NGT: Interesting take on Aaron Rodgers from Ross Tucker

He is the best that we will all ever see. There is a hunger inside of Brady to this day that Rodgers has never had nor will he ever have.

When Rodgers retires he will be in the conversation with Montana and Peyton for the 2nd best QB to ever put on a uniform, so he will be one of the immortals.

slow work day so its been interesting looking up stats. You just keep posting them with no context, its very odd. And I only bring up Eli because you rarely post his stats when backing up why he isn't finished, still good, etc. over the years. You basically have the opposite strategy in those threads which i've picked up on. Just pointing it out is all.

I believe in circumstance when it comes to sports. I believe in bad luck (Romo) and I believe in great luck (Brady). I can openly admit there's no way to prove it but I absolutely think its true. When more talented players (Rodgers) are still fairly intelligent and post highly efficient numbers it leads me to believe that the problem isn't them when talking about something as hard to come by as a Lombardi trophy.

There's varying degrees of said circumstance but I absolutely believe Brady landed himself into the circumstance of a lifetime, and to his credit made the best of it. Brees is also a beneficiary of this and even with that, doesn't have much separation statistically from Rodgers who I believe is in a far more inferior circumstance.

In comment 14179901 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

slow work day so its been interesting looking up stats. You just keep posting them with no context, its very odd. And I only bring up Eli because you rarely post his stats when backing up why he isn't finished, still good, etc. over the years. You basically have the opposite strategy in those threads which i've picked up on. Just pointing it out is all. I believe in circumstance when it comes to sports. I believe in bad luck (Romo) and I believe in great luck (Brady). I can openly admit there's no way to prove it but I absolutely think its true. When more talented players (Rodgers) are still fairly intelligent and post highly efficient numbers it leads me to believe that the problem isn't them when talking about something as hard to come by as a Lombardi trophy. There's varying degrees of said circumstance but I absolutely believe Brady landed himself into the circumstance of a lifetime, and to his credit made the best of it. Brees is also a beneficiary of this and even with that, doesn't have much separation statistically from Rodgers who I believe is in a far more inferior circumstance.

I always have posted Eli's stats. I've always defended him with the same arguments that you defend Rodgers with here. No O-line, sh-tty coaching, poor roster around him, but I'm always told here that Eli is the one constant, and there's no excuse. A franchise QB elevates those around him regardless.

But I have tried to stay away from Eli in this discussion so I will go back to these wild stats that you say I post out of context.

What exactly about them is out of context?

I posted their career statistics. kmed said not to just look at career numbers and instead look at points scored so I posted those for him.

I was genuinely looking up both for the first time. There was no agenda other than general curiosity.

Your reaction to them is curious. Perhaps they showed that maybe Rodgers isn't as far and away advanced as you might have originally thought?

There should be no knock against being compared to Brees, who is himself an all time great. Why does that rub you the wrong way?

That's why those were posted.

In comment 14179664 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14179651 Keith said: Quote: that's a pretty important piece of the puzzle. Rodgers rarely turns the ball over, Brees has turned it over a lot. Those are game changers. I also wouldn't focus on TD's as much as I would pts scored. I'd be curious to compare pts scored during that timeframe. Well, points for New Orleans, by year, 2006-2017 2006: 413 (25.8/g) 5th of 32 2007: 379 (23.7/g) 12th of 32 2008: 463 (28.9/g) 1st of 32 2009: 510 (31.9/g) 1st of 32 (Superbowl) 2010: 384 (24.0/g) 11th of 32 2011: 547 (34.2/g) 2nd of 32 2012: 461 (28.8/g) 3rd of 32 2013: 414 (25.9/g) 10th of 32 2014: 401 (25.1/g) 9th of 32 2015: 408 (25.5/g) 8th of 32 2016: 469 (29.3/g) 2nd of 32 2017: 448 (28.0/g) 4th of 32 Points for Green Bay, 2008-2017: 2008: 419 (26.2/g) 5th of 32 2009: 461 (28.8/g) 3rd of 32 2010: 388 (24.3/g) 10th of 32 (Superbowl) 2011: 560 (35.0/g) 1st of 32 2012: 433 (27.1/g) 5th of 32 2013: 417 (26.1/g) 8th of 32 2014: 486 (30.4/g) 1st of 32 2015: 368 (23.0/g) 15th of 32 2016: 432 (27.0/g) 4th of 32 2017: 320 (20.0/g) 21st of 32

Thx for doing the leg work and posting!

Very interesting to me. So Brees has over 100 more TD's, yet they both average the same exact PPG over their careers(I removed 2017 from Rodgers). They both average 27.5 PPG. Yet Brees has over 100 more INT's which I would bet hurt his teams chances of winning more than Rodgers.

you just lost me when you said that Rodgers didn't have a season that was close to Brees' when Rodgers actually won the MVP and had a better season the same year of Brees' best season. You also lost me when you discounted how much more efficient Rodgers has been than Brees and chalked it up to holding onto the ball more and taking sacks, something that all QB's do to varying degrees. Rodgers definitely takes more sacks, but his fumble rate is lower and his INT's are significantly lower so I can argue that its smart the way he plays.

The other factor is definitely coaching. How many times do we talk about a boneheaded McCarthy decision and how many times is Payton or Belichick making the same mistakes?

In sum, there are glaring reasons why I think Rodgers is better but interestingly, you don't think they matter (or atleast that's how your posts read).

Eli Manning got to spend 13 years playing 9 games a season indoors. Let's not pretend that isn't a major advantage.

The Pats-Packers played each other a few weeks ago. The narrative has always been that Brady doesn't have elite players around him, elevates average receivers, and that guys don't do anything when they leave New England. Watching that game, it looks like Brady has more talent around him than Aaron Rodgers does now. Rodgers has 1 good receiver who's never put up "star" numbers, a past his prime TE, and a solid RB. He sure as hell never played with a Moss or Gronk. Brady is quite possibly the GoAT, but I think we're giving him credit for something (routine plays/easy passes) that's a function of their offense.

with a Jimmy Graham in his prime or an Alvin Kamara and laugh at the possibilities. Instead its been Jermichael Finley or worse and guys like James Starks. And now Graham likely broke his thumb so he will be done another weapon.

In comment 14179926 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

you just lost me when you said that Rodgers didn't have a season that was close to Brees' when Rodgers actually won the MVP and had a better season the same year of Brees' best season. You also lost me when you discounted how much more efficient Rodgers has been than Brees and chalked it up to holding onto the ball more and taking sacks, something that all QB's do to varying degrees. Rodgers definitely takes more sacks, but his fumble rate is lower and his INT's are significantly lower so I can argue that its smart the way he plays. The other factor is definitely coaching. How many times do we talk about a boneheaded McCarthy decision and how many times is Payton or Belichick making the same mistakes? In sum, there are glaring reasons why I think Rodgers is better but interestingly, you don't think they matter (or atleast that's how your posts read).

When did these opinions get attributed to me?

Ross Tucker stated the long had opinion that Aaron Rodgers would rather hold onto the ball and take a sack than throw it away or take a chance. That's a widely held opinion by a lot of people, and has been for a long time. Is it not?

I just stated that statistically Brees's best season was better than Rodgers' best statistical season, and commented that he'd thrown for 5000 yards 5 times, something Rodgers had never done. I also stated that he had thrown 100 more TD's and 20,000 more yards in only two more seasons as starter than Rodgers.

What is so outrageous about that?

Like Jerry said, we're splitting hairs. I'm just stating that Rodgers, while great, isn't really in the best of all time discussion, which is no knock on Rodgers (at least to me).

maybe we're undervaluing Drew Brees in the discussion of greats of the era.

After looking at his numbers as a whole, he deserves a similar amount of credit to Rodgers that maybe he doesn't always get.

look at the INT's, why are we disregarding them? Wouldn't we rather a QB take a sack that turn the ball over? That's what loses games. Brees as way too many INT's and a significant amount more than Rodgers all while not scoring any more points.

Brees has led the league in INT's at least once, if not a couple times.

The biggest indicator of wins and losses is TO's, IMO and Brees has over 100 more INT's than Rodgers all while scoring the same exact amount per game. That leads to losses right there.

could be sheer number of passes thrown.

Drew Brees has completed more passes than Aaron Rodgers has attempted.

Brees 2006-2017: 5332 completions, 7789 attmepts
Rodgers 2008-2017: 3426 completions, 5280 attempts

In comment 14179943 Keith said:

Quote:

The biggest indicator of wins and losses is TO's, IMO and Brees has over 100 more INT's than Rodgers all while scoring the same exact amount per game. That leads to losses right there.

But has Rodgers won a significant amount more games than Brees?

when discussing TD's thrown, no?

per game.

In comment 14179938 Keith said:

Quote:

look at the INT's, why are we disregarding them? Wouldn't we rather a QB take a sack that turn the ball over? That's what loses games. Brees as way too many INT's and a significant amount more than Rodgers all while not scoring any more points.

In some circles these days, and believe me I vehemently disagree with this, sacks are being viewed like turnovers. Maybe that's what's being implied here...?

But I agree with you. Brees's INT ratio is 2X Rodgers's. Rodgers is from another planet...

In comment 14179947 Keith said:

Quote:

when discussing TD's thrown, no?

Well, sure. But that also meant that he was asked to do more, doesn't it?

Is there such a disparity in their win loss records to notice any significant difference between the two?

They've both won a Superbowl. But beyond that, are their career records very different?

I mean, if turnovers determine wins and losses, that should show up in the wins and losses, shouldn't it?

you want to lose games, turn the ball over. Brees has turned it over way too much. Rodgers rarely turns the ball over. Think about this:

In 11 seasons as a starter, Rodgers has only had double digit INT's for a season in 2 years(11 and 13) and that was in 2 of his first 3 seasons as a starter.

Drew Brees has had double digit INT's in 14 of 16 seasons

In comment 14179954 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14179947 Keith said: Quote: when discussing TD's thrown, no? Well, sure. But that also meant that he was asked to do more, doesn't it? Is there such a disparity in their win loss records to notice any significant difference between the two? They've both won a Superbowl. But beyond that, are their career records very different? I mean, if turnovers determine wins and losses, that should show up in the wins and losses, shouldn't it?

It could, but it also could be an indicator of their supporting casts. Are you denying that turnovers aren't a leading indicator towards W/L's?

In comment 14179926 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

you just lost me when you said that Rodgers didn't have a season that was close to Brees' when Rodgers actually won the MVP and had a better season the same year of Brees' best season. You also lost me when you discounted how much more efficient Rodgers has been than Brees and chalked it up to holding onto the ball more and taking sacks, something that all QB's do to varying degrees. Rodgers definitely takes more sacks, but his fumble rate is lower and his INT's are significantly lower so I can argue that its smart the way he plays. The other factor is definitely coaching. How many times do we talk about a boneheaded McCarthy decision and how many times is Payton or Belichick making the same mistakes? In sum, there are glaring reasons why I think Rodgers is better but interestingly, you don't think they matter (or atleast that's how your posts read).

This is a good post. Unlike baseball, where you can boil everything down to a number, that just isn't viable option in football. Circumstances play such an enormous role in the outcome. It's a variable that can tilt a career one way or another, sometimes significantly. So I think you always have to look at comparisons through that lens - albeit it is a subjective lens...

Rodgers is 30/7.

Brees is 30/14.

Brees turns the ball over twice as much. Don't get me wrong, Brees should be amongst the all time greats, but that's what differentiates him from Rodgers.

you have to factor in that one guy plays at least 8 games in a weather controlled dome on turf while the other guy plays at least 8 games out in the elements of GB. That should probably factor into the discussion as well.

In comment 14179938 Keith said:

Quote:

look at the INT's, why are we disregarding them? Wouldn't we rather a QB take a sack that turn the ball over? That's what loses games. Brees as way too many INT's and a significant amount more than Rodgers all while not scoring any more points.

Yes and No, depending on the situation. For example, it always frustrates me when I see a QB on any team throw a check down at the end of a half or game instead of giving their WR's a chance to make a play.

the yards, meh. 5k yards in a dome and/or the nice weather in Carolina/Tampa vs. 4,700 almost all outside makes it negligible for me. In the grand scheme of things its 30/40 yards per game.

I just think the throwaway of his efficiency is bullshit. Hes got 3 seasons with double digit INT's and his career high is 13. Is that really just taking sacks? How many times has Brees thrown under 10 INts in a season? Its 3 times, the same amount of times Rodgers was over.

That's simply a massive disparity.

In comment 14179978 Keith said:

Quote:

you have to factor in that one guy plays at least 8 games in a weather controlled dome on turf while the other guy plays at least 8 games out in the elements of GB. That should probably factor into the discussion as well.

At least 9 games. Atlanta is a guarantee road dome game. I think he has 11-12 this year alone.

so he will be down Graham for a while, already lost Allison for the season and Cobb for many games, among others. Yet he's thrown for 3,000 yards and a 19:1 ratio. If this pace continues it may be one of the greatest seasons you will ever see a QB play when you account for everything that has gone wrong.

In comment 14179425 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

the "greatest of all time" talk surrounding him.

Physically. He’s the most talented qb ever that is why

In comment 14179427 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

Well Brady plays in a weak division... The NFC North has never been great shakes, either.

Has nothing to do with division as it relates to the Pats. They are beating the better teams outside of the division in the regular season and the playoffs.

But I will say I’d be disappointed if I was a Packers fan or Saints fan and Rodgers/Brees finished with just one ring. Especially so as a Packers fan only getting two rings from Favre/Rodgers.

Rodgers and Brees have both been in good spots to potentially win multiple titles but couldn’t close the deal.

He doesn’t make easy passes? Okay Ross.

No doubt in my mind that AR wins just as many Supes, maybe more if he’s lining up in TB12s place. Playing with Hoodie is a huge edge. He’s the smartest person in the game next to Ernie Adams, no doubt about it. Serious question, when’s the last time you saw Belichick do something dumb? I guess sitting Butler in the Supe. But you look at the Pats and they just so rarely beat themselves.

In comment 14180100 trueblueinpw said:

Quote:

He doesn’t make easy passes? Okay Ross. No doubt in my mind that AR wins just as many Supes, maybe more if he’s lining up in TB12s place. Playing with Hoodie is a huge edge. He’s the smartest person in the game next to Ernie Adams, no doubt about it. Serious question, when’s the last time you saw Belichick do something dumb? I guess sitting Butler in the Supe. But you look at the Pats and they just so rarely beat themselves.

Ernie Adams reference...beautiful. Adams is smart but he’s Belichick’s bagman, his Geek Squad lead. And he’s not one of the two smartest men in football. It’s an insult to people like Reid, Ballard, Schneider, Dimitroff, etc.

I agree on ARod...it’s not a stretch to assume he’d have a handful of rings playing for BB...

In comment 14179460 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:

Quote:

26 years of Favre then Rodgers & only 2 titles. It just seems like the Packers should have had more with those 2 guys.

- Favre was backup QB for Falcons (1991)
- Favre did not make playoffs (1992)
- Favre lost to Dallas in divisional round (1993)
- Favre lost to Dallas in divisional round (1994)
- Favre lost to Dallas in championship game (1995)
- Favre won SB against Patriots (1996)
- Favre lost SB against Broncos (1997)
- Favre knocked out by 49ers after they finally got an RB (1998)
- Favre missed playoffs (1999)
- Favre missed playoffs (2000)
- Favre lost to Rams who won SB (2001)
- Favre lost to Falcons in wildcard round (2002)
- Favre lost to Eagles in divisional round (2003)
- Favre lost to Vikings in wildcard round (2004)
- Favre missed playoffs (2005)
- Favre missed playoffs (2006)
- Favre lost to Giants in championship game (2007)
- Jets (2008)
- Favre lost to Saints in championship game (2009)
- Favre missed playoffs and retired (2010)

Summary:

Cowboys had Packers number in early to mid 90s. Once Cowboys faded, Packers were able to get into back to back SBs going 1-1. 49ers had a last hurrah with Steve Young and took down Packers in 1998. Packers miss playoffs a few times. Then better Eagles teams took them down (Andy Reid used to coach in Green Bay).

The key question here is how good were the Packers really from 2002-2004?

Favre's last pass completion as a Packer was to a Giant.

Favre might have been robbed by officials vs. Saints in 2009.


As for Rodgers, he just faced good enough offenses and really good defenses:

2010 - Wins Super Bowl
2011 - Giants defense
2012 - 49ers offense
2013 - 49ers defense
** 2014 - Seahawks defense
2015 - Cardinals defense
2016 - Falcons offense
2017 - Missed playoffs

2011 - was maybe Favre's best statistical year throwing 46 TDs to 6 INTs. Team was maybe rusty coming off the bye. Giants were able to compete earlier so this game wasn't going to be easy either way.

2012 - This is the famous Kaepernick going off game. Niners were carried by the defense through Harbaugh era but this playoff run was all on Kaepernick.

2013 - Frozen tundra game. Niners win a defensive slugfest in Lambeau.

2014 - Packers choked a massive one here. Don't see Rodgers being at fault here despite throwing two picks. Seahawk most resilient defensive effort in entire Pete Carroll era.

2015 - Cardinals defense was violent and they had offense too. Still came down to a hail mary, then a quick walk off possession in OT via Fitzgerald.

2016 - Falcons just had unstoppable offense and enough defense to stymie Rodgers. Just could not compete.

2017 - Missed playoffs due to injury.

Rodgers lost to a lot of defenses from 2011-2016 that were the types that gave Brady problems (can get to you rushing 4). Patriots did not win one game against any of these teams from 2011-2012 (except Seahawks in SB that was very tight) and should have lost to Falcons in SB.

Rodgers IMO did his part elevating.

I see his career a lot like Steve Young's - supporting cast wasn't enough. In Rodgers case it was more defense and a bit RB....in Young's mostly RB and somewhat defense.


Overall:

Packers were rarely ever a top roster from 1992-2018. Just two really good QBs. Two QBs they lucked out on to boot (one a trade from Atlanta, the other lucky the 49ers didn't take at #1 and other teams for most of 1st round).

for Rodgers.

2008 - miss playoffs (Rodger's first year starting)
2009 - lose shootout to Cardinals in AZ. Rodgers strip sack led to walk off TD return.

Still, in 2009 it was the Saints year. Don't see Packers beating them that postseason.

In comment 14179790 arniefez said:

Quote:

Tom Brady has Belichick. Drew Brees Has Payton. Aaron Rogers has McCarthy. Switch coaches and see who wins more for their careers.

Excuses aside, Brady is a better QB than Rodgers. Would Rodgers have won more with BB? Of course, and that is true of any QB of this era, but that doesn't change the fact that he is absolutely right about Brady being better at game management.

It's not even close.

I don;t think he is just a bagman. He actually worked for the Giants and bought Belchick to the NYG. He is brilliant. Left the Giants and made a tone of money on Wall Street. Then he linked up with Belichek in NE. They say the guy he is talking to on the headset is usually Adams. I bet he has quite bit more in the grand scheme of things with him

I mean... come on. Josh McDaniel or Matt Pratricia, maybe, but not Adams. I don’t think there’s two people working in pro football that are smarter than Hoodie and Earnie.

Quote:

The key question here is how good were the Packers really from 2002-2004?

They were a 12-4, 10-6, and 10-6, won the division all three years, and had the 11th and 12th ranked defense in two out of three of those years.

I don't remember exactly but the record and division wins indicate they were pretty good.

In comment 14180288 Lines of Scrimmage said:

Quote:

I don;t think he is just a bagman. He actually worked for the Giants and bought Belchick to the NYG. He is brilliant. Left the Giants and made a tone of money on Wall Street. Then he linked up with Belichek in NE. They say the guy he is talking to on the headset is usually Adams. I bet he has quite bit more in the grand scheme of things with him

I know Adams's story. I just think this myth has been created about him because he's this behind the scenes, shadowy figure. He is a smart guy, but to call him one of the two smartest guys in the NFL is a ridiculous stretch...

In comment 14180350 bw in dc said:

Quote:

In comment 14180288 Lines of Scrimmage said: Quote: I don;t think he is just a bagman. He actually worked for the Giants and bought Belchick to the NYG. He is brilliant. Left the Giants and made a tone of money on Wall Street. Then he linked up with Belichek in NE. They say the guy he is talking to on the headset is usually Adams. I bet he has quite bit more in the grand scheme of things with him I know Adams's story. I just think this myth has been created about him because he's this behind the scenes, shadowy figure. He is a smart guy, but to call him one of the two smartest guys in the NFL is a ridiculous stretch...

Ridiculous? You listed above that such a statement about Adams was insulting to people like Thomas Dimitroff. Can you walk me around me that one? What has Dimitroff got that Adams doesn't have in spades? Not even sure how is Dimitroff one of the best minds in football. Was Reese one of the best minds in football when he was winning here? Were you talking about Chris Ballard? You really think he's brighter than Adams? And Big Red is having another great run through the regular season - and no doubt he's a great mind in football - but - he's also well known around these parts for doing one fairly stupid thing per game.

Don't get me wrong bw - you throw up some good smart football people but I don't know that I'd take any one of them over Adams and I certainly wouldn't take any two of them over Belichick and Adams.

It's not really that hard.

Also Rodgers over Favre. IMO easily.

In comment 14180356 trueblueinpw said:

Quote:

Ridiculous? You listed above that such a statement about Adams was insulting to people like Thomas Dimitroff. Can you walk me around me that one? What has Dimitroff got that Adams doesn't have in spades? Not even sure how is Dimitroff one of the best minds in football. Was Reese one of the best minds in football when he was winning here? Were you talking about Chris Ballard? You really think he's brighter than Adams? And Big Red is having another great run through the regular season - and no doubt he's a great mind in football - but - he's also well known around these parts for doing one fairly stupid thing per game. Don't get me wrong bw - you throw up some good smart football people but I don't know that I'd take any one of them over Adams and I certainly wouldn't take any two of them over Belichick and Adams.

When Adams is a GM or VP of Football Operations - where he’s building a team, evaluating talent, managing the cap - or a coach - building a game plan, motivating, making adjustments, etc - then let’s talk.

Until then, you really are making this enormous leap for a guy who has a niche role for the Pats. And that just doesn’t equal this title of one of the two smartest men in the NFL...

In comment 14180243 NINEster said:

Quote:

In comment 14179460 SFGFNCGiantsFan said: Quote: 26 years of Favre then Rodgers & only 2 titles. It just seems like the Packers should have had more with those 2 guys. - Favre was backup QB for Falcons (1991) - Favre did not make playoffs (1992) - Favre lost to Dallas in divisional round (1993) - Favre lost to Dallas in divisional round (1994) - Favre lost to Dallas in championship game (1995) - Favre won SB against Patriots (1996) - Favre lost SB against Broncos (1997) - Favre knocked out by 49ers after they finally got an RB (1998) - Favre missed playoffs (1999) - Favre missed playoffs (2000) - Favre lost to Rams who won SB (2001) - Favre lost to Falcons in wildcard round (2002) - Favre lost to Eagles in divisional round (2003) - Favre lost to Vikings in wildcard round (2004) - Favre missed playoffs (2005) - Favre missed playoffs (2006) - Favre lost to Giants in championship game (2007) - Jets (2008) - Favre lost to Saints in championship game (2009) - Favre missed playoffs and retired (2010) Summary: Cowboys had Packers number in early to mid 90s. Once Cowboys faded, Packers were able to get into back to back SBs going 1-1. 49ers had a last hurrah with Steve Young and took down Packers in 1998. Packers miss playoffs a few times. Then better Eagles teams took them down (Andy Reid used to coach in Green Bay). The key question here is how good were the Packers really from 2002-2004? Favre's last pass completion as a Packer was to a Giant. Favre might have been robbed by officials vs. Saints in 2009. As for Rodgers, he just faced good enough offenses and really good defenses: 2010 - Wins Super Bowl 2011 - Giants defense 2012 - 49ers offense 2013 - 49ers defense ** 2014 - Seahawks defense 2015 - Cardinals defense 2016 - Falcons offense 2017 - Missed playoffs 2011 - was maybe Favre's best statistical year throwing 46 TDs to 6 INTs. Team was maybe rusty coming off the bye. Giants were able to compete earlier so this game wasn't going to be easy either way. 2012 - This is the famous Kaepernick going off game. Niners were carried by the defense through Harbaugh era but this playoff run was all on Kaepernick. 2013 - Frozen tundra game. Niners win a defensive slugfest in Lambeau. 2014 - Packers choked a massive one here. Don't see Rodgers being at fault here despite throwing two picks. Seahawk most resilient defensive effort in entire Pete Carroll era. 2015 - Cardinals defense was violent and they had offense too. Still came down to a hail mary, then a quick walk off possession in OT via Fitzgerald. 2016 - Falcons just had unstoppable offense and enough defense to stymie Rodgers. Just could not compete. 2017 - Missed playoffs due to injury. Rodgers lost to a lot of defenses from 2011-2016 that were the types that gave Brady problems (can get to you rushing 4). Patriots did not win one game against any of these teams from 2011-2012 (except Seahawks in SB that was very tight) and should have lost to Falcons in SB. Rodgers IMO did his part elevating. I see his career a lot like Steve Young's - supporting cast wasn't enough. In Rodgers case it was more defense and a bit RB....in Young's mostly RB and somewhat defense. Overall: Packers were rarely ever a top roster from 1992-2018. Just two really good QBs. Two QBs they lucked out on to boot (one a trade from Atlanta, the other lucky the 49ers didn't take at #1 and other teams for most of 1st round).

Yeah, I think the only times the Packers had close to a complete team were in the late 90s and early 2010s when they won SBs. The best team of the Rodgers era was 2011 when they went 15-1 and got knocked out by the Giants. In the Favre era they had good teams after 1999 but not the best team

to measure QBs by citing stats as essentially the single measuring stick when determining the true value of that QB.

Only other players and coaches really know. They know how often that QB changes plays to something that worked perfectly (as just one example). How a QB does all of the other things on the field as a leader that cannot be measured.

If I can give one other example on the other site of the ball it would be Mike Singletary. Sure, he racked up the tackles but his true greatness came from the things that do not show up on the stat sheet.

Fall apart and wasting three years of a franchise QB because he couldn't put a decent offensive line together by busting on his draft picks. Let's not throw Roses at Schneider anymore. In fact, one could probably argue that Schneider owes a lot to Scot McCloughan. As soon as he left the talent level on the Seahawks began to trend south.

In comment 14180636 bw in dc said:

Quote:

In comment 14180356 trueblueinpw said: Quote: Ridiculous? You listed above that such a statement about Adams was insulting to people like Thomas Dimitroff. Can you walk me around me that one? What has Dimitroff got that Adams doesn't have in spades? Not even sure how is Dimitroff one of the best minds in football. Was Reese one of the best minds in football when he was winning here? Were you talking about Chris Ballard? You really think he's brighter than Adams? And Big Red is having another great run through the regular season - and no doubt he's a great mind in football - but - he's also well known around these parts for doing one fairly stupid thing per game. Don't get me wrong bw - you throw up some good smart football people but I don't know that I'd take any one of them over Adams and I certainly wouldn't take any two of them over Belichick and Adams. When Adams is a GM or VP of Football Operations - where he’s building a team, evaluating talent, managing the cap - or a coach - building a game plan, motivating, making adjustments, etc - then let’s talk. Until then, you really are making this enormous leap for a guy who has a niche role for the Pats. And that just doesn’t equal this title of one of the two smartest men in the NFL...

A niche roll? A bag man? *When* he coaches or builds a game plan? Serious question, are you sure you know who Adams is? It’s so completely not leap to say he’s one of the smartest people in football. You really think Belichick keeps him around for the fuck of it?

by seasons end. But yeah his impact isn’t that big.

When is Belichick getting fired? Payton?

In comment 14180951 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

by seasons end. But yeah his impact isn’t that big. When is Belichick getting fired? Payton?

Guy has been coaching for over a decade and has a SB trophy. How many teams sign up for that?

winning the Super Bowl almost a decade ago is irrelevant now, that juice has runout for quite some time, IMO.