Aaron Rodgers: A Studied Opinion

Ghetti13

Seasoned Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2004
Messages
878
Reaction score
0
I have poured over my Aaron Rodgers tapes again over the past four or five days and I thought I should share my observations. For the record, I have all or a portion of the USC, UCLA, Arizona State, Oregon and Texas Tech games.

First of all, I think Rodgers in the better prospect between himself and Alex Smith, but I will focus this thread on Aaron Rodgers.

Rodgers has possibly the most jaw dropping pocket presence and poise of any quarterback I have seen at the college level. He has that "sixth sense" to roll away from the pressure and step up in the pocket. This is something that often cannot be taught and cannot be undervalued. He has very underrated athletic skills. He will be able to take advantage of a defensive breakdown and get possitive rushing yards. He is fearless in the pocket. He keeps his eyes downfield and has no problem taking a big hit to deliver the ball. His arm strength is good and it will only improve if he is allowed to change his throwing motion and use a little more of his shoulder and lower body (Like he did when he first arrived at Cal). His accuracy is lights out at times.

Rodgers is tough because alot of what makes him special is the things that don't jump off the screen such as arm strength and size. That being said, this kid has the skills that the great quarterbacks in this league have.

In this NFL, as long as you have great accuracy, which he does, and enough arm, which he does, your success will turn on your poise, pocket presence, intelligence and fearlessness. Rodgers gets extremely high grades for these rare intangibles.

However, he is not without detractors. He is a Tedford man, and his offense raises some red flags. It is among the most boring I have ever seen. Run, Run, Run, Screen, Out. It was tough to really grade Rodgers because he was never asked to use his skills and light it up since Tedford is so conservative. You only saw glipses of what he is capable of, which is somewhat disappointing. I began to wonder if there playcalling was this way because of Tedford, or because Tedford did not trust Rodgers. My feeling is that he was playing to his strengths which were their two stud runners, rather than depend on an offensive line that pass blocked poorly at times. Also, I just think that is the type of offense Tedford likes. (Trust me, if you could not deal with Wannstedt's offense, don't watch Cal because Tedford is worse)

I am a big supporter of Rodgers and I would not be upset if Miami took him 2 overall, if he was there. See, I think the reason that many don't care for him is because he does not have the eyepoping measurables or arm strength that fans and often coaches drool all over at the top of the draft. But remember, it is not those quarterbacks who take their teams to the Super Bowl. It is the quarterback with good physical skills, good intelligence and a feel for the game who is willing to stand in the pocket and deliver the ball as does.

Try not to hold the fact that he does not excel at the "flashy" skills detract from the fact that he is excellent at the skills that matter most.
 

Dudeman

Coolness
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,815
Reaction score
1
Age
37
Location
Lake Mary....I think
Ghetti13 said:
Also, Rodgers is only 5 months older than Alex Smith.
7 Months....Alex was born in May, Aaron December of 83


btw, have you watched that part of the USC game where he completed 23 STRAIGHT passes? Pretty incredible
 

BlueFin

Seer of Visions
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
18,228
Reaction score
2,678
Location
Weeki Wachee, Florida
Ghetti13 said:
I have poured over my Aaron Rodgers tapes again over the past four or five days and I thought I should share my observations. For the record, I have all or a portion of the USC, UCLA, Arizona State, Oregon and Texas Tech games.

First of all, I think Rodgers in the better prospect between himself and Alex Smith, but I will focus this thread on Aaron Rodgers.

Rodgers has possibly the most jaw dropping pocket presence and poise of any quarterback I have seen at the college level. He has that "sixth sense" to roll away from the pressure and step up in the pocket. This is something that often cannot be taught and cannot be undervalued. He has very underrated athletic skills. He will be able to take advantage of a defensive breakdown and get possitive rushing yards. He is fearless in the pocket. He keeps his eyes downfield and has no problem taking a big hit to deliver the ball. His arm strength is good and it will only improve if he is allowed to change his throwing motion and use a little more of his shoulder and lower body (Like he did when he first arrived at Cal). His accuracy is lights out at times.

Rodgers is tough because alot of what makes him special is the things that don't jump off the screen such as arm strength and size. That being said, this kid has the skills that the great quarterbacks in this league have.

In this NFL, as long as you have great accuracy, which he does, and enough arm, which he does, your success will turn on your poise, pocket presence, intelligence and fearlessness. Rodgers gets extremely high grades for these rare intangibles.

However, he is not without detractors. He is a Tedford man, and his offense raises some red flags. It is among the most boring I have ever seen. Run, Run, Run, Screen, Out. It was tough to really grade Rodgers because he was never asked to use his skills and light it up since Tedford is so conservative. You only saw glipses of what he is capable of, which is somewhat disappointing. I began to wonder if there playcalling was this way because of Tedford, or because Tedford did not trust Rodgers. My feeling is that he was playing to his strengths which were their two stud runners, rather than depend on an offensive line that pass blocked poorly at times. Also, I just think that is the type of offense Tedford likes. (Trust me, if you could not deal with Wannstedt's offense, don't watch Cal because Tedford is worse)

I am a big supporter of Rodgers and I would not be upset if Miami took him 2 overall, if he was there. See, I think the reason that many don't care for him is because he does not have the eyepoping measurables or arm strength that fans and often coaches drool all over at the top of the draft. But remember, it is not those quarterbacks who take their teams to the Super Bowl. It is the quarterback with good physical skills, good intelligence and a feel for the game who is willing to stand in the pocket and deliver the ball as does.

Try not to hold the fact that he does not excel at the "flashy" skills detract from the fact that he is excellent at the skills that matter most.
I've been on his bandwagon all season, I think more of his skills than you do I think, he not only looked good to me at Cal but he looked pretty flashy scorching David Greene, Kyle Orton and Jason White both in accuracy and in the long ball competition of the all-star challenge in Miami.
 

finfan54

Griese Club
Joined
Aug 3, 2002
Messages
26,170
Reaction score
28
Long ball competition? Oh my goodness.............This is not what Joe Montana was all about. :rolleyes:

Rogers is 6'2, and that is being generous. I would pass on Rogers. I think he will be a fine QB...........just not on my team.

to me, Instant impact would be Edwards, Caddy, Brown, and I believe Alex Smith would be an impact later in the season or next year. I feel the same about Rogers, he would be playing next year, not this year. I really do not think Saban is doing cartwheels over Rogers.
 

Lee2000

FinHeaven VIP
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,770
Reaction score
5
Age
56
I was at the Cal/Southern Miss game this year

I watched him at the Cal/USM game this year and he does have poise in the pocket. He never seemed to get rattled. And he was very accurate. If mistakes occured in the secondary he made USM pay for it. I remember watching him and Arrington and remembering discussing with other fans that these two would play on Sunday. It was that obvious. And it was not due to the competition. USM almost beat Cal. It was sure presence.

Lee2000
 

Jnaledu3

Perennial All-Pro
Joined
Nov 12, 2003
Messages
2,639
Reaction score
0
Age
40
Location
Fort Lauderdale
finfan54 said:
Long ball competition? Oh my goodness.............This is not what Joe Montana was all about. :rolleyes:

Rogers is 6'2, and that is being generous. I would pass on Rogers. I think he will be a fine QB...........just not on my team.

to me, Instant impact would be Edwards, Caddy, Brown, and I believe Alex Smith would be an impact later in the season or next year. I feel the same about Rogers, he would be playing next year, not this year. I really do not think Saban is doing cartwheels over Rogers.
He measured 6'2 at the combine, and the guy holding the tape was not being generous.

Also, Rodgers was asked which team has contacted him the most after the combines and he said, without question- Miami.
 

Surferosa

Run to Daylight
Joined
Sep 11, 2002
Messages
5,796
Reaction score
1
Age
45
finfan54 said:
Rogers is 6'2, and that is being generous.

No its not. That is his actual height, without shoes, measured in front of hundreds of scouts.

BTW, great writeup Ghetti.
 

Da 'Fins

FinHeaven VIP
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2003
Messages
2,989
Reaction score
0
Ghetti13 said:
I have poured over my Aaron Rodgers tapes again over the past four or five days and I thought I should share my observations. For the record, I have all or a portion of the USC, UCLA, Arizona State, Oregon and Texas Tech games.

First of all, I think Rodgers in the better prospect between himself and Alex Smith, but I will focus this thread on Aaron Rodgers.

Rodgers has possibly the most jaw dropping pocket presence and poise of any quarterback I have seen at the college level. He has that "sixth sense" to roll away from the pressure and step up in the pocket. This is something that often cannot be taught and cannot be undervalued. He has very underrated athletic skills. He will be able to take advantage of a defensive breakdown and get possitive rushing yards. He is fearless in the pocket. He keeps his eyes downfield and has no problem taking a big hit to deliver the ball. His arm strength is good and it will only improve if he is allowed to change his throwing motion and use a little more of his shoulder and lower body (Like he did when he first arrived at Cal). His accuracy is lights out at times.

Rodgers is tough because alot of what makes him special is the things that don't jump off the screen such as arm strength and size. That being said, this kid has the skills that the great quarterbacks in this league have.

In this NFL, as long as you have great accuracy, which he does, and enough arm, which he does, your success will turn on your poise, pocket presence, intelligence and fearlessness. Rodgers gets extremely high grades for these rare intangibles.

However, he is not without detractors. He is a Tedford man, and his offense raises some red flags. It is among the most boring I have ever seen. Run, Run, Run, Screen, Out. It was tough to really grade Rodgers because he was never asked to use his skills and light it up since Tedford is so conservative. You only saw glipses of what he is capable of, which is somewhat disappointing. I began to wonder if there playcalling was this way because of Tedford, or because Tedford did not trust Rodgers. My feeling is that he was playing to his strengths which were their two stud runners, rather than depend on an offensive line that pass blocked poorly at times. Also, I just think that is the type of offense Tedford likes. (Trust me, if you could not deal with Wannstedt's offense, don't watch Cal because Tedford is worse)

I am a big supporter of Rodgers and I would not be upset if Miami took him 2 overall, if he was there. See, I think the reason that many don't care for him is because he does not have the eyepoping measurables or arm strength that fans and often coaches drool all over at the top of the draft. But remember, it is not those quarterbacks who take their teams to the Super Bowl. It is the quarterback with good physical skills, good intelligence and a feel for the game who is willing to stand in the pocket and deliver the ball as does.

Try not to hold the fact that he does not excel at the "flashy" skills detract from the fact that he is excellent at the skills that matter most.
Thanks. I think your analysis was very fair. Did you happen to read Peter King's MMQB this week? He discusses Rodgers at length. Very insightful.
 

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
51,525
Reaction score
5,548
Location
Tampa, FL
Yup. I'm definitely still on the Rodgers bandwagon. As much as people talk about the connections between Linehan and Smith, I think Rodgers is the QB that fits Linehan's offense more than Smith because he has a bigger arm.

As for the conservative Tedford system, from what I hear, Tedford changed that recently only just before the 2004 season I think, and asked Rodgers to play in a more conservative style offense that featured the running game with their two talented runners (if you think Arrington is good, I believe Marshawn Lynch will be better). In 2003, Rodgers and his backup Reggie Robertson had a total of 448 pass attempts and 111 rush attempts (with Rodgers accounting for 349 PAs, and 86 RAs), while the top two runningbacks Echemandu and Arrington had 345 rushes. In 2004, Rodgers had only 316 pass attempts (Robertson only had 9), and Arrington/Lynch accounted for 360 runs. So, in 2003, it was safe to say the Bears threw the ball about 56.5% of the time, in 2004 the roles were reversed and the Bears ran the ball 53% of the time.

That really is adversity for a QB, as much as some people like to say that it's not. Some guys would not, and have not, handled that kind of change of offensive style very well. But, Rodgers TD % went all the way from 5.4% to 7.6%, while his INT % increased slightly from 1.4% to 2.5%, and his YPA went down from 8.3 to 8.1, but the thing you really like to see when making this kind of switch, his completion % went from 61.6% to 66.1%. Those numbers probably would have been a lot better too, if his WR corp had ever been fully healthy.

Rodgers is the guy in this draft that I'd be prepared to take with the #2 pick. I would also be prepared to take Braylon Edwards. Mostly, I think I would like to trade down, because the more Day 1 picks Saban gets to work with, the better, since he can turn those Day 1 picks into studs with his inside track knowledge of the college players. But if we have to stay at #2, I'm all for Rodgers or Edwards.
 

General Tso

Seasoned Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
1,118
Reaction score
4
Location
Missouri
ckparrothead said:
Yup. I'm definitely still on the Rodgers bandwagon. As much as people talk about the connections between Linehan and Smith, I think Rodgers is the QB that fits Linehan's offense more than Smith because he has a bigger arm.

As for the conservative Tedford system, from what I hear, Tedford changed that recently only just before the 2004 season I think, and asked Rodgers to play in a more conservative style offense that featured the running game with their two talented runners (if you think Arrington is good, I believe Marshawn Lynch will be better). In 2003, Rodgers and his backup Reggie Robertson had a total of 448 pass attempts and 111 rush attempts (with Rodgers accounting for 349 PAs, and 86 RAs), while the top two runningbacks Echemandu and Arrington had 345 rushes. In 2004, Rodgers had only 316 pass attempts (Robertson only had 9), and Arrington/Lynch accounted for 360 runs. So, in 2003, it was safe to say the Bears threw the ball about 56.5% of the time, in 2004 the roles were reversed and the Bears ran the ball 53% of the time.

That really is adversity for a QB, as much as some people like to say that it's not. Some guys would not, and have not, handled that kind of change of offensive style very well. But, Rodgers TD % went all the way from 5.4% to 7.6%, while his INT % increased slightly from 1.4% to 2.5%, and his YPA went down from 8.3 to 8.1, but the thing you really like to see when making this kind of switch, his completion % went from 61.6% to 66.1%. Those numbers probably would have been a lot better too, if his WR corp had ever been fully healthy.

Rodgers is the guy in this draft that I'd be prepared to take with the #2 pick. I would also be prepared to take Braylon Edwards. Mostly, I think I would like to trade down, because the more Day 1 picks Saban gets to work with, the better, since he can turn those Day 1 picks into studs with his inside track knowledge of the college players. But if we have to stay at #2, I'm all for Rodgers or Edwards.
Cal was much less conservative in 2003 when Rodgers had 5 300+ yard games towards the end of the year, including his monster 400 yard performance in the insight.com bowl win over Virginia Tech where he completed nearly every pass attempted. I think the main reasons Tedford went super conservative this year were the major injuries to the team's wrs and the fact that no pac-10 run defense could slow down the arrington/lynch combo.

I completely agree on Lynch. He's someone to look for in the draft 2 to 3 years from now. With Arrington out of the way he should put up monster numbers in '05.
 

merlin00069

All-Pro
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Messages
943
Reaction score
0
Location
Miami
finfan54 said:
Long ball competition? Oh my goodness.............This is not what Joe Montana was all about. :rolleyes:

Rogers is 6'2, and that is being generous. I would pass on Rogers. I think he will be a fine QB...........just not on my team.

to me, Instant impact would be Edwards, Caddy, Brown, and I believe Alex Smith would be an impact later in the season or next year. I feel the same about Rogers, he would be playing next year, not this year. I really do not think Saban is doing cartwheels over Rogers.
First of all great thread and not only because im a huge Rodgers/Pro-QB guy but because it had in depth analysis and you seemed to be unbias. Now to finfan54...i think everyone else has commented on the 6'2 height issue you brought up. It was not "generous" in any way and 6'2 is plenty tall in the NFL ...sure 6'3-6'5 is better but 6'2 is just fine. Im also tired of hearing the phrase" immediate impact player". I myself am thinking long term(which is why i want a QB like Rodgers here) i dont care if the guy we take in the draft puts up 1300 yards rushing or 1000 yards receiving and is an immediate impact because thats going to do jack squat for us in the long run. What a franchise QB(yes i know we dont know if he's a franchise QB yet but hwe have to try) can do for a club is immeasurable and the long term benefits can be astounding. Pro bowls, records and hopefully Superbowls. We need a solid foundation to start the Saban era on and i think Rodgers is the first piece in doing so. Hopefully he'll be available at#2 when we pick. I also think that Saban will take him if he's there. Well...im optimistic he will. Heres to the Dolphins being good for the next 20 years not the next 2. Cheers.
 

Boik14

Hammered
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
7,227
Reaction score
0
Age
41
Location
NYC
My biggest problem with picking a qb is the % of succes is only 35% among 1st rd qbs and the bonus money is huge. Personally I like Orton more even though Rodgers is more fundamentally sound.

Tedford runs a naturally conservative offense. Those that criticize Jason Campbell in that regard need to look at Rodgers as well cause he falls into the same category.
 

Jaj

What you say?
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
13,149
Reaction score
0
Age
41
Location
LA
His accuracy is what stands out in my mind.
 
Top Bottom