Rodgers Will Be Chasing Starr For Awhile...

Packer fans are too quick to canonize their latest successful quarterback.

An interesting question popped up in Vic Ketchman's latest edition of "Ask Vic" over at Packers.com:

Chris from South Bend, IN

Do you think Aaron Rodgers is the best quarterback the Packers have ever seen? I know Starr was amazing and Favre was pretty spectacular, but Aaron just seems to have something the others didn't. What’s your opinion?

Vic: My opinion is that Rodgers is on track to have a great career and it’s possible that he’ll win multiple championships, but I’m not ready to anoint him the greatest quarterback in Packers history. Let’s wait and see what happens. I like to watch.

I could not agree more with Mr. Ketchman.

I understand we're all thrilled with the Packers' latest triumph, and maybe the lockout has people reaching for absurdities they would normally have the good sense to avoid - but Rodgers has been a starting quarterback for exactly three NFL seasons. Yes, he's put up some fantastic numbers and yes, he's won a ring and a Super Bowl MVP. I still think its far too early for fans to be asking that question.

Obviously, the ultimate answer will come years down the road but as of right now the conversation begins and ends with Bart Starr. Rodgers might overtake Favre, if he hasn't already, for second place on the "Greatest Packers Quarterback" list, but he would have to put together a string of incredibly special seasons, not to mention win three or four titles, to be mentioned in the same breath as Starr.

I think Rodgers has a great chance of doing exactly that. But I want Super Bowl XLV to be the beginning, not the peak. And I'm pretty sure Rodgers feels the same way.

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

0 points
 

Comments (63)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
ShopeIV's picture

April 03, 2011 at 11:40 pm

right on nagler

0 points
0
0
Vrog's picture

April 04, 2011 at 09:40 am

Agreed

0 points
0
0
djbonney138's picture

April 03, 2011 at 11:40 pm

I love the endless possibilities we have with Rodgers but some folks may need to dig into the Packers history just a tad. We have one of the most storied teams in sports (not just football)history and to crown Aaron the best ever is a bit premature, but I hope that we can one day. An undefeated season or a Super Bowl 3-peat would certainly do it for me:) Go Pack GO!!! Maybe we are a tad spoiled!

0 points
0
0
Josh's picture

April 03, 2011 at 11:47 pm

I hope the new fame for Rodgers doesn't go to his head...after all look what happened to favres mindset after his SB success

0 points
0
0
Billy Joel's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:42 pm

Favre was a car crash survivor with a kid out of wedlock and a drinking problem turning into a pain killer addiction BEFORE 1996. You seriously think his "mindset" got worse?

0 points
0
0
Stanislaw's picture

April 04, 2011 at 05:13 am

No - you are all wrong. Rodgers is not only the best packer QB bar none but best QB evar!!! - he didn't have the hall of famers surround him and the simple Lombardi offense that anyone could have done well with like Starr had.

Favre was strong and tough but as smart as the doorstop in front of my house and was clutch in letting OTHER teams win in the playoffs (see Viking loss in NFC championship in '09). The packers winning the SB in 96 was just the same as that line that says a broken clock is right twice a day - the Packers were in the playoffs like 9 seasons in a row - they were bound to win one of them.

Rodgers is the best QB evAr. End of discussion.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

April 04, 2011 at 08:39 am

Please tell me this is parody...

0 points
0
0
Ct SharpeCheddar's picture

April 05, 2011 at 08:32 am

3 seasons of starting.If you want to crown him you crown his ass,but he is who we thought he was

0 points
0
0
djbonney138's picture

April 05, 2011 at 12:42 pm

+1 Lol

0 points
0
0
Chad Toporski's picture

April 04, 2011 at 05:28 am

In short, the potential is there, but it needs to be realized before the comparison can be made.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

April 04, 2011 at 09:09 am

Wow. I may get killed for this buy I'm not ready to say that Rodgers even had a better career than Brent yet. Setting aside the numerous records and 3 consecutive MVPs, when the guy was Rodgers' age, and when he was on, he could throw it in a one-foot window in the red zone. And when he was in his prime no one created better while scrambling.

Too many interceptions? Check. Too much trying to do it all himself late in his career? Check. Annoying habit of ending play-off runs with interceptions late in his career? Check. But Chuck, or most any other quaterback in the NFL, if you told them you could retire with Brent's accomplishments would say, "where do I sign?"

When we mock Brent, as we should, we still need to remember that at one time people talked about him being the best all-time QB in the entire NFL, not just the best Packer QB. Truth be told, he's still a top-10 in many people's books, and no worse than a top-25 in anyone's book. When you talk about CAREER, if Chuck's career eneded tomorrow due to an injury, he'd be nothing but a giant WHAT IF in ten years, and most NFL fans would not even remember his name. I'll agree that Starr did not get his due from many in Brent's hey-day. But boy, I just can't put Chuck up there yet.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

April 04, 2011 at 09:33 am

I don't disagree.

0 points
0
0
MarkonceofMadison's picture

April 05, 2011 at 09:47 pm

So what will it take to eclypse Favre. Another championship, that's it, all wrapped. Favre gave you volume, the highs were up there - but the lows wrenched your gut - and were all too frequent. Drama man. Aaron is more of the Starr cut, consistent, gutsy, smart. leave it to history to rate these guys, I for one am glad #12 wears green and gold when he goes to work. Here's to eclypsing the old man from Kiln soon.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 04, 2011 at 10:09 am

"Setting aside the numerous records and 3 consecutive MVPs, when the guy was Rodgers’ age, and when he was on, he could throw it in a one-foot window in the red zone. And when he was in his prime no one created better while scrambling."

Like Rodgers to jennings (2x) in the SB? Or Rodgers to Nelson in Atlanta for a 4th down? Or Rodgers to Finley against DET?
And I don't have to talk about Rodgers scrambling, right?

Rodgers is Favre in his prime minus the boneheaded plays. He forces the ball much less than Favre, while still being able to make those incredible throws.

Now, for career, I agree that Rodgers still needs a little more (one league MVP or another SB and it's done). But as far as QB play, Rodgers is already better than Favre in his prime. And he's not done. He still needs to work on his checkdown passes (short passes in general, including slants, which Favre was the second best ever at throwing (Montana)).

0 points
0
0
IdiotFan's picture

April 04, 2011 at 10:25 am

I kind of agree with both of you. Brent gave us 15+ years of mostly spectacular QB play (I've surgically removed the memory of a few years and plays from my brain), which meant we were always competitive.

Rodgers can't really pass that with three years of great play, even if he has achieved most of the high points that Brett did. But I think what makes most of us excited, and prone to hyperbole, is that, as RS said, we see virtually all of what made Brent good and almost none of what made him bad present in #12. Given that, Rodgers SHOULD be able to eclipse Brent, and even perhaps give Starr a run. He hasn't done that yet, but I'm pumped for the future.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

April 04, 2011 at 12:11 pm

I think that you kind of agree with both of us because I think that we agree as much as we disagree. We both agree that Chuck needs to do more before we can talk about his career eclipsing Brent's. We both agree that Chuck is in the same neighborhood in terms of on-field play, minus Brent's bone-headedness. I guess where we disagree is that I think that Brent threw a better lazer into tighter windows, and I think that Brent's bone-headedness led to some more amazing scrambles than Chuck. I would point to all of those "miscommunications" between Chuck and the receivers this year. Maybe nostalgia/time/whatever is warping my memory a little. But it would be fun to pull 5 or 10 great plays from each of them in their first three years starting and see how they stack up.

0 points
0
0
IdiotFan's picture

April 04, 2011 at 02:02 pm

I might have agreed with that sentiment about 12 months ago, but after watching the Packers 2010 Season DVD, I was astounded by how many ridiculously tight throws #12 made this year, like the Finley TD against Detroit and several throws in the Super Bowl, to name a very few.

I do agree that, earned or not, #4 had the reputation of a comeback QB, which #12 doesn't have yet. And I could rattle off dozens of improvised crazy-awesome plays that #4 made for us, which helped build the legacy. #12 seems a bit more machine-like and less prone to that kind of craziness. Whether that's good or bad is up to one's tastes in QB.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 05, 2011 at 09:12 pm

There is absolutely no question in my mind that Aaron Rodgers has all of the physical tools that BrINT ever had.

Take BrINt's arm in his his heyday, I'm very confident Rodgers makes all of the same throws. If there is one area Rodgers' falls behind BrINT in terms of throws, I would say that Aaron just does not have a a feel for putting any sort of touch on the short throws- I'm talking SHORT, behind the LOS or in the extreme close flats. Rodgers has a tendency to throw them way to hard and on a frozen rope straight from his hand to the receiver's feet at the speed of sound. No loft, no touch. Otherwise, Rodgers has every bit the long strength that BrINT ever had, with far more accuracy deep. His intermediate passing into tight windows is exceptional.

The major difference between BrINT's passing and Rodgers'- and this accounts for "excitement" level/"Memorable play" level as well- is simply this: Brett was a lot less picky about what he'd throw up in the air. If Rodgers sees a horrible match up- like, let's say, triple coverage on a WR while he's scrambling for his life while he'd have to throw across his body- he won't throw it.

BrINT would throw it, and some times it would get picked.. Some of the time the WR would make a great play and a "miracle" play was born.

I completely agree that Rodgers has to continue to perform at a high level for quite some time to hold a candle to Dr. CockenCrock's overall body of work, his career. However, I have zero hesitation in saying that right now, Aaron Rodgers at this point in his career is pound for pound a more complete, disciplined, and talented QB than BrINT ever was.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 04, 2011 at 10:16 am

It's kinda hard to surpass the best QB of all time with just 3 starting seasons.

And by best QB of all time, I mean the guy who holds the record for postseason QB rating*, NFL championships with 7, and is a 2 time SB MVP (2 for 2) and 1 time NFL MVP. I mean Mr. Clutch himself, Bart Starr.

*Actually, now Starr (104.8) is second in postseason QB rating, behind Aaron Rodgers (112.6) (let that number sink in for a moment), but he has many more attempts. Rodgers also leads in the regular season QB rating (98.4). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_career_passer_rating_leaders

0 points
0
0
djbonney138's picture

April 04, 2011 at 11:23 am

"Let that number sink in for a moment..." I love it! We are so fortunate to even be in the position to have a discussion on this topic. Rodgers has only started 3 years, 3 years! That boggles my mind sometimes. GO PACK GO!

0 points
0
0
WoodyG's picture

April 04, 2011 at 11:21 am

I don’t have an issue with rating Bart Starr at numeral uno but one has to consider the vast differences between time eras when doing so …….. Starr managed to win 5 championships when the NFL had only 14 or 16 total teams in the league …… GB’s defense was ranked no lower than 3rd (usually 1st or 2nd) in any of Starr’s championship years …… Starr only had to win 1 playoff game in seasons ’61 & ’62 to win the NFL championship & only 2 playoff games in ’65 & ’66 to be NFL champion …..

Starr’s individual stats are not nearly as ’great’ as history wants to depict them …… His lifetime QB rating was 80.5 ……. His lifetime completion % was 57.4 …… He threw 138 picks versus 152 TD passes ……. The highest number of TD passes in any regular season was 16 …… In 16 seasons, Starr made the pro-bowl 4 times & was voted to the All-Pro team only once ……. He was NFL MVP once in ‘66 (AP) ………

Starr played at 6’1” & about 197 pounds …… He was slow (immobile), fragile & at best had an average arm ……. His smarts & the continuity of the players around him (no free-agency) allowed him to be extremely successful (bottom-line) ……. Truth is, the possible myth of Bart Starr continues to grow with time …… Although he was definitely the ‘Leader of the Pack’ during his career, he was never the iconic legend that people paint him as today ……. I was there for all of it.

You can put Bart Starr at #1 followed by AR (IMO) at #2 …….. BF’s not even a part of this discussion.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

April 04, 2011 at 11:57 am

I hear this a lot, the differences-in-the-game-and-the-league argument. I guess I can understand it, but the whole reason we recognize athletes as great is because they dominate their competition. Starr certainly did that. Unlike you, I wasn't around to see it, all I have are old videos, stuff I read both in books and on the Internet and the eye-witness accounts I've heard from people like my father and grandfather.

I think Cold Hard Football Facts does a good job of laying out Starr's strengths: http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2103_The_definitive_lis...

I don't necessarily agree with all of it (including his #1 ranking all-time) but it's the makings of a good case.

0 points
0
0
WoodyG's picture

April 04, 2011 at 12:39 pm

I've always appreciated that ranking by Cold Hard Football Facts but thinking back to the 60s, Johnny U. was considered the premier QB with Starr, Tittle & Brodie taking a backseat ......

Don't get me wrong ..... I love how the 60s Packers are portrayed & how Bart Starr is viewed but time has a way of misrepresenting reality .....

I mean, I didn't have shoulder-length hair, didn't smoke dope, nor did I have unlimited 'free-sex' in the 60s .... History says I did.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:17 pm

Yes, it does. But not just about the 60's.

Favre is the comeback king who everytime he has a chance to make it, he does, right?

And Manning is the best QB of all time, so cerebral, almost a coach on the field.

And Brady is the most clutch QB ever, always coming up big in the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
Cheddarhead's picture

April 05, 2011 at 10:40 pm

You have to realize that in Starrs Era teams were kept together because there was no free agency and union. So it was easier to keep everybody for years and years and win multiple championships. In Brents defense, had all the players stayed they might have not lossed to Denver, and won more SuperBowls? Just saying.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 06, 2011 at 09:40 am

If my aunt had balls... Well, you know the rest.

Tom Brady has 3 rings, doesn't he?

And it's not like Favre didn't have other opportunities. Instead, he, ahem, tossed them away.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:14 pm

That is all true. That doesn't change the fact that the guy went 9-1 in playoffs, and in those 10 games, had the best QB rating of everyone that has ever played, all while being acclaimed Super Bowl MVP both times.

Regular season, the team led him. Postseason, he was the best player on the best team ever assembled.

Oh, and he called the plays.

I also wasn't there, but I've seen the playoffs in both SBs (which include the Ice Bowl), and the guy was out of this world. He was deadly accurate, and the playcalling was terrific.

0 points
0
0
MadJam's picture

April 05, 2011 at 05:24 pm

Exactly!

0 points
0
0
Ken's picture

April 05, 2011 at 09:13 am

What makes the Lombardi Packers even more remarkable, in my opinion:

-The late 50s Colts and Giants were football royalty -- some of the best teams of all time. It wasn't like the Packers rose in a wide-open league (like our current boys are doing). They clobbered aside all-time great teams to reach the top of the ladder and stayed there by defeating the Cowboys twice in the 60s -- a club that would go on to achieve remarkable accomplishments under Laundry.

And they did it behind Bartlett Starr.

0 points
0
0
Ken at UWM's picture

April 04, 2011 at 11:40 am

Nailed it.

I'm not sure why everyone feels so obligated to always rank guys. Statistics change but championships are always the top gauge.

We can all say this: Green Bay, Wisconsin is the city of incredible QB play (Don't forget Cecil Isbell, Tobin Rote and moments of gold from Lynn Dickey and Majik)

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

April 04, 2011 at 11:58 am

Lynn Dickey is criminally underrated as a quarterback.

0 points
0
0
Glorious80s's picture

April 04, 2011 at 12:46 pm

Nailed it Ken.
Couldn't agree more Aaron.
LD still holds two regular season GB passing records without being on a championship team.

0 points
0
0
Norman's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:13 pm

Lynn Dickey was a far better QB than anyone the Bears have trotted out since Sid Luckman that's for sure.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:18 pm

But what about Jim McMahon? I mean, leadership!

0 points
0
0
IdiotFan's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:24 pm

Hey now, Jim McMahon played a crucial part as back-up QB to BLF on the '96 Super Bowl team.

0 points
0
0
Norman's picture

April 04, 2011 at 01:45 pm

Ahh, McMahon... Hard to believe that guy went to BYU. I guess they must not have had the honor code in place for student athletes back then!

0 points
0
0
Ken's picture

April 05, 2011 at 09:19 am

Wow, pretty remarkable. Imagine if he would've stayed healthy.

I wasn't around in the Coffman-Jefferson-Lofton era but though they were losing, there had to be some bright spots with that kind of firepower.

I'm only 23 but I'd love to hear the consensus opinion as to whether Coffman is the best TE in franchise history.

Perhaps the Packers will put together an all-time starting offense and defense for their 100 year anniversary in 2019. Wow, the names on that...

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 05, 2011 at 10:50 am

Ron Kramer.

0 points
0
0
glorious80s's picture

April 05, 2011 at 03:42 pm

And I would like to see a detailed analysis of the type of plays they ran and how that offense worked under LD and company. You didn't get much of that kind of analysis then.
To compare QBs, you have to take into consideration the systems as well as the personnel and coaching.
Getting back to AR, there are two catagories to measure, winning championships and execution of the plays.
Whether you can say AR is the greatest or not at this time, there is something dynamic and precision-like in the way he plays that is different than the sort of things BF did. BF was on-the-fly creative, AR is cereberal, prepared.
GB has been blessed with a lot of QB talent over the years. Don't forget Majik was a lot of fun to watch, too.

0 points
0
0
Wiscokid's picture

April 09, 2011 at 08:43 pm

Aaron, you are so correct. Dickey was one of the best pure passer ever to play the game. If it weren't for his knees going out on him people would still be talking about him. I really liked that guy.

So much is dependent on injuries it is way too premature to anoint Rodgers as the best ever.

0 points
0
0
Lynn Dickey 12's picture

April 13, 2011 at 10:35 am

LD was fearless in the pocket despite the many extremely painful injuries he endured. The man threw a lot of picks because he had to force a lot of balls. He didn't ever have much of a running game behind him...and not enough help from the D.

We should all respect the way he played the game and his contributions to Packers history.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

April 13, 2011 at 12:15 pm

I totally agree.

0 points
0
0
Ct SharpeCheddar's picture

April 05, 2011 at 08:41 am

Yes but don't forget the Randy Wright,Scott Hunter and the David Whighthurst( not sure of the speelling) Packer fans have been blessed with the last 3 quarterbacks,but most of the qbs inthe 70s and 80s were horrible.

0 points
0
0
Doug in Sandpoint's picture

April 06, 2011 at 08:45 pm

Jim Del Gazo
Carlos Brown
Jerry Tagge
John Hadel

0 points
0
0
Wiscokid's picture

April 09, 2011 at 08:45 pm

Don't forget Scott Hunter.

0 points
0
0
Timbo's picture

April 04, 2011 at 04:28 pm

Hate to be a grammar geek (actually, I love it): it's "canonize"

0 points
0
0
Will's picture

April 04, 2011 at 04:40 pm

Just talking about all of the great GB QB's all you have to do is look who Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, and what the heck Tampa Bay (for old times sake) had lined up over the past 75 years or so....puts a smile on my face everytime. :)

But it would be a huge dissapointment if Aaron doesn't see another SB title in his career, and yes he will need more to be taking any spot above #3 for all time great Packer QB's.

0 points
0
0
bill dickson's picture

April 05, 2011 at 08:26 am

u are so right arron,lets not jinx our boy.let the cards play out.......but he sure loooooks good

0 points
0
0
bill dickson's picture

April 05, 2011 at 08:28 am

timbo, i thought it was canton-nize

0 points
0
0
john driscoll austin texas's picture

April 05, 2011 at 08:50 am

a very good topic for debate...all of them good to great...Lynn Dickey for sure could throw ,especially deep, immobile, and horrible defensive Packer teams then...was good to see the Starr and Rodgers are friends and talk often...ballplayers cant get away with sex drugs and parties like the old-times could...but (hope im not putting a hex on him) Rodgers seems very solid as a young man...as well as smart and talented..lets hope he has another 10 years or so like the last 3

0 points
0
0
Norom's picture

April 05, 2011 at 11:44 am

Come on, Rodgers can't be very good, he has yet to win a single home playoff game!

0 points
0
0
some guy's picture

April 05, 2011 at 12:03 pm

Rodgers is already better than Favre ever was in terms of quality of play. EVER. hands down. Favre was terrific for a long time but his legacy is in the sheer volume of accomplishments and his iron man status (definitely had 3 or 4 great seasons). He was extremely inconsistent and his downside was much lower than Rodgers has even come close to. So until Rodgers starts having seasons with QB ratings in the 70's and where he throws about as many picks as TD's, there is no debate there.

While it sounds insane to compare Starr to Rodgers now, i think we need to give credit to just how impressive Rodgers has been. He has the highest QB rating OF ALL TIME, regular or post season. He is playing against better athletes and more complex defenses than Starr ever saw. And its not like he has a stud offensive line giving him tons of time every down.

On top of all that, he's one of the better scrambling QB's in the league. He's got 13 regular season TD's in 3 seasons and almost 1000 years rushing in 3 seasons.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 05, 2011 at 12:55 pm

I think the fact that people are comparing him to Starr and questioning who's the best after only 3 starting seasons is a big statement of how good Rodgers already is.

0 points
0
0
Bercovici's picture

April 05, 2011 at 02:38 pm

One reason I'm reserving judgment is we've yet to see how good Rodgers is without an arsenal of strong receivers to throw to. BLF put in a fair number of seasons without a deep threat or elite tight end. Sometimes he elevated the guys he had to near-elite level (Donald Driver 2004-06), sometimes he just forced a lot of picks. If Aaron sticks around long enough, chances are he'll have at least one year where he has to make do without a Jennings- or Finley-level talent. If he can remain a top-10 QB with nothing but role players around him, it'll go a long way toward separating him from BLF in the all-time rankings.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

April 05, 2011 at 03:02 pm

Agree with this a great deal. I mean, in the 96 season he was losing guys left and right and he was still making the offense run. And just think - at one point in his career his top two wideouts were a fading, long past his prime Antonio Freeeman...and Bill Schroeder.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

April 05, 2011 at 03:16 pm

I agree with that, although I often feel like our WR group is a little over-hyped. I'd also hold judgement until we see a larger body of work. Carson Palmer looked fantastic early in his career, but he had some nasty injuries and has never looked good since, even with some big name receivers. Jared Allen isn't old enough to be past his prime, but he got married last off-season and the talk was that his off-season work took a hit. There are so many things that go into a carerr.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 05, 2011 at 03:57 pm

Favre almost always had a great pass-blocking OL, and during a vast period of time, had very good running game (one period having a top 5 RB in Batman). And let's not pretend that Freeman, Brooks, Chmura, Jackson, Driver, Franks, not to mention Green and Levens, weren't very good/great receivers.

I actually hate this argument. It's a way to take away his accomplishments. Rodgers' receivers, while being amazing route-runners, also have a huge problem with drops. You don't need to look past the 6 drop SB game to see that. Yet he still produced at an amazing level.

0 points
0
0
Bercovici's picture

April 05, 2011 at 04:55 pm

I'm not saying Favre never had great receivers. In fact, you left off the two most talented -- Sterling Sharpe and Javon Walker. Remember when Walker looked like he was going to be our Calvin Johnson?

That's my point: Even with all the talent that passed through Green Bay at WR/TE, there were long stretches when he had to settle for Driver, God bless him, as his No. 1. Or worse: Didn't we host Atlanta in the playoffs in 2003 with our top 3 WRs all hurt? You remember how that turned out.

I actually think learning to play without Finley this season taught Aaron a valuable lesson that will serve him well if and when he finds himself in that kind of situation.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 05, 2011 at 05:26 pm

Well, Sharpe is a given. he's not a very good/great receiver. He's an all-time best. (I actually did forget both of them).

My point is, yes there are stretches where he played without much talent at WR. But they aren't long enough, nor important enough, to justify his failures. That game, they were hurt, but they did play, yet the offense did nothing. Well, Favre threw 2 ints and lost a fumble...

The same thing that saying Rodgers isn't in there yet because he has great receivers. Well, it wasn't Greg Jennings, or Jordy Nelson, or James Jones who were great in the playoffs or in the SB. Sure, they made some great plays, but they also made boneheaded ones. Rodgers, on the other hand, except for the second half against the Bears, was out of this world, creating plays by himself, escaping sure sacks, delivering balls with millimeter precision. And one could very well argue that the Packers' best receiver wasn't playing.

Yes, the Packers' receivers are incredibly good in being open, he has that. Almost every time one of them is open. But it's borderline criminal to doubt Rodgers' quality because they are good. Not when it's clear that he is making the plays, and not just delivering the ball to the open receiver.

In the NFL, no matter how good your receiving corps is, an average QB doesn't get results. Let alone put up the kind of performances Rodgers does.

0 points
0
0
Ruppert's picture

April 05, 2011 at 07:49 pm

Lemme say this about that...

I just know I was a hell of a lot less nervous watching Aaron Rodgers drop back in playoff games the last 2 years than I was watching Favre drop back in playoff games for basically his entire career.

And I'm pretty sure you all agree with me on that one.

PS...Majik was awesome in '89...my favorite non-champion Packers team ever.

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 05, 2011 at 08:10 pm

Pre 2010, yes. And against the Bears, because the bears' D has Rodgers' (and MM's) number.

But not this year. I was pretty confident he was gonna dissect them.

I was worried with drops (duh) and ST killing us (duh). And was worried Big Ben would murder us once Woodson and Shields went down.

But the most sure thing I was this year, specially in the playoffs, is that Rodgers was gonna light it up.

0 points
0
0
john driscoll austin texas's picture

April 06, 2011 at 07:51 am

Majkowski had a phenomenal year with the least offensive talent of most any of the QB's in this forum, he about carried that team, wasnt Vince Workman leading rusher? was a fun year...10-6

0 points
0
0
Point Packer's picture

April 14, 2011 at 04:20 am

If AR wins another Super Bowl, he will immediately escalate above Favre's status in GB. Insane to think otherwise. I also believe, minus any career threatening injuries, that AR will by the end of his career be known as the best GB QB ever and that Bart will agree. So young. So relatively humble. A good teammate. A great arm. Smart. Passionate. We are truly spoiled to be even having this conversation.

0 points
0
0