Rodgers has highest rating in the league

[Brandon494]

Should sacks be figured into the QB Rating formula? Means SO much with regards to qb "performance"

No because its not the QB's job to protect himself.

QBs can contribute mightily to sacks. Ever watch Rob Johnson play. Simple common sense should tell you this if you haven't watched enough football to know it from experience. Rodgers has contributed to many of his sacks. McCarthy has said so.

I understand that, my point is its no way to make pocket awareness a stat.

[SnakeLH2006]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

He also has the lead in 40+ pass plays, and in sacks

Crazy! Drew Brees can pass him tonight with a big game vs. the Falcons, but...

I was actually looking at the stats on nfl/espn to get his splits because I was originally going to write a post about a new plan:

Someone needs to make Aaron Rodgers believe they're already behind and he needs to catch up every time he gets on the field, especially in big games. He seems more decisive and gets the ball out faster when he just needs to score.

ESPN splits has:
BY PT DIFF CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
Ahead 48 74 709 64.9 9.58 71 5 1 8.0 113.0 15 64 4.3 19 1
Behind 64 97 885 66.0 9.12 62 8 0 14.0 122.6 10 105 10.5 35 0
Tied 35 54 395 64.8 7.32 47 1 1 9.0 85.0 4 19 4.8 15 0

I could give a fuck when QB rating doesn't take into effect throwing it out of bounds (incompletion percentage), sacks just killing drives (2nd and 20, 3rd and 18 anyone)?

Stats don't mean shit.....look at Carson Palmer. I saw all I needed to see with a 40 year old last week getting the ball off without taking sacks to keep drives alive. They need to redo that QB rating as Arod looks like David Carr back there flopping all over the field killing drive after drive. Any doubt why Favre won all those games. In 2004 (Brett had 14 sacks all season....in 2 games vs. the Vikes in 2009, Arod eclipsed that and lost both games).....Just sayin.

[mraynrand]

Should sacks be figured into the QB Rating formula? Means SO much with regards to qb "performance"

No because its not the QB's job to protect himself.

QBs can contribute mightily to sacks. Ever watch Rob Johnson play. Simple common sense should tell you this if you haven't watched enough football to know it from experience. Rodgers has contributed to many of his sacks. McCarthy has said so.

I understand that, my point is its no way to make pocket awareness a stat.

I get your point. Sorry for the shitty post. Reading it back, I sound like a total asshole. sorry about that.

[Partial]

Give me a winner over a statistician any day.

[mraynrand]

Give me a winner over a statistician any day.

How about a winner who is a statistician? Give me a guy who can figure out linear regressions and which fucking student t test to use over a fullback dive any day.

[Partial]

Give me a winner over a statistician any day.

How about a winner who is a statistician? Give me a guy who can figure out linear regressions and which fucking student t test to use over a fullback dive any day.

Your ray is no match...

Aaron is okay but he's not great. He has the physical tools but he isn't special or rare. He can be a good player with elite talent surrounding him. He's about the 10th best quarteback in the NFL according to my asssessment (which admittedly isn't as informed as I'd like it to be as I'm not .

[Gunakor]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

Stats don't mean shit.....look at Carson Palmer. I saw all I needed to see with a 40 year old last week getting the ball off without taking sacks to keep drives alive. They need to redo that QB rating as Arod looks like David Carr back there flopping all over the field killing drive after drive. Any doubt why Favre won all those games. In 2004 (Brett had 14 sacks all season....in 2 games vs. the Vikes in 2009, Arod eclipsed that and lost both games).....Just sayin.

If Rodgers is killing drive after drive, why do the Packers have a top 10 offense, averaging 370+ yards of offense per game? Why was he voted player of the month for October? Why is he 11th in completion percentage and top 10 in pretty much every other catagory? Why are the Packers the 8th best scoring team in the NFL?

And why, if Aaron Rodgers looks so much like David Carr, why couldn't Carr do any of these things for the Texans?

[Partial]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

Stats don't mean shit.....look at Carson Palmer. I saw all I needed to see with a 40 year old last week getting the ball off without taking sacks to keep drives alive. They need to redo that QB rating as Arod looks like David Carr back there flopping all over the field killing drive after drive. Any doubt why Favre won all those games. In 2004 (Brett had 14 sacks all season....in 2 games vs. the Vikes in 2009, Arod eclipsed that and lost both games).....Just sayin.

If Rodgers is killing drive after drive, why do the Packers have a top 10 offense, averaging 370+ yards of offense per game? Why was he voted player of the month for October? Why is he 11th in completion percentage and top 10 in pretty much every other catagory? Why are the Packers the 8th best scoring offense in the NFL?

And why, if Aaron Rodgers looks so much like David Carr, why couldn't Carr do any of these things for the Texans?

Lack of talent surrounding him.

I'm not saying Rodgers is Carr, he's much betetr, but lets get real here, he's not an elite QB. Yards not mean shit. Wins means shit. At the end of the day I don't give a flying fudge how spectacular my QB is between the 20s. I want a guy who is unafraid to penentrate.

[SnakeLH2006]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

I want a guy who is unafraid to penentrate.

Homo.

[Gunakor]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

Stats don't mean shit.....look at Carson Palmer. I saw all I needed to see with a 40 year old last week getting the ball off without taking sacks to keep drives alive. They need to redo that QB rating as Arod looks like David Carr back there flopping all over the field killing drive after drive. Any doubt why Favre won all those games. In 2004 (Brett had 14 sacks all season....in 2 games vs. the Vikes in 2009, Arod eclipsed that and lost both games).....Just sayin.

If Rodgers is killing drive after drive, why do the Packers have a top 10 offense, averaging 370+ yards of offense per game? Why was he voted player of the month for October? Why is he 11th in completion percentage and top 10 in pretty much every other catagory? Why are the Packers the 8th best scoring offense in the NFL?

And why, if Aaron Rodgers looks so much like David Carr, why couldn't Carr do any of these things for the Texans?

Lack of talent surrounding him.

I'm not saying Rodgers is Carr, he's much betetr, but lets get real here, he's not an elite QB. Yards not mean shit. Wins means shit. At the end of the day I don't give a flying fudge how spectacular my QB is between the 20s. I want a guy who is unafraid to penentrate.

And we are 4-3, only having been beat by 2 teams this year. We are 2nd place in the division, one game out of a wild card spot. We're winning. We just got beat twice by a superior football team in Minnesota. We aren't the best football team in the division, but that's not Rodgers' fault. In fact, I'd say it's to Rodgers' credit that we've scored as many points as we have. Maybe if there was a better team surrounding Rodgers - specifically in front of Rodgers and behind Rodgers as they line up in formation - maybe we'd be winning more games. But it's not like we're losing to teams we should be beating.

Since wins and losses are the only stat to judge a quarterback's eliteness on, how many games do the Packers have to win in one season for Rodgers to be considered an elite quarterback? 10? 13? 16? Please put a number on it so I can understand what it takes to be elite.

[Partial]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

Stats don't mean shit.....look at Carson Palmer. I saw all I needed to see with a 40 year old last week getting the ball off without taking sacks to keep drives alive. They need to redo that QB rating as Arod looks like David Carr back there flopping all over the field killing drive after drive. Any doubt why Favre won all those games. In 2004 (Brett had 14 sacks all season....in 2 games vs. the Vikes in 2009, Arod eclipsed that and lost both games).....Just sayin.

If Rodgers is killing drive after drive, why do the Packers have a top 10 offense, averaging 370+ yards of offense per game? Why was he voted player of the month for October? Why is he 11th in completion percentage and top 10 in pretty much every other catagory? Why are the Packers the 8th best scoring offense in the NFL?

And why, if Aaron Rodgers looks so much like David Carr, why couldn't Carr do any of these things for the Texans?

Lack of talent surrounding him.

I'm not saying Rodgers is Carr, he's much betetr, but lets get real here, he's not an elite QB. Yards not mean shit. Wins means shit. At the end of the day I don't give a flying fudge how spectacular my QB is between the 20s. I want a guy who is unafraid to penentrate.

And we are 4-3, only having been beat by 2 teams this year. We are 2nd place in the division, one game out of a wild card spot. We're winning. We just got beat twice by a superior football team in Minnesota. We aren't the best football team in the division, but that's not Rodgers' fault. In fact, I'd say it's to Rodgers' credit that we've scored as many points as we have. Maybe if there was a better team surrounding Rodgers - specifically in front of Rodgers and behind Rodgers as they line up in formation - maybe we'd be winning more games. But it's not like we're losing to teams we should be beating.

Since wins and losses are the only stat to judge a quarterback's eliteness on, how many games do the Packers have to win in one season for Rodgers to be considered an elite quarterback? 10? 13? 16? Please put a number on it so I can understand what it takes to be elite.

With Peyton Manning this team is undefeated imo. With Favre this team is undefeated imo. With Rodgers we're barely above .500.

Can you argue with this reasonably? You think TJack would burn us like Favre? I do not. You think with Favre we lose to the Bengals? I do not.

[SnakeLH2006]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

He's no Kerry Collins.

[Gunakor]

Re: Rodgers has highest rating in the league

Stats don't mean shit.....look at Carson Palmer. I saw all I needed to see with a 40 year old last week getting the ball off without taking sacks to keep drives alive. They need to redo that QB rating as Arod looks like David Carr back there flopping all over the field killing drive after drive. Any doubt why Favre won all those games. In 2004 (Brett had 14 sacks all season....in 2 games vs. the Vikes in 2009, Arod eclipsed that and lost both games).....Just sayin.

If Rodgers is killing drive after drive, why do the Packers have a top 10 offense, averaging 370+ yards of offense per game? Why was he voted player of the month for October? Why is he 11th in completion percentage and top 10 in pretty much every other catagory? Why are the Packers the 8th best scoring offense in the NFL?

And why, if Aaron Rodgers looks so much like David Carr, why couldn't Carr do any of these things for the Texans?

Lack of talent surrounding him.

I'm not saying Rodgers is Carr, he's much betetr, but lets get real here, he's not an elite QB. Yards not mean shit. Wins means shit. At the end of the day I don't give a flying fudge how spectacular my QB is between the 20s. I want a guy who is unafraid to penentrate.

And we are 4-3, only having been beat by 2 teams this year. We are 2nd place in the division, one game out of a wild card spot. We're winning. We just got beat twice by a superior football team in Minnesota. We aren't the best football team in the division, but that's not Rodgers' fault. In fact, I'd say it's to Rodgers' credit that we've scored as many points as we have. Maybe if there was a better team surrounding Rodgers - specifically in front of Rodgers and behind Rodgers as they line up in formation - maybe we'd be winning more games. But it's not like we're losing to teams we should be beating.

Since wins and losses are the only stat to judge a quarterback's eliteness on, how many games do the Packers have to win in one season for Rodgers to be considered an elite quarterback? 10? 13? 16? Please put a number on it so I can understand what it takes to be elite.

With Peyton Manning this team is undefeated imo. With Favre this team is undefeated imo. With Rodgers we're barely above .500.

Can you argue with this reasonably? You think TJack would burn us like Favre? I do not. You think with Favre we lose to the Bengals? I do not.

Here's what I think. I think if Rodgers were the QB for the Vikings they'd have beaten us twice, same as what happened with Favre being the QB for the Vikings. And the Vikings would be no worse off than they are now at 6-1. I think Rodgers is every bit as capable of winning on teams like the Colts and the Vikings as Favre and Manning are. I'm not sure how much more capable either would be on our team, but undefeated is more than a stretch. This isn't a 7-0 team no matter who the quarterback is.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question. How many games must our TEAM win in order for Rodgers to be considered elite? What's that magic number?

[gex]

Packers season isn't gone, but only two wins against teams that had winning records going into the game in the last 2 seasons isn't going to cut it. I am not sure on the texans situation: Maybe they have actually beaten teams that are worth a damn?

What I do know is... we haven't. Until we do, it's going to be hard to get a WC. I still want us to get it, but... We have to beat teams like the giants... dallas... don't we still have Pitt and the ravens too? The second half of this schedule is brutal, and chaulk full of playoff contenders. We have to beat not just one, but "many" teams that have winning records to get in.

Is this true? How many teams with winning records has this TT squad really beaten in the last 2 years?

[Smidgeon]

Aaron is okay but he's not great. He has the physical tools but he isn't special or rare.

He's about the 10th best quarterback in the NFL according to my assessment.

Yards not mean shit. Wins means shit.

How do you know these things? Is it because of the wins/losses record? Your ability as a scout to sift through hours upon hours of film and games to accurately judge a QB in the midst of an entire team?

I'm assuming the scout thing because it certainly can't be by record. The following is a list of some of the greatest QBs ever, as well as some are still playing that would likely be on your list (plus Aaron Rodgers at the end for comparison). This list has their first year of starting more than one game and their record during that year:

Johnny Unitas (1956) - 3-4
Sonny Jurgensen (1957) - 2-3
Bart Starr (1957) - 3-8
Fran Tarkenton (1961) - 2-8
Len Dawson (1962) - 11-3
Roman Gabriel (1962) - 0-3-1
Joe Namath (1965) - 3-5-1
Bob Griese (1967) - 3-7
Roger Staubach (1970) - 2-1
Terry Bradshaw (1970) - 3-5
Ken Anderson (1971) - 0-4
Dan Fouts (1973) - 0-5-1
Joe Montana (1980) - 2-5
Dan Marino (1983) - 7-2
John Elway (1983) - 4-6
Warren Moon (1984) - 3-13
Steve Young (1986) - 1-4
Jim Kelly (1986) - 4-12
Troy Aikman (1989) - 0-11
Brett Favre (1992) - 8-5
Peyton Manning (1998) - 3-13
Tom Brady (2001) - 11-3
Drew Brees (2002) - 8-8
Aaron Rodgers (2008) - 6-10

A couple of notes:
* Only 5 of the 24 QBs posted a record above .500 in their first year (Dawson, Staubach, Marino, Favre, Brady).
* Only 12 of the 24 QBs posted a record above .500 in their second year (not shown).
* Only 4 of the 24 QBs posted a record above .500 in their first two years (Dawson was the odd one out).
* 11 of the 24 QBs didn't have a record above .500 in either of their first two years.

So I'm desperately hoping that when you say "he isn't special or rare" that you're referring to your ability as a scout to dissect a players ability and accurately place that ability within the modern realm of the sport in terms of capably leading a team in the future. Because it couldn't be his stats (which are historically high for a first year/second year starter), and it certainly couldn't be his winning record. Because if it were his winning record, by your estimation, it sounds like you'd also be ready to move on from players like Bart Starr, Fran Tarkenton, Joe Namath, Bob Griese, Terry Bradshaw, Dan Fouts, Warren Moon, Steve Young, Jim Kelly, and Troy Aikman, 10 of the 11 QBs who didn't have a winning record in either of their first two years (I'm leaving out Brees because his career isn't complete).

Among those 10, you have:
* 10 HOFers
* 16 NFL championships (including 3 pre-Super Bowl by Starr)
* 6 Super Bowl MVPs
* 26 Pro Bowl appearances
* 6 AFL All Star appearances (by Namath and Griese)
* the only player to be in both the NFL HOF and the Canadian HOF (Moon)
* the only QB to guide his team to 4 consecutive Super Bowls (Kelly)

**EDIT: Oh yeah, forgot to mention: all the above QBs played in the era where it was still okay to mug the WR on every play.**

I'm not saying at all that Aaron Rodgers is at their level. Not one bit. All I'm saying is that you can't judge a QB based on his first couple years starting. You have to judge him based on his career.

P.S. Your boy, Peyton Manning? 3-13 his first year as a starting. You would have run him out of town so fast he wouldn't have had a chance to pack his bags.