.

Which brings up another difference between Favre's tenure here and the beginning of Rodgers career - Favre's weapons were a rotating door, while Rodgers is likely to have the same core offensive players around him for a very long time. Imagine what Favre's career could have looked like had Sterling Sharpe not been forced into early retirement. Knock on wood, but I expect Rodgers to Jennings to be around these parts for another decade. Grant is only, what 26 or 27? Jackson is even younger. Finley is in just his second year. Imagine each of them in 3 or 4 years, having played in our system and having mastered their timing, their route running, and all the other nuances that only get mastered through experience. I'd hate to be the one trying to come up with a defensive gameplan against that.

I'm sure this year's team isn't going to be better than those in the mid 90's. But this team's future is certainly brighter. I can't predict what will happen, but the foundation is here for even greater things than Wolf's Pack of the 90's had accomplished. These next couple of years are going to be fun to watch.

[The Leaper]

Keith Jackson was a Hall of Fame TE. Finley has a long ways to go. Chmura was a Pro Bowl caliber TE. Lee's not at that level.

Keith Jackson was hardly a HOF caliber TE in Green Bay...the guy was at the end of his career.

Chmura was a very good TE...but he wasn't elite. The Packers have had plenty of other TEs that I would consider superior to Chmura. Chmura simply was fortunate to get paired with Favre in his prime.

Finley has the opportunity to become a game changing TE in the mold of Gonzalez or Sharpe...not saying he will be that good, just that he has the speed and size to be a nightmare in the middle of the field. That is especially true when you have such threats at WR as Jennings, Driver and the rest. LBs and SSs will be forced to cover Finley...good luck chaps.

[MOBB DEEP]

Kuselias agrees with me that aaron BEAST rodgers is the 2nd best QB in conference behind Brees.

I'm pleasantly surprised STILL that he's such a stud; fits perfectly into our system. Is he top 5 in nfl? Will he make probowl this year?

[Partial]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

[KYPack]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.
I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

I'd strongly disagree with the bold-ed portion of this post. Keith Jackson was definitely a deep threat and a real bitch to cover in any part of the field. He'd been playing TE since 4th grade and could read D's like a QB. He knew when to sit down and could read a seam route as good as any TE I've ever seen. Chew was an average route runner and receiver, but was a devastating blocker. The combo of the two players was truly complimentary. KJ was great after the catch. Wasn't a safety in the league that wanted to tackle that big boy in the open field.

Lee can't block as good as Chew and Finley doesn't have Keith's experience or skill running routes. Finley is still pretty one dimensional. He has improved, but he's still just beginning to learn how to block.

[cheesner]

Keith Jackson was a Hall of Fame TE. Finley has a long ways to go. Chmura was a Pro Bowl caliber TE. Lee's not at that level.

Keith Jackson was hardly a HOF caliber TE in Green Bay...the guy was at the end of his career.

Chmura was a very good TE...but he wasn't elite. The Packers have had plenty of other TEs that I would consider superior to Chmura. Chmura simply was fortunate to get paired with Favre in his prime.

Finley has the opportunity to become a game changing TE in the mold of Gonzalez or Sharpe...not saying he will be that good, just that he has the speed and size to be a nightmare in the middle of the field. That is especially true when you have such threats at WR as Jennings, Driver and the rest. LBs and SSs will be forced to cover Finley...good luck chaps.

Good points. Finley has the opportunity (physically) to achieve a very elite status. But then so do other guys, usually a couple a year. Why don't more get there? Because it takes a huge amount of work and dedication. What has me excited about Finley is, he has made such a big jump in his second year that he must have put in the work. If he continues to work at it, there is a good chance he will achieve that elite level.

As far as the 96 offense goes, two of their best assets were a dominating defense that gave them the ball often and with shorter field; and great special teams play. We had over 1000 return yards that season, thats just like adding a feature back production. The defense was amazing and scored a fair share of points themselves. I thought the offense was very good. Not great. Just very good, but they got helped so much by the defense and special teams, they achieved much more than they were capable of.

[sharpe1027]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.

I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

Well, bythat standard the Lions offense last year was better than the offense that won the Packers' first superbowl. Honestly. I have no doubt that the guys on the Lions team are way more talented than even the best teams back then, offenses in general have gotten way better as have the player's skill levels. We're talking bigger, stronger and faster, by a lot.

IMHO, your relative rank compared against the teams you play in that year is the more important factor.

Yes, Levens was not the homerun guy, but he seldom lost any yards and was a better receiver and at picking up the blitz. IMO, the combination of Levens and Bennett was better than Grant and Jackson, but that could change (and may have as much to do with the linemen as anything).

[green_bowl_packer]

He's good enough to get this comparison, which is good enough for me.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Pick-your-poison-Manning-vs-Rodgers.html

Pick your poison: Manning vs. Rodgers


The NFP’s “Pick your Poison” fantasy series resumes today with the spotlight on the quarterback position.

We’ve got a heavyweight matchup in store for you on this fine Wednesday as the up-and-coming Aaron Rodgers takes on future Hall of Famer Peyton Manning. Some of you may have already made up your minds after reading the story’s title, but I assure you, this matchup is a lot closer than people think.

Without further ado, let’s go to Harold Lederman (OK, Jim!) with the Tale of the Tape:

TALE OF THE TAPE

Peyton Manning Aaron Rodgers
Height 6-5 6-2
Weight 230 220
Years Pro 11 4
’08 Comp. % 66.8% 63.6%
’08 Yards 4,002 4,038
’08 TDs 27 28
’08 INTs 12 13
’08 Fantasy Rank 6 2

The case for Manning

One of the most accomplished fantasy football quarterbacks of all time, Manning enters his 12th season in the NFL with a very impressive resume.


The Colts’ signal caller has thrown for 4,000-plus yards in nine of his 11 professional seasons, has tossed 27 or more touchdowns seven consecutive years and has attempted 515 or more passes nine times since turning pro.

In addition, Manning is exceptional at avoiding mistakes. He’s thrown more than 12 interceptions only one time in the past six years and boasts a 94.7 career passer rating.

Manning’s got a multitude of weapons at his disposal, including Pro Bowlers Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark, not to mention up-and-coming wideout Anthony Gonzalez. The Indy backfield has two capable rushers in Joseph Addai and rookie dual-threat Donald Brown.

The Colts are going to come out slinging again this season, meaning Manning should finish his 2009 campaign at the top of the charts one more time.

The case against Manning

It’s not easy trying to find flaws in one of the greatest quarterbacks ever, but I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least try.

The big question in Indianapolis is, how will the Colts fare now that head coach Tony Dungy has retired? Longtime assistant Jim Caldwell takes over the team, and with him come some new ideas and philosophies. Keep in mind that Manning‘s favorite target, Marvin Harrison, is no longer with the team, and while Peyton is certainly used to playing without Marvelous Marvin because of injuries he battled over the past few years, this will be the first true season Reggie Wayne will go 16 games as the Colts’ No. 1 wideout.

In addition, Manning is currently being selected in the third round (at the latest) of almost every fantasy mock draft I’ve participated in. Sure, you can pull the trigger on Manning by the third and land one of the games’ top fantasy quarterbacks, but could you find better value elsewhere? That question leads us to…

The case for Rodgers

The strategy in Green Bay paid off as the Packers selected Rodgers in the first round of the 2005 NFL Draft, sat him behind Brett Favre for three seasons and then unleashed him on the NFL -- with outstanding results.


Rodgers came onto the scene in a big way last season, finishing his first year as an NFL starter ranked No. 2 among fantasy quarterbacks in standard scoring formats. The former California Golden Bear threw for an impressive 4,038 yards (fourth in the NFL) and 28 touchdowns (also fourth).

Rodgers has an impressive lineup of talent surrounding him on offense this season with wide receivers Greg Jennings and Donald Driver as well as running back Ryan Grant. What could be a big benefit to the fifth-year pro is the new defensive scheme the Packers are implementing this season.

Green Bay hired defensive coordinator Dom Capers this offseason and is making the switch from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4. This type of change generally takes some time to implement, meaning the Packers could struggle trying to slow down their opponents, opening the door for Rodgers and the offense to keep their foot on the gas for four quarters.

In addition, NFP writer Michael Lombardi is always preaching that quarterbacks entering their second year as NFL starters almost always tend to take a big step forward. For a guy who threw for more than 4,000 yards in 2008, that could mean big things for fantasy owners in 2009.

Keep in mind, fantasy owners are targeting Rodgers somewhere between the end of the third round and the end of the fourth. With the numbers he’s capable of putting up in 2009, wouldn’t you rather wait an extra round (instead of drafting Manning) and find the same production for a better price?

The case against Rodgers

He has to get better at closing out games in the second half. Check out Rodgers’ production in the first half of games vs. the second half in 2008:

Touchdowns Interceptions Completion % QB Rating Sacks

First Half 16 5 66.5% 100.5 15
Second Half 12 8 60.7% 87.0 19

I know I don’t need to explain this to Packer Nation. They watched it firsthand last season.


The key to keep in mind when considering Rodgers over Manning in this debate is whether you are prepared to spend a relatively high draft pick on one year of success in the NFL.

Fantasy owners pay a premium for a quarterback like Peyton Manning because he has proven over the course of his career that he is reliable and consistent. 4,000+ yards and 27+ touchdowns is pretty much a lock.

But with Rodgers, owners are now being asked to invest a fourth round (or sometimes higher) draft pick on a quarterback who has only produced one noteworthy NFL season.

Is it worth it?

The potential deal breaker

Manning has the luxury of playing 11 games indoors this season. Yes, Lukas Oil Field, as well as some other NFL stadiums (Arizona, Houston), has a retractable roof, but it will only be open if the weather is nice.

Unfortunately, Aaron Rodgers won’t be so lucky. The Packers play 11 games outdoors. To make matters worse, Green Bay will play four of its final five games possibly in inclement weather (two in Green Bay, at Chicago, at Baltimore).

EDGE: Manning

The fantasy playoff schedule

The Colts’ final four games: Denver, at Jacksonville, New York (Jets), at Buffalo

The Packers’ final four games: at Chicago, at Pittsburgh, Seattle, at Arizona

Edge: Manning

The Tipper’s take

I don’t care what the schedule says, I’m taking Aaron Rodgers. The Green Bay quarterback averaged 260.6 yards passing with six touchdowns and three interceptions in three late-season outdoor games last year. No disrespect intended toward Manning, but I like the fact I could possibly land a better QB option one round later by drafting Rodgers rather than pulling the trigger on Manning in the third or before.

[Gunakor]

The 1996 team had the #1 offense in the league. They had two solid RBs in Bennett and Levens with Freeman, Rison, and Beebe and two great TEs in Jackson and Chmura. They may not have had a Randy Moss, but they didn't lack offensive talent. The defense was also #1 and they had the best return man in the game. Rodgers doesn't have that kind of talent around him--even offensively. The WRs are better, but the RBs and TEs are not.

I don't know what everyone thought was so special about Levens. Grant runs similar to Levens, but with more explosiveness when healthy. At least that's my take on it. Bennett wasn't special in any particular part of his game, he was just better than average at everything. Jackson can't throw a block like Bennett, but their hands out of the backfield are about even. And as Jackson's vision improves he's becoming a much better ball carrier.

I don't know about the TE's. Chewy and Jackson looked like TE's, not WR's. Finley looks like an oversized WR lining up at TE. Neither Chewy nor Jackson were as tough to cover. They made their living as Packers in the RZ. Finley is a threat anywhere on the field. He's someone teams are eventually going to have to start specifically game planning for.
I'm not saying they lacked offensive talent in the 90's, so don't take that away from this. Just because they were the #1 offense THAT year doesn't make them better than our offense this year. Offenses in general are getting better. Ours is no different. In the end it's going to come down to playcalling and execution, but I stand by my assertion that there is more talent on this offense than there was in any given year during Favre's tenure here.

I'd strongly disagree with the bold-ed portion of this post. Keith Jackson was definitely a deep threat and a real bitch to cover in any part of the field. He'd been playing TE since 4th grade and could read D's like a QB. He knew when to sit down and could read a seam route as good as any TE I've ever seen. Chew was an average route runner and receiver, but was a devastating blocker. The combo of the two players was truly complimentary. KJ was great after the catch. Wasn't a safety in the league that wanted to tackle that big boy in the open field.

Lee can't block as good as Chew and Finley doesn't have Keith's experience or skill running routes. Finley is still pretty one dimensional. He has improved, but he's still just beginning to learn how to block.

Jackson was a deep thread before coming to Green Bay. While he was here he was at the end of his career and was no longer a deep threat. Though I agree, for the majority of his career he was definitely a threat from anywhere on the field, I'm only counting the year he spent in the Green and Gold. Chewy made his living in the RZ his entire career. He was never a deep threat.

Finley is getting better at his blocking, but is already a more lethal weapon in the passing game than Chewy ever was or Jackson was as a Packer. He'll continue to improve, but I don't expect he'll ever be considered an elite blocking TE. It's not his game. His game is creating mismatches, beating coverage over the middle, moving the chains and scoring points. And maybe no TE in recent GB history has been better at that than Finley projects to be.

In today's NFL that's much more important than the guy that can throw a mean block but cant get separation in the passing game or can't catch a football. Bubba Franks was an excellent blocking TE, but I'd rather have Finley a hundred times over before I'd want Bubba back. I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people who feel differently.

[sheepshead]

You guys are going way too far imo. Rodgers looks like he could potentially be a pro bowl QB if and only if a lot of things go right. The team is going to need to have a much better record than 6-10 for starters.

Finley looks good and I think he'll be a star, but probably not quite this year. Doing it in PS is a lot different from a real game. We'll see how he looks come regular season. It's unrealistic to think he'll be as good as Jackson. Hopefully he can be a solid asset.

You are an idiot, you really are. How can you do a 180 on ARod after a few possessions in pre-season? The question is, what the hell we're you basing your mediocre assessment of him on over the last few years? Why should anyone read anything you have to say? Are your opinions derived from how guys perform on your video games? Where and how do you come up with your garbage? Maybe you just type shit on here for the sake of typing.