Help me settle a debate on who the better QB is between...

[55]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jistic

There's not one...not a single one GM in the league that would take Vick over Rodgers at this moment in time. I wouldn't even classify this as a debate.

My sentiments exactly.

[Chip Douglass]

Quote: Originally Posted by biglen

I was trying to say that Rodgers comes in right behind those guys I listed and everything after Vick is garbage.

Really now?

Matt Schaub, Tony Romo, Eli Manning, Josh Freeman, Matt Cassel, Jay Cutler, Kyle Orton, and David Garrard are garbage?

I get that you're a Philadelphia homer and have to classify 80% of the league's QBs as garbage in order to make your point, but even canesfan211 over in the college football forum thinks this is overboard.

[Antec]

For starters I'd take Rodgers.

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Rodgers didn't fumble the ball, Quinn hit the ball out of his arms, and they recovered the ball.

Dumbfounded by this. If getting the ball knocked out from your possession isn't a fumble, what is?

[HesTheCoach]

Definitely Rodgers. He has a more accurate arm across the entire football field and can read defenses better.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by Antec

For starters I'd take Rodgers. Dumbfounded by this. If getting the ball knocked out from your possession isn't a fumble, what is?

I wasn't clear on this one at all, sorry.

Rodgers had the ball in his hands and it was knocked out by Quinn Johnson because he went the wrong way.

So, yes, technically, Rodgers fumbled the ball. Johnson got an earful on the sideline for the mental and physical error.

[z Revis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Chip Douglass

Vick had a great September-early December, but after a few months of defensive adjusting; he looked like Atlanta Michael Vick and had a world of trouble recognizing the blitz. You have to go with Rodgers here.

Quote: Originally Posted by Chrisksaint

Rodgers and it's really not even close for me personally, I'll take the sustained success if rodgers

Quote: Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan

I will say this in that people do underestimate Rodgers' scrambling ability though. He may not make the Highlight reel plays like Vick but he's somebody you definitely have to consider as a duel threat.

Quote: Originally Posted by Jistic

There's not one...not a single one GM in the league that would take Vick over Rodgers at this moment in time. I wouldn't even classify this as a debate.

Quote: Originally Posted by jeremym480

Rodgers and it's not even close.

Quote: Originally Posted by Driver80

Rodgers. I'd never trade Rodgers for anything that's not Peyton Manning or Tom Brady.

Quote: Originally Posted by WazzuRC

I'm taking Rodgers every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

All of this.

Quote: Originally Posted by kng23rich

I use to love Manning but I just feel he over thinks things at times instead of just going with the flow.

Definitely seems to be doing this lately, but I think he's been forced to. Not a lot of help from the run game and key guys were injured. It seems like everything in that offense was a grind this year and it has to be perfect for it to work. It's just not as fluid as it was say last year.

Quote: Originally Posted by jnes12eaglesfan

QB rating is pretty much a pointless stat anymore. It is like judging a pitcher solely by his W-L

Wouldn't call it pointless. Usually it's a good gauge of how the QB performed, but it can be skewed a bit(say the QB throws a late TD when the game is already over).

However..

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Disagree. Career ratings are is a good yardstick to measure QB's. Just like OPS is a good measuring in baseball. Those ratings show Rodgers is more consistent vs Vick.

This. Career ratings are a good measuring stick. Hard for it to be skewed when you're counting hundreds of games.

[Rocky]

Quote: Originally Posted by z Revis

Wouldn't call it pointless. Usually it's a good gauge of how the QB performed, but it can be skewed a bit(say the QB throws a late TD when the game is already over). However.. This. Career ratings are a good measuring stick. Hard for it to be skewed when you're counting hundreds of games.

I don't know. Using career QB rating in this instance seems to just be used to skew things in favor of Rodgers.

Vick, by all accounts, is a different QB than he was in Atlanta emotionally, mentally, and physically (not as explosive now as he was in ATL). Not really fair to compare that QB to the QB Vick is now.

I would still take Rodgers due to his age, durability, and accuracy, but I don't think what he did in Atlanta is really relevant to the debate on who is better now.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rocky

I don't know. Using career QB rating in this instance seems to just be used to skew things in favor of Rodgers. Vick, by all accounts, is a different QB than he was in Atlanta emotionally, mentally, and physically (not as explosive now as he was in ATL). Not really fair to compare that QB to the QB Vick is now. I would still take Rodgers due to his age, durability, and accuracy, but I don't think what he did in Atlanta is really relevant to the debate on who is better now.

I see your side, but it's not fair to gage him on this season, either. It's a very small sample size compared to his previous seasons in ATL. We don't know what Vick we will be getting in the future based off of one season.