QB Aaron Rodgers, NYJ (2 Viewers)

[I Am the Stig]

You can't look at the numbers here. The eras are so different that it is pointless. Perhaps the conversation should start with, "what Era was the best/most fun?

To me, expansion has watered down the league in talent while rule changes have made scoring easier.

Rogers would have been great in any era but the era right now makes it to easy for him. Offences are geared towards the pass.

Marino would have absolutely killed it if he was playing right now

 

[Tony Jabroni]

With that said, and with your Manning comparison in mind, would he be as exposed if he played Belichick every year?

Not sure, but it would be fun to watch.

We will see after this week.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It's not an outlandish position to take from a pure talent/performance perspective.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

but if they had taken him you wouldn't be making this thread

Likely true, sadly. We were having this very "talent vs. environment" discussion in the Raiders thread last week and most seemed to think that he would not have been Aaron Rodgers had he gone to Oakland. Hard to argue against that. There have been plenty of talented QBs who suffered from a poor supporting cast. David Carr jumps to mind. I think he could have excelled had he not been getting sacked every 10 seconds behind the woeful O-line of an expansion team.

Rodgers played behind one of the worst o-lines in the league his first couple of seasons as a starter. He was sacked at an alarming rate.

 

[bigmarc27]

He's good, really good. I'm having a hard time deciding really just how good offensive players are in this era, though. The rules, the refs, and the game in general have just shifted so much in favor of passing, how do you account for that in putting someone in their place on an all-time list. It's like these rookie WRs as well - the stats are incredible. Are they really that much better than rookie WR groups before, or is it just a product of the NFL being at its passing game friendliest?

Anyway, stud? Absolutely, no doubt. Hall of Famer? Yup. Best ever? Ehh I can see an argument, but who knows.It's like baseball in the steroid era.

Agree until the bolded. In the steroid era, you still had an unfair playing field as not ALL players were on it (and we don't even know for sure who was / was not). Though I understand the perspective of skewed stats, but that's always a part of sport.

I'd liken this to the huge hitting years of the '30s moreso than the steroid era.

I agree with that... Not a perfect comparison, just meant if you take a look at the top home run hitters of all time now, it doesn't really mean much anymore. Same as seeing a QB pass for 4k yards in a season.

I get that it's not apples to apples though. Actually as a counterpoint I'd argue that defenses aren't playing on a level playing field, but that's a different discussion altogether!

 

[gianmarco]

Which season is better?

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV

2011*+ 28 GNB QB 12 15 15 14-1-0 343 502 68.3 4643 45 9.0 6 1.2 93 9.2 10.5 13.5 309.5 122.5 87.05 36 219 8.22 9.39 6.7 0 1 23

2013*+ 37 DEN QB 18 16 16 13-3-0 450 659 68.3 5477 55 8.3 10 1.5 78 8.3 9.3 12.2 342.3 115.1 82.93 18 120 7.91 8.87 2.7 2 2 19

ETA--####, I can't keep the formatting.....wish I knew how to do that here (used to use the code tags but that's not working).

 

[FunkyPlutos]

He is the best I have ever seen. His accuracy is off the charts! Upsets me that he is a Packer but he is fun to watch because he just doesn't miss on anything and always makes good reads. He's made McCarthy ALOT of money!!

 

[Phenomena]

Packers homer - his mental ability is off the charts, combined with deceptive lower body to get out and gain positive yardage, and one of the best arms in the game ... should certainly be in the conversation for ten best QBs ever.

But you can't count him over Bradshaw or Montana as best ever. 4 SB wins each is too much. Bradshaw never gets the love, but he won two before and two after the Mel Blount rule which proves that he could play in both eras (the PIT defense was average at best during their last two super bowl wins, by the way).

 

[njherdfan]

Agreed with other posters saying the eras are just too different to make a comparison. For better or worse, the rules governing the NFL, and the passing game in particular, have changed so much in the past decade that I don't know how you can compare QBs from different eras.

 

[Smack Tripper]

RN my history dates to yours. He has the best blend of accuracy, arm strength, mobility, and pocket awareness that I've ever seen.

With that said, and with your Manning comparison in mind, would he be as exposed if he played Belichick every year?

Could not agree more with every aspect of this

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

He will go down as the most accurate passer in NFL history. The combination of his completion percentage and interception percentage is astounding. He's #1 all time in interception percentage at 1.7%. He's #3 all time in completion %, and has been gaining on that number since 2011. His first few seasons at 63.6, 64.7 and 65.7 are dragging him down a bit from being #1 there.

 

[adrenaline]

I looked for a while but I can't find it. There was a play Aaron made this year that didn't count it was a 40-50 yard TD pass to Davante Adams that they called back. It's worth watching if you can find it. It's not a big game play like the TO catch for the Niners in the playoffs but it's one of the most amazing throws I have ever seen. He's getting hit high and low and just unleashes the dragon which happens to be a perfectly placed 40-50 yard rope right where Davante Adams can only catch it. He's the only person in the world that can make that throw in that spot. Amazing.

How hard did you look? I found it in 30 seconds.

And yeah, that's a silly throw.

I'd say that was more of a duck than on a rope.

 

[cstu]

Agreed with other posters saying the eras are just too different to make a comparison. For better or worse, the rules governing the NFL, and the passing game in particular, have changed so much in the past decade that I don't know how you can compare QBs from different eras.

Peyton is considered by many the GOAT - is there really an era difference between 1998 and 2005?

 

[thekidd2009]

Tbh, i'm a Marino supporter but Rodgers is the best I've ever seen. His mobility gives him the edge over Marino and Manning.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Rodgers started late and wasn't asked to learn on the fly like so many young QBs. He didn't make all those rookie and sophomore mistakes to lower that QBR

He also learned on the fly with a good team with good offensive weapons and hasn't played on a bad team to date.

Unlike Manning, every on of his starts have been in the most QB friendly league of all time.

He's a great player but let's see him win another SB before we anoint him over the mighty Joe Montana.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I've said this before, but how would Montana, Marino, Elway, Unitas, every other quarterback of the past done in this NFL?

Imagine all of those guys never had to worry about getting absolutely creamed three seconds after the ball has left their hands.

Anybody remember "two steps"?

 

[devouredbychaos]

Agreed with other posters saying the eras are just too different to make a comparison. For better or worse, the rules governing the NFL, and the passing game in particular, have changed so much in the past decade that I don't know how you can compare QBs from different eras.

Peyton is considered by many the GOAT - is there really an era difference between 1998 and 2005?

You mean Brady, not Peyton. I think Brady has a few more rings..

 

[hagmania]

I am so biased by what Manning does at the line of scrimmage. I don't know if that makes him the best QB of all time, but it certainly makes him the most impressive (to me) of all time.

The throws Rodgers can make though are unbelievable. He can throw it deep while looking like he's just tossing something away in the garbage.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Feel free to agree, disagree, mock me, whatever. My personal football viewing goes back to Bradshaw, Staubach, Fouts of the 70's era, so I can't speak to Johnny U. or some of the earlier greats, other than what NFL Films and Pro Football Reference tells me.

We always hear about QBs "playing at a high level", right? Well I would argue that Rodgers' highest level is superior to the highest level of any other QB. His passer ratings, in particular have been insane. This is the stat which was eye-opening to me.

Career regular season:

Rodgers has 216 TDs and 55 INTs, 106.4 QB rating.

Peyton Manning has 521 TDs and 228 INTs, 97.7 QB rating.

Rodgers is nearly as consistent in the post-season. 6-4 record, 19 TDs, 5 INTs, 103.1 QB rating.

- His 106.4 career passer rating is the highest of all-time.

- His 1.7 interception percentage is the best ever.

- No QB reached 200 TD passes faster.

- He's averaged 34 TDs per full season.

He makes everything look effortless in a game which requires great effort. Oh, he also has over 1,700 yards rushing.

This isn't meant as disrespect to the other great QBs who have multiple rings. I'm just saying that if my life depended on a team winning one game, and the other 10 players on offense were all of equal ability, I'm taking Rodgers. And I wouldn't even have to think about it for very long. He is unbelievably great and efficient.

I'm just glad the Raiders took Fabian Washington one pick before Green Bay took Rodgers.

Aaron Rodgers' game is particularly conducive to getting good passer ratings. By that, I mean he's very willing to take sacks rather than throwing the ball away, compared to Peyton Manning who would much rather throw incomplete than take the sack. How much of a difference do sacks alone make?

Well, if we count every career sack as an incomplete pass, instead, Manning's passer rating falls to 94.7, a three-point drop. Subtract yards lost to sacks from passing yards and Manning's career rating drops to 93.9.

Count sacks as incompletions for Rodgers and his passer rating falls to 98.9, a drop of 7.5 points- two and a half times the size of Manning's drop. Subtract yards lost to sacks and Rodgers' career passer rating falls to 97.0. Suddenly that "passer rating dominance" starts to look a little less, well, dominant.

This comparison also ignores the fact that Manning's career passer rating is weighed down by his rookie season while Rodgers got to learn on the bench. It also ignores the fact that Manning's passer rating was largely compiled in a tougher passing environment (38% of his career pass attempts came before the 2004 passing explosion).

PFR tracks "Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt" (or "ANY/A"), which is yards per attempt with a penalty for sacks and interceptions and a bonus for touchdowns. It also tracks ANY/A+, which is a player's ANY/A normalized against league average (so an ANY/A+ of 100 represents an ANY/A that is perfectly league average, while an ANY/A of 130 is two standard deviations above average). For his career as a starter, Rodgers has an ANYA+ of 125 over 6 years, which is ridiculously impressive. Manning, on the other hand, has an ANYA+ of 122 over 16 years. Toss out Manning's rookie year (his only season below league average in ANY/A+) and Manning rises to 124 over 15 years, which is more impressive than Rodgers' 125 over 6 years, both because he managed to sustain it for 2.5 times as long and because he managed to sustain it through age 38 (and counting), long after even Hall of Fame quarterbacks have typically entered their decline phase. If you want a true apples-to-apples comparison, Aaron Rodgers has an ANYA+ of 125 from ages 25-30. Peyton Manning had an ANYA of 127 from ages 25-30.

Now, Rodgers adds a lot of value with his legs that Manning never has, and I think it's only fair that that be considered. But from a strictly passing standpoint, Rodgers falls short of Manning in his prime.

With that out of the way, my pick for the best QB of all time? If we're ignoring longevity and just want to go with who had the highest peak, it's really hard to argue for anyone other than Steve Young. From when he earned the starting job in 1991 through to his last full season in 1998, Young had an ANY/A+ of 130, which is basically incomprehensible. Aaron Rodgers has only topped 130 ANY/A+ once in his entire career. And, of course, while Rodgers adds value with his legs, Steve Young was one of the most dangerous runners at the QB position the league has ever seen. Since earning the starting job, Rodgers has averaged 17.1 yards per game with 19 rushing TDs. From 1991 through 1998, Steve Young averaged 25.6 yards per game with 33 rushing TDs. No contest.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Agreed with other posters saying the eras are just too different to make a comparison. For better or worse, the rules governing the NFL, and the passing game in particular, have changed so much in the past decade that I don't know how you can compare QBs from different eras.

Peyton is considered by many the GOAT - is there really an era difference between 1998 and 2005?

Here's the league average YPA and passer rating year by year between 1998 and 2014:

1998- 6.8 / 76.2

1999- 6.8 / 75.1

2000- 6.7 / 76.2

2001- 6.8 / 76.6

2002- 6.7 / 78.6

2003- 6.6 / 76.6

2004- 7.1 / 80.9

2005- 6.8 / 78.2

2006- 6.9 / 78.5

2007- 6.9 / 80.9

2008- 6.9 / 81.5

2009- 7.0 / 81.2

2010- 7.0 / 82.2

2011- 7.2 / 82.5

2012- 7.1 / 83.8

2013- 7.1 / 84.1

2014**********- 7.3 / 88.5

Years to take note of: 1998 (Manning entered the league), 2004 ("point of emphasis" on illegal contact), 2008 (Rodgers' first year as a starter).

Please note that 2014 numbers so far get those ten huge asterisks because passing numbers typically start out high and then decline a lot in November/December/January as the cold weather starts to set in. I guarantee you the season-ending numbers are going to be lower, though I wouldn't be surprised to see them settle into the 7.2 / 85.0 range when all is said and done.

So the league-wide average passer rating during Rodgers' 6 years as a starter is 82.6. During Manning's first six years as a starter, it was 76.6. To put that difference into context, during the 1980s the league-wide passer rating typically hung out in the 70.5 to 73.5 range, meaning in a very real sense the early 2000s passing environment was more similar to the 1980s than it is to today's passing environment. Actually, the '80s saw substantially higher YPA averages (the league-wide YPA average only dipped below 7.0 one time between 1980 and 1989), so it would not be inaccurate to say that the '80s were actually a more favorable passing environment than the late '90s and early '00s.

 

[I Am the Stig]

Tbh, i'm a Marino supporter but Rodgers is the best I've ever seen. His mobility gives him the edge over Marino and Manning.

Agreed, but Marino's release was so fast that he never needed to run, not that he could if he wanted to though.

I just think that of QBs of the past, Marino would do the most damage of them in this era.

 

[Todem]

The rules in today's NFL are rendering passing records set in this era...meaningless for me.

Guys like Marino, Fouts, Young, Elway, Favre, Montanta etc played in an era when you can actually play defense and WR's actually had to fight for and earn everything. QB's had to fit balls into tiny windows.

Today's NFL? It's a joke. The defensive rules are an absolute joke.

Sorry. Not the same game. It's wide open and far easier to complete passes and score points and set offensive records in the last 5-7 years and getting worse by the week.. Think about how long Marino's TD record stood, only to be broken..what 2 times within a few years? And his yardage record stood...forever until Brees broke it in this modern era of touch football on defense.

Forget stats. Let's just talk skills and what QB's today do you think would have been fine in yesteryear when guys like Marino, Elway, Fouts, Montana and Favre were chucking the rock.

I think Peyton, Aaron and Tom would be fine...no doubt. I am not so sure about Drew Brees breaking those records in those days. And a host of other top QB's today would struggle to have numbers like they do today. It was a different game back then where you could really differentiate elite gun slingers from an average joe.

In today's era I would rank them if I could draft them as rookies:

1. Brady

2. Rodgers

3. Peyton

I want the guy who I have the absolute utmost confidence that if I surround him with good talent on the OL a running game and a defense...can win me a title. Brady fit's that bill. He has done it the most and he has done it with the least amount of talent IMO on paper.

Rodgers is an amazing QB. I love watching him do his thing. Wonderful pocket presence, great arm, great composure under pressure...he can do it all.

Peyton is a wizard...in the regular season. Under the big lights he just does not seem to be the same QB and his statistics in the post season prove that. Just my opinion, but he seems to clam up in the biggest games more often than not. My eyes don't lie to me.

 

[Todem]

Tbh, i'm a Marino supporter but Rodgers is the best I've ever seen. His mobility gives him the edge over Marino and Manning.

Agreed, but Marino's release was so fast that he never needed to run, not that he could if he wanted to though.

I just think that of QBs of the past, Marino would do the most damage of them in this era.

Marino would destroy defenses in today's NFL.....it would be insane.

 

[Todem]

I've said this before, but how would Montana, Marino, Elway, Unitas, every other quarterback of the past done in this NFL?

Imagine all of those guys never had to worry about getting absolutely creamed three seconds after the ball has left their hands.

Anybody remember "two steps"?

Nail hit on the proverbial head.

I think All of them would be incredible players in today's NFL. Especially Marino and Fouts.

 

[FUBAR]

I've said this before, but how would Montana, Marino, Elway, Unitas, every other quarterback of the past done in this NFL?

Imagine all of those guys never had to worry about getting absolutely creamed three seconds after the ball has left their hands.

Anybody remember "two steps"?

Nail hit on the proverbial head.

I think All of them would be incredible players in today's NFL. Especially Marino and Fouts.

of course they would, they were incredible players in their own era, which was more difficult for the QBs and WRs.

I know this is cheating, but really what's wrong with saying Peyton, Brady and Rodgers are the best in today's league, while Marino, Elway, etc. were the best in theirs?

 

[shader]

I'm a proponent of having 'best' and 'greatest' be different guys. In golf and football and anything really.

Yes, he's the best QB ever at this point. Peyton is #2 but Peyton is a greater QB historically because he's accomplished more.

As long as Rodgers can stay healthy and play reasonably close to his current level, he'll easily accomplish just as much as Peyton.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

I'm a proponent of having 'best' and 'greatest' be different guys. In golf and football and anything really.

Yes, he's the best QB ever at this point. Peyton is #2 but Peyton is a greater QB historically because he's accomplished more.

As long as Rodgers can stay healthy and play reasonably close to his current level, he'll easily accomplish just as much as Peyton.

I'd be surprised. Now, Manning lost an entire year to the neck injury but still, he started a couple years younger and has stayed very healthy. Rodgers has had concussion woes and didn't start till he was 25. Plus, it's just unfair to expect someone to play till they're almost 40 "easily". That's no small feat even WITH health assured, which it isn't. That and the fact that I expect Rodgers to win another SB or two in the next 5 years and idk how much incentive he'll have to keep playing when it hurts to wake up every morning...

I just think it'll be a tall order for him to put together the career regular season numbers that Peyton has.

 

[Pop Tart]

Best ever is going to need more than 1 ring. Now, it's "likely" I suppose - but hasn't that been the case for Peyton for a good long time, now?

In terms of skill set (including the mental aspects), hard to think of anyone greater.

Except maybe Randall Cunningham in Tecmo.

Always thought this was a terrible yard stick.

Why does everyone always say a great QB needs to have rings? What do they prove? Nothing more than you played on a great team.

Trent Dilfer has a ring, Doug Williams has a ring....... Dan Marino doesn't have a ring. Are Dilfer and Williams better QBs than Marino because they have a ring?

Ok, sorry for the sidetrack, that's probably a different discussion.

 

[Pop Tart]

You can't look at the numbers here. The eras are so different that it is pointless. Perhaps the conversation should start with, "what Era was the best/most fun?

To me, expansion has watered down the league in talent while rule changes have made scoring easier.

Rogers would have been great in any era but the era right now makes it to easy for him. Offences are geared towards the pass.

Marino would have absolutely killed it if he was playing right now

Extremely good posting

 

[Bacon]

I wonder how much of Rodgers' success is due to Green Bay making sure he had years on the bench behind Favre to learn all he could about the offense? I feel like Rogers is a testament to those who preach benching a rookie QB for at least a year to learn the offense and how to lead in the NFL, and LOTS of current coaches could stand to learn a thing or two from that philosophy.

 

[Run It Up]

By the time he retires I think he has a pretty good shot at that title.

 

[Phenomena]

You can't look at the numbers here. The eras are so different that it is pointless. Perhaps the conversation should start with, "what Era was the best/most fun?

To me, expansion has watered down the league in talent while rule changes have made scoring easier.

Rogers would have been great in any era but the era right now makes it to easy for him. Offences are geared towards the pass.

Marino would have absolutely killed it if he was playing right now

Extremely good posting

I think Unitas would be the best player in the league if he played today. His passing strategies/talent were so far ahead of their time. He would have dominated today. Put him on the 49ers 20 years ago and they win 5 rings.

 

[justinl]

Outside of the last two years, when Manning set his records and AD came back to make his mark on the NFL, Aaron Rodgers has been the best player in football, hands down.

I just can't help but look and think that Brady is still GOAT. That notion of doing more on offense with less is proven with him, and it's simply an unknown with both Manning and Rodgers because they've never had to. I firmly believe that if Jennings and Jones didn't choose career suicide by playing for 2 teams w/o a real QB, they would have continued their careers as top tier receivers.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

but if they had taken him you wouldn't be making this thread

Likely true, sadly. We were having this very "talent vs. environment" discussion in the Raiders thread last week and most seemed to think that he would not have been Aaron Rodgers had he gone to Oakland. Hard to argue against that. There have been plenty of talented QBs who suffered from a poor supporting cast. David Carr jumps to mind. I think he could have excelled had he not been getting sacked every 10 seconds behind the woeful O-line of an expansion team.

Nonsense imo. Sounds crazy to say QB in general is underrated, but when I read stuff like this that's what I think. Good is good. GB has a couple nice WR's - so what - so do a lot of teams. They were garbage without him last year. The Indianapolis Front Office should be every bit the laughing stock Oakland is but they're not and getting the #1 picks in 1998 & 2012 are literally the only reasons.

 

[Adam Harstad]

I'm a proponent of having 'best' and 'greatest' be different guys. In golf and football and anything really.

Yes, he's the best QB ever at this point. Peyton is #2 but Peyton is a greater QB historically because he's accomplished more.

As long as Rodgers can stay healthy and play reasonably close to his current level, he'll easily accomplish just as much as Peyton.

Easily?

Let's assume that the statistical gap between Manning and Rodgers stays pretty constant through the end of the year, and Manning retires as soon as the season is over, (he won't, but let's pretend). Aaron Rodgers' best season was that crazy 2011 when he had 4643 passing yards and 45 passing TDs. That year was even crazier because he sat out the final game. Pro-rate him to 16 games and that's a 4952 yard, 48 TD season.

Let's say that Aaron Rodgers does that every single year for the rest of his career. Nearly 5k yards, nearly 50 TDs, year after year, with no injury or bad seasons thrown into the mix. With the current gap between Manning and Rodgers, if Manning retired after this season, Rodgers would need to maintain that pace for nine years after this one to catch up to Manning's yardage total. That would make Rodgers 40, or two years older than Manning was when he retired in our current hypothetical. So if Aaron Rodgers manages to play at the absolute highest peak he's played in his entire career without any injury or slump and he lasts two years longer than Peyton Manning does, he has a shot at Manning's passing yardage total.

The passing TD total is a little bit easier for Rodgers. He'll only need to throw 48 passing touchdowns every single year of his career until he's the same age that Manning was when he retired. Oh yeah, he'll also need to win four more MVPs, two more OPoYs, one CPoY, and one Man of the Year award to match Peyton's trophy case.

If by "accomplish as much as Peyton" you mean "finish anywhere near Peyton in total stats and/or awards", Rodgers pretty much doesn't have a prayer. It's not his fault, Peyton just has too much of a head start.

 

[Adam Harstad]

You can't look at the numbers here. The eras are so different that it is pointless. Perhaps the conversation should start with, "what Era was the best/most fun?

To me, expansion has watered down the league in talent while rule changes have made scoring easier.

Rogers would have been great in any era but the era right now makes it to easy for him. Offences are geared towards the pass.

Marino would have absolutely killed it if he was playing right now

Extremely good posting

I think Unitas would be the best player in the league if he played today. His passing strategies/talent were so far ahead of their time. He would have dominated today. Put him on the 49ers 20 years ago and they win 5 rings.

If Unitas played today, though, his passing strategies/talent would no longer be ahead of their time.

 

[I Am the Stig]

You can't look at the numbers here. The eras are so different that it is pointless. Perhaps the conversation should start with, "what Era was the best/most fun?

To me, expansion has watered down the league in talent while rule changes have made scoring easier.

Rogers would have been great in any era but the era right now makes it to easy for him. Offences are geared towards the pass.

Marino would have absolutely killed it if he was playing right now

Extremely good posting

I think Unitas would be the best player in the league if he played today. His passing strategies/talent were so far ahead of their time. He would have dominated today. Put him on the 49ers 20 years ago and they win 5 rings.

If Unitas played today, though, his passing strategies/talent would no longer be ahead of their time.

I dunno, Unitas called his plays and was essentially the OC. Today Manning and Rodgers only audible at the line but the plays are often called for them.

Not that they don't do a great job but Manning with that limitation is still one of the few QBs given the latitude during the game.

Unitas called the whole game. And that carried through to Marino's era. Manning, Rodgers, Bree's and maybe Brady are the only QBs that I think could actually run their own huddle. Marino was at the tale end of an era where all the QBs ran their huddles.

 

[Eminence]

If he is, he'll rack up at least another ring. I honestly think he can do it this year.

 

[bucsbaby]

Whether or not he is the GOAT, he is a damn fine QB and really, really fun to watch. He came into the league with a chip on his shoulder from the draft and he is making 31 other teams pay for passing on him. Good for him.

 

[Raider Nation]

Whether or not he is the GOAT, he is a damn fine QB and really, really fun to watch. He came into the league with a chip on his shoulder from the draft and he is making 31 other teams pay for passing on him. Good for him.

Close enough.

 

[ghostguy123]

I love comparing quarterbacks when they play in the league at the same time. Brady vs Manning and so on. Comparing players that played across different eras is silly to me. The rules change so much, the players change so much, and coaching styles change so much.

At that point all ya can really do is pick out which QBs you think were more dominant in their era relative to the other QBs in the league at that time.

Even that isnt very scientific and still mostly just guessing.

 

[drummer]

To think Alex Smith was drafted #1 overall ahead of him too.............

 

[Boston]

A few random thoughts on this topic:

*If my life was on the line Joe Montana is the QB who I would want under center...using the all-important stat of life and death I think that makes him the greatest QB of all time...

*Elway is probably the most physically gifted QB I have ever seen...I still see him as the prototype...

*Roger Staubach is probably the most underrated of All-Time...a Heisman winner at Navy the guy did not play pro ball until he was 27 due to serving in the Navy which included a tour of duty in Vietnam...to think he was able to have a H-o-F career after that puts him right near the top of any All-Time list...

*(Bias alert...Patriots fan)...I don't think any QB has ever had to shoulder more of a load than Tom Brady...due to him BB has been able to build and rebuild the Pats numerous times while always remaining right near the top of the NFL...he started off as somewhat of a game manager, moved onto legit stud than to record-breaking QB and now onto the All-World vet he is...thru this time he has played with a multitude of RBs, WRs and TEs with quite a few subpar D's but the Pats have always remained high-end contenders (they were a play away from a Super Bowl with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel as starting WRs)...Elway and Marino (to a lesser extent) also fit into this category...

*Manning is Manning...the #'s are there and he is in any All-Time great conversation and supporters can make an excellent case...I don't want to get into a battle over this but I do believe he has pretty much been surrounded by big-time talent his whole career which has aided him greatly...he would have been great no matter what but having only one-ring with all that talent will always be a little wart when it comes to these discussions...

*Rodgers is interesting...he is at a point in his career where he can start to enter these conversations...I kind of see him as a Steve Young clone right now but if you can add in another championship or two that will greatly enhance his resume...at his age and with the talent surrounding him he has the opportunity so right now I still see his All-Time ranking as "still to be determined"...

 

[Ghost Rider]

Rodgers made a play the other that reminded me of Elway in his prime. He dropped back to pass, but no one was open, and the Eagles actually got pressure on him, and it looked like a surefire sack, but Rodgers avoided several rushers, not only getting out of the sack, but then ran it for 12 yards and got the 1st down. Ridiculous plays like that are so demoralizing to a defense.

 

[Jerry Curl]

How about this. Tell me one thing that Rodgers doesn't do great?

 

[Adam Harstad]

How about this. Tell me one thing that Rodgers doesn't do great?

Avoid sacks. He's never in his career posted an above-average sack%.

Some might disagree with this, but I also think he's not a very good commercial actor, though it might just be that I'm unfairly comparing him to Peyton on that one.

 

[Tau837]

IMO:

Tier 1 is still Unitas and Montana.

Tier 2 is harder to define, with several candidates. Brady and Peyton are in this tier. Rodgers isn't yet but could make it eventually.

 

[sho nuff]

How about this. Tell me one thing that Rodgers doesn't do great?

Avoid sacks. He's never in his career posted an above-average sack%.

Some might disagree with this, but I also think he's not a very good commercial actor, though it might just be that I'm unfairly comparing him to Peyton on that one.

He has taken a lot of sacks...but he is pretty darn good at avoiding them too...and getting out of what looks to be a sure fire sack and then making a play.

 

[Tau837]

How about this. Tell me one thing that Rodgers doesn't do great?

Avoid sacks. He's never in his career posted an above-average sack%.

Some might disagree with this, but I also think he's not a very good commercial actor, though it might just be that I'm unfairly comparing him to Peyton on that one.

He has taken a lot of sacks...but he is pretty darn good at avoiding them too...and getting out of what looks to be a sure fire sack and then making a play.

And that is why he takes so many. He always thinks he will escape and thus holds the ball too long to avoid them in many cases.

 

[Jerry Curl]

How about this. Tell me one thing that Rodgers doesn't do great?

Avoid sacks. He's never in his career posted an above-average sack%.

Some might disagree with this, but I also think he's not a very good commercial actor, though it might just be that I'm unfairly comparing him to Peyton on that one.

He has taken a lot of sacks...but he is pretty darn good at avoiding them too...and getting out of what looks to be a sure fire sack and then making a play.

And that is why he takes so many. He always thinks he will escape and thus holds the ball too long to avoid them in many cases.