Is Aaron Rodgers an elite QB?

[DevilDon]

I think this depends on what you consider "elite". If you use a grading scale form A+ to F on a curve you have 13 grades.
32 teams starting QBs so roughly 2.5 QBs per grade.
So is an A+ starting QB necessary to be "elite"? Could a solid A be considered elite?
Even at that rate, the argument can be made that AR is in the top 2.5 with a toss up with Brees. If you include A's then you have elite status for certain with Brees and Rivers in there too. (Or Rapistburger if you're inclined to weight SB wins heavily)
I think the term will be applied to AR more routinely after this superb season, others have mentioned it, he just hasn't done it long enough. But people's eyes are open to him now.

 

[Kitten]

I think this depends on what you consider "elite". If you use a grading scale form A+ to F on a curve you have 13 grades.
32 teams starting QBs so roughly 2.5 QBs per grade.
So is an A+ starting QB necessary to be "elite"? Could a solid A be considered elite?
Even at that rate, the argument can be made that AR is in the top 2.5 with a toss up with Brees. If you include A's then you have elite status for certain with Brees and Rivers in there too. (Or Rapistburger if you're inclined to weight SB wins heavily)
I think the term will be applied to AR more routinely after this superb season, others have mentioned it, he just hasn't done it long enough. But people's eyes are open to him now.

I agree. It can be somewhat subjective in terms of criteria. Also consider some people factor longevity into the equation. They think a QB has to be in the league "X" amount of years before they begin to consider him elite. I base my judgement on both quantity and quality. Meaning, Aaron I take into consideration what Aaron has done with his 3 short years in the league and therefore define him elite by the numbers he has put up in relative years. The SB win also factors into Aaron's favor. Even with the 13 grade scale, you have to consider what criteria defines an A+ QB and so forth. Then consider subjectivity within that criteria. It's more of a matter of opinion to some people and not as much rooted in actual facts and statistics.

 

[ivo610]

in an argument right now with someone about Manning vs Rodgers. His argument was "his peers think he is the better player, nfl networks top 100 players proves he is the better player." I laugh

 

[DevilDon]

in an argument right now with someone about Manning vs Rodgers. His argument was "his peers think he is the better player, nfl networks top 100 players proves he is the better player." I laugh

Yes, and there's longevity to consider as Kitten says. So BF was a certain elite QB for awhile, he wasn't near that his last year or for a couple of seasons. So was he considered elite last year?
Is Manning going to continue to be elite or will Rodgers and Brees supplant hiim.
But it's like this, if you were starting an expansion team in the NFL, which QB would you choose to start tomorrow? Yea, right?

 

[PackersRS]

in an argument right now with someone about Manning vs Rodgers. His argument was "his peers think he is the better player, nfl networks top 100 players proves he is the better player." I laugh

Okay, completely agree, but how's that different from a guy being voted All-Pro? One is vote by peers, other is vote by journalists. Still none requires any kind of criteria whatsoever.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

The answer is yes. No further discussion needed. Lol. GO PACK!

 

[bornnraisedwhodat]

I dont think it's too early. The kid is elite. But I would like to see him do more so he can cement his status. But what he's shown these pass to seasons is elite QB play.

 

[PackMan13x]

I didn't even read any of the replies. He is the definition of elite QB. Manning earned the right to be overrated in the twilight of his career. That is all.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

I wouldn't say Manning is overrated. 33 TDs each of the last two seasons. 16 picks and threw for 4700 yards. The guy isn't overrated. He's a very good QB and a good leader. He put up those stats on a one dimensional team with two of his favorite receiving targets injured last season and no running game. All of this at the age of 35. Manning is better than Tom Brady in my mind.

 

[ivo610]

I wouldn't say Manning is overrated. 33 TDs each of the last two seasons. 16 picks and threw for 4700 yards. The guy isn't overrated. He's a very good QB and a good leader. He put up those stats on a one dimensional team with two of his favorite receiving targets injured last season and no running game. All of this at the age of 35. Manning is better than Tom Brady in my mind.

Manning at best is the 4th best QB at this point. (rs will love this) Bradys QB rating was nearly 20 points higher last season. To be fair I only think QB rating works comparing same era Qbs and not over different generations.

 

[PackersRS]

Manning at best is the 4th best QB at this point. (rs will love this) Bradys QB rating was nearly 20 points higher last season. To be fair I only think QB rating works comparing same era Qbs and not over different generations.

Yes I do love it. And your point is very fair. I just think QB rating do co-relate, but with some alterations. I tend to think it's a 5 to 10 point readjust per era (10-20 years, depending on the rules and innovations). And I also think YPA needs to be accounted. To make it clear, I don't think a guy that had 100 rating necessarily had a better game/season than a guy that had 93 rating, but the 100 rating guy sure had a better game/season than an 80 rating guy. QB ratings stabilish tiers.

But as I said, very fair point. And, still, Starr is the #2 all time in postseason QB rating.

And regarding Mannng, funny enough, his postseason QB rating the last 3 years is far superior to Brady's.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

If I had to pick one quarterback to start a team with it would be Aaron Rodgers and then Peyton Manning. In that order. No questions asked about that in my mind.

 

[PackersRS]

If I had to pick one quarterback to start a team with it would be Aaron Rodgers and then Peyton Manning. In that order. No questions asked about that in my mind.

Personally I would never start a franchise with a 35 year old players, but that's just me.

BTW, here's my very personal and subjective list for QBs I'd like to have for next season (not 5 years from now, not career list, for next season).

1) Rodgers. The explanation is in this thread already, but in short, best regular season QB rating, best postseason QB rating, just won the SB while having one of the best postseason performances of all time.
2) Brees. Second best to Rodgers in QB rating and performance, regular season and postseason, the last 3 years. Also IMHO best leader in the NFL.
3) Rivers. Best regular season of the last 3 years, and puts up monsterous YPA, but postseason hasn't been as impressive as the other guys. Still is young and has proven he can play through pain and play well. Plays in an overrated team, though, with a stupid HC and an even stupider GM.
4) Brady. Hasn't played well in the postseason, but still is Brady.
5) Manning. He has played well both in regular season and postseason, but not all the time, and has made some really stupid mistakes that have costed his team. Still, is Manning.
6) Roethlisberger. If he's in any other team than Pittsburgh, he doesn't win a single SB. A deadly, deadly QB if he's able to scramble, but not the smartest QBs if contained. Doesn't play well in the postseason, and though has some big winning drives, usually the team is in that condition because of him, making mistakes or not making plays earlier in the game.
7) Josh Freeman. This kid is gonna be huge, but is still a kid that has never played a playoff game.

 

[ivo610]

Yes I do love it. And your point is very fair. I just think QB rating do co-relate, but with some alterations. I tend to think it's a 5 to 10 point readjust per era (10-20 years, depending on the rules and innovations). And I also think YPA needs to be accounted. To make it clear, I don't think a guy that had 100 rating necessarily had a better game/season than a guy that had 93 rating, but the 100 rating guy sure had a better game/season than an 80 rating guy. QB ratings stabilish tiers.

But as I said, very fair point. And, still, Starr is the #2 all time in postseason QB rating.

And regarding Mannng, funny enough, his postseason QB rating the last 3 years is far superior to Brady's.

Not sure how I feel about adjusting. But I agree on YPA, it has held steady through out nfl history.

QB rating doesnt take into consideration sacks, something that skews the manning big ben comparisons (last season ben had a higher rating but took more sacks per game)

 

[ivo610]

If I had to pick one quarterback to start a team with it would be Aaron Rodgers and then Peyton Manning. In that order. No questions asked about that in my mind.

The injured neck, declining passer rating, and age are what would prevent me from picking Manning. Plus he is like Favre in the post season.

 

[ivo610]

Personally I would never start a franchise with a 35 year old players, but that's just me.

BTW, here's my very personal and subjective list for QBs I'd like to have for next season (not 5 years from now, not career list, for next season).

1) Rodgers. The explanation is in this thread already, but in short, best regular season QB rating, best postseason QB rating, just won the SB while having one of the best postseason performances of all time.
2) Brees. Second best to Rodgers in QB rating and performance, regular season and postseason, the last 3 years. Also IMHO best leader in the NFL.
3) Rivers. Best regular season of the last 3 years, and puts up monsterous YPA, but postseason hasn't been as impressive as the other guys. Still is young and has proven he can play through pain and play well. Plays in an overrated team, though, with a stupid HC and an even stupider GM.
4) Brady. Hasn't played well in the postseason, but still is Brady.
5) Manning. He has played well both in regular season and postseason, but not all the time, and has made some really stupid mistakes that have costed his team. Still, is Manning.
6) Roethlisberger. If he's in any other team than Pittsburgh, he doesn't win a single SB. A deadly, deadly QB if he's able to scramble, but not the smartest QBs if contained. Doesn't play well in the postseason, and though has some big winning drives, usually the team is in that condition because of him, making mistakes or not making plays earlier in the game.
7) Josh Freeman. This kid is gonna be huge, but is still a kid that has never played a playoff game.

I have a similar list, maybe Bradford in there somwhere. Big Ben has something though that few other QBs have. He is insanely difficult to bring down and extends plays way longer than they should have gone. His ability to make a winning drive in a 7-3 game with 2 minutes left in the 4th in unreal.

I would take Rivers 2nd myself and big ben 3rd. Vick might make the list as well. unsure.

 

[greenandgold]

It amazes me that people still think Bradford is the *******.

He's done nothing to impress me yet.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

"start a franchise" was a poor choice of wording. Personally I like Peyton Manning a lot. I respect him as a football player. He's a hard working intelligent player. I love the way he plays.

 

[ivo610]

"start a franchise" was a poor choice of wording. Personally I like Peyton Manning a lot. I respect him as a football player. He's a hard working intelligent player. I love the way he plays.

I dont think anyone prepares more than Peyton. Also this really helps me like him.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ch-erbmxO4&feature=related]‪The Real Peyton Manning‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ivo610]

It amazes me that people still think Bradford is the *******.

He's done nothing to impress me yet.

well he is 23 and wasnt bad as a rookie...

the conversation was what QB do you start a team with, Bradford is the youngest QB in the league (along with Freeman) that you can say, "hey he might be a great QB in a few years."Its about balancing age with ability. No one said he is the 2nd coming of Bart Starr, but honestly for a rookie he did great. I am struggling to name a single WR on the rams, so its not like he was surrounded by great players like Marino was as a rookie.

 

[PackMan13x]

I wouldn't say Manning is overrated. 33 TDs each of the last two seasons. 16 picks and threw for 4700 yards. The guy isn't overrated. He's a very good QB and a good leader. He put up those stats on a one dimensional team with two of his favorite receiving targets injured last season and no running game. All of this at the age of 35. Manning is better than Tom Brady in my mind.

He is one of, if not the best ever. But he will never again be #1 or #2 in the league, which is where he is still ranked and probably will be until he retires. It may only be slightly overrated, but overrated nonetheless.

 

[lookoutblock]

Brees isn't thought of as an elite QB?

 

[Forget Favre]

Brees isn't thought of as an elite QB?

Go back and read some of my posts as to why I could have been mistaken by mentioning that.

 

[dansz15]

The first thought that came to mind when I read that thread title:

"Is beer good? Duhhh".

 

[PackersRS]

It amazes me that people still think Bradford is the *******.

He's done nothing to impress me yet.

Here are some Bradford's stats:

Positives:

- Threw A LOT. 590 attempts for a rookie record, and #3 in the league.
- Completed 60% of his passes, which for a rookie is great.
- Threw more TDs than INTS, and a very good 2.5 INT% (INTS per attempt). Very good for a rookie.


Negatives:

- Had a putrid 6 YPA, 30th in the league, only Jimmy Clausen had worse
- Had an average 76.5 QB rating, 25th in the league, surpasses by the likes of Donovan McNabb, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Alex Smith...
- Had an awful 36 passes for over 20 yards (including screens and such), good for 22nd in the league.
- Had a terrible 4 passes for over 40 yards, 24th in the league.

So, to sum it up, Bradford was accurate, careful with the ball, and was used a lot. But he didn't make many plays, didn't complete many deep balls, and overall was nothing more than an average game manager.

Considering he was a rookie in a bad team, he had a good season. But nothing that even comes close to indicate he's gonna be an elite QB, not on what he accomplished in the season, that is.

So, what explains the big change in the W column? Defense.

On offense, they were only 26th in PPG, with a bad 18.1 average. But it was a progression from the 2009 Rams, who were dead last in the league with 10.9 YPG. While an improvement, still a bad offense.

But on defense, the improvement was big. From a horrible 27.2 PPG in 2009, 31st in the league, they jumped to 12th in the league, with a respectable 20.5 PPG.

So, with a big improvement on defense, and an easier schedule, in an even easier division, was the main cause.