Aaron Rodgers > Bart Starr· Page 5

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

It's dense comments like this that make it hard to hold a good debate. Look, everyone knows that while playing you cannot be in the hall of fame. The point being made was look back at how many are in the hall of fame that he played with. Do that. Count them up.

I can't believe how some folks fail to be objective about this. It's not a slight on Bart Starr, he was magnificent, but he played on a dominant team. Aaron Rodgers is the better quarterback. This dumb comment about Starr had more rings ... you're saying that Rodgers is equally good as Jeff Hostetler or isn't even as good as Terry Bradshaw. Give me a break people! Show your objectivity!

Bring something to the discussion other than your bias! No room for bias here, this isn't Barry Sanders we're talkin 'bout!!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

We have no way of knowing how many current Packers will end up in the Hall.

First of all, there were half as many teams back then.

Second of all, we cannot predict the future. Therefore we cannot say Starr played with more future HoFers than Arodge.

Fact is, Starr willed his team to victory. 5 Championships. Threepeat. he made those around him great. When Arodge stops padding his own stats and starts willing the team to victory, I'll reconsider my position.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

Wade
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#42

By the time he retires, Rodgers may have demonstrated that he was better.

But, and this is our codger's main point, he simply hasn't shown it yet. The teams he has led have one championship and two embarrassing first round losses.

Starr showed it. 5 times. 3 in a row.

When Rodgers has more rings than he has first round losses, then we can start talking about him passing Starr on the list of greats.

But not until then.

IMO

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

#43

The tired "padding stats" comment that has no support and again the five rings to one ring. *yawn*

It's quite amusing how the legend of Bart Starr has clouded some of our objectivity.

Still, no one has proven that Aaron Rodgers > Bart Starr being false. And that's because it's unfair to those who try. You simply can't prove Starr > Rodgers because it's not true.

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#44

David Whitehurst was better than any of them!!!!

He just didn't have the players round him to prove it!!!

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

#45

David Whitehurst was better than any of them!!!!

He just didn't have the players round him to prove it!!!

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan

Joey Harrington feels his pain.

yooperfan
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#46

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I'm guessing you are too young to have seen the Packers play during the Bart Starr years and you are just looking at stats and I'm not a stat guy but I saw every game during the glory years.
I've seen every game that Rodgers has played for the Packers and there is no doubt in my mind that Starr was a better QB during his career than Rodgers has been thus far.[boxing]

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

#47

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

It is amazing that the immediacy of Rodgers playing clouds the minds of today's youth. They fail to consider just how much the league has changed it's approach to the game which is mainly due to the extreme change in the rules.

You keep looking and talking about how many times Rodgers throws the ball and how many yards he has accumulated. I on the other hand point out that passing is only one aspect of the duties of a qb. If we are going to speak about a QB in the NFL let's talk about the whole man not a portion. You also love to look at what Aaron did for the last few years and project those same statistics out for another 10 years. you can't do that. Well obviously you can but it is wrong to assume he will do the same. he could have a career ending injury and the first preseason play and he will not accumulate any more.

By and large everyone who supports Starr has said Rodgers has done a better job at this point in his career of throwing the football. Rodgers has not done a better job with his career as a whole and total package. One day he may get the recognition you so desire but not today.

As for me, my perception of Starr is not clouded. I think Favre is a better QB than he is even with one 1 championship. I think Starr if he played on a lesser team with lesser talent might not be in the Hall. But then he, with his excellent leadership to use your term may have made that mythical team better and won multiple championships with them too.

The first step to this whole discussion is for you to admit that while Rodgers passing stats are greater it is immensely to accumulate passing yards today.

DakotaT
Select Member

11 years ago

#48

Let's put a twist to this dilemma - if you had a choice between Starr, Favre, and Rodgers to begin a franchise with in any era of football you choose - which quarterback would you take. I'll take Rodgers and not even think twice about it.

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

#49

Originally Posted by: DakotaT

the era does matter. If it is the 30's though 60's Starr would be the better choice. if it is the 2010's Favre or Rodgers would be better choices.

dfosterf
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#50

I don't care what the criteria is. I love Bart Starr. I thought he was WAY under-rated at the time. The man seemed genius to me.

Bart Starr could not possibly be in the same conversation with Aaron Rodgers. I was just as passionate about these matters then as I am now.

Eye test and memory. Bart was better than anyone gives him credit for being now, but that isn't good enough in this comparison...

Aaron Rodgers is S I C K good. No one I have ever seen does the things that man does with a football with the circumstances he is presented with.

No One. Ever. Not in my lifetime. I keep telling you, we are living off the gravy he provides us, and so many are too young to know, and the ones that are old enough can't let go of their loyalties and distorted memories.

I AM SOMETIMES EMBARRASSED at how my team has failed to capititalize on this extraordinary talent we have. It is why I RANT, at times...

I AM CURSED WITH PERSPECTIVE! What a BITCH! lol

Favre isn't in the conversation, for me. The man was un-wise with the football too many times when it mattered a lot, and his skill-set was also below Rodgers in actually throwing the damn thing, by quite a bit, actually.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (1h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (1h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (1h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (1h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (1h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (1h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (1h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (1h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (2h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (2h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (2h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (3h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (3h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (3h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (3h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (4h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (4h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (4h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (5h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (5h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (5h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (6h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (6h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (7h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (7h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (7h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (7h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (7h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (7h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (7h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (7h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (7h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (7h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (7h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (7h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (7h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (7h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (8h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (8h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (8h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (8h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (8h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (8h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (8h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (8h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (8h) : Packers will get in

beast (8h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS