2007 Brady vs. 2011 Rodgers: Who's better?

I was just perusing PFT a few minutes ago, and saw an item about Tom Brady talking about Aaron Rodgers' season this year:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/01/brady-impossible-to-play-any-better-than-rodgers/

It got me thinking. I know the season isn't over yet, but dating to last year, the Packers have won 17 straight and many people in that timeframe have said Rodgers is having the best stretch of QB play ever. So, just curious, who would you take?

ESPN did an analysis a few days ago:

http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post?id=33128

 

I don't know how you would go about even parsing the two. In both instances the play was just so close to perfect.

Gun to my head, I suppose I might take Rodgers because he can really run as a weapon and not just scramble for his life, plus he didn't have someone like Moss to just throw it up to when all else fails. But even at that I'm grasping for the tiniest of differences.

 

It's entirely possible the February, 2012 Brady and Rodgers will meet to provide evidence on this question.

 

I'll take Rodgers.

I can't think of a game this season where the Packers were running up the score like the Pats did that season.

 

I have a feeling that matchup will only answer whose defense is worse.

 

Rogers has more weapons. Brady had a better top two.
I'm the biggest Patriots homer, but I can't even say Brady without thinking it's Rogers. No wrong pick here.

 

mini-Ditka

 

Yeah, Moss-Welker is just a little bit better than Jennings-Nelson , not that those guys are bad mind you...

Rodgers doesn't have a big receiver who can just go up and get anything the way Moss could.

That said, Jermichael Finley is far superior than any TE Brady had. Neither running game was anything special. I think Brady had the far better offensive line. I don't know the stats, but I'll bet Brady was sacked a lot less than Rodgers has been this season, but to be fair, Rodgers holds the ball longer and runs a lot more.

I don't think Rodgers will get 50 TD because the Packers don't run up the score.

 

Give it one more week, once they beat the Giants, and the questions start in earnest about how much Rodgers and the first string play the final two weeks. I figure they go full-bore in Week 16 against the Bears (AT LEAST THEY BETTER FUCKING FANTASY FOOTBALL DRIVES ME CRAZY) and a series or two the next weekend.

Big variable there is whether 49ers beat Steelers in Week 15. If Steelers win that game, undefeated Packers clinch all the way through. If 49ers win and are sitting on two losses, Packers need one win in final two games to clinch.

 

This makes no sense when you actually think about it. For one, it's five years later for Brady. He's a different quarterback. Moreover, quarterbacks don't play head-to-head in the least. Eli Manning's team beat Brady's team that year, but Manning certainly wasn't the better quarterback.

 

93 Devil strongly disagrees.

 

Until Rodgers has one of these



He's always going to be second to Brady