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

[Das Boot]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

Agreed, I expect most of the league thinks the Packers handled the Favre situation pretty well and probably sympathizes with the position GB's mgmt was placed in by Favre's retirement reversal.If GB hadn't had to handle Favre with kid gloves due to his iconic status, they just could have told him to enjoy his retirement and changed the phone number when he decided he wanted to un-retire.

 

[sho nuff]

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

In the Minnesota game, Rodgers was given the ball at their own 41 with 2:15 left. He moved them 23 yards in 1:44. Getting them in position for a 50 plus yard FG is hardly impressive at all. The play-calling was a bit too conservative, but that probably had a lot to do with how ineffective Rodgers and the passing game had been for most of the day. In the Chicago game, thanks to a great special teams return and a bad penalty by the Bears, they started with the ball at the Chicago 35 with 3:05 left. Rodgers moved them a whole 15 yards in 2:40. Real impressive! Face it: He has sucked in crunch time this year, and the numbers quite clearly demonstrate that. You won't admit it, but they are there for everyone to see. Later.

Where did I say it was impressive. You also realize McCarthy called 2 runs late in both games to run clock rather than getting more agressive with it.He moved them into FG range and took the clock (what he is supposed to do).In the Chicago game yes, it took 2:40 off the clock (again getting conservative even after Rodgers throws a pretty ball on 3rd down to James Jones.Im not saying he is impressive...not saying he has been great in "crunch time". Im saying with those 2 plays he would have "led his team to wins" in crunch time. But I suspect those using the 0-8 would still spin it.And against Carolina...a 9 minute drive for the go ahead score leaving less than 2 minutes on the clock was pretty damn good in crunch time. Or do you just consider the last 1:30 in that game crunch time.Im not denying those last drives (like in that one, against Houston, and against Tampa and Atlanta) were great or he did well. his 4th quarter numbers have been bad.I do admit it...never have denied it actually.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

Agreed, I expect most of the league thinks the Packers handled the Favre situation pretty well and probably sympathizes with the position GB's mgmt was placed in by Favre's retirement reversal.If GB hadn't had to handle Favre with kid gloves due to his iconic status, they just could have told him to enjoy his retirement and changed the phone number when he decided he wanted to un-retire.

Im sure some around the league did not like it...but others actually in the league (and that is what I am trying to separate...the difference between the league and the fans). IMO, Stinger and others are stuck more on the fan reaction.

 

[Das Boot]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

Agreed, I expect most of the league thinks the Packers handled the Favre situation pretty well and probably sympathizes with the position GB's mgmt was placed in by Favre's retirement reversal.If GB hadn't had to handle Favre with kid gloves due to his iconic status, they just could have told him to enjoy his retirement and changed the phone number when he decided he wanted to un-retire.

Im sure some around the league did not like it...but others actually in the league (and that is what I am trying to separate...the difference between the league and the fans). IMO, Stinger and others are stuck more on the fan reaction.

Favre's reversal put Packers mgmt in an unwinnable situation. Most teams don't have a career-long icon like Favre, so the situation wouldn't happen to most teams. But I'd guess that most mgmt around the NFL empathized with GB - not that they felt sorry for them, I'm sure as competitors they enjoyed GB's dilemma. But in analyzing the situation and thinking how they would have handled it, I'd guess most teams would have followed a similar course of action.

 

[Aaronstory]

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.

They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.

And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

In the Minnesota game, Rodgers was given the ball at their own 41 with 2:15 left. He moved them 23 yards in 1:44. Getting them in position for a 50 plus yard FG is hardly impressive at all. The play-calling was a bit too conservative, but that probably had a lot to do with how ineffective Rodgers and the passing game had been for most of the day.

Nice of you to throw that in there. Of course you don't mention the Carolina game when Rodgers absolutley tore up the Carolina defense until they got down on the goalline and McCarthy ran it three times. Or the times he's led them to scores at the ends of games only to have the defense blow it.You want to spin it and make Rodgers look horrible. Fine. Do it to your friends and family who don't know anything about football. But don't come on a message board full of Packer fans who live and die with their team and just start hating on Rodgers for no factual reason whatsoever other than the fact that your favorite prima-donna quarterback got traded.

I'm so sick of this ####.

 

[bcr8f]

It's Rodgers first season. Give him a break.

If Favre were here and the defense gave up 30 points a game over the last 5 he would have been firing fast balls all over the field.

Rodgers game is developing. Monday was his first game in the cold. The whole team has a lot of work to do and will get better, Aaron Rodgers included.

The Packers have scored 388 points this season, the same as the Jets. Only

New England

The Giants

and Arizona have scored more.

The defense has given up 359. Only 7 teams have given up more.

 

[zDragon]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

Have you watched the guy play this year? Im not diminishing his play...he has been bad the past few weeks. He talks about his arm being sore and not having much on it (or something to that effect).Yes...he got voted into the probowl...a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently.

Yes, he was one of the reasons they got where they did. Read the jets collapse thread...the jets fans know he was part of it...but some don't even feel he was the biggest part...and they say his play has been terrible too. I guess they are just diminishing him and are Favre haters.

You just can't take the fact that Brett is not playing well right now. It burns you up that this thread is alive and well because the decision at this point, based on Favre's play, looks like the right one.

Almost everything I do is tied to knocking him? Not at all. In this thread it has been about Favre vs. Rodgers...so yes, negative things about Favre's play are going to come up.

But his play in recent weeks has been bad...some of the worst of his career. At least in 2005 he was playing bad, but trying to do too much on his own because of injuries to his WRs and RBs and he needed to go for it far more. He has more support now. Some of its poor coaching in NY...some of it is Brett being wreckless and at 39 he may just not be able to do as much as he thought he could.

Sorry you can't see that and just think its to diminish him.

As I have posted, I hope if he is going to retire for good, that he has a good game Sunday and goes out looking like the Brett of old rather than how he has looked the past several weeks.

You stated "a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently." about the pro-bowl vote. Can you link or show where this is fact? To me the fact he was voted into the pro-bowl shows most people feel he deserves it.Just going to ignore the rest of the junk you wrote.

 

[bcr8f]

Matt Ryan is the most likely to win ROY and his team has scored 360 points.

Rodgers is a first year QB and has scored 388.

Huge disparity here.

 

[zDragon]

Mason Crosby was a much better kicker when Favre was there...they should have kept Favre!

Rodgers and McCarthy both agree that the QB blew it, not the kicker

The game might not have come down to Crosby's kick had the Packers cashed in on a first-and-goal from the Chicago 5-yard line earlier in the fourth quarter, when Rodgers didn't see a wide-open Donald Lee in the right corner of the end zone and threw incomplete to the opposite side.

Asked if he should have seen Lee, McCarthy replied, "Yes."

"I didn't see him," Rodgers said. "Looked for him, couldn't see him. You throw a touchdown there — by the look on his face as he ran off the field, he was wide open — that puts us up by 11, a two-score game. Disappointing."

Rodgers was taken down for a 5-yard loss on the next play, then threw incomplete on third down, forcing the Packers to settle for a 28-yard Crosby field goal to make it 17-10 with 12:58 left.

"Offensively we didn't cash in on our opportunities. You have to get touchdowns when it's first-and-goal," Rodgers said. "I mean, the amount of yards we put up and the efficiency with which we moved the ball, we've got to get more points than 17. ... We didn't score enough points on offense to win the game."

Here is something too that really pisses me off about McCarthy.... this is from JSOnline today

The Packers forced the Bears into third and 9, but a flat pass to Matt Forte gained 14 when McCarthy said linebacker A.J. Hawk was picked.

WTF is McCarthy talking about? Hawk slipped on that play and I didn't see a pick? He needs to stop making excuses for his team!

Yes, Rodgers shares some blame...can't always see every guy and no guarantees Lee catches it either.But nowhere do they just say Rodgers was to blame...that is classic spin by HK.

I would not say he was picked...he was rubbed by his own guy I think before making the turn and slipping and was out of position on the play.

Knew you could spin it. Good job.

I don't think you understand the word spin.The point is...Rodgers did not see him. Can't see every guy all the time. It was a mistake and a bad one.

Sorry you don't like that.

Lets see start with an insult. Guess I should have expected it since I don't agree with you.Interesting the coach disagrees with you on that point. Then again he's only the coach of the team and knows exactly what was called, how it should have been run, and has a team of people telling him. No way he would have more insight on that play.

 

[zDragon]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

You do understand they are in two different systems and have different experience levels in each.Favre is new to the system he is playing in and has to learn the system and get more of it on the fly. Rodgers has practiced and played in the Packers system for what 3 years now? Big difference so comparing the two's output just on that level alone isn't very productive.

This is pure spin...you whine about me spinning.But Favre is a 15 year vet...its week 17 coming up...when will the new system excuse be played out? He has been in the system for quite some time now...its time to give it up.No system out there is it ok for a QB to throw off his backfoot, across his body like Favre tried the other day. That was great when he was younger...not so much now. That...and for all the flack Rodgers has taken about holding the ball too long...did you see Favre in Seattle?Comparing a 1st year starter to a 15 year vet...the new system thing is pretty much a wash IMO.And Brett is a 3 time MVP... I think at this point he should be able to pick up a new system pretty quick and should not need the rest of you to make excuses for his poor play.

You just showed you lack of football knowledge and how the offensive systems are put in and work.

 

[zDragon]

If Rodgers does not come up with a game winning drive here... who is going to blame the defense here? They have given up 10 points when the Bears had "normal" field position. They also have a couple of INT's to boot.The defense sucks, huh?

What do you guys want Rodgers to do? Is Rodgers to blame for Crosby's 2 missed FGs?

Of course he isn't. However, at this point in his career he has not lead the Packers to a win in crunch time even if you take away Crosby's 2 missed FGs.

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

Funny if Rodgers punched it in at the 10 you could say the same thing. Unfortunately he didn't see his WR. It appears the coach realized what happened and hopefully in the future the offense will actually score touchdowns versus relying on FG's.

 

[Stinger Ray]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

 

[zDragon]

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

In the Minnesota game, Rodgers was given the ball at their own 41 with 2:15 left. He moved them 23 yards in 1:44. Getting them in position for a 50 plus yard FG is hardly impressive at all. The play-calling was a bit too conservative, but that probably had a lot to do with how ineffective Rodgers and the passing game had been for most of the day. In the Chicago game, thanks to a great special teams return and a bad penalty by the Bears, they started with the ball at the Chicago 35 with 3:05 left. Rodgers moved them a whole 15 yards in 2:40. Real impressive! Face it: He has sucked in crunch time this year, and the numbers quite clearly demonstrate that. You won't admit it, but they are there for everyone to see. Later.

That's the defenses fault. If they had gotten the ball to him on the 10 no way they don't score. A few picks would have helped also. Don't forget coaching. Oh yeah, don't forget the Special Teams was supposed to return the ball to inside the 10. Like I said earlier no way they don't score from there.

 

[PizzaDeliveryGuy]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

Have you watched the guy play this year? Im not diminishing his play...he has been bad the past few weeks. He talks about his arm being sore and not having much on it (or something to that effect).Yes...he got voted into the probowl...a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently.

Yes, he was one of the reasons they got where they did. Read the jets collapse thread...the jets fans know he was part of it...but some don't even feel he was the biggest part...and they say his play has been terrible too. I guess they are just diminishing him and are Favre haters.

You just can't take the fact that Brett is not playing well right now. It burns you up that this thread is alive and well because the decision at this point, based on Favre's play, looks like the right one.

Almost everything I do is tied to knocking him? Not at all. In this thread it has been about Favre vs. Rodgers...so yes, negative things about Favre's play are going to come up.

But his play in recent weeks has been bad...some of the worst of his career. At least in 2005 he was playing bad, but trying to do too much on his own because of injuries to his WRs and RBs and he needed to go for it far more. He has more support now. Some of its poor coaching in NY...some of it is Brett being wreckless and at 39 he may just not be able to do as much as he thought he could.

Sorry you can't see that and just think its to diminish him.

As I have posted, I hope if he is going to retire for good, that he has a good game Sunday and goes out looking like the Brett of old rather than how he has looked the past several weeks.

You stated "a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently." about the pro-bowl vote. Can you link or show where this is fact? To me the fact he was voted into the pro-bowl shows most people feel he deserves it.Just going to ignore the rest of the junk you wrote.

Really? He isn't even one of the top 2 QBs in his division right now and got in over the NFL's Ratings leader who has 600 more yards, 11 more TDs, and and 8 fewer INTs. Granted this isn't the link you so desperately need but if you take off the rose colored glasses off just maybe you can see it for yourself.

 

[zDragon]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

Agreed, I expect most of the league thinks the Packers handled the Favre situation pretty well and probably sympathizes with the position GB's mgmt was placed in by Favre's retirement reversal.If GB hadn't had to handle Favre with kid gloves due to his iconic status, they just could have told him to enjoy his retirement and changed the phone number when he decided he wanted to un-retire.

Im sure some around the league did not like it...but others actually in the league (and that is what I am trying to separate...the difference between the league and the fans). IMO, Stinger and others are stuck more on the fan reaction.

Care to post some facts to support this? Maybe a link like you requested earlier?

 

[Das Boot]

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

That quote is particularly funny... even if true, so the GM was unavailable for a retired player to reach him? Definitely a fireable offense.

 

[zDragon]

It's Rodgers first season. Give him a break.If Favre were here and the defense gave up 30 points a game over the last 5 he would have been firing fast balls all over the field. Rodgers game is developing. Monday was his first game in the cold. The whole team has a lot of work to do and will get better, Aaron Rodgers included. The Packers have scored 388 points this season, the same as the Jets. OnlyNew EnglandThe Giantsand Arizona have scored more.The defense has given up 359. Only 7 teams have given up more.

Why are you looking at only the last 5 games. Why not the last two they last (20 pts) the last four (24 pts) or the entire season which I figure is around 22-24 pts. Why not the five prior to the saints game (14 pts).Could it be you want to add the 51 point Saints game to the totals to make it look worse. In the last two loses the defense has given up 20 pts. The team average 23.9 pts per game given up which is one more than the Jets (9-6) who have a winning record. 0.1 pts per game less than the Saints (8-7). Two fewer than the Texans (7-8), Broncos (8-7). Three fewer than Arizona (8-7). A lot teams in that area you mentioned with bad defenses with better records.How many of those points you mentioned the offense scoring came from defense actually scoring or putting the offense in scoring position? How many of the points that the defense gave up came from offensive turn-overs that were turned into TD immediatly or put the opposing offense in an easy to score position. For example the pick in the saints game where the saints took over on the GB three.Looking at points only is a terrible way to judge an offense and defense.

 

[bcr8f]

It's Rodgers first season. Give him a break.If Favre were here and the defense gave up 30 points a game over the last 5 he would have been firing fast balls all over the field. Rodgers game is developing. Monday was his first game in the cold. The whole team has a lot of work to do and will get better, Aaron Rodgers included. The Packers have scored 388 points this season, the same as the Jets. OnlyNew EnglandThe Giantsand Arizona have scored more.The defense has given up 359. Only 7 teams have given up more.

Why are you looking at only the last 5 games. Why not the last two they last (20 pts) the last four (24 pts) or the entire season which I figure is around 22-24 pts. Why not the five prior to the saints game (14 pts).Could it be you want to add the 51 point Saints game to the totals to make it look worse. In the last two loses the defense has given up 20 pts. The team average 23.9 pts per game given up which is one more than the Jets (9-6) who have a winning record. 0.1 pts per game less than the Saints (8-7). Two fewer than the Texans (7-8), Broncos (8-7). Three fewer than Arizona (8-7). A lot teams in that area you mentioned with bad defenses with better records.How many of those points you mentioned the offense scoring came from defense actually scoring or putting the offense in scoring position? How many of the points that the defense gave up came from offensive turn-overs that were turned into TD immediatly or put the opposing offense in an easy to score position. For example the pick in the saints game where the saints took over on the GB three.Looking at points only is a terrible way to judge an offense and defense.

I did that because that was when the defense implosion began(Nick Barnett-Cullen Jenkins?). How about answering the ####### question?

 

[zDragon]

It's Rodgers first season. Give him a break.If Favre were here and the defense gave up 30 points a game over the last 5 he would have been firing fast balls all over the field. Rodgers game is developing. Monday was his first game in the cold. The whole team has a lot of work to do and will get better, Aaron Rodgers included. The Packers have scored 388 points this season, the same as the Jets. OnlyNew EnglandThe Giantsand Arizona have scored more.The defense has given up 359. Only 7 teams have given up more.

Why are you looking at only the last 5 games. Why not the last two they last (20 pts) the last four (24 pts) or the entire season which I figure is around 22-24 pts. Why not the five prior to the saints game (14 pts).Could it be you want to add the 51 point Saints game to the totals to make it look worse. In the last two loses the defense has given up 20 pts. The team average 23.9 pts per game given up which is one more than the Jets (9-6) who have a winning record. 0.1 pts per game less than the Saints (8-7). Two fewer than the Texans (7-8), Broncos (8-7). Three fewer than Arizona (8-7). A lot teams in that area you mentioned with bad defenses with better records.How many of those points you mentioned the offense scoring came from defense actually scoring or putting the offense in scoring position? How many of the points that the defense gave up came from offensive turn-overs that were turned into TD immediatly or put the opposing offense in an easy to score position. For example the pick in the saints game where the saints took over on the GB three.Looking at points only is a terrible way to judge an offense and defense.

I did that because that was when the defense implosion began(Nick Barnett-Cullen Jenkins?). How about answering the ####### question?

Really 20 pts in the last two games is considered part of an implosion. See I could give you the Saints and the Panthers but the fact your including the last two is just silly. Then again the Steelers just gave up 31 to the Titans who only scored 19 on the Packers. Wow guess you take offense to having your simple math questioned. What question would you like me to answer from your post attached to this?

 

[Stinger Ray]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there.

 

[bcr8f]

ed part of an implosion. See I could give you the Saints and the Panthers but the fact your including the last two is just silly. Then again the Steelers just gave up 31 to the Titans who only scored 19 on the Packers. Wow guess you take offense to having your simple math questioned. What question would you like me to answer from your post attached to this?

Moran

 

[ScottyFargo]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

UNLESS YOU HAVE NAMES THESE ARE ONLY RUMORS

 

[bcr8f]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there.

The Packers have scored more than the Jets have. Time to put a few more haters on ignore.

 

[Stinger Ray]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

UNLESS YOU HAVE NAMES THESE ARE ONLY RUMORS

 

[ScottyFargo]

That is the correct reaction to that post.

 

[Stinger Ray]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there.

The Packers have scored more than the Jets have. Time to put a few more haters on ignore.

If you really think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse with Favre and one of your reasons is points scored by the Jets and Packers then you really need some help understanding football.And you can't even get your facts straight!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[PizzaDeliveryGuy]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there.

The Packers have scored more than the Jets have. Time to put a few more haters on ignore.

This is false.

 

[Stinger Ray]

That is the correct reaction to that post.

Thanks! I missed the sarcasm in your initial response.

 

[Stinger Ray]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there.

The Packers have scored more than the Jets have. Time to put a few more haters on ignore.

This is false.

 

[ScottyFargo]

That is the correct reaction to that post.

Not even close. Do you really think the reporters are going to use names of exectuives when they make those reports or make up things like that? I provide links and yet the Favre haters still try to diminish it. Give me break. You are fooling yourself if you think those reports are not true.

I meant your eyeroll was correct. I found it humorous that people were asking for links but what they REALLY want are the names...which for the very reason you listed would be impossible to get. We've ALL read those reports of NFL insiders bashing the handling in the offseason, but I guess some people have conveniently forgotten how ridiculous the whole saga was, what with the bribing and everything. I was simply posting before all the other hangers-on could deny those reports the same as they attempted to deny Favre's return as a rumor as well. It's the predictable response from posters who would dare to question your assertation in the first place. These requests for links to common knowledge gets pretty annoying, especially when the people who are requesting the links are telegraphing their denial way ahead of time.

 

[sho nuff]

That said...watching him play recently...Im not exactly sad that he is not in GB.

More sad that he even tried to come back.

Hoping for a good game against Miami so he can at least go out on a good note if he does call it quits for good this time.

As bad as the memory of his last pass against NY was...I think it might be worse to go out just looking like a shell of his former self.

You do anything you can to spin about Favre. He made the Pro Bowl this year and was one of the reasons the Jets increased to 9 wins. Yet....you still spin even though you claim you never try to diminish Favre. Almost everything you do here is somehow tied to knocking Favre. That is why you post so much...anything you see about Favre you feel you have to respond to put a negative spin on it!!!

Have you watched the guy play this year? Im not diminishing his play...he has been bad the past few weeks. He talks about his arm being sore and not having much on it (or something to that effect).Yes...he got voted into the probowl...a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently.

Yes, he was one of the reasons they got where they did. Read the jets collapse thread...the jets fans know he was part of it...but some don't even feel he was the biggest part...and they say his play has been terrible too. I guess they are just diminishing him and are Favre haters.

You just can't take the fact that Brett is not playing well right now. It burns you up that this thread is alive and well because the decision at this point, based on Favre's play, looks like the right one.

Almost everything I do is tied to knocking him? Not at all. In this thread it has been about Favre vs. Rodgers...so yes, negative things about Favre's play are going to come up.

But his play in recent weeks has been bad...some of the worst of his career. At least in 2005 he was playing bad, but trying to do too much on his own because of injuries to his WRs and RBs and he needed to go for it far more. He has more support now. Some of its poor coaching in NY...some of it is Brett being wreckless and at 39 he may just not be able to do as much as he thought he could.

Sorry you can't see that and just think its to diminish him.

As I have posted, I hope if he is going to retire for good, that he has a good game Sunday and goes out looking like the Brett of old rather than how he has looked the past several weeks.

You stated "a vote that most people feel was complete crap given how he has played recently." about the pro-bowl vote. Can you link or show where this is fact? To me the fact he was voted into the pro-bowl shows most people feel he deserves it.Just going to ignore the rest of the junk you wrote.

Can I link it?Just look around...read the threads here...read the numerous articles stating the same thing...listen to nearly any talk radio.

You can keep asking...but most around here and on the radio and in articles have mirrored my thought.

Do you feel Favre deserved to be in? Quit bringing up the vote and tell me...do you believe he deserved to be in?

 

[GreenNGold]

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

That quote is particularly funny... even if true, so the GM was unavailable for a retired player to reach him? Definitely a fireable offense.

Well, he had no problem shipping him his locker and announcing that his number would be retired ASAP.

 

[sho nuff]

Mason Crosby was a much better kicker when Favre was there...they should have kept Favre!

Rodgers and McCarthy both agree that the QB blew it, not the kicker

The game might not have come down to Crosby's kick had the Packers cashed in on a first-and-goal from the Chicago 5-yard line earlier in the fourth quarter, when Rodgers didn't see a wide-open Donald Lee in the right corner of the end zone and threw incomplete to the opposite side.

Asked if he should have seen Lee, McCarthy replied, "Yes."

"I didn't see him," Rodgers said. "Looked for him, couldn't see him. You throw a touchdown there — by the look on his face as he ran off the field, he was wide open — that puts us up by 11, a two-score game. Disappointing."

Rodgers was taken down for a 5-yard loss on the next play, then threw incomplete on third down, forcing the Packers to settle for a 28-yard Crosby field goal to make it 17-10 with 12:58 left.

"Offensively we didn't cash in on our opportunities. You have to get touchdowns when it's first-and-goal," Rodgers said. "I mean, the amount of yards we put up and the efficiency with which we moved the ball, we've got to get more points than 17. ... We didn't score enough points on offense to win the game."

Here is something too that really pisses me off about McCarthy.... this is from JSOnline today

The Packers forced the Bears into third and 9, but a flat pass to Matt Forte gained 14 when McCarthy said linebacker A.J. Hawk was picked.

WTF is McCarthy talking about? Hawk slipped on that play and I didn't see a pick? He needs to stop making excuses for his team!

Yes, Rodgers shares some blame...can't always see every guy and no guarantees Lee catches it either.But nowhere do they just say Rodgers was to blame...that is classic spin by HK.

I would not say he was picked...he was rubbed by his own guy I think before making the turn and slipping and was out of position on the play.

Knew you could spin it. Good job.

I don't think you understand the word spin.The point is...Rodgers did not see him. Can't see every guy all the time. It was a mistake and a bad one.

Sorry you don't like that.

Lets see start with an insult. Guess I should have expected it since I don't agree with you.Interesting the coach disagrees with you on that point. Then again he's only the coach of the team and knows exactly what was called, how it should have been run, and has a team of people telling him. No way he would have more insight on that play.

Start with an insult?I stated you don't seem to understand the word.

Its not an insult...its an observation based on you calling what I said spin.

The coach disagrees with me? Link to the coach stating he should see him every time or hit the guy every time?

He stated he did not see him...it was his first read and he missed it. As I said, it was a mistake and a bad one.

You are again full of it.

 

[Stinger Ray]

That is the correct reaction to that post.

Not even close. Do you really think the reporters are going to use names of exectuives when they make those reports or make up things like that? I provide links and yet the Favre haters still try to diminish it. Give me break. You are fooling yourself if you think those reports are not true.

I meant your eyeroll was correct. I found it humorous that people were asking for links but what they REALLY want are the names...which for the very reason you listed would be impossible to get. We've ALL read those reports of NFL insiders bashing the handling in the offseason, but I guess some people have conveniently forgotten how ridiculous the whole saga was, what with the bribing and everything. I was simply posting before all the other hangers-on could deny those reports the same as they attempted to deny Favre's return as a rumor as well. It's the predictable response from posters who would dare to question your assertation in the first place. These requests for links to common knowledge gets pretty annoying, especially when the people who are requesting the links are telegraphing their denial way ahead of time.

Thanks for clarifying that!! I appreciate it and I agree completely with you.

 

[sho nuff]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

You do understand they are in two different systems and have different experience levels in each.Favre is new to the system he is playing in and has to learn the system and get more of it on the fly. Rodgers has practiced and played in the Packers system for what 3 years now? Big difference so comparing the two's output just on that level alone isn't very productive.

This is pure spin...you whine about me spinning.But Favre is a 15 year vet...its week 17 coming up...when will the new system excuse be played out? He has been in the system for quite some time now...its time to give it up.No system out there is it ok for a QB to throw off his backfoot, across his body like Favre tried the other day. That was great when he was younger...not so much now. That...and for all the flack Rodgers has taken about holding the ball too long...did you see Favre in Seattle?Comparing a 1st year starter to a 15 year vet...the new system thing is pretty much a wash IMO.And Brett is a 3 time MVP... I think at this point he should be able to pick up a new system pretty quick and should not need the rest of you to make excuses for his poor play.

You just showed you lack of football knowledge and how the offensive systems are put in and work.

You claim me saying I don't think you know the meaning of the word spin is an insult...but come back with this one?No, I think some of you make Favre to be so much...his leadership and experience means so much.But after 16 weeks are still making excuses for the guy playing poorly.Its completely ridiculous.

 

[Stinger Ray]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

You do understand they are in two different systems and have different experience levels in each.Favre is new to the system he is playing in and has to learn the system and get more of it on the fly. Rodgers has practiced and played in the Packers system for what 3 years now? Big difference so comparing the two's output just on that level alone isn't very productive.

This is pure spin...you whine about me spinning.But Favre is a 15 year vet...its week 17 coming up...when will the new system excuse be played out? He has been in the system for quite some time now...its time to give it up.No system out there is it ok for a QB to throw off his backfoot, across his body like Favre tried the other day. That was great when he was younger...not so much now. That...and for all the flack Rodgers has taken about holding the ball too long...did you see Favre in Seattle?Comparing a 1st year starter to a 15 year vet...the new system thing is pretty much a wash IMO.And Brett is a 3 time MVP... I think at this point he should be able to pick up a new system pretty quick and should not need the rest of you to make excuses for his poor play.

You just showed you lack of football knowledge and how the offensive systems are put in and work.

No, I think some of you make Favre to be so much...his leadership and experience means so much.

His leadership and experience did mean a lot to the Packers and that is one reasons that young team went 13-3 last year.Now you can't get back to doing everything you can to diminish Favre.

 

[sho nuff]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

 

[sho nuff]

Umm...if you take away the 2 missed FGs...they would have had 2 wins in crunch time with drives the offense did lead.They would count as much as Favre and the Jets win against Buffalo and Indy's win a few weeks ago where the defense pulled the victory.And if you come up with Rodgers had nothing to do with it...we surely know you are full of it.

In the Minnesota game, Rodgers was given the ball at their own 41 with 2:15 left. He moved them 23 yards in 1:44. Getting them in position for a 50 plus yard FG is hardly impressive at all. The play-calling was a bit too conservative, but that probably had a lot to do with how ineffective Rodgers and the passing game had been for most of the day. In the Chicago game, thanks to a great special teams return and a bad penalty by the Bears, they started with the ball at the Chicago 35 with 3:05 left. Rodgers moved them a whole 15 yards in 2:40. Real impressive! Face it: He has sucked in crunch time this year, and the numbers quite clearly demonstrate that. You won't admit it, but they are there for everyone to see. Later.

That's the defenses fault. If they had gotten the ball to him on the 10 no way they don't score. A few picks would have helped also. Don't forget coaching. Oh yeah, don't forget the Special Teams was supposed to return the ball to inside the 10. Like I said earlier no way they don't score from there.

So you think defense was great all game?Special teams too?Do you put any blame anywhere but on Rodgers?

 

[BeaverCleaver]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

:denial:

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers could have taken one more shot...but if they fall short, would that have been a good thing?

And I think most would agree they would have fallen short.

There was no guarantee they could still extend Rodgers...and then you have a GM possibly extending him without seeing what he can do at all as a starter (and there would have been plenty who would bash him for that, plenty bashed him enough for extending him so early this year...eventhough it was done to eat up a good chunk of this year's cap before it went away and from that standpoint alone was a good move).

If they would have taken one more shot and fallen short, yes, I would be happy with that, and so would all the other fans that feel alienated right now. There is now a huge rift that needs to be healed for many Packer fans that did not need to be created. It is going to take time (years) for that to heal completely, and for enthusiasm for going to the games (many resellers had to dump their tickets for below face value this year) and merchandise sales to pick up again.

I guess the only good thing to come out of this is I might start moving up more than 100 spots per year on the season ticket waiting list, which might allow me to get tickets in my lifetime. But I would still prefer to have a team that was not run by the 3 stooges.

I was under the impression that the Packers front office was one of the most respected in the leauge.

They lost a lot of respect around the league for how they handled the Favre situation.

Link?

Agreed, I expect most of the league thinks the Packers handled the Favre situation pretty well and probably sympathizes with the position GB's mgmt was placed in by Favre's retirement reversal.If GB hadn't had to handle Favre with kid gloves due to his iconic status, they just could have told him to enjoy his retirement and changed the phone number when he decided he wanted to un-retire.

Im sure some around the league did not like it...but others actually in the league (and that is what I am trying to separate...the difference between the league and the fans). IMO, Stinger and others are stuck more on the fan reaction.

Care to post some facts to support this? Maybe a link like you requested earlier?

You want me to link to articles not existing?You have got to be kidding with this...seriously...get a grip...and grow up.

 

[Stinger Ray]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

Wrong....you missed this part.."But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

That is more than one, sho.... but you just keep being in denial about this.

 

[sho nuff]

I think the Packers would be 5-10 or worse if Favre was still there. It's ridiculous blaming Rodgers for all this and thinking Favre would have made a difference, especially since Rodgers has played MUCH better than Favre this year.

You do understand they are in two different systems and have different experience levels in each.Favre is new to the system he is playing in and has to learn the system and get more of it on the fly. Rodgers has practiced and played in the Packers system for what 3 years now? Big difference so comparing the two's output just on that level alone isn't very productive.

This is pure spin...you whine about me spinning.But Favre is a 15 year vet...its week 17 coming up...when will the new system excuse be played out? He has been in the system for quite some time now...its time to give it up.No system out there is it ok for a QB to throw off his backfoot, across his body like Favre tried the other day. That was great when he was younger...not so much now. That...and for all the flack Rodgers has taken about holding the ball too long...did you see Favre in Seattle?Comparing a 1st year starter to a 15 year vet...the new system thing is pretty much a wash IMO.And Brett is a 3 time MVP... I think at this point he should be able to pick up a new system pretty quick and should not need the rest of you to make excuses for his poor play.

You just showed you lack of football knowledge and how the offensive systems are put in and work.

No, I think some of you make Favre to be so much...his leadership and experience means so much.

His leadership and experience did mean a lot to the Packers and that is one reasons that young team went 13-3 last year.Now you can't get back to doing everything you can to diminish Favre.

Sure...it was a reason, never have I denied this.The point remains...that continuing to make excuses for a 15 year vet not grasping the offense yet.When exactly will he get that throwing a duck off your back foot across your body and across the field is not a good thing?

 

[sho nuff]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

:denial:

You and Stinger? I agree.He listed one person from actually around the league.

One that talked about not having a veteran backup and did not get close to his point about how the Packers were viewed around the league over the handling of the Favre situation.

One guy saying "he may" have mishandled it.

Just linking to writers giving an opinion is not a view of the how people around the league are viewing the organization.

 

[sho nuff]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

Wrong....you missed this part.."But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

That is more than one, sho.... but you just keep being in denial about this.

Like I said...I give you one out of 3.Thinking they mishandled it is also far and away from your original claim that they lost alot of respect around the league.

Even saying they mishandled it is not saying they lost alot of respect around the league.

So, Im no longer generous...you get an 0-4 and a complete and total fail in linking anything showing they have lost alot of respect around the league.

Please try again...no, better yet...please save us all the ridiculous spin you are about to bring.

 

[Stinger Ray]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

Wrong....you missed this part.."But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

That is more than one, sho.... but you just keep being in denial about this.

Like I said...I give you one out of 3.Thinking they mishandled it is also far and away from your original claim that they lost alot of respect around the league.

Even saying they mishandled it is not saying they lost alot of respect around the league.

So, Im no longer generous...you get an 0-4 and a complete and total fail in linking anything showing they have lost alot of respect around the league.

Please try again...no, better yet...please save us all the ridiculous spin you are about to bring.

You are in complete denial on this subject if you think the Packers management didn't lose respect because of this entire ordeal not to mention the fact this team went from 13 wins to 5 so far. What is ridiculous is how you do everything you can to ignore what has been written on the subject and reported on radio and television on this subject.

 

[sho nuff]

This next part is unverified at this point...pulled it off another board...Id think it would keep a few of you quiet if true...but I doubt it...

In the 4th quarter of Jets games within 7 points (Jets winning by 7 or less, or losing by 7 or less), Favre's QB rating is 50 something

Instead just cue up the diminishing comments that are sure to come.

 

[Phurfur]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

Wrong....you missed this part.."But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

That is more than one, sho.... but you just keep being in denial about this.

Like I said...I give you one out of 3.Thinking they mishandled it is also far and away from your original claim that they lost alot of respect around the league.

Even saying they mishandled it is not saying they lost alot of respect around the league.

So, Im no longer generous...you get an 0-4 and a complete and total fail in linking anything showing they have lost alot of respect around the league.

Please try again...no, better yet...please save us all the ridiculous spin you are about to bring.

I think Favre lost more respect than GB did.What an egomaniac.

 

[Stinger Ray]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

:denial:

Just linking to writers giving an opinion is not a view of the how people around the league are viewing the organization.

SPIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Stinger Ray]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

Wrong....you missed this part.."But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

That is more than one, sho.... but you just keep being in denial about this.

Like I said...I give you one out of 3.Thinking they mishandled it is also far and away from your original claim that they lost alot of respect around the league.

Even saying they mishandled it is not saying they lost alot of respect around the league.

So, Im no longer generous...you get an 0-4 and a complete and total fail in linking anything showing they have lost alot of respect around the league.

Please try again...no, better yet...please save us all the ridiculous spin you are about to bring.

I think Favre lost more respect than GB did.What an egomaniac.

Favre haters thinks that. Rational people do not.

 

[sho nuff]

http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/07/31/did...o-stay-retired/

"the Packers have grossly mishandled the situation."

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/06/...arthy-thompson/

"But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

Said one team executive, “I can’t believe how the front office has ^&*$% up this thing. He is one of the two or three best all time players in franchise history. You can’t treat him like a piece of dirt. I would bet that this is going to end up costing a few people their jobs next January.”

http://m.si.com/news/sp/archive/detail/104...C8A.cnnsilive9i

"Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson may have mishandled this entire affair by being out of touch with Cook and virtually unreachable to Favre during the last three months."

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/0...-tavern-talk-8/

"I was talking to a GM in the league today and even he was surprised that the Packers still refuse to bring in a veteran QB to back up and help Rodgers. I think it is a dangerous move and Green Bay needs to hope Rodgers can hold up. Risky business here."

Lets take these one by one.First one...how is that a source from around the league...its one guy's opinion who starts out with his bias of the "tried to bribe" him line. Funny how that "bribe" was offered to Favre before he even retired and Andrew Brandt knew about it even before he left the Packers.

First link...utter fail.

2nd one.

Hey, you found a team exec. One.

So...a pass for now.

3rd one.

"may have mishandled".

And Peter King is not "around the league".

Another utter fail.

4th link.

Not sure what you were linking to there...nothing like that in the actual article linked.

And...it was about not getting a backup...not even about the situation.

And even I said not having a backup was a mistake.

Worst fail of all.

Being generous that you actually found one...I will give you a 1-3.

Though, the one was just one exec...a far cry from your claim of how badly people around the league looked at the Packers Org.

Wrong....you missed this part.."But given the manner in which McCarthy and Thompson have mishandled Favre’s attempt to return, some league insiders think that both men could be in danger, if the team tanks in 2008.

That is more than one, sho.... but you just keep being in denial about this.

Like I said...I give you one out of 3.Thinking they mishandled it is also far and away from your original claim that they lost alot of respect around the league.

Even saying they mishandled it is not saying they lost alot of respect around the league.

So, Im no longer generous...you get an 0-4 and a complete and total fail in linking anything showing they have lost alot of respect around the league.

Please try again...no, better yet...please save us all the ridiculous spin you are about to bring.

You are in complete denial on this subject if you think the Packers management didn't lose respect because of this entire ordeal not to mention the fact this team went from 13 wins to 5 so far. What is ridiculous is how you do everything you can to ignore what has been written on the subject and reported on radio and television on this subject.

Im stating you have no proof of your claim that they just lost respect around the league.Im sure there are a few that have possibly lost respect for Thompson. But I don't think it is nearly as many as you believe.

Your 4 attempts at proving so listed one exec who says they mishandled it...backed up by others...2 columnists giving their opinion...and a bit about not getting a veteran backup.

Not my fault that you have troubles getting near the point you made about them losing respect around the league.

Ignore what has been written and said on the radio?

I have seen plenty agree that it was the right decision. In the end, that is what this thread is about.