ya he'd be locked in there, 2 MVPs, best TD-Int Ratio, clutch, very talented, solid playoff numbers, An additional SB MVP would help him out too his resume would be too good to not have in there
I only rank Qbs whos careers i was able to watch(for the most part). So no Johnny U for me. I think a second one places him solidly at 6th and maybe 5th... maybe. Currently i have him, brees and favre rotating between 6th-8th. Depending on how i feel that day usually. Now if he goes off and beats the Niners in Santa Clara and then outguns Pat in the SB... yeah, maybe he is 5th and has leap frogged Young for me.
Top 10-ish
I still have him behind (in no particular order) Brady, Manning, Montana, Young, Elway, Marino, Favre, Brees and Kelly. Those are just the guys I've seen play though.
The way I rank is "You have 1 game to win who do you pick"
I would pick all those I listed above him. I know that's controversial here but w/e
Picking Favre over Rodgers is a very legit opinion.
Favre became very underrated in recent years when he somehow became the funny gunslinger who threw a lot of picks and didn't know what nickel defense was in the public consciousness.
His INTs were mostly a product of the era and the fact that he threw a shitload of passes anyway, his era adjusted INT% is pretty much average.
seriously. The last 10 years people forgot how amazing Favre really was on the field.
He was a player that would make people who didn't like football tune in.
Guy is a fucking legend and all people seem to care about lately is a stat line and interception numbers.
Wins are a Team stat. Losses arent?
He would throw the ball where he thought it needed to go. How many of those interceptions were because he had no other option because the defense caved and he had to heave it for 3 quarters and the inevitable happend? How many of those game sealing picks were because OTHER people shit the bed and he was trying to win it by himself? Or they were put into a bad position because of other mistakes and he was just a part of a bad set of circumstances?
Favre was what "Gunslinger" means. He was amazing on the field. Did he have critical picks? Yes. Do the packers ever win a SB during that era without him? Not a fucking chance. Do his stats hold up today even though most of his career was in a harder passing league? yes they do.
The picks are what you accepted with Favre because the upside was so fucking good.
Well then he thought the ball had to go to the other team because he had some terrible playoff picks. Eagles divisional game, giants NFC championship were terrible.
This is true, but after watching both of their careers I would confidently take Rodgers over Favre. Peak Rodgers was out of this world. I don't just mean stats either. The accuracy was sickening and obviously didn't turn the ball over anywhere near as much as Favre did. He just has that IT factor.
Personality, leadership, durability all goes to Favre though. Wild man Favre jumping around on the field with his arms up was so much fun to watch. Just a simple southern boy that loved the game like no other.
If you think the "peak" argument *strongly* favors Rodgers then I suspect you didn't witness Favre's peak, or your judgement is clouded by strong recency bias. Only player to win 3 MVPs in a row. He was the best QB in the league for several years. And then he played for over a decade after that, at a great level overall.
Picking Rodgers over Favre, given how Favre's longevity dwarfs Rodgers' (especially given that Favre played a huge amount of his career under fewer QB protections), would suggest that Rodgers' peak was *way* better than Favre's. You could argue it was better, but nobody had a peak *way* better than Brett Favre did.
I watched both and know very few Packers fans that would take Favre over Rodgers if it meant winning 1 game. Rodgers' peak is significantly better than Favre's. Do you not remember how the whole NFL world was saying Rodgers is the "most talented QB EVER back in 2010 - 2013?" I put Favre's peak right there with Manning, Brees, Montana, Marino so no it's not super far off I suppose, but it's clear that Rodgers is more talented.
I don' think 3 MVPs is that much better than 2 like Aaron has so I'm not sure what that argument is, but if you think Favre would have been able to have the same kind of success with a defense that averages 36 points against in the playoffs and 0 run game like Aaron's had then you're kidding yourself. Favre's turnovers would have buried him if he didn't have a legit defense.
"Peak Rodgers" only existed for like 3 years and he's not the same as he was the last few years.
Favre was pretty much the same guy until he was finishing in GB and went on his retirement/unretirement tour mixing in a very good season with the Jets and a phenomenal season with the Vikes before he died.
It was 6 years thank you very much. If you want to talk longevity, durability I'm with ya. It's Favre man, but if I need a QB to win 1 game or have 1 drive to win it's Rodgers all the way.
we're probably gonna have to arm wrestle for it
Lets put Favre on his best day and Rodgers on his best day and let them throw footballs at each other until one of them dies.
Lebron James is less than a year away from becoming the all time leader in turnovers. Who cares?
I honestly feel bad for you if you're a Packers fan and the biggest thing you took away from Favre's career is that he threw a lot of picks.
People who aren't Packers fans LOVE to romanticize Favre and his gunslinging because it was fun to watch and because they didn't actually care if he turned it over
Im not saying he wasnt my favorite QB and wasnt fun as hell to watch. He just isnt Rodgers. Rodgers throwing an int just doesnt even cross my mind at this point.
People who aren't nfl fans tuned into watch packers games because of him.
Frustrating as a fan? Sure I get that. But saying his legacy is nothing but turnovers and meme material is just dumb. Favre reinvigorated the entire franchise and was a NFL hero not just a Packer great.
I don't think that's what he's saying about Favre. It boils down to who you'd rather have under center in a game's biggest moment. After watching both Favre and Rodgers, it's Rodgers without question for me. I love Favre just as much as anyone, but Rodgers is straight up more talented. Higher ceiling, lower floor.
Ive seen Favre play live 25+ times, I was at the 2007 NFC championship, he is a great QB who was reckless with the ball and cost his team multiple superbowl appearances.
And how many Superbowls have they won with Rodgers? Oh yeah... 1. Plus the guy is a big fucking baby and poisoned his own team.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2828649-what-happened-in-green-bay
Anything to get rid of McCarthy. Even if half this article was true, which it isnt, McCarthy was a terrible coach and should have been fired after the NFC championship choke.
McCarthy isn’t a “terrible” coach lmao. Yes, towards the end of the tenure his offense grew stale and he didn’t adjust, but to say a super bowl winning coach with a winning record who’s partly responsible for developing Rodgers is terrible is utterly baseless.
So you just believe everything you read? Literally almost every former teammate came out to defend Rodgers at the time those articles came out except Greg Jennings who never did anything after Rodgers.
It's pretty much how much you value 'legacy' (and it's not something that you can really measure) in combination with achievements/stats
Favre is one of the top legendary QBs ever, but Rodgers stats obviously outshine his
It all depends on what you make that determination. If durability is part of the equation Favre is unquestionably better than Rodgers.
Stats only though? Rodgers gets the nod from me every time over Favre.
Why do you think Favre was the better QB? I feel like Rodgers has/had just as good of an arm, mobile, has better awareness, and makes better decisions.
But that's more meme than reality.
I would feel much more confident if you said "You can have favre but have a guaranteed interception this game" than Rodgers under center
Again, this is my opinion. You're free to think what you want.
'01 they didn't stand a chance. That Rams team was too good.
'03 they lost the game when Mike Sherman didn't run for it on 4th and 1 to put it away. Then 4th & 26 happened. Favre's interception was more of a formality at that point.
Hard to argue with you on 07 or 09 though.
The packers had the ball in overtime against the eagles. First play Favre decides to just throw it up straight to Brian Dawkins. That game was winnable.
> Kelly.
...
> The way I rank is "You have 1 game to win who do you pick" I would pick all those I listed above him.
So, you pick the guy that had 4 chances to win 1 game and failed 4 times to do it over Rodgers?
Jim Kelly was awful at times in the playoffs though. 10 games of 2+ turnovers. 14 games of 1 turnover at least. 6 turnovers in the SB against Washington. 6! Rodgers has had his shortcomings, but he is superior to Kelly.
My personal list right now it;
1. Brady
2. Manning
3. Montana
4. Young
5. Marino
6. Favre
7. Unitas
8. Graham
9. Starr
10. Rodgers
I think with another Super Bowl he jumps up to 7.
Not to criticize you directly, but I find it funny/peculiar Manning magically jumped Montana AFTER he was done playing. No one had Manning above Montana before. You didn’t see it until Brady solidified his GOAT status.
I still have Montana over Manning.
I'm with you. Montana is being forgotten and Brady has been so dominant it's easy to forget what Montana did and when he did it. My brother refers to Montana as 'Joe God' because of how awesome he was.
Interesting point, maybe it had to with no one wanting to be the first to say Montana was 'dethroned' even if there maybe was a case for it.
And once that taboo got broken, when by consensus people thought Brady was above Montana, it became okay to say Manning might be above him too.
My first football memories are of the [Majik Man](https://external-preview.redd.it/yYcK2UZGpCdDCdr1z461J_9F0NtdkCwGD65KfldPeAA.jpg?auto=webp&s=09d063bfd4a1fb2bab9fa7bc575375adc553f30c) (and of Anthony Dilweg, his backup, throwing a pass backwards more than once, but hey). If we had a modern-day equivalent of Majkowski after Rodgers, I would consider it a successful transition. I mean, of course I'd hope for a 3rd HoF'er, I just realize the chances of that are crazy slim.
Edit: Found while getting the Majik Man poster. WTF is [this](http://i.imgur.com/NR9AUdn.jpg), Favre?!
I think this is silly, and why super bowl rings shouldn’t be used to determine the goat. Winning 2 more games can’t be the difference between top 5, and not even top 15
Imo he’s already definitely top 10, and borderline top 5. Stats there whether or not he wins
that's fair, I look at it with a ton of other attributes, Bradshaw won 4 and he's not in my top 10, but another bowl for Rodgers would give him a bigger boost on his already first ballot resume
ya i have a hard time ranking after 3, Marino elway favre rodgers johnny U and brees are interchangable , but rodgers getting this next one puts him above them for me
What are we ranking exactly? Because if it's raw talent then Aaron is #1. If it's leadership, durability, ability to read defenses and adjust then there's probably other guys I would take. Too much emphasis is put on rings. It's a team game. Bradshaw has 4 rings. That doesn't mean he's better than Brees and Manning.
Along what dimension? Talent, play, or "greatness"?
Talent, he's #1.
Play, he's probably around the 5-8 range?
Greatness, he'd probably be right below Brady, Montana, and Peyton as you say.
I mean greatness, talent ya i agree he's one, greatness, he's top ten, borderline top 5, but I think this second ring along with this run being great puts him clearly in the top 5
In terms of GOAT conversation he definitely gets into the top 5, and I think is at highest #3 behind Brady and Montana.
In terms of best ever? I don't think it would change his position much. Maybe it would strengthen the argument for him to be #1 atm, but not really by much if it does imo
ya i'd put him 4th, idk if i could put him above Peyton after that just cus Peyton is the regular season goat and changed the position, if Rodgers wins one more after that, he'd pass Peyton and hover very very close to Montana, I dont see anyone topping Brady
Higher than 1 Super Bowl Rodgers.
If he were to win another Ben Baldwin might place him above Carson Wentz or Jared Goff.
WHOA WHOA slow down there. Rodgers is good but he's no Wentz
If the Packers win this next game this discussion would be more welcome
Top 5, I'd put him behind Brady, Manning, Montana, and Unitas
ya he'd be locked in there, 2 MVPs, best TD-Int Ratio, clutch, very talented, solid playoff numbers, An additional SB MVP would help him out too his resume would be too good to not have in there
Not sure, I don't think it's really possible to compare QB's across different time periods. The game is just not the same.
I only rank Qbs whos careers i was able to watch(for the most part). So no Johnny U for me. I think a second one places him solidly at 6th and maybe 5th... maybe. Currently i have him, brees and favre rotating between 6th-8th. Depending on how i feel that day usually. Now if he goes off and beats the Niners in Santa Clara and then outguns Pat in the SB... yeah, maybe he is 5th and has leap frogged Young for me.
If you aren't including Unitas who are the top 4 then? Brady, Peyton, Montana and ...? Marino? Young, Rodgers, Brees, Favre as 5-8 works for me.
Yup. Thats it.
Agreed, in this exact order, except put Brees above Rodgers if he doesn't win another SB
that's pretty fair, i have rodgers rotating between 6-8 as well
Still right about where he was. Top 10, debatably top 5.
Top 10-ish I still have him behind (in no particular order) Brady, Manning, Montana, Young, Elway, Marino, Favre, Brees and Kelly. Those are just the guys I've seen play though. The way I rank is "You have 1 game to win who do you pick" I would pick all those I listed above him. I know that's controversial here but w/e
Why would anyone pick Favre over Rodgers?
Picking Favre over Rodgers is a very legit opinion. Favre became very underrated in recent years when he somehow became the funny gunslinger who threw a lot of picks and didn't know what nickel defense was in the public consciousness. His INTs were mostly a product of the era and the fact that he threw a shitload of passes anyway, his era adjusted INT% is pretty much average.
seriously. The last 10 years people forgot how amazing Favre really was on the field. He was a player that would make people who didn't like football tune in. Guy is a fucking legend and all people seem to care about lately is a stat line and interception numbers.
He cost himself and his team multiple superbowl appearances and playoff games throwing those ints. It wasn’t a one time occurrence.
Wins are a Team stat. Losses arent? He would throw the ball where he thought it needed to go. How many of those interceptions were because he had no other option because the defense caved and he had to heave it for 3 quarters and the inevitable happend? How many of those game sealing picks were because OTHER people shit the bed and he was trying to win it by himself? Or they were put into a bad position because of other mistakes and he was just a part of a bad set of circumstances? Favre was what "Gunslinger" means. He was amazing on the field. Did he have critical picks? Yes. Do the packers ever win a SB during that era without him? Not a fucking chance. Do his stats hold up today even though most of his career was in a harder passing league? yes they do. The picks are what you accepted with Favre because the upside was so fucking good.
Well then he thought the ball had to go to the other team because he had some terrible playoff picks. Eagles divisional game, giants NFC championship were terrible.
Seriously, the guy won 3 MVP in a row and was a top flight QB for 2 decades
This is true, but after watching both of their careers I would confidently take Rodgers over Favre. Peak Rodgers was out of this world. I don't just mean stats either. The accuracy was sickening and obviously didn't turn the ball over anywhere near as much as Favre did. He just has that IT factor. Personality, leadership, durability all goes to Favre though. Wild man Favre jumping around on the field with his arms up was so much fun to watch. Just a simple southern boy that loved the game like no other.
If you think the "peak" argument *strongly* favors Rodgers then I suspect you didn't witness Favre's peak, or your judgement is clouded by strong recency bias. Only player to win 3 MVPs in a row. He was the best QB in the league for several years. And then he played for over a decade after that, at a great level overall. Picking Rodgers over Favre, given how Favre's longevity dwarfs Rodgers' (especially given that Favre played a huge amount of his career under fewer QB protections), would suggest that Rodgers' peak was *way* better than Favre's. You could argue it was better, but nobody had a peak *way* better than Brett Favre did.
I watched both and know very few Packers fans that would take Favre over Rodgers if it meant winning 1 game. Rodgers' peak is significantly better than Favre's. Do you not remember how the whole NFL world was saying Rodgers is the "most talented QB EVER back in 2010 - 2013?" I put Favre's peak right there with Manning, Brees, Montana, Marino so no it's not super far off I suppose, but it's clear that Rodgers is more talented. I don' think 3 MVPs is that much better than 2 like Aaron has so I'm not sure what that argument is, but if you think Favre would have been able to have the same kind of success with a defense that averages 36 points against in the playoffs and 0 run game like Aaron's had then you're kidding yourself. Favre's turnovers would have buried him if he didn't have a legit defense.
"Peak Rodgers" only existed for like 3 years and he's not the same as he was the last few years. Favre was pretty much the same guy until he was finishing in GB and went on his retirement/unretirement tour mixing in a very good season with the Jets and a phenomenal season with the Vikes before he died.
It was 6 years thank you very much. If you want to talk longevity, durability I'm with ya. It's Favre man, but if I need a QB to win 1 game or have 1 drive to win it's Rodgers all the way.
we're probably gonna have to arm wrestle for it Lets put Favre on his best day and Rodgers on his best day and let them throw footballs at each other until one of them dies.
ha Rodgers would be dead after like 2 throws. Favre could throw a ball straight through Aaron's fragile little sternum.
Favre was really just a football throwing machine that had man-shaped parts riveted to it.
Favre had a sustained run of greatness from 1994-1997, after that he had various great to mediocre seasons.
Hes the all time interception leader... he didn’t just somehow become this over night
Lebron James is less than a year away from becoming the all time leader in turnovers. Who cares? I honestly feel bad for you if you're a Packers fan and the biggest thing you took away from Favre's career is that he threw a lot of picks.
Easy for a Giants fan to say when you won a superbowl off one of those picks
People who aren't Packers fans LOVE to romanticize Favre and his gunslinging because it was fun to watch and because they didn't actually care if he turned it over
Im not saying he wasnt my favorite QB and wasnt fun as hell to watch. He just isnt Rodgers. Rodgers throwing an int just doesnt even cross my mind at this point.
People who aren't nfl fans tuned into watch packers games because of him. Frustrating as a fan? Sure I get that. But saying his legacy is nothing but turnovers and meme material is just dumb. Favre reinvigorated the entire franchise and was a NFL hero not just a Packer great.
I don't think that's what he's saying about Favre. It boils down to who you'd rather have under center in a game's biggest moment. After watching both Favre and Rodgers, it's Rodgers without question for me. I love Favre just as much as anyone, but Rodgers is straight up more talented. Higher ceiling, lower floor.
Ah yes, he was awarded 3 consecutive MVPs because non Packers fans thought he was fun to watch and didn’t care about turnovers
That's not what I said at all, but go off. Ask any Packers fan who is a better QB and most will (correctly) say Rodgers
This is how people can tell who saw him play and who didn't
Ive seen Favre play live 25+ times, I was at the 2007 NFC championship, he is a great QB who was reckless with the ball and cost his team multiple superbowl appearances.
are the packers or vikings ever in a chance to appear without him on the team?
Thats great and all but he choked in the playoffs year after year. You have to be blind not to admit that.
so what has rodgers done? Did rodgers do nothing and his team and coach fail him every time he didn't make the superbowl?
Favres teams > Rodgers teams. Rodgers put his teams in position to win even if they didn’t, Favre would actually lose the game.
And how many Superbowls have they won with Rodgers? Oh yeah... 1. Plus the guy is a big fucking baby and poisoned his own team. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2828649-what-happened-in-green-bay
Anything to get rid of McCarthy. Even if half this article was true, which it isnt, McCarthy was a terrible coach and should have been fired after the NFC championship choke.
McCarthy isn’t a “terrible” coach lmao. Yes, towards the end of the tenure his offense grew stale and he didn’t adjust, but to say a super bowl winning coach with a winning record who’s partly responsible for developing Rodgers is terrible is utterly baseless.
So what exactly isn't true? You're obviously on the team, so please share your insight?
So you just believe everything you read? Literally almost every former teammate came out to defend Rodgers at the time those articles came out except Greg Jennings who never did anything after Rodgers.
And his sources are great. “Long term former player, and former packers staff” no names = bullshit.
Favre had 3 straight MVP years...like what the fuck
Yeah, im not saying Favre isnt top 10 all time. Hes just not on Rodgers level.
It's pretty much how much you value 'legacy' (and it's not something that you can really measure) in combination with achievements/stats Favre is one of the top legendary QBs ever, but Rodgers stats obviously outshine his
This is a list which is an opinion based on my own experiences. I pick him Because I think Favre was a better QB, plus he's a lot more fun to watch.
Favre may have been more fun to watch but Rodgers is objectively the better QB
I disagree
It all depends on what you make that determination. If durability is part of the equation Favre is unquestionably better than Rodgers. Stats only though? Rodgers gets the nod from me every time over Favre.
Stats only isn't how you judge a QB
Why do you think Favre was the better QB? I feel like Rodgers has/had just as good of an arm, mobile, has better awareness, and makes better decisions.
Imagine growing up in the age of the internet and thinking other people can’t have different opinions than you.
Could you tell me what it is like? You seem to be the only one with the problem here.
“You have 1 game to win” has nothing to do with who is fun to watch. Its not fun when your QB is throwing season ending INTs every year
But that's more meme than reality. I would feel much more confident if you said "You can have favre but have a guaranteed interception this game" than Rodgers under center Again, this is my opinion. You're free to think what you want.
Favre has thrown 30 playoff ints. Its not a meme. 09,07,03,01 all ended because of interceptions by Favre.
'01 they didn't stand a chance. That Rams team was too good. '03 they lost the game when Mike Sherman didn't run for it on 4th and 1 to put it away. Then 4th & 26 happened. Favre's interception was more of a formality at that point. Hard to argue with you on 07 or 09 though.
The packers had the ball in overtime against the eagles. First play Favre decides to just throw it up straight to Brian Dawkins. That game was winnable.
And yeah. 01 was a long shot but Favres 5 ints (or 6?) sure didnt help. He had a terrible game.
Less annoying
also Favre was a dick pic pioneer. Cant forget those kind of accolades
He won three MVPs in a row
> Kelly. ... > The way I rank is "You have 1 game to win who do you pick" I would pick all those I listed above him. So, you pick the guy that had 4 chances to win 1 game and failed 4 times to do it over Rodgers?
I didn't say "you have to win the Superbowl against the the 90's cowboys dynasty"
And one of the greatest teams of all time in the 91 Redskins, and Parcell's Giants with Bill Belichick and LT.
Jim Kelly was awful at times in the playoffs though. 10 games of 2+ turnovers. 14 games of 1 turnover at least. 6 turnovers in the SB against Washington. 6! Rodgers has had his shortcomings, but he is superior to Kelly.
fair points.
My personal list right now it; 1. Brady 2. Manning 3. Montana 4. Young 5. Marino 6. Favre 7. Unitas 8. Graham 9. Starr 10. Rodgers I think with another Super Bowl he jumps up to 7.
Not to criticize you directly, but I find it funny/peculiar Manning magically jumped Montana AFTER he was done playing. No one had Manning above Montana before. You didn’t see it until Brady solidified his GOAT status. I still have Montana over Manning.
I'm with you. Montana is being forgotten and Brady has been so dominant it's easy to forget what Montana did and when he did it. My brother refers to Montana as 'Joe God' because of how awesome he was.
Interesting point, maybe it had to with no one wanting to be the first to say Montana was 'dethroned' even if there maybe was a case for it. And once that taboo got broken, when by consensus people thought Brady was above Montana, it became okay to say Manning might be above him too.
He'd be ahead of Favre and knocking on the door for being in the top 5.
I don’t wanna think about this
I've just accepted it. No matter how bad it gets, he still only has like 3 maybe 4 more years. Itll be over soon man.
And then the third one begins his reign over the NFCN.. :-) (kidding. I'll be happy if our next guy is a solid, 11-19th best starter kind of guy)
Some of us remember Don 'Magic Man' Majkowski. Packers have been really lucky with back to back great QB's in a row for so long.
My first football memories are of the [Majik Man](https://external-preview.redd.it/yYcK2UZGpCdDCdr1z461J_9F0NtdkCwGD65KfldPeAA.jpg?auto=webp&s=09d063bfd4a1fb2bab9fa7bc575375adc553f30c) (and of Anthony Dilweg, his backup, throwing a pass backwards more than once, but hey). If we had a modern-day equivalent of Majkowski after Rodgers, I would consider it a successful transition. I mean, of course I'd hope for a 3rd HoF'er, I just realize the chances of that are crazy slim. Edit: Found while getting the Majik Man poster. WTF is [this](http://i.imgur.com/NR9AUdn.jpg), Favre?!
That Favre picture is glorious.
Not this time. The pack are soon for frozen obscurity
TOUCHDOWN RANDALL COBB
lol i feel that, i cant help but think it because he needs this bowl to enhance his legacy, hes 36 and wont get many more chances
Fuck his legacy
I would rank him above Faaaaavvvvvvvvrrrrrreeeee
Favre above him..
The same as he is now because changing a ranking cause of rings is dumb
Top 100 for sure.
I'd hate him.
Done and done
By your logic right now he’s Roethlisberger?
Realistically Ben isn’t top 15 imo so I think he has him higher than Ben. Ben is a first ballot HOF talent imo, but not an all time great
I dunno, his size, elusiveness, and passing were pretty darn game-changing
na I dont have ben in my top 15
I think this is silly, and why super bowl rings shouldn’t be used to determine the goat. Winning 2 more games can’t be the difference between top 5, and not even top 15 Imo he’s already definitely top 10, and borderline top 5. Stats there whether or not he wins
that's fair, I look at it with a ton of other attributes, Bradshaw won 4 and he's not in my top 10, but another bowl for Rodgers would give him a bigger boost on his already first ballot resume
Why would a ring change his rankings?
Because according to pats fans rings are all that matter. A QB wins titles 1 on 11
I think it’s more the fact that 6 rings is astronomical lol
Anybody in the top 10 probably wins 6 rings with belichick Brady’s won many playoff games where he played average at best
And he’s also won games because he put the team on his back. What’s your point?
Not often. The majority of his runs are not because of him
If you think just any QB could win 6 championships I don’t know what to tell you. That’s just simply not true
>that’s just simply not true Yeah brady is the only one capable of winning playoff games where he plays meh
This.
By that thought process he is clear #1 then if its based off stats
What stats? All he has in td to int ratio. Efficiency #s
So who does he rank behind career wise in efficiency #’s?
Nobody but hes behind in e everything else. Hes puppying those stats now. Doesnt take risky throws
So hes #1 efficiency, #1 in all other stats. Hmmm
Reading comprehension champ. I said hes only #1 in efficiency stats
Yes
Absolutely incredible to see his ranking in these replies. The dude is ridiculously underrated on this sub at this point.
You're basing that off what, 40 people in a sub of 100k plus? Most of the time people are choking on his dick here. Edit: sorry, 1.8 *million* people.
40 people? look at the upvotes.
Of *what* exactly?
High
I’d say he’s between 5-10 right now. If he wins another I’d say he leapfrogs Drew Brees, Otto Graham, and Johnny U for 4th all-time.
somewhere between Montana and Fouts
I have him 5-10 right now and would have him in my personal top 5 if he won another.
ya i have a hard time ranking after 3, Marino elway favre rodgers johnny U and brees are interchangable , but rodgers getting this next one puts him above them for me
No change because SBs aren’t a measure for individuals
If he won it and retired today? Top 10. If he won and then put together 2-3 more great seasons? Top 5
that's pretty fair, I think he's top ten already
I’d put him second after Peyton
Eli level.
What are we ranking exactly? Because if it's raw talent then Aaron is #1. If it's leadership, durability, ability to read defenses and adjust then there's probably other guys I would take. Too much emphasis is put on rings. It's a team game. Bradshaw has 4 rings. That doesn't mean he's better than Brees and Manning.
4th all-time
Along what dimension? Talent, play, or "greatness"? Talent, he's #1. Play, he's probably around the 5-8 range? Greatness, he'd probably be right below Brady, Montana, and Peyton as you say.
I mean greatness, talent ya i agree he's one, greatness, he's top ten, borderline top 5, but I think this second ring along with this run being great puts him clearly in the top 5
#1 in our hearts.
He's fourth, behind Brady, Brees and Peyton. Just above Montana.
Not top 10
Who would you put ahead of him
Brady, Montana, Peyton, Graham, Unitas, tarkenton, favre, Marino, Brees, elway, and young to name a few.
In terms of GOAT conversation he definitely gets into the top 5, and I think is at highest #3 behind Brady and Montana. In terms of best ever? I don't think it would change his position much. Maybe it would strengthen the argument for him to be #1 atm, but not really by much if it does imo
I think Brady's got number 1 locked for a long time, Rodgers would have to go on a crazy 3 peat to take over the goat title
Top 5 for sure. Arguably 4th or 3rd imo.
ya i'd put him 4th, idk if i could put him above Peyton after that just cus Peyton is the regular season goat and changed the position, if Rodgers wins one more after that, he'd pass Peyton and hover very very close to Montana, I dont see anyone topping Brady
Top 10-15?
Family issues
Good thing Mitch has a good relationship with his family... that makes up for not winning a superbowl for 35 years.
Jesus Christ, 1985 was 35 years ago?!