It didn’t take long for your true colors to be revealed. I understand HardRightEdge’s hesitation in taking your post seriously because it does appear as a joke. Occasionally I run into football fans who don’t believe there are still Favre fans – people whose allegiance is more to the disgraced former QB than to the team – so every now and then it’s good to have another example. What a shame for so-called Packers fans who dislike and are biased against Thompson, McCarthy and Rodgers because they bought into the idea that Favre was more important than the franchise, as Favre did himself. And look at the kind of “reasoning” it leads to: Rodgers is overrated due to rule changes. As if those changes only apply to Rodgers and the Packers’ offense. IMO the subject of the thread, or that Rodgers’ leadership is being questioned is a little silly but the biggest joke in this thread is your posting.
And BTW it’s easy to question Favre’s leadership. I’m not going to rehash the litany here but if you’re interested do a search and you’ll find more than one Favre thread.
Lol, when was it assumed that I didn't support Thompson and McCarthy? I never wrote that in any of my posts. There must have been a huge misunderstanding. TT and MM did a solid job of creating an above average tam. Congrats to them, however, that still does not cover up the big flaws this current Packers team has.
FIRSTLY, I have never bought into the idea that Favre was bigger than the franchise. In my opinion, Favre DID build the franchise where it is today. If Favre never existed, then the Packers probably would have still been a small market team like the Jacksonville Jaguars.
SECONDLY, people are so afraid to criticize Rodgers because he is the face of the franchise. Most Packer fans are so blind to see any wrong in Aaron Rodgers. He is treated like a king, which is a really annoying, because he is just like any Packer player. He makes BIG mistakes that people seem to not question his skill. Seriously, I hope Rodgers understands that he will NOT make another SB run until the offensive line gets fixed. Favre had to deal with this pretty much during the entire early/mid 2000s. For Favre having a bad offensive line, it meant to him by taking huge risks that usually resulted into throwing interceptions. For Rodgers having a bad offensive line, it meant to him by taking NO risk that usually resulted in lots sacks/fumbles/killing drives. I hate to say this, but an interception and punting back to another team is essentially the same thing. The opposite team will get an extra possession.
Aaron Rodgers MUST take more chances during pivotal games. There will always be high risk, but the rewards are greater if its successful. This is what made Brett Favre a great player because he made near dead end plays to successful plays due to his unwillingness to take the sack.
Also, it seems that Aaron Rodgers doesn't want to mess up his "clean" stats/QBR rating/INT rate so he automatically defaults into taking the sack since he doesn't see anything open. Maybe he loves the praise by all the media journalists and ESPN of how good he is at protecting the ball...seriously Aaron? It's a team sport...
<- just for your information, this is a "wink" smilie. Threads like this bring out the Favre apologists.
It's got to kill 'em how well Rodgers is doing. (And what a strange position for a "Packers fan" to be in!) And even with his imperfections Rodgers is twice the leader Favre ever was. For example, unlike his predecessor, he knows all his teammate's names - that at the very least is the starting point.
