The path for Aaron Rodgers to become the GOAT

[Raptorman]

I'm not disputing that the Seahawks had a nice little run. But in reality how many of these "elite defenses" lasted more then 5 years before they dropped off significantly in the history of the NFL? Seattle defense already had a big drop off on defense last year. People will point to the loss of Earl Thomas but I believe there is more to it then that. They haven't gotten as good a pass rush recently and there secondary isn't that fast so they can be exposed. On top of that they don't even know who there starting corner is gonna be opposite Richard Sherman at this point.

People can throw all the Russell Wilson stats out there they want but IMO he needs to be used a certain way. He doesn't have the overall ability to carry a team and put them on his back like Aaron Rodgers does.

Some will still remain bullish on the Seahawks but I say if you must buy then "buy cautiously". I believe there is better value available.

"elite defenses" Let's talk about that for one moment because it affects two things here. First it affects how people look at Brady. New England has an "elite defense". I know , you all don't believe me. Tell me, what other defense has been in the top 10 in points given up for 10 of the last 14 years? In that time period NE has won 4 Super Bowls and lost 2. Their defense has averaged being at 7th in ppg over that time period. Now, compare that to the Packers position of 15th. And the only time the Packers won the Super Bowl their defense was ranked 2nd. Now, look at Seattle's defense. They have been 7, 1,1,1,1,3 over the last 6 years. IF their defense holds on to stay in the top 10 in ppg, and I think they will, they will be a team to reckon with for some time. Now, if New England can maintain a defense for 14 years why can't Seattle? Even if they slip some, they only need to remain in the top 10 to stat competitive. BTW, can you name any of the super stars on New England's defense over the last 14 years? How many of them have stayed for 14 years?

 

[brandon2348]

"elite defenses" Let's talk about that for one moment because it affects two things here. First it affects how people look at Brady. New England has an "elite defense". I know , you all don't believe me. Tell me, what other defense has been in the top 10 in points given up for 10 of the last 14 years? In that time period NE has won 4 Super Bowls and lost 2. Their defense has averaged being at 7th in ppg over that time period. Now, compare that to the Packers position of 15th. And the only time the Packers won the Super Bowl their defense was ranked 2nd. Now, look at Seattle's defense. They have been 7, 1,1,1,1,3 over the last 6 years. IF their defense holds on to stay in the top 10 in ppg, and I think they will, they will be a team to reckon with for some time. Now, if New England can maintain a defense for 14 years why can't Seattle? Even if they slip some, they only need to remain in the top 10 to stat competitive. BTW, can you name any of the super stars on New England's defense over the last 14 years? How many of them have stayed for 14 years?

As far as I'm concerned the New England Patriot comparison is off limits due to a guy named Bill Belichick. Schneider and Carroll combined aren't as smart as him. I believe Carroll's loose ways are about to catch up with him as they always have in the past. It won't be a pretty ending.

In fact I'm expecting a Seahawks implosion on the Lambeau sidelines on Sept 10th and I will be 16 rows up to witness the whole thing. If you want to be bullish on the Seahawks then thats your choice but I'm "selling".

 

[XPack]

Run the Table from Game 1

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just to tie some things together in this thread (at least for me). I don't see Seattle's defense going anywhere in the near future. I also would have gladly traded the Packers defense for Seattle's defense over the last 5-6 years. Finally, if the Packers had fielded the Seattle Defense since the Packers last Super Bowl Title, not only would there probably be 2-4 more Lombardi Trophies in Green Bay, but Aaron Rodgers would be alone at the top of The GOAT list!

 

[rmontro]

Just to tie some things together in this thread (at least for me). I don't see Seattle's defense going anywhere in the near future. I also would have gladly traded the Packers defense for Seattle's defense over the last 5-6 years. Finally, if the Packers had fielded the Seattle Defense since the Packers last Super Bowl Title, not only would there probably be 2-4 more Lombardi Trophies in Green Bay, but Aaron Rodgers would be alone at the top of The GOAT list!

Lol, if Seattle had our defense, they'd be sitting in last place in their division, and no one would give them a second thought.

While we're on the subject though, GB's continued inability to field a good defense (despite it being the focus of every draft) infuriates me. Y'all can blame whoever you want.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Lol, if Seattle had our defense, they'd be sitting in last place in their division, and no one would give them a second thought.

While we're on the subject though, GB's continued inability to field a good defense (despite it being the focus of every draft) infuriates me. Y'all can blame whoever you want.

Agreed and to take it one step further, just how good would the Packers offense have been without #12? It's all about having the right pieces of the Puzzle in place. The Packers have had the biggest piece, QB, covered since Brett Favre took over way back in the early 90's. The 2 SB wins during those 25+ years were a result of having enough of a supporting cast around 2 HOF QB's.

 

[PackAttack12]

"elite defenses" Let's talk about that for one moment because it affects two things here. First it affects how people look at Brady. New England has an "elite defense". I know , you all don't believe me. Tell me, what other defense has been in the top 10 in points given up for 10 of the last 14 years? In that time period NE has won 4 Super Bowls and lost 2. Their defense has averaged being at 7th in ppg over that time period. Now, compare that to the Packers position of 15th. And the only time the Packers won the Super Bowl their defense was ranked 2nd. Now, look at Seattle's defense. They have been 7, 1,1,1,1,3 over the last 6 years. IF their defense holds on to stay in the top 10 in ppg, and I think they will, they will be a team to reckon with for some time. Now, if New England can maintain a defense for 14 years why can't Seattle? Even if they slip some, they only need to remain in the top 10 to stat competitive. BTW, can you name any of the super stars on New England's defense over the last 14 years? How many of them have stayed for 14 years?

All that I will say is that if Rodgers were the signal caller for those top rated defenses, he'd be a 3-4 time champion right now.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

All that I will say is that if Rodgers were the signal caller for those top rated defenses, he'd be a 3-4 time champion right now.

Stops and makes you wonder what the Browns records would have been over the last 9 years, had AR been in Cleveland...ok....I thought long enough......AR probably wouldn't be the player he is today, had the Browns got ahold of him to mess him up.

 

[SoonerPack]

2 more rings and maintaining his all-time performance level could get him there. His numbers (stats) speak for themselves. He makes every single throw there is, puts balls into windows just big enough for a ball to get through all while having the best TD/INT ratio by a fairly wide margin. He can scramble with the best of them and has all those HM's under his belt to boot. The titles or lack thereof will haunt him for sure. I get into it with my buddies at work all the time and they always hit me with the "he isn't TB12..." because of the ring issue. My argument is and has always been, give him some of those defenses the Pats have rolled out there and do you really think AR12 wouldn't have more titles?!?
I know there is no way to quantify this statement but I believe it to be true with all my heart. How many times has AR drove the team down for the go-ahead or game-tying score only to be wearing a ballcap when the final whistle blows?? I pray we can go on a run and maybe rip 2 titles off over the next 4-5 years to make this a non-starter. He is a talent the likes of which the league has never seen in my eyes. The legitimate TOTAL PACKAGE.

 

[PackAttack12]

Stops and makes you wonder what the Browns records would have been over the last 9 years, had AR been in Cleveland...ok....I thought long enough......AR probably wouldn't be the player he is today, had the Browns got ahold of him to mess him up.

What's sad is if you take AR off of this team, they would be some version of the Browns.

 

[PackAttack12]

2 more rings and maintaining his all-time performance level could get him there. His numbers (stats) speak for themselves. He makes every single throw there is, puts balls into windows just big enough for a ball to get through all while having the best TD/INT ratio by a fairly wide margin. He can scramble with the best of them and has all those HM's under his belt to boot. The titles or lack thereof will haunt him for sure. I get into it with my buddies at work all the time and they always hit me with the "he isn't TB12..." because of the ring issue. My argument is and has always been, give him some of those defenses the Pats have rolled out there and do you really think AR12 wouldn't have more titles?!?
I know there is no way to quantify this statement but I believe it to be true with all my heart. How many times has AR drove the team down for the go-ahead or game-tying score only to be wearing a ballcap when the final whistle blows?? I pray we can go on a run and maybe rip 2 titles off over the next 4-5 years to make this a non-starter. He is a talent the likes of which the league has never seen in my eyes. The legitimate TOTAL PACKAGE.

Did any of you hear Colin Cowherd's argument today as to why Rodgers' TD to INT ratio is overrated?

Utter blasphemy.

 

[rmontro]

Stops and makes you wonder what the Browns records would have been over the last 9 years, had AR been in Cleveland...ok....I thought long enough......AR probably wouldn't be the player he is today, had the Browns got ahold of him to mess him up.

I do think McCarthy deserves a lot of the credit for developing Rodgers, just as Belichick deserves a lot of credit for developing Brady. Not everyone agrees with the latter though, some people think Brady carries Belichick. I am not one of them.

By the way, I did see someone on TV today saying that they didn't find this Rodgers stat that impressive. I hesitate to mention the name because some people seem here seem to have a violent reaction to certain TV talking heads. I will say that it was not Skip Bayless (although I did see him comment, basically he said it meant nothing to him, and Tom Brady was clutch in Super Bowls, blah blah blah).

Anyway, the guy said that stat indicated that Rodgers holds on to the ball too long and doesn't take enough risks. Not saying I agree with that, but I bring it up because Rodgers has been accused of holding on to the ball too long from time to time. And Favre has appeared in one more Super Bowl than Rodgers, and he was a big risk taker.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Did any of you hear Colin Cowherd's argument today as to why Rodgers' TD to INT ratio is overrated?

Utter blasphemy.

I missed that, but I only listen to Colin Blowhard or Skip ****less truly for a laugh and the entertainment value of hearing a couple of egotistical idiots desperately trying to gain an audience of uneducated followers...... and not calling you uneducated for pointing out Blowhard's comments.

 

[PackAttack12]

I missed that, but I only listen to Colin Blowhard or Skip ****less truly for a laugh and the entertainment value of hearing a couple of egotistical idiots desperately trying to gain an audience of uneducated followers...... and not calling you uneducated for pointing out Blowhard's comments.

I think Cowherd makes good points/arguments on some things. But I will never understand his resentment towards Rodgers. He says in one comment that he would start his franchise with Aaron Rodgers today if he had the choice of one player in the NFL, and then proceeds to say that his TD to INT ratio isn't something to brag about because taking more chances translates to more wins.

So which is it. Is there a quarterback you would rather have than him, or not?

And Bayless is totally incapable of giving Rodgers any sort of credit just because there's one quarterback that he can make even a semi-plausible case for being better than him, and that's the immortal Tom Brady.

And I would add. What Colin doesn't realize is that Rodgers makes dozens of throws every year that other quarterbacks attempt to throw, yet they get picked off. Because he makes throws that no other QB can make. Plain and simple.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I guess Russell Wilson is better than I gave him credit for. If he's so great though, like the second greatest QB ever, why were so many people upset that they let him throw the ball in that Super Bowl, instead of giving it to Beast Mode?

That isn't a knock on Wilson by any means though as I would have been upset with Rodgers throwing the ball in that situation.

Seattle defense already had a big drop off on defense last year.

I would have loved the Packers to give up only 18.3 points per game in any of the last six seasons.

The Packers have had the biggest piece, QB, covered since Brett Favre took over way back in the early 90's. The 2 SB wins during those 25+ years were a result of having enough of a supporting cast around 2 HOF QB's.

It's disappointing the Packers turned having two HOF quarterbacks over the past 25 years in only two Super Bowl wins though.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Anyway the guy said that stat indicated that Rodgers holds on to the ball too long and doesn't take enough risks. And Favre has appeared in one more Super Bowl than Rodgers, and he was a big risk taker.

I think that argumemt is total BS. While it's true that Rodgers occasionally holds on to the ball too long there's no doubt he takes enough risks but makes it look otherwise as he's capable of completing throws other quarterbacks get regularly picked off while trying.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's disappointing the Packers turned having two HOF quarterbacks over the past 25 years in only two Super Bowl wins though.

Totally agree and those 25 years will forever be remembered for what could have been. Someday, the Packers will come back to earth and have to field an average to below average QB. When that happens, all of us "old farts" will pull the youngsters aside and say "you should have seen Favre and Rodgers play, they would have guided this team to the Super Bowl."

 

[Raptorman]

All that I will say is that if Rodgers were the signal caller for those top rated defenses, he'd be a 3-4 time champion right now.

1959-1968. Lombardi era. Packers defense ranked an average of 2nd (7 times in 10 years they were 1 or 2) in PPG during that run.

BTW, when the Packers won the SB with Favre, defense was ranked..........1st in ppg.

 

[PackAttack12]

1959-1968. Lombardi era. Packers defense ranked an average of 2nd (7 times in 10 years they were 1 or 2) in PPG during that run.

BTW, when the Packers won the SB with Favre, defense was ranked..........1st in ppg.

Makes me sick that after winning the SB in the 2010 season, Aaron Rodgers hasn't been given even ONE top 10 defense in terms of points allowed.

 

[PackAttack12]

By the way, for all of the Brady lovers, all 5 times he's won the Super Bowl he's had a top 10 defense. Go figure.

 

[Mondio]

Regardless of Brady's supporting defenses, he's still a great QB, just as Rodgers is. Favre was great too and didn't win without a great defense either. It's a championship in the ultimate team sport, it doesn't diminish a players individual skill set, and a reason why "rings" aren't the be all and end all for every person in their greatest of all time criteria

 

[PackAttack12]

I never wanted to start a whole thread on this, because I just knew it wouldn't be a good idea

But I'll just leave this here...

Brady v.s. Rodgers in the postseason:

Completion % -
Rodgers - 63.5
Brady - 62.7

TD to INT ratio -
Rodgers - 3.6 to 1
Brady - 2.03 to 1

Passer Rating -
Rodgers - 99.4
Brady - 89.0

Yards/attempt -
Rodgers - 7.49
Brady - 6.86

Yards/game -
Rodgers - 278.63
Brady - 267.47

Playoff QBR by year since Rodgers became the starter.

2016 - Rodgers (84.2) Brady (78.4)
2015 - Rodgers (73.9) Brady (62.6)
2014 - Rodgers (67.8) Brady (82.3)
2013 - Rodgers (68.4) Brady (68.1)
2012 - Rodgers (79.6) Brady (69.8)
2011 - Rodgers (76.1) Brady (83.4)
2010 - Rodgers (84.4) Brady (16.9)
2009 - Rodgers (85.2) Brady (12.2)

6 out of 8 years Rodgers has had the higher QBR. Rodgers lowest QBR in a single playoff game is 55. Brady has five more worse than that in the same time frame.

Opponents ppg in playoff losses:
Packers - 36.3
Patriots - 26.4

# of 30+ point games given up by the defense:
Packers - 5 out of 16 total
Patriots - 3 out of 34 total

Record in games in which the QB throws an interception:
Rodgers - 2-6
Brady - 11-7

The partridge in a pair tree: Rodgers hasn't been given one single top 10 defense since winning the Super Bowl in the 2010 season, Brady has been given five just in his five Super Bowl winning seasons. No telling how many others.

So all and all, I would say that Rodgers has done far more than his part to win big playoff games, and if he were put in the same situation as Tom Brady, there's no telling what he might be able to accomplish. He's got better overall playoff numbers across the board no matter which metric you choose to look at, and he's been handed one top 10 defense in the past seven seasons.

BUT...

One guy is 25-9. The other is 9-7. And the narrow minded, lazy natured pro-Brady crowd out there just wants to point at the record without considering all of the variables.

That's all I have to say. Makes me wanna puke.

 

[Sky King]

I never wanted to start a whole thread on this, because I just knew it wouldn't be a good idea

But I'll just leave this here...

Brady v.s. Rodgers in the postseason:

Completion % -
Rodgers - 63.5
Brady - 62.7

TD to INT ratio -
Rodgers - 3.6 to 1
Brady - 2.03 to 1

Passer Rating -
Rodgers - 99.4
Brady - 89.0

Yards/attempt -
Rodgers - 7.49
Brady - 6.86

Yards/game -
Rodgers - 278.63
Brady - 267.47

Playoff QBR by year since Rodgers became the starter.

2016 - Rodgers (84.2) Brady (78.4)
2015 - Rodgers (73.9) Brady (62.6)
2014 - Rodgers (67.8) Brady (82.3)
2013 - Rodgers (68.4) Brady (68.1)
2012 - Rodgers (79.6) Brady (69.8)
2011 - Rodgers (76.1) Brady (83.4)
2010 - Rodgers (84.4) Brady (16.9)
2009 - Rodgers (85.2) Brady (12.2)

6 out of 8 years Rodgers has had the higher QBR. Rodgers lowest QBR in a single playoff game is 55. Brady has five more worse than that in the same time frame.

Opponents ppg in playoff losses:
Packers - 36.3
Patriots - 26.4

# of 30+ point games given up by the defense:
Packers - 5 out of 16 total
Patriots - 3 out of 34 total

Record in games in which the QB throws an interception:
Rodgers - 2-6
Brady - 11-7

The partridge in a pair tree: Rodgers hasn't been given one single top 10 defense since winning the Super Bowl in the 2010 season, Brady has been given five just in his five Super Bowl winning seasons. No telling how many others.

So all and all, I would say that Rodgers has done far more than his part to win big playoff games, and if he were put in the same situation as Tom Brady, there's no telling what he might be able to accomplish. He's got better overall playoff numbers across the board no matter which metric you choose to look at, and he's been handed one top 10 defense in the past seven seasons.

BUT...

One guy is 25-9. The other is 9-7. And the narrow minded, lazy natured pro-Brady crowd out there just wants to point at the record without considering all of the variables.

That's all I have to say. Makes me wanna puke.

Boy, I wish I had that kind of time on my hands.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The partridge in a pair tree: Rodgers hasn't been given one single top 10 defense since winning the Super Bowl in the 2010 season, Brady has been given five just in his five Super Bowl winning seasons. No telling how many others.

Overall the Patriots have featured 13 defenses that finished within the top 10 in points allowed over Brady's 16 seasons as a starter. On the other side Rodgers has had that benefit only twice in his nine season as the Packers starting quarterback with one of these units not being able to provide enough stops to win a playoff game in which the offense put up 45 points.

In addition New England has never finished worse than 17th in that category since 2001 while the Packers have somehow managed to rank lower than that four times over the last nine seasons.

 

[brandon2348]

I never wanted to start a whole thread on this, because I just knew it wouldn't be a good idea

But I'll just leave this here...

Brady v.s. Rodgers in the postseason:

Completion % -
Rodgers - 63.5
Brady - 62.7

TD to INT ratio -
Rodgers - 3.6 to 1
Brady - 2.03 to 1

Passer Rating -
Rodgers - 99.4
Brady - 89.0

Yards/attempt -
Rodgers - 7.49
Brady - 6.86

Yards/game -
Rodgers - 278.63
Brady - 267.47

Playoff QBR by year since Rodgers became the starter.

2016 - Rodgers (84.2) Brady (78.4)
2015 - Rodgers (73.9) Brady (62.6)
2014 - Rodgers (67.8) Brady (82.3)
2013 - Rodgers (68.4) Brady (68.1)
2012 - Rodgers (79.6) Brady (69.8)
2011 - Rodgers (76.1) Brady (83.4)
2010 - Rodgers (84.4) Brady (16.9)
2009 - Rodgers (85.2) Brady (12.2)

6 out of 8 years Rodgers has had the higher QBR. Rodgers lowest QBR in a single playoff game is 55. Brady has five more worse than that in the same time frame.

Opponents ppg in playoff losses:
Packers - 36.3
Patriots - 26.4

# of 30+ point games given up by the defense:
Packers - 5 out of 16 total
Patriots - 3 out of 34 total

Record in games in which the QB throws an interception:
Rodgers - 2-6
Brady - 11-7

The partridge in a pair tree: Rodgers hasn't been given one single top 10 defense since winning the Super Bowl in the 2010 season, Brady has been given five just in his five Super Bowl winning seasons. No telling how many others.

So all and all, I would say that Rodgers has done far more than his part to win big playoff games, and if he were put in the same situation as Tom Brady, there's no telling what he might be able to accomplish. He's got better overall playoff numbers across the board no matter which metric you choose to look at, and he's been handed one top 10 defense in the past seven seasons.

BUT...

One guy is 25-9. The other is 9-7. And the narrow minded, lazy natured pro-Brady crowd out there just wants to point at the record without considering all of the variables.

That's all I have to say. Makes me wanna puke.

That's why I came out from the get go and pronounced Aaron Rodgers easily the "GOAT". Everyone wants to hate on Rodgers it seems and it really doesn't matter what Aaron Rodgers does as he somehow doesn't get the full credit he deserves.

All these guys and networks can spew fraud and lies and people that don't know any better just follow along.