reply to post by chissler
Yeah, he played. His shoulder was fine for a little bit, but then it started to bother him. He stayed in there the whole game, but on some throws he
was off. One example is a 30 yard or so pass that he threw to Jennings, who was WIDE open down field, that came up short and incomplete.
The Packers trailed most of the game, and only tied once. Never led. Early in the 4th, they tied it at 17. The Falcons went down and kicked a field
goal on their next possession to make it 20-17.
On the Packers next possession, Rodgers tried to force the pass in to coverage and got it intercepted with about 5 minutes left. The Falcons turned
that in to a touchdown to make it 27-17, and although the Packers did go down and score again, they didn't get the onside kick. That was it,
The shoulder made a difference. Under throwing Jennings on what was a definite touchdown, and throwing a pretty bad pass that got intercepted were the
two big signs that his shoulder wasn't right.
This game wasn't all Rodgers' fault. The defense could not stop anyone at all. The Falcons did what ever they wanted, outside of a few drives here
and there where the defense decided to show up.
As I said earlier, I can't help but compare him and Favre. Favre fights through the injuries. Favre finds a way to complete the tough passes. Favre
finds a way to get his team going and finds a way to win.
Rodgers can't do that. Hopefully at some point in his career he will be able to, but right now, if he throws an interception or gets sacked, he's
rattled for a little bit. Or in the case of the Tampa Bay game, the whole game.
That doesn't happen with Favre. Nothing phases him. He accepts his mistakes, he accepts the mistakes of the players around him, and he goes out there
the next play and gives 110%.
It's inevitable that comparisons between the two will be drawn. Maybe that's unfair to Rodgers, but he was the guy chosen over Favre even when Favre
wanted to play.
If Rodgers had simply replaced a retired Brett Favre, then I would say it was a little more unfair. But Rodgers was chosen by the Packers over an
UNretired Brett Favre. That says to me that the Packers felt Rodgers was more right for this team and better suited for this team right now than Favre
So you know what, if that's the case, then prove it. To this point, I haven't seen the proof. This is what I see:
Brett Favre: 935 yards, 12 TDs, 4 INTs, 110.8 QB Rating, 2-2
Aaron Rodgers: 1,274 yards, 9 TDs, 4 INTs, 95.5 QB Rating, 2-3
Not a big difference, right? Yeah, well, Favre is in a new offense with new players who he didn't have the opportunity to form chemistry with, and
he's still doing better. That says all I need to know about who the better quarterback is.
[edit on 10/5/08 by NovusOrdoMundi]