Written by 
With all the Super Bowl chatter that’s surrounded the shorts-wearing 2010 Packer squad this season, I thought it might be interesting to see how Aaron Rodgers stacks up against the dynasty quarterback, Bart Starr.
Granted, that’s a great deal like comparing apples and oranges. The game has changed a lot since the Starr era, but hopefully this will be a fun comparison and spark some discussion about the future of the team and whether or not Aaron Rodgers can match the five championship rings that Bart Starr has.
Bart Starr: The Championship Years
In the 60s the Packers were nearly unstoppable and the general leading the charge was the legend that is Bart Starr. But how do Bart’s stats during the championship years compare to what Aaron Rodgers has been able to accomplish thus far?
Ok. History lesson for young Packer fans. The championship years that Bart Starr was involved in… 1961, 1962, 1965, 1966, and 1967. So, what kind of numbers did Starr put up during those glorious years?
During those championship years Starr’s completion percentage looks like this…
Percentage
- 1961 – 58.3%
- 1962 – 62.5%
- 1965 – 55.8%
- 1966 – 62.2%
- 1967 – 54.8%
That’s an average of 58.72% over those championship years. That’s good enough to rank #21 among the quarterbacks of the 2009 season.
And, what did Starr’s passer rating look like during the era of the Packer Dynasty?
QB Rating
- 1961 – 80.30
- 1962 – 90.65
- 1965 – 88.98
- 1966 – 104.9
- 1967 – 66.44
Starr and the Packers never put up huge numbers through the air, although the average 2198.2 yards per season during these five years was certainly respectable. During the 60s the powerful Packer running game carried the bulk of the load, but Bart still collected some good yardage through the air every season.
Aaron Rodgers: The First Two Seasons
Rodgers has just begun to cut his teeth in the NFL, but his numbers are certainly impressive. In his first two seasons as the quarterback of a new Packer era, Aaron finds himself in the top ten in nearly every QB category and is only surpassed in protecting the ball from interception by the Rams’ Marc Bulger.
His first two seasons look like this…
Percentage
- 2008 – 63.6%
- 2009 – 64.7%
QB Rating
- 93.79
- 103.2
Not too shabby for a second year starter. Aaron ranked #9 in percentage in 2009 and #4 in passer rating. If that’s a sign of things to come Packer fans could be in for many years of a heap of fun plays.
A Final Word About the Great Bart Starr
Statistically speaking, Aaron Rodgers shines brighter than the great Starr, but, of course, the only statistic that truly matters is wins, particularly championship wins.
Starr has won enough championships to have a ring for each finger of his throwing hand. Does Rodgers have the stuff to give rise to a new dynasty in the history of the legendary Packers? Some of that will be answered by factors that can’t be measured, like leadership. However, things sure are looking good for the newest Packer quarterback.
No related posts.
Why wouldn’t you compare Aaron to Favre? Not with the mindset of proving TT made the right decision, but simply to get a gauge of Mr. Rodgers’ progression. I feel comparing different eras skews the data too much.
Twitter: GPN_JR
Hey JonBob. A Rodgers/Favre comparison would certainly be an interesting one. I’ll sure keep that in mind for future posts.
There’s actually five reasons why I chose to compare Rodgers to Starr, and they fit on each finger of Bart Starr’s throwing hand. …The rings.
What I was curious about was how Rodgers compares to a quarterback who led his team to five championship titles. Of course, I’m hoping Rodgers can do the same, or even better.
Wins and losses never change. Though I agree that the two eras skew the data, I think the comparison between Rodgers and Starr is much more apples/apples in terms of their “way of playing quarterback” than a comparison between A-Rod and Favre. Favre was a completely different type of quarterback than Rodgers…Starr and Rodgers have the same style. What that says to me is that if we get a dominant running game going, A-Rod will be stockpiling rings too. One of the things that struck me is how we got so lucky when Aaron Rodgers dropped in the draft to have him following Brett. Two great quarterbacks, back to back. There may be a Joe Montana/Steve Young blog in there somewhere too.
Twitter: jrehor
The Packers are fortunate that Rodgers is following Starr and Favre in the tradition of star quarterbacks. Starr sets the example for championship QBs, followed by Favre. Starr won 5 championships, Favre won 1 (should have been 2, but thats another topic). I think all of us would be shocked if Rodgers does not lead the Packers to at least one SB title.
Great stuff!
Twitter: Tarynfor12
Why is this type of comparison even considered.It’s mundane at best.A true answer can never be awarded to either.Even attempting to compare Rodgers to Favre is unrealistic.Totally different eras even though it at times feels the same.
Comparing the now with the then is merely looking for a excuses for what happened then and what happens now and tommorrow.
This is as pathetic as when every Monday Night you here the same stupid remark-ONLY HE CAN MAKE THAT THROW,PLAY etc.Sorry for the negative response but geez,enough of comparing ERA to ERA.This guy has played 2 I repeat 2 years,please stop.
IT’s BS that the only thing that matters is Wins. Complete BS.
But the thing is, regular season ratings don’t mean much either.
Starr holds the all-time postseason QB rating with 104.8 (http://miamimigraine.blogspot.com/2008/04/greatest-quarterback-of-all-time-bart.html). When it mattered, Starr was the ultimate clutch player, and that’s why he won so much, and was named SB MVP both times he played. Sure, he had probably the most talented supporting cast ever, but make no mistake, when it was 3rd and 5, 4th and 1, it wasn’t Hornung, or Nitschke, or Forrest Gregg who made us win.
Those are the statistics that matter, postseason performance. And, so far, despite losing, Rodgers’ 121.4 passer rating (http://www.nfl.com/players/gamelogs?id=ROD339293) gives us a promise that the future is bright for him and for the Green Bay Packers.
Twitter: Tarynfor12
PackersRS,you are so right with the future looks bright with rodgers for the Pack.But why do we need articles oc comparing era to era.To me the past is past and let the new shine,it can get cloudy quick enough without adding the past to it.Nothing is gained by COMPARISON STATS.
Twitter: GPN_JR
PackersRS: You make a good point of Starr’s production in the post season. However, with only one playoff game to Rodgers’ name, there just isn’t enough data to compare production in the off-season. And, I would still have to disagree with you on whether the win is the most important stat. Brett took us all the way to a second Super Bowl but left us disappointed as they didn’t produce the win. It didn’t matter that his stats were solid throughout the season and the playoffs. The win was still the thing.
Taryn: Imagine how thin the weekly sports news would be if we never talked about stats or history. You’re right, the future is bright and we’re all pretty pumped about it (especially since training camp is almost upon us). But that doesn’t mean we ignore history. This is especially true for Packer fans, since we have the most outstanding history in the NFL, paralleled by none.
All: Please don’t forget what this post was intended to accomplish. It is not intended to draw any notable conclusions from the stats comparison, it was simply intended to offer some insight into the two quarterbacks. After all, Packer fans everywhere have high hopes that Aaron Rodgers is going to lead this team to multiple championships pushing the Packers even farther ahead of the rest of the league in championships won.
Twitter: Tarynfor12
J.R.
I do understand the point of not forgetting the past,especially the Packer past.Talking packer football of the now, future and the past(in appropiate manner) but not when it uses a 15 years stat in an equating way with a guy of 2 years in,as there is nothing to legitimatly compare.It can be hard and probably be harder to accomadate the sports reading fan base with such comparisons,as players staying on a team long enough to do so is becoming obsolete.I think that as of yet,using Rodgers in any era to era story for fans is at best being unworhty of a writers value and integrity to his fan base.Just my thought.But I will keep reading no matter what the topic and adding my 2cents worth of ?
Can we compare QB passer ratings of the great quarterbacks in the playoffs? I think Starr was 9-1 lifetime in the playoffs, losing only his first game vs. Philthadelphia. He played several playoff games in horrendous weather vs. dome stadiums and he also played in an era where defensive backs could maintain contact throughout the receivers routes.
Check the stats but I think Starr stands above all who have ever played the game.
Twitter: GPN_JR
Thanks for reading mister p. You’re the second person who has suggested a Rodgers/Starr playoff comparison. I guess I’d better post one.
You’re absolutely right that Starr had much better numbers when he hit the playoffs. It was a major factor in our 12 championships. The reason I left the playoffs out of this post was that we just didn’t have much data for Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs. Now that he’s gone deep into the 2011 playoffs, we’re getting a better idea how he reacts in playoff situations.
I think I’ll wait until the playoffs are over to write the post though. Hopefully, we’ll have two more games of stats to add to the analysis (and a Lombardi trophy to boot).