Rodgers = Mr. Consistency

[Pugger]

It's not talking about career achievements. Favre had more longevity than anyone. Rodgers won't be around that long, so he'll never have the career records. The premise of the article is that Rodgers is playing better right now than Favre did at his best. You don't need more seasons to determine that. Either you agree with the premise or you don't.

And the author of this article is correct. I don't know if I've seen a QB play like Rodgers is now anywhere before either. Thanks Ted!!!

[Fritz]

In some regards this is a debate about sample size. Has Rodgers performed at this high level for long enough to consider him a great as other great QB's? Whether you say Favre, or PManning or Brady, has Rodgers played long enough at a high level to be considered in their class?

[MJZiggy]

But in every thread?? As I said above, it isn't just here. Its on other forums as well. If you visit them and read any Rodgers thread about his play in any particular game sooner or later somebody will bring up #4. I don't recall this happening when Favre was our starter and folks bringing up Starr all the time.

Comparisons are fine when you are trying to establish the overall play of a QB but not when you are discussing how the QB is performing each week.

I think it may be a proximity issue. There was a LONG, COLD drought between Starr's glory and Favre's arrival. I think if the Majik Man had had a longer career, you might have seen more comparisons there, but who were people going to compare Favre to? Dickey? Really?

[Pugger]

I think it may be a proximity issue. There was a LONG, COLD drought between Starr's glory and Favre's arrival. I think if the Majik Man had had a longer career, you might have seen more comparisons there, but who were people going to compare Favre to? Dickey? Really?

You are right, it is the proximity issue. But it is still ridiculous that every time Rodgers' play is discussed somebody has to bring up #4.

[Pugger]

In some regards this is a debate about sample size. Has Rodgers performed at this high level for long enough to consider him a great as other great QB's? Whether you say Favre, or PManning or Brady, has Rodgers played long enough at a high level to be considered in their class?

This is why it is silly to compare Rodgers to ANY of these QBs until we have a larger body of work to consider.

[MJZiggy]

You are right, it is the proximity issue. But it is still ridiculous that every time Rodgers' play is discussed somebody has to bring up #4.

It'll go away soon enough. Right now people are working through the idea that Rodgers may actually be better (something that some folks thought was simply not possible) and trying to define "better" in terms of very different styles of play. It'll get worked out and hopefully the comparisons will be silly for a different reason.

[mraynrand]

Gee, you never see current QBs compared to their predecessors. Right, Steve Young?

Rodgers' play, especially over these past dozen games since last season, should stand on their own merit.

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

[Harlan Huckleby]

why aren't there more "mr rodger's neighborhood" references made? seems to me there is some comedy gold in there somewhere.

[MJZiggy]

why aren't there more "mr rodger's neighborhood" references made? seems to me there is some comedy gold in there somewhere.

Too obvious.

[ThunderDan]

The people who loved Brett Favre will not ever let go of that love as we appreciated Favre's special ways as our QB. we especilly have to appreciate his endurance and lonetivity to start all those games and somehow lead some pretty poor talent to winning seasons.

Is this really what arguement you are left with? You are trying to make BF better somehow by saying he played with poor talent. BF's record doesn't need to be propped up with crap like that.

Let's just say this: BF was an increadible Ironman. He was a dynamic player and leader. He left the Packers in a pissing contest that he was sure he couldn't loose. He went to The Queens, after the Jets, to get back at the Packers organization. He will be a first ballot HOFer.

Personally I dislike BF for leaving the Pack and trying to stick it to the organization. I also realize he was an integral part of our team for over 15 years that won the Superbowl in 96.

[pbmax]

kareemcopeland Kareem Copeland
Rodgers: 20-23, 87%, 305 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT, 158.3 QB rating. Fights crime during down time.

Copeland's Twitter feed.

[HarveyWallbangers]

24 of 30. Two spikes. Two throwaways. One drop. One off target throw. In fact, according to Stats Inc., it's the first time this year that a QB with at least 30 pass attempts had fewer than two off target throws in a game. But Partial thinks we overrate him. Talk about a guy too proud to admit he's wrong.

In his last 17 full games Rodgers is 401 of 566 (70.8 %) for 5331 yards (9.4 ypa) with 46 TDs and 6 interceptions. The Packers are 16-1. Not often you see a guy lead the league in completion % and yards per attempt.

[Upnorth]

24 of 30. Two spikes. Two throwaways. One drop. One off target throw. In fact, according to Stats Inc., it's the first time this year that a QB with at least 30 pass attempts had fewer than two off target throws in a game. But Partial thinks we overrate him. Talk about a guy too proud to admit he's wrong.

In his last 17 full games Rodgers is 401 of 566 (70.8 %) for 5331 yards (9.4 ypa) with 46 TDs and 6 interceptions. The Packers are 16-1. Not often you see a guy lead the league in completion % and yards per attempt.

After the graphic in the 49ers game that made arod a cyborg amalgamation of the best part of the best qbs I for one expect this level of performance.

[Joemailman]

Rodgers current stats if projected over 16 games: 391-546 5421 yards 46 TD's 7 INT 125.7 rating
Tom Brady in 2007: 398-578 4806 yards 50 TD's 8 INT's 117.2 rating
Peyton Manning in 2004: 336-497 4557 yards 49 TD's 10 INT 121.1 rating

[Gunakor]

But Partial thinks we overrate him.

I'd put him in the top 6 or 7.