Jaworski has Luck as Top-5 Quarterback.....

[twfish]

A better O-line will certainly help , but decisions like throwing a pick 6 (which was entirely his fault and no one else's) is where he needs to improve .

That's it, though. He should have an outstanding future.

The amount of INT he cut down from his rookie year too last year, id say hes been well on his way cutting them down. He will continue too cut them down with better WR.

[1yrdandacloudofdust]

I just assume a running gm would help Andrew, but Andrew should run more to help himself.

[MR. Blueblood]

excellent contribution to the thread

 

Not any worse than this

So would I...based on Lucks upside but in no way is Luck better then Romo now

[amfootball]

I would put Luck in top 10 not top 5 but his ceiling I think is high. He still needs to work a lot of things and I am not sure I trust his coaching in terms of his OC and Pagano seems good not great.

[sweetsurrender]

I'm not sure where you're getting the bolded from. Unless you're suggesting that all 24 of those losses were Rodgers' fault. And I don't think that's a reasonable conclusion. The example I mentioned earlier disproves it.

 

And again, you're tagging that 5-24 to the QB, even though it's a team record.

 

Last thing, just to clarify, I didn't call Rodgers #1. I said I think Rodgers current level of play plus his age makes him the most valuable commodity in the league. Doesn't necessarily mean I think he's currently the best QB in the league.

All stats are "team" in a sense in football as no one makes a play by himself. That being said, 5-24 is a huge sampling size. We would need to go through it and see how many times Rodgers had the lead only to see his D give it up. I am guessing the probability of that is about 10-20 percent of the games if that which would still leave well below .500.

[oldunclemark]

I just assume a running gm would help Andrew, but Andrew should run more to help himself.

I'd just as soon Andrew did not run more....Just occasionally..slide and get out of bounds....

...They need him all 16 games..

The comebacks against Seattle, KC last season are examples of how well the team plays with him...when they need to..

...and this has been an , injury riddled offense other than the QB...

I'm just not concerned with the interceptions....there arent that many and some and flukes

[John Dee]

Straight knowledge... 

GWD = Game Winning Drive = Keyword is winning.

 

Point made here is Rodgers didnt have many game winning drives. In otherwords, when Packers were trailing entering the 4th quarter his record is 5-24 ( I believe Jvan stated that earlier )

[John Dee]

Says a Patriot fan...
 

sighhhh

I would put Luck in top 10 not top 5 but his ceiling I think is high. He still needs to work a lot of things and I am not sure I trust his coaching in terms of his OC and Pagano seems good not great.

[amfootball]

Says a Patriot fan...

 

sighhhh

Why? What part of the post bothers you or makes you think it was Patriot biased?

[John Dee]

Just poking fun AM ..     I really do enjoy sparing with you...  

 

but you sig says it all..

Why? What part of the post bothers you or makes you think it was Patriot biased?

[ViriLudant]

Both backs helped NE win games that they had to win & the premise of my response to you was to illustrate that a good RB can be instrumental in digging a team out of any QB out of any hole.

Why are you downgrading both LeGarrette Blount & BenJarvus Green-Ellis? Because they no longer wear a Patriots uniform? Harsh VL. So, you like em when they win games in Foxboro but discard their contributions once they leave Massachusetts? Ouch man. You're brutal.

Why are you putting words in my mouth ?

Point anywhere where I said those two were great RBs.

They were average, lunch pail kind of guys.

[Gavin]

Not any worse than this

Keep glossing over Lucks own shortcomings during the first 3 quarters of many games.  Hard to gloss over that 57% career completion percentage and 55% in the playoffs and slow starts only to pull it out in the end, Saying Luck is better then Romo is debatable unless we are talking 4th quarters alone then obviously Luck is better

[amfootball]

Just poking fun AM ..     I really do enjoy sparing with you...  

 

but you sig says it all..

ha, ha. I hear you. I enjoy it too.

 

BTW, I don't have a signature anymore. I got rid of it out of respect for this forum.

[Superman]

All stats are "team" in a sense in football as no one makes a play by himself. That being said, 5-24 is a huge sampling size. We would need to go through it and see how many times Rodgers had the lead only to see his D give it up. I am guessing the probability of that is about 10-20 percent of the games if that which would still leave well below .500.

 

Meh. Wins and losses can only be had by the team. You can't have a comeback or a game winning drive if your defense can't get stops.

 

And we can guess about the nature of those 29 games, or you can actually look at those games. Either way, it doesn't change that those are not good ways to determine how a QB plays when the game is on the line.

[John Dee]

I meant avitar..   pic or whatever.. .

 

hehehe.  I'm a 3rd shifter and ...   a little high right now...

 

carry on..

ha, ha. I hear you. I enjoy it too.

 

BTW, I don't have a signature anymore. I got rid of it out of respect for this forum.

[twfish]

Keep glossing over Lucks own shortcomings during the first 3 quarters of many games. Hard to gloss over that 57% career completion percentage and 55% in the playoffs and slow starts only to pull it out in the end, Saying Luck is better then Romo is debatable unless we are talking 4th quarters alone then obviously Luck is better

The first 3 quarter's can easily be pur on the OC. With the amount pep has been forcing the run on everyone I dont see how you can blame a whole lot on him. With him having control of everything this year im sure youll see a huge difference

[sweetsurrender]

Meh. Wins and losses can only be had by the team. You can't have a comeback or a game winning drive if your defense can't get stops.

 

And we can guess about the nature of those 29 games, or you can actually look at those games. Either way, it doesn't change that those are not good ways to determine how a QB plays when the game is on the line.

I disagree. The stat is kept for a reason. You can quibble about and says it means nothing as it is a team game but you can do that with any stat. Why keep any at all? A guy like Rodgers is considered elite because of his play and his ability to cover the weaknesses of a team. Sure you can look at his defense and STs but still you expect an elite guy to be able to close out a tough game as that is what the elite guys do as a rule. I don't have time to look them all up maybe someone will but 5-24 is a very ugly stat line for him with the game on the line. And I am not saying that does not make him elite or even necessarily at fault for those games perse but it is a telling stat nonetheless.

[Superman]

I disagree. The stat is kept for a reason. You can quibble about and says it means nothing as it is a team game but you can do that with any stat. Why keep any at all? A guy like Rodgers is considered elite because of his play and his ability to cover the weaknesses of a team. Sure you can look at his defense and STs but still you expect an elite guy to be able to close out a tough game as that is what the elite guys do as a rule. I don't have time to look them all up maybe someone will but 5-24 is a very ugly stat line for him with the game on the line. And I am not saying that does not make him elite or even necessarily at fault for those games perse but it is a telling stat nonetheless.

 

No.

 

Wins and losses are a team stat. There is a clear distinction between team stats and player stats, which is why a player can have a good game, but the team still loses. This happens all the time, even for QBs. Look at Luck's stat line against the Bengals last year. That game goes as a loss when his team enters the 4th quarter trailing. Does that diminish Luck's reputation with the game on the line?

 

QBs are a huge part of their team's success. I believe it's the single most important position in team sports. Good QBs usually play for teams that have a higher win/loss record, because of how critical good QB play is. But a QB can't win games on his own. He certainly can't complete a comeback on his own.

 

I'm not saying that you can't use that 5-24 as a part of the discussion, but to draw any kind of conclusion from that stat (or even the 4QC and GWD stats) is impossible. 

 

Perhaps Rodgers isn't as good in crunch time as other guys are. I've watched a lot of Packers games, and I haven't noticed Rodgers having trouble when the game is on the line. I also haven't attempted to break down this aspect of his game, so I can't speak definitively here. (Then again, I think this aspect of the game is somewhat overrated, so...) I think Rodgers is really damn good, and the Packers record in close games doesn't really affect my opinion of the way he plays the position. 

[Shane Bond]

Keep glossing over Lucks own shortcomings during the first 3 quarters of many games.  Hard to gloss over that 57% career completion percentage and 55% in the playoffs and slow starts only to pull it out in the end, Saying Luck is better then Romo is debatable unless we are talking 4th quarters alone then obviously Luck is better

 

Intangibles and the will to win. Separates him from Romo by miles.

 

Took the team to playoffs both his years in NFL. His playoffs win is tied to Romo and how many years have Romo played?.

 

Watch this year.

[jvan1973]

Both backs helped NE win games that they had to win & the premise of my response to you was to illustrate that a good RB can be instrumental in digging a team out of any QB out of any hole.

Why are you downgrading both LeGarrette Blount & BenJarvus Green-Ellis? Because they no longer wear a Patriots uniform? Harsh VL. So, you like em when they win games in Foxboro but discard their contributions once they leave Massachusetts? Ouch man. You're brutal.

When a team is behind they pass more, especially in the fourth quarter.

[sweetsurrender]

No.

 

Wins and losses are a team stat. There is a clear distinction between team stats and player stats, which is why a player can have a good game, but the team still loses. This happens all the time, even for QBs. Look at Luck's stat line against the Bengals last year. That game goes as a loss when his team enters the 4th quarter trailing. Does that diminish Luck's reputation with the game on the line?

 

QBs are a huge part of their team's success. I believe it's the single most important position in team sports. Good QBs usually play for teams that have a higher win/loss record, because of how critical good QB play is. But a QB can't win games on his own. He certainly can't complete a comeback on his own.

 

I'm not saying that you can't use that 5-24 as a part of the discussion, but to draw any kind of conclusion from that stat (or even the 4QC and GWD stats) is impossible. 

 

Perhaps Rodgers isn't as good in crunch time as other guys are. I've watched a lot of Packers games, and I haven't noticed Rodgers having trouble when the game is on the line. I also haven't attempted to break down this aspect of his game, so I can't speak definitively here. (Then again, I think this aspect of the game is somewhat overrated, so...) I think Rodgers is really damn good, and the Packers record in close games doesn't really affect my opinion of the way he plays the position. 

To the bolded, that is all I am saying. It is part of the discussion. I said it does not mean that he is not elite or a great QB. He is. But that stat is pretty awful and that is all I was acknowledging. All stats have team implications. And this one is not a win/loss stat perse as much as his performance when the game is on the line to be able to deliver the win. 

 

I don't think he is as good in crunch time as the other elite guys- Brady, Manning, Brees and even Luck at this point. I have watched a lot of his games and he reminds me of Steve Young who was a great front-runner but not great when he got behind. Yet Young is in the HoF so like I said I don't see it as the be all, end all stat just part of the picture like you said.

[Superman]

To the bolded, that is all I am saying. It is part of the discussion. I said it does not mean that he is not elite or a great QB. He is. But that stat is pretty awful and that is all I was acknowledging. All stats have team implications. And this one is not a win/loss stat perse as much as his performance when the game is on the line to be able to deliver the win. 

 

I don't think he is as good in crunch time as the other elite guys- Brady, Manning, Brees and even Luck at this point. I have watched a lot of his games and he reminds me of Steve Young who was a great front-runner but not great when he got behind. Yet Young is in the HoF so like I said I don't see it as the be all, end all stat just part of the picture like you said.

 

That's all my point is. I may have come across as if I believe that stat is entirely useless. That's not the case.

 

All I'm saying is that I don't believe you can say "the Packers are 5-24 in games where they were trailing entering the 4th quarter, and Rodgers only has this many 4QC and GWDs, so that means Rodgers isn't clutch." I don't believe it's possible to draw any conclusions from that set of stats, as they don't speak to Rodgers' play in those situations. They only speak to the end result, which is heavily influenced by the QB, but not entirely determined by the QB. That's how I see it.

 

And yes, I still think Rodgers is an elite QB (one of only four, right now). 

[sweetsurrender]

That's all my point is. I may have come across as if I believe that stat is entirely useless. That's not the case.

 

All I'm saying is that I don't believe you can say "the Packers are 5-24 in games where they were trailing entering the 4th quarter, and Rodgers only has this many 4QC and GWDs, so that means Rodgers isn't clutch." I don't believe it's possible to draw any conclusions from that set of stats, as they don't speak to Rodgers' play in those situations. They only speak to the end result, which is heavily influenced by the QB, but not entirely determined by the QB. That's how I see it.

 

And yes, I still think Rodgers is an elite QB (one of only four, right now). 

Yeah without breaking down all 29 games it is tough to judge. His 5 wins could also be the result of the defense bailing him out. At some point, I will try to look at them and get back to you. But regardless, it does not mean he is still not elite. This area just may not be a strength for him.

[Superman]

Yeah without breaking down all 29 games it is tough to judge. His 5 wins could also be the result of the defense bailing him out. At some point, I will try to look at them and get back to you. But regardless, it does not mean he is still not elite. This area just may not be a strength for him.

 

Just based on my memory, without exhaustive observation and research, I don't think Rodgers struggles in crunch time. If I got that impression, I wouldn't really be pushing back against this classification that some are putting on him. It's only because I've watched his play and have a firm impression of him. And I could be wrong.

 

But if someone showed me the Cowboys' record with Romo in close games, I'd have no problem with that. So it's obviously influenced by my own observations, which are certainly not above reproach.

 

Another thing, when you watch some of Manning's comebacks, he gets a lot of magic. Rosencopter, 4th and 2, the close kicks in Tampa, etc. Luck has had a lot of magic in his two years, like Brown's fumble against the Chiefs (then Alex Smith overthrowing a wide open receiver on the next possession), etc. I could go on. All of this lends to a growing legend for these players, but they don't deserve all the credit for them, and they don't speak to the players' ability to play QB with the game on the line (matter of fact, no one ever mentions Luck's late pick in the Chiefs game). 

 

IMO, it's just way too nuanced to be reduced to the stats being used here.

[NewColtsFan]

Just based on my memory, without exhaustive observation and research, I don't think Rodgers struggles in crunch time. If I got that impression, I wouldn't really be pushing back against this classification that some are putting on him. It's only because I've watched his play and have a firm impression of him. And I could be wrong.

 

But if someone showed me the Cowboys' record with Romo in close games, I'd have no problem with that. So it's obviously influenced by my own observations, which are certainly not above reproach.

 

Another thing, when you watch some of Manning's comebacks, he gets a lot of magic. Rosencopter, 4th and 2, the close kicks in Tampa, etc. Luck has had a lot of magic in his two years, like Brown's fumble against the Chiefs (then Alex Smith overthrowing a wide open receiver on the next possession), etc. I could go on. All of this lends to a growing legend for these players, but they don't deserve all the credit for them, and they don't speak to the players' ability to play QB with the game on the line (matter of fact, no one ever mentions Luck's late pick in the Chiefs game). 

 

IMO, it's just way too nuanced to be reduced to the stats being used here.

 

I'm already out of "likes" otherwise, I would've given you one here....

 

A very good and very comprehensive post.    I like the way you examine the issues from all sides, and not just the point of view you're trying to advance.     Wish more posters would do this.....

 

Well said......   

[sweetsurrender]

Just based on my memory, without exhaustive observation and research, I don't think Rodgers struggles in crunch time. If I got that impression, I wouldn't really be pushing back against this classification that some are putting on him. It's only because I've watched his play and have a firm impression of him. And I could be wrong.

 

But if someone showed me the Cowboys' record with Romo in close games, I'd have no problem with that. So it's obviously influenced by my own observations, which are certainly not above reproach.

 

Another thing, when you watch some of Manning's comebacks, he gets a lot of magic. Rosencopter, 4th and 2, the close kicks in Tampa, etc. Luck has had a lot of magic in his two years, like Brown's fumble against the Chiefs (then Alex Smith overthrowing a wide open receiver on the next possession), etc. I could go on. All of this lends to a growing legend for these players, but they don't deserve all the credit for them, and they don't speak to the players' ability to play QB with the game on the line (matter of fact, no one ever mentions Luck's late pick in the Chiefs game). 

 

IMO, it's just way too nuanced to be reduced to the stats being used here.

Manning is the current leader in comebacks and GW drives so even with the magic the guy is the best. Brady is second.And Luck is the leader among the young guys. I do think it can be subjective and some call it the IT factor and so forth. But it is a measurable stat even if it is not completely comprehensive which no stat is anyways.

 

I would not call Rodgers unlucky but for sure in some cases good fortune plays in but more often than the elite guys deliver on their own.

 

Romo is a great example as most think he is very un-clutch because he has had many big games where he has not delivered at the end yet he has more than 30 comebacks and GWDs. He actually delivers way more than not but the perception is there. What is interesting about Rodgers is most just assume his stat is fine in this area because he wins so much and has great stats but like I said he is a great front runner. Not so great at coming from behind. 

[BOTT]

Keep glossing over Lucks own shortcomings during the first 3 quarters of many games.  Hard to gloss over that 57% career completion percentage and 55% in the playoffs and slow starts only to pull it out in the end, Saying Luck is better then Romo is debatable unless we are talking 4th quarters alone then obviously Luck is better

Don't worry, we know you will be here sounding like a broken record

[Gavin]

Don't worry, we know you will be here sounding like a broken record

Im not even sure about what your talkin about

[Track Guy]

Listen here 2:25 - 4:10:

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=9785758

[MR. Blueblood]

Keep glossing over Lucks own shortcomings during the first 3 quarters of many games.  Hard to gloss over that 57% career completion percentage and 55% in the playoffs and slow starts only to pull it out in the end, Saying Luck is better then Romo is debatable unless we are talking 4th quarters alone then obviously Luck is better

One player gets jokes made because he has a flip phone, the other player gets jokes made because he consistently can't get his team over the hump.

 

One player is on his way to becoming a superstar in this league, the other player is a middle of the road QB who only still has his job because Jerry Jones is too stubborn to admit he's wrong about his QB.

 

I'm not glossing over anything about Luck, maybe you're looking a little too highly upon Romo.....but then again you're never wrong are you?

[Jules]

I don't really have an issues with him at 5 since I think it's also a ranking that reflects what Jaws THINKS will happen down the road.....that Luck will crack the top 5 for good and maybe higher. Of course it has not maybe happened yet but at the same time all rankings and stuff can be up for debate and up to the personal individual doing it.

 

Besides, I can't really think of anyone who I would take as #5 after the automatic 4 right now anyway.....Rivers, Romo, Eli, Ben, Ryan etc. show massive amounts of inconsistency at times on a week to week basis.

 

Some may even argue Wilson over Luck too and for me I don't even mind, both these young guys have bright futures ahead.

[Gavin]

One player gets jokes made because he has a flip phone, the other player gets jokes made because he consistently can't get his team over the hump.

 

One player is on his way to becoming a superstar in this league, the other player is a middle of the road QB who only still has his job because Jerry Jones is too stubborn to admit he's wrong about his QB.

 

I'm not glossing over anything about Luck, maybe you're looking a little too highly upon Romo.....but then again you're never wrong are you?

 Peyton Manning himself only won 3 of his first 9 playoff games and only 2 of his first 5 and also while producing only 2 more td's in his first 4 playoff games...Luck also has not gotten his team over that hump either yet, He has 1 win in his first 3 playoff games

[Shane Bond]

Peyton Manning himself only won 3 of his first 9 playoff games and only 2 of his first 5 and also while producing only 2 more td's in his first 4 playoff games...Luck also has not gotten his team over that hump either yet, He has 1 win in his first 3 playoff games

Thought you were comparing Luck to Romo not Manning.

No one said he is better than Manning.

[Gavin]

Thought you were comparing Luck to Romo not Manning.

No one said he is better than Manning.

you missed my point apparently, Good-great Qb's will sometimes struggle getting over that bump in the playoffs,

[Shane Bond]

you missed my point apparently, Good-great Qb's will sometimes struggle getting over that bump in the playoffs,

Are you saying Romo is that good great QB?.

[Gavin]

Are you saying Romo is that good great QB?.

He is a good QB but no I don't think he is good enough given the situation he has to deal with in Dallas...That being an all offense...no defense team, I mean it took the Colts defense to finally show up in the playoffs in 2006 to get over that so called hump, Tony's problem is he tries to much to make up consistently for his teams shortcomings (again no defense) and eventually he just made 1 bad throw (Like Manning has done his fair share late) and it cost the team...The Broncos game was a prime example last year, Romo was playing fantastic (Had been all year long minus 4 games where he had under 60% completion percentage though he still threw 8 td's to 3 ints in those games)....and Romos defense was......well.... no where in sight ...Romo still managed to outdual Manning by the numbers (Manning also had an int that game)

[southwest1]

Why are you putting words in my mouth ?

Point anywhere where I said those two were great RBs.

They were average, lunch pail kind of guys.

 

VL, I didn't put any words into your mouth. Both RBs helped your squad win games NE had to. Just because RB Donald Brown is now playing for San Diego does that mean I slam him & his contributions made in INDY? No, he played great for us this last season. Okay, to be fair, I never liked his breakaway speed or that he fell down so much at the 1st sign of contact, but Brown helped us win games we desperately needed especially with Trent Richardson under performing. My point is this: I don't discount a guy or his legacy on our franchise simply because he now has a new zip code VL. 

Huh? Both of those RBs from NE were average at best. Blount had 2 great games which skew his stats.

Where in that statement am I supposed to ascertain you thought Blount was just a " lunch pail kind of guy[s.]?" Stats don't mean a darn thing to me VL. Did Blount help you down the post season stretch? Absolutely. Don't get upset at me simply because you failed to accurately articulate your original position. I like you VL, but further clarification on your part was needed & might have been beneficial to me there. JMO. 

 

When a team is behind they pass more, especially in the fourth quarter.

Tell that to Rex Ryan in NY Jvan. LOL! His family NFL DNA is all about ground & pound.

[Gavin]

VL, I didn't put any words into your mouth. Both RBs helped your squad win games NE had to. Just because RB Donald Brown is now playing for San Diego does that mean I slam him & his contributions made in INDY? No, he played great for us this last season. Okay, to be fair, I never liked his breakaway speed or that he fell down so much at the 1st sign of contact, but Brown helped us win games we desperately needed especially with Trent Richardson under performing. My point is this: I don't discount a guy or his legacy on our franchise simply because he now has a new zip code VL. 

Where in that statement am I supposed to ascertain you thought Blount was just a " lunch pail kind of guy[s.]? Stats don't mean a darn thing to me VL. Did Blount help you down the post season stretch? Absolutely. 

 

Tell that to Rex Ryan in NY Jvan. LOL! His family NFL DNA is all about ground & pound.

Rex don't have a choice, He don't have a QB...yes Im including Michael Vick in that statement

[Shane Bond]

He is a good QB but no I don't think he is good enough given the situation he has to deal with in Dallas...That being an all offense...no defense team, I mean it took the Colts defense to finally show up in the playoffs in 2006 to get over that so called hump, Tony's problem is he tries to much to make up consistently for his teams shortcomings (again no defense) and eventually he just made 1 bad throw (Like Manning has done his fair share late) and it cost the team...The Broncos game was a prime example last year, Romo was playing fantastic (Had been all year long minus 4 games where he had under 60% completion percentage though he still threw 8 td's to 3 ints in those games)....and Romos defense was......well.... no where in sight ...Romo still managed to outdual Manning by the numbers (Manning also had an int that game)

Even if all you are saying is true, if he wants to considered elite, he is supposed to cover up the deficiencies to an extent. I mean 1 playoffs win over 10 years just doesn't look good.

Do you think we put any QB with cowboys the result be the same?.

[southwest1]

Rex don't have a choice, He don't have a QB...yes Im including Michael Vick in that statement

Rex can't help himself. He'd pound the rock no matter what. Why do you think Rex Ryan signed backs like LaDainian Tomlinson & Chris Johnson? Because he's an infantry HC vs an ariel attack HC since his Big Apple hire in 2009. That's who Rex is at his core.

 

You could put Joe Montana, Steve Young, Dan Marino, or Jim Kelly all in their prime as Jets QBs & Ryan would still be a slave to the run. 

 

I don't know if Vick is protected on the line, throws away the ball, & avoids unnecessary hits they might make it to the post season. Geno Smith sucks; I'd ride with Vick & my career over the interception prone Smith any day Gavin. I will admit Michael has been injury laden though.