Aaron Rodgers and the 5 Best Quarterbacks to Build a Team Around

[GBPfan]

PackerBacker-WichitaKs wrote:

<quoted text> Nothing against Matt Flynn, but they don't win the SB if Rodgers doesn't come back from the concussion and play like he did down the stretch to win the SB.

If that isn't against Matt Flynn, what is? I'd hate to hear you say what you think is "against" Flynn if that is for him!

I see you have little if any faith in Ted Thompson. After what Ted did last year that is shocking. Has a GM of a SB winning team ever overcome injury like the Packers did last season? The Packers overcame well over a dozen season ending injuries, but you draw the line to any possible success if Rodgers gets injured. That shows a pathetic lack of respect for the rest of the PACKERS! Your attitude shows no faith in Ted Thompson, the coaching staff, and of course Matt Flynn and the rest of the Packers. What happened? Didn't Flynn perform well enough for you after his one week of getting snaps with the first string offense when he nearly helped the Packers win on the road? Was that one loss that much worse than the 5 losses when Rodgers was the starting QB?

You may want to give all the credit to one player, but I know that the Packers are good enough to win despite injuries. Ted Thompson finally accomplished what we all wanted and you want to say that he only had success because Rodgers fortunately fell 20 spots in the draft. Contrary to what you believe, it was a TEAM win in the Super Bowl. The Lombardi Trophy was awarded to the "GREEN BAY PACKERS." No player's name appears anywhere on it.

[eric]

Hey,look at you standing up for Ted Thompson! Im proud of ya!

[eric]

GBPfan wrote:

<quoted text>
If that isn't against Matt Flynn, what is? I'd hate to hear you say what you think is "against" Flynn if that is for him!
I see you have little if any faith in Ted Thompson. After what Ted did last year that is shocking. Has a GM of a SB winning team ever overcome injury like the Packers did last season? The Packers overcame well over a dozen season ending injuries, but you draw the line to any possible success if Rodgers gets injured. That shows a pathetic lack of respect for the rest of the PACKERS! Your attitude shows no faith in Ted Thompson, the coaching staff, and of course Matt Flynn and the rest of the Packers. What happened? Didn't Flynn perform well enough for you after his one week of getting snaps with the first string offense when he nearly helped the Packers win on the road? Was that one loss that much worse than the 5 losses when Rodgers was the starting QB?
You may want to give all the credit to one player, but I know that the Packers are good enough to win despite injuries. Ted Thompson finally accomplished what we all wanted and you want to say that he only had success because Rodgers fortunately fell 20 spots in the draft. Contrary to what you believe, it was a TEAM win in the Super Bowl. The Lombardi Trophy was awarded to the "GREEN BAY PACKERS." No player's name appears anywhere on it.

Its a double edged sword here.IF you say the Packers couldnt win if AR got hurt,you call it insulting the rest of the Packers.
IF
he stated the Packers would have or could have won if AR got hurt with Matt Flynn,then that diminishes AR accomplishments doesnt it?ITs like saying AR isnt great,hell, Matt Flynn would have won the SB with that team.
Just a thought

[eric]

PackerBacker-WichitaKs wrote:

<quoted text>Eric, I agree. Indy would have to take Luck. It sounds like there is a possibility that Manning's injury could be more serious than it started out as. Even if Manning comes back and plays the Colts draft Luck let him learn for a few years and then he plays. Like you said, as Packer fans, we have been down this road. It turned out pretty well.

Most def.Especially with Manning coming back from a neck injury that isnt fusing right.I read where Manning wants to play in 11,id sit his ass down and really get him to think about that and the whole situation.Neck injuries are nothing to mess with.Unless INDY has a good FA plan for a qb and can trade that number 1 pick for a pile and fill many holes,i cant see them passing up on Andrew Luck nor should they.I just hope ( for Indy's sake) Manning doesnt turn it into a Favre fest with the bs Its not my job to teach him,,or what are they going to do,Cut me? ect.

[GBPfan]

eric wrote:

Hey,look at you standing up for Ted Thompson! Im proud of ya!

I always said it was merely the results that I was unhappy about. Obviously, that problem no longer remains. I love what Ted accomplished. I can't see why any Packer fan would diminsh what he did. It's awesome.

[GBPfan]

eric wrote:

<quoted text>Its a double edged sword here.IF you say the Packers couldnt win if AR got hurt,you call it insulting the rest of the Packers.
IF
he stated the Packers would have or could have won if AR got hurt with Matt Flynn,then that diminishes AR accomplishments doesnt it?ITs like saying AR isnt great,hell, Matt Flynn would have won the SB with that team.
Just a thought

How does it diminish AR's talent to have faith and confidence in the PACKERS and Matt Flynn? You act as though believing in the PACKERS is an insult to AR. Was it an insult to Ryan Grant or Jermichael Finley if people had faith or confidence in the PACKERS last season?

It's not an either/or choice. I'll prove it. I'm saying right now that Aaron Rodgers is great and that the PACKERS would have won with Matt Flynn at QB. See. The two are not mutually exclusive. Think about that.

[PackerBacker-Wic hitaKs]

GBPfan wrote:

<quoted text>
You will not see many teams with a below average [insert name of position] win a Super Bowl. This years Ravens and 49ers could be the exception as far as QBs, in addition to every team that has been an exception in the past. A huge majority of SB winners have had very good play out of their [insert name of postion]

Wouldn't you have to agree when looking at all the past SB winners that they have had above average QB's? Bart Starr, Len Dawson,Roger Staubach, Bob Griese, Ken Stabler, Joe Montana, Steve Young, Terry Bradshaw, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre, Tom Brady etc. I know I am leaving out some good QB's. But I hope you get the ponit. More often than not you need a very good QB to lead your team even if you have a great team in all other aspects.

[GBPfan]

PackerBacker-WichitaKs wrote:

<quoted text>Wouldn't you have to agree when looking at all the past SB winners that they have had above average QB's? Bart Starr, Len Dawson,Roger Staubach, Bob Griese, Ken Stabler, Joe Montana, Steve Young, Terry Bradshaw, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre, Tom Brady etc. I know I am leaving out some good QB's. But I hope you get the ponit. More often than not you need a very good QB to lead your team even if you have a great team in all other aspects.

I would agree with you that most Championship teams have above average QBs. I would also agree that most Championship teams have above average left tackles. I would also agree that most Championship teams have above average cornerbacks. I would also agree that most Championship teams ...

I don't really need to go through each and every position, do I? The point is that Championship TEAMS usually have many good players, but they don't ALWAYS have great QBs. A team needs to be a great TEAM. Obviously, it is good to have a great QB, but any great QB still NEEDS a great team, while a great team doesn't necessarily NEED a great QB.

[GBPfan]

BTW Trent Dilfer, Jim Plunket, Ken Stabler, and Joe Namath all threw more INTs in their careers than TDs. Even Terry Bradshaw had barely more TDs tha INTs, 212 TDs to 210 INTs. By comparison Brett Favre had 508 TDs to 336 INTs. Compared to Favre, Bradshaw and many other Super Bowl winning QBs were INT machines! And I really shouldn't have to say much about Doug Williams, Brad Johnson, or Jeff Hostetler. Clearly those teams didn't require great QBs.

Ben Rothlisberger had 123 yards and 2 interceptions in Super Bowl XL, for a QB rating of 22.6. In the two Super Bowls wins he has a total of 349 yards, one touchdown, and three interceptions. That averages out to 174 yards,.5 touchdowns, and 1.5 interceptions. That's not very good, but the STEELERS seem to have found ways to win.

[GBPfan]

The QBs I mentioned above account for over 25% of all the Super Bowl wins. Does anybody still think that a team must have a great QB? It's a team game. The greatest TEAM wins. That is why the Patriots beat the Rams in Warner's record breaking season. That is why the 49ers beat the Marino led Dolphins in his record breaking season. That is why the Giants beat the Patriots in Brady's record breaking season. That is why Elway didn't win a SB until the Broncos didn't need his arm to win. That is why such notable greats as Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly and Dan Fouts hav zero SB rings among all of them.

[SteelersFan101]

GBPfan wrote:

The QBs I mentioned above account for over 25% of all the Super Bowl wins. Does anybody still think that a team must have a great QB? It's a team game. The greatest TEAM wins. That is why the Patriots beat the Rams in Warner's record breaking season. That is why the 49ers beat the Marino led Dolphins in his record breaking season. That is why the Giants beat the Patriots in Brady's record breaking season. That is why Elway didn't win a SB until the Broncos didn't need his arm to win. That is why such notable greats as Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly and Dan Fouts hav zero SB rings among all of them.

Can you say 6 rings beats 4 rings?! I can and you can't!

[GBPfan]

SteelersFan101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Can you say 6 rings beats 4 rings?! I can and you can't!

There is no limit to the embarrassment you bring upon yourself. Once again you are proving to the world that you are supremely ignorant. The first championship ring to ever be made for players by the team was for the 1922 NFL World Champions: the New York Giants. The Green Bay Packers have 13 NFL Championship rings. 13 is a lot more than 6. The Steelers do have more rings than whichever team only has four.

[SteelersFan101]

GBPfan wrote:

<quoted text>There is no limit to the embarrassment you bring upon yourself. Once again you are proving to the world that you are supremely ignorant. The first championship ring to ever be made for players by the team was for the 1922 NFL World Champions: the New York Giants. The Green Bay Packers have 13 NFL Championship rings. 13 is a lot more than 6. The Steelers do have more rings than whichever team only has four.

I'm not embarrassed. The Steelers have won more Super Bowls than the Packers. Can you say 6>4?! I can.

[SteelersFan101]

GBPfan wrote:

BTW Trent Dilfer, Jim Plunket, Ken Stabler, and Joe Namath all threw more INTs in their careers than TDs. Even Terry Bradshaw had barely more TDs tha INTs, 212 TDs to 210 INTs. By comparison Brett Favre had 508 TDs to 336 INTs. Compared to Favre, Bradshaw and many other Super Bowl winning QBs were INT machines! And I really shouldn't have to say much about Doug Williams, Brad Johnson, or Jeff Hostetler. Clearly those teams didn't require great QBs.

Ben Rothlisberger had 123 yards and 2 interceptions in Super Bowl XL, for a QB rating of 22.6. In the two Super Bowls wins he has a total of 349 yards, one touchdown, and three interceptions. That averages out to 174 yards,.5 touchdowns, and 1.5 interceptions. That's not very good, but the STEELERS seem to have found ways to win.

The Steel Curtain - Defense