nerdmann
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: dfosterf 



Bart Starr, based on intangibles.

When it comes to tangibles, Aaron is in the conversation.
“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.”
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



If you had 1/10 the insight on stuff other than football ...... I guess you'd be agreeing with me hahahaha.

I will NEVER say anything negative about Bart Starr - or for that matter Brett Favre when it comes to football either. However, NOBODY in my lifetime anyway - which goes back before the Starr era - has ever dominated the game as much as Aaron Rodgers. Brady a little bit, P. Manning came the closest, but nobody like Rodgers.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

If you had 1/10 the insight on stuff other than football ...... I guess you'd be agreeing with me hahahaha.

I will NEVER say anything negative about Bart Starr - or for that matter Brett Favre when it comes to football either. However, NOBODY in my lifetime anyway - which goes back before the Starr era - has ever dominated the game as much as Aaron Rodgers. Brady a little bit, P. Manning came the closest, but nobody like Rodgers.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Aaron Rodgers being better than Bart Starr at quarterback is most certainly not saying anything bad about Bart Starr. Not a chance.
UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago
Bart Starr was more comparable to the kid who came along decades later to lead his team to multiple Super Bowls. Aaron Rodgers' hero growing up: Joe Montana.

Both were supreme game managers and team leaders. Rodgers, as good as he is, has some proving left to do on those levels.

It always ultimately comes down to Championships, plural.

Trent Dilfer could get one. Was he as good or better than Rodgers? Of course not. Roethlesberger? No, but he has more SB wins. Bradshaw? No. But he has more Championships too. So does Eli Manning.

As much as you might hate the SBs entering into the discussion, it always winds up being the ultimate measuring stick for QB supremacy, and it really points to the larger aspects of "team" in terms of success, and who can best manage their team to realizing multiple Championships.

Not many mentions of Warren Moon or Dan Marino in this discussion.

Is Rodgers a better QB than Starr, or just a better passer?
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago
The comparison if you want to bring Montana into it, would be Montana to Steve Young - Montana being fairly similar to Starr and Young something like Rodgers. Montana was greater but Young was better - does that make sense? Anyway, it is not as somebody said above, youth being blinded by the fact that Rodgers is more recent. I was blessed to be a Packer fan when Starr was the QB. He was great; The team was super, but never find the different styles, different eras, different quality around them, Starr simply did not stand out individually like Rodgers does. Nobody in all the years I have been a fan has been as clearly better than anybody else in his time as Rodgers. He ain't the greatest yet - that would still be Favre, but he is on track to get there.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

The comparison if you want to bring Montana into it, would be Montana to Steve Young - Montana being fairly similar to Starr and Young something like Rodgers. Montana was greater but Young was better - does that make sense? Anyway, it is not as somebody said above, youth being blinded by the fact that Rodgers is more recent. I was blessed to be a Packer fan when Starr was the QB. He was great; The team was super, but never find the different styles, different eras, different quality around them, Starr simply did not stand out individually like Rodgers does. Nobody in all the years I have been a fan has been as clearly better than anybody else in his time as Rodgers. He ain't the greatest yet - that would still be Favre, but he is on track to get there.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



I was the one who made reference to youth. I was taunting Kevin. That was because he was taunting those who were defending Starr.

I take objection to a bias comparison that only favors one player.
The NFL rules are different in the 60's. Kevin never once agreed to the concept that Rodgers has flourished in the much more lenient passing rules of this day. He never accepted the fact that Starr's passing statistics are tainted because of how the defense was allowed to play in his day.
He, for the most part, ignored the fact that a QB is more than an arm. While he says Starr is an excellent leader, he then comes right back to Rodgers credentials and one who throws the ball as being the defining measure of what a QB is.
When one points out that Starr has the ultimate measure of success- championships. He dismisses that as being due to the players around Starr. He never once considers the fact that if Rodgers wins 5 SB that he will not be the only player from this team that ends up in the Hall.

He wants every indicator to point toward Rodgers. If they don't, then those indicators are not relevant.
UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago

Aaron Rodgers being better than Bart Starr at quarterback is most certainly not saying anything bad about Bart Starr. Not a chance.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I've got something bad to say about Starr. Long time ago, I was a kid in the stands at County Stadium for a game coached by Dan Devine. Bart Starr was just down the aisle. I walked over to Bart with my program, and asked him for his autograph. He had an usher take me away.

I'll never forget it, that fuckin' guy... 😆 😆 😆
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

I was the one who made reference to youth. I was taunting Kevin. That was because he was taunting those who were defending Starr.

I take objection to a bias comparison that only favors one player.
The NFL rules are different in the 60's. Kevin never once agreed to the concept that Rodgers has flourished in the much more lenient passing rules of this day. He never accepted the fact that Starr's passing statistics are tainted because of how the defense was allowed to play in his day.
He, for the most part, ignored the fact that a QB is more than an arm. While he says Starr is an excellent leader, he then comes right back to Rodgers credentials and one who throws the ball as being the defining measure of what a QB is.
When one points out that Starr has the ultimate measure of success- championships. He dismisses that as being due to the players around Starr. He never once considers the fact that if Rodgers wins 5 SB that he will not be the only player from this team that ends up in the Hall.

He wants every indicator to point toward Rodgers. If they don't, then those indicators are not relevant.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Read my comments again young man. Read them again, for the first time. [wasntme]
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

Read my comments again young man. Read them again, for the first time. [wasntme]

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I read them yesterday.
Show me where you allow for the differences in passing rules?
Show me where you agree that 🇦🇷 has more favorable passing yards and Starr less favorable ones.
Show me where you say the value of a qb is more than his passing prowess.


UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

I read them yesterday.
Show me where you allow for the differences in passing rules?
Show me where you agree that 🇦🇷 has more favorable passing yards and Starr less favorable ones.
Show me where you say the value of a qb is more than his passing prowess.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Show me where I said Aaron Rodgers was a better leader than Bart Starr. You can't, but yet you beat that drum anyway. 😳

I respect that you probably encapsulate passer, leader, field general, etc all into quarterback.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (20m) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (21m) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (35m) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (37m) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (38m) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (38m) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (39m) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (43m) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (43m) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (43m) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (44m) : 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 (45m) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (48m) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (52m) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (53m) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (54m) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (1h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (1h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (1h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (1h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (1h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (1h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (1h) : Packers will get in
beast (1h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (1h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (1h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (3h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (4h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (4h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (4h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (5h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (14h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (14h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (14h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
buckeyepackfan (18h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.
Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak
beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other
beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)
Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.
beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs
packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.
beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating
Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!
wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
45m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.