Aaron Rodgers now..

[retailguy]

will it ever end? Please?

Look, the issue isn't Favre/Rodgers. It never was, and never will be.

Right now, the issue is the OL. It is playing better and so is the team. Favre plays for the VIKINGS. Let it go. Just let it go.

[RashanGary]

I think it's a combination of McCarthy and Rodgers and honestly, it might be more McCarthy than Rodgers.

I'm fast becoming a big detractor of McCarthy for several reasons. Time and time again this offseason he talked about how much better our team was than our record. He made a comment a couple weeks ago about not being able to watch as much film because he's the HC. Well, if you're calling the plays and setting the game plan, you damn well better be watching the film or how can you make that instinctual playcall that kills your opponent if you don't even know what they try to do?

McCarthy came here a single man who couldn't sniff a crotch and in now he's become Mr. social in the community and has himself a hot wife. Look, good for him, but the arrogance with "being better than the record" and the complacency of "not watching as much film" and then him going big time and dating a hot chick (eventually married, whatever). Not too many head coaches are out wooing Mrs. right. NOt too many head choaches have that time. Most of them are married already with wives that understand the commitment their husband have to make to football. McCarthy just doesn't strike me as Mr. Commitment to this football team. That's a hunch, certainly it can have holes in it. Certainly nobody has to agree but that's the impression I get from this guy. I think he lost his ground, lost his humility. After losing to Tampa and all of the talk about him being fired, I think there was a reality check for him and I see a guy who lost his arrogant edge in the interviews. I don't think he has the type of sterling character that it will last though. He strikes me as an arrogant big head.

Anyway, Rodgers has done great the last three games. He's gotten rid of the ball. He's taken more dump offs, more quick throws. . . He's also found a way to make some of the big plays too, but the short stuff is what we were missing IMO. The simple things done really well consistently often times are better than the big things IMO. Whether it be McCarthy trying to do something different or Rodgers just not making the right decisions, something was wrong. I hope it stays fixed.

[pbmax]

No Head Coach can watch as much film as a coordinator because he needs to evaluate the entire team not just one side of the ball and has obligations that extend beyond the film room. That's where Philbin comes in and this is not uncommon, every play calling head coach has faced this difficulty.

Speculation about the coach's social status is simply fitting a circumstance to an event after the fact. If the team had one or two more wins, everyone would be saying that marriage was agreeing with him. We can barely understand the play calling changes he made before the Dallas game and yet we think we can separate out how the personal life of one person is affecting the team? Come off it.

[SnakeLH2006]

Just dropping in to give Partial some public credit that I think he's owed from me. This seems like as good of thread as any to do it.

He's argued something has been wrong with the QB position since Favre left and I agree. Rodgers has really cost us up until these last couple weeks and I was unable to see it because of the stats.

In some ways, I think Favre masked coaching flaws in McCarthy. From what I understand of McCarthy's offense, there are different progressions for each passing play depending on defense and then checks if the play is just bad all together. The problem with that is defenses are paid too. They can easily show one thing and then do another. If a QB goes to the line, thinks he's getting cover 3 and sets his progression, he's going to be in a world of hurt when he finds out the corners are sitting short and now he has to start flipping through his progressions.

It seems like Rodgers is running into a lot of problems with masked coverage (much more earlier in the season). Several times I heard McCarthy talk about defenses masking coverages, causing Rodgers to go through his reads a little more and then they blamed the OL.

Favre wasn't so robotic in the offense. Sometimes, If Favre saw a corner 4 yards off, knew his receiver was running a slant and knew he could count on him to make a touch catch, Favre would just take what he saw as a sure thing instead of trying to run the perfect play. Favre seems to rely more on just making good, old fashioned plays. McCarthy seems to want the QB to get in a perfect play and go through the perfect progression, but what about when a defense does something completely different after the snap. Now the QB has to change his presnap thinking and go to plan B. The result is sacks.


McCarthy never learned because Favre never let him. If something wasn't working, I get the impression Favre just did what he wanted instead of finding out the hard way. McCarthy and Rodgers found out the hard way this year.


I'm not sure Rodgers can be a real great QB. Despite his numbers, those sacks have been completely unacceptable and IMO should knock his QB rating down at least 10 pts if not more.



Rodger is finally starting to truly play great IMO (last couple weeks) but even that hasn't happened consistently enough for me to really believe in this McCarthy/Rodgers pair.

Partial has been right up until now IMO. Stats aside, until recently I don't think Rodgers has done as good of job as we're used to, leading a team to points and long drives. Until the last few weeks (compared to Favre) he's been a big reason we weren't as good as we were with him. Favre wasn't a big play guy in the sense that he made more big, crazy throws than Rodgers. Rodgers makes more WOW plays IMO. More last year and way more this year than Favre has made in years. Favre gives a big mother fucking WOW for how he manages an offense, sustains drives and scores points. Favre's WOW isn't individual big plays like Rodgers last year and part of this year, it's scoring points.

It's hard to believe (for Snake and most) but I agree with JH agreeing with Partial...yep.

Arod has been stats great, but those win-losses add up. Favre has always been a HUGE winner (and now). ARod's stats are predicated on the big play (or take sacks). Maybe there's a reason he's 13-14 as a starter and Favre's winning % is through the roof with every team he's played for... I like Arod, but those sacks kill drives....Favre never did that (and to those that claim INT's for Brett....he still won and manages a game like a champ).

I'm a big ARod fan, but Snake would still take 40 year BF over ARod right now. We'd win games. He's that special.

Stats are misleading. Carson Palmer puts up crazy stats over his career. Has he won anything? Kobe does his shit and wins. Carmelo put up the same stats and loses. I hate both NBA players, but the assessment is fair. Similar stats aside, some guys win games, some don't.

I'm not a Partial fan lately, but you guys are really trying to chew him up with stats and it's unfair to a point. Rodgers QB rating is better, but is not a winner yet (and hope he is)....Favre's stats aren't as good over his career, but his winning records (18/19 years as a starter with a winning record) speak volumes. Nothing wrong with a winner...at all.

Some guys have it...some don't. I can't think of one game where ARod just came back and won it for us...his stats are great, but I don't get the vibe (we are down and ARod is gonna win this for us)...Favre did that. I'll take that anyday.

So really, lay off Partial or man up. I think most around here hate on BF cuz of his Vike shit, but really the dude wins games, and as great as ARod has been stats wise, we haven't won much under him. That's not all on him, but hey, you guys are naming names of who won this/stat this...

Favre is one the best athlete/winners of any pro sport team bar none. ARod hasn't done shit yet, but you wanna compare him to Brett. Icon/legend vs. up-and-coming done nothing as of yet QB. I like ARod, but that is a crock to think he's in BF's league given he's done little yet to prove that much.

Give BF some respect. Even at 40, he's the clear MVP of this league with a 9-1 team. That's fucking amazing. (Snake self-nominates this for post of the year)

[Bossman641]

Some guys have it...some don't. I can't think of one game where ARod just came back and won it for us...his stats are great, but I don't get the vibe (we are down and ARod is gonna win this for us)...Favre did that. I'll take that anyday.

See, this is where I disagree. For his last couple years, I had more confidence in the fact that Favre would throw a stupid INT to lose the game then I did in him leading them back. There was always the constant fear of him throwing a pick.

I really think the standards Rodgers is being held to are ridiculous - 1.75 years of starting vs years and years of fans' favorite Favre memories.

[RashanGary]

A whole lot of it is the teams you play for. The last 5 years, Favre has gone 4-12, 8-8, 13-3, 9-7 and now I'm guessing another 13-3.

2 of the last 5 years (including this year) he'll make the playoffs.

The big difference between the good years and the bad years isn't Favre himself, but the team around him.


All NFL QB's can play on some level. The biggest difference between QB play from team to team is 7 parts surrounding team and 3 parts the QB himself IMO. When a good QB has a great team, the win the SB. When a good QB has a shit team, they suck ass.


All that said though, the Packers offense has had a big problem with getting the ball out. 25 sacks on 1st down!! That's insane. Most teams are trying to stop the run first and the teams we play are coming at Rodgers head. That falls on McCarthy and the run game too because if teams are coming at your QB's head on 1st down, you need to be doing something differently.

The Packers are now 13th in YPG running and 12th in YPC running. The long run of the season is 37 yards. They're not breaking big runs. If they had a couple big runs they might be top 5 or 6 in running. They are very consistent though. They keep getting yards over and over and over. They've committed much more to the run. That might be the biggest reason Rodgers isn't getting killed. We're grinding teams out with the run, so they have to slow up their pass rush a little on early downs. They can't just go at Rodgers and win. Also, they stopped trying so many long developing plays and went back to the short stuff more with a lot of little screens, dump offs, quick throws to a WR in the flat and so on. Instead of forcing OL to just "block better", they took pressure off in other ways. I can't believe it took so long.

Anyway, the Packers offense is finally starting to look like a premium unit and Rodgers has been the best player on one of hte best offenses in the NFL the last 3 games. My whole point with giving partial credit was that up until now I argued that Rodgers was playing great and in hindsight, I was wrong. Rodgers has not been playing great even if the stats say he has. Rodgers is just now starting to play great and if it keeps up, I'm really excited. I had all but given up on this team and this coach but the last few weeks make me feel like maybe they get it.

[Smidgeon]

I'm not a Partial fan lately, but you guys are really trying to chew him up with stats and it's unfair to a point. Rodgers QB rating is better, but is not a winner yet (and hope he is)....Favre's stats aren't as good over his career, but his winning records (18/19 years as a starter with a winning record) speak volumes. Nothing wrong with a winner...at all.

Favre is one the best athlete/winners of any pro sport team bar none. ARod hasn't done shit yet, but you wanna compare him to Brett. Icon/legend vs. up-and-coming done nothing as of yet QB. I like ARod, but that is a crock to think he's in BF's league given he's done little yet to prove that much.

Back to ARod isn't a good QB because he can't win? And you're comparing him to a 40 year old Favre? Yes, Favre is special, but be fair in your comparison and compare him to Favre at the same point in his career: in his second year starting. He was 8-5 the year he took over for Majik. His first two years starting he was 1 game over .500 at 9-7 each. That counts as "barely winning" (still a win but hardly "just winning"). So in BF's first three years starting, he didn't finish a season with 10 wins or more until his fourth season as a starter (including the 13 games he started after taking over for Majik). It looks like AR has a good chance of getting 10 wins in his second season. Don't compare AR to BF unless you're willing to compare them at the same point in their careers. Otherwise it's just an exercise of justifying your position without honestly taking a look at what's really happening.

I have statistics about winning that I've given Partial a couple times. I can bring those up if you want me to. There are 26 QBs in the HOF. Only 22 of them have available W-L records for their entire careers. Do you know how many didn't have a winning season either of their first two years? 10. Ten HOF QBs didn't do as well as AR has if he finishes with a winning record in their first 2 years. So don't tell me that AR just doesn't have what it takes. You don't know that yet because his career hasn't played out yet. You have to have a QB who can put up stats, otherwise you have no chance. If the QB can't put up stats, the team has no chance. None. Tell me how often teams win superbowls without an incredible stat-producing QB? The Dilfer led 2000 Ravens and who else?

And no, BF doesn't have 18/19 winning seasons. Two of his seasons were 8-8 seasons. Hardly "winning". Are you also forgetting the playoff games where he threw 6 INTs? Hardly "winning".

Yes, Favre is unique. He's a special QB. He's one of the all time greats. How many other QBs are still playing this well at age 40? So few. Okay: none. He's the first. I'm not discounting that. But it's taken his entire career to get this efficient. He wasn't playing this well between the superbowl years and 2007.

[Brandon494]

Back to ARod isn't a good QB because he can't win? And you're comparing him to a 40 year old Favre? Yes, Favre is special, but be fair in your comparison and compare him to Favre at the same point in his career: in his second year starting. He was 8-5 the year he took over for Majik. His first two years starting he was 1 game over .500 at 9-7 each. That counts as "barely winning" (still a win but hardly "just winning"). So in BF's first three years starting, he didn't finish a season with 10 wins or more until his fourth season as a starter (including the 13 games he started after taking over for Majik). It looks like AR has a good chance of getting 10 wins in his second season. Don't compare AR to BF unless you're willing to compare them at the same point in their careers. Otherwise it's just an exercise of justifying your position without honestly taking a look at what's really happening.

I have statistics about winning that I've given Partial a couple times. I can bring those up if you want me to. There are 26 QBs in the HOF. Only 22 of them have available W-L records for their entire careers. Do you know how many didn't have a winning season either of their first two years? 10. Ten HOF QBs didn't do as well as AR has if he finishes with a winning record in their first 2 years. So don't tell me that AR just doesn't have what it takes. You don't know that yet because his career hasn't played out yet. You have to have a QB who can put up stats, otherwise you have no chance. If the QB can't put up stats, the team has no chance. None. Tell me how often teams win superbowls without an incredible stat-producing QB? The Dilfer led 2000 Ravens and who else?

And no, BF doesn't have 18/19 winning seasons. Two of his seasons were 8-8 seasons. Hardly "winning". Are you also forgetting the playoff games where he threw 6 INTs? Hardly "winning".

Yes, Favre is unique. He's a special QB. He's one of the all time greats. How many other QBs are still playing this well at age 40? So few. Okay: none. He's the first. I'm not discounting that. But it's taken his entire career to get this efficient. He wasn't playing this well between the superbowl years and 2007.

+1

Rodgers has the highest QB rating in the league and is only 25, a year older than M. Ryan and J. Flacco. Yet people act like he should be a 10 year vet just because he sat on the bench his first couple of seasons.

[Smidgeon]

Back to ARod isn't a good QB because he can't win? And you're comparing him to a 40 year old Favre? Yes, Favre is special, but be fair in your comparison and compare him to Favre at the same point in his career: in his second year starting. He was 8-5 the year he took over for Majik. His first two years starting he was 1 game over .500 at 9-7 each. That counts as "barely winning" (still a win but hardly "just winning"). So in BF's first three years starting, he didn't finish a season with 10 wins or more until his fourth season as a starter (including the 13 games he started after taking over for Majik). It looks like AR has a good chance of getting 10 wins in his second season. Don't compare AR to BF unless you're willing to compare them at the same point in their careers. Otherwise it's just an exercise of justifying your position without honestly taking a look at what's really happening.

I have statistics about winning that I've given Partial a couple times. I can bring those up if you want me to. There are 26 QBs in the HOF. Only 22 of them have available W-L records for their entire careers. Do you know how many didn't have a winning season either of their first two years? 10. Ten HOF QBs didn't do as well as AR has if he finishes with a winning record in their first 2 years. So don't tell me that AR just doesn't have what it takes. You don't know that yet because his career hasn't played out yet. You have to have a QB who can put up stats, otherwise you have no chance. If the QB can't put up stats, the team has no chance. None. Tell me how often teams win superbowls without an incredible stat-producing QB? The Dilfer led 2000 Ravens and who else?

And no, BF doesn't have 18/19 winning seasons. Two of his seasons were 8-8 seasons. Hardly "winning". Are you also forgetting the playoff games where he threw 6 INTs? Hardly "winning".

Yes, Favre is unique. He's a special QB. He's one of the all time greats. How many other QBs are still playing this well at age 40? So few. Okay: none. He's the first. I'm not discounting that. But it's taken his entire career to get this efficient. He wasn't playing this well between the superbowl years and 2007.

+1

Rodgers has the highest QB rating in the league and is only 25, a year older than M. Ryan and J. Flacco. Yet people act like he should be a 10 year vet just because he sat on the bench his first couple of seasons.

I think people also forget that as he gets more experience, he's going to get better. He hasn't peaked yet.

[Chevelle2]

Why the hell has this become a Favre thread? My God...

[get louder at lambeau]

Re: Aaron Rodgers now..

Rodger's game is to make a few plays when their, but avoid making mistakes at all costs. Different strokes for different folks, but I prefer the gunslinger.

WRONG! Rodgers is a playmaker. 51 TDs in 27 career starts. Add 454 yards rushing and 7 rushing TDs to the total. Nothing against Favre, but you brought up the comparison. How about 7.6 yards/attempt in his career so far vs. 7.0 yards/attempt for Brett in his career. Second QB to have over 4000 yards in his first year as a starter (Kurt Warner was the first). He's on pace for 4561 yards, 32 TDs, and 7 interceptions--with 359 rushing yards and 4-5 rushing TDs. Playmaker.

By the way, for some reason no one is talking about this fact, but Rodgers is on pace for a grand total of 4920 yards this year (4561 passing and 359 rushing), which would be the 2nd highest yardage total in NFL history, eclipsed ONLY by Marino in his magical 1984 season. Better than Favre, Manning, Brady, Elway, Montana, Young, etc. EVER had in any season.

Why haven't those fucktards at The Press Gazette and Journal-Sentinal mentioned this? Is that not even worth noting?

[Bretsky]

Re: Aaron Rodgers now..

Rodger's game is to make a few plays when their, but avoid making mistakes at all costs. Different strokes for different folks, but I prefer the gunslinger.

WRONG! Rodgers is a playmaker. 51 TDs in 27 career starts. Add 454 yards rushing and 7 rushing TDs to the total. Nothing against Favre, but you brought up the comparison. How about 7.6 yards/attempt in his career so far vs. 7.0 yards/attempt for Brett in his career. Second QB to have over 4000 yards in his first year as a starter (Kurt Warner was the first). He's on pace for 4561 yards, 32 TDs, and 7 interceptions--with 359 rushing yards and 4-5 rushing TDs. Playmaker.

By the way, for some reason no one is talking about this fact, but Rodgers is on pace for a grand total of 4920 yards this year (4561 passing and 359 rushing), which would be the 2nd highest yardage total in NFL history, eclipsed ONLY by Marino in his magical 1984 season. Better than Favre, Manning, Brady, Elway, Montana, Young, etc. EVER had in any season.

Why haven't those fucktards at The Press Gazette and Journal-Sentinal mentioned this? Is that not even worth noting?

He's having a great year, and it's likely in his second year of starting he's taking us to the playoffs if he keeps it up

[Partial]

Re: Aaron Rodgers now..

Rodger's game is to make a few plays when their, but avoid making mistakes at all costs. Different strokes for different folks, but I prefer the gunslinger.

WRONG! Rodgers is a playmaker. 51 TDs in 27 career starts. Add 454 yards rushing and 7 rushing TDs to the total. Nothing against Favre, but you brought up the comparison. How about 7.6 yards/attempt in his career so far vs. 7.0 yards/attempt for Brett in his career. Second QB to have over 4000 yards in his first year as a starter (Kurt Warner was the first). He's on pace for 4561 yards, 32 TDs, and 7 interceptions--with 359 rushing yards and 4-5 rushing TDs. Playmaker.

By the way, for some reason no one is talking about this fact, but Rodgers is on pace for a grand total of 4920 yards this year (4561 passing and 359 rushing), which would be the 2nd highest yardage total in NFL history, eclipsed ONLY by Marino in his magical 1984 season. Better than Favre, Manning, Brady, Elway, Montana, Young, etc. EVER had in any season.

Why haven't those fucktards at The Press Gazette and Journal-Sentinal mentioned this? Is that not even worth noting?

That is pretty unreal. That would be pretty cool to see a Packer hold that record.

[Waldo]

Re: Aaron Rodgers now..

Rodger's game is to make a few plays when their, but avoid making mistakes at all costs. Different strokes for different folks, but I prefer the gunslinger.

WRONG! Rodgers is a playmaker. 51 TDs in 27 career starts. Add 454 yards rushing and 7 rushing TDs to the total. Nothing against Favre, but you brought up the comparison. How about 7.6 yards/attempt in his career so far vs. 7.0 yards/attempt for Brett in his career. Second QB to have over 4000 yards in his first year as a starter (Kurt Warner was the first). He's on pace for 4561 yards, 32 TDs, and 7 interceptions--with 359 rushing yards and 4-5 rushing TDs. Playmaker.

By the way, for some reason no one is talking about this fact, but Rodgers is on pace for a grand total of 4920 yards this year (4561 passing and 359 rushing), which would be the 2nd highest yardage total in NFL history, eclipsed ONLY by Marino in his magical 1984 season. Better than Favre, Manning, Brady, Elway, Montana, Young, etc. EVER had in any season.

Why haven't those fucktards at The Press Gazette and Journal-Sentinal mentioned this? Is that not even worth noting?

Where is Bree's 2008? Didn't he miss Marino's record by like 15 yards?

[Administrator]

yes. he threw for 5069 yards. Marino threw for 5084 in 1984... 15 yards it is.. good memory.