Aaron Rodgers, the most complete Packer QB ever?

[HarveyWallbangers]

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.

Schroeder was the favorite whipping boy to a lot of Packer fans, but he's better than most people remember. Unbelievable athleticism. Would run the wrong or poor routes at times, but was thrown under the bus by Favre ball washers too much.

Schroeder had a three year stretch where he caught 53 balls for 913 yards and 9 TDs, 65 balls for 999 yards and 5 TDs, and 74 balls for 1051 yards and 4 TDs as the #2 receiver behind Antonio Freeman.

[Patler]

Schroeder was the favorite whipping boy to a lot of Packer fans, but he's better than most people remember. Unbelievable athleticism. Would run the wrong or poor routes at times, but was thrown under the bus by Favre ball washers too much.

Schroeder had a three year stretch where he caught 53 balls for 913 yards and 9 TDs, 65 balls for 999 yards and 5 TDs, and 74 balls for 1051 yards and 4 TDs as the #2 receiver behind Antonio Freeman.

Schroeder's biggest problem was that he often flinched at contact. Short-armed passes and stopped on routes when a big hit was coming. Favre chewing him out and one of the coaches (Sherman?) grabbing his face mask to talk to him brought down the ire of the fans upon him. I always felt that he played as much as he did because for a few years the Packers really had no one else. He had good size and speed, but played smaller than he was. Green and Henderson were always among the top receivers, Green even lead the team in receptions a couple years when Schroeder was starting.

[King Friday]

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.

First, I was specifically speaking to the mid to late 90s Packers. Favre had some incredible talent around him in the Sherman years...but the defense was an awful mess. During his MVP seasons, the talent around Favre was less than what Rodgers has around him now. Favre was tossing to a bunch of nobodies in SB31. Rison wasn't wanted by anyone in the league until the Packers needed a body. Beebe was solid, but well past his prime. Freeman was a raw rookie with one good arm.

Second, I love Levens and Bennett...but their receiving ability had far more to do with Holmgren's dominance in playcalling. Go back and take a long hard look at the offensive production of many of the mid 90s players once Holmgren left. It went into the tank for many...Levens being one of them. It wasn't because he was used up...he remained in the league until 2004, and his only productive years after Green Bay were in Philly under the offensive direction of Holmgren disciple Andy Reid. Levens was an average RB...not exceptional fast or powerful...but made good decisions and could run a screen play with lethal timing and precision.

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 won the MVP in 1996...and rightfully so. Personally, I think you discredit Favre way too much by claiming that he couldn't carry an offense. That is one of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read. He carried the Packer offense for years...he just also happened to also be the guy who caused the self inflicted gunshot as well. Just because he left on bad terms is no reason to selectively revise history. The guy won 3 straight league MVPs for a reason.

So our current Packer team is "not complete"? Again...a ludicrous comment. Our defense is excellent...especially when you consider the injuries we sustained and how the level of play was not impacted all that greatly. Our defense is one of the best in the league. Our defense helped win SB45 with 3 turnovers...every bit as much a contribution as what Rodgers did. Our defense also came up with numerous huge plays to seal victories against Philly, Atlanta and Chicago in the playoffs. Sorry bud...but the notion that Aaron Rodgers is the only reason this team won is ridiculous. This was a complete team effort. Any SB title is.

[King Friday]

Schroeder was the favorite whipping boy to a lot of Packer fans, but he's better than most people remember. Unbelievable athleticism. Would run the wrong or poor routes at times, but was thrown under the bus by Favre ball washers too much.

Schroeder had a three year stretch where he caught 53 balls for 913 yards and 9 TDs, 65 balls for 999 yards and 5 TDs, and 74 balls for 1051 yards and 4 TDs as the #2 receiver behind Antonio Freeman.

I think many of you truly forget just how impressive Favre was under Holmgren in the mid 90s. He was a fucking beast. He was a complete jackass on his way out the door...yeah, I get it. That doesn't change the fact that Favre MADE the career of several of his offensive players...and Schroeder is probably exhibit A. Schroeder would be a distant #5 WR on this team.

The pissing on Favre needs to stop people. He will ALWAYS be one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. He's gone now...and we have a new guy who potentially can be even better. Why sit here and try to build up Bill Schroeder as evidence for why Favre sucks?

[Patler]

Second, I love Levens and Bennett...but their receiving ability had far more to do with Holmgren's dominance in playcalling. Go back and take a long hard look at the offensive production of many of the mid 90s players once Holmgren left. It went into the tank for many...Levens being one of them. It wasn't because he was used up...he remained in the league until 2004, and his only productive years after Green Bay were in Philly under the offensive direction of Holmgren disciple Andy Reid. Levens was an average RB...not exceptional fast or powerful...but made good decisions and could run a screen play with lethal timing and precision.

Yes. Levens was basically used up by the time he left. He spent 8 years in Green Bay and was 32 years old when he left. Not many running backs are not used up by then.

Favre had different weapons than Rodgers, better at some positions and not as good at others. Favre had much better running back receivers with Bennett, Levens and Green, and a much better fullback receiver in Henderson than Rodgers has had. Favre had better tight ends, because Finley, while good, really hasn't contributed much in three years. He did nothing as a rookie, emerged last year, but missed some games, and had a very abbreviated year this year. Lee and Quarless don't hold a candle to Chmura, Jackson, etc. Bubba Franks had a few years in which he was a TD machine. A huge body who was always open short. Rodgers has the advantage at WR, but Favre usually had one good one, just not a lot of depth.

Overall both have good options available, just from different positions.

[Patler]

I think many of you truly forget just how impressive Favre was under Holmgren in the mid 90s. He was a fucking beast. He was a complete jackass on his way out the door...yeah, I get it. That doesn't change the fact that Favre MADE the career of several of his offensive players...and Schroeder is probably exhibit A. Schroeder would be a distant #5 WR on this team.

The pissing on Favre needs to stop people. He will ALWAYS be one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. He's gone now...and we have a new guy who potentially can be even better. Why sit here and try to build up Bill Schroeder as evidence for why Favre sucks?

That is a total and unfounded discredit to the players Favre played with.

Who has argued that Favre sucked? Favre is and always has been much better than sucking, but not nearly the QB god that you seem to think he was.

I can very well argue that Favre was not nearly as great as you may remember. He did impressive physical things throwing the ball. But I have argued for years and years, from long before he left GB, that he was not a great QUARTERBACK, due to the other things in which he came up short.

[King Friday]

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).

Freeman was good...but not great. He had the benefit of playing in Favre's prime, and the Packers didn't have too many great receiving options other than him. That's my point. If he was so great, he should've been putting up Sterling Sharpe numbers (another guy playing with Favre surrounded by no other receiving threats) but Freeman did not...not even close.

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?

They do to this extent...postseason play means a lot to me. Robert Brooks never had a playoff game as good as Nelson's in SB45. Brooks scored 4 career postseason TDs. Jordy has 3 in only 4 games. Nelson had 22 receptions for 297 yards and 2 TDs this postseason. Few Packer receivers can claim that kind of statline for a single postseason. Sure, Brooks had great talent...but he was often injured and never was the factor in the postseason during his career than Jordy was this year. People can sit here and poo-poo Jordy's postseason all they want and make whatever excuses they want. Bottom line...Jordy came up just as big as Rodgers IMO.

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.

Yeah...they had a finely tuned machine put together by Holmgren. I was probably wrong to say they would've been worse in the league without Favre (and I was refering strictly to the 1996 offense that had been decimated by injury) but they would've been a lot worse. The screen game was so devastating because of the continual threat Favre posed downfield. and Holmgren milked that beautifully. Holmgren's playcalling was one of the main reason that offense could be so successful without a great OL. That OL was average...but the threats were so numerous due to Favre raw talent and Holmgren's offensive genius, it didn't matter. Defenses were always on their heels.

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.

Pro Bowl, perhaps. All-Pro? That's a stretch. Levens was a Pro Bowler once...never an All-Pro. Freeman was a Pro Bowler and All-Pro once (98). Chmura made 3 Pro Bowls, but was never an All-Pro. He had a great year in 1995 and lived off reputation after that by and large, and probably didn't have that much competition at the position either (TE then isn't what TE is now). Brooks and Bennett never were either.

Sorry pbmax...but the hardware isn't adding up to this "great" talent assembled around Favre in the mid-90s. The guy getting all the hardware was Favre...and deservedly so. That is why Favre's MVPs (and Holmgren's playcalling and coaching staff) are all the more impressive in my book. He did it with mostly glorified role players around him...coached up by a hell of a coaching staff and led by an uber-talented QB in his prime who caused each of them to believe good things could happen at any time.

[King Friday]

That is a total and unfounded discredit to the players Favre played with.

Sorry Patler. Freeman would not have been a Pro Bowl WR without Favre (he only made it once WITH Favre). Schroeder wouldn't have been a starting receiver without Favre. Yeah...Chmura was good, Brooks was good (when he could stay healthy), and Bennett and Levens were average RBs in terms of running but were phenominal receivers in the offense out of the backfield. I give them loads of credit on that...but the screen play's threat is greatest when defenses have to rush the QB, and Favre's brilliance during the Holmgren days is what created so many huge plays for our RBs on the edge.

You say Favre was not a great QB? How the hell do you win 3 straight league MVP awards and not be a great QB? Favre was indeed a great QB under Holmgren, who reigned him in as best he could and produced a player that dominated the league for the better part of 4 seasons.

Favre regressed into a pure gunslinger after Holmgren...which is where I would agree that he wasn't a great QB because of poor decision making in clutch situations. But to claim he was never a great QB is utterly ridiculous, especially when you look at the stats he produced from 94-98. Most QBs with that kind of production over a period of time have another HOF caliber player to work with. Favre did not.

[Patler]

Why are Favre's receivers good only because Favre made them good, but Jordy Nelson is great on his own merit? Maybe Rodgers made him great this playoff season? Truth be told, I think he did. Some of the throws Rodgers made were unbelievably accurate. Favre never threw deep balls as accurately as Rodgers has. On the other hand, Favre was laser accurate on the mid range stuff in the middle.

In the '90s Favre's O-line wasn't great, but I don't think the one Rodgers has played behind is any better.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Nice. A Bill Schroeder video. Nice throw, but Schroeds got open with his speed (he was also 6'3" and could jump out of the gym).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lri3dDGLb0c

Sterling Sharpe takes issue with you saying Favre didn't have weapons:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jewbuNRUv0M&playnext=1&list=PLAAD995D15CF66F16

So does Don Beebe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV8NuzMTBLo&feature=related

And Robert Brooks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6765-GKyW0Y&feature=related

And Antonio Freeman:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_dQrqiFIKI

And Mark Chmura and Keith Jackson:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xqV4IEJX1I

And Donald Driver:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5dXTZCgL7c&feature=related

And Javon Walker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7AaqnBd4oE

And Greg Jennings:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38PP6Lwfnis

Ahman says I could run for 98 yard TDs like this and catch 70 balls in a season:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7fyBZvg7cI

[Patler]

Sorry Patler. Freeman would not have been a Pro Bowl WR without Favre (he only made it once WITH Favre). Schroeder wouldn't have been a starting receiver without Favre. Yeah...Chmura was good, Brooks was good (when he could stay healthy), and Bennett and Levens were average RBs in terms of running but were phenominal receivers in the offense out of the backfield. I give them loads of credit on that...but the screen play's threat is greatest when defenses have to rush the QB, and Favre's brilliance during the Holmgren days is what created so many huge plays for our RBs on the edge.

You say Favre was not a great QB? How the hell do you win 3 straight league MVP awards and not be a great QB? Favre was indeed a great QB under Holmgren, who reigned him in as best he could and produced a player that dominated the league for the better part of 4 seasons.

Favre regressed into a pure gunslinger after Holmgren...which is where I would agree that he wasn't a great QB because of poor decision making in clutch situations. But to claim he was never a great QB is utterly ridiculous, especially when you look at the stats he produced from 94-98. Most QBs with that kind of production over a period of time have another HOF caliber player to work with. Favre did not.

MVP awards are often popularity contests among the players on winning teams who had good years. As a matter of fact, wasn't it the second MVP (or the first) that was fairly controversial, and he shared the 3rd one, so its not like he was lights out better than anyone else those years.

But, you are arguing a few years, I am arguing a career. A great QB does not continue to make bone head plays with the frequency that Favre did after he has been in the league for 10 years. Favre was a tremendous throwing talent, but QB play is more than that. The simple fact is that the Packers many times were in positions in the playoffs to do something, and more often than not Favre threw it away. It's those situations, those few plays, that make a very good QB into a great one. In my opinion it is a very high standard and is much more than just stats, or beauty contest results.

Johnny Unitas, Bart Starr, Joe Montana to name a few were great QBs who played their best in the games that meant the most at the precise times their teams needed them the most, and very rarely pulled bonehead plays to cause defeats. I can't imagine any of them throwing the interception Favre threw for the Vikings in the playoffs, or the one Favre threw up for grabs against the Eagles for GB.

But, while I enjoyed watching Favre, I was never as enamored with his play as many were, even in the '90s. I kept hoping he would grow into the greatness that I thought he had the potential for, but he didn't.

What did Favre really accomplish after the two Super Bowl appearances, other than a lot of seasonal stats? He won games but played in a division that during the Sherman years had no other team with a winning record cumulatively. Those should have been the prime years of his career,

[Freak Out]

Lynn Dickey will always be my favorite GB QB. Most complete....? No.

[HarveyWallbangers]

And don't forget the guy who caught Favre's first ball. He was a good player too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc3RQ1LXi4w&feature=related

[HarveyWallbangers]

MVP awards are often popularity contests among the players on winning teams who had good years. As a matter of fact, wasn't it the second MVP (or the first) that was fairly controversial, and he shared the 3rd one, so its not like he was lights out better than anyone else those years.

I think his first two were legit. His third one was kind of a joke. He didn't even compete 60% of his passes and he threw 16 interceptions--yet tied Barry Sanders for the award. Sanders ran for 2,053 yards that year.

[Patler]

You say Favre was not a great QB? How the hell do you win 3 straight league MVP awards and not be a great QB? Favre was indeed a great QB under Holmgren, who reigned him in as best he could and produced a player that dominated the league for the better part of 4 seasons.

That is where your argument fails. A truly GREAT QB doesn't have to be reigned in. A truly GREAT QB is given his head and allowed to run. If the coach has to control him to prevent him from screwing up, the QB is a tremendous talent, but not a great QB.