Aaron Rodgers Appreciation Thread 4.20

[TheBitzMan]

20 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

That's not remotely in the same vicinity of what I'm acting like.  I'm acting like, in spite of loads of talent on that team, we went to that Super Bowl in spite of Rodgers.  He had a crap game with a great receiving corps.  There have been better 1's at WR.  There have been better 1's and 2's.  There's probably been better 1's, 2's and 3's, but I stand by my claim that that was probably a top 10 1-4 receiving corps of all time.  Rodgers helped, but you can't put that talent on Rodgers alone. 

That's not even getting into what the defense did for him in that game either.  Rodgers is not the god people make him out to be. 

*He has missed 18 games.
*He has had two poor Championship performances.
*He's failed to score the NFL average (23 points) 8 times out of 17 playoff games. 

He is 34 years old.  He has 6 years maximum.  No QB has ever won a Super Bowl who has taken up 13% of their team's salary (except for Young, who was on the Niners, who cheated by being over the cap).  Rumors suggest Rodgers wants his salary to be tied to 15% of the cap.  I refuse to be okay with that.  He will never ever ever ever ever ever ever win a Super Bowl taking 15% of the cap.

Why is this so hard of a standpoint to accept? 

 

Because your narrative only mentions Rodgers as being the problem. What about every other year when his defense has been terrible and he carried the team to the playoffs and two years ago to the NFC Championship game?

We can agree to disagree on this one. I love Rodgers, you hate him. The truth is somewhere in the middle. 

 

 

[MacReady]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

Because your narrative only mentions Rodgers as being the problem. What about every other year when his defense has been terrible and he carried the team to the playoffs and two years ago to the NFC Championship game?

We can agree to disagree on this one. I love Rodgers, you hate him. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

I have NEVER said Rodgers is THE problem, and that's what you call putting words in someone's mouth.  Go back and read what I've said and you'll see I have acknowledged that the defense has been responsible for at least 4 of his losses. 

I don't hate Rodgers.  I hate Rodgers at 15% of the cap at 34 years old. 

[TheBitzMan]

4 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

I have NEVER said Rodgers is THE problem, and that's what you call putting words in someone's mouth.  Go back and read what I've said and you'll see I have acknowledged that the defense has been responsible for at least 4 of his losses. 

I don't hate Rodgers.  I hate Rodgers at 15% of the cap at 34 years old. 

Those were the wrong words. My apologies. I can respect your viewpoints on this. 

[Kepler]

8 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

I have NEVER said Rodgers is THE problem, and that's what you call putting words in someone's mouth.  Go back and read what I've said and you'll see I have acknowledged that the defense has been responsible for at least 4 of his losses. 

I don't hate Rodgers.  I hate Rodgers at 15% of the cap at 34 years old. 

That's exactly what I was trying to say, but didn't word it as well earlier. It's hard to understand why this viewpoint is so controversial. Rodgers is great, but I believe he needs to clean up his performances late in the postseason.  Why do all of his poor  postseason performances have extenuating circumstances? Has he ever had a bad game, or does the fault always lay elsewhere?

If he takes up too much of the cap GB will have less of a chance to improve the rest of their roster. How are these views controversial?

[SSG]

5 minutes ago, Kepler said:

That's exactly what I was trying to say, but didn't word it as well earlier. It's hard to understand why this viewpoint is so controversial. Rodgers is great, but I believe he needs to clean up his performances late in the postseason.  Why do all of his poor  postseason performances have extenuating circumstances? Has he ever had a bad game, or does the fault always lay elsewhere?

If he takes up too much of the cap GB will have less of a chance to improve the rest of their roster. How are these views controversial?

Because Rodgers is a generational player who's going to be VERY difficult to replace.  Looking around the league, you are likely talking about a good half dozen years before we adequately replace him.  Can we name a franchise that has hit a home run with 3 consecutive QBs?   I truly believe that some think you can just plug any war body off the street at QB and have success and its not that easy.  Far more rookie QBs bomb out of the NFL than succeed.  Do we want to end up like the Vikings who had to revert to UFA to find their QB after striking out multiple times in the first round trying to find one?

In just last 10 years, 16 teams have spent multiple first or second round picks on a QB (at a minimum, some teams have done it 3 or 4 times).  Almost half of those 16 teams have used multiple first round picks in those 10 years.  QB is such an important position and it is a very difficult position to fill with the failure rate being a lot higher and a lot more painful than most positions.  When you strike out at QB it seems to hurt a lot more than when you strike out at other positions. 

 

I'd rather pay Aaron Rodgers 15 or 16% of the cap than have to pay a guy like Alex Smith 14% because we've got no plan for the future (or the plan sucks).  When you are talking about a QB, a bad pick could set you back about 3 years (teams want to give the player some time). 

[pollino14]

1 hour ago, HorizontoZenith said:

I have NEVER said Rodgers is THE problem, and that's what you call putting words in someone's mouth.  Go back and read what I've said and you'll see I have acknowledged that the defense has been responsible for at least 4 of his losses. 

I don't hate Rodgers.  I hate Rodgers at 15% of the cap at 34 years old. 

You suggest  his ego is the reason he only has one SB.

Edited April 12, 2018 by pollino14

[MacReady]

Just now, pollino14 said:

You suggest  his ego is the reason he only has one SB.

Nope.  I suggested if it wasn't for his ego he'd have had another one.  Everybody in that Championship loss was to blame, not THE blame.  I believe if Rodgers would have gotten over his refusal to throw check downs, we would have won that game. 

[MacReady]

Just now, SSG said:

I'd rather pay Aaron Rodgers 15 or 16% of the cap than have to pay a guy like Alex Smith 14% because we've got no plan for the future (or the plan sucks).  When you are talking about a QB, a bad pick could set you back about 3 years (teams want to give the player some time). 

No quarterback in the history of the NFL has won a Super Bowl while accounting for 14% of the cap.  Only one has done it at 13% of the cap, and they cheated.  Literally.  They got in trouble for it. 

 

[pollino14]

1 minute ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Nope.  I suggested if it wasn't for his ego he'd have had another one.  Everybody in that Championship loss was to blame, not THE blame.  I believe if Rodgers would have gotten over his refusal to throw check downs, we would have won that game. 

That’s what I said.

[MacReady]

Just now, pollino14 said:

That’s what I said.

You said I said his ego was THE reason.  I never said that. 

If Bostick didn't do what he did, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost. 

If Burnett kept running, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost.

If Peppers didn't tell Burnett to get down, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost.

If Clinton-Dix didn't make that crap play on the ball on the extra point, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost.

If Hawk didn't do so poorly on coverage on that fake play, we would have won.  He's not the reason we lost.

Do I need to keep going? 

[pollino14]

1 minute ago, HorizontoZenith said:

You said I said his ego was THE reason.  I never said that. 

If Bostick didn't do what he did, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost. 

If Burnett kept running, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost.

If Peppers didn't tell Burnett to get down, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost.

If Clinton-Dix didn't make that crap play on the ball on the extra point, we'd win.  He's not the reason we lost.

If Hawk didn't do so poorly on coverage on that fake play, we would have won.  He's not the reason we lost.

Do I need to keep going? 

“If it wasn’t for his ego he’d have another one”  either you’re not comprehending what you’re even saying or you just won’t admit you’re wrong or you misspoke. Either option is equally ridiculous.

[MacReady]

Just now, pollino14 said:

“If it wasn’t for his ego he’d have another one”  either you’re not comprehending what you’re even saying or you just won’t admit you’re wrong or you misspoke. Either option is equally ridiculous.

... Yeah.  If it wasn't for Bostick, we'd have another one.  If it wasn't for Burnett, we'd have another one...

Do you honestly believe I am saying that Aaron's ego is the single solitary reason he hasn't won another Super Bowl? 

[pollino14]

Just now, HorizontoZenith said:

... Yeah.  If it wasn't for Bostick, we'd have another one.  If it wasn't for Burnett, we'd have another one...

Do you honestly believe I am saying that Aaron's ego is the single solitary reason he hasn't won another Super Bowl? 

You’re making it seem like his ego is an isolated reason why he doesn’t have another SB. Think it’s a wording issue.

[MacReady]

Just now, pollino14 said:

You’re making it seem like his ego is an isolated reason why he doesn’t have another SB. Think it’s a wording issue.

It's obviously semantics then. 

[ThatJerkDave]

1 hour ago, Kepler said:

That's exactly what I was trying to say, but didn't word it as well earlier. It's hard to understand why this viewpoint is so controversial. Rodgers is great, but I believe he needs to clean up his performances late in the postseason.  Why do all of his poor  postseason performances have extenuating circumstances? Has he ever had a bad game, or does the fault always lay elsewhere?

Just looking at the numbers, Rodgers has had 4 games with an under 90 passer rating.  One of those was the NFCC against the Bears that the Packers won.  The other three were:  2011 NYG, 2014 SEA, and 2015 ARI.  There were a couple more losses where his stats are better than the actual game, like 2016 ATL, but these are his real stinkers.  

In his MVP years of 2011 and 2014 he probably did cost the Packers the game.  If he had played MVP ball they maybe beat the Giants, and definitely beat the Seahawks.  We knew what that 2011 team was, and the offense had some uncharacteristic turnovers and miscues that they could not afford to have.  In 2014 they are held to 3 red zone FGs, so none of the wacky stuff should have mattered.  I give him a little more of a pass on the Arizona game.  By the end of that game he was throwing to Janis and Abbrederris, and I think DickRod took WR snaps too, and the team took it to OT.  

 

The thing is, if we had a lesser QB in 2016, do we beat Dallas to even get to Atlanta, where he didn't play as well as statistics would indicate?

Numbers:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RodgAa00/gamelog/post/