Player Spotlight: Aaron Rodgers (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

2008 Player Spotlight Series

One of Footballguys best assets is our message board community. The Shark Pool is, in our view, the best place on the internet to discuss, debate and analyze all things fantasy football. In what's become an annual tradition, the Player Spotlight series is a key part of the preseason efforts. As many of you know, we consider the Player Spotlight threads the permanent record for analyzing the fantasy prospects of the player in question. Last year, we published more than 140 offensive spotlights covering the vast majority of expected skill position starters. This year will be no different.

Each week we will post a list of players to be discussed. Those threads will remain open for the entire preseason, and should be a central point to discussion expectations for the player in question. Importantly, analysis done in the first week of posting will be part of the permanent record in two ways. 1) At the end of the week, we will tally the projections into a consensus. 2) We will select a number of pull quotes from forum contributors who make a compelling statement or observation. Both the projections and pull quotes will be part of a published article on the main website.

Thread Topic: Aaron Rodgers, QB, Green Bay Packers

Player Page Link: Aaron Rodgers Player Page

Each article will include:

Detailed viewpoint from a Footballguys staff member
Highlighted member commentary from the message board threads
FBG Projections
Consensus Member ProjectionsThe Rules

In order for this thread to provide maximum value, we ask that you follow a few simple guidelines:

Focus commentary on the player in question, and your expectations for said player
Back up your expectations in whatever manner you deem appropriate; avoid posts that simply say "I hate him" or "He's the best"
To be included in the final synopsis and consensus outlook, you MUST provide projections for the playerProjections should include (at a minimum):

For QBs: Passing Yards, Passing TDs, Ints, Rush Yards, Rush TDs
For RBs: Rushes, Rushing Yards, Rush TDs, Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs
For WRs & TEs: Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDsNow let's get on with the conversation! We look forward to your contributions and let me offer a personal thanks in anticipation of the great debate and analysis.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

295 comp. 476 att. 3522 yds

21 TD 16 int.

30 att. 105 yds. 0 TD

2 very good wr's with Driver and Jennings. Grant/Jackson will provide balance at rb even with an injury.

He has learned from one of the greats and showed in Dallas that he the tools necessary to compete at this level.

The drafting of Brohm is a concern as is his health issues, but the upside here is quite high.

 

[msommer]

Not quite as bullinsh bu the should be fine

250 comp 400 att for 2800 yards with 23 TDs and 18 Int

 

[Tanner9919]

Great O-line, solid defense, good set of WR's and a good running game.

Surprise player of the year, IMO..could post Delhomme-type numbers from 2004/5, i.e, 3600 yards, 26 Tds, 13 ints..

The Packers are for real , not a smoke-n-mirrors team like Cleveland...

 

[Jason Wood]

I absolutely love Rodgers potential in this offense. A lot of people are going to talk about the pressures of stepping into Brett Favre's shoes but, to my mind, it's a lot different today than had he taken over the helm as an untested rookie if Favre retired abruptly. Rodgers has a lot of seasoning in this offense. Sure you can't mirror game conditions, and that's certainly a risk, but there are plenty of examples of QBs that sat and watched for a few seasons who then stepped into the lineup with immediate success.

Injuries are always something that can derail any prediction, but right now it's hard to say Rodgers doesn't have a stocked cupboard. His offensive line is excellent, Ryan Grant and his backups are certainly capable of getting the job done and the defense should be rock solid. With or without a healthy Driver, the receiving corps is daunting, too.

To my mind, Rodgers is one of the few QBs drafted outside of the top 10 that has a legitimate path to elite fantasy numbers this year if everything falls just right. Not saying to expect elite numbers, but that the realistic potential for them is there.

 

[fightingillini]

VALUE! VALUE! VALUE!

Rodgers will be a great value pick this year, given his draft position. He isn't a rookie, he has learned from an NFL legend for 3 years. He played very good in relief of Favre in the DAL game last year. Has great receiving weapons as well as a good RB in Grant. Don't expect him to sling it all over the field like Favre did, but he should easily exceed his draft position, assuming he stays healthy.

3350 yds, 22 TDs, 15 Int

75 yds rushing, 1 TD

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

just picked him up in the FIX!!!!

Editor's Note: The FIX is a dynasty league that features a number of active message board members, as well as yours truly.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

just picked him up in the FIX!!!!

Editor's Note: The FIX is a dynasty league that features a number of active message board members, as well as yours truly.

And we're glad to have you.We only roster 20-22 the past couple of seasons in the dynasty portion. Rodgers was on the WW and we have had it shut down for the past 6 months...when we started the rookie draft this past Sunday, BSS snared him at the 1.09...I think more than a few owners forgot he was available.

I will be very interested to see what you do with the 2.09.

 

[rzrback77]

I think that Aaron Rodgers is poised and ready to succeed in Green Bay's potent offense. He was a first round selection and he got the opportunity to grow into the starter's position by essentially watching for three years. I think that his three years on the team will allow the OC to give him the full playbook from the first snap. I see a continuation of last year's success even with a new QB under center. Lots of weapons and a strong running game are a QBs best friends. With his current ADP at QB18 and 113 overall, this will provide savvy drafters a top ten QB at a bargain basement price tag.

Aaron Rodgers 350 compete out of 550 attempts for 4,050 yards 7.36 ypa with 25 TDs and 15 ints and add 40 carries for 100 yards and 1 TD

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I think that Aaron Rodgers is poised and ready to succeed in Green Bay's potent offense. He was a first round selection and he got the opportunity to grow into the starter's position by essentially watching for three years. I think that his three years on the team will allow the OC to give him the full playbook from the first snap. I see a continuation of last year's success even with a new QB under center. Lots of weapons and a strong running game are a QBs best friends. With his current ADP at QB18 and 113 overall, this will provide savvy drafters a top ten QB at a bargain basement price tag.Aaron Rodgers 350 compete out of 550 attempts for 4,050 yards 7.36 ypa with 25 TDs and 15 ints and add 40 carries for 100 yards and 1 TD

I've been targeting him in mocks and been getting him extremely late.

 

[dmac37]

Another aspect in dynasty, Brohm is a cheap handcuff, one of these 2 QB's will be a stud for years to come in GB with the WR's and system in place. There is also a chance that one of these 2 could go to another team in a few years and give you a 2nd quality starter.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

 

[T Bell]

I think he can put up very good numbers, but the concern I have with him is that he suffers a season-ending injury, and loses the job to Brohm by the end of training camp in 2009. His job security is at risk.

Assuming he starts 16 games which he's of course slated to do, then I'd project:

3600/24/18 125/0

Again, though, in a redraft league I'd probably try to draft someone else I've projected to have similar numbers ahead of him.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Aaron Rodgers:

I'm in a real dilemma on how to try and predict what Aaron Rodgers is going to do this season. Right now, I feel this guy isn't going to be mediocre, he's either going to do very well or he's going to be a bust. Really, the only time I've really seen him play was against Dallas last season when he came in when Farve was injured.

The game was a night game, best two teams in the NFC at the time and he came in and played outstanding. He didn't only fill Farve's shoes that night, he gave the entire offense a shot in the arm and brought them back into the game. However, Dallas was ahead by a comfortable margin at the time and it was my opinion (and a mistake on the defenses part) that since Farve was out, it was like a sigh of relief and they didn't play with the same intensity with Farve out.

That's it for me, now I'm supposed to predict what this guy is going to do as the new starter. My eyes saw a guy who could fill Farve's shoes but my gut tells me don't buy into it. Brett Farve isn't going to just retire and the QB position in GB doesn't skip a beat.

This is only an educated guess but what I think GB will miss the most, isn't Farve's skilled ability to play QB, because Rodgers showed he can play the position. I think it'll be his toughness and ability to play week in and week out. For so long, we all took for granited that Farve will always play, we just had to figure out how he'd do versus that defense that week. I don't think Aaron Rodgers will be that Iron Man. I have to imagine that when he came in versus Dallas, he was as fresh as a daisy and played the very best he could but how is he going to play when his thumb is swollen from dinging it on a lineman's helmet on the follow through. How will that feel in November in Green Bay or Chicago?

Green Bay's offense is skilled, so he's going to get some yards and Td's just being in the game but I am on the chilly side when it comes to Aaron Rodgers but openly admitting he has room to seriously outperform my projections.

3200 yards 19 td's and 19 Int's

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

Any quarterback can look good coming off of the bench when the defense doesn't have to gameplan for them.

 

[sho nuff]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

Any quarterback can look good coming off of the bench when the defense doesn't have to gameplan for them.

So Dallas did not game plan for short quick passes to those WRs?If so...they have the worst DC ever as that is what they had been doing all year long.Its not like Favre went out and a player like Vince Young came in and ran all over them as a completely different style.Rodgers ran the same offense Favre ran all year long.Barring injury...I see him at about 3800 yards, 23 TDs 11 INTs...rushing will be gravy but I think some have gone a little low here.This is where he is a bit different from Favre and is a bit more mobile. (not that this changes what I said about the Dallas game).I think instead of throwing it away alot as Favre might have later in his career...Rodgers might tuck it and try gaining some yards on the ground.Im not talking of alot of yards here...150 or so...but there may be more bootlegs or sneaks near the goalline than there have been for Favre lately.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I'm not sure what Rodgers year end numbers will be, because his track record indicates that he might be brittle - breaking his foot in his first extended action of 06, then pulling a hammy in practice the week after his first extended action last year.

I am sure that any week Rodgers is healthy, I'll probably be projecting him in the top 10 QB because of the offense, the quality of the weapons and O-Line, and his command of the offense (if the Dallas game is any indication).

Seems to me like this guy is almost universally underrated, and yet another reason that waiting on QB will be rewarded in redraft leagues.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

Any quarterback can look good coming off of the bench when the defense doesn't have to gameplan for them.

I don't know exactly what to say to this except you need to just watch more football I guess.

 

[T Bell]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

Any quarterback can look good coming off of the bench when the defense doesn't have to gameplan for them.

I don't know exactly what to say to this except you need to just watch more football I guess.

I don't know about the "any quarterback . . ." part, but it's pretty hard to deny that backups have that built-in advantage when they come into games in relief of the starter, isn't it?

 

[offdee]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

Any quarterback can look good coming off of the bench when the defense doesn't have to gameplan for them.

I don't know exactly what to say to this except you need to just watch more football I guess.

I don't know about the "any quarterback . . ." part, but it's pretty hard to deny that backups have that built-in advantage when they come into games in relief of the starter, isn't it?

Rob Johnson agrees.

 

[sho nuff]

So the team's the only reason to like Rodgers this season? Besides the Packers supporting cast what makes Aaron Rodgers so good?

He was a high draft pick, he's been in the system learning from Farve for years and when you had a chance to see how good he was last year versus Dallas, he played extremely well.

Any quarterback can look good coming off of the bench when the defense doesn't have to gameplan for them.

I don't know exactly what to say to this except you need to just watch more football I guess.

I don't know about the "any quarterback . . ." part, but it's pretty hard to deny that backups have that built-in advantage when they come into games in relief of the starter, isn't it?

Do they really?Or is it just the few good to very good performances you remember skewing what people believe?

Backups generally don't take all of the reps...and are backups because the starter is usually better.

Its one thing if a player is a completely different style QB behind him...like going from Favre to Vick (without all the dog killing). But this was going from Favre to Rodgers who was playing a nearly identical style of play (other than a few scrambles). The game plan was similar to nearly every other game that season.

 

[jurrassic]

I think it will be a race between Min and GB as well. Besides the qb position being important for both teams, I really think GB has a huge advantage in the coaching department. Not just play calling but coaching. Look at the improvement from within in the organization. The Packers coaches are greatly skilled at coaching up their players. They went from 4-12 to 13-3 with essentially the same guys. They have taken numerous undrafted free agents and turned them into contributors. I don't think Childress has that type of skill. The Minnesota coaching staff is essentially University of Wisconsin West (Childress, Huber, Bevell, and now Panos helping out).

 

[Jon_Moore]

He steps into a fantastic situation. 1-4, Green Bay has 2 receivers that could make the pro-bowl, James Jones and Jordy Nelson will provide perhaps the most talented #3 and #4 in the league. I don't have alot of faith in Ryan Grant despite his efforts last year, but between he and Brandon Jackson, they'll be fine in the running game as well. If you saw Rodgers play any before 2007, he looked like a deer in headlights, a bust for sure. In 2007, against the Cowboys, he looked poised and took control of the offense. I think the years waiting behind one of the best ever to play the game have really brought him along. He should be a very good quarterback, and the leader of a top 10 passing attack.

299/474

3615

22 Toucdowns

14 Ints

30 Rushes

114 Yards

1 Td

 

[Donnybrook]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre.

It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB.

2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

 

[The Jacket]

The supporting cast will make him look better than he is.

3100 yards

59% competions

23 TDs

18 INTs

Solid enough in fantasy, I guess.

 

[cstu]

I don't want a Tedford product on my team until I see one actually produce. No doubt that Rodgers is in a great situation, but I'll believe he's top 15 material when I see it. I don't mind missing the boat on this one.

 

[houndirish]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre. It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB. 2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

Finally ... someone who's willing to look beyond the half of football Rodgers played against the Cowboys. Props to CTSU for the Tedford reference too ... you stole my thunder.If we're going to judge Rodgers on his history to date I think you have to look at the guy as a major injury risk. He's had the opportunity to shine a few times and while he hasn't necessarily come up short he has come up dinged.I'll admit Rodgers has shown me more in his upside performances than I ever figured he would. I wasn't high on him coming out. However don't underestimate the "pressure of replacing a legend" theory. I agree that Rodgers is better equipped to take on this challenge having carried the clipboard for a few years. However I'll be surprised if he makes people wonder why they rooted for "big play/big interception Brett". I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but I felt Brian Griese was in as good a scenario, given his pedigree, his college success, and the strength of his team, to replace Elway as Rodgers is, but we all saw how that played out. I think the one huge benefit Rodgers has in his favor is that most fans most recent memory of the guy was a good performance in a highly televised game. That takes a lot of pressure off him initially and likely buys him a bad game or two, if needed.

 

[Manster]

Rodgers? what QB didnt' look good against the Cowboys? pass D was not their strong point in '07.

he's comin into a decent situation. the NFC is gonna come down to the Packers, Cowboys, G-men, seachickens, saints?? maybe even arizona!

i'll pull a prediction out of me ####.

3000 18 tds 15 int's packers will run first!

 

[cstu]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre. It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB. 2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

Finally ... someone who's willing to look beyond the half of football Rodgers played against the Cowboys. Props to CTSU for the Tedford reference too ... you stole my thunder.If we're going to judge Rodgers on his history to date I think you have to look at the guy as a major injury risk. He's had the opportunity to shine a few times and while he hasn't necessarily come up short he has come up dinged.I'll admit Rodgers has shown me more in his upside performances than I ever figured he would. I wasn't high on him coming out. However don't underestimate the "pressure of replacing a legend" theory. I agree that Rodgers is better equipped to take on this challenge having carried the clipboard for a few years. However I'll be surprised if he makes people wonder why they rooted for "big play/big interception Brett". I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but I felt Brian Griese was in as good a scenario, given his pedigree, his college success, and the strength of his team, to replace Elway as Rodgers is, but we all saw how that played out. I think the one huge benefit Rodgers has in his favor is that most fans most recent memory of the guy was a good performance in a highly televised game. That takes a lot of pressure off him initially and likely buys him a bad game or two, if needed.

Griese is a good comparision. What does favor Rodgers is that even though Griese has a poor 1st year starting, he followed it up with a fantastic year before he was injured. He was never the same after that though. I think the fans are going to get rough on Rodgers if he disappoints early on, he'll probably start hearing shouts about getting Favre on phone.

 

[T Bell]

I don't want a Tedford product on my team until I see one actually produce. No doubt that Rodgers is in a great situation, but I'll believe he's top 15 material when I see it. I don't mind missing the boat on this one.

This has some validity given the failure rate of Tedford's QB's, but unlike the others Rodgers has has sufficient time before being thrown into the fire to learn the NFL QB position thoroughly. I think that he's the exception in that regard, in contrast to a guy like Kyle Boller.

 

[MCguidance]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre. It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB. 2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

Finally ... someone who's willing to look beyond the half of football Rodgers played against the Cowboys. Props to CTSU for the Tedford reference too ... you stole my thunder.If we're going to judge Rodgers on his history to date I think you have to look at the guy as a major injury risk. He's had the opportunity to shine a few times and while he hasn't necessarily come up short he has come up dinged.I'll admit Rodgers has shown me more in his upside performances than I ever figured he would. I wasn't high on him coming out. However don't underestimate the "pressure of replacing a legend" theory. I agree that Rodgers is better equipped to take on this challenge having carried the clipboard for a few years. However I'll be surprised if he makes people wonder why they rooted for "big play/big interception Brett". I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but I felt Brian Griese was in as good a scenario, given his pedigree, his college success, and the strength of his team, to replace Elway as Rodgers is, but we all saw how that played out. I think the one huge benefit Rodgers has in his favor is that most fans most recent memory of the guy was a good performance in a highly televised game. That takes a lot of pressure off him initially and likely buys him a bad game or two, if needed.

Brian Griese played for one year behind Elway, Rogers had three behind Favre. Griese had to replace a two-time defending Super Bowl champion. Rodgers has to follow a legend, no doubt, but a player not nearly as good as he was in his prime (though neither was Elway). There is a difference in learning the offense for one year and learning it for three. I believe that Rodgers comes into a comparable situation...but is a better player. I think that is where the difference is. You can draw comparisons, but we have the benefit of hindsight with Brian Griese. Griese was a 3rd round draft pick, Rodgers was a potential first overall pick. I think talent + preparation = 3,500/24/13.

 

[David Yudkin]

There are conflicted forces at work here. 1) New guy replacing a legendary QB (usually not great production). 2) Highly drafted backup that sat in a decent system (in recent years generally good production). I have ouutlined the first part in other threads, but as far as #2:

Some of the guys that took mostly a full year or more off and hten started for their original team:

Culpepper

Palmer

Rivers

Brees

Brady

Garrard

Romo

Griese

I'm warming up on Rodgers, but I'm still not totally sold yet.

 

[MCguidance]

There are conflicted forces at work here. 1) New guy replacing a legendary QB (usually not great production). 2) Highly drafted backup that sat in a decent system (in recent years generally good production). I have ouutlined the first part in other threads, but as far as #2:Some of the guys that took mostly a full year or more off and hten started for their original team:CulpepperPalmerRiversBreesBradyGarrardRomoGrieseI'm warming up on Rodgers, but I'm still not totally sold yet.

You can even add Pennington to that list.

 

[sho nuff]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre. It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB. 2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

Finally ... someone who's willing to look beyond the half of football Rodgers played against the Cowboys. Props to CTSU for the Tedford reference too ... you stole my thunder.If we're going to judge Rodgers on his history to date I think you have to look at the guy as a major injury risk. He's had the opportunity to shine a few times and while he hasn't necessarily come up short he has come up dinged.I'll admit Rodgers has shown me more in his upside performances than I ever figured he would. I wasn't high on him coming out. However don't underestimate the "pressure of replacing a legend" theory. I agree that Rodgers is better equipped to take on this challenge having carried the clipboard for a few years. However I'll be surprised if he makes people wonder why they rooted for "big play/big interception Brett". I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but I felt Brian Griese was in as good a scenario, given his pedigree, his college success, and the strength of his team, to replace Elway as Rodgers is, but we all saw how that played out. I think the one huge benefit Rodgers has in his favor is that most fans most recent memory of the guy was a good performance in a highly televised game. That takes a lot of pressure off him initially and likely buys him a bad game or two, if needed.

See...this makes no sense to me...people want to say don't judge him on his limited time against Dallas (and I agree not to judge solely on that)...but then in the same post, based on 2 injuries they claim he is some major injury risk. Is the same size for that not equally as small?Griese got thrown in pretty quickly though...in his 2nd year.With Terrell Davis hurt early on in the season, Sharpe was hurt as well.I think they are in totally different scenarios really (which is why I don't buy into any of the comparisons to people following legends...not even Young). Not Fiedler, Griese, Young...nobody was on this Packer team, with this cast, with this coaching staff, with this defense....after sitting for 3 years learning and improving.He also fits nearly perfectly within this system right now (according to coaches at least).What I took from the Dallas game was not his stats. But his presence and how he handled the pressure and the offense. He was in control, no "deer in the headlights" look...that is the part of it that impressed me.

 

[gheemony]

Great pass blocking OL, great passing offense, been sitting on the bench learning the offense... I like this guy to be a top 10 QB with the potential to be top 5. Would love to get him as my QB2 in any league. The question is whether he's brittle or been unlucky.

 

[cstu]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre. It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB. 2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

Finally ... someone who's willing to look beyond the half of football Rodgers played against the Cowboys. Props to CTSU for the Tedford reference too ... you stole my thunder.If we're going to judge Rodgers on his history to date I think you have to look at the guy as a major injury risk. He's had the opportunity to shine a few times and while he hasn't necessarily come up short he has come up dinged.I'll admit Rodgers has shown me more in his upside performances than I ever figured he would. I wasn't high on him coming out. However don't underestimate the "pressure of replacing a legend" theory. I agree that Rodgers is better equipped to take on this challenge having carried the clipboard for a few years. However I'll be surprised if he makes people wonder why they rooted for "big play/big interception Brett". I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but I felt Brian Griese was in as good a scenario, given his pedigree, his college success, and the strength of his team, to replace Elway as Rodgers is, but we all saw how that played out. I think the one huge benefit Rodgers has in his favor is that most fans most recent memory of the guy was a good performance in a highly televised game. That takes a lot of pressure off him initially and likely buys him a bad game or two, if needed.

See...this makes no sense to me...people want to say don't judge him on his limited time against Dallas (and I agree not to judge solely on that)...but then in the same post, based on 2 injuries they claim he is some major injury risk. Is the same size for that not equally as small?Griese got thrown in pretty quickly though...in his 2nd year.With Terrell Davis hurt early on in the season, Sharpe was hurt as well.I think they are in totally different scenarios really (which is why I don't buy into any of the comparisons to people following legends...not even Young). Not Fiedler, Griese, Young...nobody was on this Packer team, with this cast, with this coaching staff, with this defense....after sitting for 3 years learning and improving.He also fits nearly perfectly within this system right now (according to coaches at least).What I took from the Dallas game was not his stats. But his presence and how he handled the pressure and the offense. He was in control, no "deer in the headlights" look...that is the part of it that impressed me.

TD was replaced by Gary who did a very good job. Sharpe was hurt, but he still had great offense around him otherwise. Rodgers doesn't have a TE like Sharpe either - Lee is good, but Chamberlain also filled in well for Sharpe when he was injured.I agree that looked good in the Dallas game, but there is a huge difference between filling in for a game and producing consistently over a whole season after replacing a legend.

 

[southeastjerome]

The good: The upside is there with the very good supporting cast. He also has QB guru Mike McCarthy mentoring him and is the only non rookie QB on the roster. He's in a situation that it would be difficult to fail.

The bad: Obviously he is unproven. If McCarthy was/is ultra confident in Rodgers, would they have spent a high draft choice on Brohm?

I think well see ups and downs for Rodgers, but he has a pretty big safety net in Driver, Jennings, the oline, the running game and the head coach. That's a lot going for the guy and I think the upside outweighs the downside. 3475, 20 TDs, 17 INTs; 96, 1.

 

[sho nuff]

I think people are overvaluing Rodgers based on the Dallas game. If you can judge a QB based on one game then Craig Nall should be starting somewhere instead of walking the street. After all, Nall compiled a passer rating of 139.4 in relief of Favre. It not uncommon for a first year starter to have more interceptions than TDs. However, most first year starters are not playing behind an established NFL line and already have a talent core of receivers. Rodgers situation is more closely related to Phillip Rivers situation in 2006. Rodgers has better receivers but Rivers, IMO, is a better QB. 2008 projection: 3400 19 TDs 16 Ints

Finally ... someone who's willing to look beyond the half of football Rodgers played against the Cowboys. Props to CTSU for the Tedford reference too ... you stole my thunder.If we're going to judge Rodgers on his history to date I think you have to look at the guy as a major injury risk. He's had the opportunity to shine a few times and while he hasn't necessarily come up short he has come up dinged.I'll admit Rodgers has shown me more in his upside performances than I ever figured he would. I wasn't high on him coming out. However don't underestimate the "pressure of replacing a legend" theory. I agree that Rodgers is better equipped to take on this challenge having carried the clipboard for a few years. However I'll be surprised if he makes people wonder why they rooted for "big play/big interception Brett". I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but I felt Brian Griese was in as good a scenario, given his pedigree, his college success, and the strength of his team, to replace Elway as Rodgers is, but we all saw how that played out. I think the one huge benefit Rodgers has in his favor is that most fans most recent memory of the guy was a good performance in a highly televised game. That takes a lot of pressure off him initially and likely buys him a bad game or two, if needed.

See...this makes no sense to me...people want to say don't judge him on his limited time against Dallas (and I agree not to judge solely on that)...but then in the same post, based on 2 injuries they claim he is some major injury risk. Is the same size for that not equally as small?Griese got thrown in pretty quickly though...in his 2nd year.With Terrell Davis hurt early on in the season, Sharpe was hurt as well.I think they are in totally different scenarios really (which is why I don't buy into any of the comparisons to people following legends...not even Young). Not Fiedler, Griese, Young...nobody was on this Packer team, with this cast, with this coaching staff, with this defense....after sitting for 3 years learning and improving.He also fits nearly perfectly within this system right now (according to coaches at least).What I took from the Dallas game was not his stats. But his presence and how he handled the pressure and the offense. He was in control, no "deer in the headlights" look...that is the part of it that impressed me.

TD was replaced by Gary who did a very good job. Sharpe was hurt, but he still had great offense around him otherwise. Rodgers doesn't have a TE like Sharpe either - Lee is good, but Chamberlain also filled in well for Sharpe when he was injured.I agree that looked good in the Dallas game, but there is a huge difference between filling in for a game and producing consistently over a whole season after replacing a legend.

While Gary did a good job...he is no TD.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Here's a list of some of the top QBs in NFL history, and the QBs that replaced them.

sfo 1990 Joe Montana Steve Youngsfo 1998 Steve Young Jeff Garciamia 1999 Dan Marino Jay Fiedlermin 1978 Fran Tarkenton Tommy Kramersdg 1987 Dan Fouts Mark Malonedal 1979 Roger Staubach Danny Whitecin 1984 Ken Anderson Boomer Esiasonclt 1972 Johnny Unitas Marty Domreskan 1975 Len Dawson Mike Livingstonden 1998 John Elway Brian Grieseram 2002 Kurt Warner Marc Bulgerram 1957 Norm Van Brocklin Billy Wadegnb 1970 Bart Starr Scott Hunterwas 1974 Sonny Jurgensen Billy Kilmerpit 1982 Terry Bradshaw Cliff Stoudtdal 2000 Troy Aikman Quincy Cartercle 1955 Otto Graham Tommy O'Connellrai 1972 Daryle Lamonica Ken Stableroti 1993 Warren Moon Billy Joe Tollivercin 1997 Boomer Esiason Neil O'Donnellram 1972 Roman Gabriel John Hadlkan 2006 Trent Green Damon Huardchi 1948 Sid Luckman Johnny Lujacksfo 1960 Y.A. Tittle John Brodiesdg 1972 John Hadl Dan Foutscrd 1981 Jim Hart Neil Lomaxoti 2005 Steve McNair Vince YoungEveryone knows about Montana and Young, but Garcia did a very nice job following Young, and Brodie did a very nice job following Tittle. SF has a nice history there.So does San Diego. I hadn't realized that Hadl (a very good QB in his own right) was followed by Fouts. And Hadl himself followed up Roman Gabriel. Neil Lomax, another very good QB, followed Jim Hart's steller years for the Cardinals. Ken Stabler ws terrific after Lamonica. Obviously Boomer's on this list, and he followed up Ken Anderson. There are quite a few more "stud" QBs that followed up some great QBs than I would have guessed. I think there's a bit of myth w/r/t following a legend. Aaron Rodgers doesn't have it easy, but Boomer Esiason, Steve Young, Jeff Garcia, Marc Bulger, Ken Stabler, John Hadl, John Brodie, Dan Fouts and Neil Lomax didn't have it easy, either.

 

[cstu]

I think there's a bit of myth w/r/t following a legend.

Possibility, but is the "Tedford QB" a myth as well?

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think there's a bit of myth w/r/t following a legend.

Possibility, but is the "Tedford QB" a myth as well?

By the time Rodgers was drafted, the Tedford QB had been pretty well known. So I don't think the Packers were "fooled" by Rodgers' bio.

 

[Cass Durham]

Now that we know the Packers are well prepared to play this season without Favre as the starting QB, even though he is now an option, does this add more credibility to Rodgers as genuine top 10 QB candidate this year? And does this make those who predicted the higher ceiling numbers for Rodgers feel a bit more comfortable going out on that limb? I really want to get on this bandwagon, since he could represent major value this season. But I'm still hesitant as of now.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Rodgers? what QB didnt' look good against the Cowboys? pass D was not their strong point in '07.

The Cowboys ranked 15th in fantasy points per game (adjusted for SOS) allowed to opposing QBs, and 6th in adjusted yards per attempt allowed (adjusted for SOS) to opposing QBs.

 

[AnonymousBob]

28/39 319 yards in the preseason with 2 tds 0 ints.

 

[cstu]

I don't want a Tedford product on my team until I see one actually produce. No doubt that Rodgers is in a great situation, but I'll believe he's top 15 material when I see it. I don't mind missing the boat on this one.

Wanted to give props to Rodgers. He has performed great and looks like the real deal.

 

[T Bell]

I don't want a Tedford product on my team until I see one actually produce. No doubt that Rodgers is in a great situation, but I'll believe he's top 15 material when I see it. I don't mind missing the boat on this one.

Wanted to give props to Rodgers. He has performed great and looks like the real deal.

He looks like he's truly in command of that offense, and I'm surprised at how much he appears to have learned from Favre about how to ad lib and make plays even with chaos around him.

 

[Gottabesweet]

Has any one sold high?

what did you get?

 

[Banger]

I don't want a Tedford product on my team until I see one actually produce. No doubt that Rodgers is in a great situation, but I'll believe he's top 15 material when I see it. I don't mind missing the boat on this one.

Wanted to give props to Rodgers. He has performed great and looks like the real deal.

Good post. I agree I missed the boat on him. I knew they had the pieces in place but didn't think that he was good enough to step in and continue where Favre left off. Live and learn.