Woodson Named Team MVP and Rodgers can't get any love. Nelson named Team Rookie of the Year.

by justinlewis on Jun 16, 2009 12:24 AM CDT Comment 24 comments

Obviously Jordy Nelson was the team's rookie of the year, but did Charles Woodson really deserve to be named Team MVP?

I think that the organization should have awarded Aaron Rodgers Team MVP. With the Favre drama in the offseason, little defense, and a minimal running game, A-Rodg put the team on his back, putting up Pro-Bowl worthy numbers- (better than Eli Manning's at least). He proved many wrong and showed the organization that the team's future lies in very good hands. Our passing game kept us in many contests this year and we lost various games because of defense or kicking. Rodgers single-handidly put us in the position to win many games this year, but flaws in other aspects of the team, injuries, and youth, ultimately prevented us from winning almost all of the games decided by one possession.

Maybe Woodson was a vital part of our defense (the side of the ball the kept us out of the postseason), and this is a somewhat meaningless award, but I thought Aaron Rodgers was the Team MVP. Many's views of his production may have been skewed by the team's poor record, costing him a Pro Bowl berth and this award, but he showed everyone that he is the present and future of this team.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'll stick up for Charles

You make a very good point with Rodgers, but I’ll stand by the Packer Hall of Fame in selecting Woodson. As they mentioned in their press release, it was a statistically great season. In addition, I’d say the secondary was the best unit on the 2008 Packers and he was the best player in the secondary, so he should be MVP.

by Brandon on Jun 16, 2009 1:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree with Woodson

Quietly, Chuck has put up monster seasons worthy of all pro consideration. He’s won games with big plays (I think he’s killed the Lions singlehandedly the last two years), and become something of a leader to a promising group of players. Its not just statistics, although they back up what has been a great career as a Packer.

by BangOnMeDrumAllDay on Jun 21, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ya but....

“In addition, I’d say the secondary was the best unit on the 2008 Packers and he was the best player in the secondary, so he should be MVP.”

That isn’t saying much about a defense that was ranked 22nd in total defense, was only 12th in passing yards a game, and gave up the 11th most passing td’s. I think without a doubt Rodgers was the team MVP. His stats were GREAT but that’s not even why he deserves it. He came into this having the most pressure to produce any QB has ever had in the history of the game. He reacted in the best way he possibly could of. He handled the whole fiasco PERFECTLY, and then put up Pro Bowl numbers to boot. Woodson was GREAT this year, but what he accomploshed isn’t nearly as impressive as what Rodgers did. I am very happy we let go of Favre when we did, it’s obvious Rodgers is the QB of the future, and I feel strongly he could become just as good, (probably better) then Favre was at his best.

by packallday555 on Jun 16, 2009 1:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Rodgers does deserve the MVP title for everything mentioned above. Talk about a rock solid start of a career. Granted, he didn’t give us the clutch comeback wins we needed out of him. However, that can be entirely blamed on our pathetic defense.

Mark my words…Rodgers WILL be the best QB in the NFC North next year. Even if a former GB player (I dare not bring up the “F” word) is the QB for the Vikings. Cutler doesn’t have anybody to throw to, and Stafford will be too green. We have a lot of great things to look forward to in GB.

by Cockdie on Jun 16, 2009 10:23 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Rodgers WILL be the best QB in the NFC North next year

He could possibly be the best QB in the NFC if his supporting cast allows it.

"Today is."

by juggernaut400 on Jun 16, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

I think he could easily be the best QB in the NFC next year. If not next year though, it will probably be the year after that.

by packallday555 on Jun 16, 2009 9:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No offense but

That asserion is a bit illogical. I understand that Rodgers played well last year and wasnt the reason for your poor record, but saying he will the the NFCs best qb based on what he did last year is just wrong. He still needs to improve alot to catch the likes of McNabb, Romo, Manning, Brees or even Warner.

by aussie_cowboy on Jun 17, 2009 3:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

(cough)

Listen here bub. Rodgers is already better than Romo or Manning. Romo is the worst quarterback in that bunch (coming from a guy who lives where Romo is from) I don’t disagree with your criticism of the above statement, but Rodgers could step up atop the NFC quarterback heap.

by StephanL on Jun 17, 2009 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What evidence is there that Rodger is better than Romo?

Lokking at their first seasons starting respetively, Romo had a slightly better completion percentage at 64.4% to 63.6%.
He threw for more yards 4211 to 4038.
Rodgers had a slightly better TD to Int ration, but Romo was rated 97.4 compared to Rodgers at 93.8.
Most importantly though, Romo won 13 games that year.

Lokking at the stats, I realise just how wll Rogers played last year (statistically at least), and yes he may be better than Manning, but he hasnt shown himself to be better than Romo.

by aussie_cowboy on Jun 17, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Romo

had probably the best overall team in the NFL around him, including a running game, a defense not decimated with injuries, and one of the best O-lines in the league.

by justinlewis on Jun 17, 2009 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They were not considered a great o-line before Romo started playing behind them

and our #2 WR was Patrick Crayton, a guy who would be at best #4 on your team.

They are both good young qbs with bright futures, but at this point Romo has to be considered superior.

by aussie_cowboy on Jun 18, 2009 1:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Romo

Wasn’t very good at all last year. I personally think it was because of him you guys didn’t make it to the playoffs. The guy had A BROKEN PINKIE for crying out loud and he sat out haha. Favre played with a BROKEN THUMB (which you need to even be able to hold the ball). Romo had T.O., Williams, and WItten, plus Marion the Barbarian and still couldn’t get his team to the playoffs. He makes to many stupid decisions and throws a lot of bad picks.

The fact that Crayton would only be a #4 wr on our team really doesn’t matter. He has had one of the best te’s (if not the best) and probably the 2nd best wr in the league. So arguing that Rodger’s supporting cast is better, to me is kind of illogical.

by packallday555 on Jun 18, 2009 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well if it helps

Neither Rodgers nor Romo have actually won a playoff game yet, and the conversation will be easier to carry on once either/both of them have done that

by pharom on Jun 18, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

His stats are better but you have to keep im mind you guys had the best offense in the league. Romo had T.O., Witten, Crayton. Rodgers had Jennings, Driver, Lee. Both are good but it’s pretty obvious that Romo’s supporting cast is better.

by packallday555 on Jun 18, 2009 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

not

It’s not illogical at all. He is already better then Manning and Romo. McNabb is good his play is always so streaky, and Warner will be done after this year. To say this year or next year he could be the best is not one bit illogical.

by packallday555 on Jun 18, 2009 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rodgers/Woodson

He came into this having the most pressure to produce any QB has ever had in the history of the game.

A lot of pressure, yes. Most pressure ever? Doubtful.

Brian Griese, son of a HOF QB legend, following Elway after a walkoff Super Bowl victory… now THAT was pressure.

I have no beef with Rodgers not getting the nod as MVP. He was definitely in contention, but his 4th quarter performances were lackluster, which was not at all surprising for his first year and given the mediocre play on both sides of the line. I’m definitely hopeful that this year should be a good leap forward for him.

by swilldog on Jun 16, 2009 10:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

That was a lot of pressure, sure; but the pressure already on Rodgers, replacing BF, was turned up exponentially last July/August.
And, NObody could have asked him to handle it with more professionalism and level-headedness.

The Bears still suck; The 'Queens take it a step further.
And the Lions couldn't beat The Little Sisters of the Poor!

by NorthStarr on Jun 16, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dunno

Favre had just broke the record for most TD’s and had just had one of his better years ever in his 18 year career, leading us to the conference championship. That by itself is more pressure, but then factor in how the situation played out, and all the drama, and I think without a doubt his situation was the most difficult to come into ever.

by packallday555 on Jun 16, 2009 9:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Elway...

John didn’t try to come back. The Broncos didn’t send the ol’ fella packing. Brian didn’t have to deal with that situation. Denver fans had just won a superbowl and watched their good ol’ boy end his career the way every QB tried to end it.

The Packers fans watched their team lose an NFC Championship game, a game that could have easily been won by a strong 13-3 team. The ’07 Packers were a superbowl caliper team. The Packer fans were hungry for that title in ’08.

For these reasons, A Rodge was under more pressure than Greasy Brian.

by StephanL on Jun 17, 2009 8:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Different situation

As someone else pointed out, Elway didn’t have the same dramatic waffling, and he had just given his team and the fans the ultimate end to a story, the walk-off superbowl victory, reaching the top of the mountain, and going out on top.

No one expected Griese to be as good as Elway, and the fanbase had just been given a storybook season. They were high on the elation of the moment, their hero went out the way heroes should.

It’s the exact opposite in Greenbay. Greenbay didn’t get to have a hero walk off after reaching the top of the mountain, we didn’t get that storybook. We got the storybook of “close, but not close enough,” the storybook Packer season in ‘07 revolved around a team getting hot and playing far better then expectations, overcoming adversity (that Seattle game with the two Grant fumbles? down 14pts in the first 3mins), and… falling short in overtime after a horrendous pass. If Rodgers had inherited a team who had just won the superbowl, who had a hero walk off, the pressure would be "hey, you’re being handed a great team, do your best."

We didn’t get that, we got a summer of “will he/won’t he,” we had the waffling, the possibility of open competition, the denial of open competition, accusations of tampering, etc.

Replacing a legend is hard, replacing a legend who came that close to the top is harder, replacing a legend who can’t decide if he needs/wants to be replaced yet is hardest. Packers fans didn’t get a storybook to point to, we had the Cheesehead civil war leaving a bad taste in our mouth.

by pharom on Jun 18, 2009 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well said!

by packallday555 on Jun 18, 2009 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

One of the god things about rodgers....

he’s not going to throw fit about this like a lot of QB’s would.

cool as a cucumber.

by mossdog427 on Jun 16, 2009 12:07 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I would have gone with Rogers

But there is a good arguement for Woodson too. They should just have an offensive MVP and a defensive MVP to keep everyone happy.

by grant76 on Jun 16, 2009 2:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Going with Rodgers

Honestly, he’s got alot of talent, and when this team does achieve what it has the potential to, Rodgers will be vying for MVPs of the league, considering how well Woodson did on an otherwise lacking D, his probowl season, I like giving him this award. It reminds me of when Al Harris made the probowl and pointed towards Woodson instead. I think it’s a good move to both recognize the contribution of Woodson and a way of showing the D wasn’t all horrible (results aside), and Rodgers should have quite a few seasons of showing his value and making his case.

by pharom on Jun 18, 2009 2:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs