NGT: Interesting take on Aaron Rodgers from Ross Tucker

why Rodgers hasn't won more in Green Bay but I didn't think it would go over well.

Especially since he's always referenced as the type of QB who can carry a team and make up for just about any deficiency.

My own opinion is that part of it has been durability. They've lost a few seasons to his injuries. But there is something else I'm not sure I can explain. He's had good offensive lines, very good skill players, one head coach/system, and a very stable organization.

the "greatest of all time" talk surrounding him.

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

I think Rodgers is hurt by a bad head coach more than anything.

In comment 14179418 Chris684 said:

Quote:

why Rodgers hasn't won more in Green Bay but I didn't think it would go over well. Especially since he's always referenced as the type of QB who can carry a team and make up for just about any deficiency. My own opinion is that part of it has been durability. They've lost a few seasons to his injuries. But there is something else I'm not sure I can explain. He's had good offensive lines, very good skill players, one head coach/system, and a very stable organization.

I thin durability is a huge issue with him and his size plays into that. But I also think he props up that team and masks a lot of their flaws. Have they really been run that well the last 5 years?

But overall QB, I think Brady deserves it.

that hurt their chances of winning. As did the HC. He's a great QB, he's not the best ever, IMO. He's certainly not perfect though.

For really being made of glass, unable to win the big one w ample opportunities, and struggling at times.

John Elway he is not.

If the media rips Eli Manning, Brett Favre, Matt Ryan for their inefficiencies why don’t they ever get on this guy when he falls apart or stinks?

I just don’t see him as being an alltime top 10.. He had the fortune of playing in the offensive passing easy era and really hasn’t won anymore than the others.

I think Rodgers has been hurt more (rings-wise) but a defense that has let him down too many times. Didn't he lose something like 7 straight OT games (including a few postseason) without ever touching the ball?

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

In comment 14179425 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

the "greatest of all time" talk surrounding him.

I think he’s up there but that coach/GM has been terrible for years. I think Rodgers often tries to do too much which is a blessing and a curse - but I get it since McCarthy sucks.

and Rodgers doesn't?

Even after Rodgers shit pass on 3rd and 2. All Seattle needed basically was a first down and then run the clock out. Which ended up happening.

How someone could say they don't see Rodgers as an all-time top 10 QB is astounding.

.

behind Brady and Peyton.

His completely leans on Rodgers ability to improvise and create plays. Of course he is having difficulty with the routine when his coach is asking 5th and 6th round rookie draft picks to consistently win one on one. They don't scheme anybody open. I see a coach that hasn't evolved because he hasn't had to with Rodgers as his QB. There's a reason that McAdoo and Philbin failed miserably once they got their shot.

Keep in mind, they're still a Top 10 offense with Rodgers playing on one leg.

In comment 14179462 Chris684 said:

Quote:

and Rodgers doesn't?

Probably because Rodgers, by any objective measure, has been a better playoff QB than Peyton Manning.

In comment 14179432 BrettNYG10 said:

Quote:

I think Rodgers is hurt by a bad head coach more than anything.

+1

Without McCarthy. McCarthy is a very very good offensive mind.

In comment 14179492 dep026 said:

Quote:

Without McCarthy. McCarthy is a very very good offensive mind.

Sure he is

In comment 14179492 dep026 said:

Quote:

Without McCarthy. McCarthy is a very very good offensive mind.

You have this backwards.

Swap Brady and Rodgers, so Rodgers is playing for Belichick and Brady is playing for McCarthy - who do you think wins more in that scenario?

that a QB, while having more influence than any other position, still has less influence than everything else, overall. He's only on the field for about 40-45% of his team's plays and when he's on the field, he still has to rely on the performance of 10 other teammates.

It's the ultimate team game. It's similar to pitcher wins. Look at what Jacob deGrom did this season. Third lowest ERA since lowering the mound in 1969 (non-strike year), 29 consecutive games of 3 or fewer runs allowed. And he needed his last start just to get to 10-9.

There is so much out of the control of a QB (or pitcher).

Is a good QB but overrated — and it looks like Chicago and Minny will be leaving GB behind in the division moving forward.

In comment 14179465 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

How someone could say they don't see Rodgers as an all-time top 10 QB is astounding.

Some people will engage in any mental contortions, no matter how ridiculous, in order to fluff up Eli Manning's career.

But as an offensive mind... he’s very very good. He had success at NO as a coordinator and his offense in GB have always been good.

Sure having Rodgers helps... but I love his schemes and play design. He does stupid things as a HC. But that’s not what I am referring too.

In comment 14179474 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

In comment 14179462 Chris684 said: Quote: and Rodgers doesn't? Probably because Rodgers, by any objective measure, has been a better playoff QB than Peyton Manning.

Career postseason #s:
Peyton: 52% win% 2 rings 63.2% comp% 271.8 y/g 40:25 TD:INT 3.7% sack%
Rodgers: 56% win% 1 ring 63.5% comp% 262.2 y/g 36:10 TD:INT 6.2% sack%

Assuming fumbles are comparable, Rodgers did a better job taking care of the ball which is significant, but the rest of the #s are a push or advantage Peyton.

And yes, Peyton was a shell of himself when he got ring #2, but those last 2 seasons in Denver also negatively impacted all of his rate stats (comp%, y/g, sack%, etc).

I think we apply too much credit on coaching.

I don't know for sure that we do, but I think we might.

How is it that only one coach on the planet, Belichick, can consistently put his QB in a position to succeed, but every other coach, sets the QB up to fail, or at least isn't helping the QB enough.

Do you think it's even a possibility that Brady is as much a reason for the Patriots success as Belichick?

And that McCarthy isn't as much to blame for the lack of ring success in GB for Rodgers and maybe there are multiple factors and if Belichick was coaching GB the results would be the same or close?

Not saying anything definitively this is all opinion, but I honestly don't know how much credit the coaches deserve/blame they should get.

In comment 14179500 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

Swap Brady and Rodgers, so Rodgers is playing for Belichick and Brady is playing for McCarthy - who do you think wins more in that scenario?

THats my take. Aaron Rodger would be successful in any offense under any HC, IMO. I don’t think the same can be said for Brady especially if he started out under someone other than B.B.

Brees over Rodgers

McCarthy is a very good offensive mind. His system has worked for more than one starting qb. There has to be something to that. However his skills as an actual HC are questionable.

In comment 14179509 giants#1 said:

Quote:

In comment 14179474 arcarsenal said: Quote: In comment 14179462 Chris684 said: Quote: and Rodgers doesn't? Probably because Rodgers, by any objective measure, has been a better playoff QB than Peyton Manning. Career postseason #s: Peyton: 52% win% 2 rings 63.2% comp% 271.8 y/g 40:25 TD:INT 3.7% sack% Rodgers: 56% win% 1 ring 63.5% comp% 262.2 y/g 36:10 TD:INT 6.2% sack% Assuming fumbles are comparable, Rodgers did a better job taking care of the ball which is significant, but the rest of the #s are a push or advantage Peyton. And yes, Peyton was a shell of himself when he got ring #2, but those last 2 seasons in Denver also negatively impacted all of his rate stats (comp%, y/g, sack%, etc).

Only 4 fewer TD passes in 10 fewer games. 15 fewer INT's. 99.4 QBR to Peyton's 87.4. Winning% and completion% are about a push, but I think the other stuff is quite a bit more significant. Rodgers has generally been a better playoff performer. Peyton really didn't even play well in the playoffs when he won with IND. 3 TD passes in 4 games - 7 picks. If the defense hadn't come alive, they probably don't survive that year.

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.

Perhaps they could have, if not for Eli getting in their way a few times!

“Too often doesn't make the routine play“

Too often, my ass.

And if we're talking about systems and offensive minds - go back and watch what the Packers looked like without Aaron Rodgers. When they were playing with guys like Scott Tolzein or Brett Hundley, how'd they fare?

Conversely, how have the Patriots fared when Brady has been out? They won 11 games with Matt Cassell. They won 3 of 4 with Jacoby Brissett.

Belichick is a far better coach than Mike McCarthy. Not even close.

Peyton usually played indoors. His playoff totals on the road or neutral territory are like 9 TDs to 14 INTS. At home it’s 31 TDs and 11 Ints. Rodgers is 25/9 on the road and the rest at home in the cold.

It’s a significant different IMO.

McCarthy is an underachieving HC. Nothing to compare. I still think McCarthy has a good offensive system. He has a good offensive mind, but again like I have stated, questionable HC who hasn't done with what he's had imo

Rodgers' top 100 throws are probably better than any other QB in NFL history's top 100 throws imo. At his best, he's just the perfect combination of accuracy, power, and mobility.

But he's too often conservative and doesn't make the simple plays or avoid taking sacks as Ross mentions.

Brady's the best I've seen. Peyton vs. Rodgers is a tough one, I lean Peyton for durability/longevity purposes as of now. Brees vs. Rodgers is a pretty clear victory for Rodgers in my eyes.

Isn’t good either because if you switched brees and Brady...

No one said McCarthy is a better HC than Bill. All I am saying is McCarthy is a very good offensive mind.

In comment 14179540 Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy said:

Quote:

Rodgers' top 100 throws are probably better than any other QB in NFL history's top 100 throws imo. At his best, he's just the perfect combination of accuracy, power, and mobility. But he's too often conservative and doesn't make the simple plays or avoid taking sacks as Ross mentions. Brady's the best I've seen. Peyton vs. Rodgers is a tough one, I lean Peyton for durability/longevity purposes as of now. Brees vs. Rodgers is a pretty clear victory for Rodgers in my eyes.

x2

Against a team and a QB that doesn't get much respect from most people around here.

Peyton lost what, twice in Foxboro, in horrible weather against Belichick's defenses.

Rodgers won his Sb in a dome.

Peyton won one of his in the only rain Super Bowl.

he's a good HC, which is his job - he's the HC.

The Packers have had limited success at the playoff level because their head coach isn't good at his job. The same could be said for their FO, which underwent some changes recently so it remains to be seen if that's still the case.

and taking sacks to boost his completion percentages and numbers is not a new knock. It's been around as long as I can remember watching him. I remember it being discussed all the time on BBI prior to his Superbowl win.

Bottom line - Aaron Rodgers has been covering up a lot of holes for a long time. And he's actually sort of being penalized for it.

sportswriter talks shit and of course, there are people who take the bait.

Ask around the NFL and see how many coaches would take Rodgers if they had the chance. Answer: all of them.

And the "not winning" is a canard. Rodgers took over as the starter in 2008. They had a losing season. They have had one losing season since then and that was last season when he was hurt and only played 7 games. During that time, they have won their division 5 times, gone to three conference championship games and won a Super Bowl. Total loser.

Rodgers doesn't play defense, he's not a running back and the Packers have not been able to consistently field credible defenses or running backs. He's getting killed for missing a pass on 3rd and 2 without anyone questioning why the Packers didn't think they had a prayer of making it running the ball on 3rd and 2.

Here's why. Last night the Packers had 48 yards rushing. Seattle had 155 just from the running backs who averaged 5 yards a carry which is why McCarthy should have gone for it; his defense wasn't getting that ball back. But Rodgers is a loser because on one leg, they only scored 24 points and lost by 3.

Rodgers is carrying the entire offense on his back and one good leg but he's an asshole. Check. Ross Tucker is the asshole.

In comment 14179541 dep026 said:

Quote:

Isn’t good either because if you switched brees and Brady... No one said McCarthy is a better HC than Bill. All I am saying is McCarthy is a very good offensive mind.

There's a lot of those who aren't good HC's, which is the point. I mean, the GIants tried getting 2 of them - 1 didn't work and the other is on his way to not working...

I blame the GB FO as much as I do McCarthy. They've had some really bad teams that have won 9+ games simply due to the QB. Rodgers has saved a lot of their jobs over the years.

Mike McCarthy as HC his entire career, but the criticisms are valid. I think he is always trying to hit the HR, and often fails to take the small gain or no gain, rather than the loss.

GB's struggles aren't about him, though. That defense is brutal, and McCarthy made some boneheaded decisions last night.

In comment 14179557 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

In comment 14179541 dep026 said: Quote: Isn’t good either because if you switched brees and Brady... No one said McCarthy is a better HC than Bill. All I am saying is McCarthy is a very good offensive mind. There's a lot of those who aren't good HC's, which is the point. I mean, the GIants tried getting 2 of them - 1 didn't work and the other is on his way to not working... I blame the GB FO as much as I do McCarthy. They've had some really bad teams that have won 9+ games simply due to the QB. Rodgers has saved a lot of their jobs over the years.

My initial point is I think McCarthy hs played a very big role in Rodgers career and why Rodgers is one of the best all time. I am not arguing the HC stance, even though I dont think he is as bad as many are suggesting. He's not BB or Payton or maybe even Andy Reid.... but he has been very successful as a HC.

In comment 14179527 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

And if we're talking about systems and offensive minds - go back and watch what the Packers looked like without Aaron Rodgers. When they were playing with guys like Scott Tolzein or Brett Hundley, how'd they fare? Conversely, how have the Patriots fared when Brady has been out? They won 11 games with Matt Cassell. They won 3 of 4 with Jacoby Brissett. Belichick is a far better coach than Mike McCarthy. Not even close.

Not being a dick or a contrarian here, serious question.

Do you know how much influence Belichick, a defensive-minded coach, has on the offense and play calling?

And some other ground that has been covered, but sometimes ignored, the Matt Cassell 11 wins, was a documented historical easiest schedule in modern NFL history, and they missed the playoffs. Not to mention it was a 5 win dropoff from the prior season.

Second, when Brady was suspended they won the first two games with Garoppolo, not Brissett (though Jimmy G was injured late in the second game once the score was no longer in doubt).

The third game they shut out the Texans. Brisset was 11 for 19 for 103 yards - real QB whisperer stuff there from Belichick. He did have a rushing TD.

And in the 4th and final game sans Brady they were shutout 16 - 0 by the Bills. Brissett was 17 of 27 for 205 yard and no TD's.

Not sure I'd use that as examples Belichick can win anywhere with anyone at QB.

But I'd seriously be interesting in knowing how much input and influence Belichick does in fact have on the offense, instead of people just making assumptions (unless they do know the truth).