The Aaron Rodgers performance thread

[rmontro]

You certainly don't see other QBs trying to make less.

You don't see other QBs winning six Super Bowls either.

 

[Do7]

You don't see other QBs winning six Super Bowls either.

Are we really doing this? Tell you what. Put Brady on an NFC team which is by far a tougher conference and then we'll see how well he does. Hell if all Rodgers had to worry about in regards to opposition was Peyton and Big Ben over these past several years I'm sure he'd be in as many SBs. Let's not forget he got a break on two of them being Seattle and Atlanta.

 

[rmontro]

Let's not forget he got a break on two of them being Seattle and Atlanta.

A break? Both of those teams beat the Packers in the playoffs in those years, and the Falcons destroyed them. The Seattle game I don't care to discuss.

Anyway, I agree Brady has had some advantages. The biggest one is that his team has a defense, and Rodgers has had to play without one. The AFC East has been a dumpster fire mostly. Belichick is the greatest coach of the post-Lombardi era.

But if wishes and buts were candy and nuts, it would be Christmas all year long. Brady and the Patriots have won six Super Bowls, like it or not. Nothing matters but the results. The Packers aren't going to give back Super Bowl XXXI because they didn't have to go through the Cowboys that year.

All I'm saying is that Brady has a competitive spirit, and wants to win. Is it so hard to believe that one of the reasons that he might take a few less bucks is because he wants a better team around him?

 

[Mondio]

That really isn’t the argument that some of us have been having. While I do actually think Brady could have demanded more based on the success he has had in the NFL, he has still made a ridiculous amount of money. I don’t believe for one second that the reason he doesn’t demand more has anything to do with his wife’s net worth. There are many much more plausible alternatives... such as actually wanting the team to win, his seemingly father/son like relationship with Bob Kraft... etc...

There are many, of which his wife's earnings are every bit as likely to be a part of his decision making. It's not an either or situation. I often talk about lifetime earnings and not short term payouts. I've said before it is more workable with QB's than say a RB, a RB i'd maximize my dollars the first contract I could. As a QB and face of a franchise, taking a few million less at times could increase lifetime value of yourself by tens of millions over your lifetime. John Elway didn't become a millionaire because he was good at selling cars, but being the good steward of a franchise sure helped him become a millionaire selling cars. I get it.

I also know that having your lifestyle already supported and paid for many times over makes it a lot easier to head into camp when your agent says, "they're only offering this, what do you want to do?" to say, "it's ok, let's just get to work" than if you're trying to build the lifestyle you want and your income is the only thing doing it.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I realize you are someone who loves to use your Red X, but before Red X'ing my previous post and really making no sense at all in your own follow up post, you might want to read the article and watch the Brady interview on the Jimmy Kimmel show. Because, that IS exactly what he said, tongue firmly in his cheek.

Your comment about GM's has really nothing to do with anything, except your desire to create yet another straw man argument.

I actually don't often use the red X. And my comment about GMs was sarcasm, not strawman.

 

[Do7]

A break? Both of those teams beat the Packers in the playoffs in those years, and the Falcons destroyed them. The Seattle game I don't care to discuss.

First of all if Atlanta wasn't stupid and simply run the time out then New England would've been in the same boat as us. On top of that New England's defense found the resolve to give Brady and company a chance, where our didn't. So hell yeah that's a break.

Second, we were botched kick return from going to The Superbowl. Don't get me started on how Brady was watching helplessly on the sidelines when one of the dumbest playcalling decisions in NFL history was ever made. So again that's a freaking break.

Anyway, I agree Brady has had some advantages. The biggest one is that his team has a defense, and Rodgers has had to play without one. The AFC East has been a dumpster fire mostly. Belichick is the greatest coach of the post-Lombardi era.

But if wishes and buts were candy and nuts, it would be Christmas all year long. Brady and the Patriots have won six Super Bowls, like it or not. Nothing matters but the results. The Packers aren't going to give back Super Bowl XXXI because they didn't have to go through the Cowboys that year.

All I'm saying is that Brady has a competitive spirit, and wants to win. Is it so hard to believe that one of the reasons that he might take a few less bucks is because he wants a better team around him?

And what? Rodgers doesn't have a competitive spirit? He doesn't want to win just as badly or as much as Brady? Hell not just Rodgers but the other greats, like Brees, or Peyton when he was playing? And like I said when you factor in those variables and whatnot I find it simply hard to believe that would be the driving factor for him taking all these discounts, that may be part of it perhaps but it's largely because he's in a situation where he can afford to take discounts. Let's also not forget Brady has been in the league longer.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

You don't see other QBs winning six Super Bowls either.

Yeah, the ONLY factor is the QB making less. Having the best GM/Coach ever has absolutely nothing to do with it...

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That's fine, he's been winning super bowls since 2001. He likely could have signed even bigger contracts.

The Patriots didn't win a Super Bowl for 10 straight seasons as well yet Brady earned more money than Rodgers. While he could have signed bigger contracts that's true for a lot of quarterbacks.

Well Tom has said in the past that part of the reason he takes less is because his wife, and I quote, "makes a lot of money". So what you're saying really doesn't mean all that much to me.

It shouldn't matter as Brady hasn't taken less money than other quarterbacks in the league.

Are we really doing this? Tell you what. Put Brady on an NFC team which is by far a tougher conference and then we'll see how well he does. Hell if all Rodgers had to worry about in regards to opposition was Peyton and Big Ben over these past several years I'm sure he'd be in as many SBs. Let's not forget he got a break on two of them being Seattle and Atlanta.

Brady and the Patriots would have dominated in the NFC as well as they have an even better record against NFC opponents since 2002. Belichick being the best head coach in the NFL and the front office surrounding Brady with a ton of talent being the main reason for their dominance though.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Brady and the Patriots would have dominated in the NFC as well as they have an even better record against NFC opponents since 2002. Belichick being the best head coach in the NFL and the front office surrounding Brady with a ton of talent being the main reason for their dominance though.

The front office point is also a very good argument for a QB perhaps taking less. We can quibble on the discount that Brady has taken but keep in mind that Brady knows that any money he gives up will be well spent to help the team. What was Rodgers supposed to give up money for with TT? So that TT could re-sign more bad defensive draft picks to worse contract extensions? Why should Rodgers have had any faith that the Packers would use money he was giving away for a good purpose? It's not like Rodgers' contract was the difference in bringing back Hayward or TT deciding to waste a draft pick and money on Nick Perry.

This isn't meant to poop on TT's legacy, he was very good in the beginning when he built an amazing support team in the front office, but it's not like extra salary cap space was ever something he really needed since 99% of what he did was re-sign draft picks.

 

[Do7]

Brady and the Patriots would have dominated in the NFC as well as they have an even better record against NFC opponents since 2002. Belichick being the best head coach in the NFL and the front office surrounding Brady with a ton of talent being the main reason for their dominance though.

I get that Brady and Belichick has fared well against NFC opponents, but you and I both know that the playoffs are a different animal altogether and the playoffs in the NFC has been more competitive than it has been for the AFC. All Brady had to worry about was Peyton and Big Ben for the most part over the years until recently. Do you really think New England would've gotten to as many Superbowls, let alone get their in one piece had they been in the NFC? With all those defenses, and more competent QBs to face. He'd had to face the likes of Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, Cam, Wilson just to name a few. Definitely would've been a tougher road if you ask me.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The front office point is also a very good argument for a QB perhaps taking less. We can quibble on the discount that Brady has taken but keep in mind that Brady knows that any money he gives up will be well spent to help the team. What was Rodgers supposed to give up money for with TT? So that TT could re-sign more bad defensive draft picks to worse contract extensions? Why should Rodgers have had any faith that the Packers would use money he was giving away for a good purpose? It's not like Rodgers' contract was the difference in bringing back Hayward or TT deciding to waste a draft pick and money on Nick Perry.

Once, everyone seems to consider it a fact that Brady has taken less money but has accounted for $14 million more in cap space than Rodgers since the Packers quarterback has been paid as a starter in 2008. I don't get it why everyone seems to ignore that!!!

I get that Brady and Belichick has fared well against NFC opponents, but you and I both know that the playoffs are a different animal altogether and the playoffs in the NFC has been more competitive than it has been for the AFC. All Brady had to worry about was Peyton and Big Ben for the most part over the years until recently. Do you really think New England would've gotten to as many Superbowls, let alone get their in one piece had they been in the NFC? With all those defenses, and more competent QBs to face. He'd had to face the likes of Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, Cam, Wilson just to name a few. Definitely would've been a tougher road if you ask me.

I'm not convinced about that either as AFC teams not named the Patriots are 5-4 in Super Bowls since 2001.

 

[Do7]

Once, everyone seems to consider it a fact that Brady has taken less money but has accounted for $14 million more in cap space than Rodgers since the Packers quarterback has been paid as a starter in 2008. I don't get it why everyone seems to ignore that!!!



I'm not convinced about that either as AFC teams not named the Patriots are 5-4 in Super Bowls since 2001.

Yeah but those who won from the SB from the AFC in those years were typically Big Ben, Peyton, and Brady. The only exception was Baltimore those two times. See my point? Very less opposition compared to the jungle that's the NFC.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Once, everyone seems to consider it a fact that Brady has taken less money but has accounted for $14 million more in cap space than Rodgers since the Packers quarterback has been paid as a starter in 2008. I don't get it why everyone seems to ignore that!!!

I realize that, but that's why I said to not quibble, those that are convinced aren't going to change their minds. I was attempting to focus the discussion on the fact that Rodgers doesn't really have any reason to be confident the front office would use any of his money wisely if they spent it elsewhere.

 

[PackAttack12]

Yeah but those who won from the SB from the AFC in those years were typically Big Ben, Peyton, and Brady. The only exception was Baltimore those two times. See my point? Very less opposition compared to the jungle that's the NFC.

The Patriots have definitely had the benefit of playing in a lousy division all these years.

 

[Do7]

The Patriots have definitely had the benefit of playing in a lousy division all these years.

Let alone a weaker conference, especially at the QB position.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah but those who won from the SB from the AFC in those years were typically Big Ben, Peyton, and Brady. The only exception was Baltimore those two times. See my point? Very less opposition compared to the jungle that's the NFC.

There's an argument to be made that it would have been easier to make it to the Super Bowl out of the NFC because there hasn't been a dominant team in the conference over that period.

The Patriots have definitely had the benefit of playing in a lousy division all these years.

The Bills, Dolphins and Jets have a higher combined winning percentage in games outside their division than the Bears, Lions and Vikings since 2002.

 

[Do7]

There's an argument to be made that it would have been easier to make it to the Super Bowl out of the NFC because there hasn't been a dominant team in the conference over that period.



The Bills, Dolphins and Jets have a higher combined winning percentage in games outside their division than the Bears, Lions and Vikings since 2002.

And yet 2 teams from NFCN has made it to the postseason more than that of the AFCE

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And yet 2 teams from NFCN has made it to the postseason more than that of the AFCE

While that's true the Patriots having been dominant definitely factors into it.

 

[PackAttack12]

The Bills, Dolphins and Jets have a higher combined winning percentage in games outside their division than the Bears, Lions and Vikings since 2002.

How does that invalidate my point? lol.

 

[Do7]

While that's true the Patriots having been dominant definitely factors into it.

But like I said playoffs are a different animal. Do you think they would've went to The Superbowl as many times as they did when constantly facing Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, Cam, Wilson, etc and when Harbaugh was coaching? I can guarantee Brady would've went to less SBs and won far less.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

How does that invalidate my point?

That should be pretty obvious.

But like I said playoffs are a different animal. Do you think they would've went to The Superbowl as many times as they did when constantly facing Rodgers, Brees, Ryan, Cam, Wilson, etc and when Harbaugh was coaching? I can guarantee Brady would've went to less SBs and won far less.

I don't believe the Patriots would have won less Super Bowls while playing in the NFC.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That should be pretty obvious.



I don't believe the Patriots would have won less Super Bowls while playing in the NFC.

Kind of funny that this is even being debated, since the Patriots could have also won more Super Bowls had they been in the NFC, we will never know.

Not sure what the angle is here for some, but hard for me not to say that the Patriots aren't in a "League of Their Own", basically since BB took over almost 20 or so years ago. His Record during that time, with or without Brady.....225–79–0

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Not sure what the angle is here for some, but hard for me not to say that the Patriots aren't in a "League of Their Own", basically since BB took over almost 20 or so years ago. His Record during that time, with or without Brady.....225–79–0

As I've mentioned earlier the Patriots are even better against NFC opponents (57-19).

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As I've mentioned early the Patriots are even better against NFC opponents (57-19).

Yup and as much as some of us don't like BB or even TB, trying to discount their accomplishments is not only pretty silly, but pretty transparent that someone might not be looking at it through clear glasses.

If I had been a Patriots fan over the last 20 years, I would be over the moon loving my Football team and its accomplishments, how could you not? (opens door up for all the debate).

 

[Do7]

I don't believe the Patriots would have won less Super Bowls while playing in the NFC.

I don't think they would've MADE it to as many SBs as they have, that's for certain.