Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
4 Pages<1234>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
nerdmann  
#41 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 12:55:04 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
It's dense comments like this that make it hard to hold a good debate. Look, everyone knows that while playing you cannot be in the hall of fame. The point being made was look back at how many are in the hall of fame that he played with. Do that. Count them up.


I can't believe how some folks fail to be objective about this. It's not a slight on Bart Starr, he was magnificent, but he played on a dominant team. Aaron Rodgers is the better quarterback. This dumb comment about Starr had more rings ... you're saying that Rodgers is equally good as Jeff Hostetler or isn't even as good as Terry Bradshaw. Give me a break people! Show your objectivity!

Bring something to the discussion other than your bias! No room for bias here, this isn't Barry Sanders we're talkin 'bout!!


We have no way of knowing how many current Packers will end up in the Hall.

First of all, there were half as many teams back then.

Second of all, we cannot predict the future. Therefore we cannot say Starr played with more future HoFers than Arodge.

Fact is, Starr willed his team to victory. 5 Championships. Threepeat. he made those around him great. When Arodge stops padding his own stats and starts willing the team to victory, I'll reconsider my position.
Wade  
#42 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 1:01:32 PM(UTC)
By the time he retires, Rodgers may have demonstrated that he was better.

But, and this is our codger's main point, he simply hasn't shown it yet. The teams he has led have one championship and two embarrassing first round losses.

Starr showed it. 5 times. 3 in a row.

When Rodgers has more rings than he has first round losses, then we can start talking about him passing Starr on the list of greats.

But not until then.

IMO
Zero2Cool  
#43 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 1:13:47 PM(UTC)
The tired "padding stats" comment that has no support and again the five rings to one ring. *yawn*

It's quite amusing how the legend of Bart Starr has clouded some of our objectivity.

Still, no one has proven that Aaron Rodgers > Bart Starr being false. And that's because it's unfair to those who try. You simply can't prove Starr > Rodgers because it's not true.
buckeyepackfan  
#44 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 1:37:35 PM(UTC)
David Whitehurst was better than any of them!!!!

He just didn't have the players round him to prove it!!!
Zero2Cool  
#45 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 1:58:15 PM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: Go to Quoted Post
David Whitehurst was better than any of them!!!!

He just didn't have the players round him to prove it!!!


Joey Harrington feels his pain.
yooperfan  
#46 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 2:11:07 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
The tired "padding stats" comment that has no support and again the five rings to one ring. *yawn*

It's quite amusing how the legend of Bart Starr has clouded some of our objectivity.

Still, no one has proven that Aaron Rodgers > Bart Starr being false. And that's because it's unfair to those who try. You simply can't prove Starr > Rodgers because it's not true.


I'm guessing you are too young to have seen the Packers play during the Bart Starr years and you are just looking at stats and I'm not a stat guy but I saw every game during the glory years.
I've seen every game that Rodgers has played for the Packers and there is no doubt in my mind that Starr was a better QB during his career than Rodgers has been thus far.Lets Box!

wpr  
#47 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 2:31:46 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
The tired "padding stats" comment that has no support and again the five rings to one ring. *yawn*

It's quite amusing how the legend of Bart Starr has clouded some of our objectivity.

Still, no one has proven that Aaron Rodgers > Bart Starr being false. And that's because it's unfair to those who try. You simply can't prove Starr > Rodgers because it's not true.


It is amazing that the immediacy of Rodgers playing clouds the minds of today's youth. They fail to consider just how much the league has changed it's approach to the game which is mainly due to the extreme change in the rules.

You keep looking and talking about how many times Rodgers throws the ball and how many yards he has accumulated. I on the other hand point out that passing is only one aspect of the duties of a qb. If we are going to speak about a QB in the NFL let's talk about the whole man not a portion. You also love to look at what Aaron did for the last few years and project those same statistics out for another 10 years. you can't do that. Well obviously you can but it is wrong to assume he will do the same. he could have a career ending injury and the first preseason play and he will not accumulate any more.

By and large everyone who supports Starr has said Rodgers has done a better job at this point in his career of throwing the football. Rodgers has not done a better job with his career as a whole and total package. One day he may get the recognition you so desire but not today.

As for me, my perception of Starr is not clouded. I think Favre is a better QB than he is even with one 1 championship. I think Starr if he played on a lesser team with lesser talent might not be in the Hall. But then he, with his excellent leadership to use your term may have made that mythical team better and won multiple championships with them too.

The first step to this whole discussion is for you to admit that while Rodgers passing stats are greater it is immensely to accumulate passing yards today.
DakotaT  
#48 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 2:35:34 PM(UTC)
Let's put a twist to this dilemma - if you had a choice between Starr, Favre, and Rodgers to begin a franchise with in any era of football you choose - which quarterback would you take. I'll take Rodgers and not even think twice about it.
wpr  
#49 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 2:49:02 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
Let's put a twist to this dilemma - if you had a choice between Starr, Favre, and Rodgers to begin a franchise with in any era of football you choose - which quarterback would you take. I'll take Rodgers and not even think twice about it.


the era does matter. If it is the 30's though 60's Starr would be the better choice. if it is the 2010's Favre or Rodgers would be better choices.
dfosterf  
#50 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 3:05:30 PM(UTC)
I don't care what the criteria is. I love Bart Starr. I thought he was WAY under-rated at the time. The man seemed genius to me.

Bart Starr could not possibly be in the same conversation with Aaron Rodgers. I was just as passionate about these matters then as I am now.

Eye test and memory. Bart was better than anyone gives him credit for being now, but that isn't good enough in this comparison...


Aaron Rodgers is S I C K good. No one I have ever seen does the things that man does with a football with the circumstances he is presented with.

No One. Ever. Not in my lifetime. I keep telling you, we are living off the gravy he provides us, and so many are too young to know, and the ones that are old enough can't let go of their loyalties and distorted memories.

I AM SOMETIMES EMBARRASSED at how my team has failed to capititalize on this extraordinary talent we have. It is why I RANT, at times...

I AM CURSED WITH PERSPECTIVE! What a BITCH! lol

Favre isn't in the conversation, for me. The man was un-wise with the football too many times when it mattered a lot, and his skill-set was also below Rodgers in actually throwing the damn thing, by quite a bit, actually.
nerdmann  
#51 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 4:23:02 PM(UTC)
dfosterf said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't care what the criteria is. I love Bart Starr. I thought he was WAY under-rated at the time. The man seemed genius to me.

Bart Starr could not possibly be in the same conversation with Aaron Rodgers. I was just as passionate about these matters then as I am now.

Eye test and memory. Bart was better than anyone gives him credit for being now, but that isn't good enough in this comparison...


Aaron Rodgers is S I C K good. No one I have ever seen does the things that man does with a football with the circumstances he is presented with.

No One. Ever. Not in my lifetime. I keep telling you, we are living off the gravy he provides us, and so many are too young to know, and the ones that are old enough can't let go of their loyalties and distorted memories.

I AM SOMETIMES EMBARRASSED at how my team has failed to capititalize on this extraordinary talent we have. It is why I RANT, at times...

I AM CURSED WITH PERSPECTIVE! What a BITCH! lol

Favre isn't in the conversation, for me. The man was un-wise with the football too many times when it mattered a lot, and his skill-set was also below Rodgers in actually throwing the damn thing, by quite a bit, actually.


Bart Starr, based on intangibles.

When it comes to tangibles, Aaron is in the conversation.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#52 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 4:56:21 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
Let's put a twist to this dilemma - if you had a choice between Starr, Favre, and Rodgers to begin a franchise with in any era of football you choose - which quarterback would you take. I'll take Rodgers and not even think twice about it.


If you had 1/10 the insight on stuff other than football ...... I guess you'd be agreeing with me hahahaha.

I will NEVER say anything negative about Bart Starr - or for that matter Brett Favre when it comes to football either. However, NOBODY in my lifetime anyway - which goes back before the Starr era - has ever dominated the game as much as Aaron Rodgers. Brady a little bit, P. Manning came the closest, but nobody like Rodgers.

Zero2Cool  
#53 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 6:50:46 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
If you had 1/10 the insight on stuff other than football ...... I guess you'd be agreeing with me hahahaha.

I will NEVER say anything negative about Bart Starr - or for that matter Brett Favre when it comes to football either. However, NOBODY in my lifetime anyway - which goes back before the Starr era - has ever dominated the game as much as Aaron Rodgers. Brady a little bit, P. Manning came the closest, but nobody like Rodgers.



Aaron Rodgers being better than Bart Starr at quarterback is most certainly not saying anything bad about Bart Starr. Not a chance.
play2win  
#54 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 5:35:59 AM(UTC)
Bart Starr was more comparable to the kid who came along decades later to lead his team to multiple Super Bowls. Aaron Rodgers' hero growing up: Joe Montana.

Both were supreme game managers and team leaders. Rodgers, as good as he is, has some proving left to do on those levels.

It always ultimately comes down to Championships, plural.

Trent Dilfer could get one. Was he as good or better than Rodgers? Of course not. Roethlesberger? No, but he has more SB wins. Bradshaw? No. But he has more Championships too. So does Eli Manning.

As much as you might hate the SBs entering into the discussion, it always winds up being the ultimate measuring stick for QB supremacy, and it really points to the larger aspects of "team" in terms of success, and who can best manage their team to realizing multiple Championships.

Not many mentions of Warren Moon or Dan Marino in this discussion.

Is Rodgers a better QB than Starr, or just a better passer?
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#55 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 5:52:31 AM(UTC)
The comparison if you want to bring Montana into it, would be Montana to Steve Young - Montana being fairly similar to Starr and Young something like Rodgers. Montana was greater but Young was better - does that make sense? Anyway, it is not as somebody said above, youth being blinded by the fact that Rodgers is more recent. I was blessed to be a Packer fan when Starr was the QB. He was great; The team was super, but never find the different styles, different eras, different quality around them, Starr simply did not stand out individually like Rodgers does. Nobody in all the years I have been a fan has been as clearly better than anybody else in his time as Rodgers. He ain't the greatest yet - that would still be Favre, but he is on track to get there.
wpr  
#56 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 6:12:36 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
The comparison if you want to bring Montana into it, would be Montana to Steve Young - Montana being fairly similar to Starr and Young something like Rodgers. Montana was greater but Young was better - does that make sense? Anyway, it is not as somebody said above, youth being blinded by the fact that Rodgers is more recent. I was blessed to be a Packer fan when Starr was the QB. He was great; The team was super, but never find the different styles, different eras, different quality around them, Starr simply did not stand out individually like Rodgers does. Nobody in all the years I have been a fan has been as clearly better than anybody else in his time as Rodgers. He ain't the greatest yet - that would still be Favre, but he is on track to get there.


I was the one who made reference to youth. I was taunting Kevin. That was because he was taunting those who were defending Starr.

I take objection to a bias comparison that only favors one player.
The NFL rules are different in the 60's. Kevin never once agreed to the concept that Rodgers has flourished in the much more lenient passing rules of this day. He never accepted the fact that Starr's passing statistics are tainted because of how the defense was allowed to play in his day.
He, for the most part, ignored the fact that a QB is more than an arm. While he says Starr is an excellent leader, he then comes right back to Rodgers credentials and one who throws the ball as being the defining measure of what a QB is.
When one points out that Starr has the ultimate measure of success- championships. He dismisses that as being due to the players around Starr. He never once considers the fact that if Rodgers wins 5 SB that he will not be the only player from this team that ends up in the Hall.

He wants every indicator to point toward Rodgers. If they don't, then those indicators are not relevant.
play2win  
#57 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 7:14:37 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
Aaron Rodgers being better than Bart Starr at quarterback is most certainly not saying anything bad about Bart Starr. Not a chance.


I've got something bad to say about Starr. Long time ago, I was a kid in the stands at County Stadium for a game coached by Dan Devine. Bart Starr was just down the aisle. I walked over to Bart with my program, and asked him for his autograph. He had an usher take me away.

I'll never forget it, that fuckin' guy... [laughing] [laughing] [laughing]
Zero2Cool  
#58 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 7:24:22 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I was the one who made reference to youth. I was taunting Kevin. That was because he was taunting those who were defending Starr.

I take objection to a bias comparison that only favors one player.
The NFL rules are different in the 60's. Kevin never once agreed to the concept that Rodgers has flourished in the much more lenient passing rules of this day. He never accepted the fact that Starr's passing statistics are tainted because of how the defense was allowed to play in his day.
He, for the most part, ignored the fact that a QB is more than an arm. While he says Starr is an excellent leader, he then comes right back to Rodgers credentials and one who throws the ball as being the defining measure of what a QB is.
When one points out that Starr has the ultimate measure of success- championships. He dismisses that as being due to the players around Starr. He never once considers the fact that if Rodgers wins 5 SB that he will not be the only player from this team that ends up in the Hall.

He wants every indicator to point toward Rodgers. If they don't, then those indicators are not relevant.


Read my comments again young man. Read them again, for the first time. [wasntme]
wpr  
#59 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 7:35:42 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
Read my comments again young man. Read them again, for the first time. [wasntme]


I read them yesterday.
Show me where you allow for the differences in passing rules?
Show me where you agree that Aaron Rodgers has more favorable passing yards and Starr less favorable ones.
Show me where you say the value of a qb is more than his passing prowess.

Zero2Cool  
#60 Posted : Tuesday, April 2, 2013 7:40:43 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I read them yesterday.
Show me where you allow for the differences in passing rules?
Show me where you agree that Aaron Rodgers has more favorable passing yards and Starr less favorable ones.
Show me where you say the value of a qb is more than his passing prowess.



Show me where I said Aaron Rodgers was a better leader than Bart Starr. You can't, but yet you beat that drum anyway. [-x

I respect that you probably encapsulate passer, leader, field general, etc all into quarterback.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
uffda udfa (5h) : Per Schefter: Former Skins DT Ricky Jean Francois signed a one-year, $3M deal with Packers, per source.
uffda udfa (5h) : Per Schefter: FormerSkins DT Ricky Jean Francois signed a one-year, $3M deal with Packers, per source.
Zero2Cool (10h) : lol by .01 not what i thought
Zero2Cool (10h) : he's faster than Montgomery
uffda udfa (22-Mar) : Packers re-sign Christine Michael
Smokey (22-Mar) : Easier said than fixed .
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : The web version lists who started the thread; the mobile version lists who last updated it.
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : Also, there's a weird disparity between the web version and online version of this site.
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : ;-)
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : Packers wanted D. Ware in 2005. Thank you Cowboys!
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : lol Rourke
Nonstopdrivel (21-Mar) : I HATE HATE HATE the way all threads get marked as read after viewing a few of them in one session. It's obnoxious.
Smokey (21-Mar) : Check out this site, NFLdraftscout.com , a great resource site.
Smokey (20-Mar) : Jared Cook signs with Raiders .
Smokey (20-Mar) : I did watch SB 45 on YouTube the other night, very eye opening .
Smokey (20-Mar) : Watching Spring Training Baseball, Nationals vs Yankees, very interesting .
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : B1G making some noise in that bracket
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : The more join, the more talk, the better. including John
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : no forum should need one person, we have others, speak up!
gbguy20 (19-Mar) : slow forum needs more uffda
Smokey (19-Mar) : There's always next year .
Smokey (18-Mar) : Virginia is still in it !
Smokey (18-Mar) : On Wisconsin
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Down goes Villanova!! Badgers!!!
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Might have went into your SPAM or JUNK folder??
yooperfan (18-Mar) : Funny I never got the invite
wpr (17-Mar) : Ignoring the Signing Bonus, Jones' base is only $725K above the vet min
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Not many seem interested, but I did invite those from last year.
dhazer (16-Mar) : no bracket challenge Kevin?
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Blame twitter on the /home page here lol
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Datone Jones Vikings deal $3.75M, $1.6M signing bonus, $1.5M salary, $31,250 per game active, $150K workout bonus, $1.25M sacks-pt incentive
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Nope. I don't care to read up on Vikings players. :-)
Bnoble (15-Mar) : Anyone see any numbers on Jones deal?
uffda udfa (14-Mar) : Datone to Minnesota.
musccy (14-Mar) : A more $ than I'd prefer, but still glad Elliott is back
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Announcements / Zero2Cool

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

13h / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Mar / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

17-Mar / Around The NFL / Smokey

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

Headlines