Disingenuous article.

First of all just how well IS Aaron playing? Let's recall the past two years. 2015, he goes 6-0, thhen the wheels came off until Mike McCarthy took back play calling duties in a desperate attempt to right the ship. Then in 2016, Aaron was back to his old stat whoring ways, passing up the open guy to heave it deep all thhe time, until we were 4-6 and forced to run the table just to make the post season. Fortunately Aaron was able to start "really trying" by executing the offense most of the time, and we were able to do so, until the NFCCG.

Second of all, as the article points out, Aaron's mobility is a large part of his game. Brady is able to play well at 40, because he hits the open guy and functions wihin the confines of the offense. He's not scrambling around trying to make the highlight reel, holding the ball for 8 seconds or more and taking unnecessary hits. Aaron is.

FACT. If Aaron really wants to emulate Brady by playing well until he is 40, perhaps he could do more than merely adhere to Brady's dietary protocols.

---

Baring injury, there is no reason to expect that he won't be able to play as long as Brady has. He will have to adjust some as he gets a little older and may start to lose some mobility. Brady is often criticized for going fetal when the pass rush is coming. When that is something that has saved him abuse. Rodgers accomplishes the same thing, in a different way and he learned much of it from Favre. Lots of the hits he does take, are not hard because he is usually moving away from the impact.

And less face it, taking a sack after 3 seconds or that sack coming after 6 is still getting hit and taking a sack. The sack after 6 is probably less of an impact.

---

I don't think Rodgers will last as long as Brady, unless he's willing to take a backup role. Aaron Rodgers' game is being an athletic quarterback that scrambles to make plays. I'm not sure why so many get so hung up on this. Like, THAT'S HIS GAME! That's who he is. Expecting that to quickly change is unreasonable. You may not like it, but that doesn't change the reality of who Rodgers is.

Favre played his game, Brady plays his game, Rodgers plays his game. There are pros and cons to all of the different ways, but the players have to be true to themselves and their innate abilities and instincts. Hopefully Rodgers can slowly change his game to enhance his longevity, but I doubt he will be nearly the same player when and if he does. He might still be a decent QB, but if he changes what makes him special in the first place, he will likely no longer be special.

I think I have read somewhere that Rodgers says he will keep playing as long as he "has his legs." I can't imagine him "keeping his legs" for more than 3-4 additional years.

---

Speaking of being disingenuous . How do you go from something is wrong with him when he's not racking up amazing stats and then when he is, he's a stat whore?

---

When a QB holds on to a football for more than 3 to 4 seconds , it's because his WR's are not getting open . In addition , not getting sacked when he has to hold on to the football is a tribute to his abilities and to his Offensive Line .

I can remember when Rodgers and his WRs/TEs were so closely in sync. , that they were showing the rest of the league how it's done . Also Rodgers next contract will likely allow him to play into his 40's if he chooses to . [cool]

---

I'm in favor of hitting the open guy, like Tom Brady. Being able to strike deep is nice, but let's just move the chains this year, so we don't end up 4-6 with our backs against the wall.

---

Love when people who have no idea what the play called was, or what the progressions of the play are, act like the do.

---

Because Nerd is not a monosyllabic thinker! Monosyllabic Cavemen think like this: fire good; Rodgers good; Adams bad! Stats good, play good!

The enlightened and heighten mind realizes fire is good and bad, it cooks and warms, but also burns and destroys. And also knows every player performs very good and very bad plays and everything in between. What separates the good player from bad is the ratio of good to bad plays he performs. And the enlightened realize good NFL stats do not always follow from good play.

A stat whore is a guy that puts his desire for stats above what's best for the team.

Rodgers has killed 3 of 4 drives by refusing to move the chains; and then makes a few big plays; thereby having good stats but hurting the team. I've seen him work to move the chains with great brilliance and playing within the offense and doing everything to help the team win. In the former Rodgers is a stat whore hurting the team [this is bad play]; in the later Rodgers is a good player.

When Rodgers plays well; he's better than Brady. But, over the last 2 years when Rodgers has played bad; he has been exponentially worse than when Brady is at his worst. And of course Rodgers doesn't play his best ball when the pressure is on, like Brady does.

I say let the contract pretty much play out; unless he reverts back to Douchebag. If he demands to be highest paid; then let him be for another team. If he takes a Brady like team first approach to his salary that will be a good indication Rodgers is keeping his doche under control; then let him play until he's 50.

I don't necessary get the constant comparisons to Brady. What QB in history will look as good as Brady has in terms of overall successes? Is arguably the best QB of all time the standard in which all QBs will be judged? Is Derek Carr being judged that way?

Moreover, I still say Rodgers career would have been much different up to this point if he had both the coaching and especially the defenses that Brady has had. Overall on average, the differences between the defenses have been night and day. Rodgers knows the team lives and dies with him. Brady knows they at least have a chance if he is struggling. Rodgers may not play his best in the biggest moments (except of course for his amazing Super Bowl run and Super Bowl MVP). But overall, how have his defenses played during those same biggest moments? No, but of course, it's all on Rodgers, just like it's always been.

None of this is to say Rodgers is perfect or couldn't be better. That's rhetorical. But things need to be contextualized when making impossible comparisons between two different players on two different teams in different circumstances, different coaching, and different defenses.