How many teams win the Super Bowl each year?
Getting rid of Rodgers means at LEAST 4 or 5 years of mediocre seasons. At LEAST.
So, if they can put some decent players in other parts of the team, Rodgers still gives us the best chance at going all the way. As I pointed out already, most of the playoff losses in previous years was NOT because of Rodgers.
So if Gute gets serious and fills some glaring needs, there's no reason to not win it all.
But if those needs are not addressed, then you can expect similar results.
Against the Bucaneers, Kevin King was the weak link that cost the most. Tampa's defense was superior to ours and made Brady's mistakes null.
This year our special teams cost us the game. To blame losses like that on ARA is short sighted.
How far did Brady take TB this year? It's a team game. One mam can't do it all. Look at NEs super bowl win against Seattle. It wasn't Brady being perfect, it was Seattle screwing it up by passing on the goal line instead of handing the ball off to Lynch

Luck can play into a game. And one play can swing momentum.
JMO, but I feel Aaron Rodgers still gives us the best chance to win.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 

The premise of the article is wrong because it relies on the notion that Aaron Rodgers is Tom Brady.

Aaron Rodgers is not Tom Brady. Simple as that.

The situations are completely different. Brady is the greatest QB ever. Rodgers is not. I know that's a hard truth for many Packers fans, as the 2010s was supposed to be the Packers' decade. Instead the decade belong to the Patriots just as the 2000s did. We can't go with the "what if" scenarios to build up Rodgers. He's just not a big game quarterback. There's a lot of issues you can point to, but a lot of these postseason games saw Rodgers not play at the same level he did in the regular season.

Rodgers is much more comparable to Drew Brees than he is Tom Brady. As is the Packers' situation.

The Saints kept Brees and it didn't workout relative to Super Bowls. However, the Saints remained very relevant and Brees' legacy with the franchise is special.

Do we trade Rodgers? No, not necessarily. It's a hard decision to make. If someone is going to say we're going to give you 3 first-round picks and two starters in return for a 39-year-old QB (who is kind of a distraction), then I can see the argument. I'm not sure I go with the PFF trade proposal lingering out there, however. So, we do need the right compensation.

I also see an NFC that doesn't have a lot of great teams. Let's be honest. The Super Bowl this year was Cincinnati vs. Los Angeles. Green Bay beat both teams in the regular-season. The 49ers are good, but there's going to be a ton of growing pains with Trey Lance. What else is left in the NFC? In other words, there's a path for the Packers to make a run with Rodgers again - even though they may have less veteran presence on this team than in the last three years.

Alternatively, if you trade Rodgers and you take a hit in the next two years, you do have a lot of resources to retool a team. The Packers could just as easily turn those resources into quality players or their next franchise QB (if it's not Jordan Love). That could sustain success for another 15 years.

It's a tough decision. However, there is one variable that makes it easy. What if Rodgers doesn't want to play in Green Bay anymore? That was the case last year and they worked it out. However, you can't keep going back and forth as he did last summer. At some point, the two sides will separate.

Originally Posted by: porky88 

Starr, Unitas, Montana, Marino, Warren Moon, go from there. Brady, maybe top 10. As for Aaron, "Best Thrower of the Football." 😄

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Originally Posted by: Pugger 

How nany SB champion teams in the history of football had Aaron Rodgers as their QB?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

ONE.
Which is one more then a lot of teams. I looked it up, and 12 NFL teams have never won even ONE Super Bowl. 56 Super Bowls, and the Packers have four wins.
Rodgers won one more SB then the Vikings and Lions have won in their existence, and the same amount as the Bears won in their existence. So I'd say that's not so horrible.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey