ThxJackVainisi - again...keep posting all the stats you want. They prove nothing other than Rodgers is an unreal QB and the stats you show just prove it. And since when is a 20 yard pass considered a shot down field?! lol Yes Jack, I can promise you (and your little stats would show it), there are many MANY of those 20 yard passes that were 10-15 yard thrown balls. A 10-15 yard pass is not a big play down field. Only a fool would not understand that.
I've tried to be nice but your "fool" reference and so on ? .....
You my friend do NOT have a clue. People can question Rodgers on a number of things. HOWEVER, anyone that would suggest Aaron Rodgers has a problem taking what defenses give him:
A. Knows ZERO about football. As in - NOTHING
B. Doesn't watch much NFL football and listen to coach and player and professional input on players. If you did, you would know that one of the main things you'll hear is that Rodgers is one of, if not "the" smartest QB in the game and he'll take what teams give him. That's what makes him hard to beat and it's exactly what the pros say about him. It's exactly what we've been hearing for years!
C. You are just about as non-analytical as they come. Aaron Rodgers is shattering passing records with every year he plays. If he, as you say, has a problem with holding onto the ball for the sake of looking for the big play rather than taking what teams give him, he wouldn't be breaking those records.
Again...maybe you aren't even reading my posts in full so you're not hearing. There's a giant difference between the debate over "Does Aaron Rodgers hold the ball too long" verses "Does Aaron Rodgers have a problem holding the ball too long because (as you say) he always wants to make the big play and he needs to take what the defense gives him."
The Derp is strong in this one.
See Bob McGinn's take on Rodgers play:
Mike McCarthy's game plan lacked punch. He decided to run against Fangio's two-shell secondary from spread formations, throw short with check-downs and screens and try to get Rodgers out on extended plays. Another part of the problem was the quickness and speed of the inside linebackers in their matchup coverage underneath. In the first half, Rodgers was indecisive. He held the ball 4.3 seconds on the first sack, then fumbled in 3.8 seconds after being scrunched by Brooks and Aldon Smith. For Rodgers, who fumbled just 17 times in 53 games from 2010-'12, it was his fifth fumble in 10 games this season.
Rodgers was at least partially responsible for three of the four sacks. At times, he had receivers open but thought better of it and decided not to take the chance downfield. Fangio forced Rodgers to be patient, and it's not a game that he prefers to play. In the second half, he ignited the team with two impromptu plays. Trapped by McDonald after his bull rush through Dietrich-Smith, Rodgers managed to get out and with eyes up spotted Cobb behind Cox for 26. On the next series, James Starks and Newhouse didn't react well to a rare slot blitz. Rodgers ducked inside of the onrushing Cox and hit Cobb again for 25. Other than that, his longest completion was 19 yards.
Read more from Journal Sentinel:
http://www.jsonline.com/mainheadlines/sports/rating-the-packers-vs-49ers-b99178387z1-238999221.html#ixzz2pkDLM1Rc
That Aaron Rodgers has a habit of holding the ball too long has been a frequent topic of conversation since the mid point of 2012. If you think this criticism is unique then quite frankly you must be living under a rock.
Is Rodgers one of the best quarterbacks in the league, certainly. Is he one of the great quarterbacks to play the game, absolutely. But does his game have holes, yes. Right now Rodgers has developed the same sort of maddening habit that Brett Favre developed following his ascension to super star status. Where Favre would kill drives by trying to force big plays which too frequently resulted in picks, Rodgers kills drives by trying to force big plays and gets sacked.
Now is Aaron Rodgers a deity or an infallible Godhead, no he is not. Does his play occasionally warrant criticism, yes it does.