nerdmann
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
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago
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
11 years ago
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.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
11 years ago
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
11 years ago

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.
UserPostedImage
yooperfan
11 years ago

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.

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
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

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.

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.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
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.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
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 



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.
UserPostedImage
dfosterf
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.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (17m) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (1h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (1h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (2h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (11h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (11h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (11h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (14h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (14h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
Mucky Tundra (15h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
buckeyepackfan (15h) : 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.
beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!
beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed
Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)
Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : The entirety of week 18 being listed as flex is weird
Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Matt LaFleur today says unequivocally "Ted Thompson had nothing to do with the drafting of Jordan Love."
Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Apparently, the editing is what pieces comments together. That Ted thing ... fake news.
Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : LaFleur "opportunity that Ted Thompson thought was too good to pass up"
Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Jordan Love pick was Ted Thompson's idea.
Mucky Tundra (19-Dec) : Kyle Shanahan on signing De'Vondre Campbell as a FA last offseason: “We obviously made a mistake.”
packerfanoutwest (19-Dec) : Alexander’s last season with GB
Martha Careful (18-Dec) : if I were a professional athlete, I would probably look to see who the agent is for Kirk Cousins and then use him
beast (18-Dec) : $100 million fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins gets benched for rookie
Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : a lower case b
Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : The real lie is how beast capitalized his name in his message while it's normally spelled with
packerfanoutwest (18-Dec) : haha that's a lie
beast (17-Dec) : Despite what lies other might tell, Beast didn't hate the Winter Warnings, it felt refreshing to Beast for some reason.
Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : whiteout uniforms in general are pretty lame and weak. NFL greed at it's worst
Martha Careful (17-Dec) : The Viking uniforms, the whiteout uniforms specifically absolutely suck
beast (17-Dec) : Thanks Zero2Cool, looks a lot better now
beast (17-Dec) : Seems like someone has a crush on me, can't stop talking about me
Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : Should be gooder now. The forum default theme went to goofy land.
Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : What the hell
packerfanoutwest (17-Dec) : yeah beast hates the Winter Warning Unies
Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Okay I'm glad to know it's not just something happening to me lol
Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Zero, did you copy the Packers uniforms from last night and white out the board?
beast (16-Dec) : Oh crap, is the board going to the Winter Warning Uniforms too?!? It's all white on white right now!
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
27m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

11h / 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.