Aaron Rodgers Talent

[PackMan13x]

haha nice one with aikmen, i chuckled at that he won't let us forget him comment. Yes, it is insane how he is already a superbowl champion in such a short period of time. The only other person who i can think of in the past 10 years who did this was brady i think?

And i think its nonsense when people say that the packers were this SUPERBLY talented team right off the bat when rodgers got them... i think they had downer of a year compared to their previous one, where they almost made the SB right? (i think favre choked that game).

Anyways, from what i have seen from A-ROD thus far... he is definitely one of the most talented qbs that i have seen.

Unfortunately, Big Ben also did. And the Steelers just happen to be the team I hate the most. Just barely ahead of the Vikes and Bears, and only because I live in this Black and Gold town.

 

[PackMan13x]

I'm not a big Brady fan okay not a Brady fan at all but I do know he is a very good q.b why because he does know how to win games,the s.b he made sure his kicker could make the 3 points in those games if he couldn't get a touch down,he has a few tricks that he uses to this day,and the d falls for why he is very good at it,the one I'm speaking of is where he turns his back like he is handing the ball off,but he still has it and the d-line is after the r.b wham Brady throws ball t.d or big yards,he may not rush a lot but he has smarts A-rod is the same way he is not going to throw if he knows the ball wont go where it needs too,I may not be a brady fan but I do respect his talent.But A-rod I always new he would be good for the pack.

Yes, Brady has an insane play action fake, particularly when Moss was there. How could you not notice him streaking down the sideline anyway?? haha

 

[weeds]

how do u think rodgers compares (talent wise) to the montanas, youngs, marinos etc

I hate comparing players of a different eras and different systems; different athletic skills. All that I can say is that Joe Montana was a surgeon. There was no doubt just who the best player on the field was when Montana was executing that offense. The guy just seemed to NEVER make that critical mistake that would cost the 9'ers the game. In that regard, I see and remember a good number of those traits in Rodgers. He's smart...calculating and knows where EVERYONE in his offense are supposed to be at all times. He's young yet so his arm strength hasn't diminished yet...that's when the laser balls into double coverage start catching up on a QB...Montana didn't try many of those because Walsh would have **** a screaming worm... Rodgers is 10X the running threat that Montana was, but in that early Stanford West Coast offense that the 9'ers ran, he wasn't supposed to run...he was to dump the ball into the flats to his FB - most memorably, Roger Craig...

If I was pushed to make a statement, I'd say that in year 4 as a starter ... as memory serves me ... I'd call it a toss-up. Rodgers does a lot of things that Montana couldn't or didn't within that system ... and Montana was...well, Montana. Show me the rings, baby... you know? Fact is that if Montana played under the current rules protecting QB's and restricting DB's there's not doubt in my mind that Montana would have been even more of a force. I'd still have to go with Montana...but because he has a complete body of work, you know?

Young? He was serviceable ... truthfully. I was never too impressed with Steve Young, but only because HE is the guy that fell into a good situation...I mean, I remember him as the guy who couldn't make Tampa Bay a winner...but, suddenly became "god" when he's put into a successful system. Rodgers is a complete QB, even at this stage.

Marino... all arm....I never felt he was always in control of his offense. Rodgers

Bradshaw --- again...in my opinion, a product of Chuck Noll's system. Frankly, history says that it was really a toss up between Terry Hanratty and Bradshaw. Make no mistake, I'm not dissing Bradshaw, again, show me the rings, baby ... but when you're handing the ball off to Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier ... and there's a defense like the Steel Curtain... my gawd... go look at some of those names... Mel Blount, Chris Hanburger, Hacksaw Reynolds, Joe Greene, Greenwood, Holmes and White... again, from a pure standpoint at this stage, if forced to make a statement, I'd go with Rodgers.

Favre -- You know, I don't have *** for Favre because I never idolized him...still, even though Favre was winning MVP's, his carelessness with the ball even back then always scared the living hell out of me. "You live or die with Brett Favre" became the 'vogue' saying during this time. My preference has always been for smart QB's who are careful with the ball...and so, if I had my choice - all things being equal - I'd take Rodgers.

Starr -- as I said in previous post. The gold standard is 5 Championships in 7 years. Show me the rings baby. For that system at that time ... he's the man.

Brady -- what can you say. All the guy does is perform. For a Belichek system, he's the guy ... for a McCarthy system, probably not... he's become a pocket passer and that's what's expected of him. If he had to execute an offense other than a McCarthy offense, he may or may not be as successful. From a pure thrower standpoint...he's the guy to be sure.

Archie Manning -- again, from a pure thrower standpoint if that's the only criteria ... he was good.

Peyton Manning -- pure thrower. What can you say?

Each of these guys has something different. Have I hedged enough for you? hahaha.

 

[whoartthou]

Thanks for the analysis!Good to know what a Patriots fan thinks, an honest one at that. Personally, I think Brady has a SB left, maybe not this year, but I think he's far from done. Again, good luck this Sunday and may you slaughter the Jets.

yea he has a superbowl in him i hope.

In all honesty though, when i compare rodgers and brady... both are great (brady is obviously "greater" atm since he accomplished more)... but i believe aaron rodgers ceiling is higher than brady's. Do you guys agree?

 

[whoartthou]

I hate comparing players of a different eras and different systems; different athletic skills. All that I can say is that Joe Montana was a surgeon. There was no doubt just who the best player on the field was when Montana was executing that offense. The guy just seemed to NEVER make that critical mistake that would cost the 9'ers the game. In that regard, I see and remember a good number of those traits in Rodgers. He's smart...calculating and knows where EVERYONE in his offense are supposed to be at all times. He's young yet so his arm strength hasn't diminished yet...that's when the laser balls into double coverage start catching up on a QB...Montana didn't try many of those because Walsh would have **** a screaming worm... Rodgers is 10X the running threat that Montana was, but in that early Stanford West Coast offense that the 9'ers ran, he wasn't supposed to run...he was to dump the ball into the flats to his FB - most memorably, Roger Craig...

If I was pushed to make a statement, I'd say that in year 4 as a starter ... as memory serves me ... I'd call it a toss-up. Rodgers does a lot of things that Montana couldn't or didn't within that system ... and Montana was...well, Montana. Show me the rings, baby... you know? Fact is that if Montana played under the current rules protecting QB's and restricting DB's there's not doubt in my mind that Montana would have been even more of a force. I'd still have to go with Montana...but because he has a complete body of work, you know?

Young? He was serviceable ... truthfully. I was never too impressed with Steve Young, but only because HE is the guy that fell into a good situation...I mean, I remember him as the guy who couldn't make Tampa Bay a winner...but, suddenly became "god" when he's put into a successful system. Rodgers is a complete QB, even at this stage.

Marino... all arm....I never felt he was always in control of his offense. Rodgers

Bradshaw --- again...in my opinion, a product of Chuck Noll's system. Frankly, history says that it was really a toss up between Terry Hanratty and Bradshaw. Make no mistake, I'm not dissing Bradshaw, again, show me the rings, baby ... but when you're handing the ball off to Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier ... and there's a defense like the Steel Curtain... my gawd... go look at some of those names... Mel Blount, Chris Hanburger, Hacksaw Reynolds, Joe Greene, Greenwood, Holmes and White... again, from a pure standpoint at this stage, if forced to make a statement, I'd go with Rodgers.

Favre -- You know, I don't have *** for Favre because I never idolized him...still, even though Favre was winning MVP's, his carelessness with the ball even back then always scared the living hell out of me. "You live or die with Brett Favre" became the 'vogue' saying during this time. My preference has always been for smart QB's who are careful with the ball...and so, if I had my choice - all things being equal - I'd take Rodgers.

Starr -- as I said in previous post. The gold standard is 5 Championships in 7 years. Show me the rings baby. For that system at that time ... he's the man.

Brady -- what can you say. All the guy does is perform. For a Belichek system, he's the guy ... for a McCarthy system, probably not... he's become a pocket passer and that's what's expected of him. If he had to execute an offense other than a McCarthy offense, he may or may not be as successful. From a pure thrower standpoint...he's the guy to be sure.

Archie Manning -- again, from a pure thrower standpoint if that's the only criteria ... he was good.

Peyton Manning -- pure thrower. What can you say?

Each of these guys has something different. Have I hedged enough for you? hahaha.

great analysis man.

I actually disagree with what you said about young and marino. The rest is good.

 

[weeds]

yea he has a superbowl in him i hope.

In all honesty though, when i compare rodgers and brady... both are great (brady is obviously "greater" atm since he accomplished more)... but i believe aaron rodgers ceiling is higher than brady's. Do you guys agree?

Fingers crossed...barring injury and Thompson's ability to keep a serviceable stable of great big fat guys in front of Rodgers, protecting his bacon ... the next few years could be interesting. As I said, the guy continues to astound me with his command of the entire field and his offense.

 

[whoartthou]

just curious. but how is aaron rodgers on audibles and broken down plays? I think he is one of if not the best on broken down plays, right?

Also, does he follow the offensive coorindators plans to heart, or does he like to mix things up himself (kinda like manning i guess)

 

[DevilDon]

Yes one of the most talented QBs of all time...

Great topic, man, and welcome to the forum!

(ps.: sorry for the long post. Kept writing...)

I'll tell you what RS, that was one of the best analysis I've ever read. I've often tried to put my finger on what Marino's problem was and I think you nailed it. I am not old enough to have ever seen Starr play but remember listening to those games on radio. I wasn't old enough to appreciate it at the time, I just took it for granted.
Everything in your post was on point and fair and balanced. You know, this is why I come to this board. Every now and again there is a really nice gem. Thanks for a great piece of reading.

 

[DevilDon]

great analysis man.

I actually disagree with what you said about young and marino. The rest is good.

Hey whoartthou, sorry about my initial response to your post here. I really misread you and when I'm wrong I'll step up and apologize. I should have given you the benefit of the doubt not to be a troll since you represented yourself right up front as a Patriots fan.
This was a great thread and you've provided some good insight. I can only speak for myself but I do appreciate other teams' fans perspective on the football world and please know I just misjudged you on the basis of written words. I'm sure if you were speaking those words I'd have known you weren't being disrespectful to Aaron Rodgers.
I agree with you on Young and Marino. Young just took some time to come into his best and Marino was who I always considered the best pure QB ever. Imagine how good he could have been if he'd been a student of the game. He was working on talent alone.
It makes me wonder if Brady is falling into Marino's trap, he's just so good.
Good luck to you this season, I for one would relish an opportunity to see the Patriots and the Packers in this year's SB.
And just for thought's sake, I'd think Dan Fouts and Bernie Kosar were on par with many of the greats talked about here.

 

[whoartthou]

Hey whoartthou, sorry about my initial response to your post here. I really misread you and when I'm wrong I'll step up and apologize. I should have given you the benefit of the doubt not to be a troll since you represented yourself right up front as a Patriots fan.
This was a great thread and you've provided some good insight. I can only speak for myself but I do appreciate other teams' fans perspective on the football world and please know I just misjudged you on the basis of written words. I'm sure if you were speaking those words I'd have known you weren't being disrespectful to Aaron Rodgers.
I agree with you on Young and Marino. Young just took some time to come into his best and Marino was who I always considered the best pure QB ever. Imagine how good he could have been if he'd been a student of the game. He was working on talent alone.
It makes me wonder if Brady is falling into Marino's trap, he's just so good.
Good luck to you this season, I for one would relish an opportunity to see the Patriots and the Packers in this year's SB.
And just for thought's sake, I'd think Dan Fouts and Bernie Kosar were on par with many of the greats talked about here.

all is forgiven.

What do you exactly mean by this: "it makes me wonder if brady is falling into marino's trap, hes just so good?"

Also, how does rodgers compare talent vs other greats (young, marino, etc etc)

 

[weeds]

How about you? Young and Marino ... stats aside.

 

[whoartthou]

How about you? Young and Marino ... stats aside.

how does rodgers compare to marino and young? or how do young and marino compare with one another

 

[weeds]

just curious. but how is aaron rodgers on audibles and broken down plays? I think he is one of if not the best on broken down plays, right?

Also, does he follow the offensive coorindators plans to heart, or does he like to mix things up himself (kinda like manning i guess)

I don't think that anyone watching from the stands or on TV can really state for certain how many times Rodgers audibles...not really...we can speculate and from that standpoint, I'm reasonably sure that he's allowed to audible out of any particular play at any time, but, I'd also speculate that he will have the play caller in his ear asking "ok, what did you see?" I'd venture a guess that Rodgers just goes through his checkdowns, reads and progessions with the best of them -- the best QB's in history (again, just my opinion - which as a rule of thumb, wouldn't get you across town even if you had bus token), are the SMART QB's .... with the proper camera angles you can actually watch Rodgers go through his progressions...and it's a thing of beauty.

I don't think the Pack have a lot of broken plays...which to me, for example is taking the snap and not finding a RB to hand off to. I think that the Pack have a lot of plays designed to get Rodgers' out of the pocket, I really do.

Incidentally, I think that the OC position in GB is kind of a figurehead scenario. McCarthy runs that offense and Capers runs that defense.

 

[weeds]

how does rodgers compare to marino and young? or how do young and marino compare with one another

No, no ... I was asking for your opinion because it seems as though you hold them in higher regard than I. Obviously, both great players in the Hall of Fame - I'm just somewhat indifferent to both...

 

[whoartthou]

OFF TOPIC... Holy crap what a game so far!

Our running game is on fire and bradys playing not too bad!

 

[Bogart]

I hate comparing players of a different eras and different systems; different athletic skills. All that I can say is that Joe Montana was a surgeon. There was no doubt just who the best player on the field was when Montana was executing that offense. The guy just seemed to NEVER make that critical mistake that would cost the 9'ers the game. In that regard, I see and remember a good number of those traits in Rodgers. He's smart...calculating and knows where EVERYONE in his offense are supposed to be at all times. He's young yet so his arm strength hasn't diminished yet...that's when the laser balls into double coverage start catching up on a QB...Montana didn't try many of those because Walsh would have **** a screaming worm... Rodgers is 10X the running threat that Montana was, but in that early Stanford West Coast offense that the 9'ers ran, he wasn't supposed to run...he was to dump the ball into the flats to his FB - most memorably, Roger Craig...

If I was pushed to make a statement, I'd say that in year 4 as a starter ... as memory serves me ... I'd call it a toss-up. Rodgers does a lot of things that Montana couldn't or didn't within that system ... and Montana was...well, Montana. Show me the rings, baby... you know? Fact is that if Montana played under the current rules protecting QB's and restricting DB's there's not doubt in my mind that Montana would have been even more of a force. I'd still have to go with Montana...but because he has a complete body of work, you know?

Young? He was serviceable ... truthfully. I was never too impressed with Steve Young, but only because HE is the guy that fell into a good situation...I mean, I remember him as the guy who couldn't make Tampa Bay a winner...but, suddenly became "god" when he's put into a successful system. Rodgers is a complete QB, even at this stage.

Marino... all arm....I never felt he was always in control of his offense. Rodgers

Bradshaw --- again...in my opinion, a product of Chuck Noll's system. Frankly, history says that it was really a toss up between Terry Hanratty and Bradshaw. Make no mistake, I'm not dissing Bradshaw, again, show me the rings, baby ... but when you're handing the ball off to Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier ... and there's a defense like the Steel Curtain... my gawd... go look at some of those names... Mel Blount, Chris Hanburger, Hacksaw Reynolds, Joe Greene, Greenwood, Holmes and White... again, from a pure standpoint at this stage, if forced to make a statement, I'd go with Rodgers.

Favre -- You know, I don't have *** for Favre because I never idolized him...still, even though Favre was winning MVP's, his carelessness with the ball even back then always scared the living hell out of me. "You live or die with Brett Favre" became the 'vogue' saying during this time. My preference has always been for smart QB's who are careful with the ball...and so, if I had my choice - all things being equal - I'd take Rodgers.

Starr -- as I said in previous post. The gold standard is 5 Championships in 7 years. Show me the rings baby. For that system at that time ... he's the man.

Brady -- what can you say. All the guy does is perform. For a Belichek system, he's the guy ... for a McCarthy system, probably not... he's become a pocket passer and that's what's expected of him. If he had to execute an offense other than a McCarthy offense, he may or may not be as successful. From a pure thrower standpoint...he's the guy to be sure.

Archie Manning -- again, from a pure thrower standpoint if that's the only criteria ... he was good.

Peyton Manning -- pure thrower. What can you say?

Each of these guys has something different. Have I hedged enough for you? hahaha.

Disagree with you on Marino, and Young.

Young similar to Rodgers was brought into that system of westcoast offense and that's why it worked. Yeah you can say he was loaded with good play makers, but when it came right down to depending on him, he was a threat with his legs and arm. Both of them sat on the bench while being trained into that offense. Steve Young was one of my favorite quarterbacks, and you forget, he was thrown into a very bad situation with Tampa Bay. Look at highlights of them, their O-Line and everything was very very terrible. They could have had a better quarterback and still same results with no team built around. Young sat on that bench to learn, and in the long run it helped him. In Tampa Bay they just threw him out to the wolves with no O-line to protect him.

Dan Marino played in the days quarterbacks could be killed. Sure you can say he's "All arm" but do not forget, back in the 1980's, quarterbacks could not throw the ball out of bounds, you had to force it or you'd get a penalty. People love to down the guy for his interceptions, but what's a bigger accomplishment? Drew Brees throwing for 5,000 yards a few years ago with rules favoring the quarterback, or Marino with 5,000 yards back when rules didn't help quarterbacks?
Brady had 49 TD's a few years back, and Manning too, but it didn't thrill me as much as Marino hitting 48 Touchdowns back when Quarterbacks got treated like every other player in the league. Plus, he was a playoff quarterback. Marino may not have won a Super Bowl, but he was not a quitter. No QB deserves a ring more than Jim Kelly I believe after showing up in 4 Super Bowls, but if Trent Dilfer and Ben Roethlisberger have rings, then Marino should have one.

I hate comparing quarterbacks today to quarterbacks of the past because it was such a different game. Brady can break every record there is but he's still not going to be better than Montana to me. Montana was the greatest quarterback I believe ever played the game, and he did it without rules favoring him such as all the ridiculous penalties today and the tuck rule. Also this is why guys like Moon, Kelly, and Marino stand out.

 

[whoartthou]

Disagree with you on Marino, and Young.

Young similar to Rodgers was brought into that system of westcoast offense and that's why it worked. Yeah you can say he was loaded with good play makers, but when it came right down to depending on him, he was a threat with his legs and arm. Both of them sat on the bench while being trained into that offense. Steve Young was one of my favorite quarterbacks, and you forget, he was thrown into a very bad situation with Tampa Bay. Look at highlights of them, their O-Line and everything was very very terrible. They could have had a better quarterback and still same results with no team built around. Young sat on that bench to learn, and in the long run it helped him. In Tampa Bay they just threw him out to the wolves with no O-line to protect him.

Dan Marino played in the days quarterbacks could be killed. Sure you can say he's "All arm" but do not forget, back in the 1980's, quarterbacks could not throw the ball out of bounds, you had to force it or you'd get a penalty. People love to down the guy for his interceptions, but what's a bigger accomplishment? Drew Brees throwing for 5,000 yards a few years ago with rules favoring the quarterback, or Marino with 5,000 yards back when rules didn't help quarterbacks?
Brady had 49 TD's a few years back, and Manning too, but it didn't thrill me as much as Marino hitting 48 Touchdowns back when Quarterbacks got treated like every other player in the league. Plus, he was a playoff quarterback. Marino may not have won a Super Bowl, but he was not a quitter. No QB deserves a ring more than Jim Kelly I believe after showing up in 4 Super Bowls, but if Trent Dilfer and Ben Roethlisberger have rings, then Marino should have one.

I hate comparing quarterbacks today to quarterbacks of the past because it was such a different game. Brady can break every record there is but he's still not going to be better than Montana to me. Montana was the greatest quarterback I believe ever played the game, and he did it without rules favoring him such as all the ridiculous penalties today and the tuck rule. Also this is why guys like Moon, Kelly, and Marino stand out.

good post.

Since we can only estimate... how would quarterbacks of today fair in the era of a dan marino or joe montana? How would aaron rodgers (or brady or manning or brees) perform in that era? Obviously we can't know for sure, but we can always guesstimate.

I believe similar arguments are being made in the NBA. Today's NBA is much "softer" than the late 1980s to early 1990s.

How would michael jordan peform in todays league with all those rules that favor perimeter players?

 

[Bogart]

good post.

Since we can only estimate... how would quarterbacks of today fair in the era of a dan marino or joe montana? How would aaron rodgers (or brady or manning or brees) perform in that era? Obviously we can't know for sure, but we can always guesstimate.

I believe similar arguments are being made in the NBA. Today's NBA is much "softer" than the late 1980s to early 1990s.

How would michael jordan peform in todays league with all those rules that favor perimeter players?

For MJ, he would be averaging 50 points a game with the NBA's rules today. All the players that shoot the most free throws in the recent years have all had the top selling jerseys. I knew the NBA was rigged when the Trail Blazers blew a 30 point lead over the Lakers, and I don't know anyone that has said the 2006 Finals between Miami and Dallas with Wade shooting 80 free throws was not rigged. Even last year, I think the Heat got by with many penalties to reach the Finals, especially the Chicago/Miami series, anytime the Bulls were up by 10, a Heat drive always sparked from fouls and free throws. The world knows the NBA is rigged, that's why no one is heart broken they're having a lock out.

There's MANY quarterbacks today I doubt would have made it in the Montana/Marino days.

This is why I hate it when they compare Brees to Warren Moon's 4,000 yard seasons. Don't get me wrong, I love Drew Brees, but if we were playing with those rules from back then, I don't think he would have the same stats, nor would Manning. I do however believe Rodgers would win and be a top quarterback back in those eras, but probably would get injured often and hurt his career. Bernie Kosar led the league in passing, and then his injuries really wore his talent out. Quarterbacks got injured way more often back then. If Montana was playing with these kind of rules, I'm sure the 1990 Super Bowl would have been San Francisco and Buffalo, and then we'd really know who should have won that Super Bowl.

 

[whoartthou]

For MJ, he would be averaging 50 points a game with the NBA's rules today. All the players that shoot the most free throws in the recent years have all had the top selling jerseys. I knew the NBA was rigged when the Trail Blazers blew a 30 point lead over the Lakers, and I don't know anyone that has said the 2006 Finals between Miami and Dallas with Wade shooting 80 free throws was not rigged. Even last year, I think the Heat got by with many penalties to reach the Finals, especially the Chicago/Miami series, anytime the Bulls were up by 10, a Heat drive always sparked from fouls and free throws. The world knows the NBA is rigged, that's why no one is heart broken they're having a lock out.

There's MANY quarterbacks today I doubt would have made it in the Montana/Marino days.

This is why I hate it when they compare Brees to Warren Moon's 4,000 yard seasons. Don't get me wrong, I love Drew Brees, but if we were playing with those rules from back then, I don't think he would have the same stats, nor would Manning. I do however believe Rodgers would win and be a top quarterback back in those eras, but probably would get injured often and hurt his career. Bernie Kosar led the league in passing, and then his injuries really wore his talent out. Quarterbacks got injured way more often back then. If Montana was playing with these kind of rules, I'm sure the 1990 Super Bowl would have been San Francisco and Buffalo, and then we'd really know who should have won that Super Bowl.

do you think rodgers would be winning superbowls?

I think brady would fit the 49ers system perfectly where montana played... i also think aaron rodgers could have won superbowls as well.

What do you think?

 

[whoartthou]

For MJ, he would be averaging 50 points a game with the NBA's rules today. All the players that shoot the most free throws in the recent years have all had the top selling jerseys. I knew the NBA was rigged when the Trail Blazers blew a 30 point lead over the Lakers, and I don't know anyone that has said the 2006 Finals between Miami and Dallas with Wade shooting 80 free throws was not rigged. Even last year, I think the Heat got by with many penalties to reach the Finals, especially the Chicago/Miami series, anytime the Bulls were up by 10, a Heat drive always sparked from fouls and free throws. The world knows the NBA is rigged, that's why no one is heart broken they're having a lock out.

There's MANY quarterbacks today I doubt would have made it in the Montana/Marino days.

This is why I hate it when they compare Brees to Warren Moon's 4,000 yard seasons. Don't get me wrong, I love Drew Brees, but if we were playing with those rules from back then, I don't think he would have the same stats, nor would Manning. I do however believe Rodgers would win and be a top quarterback back in those eras, but probably would get injured often and hurt his career. Bernie Kosar led the league in passing, and then his injuries really wore his talent out. Quarterbacks got injured way more often back then. If Montana was playing with these kind of rules, I'm sure the 1990 Super Bowl would have been San Francisco and Buffalo, and then we'd really know who should have won that Super Bowl.

50 points a game IMO might be pushing it... but i could easily see michael jordan averaging 40 ppg in todays soft *** NBA.

Hell, he came back at the age of 40 and lit up the league...

 

[whoartthou]

rodgers talent was on fully display against the falcons IMO

 

[whoartthou]

I was reading some nfl forums and came across the following:

"Elway is supremely naturally talented and routinely made throws and athletic plays that most QB's could not make."

Would you say the same about rodgers?

 

[PackersRS]

good post.

Since we can only estimate... how would quarterbacks of today fair in the era of a dan marino or joe montana? How would aaron rodgers (or brady or manning or brees) perform in that era? Obviously we can't know for sure, but we can always guesstimate.

I believe similar arguments are being made in the NBA. Today's NBA is much "softer" than the late 1980s to early 1990s.

How would michael jordan peform in todays league with all those rules that favor perimeter players?

The thing about past eras, not only the rules and the game was much different, but preparation and overall knowledge of the game was much different.

So Starr and those guys didn't have the knowledge about certain patterns, certain tendencies. Film break was much more rudimentary than it is today. Nowadays, if you really study, you can tell what a team runs on 1st down depending on their formation. It wasn't that case in the old days (did not live them, just read a lot. Instant Replay is a GREAT book BTW).

Rodgers got it all spoonfed to him (Brady and Manning had the same, though Manning has altered some routes and some throws). Of course it's still him recognizing defenses, it's him studying his *** off, but he didn't have to come up with all that.

Starr and Unitas did.

In that sense, one can discredit what Montana did, because Walsh was simply way ahead of the curve than everyone else. But that logic can apply to the 60's Packers, 2000's Patriots.

Heck, you can even apply to this Packers. They're the poster child for exploiting mismatches in the passing game, and for building a roster in today's NFL.

Projecting eras is impossible. You would have to consider that Rodgers wouldn't have all this knowledge available, he wouldn't have the rules protecting the passing game, etc...

His accuracy is all his, and it's out of this world. His decision making is all his. Mobility, arm strenght, etc...

But the numbers, not a single doubt it would be much different, for the worse.

And that's why Starr's 104.8 postseason QB rating is so stunning. So what those teams were build for the run? He was calling the plays. And he was the most important player when it mattered, playing out of his mind.

It's one thing if Matt Ryan is only a great QB when he has a running game and is able to work the playaction, in this era. In this passing era, if the QB isn't the focus of the team and isn't able to perform even without a running game, he is not elite.

It's another thing if he was doing it in the 60's, calling the plays.

 

[PackersRS]

I was reading some nfl forums and came across the following:

"Elway is supremely naturally talented and routinely made throws and athletic plays that most QB's could not make."

Would you say the same about rodgers?

Now, yes. But Rodgers wasn't nearly as mobile neither had the arm strenght he has now when he was in college.

Yes, it's natural to him, but he had to work his butt off in the weight room to get it. I don't know if Elway did the same, though. As long as I remember, Elway was incredibly athletic.

Brady is the same, actually. Was very skinny and didn't have a strong arm coming out of Michigan.

 

[whoartthou]

Now, yes. But Rodgers wasn't nearly as mobile neither had the arm strenght he has now when he was in college.

Yes, it's natural to him, but he had to work his butt off in the weight room to get it. I don't know if Elway did the same, though. As long as I remember, Elway was incredibly athletic.

Brady is the same, actually. Was very skinny and didn't have a strong arm coming out of Michigan.

im sure elway did something similar... i highly doubt he developed that cannon of an arm without heavy lifting.