Rank the Roster 2020: #1

[British]

I went with Z. The Packers are more likely to be able to win a playoff game without Rodgers than they are to win a playoff game without Z

With which QB? I like the Love pick but I hope you don't think he has a hope of winning a playoff game in his rookie year.

[Madcity_matt]

Still Rodgers for me, but it’s not the slam dunk it used to be. Also agree on Jenkins for next up.

[Packfntk]

People can say whatever they want, but it is Rodgers. It will always be Rodgers if he is a Packer.

[TheSkeptic]

I went with Z. The Packers are more likely to be able to win a playoff game without Rodgers than they are to win a playoff game without Z

With which QB? I like the Love pick but I hope you don't think he has a hope of winning a playoff game in his rookie year.

It does not matter. If Jones has 140 yards and Dillon has 100 the Packers are going to win. Both Love and Boyle are perfectly capable of handing the ball off and completing an occasional pass.

In 2006 the Bears beat the Seattle Seahawks in the first playoff game. The following week, they beat the Saints 39–14, which allowed the Bears to claim the NFC Championship and advance to Super Bowl XLI. The QB was Wrecks Grossman. It is not necessary to have a competent QB to win playoff games and get to the SB. It is necessary to have a great D and Z is the heart and soul of the Packers D.

[go pak go]

I mean I don't know how you can watch last December and start to not get the sense that we can't win without Rodgers. We won the last two games despite Rodgers. Even the MN game. Holy crap was our grading of him curved down.

We won those games because our defense won it for us and kept us in it. Seattle was the other way around.

But goodness. The backup QB for the Lions was the best QB in week 17.

[Yoop]

the only people not voting for Rodgers don't like Rodgers, he's cocky, brash, and that sets some off, without Rodgers it doesn't matter, this defense is better, but not top 10 better, and the improvements on offense wont mean near as much without Rodgers, you people that don't like Rodgers would be balling in your beer if he had a season ending injury, you might be fooling others here with your nonsense, but you aint fooling me, and you damn sure aint fooling yourselves.

[Pugger]

the only people not voting for Rodgers don't like Rodgers, he's cocky, brash, and that sets some off, without Rodgers it doesn't matter, this defense is better, but not top 10 better, and the improvements on offense wont mean near as much without Rodgers, you people that don't like Rodgers would be balling in your beer if he had a season ending injury, you might be fooling others here with your nonsense, but you aint fooling me, and you damn sure aint fooling yourselves.

No, those who didn't vote for Rodgers believe he isn't the player he once was. I for one am hoping this new offensive scheme will be a benefit for a HOF QB who is getting a little long in the tooth.

[Backthepack4ever]

I never ever only looked at this as purely the best player. To me its the most important player on the roster. Play position and war all matter to me. So the 1st player off the board is qb1. Hes not the player he was 3ish years ago but this team still rides on him.

Z next in a land slide

[Backthepack4ever]

I went with Z. The Packers are more likely to be able to win a playoff game without Rodgers than they are to win a playoff game without Z

With which QB? I like the Love pick but I hope you don't think he has a hope of winning a playoff game in his rookie year.

It does not matter. If Jones has 140 yards and Dillon has 100 the Packers are going to win. Both Love and Boyle are perfectly capable of handing the ball off and completing an occasional pass.

In 2006 the Bears beat the Seattle Seahawks in the first playoff game. The following week, they beat the Saints 39–14, which allowed the Bears to claim the NFC Championship and advance to Super Bowl XLI. The QB was Wrecks Grossman. It is not necessary to have a competent QB to win playoff games and get to the SB. It is necessary to have a great D and Z is the heart and soul of the Packers D.

I think Z is a monster....an all pro. Hes my fav packer right now. But I 100% think you are over valuing the d as a whole. It is NOT great. Nowhere near the bears you use in an example. They also had a great special teams. Apples to oranges

[British]

I went with Z. The Packers are more likely to be able to win a playoff game without Rodgers than they are to win a playoff game without Z

With which QB? I like the Love pick but I hope you don't think he has a hope of winning a playoff game in his rookie year.

It does not matter. If Jones has 140 yards and Dillon has 100 the Packers are going to win. Both Love and Boyle are perfectly capable of handing the ball off and completing an occasional pass.

In 2006 the Bears beat the Seattle Seahawks in the first playoff game. The following week, they beat the Saints 39–14, which allowed the Bears to claim the NFC Championship and advance to Super Bowl XLI. The QB was Wrecks Grossman. It is not necessary to have a competent QB to win playoff games and get to the SB. It is necessary to have a great D and Z is the heart and soul of the Packers D.

2006!

You're reference point is a game 14 years ago? Ok mate.

[NCF]

This was tough. I went with the face of the D over the face of the O. What Za'Darius Smith did to come in and assume leadership over THE ENTIRE team is hard to quantify. In many ways, if you think back to last year, he became the face of the team... not just the face of the defense. This is 1A/1B for me, with Rodgers, of course.

[Yoop]

the only people not voting for Rodgers don't like Rodgers, he's cocky, brash, and that sets some off, without Rodgers it doesn't matter, this defense is better, but not top 10 better, and the improvements on offense wont mean near as much without Rodgers, you people that don't like Rodgers would be balling in your beer if he had a season ending injury, you might be fooling others here with your nonsense, but you aint fooling me, and you damn sure aint fooling yourselves.

No, those who didn't vote for Rodgers believe he isn't the player he once was. I for one am hoping this new offensive scheme will be a benefit for a HOF QB who is getting a little long in the tooth.

come on Girl, take away Z and we still win 10 games, take away Rodgers, and we might win 3 possibly 4 and thats if the opposing teams plane crashes, what was Z's production against SF again? don't get me wrong, I may vote for Z next, but this first choice should be unanimous, Z scores no points and can't throw the ball, and even with him this defense didn't crack top 10

[NCF]

the only people not voting for Rodgers don't like Rodgers, he's cocky, brash, and that sets some off, without Rodgers it doesn't matter, this defense is better, but not top 10 better, and the improvements on offense wont mean near as much without Rodgers, you people that don't like Rodgers would be balling in your beer if he had a season ending injury, you might be fooling others here with your nonsense, but you aint fooling me, and you damn sure aint fooling yourselves.

Oh, STFU, Yoop. That's not even close to true.

[Yoop]

the only people not voting for Rodgers don't like Rodgers, he's cocky, brash, and that sets some off, without Rodgers it doesn't matter, this defense is better, but not top 10 better, and the improvements on offense wont mean near as much without Rodgers, you people that don't like Rodgers would be balling in your beer if he had a season ending injury, you might be fooling others here with your nonsense, but you aint fooling me, and you damn sure aint fooling yourselves.

Oh, STFU, Yoop. That's not even close to true.

sure it is, one person for sure, and it mostly was directed at him, like I said, without Rodgers, we are a 3 and 13 team,we should have just sat Rodgers for the season and taken the best QB in the draft next year, because that could very well happen minus Rodgers.

[Labrev]

Like Texas said, Rodgers was in the "average"-range for his position last year. So the idea that we'd fall apart without him just does not really make sense to me. Despite the narrative from Rodgers's cult-like apologists, our offensive supporting cast is a really good one -- good OL (elite LT), elite RB, elite WR1 -- and could buoy just about any passer one would put behind it.

Considering that we went 13-3 with middle-of-the-road QB play, I think this team would have like a 50/50 shot at a (wildcard) playoff spot with a Josh McCown starting all 16. A guy like that would not make as many plays as Rodgers is capable of, but on the other hand, would probably be more efficient by taking the gimme completions. Or, for that matter, by not holding a grudge against one of our receivers for half the season because they did not run a route perfectly.

[British]

The case for Rodgers:

[Waldo]

The case for Za'Darius:

[Waldo]

The case for Jones:

[Yoop]

Like Texas said, Rodgers was in the "average"-range for his position last year. So the idea that we'd fall apart without him just does not really make sense to me. Despite the narrative from Rodgers's cult-like apologists, our offensive supporting cast is a really good one -- good OL (elite LT), elite RB, elite WR1 -- and could buoy just about any passer one would put behind it.

Considering that we went 13-3 with middle-of-the-road QB play, I think this team would have like a 50/50 shot at a (wildcard) playoff spot with a Josh McCown starting all 16. A guy like that would not make as many plays as Rodgers is capable of, but on the other hand, would probably be more efficient by taking the gimme completions. Or, for that matter, by not holding a grudge against one of our receivers for half the season because they did not run a route perfectly.

who do we have besides Rodgers that can make the throws in that Vid that British just brought, or the countless others he does that you think MaKowen can do, Tex leaves out the countless times that receivers like MVS or Alison screw up a route, we have no idea when the timing is off to the pitch point, we see a pass leading or behind the receiver and right away the QB missed the throw, when in reality the receiver never runs the same route with consistent timing, who you gonna believe? a 15 year HOF QB, some announcer? a stat sheet wont/can't reflect the nuance of a PASS play, and Rodgers is better then those stats show.

[Pckfn23]