Aaron Rodgers, the most complete Packer QB ever?

[Fritz]

Let's not forget that Favre had some great TEs in Chmura and Jackson. He also had a couple of excellent receiving RBs in Bennett and Levens. Favre had really good talent around him in the 2000s. Driver, Walker, and Jennings were all studs. Ahman Green was one of the best RBs in football. For a couple of years the Packers also had the best or one of the best OLs in the NFL.

Thank you, Harv. I hope this forestalls any arguments about poor Brent not having a good enough supporting cast. And I would argue that before Brooks got hurt, he was a superb wide receiver - it's one of the great shames of Packer history that the poor guy got hurt during the SB year. He had fine hands, good moves, ran disciplined routes, and apparently was a quiet, humble guy on top of it. Perhaps defensively the Packers did not have the team one would've liked - I will grant that. But they did have some good defenses out there for several years, anyway. And, as someone else pointed out, Favre probably had as strong a supporting cast as any QB in the NFL with Minnesota two years ago.

On the other hand, I don't want to pretend Favre wasn't a superb QB. He was. But oh my god, he was maddening. I always used to think, back in the mid-90's, that Brent would get better and better as he matured and started to make better decisions. But he never did.

[swede]

I always used to think, back in the mid-90's, that Brent would get better and better as he matured and started to make better decisions. But he never did.

To which Deanna says, welcome to my world.

[King Friday]

Your overall point that Favre did not have great WR's is correct. Ron Wolf has said he wishes he had gotten Favre better receivers. However, Jordy Nelson was not a better receiver than Robert Brooks, and probably not better than Freeman, although time will tell on that one.

Yeah...I could perhaps give you Robert Brooks as being better than Nelson. It's at least debatable. If Nelson just catches a couple of those tosses he dropped, he could've had 11-12 catches for 200+ yards in the Super Bowl...with a busted bursa sac in the 4th quarter. Those are epic numbers. Nelson's postseason production was every bit as much of a breakout as Rodgers' IMO. The main issue with Brooks was that the guy couldn't stay healthy, which always factors in for me. He had one monster season (when he stayed healthy) but didn't have more than 60 catches any other year. If a guy can't stay on the field, I have to consider that in a comparison even if he was more talented than someone else who was more reliable.

Freeman? Nah. Freeman never impressed me. The guy made a living off the fact that Favre could throw a laser beam between 3 defenders..which was often necessary because Freeman had trouble getting separation. He put up big numbers because there wasn't much else for Favre to throw to in the late 90s. Despite playing with Favre in his prime...a lot of it as the #1 WR...he only managed to exceed 75 catches twice and 1000 yards thrice. Respectable numbers...but as the #1 option in Favre's MVP years I would expect a truly great WR to do better. Driver has been able to do that consistently even as a #2 option behind Walker and Jennings.

[King Friday]

I always used to think, back in the mid-90's, that Brent would get better and better as he matured and started to make better decisions. But he never did.

So true. I wonder how much had to do with Holmgren leaving. Favre's mental development seemed to nosedive once Holmgren departed.

The great thing is that I actually feel confident that Rodgers will only continue to improve...especially with McCarthy as coach. McCarthy is an excellent QB coach...the development of Flynn really confirms that for me.

[RashanGary]

I disagree with you on just about everything, friday. I'm with Harvey here. Favre had some damn good weapons too. That's one of the things a bunch of us were happy about when he left; the rest of the team would finally get credit. For so many years there were crowds of people just like you who said Favre made other players careers. It's just not the case. Sharpe, Brooks, Freeman, Rison, Chumura, Driver, Walker, Jennings, Rice, Ahman Green, Levens, Adrian Peterson, good-great OL's for his entire career except 2005-2007. . . . All of these guys were damn good football players. Let's not try to hype Favre up and credit him for other players careers. You're not going to find many here who buy that.

I would say it the opposite way. The one year Favre won the SB, it had dominant STs, dominant defense and a rock solid running game. McCarren said that 96 team was much stronger than this 2010 team. Anyone with a football sense would agree. That team was complete. Rodgers did what Favre could never do and that's carry an offense on his back to win a SB, and without good ST's. What Rodgers accomplished this year, that was bigger than anything Brett Favre did in his entire career. I think AR is the better player even if he doesn't accumulate the regular season stats over as long of a career.

[channtheman]

I disagree with you on just about everything, friday. I'm with Harvey here. Favre had some damn good weapons too. That's one of the things a bunch of us were happy about when he left; the rest of the team would finally get credit. For so many years there were crowds of people just like you who said Favre made other players careers. It's just not the case. Sharpe, Brooks, Freeman, Rison, Chumura, Driver, Walker, Jennings, Rice, Ahman Green, Levens, Adrian Peterson, good-great OL's for his entire career except 2005-2007. . . . All of these guys were damn good football players. Let's not try to hype Favre up and credit him for other players careers. You're not going to find many here who buy that.

I would say it the opposite way. The one year Favre won the SB, it had dominant STs, dominant defense and a rock solid running game. McCarren said that 96 team was much stronger than this 2010 team. Anyone with a football sense would agree. That team was complete. Rodgers did what Favre could never do and that's carry an offense on his back to win a SB, and without good ST's. What Rodgers accomplished this year, that was bigger than anything Brett Favre did in his entire career. I think AR is the better player even if he doesn't accumulate the regular season stats over as long of a career.

Favre didn't even play particularly well the entire post season the Packers won the Super Bowl. My dad and I rewatched his old taped playoff games a few weeks ago and Favre was downright awful in some of the games.

[Bretsky]

There's no way Jordy is better than Sterling Sharpe, Robert Brooks, and Antonio Freeman. He actually is probably comparable in a lot of ways to Schroeder.

You must think of lot more of Schroeder than I do. I thought he was closer to Swain than a starting caliber WR. Marginal #3 at best IMO Agree Jordy is not better than the other three.

[woodbuck27]

The complete package in terms of intelligence, arm strength and accuracy.

YES !

GO Aaron Rogders !

GO PACKERS in 2011

[woodbuck27]

I disagree with you on just about everything, friday. I'm with Harvey here. Favre had some damn good weapons too. That's one of the things a bunch of us were happy about when he left; the rest of the team would finally get credit. For so many years there were crowds of people just like you who said Favre made other players careers. It's just not the case. Sharpe, Brooks, Freeman, Rison, Chumura, Driver, Walker, Jennings, Rice, Ahman Green, Levens, Adrian Peterson, good-great OL's for his entire career except 2005-2007. . . . All of these guys were damn good football players. Let's not try to hype Favre up and credit him for other players careers. You're not going to find many here who buy that.

I would say it the opposite way. The one year Favre won the SB, it had dominant STs, dominant defense and a rock solid running game. McCarren said that 96 team was much stronger than this 2010 team. Anyone with a football sense would agree. That team was complete. Rodgers did what Favre could never do and that's carry an offense on his back to win a SB, and without good ST's. What Rodgers accomplished this year, that was bigger than anything Brett Favre did in his entire career. I think AR is the better player even if he doesn't accumulate the regular season stats over as long of a career.

Solid post JH and accurate analysis.

Good points ...TRUTH.

GO PACKERS !

[Patler]

The "gunslinger" mentality is exciting, fun to watch and will occasionally result in a stunning, unbelievable win. It also results in heartbreaking losses. In the long run of a playoff march when teams are evenly matched, games are close and wins must be strung together, the stunning wins and heartbreaks tend to cancel themselves, and of course the heartbreaks lead to a playoff exit.

The cool, steady play of a tactician at QB is often less exciting, and seldom heart-breaking. The performance is usually not appreciated on a play-by-play basis, but collectively at the end of the game by the accumulation of plays.

It is easier to string together playoff wins with a tactician because of his steadiness and reliability. It is more difficult to string together playoff wins with a gunslinger because of his crippling mistakes and uneven play. You can scheme your offense for the play of a tactician because you know what he will do, you can not for the gunslinger because you are never sure what he will do in a given situation.

In the end, an ultimate gunslinger might win you a championship, but a tactical perfectionist can bring repeated championships. The Packers have seen the results of both with Starr as a tactical genius at QB and Favre as the ultimate gunslinger. It's too early to tell, but Rodgers looks like a unique combination of the two who can distinguish between the less risky plays and more risky plays recognized by the gunslinger, and complete the first while avoiding the second.

[Pugger]

Golly I hate that unctuous, oily, self-impressed loathsome jerk. I rarely can listen for more than a few minutes before I have to tune out, but I did hear him list all of the best young QB's--including AR--and then say that Ben Roethlisburger was the guy you would want to build a young winning team around.

Do you suppose he will rethink, recant, or backpedal?

If I had Skinbasket's way with words I would say very bad mean things about Colin Cowherd.

I'd also put Skip Clueless in with Cowherd. :-p

[gbgary]

you can't do it without weapons and bf was loaded (no pun intended) during his mvp years.

[mission]

Yeah...I could perhaps give you Robert Brooks as being better than Nelson. It's at least debatable. If Nelson just catches a couple of those tosses he dropped, he could've had 11-12 catches for 200+ yards in the Super Bowl...with a busted bursa sac in the 4th quarter. Those are epic numbers. Nelson's postseason production was every bit as much of a breakout as Rodgers' IMO. The main issue with Brooks was that the guy couldn't stay healthy, which always factors in for me. He had one monster season (when he stayed healthy) but didn't have more than 60 catches any other year. If a guy can't stay on the field, I have to consider that in a comparison even if he was more talented than someone else who was more reliable.

Freeman? Nah. Freeman never impressed me. The guy made a living off the fact that Favre could throw a laser beam between 3 defenders..which was often necessary because Freeman had trouble getting separation. He put up big numbers because there wasn't much else for Favre to throw to in the late 90s. Despite playing with Favre in his prime...a lot of it as the #1 WR...he only managed to exceed 75 catches twice and 1000 yards thrice. Respectable numbers...but as the #1 option in Favre's MVP years I would expect a truly great WR to do better. Driver has been able to do that consistently even as a #2 option behind Walker and Jennings.

I don't think Robert Brooks ever went against a team's #3 or #4 corner.

The numbers could have been "epic" but everything's skewed. We are a matchup-based offense, not as much of a traditional, lineup and beat the guy in front of you offense. Jordy didn't have those numbers because he was the absolute best WR on the field. He had those numbers because the difference in skill between him and the player he matched up against was the highest out of all matchups on the field - and MM was willing to exploit that.

That does speak a lot to Jordy's talent but it also says just as much about the CBs he was up against (and none of that was a secret leading up to XLV).

And saying Brooks was basically Jennings? Are you then saying that Jordy is better than Jennings?

Jennings made every play he needed to. Big time clutch at big time moments. Jordy's SB was a product of opportunity.

[pbmax]

I understand the criticism of Brooks career as short compared to Driver or Jennings and that Freeman was truly great for 2 or 3 seasons (I cannot see how you could fail to be impressed with his stretch starting from the 96 Super Bowl year through 1999).

But in your original argument, you asked about Favre's MVP years, so the short careers of his targets doesn't really come into play, do they?

In 1995, Brooks had an All-Pro year and the Packer offense was as lethal as it would get during the Holmgren era. Bennett and Levens combine for 100 catches and Chmura and Jackson total 67 for 8 TDs.

In 1996, I think the offense took a step back because of injuries and succeeded in scoring more because of fantastic defense and special teams. That team had more short fields to work with than any other outfit I have ever seen. Imagine the recent Super Bowl field position for an entire 19 games. Chmura and Jackson combine for 68 catches and 10 TDs. Freeman misses time with a broken arm and gets 56 catches for 9 TDs. Beebe goes for 39 and 18 yards a catch. Bennett/Levens/Henderson get 89 catches and 7 TDs. And then the pupu platter of Mickens/Rison/Mayes/Howard trying to replace Brooks who was at 23 catches for 15 yards a pop before injury.

In 1997, Freeman (81 and 12), Brooks (60 and 7 at 17 ypc), Levens/Henderson (94 and 6) and Chmura and Thomasen (47 and 7). There wasn't much of a third wideout as Beebe got hurt and Mickens and Mayes were eh.

All in all, not Rice and Taylor, but in 2 years he arguably had a Pro Bowl/All Pro at WR, TE and RB catching passes.

[gbgary]

AR is the best ever for Green Bay because he is:

Bart Starr with a better arm,
Lynn Dickey with better legs.
Brett Favre with a better head.

i think you're 100% correct there.