Why McGinn Retired: His Memory Is Gone

[pbmax]

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/06/13/themmqb-exit-interview-bob-mcginn-green-bay-packers-milwaukee-journal-sentinel-nfl-beat-writer

The MMQB: You documented how fortunate it was that Aaron Rodgers didn’t have to play the first couple of years—he just wasn’t ready.

McGinn: “He was a very poor player here for his first two summers and regular-season practices. Fortunately for him, and he knows that down deep, he didn’t have to play early. His delivery was a mess, bad body language, he didn’t know how to deal with teammates. He learned so much from Brett Favre on how to in some ways be one of the guys and relate, and he became much more of a leader. He was really poor and how many great players have ever had a start like that? Not that many. A lot of scouts look at that exhibition tape those first two years and he was a little bit better the third year, but not to any degree, and then he just really developed. He lost a lot of close games in ’08, but by ’09 he was playing great and by 2010 he was maybe the best in the business. And then there have been a lot of playoff disappointments and poor performances. It’s a quarterback league and all the rules are designed for that quarterback to dominate, and he hasn’t done it in the most important times since 2010.

There are at least 3 factual inaccuracies in this paragraph. One complete logical fallacy as well.

There are also two not frequently remembered factoids in there.

Can you spot them?

[bobblehead]

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/06/13/t...fl-beat-writer



There are at least 3 factual inaccuracies in this paragraph. One complete logical fallacy as well.

There are also two not frequently remembered factoids in there.

Can you spot them?

Not to get into the inaccuracies, but a light has suddenly turned on. McGinn hid it well, but obviously he held a grudge against TT for ditching Favre. He tried to give Favre credit for Rodgers success, when by all counts Brent did everything he could to sandbag Rodgers.

[hoosier]

1. I can't be sure but it sounds like McGinn remembers Rodgers being Favre's backup for just two years and then Favre-a-palooza in his third camp. Actually it was his fourth (2005-08).
2. I don't have numbers or any other evidence, but my recollection is that Rodgers was not unequivocally bad during his first two years. And his performance in the Dallas game in '07 is what made most of us feel that he was the legit heir to Favre.
3. Great QBs who had lowly beginnings: Bradshaw, Fouts, Steve Young, hell it took Favre four full years (counting his first one in Atl) to gain Holmgren's trust and perform at his 1995-98 level.
4. logical fallacy: learning to be one of the guys and leadership are not the same thing.

[Cleft Crusty]

McGann...McGinn....name rings a bell, but I just can't place the guy. Milwaukee politician? Actor?

Rodgers was pretty bad when he arrived. He had to retool his mechanics. Other Tedford guys flamed out. Rodgers was lucky to have time and a QB guru who knew what they hell he was doing.

[hoosier]

So he had to change how he held the ball, bfd. Rodgers is much better athlete than his Tedford predecessors. To sY n he stunk (or didnt) based on what we fans see of preseason is silly

[Rutnstrut]

Rodgers was far from great when he arrived in GB. That is the only thing correct in that article.

[Cleft Crusty]

So he had to change how he held the ball, bfd. Rodgers is much better athlete than his Tedford predecessors. To sY n he stunk (or didnt) based on what we fans see of preseason is silly

I probably used a little hyperbole there. You have to remember that Crusty gets $.01 every time I get a hit on my blog or twitter feed. That extra $.23/week comes in handy.

Still, Rodgers was in no way a finished product when he arrived in GB. The contribution of Mr. McCarthy was as QB guru and offensive genius. The scheme and the retooling did help Rodgers. No doubt Rodgers himself had a lot to do with his success. It's debatable how much Favre contributed other than dealing out a wedgie or two in the locker room.

[Fritz]

McGann...McGinn....name rings a bell, but I just can't place the guy. Milwaukee politician? Actor?

Rodgers was pretty bad when he arrived. He had to retool his mechanics. Other Tedford guys flamed out. Rodgers was lucky to have time and a QB guru who knew what they hell he was doing.

Agreed. Rodgers had the luxury of time; something I thought organizations would learn from - they draft talented kids, but don't give them time to develop, and many of them flunk out.

But that comment is in no way a criticism of Rodgers; it's an indictment of football culture today.

I do think Rodgers learned a lot from Favre, both what to do and what not to do, but he learned by standing back and paying attention, not because kindly ol' Brent took the kid under his wing.

[hoosier]

Having Favre around probably helped Rodgers cultivate the ever-present chip on his shoulder. In that way I don't doubt he benefited from 4's presence.

[wthigoot]

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/06/13/t...fl-beat-writer



There are at least 3 factual inaccuracies in this paragraph. One complete logical fallacy as well.


There are also two not frequently remembered factoids in there.

Can you spot them?

Hazy memories but remember his 3rd year in preseason. He led a drive all the way down the field and then forced in a very low pass that the receiver was expecting and caught for a touchdown. Had not seen much from him before but that showed he had figured it out. Thought Packers would get a good draft pick for him the next year when Favre came back. Dallas game was later that year IIRC.

[Guiness]

Other than his draft, the most enduring memory I have of Rodger's early years with the Packers was when he came into a game against the Patriots to replace an injured Favre...and he promptly broke his foot and missed the rest of the season. I remember at that time doubting he would ever be the Pack's starting QB.

[pbmax]

First item in the wrong column, if Favre did any teaching about teammates, it was what not to do with a team younger than you. Favre had his own office and was not in the locker room much. He did no media there and was scarce most of the time. Rodgers made it a point to get to know each of the new players, vets or rookies. And he has been doing it each year since. Every year some new player has a story about a personal detail Rodgers remembers or a question he asked the new guy.

Favre had his buddies, Rodgers wasn't one of them (see Perlman's book), and he stuck to himself. Fritz was very close on this one.

First item in the correct department, Rodgers had a come to Jesus meeting with his coaches about his demeanor on the field when a play did not go as planned or someone screwed up.

[Joemailman]

First item in the wrong column, if Favre did any teaching about teammates, it was what not to do with a team younger than you. Favre had his own office and was not in the locker room much. He did no media there and was scarce most of the time. Rodgers made it a point to get to know each of the new players, vets or rookies. And he has been doing it each year since. Every year some new player has a story about a personal detail Rodgers remembers or a question he asked the new guy.

Favre had his buddies, Rodgers wasn't one of them (see Perlman's book), and he stuck to himself. Fritz was very close on this one.

First item in the correct department, Rodgers had a come to Jesus meeting with his coaches about his demeanor on the field when a play did not go as planned or someone screwed up.

I do remember though reading an article after Favre had left Green Bay in which Rodgers was asked what he learned from from playing with Favre. He said Favre stressed the importance of how he conducted himself on the field both in practice and games because everyone is watching the starting QB. So I think there were those moments. I don't know how frequent they were. Favre and Rodgers seemed to get along pretty well in 2007, so it may have been an evolving situation.

[Carolina_Packer]

Agreed. Rodgers had the luxury of time; something I thought organizations would learn from - they draft talented kids, but don't give them time to develop, and many of them flunk out.

But that comment is in no way a criticism of Rodgers; it's an indictment of football culture today.

There are precious few HC jobs, so if you are say, John Fox, and you want to coach again and Chicago is your best option, then you go there knowing that they don't have a franchise QB. That sucks, relative to what other coaches have to work with like MM, Belichick, Tomlin, etc.

Those are two very different situations by which to come into a head coaching job. Fox may likely be on the treadmill that many of these head coaches are on. Once they finally draft the guy they have tabbed as the "franchise QB", the team is desperate for a turn-around, and you almost have to cast your lot with the young guy, unless you can get a stop-gap vet, which also may not work out. I'm not sure what took the Rams so long to try and find one, but by that point, Fisher had no shot of a turn-around.

[Guiness]

Agreed. Rodgers had the luxury of time; something I thought organizations would learn from - they draft talented kids, but don't give them time to develop, and many of them flunk out.

Those are two very different situations by which to come into a head coaching job. Fox may likely be on the treadmill that many of these head coaches are on. Once they finally draft the guy they have tabbed as the "franchise QB", the team is desperate for a turn-around, and you almost have to cast your lot with the young guy, unless you can get a stop-gap vet, which also may not work out. I'm not sure what took the Rams so long to try and find one, but by that point, Fisher had no shot of a turn-around.

No doubt many QBs would benefit from the beginning Rodgers was afforded. Obviously it's not a magic bullet and doesn't mean they'd all end up viable NFL QBs, but it would greatly help many.

Hardly a new question, but what would of happened with Rodgers if he had gone #1 overall to the 49ers?