Best QB In NFC North

[Dr. Gonzo]

Rosencoptre is easily the most athletic QB in the division and we all know athletic = successful.

[bored of education]

John David Booty

IBTL

[Dr. Gonzo]

Originally Posted by bored of education

John David Booty

IBTL

Well obviously he is the best. I blame Childress for not letting him prove it to the world.

[ChezPower4]

Originally Posted by Dr. Gonzo

Rosencoptre is easily the most athletic QB in the division and we all know athletic = successful.

Sage= Championship

[Packystan]

It's closer than people may think. Cutler has that Bazooka arm and is more accurate than people give him credit for, but I still have to give the nod to Rodgers. I think Rodgers' decision making is what sets him apart. Yes, he needs to make better decisions when it counts, but he threw for over 4,000 yards, had a 63.6 comp pct, and only had 13 ints. I have a lot of love naturally for Cutler and his Favre like gunslinging mentality, but with him going to a Chicago offense that has very few offensive weapons, a shaky offensive line and an aging D, I dont see him to making a huge impact like a lot of people have been saying.

This is great for the NFC North though no doubt.

[Mr. Hero]

As an outsider I've gotta say Cutler, Rodgers is a very good QB and has vindicated me for saying he should've gone number one overall, but Cutler's a notch better, he's shown more for longer. Yes he takes a lot of risks but he's pass/int ratio is exceptional and he's shown he can carry a team into playoff contention, he did so this past season with no defense and new starting RB each week. This isn't an insult to rodgers at all, Cutler's just an exceptional young QB and one of the three best QBs in the league under thirty.

[bearsfan_51]

Originally Posted by Packystan

It's closer than people may think. Cutler has that Bazooka arm and is more accurate than people give him credit for, but I still have to give the nod to Rodgers. I think Rodgers' decision making is what sets him apart. Yes, he needs to make better decisions when it counts, but he threw for over 4,000 yards, had a 63.6 comp pct, and only had 13 ints. I have a lot of love naturally for Cutler and his Favre like gunslinging mentality, but with him going to a Chicago offense that has very few offensive weapons, a shaky offensive line and an aging D, I dont see him to making a huge impact like a lot of people have been saying.

This is great for the NFC North though no doubt.

Come on. Be honest with yourself. Rodgers had a great first year, but the reason you think he's better than Cutler is because you're a Packers fan. I wish you guys could at least own up to that.

[Packystan]

Originally Posted by bearsfan 51

Come on. Be honest with yourself. Rodgers had a great first year, but the reason you think he's better than Cutler is because you're a Packers fan. I wish you guys could at least own up to that.

Exactly, he had a great year being put in the situation of not only taking over a 13-3 team, but taking the spot of a quarterback that finished only behind Brady for the MVP. When is the last time you've seen a first year quarterback succeed in that much of a pressure situation. Packer fans were blessed, and spoiled to seeing the same quarterback walk out on the field, every game, for 16 years. He knew he was going to be held to Favre's standard every game, and played extremely well. He went through the adversity of playing through an injury. He showed the toughness of getting pummeled during the year and getting right back up and producing. The defense had a lot of key injuries during the year, and if not for noticable defensive breakdowns at the end of games, and 2 special teams plays that would normally have been made weren't, they would have been well in contention.

Like I said, Jay Cutler is a good quarterback, but he already had 21 carrer starts in the league, compared to 0 for Rodgers. Not only that but, but other than passing yards, ALL of Rodgers' stats would have been career highs for Cutler.

If Cutler was better than Rodgers, I would be glad to admit it, because honestly, I didn't expect Rodgers to perform as well as he did, and this is just my opinion. I've liked Cutler since he was at Vandy, I love a great quarterback just as much as the next guy. I never said Aaron was far and away better than Jay, like i said, its close. But I'd take Rodgers.

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

Come on. Be honest with yourself. Rodgers had a great first year, but the reason you think he's better than Cutler is because you're a Packers fan. I wish you guys could at least own up to that.

or the matter of him putting up better stats, idk...

[regoob2]

Originally Posted by Packystan

Exactly, he had a great year being put in the situation of not only taking over a 13-3 team, but taking the spot of a quarterback that finished only behind Brady for the MVP. When is the last time you've seen a first year quarterback succeed in that much of a pressure situation. Packer fans were blessed, and spoiled to seeing the same quarterback walk out on the field, every game, for 16 years. He knew he was going to be held to Favre's standard every game, and played extremely well. He went through the adversity of playing through an injury. He showed the toughness of getting pummeled during the year and getting right back up and producing. The defense had a lot of key injuries during the year, and if not for noticable defensive breakdowns at the end of games, and 2 special teams plays that would normally have been made weren't, they would have been well in contention.

Like I said, Jay Cutler is a good quarterback, but he already had 21 carrer starts in the league, compared to 0 for Rodgers. Not only that but, but other than passing yards, ALL of Rodgers' stats would have been career highs for Cutler.

If Cutler was better than Rodgers, I would be glad to admit it, because honestly, I didn't expect Rodgers to perform as well as he did, and this is just my opinion. I've liked Cutler since he was at Vandy, I love a great quarterback just as much as the next guy. I never said Aaron was far and away better than Jay, like i said, its close. But I'd take Rodgers.

Im not trying to take a shot at the Pack but do you really want to bring up your record when trying to say Rodgers is better? And if the Bears didnt lose so many close games you guys one again wouldnt have been in contention. Everyone loses close games.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

or the matter of him putting up better stats, idk...

cause stats tell the whole story.

Tell me, who had the better defense? Who had the better Receiving Corps? Who had the better run game?

[regoob2]

No one is ever going to win this argument. Its bears fans vs Packer fans. We'll just have to see who has the better season.

[BaLLiN]

if im looking overall player id take cutler, i dont think rodgers would do the crazy **** that cutler does like throw his body infront of defenders to help his RB.

The test will be to produce with the bears recievers, rodgers has pretty good WC WRs, Cutler doesnt even have 1 big target and he's a gun slinger.

now cutlers gunna say "screw this, im going long to hester" and itll actually work unlike what grossman was trying to do.

[Dr. Gonzo]

As a Vikings fan I would take Cutler even if he is a whiny ***** who I despise (now that he is a Bear I hate him even more). This season will go a long way towards proving who is better. It will still be tough to compare the two considering how much better the Packers receiving corp is but I think it will be a lot easier to compare the two after this year than it is now.

[GB12]

A big disadvantage in this argument is that people have watched Cutler for 2+ years while Rodgers has only had one. After Rodgers does it again next year he will get more respect.

[Boston]

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

Come on. Be honest with yourself. Rodgers had a great first year, but the reason you think he's better than Cutler is because you're a Packers fan. I wish you guys could at least own up to that.

Come on now, you know it goes the same way for Bears fans with Cutler.

Originally Posted by GB12

A big disadvantage in this argument is that people have watched Cutler for 2+ years while Rodgers has only had one. After Rodgers does it again next year he will get more respect.

And the fact that Cutler has pretty much been performing right out of the gates, after going high in the first round.

In all honesty, I think Cutler is better then Rodgers at this point, but I don't think there's that big of a gap, and I think it's going to get even smaller after this season.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Originally Posted by GB12

A big disadvantage in this argument is that people have watched Cutler for 2+ years while Rodgers has only had one. After Rodgers does it again next year he will get more respect.

A little cocky there. I hope for your sake that doesn't end up biting you in the ass.

On second thought I kind of day, I can't have myself every hoping a Packer does good.

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

cause stats tell the whole story.

Tell me, who had the better defense? Who had the better Receiving Corps? Who had the better run game?

We had a better defense, but they were also crap. They had the better receiving corps, and they had a better run game...Plus, if we had the better defense then Cutler should have put up even more stats, because he needed to always score.

[regoob2]

I wouldnt be surprised at all if Rodgers puts up better numbers than Cutler. Rodgers has 2 great WRs to throw to and he's been in GB for 5 years now. Id be very happy if Cutler throws for 3500 and 20+ TDs. I think now that we finally have a legit QB Forte is really gonna break out next season behind a much improved passing game and OL.

[regoob2]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

We had a better defense, but they were also crap. They had the better receiving corps, and they had a better run game...Plus, if we had the better defense then Cutler should have put up even more stats, because he needed to always score.

Id take GBs WRs over Denver'.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

We had a better defense, but they were also crap. They had the better receiving corps, and they had a better run game...Plus, if we had the better defense then Cutler should have put up even more stats, because he needed to always score.

really? after all these threads: Greg Jennings is at least on par with Marshall if not better now the receiving corps is suddenly worse?

I remember when packers fans were trying to sell the Packers WR Corps as the best in the NFC at least the one with most depth and like in the top3 or something. I mean Ruvell Martin is better than berrian, i just read that yesterday on here

[GB12]

Originally Posted by regoob2

Id take GBs WRs over Denver'.

No question.

Jennings and Marshall are more or less even
Driver is better than Royal (for last year at least, could change in '09)
Nelson/Jones/Martin are better than Stokely/Jackson/Jackson

[Gay Ork Wang]

yea but i see how the guy is trying hard to make a point for rodgers

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

yea but i see how the guy is trying hard to make a point for rodgers

TEs:
Graham=Lee
Scheffler>Finely
WRs:
Marshall> Driver(last time I check, he was our number one. Marshall is also better then Jennings, don't let the homer side get to you)
Royal<Jennings
Stokley>Nelson
Jackson<Martin

James Jones was only healthy for 10 games, if that, he was battling injuries last year.

Based on last year, since Rodgers only played last year, he was completely the better qb. Plus, he was playing through injuries and didn't have the lucky calls the Broncos got last year.

[Dr. Gonzo]

I just thought about this. Stafford (I assume he is the Lions pick), Cutler, Rodgers and m personal Jesus John David Booty all in the same division. There should be some great QB battles ahead (nobody better post any JDB hate, let me have my deity).