How could you doubt Yahoo news ??
Henry posted:Henry posted:Who said all time? As for players currently in the NFL and specifically in regards to his contract, it's not even a question you inert fart bubble. Rodgers career isn't over yet either.
Do you honestly think Rodgers isn't the best player in the NFL? Are you such a homer dolt that you can't see that? Again, all questions posed to you are rhetorical. I felt a slight moment of charity in explaining that for you you indeterminate cyst.
Take it up with him. Sentient POS, Why don't you just bottom line it for me when it comes to Rodgers. Tee that ****er up.
I'll say it then. I think Rodgers is the best to ever play the game, or, at the very least, he's on par with any other all-time great you can throw out there. And, I'm not being a "homer" by saying it. My comment is based on what I've heard from men who have played the game, watching a lot of film, and a good deal of statistical analysis.
The game has changed a lot over time, as have the rules governing it. Obviously, Aaron Rodgers and passers from his era have a statistical advantage over passers from prior generations. For one thing, the game is played in inclement weather a lot less frequently than it used to be-many teams play in domes now. And, the rules changes have made throwing the ball much easier. Defensive backs simply can't do the things they used to. Defensive pass interference in the NFL is a joke, for one thing. And, if you even fart in the general direction of a quarterback in the pocket, it's a penalty now. But you can't tell me that Aaron Rodgers couldn't play, and succeed, in any era with his arm strength, accuracy and competitive spirit. Outside of the two collarbone breaks, he's been durable. He's played in 149 of a possible 162 games in the ten years he's been the starter, and one of those games he didn't play was week 17 of 2011 when McCarthy decided to rest the starters going into the playoffs (the Packers were 14-1 headed into the game, and had secured home field advantage). He's played in 93% of his team's games in the last decade.
His 4:1 career touchdown to interception ratio is, by far, the best in the history of the NFL. And he hasn't had the historic level of talent around him that somebody like Troy Aikman, Joe Montana or Steve Young had. Only one other passer has even a 3:1 ratio, and that's Tom Brady.
The best pure passer I'd ever seen before Aaron Rodgers became the Packer starter was Dan Marino. Rodgers is every bit as good as Marino was.
Oh, and as far as Tom Brady goes, there's no argument to be made where he's better than Rodgers. None. He's labeled the GOAT by people who are talking out of their asses. Super Bowl wins are a team accomplishment. Brady has been a tremendous quarterback, no doubt. He will be a first ballot Hall of Famer. But is he better than Rodgers? Nope. Compare their career statistics. Rodgers is better in every metric. Completion percentage, touchdown and interception percentage, yards per attempt and completion, QB rating--all favor Rodgers. Even if you look at Brady from 2008 on, when Rodgers became the starter, their statistics are a dead heat.
Rodgers 2008-2017 142 Games
4,836 attempts, 65.2% completion, 38,173 yards, 312 TD passes (6.5%) , 77 INT (1.6%), Y/A 7.9, Y/C 12.1, 104.2 QB rating
Brady 2007-2017 (Brady only played 1 game in 2008, so I'm including Brady's best year of 2007) 157 Games
5,741 attempts, 65% completion, 44,595 yards, 341 TD passes (5.9%), 82 INT (1.4%), 7.8 Y/A, Y/C 11.9, 102.5 QB rating.
Rodgers is slightly better, but keep this in mind: this is Rodgers from his first year starting going forward. The comparative period for Brady begins with Brady's seventh year as starter, a season where he completed 68.9% of his passes for 4,806 yards and 50 TD passes, a 117.2 QB rating. That season, Brady benefited from having a future Hall of Fame receiver in Randy Moss. Moss played three full seasons with Brady, catching 250 passes for 3,765 yards and 47 TD. Brady has also had the best tight end in football, Rob Gronkowski, since 2010.
What Hall of Famer has Rodgers had on the offensive side of the ball?
Rodgers is also better, statistically, than Brady in the playoffs. And the Packers offense under Rodgers has scored more points per game than the Patriots offense under Brady in the playoffs. The reason Brady has all those rings, while Rodgers has only one, is the defense. The Patriots have won five Super Bowls with Brady. In those seasons, here's where the Pats have ranked in the NFL in scoring defense:
2001: 6th
2003: 1st
2004: 2nd
2014: 8th
2016: 1st
And the years they lost the Super Bowl?
2007: 4th
2011: 15th
2017: 5th
Only one time in their eight trips to the Super Bowl did the Pats have a scoring defense outside of the top ten. In their eight trips, their average defensive ranking in the NFL was fifth! Rodgers? Here's where the Packers scoring defense has ranked in the NFL each season he's been the starter:
2008: 20th
2009: 7th (the Packers defense gave up 45 to the Cardinals in the playoffs)
2010: 2nd (Packers won the Super Bowl)
2011: 19th
2012: 11th
2013: 24th
2014: 13th
2015: 12th
2016: 21st
2017: 26th
Give Aaron Rodgers the defense that Tom Brady has had, and he's got more than one Super Bowl ring.
So, go ahead and tell me why Brady's better than Aaron Rodgers.
FinnLander posted:Maybe Danica can take Rodgers for a long drive. That usually stops babies from crying.
More to the point, both Danica & Rodgers are both looking for a ring. Trouble is it isn't the same ring.
I think that should be "another" ring.
Terrific post, LS.
I agree wholeheartedly. The thing that separates Rodgers from Marino is 12's mobility and ability to throw "off-platform" and on the move. Joe Montana was a lot like Rodgers that way but wasn't even close in terms of arm talent.
The three greatest arm talents I've seen are Sonny Jurgensen, Marino and Rodgers. Rodgers could excel in any era and in any offense.
About Brady. To me his comparison is Bart. Not the most gifted physically but could make most of the throws they needed to when their feet and mechanics were right. Surrounded by great players in offensive schemes tailored to what they could do. Very smart obviously and terrific, clutch leaders. Bart called all his own plays though.
IMO Starr is the most underrated quarterback in NFL history. He and Joe Montana are the greatest championship clutch performers ever. Both statistically and using the eyeball test. How Starr pulled off the Ice Bowl drive -- in those conditions, and after having gotten beaten to a pulp most of the second half -- is still a wonder to me.
That's a fantastic post, Lambeau South. I completely agree.
Football is the ultimate team game. It's silly to judge any player by the number of rings they've won, although I think it is fair to ding a player for terrible games in the playoffs (see, e.g., the second half of Favre's career). Honestly, Rodgers has had a couple subpar games in the playoffs (by his standards), but there hasn't been a single loss where I thought it primarily fell on Rodgers.
The loss to the Giants in January 2012 was probably his worst game, but the entire team seemed "off" that day. Of course, I've always thought that the death of Philbin's son that week was the primary reason they had such a bad game. That offense was one of the best we've ever seen, and their performance was completely uncharacteristic. But the emotional impact of that death cannot be overstated.
How much longer before the Packers start marketing the âTrust the Processâ t-shirt and hoody?
Iâll probably buy one.
You would.
Great post Lambeau. I think the other way to look at it would be whether Bill Belichik would have traded Brady straight up for Rodgers - even if they were the same age. I think Belichick would have chosen Rodgers over Brady in a heartbeat.
It's not the defensive talent that Brady has played with as much as the defensive coordinator (essentially Belichick) he's had. Up until the last Super Bowl, Belichick was clearly the best DC in history. Have the Patriots really had a LB better than CM3? Shields, Tramon, Nick Collins, Woodson, Dix, and Burnett would have all started for the Pats.
He got way too cute this year and somehow decided not to even play one of his best CBs for reasons he's never really explained. If it was really a disciplinary thing then why even dress Butler? It was clear that the Eagles were toasting the Pats' secondary, but you don't even try Butler for a series? Hubris is what beat the Patriots this year and essentially made Brady look like playoff Rodgers this Super Bowl which was to run up historic stats, play a great game, and lose. Is Brady's legacy tarnished because Belichick F'd up this Super Bowl from a coaching perspective - obviously not. Rodgers was held back by Dom Capers.
Rodgers was held back by Dom Capers.
This.
World peace is held back by Dom Capers.
Thanks DOM!
DH13 posted:World peace is held back by Dom Capers.
Metta
Buttered Fly effect.
Lambeau South; I have made similar arguments in the past! I am a huge fan of 60's football and there is no doubt Rodgers would have been a great star in the 60's. Any moron who doubts Rodger's talent need only look at his top ten throws of his career and show me any other QB who can match those let alone the 100's of eyeblinkers where fans and players alike say 'did you see that'. I won't forget a few years ago when Rodgers threw a TD pass against the Bears that was called back and Alshon Jeffries said Rodgers was an alien and did you see that throw. There are 100 examples of it so please I get it that they don't like Rodger's but grow up!!
What Madden said about Lombardi applies to a select group of players including Rodgers.
"He would have won 50 years before he coached. He obviously won when he coached. He would have won 50 years after he finished coaching. He had it. Whatever IT is, he had it"
Whew, LS, take a breath and accept some applause!
IMHO, it takes 2 things to play QB in the NFL at a high level: Smerts and arm strength.
Bart was heavy on intelligence and a little light on arm strength.
TOG was heavy on strength and light on smarts.
ARod has both in spades!
I think ILCUQUI's Starr/Brady analogy is a good one.
Again, it's JMHO, but the biggest benefit to Brady's career was playing in the NFCE. The rest of that division has been mostly woeful over the last decade or so, so NE was always in favorable position for playoff seeding and HFA. Give them credit for taking advantage of what was available to them, and curse them for cheating to get what wasn't, but it's hard to argue the results.
Good post yourself, TImmy!
I would add to the list:
Leadership! And the ability to inspire.
Look at some truly great QB's. Unitas, Starr, Staubach, Montana, Elway (ugh!), our three guys (15, 4, 12), Brady, to name a few. They drove the train. They created belief. They made their teams better simply by the force of their personalities and lifted up everybody associated with the organization. I'm talking about the QB's who everybody worries about come the second half or the fourth quarter.
Doesn't matter how far behind any team might be, as long as it has belief it can win. And the quarterback is the key figure in this nearly all the time. Run the tableâĒ being an example.
Matty Ryan is smart and physically talented. I'd argue he doesn't have that quality, at least not yet.
Big Ben has it however, as did Troy Aikman. I'd also argue that a lot of QB's who didn't win a a ring or even a lot of games have it, too. Look at Marino and Dan Fouts. Never out of a game if they were on the field. Joe Namath and yes, Lynn Dickey.
Lots of different styles but it boils down to incredible self-confidence, a never quit attitude, and being regarded without question as the team's leader.
It is hard to quantify this but we know which quarterbacks have this quality. More importantly players do too, be they on that QB's team or an opponent.
This is what separates the top tier in my mind. The best of the best had that ability to make plays and keep their teams together. They could, and WANTED, to put their team on their back.
That ability is also what enables some of these less physically amazing quarterbacks to keep winning, and so many of the great ones to play well into their late 30's or beyond even though they can't throw or run as well anymore.
As MM says, stacking success... it can happen in one game, one season, or over a career. If the players believe they are NEVER out of a game with their QB, it is a very powerful thing.
LambeauSouth's post was excellent.
I've been one to jump on the Tom Brady is GOAT bandwagon, but LS's post does an excellent job of pointing out why Rodgers deserves serious consideration over him. Let's put it this way, both guys belong in that discussion.
I just hope that Rodgers does get a few more rings even if it doesn't matter in terms of a GOAT type discussion. He definitely got screwed out of a couple with some subpar play around him.
If there is one thing that could have worked against Rodgers in previous eras, up until the 2000s QBs were hit way way more often down after down than they are nowadays. Hits like that Anthony Barr drive of Rodgers into the ground were not uncommon in the first 20 years I watched the NFL. I am not as convinced that Rodgers would have been as injury free as he has been in today's era where QBs are vastly more protected by rules and enforcement of those rules than they had been. In terms of pure ability though, Rodgers would have dominated any era.
Recently rewatched the fourth quarter of that Dallas game. From the MINUTE that the Cowboys stepped in the end zone Aikman was warning they left too much time for Rodgers. So sweet when he goes down not to get a field goal but to win the fricking game.
Watching that again in the off season is sweet.
Get that man a D STAT!
I honestly don't want to get into another TB v. AR debate but I really wouldn't agree with anyone proposing TB is more of a system QB or that he is lesser a QB in aggregate than AR. The argument about the rings has validity but even though those Pats teams had much better D's than AR has had, TB still had to do amazing things to earn those SB wins. Especially in the clutch.
I don't think there is any debate that AR has better athleticism. But where TB makes up for that is his machine like ability to complete passes and win games when necessary. I have too many times watched him just seemingly without resistance, move through defenses at will. He's not the artist AR is but he just finds his receivers when and where he needs to at almost any given moment. It's not like he's had great receivers either outside of Moss and Gronk.
By the time AR hangs them up, if it's not significantly earlier than the undead Brady, he could very well have all the stats to point to more success. But based on the eye test and what I've seen so far from both of them, it's not A/B, it's A1/A2. I don't see one as clearly above the other, all things considered.
DH13 posted:I have too many times watched him just seemingly without resistance, move through defenses at will.
You don't think there was some "Billy B jeeenyus" stuff going on at the end of those games?
It's really easy to move an offense against a defense when you KNOW what defense is coming - just ask Dom Capers
Brady is a great QB - but he cannot create plays like Rodgers - not even close
Something about top shelf FA's wanting to come to GB.
Brainwashed Boris posted:DH13 posted:I have too many times watched him just seemingly without resistance, move through defenses at will.
You don't think there was some "Billy B jeeenyus" stuff going on at the end of those games?
It's really easy to move an offense against a defense when you KNOW what defense is coming - just ask Dom Capers
Brady is a great QB - but he cannot create plays like Rodgers - not even close
Exactly what I said about TB not being the artist AR is. They excel in different ways but I don't see AR in general being "clearly above" TB.
May they be good mangos.
DH13 posted:Something about top shelf FA's wanting to come to GB.
Teams are going to be trying to take Graham out (shots to the knee especially). Look at how teams end up trying to defend Gronk. They can't stop him straight up so the plan is to knock him out of the game.
Don't throw it too high over the middle, 12.
Gronk and Graham have different games despite their measureables. Gronk is a runaway freight train who doesn't really use a lot of route running acumen to get open. Defenders go after him low because they don't want to get trucked and injured but also because they know Gronk isn't going to run around them or make much of a lateral move. Graham is more athletic that way. He can run routes and avoid submarine shots a little better. Defenders trying to just dive at him will miss or get hurdled.
ilcuqui posted:I would add to the list:
Leadership! And the ability to inspire.
...but it boils down to incredible self-confidence, a never quit attitude, and being regarded without question as the team's leader.
...This is what separates the top tier in my mind. The best of the best had that ability to make plays and keep their teams together. They could, and WANTED, to put their team on their back.
"The Will To Win"
This is why I think Bart was the best ever, and is the single biggest trait Rodgers shares with him.
Timmy, Timmy, Timmy. I had 2 posters on here tell me that "The Will To Win" in the Ice Bowl was a bunch of bull poop. I happen to agree with you, but these 2 unnamed posters are all NFL know it alls. At least that is what they tell us. All the time.
Attachments
Images (1)
Some of the biggest hands in the league.
The @Bucks just announced that @AaronRodgers12 has bought in and is now a part owner of the franchise. The @Packers QB is here sitting courtside along with girlfriend Danica Patrick and fellow Bucks owner Wes Edens.
Meh. I've been part owner of the Packers for years.
Yet you didnât fire Capers until this year.
You suck.
Does this mean Rodgers has a say in decision making?
