Would a bullet-throwing 'rifle' style of QB passing (Rodgers-type) work for Dallas?

[ROUSH8692]

Rodgers is playing at an all time great level. Love Tony, but he's not on the same stratosphere as Aaron. That's not a knock at all because no quarterback is even close to Rodgers level. I'll put it this way if Rodgers continues playing like this the rest of the regular season, into the playoffs and wins another super bowl it will go down as the greatest season ever for an NFL QB. If he wins a super bowl this year and next year he will be in the discussion for greatest quarterback of all time. I know it's a different sport, but the way Rodgers is playing reminds me so much of Michael Jordan in the 90's. Jordan like Rodgers was simply unstoppable and indefensible. There was nothing you could do. If you tried to double or triple team Jordan he would just pass it to his teammates and they would hurt you. With Rodgers you can try to blitz him and hit him all you want, but he's a tough player and can take the hits. His recieving core is one of the most talented and consistent recieving cores in recent memory. You can't double any of his receivers.

Dude did you even read the thread title? Read dude read

 

[Aikmaniac]

I think Tony (you know, that undrafted guy from Eastern Illinois) would be ecstatic to be compared to Aaron Rodgers (the first round pick). Although, yes, the Cowboys would be better with Rodgers.

I'm pretty stoked that Romo has made it to where he has.

 

[perrykemp]

I think Tony (you know, that undrafted guy from Eastern Illinois) would be ecstatic to be compared to Aaron Rodgers (the first round pick). Although, yes, the Cowboys would be better with Rodgers.

I'm pretty stoked that Romo has made it to where he has.

The odd thing is that Rogers seems to draw strength from the fact that he went late in the 1st round when he was considered up to about to week before the 2005 draft to be the likely 1st pick overall. He plays with a huge chip on his shoulder about it.

Romo was passed up by everybody, but I've never really heard much said about the fact that it gives him strength or that he really cares.

Not saying it matters ones iota either way, but it goes to show that perspective can be a funny thing.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Velocity? If you're an NFL WR, your goal is to catch any ball that comes your way, it doesn't matter if it's a wobbly duck or a fastball bullet. When's the last time you've seen a drop and they say "Aw well that quarterback needs to not throw it so hard next time."

Happens quite a lot, actually. Saw it a lot with Favre. The ability to adjust velocity and touch to make balls more catchable is definitely a useful skill for a QB.

 

[Tricericon]

We're now reduced to dreaming up reasons not to take an MVP caliber quarterback (not just a guy who can "throw hard") over Tony. Crazy.

The OP asked about a QB with Rodgers' play style, (presumably being equal in overall level of play to Romo), not Rodgers himself.

 

[bbgun]

The OP asked about a QB with Rodgers' play style, (presumably being equal in overall level of play to Romo), not Rodgers himself.

Then he shouldn't have invoked Rodgers' name. When he did so, he naturally invited comparisons.

 

[fortdick]

I love Tony, I really do. There's nothing, nothing, Tony does better than Rodgers. That's not an insult.

Yeah? What's Rodgers handicap? I bet Tony can give him 3 strokes a side.

 

[BHendri5]

we already have on, plus he is the most accurate QB in the league.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

RODGERS

Does that dude even have a weakness anymore?

I am sure he does.
BUT he is playing at an elite level. Almost on a mission to erase Favre's name from history(I know, not possible) but I believe he will go down as a greater QB when all is said and done in GB. This guy can win 2 more SB's easy.

I love Tony, I really do. There's nothing, nothing, Tony does better than Rodgers. That's not an insult.

I am inclined to agree with this.
I thought when Tony first became a starter that he did a better hoodini than Rodgers. Still does? but just doesnt do it anymore??

The odd thing is that Rogers seems to draw strength from the fact that he went late in the 1st round when he was considered up to about to week before the 2005 draft to be the likely 1st pick overall. He plays with a huge chip on his shoulder about it.

As I mentioned above. I believe he draws MORE strength from Favre drama nonsense. Having to sit on sidelines KNOWING he was better or would be.

Also, Favre said it was the best team he had ever been on in hist last year and then he says he is surprised Rodgers didnt win sooner.

Favre, when you were on the best team ever - did you win?


I see a man on a mission to win for his team and the by-product is lessening Favre's name there. Or vice versa.

 

[KJJ]

The OP asked about a QB with Rodgers' play style, (presumably being equal in overall level of play to Romo), not Rodgers himself.

Read his post he's comparing Rodgers throwing style with Romo's. The OP said "I am not commenting positively or negatively on either one, just simply comparing."

He claims he's not commenting positively or negatively on either QB but he is. He's saying Rodgers balls have too much zip which causes his receivers to drop them and have to jump and reach awkwardly for them to make a catch while Romo floats his passes where they need to be.

He says Rodgers tries to gun his passes into tight spots like that's been a problem for him. In the OP's clouded eyes a QB having a rifle arm can be an issue depending on the receivers you have. lol It's only an issue if they're not NFL caliber receivers. He says the only benefit of Rodgers having a rifle arm is that it results in fewer int's. I guess he figures because Rodgers passes have so much zip not even defenders can hang onto them. :laugh2:

 

[Deep_Freeze]

The odd thing is that Rogers seems to draw strength from the fact that he went late in the 1st round when he was considered up to about to week before the 2005 draft to be the likely 1st pick overall. He plays with a huge chip on his shoulder about it.

Romo was passed up by everybody, but I've never really heard much said about the fact that it gives him strength or that he really cares.

Not saying it matters ones iota either way, but it goes to show that perspective can be a funny thing.

Funniest perspective to me is that the 9ers picked Alex Smith first overall, over Rodgers. Talk about rueeeee.......that's on a whole nother level of rue.

We were real lucky to get Romo for nothing, after all of our disasters at QB. We never really drafted a QB real high, never had to use the resources most use to get a QB. Since we have used resources elsewhere, it would seem like all Romo needs to be is a busdriver....but of course that's not exactly the case at all.

 

[Tricericon]

Read his post he's comparing Rodgers throwing style with Romo's. The OP said "I am not commenting positively or negatively on either one, just simply comparing."

Either *style*, at least the way I read it.

Somebody drag him in here and make him clarify.

 

[Fletch]

Tony Romo and Aaron Rodgers are different types of throwing quarterbacks. I am not commenting positively or negatively on either one, just simply comparing.


Romo often "floats" balls to receivers to where they need to be. His passes tend to be softer, with a more graceful, lobbed, higher arc, and thrown to a spot. The ball does sometimes seem to take a long time to arrive.


Rodgers tends to "gun" the ball to where he wants it. He throws at a much lower, level, bullet-type pass with much more zip to it. Watching Pack film, his receivers often have to jump, sometimes a bit awkardly, to snag the ball that is traveling almost on a line. His passes, thrown harder, lower, and more powerfully, tend to arrive a split second earlier than a Romo pass would. Rodgers tries to gun the ball in between tight spots, too.



Put in other terms, Romo is more of an arc howitzer, while Rodgers is a rifle.



Now, with Romo's corps of receivers - Bryant, Robinson, Austin, Witten, etc. - would a "rifle bullet" style of passing - with a QB trying to gun the ball low and hard to where it needs to go - work in Dallas? Would it do any good? Or would Dallas receivers simply drop the passes as the ball knifed them in the hands?



One benefit of the Rodgers passing style (in theory) is that there would be fewer interceptions, since the ball arrives more quickly. But such a QB might also be tempted to gun the ball in between tight spots such as two defenders, maybe leading to more INTs.




James Jones of the Packers is known for drops, so maybe Rodgers' approach has its pros and cons.

It's called Pro set vs. West Coast.

 

[KJJ]

Either *style*, at least the way I read it.

Somebody drag him in here and make him clarify.

Regardless he's making a comparison between Romo and Rodgers. He's claiming Rodgers laser arm leads to drop balls and Romo's floaters are best suited for this team and the receivers the Cowboys have. What a ridiculous statement I'm sure that's why he hasn't shown up.

 

[Fletch]

I think Tony (you know, that undrafted guy from Eastern Illinois) would be ecstatic to be compared to Aaron Rodgers (the first round pick). Although, yes, the Cowboys would be better with Rodgers.

I'm pretty stoked that Romo has made it to where he has.

Huge ditto.

 

[interestedobserver]

would a rodgers type quarterback work for dallas? i think he would work for anyone!

I think I'd take him over any QB in the league right now.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I think I'd take him over any QB in the league right now.

Agreed...............he is the best QB on the planet right now.