NFL.

lonewolf371 · **Joined:** Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:05 am **Posts:** 4166

corrections wrote:

Actually the FO stats have Rodgers as better on a per play basis but Manning having thrown more passes so having more total value. In those stats Rodgers probably played better. But they don't take into account the fact that Manning had even less of a running game, a worse line, and worse receivers. He was playing in a more difficult situation. I don't think it is fair to judge Manning this year. Last year and the year before he was much better than Rodgers and that isn't even taking into account what he does on the field.

Also for QBs I don't think the sample size is too small particularly given that their baseline is set on effectively a rolling average of multiple years.

Yeah, Manning had it really rough this year from an injury standpoint.

We'll just agree to disagree. I think Rodgers is at least on the same level, tier, whatever you want to call it as Manning and Brady.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

lonewolf371 wrote:

corrections wrote:

Actually the FO stats have Rodgers as better on a per play basis but Manning having thrown more passes so having more total value. In those stats Rodgers probably played better. But they don't take into account the fact that Manning had even less of a running game, a worse line, and worse receivers. He was playing in a more difficult situation. I don't think it is fair to judge Manning this year. Last year and the year before he was much better than Rodgers and that isn't even taking into account what he does on the field.

Also for QBs I don't think the sample size is too small particularly given that their baseline is set on effectively a rolling average of multiple years.

Yeah, Manning had it really rough this year from an injury standpoint.

We'll just agree to disagree. I think Rodgers is at least on the same level, tier, whatever you want to call it as Manning and Brady.

Oh I agree.

My elite tier was Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers. I just think there are slight gradients of difference that would still lead me to take the other 3 over him at least for now.

chicken sandwich · **Joined:** Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:28 am **Posts:** 3104

Why is that? Rodgers is at least 5 years younger than all of those guys. Manning, Brady and Brees had their reign and obviously will be elite QBs for the next couple of years but I think given those guys projected gradual recession and Rodgers entering his prime I want Rodgers as my franchise QB, and this is coming from a huge lifelong Pats fan. If we're talking about 2011 fantasy value my take might be a little different, but it seems like we're about to enter the Rodgers era pretty soon.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

chicken sandwich wrote:

Why is that? Rodgers is at least 5 years younger than all of those guys. Manning, Brady and Brees had their reign and obviously will be elite QBs for the next couple of years but I think given those guys projected gradual recession and Rodgers entering his prime I want Rodgers as my franchise QB, and this is coming from a huge lifelong Pats fan. If we're talking about 2011 fantasy value my take might be a little different, but it seems like we're about to enter the Rodgers era pretty soon.

Well for one there is the insane durability of Manning as compared to Rodgers having had 3 concussions this year on top of earlier concussions in his career (rather alarming for your QB). For another while Rodgers is only 3 years in the league he's 6 years out of school making him older than his career would suggestion. Third, while Manning has slowed somewhat physically there has been barely a drop off in his performance and what he does he can do for at least the next 5 years. That ties into the larger gradual decline point. Yes most QBs decline as they age. But certain skill sets don't particularly decline and Manning has the profile to look like a supped up version of Brett Favre. Brady and Brees I would say this about to a lesser extent and Rodgers may pass them next year. I should also point out that I'm not ranking these guys on who I would pick right now if I were starting a team. If this were the NBA that kind of discussion would have me taking Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose even if Kobe Bryant is better than both of those guys right now. If I need to win won season and have the best shot at the playoffs I'm still taking those three over Rodgers and if I need one game that's also the case.

My other big thing is don't let one short stretch of really good play cloud judgment. Rodgers was completely shut down (and then knocked out) by the Lions in a game this year and the Packers were actually outscored by them. Rodgers in game 17 was almost totally held in check by the Bears and the Bears did the same thing in the 2nd half of the championship game (although that may not be fair to Rodgers because I think he was concussed). When it comes down to it I think its easier to take away what Rodgers does than what Manning does. Not to say its easy but I think its been shown to be easier. Veteran experience matters and proven long run performance does too.

pave · **Posted:** Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:41 am

i'd just like to say that Manning not only is an elite QB but also one of the best Offensive Coordinators in the league as well... for what its worth.

lonewolf371 · **Joined:** Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:05 am **Posts:** 4166

corrections wrote:

Well for one there is the insane durability of Manning as compared to Rodgers having had 3 concussions this year on top of earlier concussions in his career (rather alarming for your QB). For another while Rodgers is only 3 years in the league he's 6 years out of school making him older than his career would suggestion. Third, while Manning has slowed somewhat physically there has been barely a drop off in his performance and what he does he can do for at least the next 5 years. That ties into the larger gradual decline point. Yes most QBs decline as they age. But certain skill sets don't particularly decline and Manning has the profile to look like a supped up version of Brett Favre. Brady and Brees I would say this about to a lesser extent and Rodgers may pass them next year. I should also point out that I'm not ranking these guys on who I would pick right now if I were starting a team. If this were the NBA that kind of discussion would have me taking Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose even if Kobe Bryant is better than both of those guys right now. If I need to win won season and have the best shot at the playoffs I'm still taking those three over Rodgers and if I need one game that's also the case.

My other big thing is don't let one short stretch of really good play cloud judgment. Rodgers was completely shut down (and then knocked out) by the Lions in a game this year and the Packers were actually outscored by them. Rodgers in game 17 was almost totally held in check by the Bears and the Bears did the same thing in the 2nd half of the championship game (although that may not be fair to Rodgers because I think he was concussed). When it comes down to it I think its easier to take away what Rodgers does than what Manning does. Not to say its easy but I think its been shown to be easier. Veteran experience matters and proven long run performance does too.

To be fair, with Ndamukong Suh in the lineup those Lions may be shutting down a number of QBs and giving them concussions over the next few years. They also took out a very hot Tampa Bay team in the middle of a 4-game winning streak at the end of the season.

SanTropez · **Posted:** Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:54 pm

Fuck yah

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

lonewolf371 wrote:

corrections wrote:

Well for one there is the insane durability of Manning as compared to Rodgers having had 3 concussions this year on top of earlier concussions in his career (rather alarming for your QB). For another while Rodgers is only 3 years in the league he's 6 years out of school making him older than his career would suggestion. Third, while Manning has slowed somewhat physically there has been barely a drop off in his performance and what he does he can do for at least the next 5 years. That ties into the larger gradual decline point. Yes most QBs decline as they age. But certain skill sets don't particularly decline and Manning has the profile to look like a supped up version of Brett Favre. Brady and Brees I would say this about to a lesser extent and Rodgers may pass them next year. I should also point out that I'm not ranking these guys on who I would pick right now if I were starting a team. If this were the NBA that kind of discussion would have me taking Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose even if Kobe Bryant is better than both of those guys right now. If I need to win won season and have the best shot at the playoffs I'm still taking those three over Rodgers and if I need one game that's also the case.

My other big thing is don't let one short stretch of really good play cloud judgment. Rodgers was completely shut down (and then knocked out) by the Lions in a game this year and the Packers were actually outscored by them. Rodgers in game 17 was almost totally held in check by the Bears and the Bears did the same thing in the 2nd half of the championship game (although that may not be fair to Rodgers because I think he was concussed). When it comes down to it I think its easier to take away what Rodgers does than what Manning does. Not to say its easy but I think its been shown to be easier. Veteran experience matters and proven long run performance does too.

To be fair, with Ndamukong Suh in the lineup those Lions may be shutting down a number of QBs and giving them concussions over the next few years. They also took out a very hot Tampa Bay team in the middle of a 4-game winning streak at the end of the season.

Although funnily enough Sitton was one of the few guys who really handled Suh well this year and did so mostly one on one. So I think its just the rest of Detroit matched up well for some reason.

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

If I remember right a few Packers wideouts dropped passes too. Jennings had like a 60 yard touchdown handed to him and he bobbled it.

chicken sandwich · **Joined:** Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:28 am **Posts:** 3104

vankush wrote:

If I remember right a few Packers wideouts dropped passes too. Jennings had like a 60 yard touchdown handed to him and he bobbled it.

Jones and Jordy Nelson dropped s couple passes also. Rodgers probably would have thrown for 400+ yards if those catches were made.

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

Yeah I remember watching that game and thinking "This sucks for Aaron Rodgers" and not "Aaron Rodgers is sucking."

Matz · **Joined:** Tue Oct 12, 2010 9:19 pm **Posts:** 312

I agree, Rodger's makes receivers' jobs ridiculously easy. You rarely see a game where there are less dropped passes than bad passes.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

chicken sandwich wrote:

vankush wrote:

If I remember right a few Packers wideouts dropped passes too. Jennings had like a 60 yard touchdown handed to him and he bobbled it.

Jones and Jordy Nelson dropped s couple passes also. Rodgers probably would have thrown for 400+ yards if those catches were made.

Or on other plays different things would have happened.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

Matz wrote:

I agree, Rodger's makes receivers' jobs ridiculously easy. You rarely see a game where there are less dropped passes than bad passes.

Yes but keep in mind that Rodgers has about the best stable of receivers in the league. They do plenty to help him too.

SanTropez · **Posted:** Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:58 pm

*Pukes*

NFL.

Who is online