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

[The Gatekeeper]

Now that the season is over for the Cheeseheads and Favre, please let this thread die. Thanks

 

[Aaronstory]

Rodgers > Favre. But the most important thing to note is that the Packers are a bad, bad team and last year's record was an aberration. The Packers will be bad for years to come.

I'd say this year was the aberration. Too many key players lost on defense. It didn't matter what the offense did, the defense couldn't hold down the fort. Next season, if they can get Rouse and Bigby to play better and stay healthy, Cullen Jenkins back, and Nick Barnett back, they'll rebound just fine.

Considering that this season was preceded by a 13-3, 8-8 and 4-12 season, I am not sure I am seeing why 6-10 is the aberration. One of these seasons is not like the other, if you catch my drift...and if you don't it's last season, because it's the last winning season the Green Bay Packers have had in four seasons. I understand that cheeseheads wear their hats low though, so it can be difficult to see the truth with gouda in your eyes.

How close is this team to the team that went 4-12? Entirely different coaching staff. Different Offensive backfield, 3 different linemen, different wideouts, different tight end, you catch my drift?

And so particularly odd that last year's 13-3 team lost only the QB before the start of the season and suddenly this season looks a lot more like that totally different team that went 4-12 than the team that played to the NFC Championship last year!

The bolded proves you have no idea what you are talking about.

"Injuries!" If only any other team had to deal with them, too. How unfair!

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

 

[Sabertooth]

Fargo is just trying to stir the pot here folks.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

So what do the Packers get for Favre? I don't know if its been answered in here but don't want to wade through 50-something pages to find it.

No matter how high the pick is, the Packers win because they got a pick for someone that retired.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

So what do the Packers get for Favre? I don't know if its been answered in here but don't want to wade through 50-something pages to find it.

No matter how high the pick is, the Packers win because they got a pick for someone that retired.

I believe a third round pick....http://bleacherreport.com/articles/45027-b...s-trade-details

The Packers get a fourth round pick if Brett plays under 50 percent of the snaps in 2008.

If Favre plays over 50 percent of the snaps it becomes a third round pick. If Favre plays 70 percent of the snaps and makes the playoffs it becomes a second round pick. If the Favre plays 80 percent of the snaps and the Jets make the Super Bowl it becomes a first round pick.

 

[ScottyFargo]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You just shifted gears. Not that I blame you.This years draft pick wasnt the concern.

Long term overall success was. And they nailed it.

No, I didn't shift gears. I was being facetious. This talk of "FUTURE" that everybody bandies about discounts the fact that Rodgers was a 1st round draft choice...FOR THE FUTURE. Life without Favre WAS supposed to be the future. Now that this season was shot in the foot, the moves they made this offseason were all for the future? They didn't care how they performed this season all of a sudden? Ridiculous. The Packers organization believed they wouldn't miss a step this year.Since it was finally his time, the future was NOW, expecially coming off of a 13-3 season. He wasn't a rookie, the team simply wasn't set up to win this year, which is a catastrophic mistake. The players play to win each game, all season long...are you trying to say that the front office operates any differently? This season was a wash to begin with? Ridiculous.

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.

It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

They were compensated for the trade, were they not? He was clearly seen as expendable in their eyes...just like Favre became when they decided to trade him away to the Jets. Who cares about losing Corey Williams? Did the Packers really miss his 50 tackles and half a sack this year? Corey Williams was such an integral piece to the puzzle that HE was the reason the Packers team sucked this year? He wasn't worth mentioning, just like any practice squad players or second string guys or the countless other roster moves teams make. The core of the team was still there to start the year: Jennings, Driver, Clifton etc on offense, Hawk, Kampman, Woodson, Harris on defense, and the team fell from 13-3 to 6 and 10.If you feel vindicated on the technicality that I didn't include a player that the Packers voluntarily traded away among the "losses" of the year, then bully for you. Nevermind the fact that the rest of the team remained the same, the play just dropped off to the tune of a seven game switch in wins and losses.

I don't know how I must have missed all the stories about irate Corey Williams fans protesting outside of Lambeau when he was traded away.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You just shifted gears. Not that I blame you.This years draft pick wasnt the concern.

Long term overall success was. And they nailed it.

No, I didn't shift gears. I was being facetious. This talk of "FUTURE" that everybody bandies about discounts the fact that Rodgers was a 1st round draft choice...FOR THE FUTURE. Life without Favre WAS supposed to be the future. Now that this season was shot in the foot, the moves they made this offseason were all for the future? They didn't care how they performed this season all of a sudden? Ridiculous. The Packers organization believed they wouldn't miss a step this year.Since it was finally his time, the future was NOW, expecially coming off of a 13-3 season. He wasn't a rookie, the team simply wasn't set up to win this year, which is a catastrophic mistake. The players play to win each game, all season long...are you trying to say that the front office operates any differently? This season was a wash to begin with? Ridiculous.

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.

It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

They were compensated for the trade, were they not? He was clearly seen as expendable in their eyes...just like Favre became when they decided to trade him away to the Jets. Who cares about losing Corey Williams? Did the Packers really miss his 50 tackles and half a sack this year? Corey Williams was such an integral piece to the puzzle that HE was the reason the Packers team sucked this year? He wasn't worth mentioning, just like any practice squad players or second string guys or the countless other roster moves teams make. The core of the team was still there to start the year: Jennings, Driver, Clifton etc on offense, Hawk, Kampman, Woodson, Harris on defense, and the team fell from 13-3 to 6 and 10.If you feel vindicated on the technicality that I didn't include a player that the Packers voluntarily traded away among the "losses" of the year, then bully for you. Nevermind the fact that the rest of the team remained the same, the play just dropped off to the tune of a seven game switch in wins and losses.

I don't know how I must have missed all the stories about irate Corey Williams fans protesting outside of Lambeau when he was traded away.

Corey Williams, Abdul Hodge, Tracy White, KGB. If you go to the jsonline blog, you'll hear these names thrown out as 'reasons' for Green Bay's demise, as if these guys prove that Thompson is a bad GM.I think we saw the culmination of a lot of circumstances.

1. Favre circus. I'm done discussing it. But this weighed on the team for sure.

2. Transition of leadership. Rodgers said yesterday that we wasn't sure what the team wanted out of him from a leadership perspective. No matter how you slice it, roles changed and players had to adjust without having THE QB in place. This factored in. Players are learning their new roles. Some have to emerge as leaders. Others have to find their spot.

3. Schedule. The 08 schedule was much tougher than 07.

4. Youth. Still the youngest team in the NFL. Gotta expect growing pains.

5. Injuries and player declines. If you don't think losing Jenkins, Barnett, and a capable Strong Safety impacted this defense, then I don't know what to say. I was also diappointed with the play of Hawk (is it injury or is he not that good?). The team gambled that Biamila would return to form after a knee injury, but it became clear he was done. Couple that with no Jenkins, and the pass rush took a big, big hit.

You can't lay blame on just one person here in my opinion. Everyone had a hand in this 6-10. Overall though, I don't think they're that far off. It's going to be an interesting off season.

 

[Phurfur]

The season is over and the answer is pretty obvious. There is no arguement here.

 

[Aaronstory]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You just shifted gears. Not that I blame you.This years draft pick wasnt the concern.

Long term overall success was. And they nailed it.

No, I didn't shift gears. I was being facetious. This talk of "FUTURE" that everybody bandies about discounts the fact that Rodgers was a 1st round draft choice...FOR THE FUTURE. Life without Favre WAS supposed to be the future. Now that this season was shot in the foot, the moves they made this offseason were all for the future? They didn't care how they performed this season all of a sudden? Ridiculous. The Packers organization believed they wouldn't miss a step this year.Since it was finally his time, the future was NOW, expecially coming off of a 13-3 season. He wasn't a rookie, the team simply wasn't set up to win this year, which is a catastrophic mistake. The players play to win each game, all season long...are you trying to say that the front office operates any differently? This season was a wash to begin with? Ridiculous.

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.

It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

They were compensated for the trade, were they not? He was clearly seen as expendable in their eyes...just like Favre became when they decided to trade him away to the Jets. Who cares about losing Corey Williams? Did the Packers really miss his 50 tackles and half a sack this year? Corey Williams was such an integral piece to the puzzle that HE was the reason the Packers team sucked this year? He wasn't worth mentioning, just like any practice squad players or second string guys or the countless other roster moves teams make. The core of the team was still there to start the year: Jennings, Driver, Clifton etc on offense, Hawk, Kampman, Woodson, Harris on defense, and the team fell from 13-3 to 6 and 10.If you feel vindicated on the technicality that I didn't include a player that the Packers voluntarily traded away among the "losses" of the year, then bully for you. Nevermind the fact that the rest of the team remained the same, the play just dropped off to the tune of a seven game switch in wins and losses.

I don't know how I must have missed all the stories about irate Corey Williams fans protesting outside of Lambeau when he was traded away.

They also lost Frank Walker, but that's a technicality I guess. The truth is so annoying. Keep up the spin job on how you were wrong though.

 

[Aaronstory]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You just shifted gears. Not that I blame you.This years draft pick wasnt the concern.

Long term overall success was. And they nailed it.

No, I didn't shift gears. I was being facetious. This talk of "FUTURE" that everybody bandies about discounts the fact that Rodgers was a 1st round draft choice...FOR THE FUTURE. Life without Favre WAS supposed to be the future. Now that this season was shot in the foot, the moves they made this offseason were all for the future? They didn't care how they performed this season all of a sudden? Ridiculous. The Packers organization believed they wouldn't miss a step this year.Since it was finally his time, the future was NOW, expecially coming off of a 13-3 season. He wasn't a rookie, the team simply wasn't set up to win this year, which is a catastrophic mistake. The players play to win each game, all season long...are you trying to say that the front office operates any differently? This season was a wash to begin with? Ridiculous.

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.

It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

They were compensated for the trade, were they not? He was clearly seen as expendable in their eyes...just like Favre became when they decided to trade him away to the Jets. Who cares about losing Corey Williams? Did the Packers really miss his 50 tackles and half a sack this year? Corey Williams was such an integral piece to the puzzle that HE was the reason the Packers team sucked this year? He wasn't worth mentioning, just like any practice squad players or second string guys or the countless other roster moves teams make. The core of the team was still there to start the year: Jennings, Driver, Clifton etc on offense, Hawk, Kampman, Woodson, Harris on defense, and the team fell from 13-3 to 6 and 10.If you feel vindicated on the technicality that I didn't include a player that the Packers voluntarily traded away among the "losses" of the year, then bully for you. Nevermind the fact that the rest of the team remained the same, the play just dropped off to the tune of a seven game switch in wins and losses.

I don't know how I must have missed all the stories about irate Corey Williams fans protesting outside of Lambeau when he was traded away.

Corey Williams, Abdul Hodge, Tracy White, KGB. If you go to the jsonline blog, you'll hear these names thrown out as 'reasons' for Green Bay's demise, as if these guys prove that Thompson is a bad GM.I think we saw the culmination of a lot of circumstances.

1. Favre circus. I'm done discussing it. But this weighed on the team for sure.

2. Transition of leadership. Rodgers said yesterday that we wasn't sure what the team wanted out of him from a leadership perspective. No matter how you slice it, roles changed and players had to adjust without having THE QB in place. This factored in. Players are learning their new roles. Some have to emerge as leaders. Others have to find their spot.

3. Schedule. The 08 schedule was much tougher than 07.

4. Youth. Still the youngest team in the NFL. Gotta expect growing pains.

5. Injuries and player declines. If you don't think losing Jenkins, Barnett, and a capable Strong Safety impacted this defense, then I don't know what to say. I was also diappointed with the play of Hawk (is it injury or is he not that good?). The team gambled that Biamila would return to form after a knee injury, but it became clear he was done. Couple that with no Jenkins, and the pass rush took a big, big hit.

You can't lay blame on just one person here in my opinion. Everyone had a hand in this 6-10. Overall though, I don't think they're that far off. It's going to be an interesting off season.

Damn

 

[Sabertooth]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You just shifted gears. Not that I blame you.This years draft pick wasnt the concern.

Long term overall success was. And they nailed it.

No, I didn't shift gears. I was being facetious. This talk of "FUTURE" that everybody bandies about discounts the fact that Rodgers was a 1st round draft choice...FOR THE FUTURE. Life without Favre WAS supposed to be the future. Now that this season was shot in the foot, the moves they made this offseason were all for the future? They didn't care how they performed this season all of a sudden? Ridiculous. The Packers organization believed they wouldn't miss a step this year.Since it was finally his time, the future was NOW, expecially coming off of a 13-3 season. He wasn't a rookie, the team simply wasn't set up to win this year, which is a catastrophic mistake. The players play to win each game, all season long...are you trying to say that the front office operates any differently? This season was a wash to begin with? Ridiculous.

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.

It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

They were compensated for the trade, were they not? He was clearly seen as expendable in their eyes...just like Favre became when they decided to trade him away to the Jets. Who cares about losing Corey Williams? Did the Packers really miss his 50 tackles and half a sack this year? Corey Williams was such an integral piece to the puzzle that HE was the reason the Packers team sucked this year? He wasn't worth mentioning, just like any practice squad players or second string guys or the countless other roster moves teams make. The core of the team was still there to start the year: Jennings, Driver, Clifton etc on offense, Hawk, Kampman, Woodson, Harris on defense, and the team fell from 13-3 to 6 and 10.If you feel vindicated on the technicality that I didn't include a player that the Packers voluntarily traded away among the "losses" of the year, then bully for you. Nevermind the fact that the rest of the team remained the same, the play just dropped off to the tune of a seven game switch in wins and losses.

I don't know how I must have missed all the stories about irate Corey Williams fans protesting outside of Lambeau when he was traded away.

Corey Williams, Abdul Hodge, Tracy White, KGB. If you go to the jsonline blog, you'll hear these names thrown out as 'reasons' for Green Bay's demise, as if these guys prove that Thompson is a bad GM.I think we saw the culmination of a lot of circumstances.

1. Favre circus. I'm done discussing it. But this weighed on the team for sure.

2. Transition of leadership. Rodgers said yesterday that we wasn't sure what the team wanted out of him from a leadership perspective. No matter how you slice it, roles changed and players had to adjust without having THE QB in place. This factored in. Players are learning their new roles. Some have to emerge as leaders. Others have to find their spot.

3. Schedule. The 08 schedule was much tougher than 07.

4. Youth. Still the youngest team in the NFL. Gotta expect growing pains.

5. Injuries and player declines. If you don't think losing Jenkins, Barnett, and a capable Strong Safety impacted this defense, then I don't know what to say. I was also diappointed with the play of Hawk (is it injury or is he not that good?). The team gambled that Biamila would return to form after a knee injury, but it became clear he was done. Couple that with no Jenkins, and the pass rush took a big, big hit.

You can't lay blame on just one person here in my opinion. Everyone had a hand in this 6-10. Overall though, I don't think they're that far off. It's going to be an interesting off season.

This post nails it perfectly. People like Fargo and others are just baiting at this point because they've been proven absolutely wrong. Glad to see that some fans actually get what happened.

 

[ScottyFargo]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You just shifted gears. Not that I blame you.This years draft pick wasnt the concern.

Long term overall success was. And they nailed it.

No, I didn't shift gears. I was being facetious. This talk of "FUTURE" that everybody bandies about discounts the fact that Rodgers was a 1st round draft choice...FOR THE FUTURE. Life without Favre WAS supposed to be the future. Now that this season was shot in the foot, the moves they made this offseason were all for the future? They didn't care how they performed this season all of a sudden? Ridiculous. The Packers organization believed they wouldn't miss a step this year.Since it was finally his time, the future was NOW, expecially coming off of a 13-3 season. He wasn't a rookie, the team simply wasn't set up to win this year, which is a catastrophic mistake. The players play to win each game, all season long...are you trying to say that the front office operates any differently? This season was a wash to begin with? Ridiculous.

Um, more ignorance. What did I say about injuries? Corey Williams was traded before the season, yes? You clearly said the Packers ONLY lost the QB before the start of the season.

It's hard, I know, but you're wrong. Man up and admit it. I'll wait.

They were compensated for the trade, were they not? He was clearly seen as expendable in their eyes...just like Favre became when they decided to trade him away to the Jets. Who cares about losing Corey Williams? Did the Packers really miss his 50 tackles and half a sack this year? Corey Williams was such an integral piece to the puzzle that HE was the reason the Packers team sucked this year? He wasn't worth mentioning, just like any practice squad players or second string guys or the countless other roster moves teams make. The core of the team was still there to start the year: Jennings, Driver, Clifton etc on offense, Hawk, Kampman, Woodson, Harris on defense, and the team fell from 13-3 to 6 and 10.If you feel vindicated on the technicality that I didn't include a player that the Packers voluntarily traded away among the "losses" of the year, then bully for you. Nevermind the fact that the rest of the team remained the same, the play just dropped off to the tune of a seven game switch in wins and losses.

I don't know how I must have missed all the stories about irate Corey Williams fans protesting outside of Lambeau when he was traded away.

They also lost Frank Walker, but that's a technicality I guess. The truth is so annoying. Keep up the spin job on how you were wrong though.

Also, I forgot Poland!

 

[Da Guru]

The season is over and the answer is pretty obvious. There is no arguement here.

I agree. The Packers are all set at QB for the next 10 years. Rodgers has skills and had a "great" year for a first year QB. The kid can play.

 

[mozzy84]

sho must have gotten a timeout

 

[Ozymandias]

The season is over and the answer is pretty obvious. There is no arguement here.

I agree. The Packers are all set at QB for the next 10 years. Rodgers has skills and had a "great" year for a first year QB. The kid can play.

 

[maxwelledison]

Bears fan chiming in:

It was definitely a frustrating year for the Pack but they made the right move for many of the reasons discussed above: the kid stayed healthy, maintained his composure in a difficult situation and proved he can play. On the flip side, if Favre were around they would have a bunch of pain in the *** questions in front of them rather than behind them. That alone is worth the growing pains of 2008. In 2009 they will be another year removed from the circus and Rodgers can come into his own a little bit in the leadership role.

I predict a division win for the Pack next year (pains me to say it but the Bears are a joke and with Childress at the helm the Queens have a glass ceiling).

 

[sho nuff]

Your statements that are leading to the conclusion that Favre is/was currently (2008) better then Rodgers are absolutely wrong. Proven beyond a shadow of the doubt. Regardless of the Packers or Jets.

I have not been arguing that Favre would have been better for the Pack this year, I abandoned that argument weeks ago when Favre started peeing the bed and Rodgers proved he was a consistent performer. (Save for the fact that Favre had been good for some 3 out of 10 come from behind victories, where Rodgers is 0 fer 100% this season, but Favre this season wasn't playing up to snuff.)As I posted this:

Rodgers > Favre. But the most important thing to note is that the Packers are a bad, bad team and last year's record was an aberration. The Packers will be bad for years to come.

I thought I had made that clear. Now the facts are that the Packers clearly had more work to do this offseason than try to spin the whole Favre/retirement fiasco and they lost their bearings.

Why would you think they will be bad for years to come?As for spinning the whole fiasco...its pretty clear which side in this thread has been spinning it.

And its not the ones who supported the decision.

 

[sho nuff]

sho must have gotten a timeout

Nope...Sho took a break, went to visit the inlaws...then made the long drive to Wisconsin and was at the game yesterday.

 

[culdeus]

Stunned it took 26 pages for people to realize the right side of this.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

sho must have gotten a timeout

Nope...Sho took a break, went to visit the inlaws...then made the long drive to Wisconsin and was at the game yesterday.

You better get busy...you have a lot of catching up to do.

 

[sho nuff]

sho must have gotten a timeout

Nope...Sho took a break, went to visit the inlaws...then made the long drive to Wisconsin and was at the game yesterday.

You better get busy...you have a lot of catching up to do.

Nah...decided to just make a clean break from the previous posts in this thread.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Rodgers acquited himself well, and with class.

The Packers have obvious holes. They can be filled this off season. I am optimistic about next year.

 

[scott72]

Why do you invest so much time analyzing our team? You don't have one of your own to root for?

I am sorry if I offended you. I had only figured that Packer fans would have already realized what I was saying: 6-10 is bad. If I in any way pulled you from a safe area in which you had protected yourself from this reality, then I apologize.

What is your deal? I realize 6-10 is bad, but for some odd reason you aren't even a fan of this team, but you're here day after day to rub our faces in the fact we went 6-10. I got it dude, the team needs to improve. Now please move on to your own team if you even have one. Whoever said you like to was dead on..Your just here to cause trouble. I'm not biting anymore.

 

[bcr8f]

sho must have gotten a timeout

Nope...Sho took a break, went to visit the inlaws...then made the long drive to Wisconsin and was at the game yesterday.

You better get busy...you have a lot of catching up to do.

What's the record for posts?

 

[scott72]

he wasn't what the front office should have hung their hopes of repeating last years success on.

Repeating wasnt the agenda. Long term overall success of the team was.It was just like my Steelers letting Faneca go without any offer what-so-ever.

Well if getting a top ten draft pick was on their agenda, then you can not look at this season as anything but a resounding success.

You have officially been awarded "troll" status. Congrats..

 

[phthalatemagic]

Stunned it took 26 pages for people to realize the right side of this.

Ookie will still be waking up in the middle of the night screaming "Brett Favre is 9-7! Brett Favre 9-7! Hahaha! I showed him....."

 

[snorlax]

I just wanted to mention, since I haven't seen it yet, that Aaron Rodgers joins Kurt Warner as only the second quarterback to throw for over 4,000 yards in his first year as the starter. He's only going to get better with more experience.

 

[sho nuff]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jet...0,7764382.story

"There was a lot of resentment in the room about him," a Jets player told Newsday yesterday. He requested anonymity because team owner Woody Johnson has stated publicly that Favre is welcome to return next season if he wants to. (Favre reportedly will take until the end of February to decide about returning.)

The 39-year-old quarterback is not as welcome with his teammates, according to this veteran. After the Jets traded for Favre Aug. 6, the sure Hall of Famer made no effort to ingratiate himself with the already assembled team, the veteran said. He said Favre spent most of his down time at the practice facility in an office specially designated for him near the equipment room, not with teammates in the locker room, even after the media departed.

"He never socialized with us, never went to dinner with anyone," the player said. Asked to describe Favre in a word, he said: "Distant."

According to the player - and he was backed by very supportive comments about Mangini from other Jets - very few in the room thought Mangini deserved to be fired, and that the acquisition of Favre and his subsequent "me-first" attitude hurt the Jets more than anything.

With that and Thomas Jones comments...seems like the picture of the happy team with Favre playing jokes was not quite the full truth.Cue the "youre just a hater and diminishing him" comments...well, I guess his own teammates are now just haters too.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jet...0,7764382.story

"There was a lot of resentment in the room about him," a Jets player told Newsday yesterday. He requested anonymity because team owner Woody Johnson has stated publicly that Favre is welcome to return next season if he wants to. (Favre reportedly will take until the end of February to decide about returning.)

The 39-year-old quarterback is not as welcome with his teammates, according to this veteran. After the Jets traded for Favre Aug. 6, the sure Hall of Famer made no effort to ingratiate himself with the already assembled team, the veteran said. He said Favre spent most of his down time at the practice facility in an office specially designated for him near the equipment room, not with teammates in the locker room, even after the media departed.

"He never socialized with us, never went to dinner with anyone," the player said. Asked to describe Favre in a word, he said: "Distant."

According to the player - and he was backed by very supportive comments about Mangini from other Jets - very few in the room thought Mangini deserved to be fired, and that the acquisition of Favre and his subsequent "me-first" attitude hurt the Jets more than anything.

With that and Thomas Jones comments...seems like the picture of the happy team with Favre playing jokes was not quite the full truth.Cue the "youre just a hater and diminishing him" comments...well, I guess his own teammates are now just haters too.

You forgot to cue the you had to get this back to the front page again.

 

[sho nuff]

Well, i read the article today(it was in the local papers here in wisconsin today)...and it fit here, so i posted it.

But again funny that it only matters when i bring this thread back up...if someone brings it back up to praise Favre or bash Thompson, most of you dont seem to have a problem with that.

 

[Irish]

I think that with the very good 1st season by Rodgers and Favre's terrible season and now info how Mangini and rest of players feel about Favre that we can put to rest this thread. It is very obvious that the Packers made a great decision and the Jets not so much. Jets are having a hard time getting top coaches to even consider the job because of their qb situation.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Looks like Favre won few friends there in NY. He should probably hang it up for good now.

 

[Sabertooth]

Looks like Favre won few friends there in NY. He should probably hang it up for good now.

I think he's done.

 

[Sabertooth]

A veteran Jets player, quoted anonymously by Newsday, described Favre as a "distant" teammate who, when at the Jets' practice facility, spent his down time away from teammates in an office specially designated for him.

"There was a lot of resentment in the room about him. He never socialized with us, never went to dinner with anyone," the player told Newsday.

I think this is basically how he got to New York in the first place. We, as fans, don't get the full scoop a lot of the time. We only get what is spoon fed to us by the media.

 

[PizzaDeliveryGuy]

Seems to be some usual names missing from this thread........

 

[Phurfur]

A veteran Jets player, quoted anonymously by Newsday, described Favre as a "distant" teammate who, when at the Jets' practice facility, spent his down time away from teammates in an office specially designated for him.

"There was a lot of resentment in the room about him. He never socialized with us, never went to dinner with anyone," the player told Newsday.

I think this is basically how he got to New York in the first place. We, as fans, don't get the full scoop a lot of the time. We only get what is spoon fed to us by the media.

We heard things like this coming out of GB for years but it was always hearsay. The press never pursued it so no one knew for sure, I guess now we know.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Well, i read the article today(it was in the local papers here in wisconsin today)...and it fit here, so i posted it.But again funny that it only matters when i bring this thread back up...if someone brings it back up to praise Favre or bash Thompson, most of you dont seem to have a problem with that.

You are a joke. You whine when you think people pile on you and you think you never do anything to diminish Favre yet you do it all the time. It is rather amusing. Just check my sig.

 

[Phurfur]

Well, i read the article today(it was in the local papers here in wisconsin today)...and it fit here, so i posted it.But again funny that it only matters when i bring this thread back up...if someone brings it back up to praise Favre or bash Thompson, most of you dont seem to have a problem with that.

You are a joke. You whine when you think people pile on you and you think you never do anything to diminish Favre yet you do it all the time. It is rather amusing. Just check my sig.

I don't think he wrote the article! I found it interesting, some people still have Favre on their dynasty rosters so it is relevant.

 

[Irish]

Well, i read the article today(it was in the local papers here in wisconsin today)...and it fit here, so i posted it.But again funny that it only matters when i bring this thread back up...if someone brings it back up to praise Favre or bash Thompson, most of you dont seem to have a problem with that.

You are a joke. You whine when you think people pile on you and you think you never do anything to diminish Favre yet you do it all the time. It is rather amusing. Just check my sig.

He's just the messenger not the author of the article.

 

[sho nuff]

Well, i read the article today(it was in the local papers here in wisconsin today)...and it fit here, so i posted it.But again funny that it only matters when i bring this thread back up...if someone brings it back up to praise Favre or bash Thompson, most of you dont seem to have a problem with that.

You are a joke. You whine when you think people pile on you and you think you never do anything to diminish Favre yet you do it all the time. It is rather amusing. Just check my sig.

Not whining...pointing out the fact that the few of you whine if I post in this thread when its on the 2nd page...but none of you seem to have any problem when someone else does it to bash Thompson. Its a laughable and predictable action by you.I don't do anything to diminish him...you can keep posting that lie, it will not make it come true.I checked your sig...its freakin hilarious that you are so obsessed with me.

 

[zDragon]

I think that with the very good 1st season by Rodgers and Favre's terrible season and now info how Mangini and rest of players feel about Favre that we can put to rest this thread. It is very obvious that the Packers made a great decision and the Jets not so much. Jets are having a hard time getting top coaches to even consider the job because of their qb situation.

Really. Where has that been stated as a fact?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I am glad this season is behind the Packers and that this discussion is winding down. Transition periods for teams can be traumatic and can last for years. I believe the Packers have shotened that process.

What I wonder is this. Picture the scenario next yer of the packers starting out 7 and 1 and then Rodgers getting hurt so that it is clear he will be out 4 or 5 games but will be returning. Picture Favre being unemployed in Kiln. I shudder at the potential drama.

 

[sho nuff]

How dare all of these writers Favre-haters write these things to diminish Favre...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/articl...1031/1058/PKR01

just look at jsonline, in the insider section...several more headlins for some of you...

"Hunt: Packers made right call moving Favre"

"Grapevine: Favre's absence not reason for lost season"

 

[Traders2001]

I think that with the very good 1st season by Rodgers and Favre's terrible season and now info how Mangini and rest of players feel about Favre that we can put to rest this thread. It is very obvious that the Packers made a great decision and the Jets not so much. Jets are having a hard time getting top coaches to even consider the job because of their qb situation.

Really. Where has that been stated as a fact?

A few already mentionned they had zero intention of coaching the Jeys if Favre is there , seen it a few times already.Favre had nothing to do in the Jets success at the beginning of the season but he is the reason for the terrible final stretch.

 

[zDragon]

I think that with the very good 1st season by Rodgers and Favre's terrible season and now info how Mangini and rest of players feel about Favre that we can put to rest this thread. It is very obvious that the Packers made a great decision and the Jets not so much. Jets are having a hard time getting top coaches to even consider the job because of their qb situation.

Really. Where has that been stated as a fact?

A few already mentionned they had zero intention of coaching the Jeys if Favre is there , seen it a few times already.Favre had nothing to do in the Jets success at the beginning of the season but he is the reason for the terrible final stretch.

Which coaches stated they would not coach there if the Jets had Favre?

 

[zDragon]

How dare all of these writers Favre-haters write these things to diminish Favre...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/articl...1031/1058/PKR01

just look at jsonline, in the insider section...several more headlins for some of you...

"Hunt: Packers made right call moving Favre"

"Grapevine: Favre's absence not reason for lost season"

The article states that Rodgers would have beat Favre out and that is just speculation. It also compares playing with the Jets weapons and system versus playing with the Packers weapons and system. This has been mentioned here repeatedly and I thought everyone agreed that it was silly to do that. The Packers have much better weapons all around than the Jets.I personally thing the opposing coordinators realized a few things toward the end of the season. One is the lack of true deep threat wide receivers. Two Favre just can't hit the deep ball as well as he used to. Those two things were exposed and the Jets were done.

For the Packers Rodgers had plenty of weapons and used them. The biggest problem they had was a lack of communication and leadership. The article points out how the defense gave up the lead but look at it this way. The other teams QB brought them back for the win. The only excuse an offense has is if it flat out runs out of time. That was not always the case for the Packers.

I'm not convinced the Packers don't have a better season with Favre at the helm. It will remain an unknown.

I am convinced that for the future the Packers made the right choice in going with Rodgers but they did not get enough in return for Favre.

 

[sho nuff]

I think that with the very good 1st season by Rodgers and Favre's terrible season and now info how Mangini and rest of players feel about Favre that we can put to rest this thread. It is very obvious that the Packers made a great decision and the Jets not so much. Jets are having a hard time getting top coaches to even consider the job because of their qb situation.

Really. Where has that been stated as a fact?

A few already mentionned they had zero intention of coaching the Jeys if Favre is there , seen it a few times already.Favre had nothing to do in the Jets success at the beginning of the season but he is the reason for the terrible final stretch.

What?How could he have nothing to do with the early stuff...but is the reason for the rest?

Come on.

He had alot to do with the first part of the season, along with other additions.

And he had alot to do with the collapse, as did the other players.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Thursday, January 1, 2009

Favre-Rodgers saga didn't have to end this way

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Gene Wojciechowski

ESPN.com

The e-mails began arriving shortly after the New York Jets' season ended.

"Get ready to print your retraction," read one.

"I'll bet you don't remember me," began another. "I'm the guy who said, 'I think you're wrong about Brett Favre. I think he's washed up."'

And "[Aaron] Rodgers is, right now, much, much better than Favre -- not a little, a whole lot better."

Turns out some Green Bay Packers fans have long memories, except when it comes to the Packers' 6-10 record this season. They also have blind spots; we all do. I have one for Favre and will never apologize for it. I also have one for the Packers. It's my favorite pro team, favorite stadium, favorite helmet logo, favorite game-day experience. I grew up on that franchise.

But sorry, there won't be any retractions. Just because Rodgers had a better statistical season doesn't mean the Packers were a better team without Favre.

First of all, the numbers don't always make the man. If they did, then six of the top 10 quarterbacks by passing yards and six of the top 10 by touchdowns wouldn't be done with their seasons. But they are, including Rodgers and Favre.

I wrote before the season's start that Packers management botched the entire Favre situation. I stand by that. Favre changed his mind about retirement, but the Packers just as clumsily changed their minds about Favre.

I wrote that Favre was the best QB on the roster: "Again, nothing against Rodgers, who finds himself between a rock and a legacy, but if the goal is to win as many games as possible, then [general manager Ted] Thompson has to embrace Favre's possible return." I stand by that, too.

Rodgers played well this season. He played hurt. He played in the blinding light of the post-Favre era and did so with poise and heart. If he stays healthy (he played much of the season with a shoulder injury), the Packers have themselves a quarterback.

But Favre played well, too -- not as often as Rodgers did, but well enough that the Jets were 8-3 after beating the then-undefeated Tennessee Titans on the road. You remember: That was the same week the Packers got beat 51-29 by New Orleans to drop to 5-6 and start a five-game losing streak. Weird. I don't remember getting any "Favre's washed up" e-mails then.

Turns out Favre played hurt, too. No surprise there. But a now-diagnosed torn biceps tendon affected his arm strength down the stretch.

His critics say he looked old. Duh -- he's 39. But isn't there the possibility that he simply looked injured? Big difference.

The mistake people make is trying to compare Rodgers' season with Favre's. Rodgers had more passing yards, more touchdowns, fewer interceptions, more rushing yards and a higher passer rating -- so he's clearly the better quarterback.

But do wins count for anything? Favre's Jets had nine compared to the Packers' six. They beat three playoff-bound teams; the Packers defeated one. Favre's Jets gagged away their division lead in the last month, but they still had a chance at the playoffs. The Packers were officially eliminated with two weeks remaining in the season.

Do divisions count for anything? Favre's Jets played in an AFC East in which two teams finished with 11 wins and the worst team finished with seven. Compare that to the mediocre NFC North, home of only one double-digit-win team (the Minnesota Vikings) and the 0-16 Detroit Lions. One-third of the Packers' victories came against the losingest team in the history of the NFL.

Do circumstances count for anything? Favre didn't have the benefit of a full training camp or a full playbook. Everything was a work in progress with the Jets -- and stayed that way. (And yes, I know Chad Pennington made a similar transition from the Jets to the Miami Dolphins and thrived. It was a remarkable season for him. Pennington deserves much of the credit, but it helped that he was in Jets/Dolphins camp for the entire time. And it's clear now that Tony Sparano and his Miami staff were more nimble and better prepared for the transition than the Jets' Eric Mangini and his staff.)

Rodgers had the pressure of replacing Favre, but he also had an entire offseason and training camp to prepare for it. And there can't be any debate that the Packers' skill players, especially at wide receiver, were better than the Jets'.

Anyway, the move from the Packers to Jets doesn't absolve Favre from throwing a league-leading 22 interceptions. Some of those INTs were killers. But the same goes for Rodgers, whose late-game interceptions in Week 14 against Houston and Week 15 against Jacksonville ended comeback attempts. In fact, Rodgers was 0-8 in comeback situations this season.

The simple truth is we'll never know if the Packers would have been better or worse with Favre this season. That's because it was never an option.

All we know for sure is that the inconsistent and underachieving Packers moved on. Did they move forward? I don't know -- is 6-10 moving forward after playing in an NFC Championship Game with Favre a season earlier?

I'm not blaming Rodgers for the mess. He wasn't perfect, but he also wasn't the problem -- just like Favre wasn't the main problem with the Jets. I see why Thompson was willing to make a leap of faith with Rodgers, but Favre's departure could have -- and should have -- been handled better by Packers management.

What I don't see is why it had to end this way, with some Packers fans reveling in the Jets' failures and Favre's injury and struggles. It's as if they can live with a 6-win season as long as Favre and the Jets suffer, too. Dumb.

So no retractions. Favre did what he could. So did Rodgers. As it turns out, neither was enough.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/sto...mp;sportCat=nfl

 

[Irish]

Thursday, January 1, 2009

Favre-Rodgers saga didn't have to end this way

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Gene Wojciechowski

ESPN.com

The e-mails began arriving shortly after the New York Jets' season ended.

"Get ready to print your retraction," read one.

"I'll bet you don't remember me," began another. "I'm the guy who said, 'I think you're wrong about Brett Favre. I think he's washed up."'

And "[Aaron] Rodgers is, right now, much, much better than Favre -- not a little, a whole lot better."

Turns out some Green Bay Packers fans have long memories, except when it comes to the Packers' 6-10 record this season. They also have blind spots; we all do. I have one for Favre and will never apologize for it. I also have one for the Packers. It's my favorite pro team, favorite stadium, favorite helmet logo, favorite game-day experience. I grew up on that franchise.

But sorry, there won't be any retractions. Just because Rodgers had a better statistical season doesn't mean the Packers were a better team without Favre.

First of all, the numbers don't always make the man. If they did, then six of the top 10 quarterbacks by passing yards and six of the top 10 by touchdowns wouldn't be done with their seasons. But they are, including Rodgers and Favre.

I wrote before the season's start that Packers management botched the entire Favre situation. I stand by that. Favre changed his mind about retirement, but the Packers just as clumsily changed their minds about Favre.

I wrote that Favre was the best QB on the roster: "Again, nothing against Rodgers, who finds himself between a rock and a legacy, but if the goal is to win as many games as possible, then [general manager Ted] Thompson has to embrace Favre's possible return." I stand by that, too.

Rodgers played well this season. He played hurt. He played in the blinding light of the post-Favre era and did so with poise and heart. If he stays healthy (he played much of the season with a shoulder injury), the Packers have themselves a quarterback.

But Favre played well, too -- not as often as Rodgers did, but well enough that the Jets were 8-3 after beating the then-undefeated Tennessee Titans on the road. You remember: That was the same week the Packers got beat 51-29 by New Orleans to drop to 5-6 and start a five-game losing streak. Weird. I don't remember getting any "Favre's washed up" e-mails then.

Turns out Favre played hurt, too. No surprise there. But a now-diagnosed torn biceps tendon affected his arm strength down the stretch.

His critics say he looked old. Duh -- he's 39. But isn't there the possibility that he simply looked injured? Big difference.

The mistake people make is trying to compare Rodgers' season with Favre's. Rodgers had more passing yards, more touchdowns, fewer interceptions, more rushing yards and a higher passer rating -- so he's clearly the better quarterback.

But do wins count for anything? Favre's Jets had nine compared to the Packers' six. They beat three playoff-bound teams; the Packers defeated one. Favre's Jets gagged away their division lead in the last month, but they still had a chance at the playoffs. The Packers were officially eliminated with two weeks remaining in the season.

Do divisions count for anything? Favre's Jets played in an AFC East in which two teams finished with 11 wins and the worst team finished with seven. Compare that to the mediocre NFC North, home of only one double-digit-win team (the Minnesota Vikings) and the 0-16 Detroit Lions. One-third of the Packers' victories came against the losingest team in the history of the NFL.

Do circumstances count for anything? Favre didn't have the benefit of a full training camp or a full playbook. Everything was a work in progress with the Jets -- and stayed that way. (And yes, I know Chad Pennington made a similar transition from the Jets to the Miami Dolphins and thrived. It was a remarkable season for him. Pennington deserves much of the credit, but it helped that he was in Jets/Dolphins camp for the entire time. And it's clear now that Tony Sparano and his Miami staff were more nimble and better prepared for the transition than the Jets' Eric Mangini and his staff.)

Rodgers had the pressure of replacing Favre, but he also had an entire offseason and training camp to prepare for it. And there can't be any debate that the Packers' skill players, especially at wide receiver, were better than the Jets'.

Anyway, the move from the Packers to Jets doesn't absolve Favre from throwing a league-leading 22 interceptions. Some of those INTs were killers. But the same goes for Rodgers, whose late-game interceptions in Week 14 against Houston and Week 15 against Jacksonville ended comeback attempts. In fact, Rodgers was 0-8 in comeback situations this season.

The simple truth is we'll never know if the Packers would have been better or worse with Favre this season. That's because it was never an option.

All we know for sure is that the inconsistent and underachieving Packers moved on. Did they move forward? I don't know -- is 6-10 moving forward after playing in an NFC Championship Game with Favre a season earlier?

I'm not blaming Rodgers for the mess. He wasn't perfect, but he also wasn't the problem -- just like Favre wasn't the main problem with the Jets. I see why Thompson was willing to make a leap of faith with Rodgers, but Favre's departure could have -- and should have -- been handled better by Packers management.

What I don't see is why it had to end this way, with some Packers fans reveling in the Jets' failures and Favre's injury and struggles. It's as if they can live with a 6-win season as long as Favre and the Jets suffer, too. Dumb.

So no retractions. Favre did what he could. So did Rodgers. As it turns out, neither was enough.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/sto...mp;sportCat=nfl

This writer admits to having a huge bias for Favre. He is not an objective person on the situation. He does not give any blame to Favre for how he handle the situation in GB. He also does not give any blame to Favre for the Jets season, but gives the coaching staff the blame. Favre can do no wrong in his eyes.

 

[zDragon]

Thursday, January 1, 2009

Favre-Rodgers saga didn't have to end this way

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Gene Wojciechowski

ESPN.com

The e-mails began arriving shortly after the New York Jets' season ended.

"Get ready to print your retraction," read one.

"I'll bet you don't remember me," began another. "I'm the guy who said, 'I think you're wrong about Brett Favre. I think he's washed up."'

And "[Aaron] Rodgers is, right now, much, much better than Favre -- not a little, a whole lot better."

Turns out some Green Bay Packers fans have long memories, except when it comes to the Packers' 6-10 record this season. They also have blind spots; we all do. I have one for Favre and will never apologize for it. I also have one for the Packers. It's my favorite pro team, favorite stadium, favorite helmet logo, favorite game-day experience. I grew up on that franchise.

But sorry, there won't be any retractions. Just because Rodgers had a better statistical season doesn't mean the Packers were a better team without Favre.

First of all, the numbers don't always make the man. If they did, then six of the top 10 quarterbacks by passing yards and six of the top 10 by touchdowns wouldn't be done with their seasons. But they are, including Rodgers and Favre.

I wrote before the season's start that Packers management botched the entire Favre situation. I stand by that. Favre changed his mind about retirement, but the Packers just as clumsily changed their minds about Favre.

I wrote that Favre was the best QB on the roster: "Again, nothing against Rodgers, who finds himself between a rock and a legacy, but if the goal is to win as many games as possible, then [general manager Ted] Thompson has to embrace Favre's possible return." I stand by that, too.

Rodgers played well this season. He played hurt. He played in the blinding light of the post-Favre era and did so with poise and heart. If he stays healthy (he played much of the season with a shoulder injury), the Packers have themselves a quarterback.

But Favre played well, too -- not as often as Rodgers did, but well enough that the Jets were 8-3 after beating the then-undefeated Tennessee Titans on the road. You remember: That was the same week the Packers got beat 51-29 by New Orleans to drop to 5-6 and start a five-game losing streak. Weird. I don't remember getting any "Favre's washed up" e-mails then.

Turns out Favre played hurt, too. No surprise there. But a now-diagnosed torn biceps tendon affected his arm strength down the stretch.

His critics say he looked old. Duh -- he's 39. But isn't there the possibility that he simply looked injured? Big difference.

The mistake people make is trying to compare Rodgers' season with Favre's. Rodgers had more passing yards, more touchdowns, fewer interceptions, more rushing yards and a higher passer rating -- so he's clearly the better quarterback.

But do wins count for anything? Favre's Jets had nine compared to the Packers' six. They beat three playoff-bound teams; the Packers defeated one. Favre's Jets gagged away their division lead in the last month, but they still had a chance at the playoffs. The Packers were officially eliminated with two weeks remaining in the season.

Do divisions count for anything? Favre's Jets played in an AFC East in which two teams finished with 11 wins and the worst team finished with seven. Compare that to the mediocre NFC North, home of only one double-digit-win team (the Minnesota Vikings) and the 0-16 Detroit Lions. One-third of the Packers' victories came against the losingest team in the history of the NFL.

Do circumstances count for anything? Favre didn't have the benefit of a full training camp or a full playbook. Everything was a work in progress with the Jets -- and stayed that way. (And yes, I know Chad Pennington made a similar transition from the Jets to the Miami Dolphins and thrived. It was a remarkable season for him. Pennington deserves much of the credit, but it helped that he was in Jets/Dolphins camp for the entire time. And it's clear now that Tony Sparano and his Miami staff were more nimble and better prepared for the transition than the Jets' Eric Mangini and his staff.)

Rodgers had the pressure of replacing Favre, but he also had an entire offseason and training camp to prepare for it. And there can't be any debate that the Packers' skill players, especially at wide receiver, were better than the Jets'.

Anyway, the move from the Packers to Jets doesn't absolve Favre from throwing a league-leading 22 interceptions. Some of those INTs were killers. But the same goes for Rodgers, whose late-game interceptions in Week 14 against Houston and Week 15 against Jacksonville ended comeback attempts. In fact, Rodgers was 0-8 in comeback situations this season.

The simple truth is we'll never know if the Packers would have been better or worse with Favre this season. That's because it was never an option.

All we know for sure is that the inconsistent and underachieving Packers moved on. Did they move forward? I don't know -- is 6-10 moving forward after playing in an NFC Championship Game with Favre a season earlier?

I'm not blaming Rodgers for the mess. He wasn't perfect, but he also wasn't the problem -- just like Favre wasn't the main problem with the Jets. I see why Thompson was willing to make a leap of faith with Rodgers, but Favre's departure could have -- and should have -- been handled better by Packers management.

What I don't see is why it had to end this way, with some Packers fans reveling in the Jets' failures and Favre's injury and struggles. It's as if they can live with a 6-win season as long as Favre and the Jets suffer, too. Dumb.

So no retractions. Favre did what he could. So did Rodgers. As it turns out, neither was enough.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/sto...mp;sportCat=nfl

This writer admits to having a huge bias for Favre. He is not an objective person on the situation. He does not give any blame to Favre for how he handle the situation in GB. He also does not give any blame to Favre for the Jets season, but gives the coaching staff the blame. Favre can do no wrong in his eyes.

Seems your more biased than he is. From the article

"Anyway, the move from the Packers to Jets doesn't absolve Favre from throwing a league-leading 22 interceptions. Some of those INTs were killers."

Seems like he did blame Favre for some of it so therefore could do some wrong in his eyes. Of course this is SOP in these threads.