"Tom Brady is the most accomplished QB, but Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL"

>"Tom Brady is the most accomplished QB, but Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL"

Why do people say this? Their stats are very close, but Brady has not only more wins and titles, but a massive, incomparable advantage when it comes to clutch situations and comebacks. People act like Rodgers has never had a bad game and only loses games by scores of 41-38 because of his defense, but Rodgers has shit the bed in key games (including postseason) a few times for sure.

Is it just cause Rodgers runs better and has a stronger arm? Haven't people learned by now that better style doesn't mean shit if you're not placing the ball where it needs to be - when it needs to be there - like Brady?

I REALLY REALLY LIEK PEEPEE

because Rodgers is flashier and people attribute his team catching few hail mary's solely to him for some reason

>Their stats are very close
lolno. Rodgers is the best passer ever by far. You could argue that Brady is the better QB but he's just a glorified game manager, VERY inconsistent throwing deep and he gets exposed every time Edelman sits. Rodgers OTOH has never had a good receiver (Nelson is not elite don't even @ me) and routinely completes 50+ yard bombs with practice squad scrubs. There's really no comparison

Both benefit from massive refball, but Brady even moreso.

There is not a team more babied by the refs than the Packers

>he's a better passer

Kek. This has always been one of the most nonsensical arguments.

Quarterback A throws a ball hard and perfectly to a guy well short of a first down and then gets tackled

Quarterback B throws an ugly duck to someone coming out of a route who by virtue of the timing is open for the first

Quarterback A is the better passer, Quarterback B is the better quarterback. Rodgers being able to make more throws means nothing is he's not making the right ones in the right spot at the right time.

Because people want to hate on Tom Brady and so they juggle around with ways to do it

Although Peyton Manning was a better quarterback than Brady. That's an example where "accomplished vs great" came into play

They just want to reinvent it

how much does rodgers o line want to kill him for running around like a chicken while praying someone can get separation?

I always contended that Manning was better than Brady until about a year or so ago. The clutch thing is what swayed me; honestly, as amazing as Peyton was, I just don't think he would've ever had it in him to beat the Seahawks in that SuperBowl, or come anywhere close to what Brady did in the second half of that SuperBowl.

the second half of that SuperBowl against the Falcons, I mean. Granted, rime Peyton might've started the game better, but Brady's ballsiness and level of play to come back was unprecedented and borderline insanity.

Manning was amazing until he plays a legit defense. That's why he sucked in the playoffs.

Brady has always had the better coach. When Tom went down for the season they still went 11-5. When Rodgers went down for half a season they almost lost every game without him. The Patriots without Tom are functional whereas the McCarthy Packers sans Rodgers are an absolute trainwreck.

As for the close games stat, it is precisely because he has a shit defense that almost never helps him out. Sometimes I feel like I'm stuck in groundhog day watching the Packers go ahead by a score with a minute and a half every year in the playoffs only to quickly concede to the other team in like a minute.

And not to invoke the eye test but you can just tell Rodgers is a superior passer and athlete. That's why they say he's "better", his ceiling is higher, but Tom's consistency can't be beaten.

Manning is literally the anti-clutch

>brady cocksuckers shitposting again

took you half a week to get over that loss

>Gayron Floggers

Rodgers tens to rely far too much on broken plays for his offense.

Brady is a lot more surgical, superior at reading defenses and has proven to be capable of going deep, short, intermediate, at various stages throughout his career or even within the game.

The clutch advantage Brady has is also pretty obvious too. By every metric, Rodgers' comeback stats are horrendous. He also has just 1 or 2 games throwing 50+ passes. Both losses. Brady has 27 and won 18 of them - the only QB in history to have a winning record while throwing 50+ passes. Speaks volumes about his ability to put the team on his back and win.

Rodgers' stats in NFCCGs are also putrid.

Brady is the most dedicated QB in the NFL and that, plus BB is what got him 5 rings.

Put any other QB In BB's system and I guarantee you they wouldn't get more than 3 rings. Brady being Brady is what won 5 superbowls, his iron will, his drive, his tenaciousness and fierceness as an opponent, dedicating mind, body, soul and spirit to being the best at football and being #1 at his position, the QB which he as achieved, but it extends even further than that, not only on the field but off the field his dedication to keeping healthy, inshape, and out of trouble. Practicing early at 5am every day, and never counts himself out until the last goddamn moment, and of course even his marriage to the worlds richest supermodel who is so much wealthier than Tom that Brady can afford to take paycuts in order for other stars to be able to stay on the roster improving the overall team strength and core, not to mention the dude is just a natural leader, all his teammates adore and respect the dude, and he drives them to be their best too it's just his energy as a person.

So when we're talking about pure athletic skill cap, Rodgers might take the cake, but everywhere else Brady just outshines every other quarterback in the NFL. Dedication.

>Brady has always had the better coach. When Tom went down for the season they still went 11-5.

It's incredible just how dumb and simple minded you have to be to make this your "argument".

Cassell went 11-5 vs Brady going 18-0 the year before with a near identical roster. That's a difference of 7 damn games. Cassell had a significantly easier schedule and missed the playoffs. He also got blown out at home twice that year. Does Brady do that? Hell no. He probably goes 14-2 or 15-1 that year and makes the Super Bowl. AFCCG at least. The AFC was pretty weak.

>When Rodgers went down for half a season they almost lost every game without him. The Patriots without Tom are functional whereas the McCarthy Packers sans Rodgers are an absolute trainwreck.

Once again, a laughable attempt at an argument. You can't compare Brady/Rodgers head to head because you know it becomes embarrassing. You're just shifting the argument to their backup QBs. Not Brady's fault that some other teams' backup is complete shit.

>As for the close games stat, it is precisely because he has a shit defense that almost never helps him out. Sometimes I feel like I'm stuck in groundhog day watching the Packers go ahead by a score with a minute and a half every year in the playoffs only to quickly concede to the other team in like a minute.

Brady took a shit defense with Edelman playing snaps, and a bunch of other hilarious scrubs, to the SuperBowl in 2011-12 and came within a Welker drop of winning it. His defenses also gave up late scores in several Super Bowls, only to be bailed out by Brady and the offense for the game winning FG (Rams, Panthers). His D also gave up late go-ahead scores to the Giants with 1-1:30 minutes remaining.

>And not to invoke the eye test but you can just tell Rodgers is a superior passer and athlete. That's why they say he's "better", his ceiling is higher, but Tom's consistency can't be beaten.

Superior passer? Except when the game is on the line, apparently. Being a "superior passer" means absolutely nothing. And it's gotten him nowhere. If he was so clearly superior, he could've reached another SB or two on his own, at the very least - no matter how shit his defense is. Brady did it as I mentioned above.

Being a "better athlete" means nothing either. Cam Newton is a better athlete than Rodgers and Brady. So is Russell Wilson. Who cares?

Also, on your lame point/excuse about the defenses:

Brady's ability to turn undrafted/late-round nobodies or other team's scrap heaps into legit WRs affords the Patriots the opportunity to spend their high draft picks on defense. (Ex. Edelman, Amendola, Lafell, David Givens). Don’t even start with “le patriots system” bullshit either. Other teams have tried it and failed for a reason. Most notably the Texans with Osweiler/Mallet/Hoyer and Savage at QB.

That's why you don't see the Pats drafting WR/RB/TE high in the draft. (it’s extremely rare) It speaks to Brady’s ability to turn nobodies into major contributors.

Whereas Rodgers has never really turned ANY player into a legit weapon. He's consistently required multiple high draft pick WR/RB/TEs, most notably rounds 2-3. Randall Cobb, Nelson, Devante Adams, James Jones, Ty Montgomery, Greg Jennings, Jermichael Finley, Richard Rodgers, Eddie Lacy were all high draft picks. All round 2-3 guys/top 100 picks.

Rodgers is more athletic and more accurate than Brady, even in his prime.

Brady is far more clutch though.

Because Rogers constantly has way worse teammates than Brady.
Also, Belicheck is the GOAT coach and McCarthy is just some random guy pulled from the stands of Lambeau Field

Rodgers is more than capable of making plays when things don't break down. Hes just very good at taking advantage when shit goes bad.

Brady is definitely more accomplished and for everyone knocking Rodgers for clutch plays/drives when being down. Id like you to remember that Rodgers rarely gets into those kind of situations to being with so its debatable to blame him for those kind of things. Most of the time the packers are ahead for most of the games played.

Rodgers has success in spite of the team and staff that surround him.

Brady would not have the success he had without consistently being on a stacked squad and having Bill's coaching autism calling the plays.

>And for everyone knocking Rodgers for clutch plays/drives when being down. Id like you to remember that Rodgers rarely gets into those kind of situations to being with so its debatable to blame him for those kind of things. Most of the time the packers are ahead for most of the games played.

This is extremely disingenuous and flat out wrong. Nothing but an excuse.

He was something like 0 for 28 (something in the 20s) when trailing by more than 1 score in the second half, up until he converted a flukey hail-mary vs the Lions a couple years ago.

>Aaron Rodgers
>drafted in 2005
>ever being considered one of the best QBs of his era
Brees, Brady, Peyton and Eli Manning, Rothlisberger, The Elite Joe Flacco stand in his path.

I like how the only "arguments" I ever see against Brady at this point are just baseless hypotheticals that conveniently happen to suit the person arguing against the case for Brady.

Either that, or someone shifts the argument to comparing backup QBs to take away from Brady.

>Brady would not have the success he had without consistently being on a stacked squad

Past the first 2 superbowls the reason the Patriots teams were so stacked was because Tom, not having the superstar contract that someone with his track record at that point through his career was entirely because his off the field decision to tactically marry Gisele, Brady could now afford to take a low paycheck in order to keep better talent on the field managing not only himself, but the players on the field around.

Other Quarterbacks only commit 100% of themselves on the field, Brady does it on and off the field and that's why combined with BB's genius they won 5 rings.

No other BB QB, or coach Brady combo would have been as successful for that reason.

Yeah, remember that one time James Jones and Greg Jennings didn't immediately bust after leaving Green Bay

you dumb shit

Aaron will always be that other QB from the era of GOATs no matter how many 300+ yard games he has he will always have the fact he played shitty Lions, Bears and Vikings teams in comparison to Brett Favre against Randy Moss Vikings and Barry Sanders Lions.

Huh? James Jones had 73 receptions, 6 TDs in his lone year with Oakland with a rookie Derek Carr. You're the dumbass.

Jones was a 3rd round pick, buddy. You're trying to give Rodgers credit for a high draft pick/ at WR? Just stop.

Greg Jennings was a 2nd round pick. Rodgers didn't "make him". The Vikings just had garbage QBs.

If anything, wouldn't making the point you're trying to make just prove the Packers' offense is just all due to "le system"?

HOLY SHIT 73 receptions?? and 6 TDs!!!

>picks generate the caliber of player

And you have the gall to call anyone an idiot in this thread

you literally were raised on a diet of lead paint as a child

Your point was proven to be false and total garbage, so of course, you resort to ad-hominems. Nice.

And 73 receptions in Oakland was more than Jones ever had with Rodgers and the Packers.

The more you post, the dumber you look.

why do GB fans blaim every other position and coach but never Rodgers?

The only reason I did that was to get you to be an enormously hypocritical faggot and make the exact comment you just did in the context of the fact that you've spent most of your time in here ad homming and making stupid arguments

You may be self aware enough to understand what I'm saying, maybe not, others will

You have a canned argument

Notice how their 'Rodgers >Brady' narrative only came on even stronger after SB 51? They're so insecure over Brady winning his 5th. To act like there was even a worthy debate over the two is funny.

They deflect to stuff like citing how the team did without each QB (which is literally just making a point about one backup QB being better than another), or some baseless hypothetical.

When all the stats and accomplishments are put on display, Rodgers gets blown out of the water. Especially all the stats & facts regarding comebacks and clutch ability.

>The only reason I did that was to get you to be an enormously hypocritical faggot and make the exact comment you just did in the context of the fact that you've spent most of your time in here ad homming and making stupid arguments

This is absolutely hilarious and delusional. What are you smoking?

So much projecting.

You don't have arguments. So this is what you resort to. 2 posts in a row.

Because their team is legitimately bad without Rodgers. Without Rodgers they drop to 8-8. It's kind of like watching the old 90's Lions handle Barry the only difference being a QB can effect the game a whole hell of more then a GOAT QB.

...

No no no

you are wrong, and I am right, red herring ad hommy fallacy projection deflector man

Rodgers good Brady bad

can't believe you

Flacco is better than both of them.

Still no counterargument. Speaks volumes.

3 posts in a row.

Hasn't the concept of clutch been btfo by statisticians? Are you secretly skip Bayless from 6 years ago?

>clutch doesn't exist
imagine watching sports and actually thinking this

>down 3-28
>somehow doesn't lose hope (like just about any other quarterback in the NFL would) and manages to come back for a win in the FUCKING SUPERBOWL

Yeah haha clutch isn't a thing at all, enjoy your regular season stat QBs

>no such thing as clutch
Haha okay faggot

daily reminder that rings are jewelry, not qb statistics

>being the best in football doesnt count

You are so assblasted