One aspect of Aaron's game that gets overlooked is that he can move. He's an athlete. Aaron right now is leading the NFL in run yardage for QBs. Actually, it's low as I think there were more than a few cases even in the Vikings game alone where he really should have just taken off and run. He has the athletic ability to do that, and scrambling for first downs seriously drives opposing Defensive Coordinators up the wall.

Neither Ryan nor Flacco are half as mobile as Rodgers.

This is actually one of my prejudices, but I'll say it anyways. I hate pocket passers. I like to see a QB if nothing is there to make something happen. Favre does it by going to either his left or his right, buying time, then squeezing the ball between defenders. Aaron can keep drives alive by scrambling for the first down. Ryan and Flacco can't do either.

We've already discussed statistics to death in this thread and Rodgers clearly leads in stats. Add mobility and I don't see how we could put either above Rodgers.

I think the only valid criticism of Rodgers is his release, which will come. However, I do think part of that problem is Mike McCarthy's playcalling. If I were calling the plays, we'd see a lot more screens and I'd also have Rodgers dumping off more.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

how can you compare these 3?

Rodgers 5th year
Ryan & Flacco 2nd year.

"dhazer" wrote:

Rodgers is better than anyone else.

"DGB454" wrote:

Me anyway is not saying he's a bad QB or something. Its not an all or nothing thing. I just feel that he's not quite "there" yet like a Matt Ryan or even a Joe Flacco. He hasn't been able to have a lot of those signature wins. Last year, 8 times with ball to take lead or win and failing each time is pretty bad and that 31-26 drive/the first half in big Vikings games are not so good. He's still a great QB but all I am saying is that he hasn't turned the corner into turning the corner yet in winning games for his team.

He's young and the sample size is small, so it will come with time I assume. But just like any other QB in the league, there are areas for improvement and one of them is winning games for his team. I think its hard to argue against that.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:

Ok, I just took it from the article. But I don't get why its impossible that he has some flaws:

Good:

Strong character (took over for a HOF QB and survived AND with class)

Tough as nails (gets up after every hit and has played injured)

Great teammate (doesn't throw the OL under the bus in the media)

Strong arm (can sling it anywhere)

Decent speed and not afraid to run it (great for us considering our OL)

Great statistics (last year and this year)

Starting to use all wide receivers, TEs, FBs, RBs, etc.

Etc.


Not So Good:

Holds on to the ball too long/Game Management (I don't know how this can be denied, i.e. Vikings safety, you have ot know your in the end zone)

"Clutch" (he has failed a bunch of times, maybe not 8 or whatever but Falcons game, bad, Matt Ryan good. Tampa Bay late game INT, not good. Vikings game, 31-26 drive bad, Favre 31-26 drive good. Can you honestly say you would choose him if you were down by 4 in the 4th quarter, one drive over "the" guys like Favre, Brady and Manning? No of course not but he's young, it will come)

Win-Loss record (has not had a lot of signature wins and has already had as many losing seasons as Favre)

Not taking Risks (Yes he has a great TD/INT ratio but sometimes you have to sling it. I love what he did when we were down 38-26, he took some risks and tried to thread the needle, worst happens you get picked off. Favre was Mr. INT but he is also the winningest QB ever, so sometimes you have to do it)

Etc.



But those things can be corrected with age and experience and are not physical. And enough with these "well if he had a great OL and had Barry Sanders in his prime and had Jerry Rice has his 3rd WR", it'd be different. Its life, your play with the cards your dealt.

Do you consider Jay Cutler as a top 5 QB because if he had WRs and a RB, he'd be way better? Favre had garbage offenses at times where Billy Schroder was his #1 WR, etc. but he still won a ton of games (difference is Rodgers is young and Favre was older, its not saying Rodgers sucks, it just saying he's not there yet). We can't constantly make excuses for him. At some point he has to just plain win and have game winning drives. It will happen but I don't think its the end of the world that it hasn't happened so far. I'm just pointing out that its not an all or nothing argument, he can be in between perfect and Jamarcus Russel.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

Combined stats against Detroit, Cleveland and St. Louis.

57/80 (71.3%) for 873 yards (10.9 avg), with 7 TDs and 1 Int.

Combined stats against Minnesota x 2 and Cincinnatti.

73/117 (62.4%) for 932 yards (8.0 avg), with 6 TDs and 1 Int.

I left the Bears out on purpose. Don't know where to place them. They're somewhere in between those 6 teams.

The thing that stands out to me is that he's still playing amazing games against these strong teams. Maybe not in the first half, but overall, he puts up some impressive stats.

The thing that I noticed is the 'low' average (still high by league standards) in these big games. Once again, it shows that they tend to figure out that constantly going deep doesn't work well against these strong teams. Problem is, they usually find out too late.

"Rockmolder" wrote: