When will people finally admit Aaron Rodgers has incredible talent around him?

Originally posted by LAFortyNinerfan:
It's true the team around you matters, but plenty of qbs landing in good situations haven't done anything close to what rodgers has done. Lienart is the first that comes to mind. I'm not sure Flynn is a scrub though. Teams wanted him this off season and GB refused to trade him. They must like something about him. We'll find out how good he is when he's starting for someone else next season.

Why did the Packers refuse to trade him but didn't give him an extension? That'd be one of the dumbest moves a FO could make the year before a QB becomes unrestricted free agent.

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:
There is no "Jerry Rice" on this Packers team. By that I mean Hall of Fame.

That's a wonderful observation....but there is Jennings a pro bowl and top 5 wr that could eventually be a hover and Nelson and jones and driver and Finley so don't know the point you are trying to make when rodgers would never do great without his great wr core and Montana won 2 subs with Dwight Clark....wow. Last time I checked rogers is a great qb with great weapons, however when they didn't have great weapons I seem to recall an 8-8 and a 9-7 team with a good qb not a great one. Now they have better weapons = great qb......hence the whole point of this thread

There you go...

Originally posted by fastforward:

Originally posted by LAFortyNinerfan:
It's true the team around you matters, but plenty of qbs landing in good situations haven't done anything close to what rodgers has done. Lienart is the first that comes to mind. I'm not sure Flynn is a scrub though. Teams wanted him this off season and GB refused to trade him. They must like something about him. We'll find out how good he is when he's starting for someone else next season.

Why did the Packers refuse to trade him but didn't give him an extension? That'd be one of the dumbest moves a FO could make the year before a QB becomes unrestricted free agent.

We will find out how good he is when he is a FA for another team. If he can post 480 yards and 6 TD's a game for his next team when he is a FA then I guess he really is that good. And if not than it would have a lot to do with talent, scheme, and playcalling of Green Bay...

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by vaden:
So because a few other backup QBs have had similarly (but not equally) great games, the implication is that Flynn's performance was just another fluke and had nothing to do with GB's talent and offensive system. I don't buy it. The odds are astronomical that the next backup QB to do this just so happened to be Rodgers' backup and a guy who's had four years to train in that system.

Nobody has said Green Bay doesn't have a good offensive system. I'd like you guys to show me one time anybody has ever said otherwise.

I never said anyone had.

It's funny that you guys are also completely ignoring that the rest of Green Bay's offense also benefits from that same system.

I haven't seen that come up yet in this thread, but I highly doubt anyone here would say their other offensive players don't benefit from that system.

Regarding Matt Flynn's game. It's one game and it was just 2 weeks ago when the same people making this argument was telling everyone look at Green Bay without Jennings they can't throw the ball. You need elite receivers. How's that working out right now? One game is too small of a sample size to make any definitive statement.

I agree. That's why I've only said it's an indicator. And Flynn doing what he did without Jennings only highlights his performance.

Originally posted by fastforward:

Originally posted by LAFortyNinerfan:

It's true the team around you matters, but plenty of qbs landing in good situations haven't done anything close to what rodgers has done. Lienart is the first that comes to mind. I'm not sure Flynn is a scrub though. Teams wanted him this off season and GB refused to trade him. They must like something about him. We'll find out how good he is when he's starting for someone else next season.

Why did the Packers refuse to trade him but didn't give him an extension? That'd be one of the dumbest moves a FO could make the year before a QB becomes unrestricted free agent.

They did try to work out an extension. He didn't wanna resign...likely because he doesn't wanna continue being a backup. I've read green bay will probably tag and trade him since his stock has increased.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
They put in scrub backup Matt Flynn and he has 480 yards and 6 TD's. It's ALL the system, play calling, WR's, TE's, O Line protection and coaching. You can plug anybody into Green Bay and they look better than Dan Marino + Joe Montana combined... It's absurd to think the guy doesn't have incredible receivers around him. They catch every ball, don't drop a thing, have speed and size and break tackles and get huge YAC. If you played scrub Matt Flynn for the whole year he would go the Pro Bowl as a starter, win every game except maybe 1 and win the Super Bowl. That's an absurdly talented team. You guys are kidding yourselves if you think otherwise. They are awesome in all aspects of offensive production. And obviously it's not just the QB. Because you have seen what the backup did. And Matt Flynn on our team with all the drops and shoddy O Line protection surely wouldn't do that...

Clearly they have a lot of talent but Matt Flynn isn't a scrub. That was a highly irresponsible comment from you. Scouts from a lot of teams have believed for about the last two years that Matt Flynn is the best backup QB in the NFL. The guy isn't a scrub.

If you want to talk about the system. It was actually Aaron Rodgers calling the plays that day. I agree, its obviously not all the QB. It never is. You could say the same exact thing about Joe Montana. He ran a brilliant offensive system that teams had a hard time stopping and threw to the greatest WR in NFL history. Drew Brees has loads of talent in New Orleans. The Colts have a lot of talent on offense as well. They just completely botched the backup QB situation. Matt Cassel went 11-5 with the Patriots and had back to back 400 yard games.

Originally posted by strat1080:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
They put in scrub backup Matt Flynn and he has 480 yards and 6 TD's. It's ALL the system, play calling, WR's, TE's, O Line protection and coaching. You can plug anybody into Green Bay and they look better than Dan Marino + Joe Montana combined... It's absurd to think the guy doesn't have incredible receivers around him. They catch every ball, don't drop a thing, have speed and size and break tackles and get huge YAC. If you played scrub Matt Flynn for the whole year he would go the Pro Bowl as a starter, win every game except maybe 1 and win the Super Bowl. That's an absurdly talented team. You guys are kidding yourselves if you think otherwise. They are awesome in all aspects of offensive production. And obviously it's not just the QB. Because you have seen what the backup did. And Matt Flynn on our team with all the drops and shoddy O Line protection surely wouldn't do that...

Clearly they have a lot of talent but Matt Flynn isn't a scrub. That was a highly irresponsible comment from you. Scouts from a lot of teams have believed for about the last two years that Matt Flynn is the best backup QB in the NFL. The guy isn't a scrub.

If you want to talk about the system. It was actually Aaron Rodgers calling the plays that day. I agree, its obviously not all the QB. It never is. You could say the same exact thing about Joe Montana. He ran a brilliant offensive system that teams had a hard time stopping and threw to the greatest WR in NFL history. Drew Brees has loads of talent in New Orleans. The Colts have a lot of talent on offense as well. They just completely botched the backup QB situation. Matt Cassel went 11-5 with the Patriots and had back to back 400 yard games.

A lot of it is system and talent. Yes Montana had amazing talent around him. And a very innovative system at the time. He hugely benefited from that. WZers never want to admit that because they are homers. Pre salary cap era Montana had Debartolo fielding the best roster in football year after year. Of course Montana benefited from that.

Flynn was a 7th round pick and wasn't even a full time starter on his own college team. So he was no star. He's a star in GB. Because they have great talent, a great system and great coaching....

Originally posted by blizzuntz:
Dwight Clark was a pro bowler as well.

My whole point is Rodgers has won with out a Jerry Rice HOF talent just like Joe Montana. And If you look back Joe Montana had some all pro talent around him when he won with out Rice.

Both Montana and current day Rodgers are surgeons as far as cutting up defenses with precision accurate passing.

Rodgers has won over 10 games every year he has started except his first year starting

Yeah. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise. I don't know why some people have to pigeonhole themselves into thinking a guy can't be great while also playing in a great system. Joe Montanta played in a groundbreaking offensive system that changed the NFL. The Packers were a very banged up team last year with no running game and Jermichael Finley missed almost the entire season. Those great WRs sure didn't play very great in the Super Bowl.

Some of those TDs were total fluke plays by Flynn. The Packers didn't have a RB screen for a TD all season. Then all of a sudden Ryan Grant takes one 80 yards to the house. That Driver TD was a total busted coverage. If you ask me, I think the Lions simply overlooked Flynn. I bet they thought they just had to show up and win. Clearly Flynn is a very capable player. He played well against New England last year. He's proven he can play. At the same time, it wasn't but a couple hours before the game that the Packers put Rodgers on the inactive list. I think some of it was Flynn playing really well and another part was the Lions thinking they couldn't possibly lose to Matt Flynn.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
A lot of it is system and talent. Yes Montana had amazing talent around him. And a very innovative system at the time. He hugely benefited from that. WZers never want to admit that because they are homers. Pre salary cap era Montana had Debartolo fielding the best roster in football year after year. Of course Montana benefited from that.

Flynn was a 7th round pick and wasn't even a full time starter on his own college team. So he was no star. He's a star in GB. Because they have great talent, a great system and great coaching....

Great system and great coaching breeds great talent. Jordy Nelson is not a 1300 yard receiver for us. There's no blue chip talents on Green Bay's offense. It's all 2nd thru 7th rounders.

If Flynn is system than so are they.

Originally posted by LAFortyNinerfan:
They did try to work out an extension. He didn't wanna resign...likely because he doesn't wanna continue being a backup. I've read green bay will probably tag and trade him since his stock has increased.

Maybe they didn't have much cap room to play the game. Otherwise, they could do what the Eagles did for Kolb: giving him a short extension (one extra year) with a hefty bonus. The new team would have to give him a new contract right away to prevent him from bolting as soon as the year is over. It worked for the Eagles and Kolb.

Originally posted by fastforward:
Maybe they didn't have much cap room to play the game. Otherwise, they could do what the Eagles did for Kolb: giving him a short extension (one extra year) with a hefty bonus. The new team would have to give him a new contract right away to prevent him from bolting as soon as the year is over. It worked for the Eagles and Kolb.

It's 2 things.

1. You keep him because you need a quality back up in the NFL. Once they get rid of him they have to start a new quarterback and it takes time to develop anyone.
2. You keep him to maxumize trade value. The better he performs the more value he's worth.

Originally posted by strat1080:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Dwight Clark was a pro bowler as well.

My whole point is Rodgers has won with out a Jerry Rice HOF talent just like Joe Montana. And If you look back Joe Montana had some all pro talent around him when he won with out Rice.

Both Montana and current day Rodgers are surgeons as far as cutting up defenses with precision accurate passing.

Rodgers has won over 10 games every year he has started except his first year starting

Yeah. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise. I don't know why some people have to pigeonhole themselves into thinking a guy can't be great while also playing in a great system. Joe Montanta played in a groundbreaking offensive system that changed the NFL. The Packers were a very banged up team last year with no running game and Jermichael Finley missed almost the entire season. Those great WRs sure didn't play very great in the Super Bowl.

Some of those TDs were total fluke plays by Flynn. The Packers didn't have a RB screen for a TD all season. Then all of a sudden Ryan Grant takes one 80 yards to the house. That Driver TD was a total busted coverage. If you ask me, I think the Lions simply overlooked Flynn. I bet they thought they just had to show up and win. Clearly Flynn is a very capable player. He played well against New England last year. He's proven he can play. At the same time, it wasn't but a couple hours before the game that the Packers put Rodgers on the inactive list. I think some of it was Flynn playing really well and another part was the Lions thinking they couldn't possibly lose to Matt Flynn.

Very nice!

Could it also be some systems create better QBs as well? Being around offensive gurus will rub off on a QB and just make the QB a better decision maker.

Let's not kid our selves, the same system Joe Montana was in, also made Young a HOF and also got Bono, Grbac some huge contracts as well.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

There is no "Jerry Rice" on this Packers team. By that I mean Hall of Fame.

That's a wonderful observation....but there is Jennings a pro bowl and top 5 wr that could eventually be a hover and Nelson and jones and driver and Finley so don't know the point you are trying to make when rodgers would never do great without his great wr core and Montana won 2 subs with Dwight Clark....wow. Last time I checked rogers is a great qb with great weapons, however when they didn't have great weapons I seem to recall an 8-8 and a 9-7 team with a good qb not a great one. Now they have better weapons = great qb......hence the whole point of this thread

There you go...

Rodgers was good from the day he started. Look at his numbers. And what weapons changed between his first year starting and his second year?

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:
There is no "Jerry Rice" on this Packers team. By that I mean Hall of Fame.

That's a wonderful observation....but there is Jennings a pro bowl and top 5 wr that could eventually be a hover and Nelson and jones and driver and Finley so don't know the point you are trying to make when rodgers would never do great without his great wr core and Montana won 2 subs with Dwight Clark....wow. Last time I checked rogers is a great qb with great weapons, however when they didn't have great weapons I seem to recall an 8-8 and a 9-7 team with a good qb not a great one. Now they have better weapons = great qb......hence the whole point of this thread

There you go...

Rodgers was good from the day he started. Look at his numbers. And what weapons changed between his first year starting and his second year?

You got to be kidding. He has enormous talent around him. Plus continuity of system, coaching staff and coordinators. And continuity of key players around him too. He has a great system too. He has a lot. He's not doing this by himself.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

There is no "Jerry Rice" on this Packers team. By that I mean Hall of Fame.

That's a wonderful observation....but there is Jennings a pro bowl and top 5 wr that could eventually be a hover and Nelson and jones and driver and Finley so don't know the point you are trying to make when rodgers would never do great without his great wr core and Montana won 2 subs with Dwight Clark....wow. Last time I checked rogers is a great qb with great weapons, however when they didn't have great weapons I seem to recall an 8-8 and a 9-7 team with a good qb not a great one. Now they have better weapons = great qb......hence the whole point of this thread

There you go...

Rodgers was good from the day he started. Look at his numbers. And what weapons changed between his first year starting and his second year?

You got to be kidding. He has enormous talent around him. Plus continuity of system, coaching staff and coordinators. And continuity of key players around him too. He has a great system too. He has a lot. He's not doing this by himself.

No s**t?! You mean there are 11 players on the field? If I recall right, there was 11 players on the field with Montana. Whatever you say about Rodgers and Flynn can easily apply to Montana, Young, Grbac, Bono.