This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- D1 scholarship from England
- NFL survey (Non-US Fans)
- Kallisto's Saturday Question: Weekend
- American VSP that's super confused
- Football Career Mode
- uni society info
- Are there hobbies or interests that make men more interesting
- Edexcel History A Level option 1F In search of the American dream
- OCR A Level English Literature Comparative and contextual study H472/02 - 15 Jun 2022
- Edexcel GCSE History Paper 2 (1HI0 2A-2W) - 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- opinions on travis kelce x taylor swift??
- University of Essex Official Q&A Thread
- University of Essex - Sports Question
- Of Mice and Men, extract question Jan 2024 exam
- English speech
- What is your favorite sport to watch and play?
- Do De Montford business students live at home a lot?
- AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Kallisto's Sunday Question: The United States
- History coursework AQA help
NFL talk? Questions about American football?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by SaltyPiratePony
At least that game proved that Rodgers isn't as good as he is hyped up to be.
This. The Steelers will kill him, hopefully.
Man, I was gutted, didn't watch the Steelers game in the end as I was so down about the Bears. Hanie did well, no doubt he has shown himself to shine when he needed to and the Bears will notice this. Collins is ****ing awful. Nothing else need be said about him.
Cutler, I am unsure if he was truly injured or not, just seemed like a case of bruised ego supported by a convenient knee injury. Meh, too many mistakes from the Bears to truly deserve to go to the Bowl, they would have been destroyed by the Steelers should they have gotten there.
I don't care who wins now, as long as it isn't Greenbay.
So much Rodgers/Packer hate here. Hope the Packers play a great, hard in-your-face game in 2 weeks for you.
Original post by RabbitCFH
So much Rodgers/Packer hate here. Hope the Packers play a great, hard in-your-face game in 2 weeks for you.
Wayyy tooo much hate, it's all good though, Rodgers will turn it out come Feb 6 when the Packers take down the superbowl.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by RabbitCFH
So much Rodgers/Packer hate here. Hope the Packers play a great, hard in-your-face game in 2 weeks for you.
Original post by kingkev
Wayyy tooo much hate, it's all good though, Rodgers will turn it out come Feb 6 when the Packers take down the superbowl.
There would probably be zero hate if a) People stopped rating Aaron Rodgers as amazing, and b) if Clay Matthews wasn't a tosser. Those are my reasons, otherwise they are fine. I much prefer Steelers.
Superbowl. BAM! Packers got it I think.
Original post by SaltyPiratePony
There would probably be zero hate if a) People stopped rating Aaron Rodgers as amazing
the thing is though it's hard not to rate a guy whose career quarterback rating in the regular season is the highest of all quarterbacks EVER, and he's still in his 20s.
Yes he has time to **** it all up, but he's posted 2 100+ rated seasons in 3 seasons as a starter, and the other was still 93.8, which is still better than Kurt Warner's career average, and that guy's a 2 time MVP!
I don't think people are rating him as amazing, but rather that he's well ON COURSE to be amazing.
If he was to post say 5 or 6 seasons similar to the last 3 then there'd be no doubting his credentials.
As it stands, how many quarterbacks have been so effective once becoming a starter like Rodgers has started his?
The only ones that really come to mind for me are Dan Marino and Steve Young - and he was in the league 6 years before he became a starting quarterback - with Jerry Rice as a receiver...
Maybe people are overrating him slightly (i haven't seen anything to suggest this), but to say he's not already one of the top quarterbacks in the league, let alone on his way to being a great is pretty unfair on the guy, let's be honest, outside of Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, New Orleans and San Diego, who in the league would say no to Rodgers?
St Louis, Atlanta and both New York teams are probably happy with their situation, but he'd still be an upgrade for all of them.
The rest of the league would happily give up their first 2 draft picks (at least) if they thought it'd get them Rodgers.
I think the media sucking Clay Mathews' D isn't winning the packers any new fans either. USC is my favourite college and i've been saying for years that he's better than Cushing or Maualuga, he's only just this season getting the recognition he deserves and the media are going pretty overboard imo.
Original post by munn
the thing is though it's hard not to rate a guy whose career quarterback rating in the regular season is the highest of all quarterbacks EVER, and he's still in his 20s.
Yes he has time to **** it all up, but he's posted 2 100+ rated seasons in 3 seasons as a starter, and the other was still 93.8, which is still better than Kurt Warner's career average, and that guy's a 2 time MVP!
I don't think people are rating him as amazing, but rather that he's well ON COURSE to be amazing.
If he was to post say 5 or 6 seasons similar to the last 3 then there'd be no doubting his credentials.
As it stands, how many quarterbacks have been so effective once becoming a starter like Rodgers has started his?
The only ones that really come to mind for me are Dan Marino and Steve Young - and he was in the league 6 years before he became a starting quarterback - with Jerry Rice as a receiver...
Maybe people are overrating him slightly (i haven't seen anything to suggest this), but to say he's not already one of the top quarterbacks in the league, let alone on his way to being a great is pretty unfair on the guy, let's be honest, outside of Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, New Orleans and San Diego, who in the league would say no to Rodgers?
St Louis, Atlanta and both New York teams are probably happy with their situation, but he'd still be an upgrade for all of them.
The rest of the league would happily give up their first 2 draft picks (at least) if they thought it'd get them Rodgers.
Yes he has time to **** it all up, but he's posted 2 100+ rated seasons in 3 seasons as a starter, and the other was still 93.8, which is still better than Kurt Warner's career average, and that guy's a 2 time MVP!
I don't think people are rating him as amazing, but rather that he's well ON COURSE to be amazing.
If he was to post say 5 or 6 seasons similar to the last 3 then there'd be no doubting his credentials.
As it stands, how many quarterbacks have been so effective once becoming a starter like Rodgers has started his?
The only ones that really come to mind for me are Dan Marino and Steve Young - and he was in the league 6 years before he became a starting quarterback - with Jerry Rice as a receiver...
Maybe people are overrating him slightly (i haven't seen anything to suggest this), but to say he's not already one of the top quarterbacks in the league, let alone on his way to being a great is pretty unfair on the guy, let's be honest, outside of Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, New Orleans and San Diego, who in the league would say no to Rodgers?
St Louis, Atlanta and both New York teams are probably happy with their situation, but he'd still be an upgrade for all of them.
The rest of the league would happily give up their first 2 draft picks (at least) if they thought it'd get them Rodgers.
Plus Rodgers is great at something that few QBs can do really well - running. Not only does it help him score rushing TDs but also avoid sacks.
Original post by RabbitCFH
Plus Rodgers is great at something that few QBs can do really well - running. Not only does it help him score rushing TDs but also avoid sacks.
Agreed. However I don't see him running much against the Steelers somehow.
anyone else got tickets to the Super Bash party at IndigO2 to watch the Super Bowl?
Original post by munn
the thing is though it's hard not to rate a guy whose career quarterback rating in the regular season is the highest of all quarterbacks EVER, and he's still in his 20s.
Yes he has time to **** it all up, but he's posted 2 100+ rated seasons in 3 seasons as a starter, and the other was still 93.8, which is still better than Kurt Warner's career average, and that guy's a 2 time MVP!
I don't think people are rating him as amazing, but rather that he's well ON COURSE to be amazing.
If he was to post say 5 or 6 seasons similar to the last 3 then there'd be no doubting his credentials.
As it stands, how many quarterbacks have been so effective once becoming a starter like Rodgers has started his?
The only ones that really come to mind for me are Dan Marino and Steve Young - and he was in the league 6 years before he became a starting quarterback - with Jerry Rice as a receiver...
Maybe people are overrating him slightly (i haven't seen anything to suggest this), but to say he's not already one of the top quarterbacks in the league, let alone on his way to being a great is pretty unfair on the guy, let's be honest, outside of Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, New Orleans and San Diego, who in the league would say no to Rodgers?
St Louis, Atlanta and both New York teams are probably happy with their situation, but he'd still be an upgrade for all of them.
The rest of the league would happily give up their first 2 draft picks (at least) if they thought it'd get them Rodgers.
Yes he has time to **** it all up, but he's posted 2 100+ rated seasons in 3 seasons as a starter, and the other was still 93.8, which is still better than Kurt Warner's career average, and that guy's a 2 time MVP!
I don't think people are rating him as amazing, but rather that he's well ON COURSE to be amazing.
If he was to post say 5 or 6 seasons similar to the last 3 then there'd be no doubting his credentials.
As it stands, how many quarterbacks have been so effective once becoming a starter like Rodgers has started his?
The only ones that really come to mind for me are Dan Marino and Steve Young - and he was in the league 6 years before he became a starting quarterback - with Jerry Rice as a receiver...
Maybe people are overrating him slightly (i haven't seen anything to suggest this), but to say he's not already one of the top quarterbacks in the league, let alone on his way to being a great is pretty unfair on the guy, let's be honest, outside of Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, New Orleans and San Diego, who in the league would say no to Rodgers?
St Louis, Atlanta and both New York teams are probably happy with their situation, but he'd still be an upgrade for all of them.
The rest of the league would happily give up their first 2 draft picks (at least) if they thought it'd get them Rodgers.
Could I add the Eagles to that last list?
Other than that, fair play.
Original post by amiparanoid
Could I add the Eagles to that last list?
Other than that, fair play.
Other than that, fair play.
Really though?
He's undoubtably better than Kolb and different from Vick, whose style leaves him open to getting injured regularly (just as McNabb used to), the difference was that McNabb could play in the pocket too, whereas if you limit Vick to the pocket he's not a particularly good thrower.
I don't think anywhere near as many teams would want Vick despite the fact that he's not so much of a character issue anymore, though I suppose a number of them WOULD put it down to that.
I think if the Eagles were given the choice between the two they'd opt for Rodgers
Pro Bowl predictions?
Original post by SaltyPiratePony
Pro Bowl predictions?
It has the potential to throw up a few surprises, much like its baseball counterpart.
However, NFC for me, Chicago and Philly make it a completely bias choice though. Plus I can't stand to see the Patriots have any kind of victory.
The pro bowl would be better served at the END of february, and instead of AFC vs NFC, it should be superbowl champions versus the best possible team from the rest of the NFL
that way there's real competition as the rest of the NFL wants to show the champs that they can be better, but the superbowl winning team has continuity on its side and wants to show the rest of the league that no matter what you throw up against them, they're still the best in the league.
that way there's real competition as the rest of the NFL wants to show the champs that they can be better, but the superbowl winning team has continuity on its side and wants to show the rest of the league that no matter what you throw up against them, they're still the best in the league.
Original post by RNBen
It has the potential to throw up a few surprises, much like its baseball counterpart.
However, NFC for me, Chicago and Philly make it a completely bias choice though. Plus I can't stand to see the Patriots have any kind of victory.
However, NFC for me, Chicago and Philly make it a completely bias choice though. Plus I can't stand to see the Patriots have any kind of victory.
I thought Brady was QB vs. Vick, which was no real contest but apparently he's out for Rivers due to his knee. I still think Rivers has better ability over Vick though, so i'm siding with him.
Original post by munn
The pro bowl would be better served at the END of february, and instead of AFC vs NFC, it should be superbowl champions versus the best possible team from the rest of the NFL
that way there's real competition as the rest of the NFL wants to show the champs that they can be better, but the superbowl winning team has continuity on its side and wants to show the rest of the league that no matter what you throw up against them, they're still the best in the league.
that way there's real competition as the rest of the NFL wants to show the champs that they can be better, but the superbowl winning team has continuity on its side and wants to show the rest of the league that no matter what you throw up against them, they're still the best in the league.
I like this idea, it'd certainly be a good game to watch.
Original post by Mann18
The Pro Bowl is never good, they shouldn't even have a game, just award players a "Pro" status for the year.
No-one tries.
No-one tries.
Fair point really. Most coaches will tell their players to not over do it as if they get injured then their post-season rest will mainly be spent in the physio room. Plus, they want to draft for players they have needed through watching the entire season, not because a player went in too hard in a meaningless tackle.
Related discussions
- D1 scholarship from England
- NFL survey (Non-US Fans)
- Kallisto's Saturday Question: Weekend
- American VSP that's super confused
- Football Career Mode
- uni society info
- Are there hobbies or interests that make men more interesting
- Edexcel History A Level option 1F In search of the American dream
- OCR A Level English Literature Comparative and contextual study H472/02 - 15 Jun 2022
- Edexcel GCSE History Paper 2 (1HI0 2A-2W) - 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- opinions on travis kelce x taylor swift??
- University of Essex Official Q&A Thread
- University of Essex - Sports Question
- Of Mice and Men, extract question Jan 2024 exam
- English speech
- What is your favorite sport to watch and play?
- Do De Montford business students live at home a lot?
- AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Kallisto's Sunday Question: The United States
- History coursework AQA help
