http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/0-12-3...s--Rodgers.html

Thoughts?

I would say right now it is a coin flip. Cutler had better numbers but with a different team. Ask me next year.

Wait, were Cutler's numbers better last year?

Cutler 4,500 yards 25 TD 18 INT 62% completion 86 QB Rating

Rodgers 4,000 yards 28 TD 13 INT 64% completion 94 QB Rating

The only thing Cutler had was yards. But he is less disciplined. Keep in mind that this was his second full year as a starter and it was Rodgers' first. The hype machine got a bit out of control for the brat because he went to Chicago. He's decent, in a Jeff George kind of way, but he hasn't really proven much so far.

They are both very good. Rodgers had a better season than jay imo. Both are too young for a definitive answer and neither has proven to be a guy who can put the team on their shoulders just yet. That is more a product of age and experience at this point. I think Cutler compares more to Favre in terms of discipline and style. Rogers seems to be to be a bit smarter and more disciplined qb. Of course I'm biased and I only have a year to go from but I would take Rodgers any day.

Hopefully the competition will bring out the best in Rodgers.

That said, I'd take Rodgers 10 times out of 10 over Cutler. I just don't know about Cutler's mental make-up or capacity. He's a helluva talent, but I like the total package that Rodgers brings to the table. He's a good guy, plays smart, and has all the physical tools you could ever want in a QB.

I feel pretty damn fortunate to have gone from a HoF QB in Favre to such an up-and-comer in Rodgers.

I think the debate begins on 13 September at Lambeau, and hopefully doesn't conclude for another decade or so.

They're both promising players: Cutler has been consistent over 37 games as a starter, but Rodgers is entering his fifth year in the same offense; Minnesota fans would welcome either.

I'm looking forward to having some decent QBs in the NFC North: although the Pack's fortunes were brighter with the likes of Grossman and Kitna behind center, I ultimately prefer to watch (and beat!) quality opponents. The North/Central hasn't contained three good starting QBs in as long as anyone can remember (I suppose Erik Kramer and Scott Mitchell were OK for a couple of seasons, but I feel like I'm stretching the definition of 'quality' to include those guys). Now if Rodgers and Stafford fulfil their potential, and Cutler doesn't go to pot in the Ron Turner offense, we might get to see three standouts at the position — for a decade. That's exciting to me (and should be worrying for Viking fans).

I agree with Tony Dungy -- Cutler still has a lot to prove, and he will not have the benefit of some of the young talented receivers he had in Denver.

When he was with the Broncos, I would have said that Cutler was one of the most promising QBs in the league and that we'll be hearing his name for a long time.

Of course, now that he's in Chicago, I think he's a stupid worthless bum.

Both have a lot to prove... I really feel that Cutler is believed to be the better QB by people around the nation for 2 reasons. First he made the probowl last year and hence is now called 'a probowl quarterback' this has a big effect psychologically since logic follows that to make it to the Probowl you must be really good, when in actuality the AFC probowl QB's were not great last year. Second he has been starting on a high profile team for 3 years already. His first 2 seasons were not very good statistically speaking, and even his last was not stellar. IMO both these reason are why people feel he is a good QB, but not proof that he actually is.

Further Cutler had more game experience in the NFL, but lets not forget Rodgers was drafted a year before Cutler. So think it is fair to say that Rodgers has much more NFL experience than his one year of stating stats would indicate.

Nor the line he had in Denver.

There are a lot of misconceptions about Jay Cutler and the Broncos offense. I keep hearing so many people say as if its a fact that Cutler had a better season than Rodgers. That just simply isn't true. He had more yards but Rodgers had a higher average per attempt. Cutler had all those yards because he threw 600+ times. The telling stat is that if Rodgers had thrown as many passes as Cutler he would have surpassed him in yards and would have thrown 32 TDs and 15 INTs. For comparisons sake if Cutler had thrown as many passes as Aaron Rodgers he would have only thrown 21-22 TDs and 15-16 INTs. In all honesty 25 TDs is pretty disappointing for 616 pass attempts. His TD/INT ratio wasn't all that good.

Now let's compare the situations of Cutler and Rodgers. The Denver Broncos were tied for the fewest amount of sacks allowed in the NFL. A huge feat considering all the pass attempts. 11 sacks on 616 attempts that is mind-boggling. Rodgers on the other hand spent the year running for his life for the most part. Tauscher went down towards the end of the season and Clifton was battling injuries all year long. He didn't have a 22 year old LT that only gave up half a sack his rookie year. If you ask me Ryan Clady should have made the Pro Bowl over Jake Long. He was the best OT drafted last year.

Now another misconception; The Broncos didn't have a running game last year. They certainly weren't the Vikings or Panthers but they got the job done on the ground. They were ranked #12 in rushing yardage per game and tied for #2 in YPC. The Broncos certainly had a better running game than Green Bay or Chicago. The Broncos had 13 rushing TDs by someone other than the QB. The Packers only had 7 rushing TDs by somebody other than the QB. Rodgers was tied for #1 in the team in rushing TDs.

Now the most critical part of all. Red zone performance. Cutler had a red zone rating of 76 compared to Rodgers +100 QB Rating in the red zone. I saw a stat that Rodgers threw more than any QB in the red zone yet was the only QB in the NFL to not commit a turnover in the red zone. I think some people SEVERELY under-estimate the pressure that was on Rodgers last year. He had to be absolutely perfect most of the time for the Packers to win. I mean PERFECT. Cutler would have snapped in a heartbeat under that kind of pressure. Replacing a legend who decided to come back and was later traded to another team. Very little help from the running game and a defense that was as bad as the Detroit Lions in the 4th quarter. When its all said and done, the Packers were #5 in points scored while the Broncos were a paltry #16. Cutler had more offensive support than Rodgers did.

A lot is said about how bad the Broncos defense was but the Broncos offense didn't do it any favors. Although Cutler had a respectable INT% based on how many attempts he had, the INTs and turnovers that he committed were very costly. He had several INTs returned for TDs and committed quite a few turnovers in the red zone. Rodgers rarely put the defense in a bad spot. He didn't have a single INT returned for a TD and didn't commit a single turnover in the red zone. The defense sucked because it just plain sucked. Not because Rodgers put them in bad spots. You can't say the same for Cutler. I think Rodgers is a MUCH MUCH better decision maker than Cutler.

All in all, before Kyle Orton got injured his stats were very comparable to Cutler's. The important thing is that he had at most HALF the talent around him on offense than Cutler did in Denver. Cutler's QB Rating was 86 good for being the #16 ranked QB. He has yet to post a QB Rating in the 90s and until he does he is simply overrated. All the great QBs have posted QB Ratings in the 90s and even 100s in their good seasons. Cutler is this overhyped superstar despite posting a QB Rating marginally above the league average. Rodgers finished in the Top 10 in every meaningful QB category while Cutler finished outside the Top 10 in some very important categories.

I rest my case.

Well said indeed.

Can't we hold off this debate till we have all their career numbers?

I really don't feel like debating this for the next 10 years.

Excellent post strat!!!

Good ones by Pack_Euro_trash and Rman too!!!

As I have stated in several other posts-

Jay Cutler has not had a winning record as a starting QB...

since HIGH SCHOOL!!!!!!

Despite an excellent line and some great receivers and ok runnning backs
he has not led his team to the playoffs or even had a winning record since
his senior year in high school.

I know he's been compared to Brett Favre and that has a lot of people
drooling but I, for one, don't see it except for pure arm strength,
and can't wait to see how badly we kick the Bares!!

Go Pack!!

Better numbers really? More passing yards, that's about it.

There seems to be 2 people Cutler is most often compared to, Brett Favre and Jeff George. If he's Brett Favre it should be a great rivalry for years to come. If he's Jeff George, we have nothing to worry about. Depite his record, I think Cutler's a gifted QB. But does he have it mentally? Seems like he could be the proverbial million dollar arm with the 10 cent head. I guess we'll find out.

I've never been comfortable assigning wins and lsses to QBs in a team sport like football. So I don't put much stock into that, at least not yet. It's possible neither have hit their prime yet, though some in Denver feel that Cutler has maxed out his potential already.

But I'll take Rodgers over Cutler right now. I think he's at least as talented and is more mentally tough. I might be guilty of some homerism, though.

I think some people really overlook what you just wrote. In the NFC last year there were TEN QBs with a higher QB Rating than Cutler. In the NFC only five. Let's not forget that Tom Brady and Carson Palmer were lost for the entire year. Let's also not forget that Phillip Rivers easily outperformed Cutler and definitely deserved to go. That proves what an absolute joke the Pro Bowl is. Cutler wouldn't have come even close to sniffing the Pro Bowl in the NFC last year. Not even close. In the AFC it was pretty much Rivers, Cutler, and Manning. I mean Kerry Collins ended up playing as a Pro Bowl alternate. Kerry Collins!!! A really poor QB class last year. In the NFC, there were two QBs at one point threatening to pass Marino's passing yardage record. Rodgers was the third rated QB in the NFC behind Warner and Brees. Some people overlook that.

One thing I see a lot of people overlook is the fact that Rodgers and Brees were tied for most passing plays of 40+ yards with a whopping SIXTEEN!!! Everybody says Cutler has this cannon of an arm and that he definitely has a better arm. Well he only had 7 passing plays of 40+ yards or more. So either his arm is overrated or he can't hit the broad side of a barn at 40 yards because Denver's offense was mostly a dink and dunk offense last year.

I'm just tired of the misconceptions. I've seen so many people say Cutler is more mobile than Rodgers and he has a stronger arm. Well Rodgers ran a 4.7 40 out of college compared to Cutler's 4.8 time. I've never seen Cutler make a throw that Rodgers couldn't make. I will say that Cutler throws better on the run just from my observations. I just don't buy that Cutler is any more talented than Rodgers though. I know for sure that Rodgers is more mature and a better leader. I think he flat out is a better QB. I think people overlook how much Cutler contributed to Denver's bad scoring defense. He routinely threw INTs to give the defense a short field and had a few returned for TDs. Rodgers rarely made bad decisions like that. He rarely threw INTs in Green Bay territory and didn't have a single INT returned for a TD.

NeuBrew, understand, this is all tounge-in-cheek, and I simply couldn't resist.

My gosh- thank goodness the Packers never had a QB that was "undisciplined". It would have been a disaster!

Seriously though, I agree with you. How many of a QB's yards are YAC? For both QB's, that was significant. I really preferred Rodgers number of interceptions also- a welcome change. I also agree, that was Rodgers first year as a startr- and, he had to deal with all the "Favre fallout" to boot. No matter what the team says- believe me, they were affected by what happened.

Because of his poise and calm during the "Favre storm", I also give Rodgers the nod on the issue of leadership. I think you're on to something when you compare him to Jeff George. A million dollar arm, and a nickel head. Besides, who is he going to throw to in Chicago?

As far as Favre is concerned, my goodness, Percy Harvin must be the next coming of Randy Moss to get such glowing previews. The guy has done nothing so far- yet, the media keep projecting him to be a major threat in the passing game. This is speculation, not fact. When the games actually begin, we'll see how a rookie WR fares against the DB's in the NFL.

The question is: Was it fortune, or an opportunity the Packers chose to take advantage of? Yes, Rodgers dropped- but the Packers still had the choice of other players, yet chose him. Then, did the wise thing, and let him develop on the the sidelines (though the presence of Favre made that choice simple and palatable).

Still, when push came to shove after Favre's first retirement, the Packers didn't hesitate. They chose the future rather than the past. So far- all of 16 games- I have been happy with Rodgers' performance, but not the record of the Packers. I believe this situation will resolve itself, starting this year, when I am happy with both.

Some of that was just luck on Rodgers' part. He had eight balls counted as 'dropped interceptions' — second-most in the league behind Tyler Thigpen.

Because INTs are so critical, and happen so infrequently (unless you're a Lions fan), the numbers can be misleading. Lots of different things go into a pick. By the time you have enough evidence to say that a certain QB is interception-prone or not, he's 10 years into his career and a wily vet.

Adjusting the numbers to account for passes that were interceptable, rather than just intercepted, Rodgers comes out with a rate of 3.92% and Cutler 3.90%.

There may be good reasons to prefer Rodgers over Cutler, but a propensity for throwing interceptable passes isn't one of them.

Great post. Rodgers also has a better corp of WR's to throw to than most other QB's. Cutler may struggle a bit in Chicago unless Hester pans out and Olson continues to be the Pro Bowler that he is.

It's great post because it makes our QB look worse????

Your a tremendous fan!!

And ammek, not calling you out, but "interceptable passes" and "dropped interception" stats?

I've got to look further into their site.

Do they talk about "adjusted stats" for own team drops
and YAC reductions for missed tackles
or "great defensive play" adjustments
and "quality of your receivers" adjustments??
Don't forget the "off the WR's hands" adjustment
and the "tipped by the DLine" adjustment.
Why not a "TT sucks because your OL has no great players" adjustment.


Come on!!!


Go Pack!!

This makes me interested to see what Favre's ratio is.

I can't recall how many times he would throw what you term an "interceptable pass" only to see it dropped because of its velocity.

That said, these statistics don't consider the severity of each interception. In other words, some "interceptable passes" are far worse than others, especially ones that either (1) take points off the board if the offense is in scoring range, (2) put the opposing offense in scoring range, or (3) are returned for touchdowns (like on, say, an out pattern). Then there are the interceptions that are similar to punts, and though I still think these are detrimental--as they provide the opposing team with momentum and prevent your special teams from potentially making a big, momentum-swinging play--I can understand how this type of intercpeteion is more palatable than the three I listed.

because it puts things into perspective regarding QB's... no matter who we are discussing.

But then again, I didn't expect you to "get it". You never do.

Or caught in the end zone for a TD after going through a Viking defenders hands!

I never claimed to know what you mean, when you post "Great post" to a post which in fact, talks about how Rodgers is over-rated. .
Please try to explain a little more clearly.

And I never "get it"?? Yet it was you who replied to another poster earlier-



And that was your reply to a perfectly clear post.


Go Pack!!

Cutler also had arguably the best OL in the entire NFL that gave him all day to throw. Trust me, I'm from Denver, I've seen plenty of Broncos games. Cutler ROUTINELY had MUCH MUCH better protection than Rodgers did. Tauscher and Clifton plain sucked last year. Cutler was sacked 1/3 as many times as Rodgers was. Cutler was only sacked TWELVE TIMES. The Broncos WRs aren't too shabby either. I seem to recall one of them playing in the Pro Bowl lined up against Al Harris last year. Brandon Marshall is a BEAST!!!

Also ammek's response completely missed my point. I wasn't talking about total INTs. I was talking about the consequences of INTs. My point was about Rodgers decision making. He rarely threw INTs in GB territory or in the red zone. That was my entire point. Rodgers had a much better TD/INT ratio as a whole than Cutler has ever even come close to in just one season as a starter.

Sorry, I didn't realize I'd dropped in on StalinChatters by mistake.

As strat has pointed out in this thread, there are a ton of reasons to believe that Rodgers is a genuine franchise QB who compares pretty well to Cutler. I was just making the observation that one — and only one — of the stats employed in Rodgers' favor is less clear-cut than it may appear. The main reason for this is not that Rodgers is "over-rated", but that he has played only one season, during which he was the beneficiary of some good luck with dropped interceptions. If he had had terrible luck, and all eight of the interceptable passes had actually been intercepted, he would have finished with 21 INTs. There would be threads accusing him of fuzzy decision-making and questionable accuracy. It really is a fine line.



They do in fact measure all those things, although most are not incorporated into their "adjusted" stats. Clearly there's room for plenty of human error in there, but (together with Stats, Inc) their data do go a long way to challenge some of my assumptions about what my (and others') eyes have seen on the field. That's their value, from my point of view.



strat, I agree with a lot of what you wrote about Cutler, his line, and his receivers, and appreciate your perspective as a Denverite. However, I'm not sure there is ever a good spot on the field to throw a pick! Nine of Rodgers' 13 picks (and an unknown number of his dropped INTs) actually came in GB territory, although only one was thrown inside the GB 20. More significant — and excusable — is the fact that more than half of his picks came with the Pack trailing by more than a TD. In other words, most of Rodgers' INTs were situational: a consequence of quarterbacking a team in a losing situation.

Indeed what is most impressive about Rodgers, as compared with Cutler, is not the downside of his game (picks) but the upside. When their teams were trailing by 9-16 points, both QBs were called upon to throw 164 times — representing 30.6% of Rodgers' total pass attempts and 26.6% of Cutler's. Both QBs threw 7 picks. However, Rodgers completed 20 more passes (108 versus 88) for nearly 250 extra yards, with four more first downs, six more long gains, and four more touchdowns. (He was sacked 15 times, compared with 6 for Cutler.)

Rodgers' passer rating while trailing by 9-16 points was a sensational 94.8, compared with Cutler's 68.0, Peyton Manning's 91.9, or Drew Brees' 84.9.

Undoubtedly Rodgers got lucky with the dropped INTs. But he was the most aggressive come-from-behind QB in the NFL last year, and probably the most successful. Credit where it's due.

The OL point is a good one. The Denver OL was fantastic last year.

No doubt about it! I think our OL could be Rodgers achillies heel....if he has one. Cutler will have a decent run game and the Bear OL is alright. But Rodgers, overall, everything being equal, is a better QB.

Round one to Rodgers. The numbers make it look like a KO, but it was closer than that. Hindered by a weak supporting cast and some wacky playcalling, both QBs struggled. Rodgers' issues were mainly to do with touch and accuracy, Cutler's with vision and decision-making.

The WRs didn't help either passer. Green Bay's dropped some catchable balls, Chicago's ran some horrible routes. McCarthy called plenty of deep passes, but Rodgers overthrew his receivers and seemed to release the ball too early. Cutler made a couple of nice deep throws, looking Woodson off on a long completion in the first half, and floating a perfect TD to Devin Hester. But at other times he threw into traffic. At least three passes were lobbed into space nowhere near a Bears receiver: two of them were picked and one dropped by the Packer secondary.

Neither offensive line proved to be much cop at pass protection, and neither quarterback dealt well with the pressure. Rodgers' errors were less severe than Cutler's. Rodgers stayed in the pocket more readily than last year, but he got jumpier as the game went on; even the winning touchdown pass came with a wince and a prayer. His failure to pick up a corner blitz led to a safety, but he did an ok job of reading the Bears' coverage and was able to check down on passes to Lee, Grant and Wynn. As was mentioned earlier in the thread, in 2008,



But in 2009 he doesn't. It showed. His final interception betrayed a lack of anticipation and, above all, a lack of preparation: having gone through his reads, Cutler unloaded a weak, complacent pass without appreciating Al Harris's man coverage or the jam he had put on Johnny Knox before the ball was released. Harris has been doing exactly that since the last millennium. There was no excuse for that throw.

Both QBs are gifted physically but last night in the clutch Rodgers came thru and Cutler didn't. End of story.

Here is my take. I think Cutler is one of the most physically gifted QBs in the NFL. He just doesn't have his head screwed on straight. Just as an observation from watching the guy play nearly every Sunday here in Denver he has immense talent but has some serious emotional issues. He gets really down when things are going bad and that rubs off on his teammates. Well before the end of last season some talk radio hosts were questioning his maturity and leadership. So many times you would see him frowning and casually walking onto the field for an offensive possession. Sometimes it looks like the guy doesn't even care if his team wins. He clearly lets his emotions get the best of him. Tony Dungy questioned Chicago's trade for Cutler based on Cutler's maturity and leadership. I think it showed last night. QBs have bad games but they must maintain their composure. I've never seen Aaron Rodgers behave that way when having a bad game. If Cutler keeps getting into defensive players faces one of them is going to take his head off eventually. I'm sure Clay Matthews would have if given the chance. So far I just don't think the guy can take the pressure of being an NFL QB. He has the talent to possibly be the best in the NFL but playing QB isn't just about physical skills. You have to be a leader and deal with pressure and adversity as well. So far Cutler just hasn't shown he is capable of dealing with adversity. Something doesn't go his way and starts complaining and flipping out.

With that said, I don't think Cutler is more talented than Rodgers. I've seen people try to make that claim but none of it is backed by facts. I've seen so many people say Cutler is more mobile and has a stronger arm than Rodgers. This isn't reality. Rodgers ran a faster 40 coming out of college and I've never seen Cutler make a throw that Rodgers couldn't. I just don't understand how a guy can be so overhyped. Everybody says he is super mobile and has a cannon of an arm. If his arm is so strong then why did Rodgers have over twice as many big plays last year than Cutler? Cutler is certainly a huge upgrade over Kyle Orton and certainly makes the Bears a better team but he isn't Drew Brees or Peyton Manning. When I first heard about the Chicago trade I was pretty worried but after thinking about it for some time, I don't think Cutler makes the Bears that much better. I don't think he turns them into a Super Bowl caliber team. A lot of people assume certain things will carry over from Denver to Chicago. I don't. I've seen people state the fact that Cutler was 12-1 in Denver when the defense gave up 21 points or less and since Chicago routinely gives up fewer points than that they would be unstoppable. Well guess what, Cutler also had one of the best offensive supporting casts in the NFL and an offensive genius calling plays in Denver. He doesn't have that in Chicago. The Bears OL is a far cry from the unit he had in Denver. He is never going to produce the type of gawdy stats that he produced in Denver until the Bears upgrade their OL, WRs and bring an OC that knows how to call a game.

I don't understand this. Is your fan rating scale dependent upon a selective examination of facts - particularly with a heavy emphasis on ignoring inconvenient facts?

It was an excellent post, in fact. Ammek has outdone himself in this thread and in combination with Strat, they are a compelling combination. Personally, I found it all quite interesting. I suppose that make me a bad patriot fan too.

Right now, Rodgers has the best combination of throwing and running in the NFL.

He doesn't have the position perfected yet quite like Brady or Manning or Brees, but he did an excellent job the other night taking what the defense gave him (which wasn't much, Mr. Barbre).

That's a veteran game he played.

Brett Favre throws at least two picks in that game.

Cutler threw four.

Rodgers did what he had to do to win. All you can ask from your QB.

Great post. You have to love the fact that he didn't turn it over at all.

In fact, one has to wonder what kind of game he would have had, if he wasn't running for his life most of the game.

I think we all know what type of game he would have had without pressure - we saw that all during the preseason.

Couldn't agree more. It was good to see Rodgers finally maintain his composure late in the game and put the team on his back and will them to victory. He looked really good out there on that last drive. He made good smart plays and led an efficient drive to mid-field before hitting Jennings on that 50 yard drive. I don't know why the analysts were criticizing the Packers offense of using too much time. They only needed a FG and were already at mid-field. Last year our problem was that we scored too quickly and left the other team too much time on the clock.

Collinsworth's comments on that 2nd down scramble to mid-field kind of irked me a little bit. I don't think it would have been smart for Rodgers to expose himself in that situation. I'm not sure if Collinsworth understands our QB situation. Rodgers won the game without picking up the 1st down in that situation anyway but if he had taken the hit to pickup the 1st down and got injured we might not win another game with Flynn as QB. He said you have to do anything to win and mentioned that great scramble by John Elway against the Packers in the Super Bowl. That was the Super Bowl. You have to do anything possible to win that game. Its the final season of the year. Yes in important to win games but getting injured for a significant part of the season in Week one doesn't exactly help the team when we have Flynn and Brohm behind Aaron Rodgers.

Yeah, that was pretty perplexing to me as well.

It's not like he slid and left 4 or 5 yards on the table. It was ONE yard for cryin' out loud in the first game of the season - not his final hurrah in the Super Bowl like Elway.

If he dives on that play and gets injured everyone is then asking, "Why didn't he just slide?"

Yeah, I don't think he would have gotten there anyway and would have take a blow to the head for his efforts. We still had 2 downs to get that one yard. Although it looked like he got a very favorable spot on that slide. It probably should have been at least a yard farther back if they're marking it where the slide started.

Yeah, this isn't Madden where I, (true story) did a QB sneak w/ Rodgers last night and he dove and front flipped OVER a defender.

That was awesome.

Risking your franchise QB's health in week 1 is not.

Or Rodgers could be like McNabb. Its 31-10 against the Panthers and he cracks his rib scrambling for a TD. Does this guy have a brain? They were up by 3 TDs in the 4th quarter. Slide moron. What the heck do they have Brian Wesbrook for? He got the TD but might miss several games. The Saints are now favored to beat the Eagles. Sacrificing everything to win the first game of the season is not very smart. Sure they won the game but they might lose the next couple of games and start off 1-3. That was a pretty boneheaded comment by Collinsworth.