What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now? (1 Viewer)

packersfan said:
hauser42 said:
As a huge Packer fan I understan that Favre was not and never was the reason the team won games.
Wow. With all due respect, that's a ridiculous statement to make. Favre wasn't the only reason the team had success but to say he never was a reason why the team won a single game during his tenure as a starter? Honestly, that's beyond ridiculous.
Agreed...there were plenty of games they won in large part because of, if not almost solely because of his play.
The guy was a three-time MVP, finished second in the MVP voting last year and led the team to two Super Bowls, winning one. It's safe to say he won a game or two during his time with the Packers.
Yup...lost a few too.
 
From an article on ESPN websiteFavre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him."The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
 
packersfan said:
hauser42 said:
As a huge Packer fan I understan that Favre was not and never was the reason the team won games.
Wow. With all due respect, that's a ridiculous statement to make. Favre wasn't the only reason the team had success but to say he never was a reason why the team won a single game during his tenure as a starter? Honestly, that's beyond ridiculous.
Agreed...there were plenty of games they won in large part because of, if not almost solely because of his play.
The guy was a three-time MVP, finished second in the MVP voting last year and led the team to two Super Bowls, winning one. It's safe to say he won a game or two during his time with the Packers.
Yup...lost a few too.
I've never seen a QB who didn't.
 
Ookie Pringle said:
sho nuff said:
Ookie Pringle said:
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
What what the Packers record be with Favre right now?
4-1They beat Tampa last week and beat the Falcons today.
Who knows is the real answer.Would he have won the first 2? I don't know.Would he have thrown that same INT today? I don't know.Nobody can really say what their record would be.Hell, he may have even been able to beat Dallas....but we just don't know.
You seem rather defensive today.
Defensive?I answered the question...truthfully.Rather than pure speculation that Favre would have them at 4-1.
You do come off as defensive in your replies...
There was a question about what the team's record would be.I answered it. Sure, I was a bit defensive...but some of these claims that automatically Brett would have the team 4-1 or even 3-2 is laughable.
I don't disagree with you.
 
From an article on ESPN websiteFavre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him."The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
Go find a direct quote from TT or McCarthy that states they were flying to Mississippi to finalize Favre's comeback.
 
Ookie Pringle said:
sho nuff said:
Ookie Pringle said:
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
What what the Packers record be with Favre right now?
4-1They beat Tampa last week and beat the Falcons today.
Who knows is the real answer.Would he have won the first 2? I don't know.Would he have thrown that same INT today? I don't know.Nobody can really say what their record would be.Hell, he may have even been able to beat Dallas....but we just don't know.
You seem rather defensive today.
Defensive?I answered the question...truthfully.Rather than pure speculation that Favre would have them at 4-1.
You do come off as defensive in your replies...
There was a question about what the team's record would be.I answered it. Sure, I was a bit defensive...but some of these claims that automatically Brett would have the team 4-1 or even 3-2 is laughable.
What is laughable is not having an open mind about the possibility of the Packers being 4-1 or 3-2 if Favre was the QB.
 
Somebody really has their panties in a bunch over Brett Favre. I never knew what the media reported was to be 100% factual all of the time. Again, some people need to get their panties untwisted and stop the hating of certain people. Does not help your cause at all.

 
From an article on ESPN website

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
Go find a direct quote from TT or McCarthy that states they were flying to Mississippi to finalize Favre's comeback.
The piece you used from Favre even admits he could not yet commit. Told them don't worry about coming down or dropping by. What about that don't you understand?They had the freakin press release done too the sources said they saw it.

Why would a McCarthy quote or Thompson quote be needed...IMO, that would be one of the least reliable (like just quoting Favre and not anything else).

They would have the reasons to not tell the truth.

But here you go with the Packers version of the timeline...while there is no direct quote on they were going down to finalize that...it talks of the jet, it talks of all of it...and it came from the Packer org.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/...imeline-ON.html

 
Ookie Pringle said:
sho nuff said:
Ookie Pringle said:
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
What what the Packers record be with Favre right now?
4-1They beat Tampa last week and beat the Falcons today.
Who knows is the real answer.Would he have won the first 2? I don't know.Would he have thrown that same INT today? I don't know.Nobody can really say what their record would be.Hell, he may have even been able to beat Dallas....but we just don't know.
You seem rather defensive today.
Defensive?I answered the question...truthfully.Rather than pure speculation that Favre would have them at 4-1.
You do come off as defensive in your replies...
There was a question about what the team's record would be.I answered it. Sure, I was a bit defensive...but some of these claims that automatically Brett would have the team 4-1 or even 3-2 is laughable.
What is laughable is not having an open mind about the possibility of the Packers being 4-1 or 3-2 if Favre was the QB.
Im the only one with the open mind not saying it would definitely be one or the other.I said I simply don't know. Nice try though...
 
From an article on ESPN website

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
Go find a direct quote from TT or McCarthy that states they were flying to Mississippi to finalize Favre's comeback.
The piece you used from Favre even admits he could not yet commit. Told them don't worry about coming down or dropping by. What about that don't you understand?They had the freakin press release done too the sources said they saw it.

Why would a McCarthy quote or Thompson quote be needed...IMO, that would be one of the least reliable (like just quoting Favre and not anything else).

They would have the reasons to not tell the truth.

But here you go with the Packers version of the timeline...while there is no direct quote on they were going down to finalize that...it talks of the jet, it talks of all of it...and it came from the Packer org.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/...imeline-ON.html
The point is that no one has ever heard TT or McCarthy verify that they had a plane ready to fly down to visit Favre to work the details of his return. The basis of the story makes it sound like the Packers specifically had secured the jet to see Favre when in reality that isn't true. They were flying to the owners meeting in Florida. What took place was TT trying to spin this into his favor. Favre denies the story and I'll believe him until I hear TT or McCarthy actually acknowledge the so called details of that trip. You talk about reliable....you want to believe "sources" inside the Packer organization with your belief that Favre is a liar.
 
Ookie Pringle said:
sho nuff said:
Ookie Pringle said:
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
What what the Packers record be with Favre right now?
4-1They beat Tampa last week and beat the Falcons today.
Who knows is the real answer.Would he have won the first 2? I don't know.

Would he have thrown that same INT today? I don't know.

Nobody can really say what their record would be.

Hell, he may have even been able to beat Dallas....but we just don't know.
You seem rather defensive today.
Defensive?I answered the question...truthfully.

Rather than pure speculation that Favre would have them at 4-1.
You do come off as defensive in your replies...
There was a question about what the team's record would be.I answered it. Sure, I was a bit defensive...but some of these claims that automatically Brett would have the team 4-1 or even 3-2 is laughable.
What is laughable is not having an open mind about the possibility of the Packers being 4-1 or 3-2 if Favre was the QB.
Im the only one with the open mind not saying it would definitely be one or the other.I said I simply don't know. Nice try though...
In other news, Sarah Palin just received the Nobel Prize for her work in Rocket Scientology.
 
From an article on ESPN website

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
Go find a direct quote from TT or McCarthy that states they were flying to Mississippi to finalize Favre's comeback.
The piece you used from Favre even admits he could not yet commit. Told them don't worry about coming down or dropping by. What about that don't you understand?They had the freakin press release done too the sources said they saw it.

Why would a McCarthy quote or Thompson quote be needed...IMO, that would be one of the least reliable (like just quoting Favre and not anything else).

They would have the reasons to not tell the truth.

But here you go with the Packers version of the timeline...while there is no direct quote on they were going down to finalize that...it talks of the jet, it talks of all of it...and it came from the Packer org.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/...imeline-ON.html
The point is that no one has ever heard TT or McCarthy verify that they had a plane ready to fly down to visit Favre to work the details of his return. The basis of the story makes it sound like the Packers specifically had secured the jet to see Favre when in reality that isn't true. They were flying to the owners meeting in Florida. What took place was TT trying to spin this into his favor. Favre denies the story and I'll believe him until I hear TT or McCarthy actually acknowledge the so called details of that trip. You talk about reliable....you want to believe "sources" inside the Packer organization with your belief that Favre is a liar.
Ummm...the above timeline was from their interview with the AP...so not sure how you think nobody heard them say it.Look, they were welcoming him back...your boy Favre even admits he could not commit (as he did several times in the offseason).

The basis of the story has been verified by other parties as well...Ive heard at least 2 guys on sports radio who say they saw the press release ready to go and saw the documentation of the jet ready to head to Mississippi. You have Favre admitting they were coming to visit and admitting he told them not to because he could not commit. What more do you need?

Favre only denies they were not coming right down...but he admits he told them not to that he could not commit...which is the meat of the story.

I did not call Favre a liar. I simply don't think Favre could know what they had in GB ready to go.

He admits they were going to come and that he told them not to.

 
Ookie Pringle said:
sho nuff said:
Ookie Pringle said:
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
What what the Packers record be with Favre right now?
4-1They beat Tampa last week and beat the Falcons today.
Who knows is the real answer.Would he have won the first 2? I don't know.

Would he have thrown that same INT today? I don't know.

Nobody can really say what their record would be.

Hell, he may have even been able to beat Dallas....but we just don't know.
You seem rather defensive today.
Defensive?I answered the question...truthfully.

Rather than pure speculation that Favre would have them at 4-1.
You do come off as defensive in your replies...
There was a question about what the team's record would be.I answered it. Sure, I was a bit defensive...but some of these claims that automatically Brett would have the team 4-1 or even 3-2 is laughable.
What is laughable is not having an open mind about the possibility of the Packers being 4-1 or 3-2 if Favre was the QB.
Im the only one with the open mind not saying it would definitely be one or the other.I said I simply don't know. Nice try though...
In other news, Sarah Palin just received the Nobel Prize for her work in Rocket Scientology.
Thanks for another fine contribution to this thread that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.Do either you or Phase have anything useful to add?

Or just more piling on?

 
I think Rodgers is fine. The line is playing like crap and the D has a lot of injuries.

He isn't iron man Favre but he's only 24.

 
From an article on ESPN website

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
Go find a direct quote from TT or McCarthy that states they were flying to Mississippi to finalize Favre's comeback.
The piece you used from Favre even admits he could not yet commit. Told them don't worry about coming down or dropping by. What about that don't you understand?They had the freakin press release done too the sources said they saw it.

Why would a McCarthy quote or Thompson quote be needed...IMO, that would be one of the least reliable (like just quoting Favre and not anything else).

They would have the reasons to not tell the truth.

But here you go with the Packers version of the timeline...while there is no direct quote on they were going down to finalize that...it talks of the jet, it talks of all of it...and it came from the Packer org.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/...imeline-ON.html
The point is that no one has ever heard TT or McCarthy verify that they had a plane ready to fly down to visit Favre to work the details of his return. The basis of the story makes it sound like the Packers specifically had secured the jet to see Favre when in reality that isn't true. They were flying to the owners meeting in Florida. What took place was TT trying to spin this into his favor. Favre denies the story and I'll believe him until I hear TT or McCarthy actually acknowledge the so called details of that trip. You talk about reliable....you want to believe "sources" inside the Packer organization with your belief that Favre is a liar.
Ummm...the above timeline was from their interview with the AP...so not sure how you think nobody heard them say it.Look, they were welcoming him back...your boy Favre even admits he could not commit (as he did several times in the offseason).

The basis of the story has been verified by other parties as well...Ive heard at least 2 guys on sports radio who say they saw the press release ready to go and saw the documentation of the jet ready to head to Mississippi. You have Favre admitting they were coming to visit and admitting he told them not to because he could not commit. What more do you need?

Favre only denies they were not coming right down...but he admits he told them not to that he could not commit...which is the meat of the story.

I did not call Favre a liar. I simply don't think Favre could know what they had in GB ready to go.

He admits they were going to come and that he told them not to.
I'm sure those 2 guys on sports radio are reliable. Also, they were not welcoming him back. There is no proof that the Packers were going to Mississippi to ask him back. Favre has stated that TT only had one conversation with him while all this took place. Since you admit you are the only one with an open mind I'm sure you will consider this. I really need to follow Joe B's lead and not reply to this stuff.
 
I'm very pleased with the play of Rodgers. I have been displeased with the offensive line play though that is coming along. The defense however is a sieve. Granted with injuries to all three levels of the defense drop off is to be expected. That said the guys out there are professionals and they should be able to execute the fundamentals of lane control and tackling. If they don't get healthy and start tackling they are done. Yesterday I felt I was watching the Packers from the late 70's and the 80's, a sickening feeling. i do believe McCarthy is the guy to right the ship. here's to hoping he does.

 
Sho Nuff (Flower child of open mindedness) Could you tell me the story again about how Favre is your favorite player of all time? TIA

 
I'm very pleased with the play of Rodgers. I have been displeased with the offensive line play though that is coming along. The defense however is a sieve. Granted with injuries to all three levels of the defense drop off is to be expected. That said the guys out there are professionals and they should be able to execute the fundamentals of lane control and tackling. If they don't get healthy and start tackling they are done. Yesterday I felt I was watching the Packers from the late 70's and the 80's, a sickening feeling. i do believe McCarthy is the guy to right the ship. here's to hoping he does.
:shrug: I think McCarthy did a better job of trying to get the ball downfield even with Rodgers bum shoulder. The playcalling wasn't as predicitable and conservative as it had been. I was disappointed that they didn't do more to go after a rookie QB. They gave Ryan too much time to throw.
 
From an article on ESPN website

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
The above basically says that the Packers wanted to stop by and speak to Favre (I doubt it was for tea and crackers, they were going to talk about whether Favre wanted to play again) and Favre told them no.
Shhh...some people only see what they want to. They don't want to see evidence that Favre waffled all offseason.
Go find a direct quote from TT or McCarthy that states they were flying to Mississippi to finalize Favre's comeback.
The piece you used from Favre even admits he could not yet commit. Told them don't worry about coming down or dropping by. What about that don't you understand?They had the freakin press release done too the sources said they saw it.

Why would a McCarthy quote or Thompson quote be needed...IMO, that would be one of the least reliable (like just quoting Favre and not anything else).

They would have the reasons to not tell the truth.

But here you go with the Packers version of the timeline...while there is no direct quote on they were going down to finalize that...it talks of the jet, it talks of all of it...and it came from the Packer org.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/...imeline-ON.html
The point is that no one has ever heard TT or McCarthy verify that they had a plane ready to fly down to visit Favre to work the details of his return. The basis of the story makes it sound like the Packers specifically had secured the jet to see Favre when in reality that isn't true. They were flying to the owners meeting in Florida. What took place was TT trying to spin this into his favor. Favre denies the story and I'll believe him until I hear TT or McCarthy actually acknowledge the so called details of that trip. You talk about reliable....you want to believe "sources" inside the Packer organization with your belief that Favre is a liar.
Ummm...the above timeline was from their interview with the AP...so not sure how you think nobody heard them say it.Look, they were welcoming him back...your boy Favre even admits he could not commit (as he did several times in the offseason).

The basis of the story has been verified by other parties as well...Ive heard at least 2 guys on sports radio who say they saw the press release ready to go and saw the documentation of the jet ready to head to Mississippi. You have Favre admitting they were coming to visit and admitting he told them not to because he could not commit. What more do you need?

Favre only denies they were not coming right down...but he admits he told them not to that he could not commit...which is the meat of the story.

I did not call Favre a liar. I simply don't think Favre could know what they had in GB ready to go.

He admits they were going to come and that he told them not to.
I'm sure those 2 guys on sports radio are reliable. Also, they were not welcoming him back. There is no proof that the Packers were going to Mississippi to ask him back. Favre has stated that TT only had one conversation with him while all this took place. Since you admit you are the only one with an open mind I'm sure you will consider this. I really need to follow Joe B's lead and not reply to this stuff.
They were not having to ask him back...he was telling them he was ready to come back.And it has been said he did it several times and each time they were ready to welcome him back...and each time he did as he admitted in your quote above...that he could not commit to it...hence, the waffling he did all offseason.

Favre stated that TT called him and let him make his own decision.

Maybe you need to stop hiding behind Joe B. Why do you keep feeling the need to bring him up as if it lends any credibility to the BS you are spewing.

 
Sho Nuff (Flower child of open mindedness) Could you tell me the story again about how Favre is your favorite player of all time? TIA
Can you tell me why you are here and what this post of yours has to do with this thread?Is there a reason you are going into threads simply to post about me?Got a little man crush?Ill stop that for you, I am married and only like women.
 
I'm very pleased with the play of Rodgers. I have been displeased with the offensive line play though that is coming along. The defense however is a sieve. Granted with injuries to all three levels of the defense drop off is to be expected. That said the guys out there are professionals and they should be able to execute the fundamentals of lane control and tackling. If they don't get healthy and start tackling they are done. Yesterday I felt I was watching the Packers from the late 70's and the 80's, a sickening feeling. i do believe McCarthy is the guy to right the ship. here's to hoping he does.
:goodposting: I think McCarthy did a better job of trying to get the ball downfield even with Rodgers bum shoulder. The playcalling wasn't as predicitable and conservative as it had been. I was disappointed that they didn't do more to go after a rookie QB. They gave Ryan too much time to throw.
And I agree, they did well going downfield and that they did nothing to put pressure on the QB. They have struggled with that this year and Sanders simply does not feel the need to ever try many blitzing schemes.
 
And I agree, they did well going downfield and that they did nothing to put pressure on the QB. They have struggled with that this year and Sanders simply does not feel the need to ever try many blitzing schemes.
That's true. With Jenkins gone now they may have to and that could help.
 
Well, I started this thread a couple of weeks or so ago, and here is my take.

The Packers might have won more so far games with Favre. Hard to tell, because that is an alternative universe, and we live in this one. But Favre is at the end of his career; he might have a good year this year; he might even have a good one next year. Or he might retire.

Aaron Rodgers is a legitimate NFL QB. He might not ever be as good as Favre in his prime, but he is very, very good.

The Packers made the right decision. This thing is looking more and more like Montana vs Young. The Niners made the right decision there, too.

 
Well, I started this thread a couple of weeks or so ago, and here is my take.

The Packers might have won more so far games with Favre. Hard to tell, because that is an alternative universe, and we live in this one. But Favre is at the end of his career; he might have a good year this year; he might even have a good one next year. Or he might retire.

Aaron Rodgers is a legitimate NFL QB. He might not ever be as good as Favre in his prime, but he is very, very good.

The Packers made the right decision. This thing is looking more and more like Montana vs Young. The Niners made the right decision there, too.
Huge leap there. Montana and Young are both among the best NFL QBs of all time, as is Favre. Rodgers has started 5 games... And Young started for 2 seasons and won an MVP award before the 49ers traded Montana... the situations were not similar.
 
Well, I started this thread a couple of weeks or so ago, and here is my take.

The Packers might have won more so far games with Favre. Hard to tell, because that is an alternative universe, and we live in this one. But Favre is at the end of his career; he might have a good year this year; he might even have a good one next year. Or he might retire.

Aaron Rodgers is a legitimate NFL QB. He might not ever be as good as Favre in his prime, but he is very, very good.

The Packers made the right decision. This thing is looking more and more like Montana vs Young. The Niners made the right decision there, too.
Huge leap there. Montana and Young are both among the best NFL QBs of all time, as is Favre. Rodgers has started 5 games... And Young started for 2 seasons and won an MVP award before the 49ers traded Montana... the situations were not similar.
They are similar in the sense that the Niners had a QB in which the coaching staff had confidence; and a multiple Superbowl winner that many call the greatest of all time. Favre is not as good as Montana was, and Rodgers is not as good as Young. But the situations are somehwat analogous.
 
One thing I didn't see in this thread is something I heard listening to one of the games a few weeks ago. When Favre was QB the Packers felt they had to max protect him all the time hence all the short drops by Favre and very high YAC by the receivers. With Rodgers at QB the Packers feel more willing to try things they wouldn't feel comfortable letting Favre do. I think the announcers said the reason had to do with Rodgers being a more mobile QB and thus the Packers were willing to take more risks down field with Rodgers at QB. I think it's going to take some time for the offense and Rodgers to find their comfort zone.

Of course with all the injuries combined with the tougher schedule the Packers have had this season the Pachers will be 3-6 by that time and all the Rodgers and TT haters will claim that by having Favre still as the Packers QB that this team would still be a Super Bowl favorite based on last years magical season.

Until this team gets healthy, starts playing much sounder football both defensively and offensively having Favre as the Packers QB would only fool people into believing that they are a contender. Right now they're not and it has little to do with Rodgers performance.

 
I'm really disappointed with the veterans on this team. I know Favre ultimately played a leadership role, and it strikes me that this team does not have an identity right now. They used to be Brett Favre's Packers, and all eyes were on him. The players looked to him.

Without him, there seems to be a large void in this department. And I'm not one to put this on Rodgers. The guys who need to step up and take control on the field are guys like Driver, Tauscher, Pickett, Woodson. They need to stand up and give this team some identity.

I still support the decision to make the switch with Rodgers. But I'll admit I didn't see this lack of identity hitting the team as hard as it has. They can work out of it, but it's going to take the vets standing up and assuming some leadership. This team looks lethargic and rudderless.

 
I'm really disappointed with the veterans on this team. I know Favre ultimately played a leadership role, and it strikes me that this team does not have an identity right now. They used to be Brett Favre's Packers, and all eyes were on him. The players looked to him.Without him, there seems to be a large void in this department. And I'm not one to put this on Rodgers. The guys who need to step up and take control on the field are guys like Driver, Tauscher, Pickett, Woodson. They need to stand up and give this team some identity. I still support the decision to make the switch with Rodgers. But I'll admit I didn't see this lack of identity hitting the team as hard as it has. They can work out of it, but it's going to take the vets standing up and assuming some leadership. This team looks lethargic and rudderless.
I think the offense has had some leadership and Rodgers is trying to make sure he controls the huddle...but they have been missing it on defense since Butler left IMO.I have not seen anyone on defense take control like he used to.IMO, Barnett or Kampman really need to step up in the locker room and in the huddle.Agreed that the Vets need to get this thing together for sure.
 
I'm really disappointed with the veterans on this team. I know Favre ultimately played a leadership role, and it strikes me that this team does not have an identity right now. They used to be Brett Favre's Packers, and all eyes were on him. The players looked to him.Without him, there seems to be a large void in this department. And I'm not one to put this on Rodgers. The guys who need to step up and take control on the field are guys like Driver, Tauscher, Pickett, Woodson. They need to stand up and give this team some identity. I still support the decision to make the switch with Rodgers. But I'll admit I didn't see this lack of identity hitting the team as hard as it has. They can work out of it, but it's going to take the vets standing up and assuming some leadership. This team looks lethargic and rudderless.
Great post, and I agree to an extent. But more than the players being responsible for the team appearing "lethargic and rudderless", much of the blame has to be laid at McCarthy's feet. To come out on offense and start with two three-and-outs, after spending the week supposedly working on fundamentals and execution, is alarming. And how Sanders continues to be employed is beyond me...
 
Well, I started this thread a couple of weeks or so ago, and here is my take.

The Packers might have won more so far games with Favre. Hard to tell, because that is an alternative universe, and we live in this one. But Favre is at the end of his career; he might have a good year this year; he might even have a good one next year. Or he might retire.

Aaron Rodgers is a legitimate NFL QB. He might not ever be as good as Favre in his prime, but he is very, very good.

The Packers made the right decision. This thing is looking more and more like Montana vs Young. The Niners made the right decision there, too.
Huge leap there. Montana and Young are both among the best NFL QBs of all time, as is Favre. Rodgers has started 5 games... And Young started for 2 seasons and won an MVP award before the 49ers traded Montana... the situations were not similar.
They are similar in the sense that the Niners had a QB in which the coaching staff had confidence; and a multiple Superbowl winner that many call the greatest of all time. Favre is not as good as Montana was, and Rodgers is not as good as Young. But the situations are somehwat analogous.
I disagree. What would have been analagous would have been if they had traded Montana to KC in order to plug in Steve Bono or some other unknown (at the time) 49ers QB. Steve Young was arguably the best QB in the league at the time the 49ers traded Montana, as he had just proved by winning MVP. Rodgers' situation and pedigree is not remotely close to Young's at the times of the respective trades.
 
A few quick thoughts:

(1) It is too early to say Rodgers is a very, very, good QB. Right now he looks like a solid young QB that has some things to learn. I have seen young QBs progress and some regress. Good signs to be sure (but he has some good WRs to make him look good too).

(2) The main problem is that the Packers were not really as good as their record suggested last year. They got fortunate to win some of their games that could have gone the other way by a toss of a coin. So their record was sure to be worse this year, with or without Favre. I would have given 20-1 odds easy.

(3) Favre does some pretty amazing things that can cover up weaknesses a team has. His mobility in the pocket and ability to throw outside the pocket, quick release, etc. guiled fans into thinking the O-line was better than it was or is. He also was so good early in the season that defenses had to adjust and this helped the run game later.

All off-season I was concerned that the rushing we saw second half of the season would disappear this time this season. Now, Jackson looked pretty good at times, so we will see. But early last season the problem was not the RBs, but the line.

(4) I think the odds are better than 50% the Packers would have won one more game with Favre at QB. But it is what it is. Can we know? Nope. Could we project either from Favre's stats last year or this year? Yep. I think the key would be how liekly it is that Favre would have taken fewer sacks to date.

(5) Props to Rodgers for wanting to play even when injured and in pain. Jeers to TT for not having a more realistic backup to someone who had been sacked and injured as many times as Rodgers in his admittedly small sample of practice and play.

So, although I am no fan of how Favre was treated (if he wanted to play for them I think he was owed the chance to compete, even after flip-flops), there were going to be a LOT of better teams out there for the next two years.

 
One thing I didn't see in this thread is something I heard listening to one of the games a few weeks ago. When Favre was QB the Packers felt they had to max protect him all the time hence all the short drops by Favre and very high YAC by the receivers. With Rodgers at QB the Packers feel more willing to try things they wouldn't feel comfortable letting Favre do. I think the announcers said the reason had to do with Rodgers being a more mobile QB and thus the Packers were willing to take more risks down field with Rodgers at QB. I think it's going to take some time for the offense and Rodgers to find their comfort zone.
Some announcers may have said this, but I call :lmao: on the bolded parts. This completely contradicts what I have seen on the field over the years, so I looked it up.In his last 5 seasons for the Packers, 12.6% of Favre's passing attempts went 21+ yards in the air. I expect that either led the league or was very close to doing so.

Just looking at last year, Favre attempted 50 passes that went 21+ yards in the air - 3.1 per game and 9.3% of his attempts. So far this year, Rodgers has attempted 12 such passes in 5 games - 2.4 per game and 7.4% of his attempts. So the Packers are not "taking more risks down field" with Rodgers.

As for measuring "max protect," I'm not as certain which splits apply. But on 454 of Favre's 535 attempts last year (85%), there was either no TE or 1 TE. So they weren't max protecting him with multiple TEs. 400 of his attempts last season (75%) were with 3-4 WRs. 338 of his attempts last season (63%) were from the shotgun. I'm not sure if any of these definitively measure how often they used max protect for Favre, but none of them are strong indicators.

And just as importantly, Favre has been the most durable QB in history, whereas Rodgers has more of a reputation of being injury prone, deserved or not. It is not intuitive that the Packers would have felt compelled to protect Favre more than Rodgers.

 
My first contribution to this post that has some good postings and a whole bunch of bickering and other crap. As a Packer fan I am more than pleased at the transition of the QB position from favre to Rodgers. Favre was awesome and I really did not understand why they did not allow him to come back and assume the starting job but Rodgers to this point has exceeded my expectations. The decision to go with Rodgers looks to be an OK decision at this point.

It seems the biggest problem the Packers are having right now are on defense. Some of this is understandable with the loss of Jenkins, Hawk being banged up, Harris out and Bigby being out. They have lost quite a few key components and hopefully they can get things together soon.

 
Phase of the Game said:
That is a myth.

From an article on ESPN website



Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
How is what Brett is saying different than what Mike said? They were coming to see him and he told them not to because he couldn't commit to playing.Brett is splitting hairs. The red part sounds like something Paris Hilton would say. "Well yeah, they were coming down but not just to see me."

 
Ozymandias said:
Chachi said:
13-32-3Why is this even a discussion, isn't it all about winning and losing? :goodposting:
By your logic, the Packers should have canned Favre after the 2005 season (they went 4-12). He obviously was a POS.
This is 2008, what have you done for me lately?
 
ookook said:
A few quick thoughts:

(1) It is too early to say Rodgers is a very, very, good QB. Right now he looks like a solid young QB that has some things to learn. I have seen young QBs progress and some regress. Good signs to be sure (but he has some good WRs to make him look good too).

(2) The main problem is that the Packers were not really as good as their record suggested last year. They got fortunate to win some of their games that could have gone the other way by a toss of a coin. So their record was sure to be worse this year, with or without Favre. I would have given 20-1 odds easy.

(3) Favre does some pretty amazing things that can cover up weaknesses a team has. His mobility in the pocket and ability to throw outside the pocket, quick release, etc. guiled fans into thinking the O-line was better than it was or is. He also was so good early in the season that defenses had to adjust and this helped the run game later.

All off-season I was concerned that the rushing we saw second half of the season would disappear this time this season. Now, Jackson looked pretty good at times, so we will see. But early last season the problem was not the RBs, but the line.

(4) I think the odds are better than 50% the Packers would have won one more game with Favre at QB. But it is what it is. Can we know? Nope. Could we project either from Favre's stats last year or this year? Yep. I think the key would be how liekly it is that Favre would have taken fewer sacks to date.

(5) Props to Rodgers for wanting to play even when injured and in pain. Jeers to TT for not having a more realistic backup to someone who had been sacked and injured as many times as Rodgers in his admittedly small sample of practice and play.

So, although I am no fan of how Favre was treated (if he wanted to play for them I think he was owed the chance to compete, even after flip-flops), there were going to be a LOT of better teams out there for the next two years.
Why do you think Favre would have taken fewer sacks? He has taken one less sack than Rodgers this year...in one less game. Just wondering.
 
Phase of the Game said:
That is a myth.

From an article on ESPN website



Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him.

"The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."
How is what Brett is saying different than what Mike said? They were coming to see him and he told them not to because he couldn't commit to playing.Brett is splitting hairs. The red part sounds like something Paris Hilton would say. "Well yeah, they were coming down but not just to see me."
Yes...because apparently, there was someone else near Hattiesburg that they were going to detour from Orlando to go see...or is that a regular layover from Florida to GB?
 
The only thing that matters here is Favre is better than Rodgers right now. The Packers kicked Favre to the curb out of pettiness on Ted Thompsons part. The Packers are 2-3 right now, Aaron Rodgers threw a horrible pick yesterday at the wrong time and they lost at home to the lowly Falcons. Favre has more TDS, A better record on a worse team. The Packers would have won yesterday with Favre, they were 13-3 last year and are now 2-3 with Rodgers this year, Rodgers is extremely injury prone and they have garbage backing him up. Ted Thompson put his ego ahead of his team, "Nuff said".

 
The only thing that matters here is Favre is better than Rodgers right now. The Packers kicked Favre to the curb out of pettiness on Ted Thompsons part. The Packers are 2-3 right now, Aaron Rodgers threw a horrible pick yesterday at the wrong time and they lost at home to the lowly Falcons. Favre has more TDS, A better record on a worse team. The Packers would have won yesterday with Favre, they were 13-3 last year and are now 2-3 with Rodgers this year, Rodgers is extremely injury prone and they have garbage backing him up. Ted Thompson put his ego ahead of his team, "Nuff said".
Why do you think they would have won yesterday with Favre?Why do some of you think that the all time INT leader in the NFL would not have thrown a pick late as well?

All pettiness on TT's part?

So extremely injury prone that he still played yesterday?

Or Favre also put his ego ahead of the team and clashed with the GM's ego. But some of you just won't ever admit that.

 
The only thing that matters here is Favre is better than Rodgers right now. The Packers kicked Favre to the curb out of pettiness on Ted Thompsons part. The Packers are 2-3 right now, Aaron Rodgers threw a horrible pick yesterday at the wrong time and they lost at home to the lowly Falcons. Favre has more TDS, A better record on a worse team. The Packers would have won yesterday with Favre, they were 13-3 last year and are now 2-3 with Rodgers this year, Rodgers is extremely injury prone and they have garbage backing him up. Ted Thompson put his ego ahead of his team, "Nuff said".
Why do you think they would have won yesterday with Favre?Why do some of you think that the all time INT leader in the NFL would not have thrown a pick late as well?

All pettiness on TT's part?

So extremely injury prone that he still played yesterday?

Or Favre also put his ego ahead of the team and clashed with the GM's ego. But some of you just won't ever admit that.
I've heard your opinion enough. Are you Ted Thompson?You hate Favre's guts and absolutly want to marry Aaron Rodgers.

We all get it dude, give it up already.

You're not a real Packers fan, you don't even WATCH the games, you realize listening to you talk about the games makes me ill.

You've admitted you don't live anywhere near here.

You've admitted you listen to the games on the radio.

I don't think you're qualified to speak on the packers behalf, all day, every day as if you know more than everyone else.

You'll probaly say, I'm spinning it. Seems you're the one spinning it since you don't even watch the gosh darn games.

We don't need your spin on every single post, we don't need rubuttals for every single post. Stop it already.

 
Why do you think Favre would have taken fewer sacks? He has taken one less sack than Rodgers this year...in one less game. Just wondering.
It is hard to compare apples to apples since the Packers and Jets obviously have different offensive lines. But, Rodgers has already taken more sacks this year than Favre did all of last year, behind pretty much the same offensive line. Now, i'm not sure how much of that is based on the QB, and how much is our line is playing worse for whatever reason. However, I think Favre's pocket awareness was much better than Rodgers. I have seen Rodgers take some sacks from pressure that we all know Favre would have been aware of and escape from or get rid of the ball quicker. Hopefully Rodgers will get better at this with time, he has performed better than I was expecting YTD.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
However, I think Favre's pocket awareness was much better than Rodgers. I have seen Rodgers take some sacks from pressure that we all know Favre would have been aware of and escape from or get rid of the ball quicker.
:kicksrock: For those of us who actually watch the games, this is obvious. Sho Nuff, for you this isn't spin, this is fact. Rodgers pocket awareness is awful, if you actually watched the games you'd know this. I guess if all you go by is stat lines then it makes sense why you'd be ignorant to this fact. Since you don't actually watch the games you should think about not analyzing how the Packers/Rodgers is playing and if you do decide to chime in then do just that and don't argue with people who actually watch the games and call everyone wrong cause it's not what you think you heard on the radio or read in the stats.
 
The only thing that matters here is Favre is better than Rodgers right now. The Packers kicked Favre to the curb out of pettiness on Ted Thompsons part. The Packers are 2-3 right now, Aaron Rodgers threw a horrible pick yesterday at the wrong time and they lost at home to the lowly Falcons. Favre has more TDS, A better record on a worse team. The Packers would have won yesterday with Favre, they were 13-3 last year and are now 2-3 with Rodgers this year, Rodgers is extremely injury prone and they have garbage backing him up. Ted Thompson put his ego ahead of his team, "Nuff said".
Why do you think they would have won yesterday with Favre?Why do some of you think that the all time INT leader in the NFL would not have thrown a pick late as well?

All pettiness on TT's part?

So extremely injury prone that he still played yesterday?

Or Favre also put his ego ahead of the team and clashed with the GM's ego. But some of you just won't ever admit that.
I've heard your opinion enough. Are you Ted Thompson?You hate Favre's guts and absolutly want to marry Aaron Rodgers.

We all get it dude, give it up already.

You're not a real Packers fan, you don't even WATCH the games, you realize listening to you talk about the games makes me ill.

You've admitted you don't live anywhere near here.

You've admitted you listen to the games on the radio.

I don't think you're qualified to speak on the packers behalf, all day, every day as if you know more than everyone else.

You'll probaly say, I'm spinning it. Seems you're the one spinning it since you don't even watch the gosh darn games.

We don't need your spin on every single post, we don't need rubuttals for every single post. Stop it already.
Can you spin and lie anymore?I hate Favre's guts? Lie

Want to marry Aaron Rodgers? Now that just sounds like an attempted slam...but a lie.

Im not a real Packers fan? hah!!!!!!!

I actually watch most of the games there chief...so another lie by you.

Yes, I don't live near there, I grew up there, have a ton of family and friends that do, listen to local sports talk from up there on the web, watch most every game and listen to the radio feed when I cannot watch.

I say you are spinning when you make outrageous claims.

What spin have I done?

Where do you think may analysis of the games has been wrong?

Perhaps you should focus on actually responding to the content of my post rather than you opinion of me and quit trying to make it personal.

 
Why do you think Favre would have taken fewer sacks? He has taken one less sack than Rodgers this year...in one less game. Just wondering.
It is hard to compare apples to apples since the Packers and Jets obviously have different offensive lines. But, Rodgers has already taken more sacks this year than Favre did all of last year, behind pretty much the same offensive line. Now, i'm not sure how much of that is based on the QB, and how much is our line is playing worse for whatever reason. However, I think Favre's pocket awareness was much better than Rodgers. I have seen Rodgers take some sacks from pressure that we all know Favre would have been aware of and escape from or get rid of the ball quicker. Hopefully Rodgers will get better at this with time, he has performed better than I was expecting YTD.
I think he does have better pocket awareness...that hopefully Rodgers will learn.But I don't think there is any right minded individual that will claim this line is playing as well as they did last year.and the first 3 games it was not the same line. Wells was out and Moll was in.Tauscher and Clifton both have played worse than last year as well.Rodgers also held the ball too long a few times, I agree that has happened.But we also don't know that Favre would have gotten rid of the ball safely either.Ive heard numerous coaches and analysts talking about how sometimes, its not always bad to take a sack rather than giving up the ball. (again, not saying Favre would for sure have turned it over more...please nobody try claiming that).
 
However, I think Favre's pocket awareness was much better than Rodgers. I have seen Rodgers take some sacks from pressure that we all know Favre would have been aware of and escape from or get rid of the ball quicker.
:goodposting: For those of us who actually watch the games, this is obvious. Sho Nuff, for you this isn't spin, this is fact. Rodgers pocket awareness is awful, if you actually watched the games you'd know this. I guess if all you go by is stat lines then it makes sense why you'd be ignorant to this fact. Since you don't actually watch the games you should think about not analyzing how the Packers/Rodgers is playing and if you do decide to chime in then do just that and don't argue with people who actually watch the games and call everyone wrong cause it's not what you think you heard on the radio or read in the stats.
Im going to ask you to just stop the personal crap.Saying I don't watch the games is a lie.Saying I only look at the stat line is a lie.Saying I only heard it on the radio is a lie.Can you please stop lying about things and misrepresenting the facts.Again, perhaps you should stick to the facts rather than continuing your little personal tirade against me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top