Rodgers has highest rating in the league

[Tyrone Bigguns]

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.

Great post. Ty was worried a bit after the Chambers debacle. But, you clearly spent some time and COMPLETELY redeemed yourself.

Now, unfortunately, none of this matters, as Partial will just find another reason to dismiss FACTS

Edit: Well, i say your post and responded. Boom, next page..there is partial in all his glorious ridiculousness. The different era theory. The racial theory. Difficult to compare theory.

It was just so predictable.

[Scott Campbell]

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.

Ridiculously outstanding post.

[bobblehead]

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.

Go Look at ARods red zone numbers for last season and compare them to ANY season BF ever had....hell, compare them to any QB ever. At one point he had something like 19TD's and 3FG's in 24 red zone possessions. I saw that on the tube last year and almost spit up my beer. If anyone is good at digging it up, I would like to see his finals for last season.

[Scott Campbell]

Edit: Well, i say your post and responded. Boom, next page..there is partial in all his glorious ridiculousness. The different era theory. The racial theory. Difficult to compare theory.

It was just so predictable.

My personal favorite is the "harmonic synergy" theory.

[bobblehead]

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?

Can we look at '07 as well, and the vikings this season....I mean, we wouldn't want to be intellectually dishonest would we??

[g4orce]

this may change...

[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.

Go Look at ARods red zone numbers for last season and compare them to ANY season BF ever had....hell, compare them to any QB ever. At one point he had something like 19TD's and 3FG's in 24 red zone possessions. I saw that on the tube last year and almost spit up my beer. If anyone is good at digging it up, I would like to see his finals for last season.

That is fair. I don't know any numbers but the Detroit game comes to mind this year where we had three red zone trips that should have been TDs instead of FGs. Kind of been like that all year to me.

[MOBB DEEP]

this may change...

Last INT was favre-esque

[Partial]

1. Bucs QB Josh Freeman: Didn't have great stats (14 of 31, 205 yards, 3 TDs and 1 INT, 86.1 passer rating), but he played with poise and toughness and almost willed the Bucs to victory with his inspired play down the stretch.

I agree, and this is the attitude that I feel like Rodgers doesn't have in spades

[rbaloha1]

Stats dude -- big deal, 10-14 as a starter with few big wins.

Also do not like AR's response to holding the ball too long -- "well I only have 2 interceptions." Holds the ball too long today and throws 3 interceptions today. Loser!

[mraynrand]

Stats dude -- big deal, 10-14 as a starter with few big wins.

Also do not like AR's response to holding the ball too long -- "well I only ave 2 interceptions. Holds the ball too long today and throws 3 interceptions today. Loser!

Geez, I just don geddit. We hadd all dose deep patterns dialed up. We shoudda had four more tds offa dem. Cept the drive that was all runs

[Partial]

To those saying Rodgers is running for his life....

From the horses mouth...

I thought (Rodgers) had plenty of time to throw,” McCarthy said. “I’m real curious to see the film because either they’re doing a hell of a job covering us, I mean there was time and again that our receivers were on crossing routes versus that coverage, I mean it’ll be curious to see what the film looks like.”

[g4orce]

To those saying Rodgers is running for his life....

From the horses mouth...

I thought (Rodgers) had plenty of time to throw,” McCarthy said. “I’m real curious to see the film because either they’re doing a hell of a job covering us, I mean there was time and again that our receivers were on crossing routes versus that coverage, I mean it’ll be curious to see what the film looks like.”

The protection hasnt been great, but its been good enough. Its pocket awareness thats killing him. He has no "feel" for the game. Its like he takes 5-6 seconds to process a play... well you don't have 5-6 seconds every play. Get the snap, read the D, throw the fucking thing!

[mraynrand]

To those saying Rodgers is running for his life....

From the horses mouth...

I thought (Rodgers) had plenty of time to throw,” McCarthy said. “I’m real curious to see the film because either they’re doing a hell of a job covering us, I mean there was time and again that our receivers were on crossing routes versus that coverage, I mean it’ll be curious to see what the film looks like.”

The protection hasnt been great, but its been good enough. Its pocket awareness thats killing him. He has no "feel" for the game. Its like he takes 5-6 seconds to process a play... well you don't have 5-6 seconds every play. Get the snap, read the D, throw the fucking thing!

You can see this on the empty backfield plays. He turned that one into a nice TD, but either he hesitated way too long or the receivers were totally covered. I couldn't tell for sure. Either way it's bad, even though on that particular play, he used his feet to turn it into something good. On those plays the ball has to come out right away. Maybe he just isn't seeing the whole field yet, and not fast enough. Painful

[packerbacker1234]

If I had a nickle for every time this year I shouted at the TV "Rodgers, GET RID OF THE BALL" - bam sacked.

I swear, I could buy an entire value meal and McDonalds.