ITT: Quarterbacks with more Superb Owl rings than Dan Marino

>more superbowl rings than Aaron "supposedly more talented than Brady" Rodgers
He really really likes losing in the nfl championship

>>74134356
B-but he's more athletic a-and had a stronger arm.
>sits behind his o line for 45 seconds
A-and his team is worse!

>>74134361
Rodgers is terrible pre snap compared to Brady and Peyton manning. He's still good and a lot of the plays he makes are great, but improvision can only get you so far. His luck constantly runs out in playoffs, the Falcons blowout proved it. He can't carve up a defense like Brady or manning can. Not to mention Rodgers takes a lot of sacks instead of just throwing the ball out of bounds

File: trevtrev.png (1005KB, 1014x899px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 1014x899px

Oh hi

>>74134425
>>74134425
Tbh the Falcons didn't need to be a blow out. The game plan of the Packers was decent enough but they made a lot of mistakes. From the top of my head just in the first half
- One missed field goal
- One fumble after a solid run and first down
- One interception
- Two passes which they should have made easy interception
- One fumble which they should have capitalized on

>>74134425
This is horribly inaccurate as rebutted by the players in the NFL that, you know, actually play against the guy.

>>74135194
show me a play in those playoff games where he makes a pre snap read and produces a big gainer after less than 4 seconds in the pocket. Maybe 5% of his big plays come from this, as opposed to 95% for other qbs

>>74135374
Do you have factual statistics to back this up or is your claim totally built upon "dude go look at some plays, you'll see!"?

He, like every single NFL QB, makes pre snap reads. Whether it results in a " big gain" or not depends on a variety of factors.

>>74134425
who the fuck is "manning"?

>>74134425
>improvision

>>74134425
once rodgers legs go, its all over

>>74138853
I think he means Nick Manning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Manning