Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Crazy, Diggr, I could have sworn that article was about Aaron Rodgers.
quote:Originally posted by Diggr14:
Is this where we post about Brett Favre?
No, this is where everyone starts posting about Rodgers' durability issues.
Nice article. I am hoping ARod shuts up all the naysayers and makes them eat that big 'ol plate of grilled crow. Good luck Aaron!
This article has some wisdom in it.
The last guy to come into a good situatuion, considering the guys around him, was Steve Young. Who did well and went to at least one SB.
I want to second what Jones has said. No 2 people are exactly alike anyway. When Rodgers was in college, and a Cal game was on, i'd watch it because I liked watching AR. In those days, SI had an article where a Cal official apologized to a guest because AR had gone a whole quarter without throwing a TD pass. Some QBs go a whole game without throwing a TD pass. If GB lets him be himself, AR will do fine.
Developing QBs the way they use to. Priceless. I remember those days. In doing so, Don Horn was the guy who was to follow Bart Starr. Had Lombardi hung around, he might have been good. But with the different coaching staff, it was hard to make any transition. Horn was ultimately traded.
I like AR. I liked him when he was drafted. I will be pulling for him and his success. The one question that comes to mind is, what Brian & Matt thinking at this point? I hope GB gets into the groom & trade MO for their backups until one of them is needed to start.
quote:The history is this: The NFL has not been kind to quarterbacks who follow a legend, as Rodgers is trying to do after Brett Favre's retirement.
Rodgers hasn't studied it closely, but he has a theory, that in many cases, when a great quarterback retired or moved on, the team around him had grown old and its so-called window of opportunity was closing, anyway.
Aaron Rodgers says he had a good relationship with Brett Favre and that he learned a lot from the record-setting QB.
"My situation is probably a little different," he said Thursday during an interview following an OTA practice. "We have a great team already in place."
And a young one, too. The Packers reached the NFC Championship game last season with the league's youngest roster. So there is reason for optimism. Nonetheless, everyone, even those in the organization giving Rodgers their unconditional support, knows it's going to be different.
The last guy to come into a good situatuion, considering the guys around him, was Steve Young. Who did well and went to at least one SB.
quote:Favre's shadow, of course, is a long one, and everyone knows there will be endless references.
"If (Rodgers throws) for three touchdowns, then the fan down the street's going to say, 'Well, Brett would have thrown for five,'" Thompson said.
Yet, Rodgers has enough confidence and thick skin that he'll likely be able to shrug that stuff off.
"I see a dude with all the tools that's just ready to show his talent," said James Jones, a second-year receiver. "He's not trying to do what Brett does, but just be himself and lead this team."
I want to second what Jones has said. No 2 people are exactly alike anyway. When Rodgers was in college, and a Cal game was on, i'd watch it because I liked watching AR. In those days, SI had an article where a Cal official apologized to a guest because AR had gone a whole quarter without throwing a TD pass. Some QBs go a whole game without throwing a TD pass. If GB lets him be himself, AR will do fine.
quote:"Looking back, I know I wasn't ready (to play right out of college). At the time, you want to play, obviously, but a situation like this ... it prepared me very well, because I got to sit behind a guy and learn for three years, kind of like they used to do it with quarterbacks. I feel like now, I'm more prepared than if I had been thrown in right away."
Developing QBs the way they use to. Priceless. I remember those days. In doing so, Don Horn was the guy who was to follow Bart Starr. Had Lombardi hung around, he might have been good. But with the different coaching staff, it was hard to make any transition. Horn was ultimately traded.
I like AR. I liked him when he was drafted. I will be pulling for him and his success. The one question that comes to mind is, what Brian & Matt thinking at this point? I hope GB gets into the groom & trade MO for their backups until one of them is needed to start.
I'm excited about the new look Packers. It was time for Favre to move on, and Rodgers should be able to step in, and continue to lead the team to victory. He's got a good cast of wideouts, and overall offensive talent to work with, and a head coach who seems to know how to put people in position to succeed. If he plays within the system he'll be just fine.
We may look back on the Favre era and ultimately come to see that one of the biggest benefits of his long career was that by continuing to play well under MM for those last couple of years, it allowed the GBP to groom AR in the old-school way, one which IMHO is generally becoming obsolete. Teams that draft a QB high often face huge pressure to get him on the field, often before he's ready, and it works out to be a disaster for the organization and the player. Drafting AR a couple of years before they needed him - and I realize that TT at the time perhaps didn't realize when he would need to play - could be the difference between his ultimate success and failure. Of course, this is all dependent upon whether or not AR works out, but he's been given every advantage a QB could use:
1. A great, HOF mentor from whom he learned how to approach the game;
2. A coach with a history of developing QB's - look how MM helped refine Favre during their two years together, and look at what MM did with Aaron Brooks, who was last seen throwing backwards passes before selling insurance.
3. A huge nucleus of young players with tallant to work with while being groomed;
4. Time to learn the complicated offense;
5. For the MOST part, random haters aside, reasonable expectations based on the legacy he's following. We'll see if that holds water if GB starts 2-4, however.
It's all there for him - the maturity, time to learn, coaching, tallant around him and a positive environment. At this point, neither he nor anyone else could've hoped for it to go any better in terms of his preparation to take over the team. We'll see how he does from here.
1. A great, HOF mentor from whom he learned how to approach the game;
2. A coach with a history of developing QB's - look how MM helped refine Favre during their two years together, and look at what MM did with Aaron Brooks, who was last seen throwing backwards passes before selling insurance.
3. A huge nucleus of young players with tallant to work with while being groomed;
4. Time to learn the complicated offense;
5. For the MOST part, random haters aside, reasonable expectations based on the legacy he's following. We'll see if that holds water if GB starts 2-4, however.
It's all there for him - the maturity, time to learn, coaching, tallant around him and a positive environment. At this point, neither he nor anyone else could've hoped for it to go any better in terms of his preparation to take over the team. We'll see how he does from here.
If you want an NFL QB to be successful you don't march him out there day 1 and expect to win. Guys like Palmer, McNabb, McNair, heck even Favre had the benefit of studying the playbook and practicing well before they were thrown into the fire.
quote:Originally posted by JJSD:
look at what MM did with Aaron Brooks, who was last seen throwing backwards passes before selling insurance.
Was he a success for MM? Where is he these days?
quote:Originally posted by Hauser:quote:Originally posted by JJSD:
look at what MM did with Aaron Brooks, who was last seen throwing backwards passes before selling insurance.
Was he a success for MM? Where is he these days?
I think that's kind of the point. He's no where these days. He was at least an efficient quarterback every year MM was with him. When MM left for SF, Brooks became a much less disciplined player, and quickly lost his job.
MM was in New Orleans from 2000 to 2004.
2000, age 24, 8 games, 9 TDs, 6 INTs
2001, age 25, 16 games, 26 TDs, 22 INTs
2002, age 26, 16 games, 27 TDs, 15 INTs
2003, age 27, 16 games, 24 TDs, 8 INTs
2004, age 28, 16 games, 21 TDs, 16 INTs
2005, age 29, 13 games, 13 TDs, 17 INTs
2006, age 30, 8 games, 3 TDs, 8 INTs
In addition to Brooks, McCarthy coached Delhomme for a few years in New Orleans where he was a backup.
quote:2005, age 29, 13 games, 13 TDs, 17 INTs
DAMN, Tavarias Jackson would kill for those numbers.
It will tough without #4 in the huddle and under center. But I am cheering for Rodgers. It will be very interesting to see what transpires this season.
I, for one, am very excited about seeing AR & the Packers this upcoming season. I like what I see of him as a person in his interviews and his limited playing time on the field. I think the team, for the most part, is ready for the Favre era to end & the Rodgers era to begin. I know I am.
Rodgers doesn't have to be great. He just has to be good. The rest of the team should/will pick up the slack.
I looked up Brooks' numbers a while back, and I kind of smiled a bit. Those are pretty fair numbers for a rather mediocre qb in a McCarthy led offense. Rodgers has more talent than Brooks ... mainly in terms of accuracy, and should really be able to do well. We'll see how it works out, but these numbers might bode well for Rodgers.quote:Originally posted by Liam:quote:Originally posted by Hauser:quote:Originally posted by JJSD:
look at what MM did with Aaron Brooks, who was last seen throwing backwards passes before selling insurance.
Was he a success for MM? Where is he these days?
I think that's kind of the point. He's no where these days. He was at least an efficient quarterback every year MM was with him. When MM left for SF, Brooks became a much less disciplined player, and quickly lost his job.
MM was in New Orleans from 2000 to 2004.
2000, age 24, 8 games, 9 TDs, 6 INTs
2001, age 25, 16 games, 26 TDs, 22 INTs
2002, age 26, 16 games, 27 TDs, 15 INTs
2003, age 27, 16 games, 24 TDs, 8 INTs
2004, age 28, 16 games, 21 TDs, 16 INTs
2005, age 29, 13 games, 13 TDs, 17 INTs
2006, age 30, 8 games, 3 TDs, 8 INTs
In addition to Brooks, McCarthy coached Delhomme for a few years in New Orleans where he was a backup.
quote:Originally posted by Gun4Arm:
I, for one, am very excited about seeing AR & the Packers this upcoming season. I like what I see of him as a person in his interviews and his limited playing time on the field. I think the team, for the most part, is ready for the Favre era to end & the Rodgers era to begin. I know I am.
I think this team wants to show it wasn't "all Brett Favre" last season. Most of the young guys really had no connection with Brett due to the age gap. I'm anxious to see what a bunch of young hungry guys with something to prove do this season without the old venerable #4 under center. I'm sure it got old always having to talk about him in every interview they did.
Aaron Rodgers is a very bright young man which is the biggest thing going for him. I think he does realize exactly what he's in the middle of and I get the sense he's fired up about proving the world wrong about him. A lot of guys who should've gone at the very top of the draft and fell have played with a chip that led them to magnificent careers.
This really is a unique season for Packers fans. 17 years of Favre. Shoot, I was a kid when the Favre era started. For the first time there's change. I think it'll be for the better.
quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:
Rodgers doesn't have to be great. He just has to be good. The rest of the team should/will pick up the slack.
Am I the only person worrying about aging corners?
We don't have any Asian corners.
Nobody does. Great at math, but damn those folks can't cover worth crap.
quote:Originally posted by Blair Kiel:
Nobody does. Great at math, but damn those folks can't cover worth crap.
Blair Kiel channels Reggie White....
Can you build a car with paper clips?
I think a lot of people are concerned about their Asian corners, or aging corners, whatever your preference.
That's why they selected Lee early in the draft and I think they have high hopes for Blackmon assuming he stays healthy.
I am also excited to see what Rodgers can do because I was a big fan of the pick when it happened and while he lacks Favre's experience, proven leadership, and obvious arm strength he also brings a few things to the table that Favre was lacking at this point in his career- namely his scrambling ability and (good) decision making.
The way I see it Rodgers doesn't need to be Favre in terms of putting up Favre-like numbers but in this offense if he can do his job and reduce or eliminate mistakes I think he'll be just fine. The talent is certainly there and he seems like he has a good head on his shoulders so that's a start.
That's why they selected Lee early in the draft and I think they have high hopes for Blackmon assuming he stays healthy.
I am also excited to see what Rodgers can do because I was a big fan of the pick when it happened and while he lacks Favre's experience, proven leadership, and obvious arm strength he also brings a few things to the table that Favre was lacking at this point in his career- namely his scrambling ability and (good) decision making.
The way I see it Rodgers doesn't need to be Favre in terms of putting up Favre-like numbers but in this offense if he can do his job and reduce or eliminate mistakes I think he'll be just fine. The talent is certainly there and he seems like he has a good head on his shoulders so that's a start.
Uh, guys, I believe Lee is an Asian name? Duh.
I just wonder how Rodgers will balance his time between starting and that show he's on.
I just wonder how Rodgers will balance his time between starting and that show he's on.
quote:Originally posted by Brak:
Uh, guys, I believe Lee is an Asian name? Duh.
Racist aliens. I hate them.
Where I think Favre will be missed most is the pre-snap stuff. Line-calls, cadence, having run/pass options, knowing defenses, recognizing blitzes, that sort of stuff. I worry about the OL a bit, they'll have to better under Rodgers. because I think he's going to miss some of the stuff I listed above and therefore will hold the ball a little longer. It will also take some time for the WR's and Rodgers to get on the same page for hot-reads and some of the improvisation that Favre used to do with Driver might also be out the window for a while.
It will just take some time and Rodgers needs to be allowed to make some mistakes without a rain of "booos" hailing down at Lambeau when he makes a mistake. That will do nothing for his confidence. IMO, Rodgers should pretty much get a free pass this year as he learns the ropes with real bullets flying.
It will just take some time and Rodgers needs to be allowed to make some mistakes without a rain of "booos" hailing down at Lambeau when he makes a mistake. That will do nothing for his confidence. IMO, Rodgers should pretty much get a free pass this year as he learns the ropes with real bullets flying.
quote:Originally posted by CJS:
Where I think Favre will be missed most is the pre-snap stuff. Line-calls, cadence, having run/pass options, knowing defenses, recognizing blitzes, that sort of stuff. I worry about the OL a bit, they'll have to better under Rodgers. because I think he's going to miss some of the stuff I listed above and therefore will hold the ball a little longer. It will also take some time for the WR's and Rodgers to get on the same page for hot-reads and some of the improvisation that Favre used to do with Driver might also be out the window for a while.
It will just take some time and Rodgers needs to be allowed to make some mistakes without a rain of "booos" hailing down at Lambeau when he makes a mistake. That will do nothing for his confidence. IMO, Rodgers should pretty much get a free pass this year as he learns the ropes with real bullets flying.
Rodgers doesn't deserve any honeymoon period, IMO. He was potentially the overall #1 pick in the NFL draft in 2005. He's had the rare opportunity to sit and learn for 3 full seasons from the unorthodox Brett Favre. The kid is smart enough to take the good from Brett and leave the bad. Rodgers has had plenty of reps to develop chemistry with the WR's. Over the last 3 off-seasons Rodgers has gotten more time with the 1's than Brett. Rodgers has been here while Brett has tended to graduation parties and the like.
His scrambling ability should be put on display often this season which causes a ton of injury concern. Where Brett would run around and make a crazy play Rodgers will tuck and run. As long as Aaron can get out of bounds and not take it up the middle he should be fine.
I'm a little concerned about the first few weeks. It is said the offense is always behind the defense early on. We get Minnesota and last years LAST ranked pass defense in the opener. As long as Clifton can handle Jared Allen the way he did vs. KC last season, Rogders should get his career off to a great start.
Unlike Brett, I think AR will take advantage of that wide open real estate that lays in front of him instead of throwing it to a wide receiver in triple coverage for no play. I love Brett, but... that use to drive me crazy.
quote:Originally posted by Gun4Arm:
Unlike Brett, I think AR will take advantage of that wide open real estate that lays in front of him instead of throwing it to a wide receiver in triple coverage for no play. I love Brett, but... that use to drive me crazy.
I couldn't agree more with that last statement. Rodgers is smarter than what we used to have. It will be nice to see a 3rd and 6 run for a first down instead of turned into a pick 6, or great field position, for the other team.
The question is...Will Rodgers get hurt doing this?
quote:Originally posted by Change of Possession:
Rodgers is smarter than what we used to have.
yeah, that is what he meant.
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:quote:Originally posted by Change of Possession:
Rodgers is smarter than what we used to have.
yeah, that is what he meant.
Yes... It certainly is. BTW, I do like that video clip.
Who do you think is smarter? I'm not talking experience. You take these two and put them through the exact same things which one would you surmise would learn the most and, in effect, be smarter? Just purely from an overall intelligence standpoint who do you think is brighter?
NFL teams use the Wonderlic as a barometer to measure intelligence especially at the QB position. Rodgers scored higher. He's a bright guy who I think will have no problem playing within himself which is needed in the WCO. I expect less turnovers from our offense with his smarter decision making. Even as a first time starter I expect it to be better than what we've witnessed the last few years.
As pointed out already... he'll run for a first down instead of wildly heaving it into triple coverage. That is a plus right there. He'll also take to coaching much easier than someone who is a legend and has been doing it for a long time. I see all those as pluses for Mr. Rodgers' neighborhood.
James Jones certainly seems fired up about the switch. I love the comment he made about Rodgers knowing the offense better than Brett and throwing a harder ball. Both shocking statements.
Statistically, or whatever you'd label the measure that describes the Wonderlic, Rodgers is smarter. He probably even is more intelligent than Favre, but there's 'intelligent' and 'smart,' and at this point, there's no way to expect Rodgers to be as 'smart' as Favre was after 16 years in GB. I'd think he may even pick up the nuances and improve his 'smartness' faster than Favre did, and I also think MM is going to show he's a blue-chip coach this year, but Rodgers will throw more than his share of boners this season. It's unavoidable, and every first-time starter does.
Instead of the 2-3 years that Favre drove us crazy when he was learning the game, it may be only 1-2 years, but it'll still be a curve he has to overcome, and that can only be done with experience. Of course, this all assumes he'll stay healthy as well. I have hopes for a good, solid season, maybe 20-22 TDs and 9-11 INT's, and I'd call that a damn good first year, especially if GB gets into the playoffs the year after Favre retires.
Instead of the 2-3 years that Favre drove us crazy when he was learning the game, it may be only 1-2 years, but it'll still be a curve he has to overcome, and that can only be done with experience. Of course, this all assumes he'll stay healthy as well. I have hopes for a good, solid season, maybe 20-22 TDs and 9-11 INT's, and I'd call that a damn good first year, especially if GB gets into the playoffs the year after Favre retires.
Using the wonderlick to measure intelligence is like measuring the square feet of a room using your shoe. It will give you a rough estimate, that's it.
Gun4arm was talking about making a choice to run instead of throw, not that BF was dumb. That is just your (AWSOME!!11!) personal agenda speaking.
Favre talked country dumb, but a smart guy like yourself with intimate knowledge of football should know that you can't have a moron running the WCO, at least not at a HOF level.
Trying to determine which QB is 'smarter' is at best subjective, at worst, just another method of demonstrating you silly agenda.
Gun4arm was talking about making a choice to run instead of throw, not that BF was dumb. That is just your (AWSOME!!11!) personal agenda speaking.
Favre talked country dumb, but a smart guy like yourself with intimate knowledge of football should know that you can't have a moron running the WCO, at least not at a HOF level.
Trying to determine which QB is 'smarter' is at best subjective, at worst, just another method of demonstrating you silly agenda.
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:
Using the wonderlick to measure intelligence is like measuring the square feet of a room using your shoe. It will give you a rough estimate, that's it.
Gun4arm was talking about making a choice to run instead of throw, not that BF was dumb. That is just your (AWSOME!!11!) personal agenda speaking.
Favre talked country dumb, but a smart guy like yourself with intimate knowledge of football should know that you can't have a moron running the WCO, at least not at a HOF level.
Trying to determine which QB is 'smarter' is at best subjective, at worst, just another method of demonstrating you silly agenda.
It has nothing to do with an agenda. If you want to call my honest assessment of the situation an "agenda" then I'm fine with it. Rodgers is a bright guy. Is that debatable? Was Favre ever thought of in that regard? No.
James Jones said Rodgers knew the WCO offense better than Favre. There we have an actual player backing up my "agenda". It is odd that a man who ran the offense for 17 years vs. a guy who only practiced for 3 years has a better understanding. It has to do with intelligence and preparation. Obviously, Rodgers is a studier. Favre said he really hit the tapes last year to play at a high level which is something he'd never done before. Brett was magnificently naturally gifted and relied on that. Rodgers is far less talented but a brighter individual thus I expect less mistakes and far less exciting plays. I'll take a consistent QB vs. what we used to have. I hated the crazy ints more than I liked the "wow" plays.
If Rodgers truly understands this offense the way we've heard, I don't expect him to make "rookie" mistakes. He possesses a maturity already just in apparently mastering the inner workings of the WCO. That is a humongous plus. To know what you're doing when you hit the field will only pay dividends.
Personally, I've never heard anyone question Favre's intelligence or suggest he wasn't bright. Yeah, he was generally described as an aw shucks Southern boy, but nobody ever suggested he wasn't smart enough to pick up the WCO. Until now, anyway. This idea that he's heading to the Hall of Fame essentially on natural ability alone is ludicrous. But hey, that IS your agenda, so fine.
What if James Jones doesn't know the WCO, but he thinks he does, and so he thinks Rodgers does too, but he really doesn't?
Don'tcha know, Favre froze out James Jones most of the season while he was forcing throws in to Koren Robinson. Obviously Jones has a huge chip on his shoulder toward Favre.
quote:Originally posted by Ghost of Lambeau:
The last guy to come into a good situatuion, considering the guys around him, was Steve Young. Who did well and went to at least one SB.
Steve Young is an intriguing comparison. As a Hall of Famer, he is probably the best QB ever to follow another Hall of Fame QB. An interesting thing about Young, however, is that it wasn't until his seventh year in the NFL that he finally started a game (although he did start a couple of seasons in the USFL). You could say Steve Young had twice as long to be groomed as Rodgers did. Young also got more playing experience as Montana was injured numerous times.
