What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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

Missing Element-Brett Favre & The Packers (1 Viewer)

From Favre..

Favre defined his ideas on leadership for the magazine: "It's somehow getting 52 other guys to raise their level of play. To get them to believe in what we're trying to do. You do that by setting an example, by doing things the right way. I've always shown up. I've always been prepared. I practice every day. I practice hard. I study. No matter what happens on the field, I never point blame at anybody else. Everything I do comes back to leadership, the example I want to set."

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/jan/11...ers_brett27265/
Now this is actually the best one you've found. So let's parse it out.Favre says being a leader is getting the guys to raise their level of play. Sounds kind of like "giving their best effort". Not sure if Favre thinks there's so much more to it than that as you do, but who's to know.

Anyway, to get them to raise their level of play, you've got to set an example by

1) doing it the right way

2) showing up

3) being prepared

4) practice everyday

5) practice hard

6) study

7) never blame someone else

Does Rodgers do whatever it is the right way? Does Rodgers not show up? Does Rodgers not prepare? Does Rodger's not practice everyday? Does Rodgers not practice hard? Does Rodgers not study? Does Rodgers blame someone else?

So what from this list is Rodgers not doing that Favre did that is keeping his teammates from rasing their level of play?
I'm done with someone that doesn't realize the Packers are missing leadership this season and the fact you think Rodgers is providing the same level of leadership that Favre did. Good luck with reality, ace.
Was it just leadership they lacked in 2005 or 2006?
Don't you remember......the excuse the you and the TT supporters have for 2005 was that TT had to clean house from the mess that Sherman left. They improved in 2006 and then improved in 2007 as Favre helped with his leadership with such a young team.
Actually, I made no excuse about that team.THe team did have to clean house a bit (but that was not the only reason either).

Some injuries in 2005, coupled with Brett's play trying to do it all himself with not much out there as a receiving corps and the lack of discipline Sherman had (which McCarthy is not showing to be much better in that capacity this year).

2006 they improved some...but play was still a bit out there.

I remember saying after 2005 as Brett was thinking about retirement, that if he was going to play that way again, I hoped he retired. If he was going to reel it in a bit, I hope he came back. He reeled it in a bit starting to buy into what McCarthy was doing. And really reeled it in last year.

This year...some of that gunslinger is back out there. In the end, I think it (along with Jenkins looking worn down and that defense struggling) might hurt the Jets.

So in 2005 and 2006, his leadership was not enough, but in 2007 it was? Is that seriously what you are trying to say? Im not trying to spin your words, but to clarify what you are saying there.

 
A quote from Leon Washington....

"When you have Brett Favre coming into the huddle, it makes everybody else in the huddle step their games up"

Jerico Cotchery

"It is very special to have a guy like that step into your huddle"

Eric Mangini

" I think Brett just . . . he instills confidence in the group ... There's a sense of ease when he has the ball. You feel he's going to get it to the right place."

From another player

"I didn't see any nervousness on his face; I saw a quiet confidence on his face, so to speak. When he stepped into the huddle, we knew we were going to be able to get it done because that's the way he's been this entire year."

http://www.daylife.com/quote/0fav1s56wI8vz
So again, I ask you in two specific instances this Sunday that were keys in the game.Did Kuhn and Grant just not have confidence in their 3 attempts to get that one yard? Would they have had that confidence last year? (Id say it made no difference as the team sucked in 3rd and short situations last season)

Was the team less confident in allowing an 80 yard TD drive that ended up being the difference in the game? Were they just not able to step up because #4 was on the sidelines?

I'm much more aware of how hard it is to win in this league and to play at a high level. I'm not up to the challenge anymore. I can play, but I'm not up to the challenge.
And Brett Favre got hard to live up to. And I found myself during games at times, tough situation, people always kind of made this joke or other guys on the team, even Mike at times would turn to me and say, 'All right Brett. This is where you're at your best. Pull us out.' I'm thinking, 'Uh! ... ' Now I wouldn't do that, but I'm thinking that. I'm thinking, 'Boy it sure would be nice to be up about 14 right now.' It's just hard. It got hard. I did it, but it got hard.
Does that sound like a guy who would be instilling a ton of confidence in a team? Oh wait, I forgot, that was after his retirement speech so he must not have meant any of that...or what is to follow.
I had one of the better years in my career, the team had a great year, everything seems to be going great, the team wants me back, I still can play, for the most part everyone would think I would be back, would want me back.
So the Packers wanted me, I know I can play, the fans, I guess they love me.
Wait, I thought the team did not want him back?
(Is there anything anybody in the organization could have said to you to change your mind and get you to play one more season?)

Once again I think that there have been a lot of things in the press this week that aren't true. Believe me, I've questioned my decision. I believe it's the right decision. And there's nothing that they can do or say to change that.
Wait...I was told that if Ted had just called him everything would have been fine?http://www.packers.com/news/releases/2008/03/06/3/

Now...sure...all that changes when he steps in the huddle and they can see he is ready...but what happens when he looks just a bit off...do they go back to thinking, wait a minute, this is how he was when he retired?

That is something nobody here can know...what effect would that have had on the team had they been in a situation where Brett did not have that confident look...would everyone else just step up? Would they rely on him to do it? Would they get deflated and feel defeated?

None of us know that.

So, the leadership and confidence can be a great thing...but it can also be a detriment if it ever faltered for just a bit.

And sorry to Leon, it sounds nice of him to say...but I doubt Brett Favre's confidence had anything to do with his run the other day.
It just kills you to see anything positive about Favre.
Not at all.Does it kill you to see anything negative about him? Even if its his own words?

People wanted the quote a while back about his reaction to people thinking "alright Brett, its up to you". I put that out there.

Even his own words about the team wanting him back. But I guess he was lying huh?

This is about the response I would expect from you. A complete failure to admit that maybe Brett had some issues and fault in how things went down too. (which is all I have ever said about this).
Huh? This is about you trying to come into this thread and diminish what Favre meant to the Packers and the leadership he brought. I thought even you wouldn't try and argue that. But.....once a Favre hater always a Favre hater.
No, this is me giving you a dose of reality that Brett's own words about the desire he had added to why he was not around.That his own words were not all that confidence inspiring.

I am not diminishing what he did or meant to the Packers other than to diminish the importance some of you have put on it.

You are all making him out to be a messiah and he simply was not that.

Favre hater? Never have been one, never will be actually. Despite your feeble attempts at labeling me that.

 
The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.
This is easy. First, you are underestimating what a leader means to a team. What effect that player has, not only to his side of the ball, but the team in general.Second, players respect Favre, offense, defense, opponents respect what he brought to the table. With that respect came an urgency to play better because that leader made the team better.Lastly, when Favre stepped onto the field, the team, the opponents saw a guy who could win the game at any time in the last drive. Favre could beat any team, at any time. The opponents knew this and the team knew this. That same sense of urgency is not there with Rodgers... at all.
This is exactly what I addressed earlier in this thread.Does anyone actually believe the players out there this past Sunday, were not trying to play better because Aaron Rodgers was back there and not Brett Favre?
Only the Favre haters will try and make this arguement and not acknowledge the impact Brett Favre had as a leader with the Green Bay Packers. You go spin all you want sho but you won't win on this.
And only a few of you who cannot get past the thought that anyone who supports the decision to go with Rodgers must just be a Favre hater would see this as me not acknowledging the impact he had as a leader.He did have one. But not enough IMO.And again, I was specifically addressing this point of people try harder because he is the QB. The point that Phase tried to spin away from earlier, now is posting quotes about that exact thing.Again...answer the question. Do you believe players were not playing or trying harder because Brett was not out there?Is trying harder enough?
You are a total fool, sho. I am done on this topic as well. Do we know if the players are playing just as hard for Rodgers? Hell no. What we do know is that this team is lacking leadership and one of the main reasons they are lacking in that area the absense of Brett Favre. And yes, you are a Favre hater otherwise you wouldn't be in this tread coming with the this crap. And that is what it is.....complete crap to try and diminish what Favre meant to the Packers. I should be like Joe and realize it is pointless to deal with you.
Im glad you feel the need to sling childish names at me.The team is lacking alot of things. And much of it has absolutely nothing to do with Brett Favre.No, I am not a Favre hater. Disagreeing with how important leadership is does not make me one.Not thinking he is the end all be all savior of this team does not make me one.Its not crap...its the man's own words. Its part of what makes me question how much leadership he would have brought to this team right now.And none of it is trying to diminish what Favre meant to the team.Wow...bringing up Joe...you trying to hide behind him now too?Can a few of you not have a thought of your own without Joe?
 
sho....

No one has called him or made him out to be a "messiah"....those with common sense can acknowledge what Favre meant to the Packers and that he will be known as a great leader on the field. I don't expect you to understand that, sho.

 
Ok, so let's try to quantify this leadership thing. Brett being a quitter notwithstanding, how many actual points does the team score with a better leader. How many less points does the defense allow with the mere presence of Brett "I don't think I want to play anymore" Favre on the sidelines rooting them on to victory.

 
Ok, so let's try to quantify this leadership thing. Brett being a quitter notwithstanding, how many actual points does the team score with a better leader. How many less points does the defense allow with the mere presence of Brett "I don't think I want to play anymore" Favre on the sidelines rooting them on to victory.
More sho like solid analysis from a Favre hater. :thumbup:
 
sho....No one has called him or made him out to be a "messiah"....those with common sense can acknowledge what Favre meant to the Packers and that he will be known as a great leader on the field. I don't expect you to understand that, sho.
IMO, people are putting too much stock into the leadership. So yes, plenty are acting as if the leadership and Brett were the end all be all of this team.I acknowledge he meant alot to the team. But not enough to change this season around given the things that have happened. Its as simple as that.Im not denying he was a great leader on the field (despite you and ookie and phases thoughts that I am).Im saying, being a leader is not enough in this case. That his play would not be motivating these guys enough. That motivation is not why they are losing right now.THe want to play better for Favre is not why they are not winning this year.I don't expect you to understand that.I just expect the usual response of "youre a Favre hater" " you don't understand" "Favre was a leader" "hooray for me, hooray for school, hooray for Brett Favre".
 
Ok, so let's try to quantify this leadership thing. Brett being a quitter notwithstanding, how many actual points does the team score with a better leader. How many less points does the defense allow with the mere presence of Brett "I don't think I want to play anymore" Favre on the sidelines rooting them on to victory.
More sho like solid analysis from a Favre hater. :popcorn:
More nonsense that if anyone posts something negative at all about Brett...he must just be a hater.His question, without the quitter part stands.How many points is it worth?How many points against is it worth?
 
The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.
This is easy. First, you are underestimating what a leader means to a team. What effect that player has, not only to his side of the ball, but the team in general.Second, players respect Favre, offense, defense, opponents respect what he brought to the table. With that respect came an urgency to play better because that leader made the team better.Lastly, when Favre stepped onto the field, the team, the opponents saw a guy who could win the game at any time in the last drive. Favre could beat any team, at any time. The opponents knew this and the team knew this. That same sense of urgency is not there with Rodgers... at all.
This is exactly what I addressed earlier in this thread.Does anyone actually believe the players out there this past Sunday, were not trying to play better because Aaron Rodgers was back there and not Brett Favre?
Only the Favre haters will try and make this arguement and not acknowledge the impact Brett Favre had as a leader with the Green Bay Packers. You go spin all you want sho but you won't win on this.
And only a few of you who cannot get past the thought that anyone who supports the decision to go with Rodgers must just be a Favre hater would see this as me not acknowledging the impact he had as a leader.He did have one. But not enough IMO.And again, I was specifically addressing this point of people try harder because he is the QB. The point that Phase tried to spin away from earlier, now is posting quotes about that exact thing.Again...answer the question. Do you believe players were not playing or trying harder because Brett was not out there?Is trying harder enough?
You are a total fool, sho. I am done on this topic as well. Do we know if the players are playing just as hard for Rodgers? Hell no. What we do know is that this team is lacking leadership and one of the main reasons they are lacking in that area the absense of Brett Favre. And yes, you are a Favre hater otherwise you wouldn't be in this tread coming with the this crap. And that is what it is.....complete crap to try and diminish what Favre meant to the Packers. I should be like Joe and realize it is pointless to deal with you.
Im glad you feel the need to sling childish names at me.The team is lacking alot of things. And much of it has absolutely nothing to do with Brett Favre.No, I am not a Favre hater. Disagreeing with how important leadership is does not make me one.Not thinking he is the end all be all savior of this team does not make me one.Its not crap...its the man's own words. Its part of what makes me question how much leadership he would have brought to this team right now.And none of it is trying to diminish what Favre meant to the team.Wow...bringing up Joe...you trying to hide behind him now too?Can a few of you not have a thought of your own without Joe?
1. I agree with other in here that part of this seasons failure is not have Favres leadership. As explained in the other thread this is something Rodgers will learn how to do and earn. If not he will not be there long but I think he will.2. Just because he has a moments where he feels the pressure to live up to his own legend and thoughts that are not inspiring does not reflect what he would do on the field now.3. I think he would have brought just as much leadership as before. I don't think he would be out their if he wasn't going to.4. How much leadership does he bring. Well this should clear it up from a post above."even Mike at times would turn to me and say, 'All right Brett. This is where you're at your best. Pull us out."That with out a doubt a lot of pressure.
 
1. I agree with other in here that part of this seasons failure is not have Favres leadership. As explained in the other thread this is something Rodgers will learn how to do and earn. If not he will not be there long but I think he will.2. Just because he has a moments where he feels the pressure to live up to his own legend and thoughts that are not inspiring does not reflect what he would do on the field now.3. I think he would have brought just as much leadership as before. I don't think he would be out their if he wasn't going to.4. How much leadership does he bring. Well this should clear it up from a post above."even Mike at times would turn to me and say, 'All right Brett. This is where you're at your best. Pull us out."That with out a doubt a lot of pressure.
1. Part of it sure. I don't think its as big of a part as some. And I think it has been lacking on the D for a long long time.2. Sure, it does not...at the same time, if we are talking the mental aspect of the game, each of the Packers players heard those comments. When they get in the huddle or they are on the sidelines late...will that be in the back of their mind? The idea that he feels the pressure and is not sure of his desire anymore? Do you want your QB questioning those sorts of things? I hope Rodgers does not question that in his head. I hope he feels he can do it and wants the ball. And I remember having these feelings as soon as I heard Favre say them. It was not just a recent thing with him coming back.3. He might...would it still be the same? We will never know.4. And his reaction to that showed what he was thinking too. Do you think Mike says anything to Rodgers? I don't know off hand.
 
1. I agree with other in here that part of this seasons failure is not have Favres leadership. As explained in the other thread this is something Rodgers will learn how to do and earn. If not he will not be there long but I think he will.2. Just because he has a moments where he feels the pressure to live up to his own legend and thoughts that are not inspiring does not reflect what he would do on the field now.3. I think he would have brought just as much leadership as before. I don't think he would be out their if he wasn't going to.4. How much leadership does he bring. Well this should clear it up from a post above."even Mike at times would turn to me and say, 'All right Brett. This is where you're at your best. Pull us out."That with out a doubt a lot of pressure.
1. Part of it sure. I don't think its as big of a part as some. And I think it has been lacking on the D for a long long time.2. Sure, it does not...at the same time, if we are talking the mental aspect of the game, each of the Packers players heard those comments. When they get in the huddle or they are on the sidelines late...will that be in the back of their mind? The idea that he feels the pressure and is not sure of his desire anymore? Do you want your QB questioning those sorts of things? I hope Rodgers does not question that in his head. I hope he feels he can do it and wants the ball. And I remember having these feelings as soon as I heard Favre say them. It was not just a recent thing with him coming back.3. He might...would it still be the same? We will never know.4. And his reaction to that showed what he was thinking too. Do you think Mike says anything to Rodgers? I don't know off hand.
1. If D has been lacking it for a long-long time then it is a wash.2. Why would they. Once he made the decision to play they knew he had their backs. Not sur e if you can relate to him or not. I can't on his level but have been in the situation where I was going back into a system that I was just wore out from the year before. The fact is once I made the decision I was there to get my job done and what I had said/thought before was irrelevant at that point. I think the team understands and never questions his direction once he steps on the field.3. We will never know but my thought is the team understands where he's at in terms of life and the game. I don't think it's really a question he plays hard and inspires period. 4. I'm sure most people that are in that situation year after year have the same reaction. Does he do that for Rodgers who knows I would not think so at this point. Everything I've read he's really trying to keep the criticism of the offense spread and not let it be QB focused.Which is a good idea since the QB is always the one taking the pressure regardless of what happens on the field. Especially to the casual fan who does not really understand football but can read the scoreboard.Rodgers is under enough pressure simply by replacing Favre under the circumstances and does not need the added mess.
 
1. I agree with other in here that part of this seasons failure is not have Favres leadership. As explained in the other thread this is something Rodgers will learn how to do and earn. If not he will not be there long but I think he will.2. Just because he has a moments where he feels the pressure to live up to his own legend and thoughts that are not inspiring does not reflect what he would do on the field now.3. I think he would have brought just as much leadership as before. I don't think he would be out their if he wasn't going to.4. How much leadership does he bring. Well this should clear it up from a post above."even Mike at times would turn to me and say, 'All right Brett. This is where you're at your best. Pull us out."That with out a doubt a lot of pressure.
1. Part of it sure. I don't think its as big of a part as some. And I think it has been lacking on the D for a long long time.2. Sure, it does not...at the same time, if we are talking the mental aspect of the game, each of the Packers players heard those comments. When they get in the huddle or they are on the sidelines late...will that be in the back of their mind? The idea that he feels the pressure and is not sure of his desire anymore? Do you want your QB questioning those sorts of things? I hope Rodgers does not question that in his head. I hope he feels he can do it and wants the ball. And I remember having these feelings as soon as I heard Favre say them. It was not just a recent thing with him coming back.3. He might...would it still be the same? We will never know.4. And his reaction to that showed what he was thinking too. Do you think Mike says anything to Rodgers? I don't know off hand.
1. If D has been lacking it for a long-long time then it is a wash.2. Why would they. Once he made the decision to play they knew he had their backs. Not sur e if you can relate to him or not. I can't on his level but have been in the situation where I was going back into a system that I was just wore out from the year before. The fact is once I made the decision I was there to get my job done and what I had said/thought before was irrelevant at that point. I think the team understands and never questions his direction once he steps on the field.3. We will never know but my thought is the team understands where he's at in terms of life and the game. I don't think it's really a question he plays hard and inspires period. 4. I'm sure most people that are in that situation year after year have the same reaction. Does he do that for Rodgers who knows I would not think so at this point. Everything I've read he's really trying to keep the criticism of the offense spread and not let it be QB focused.Which is a good idea since the QB is always the one taking the pressure regardless of what happens on the field. Especially to the casual fan who does not really understand football but can read the scoreboard.Rodgers is under enough pressure simply by replacing Favre under the circumstances and does not need the added mess.
1. Sure. Just pointing that out though.2. Why would they? If the mental aspect is such a big thing...how could a player not think back...if they see any glimmer of Favre doubting himself at all...how could they not think about those words? What if he again looks like he did against NY or Chicago. Do the other players feed negatively off that...or is it just the positive leadership that mattered? Its alot of what ifs...but so is the what if he was around would everything just be the same. Fact is, in the offseason, he told the world he did not want to do it anymore...and to think that might not have had an effect at all on the players is naive IMO. They may very well wonder, what if he feels like that again in the middle of a season or game.3. And I don't think inspiration is the problem right now. Again, nobody has been able to answer the question, but does anyone seriously think that guys are not playing as hard or trying as hard because the QB is now wearing #12 rather than #4? If they are, Id like to know which players and have them released cause I don't want a guy like that on my favorite team.4. I agree...and the biggest part of him I am impressed with is how he has handled it this year. Taken alot on himself when he feels he was not as good...other than the comment about getting on board or whatever prior to the season, he has not really had any lash out moments to make it look like he was not handling it.
 
Ok, so let's try to quantify this leadership thing. Brett being a quitter notwithstanding, how many actual points does the team score with a better leader. How many less points does the defense allow with the mere presence of Brett "I don't think I want to play anymore" Favre on the sidelines rooting them on to victory.
More sho like solid analysis from a Favre hater. :unsure:
Great Answer! :lmao: So....how many points can I put you down for? 1ppg for leadership? 10? Maybe the defense allows 4 less ppg? Throw me a number. Shoot. Shoot me a number. 7? You like 7?
 
As a non-biased football fan it was time for both Farve and GB to move on.

I saw a pre-season show before last season and it stated that Farve had become "withdrawn and a loner" and spoke to very few teamamtes, and did not hang out with any of them like the old days.

 
As a non-biased football fan it was time for both Farve and GB to move on.I saw a pre-season show before last season and it stated that Farve had become "withdrawn and a loner" and spoke to very few teamamtes, and did not hang out with any of them like the old days.
I believe it was James Jones last season that stated that he and Favre had never had a conversation in the locker room. Kind of weird, him being the WR3 on the team.
 
Wow, another Favre inspires his team mates to play better. We're really expanding the definition of Leadership past "makes his team mates give more effort".No, wait...that's still all we have.
Do you have similar quotes from players, coaches, involved with the Packers that have said the same about Rodgers?
I haven't gone to look for them, because that would simply be me ripping off someone else's unsupported assertion...which is part of my point. Saying a guy is a leader is composed mostly of cliche and good intentions. There's very little substantive about it...which is why after several pages we have nothing specific or substantive to point to which evidences a difference in Favre's leadership from Rodgers's leadership. It's apparently so obvious that no one can define the difference. All of you guys that say Favre is a better leader than Rodgers and that's making the difference this year can't come up with anything other than a google search for quotes about Favre's leadership.I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't many, if any, about Rodgers's leadership...Rodgers isn't a legendary QB of the game and is in his first year starting after a controversial ouster of a HOF predecessor. Now, if anyone wants to argue that Favre is a legend and Rodgers isn't, you can count me out - there isn't any argument there.But to argue the position that Favre provides leadership which Rodgers doesn't and then quote articles which assert that Favre is a leader doesn't constitute proof of that position. It merely proves that a legendary QB in the game is thought of as a leader. Wow, a QB playing at a high level is considered a leader on his team. Can you think of a HOF QB who isn't thought of as a leader? Face it. If you're a QB in this league and can hold down the starting gig for a team for a little while, you're going to get the leadership tag simply because of your position. In fact, you don't have to be a HOF QB to get the tag.
 
[“He’s just a real cool guy to be around,” said Roman. “He’s a guy who boosts morale in the locker room and helps you believe that you can win when you are on the offensive side of the ball. I’m sure his receivers feel that there isn’t any place he can’t pull the ball, so I have to stay alive, I have to keep working, because in any given situation he can get the ball. You tend to believe in a guy like that. Obviously with them turning it around like they have this year, a lot of guys on offense are believing in him.”
So, am I to assume that the Packers don't think they can win when Rodgers is in the huddle. I'm still kind of curious how that actually manifests itself on the playing field this season.How does Roman explain Chad Penninton?
Maybe they don't or they'd have won any of the seven chances they've had to come from behind?
I'm curious. Did the players on some of those not-so-winning Favre led teams stop considering Favre a leader when he failed to pull out a win? Did Favre's leadership take a hit after the NFC Championship game and others when he (arguably) lost it for them?Surely we wouldn't be talking about another double standard. :lmao:
 
There is no case to be made for you other than you are a blind Favre hater.
Believe what you want about my opinion of Favre. The guy is clearly one of the best QB's to play the game. I'd say top 10 without question, maybe even top 5. I'd put him in the top 3 or 4 QB's of my generation, no question.The difference is, I can respect his ability and career and even his position in the pantheon of great NFL QB's but still call a spade a spade when I see it.You make the assertion (or join in with it) that Favre's leadership would be getting the Packers more wins this season. I ask for evidence which proves that assertion. You come back with nothing but a restatement of the same assertion. I ask again for proof or evidence of that assertion and someone posts quotes stating that Favre is a leader. of course, that's not proof that Rodgers lacks it, it's merely an assertion that Favre has it - something I NEVER denied. I ask you to quantify or define what makes up leaderhsip when someone smugly claims there's more to it than just getting your teammates to give their best effort. Some of you all post someone else's ideas (which have little to do with being a player). When I ask you to identify which of the specific qualities you googled and posted that Favre possess which Rodgers lacks, you can't. That would require you to analyze your own preconceived beliefs and risk admitting you don't have a good reason for your position. So you all come back with the same old unsupported assertion that Favre is a leader, Rodgers isn't, and then retreat to the "it's so obvious I can't be bothered to explain it to you".
 
[“He’s just a real cool guy to be around,” said Roman. “He’s a guy who boosts morale in the locker room and helps you believe that you can win when you are on the offensive side of the ball. I’m sure his receivers feel that there isn’t any place he can’t pull the ball, so I have to stay alive, I have to keep working, because in any given situation he can get the ball. You tend to believe in a guy like that. Obviously with them turning it around like they have this year, a lot of guys on offense are believing in him.”
So, am I to assume that the Packers don't think they can win when Rodgers is in the huddle. I'm still kind of curious how that actually manifests itself on the playing field this season.How does Roman explain Chad Penninton?
Maybe they don't or they'd have won any of the seven chances they've had to come from behind?
I'm curious. Did the players on some of those not-so-winning Favre led teams stop considering Favre a leader when he failed to pull out a win? Did Favre's leadership take a hit after the NFC Championship game and others when he (arguably) lost it for them?Surely we wouldn't be talking about another double standard. :bag:
I don't see how it's a double standard if Rodgers is 0-7 on attempts to win when he was behind and Favre has, you know, actually won games from behind. Obviously the Packers office lost faith in Favre after his inability in the NFC Championship game last season which is why he is now playing for the Jets.
 
I bet you believe all the nice things they say about people at their retirement parties and funerals, don't you. :thumbup: Anymore fluff?
For as much "fluff" as you claim has been presented... you sure have not added much hard evidence.
I'm the jury. I don't have a position. You all could be right, you could be wrong. If you're someone asserting that this Packers team would be winning more games due to Favre's leadership, as the OP article did, I've asked for proof of that. So far I've gotten nothing back but quotes saying Favre is a leader. I never disputed that Favre is a leader. I've said I'm skeptical that there's a difference in Favre's and Rodgers's leadership which would account for a difference in wins this year if Favre were still in GB. So far, after 5 or so pages, the pro-Favre's leadeship crew have got nothing to support their position. All I've seen are re-assertions of the same unsupported opinion over and over again.
 
There is no case to be made for you other than you are a blind Favre hater.
Believe what you want about my opinion of Favre. The guy is clearly one of the best QB's to play the game. I'd say top 10 without question, maybe even top 5. I'd put him in the top 3 or 4 QB's of my generation, no question.The difference is, I can respect his ability and career and even his position in the pantheon of great NFL QB's but still call a spade a spade when I see it.You make the assertion (or join in with it) that Favre's leadership would be getting the Packers more wins this season. I ask for evidence which proves that assertion. You come back with nothing but a restatement of the same assertion. I ask again for proof or evidence of that assertion and someone posts quotes stating that Favre is a leader. of course, that's not proof that Rodgers lacks it, it's merely an assertion that Favre has it - something I NEVER denied. I ask you to quantify or define what makes up leaderhsip when someone smugly claims there's more to it than just getting your teammates to give their best effort. Some of you all post someone else's ideas (which have little to do with being a player). When I ask you to identify which of the specific qualities you googled and posted that Favre possess which Rodgers lacks, you can't. That would require you to analyze your own preconceived beliefs and risk admitting you don't have a good reason for your position. So you all come back with the same old unsupported assertion that Favre is a leader, Rodgers isn't, and then retreat to the "it's so obvious I can't be bothered to explain it to you".
I'd lake to see the information proving he is not a better leader.
 
From Favre..

Favre defined his ideas on leadership for the magazine: "It's somehow getting 52 other guys to raise their level of play. To get them to believe in what we're trying to do. You do that by setting an example, by doing things the right way. I've always shown up. I've always been prepared. I practice every day. I practice hard. I study. No matter what happens on the field, I never point blame at anybody else. Everything I do comes back to leadership, the example I want to set."

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/jan/11...ers_brett27265/
Now this is actually the best one you've found. So let's parse it out.Favre says being a leader is getting the guys to raise their level of play. Sounds kind of like "giving their best effort". Not sure if Favre thinks there's so much more to it than that as you do, but who's to know.

Anyway, to get them to raise their level of play, you've got to set an example by

1) doing it the right way

2) showing up

3) being prepared

4) practice everyday

5) practice hard

6) study

7) never blame someone else

Does Rodgers do whatever it is the right way? Does Rodgers not show up? Does Rodgers not prepare? Does Rodger's not practice everyday? Does Rodgers not practice hard? Does Rodgers not study? Does Rodgers blame someone else?

So what from this list is Rodgers not doing that Favre did that is keeping his teammates from rasing their level of play?
I'm done with someone that doesn't realize the Packers are missing leadership this season and the fact you think Rodgers is providing the same level of leadership that Favre did. Good luck with reality, ace.
What? You post a direct quote from Favre on what it takes to be a leader and get your teammates to elevate their play. I make a checklist for you and ask you what Rodgers isn't doing. And this is your response? If you have any idea what you are talking about, how can you not hit this one out of the park? It should be simple. What is it that Rodgers is not doing that Favre says should be done? I'm even letting you use Favre's own checklist!

Could it be that you believe Favre would be leading this team to more wins but have no evidence to support that belief?

Could it be that rather than admit it, you just say "it's so obvious" and run away?

 
One must really despise Favre to try and ignore what he meant to the Packers. Trying to diminish the leadership he brought to the team is pathetic. Go ahead and be a hater but please get some grasp of reality.
This is the part of this debate that is just BS.I've never diminished the leadership he brought to the Packers.

Many on here have tried to diminish the leaderhsip Rodgers has shown this season.

When you've done that, I've called you out on it and asked you to provide proof that Favre's leadership would be getting the Packers more wins this year.

You obviously have nothing to use as proof, so rather than address that challenge, you label me and Sho as Favre-haters and accuse us of diminishing Favre's leadership.

It's a wonderful tactic. Politicians do it all the time. Don't respond to the question presented, instead attack the person asking the question and attack a straw man argument which was never asserted by your opposition.

 
James is a bit misguided for sure.IMO, the truth is in the middle here.They are lacking some leadership, but, IMO, that would not be enough of a difference this season.Was it just leadership they lacked in 2005 or 2006?There was miscommunication in those years too on defense (and they need a leader there as well, not just on offense).
I'm not misguided at all. But you make a fair point about prior seasons. :lmao:
 
No one has called him or made him out to be a "messiah".
:scared: Please tell me you don't really believe this.
Give me a break with the roll eyes. Of course I don't believe it but that is what the haters like to say about Favre supporters. However I'd rather be a guy that understands and appreciates what it meant to have Brett Favre be a Packer all those years than a hater trying to rip on one of the best QBs to play the game.
 
Actually, those are complete facts.

They were planning to fly to Mississippi, rather than right back to GB. Thats pretty much a special trip that was not planned prior to talking to Favre. He then told them not to come.

The locker thing is complete spin by anyone using it to show that Packers did not want the guy.
You're missing the point, Sho.It wasn't special enough! TT, to show Favre the respect Favre deserves, should have flown back to GB and then booked a seperate flight back to Mississippi thus proving how bad he wanted Favre back.

In fact, if TT really wanted Favre back, he would have made that special trip to see Favre seperately BEFORE the owners' meeting.

No, even better, if TT really, really wanted Favre back, he would have said "F' the owners' meeting. I'm going to get Favre back instead!".

Clearly, TT mishandled this crucial detail. We could have had that An Officer And A Gentleman ending with Thompson playing Gere's part and Favre playing Winger's part. Instead, we end up with this thread.

:tumbleweed:

 
And again, I was specifically addressing this point of people try harder because he is the QB. The point that Phase tried to spin away from earlier, now is posting quotes about that exact thing.
Thank you, Sho, for catching that!He said that leadership was so much more than that when you called him out on that. That's when I first got involved in this thread.Yet, ironically, that's pretty much the only thing people can toss out there as a way that Favre's leadership might make a difference in a game. :confused:
 
Brett Favre- named to the Pro BowlAaron Rodgers--still waiting
That he was...but so were two members of a bad GB defense.Woodson deserved it...Collins made it on some big plays early in the year...lately, you only hear his name if he is getting burned.Oh...and Rivers got hosed by being on a bad team.And nobody thought Rodgers would make it anyway.
 
Nice try sho but just pathetic that you have to fall on one game examples and ignore the big picture about Favre and leadership. You have no chance on this one but keep trying.
Umm...first off it was a joke because the article posted was a piece right before the 9ers beat the Jets.Im not ignoring that he had leadership. Im questioning that leadership is enough to improve this Packer team enough to mean anything.

The ones who have no chance are those trying to equate something so intangible into wins and how this team would be doing this year.
Exactly, Sho!Yet ask them how his leaderhsip would be translating into wins, or even how Rodgers's alleged lack thereof translates into losses, and all you get is cricket chirps and tumble weeds rolling through.

Then they call you a "Favre-hater" and say "It's too obvious to explain" and then scurry off. :confused:

 
Nice try sho but just pathetic that you have to fall on one game examples and ignore the big picture about Favre and leadership. You have no chance on this one but keep trying.
Umm...first off it was a joke because the article posted was a piece right before the 9ers beat the Jets.Im not ignoring that he had leadership. Im questioning that leadership is enough to improve this Packer team enough to mean anything.

The ones who have no chance are those trying to equate something so intangible into wins and how this team would be doing this year.
Exactly, Sho!Yet ask them how his leaderhsip would be translating into wins, or even how Rodgers's alleged lack thereof translates into losses, and all you get is cricket chirps and tumble weeds rolling through.

Then they call you a "Favre-hater" and say "It's too obvious to explain" and then scurry off. :confused:
I think they gave up because it is obvious you two are delusional on the subject of Favre and leadership. Now you and sho can get back to your delusional rants. Have fun.
 
Ok, so let's try to quantify this leadership thing. Brett being a quitter notwithstanding, how many actual points does the team score with a better leader. How many less points does the defense allow with the mere presence of Brett "I don't think I want to play anymore" Favre on the sidelines rooting them on to victory.
The answer is so obvious that the anti-Favre-haters can't be bothered to respond to the question. Of course, they can be bothered to instead accuse you of being something-or-other or call you a tool. :thumbup:
 
Nice try sho but just pathetic that you have to fall on one game examples and ignore the big picture about Favre and leadership. You have no chance on this one but keep trying.
Umm...first off it was a joke because the article posted was a piece right before the 9ers beat the Jets.Im not ignoring that he had leadership. Im questioning that leadership is enough to improve this Packer team enough to mean anything.

The ones who have no chance are those trying to equate something so intangible into wins and how this team would be doing this year.
Exactly, Sho!Yet ask them how his leaderhsip would be translating into wins, or even how Rodgers's alleged lack thereof translates into losses, and all you get is cricket chirps and tumble weeds rolling through.

Then they call you a "Favre-hater" and say "It's too obvious to explain" and then scurry off. :thumbup:
I think they gave up because it is obvious you two are delusional on the subject of Favre and leadership. Now you and sho can get back to your delusional rants. Have fun.
Or we, and others as its more than just us two disagreeing with you in here...think some of you overestimate how much that leadership meant to this team.And that in doing that, we are not hating him or disrespecting him...just logically questioning how much it really meant.

And some of you just can't handle that.

 
Ok, so let's try to quantify this leadership thing. Brett being a quitter notwithstanding, how many actual points does the team score with a better leader. How many less points does the defense allow with the mere presence of Brett "I don't think I want to play anymore" Favre on the sidelines rooting them on to victory.
More sho like solid analysis from a Favre hater. :thumbup:
See what I mean, Sabertooth?
 
Brett Favre- named to the Pro BowlAaron Rodgers--still waiting
That he was...but so were two members of a bad GB defense.Woodson deserved it...Collins made it on some big plays early in the year...lately, you only hear his name if he is getting burned.Oh...and Rivers got hosed by being on a bad team.And nobody thought Rodgers would make it anyway.
Maybe the defense isn't as bad as some would like you to think. Two pro bowlers. Things that make you go hmmmmmmm.....
 
Nice try sho but just pathetic that you have to fall on one game examples and ignore the big picture about Favre and leadership. You have no chance on this one but keep trying.
Umm...first off it was a joke because the article posted was a piece right before the 9ers beat the Jets.Im not ignoring that he had leadership. Im questioning that leadership is enough to improve this Packer team enough to mean anything.

The ones who have no chance are those trying to equate something so intangible into wins and how this team would be doing this year.
Exactly, Sho!Yet ask them how his leaderhsip would be translating into wins, or even how Rodgers's alleged lack thereof translates into losses, and all you get is cricket chirps and tumble weeds rolling through.

Then they call you a "Favre-hater" and say "It's too obvious to explain" and then scurry off. :goodposting:
Can you show me the information on how the lack of leadership is not effecting the team?
 
Nice try sho but just pathetic that you have to fall on one game examples and ignore the big picture about Favre and leadership. You have no chance on this one but keep trying.
Umm...first off it was a joke because the article posted was a piece right before the 9ers beat the Jets.Im not ignoring that he had leadership. Im questioning that leadership is enough to improve this Packer team enough to mean anything.

The ones who have no chance are those trying to equate something so intangible into wins and how this team would be doing this year.
Exactly, Sho!Yet ask them how his leaderhsip would be translating into wins, or even how Rodgers's alleged lack thereof translates into losses, and all you get is cricket chirps and tumble weeds rolling through.

Then they call you a "Favre-hater" and say "It's too obvious to explain" and then scurry off. :goodposting:
I think they gave up because it is obvious you two are delusional on the subject of Favre and leadership. Now you and sho can get back to your delusional rants. Have fun.
people just stopped taking the stinky bait.
 
There is no case to be made for you other than you are a blind Favre hater.
Believe what you want about my opinion of Favre. The guy is clearly one of the best QB's to play the game. I'd say top 10 without question, maybe even top 5. I'd put him in the top 3 or 4 QB's of my generation, no question.The difference is, I can respect his ability and career and even his position in the pantheon of great NFL QB's but still call a spade a spade when I see it.You make the assertion (or join in with it) that Favre's leadership would be getting the Packers more wins this season. I ask for evidence which proves that assertion. You come back with nothing but a restatement of the same assertion. I ask again for proof or evidence of that assertion and someone posts quotes stating that Favre is a leader. of course, that's not proof that Rodgers lacks it, it's merely an assertion that Favre has it - something I NEVER denied. I ask you to quantify or define what makes up leaderhsip when someone smugly claims there's more to it than just getting your teammates to give their best effort. Some of you all post someone else's ideas (which have little to do with being a player). When I ask you to identify which of the specific qualities you googled and posted that Favre possess which Rodgers lacks, you can't. That would require you to analyze your own preconceived beliefs and risk admitting you don't have a good reason for your position. So you all come back with the same old unsupported assertion that Favre is a leader, Rodgers isn't, and then retreat to the "it's so obvious I can't be bothered to explain it to you".
I'd lake to see the information proving he is not a better leader.
I wouldn't mind that either. Of course, it won't be me doing that because I've never said he wasn't a better leader. In fact, I'm in the skeptical crowd that thinks leadership is way overblown in professional level sports because there is scant evidence to support it's asserted importance. As I previously stated, I'm a cynical jurist looking for evidence to convince me of an assertion that was made. Let me recap. I was asking of those that asserted that Favre was a better leader...you know, the ones who stated as fact what was an unsupported opinion...for proof of their assertion.BTW, the inability to prove the counter-position is not evidence which proves the initial conflicting position. You recognize that, right? When I ask you for evidence to support your position and you respond with "where's the evidence to support yours", you are really just admitting you got nothing and the best that you can hope for is a tie.I don't know that there is any evidence of the contrary...which would still be my whole point! Saying that "leadership" is the difference in this Packer team, whether because Favre had more of it or because Rodgers lacks it, is not been supported by any evidence that I've seen either way.
 
Nice try sho but just pathetic that you have to fall on one game examples and ignore the big picture about Favre and leadership. You have no chance on this one but keep trying.
Umm...first off it was a joke because the article posted was a piece right before the 9ers beat the Jets.Im not ignoring that he had leadership. Im questioning that leadership is enough to improve this Packer team enough to mean anything.

The ones who have no chance are those trying to equate something so intangible into wins and how this team would be doing this year.
Exactly, Sho!Yet ask them how his leaderhsip would be translating into wins, or even how Rodgers's alleged lack thereof translates into losses, and all you get is cricket chirps and tumble weeds rolling through.

Then they call you a "Favre-hater" and say "It's too obvious to explain" and then scurry off. :thumbup:
I think they gave up because it is obvious you two are delusional on the subject of Favre and leadership. Now you and sho can get back to your delusional rants. Have fun.
You squeeze tight to a pre-conceived notion which you can in no way rationalize or defend with any evidence and yet you call us delusional. That's rich. :excited:
 
Can you show me the information on how the lack of leadership is not effecting the team?
Well, now you're assuming as fact what hasn't yet been established as fact: that there is a lack of leadership on this team.I can't very well prove that a lack of leadership is not affecting the team when you can't prove to me that there is a lack of leadership on this team in the first place. See how that works? If you make the first assertion - that there's a lack of leadership on this team, it's your responsibility to prove it or admit it's just an unsupported opinion. I don't buy your underlying premise in other words.

Of course, I probably couldn't prove that there's a lack of leadership either even if I believed there was, so don't feel bad. But this is the very reason why I remain skeptical about how much "leadership" actually affects NFL players (to the good or to the bad)...because there is scant evidence to support it either way.

 
Can you show me the information on how the lack of leadership is not effecting the team?
Well, now you're assuming as fact what hasn't yet been established as fact: that there is a lack of leadership on this team.I can't very well prove that a lack of leadership is not affecting the team when you can't prove to me that there is a lack of leadership on this team in the first place. See how that works? If you make the first assertion - that there's a lack of leadership on this team, it's your responsibility to prove it or admit it's just an unsupported opinion. I don't buy your underlying premise in other words.

Of course, I probably couldn't prove that there's a lack of leadership either even if I believed there was, so don't feel bad. But this is the very reason why I remain skeptical about how much "leadership" actually affects NFL players (to the good or to the bad)...because there is scant evidence to support it either way.
Leadership is an intangible and tough to measure. There were numerous quotes and articles about Favre and leadership in this thread and you ignore them all.Anyone with common sense knows how important leadership is in life and in sports. When you read about successful organizations or winning teams you will hear about examples of leadership and how important it is.

The fact you want to ignore the leadership Favre brought to the Packers is because you and sho have issues with him. That is fine but don't act ignorant and try to diminish how important leadership is in sports and in life.

 
:deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse:

WHO CARES???????

The decision was made and it's OVER.

:goodposting:
Don't disagree it's over and nothing you can do. But looking at gm move and how they worked out is always going to be a huge part of the talk here.J
I do agree with you here and maybe because it's my team, but I am sick to death of all the second guessing and maybes, coulda, shoulda's etc.We just need to move on and let it go.
:goodposting:
 
[“He’s just a real cool guy to be around,” said Roman. “He’s a guy who boosts morale in the locker room and helps you believe that you can win when you are on the offensive side of the ball. I’m sure his receivers feel that there isn’t any place he can’t pull the ball, so I have to stay alive, I have to keep working, because in any given situation he can get the ball. You tend to believe in a guy like that. Obviously with them turning it around like they have this year, a lot of guys on offense are believing in him.”
So, am I to assume that the Packers don't think they can win when Rodgers is in the huddle. I'm still kind of curious how that actually manifests itself on the playing field this season.How does Roman explain Chad Penninton?
Maybe they don't or they'd have won any of the seven chances they've had to come from behind?
I'm curious. Did the players on some of those not-so-winning Favre led teams stop considering Favre a leader when he failed to pull out a win? Did Favre's leadership take a hit after the NFC Championship game and others when he (arguably) lost it for them?Surely we wouldn't be talking about another double standard. :lmao:
I don't see how it's a double standard if Rodgers is 0-7 on attempts to win when he was behind and Favre has, you know, actually won games from behind. Obviously the Packers office lost faith in Favre after his inability in the NFC Championship game last season which is why he is now playing for the Jets.
True, at a 23-69 clip.Most impressive

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top