Aaron gets a big win

[Bossman641]

Obviously tahts an exagerration, but Cutler chucks it up when he feels pressure. Rodgers takes the sack. I'm not confident either team has a different record if you swap the QBs. Maybe the Packers do. I do think the Bears beat the Packers in week 1 and the Bears lose to the Steelers.

I'd guess with Rodgers the Bears win in week 1, beat SF in week 10, and Philly in week 11. I'll even give you Pitt, so a 2 game difference.

With Cutler I'm guessing Packers are a game worse than currently.

BTW, how did your turkey challenge end up

[channtheman]

I didn't say he didn't have any talent. Why are you twisting words and being incredibly dense and argumentative.
He has absolute garbage talent around him in Chitown. Put ARod on that team and he has less picks but WAY more sacks. Probably 3x the sacks as he does in GB. If he has proven anything its that he'd rather take a sack than possibly wing up an INT.

He is a solid player right now on the verge of becoming a good player. Part of being a good player is to consistently win games he should. We should have beaten Tampa and a whole lot of games last year that we didn't. He's not there yet but is he is getting there.

To be a great player, you need to beat teams that you should not beat once in a while, and carry the team on your back. Comeback wins, big time plays, playoff games, etc. It takes a long time to reach this status.

In my book, you need to climb the latter. Some of you seem to put a player at the top rung and wait for them to drop down. Rodgers started out as unproven, has progressed to average, and is now at solid. Will he ever get to good or great? Maybe. Hopefully. Not only does one have to be able to do it consistently or a significant period of time (Rodgers hasn't started a significant period of time), but they have to have success in the big games. I have a very hard time rating Rodgers higher than a player who has been in the playoffs and won big games. Why? Because we have no idea how he will handle the pressure. He hasn't won a truly huge game yet, so we don't even know if he can. Beating the Steelers will be a pretty damn big game I would think.

Way to go "Positive Posterboy"

Chicago went 9-7 last year. They have no talent? Way to try and fit the real "facts" to your conclusion. 3X the sacks. Stop being ridiculous, wait maybe you were serious who knows with your posts!

Cutler's W-L is worse than Rodgers. Yet you hold him in high esteem. What has he done (other than lose 3 games last year down the stretch to not clinch a playoff spot) to warrent this "love?"

Real QBs win those games and bring their team to the playoffs!

Well he said Cutler wins games he shouldn't (for example Pitt this year). He never said that Cutler won games he should!

[sharpe1027]

Well he said Cutler wins games he shouldn't (for example Pitt this year). He never said that Cutler won games he should!

Rex Grossman II.

[Packers4Ever]

A game where he made enough plays in the right times and won. Very nice to see. A little sloppy at times, but it was nice to see him do the things we needed on 3rd downs and in the red zone late in the game. I'll take this Arod over the girly one that usually shows up in big games any day.

"The girly one" ?? Explain, please. I'll take this guy
any day of the week, he's getting the job done and
he looks good doing it !! What more do we need?

[bobblehead]

As you can see, statistically it's very close, despite Rodgers surrounding talent coming a Bush recovered fumble away from the super bowl. Cutler's was coming off a 7-9 year. Seems to me that Rodgers had better talent around him.

And Cutler had no talent around him in Denver? Marshall, Royal and down to their 7th string RB but still managed to rush for 1,800+ yards as a team ranking 12th in rushing. They had 3 offensive Pro Bowlers to our 0.

Than he goes to Chicago and all of the people who said Cutler would struggle because he doesn't have the weapons they do in Denver were told that your crazy and Cutler would elevate the whole Chicago offensive attack.

I guess we see that 1 QB doesn't make that great of a difference. Because if Cutler could he should have taken a 9-7 Chicago team last year with no "Awesome" QB to at least 11-5 because he has "it" and should be able to win the games that Sexy Rexy couldn't.

I didn't say he didn't have any talent. Why are you twisting words and being incredibly dense and argumentative.

He has absolute garbage talent around him in Chitown. Put ARod on that team and he has less picks but WAY more sacks. Probably 3x the sacks as he does in GB. If he has proven anything its that he'd rather take a sack than possibly wing up an INT.

He is a solid player right now on the verge of becoming a good player. Part of being a good player is to consistently win games he should. We should have beaten Tampa and a whole lot of games last year that we didn't. He's not there yet but is he is getting there.

To be a great player, you need to beat teams that you should not beat once in a while, and carry the team on your back. Comeback wins, big time plays, playoff games, etc. It takes a long time to reach this status.

In my book, you need to climb the latter. Some of you seem to put a player at the top rung and wait for them to drop down. Rodgers started out as unproven, has progressed to average, and is now at solid. Will he ever get to good or great? Maybe. Hopefully. Not only does one have to be able to do it consistently or a significant period of time (Rodgers hasn't started a significant period of time), but they have to have success in the big games. I have a very hard time rating Rodgers higher than a player who has been in the playoffs and won big games. Why? Because we have no idea how he will handle the pressure. He hasn't won a truly huge game yet, so we don't even know if he can. Beating the Steelers will be a pretty damn big game I would think.

Not that I disagree with most of what you write, but most of us who are favre "haters" point to his propensity to throw mountains of interceptions in the biggest games. Because he was surrounded with epic talent they won a superbowl and made it to another, but if you are downranking Aaron for not winning big games you really gotta discount brett for laying many many big game eggs.

[mraynrand]

I've always been bothered by this idea that a player has to win a title in order to be considered truly great.

Was Ernie Banks not great because the Cubs organization wasn't good enough to get the talent it needed?

Was Barry Sanders not great because the Lions couldn't get enough talent to get over the top?

Archie Manning was a fine quarterback, as was Bert Jones. Dan Marino didn't "win" after his first year - did he get bad at his position?

Fritz, you and I can be friends