What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

QB Aaron Rodgers, NYJ (1 Viewer)

Adam Harstad said:
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 is very poor methodologically. For one, the obvious reason being sacks are not incompletions. You can't (as it seems to be the case here) simply equivilate the two as to determine the effect of a sack, without respect to specific drive information, opponent, etc. What % of Rodgers sack's come outside of FG range? To what effect do those impact field position following punts?

The sort of bad argumentation that pervades that argument, and similarly the one directed toward Big Ben gets overblown IMO. I'm not even sure it makes Rodgers look worse:

Since, 2008, the Packers have finished:

2008: 5th in scoring

2009: 3rd in scoring (set franchise record)

2010: 10th in scoring

2011: 1st in scoring (set franchise record)

2012: 5th in scoring

2013: Clearly outlier seeing as he missed half the year

2014: 1st in scoring (as of this week)

Clearly, taking sacks at a higher rate has not prevented the Packers from being on the most dominant offensive teams in the NFL over the course of Rodgers' career. If anything, if we are to assume that in taking said sacks Rodgers is negatively effecting their offensive performance, that must mean that either:

-McCarthy is a GOAT-quality offensive coach

-The Packers are loaded with offensive talent

Neither of which don't seem to be particularly true, especially given the running problems demonstrated by the offense in that span other than the 2009 season, the massive flux of targets that have caught passes (from Donald Lee, Donald Driver, Ruvell Martin, to Jarret Boykin, Davante Adams, etc), and their consistently mediocre o-line grades by FO during that span.

Either way, speaking as of this season in particular, Rodgers protection seems to be the best I can recall during his time in the NFL, and it's reflected in his sack % being .9 below his career average. Further, iirc PFF has him charted at a higher throway % than any previous career highs, and he is still "dominating" passer rating.

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.
Not sure the whole elite QB decline is necessarily a thing in the post 2004 era. QB's stay healthier longer than ever, Kurt Warner, Brett Favre, Manning, Brady, etc are all playing effectively long into their careers. I don't think that is a coincidence or some statistical aberration, but a reflection of training, medical care, and nutrition being at all-time highs for NFL players. On top of that QB's get afforded a range of rule-based protection to prevent them from getting Troy Aikman-ed into oblivion.

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.
ANY/A+ tells you Young's performance viz league average, when the NFL was in a relatively-down passing era in the early-mid 1990s. Young is an easy GOAT contender, but their were also a lot of crappy QB's in the early 1990s. To give a relative picture of the dive there in performance:

1990: 87,249 yards, 575 touchdowns, 480 interceptions

1991: 89,203 yards, 511 touchdowns, 488 interceptions
1992: 84,064 yards, 516 touchdowns, 519 interceptions
1993: 89,874 yards, 517 touchdowns, 469 interceptions
1994: 95,694 yards, 583 touchdowns, 474 interceptions

LIS, Young is a GOAT, and his 1994 season is one of the best ever, but look at those league wide #'s in his first two all-pro seasons.

Compare to say, the 1980s, when the league regularly surpassed 600 passing TD's in a season.

I also have Young as a top 3 all time QB and Rodgers isn't on that list, for what it's worth. Just playing devil's advocate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
:lol:
It's true. Roethlisberger does the same thing. He holds the ball forever because he thinks he'll be able to spin away once pressure gets there. A lot of the time, he's right. A lot of the time he's wrong, too. It's no coincidence that Roethlisberger has also never been above league average in sack%, either.

Vick's another one. He always trusts his legs to get him out of trouble, so he never bothers getting rid of the ball before pressure arrives, he just holds on and tries to make something happen. The result is a lot of plays where he makes something happen and looks like something out of a video game. It also results in a lot of plays where he tries to make something happen, fails, and gets dropped for a loss. In 2004, for instance, he had a 12.5% sack rate. That's obscene. For context, during David Carr's career as a Texan he was sacked 10.7% of the time.

 
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.
Sure...and thus far, it has helped him more than it has hurt him.

 
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.
Sure...and thus far, it has helped him more than it has hurt him.
I don't think it is possible to really validate that opinion. :shrug:

 
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.
Sure...and thus far, it has helped him more than it has hurt him.
Again, no one is saying that Rodgers isn't fantastic. The guy is clearly the MVP of the NFL to this point of the season, IMO. We're just saying that the sacks are a part of his game. The total package, including the sacks, is one of the best provided by an quarterback in history, but there are a lot of ways of measuring a quarterback's prowess that ignore sacks (YPA, passer rating, TD:INT ratio), and all of those methods are going to overrate Rodgers a little bit, because they completely ignore his biggest weakness.

Even when measuring by ANY/A or DVOA or EPA or QBR, (all of which account for sacks taken), Rodgers is the best quarterback in the NFL right now and one of the greatest in history (though "history" for QBR only goes back to 2005, iirc). But any metric that includes adjustments for the fact that he takes a lot of sacks is going to necessarily paint a more accurate and complete picture of his performance than one that doesn't. And when we're splitting hairs between the greatest players to ever lace up football cleats, painting as accurate a picture of player performance as we possibly can is A Good Thing.

 
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.
Sure...and thus far, it has helped him more than it has hurt him.
I don't think it is possible to really validate that opinion. :shrug:
True...without looking at the sacks vs. times he was almost sacked, escaped and either ran for yardage, first down, or threw for a first or a big play.

I think part of it is he always feels the play is alive and he has a chance to make a big play. And he would much rather take a sack than throw an INT.

 
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.
Sure...and thus far, it has helped him more than it has hurt him.
Again, no one is saying that Rodgers isn't fantastic. The guy is clearly the MVP of the NFL to this point of the season, IMO. We're just saying that the sacks are a part of his game. The total package, including the sacks, is one of the best provided by an quarterback in history, but there are a lot of ways of measuring a quarterback's prowess that ignore sacks (YPA, passer rating, TD:INT ratio), and all of those methods are going to overrate Rodgers a little bit, because they completely ignore his biggest weakness.

Even when measuring by ANY/A or DVOA or EPA or QBR, (all of which account for sacks taken), Rodgers is the best quarterback in the NFL right now and one of the greatest in history (though "history" for QBR only goes back to 2005, iirc). But any metric that includes adjustments for the fact that he takes a lot of sacks is going to necessarily paint a more accurate and complete picture of his performance than one that doesn't. And when we're splitting hairs between the greatest players to ever lace up football cleats, painting as accurate a picture of player performance as we possibly can is A Good Thing.
And again...I get all that. And criticize him from time to time for taking some of the sacks.

But in the end, live with it because of what he is trying to do. And if his biggest weakness is taking sacks, so be it.

Im not even making a case for him being the best of all time.

I think he has a ways to go before getting there longevity wise. Just fun to watch and spoiled as a Packers fan for having 20+ years of 2 guys playing QB at a high level.

 
sho nuff said:
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.
Sure...and thus far, it has helped him more than it has hurt him.
I don't think it is possible to really validate that opinion. :shrug:
True...without looking at the sacks vs. times he was almost sacked, escaped and either ran for yardage, first down, or threw for a first or a big play.

I think part of it is he always feels the play is alive and he has a chance to make a big play. And he would much rather take a sack than throw an INT.
Right, the bolded part was my point. Like Adam said, I think he is a truly great QB. I think he has a good chance to put himself into the second tier of all-time QBs before he is done.

 
I think Rodgers needs more superbowl to be sniffing GOAT. One trip does not cut it.
If we're talking about quality of careers, sure. If we're talking about how good quarterbacks are, though, rings don't really matter.

Will winning another superbowl really mean that Aaron Rodgers is a better quarterback in February than he is today? Will he be more likely to win games going forward because he has that second ring? Will his YPA jump up and his scrambles be even more unstoppable? Would Kurt Warner have been easier for defenses to shut down if Kevin Dyson had stretched out one yard further?

 
I think Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in NFL history. Am I nuts?
Willie Nelson wrote it, Patsy Cline sang it.

------------------------------------------------------

"Crazy"

Crazy
I'm crazy for feeling so lonely
I'm crazy
Crazy for feeling so blue
I knew you'd love me as long as you wanted
And then some day
You'd leave me for somebody new

Worry
Why do I let myself worry?
Wondering
What in the world did I do?

Oh, crazy
For thinking that my love could hold you
I'm crazy for trying
And crazy for crying
And I'm crazy for loving you

Crazy for thinking that my love could hold you
I'm crazy for trying
And crazy for crying
And I'm crazy for loving
You
 
I think Rodgers needs more superbowl to be sniffing GOAT. One trip does not cut it.
If we're talking about quality of careers, sure. If we're talking about how good quarterbacks are, though, rings don't really matter.

Will winning another superbowl really mean that Aaron Rodgers is a better quarterback in February than he is today? Will he be more likely to win games going forward because he has that second ring? Will his YPA jump up and his scrambles be even more unstoppable? Would Kurt Warner have been easier for defenses to shut down if Kevin Dyson had stretched out one yard further?
People are mixing the two issues. Rodgers may very well be the best (aka be capable of playing the best) QB in the NFL right now.

But he has a long way to go to establish his career as among the best of all time. He is capable of that but that doesn't mean he will.

 
You are wrong, that's ok, many are confused. Brady is the best ever, Montana in the mix. But its a real toss up after that, Rodgers and Manning right there.

 
I think Rodgers needs more superbowl to be sniffing GOAT. One trip does not cut it.
If we're talking about quality of careers, sure. If we're talking about how good quarterbacks are, though, rings don't really matter.

Will winning another superbowl really mean that Aaron Rodgers is a better quarterback in February than he is today? Will he be more likely to win games going forward because he has that second ring? Will his YPA jump up and his scrambles be even more unstoppable? Would Kurt Warner have been easier for defenses to shut down if Kevin Dyson had stretched out one yard further?
People are mixing the two issues. Rodgers may very well be the best (aka be capable of playing the best) QB in the NFL right now.

But he has a long way to go to establish his career as among the best of all time. He is capable of that but that doesn't mean he will.
Respectfully to all, this wasn't my original point. Obviously his career numbers aren't going to measure up at this point.

I'm talking about playing the position at the highest level. I don't think anyone has ever done it better than Rodgers. :shrug:

 
I think Rodgers needs more superbowl to be sniffing GOAT. One trip does not cut it.
If we're talking about quality of careers, sure. If we're talking about how good quarterbacks are, though, rings don't really matter.

Will winning another superbowl really mean that Aaron Rodgers is a better quarterback in February than he is today? Will he be more likely to win games going forward because he has that second ring? Will his YPA jump up and his scrambles be even more unstoppable? Would Kurt Warner have been easier for defenses to shut down if Kevin Dyson had stretched out one yard further?
People are mixing the two issues. Rodgers may very well be the best (aka be capable of playing the best) QB in the NFL right now.But he has a long way to go to establish his career as among the best of all time. He is capable of that but that doesn't mean he will.
Respectfully to all, this wasn't my original point. Obviously his career numbers aren't going to measure up at this point.

I'm talking about playing the position at the highest level. I don't think anyone has ever done it better than Rodgers. :shrug:
Then no, he isn't. Simply because the Eras are different. The league has never been more pass friendly then it is now. His numbers are inflated due to the emphasis of the passing game.

4000 yards used to be a special season, and now it is easily reached.

 
Yes it's a passing league now and easier to put up stats than past years but it also helps pile up stats when you throw the ball a lot. Green Bay does not do that. In his first season as the starter Green Bay was 10th in the league in attempts. That would be the last time in his career to date the Pack would be in the top 10 in attempts. That number went to 12 the next year followed by 3 straight seasons at #16 before falling further.

That's something he does not get enough credit for, even among fantasy fans who should know better. He puts up elite numbers, elite fantasy numbers, but without being among the league leaders in attempts. I don't think we'd be seeing the video game numbers out of Peyton, Brees, Brady if they were consistently limited to number of passing attempts a guy like Rodgers gets. Fantasy and NFL production speaking, no one is more efficient.

Personally I've considered him the best QB in the NFL for a few seasons. Difficult to compare era's so impossible to know who is the best ever but if you are IMO the best QB in the league and to others arguably the best QB in a golden era of QB's I'd say that should at least put you in the conversation for the best ever.

 
To me Rodgers is the best parts of Manning, Brady and Young. He appears to have it all. I see glimpses of it every game.

At this point I think its not really about stats I think its about performances and situations. Hes got plenty of time to prove hes the best and I'd like to see it.

 
Yes it's a passing league now and easier to put up stats than past years but it also helps pile up stats when you throw the ball a lot. Green Bay does not do that. In his first season as the starter Green Bay was 10th in the league in attempts. That would be the last time in his career to date the Pack would be in the top 10 in attempts. That number went to 12 the next year followed by 3 straight seasons at #16 before falling further.

That's something he does not get enough credit for, even among fantasy fans who should know better. He puts up elite numbers, elite fantasy numbers, but without being among the league leaders in attempts. I don't think we'd be seeing the video game numbers out of Peyton, Brees, Brady if they were consistently limited to number of passing attempts a guy like Rodgers gets. Fantasy and NFL production speaking, no one is more efficient.

Personally I've considered him the best QB in the NFL for a few seasons. Difficult to compare era's so impossible to know who is the best ever but if you are IMO the best QB in the league and to others arguably the best QB in a golden era of QB's I'd say that should at least put you in the conversation for the best ever.
Wow, just wow. Aaron Rodgers doesn't throw much?? He averages 31 attempts per game and has thrown over 500 times in four seasons out of five full seasons. His other "full season he played in 15 of 16 games and had 475 attempts that year.

Historically the current numbers are off the charts. He may not have as many attempts as Manning or Brees but he is well above the historic mean in an era that is off the charts relatively.

To put the last 3 seasons in perspective:

The NFL has had 500 pass attempts surpased 247 times. This happened roughly 93 times before 2000, roughly 42 times durning the 90's and roughly 47 times since 2011. Nearly 20 percent of all 500 attempt seasons in the history of the NFL have occurred in the last 3 seasons!

To say that Aaron Rodgers "doesn't throw much" is madness.

 
How much more does anyone need to see? This guy is unbelievable. He hasn't been picked off at Lambeau since about 1950.
I'd need to see him go back in time about 25 years and see if he could still play this well. That's the problem. It's just too hard to gage players in different eras.

Rodgers is clearly the best today, though.

 
But I'm not comparing eras. I'm simply saying that nobody has ever played the position at a higher level, regardless of whether they played with leather helmets or in 2010.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But I'm not comparing eras. I'm simply saying that nobody has ever played the position at a higher level, regardless of whether they played with leather helmets or in 2010.
I don't really see how you can know this without considering the differences across eras.

 
Couple posters in the Packers/Falcons thread pretty much say it's all the O-Line and the refs protecting Rodgers. Maybe?

 
Not old enough to speak on anyone beyond 10 years or so ago but his combination of raw stats, lack of turnovers, and efficiency is insane.

 
Johnny Unitas could walk into today's game and dominate. Bradshaw won two Super Bowls BEFORE and AFTER the "Mel Blount" rule changes (the most drastic rule change in NFL history, favoring QB/WRs). Yes, Rodgers is very good. And I'm a packers homer. But there are way too many legends out there to proclaim one the best ever. Rodgers may not even be the best Packer ever. Bart Starr won 5 NFL championships and was the best QB in his era.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He is the purest passer I've ever seen. Lightning release that is deadly accurate.

Best today for sure. But he also has some serious weapons.

 
Not old enough to speak on anyone beyond 10 years or so ago but his combination of raw stats, lack of turnovers, and efficiency is insane.
As someone who has seen 30 years of QBs he is currently playing at a level that has him in the conversation.

But please stop this best of all time nonsense. It is difficult to judge across eras. For someone who has only been watching for ten years you really have no idea how offenses have changed and have inflated passing numbers.

Completion percentage being the first beneficiary. Dan Marino didn't have the luxury of the dump off bubble or smoke screen. Everything was downfield.the only time a five reciever set was ever used was for a Hail Mary.

This isn't a judgement on what era was better or not, just stating that they are different that comparing across them is fruitless.

For me personally, I need to see how Rodgers can handle adversity and rally a team. That is what made Montana special. He was cold blooded and would rip out your heart.

That said, Rodgers is playing as great as anyone has ever played the position right now though.

 
Rodger's release on that little shot up the middle to (Lacy I think) was just lightning. Most NFL QBs can't make that throw. His velocity is unreal. His release is perfect. His courage is phenomenal. His off the field leadership is great. He's everything you'd ever want in a QB. He's better than Favre. That's saying something. Incidentally a guy I know had his question read on air last night by Tirico. It was basically "Who was better in their prime, Favre or Rodgers." Gruden said Rodgers.

I don't think Rodgers will play as long as Manning, Brady, or Favre though. He doesn't seem to have that kind of mentality. He'll play until he's satisfied and walk. More like Elway in that respect. I can't see him playing past probably 36. Just a hunch. I doubt we see him start bouncing around to different teams at the end.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rodger's release on that little shot up the middle to (Lacy I think) was just lightning. Most NFL QBs can't make that throw. His velocity is unreal. His release is perfect. His courage is phenomenal. His off the field leadership is great. He's everything you'd ever want in a QB. He's better than Favre. That's saying something. Incidentally a guy I know had his question read on air last night by Tirico. It was basically "Who was better in their prime, Favre or Rodgers." Gruden said Rodgers.

I don't think Rodgers will play as long as Manning, Brady, or Favre though. He doesn't seem to have that kind of mentality. He'll play until he's satisfied and walk. More like Elway in that respect. I can't see him playing past probably 36. Just a hunch. I doubt we see him start bouncing around to different teams at the end.
Elway retired at 38, not exactly walking away. We might be seeing a bit of Elway's last two season playbook happening with Manning now. Hand the ball off and manage the game if you want to win a Super Bowl. I digress.

I can see Rodgers easily playing to 36 and beyond. He doesn't take much punishment and unlike Elway, he has two working knees. He also seems to have a team mentality that will allow him to adjust his game as body starts to slow down. I don't think he cares how they win, just win.

 
Wasn't even mentioned.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_25040661/great-debate-rages-about-best-quarterbacks-all-time

Great debate rages about the best quarterbacks of all timeBy Mike Klis
The Denver Post

Posted: 02/01/2014 07:10:00 PM MST

JERSEY CITY, N.J. — There is so much debate about the "greatest quarterbacks of all time" list that two of the greatest quarterbacks disagree on whether there should even be a list.

Drew Brees has a long list. Peyton Manning has no list.

The ever-whirring Manning prefers an alternative mental exercise in which he plucks the prominent characteristics from the greats to make up the perfect quarterback.

"Take John Elway's arm (sorry about that, Jay Cutler), Dan Marino's release, Troy Aikman's dropback, Brett Favre's scrambling ability, Joe Montana's two-minute poise," Manning said. "So that's how I like to look at it. I don't have a list. I know a lot of people have lists."

Brees has a list. He is widely considered one of the top three quarterbacks of the past decade, along with Manning and Tom Brady. Brees and his New Orleans Saints beat Manning and the Indianapolis Colts the last time each was in a Super Bowl, after the 2009 season.

When asked about his top three quarterbacks of all time, Brees insisted on expansion.

"I have a top 15," Brees said at the Super Bowl media center in New York. "How can you possibly narrow it down to a top three? Here's a name for you: Why wouldn't you put Otto Graham in your top three? He had what, eight championships in 10 years?"

Graham led the Cleveland Browns to 10 championship games in 10 years (counting the team's place in the All-America Football Conference), winning seven.

"I actually looked at it at the end of the year," Brees said. "I was just curious. Fran Tarkenton played in three (Super Bowls). Marino and Elway. Of course, Johnny U. and Bart Starr.

"My point is, each set of guys you have to keep in their era and say these are the best in their time. I don't think you can compare. The game is different now than it was 10 years ago, than it was 20, than it was 50. I think you have to section them off and say these are the guys who were the best of that era and then you put them all together and it gives you guys something to talk about and argue about. But at the end of the day, you can't narrow it down to a top three."

On most lists, Joe Montana is at the top. He wasn't close to being the most physically gifted. Some say he benefited from playing in Bill Walsh's West Coast system, an innovative, unsolvable offense at the time.

Manning said it well, though, when he mentioned Montana's two-minute poise. As a quarterback, nothing beats poise under pressure. Montana was 4-0 in Super Bowls, including victories against Marino and Elway. Put Montana No. 1.

But say Manning wins the Super Bowl for the Broncos on Sunday against the Seattle Seahawks. Does he join Montana at the top?

Manning would have only half of Montana's Super Bowl-ring collection, but he'd be the first to win one each with two teams. So it's two Super Bowls with a bonus. And Manning would become the only quarterback with multiple Super Bowls, five MVP awards and more than 400 touchdown passes. He would also finish perhaps the best season in NFL history, setting all-time records for touchdown passes and passing yards.

"There's no guy that deserves to be in that conversation more than Peyton," Brees said. "I mean, he's the guy who set the standard for all of us. At least since I've been in the game. Tom Brady being the other one. He's the one playing in this game, so he's the one who deserves to be talked about. He's the man of the hour."


This story, though, is about whether he's the man of all time. Say the Broncos don't beat the Seahawks and their No. 1-rated defense. Does Manning slide to say, sixth best, alongside Marino, but behind Montana, Brady, Elway, Johnny Unitas and Graham?

"Crazy," said former Dallas Cowboys defensive end Ed "Too Tall" Jones.

"Absurd," said former Baltimore Ravens coach Brian Billick.

Going from elite to the very top

This Super Bowl would give the Broncos' Pat Bowlen his third Lombardi Trophy as owner, and Elway his first championship as executive after winning two as a quarterback. And it would seemingly lift Manning from merely one of the great quarterbacks based on his overall body of work to arguably neck and surgically repaired neck with Montana.

"You don't have to win a Super Bowl to be a great quarterback. But to be in the conversation for the great-EST, you got to have that jewelry," said Shannon Sharpe, the former Bronco and Hall of Fame tight end who is now an NFL analyst for CBS. "If you don't have the rings, you're not even in the conversation. So we're just skipping over you.

"Joe Montana has four rings. Terry Bradshaw has four. Tom Brady has three. Peyton Manning has one. I didn't set the criteria. But I'm not going to let you change it to make it fit what you think it should be."

If Manning and the Broncos are to beat the Seahawks, history must be defeated. Manning is the fourth quarterback to reach the Super Bowl after leading the NFL in both passing yards and touchdown passes during the regular season. The others were Tom Brady (2007), Kurt Warner (2001) and Dan Marino (1984).

All lost their Super Bowls, by a combined score of 75-47.

The Broncos' 606 points are the most scored by a team in a single season. Of the next eight teams on the all-time scoring list, not one went on to win the Super Bowl.

In the ultimate game, defense has ruled.

Then again, it's not all that uncommon in the modern era for trends to bust. The Green Bay Packers beat Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl four years ago largely because their quarterback, Aaron Rodgers, carved up the Steelers' No. 1-ranked scoring defense.

As great as Rodgers was in 2010 and 2011, Manning was better this season.

"I don't have a top five," said former NFL coach **** Vermeil. "But I do say Peyton's the best to have ever played that position. I've studied the numbers. I've taken all the numbers for the so-called great ones when they were great. His numbers are better."

But former Broncos running back Terrell Davis says Manning is not even the all-time best quarterback on his own team, much less the best, period. Davis would take Elway.

Why? Because with quarterbacks, Davis believes it's about more than the numbers.

"We do this in the world of sports, but they're all opinions," Davis said. "There are no facts. They're all subjective answers. If you ask me who threw for the most yards and most touchdowns, that's easy. Peyton Manning. Peyton Manning is the best. But if there are intangibles involved, if it's who got the most out of their team, that's debatable."

Combining traits of the greats

When Jones started talking about his top five quarterbacks, he pointed out traits nearly identical to Manning's idea of perfection. Elway had the strongest arm, Montana was the coolest. Marino, though, didn't have exclusivity on the release.

"Peyton and Marino have the two quickest releases of anybody I've ever seen," Jones said. "Manning is like a coach on the field. As a defensive player, if I could avoid playing against a Manning, I would."

Billick, an NFL Network analyst, immediately started his top five with Manning and Brady.

"I'll tell you one guy who's in there and nobody talks about him: Otto Graham," Billick said. "I saw film of him for a piece on NFL Films. It's a fascinating question."

Vermeil is 77 and started coaching football in 1959, so he has a little more context than most regarding any "all time" discussion. But this is an old-timer who doesn't stand up for the likes of Johnny Unitas or Otto Graham of yesteryear.

"We have a different game for quarterbacks," said Vermeil, who upon more reflection made Steve Young his second-best quarterback of all time.

"Quarterbacks were never asked then to do what quarterbacks are asked to do now. Bart Starr threw the ball 18, 19 times a game. That doesn't make him any less (great). It makes him great for that vintage. Just like the Model A was a great car for 1931. No one in 1931 liked a car any better than the Model A. But today it doesn't compare."

Before Manning-Brady, there were Sid Luckman and Sammy Baugh in the 1940s. There were similarities in the quarterback rivalries. Most notably that Manning, like Baugh, was considered the better quarterback, but Brady, like Luckman, prevailed more often head to head.

A legacy, as defined in the sports world, is how an athlete is to be remembered forever more. Manning's is at stake in this Super Bowl.

But whether he wins or loses the Super Bowl on Sunday, what will be accomplished if in 75 years no one will be around to call Manning the all-time greatest quarterback, anyhow?

"That's where "all time" gets tricky for me," Davis said. "I never saw Otto Graham play. We can only talk about the guys we've seen with our own eyes.

When you say 'all time,' I can only talk about 'my time.' "

Top 10 NFL quarterbacksDenver Post NFL reporter Mike Klis lists his all-time best QBs. (If Denver loses Sunday, Manning drops behind Boss Elway, Unitas and Brady.)

1. Joe Montana

So methodically brilliant in going 4-0 in Super Bowls. His effortless big-game performances gave birth to the cliché "cool as the other side of the pillow."

2. Peyton Manning

No one ever played the position more efficiently. But it's a tough list, and the pick-six by Tracy Porter in a Super Bowl loss to New Orleans leaves him below Montana.

3. John Elway

Even if Manning was better, Elway was more mesmerizing. He could beat you by arm, by legs and by helicopter.

4. Johnny Unitas

He threw a touchdown pass in 47 consecutive games, a record that held for — get this — 52 years! Drew Brees didn't break it until 2012. Neither Montana nor Manning dominated their era as Johnny U. dominated his.

5. Tom Brady

He's not near the passer of Manning. Not even close. But there is a winning intangible about Brady that is difficult to describe.

6. Otto Graham

He went 4-0 in championship games in his first four AAFC seasons. Then he went 3-3 in NFL title games in his first six NFL seasons. But he threw 88 TD passes against 94 picks in the NFL, so don't get any ideas about a higher ranking.

7. Steve Young

This guy was so good, the 49ers gave up on Montana so they could give Young a chance to play. Might have been the all-time best combination of runner/high-percentage passer.

8. Sammy Baugh

As Babe Ruth brought the home run excitement to baseball, Baugh really delivered the forward pass to the NFL. He retired as the career leader in passing yards, touchdown passes, punt average and interceptions.

9. Brett Favre

A body of work counts, and besides one Super Bowl win, he holds all significant career passing records — at least until Peyton starts breaking them in the next year or two.

10. Bart Starr, Terry Bradshaw (tie)

Starr is the only quarterback to win five NFL championships, including Super Bowls I and II. Bradshaw went 4-0 in Super Bowls. They generally get docked because they led deeply talented teams.

Wish there was a longer list

Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, Sid Luckman, Joe Namath, Drew Brees, Fran Tarkenton, Arnie Herber, Norm Van Brocklin, Roger Staubach.
 
He is the purest passer I've ever seen. Lightning release that is deadly accurate.

Best today for sure. But he also has some serious weapons.
This is where scouting and Ted Thompson come into play. They were able to let Greg Jennings walk. They will let Randall Cobb walk. Adams will take his place and Janis will probably take Adams place. When your QB is a stud, you can do this.

The NFL could use 32 Aaron Rodgers'.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He is the purest passer I've ever seen. Lightning release that is deadly accurate.

Best today for sure. But he also has some serious weapons.
This is where scouting and Ted Thompson come into play. They were able to let Greg Jennings walk. They will let Randall Cobb walk. Adams will take his place and Janis will probably take Adams place. When your QB is a stud, you can do this.
Also James Jones is another whose game dropped off when they left. Granted, both Jennings and Jones went to much weaker offenses (and QBs) where they were expected to carry the load themselves in the passing game. But overall I think we've seen enough evidence that in GB, it's essentially Rodgers that makes the weapons, not the other way around.

Jordy Nelson is a terrific receiver, but put him on Oakland, KC, the Jets, etc. and you'd see much different production.

 
He is the purest passer I've ever seen. Lightning release that is deadly accurate.

Best today for sure. But he also has some serious weapons.
This is where scouting and Ted Thompson come into play. They were able to let Greg Jennings walk. They will let Randall Cobb walk. Adams will take his place and Janis will probably take Adams place. When your QB is a stud, you can do this.
Also James Jones is another whose game dropped off when they left. Granted, both Jennings and Jones went to much weaker offenses (and QBs) where they were expected to carry the load themselves in the passing game. But overall I think we've seen enough evidence that in GB, it's essentially Rodgers that makes the weapons, not the other way around.Jordy Nelson is a terrific receiver, but put him on Oakland, KC, the Jets, etc. and you'd see much different production.
This is how I see it as well. He has good weapons but Rodgers makes the terrific. He's just that good. He is the most accurate passer in the NFl right now... By far. I can't even think of a ball of his recently that was just poorly thrown. Maybe a miscommunication with a WR or something, but never just poorly thrown. He is amazing in the pocket and creates extra time for his WRs on a consistent basis. He's Big Ben like, but even better IMO. Just think about a Packers game and you will recall several plays that were of the "sandlot" type. Where he just extends and extends until a receiver finally breaks free. He and Nelson seem to have an uncanny connection with this. I like his weapons, don't get me wrong. But he is the catalyst of what makes them great.

 
Furthermore.. are Favre/Rodgers the best back to back QB tandem a team has ever seen?

Montana/Young?

Peyton/Luck (with 1 year of suck for Luck in between)?

Carter/Testeverde?

Imagine being a Packer fan born in '84. Favre gets going when you're about 10 and you've seen he or Rodgers lead your team your entire life, that's all.

 
Furthermore.. are Favre/Rodgers the best back to back QB tandem a team has ever seen?

Montana/Young?

Peyton/Luck (with 1 year of suck for Luck in between)?

Carter/Testeverde?

Imagine being a Packer fan born in '84. Favre gets going when you're about 10 and you've seen he or Rodgers lead your team your entire life, that's all.
Right now Id put Montana/Young ahead of them...but the gap is closing.

 
He is the best QB in the game right now no doubt.

However enter into the equation Andrew Luck and we may be singing a different tune in time.

Rodgers first year starting was in 2008, Rodger's was 25 years old and after working behind Favre and being coached up by McCarthy Rodgers stepped in and had an awesome year throwing for 4038 yards with 28 td's and 13 ints while adding 56 rushes for 207 yards and 4 rushing tds.

Luck who was fortunate enough to step in and start for his first 2 years learned while playing. Lucks 3rd year in the league right now he is 25 years of age. With 3 games still left in the season Luck has thrown for 4,305 yards with 36 tds and 13 ints while adding 55 rushes for 250 yards and 3 td's.

I think we may be saying the same thing about Luck in 5 years time.

 
He is the best QB in the game right now no doubt.

However enter into the equation Andrew Luck and we may be singing a different tune in time.

Rodgers first year starting was in 2008, Rodger's was 25 years old and after working behind Favre and being coached up by McCarthy Rodgers stepped in and had an awesome year throwing for 4038 yards with 28 td's and 13 ints while adding 56 rushes for 207 yards and 4 rushing tds.

Luck who was fortunate enough to step in and start for his first 2 years learned while playing. Lucks 3rd year in the league right now he is 25 years of age. With 3 games still left in the season Luck has thrown for 4,305 yards with 36 tds and 13 ints while adding 55 rushes for 250 yards and 3 td's.

I think we may be saying the same thing about Luck in 5 years time.
Agree. In 25 years 5 of the top ten QBs in career passing yards will be over 70,000 yards. 40,000 yards will look quite pedestrian.

 
He is the best QB in the game right now no doubt.

However enter into the equation Andrew Luck and we may be singing a different tune in time.

Rodgers first year starting was in 2008, Rodger's was 25 years old and after working behind Favre and being coached up by McCarthy Rodgers stepped in and had an awesome year throwing for 4038 yards with 28 td's and 13 ints while adding 56 rushes for 207 yards and 4 rushing tds.

Luck who was fortunate enough to step in and start for his first 2 years learned while playing. Lucks 3rd year in the league right now he is 25 years of age. With 3 games still left in the season Luck has thrown for 4,305 yards with 36 tds and 13 ints while adding 55 rushes for 250 yards and 3 td's.

I think we may be saying the same thing about Luck in 5 years time.
Agree. In 25 years 5 of the top ten QBs in career passing yards will be over 70,000 yards. 40,000 yards will look quite pedestrian.
Outdated moreso than pedestrian, but good point.

 
9. Brett Favre

A body of work counts, and besides one Super Bowl win, he holds all significant career passing records — at least until Peyton starts breaking them in the next year or two.
He had a great 4-5 year run but was a compiler for the rest of his career.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top