RE: The Packers

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: The Packers

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk >> RE: The Packers

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 12:22:25 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19614
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

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.

Post #: 2276

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 2:07:06 PM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

I think we're disagreeing on what "talent" is.

Vick is much more "talented" than Rodgers IMO.

Rodgers is better.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2277

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 3:26:45 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19614
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

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.

Post #: 2278

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 3:55:41 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39278
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 2279

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 4:00:17 PM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2280

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 4:05:24 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19614
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

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.

Post #: 2281

RE: The Packers - 1/17/2011 9:18:07 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28303
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

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.

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.

Post #: 2282

RE: The Packers - 1/18/2011 12:28:15 AM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2283

RE: The Packers - 1/18/2011 10:13:28 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19614
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

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.

Post #: 2284

RE: The Packers - 1/18/2011 10:14:32 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19614
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

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.

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.

Post #: 2285

RE: The Packers - 1/18/2011 11:17:20 PM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2286

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 6:08:51 AM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

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

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2287

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 8:50:45 AM

thebigo

Posts: 28303
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

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.

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.

Post #: 2288

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 11:10:28 AM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

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".

Post #: 2289

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 11:45:25 AM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2290

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 12:23:56 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28303
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

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.

< Message edited by thebigo -- 1/19/2011 12:26:35 PM >

Post #: 2291

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 2:26:42 PM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2292

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 4:31:24 PM

Cheesehead Craig

Posts: 967
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: The Frozen Tundra
Status: offline

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.

Post #: 2293

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 4:53:19 PM

Todd M

Posts: 40668
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

Let's move on to something else.

Packers are going DOWN!

(to Dallas

)

Post #: 2294

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 5:59:55 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19614
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd Mallett

quote:

Let's move on to something else.

Packers are going DOWN!

(to Dallas )

Post #: 2295

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 10:30:56 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28303
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

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.

Post #: 2296

RE: The Packers - 1/19/2011 10:31:58 PM

thebigo

Posts: 28303
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd Mallett

quote:

Let's move on to something else.

Packers are going DOWN!

(to Dallas )

They need to contact Mike Tice if they can't get rid of their SB tickets.

Post #: 2297

RE: The Packers - 1/20/2011 12:28:45 AM

djskillz

Posts: 56863
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."

Post #: 2298

RE: The Packers - 1/20/2011 1:04:05 AM

jinxi

Posts: 15
Joined: 1/20/2011
Status: offline

Packer has break out this season,maybe get the SB.
_______________________
retail jerseys,nfl wholesale jersey

Post #: 2299

RE: The Packers - 1/20/2011 7:21:31 AM

John Childress

Posts: 42898
Joined: 7/15/2007
Status: offline

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!

_____________________________

No more acceptance of mediocrity!!!! EVER!

Post #: 2300