Aaron has peaked, sad for me to say,
Alex smith was leading stats and got pulled for is guy, you can see why,
Kaepernick is the future and it is now.

This happened to Farve too.

Originally Posted by: Cal2GreenBay 

Favre's only 100+ QB rating season was 2009 with the vikes. With the Packers, he had 5 years in the 70s and 5 years with 20+ INTs. In his best year, he threw 39 TDs and 13 INTs (1996). In his worst year, he threw 24 picks with only 19 TDs.

Rodgers has had one sub-100 season (his first year, 93.8) and in his worst year, threw 13 picks with 28 TDs. In his best year (last year), he threw for 45 TDs and 6 INTs.

This year, he "dropped off" to 39 TDs and 8 INTs, a QB rating of 108, 4295 yards and a 67.2 completion percentage behind a swiss cheese offensive line.

I have absolutely no idea how anybody that's watched football for more than 5 years could start talking about Aaron "peaking", and then start talking about how Alex smith was pulled for someone better and then bring up Favre. I don't know if it was your intention to criticize Rodgers but it sounded that way and out of everybody on this team, I think there's probably only 3 people you could criticize less (Cobb, Jones, Matthews). And I don't think you realize just how incredibly blessed we are.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 

Let me rephrase since people seem to let their sensitivities overrule what was said.

This was absolutely NOT a criticism on Rodgers. He is the best he can be. He is AT his peak and is as good as a traditional QB can get. He was the primary reason the packers were even competing in that game. THAT is what I said and nothing else.

what I was explaining, was that in the midst of being blessed with having the best traditional QB in the league, we are also witnessing an evolution of the QB position right before our eyes.

Kaepernick, RG3 and Wilson are ushering in a new QB style that has no answer at this point. This is NOT the wildcat and its NOT a fad. It's not going away and traditionalist are not going to like it. All of the NFL alum and analysts all say so as well.

Teams are going to have to change with the times or get left behind. To compete with the new type of QB, teams need super althletic defenses to catch them. Only the niners and Seahawks presently have that.

What I said was, as good as Aaron is, he will need more dynamic players around him to compete with teams like Seatttle and San Francisco. Aaron's not going to run any faster and transform into a running QB, and Green Bay deosnt need him to be. But he does need help.

The landscape of the NFL has changed in 2 seasons since the Super Bowl. We have to evolve with it.
Be a traditionalist, and we will be one and out of the playoffs for a long time and not sniff the Super Bowl.
That's where we are all disagreeing,

Time will tell.

Originally Posted by: Cal2GreenBay 

Ah, I get you now. Personally, I think after a couple years defenses WILL adapt to this style of offense. Whether we can win it all in the interim or not depends more on our defense than offense, IMO. If a large portion of the league changed their offenses to closer resemble the niners and redskins, wouldn't it be BENEFITIAL to have something different, so that defenses aren't practicing against similar style offenses every week during games?

Anyhow, time will tell indeed. I'd be full of myself and lying if I said that I thought I had any better idea than you how things will turn out in the next half decade or so.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 

Defenses always adjust to everything (well, at least the good ones). That's how the NFL works. Someone comes up with a new scheme, and teams work to try to find a way to solve it. It may take awhile, or it may not, that really just depends on coaching, schemes, and as always and most importantly, talent. The read option probably will be around in some form for the long-term, probably just like most teams run some variation of West Coast, etc. The main question is, how effective it will be in the long run. Guys like RG3, Russell Wilson, and even Colin Kap are very rare, and even those guys need many pieces around them to make it work. For every one RG3, there will be 20 Joe Webb's. Of course it's incredibly hard to stop a truly gifted athlete on an elite team that is very well coached. That will always be the case, regardless of the specific schemes used to run the plays. It's all an equilibrium in the NFL, as in nature. Less talented and poorer coached teams will usually lose to the better talented and coached team. One of the most talented 'new-aged' QB's in Cam Newton has yet to have a winning season, despite being more talented than Colin Kap. or Russell Wilson. The biggest difference between those teams is defense and coaching, imo.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 

Cam is NOT more talented than Russell Wilson, Kapernick, or RG3. There is a reason I left him out of this conversation for dynamic quarterbacks.

Newton is NOT a cerebral quarterback. He is a bigger stronger, slightly slower Michael Vick.
He runs a very simplistic offense in Carolina, and it's the only one he is able to comprehend.
The reason they don't win is because that offense doesn't work in the NFL. He puts up big numbers mainly after the team has lost the game or they are in a losing season and other teams have dialed it down when they play them.

Carolina is a mess and Newton has plateaued. He can't even "peak" because he doesn't really improve.

The three I mentioned are all winning. They all can process information and read defenses and exploit weaknesses., Kapernick outplayed Rodgers, AND Brady. Keep that in mind.

I would argue that Kaepernick is the most talented, not Newton.

Defenses figure things out yes. The point we should focus on is that really physical teams have figured out the packers. The giants and 49ers will probably not lose to the packers in the near future. I would argue the same will go for Seattle. To beat the top tier teams, Green Bay will need to complement Aaron's greatness with some elite athletes, That needs to happen way before defenses figure out how to stop the read option.

Originally Posted by: Cal2GreenBay 

I agree that Cam Newton isn't as intelligent as Russell Wilson. He is, however, more athletic, unquestionably. Bigger, stronger, as fast or faster. As Tom Brady has shown and continues to do so, the mental aspect of the game often matters most. But there is no denying that the other pieces around Newton can't even be compared to that of Seattle of the 49'ers. The Panthers defense is pathetic. They have some pieces on offense, but they pay three very talented RBs a ton of money and hardly use them. The coaching has been fairly pathetic, as well. As Pack93z always says, it's important to not over inflate the QB position. There is so many other factors that go into it, and that is especially the case with the 49'ers and Seahawks. As good as the QBs on those two teams have played, the rest of the team has played as good or better.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy into the direct "Colin Kaepernick outplayed so-and-so" cliches. On a team like the 49'ers, that's just so bogus, and insulting to the rest of the team. I can almost guarantee Rodgers would play much better against the Packers defense rather than the 49'ers, as well, especially with their offensive line. QB's don't play each other, they play opposing defenses.

Kaepernick may be overall more talented than Newton, but how successful would he be on the Carolina Panthers roster and with their coaches? Jim Harbaugh always seems to get the most out of his QBs. Again, there are so many variables it's just not a comparison I buy into. Is he playing much better in one half of a season and one playoff game? Yes. Cam Newton actually played very well his rookie year too, but just like Aaron Rodgers in 2009, his defense often let him down. One cannot deny some of the amazing games Cam played his rookie year in which he did more than his share to win, but still came up with a loss. With that being said, I live in North Carolina and almost everyone was sure that Cam Newton was the next elite QB. I maintained my skepticism because I needed to see more than a full season of solid play from him to be a believer. The same applies to any other young QB as well. Although the defenses of Seattle and San Fran. would keep many QBs competitive, to be fair. I have no doubt Cam Newton would be very successful as the QB of the 49'ers.

Additionally, I just feel like some are putting too much emphasis in a handful of games by Kaepernick. I 'do science' for a living, so I simply have to have a substantial data set to make definitive statements. I believe he is playing like a really good QB on an even better team. Beyond that, I'm just not comfortable saying anything else at this point, as it's only conjecture beyond that. It's fine to do so, I suppose, it's just I and many others will need to see more. But unquestionably, the 49'ers will be competitive with either Kaepernick or Alex Smith at QB. Alex Smith was one of the highest rated QBs in the league for the first part of the season. They are running a great system in San Francisco, from top to bottom. It's impressive, and goes far beyond the QB, imo.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 

Harbuagh switched to Kaepernick because he knew that smith could only take the team so far with his limitations. Yes, they won with Smith, but like you said, he has a better situation than Newton. You cannot directly compare QBs because of all the factors, but as some point you have to consider them as a direct factor in their success, not just their team. Brett Farve would've struggled on a bad team as well. But that doesn't mean that the converse is guaranteed. I don't believe newton would be as successful as Kaepernick if he was on the 49ers.

Originally Posted by: Cal2GreenBay