JUSTgottaBELIEVE

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 12:48 PM) Why so insecure? Both are great QBs. Not insecure at all. Brady is an all time great QB without a doubt but I think Rodgers is better.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/malcolm-.../?client=safari IF a team can get pressure on Brady, he can be kept in check. Not so much the case with Rodgers.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 07:53 AM) You act as if you were told Rodgers sucks. Nobody ever said that. Nah but it was clearly stated by others that Brady>Rodgers and largely because he has more playoff wins and super bowls. Well so does Terry Bradshaw.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 08:47 AM) Brady is certainly more accomplished. He also has a significantly better coach. I agree; however, he is more accomplished because he's played on better teams with a better coach, not because he's a better quarterback than Aaron Rodgers. The stat I posted above shows that in nearly half of Brady's career postseason wins he played average to below average. The Packers never win in the postseason if Rodgers plays average to below average (well they did once) and sometimes they don't even win when he plays well above average. I'm still failing to understand why that would be held against him in a Rodgers vs Brady debate. In fact, there's a pretty good chance Rodgers has a monster game today (300+ yards, 3 TD, 100+ passer rating) and the Packers still lose. He is the single most important player to his team in the NFL and yet there's only so much he can do if the defense is sucking it up. We'll see what happens but if Rodgers wills his team to a road playoff win against the top team in the conference without his best WR, it's another tally for Rodgers in this debate.

Another playoff game with a passer rating below 90 and another win for Brady. That's now happened in 10 of his 23 career playoff wins. By comparison, only once have the Packers won a playoff game with Rodgers posting a passer rating below 90 (NFC championship vs the Bears). And people still consider Brady the better postseason performer because the Patriots have more wins in his tenure?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 13, 2017 -> 10:37 AM) Jordy is OUT for Sunday's game. Rodgers did fine without him Sunday, but during the season Rodgers' turnaround seemed to coincide with Jordy finally getting back to full strength. Should be ready for the Super Bowl if they can get past Dallas and Atlanta without him.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 02:31 PM) Dallas might be the only team that can stop Rodgers by keeping him off the field. Yup, it's Zeke/OL I fear the most

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 10:04 AM) If he's going to throw out passer ratings, the number of playoffs games played definitely has something to do with it. Just updated. Rodgers' career postseason passer rating now stands at 100.3. Maybe with a few more playoff games he will surpass his career regular season passer rating of 104.1, which is the current record by a wide margin. All time record for career postseason passer rating is 104.8 held by ex-Packer Bart Starr. Aside from Starr, only Warner and Brees are ahead of Rodgers for career postseason passer rating. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/lead...er_playoffs.htm

https://mobile.twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/st...%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 10:39 AM) So the argument is that Brady's larger sample size has led to a lower postseason passer rating? Rodgers has nearly a full season's worth of playoff games under his belt so it's not exactly neglible. Rodgers faces the number 2 passing defense (by opponent passer rating) this weekend so it's certainly an opportunity to make a statement. If he puts up a passer rating > 100 but they still lose because of their porous pass defense, is it Rodgers' fault? If they get past NYG, I see Rodgers putting up big numbers in Dallas and single handedly keeping them competitive in that game vs a superior opponent. Peaking at the right time. Absolutely ripped that top rated passing defense to shreds the last 2.5 quarters. Hopefully Jordy is available next Sunday. Should be a great game.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 10:04 AM) If he's going to throw out passer ratings, the number of playoffs games played definitely has something to do with it. So the argument is that Brady's larger sample size has led to a lower postseason passer rating? Rodgers has nearly a full season's worth of playoff games under his belt so it's not exactly neglible. Rodgers faces the number 2 passing defense (by opponent passer rating) this weekend so it's certainly an opportunity to make a statement. If he puts up a passer rating > 100 but they still lose because of their porous pass defense, is it Rodgers' fault? If they get past NYG, I see Rodgers putting up big numbers in Dallas and single handedly keeping them competitive in that game vs a superior opponent.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 10:33 PM) Well different guys have different aging patterns. Greg Jennings was already falling apart with the Packers. He was banged up his last season in GB but relatively healthy prior to that.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 10:11 PM) Donald Driver was a very good WR. Greg Jennings in his prime would've been good anywhere, age just caught up with him. Jordy Nelson is a good WR that plays like a great WR because of his chemistry with Rodgers. Randall Cobb is a useful NFL player, or at least has been the last few years. If you want to make an argument for Rodgers doing less than more it would be the fact that the the best RB he's ever had behind him is Ryan Grant. Donald was on the back end of his career by the time Aaron took over. His prime years were easily during Favre's tenure. Jennings absolutely sucked when he left GB. He was 29 when he left, maybe not in his prime but not exactly over the hill either. Jordy is 31 right now for reference and has been through more severe injuries up to this point than Jennings at a similar age. Outside of 2014 in which he was excellent, Cobb has been "useful" but he hasn't played the last two games and no one has missed him (Aaron hasn't either if you look at his stat line).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 09:58 PM) I'm confident Randall Cobb is pretty solid. Cobb is pretty solid but by no means an elite receiver. That was very apparent last season when Jordy went down. He's a solid slot receiver but nothing special and has really been a disappointment over the last two seasons.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 07:10 PM) They are both amazing, and both had times where the talent around them slipped and people asked whether they were on decline only to see them post another dominant year. That and their bad years are still typically top ten in league. edit: That said, Brady's longevity does matter and for last decade Brady has had a WR crew that has looked a lot like Green Bays last year. I have yet to see a former GB receiver excel outside of GB during Aaron's tenure. Same can't be said for Brady. Moss and Welker were both studs for other teams and obv Gronk would be a stud anywhere (when he's healthy). Outside of Jordy, I'm not convinced Rodgers has ever worked with an elite WR. He makes guys like Davonte Adams look like top receivers when really he's just another guy on a team like the Bears. This is another myth that Rodgers has all these great receivers while Brady has nothing. Any one happen to catch how great these stud receivers were when Scott Tolzein and Matt Flynn were starting at QB a few years ago?

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 04:01 PM) Brady choked in 2007. Patriots had their lowest scoring game of the entire season against the Giants and Brady put up a 82.5 passer rating(Eli had an 87.3). Patriots let the Giants hang around mostly because Brady couldn't get it going and eventually paid the price. Get out of here with the "should be 6/6 crap"....Brady is not even close to deserving of that title and he knows it. I also find it odd that the common perception is Brady is a terrific postseason performer while Rodgers is not. Their individual statistics say differently as Brady has a career postseason passer rating of 88 to Rodgers' 98. Rodgers better there too

Rodgers has a higher passer rating, completion %, YPA, passing TD/INT, rushing yards and rushing TD. Basically leads every individual statistical category outside of longevity stats like total passing yards, TD, etc. Barring injury, he will have the edge in those as well in time. http://m.espn.com/nfl/playerseasonstats?se...39&teamId=0 http://m.espn.com/nfl/playerseasonstats?se...30&teamId=0

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 03:37 PM) And if Rodgers does this at 37, 38 and 39 we can talk. Please. The Tyree catch and the choke by whatever WR that was are infamous. Find me single plays in any of Brady wins to rival those two epic flukes. By your logic Garnett > Duncan. When you're great, you win even when you have no business winning. Tom Brady is a lock to win his 5th title. Keep up with your lame hypotheticals. By your logic, Terry Bradshaw = Tom Brady. You know because they have the same number of rings.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 03:15 PM) Haha. Should be 6 for 6? So he should have won the two one score losses but he couldn't have lost the 4 one score victories. Rings matter but it's way different than the NBA, one player can only do so much. Peyton finally won a 2nd ring when he couldn't throw the ball past 15 yards. QB is the most important position on the field but even then they can only carry a team so far. Still need the other 21 starters to perform. Rodgers has been a victim of a poor Packers defense for most of his career. Only twice have the Packers had a defense that ranked in the top 10 in points allowed and one of those years Rodgers won a ring. By comparison, Brady has had a defense ranked in top 10 in points allowed 11 times over the course of his career. Brady has played on far better teams, it's no wonder he has more rings. Doesn't make him the better player though.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 02:51 PM) Not really. Brady has clearly been better the last two years and he's 6 years older. Rodgers is sick. Don't get me wrong. But Brady is damn near 40 doing what he's doing. I want to see Rodgers dominating like this at 37, 38, and 39. Ok, but over the course of their careers Rodgers has been better from a statistical standpoint and it's not that close really. I'm talking individual accomplishments, not team.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 01:36 PM) That means Belicheck is a better GM than Thompson and is able to assemble a better team around him, it doesn't make Rodgers clearly better than Brady Let's say the two switch teams. Does Brady put up better numbers than Rodgers on the Packers and vice versa does Rodgers put up worse numbers than Brady on the Patriots? Rodgers is already the highest rated passer in NFL history by a substantial margin (and this doesn't even account for his well above average rushing abilities). Statistically speaking from an individual standpoint, he's in a league of his own.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 10, 2016 -> 12:41 PM) Unless the plan is to keep him until he retires, which could be possible, I think the Sox have to trade Abreu before the season starts. If they dump Frazier and Melky, there is zero motivation for the opposition to ever throw him a strike. Unless he accepts that he is going to walk 150 times, his numbers are going to drop because he is going to to swinging at a lot of crap. Agree but I'm starting to think they won't trade Frazier or Melky until the July 31 trade deadline, if at all.

It's so hard to be patient! If nothing happens this week, I wouldn't expect any trades to happen (if there are any trades at all) until after the holidays.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 10:38 AM) You do not just trade Sale and Eaton and call it an offseason, that would run counter to performing an impactful rebuild Trading Eaton and Sale effectively punts on the next two seasons, so why keep players around any longer than they need to be? I will not trade them for less value than they are worth, but by the deadline in 2017 you will see pretty much every tradeable asset moved I completely agree that they should be moved but I don't see how it's the certainty that everyone here is proclaiming. There is a very real possibility that they enter the season with Q, Frazier, Abreu, etc. still on the roster. Until proven otherwise, it's more likely that they remain on the OD roster than don't.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 10:27 AM) Of course, as currently constructed we are not THAT bad But, we all know that guys like Quintana/Robertson/FRazier/etc are more likely than not going to be moved for prospects How do we know that? The front office has already stated they aren't moving those guys unless they get full value in return (in their eyes). Why are we certain that they will receive a satisfactory return this offseason?