Aaron Rodgers Appreciation Thread 4.20

[TheBitzMan]

1 minute ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Answer your own question.  Do you think Donald Driver was only talented because of his quarterbacks?  Do you think Greg Jennings was only talented because of his quarterbacks?  Jones?  Nelson?  It was a wildly talented receiving corps.  You could probably find ten receiving corps that combined for more yards and touchdowns in the history of the NFL.  32,000 yards, 245 touchdowns.  Prove me wrong. 

I never said they aren't talented. However none are elite talents, Jennings/Jones absolutely stunk when they left.

You cannot discount the affect that Rodgers (& Favre) had on their careers. He puts balls places no other QB can which equals yards/Tds they wouldn't have with another QB. You're whole point in saying they are generational is to discredit Rodgers. Rodgers made them generational (if they were). 

Hypothetically:

Would they be generational (in your words) if they had Eli Manning as their QB and not Rodgers? 

[MacReady]

It's not about them as individuals, it's about them as a group.  How many receiving corps could say they had James Jones as a fourth WR? 

[TheBitzMan]

3 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

It's not about them as individuals, it's about them as a group.  How many receiving corps could say they had James Jones as a fourth WR? 

it's a chicken and the egg argument. You won't give credit to Rodgers. I think they are all overrated because they had Rodgers. 

[MacReady]

31 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

it's a chicken and the egg argument. You won't give credit to Rodgers. I think they are all overrated because they had Rodgers. 

Greg Jennings had 800 yards, then 700 yards playing with Christian Ponder, Matt Cassell and Teddy Bridgewater the two years before he retired.  11.8 yards and 12.6 yards per catch.  With Christian Ponder and Teddy Bridgewater. 

James Jones had 666 yards and 6 touchdowns playing with a rookie QB. 

This Christian Ponder:

 

[TheBitzMan]

2 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Greg Jennings had 800 yards, then 700 yards playing with Christian Ponder, Matt Cassell and Teddy Bridgewater the two years before he retired.  11.8 yards and 12.6 yards per catch.  With Christian Ponder and Teddy Bridgewater. 

James Jones had 666 yards and 6 touchdowns playing with a rookie QB. 

This Christian Ponder:

Are those numbers supposed to help your argument? All of their production fell off a cliff without Rodgers. Good luck dying on this hill.

With those same QBs:

Percy Harvin had 967 (10.9 YPC)

Jerome Simpson had 726 (15.1 YPC)

Jarius Wright had 588 (14 YPC)

In Oakland

Andre Holmes had 693 (14.7 YPC) - JJ wasn't even the leading reciever

[SSG]

On ‎4‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 11:21 AM, HorizontoZenith said:

Foles, Peyton Manning, Flacco, Eli Manning, Brady's first year, Johnson, Dilfer. 

As I've already shown, not one single quarterback has won a Super Bowl since before 2000 unless their defense gave up less than 20 points average throughout the postseason.  You can win the Super Bowl with bad to average QB play, but no QB ever has and no QB ever will win a Super Bowl with bad to average defensive play. 

Also, Aaron Rodgers is a whiner.  I really can't stand him.  Boo effing hoo, they cut Nelson.  I wasn't thrilled about it either, but if I was getting paid 20 million dollars and my team just signed a better receiving threat (Graham), I'd find a way to not ***** and moan about it. 

Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Eli Manning are all First ballot HOF QBs.  I don't see any scenario in which you can use them evidence that you don't need quality QB play to win a Super Bowl. 

Nick Foles wasn't in the Super Bowl because of a great defense though.  The Eagles aren't the #1 seed without Carson Wentz who was the league MVP  before his injury.  Also, the Eagles defense had one of the worst Super Bowls in NFL history and was bailed out by the single greatest QBing performance in the games history.  It hardly represents the idea that they won with a great defense, despite their QB.  It was the opposite. 

In 2011-2012, the Giants had the 27th ranked defense in the regular season.  They were middle of the pack in turnovers and 26th in sacks.  They had a bad defense that got hot in the playoffs.  They also had their first ballot HOF QB give them 9 TDs and only 1 INT over the playoffs stretch. 

Obviously the hatred you have for Aaron Rodgers is clouding you judgement.  You'd rather see a terrible Packers team without AR12 than one that is making the playoffs every year with.  Some people can't see past personality differences.

[MacReady]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

Are those numbers supposed to help your argument? All of their production fell off a cliff without Rodgers. Good luck dying on this hill.

With those same QBs:

Percy Harvin had 967 (10.9 YPC)

Jerome Simpson had 726 (15.1 YPC)

Jarius Wright had 588 (14 YPC)

In Oakland

Andre Holmes had 693 (14.7 YPC) - JJ wasn't even the leading reciever

Percy Harvin, one of the most physically gifted receivers to play the game, managed 163 more yards and a yard less per catch than Jennings?  Huh. 

You know as well as I do it's not even realistic to compare 25-year-old deep threat receivers to Jennings, who was 30 at the time. 

Jones was 31 years old when he played for the Raiders.  Holmes isn't even 30 right now. 

Jordy Nelson averaged 14 yards a catch with Matt Flynn throwing to him for 5 games in 2013.  So did James Jones in the same year. 

Acting like those receivers weren't talented is just ridiculous, and you know it. 

I'm not "dying on this hill," and you know it.  That 2010 team was one of the most talented teams the Packers have ever had.  Lang, Sitton, Clifton, Bulaga, Colledge, EDS, and Scott Wells were all on that offensive line.  James Starks had 74 yards rushing in that game. 

All of that on top of the fact that the Bears scored 14 points and the Packers defense scored 7.  Rodgers had a crap game with loads of talent bailing him out. 

[MacReady]

Just now, SSG said:

Nick Foles wasn't in the Super Bowl because of a great defense though. 

Really?  The Eagles were #4 in scoring defense that year and allowed 10 points against the Falcons and 7 points against the Vikings.  Nick Foles wasn't in the Super Bowl because of a great defense?  Do you stand by that statement? 

[TheBitzMan]

Just now, HorizontoZenith said:

Percy Harvin, one of the most physically gifted receivers to play the game, managed 163 more yards and a yard less per catch than Jennings?  Huh. 

You know as well as I do it's not even realistic to compare 25-year-old deep threat receivers to Jennings, who was 30 at the time. 

Jones was 31 years old when he played for the Raiders.  Holmes isn't even 30 right now. 

Jordy Nelson averaged 14 yards a catch with Matt Flynn throwing to him for 5 games in 2013.  So did James Jones in the same year. 

Acting like those receivers weren't talented is just ridiculous, and you know it. 

I'm not "dying on this hill," and you know it.  That 2010 team was one of the most talented teams the Packers have ever had.  Lang, Sitton, Clifton, Bulaga, Colledge, EDS, and Scott Wells were all on that offensive line.  James Starks had 74 yards rushing in that game. 

All of that on top of the fact that the Bears scored 14 points and the Packers defense scored 7.  Rodgers had a crap game with loads of talent bailing him out. 

I never said they weren't talented. Jennings/Jordy above average - JJ was slightly above average. As a whole they were a top 5 unit in the NFL but not generational just based on their talents. 

Rodgers makes their offense elite. 

Andre Holmes isn't 30 now and still sucks....great point.

 

[SSG]

Just now, HorizontoZenith said:

Really?  The Eagles were #4 in scoring defense that year and allowed 10 points against the Falcons and 7 points against the Vikings.  Nick Foles wasn't in the Super Bowl because of a great defense?  Do you stand by that statement? 

Yes I made that statement.  The Eagles were the number #1 seed in large part because they had the best QB in the NFL last season.  You want to make it sound like average QB play got them through the season and into the playoffs when nothing could be further from the truth.  Elite play from their QB was every bit the reason.  Without Carson Wentz, they aren't in the playoffs IMO. 

Its funny that you are talking up the Eagles defense.  The same defense that wasn't able to force one single punt in the Super Bowl.  One of the worst defensive performances in Super Bowl history was bailed out by the single greatest game by a QB ever in the game.  Your argument is flawed because you are wanting to look at everything in a vacuum in your crusade to hate and belittle AR12. 

[MacReady]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

Andre Holmes isn't 30 now and still sucks....great point.

Jarrett Boykin had 49 catches with Matt Flynn and 3 with Rodgers.  Rodgers really frickin sucks. 

You're still missing the entire point.  How's it going finding ten receiving corps that had 32,000 yards and 245 career touchdowns between them? 

[MacReady]

Just now, SSG said:

Yes I made that statement.  The Eagles were the number #1 seed in large part because they had the best QB in the NFL last season.  You want to make it sound like average QB play got them through the season and into the playoffs when nothing could be further from the truth.  Elite play from their QB was every bit the reason.  Without Carson Wentz, they aren't in the playoffs IMO.

Pretty bold words considering Foles threw for 1429 yards, 11 touchdowns and 3 interceptions in his five starts, including the #1 defense and considering Foles had a season in which he threw for 27 touchdowns and 2 interceptions.  Eagles wouldn't have made the playoffs? 

How do you get a Carson Wentz?  Those guys rolling around in the 2nd through 7th rounds, or does it take a bold move to get one? 

Quote

Its funny that you are talking up the Eagles defense.  The same defense that wasn't able to force one single punt in the Super Bowl.  One of the worst defensive performances in Super Bowl history was bailed out by the single greatest game by a QB ever in the game. 

This argument is made by children.  The Eagles had just held the Falcons to 10, the Vikings to 7, and people act like they're a crap defense because the Patriots scored a bunch on them.  How do you think our defense would have played in that Super Bowl?  It's such a childish argument.  The Patriots flat out dominated offensively.  And yet... What was the dagger in that game?  I seem to recall a sack and fumble recovery was a pretty big event in that game.  I seem to recall that an all time great QB lost to an all time okay QB. 

Quote

Your argument is flawed because you are wanting to look at everything in a vacuum in your crusade to hate and belittle AR12. 

This is karma for me.  I talked to Polaris the same way when he argued that we needed to move on from Favre. 

I don't hate Rodgers.  I love watching him play as much as the next person.  I won't love watching him play if he takes up 15% of our cap because I don't care how good he is, he ain't winning a Super Bowl taking up 15% of his team's cap.  No matter who he plays for. 

[TheBitzMan]

4 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Jarrett Boykin had 49 catches with Matt Flynn and 3 with Rodgers.  Rodgers really frickin sucks. 

You're still missing the entire point.  How's it going finding ten receiving corps that had 32,000 yards and 245 career touchdowns between them? 

You mean this Jarrett Boykin? The insurance agent? He had to get receptions because our whole offense was hurt. Doesn't this hurt your whole Jennings was good with Ponder argument? If you have no one else someone has to get the ball right?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jarrett-boykin-a13670152/

I understand your point it's just completely illogical. You are acting like these receivers threw themselves the ball. 

 

[MacReady]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

I understand your point it's just completely illogical. You are acting like these receivers threw themselves the ball.

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? 

 

[Leader]

This thread is making my brain hurt.