Top 10 Players in 2009: #1 QB Aaron Rodgers
by Brandon on Jul 15, 2009 11:00 AM CDT
Email
PrintIn probably the least surprising development of the off-season, QB Aaron Rodgers enters the 2009 season as the most important player on the team.
In one way he might be less important in 2009 than he was in 2008. If he had gotten hurt and they would have been forced to start QB Matt Flynn instead, then they would have had no chance of winning. Flynn wasn't ready last season. Actually I'm still not sure he's ready, although I think he'll be a solid backup QB soon.
A 64% completion percentage in his first season as a starter is very good, but his passes always seem to be in the right place. His accuracy is exceptional. Most of his incompletions/interceptions seem to be due to a good play on defense or a missed catch by a receiver. I'm a huge fan of his accuracy while scrambling or on a called bootleg too.
He already seems like he's comfortable as a team leader and good at it. It appears that he has a complete understanding of the playbook and that his teammates have confidence in him.
I was worried about his durability entering 2008. He had suffered season ending injuries in both 2006 and 2007 (and in 2005 too?), but after he played through a bad right shoulder injury during a game late last season in Tampa, I'm not worried about that anymore. Still, I'm not expecting another QB Brett Favre like Iron Man streak; that's asking too much.
And he should only get better. The accuracy, arm strength, and mechanics are all there. The team has remained largely intact over the past few seasons and he's familiar with all his receivers and Mike McCarthy's offense. He should only get better with more experience. And there is plenty of time left since he's only 25 years old.
Just as I mentioned with WR Greg Jennings; there is still some room for improvement. There weren't a lot of late game comebacks, although I'm not sure I would ever have said any of the last minute losses were his fault. They struggled in the red zone, again not I'm not saying it's all his fault, but there is definite room for improvement. He hasn't mastered all the plays; he doesn't throw that quick slant nearly as often as Favre used to.
But if 2008 was just a typical season that we should expect from him in the future; 4000 yards, 28 TDs and 13 INTs for the next decade, I'll gladly take it. QB is the most important player on any team and he's clearly a good one that they can build around for the future.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Rodgers
I think Rodgers can make all the throws… He can go deep, he has the deep out in his repetoir, he can throw the slant, the crossing patterns. Every throw. His accuracy is amazing… He completed over 65% at Cal if memory serves, so I think it will continue to get better and would not be surprised if he exceeds the accuracy of #4. I can see him completing nearly 70%. Not for career, but in single seasons.
In regards to the slant. That was Favres signature throw! He may have been the best in NFL history at that particular pass! Rodgers strengths seem to be more the outs and crossing patterns. Not to mention the deep ball, which he helped Favre improve on. Even if indirectly, through competition in practice.
He’s off to a really good start to his career! He needs to make a few more plays in critical situations, I’ll grant that… BUT, at the same time he could easily have 3 or 4 late game wins last year if not for ST and Defensive shortcomings!!!
Time for McCArthy to take the kid gloves off and set Rodgers FREE!!!
What !!! ???
Not to mention the deep ball, which he helped Favre improve on.
If you go back quite a few years in Packers history, when Aaron Rodgers was still in elementary school, I remember a then young QB who torched defenses deep from his very first game as a Packer.
And he was always know for his ability to go deep at any given time, from his back foot or any other impossible posision. So I don’t think Rodgers helped him improve on those throws. Favre had every throw in the book. The reason he used the slant so much for the last couple of years, was also due to the uniqe communication he had with DD, one look and they could change the play if the defense gave away the slant.
No disrespect to Rodgers, he had a great year as a first years starter, although he still has a lot to learn. + he had to cope with the sometimes moronic playcalling of McCarthy.
I still think the Packers would have been better of with the old guy in 2008, Yes I know he had a horrible end to the season with the Jets, but I hope everyone realizes, the Jets were significantly less talented for the rest of the offense than the Packers.
No?
“but I hope everyone realizes, the Jets were significantly less talented for the rest of the offense than the Packers.”
I think the only position we were better then them at was wr. They had a better o-line, better rb’s, better te.
He really did help Favre with the deep ball too. Favre has always thrown his deep balls to flat, and a lot of the time missed his receivers deep.
by packallday555 on Jul 15, 2009 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
actually
The jets WERE more talented on offense. The jets offensive line looked a lot better because they had favre, who has a very quick release. Take a look at the colts. The line was in shambles all season and there were many rookies starting, but Manning only got sacked 13 times. Nothing against Rodgers, but Favre is just the better quarterback, and at this point he is the greatest ever to play the game.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 15, 2009 5:03 PM CDT reply actions
also....
The weaker running game for Rodgers should have boosted his numbers, seeing as he would need to pass more on 2nd and long, 3rd and long situations. The wide receivers were MUCH better on the Packers (i would say they had a top 5 receiving group) than the jets, and that position directly affects the quarterback.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 15, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Greatest?
You need to take a look at ColdHardFootballFacts!!! THe guys over there have done a list of the top 10 QB’s of All Time… Guess where your beloved Favre ranked? No. 10 and barely in the top 10…
Wonder who was #1? Bart Starr!!! And the reasons why are extremely compelling! So really Favre is just the 2nd best in FRANCHISE history!
A BIG reason is playoff performance… Starr was Head and Shoulders ahead of Favre. Playoff INT’s also play a HUGE role in winning in the playoffs… And Favre has cornered the market on those! Not to mention he is the ONLY QB to throw not one, but 2, overtime playoff INT’s!!!
Rodgers helped Favre due his accuracy on the deep throw! Sure #4 could throw it farther, but as mentioned by packallday, Rodgers knows to put air under the deep ball. Farve struggled w/ deep accuracy due to mechanics and loft. When they had to throw the ball into trash cans from 50 yds, Rodgers beat Favre regularly… UNTIL Favre realized that he had to learn to throw w/ LOFT.
Jets had very good overall talent on Offense. T. Jones was among the best NFL RB last year in NY. Grant was average at best. Better OL in NY too. Not to mention that they shelled out over 100M to make a run at the playoffs, even before #4 joined them! Of course, #4 threw the late game and late season INT’s to sink them…
OFCOURSE
How did I not think of it before! The guys at Coldhardfootballfacts ALWAYS know what they’re talking about! Its football FACTS! And how did I not think of the TD to INT ratio? I mean, it obviously matters a lot, no wonder they put Sammy Baugh at no. 3, 187 tds to 203 ints. Wait… 187 is bigger than 203, right? Not to mention Bart Starr had a TD to INT ratio of 152-138. 14 more tds than picks. Favre? That guy obviously sucks. He owns all of the records for QBs, he put Green Bay on the map, he was a three time MVP, he won a superbowl, and he hasn’t missed a game for like, 20003309434 million years.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 15, 2009 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Care less!
I could care less about the REGULAR season… They mention #4 INT record in the regular season, not me… What I said, was what has he done in the PLAYOFFS?!! The playoffs is where your legacy is built, not the regular season! How many INT’s did Starr throw in the PLAYOFFS? As compared to #4, who threw them w/ alarming regularity!
The best of the Best QB’s get thier teams in the playoffs, and the best of the best WIN in the playoffs!!! #4 got the Packer to the playoffs which is why he is among the best QB’s ever! Starr got to the playoff and WON in the playoffs!!!
He didn’t have the running game that most people thought and the AFC was as good as the NFL, except the Packers, in the 1st Super Bowls. Why you ask, were the Packers the best? Bart Starr!!! THe guys at ColdHardFootballFacts take into account the generation in which the game was played, they DON’T let themselves be swayed by recent history. The recent history leads to the feeling that #4 is best, cuz he has records… Well guess what… They are REGULAR season records, which is why they are less pertinent.
BTW- I am not old enough to have had the privelege of seeing Starr play!!!
The playoffs don’t matter. period. unless you win the big game it doesn’t matter if you lost in the first round or the championship round. and winning the superbowl takes a good TEAM. NEVER will you find a team that won the superbowl because of ONE player. The packers were a better team when Starr played, and if you’re old enough, you know this. Don’t deny that the packers of the last 10-15 years were anywhere CLOSE to the packers that established green bay as “title town”.
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 16, 2009 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions
link
Heres the link on the top 10 QB’s of all time… I suggest you read it closely. Quite revealing…
Should help dispel the notion that #4 was #1…
Yes!
I am with you on this one Strohman. CHFF’s replaces hot air and adrenaline with reality.
The central argument is that the criterion for the best QB should be playoff performance. This is when the best in the league meet and put it all on the line. Only the very best succeed here. Starr has the best playoff QB rating in history. He was the MVP of two SBs. He is playing with a raft of HOFs and they pick him for the MVP saying that he is the best of this elite group.
You may say that staying healthy, or being on a winning team is the mark of great QB. I prefer CHFF’s approach.
Amen Strohman!
by 50 years and Counting on Jul 15, 2009 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly...
You “prefer” it. It is anything but an exact science.
Furthermore, what does “Best QB” really mean? The best of their era? The best pound for pound? I didn’t grow up watching Starr, but I would imagine he wouldn’t be at the same level as Favre, Manning, and Brady. Likewise, I think if you took Favre back to 60’s, he would be even more dominant than he was in the 90’s.
The standards for evaluating player performance between different eras are so ambiguous themselves, that it is absolute poopy-cock to declare that your analysis is devoid of any subjectivity.
"stay (green and) gold"
by Green and Bold on Jul 15, 2009 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions
poopy-cock???
HAHA but I agree. First off I will say I watch ESPN everyday but the number one thing you have to do is not believe everything they throw at you. It is all opinion and their opinions are just on TV while ours are on blogs. There is no one way to compare players.
Starr was great and Brett was great! They were both great Packers!!! Bart got more Super Bowl Ws.. ok so plus one for him. He was also surrounded by a few fellows by the names of Jim Taylor, Paul Hornung, Max McGee and if you want to judge by playoff wins Starr 9-1 very good! But Brett had more wins and games 11-9… Some of Starrs wins could be erased as they were the Championship games (before the Superbowl) but I would give him that but the era was different with less playoff games too.
I dont think you can chose one over the other they were both great…
Just the facts Ma'am
Sorry but best QB rating in the playoffs is not ambiguous. It is a clearly defined measure of success. You can argue you prefer another measure, but it is not ambiguous.
As for later generations being stronger and faster, I agree only if you are talking about the dome experience. ( A recent fad created to coddle “fans”) Put Haynesworth in the mud of the 1963 NFL Championship game, he would be on the ground every play. Put Brett in the Icebowl, he’d be dead by half time. Ask Brady to throw without the rule changes made in the 70’s to make life easier for the QBs, he’s average at best. Unitas and Starr destroyed defenses without the help of computers. Only Manning brings the kind of intellectual power to the game that older generations had to have just to survive.
Hence my preference for a standard that compares a QB against the best contemporary defenses of his day. A standard that takes into account the choke factor that is missing during regular season (I’m thinking Brett without Holmgren).
There are other standards. Consider total wins. It begs the question: Shouldn’t he, then, also own the playoff title? If he doesn’t what does that say? That he played in a weak division? That he didn’t have the strength to finish the season out? That he was so popular that his franchise kept him on after his ability to win playoffs was gone?
However you see it, suggest a different criterion and we can talk about it.
by 50 years and Counting on Jul 16, 2009 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Dilfer has 1 superbowl. Marino has none. Does that make Dilfer better than Marino? Russel has 7 rings, Michael Jordan has 6. Does that make Russel better than Jordan?
by Colts_and_Cavs_in_09! on Jul 16, 2009 11:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Brandon, you are quite the prolific writer. While the likes of the Journal-Sentinel and Press Gazette are hard-pressed to turn out a single interesting article in a week, you pump ’em out on a daily basis. Kudos.
"stay (green and) gold"
Pretty good list
I gotta say, all and all I liked the list. A little nostolgic for my tastes, but there was only one fellow I would argue with (Nick Collins) and I did (no one cared – lol).
My list would go as such, with much less explination.
10. Jenkins – Crazy amount of potential, but hasn’t done much yet.
9. A.J. Hawk – Lead the pack in tackles 2 out of the last 3 years. He always seems to be around a play even if he’s not in it. He hasn’t gotten the big sacks like we expected, but he’s
7. Al Harris – I’ve already given my reasons
6. Jason Spitz – I think he’s the best OL guy we got. Once he settles down and actually starts playing regularly at any position, he’s gonna be a rock. The most consistant guy since Taucher (yeah, i know, not going back that far, but man… he’s great!)
5. Kampan – Hardest working guy on the team. Yeah, I’m scared with his transition, but I trust him more than anyone else on the roster to make the change.
4. Woodson – Best free agent signing since reggie white by the packers. The guy can do it all, a complete player and team leader
3. Mason Crosby – Top 5 kicker in the league. 58 of 73 kicks made, not including PAT’s. Lead the league in scoring as a rookie, broke a couple records and this is only coming up on year three. This kid has some serious talent. Everyone always forgets about the kicker until it’s tied up and we’re 37 yards away. This guy has a 80% chance of making it.
2. Jennings – Last year he started off kind of slow if you ask me. He wasn’t running good routes, but he got out of his slump and pulled off a second great year. No reason not to think he wont have a third
1. Rodgers – He’s only getting better.
Not a bad list either
You’ve got a couple guys on your Top 10 list that I didn’t include:
1. A.J. Hawk. If he stays inside, which I expect he will, then he loses a lot of his value. Will he come off the field when the Packers bring in the nickel back? On obvious passing downs, I’m expecting the two outside linebackers will move up as rushing down lineman and Barnett never comes off the field. So it seems like Hawk might lose a lot of playing time.
2. Spitz was their best offensive lineman in 2008 because Clifton struggled with injuries. If both are healthy, Clifton is better, and much more important to the team since he’s the left tackle. Spitz is a good lineman, but Clifton is an incredible pass blocker, when healthy.
3. I’m a big fan of Crosby and he’s important to the team, but I don’t think a kicker can be in a top 10 list.
Yeah, Crosby’s at a hair below 80%, but that really isn’t so great. He’s a couple notches below the best kickers like Gostkowski, who was above 90%. Crosby is the 3rd best place kicker in the division. Sure he has some tough competition in Gould and Longwell, but then again, he hasn’t risen above his peers. And he flubbed the big kicks last year. He needs to improve.
Hawk is headed toward a part time role. He’s slow, and unfortunately there’s no cure for that.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Jul 16, 2009 3:18 AM CDT up reply actions
Crosby...
I would give Longwell and Gould the nod right now but Crosby has nothing but an upside. Longwell was one of the best Kickers in Packers history but he couldnt hit the long ball he topped out around 50 I think his longest is 55. Crosby has all the power that he needs just needs to hone in on his accuracy which will come around
Offensive Improvement
If the Packers offensive line can play well and stay healthy, I expect big improvements from the offensive skill positions. I think Rodgers will be even better this year.
Imporvement on defense + impovement on offense = Playoffs
uhhh....
Yah…kind of like 1 + 1= 2…or the team that scores the most points usually wins the game.
"stay (green and) gold"
by Green and Bold on Jul 16, 2009 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm a softy
What can I say? I suppose I just have a soft spot for Crosby. I probably put him waay to high up on the list looking back at it. I’m just smittin with him. I’d still keep him on it though, mostly because, if memory serves me right, the big kicks he missed were some pretty deep balls.
I totally agree that when healthy, Clifton is hand over foot better than Spitz, but we can’t count on that one anymore and that’s why I think right now Spitz is better.
As for Hawk, I’m afraid to admit you might be right. You may be. I’m not convinced he’d be the guy coming off the field. I just can’t see Clay mathews or Brady Poppinga (who I think is awesome) stay on the field and Hawk come off. I think bigger brutish LB’s do better in the ILB spot when you’re running the 3-4. I just think of Suggs, Lewis, Willis or even Beason and Ryans, they’re all pretty big guys and I think of them as some of the best in the game. Heh heh, and here I thought the change in defense would only help Hawk. Here someone else thinks it’s the end of him. Goes to show you how much I know.
How will Capers use Hawk
Actually that’s a very good question going into the season. I’m used to what former defensive coordinator Bob Sanders did, but I’m not that familiar with Dom Capers. It’s hard to see how they move from a 4-3 to 3-4 and manage to use Hawk less next season, but that was my first impression. Maybe that impression is driven by how Sanders would manage the defense. One thing that stands out with Capers’ defenses in Pittsburgh, Carolina and Jacksonville is that their linebackers were a huge part of it. Hawk could go either way; anything from a cut in playing time to a break out season wouldn’t surprise me.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
