1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

So, in the end, who would you rather have?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Jess, Nov 1, 2009.

?

Who would you rather have?

  1. Rodgers for the next 10 years

    33 vote(s)
    71.7%
  2. Favre for the next 2

    13 vote(s)
    28.3%
  1. Skol guy
    Offline

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Then watch Aaron Rodgers tear it up for somebody else? The packers did the right thing IMO as Rodgers will be a stud in this league for years to come.
  2. angryguy77
    Offline

    angryguy77 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    384
    Location:
    oshkosh
    Ratings Received:
    +2 / 0 / -0
    There wasn't a need for them to build the team this way. Like jeff said they should have tried to build quicker and see what happened.
  3. PackersRS
    Offline

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Location:
    Porto Alegre, Brazil
    Ratings Received:
    +979 / 0 / -0
    IMHO it's crazy when people say it's the OBVIOUS choice to have Favre when the voting is 27-9 in favor of having a young Aaron Rodgers... You better be trying to convince yourselves when you say that, because it's nowhere near the common belief.
  4. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,605
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings Received:
    +2,517 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    I thought they did the quicker way with Sherman

    They had NUMEROUS chances and what happened?
  5. Zeppelinelite51
    Offline

    Zeppelinelite51 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    225
    Ratings Received:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    your a fool if you seriously beleive that. Favre would be the Farve that throws a **** ton of interceptions because he would begin forcing the ball more with all that pressure from our ****** o-line and the fact that the running game is nonexistant.

    Dont forget... the last play as a Packer for Favre was a last second interception that Im pretty sure sealed the game in the playoffs.

    :viksux:
  6. thetrooper
    Offline

    thetrooper Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2009
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Baltimore,Maryland
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    i guess i'd go for rodgers also.he could be awesome in a few years.he's pretty good now.how much does favre have left?
  7. RobsPics
    Offline

    RobsPics Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2009
    Messages:
    17
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Yea of course I would pick Rodgers over Favre...if there was never ever going to be another decent QB in the draft for the next 10 years.

    But we all know that is unlikely to be the case. There's lots of QB talent in the draft at least every 2 or 3 years. So why draft Rodgers in 2005? I mean what...like he was a once in a lifetime QB that the packers just needed to draft right then and there?
  8. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,605
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings Received:
    +2,517 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975

    Seriously thats a crazy argument..


    2002
    99
    98
    96
    93

    Years that Wolf drafted q/b...You could say why in the hell did he draft any then?....cuz of Brett's caliber and the ability to play through ANYTHING you dont draft q/b in those times at all

    It made more sense to draft a q.b in 05 or 06 because leading up to the draft you had no idea if Brett was playing or not.
  9. Schmitty327
    Offline

    Schmitty327 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2009
    Messages:
    48
    Location:
    Packer Country
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Rodgers in my opinion is a better QB then Favre at this point in both of their careers. I would take Rodgers. If we had a good o-line imagine what Rodgers could do. He is doing very well with a under average line. Give him a better ground game and a break from running every play and he would pick teams apart.
  10. Quientus
    Offline

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Denmark, Scandinavia
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1993

    While saying that .... you should probably also keep in mind that during more than the first half of *that* particular season ... Green Bay had ZERO running game as well ... and had ALOT of scrimmage plays with NONE in the backfield ...

    The 2007 team *probably* would not even have made the play offs had it not been for Favre under center as well ... - Might want to keep that in mind also, when you write the above ...



    I beg the differ ... The current offensive line isn't exactly as bad as people say it is ... In fact one could argue that the offensive line Favre started behind in 1992 was only a little better ... if not equal ...

    Regardless ... Favre went and started with a winning season ... Rodgers didn't ... So if that is your arguement ... it is severely flawed ...
  11. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,605
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings Received:
    +2,517 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    Quin you know I think your one smart cookie, but look at these stats and then tell me it was Brett who got those 2 wins..
    that was from the Philly game and the Washington game...If you still say he should get credit for those games, then you and I need a talk LOL

    People forget that in 07, we did see how Brett handled the o-l and how Rodgers handled it..Granted it was a tiny sample but recall the Dallas game? Brett played entire 1st q and the 1st series in 2nd q...Brett 2 ints....Rodgers none..

    I still want Bret ton this team but he isnt..but when people refuse to look at the facts and say Brett wouldnt do that or Brett could do this, are turning a blind eye..
  12. JeffQuery
    Offline

    JeffQuery Banned Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    244
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Dude, you always point to those two games and the Dallas game, so you definitely don't want Brett here..that's just a lie.

    Why don't you talk about the other games in the '07 season...?

    If you do, then you know that Quientus's assestion is true. Without Brett Favre that year, they DON't make the playoffs, and you know it.

    The Dallas game, McCarthy had a plan to go deep, and Ted's pathetic O-Line couldn't protect Favre....

    Why don't you just come out and admit that you favor Rodgers over Favre, and that you're biased against Favre?

    Tell the truth, man...
  13. angryguy77
    Offline

    angryguy77 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    384
    Location:
    oshkosh
    Ratings Received:
    +2 / 0 / -0
    4-26 happend and a very good rams team that was destroying everyone during his era. The pack had some good teams under him.

    Also what "happend" was GB had a good team that had a legit shot a few of those years. Whats happening now is the exact opposite. We were not content with potential like so many are now
  14. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,605
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings Received:
    +2,517 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975

    Blame the defense for the Philly game..but when it comes to the Vikings this year its all Rodgers, right?

    Face it..No matter what---it will never be Brett's fault for a lot of losses in his career..Even tho he has played major roles in those losses..It will always fall on other parts of the team..

    but now it seems those same people that defended Brett for his stink bombs are fast to blame Rodgers for even less reasons for losses
  15. Skol guy
    Offline

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    All i know is Aaron Rodgers is too valuable to lose as good as Brett is right now maybe the pack would be better off right now with no. 4 at QB but as a fan of a team that has brought in way too many QB's over the past twenty years or so including a forty year old warren Moon besides Favre also a construction worker in randall Cunningham so replaceing a Aaron Rodgers in the draft or free-agency is easier said than done. With that being said i would bet the pack would be better this year with Brett favre as he is playing at a high level and could win MVP this year with his numbers. For the future they did the right thing IMO but maybe the present is hurting also because of favre being gone because 13-3 to 6-10 is to glareing to dismiss
  16. JeffQuery
    Offline

    JeffQuery Banned Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    244
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    You mean that "it will never be Aaron Rodgers fault", according to many of you Homers in Green Bay, even when we proved that Rodgers holds on to the ball too long putting his team in a bad position, and that he doesn't read defenses as good as Favre.

    Also, Rodgers threw 2 or 3 game ending picks last year that lost the game for the Pack. Guess that wasn't the "untouchable one's" fault either, right?

    To admit that Rodgers isn't perfect, or better than Favre, is to admit that Ted was wrong and that your team went in the wrong direction, and you guys just can't do that.

    Did Favre lose some games for the Pack. Yes..absolutely. I'm saying it here and now. But you won't remember it, because of your agenda. But Favre WON WAY MORE games because of his play, then he's lost, and you can't deny that!

    No matter how much you try to wriggle and twist the facts..:rotfl:
  17. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,605
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings Received:
    +2,517 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    Read my effing posts...

    I have placed blame on Rodgers last year..I have said there were at LEAST 2 games that he made them lose....


    There ya happy?

    Maybe you never read my posts to see I do place blame on him..
  18. Skol guy
    Offline

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    I remember 2 weeks ago you pinned the Steelers loss on favre. Sounds to me like you twist your agenda abit on where the blame goes. You really can't blame a loss on a QB in one game and no blame in games of your chooseing. favre had the one pick that was hardly his fault and threw for 340 at about a 70% comp. rateing so really your points are kinda of wishy washy. I would bet you would have a hard time convinceing anybody the pack is better with Aaron rodgers than they would be with Brett favre right now.
  19. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,605
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings Received:
    +2,517 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    Washington game and the Philly game piss me off because people are fast to give Brett credit for getting to 14-4...But forget that in those 2 games he did NOTHING to help team win.

    The Philly games s/t came up with HUGE plays and Crosby hit a 53 yarder to win ( unlike in Minny last year when he MISSED same distance and people blamed Rodgers for it)

    The Washington game it was all on the D that won that game...
    He played absolutley awesome for 13 other games.

    and yes even the 3 games he dropped a stink bomb they still make playoffs..





    My gawd I can say it every day and people only focus on the fact that I say he played BAD and take that to mean I think he sucks!!

    AGAIN

    I WISH HE WAS A PACKER STILL

    He gets rid of ball faster and knows the defenses better than ANY
    ONE

    I think I am going to copy that last statement and post it every effing week so people that have Brett slobber on their chins will STFU on my stance..

    Just because I am not bitching and moaning on how this entire thing is screwed up in every post I make does not mean I think Brett sucks..

    Now please Pack66...Stop with the wrong assumptions on how I feel about it..

    He is not the q/b for the team I love so I support Rodgers...... but would like to have Brett back but he isnt coming back
  20. Quientus
    Offline

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Denmark, Scandinavia
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1993

    I think we actually see "eye to eye" on alot of the "issues" ... and mostly to me, it seems we are arguing semantics LOL ...

    I've never said that Favre didn't "blow" *some* games, but mostly, those (crucial play off) games, where most people "blame" him ... Favre actually wasn't "the ONLY one" to blame ... (yes he had part of the blame, but not all, as many seem to give him ...).

    Still, DESPITE all the games Favre "has lost" (partly blamed), MORE so than less, Favre was *also* one of the major reasons, why the Packers were a Contender during his 16 seasons with the Packers ... - Making a huge impact almost from the start of his career there ... - No matter how good stats Aaron Rodgers has ... the same thing can NOT be said of him - AT *This* time in his career ...
  21. Skol guy
    Offline

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Well I guess you have switched to Brett Favre's side with you last statement since you would love to have Brett back but he is not coming back. Am I correct? If so, nice job JeffQuery and Quientus
  22. Quientus
    Offline

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Denmark, Scandinavia
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1993


    My eyes are bleeding now ...


    :paladin:
  23. Skol guy
    Offline

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    I didn't even have to squint to read that post. I think you peeded him off alittle. That was some good forum jawing.
  24. Quientus
    Offline

    Quientus Oenophile

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Denmark, Scandinavia
    Ratings Received:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1993

    If you think *I* made Longtimefan upset ... you are SADLY mistaken ...
  25. Skol guy
    Offline

    Skol guy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Ye he told me your a peach of a guy

Share This Page