RE: The Packers

RE: The Packers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk

Message

Richard Neussendorfer -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 12:22:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Most talented? I don't think so. Not if we're talking about the complete package. He's definitely amongst the "best" though. Top 5. So who's more talented in your mind? I think Vick is the only one in the same area code but I think Rodgers has a quicker release and is more accurate.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 2:07:06 PM)
I think we're disagreeing on what "talent" is. Vick is much more "talented" than Rodgers IMO. Rodgers is better.

Richard Neussendorfer -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 3:26:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz I think we're disagreeing on what "talent" is. Vick is much more "talented" than Rodgers IMO. Rodgers is better. I disagree. I think Rodgers is more talented and better. He's a much more pure passer than Vick and has a much quicker release. Also he's the second best running QB behind only Vick. Therefore I would say talentwise Rodgers beats him.

Trekgeekscott -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 3:55:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz I think we're disagreeing on what "talent" is. Vick is much more "talented" than Rodgers IMO. Rodgers is better. If I had to choose, I'd take Rodgers in a heartbeat. Vick has a lot more athletic ability, but Rodgers is far better as a QB. and in that regard has a lot more 'talent' than Vick.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 4:00:17 PM)
Again, I think there's a disagreement on what "talent" is. Talent doesn't mean "best" to me. Talent is physical talent, athleticism, etc. Vince Carter is one of the most "talented" basketball players I've ever seen. But I wouldn't put him in the top 100 players all-time. Like I said, I'd absolutely take Rodgers over Vick too; he's a top 5 QB. But I think Vick has more "talent". Arm strength, mobility, overall athleticism, etc.

Richard Neussendorfer -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 4:05:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think there's a disagreement on what "talent" is. Talent doesn't mean "best" to me. Talent is physical talent, athleticism, etc. Vince Carter is one of the most "talented" basketball players I've ever seen. But I wouldn't put him in the top 100 players all-time. Like I said, I'd absolutely take Rodgers over Vick too; he's a top 5 QB. But I think Vick has more "talent". Arm strength, mobility, overall athleticism, etc. I don't know that Vick has a stronger arm. Did you see those ropes that Rodgers was throwing? Also all measureables play into talent and Rodgers is much bigger and stronger. I understand where you're coming from but IMO Rodgers is more talented than any other QB in the game.[:D]

thebigo -> RE: The Packers (1/17/2011 9:18:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Richard Neussendorfer quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think there's a disagreement on what "talent" is. Talent doesn't mean "best" to me. Talent is physical talent, athleticism, etc. Vince Carter is one of the most "talented" basketball players I've ever seen. But I wouldn't put him in the top 100 players all-time. Like I said, I'd absolutely take Rodgers over Vick too; he's a top 5 QB. But I think Vick has more "talent". Arm strength, mobility, overall athleticism, etc. I don't know that Vick has a stronger arm. Did you see those ropes that Rodgers was throwing? Also all measureables play into talent and Rodgers is much bigger and stronger. I understand where you're coming from but IMO Rodgers is more talented than any other QB in the game.[:D] Rodgers may be bigger than Vick, but Vick is significantly stronger than Rodgers. If Rodgers had taken the hits Vick has taken, he would be a quivering pile of goo.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/18/2011 12:28:15 AM)
No way does Rodgers have a stronger arm than Vick. No way. Hell, that was one of the knocks on Rodgers from the beginning; arm strength. Vick may have the strongest arm in the NFL. Agreed with Todd as well.

Richard Neussendorfer -> RE: The Packers (1/18/2011 10:13:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz No way does Rodgers have a stronger arm than Vick. No way. Hell, that was one of the knocks on Rodgers from the beginning; arm strength. Vick may have the strongest arm in the NFL. Agreed with Todd as well. Seriously? I don't know what the scouts were looking at if they questioned Rodgers arm strength. I saw many Cal games and his arm was very live. It's gotten even more live in the NFL. The out patterns that he threw against the Falcons were on a rope and right where they were supposed to be. Also, the pass that Jennings fumbled was a laser between three defenders. Rodgers arm is VERY good.

Richard Neussendorfer -> RE: The Packers (1/18/2011 10:14:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thebigo quote: ORIGINAL: Richard Neussendorfer quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think there's a disagreement on what "talent" is. Talent doesn't mean "best" to me. Talent is physical talent, athleticism, etc. Vince Carter is one of the most "talented" basketball players I've ever seen. But I wouldn't put him in the top 100 players all-time. Like I said, I'd absolutely take Rodgers over Vick too; he's a top 5 QB. But I think Vick has more "talent". Arm strength, mobility, overall athleticism, etc. I don't know that Vick has a stronger arm. Did you see those ropes that Rodgers was throwing? Also all measureables play into talent and Rodgers is much bigger and stronger. I understand where you're coming from but IMO Rodgers is more talented than any other QB in the game.[:D] Rodgers may be bigger than Vick, but Vick is significantly stronger than Rodgers. If Rodgers had taken the hits Vick has taken, he would be a quivering pile of goo. Didn't Rodgers get sacked a bunch last year and this year too especially early in the year? I think they were both hit a ton.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/18/2011 11:17:20 PM)
I saw a lot of him at Cal too (lived out there at the time) but I thought he was always more "accurate" than arm strength. His accuracy was always very good. Hmm, maybe I'm misremembering. Still, I don't think his talent matches Vick's. He's better though.

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 6:08:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz I think we're disagreeing on what "talent" is. Vick is much more "talented" than Rodgers IMO. Rodgers is better. If I had to choose, I'd take Rodgers in a heartbeat. Vick has a lot more athletic ability, but Rodgers is far better as a QB. and in that regard has a lot more 'talent' than Vick. I have seen both play almost every game this year They are on the same level Rodgers is a more consistent passer. Vick can get inaccurate sometimes in the middle range. Vick can throw the deep ball better than anyone I have seen in years UNLESS he is physically beat up a lot in the game. Rodgers has the advantage of being taller so that helps a lot also. Vick is not even close to his listed height. However, people greatly underrate Vick's throwing ability - he is top 5 in just throwing. The Eagles have no offensive line. They benched Winston Justice DURING the playoff game for a stiff named King Dunlap! Also, the Eagles flyboy WRs are not built for tough football games. IOW, if you swapped Vick adn Rodgers this playoff the result would be the same. The Eagles were a 7-9 team at best with Kolb

thebigo -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 8:50:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Richard Neussendorfer quote: ORIGINAL: thebigo quote: ORIGINAL: Richard Neussendorfer quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think there's a disagreement on what "talent" is. Talent doesn't mean "best" to me. Talent is physical talent, athleticism, etc. Vince Carter is one of the most "talented" basketball players I've ever seen. But I wouldn't put him in the top 100 players all-time. Like I said, I'd absolutely take Rodgers over Vick too; he's a top 5 QB. But I think Vick has more "talent". Arm strength, mobility, overall athleticism, etc. I don't know that Vick has a stronger arm. Did you see those ropes that Rodgers was throwing? Also all measureables play into talent and Rodgers is much bigger and stronger. I understand where you're coming from but IMO Rodgers is more talented than any other QB in the game.[:D] Rodgers may be bigger than Vick, but Vick is significantly stronger than Rodgers. If Rodgers had taken the hits Vick has taken, he would be a quivering pile of goo. Didn't Rodgers get sacked a bunch last year and this year too especially early in the year? I think they were both hit a ton. Vick takes many hits that are normally meant for RBs. That's just his style. Most QB sacks do not involve high speed impacts like you see Vick regularly involved in.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 11:10:28 AM)
I would say that Vick has a stronger arm than Rodgers. DJ has it right that Rodgers is more accurate than Vick is and I'd say he's also much better at touch passes than Vick as well. While I will agree that Vick has more athleticism than Rodgers does, Rodgers is a better QB and has a better range of "talents".

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 11:45:25 AM)
Again, I think this is very subjective. To me, talent is things like arm strength, speed, jumping ability, size, overall strength, etc. Accuracy is something that comes with hard work, mechanics, etc. Ditto for things like touch. So in that light, Vick has more overall talent, but Rodgers is better, mainly because of his hard work.

thebigo -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 12:23:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think this is very subjective. To me, talent is things like arm strength, speed, jumping ability, size, overall strength, etc. Accuracy is something that comes with hard work, mechanics, etc. Ditto for things like touch. So in that light, Vick has more overall talent, but Rodgers is better, mainly because of his hard work. There is more to playing QB than physical talents and hard work. Hard work can help you improve some things you may not be good at, but someone who is innately better at something AND combines that with hard work will be better than the guy who is not so good to start out with but gets better with hard work. The guy with the most organized "minds eye" usually makes the best QB, basically seeing the field without having to look at it. And that is not something that is created equally for all.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 2:26:42 PM)
That's a solid point. I'm not sure how you can really quantify that though. We don't know what's going through each guy's head.

Cheesehead Craig -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 4:31:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think this is very subjective. To me, talent is things like arm strength, speed, jumping ability, size, overall strength, etc. Accuracy is something that comes with hard work, mechanics, etc. Ditto for things like touch. So in that light, Vick has more overall talent, but Rodgers is better, mainly because of his hard work. It comes down to different definitions of talent. I don't think it's all only about the physical attributes. But this discussion has been beat to death. Let's move on to something else.

Todd M -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 4:53:19 PM)
quote: Let's move on to something else. Packers are going DOWN! (to Dallas [sm=cry2.gif])

Richard Neussendorfer -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 5:59:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Todd Mallett quote: Let's move on to something else. Packers are going DOWN! (to Dallas [sm=cry2.gif]) [&:][&:]

thebigo -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 10:30:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz That's a solid point. I'm not sure how you can really quantify that though. We don't know what's going through each guy's head. True dat.

thebigo -> RE: The Packers (1/19/2011 10:31:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Todd Mallett quote: Let's move on to something else. Packers are going DOWN! (to Dallas [sm=cry2.gif]) They need to contact Mike Tice if they can't get rid of their SB tickets.

djskillz -> RE: The Packers (1/20/2011 12:28:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesehead Craig quote: ORIGINAL: djskillz Again, I think this is very subjective. To me, talent is things like arm strength, speed, jumping ability, size, overall strength, etc. Accuracy is something that comes with hard work, mechanics, etc. Ditto for things like touch. So in that light, Vick has more overall talent, but Rodgers is better, mainly because of his hard work. It comes down to different definitions of talent. I don't think it's all only about the physical attributes. But this discussion has been beat to death. Let's move on to something else. Exactly what I said at the very beginning of this. [;)]

jinxi -> RE: The Packers (1/20/2011 1:04:05 AM)
Packer has break out this season,maybe get the SB. _______________________ retail jerseys,nfl wholesale jersey

John Childress -> RE: The Packers (1/20/2011 7:21:31 AM)
Accuracy doesn't just come with hard work - it is a talent that includes hand-eye coordination and repeatable muscle exercises. You can train a QB to be more accurate than he might be but you can't take a QB who is not accurate and make him Peyton Manning no matter how much work. Also, Vick's running ability IS a talent and it helps him become a better QB. But Rodgers is no slouch running the ball either. Rodgers almost has the perfect mix of when to run - if he would just slide!

Page: << < prev 90 91 [92] 93 94 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode