Homercles82 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&page=wojciechowski/110103&sportCat=nfl Six seasons later, he's right. He's way better than Smith, who has never reached the playoffs, never had a winning record and never kept the starting job two full seasons in a row. Smith is going on his third head coach and another offensive system. And Rodgers was right about the 11 other quarterbacks who were taken in that draft. None of them -- not Jason Campbell, Kyle Orton, Matt Cassel, Andrew Walter, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, etc. -- is within a Lambeau Field of Rodgers' talent and stats..........When he arrived at his New York hotel for the 2005 pre-draft functions, a fan asked, "Hey, Alex, will you sign this?" Just another swing and miss for the Redskins and other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&page=wojciechowski/110103&sportCat=nflJust another swing and miss for the Redskins and other teams. Rodgers was picked ahead of JC. He wasn't available when the Skins picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homercles82 Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 Rodgers was picked ahead of JC. He wasn't available when the Skins picked. Could have taken him with our earlier pick, instead we got Carlos Rogers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrecker Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 We took the Rogers with no d. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Just another swing and miss for the Redskins and other teams. Course, I always wonder if Rodgers would have done as well if his situation was more like Smith's or Campbell's. Both have had to deal with continually fluid situations which make it difficult to develop as a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Could have taken him with our earlier pick, instead we got Carlos Rogers. At the time, CB was a greater need than qb...and, as much as I like Rodgers, he wouldn't have been afforded 4 years on the bench to learn a system anywhere else other than GB. BTW, Rodgers graded out better than Smith at the combine...which made it very surprising Smith was picked #1. I guess ESPN hype affects everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyRomoProBowl Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Could have taken him with our earlier pick, instead we got Carlos Rogers. so stupid......Drafts can be revisited every year and the same can always be said. The skins had a need at CB and took the best available at that position...who knew he would come to the skins without hands, but still, it was the right pick at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20 ---------- Post added January-4th-2011 at 10:28 AM ---------- Course, I always wonder if Rodgers would have done as well if his situation was more like Smith's or Campbell's. Both have had to deal with continually fluid situations which make it difficult to develop as a QB. EXACTLY...what a great point, you know these draft picks always come with some luck as well, but the really good teams know what they are doing and know how to draft players to fit....and your right, Rodgers may have never matured in this way had he been drafted #1 or had he fallen to the Skins. He fit perfectly in the GB system and how they groomed him in etc........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Rodgers was dicked around a lot at the start of his career, but in the end, it may have been the best thing for him. He should have been a top five pick, but by falling and falling, he ended up on a pretty good team. He had to put up with Brett Favre ignoring him, going through his endless Hamlet routine, and then pitching a fit when the Packers finally cut bait...but he got to sit and learn for a few years before being fed to the dogs. He certainly lost millions of dollars, which has to be upsetting, but he is now positioned to make up for it on the back end of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I can't believe we passed on Demarcus Ware with one pick and were one pick away from Aaron Rodgers with another. Man how our fortunes would be different... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Rodgers was dicked around a lot at the start of his career' date=' but in the end, it may have been the best thing for him.He should have been a top five pick, but by falling and falling, he ended up on a pretty good team. He had to put up with Brett Favre ignoring him, going through his endless Hamlet routine, and then pitching a fit when the Packers finally cut bait...but he got to sit and learn for a few years before being fed to the dogs. He certainly lost millions of dollars, which has to be upsetting, but he is now positioned to make up for it on the back end of his career.[/quote'] He also had to deal with the Packers drafting another QB in the second round (Brian Brohm) because they weren't completely sold on him. I can't believe we passed on Demarcus Ware with one pick and were one pick away from Aaron Rodgers with another. Man how our fortunes would be different... Ware wouldn't have fit on our team at the time. He's purely a 3-4 OLB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyRomoProBowl Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 He also had to deal with the Packers drafting another QB in the second round (Brian Brohm) because they weren't completely sold on him.Ware wouldn't have fit on our team at the time. He's purely a 3-4 OLB. not purley.....Ware can play both. Yes, he was primarily and still is primarily a OLB in a 3-4...HOWEVER, its a WRONG statement to make to say, he cant play DE in a 4-3........And the same goes for Rak. He can also do both.....most 3-4 OLB's, played DE in college, they were just faster and a tad bit undersized for it in the NFL..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 It's very possible that Gibbs wanted Rodgers, telegraphed the move by trading up, and then made it look like he wanted Campbell all along. I always had a feeling that GB scooped us that draft. IIRC, they traded into the spot before us right after we traded up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 It's very possible that Gibbs wanted Rodgers, telegraphed the move by trading up, and then made it look like he wanted Campbell all along. I always had a feeling that GB scooped us that draft. IIRC, they traded into the spot before us right after we traded up. No, Gibbs wanted Campbell. It was called by Mortensen before the draft because Gibbs spent a lot of time with Campbell in his visit to Auburn. It would have been interesting if both were on the board at the time when we picked. ---------- Post added January-4th-2011 at 11:40 AM ---------- not purley.....Ware can play both. Yes, he was primarily and still is primarily a OLB in a 3-4...HOWEVER, its a WRONG statement to make to say, he cant play DE in a 4-3........And the same goes for Rak. He can also do both.....most 3-4 OLB's, played DE in college, they were just faster and a tad bit undersized for it in the NFL..... Ware was 250 when he was drafted. Most teams were looking at him at OLB at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 No, Gibbs wanted Campbell. It was called by Mortensen before the draft because Gibbs spent a lot of time with Campbell in his visit to Auburn. I know what was reported and who was visited. But smokescreens have been up before. I actually thought they wanted Rodgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyRomoProBowl Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 No, Gibbs wanted Campbell. It was called by Mortensen before the draft because Gibbs spent a lot of time with Campbell in his visit to Auburn.It would have been interesting if both were on the board at the time when we picked. ---------- Post added January-4th-2011 at 11:40 AM ---------- Ware was 250 when he was drafted. Most teams were looking at him at OLB at the time. no your right...at the time he was (like i said) primarily a prospected 3-4 OLB.....I am definitely agreeing with you on that, and i don't think its fair when people say the "skins shoulda drafted him" instead of Rogers.....its hindsight. and extremely unrealistic! EDIT: Fixed this....was working and typing and completely jacked up my own post....I was misquoted!!!! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 We are the Redskins. I highly doubt that Rodgers would've been successful here, especially with the amount of turnover we've had. Of course that's just the pessimist in me talking, but it seems that we just can't catch a break sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 no your right...at the time he was (like i said) primarily a prospected 3-4 OLB.....I am definitely agreeing with you on that, and i don't think its fair when people say the "skins shoulda drafted him" instead of Rogers.....its hindsight. They did talk to him and showed some interest, but not REAL interest. It was more or so because he was local, and to get some other teams thinking that they would to bait teams into jumping up in a trade...But its really unfair to say that "they" ( The Skins) should have or could have drafted D Ware) .... I think you are mixing up Ware with Merriman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyRomoProBowl Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I think you are mixing up Ware with Merriman. HAHAHA...i did. I was typing this while working...was on the phone doing business and typing at the same time..... Half of that statement stands to be true, but the part about the Skins "showing some interest" was indeed Shawne.....sorry. Thats the last time i will let work get in the way of my internet fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Aaron Rodgers would have been behind Brunell, but I doubt he's be the QB he is today. Green Bay has actually tried to upgrade their line over the last 5 years. We haven't until last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Aaron Rodgers would have been behind Brunell, but I doubt he's be the QB he is today. Green Bay has actually tried to upgrade their line over the last 5 years. We haven't until last year. This right here is probably one of the most logical reasons for Rodgers success. Doesn't hurt that he has Jennings, Driver, Jones, Finley, Nelson .... Bulaga, Marshall Newhouse, Lang, Colledge, Spitz, Dietrich-Smith, McDonald ... too name a few. His line is pretty in tact for the next few years ... LT - Clifton (Bulaga is just waiting his turn to go to LT) LG - Colledge ... Only 28 C - Wells ... Only 29 RG - Sitton ... Only 24 RT - Tauscher .... Lang could start here if Bulaga moves over to LT. Yeah, they seem set. When Clifton and Tauscher retire they will not lose a beat. Their inside line is set and Bulaga is a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.