For official Brett forum peeps

angryguy is a Packer fan?
I always thought that he was a Bret Farve fan like Hauschild.
ag posts blogs supporting Farv on Viqueens fan sites.

Don't care what he is.....obviously not a Packer fan I guess.

Why do people need to toss Brett under the bus to make Rodgers appear better? It doesn't make any sense.

Favre's like the gash-hound that is continually putting the moves on the ladies. Sometimes he gets lucky, sometimes he doesn't. But, you could say it is the "hunt" that keeps him coming back for more, as opposed to the rewards. His motto? No guts, no glory.

Contrast this to Rodgers. He's like the hesitant dude that over-analyzes to the point that he ends up talking himself outta the chance to score. In his mind, he eventually talks himself into believing that he really hasn't lost out on anything. It's a much "safer" environment to exist within.

So, that begs the question of whether it is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all - so to speak???

Actually, I don't think many people do tear down favre to build up AR. I think we all see what we have in AR and it is a welcomed change of pace after the TO machine favre had become. Favre in his best years was as good a QB as you could find though - but that was about 3 out of 16 for us. The other years he was average to above average, not great.

TO's are death to an NFL team. You sort of found that out this year in the NFCC right? Why would you want a guy who is okay with muliple TOs? I'd much rather have a guy who maybe misses on a couple big plays but who turns it over a hell of a lot less. Aaron still makes plenty of big plays - he isn't like Ty Detmer out there, just plodding along a few yards at a time. I'll take his style of play over favre's from 13 of the 16 years he played for us.

Question for the Favre-lovers. What did Favre win in his second year as a starter? You guys keep saying that Rodgers hasn't won anything yet like it's a bad thing, when your life partner didn't either at that point in his career. Gotta give Rodgers time before we start labeling him. If we get 5 or 6 years in and he hasn't won anything yet, then by all means, go nuts. I just think at this point we have to hold up with the "Rodgers hasn't won anything" argument.

Who's to say there isn't 3 consecutive MVP's, two Super Bowl appearances with a win in one of them, and a bunch of records in Rodgers future.

I don't understand how anyone can keep defending Burnt Fart.
If he had like even 3 SB wins by now, I could see that.
But he just fails time and time again.
That is what is expected of him.
If he comes back next year, he will fail. Guaranteed.
If not during the reg. season then in post. And if not in post then in the SB.
You can hold me to that.

Quoting only a part of Murgen's post makes it seem like it was he who started the whole thing, like he came out of the blue bashing Favre... Clever...

Just for the Record.

Rodgers vs AZ. 2 turnovers 13 points scored by AZ.
Favre vs NO. 2 trunovers 0 points scored by NO.

I know you highlighted the sentence. But just for the record:

Points generated directly by Rodgers (not considering extra point): 30
Points generated directly by Favre: 6

Just to make it pretty clear.

Looking at one data point - the kid's first playoff game versus a sea of data for favre... Shrewd.

The great thing about looking at one data point - you can draw the line any freakin' way you like...

Did this make sense to anyone else? I think I missed the point.

Viqueen fans rarely make sense to me. The entire premise of being a queen fan simply does not follow logic and loses me quickly...

I can't get past any of the following

Franchise has never won it all
Play in the most sterile, artificial environment in the NFL
Mascot and stupid horn are the most annoying things the league has to offer
Men who like to wear blonde braids like the Swiss Miss girl

Just one would likely be enough to keep me from being a queenie fan, but for all of that to be true and more, well, it is no wonder they have trouble selling out playoff games...

Ive said it once and I'll say it again. You can not give a queen fan success. They don't know how to handle it. Give them a playoff birth and they start to think they are the greatest franchise in the league. :viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux:

he obviously hasnt seen rodgers girlfriend haha

I really hope the 'queens move out of Minnesota. Maybe to L.A. or something. That would be just awesome. Probably the best thing that could happen to me after the Pack winning another Super Bowl.:viksux:

This doesn't hold any water since Minny lost too. :icon_rolleyes:

Don't they have trouble even just selling out home games?
Somewhere on line I read that tix were selling quicker and easier since Burnt Fail started playing there.
Now we all know how hard it is to get into Lambeau. Right?
Like EVERY seat is a season ticket and you have to know someone.
So does all this mean that it would be easier to travel to Minny to watch the Pack play when they play the Viqueens in the Metrodumb?

While I don't think it would be good for the NFL, and it would certainly lead to re-alignment with them leaving our division...

There isn't a more deserving, whiny bitch fan base for such a fate. If they move to LA I think I'd laugh for about a week straight. They'd likely never have NFL football back in Minny in my lifetime and it would be funny as hell watching several of them try to become Packer fans like their grandfathers were.
:viksux:

I like them in here. It would be really funny for a couple of years, calling them the L.A. Vikings. But the rivalry is good. Who will be our laughing-stock when they fail on the big games? It's not the same with the bears... The minnesota rivalry has it's own flavor...

Of course not. Because that would not hold up to the statement "Favre gave the game away". Of the 5 TO's that MN had in that game only one amounted to any points for the Saints. And that was Harvins fumble. Petersons and Berrian's fumbles as well as Brett 2 INT's amounted to 0 points for the high powered Saints offense.

Exactly.

Saying that those TOs didn't result in points talks much more about the prowess of the D and puts the O in a worse position than if it had generated points.

They had turnovers, the D managed to overcome them, and even then they lost the game. Who's fault is that then? With the same D and a better O, you win the game.

In our game, the TOs generated points for them, but the D couldn't stop noone. With the same O but a better D, we win the game.

All 5 took away scoring opportunities. Only 1 gave away the game however. If you want to look at it like that. The way MN was moving the ball, if you take 3 of those away and make them scoring plays, even FG's, the overtime never happens. Vikings fans know this and hence don't blame Brett for losing the game. Only disgruntled Favre hater's blame him for the loss. IF, MN does not have those 5 TO's the game is a blowout by the middle of the 4th quarter.