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!
It was a fishing trip trying to get a reaction from me.Right. And the Viking's future looks very bright with Favre.A lot of people on both sides of this were wrong. A few interesting stats...Favre's record since leaving the Packers is 24-17. Rodgers is 23-18.Favre got to the NFC Championship game and Rodgers has yet to win a playoff game.
Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
To be fair, Brett was injured with the Jets and had a amazing year last year. I don't think even the most die-hard Favre lover would debate that Rogers would be better almost 3 years later. I think Childress is more at fault for the disaster this season then Favre is. If you're going to hinge your Superbowl hopes on Favre, you need to make sure you get along with the guy. He's a horrid coach.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
You forgot "drug addicted".Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
I pretty much agree with everything you said.But I do think the Packers made the right choice when Favre wanted to un-retire a couple of years ago.The last 2 years have truly cemented Favre's legacy as one of the top QBs ever... what he did last year was incredible.But the last 2 years have also given the world a good look at Favre's true persona... and he would have been a lot better off in that regard retiring while everyone still worshiped him.To be fair, Brett was injured with the Jets and had a amazing year last year. I don't think even the most die-hard Favre lover would debate that Rogers would be better almost 3 years later. I think Childress is more at fault for the disaster this season then Favre is. If you're going to hinge your Superbowl hopes on Favre, you need to make sure you get along with the guy. He's a horrid coach.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
That one I'm sympathetic / empathetic toward.You forgot "drug addicted".Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
meh ... at the time it was the best decision for all parties and that is what it still is
Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? I do wish the Packers would have chose to go with Favre one more year after they went 13-3. It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
The Packers would have lost Rodgers if they didn't play him. They certainly couldn't have franchised a backup QB and pay Favre at the same time. To act like what is happening and will happen years down the road aren't an important factor in evaluating the Packers decision seems kind of foolish.Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
If they'd gone with Favre one more year, they would have lost Rodgers. He wasn't going to sit around any longer.Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? I do wish the Packers would have chose to go with Favre one more year after they went 13-3. It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
Victory has been claimed for 3 yrs running now. People are not claiming victory after 3 yrs have expired. Packers knew what they had in Rodgers and they also knew all the baggage that comes with having Favre at qb and in the locker room. Packers mgmt were privy to a lot more intel on Favre than the public.Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? I do wish the Packers would have chose to go with Favre one more year after they went 13-3. It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
I see you missed the point completely.Victory has been claimed for 3 yrs running now. People are not claiming victory after 3 yrs have expired. Packers knew what they had in Rodgers and they also knew all the baggage that comes with having Favre at qb and in the locker room. Packers mgmt were privy to a lot more intel on Favre than the public.Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? I do wish the Packers would have chose to go with Favre one more year after they went 13-3. It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
They did.
I think the point is was it the best move to let Favre go(FOR THE SHORT TERM) after the Packers went 13-3 and almost to the Super Bowl.Victory has been claimed for 3 yrs running now. People are not claiming victory after 3 yrs have expired. Packers knew what they had in Rodgers and they also knew all the baggage that comes with having Favre at qb and in the locker room. Packers mgmt were privy to a lot more intel on Favre than the public.Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? I do wish the Packers would have chose to go with Favre one more year after they went 13-3. It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
They went 6-10 the following year.
They looked more than one year ahead and chose to keep Rodgers over Favre.
And had plenty of other issues besides QB.
13-3 and instead of one more year with Favre before moving ahead with Rodgers they made the move. I am not saying it was the right thing to do but they did go 6-10 the following season and Rodgers has yet to win a playoff game. Of course they made the right decision to move on with Rodgers but should they have waiting one year? That's all. It's awesome to see Favre getting what is coming to him now. He should have retired after last season.
13-3 to 6-10.
There really needs to be some sort of standard for Shark Pool posting rights. Maybe a test, or some other form of demonstrated football knowledge. This kind of post would be funny if the poster was being ironic, but that's more of a FFA thing.
You think they should have sacrificed the future of the team for one year?
Explain to us how one more year of Favre would have sacrificed the future of the Packers? One year would have hurt Rodgers development?
Never mind the fact that there's no reason to think Favre would have done any better than Rodgers with the 2008 Packers.
What would the Packer record have been that year if they kept Favre?What would the Packer record be this year?
It wouldn't have necessarily hurt Rodgers development, but it likely would have hurt the Packers' record. Rodgers was the best QB on their roster at that point.Edit: It's pretty funny that people are still arguing this point three years later. I take back what I said earlier about having to establish the right to post in the Shark Pool. This kind of thing provides genuine entertainment.
13-3 to 6-10 all because of one player?My God the SP is seriously going down hill.Terrible
Aaron was "ready". No reason to risk losing him. You could not predict what Favre was going to do for another season or even two.It was time to move on, and they did.
Because there would have been a good chance that they would have lost Rodgers and would have to beg Favre to keep coming back until a new replacement could have been found.
So if they kept Favre maybe they go 6-10 anyways or at best 8-8. At the risk of losing Rodgers?I think the point is was it the best move to let Favre go(FOR THE SHORT TERM) after the Packers went 13-3 and almost to the Super Bowl.Victory has been claimed for 3 yrs running now. People are not claiming victory after 3 yrs have expired. Packers knew what they had in Rodgers and they also knew all the baggage that comes with having Favre at qb and in the locker room. Packers mgmt were privy to a lot more intel on Favre than the public.Exactly..this isn't a debate about 3 years later if the Packers made the right decision. The debate is did they may the right decision to move on without Favre after the Packers went 13-3 and were very close to making it to the Super Bowl. You clowns claiming a victory at this point look foolish. The Packers went 6-10 the season after they let Favre move on and last season Favre went further than the Packers did.So yes, it was obvious that Rodgers was the QB of the future for the Packers but what would have happened if the Packers had Favre two years ago or even last year? I do wish the Packers would have chose to go with Favre one more year after they went 13-3. It doesn't matter anymore. Hopefully the Packers can make the playoffs and Rodgers will take his next step and win a playoff game this year. Favre...stick a fork in him.Who could have predicted that a young talented QB would be a better long term choice than an aging, drama queen, marriage cheating, non-committal Favre?
the strategy worked for the Vikes.
Not really...Thompson could have offered an extension to Rodgers to lock him up prior to the 2009 season.
Exactly.
all this leads to the absolute simplest answer for the question ... the packer/favre divorce was best for all parties involved.
If only the Vikings would have gotten the Favre of the 90's, maybe they would have won a Superbowl.You understand that time passes and things do not remain the same from one day, month, or year to the next, do you not? And that the Favre of 08 was not the same as the Favre of 96, physically or mentally?If only the Packers would of had Rodgers during the 90s, they might of won a Super Bowl..
It was never Thompson on his own.The story from McGinn was that there was a meeting and everyone in football operations wanted to move on with Rodgers...that they would not force Favre out, but they were, in a way, hoping he would retire after the 2007 season.But, both sides could have been more professional in how they handled everything.
Updated now their records are even at 24-18.In addition, one team looks set to keep competing in the future, another that moved on after Favre is one of the better teams in the AFC, and the other team just fired a coach and look to be heading in a downward spiral.Once again...the correct decision was made.Yes, Favre and the Vikings got to the NFC Championship game. No, Rodgers has not won a playoff game yet.But, the ultimate goal is a Super Bowl. And not just one time, but to keep being competitive to be able to push for that SB.The decision was made because those in football operations thought Favre was no longer able to push the Green Bay Packers to the SB. Nothing that has happened so far has shown that part of the decision to be incorrect.Right. And the Viking's future looks very bright with Favre.A lot of people on both sides of this were wrong. A few interesting stats...Favre's record since leaving the Packers is 24-17. Rodgers is 23-18.Favre got to the NFC Championship game and Rodgers has yet to win a playoff game.
Favre pushed his team closer to a Super Bowl than the Packers had prior to this year.Updated now their records are even at 24-18.In addition, one team looks set to keep competing in the future, another that moved on after Favre is one of the better teams in the AFC, and the other team just fired a coach and look to be heading in a downward spiral.Once again...the correct decision was made.Yes, Favre and the Vikings got to the NFC Championship game. No, Rodgers has not won a playoff game yet.But, the ultimate goal is a Super Bowl. And not just one time, but to keep being competitive to be able to push for that SB.The decision was made because those in football operations thought Favre was no longer able to push the Green Bay Packers to the SB. Nothing that has happened so far has shown that part of the decision to be incorrect.Right. And the Viking's future looks very bright with Favre.A lot of people on both sides of this were wrong. A few interesting stats...Favre's record since leaving the Packers is 24-17. Rodgers is 23-18.Favre got to the NFC Championship game and Rodgers has yet to win a playoff game.
Yes he did.And he pushed the Packers to that same spot in 2007.After that game the decision was made...and again, it appears to be correct.Favre pushed his team closer to a Super Bowl than the Packers had prior to this year.Updated now their records are even at 24-18.In addition, one team looks set to keep competing in the future, another that moved on after Favre is one of the better teams in the AFC, and the other team just fired a coach and look to be heading in a downward spiral.Once again...the correct decision was made.Yes, Favre and the Vikings got to the NFC Championship game. No, Rodgers has not won a playoff game yet.But, the ultimate goal is a Super Bowl. And not just one time, but to keep being competitive to be able to push for that SB.The decision was made because those in football operations thought Favre was no longer able to push the Green Bay Packers to the SB. Nothing that has happened so far has shown that part of the decision to be incorrect.Right. And the Viking's future looks very bright with Favre.A lot of people on both sides of this were wrong. A few interesting stats...Favre's record since leaving the Packers is 24-17. Rodgers is 23-18.Favre got to the NFC Championship game and Rodgers has yet to win a playoff game.
2008 even with Favre they likely would not have won any Super Bowl.Would he have had the same injury in 2008 that eventually doomed the Jets chances that year? I don't know.But that team was far from the same one that played in 2007. Look at the defensive numbers.Sure, Favre gave them a better chance going into that one year...I don't think many here disputed that.But the decision was not a one year decision. And as has been said, if they go with Favre in 2008, there is a pretty solid possibility Rodgers in 2010 is not wearing Green and Gold.
That big a drop was NOT just due to QB play.
