British Packer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2016
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 2
Whose the greatest Packers QB Favre or Rodgers?
Best QB
- Thread starter British Packer
- Start date
Sky King
158.3
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2012
- Messages
- 2,817
- Reaction score
- 329
Bart Starr
C-Lee
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2015
- Messages
- 2,144
- Reaction score
- 420
Matt Flynn
OP
OP
British Packer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2016
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 2
Ok. I've never seen him play
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
Sky King
158.3
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2012
- Messages
- 2,817
- Reaction score
- 329
That's too bad. He led the team to 5 championships in a 7 year span, including the first two Super Bowls and also 3 championships in a row - an accomplishment that the Packers have done twice in their history. No other team has ever won more than two NFL championships in a row. Starr called his own plays, BTW. Extremely smart and utterly unflappable.
I got to meet him twice as a kid. A true gentleman.
OP
OP
British Packer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2016
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 2
Sounds like a true great sportsman. Not many around these days.
Sky King
158.3
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2012
- Messages
- 2,817
- Reaction score
- 329
Between Favre and Rodgers, only, I would pick Favre because we've already seen his entire body of work. Rodgers may be able to exceed what he accomplished but he still has several years ahead of him to be properly compared to Favre.
OP
OP
British Packer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2016
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 2
That's fair
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I did as well! It was after his playing career. But one time was at Banquet he was speaking at, I shyly asked if I could get his autograph and take his picture. He insisted "no, I would like you to be in the picture with me" and asked a wait person nicely if they would take the picture. The second time, I was at Disney World and he and his wife Cherry sat down pool side next to my family. We couldn't resist saying "hi". We expected a warm greeting, but in addition to that, he ended up talking to us for the rest of the afternoon while we all soaked up the sun.
Robert Mason
Cheesehead
Rodgers throws a lot less interceptions and is more mobile.
OP
OP
British Packer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2016
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 2
He is very accurate
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
One Stat not mentioned a lot between the 2 QB's is fumbles.
Favre had 54 during his playing career.
Rodgers so far: 14
Favre had 54 during his playing career.
Rodgers so far: 14
OP
OP
British Packer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2016
- Messages
- 30
- Reaction score
- 2
That's an interesting stat thanks
Robert Mason
Cheesehead
Check out Youtube.com.....You can probably find a lot of highlights videos of his play.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I saw Starr once. I was at a Packer event at the stadium and was back by the elevators. Hardly anybody around and i found myself standing right next to Bart Starr. It was about 7-8 years ago now. I just said "Hi" and he asked if we were having fun. Another group came up and started talking to him. I just sat there like a little kid and watched him talk to everyone. No idea what they were talking about, didn't care. I was close enough I could reach out and touch Bart Starr if I wanted to 
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
No doubt in my mind from my own experiences and ones I have read from other people, Bart was a fans type player. He didn't elevate himself above the fans who adored him. Now I am sure being humble was also a byproduct of the time he played in, but it would sure be nice to have some "ordinary Joe's" in professional sports today.
weeds
Fiber deprived old guy.
To date ... I'd say Starr... However, the game has changed so much from Starr's era to Favre's and from Favre's hey day to Rogers' that coming up with a comparison is like trying to compare a lightning bug to lightning.
In my world, the measuring stick...the benchmark...is 5 championships in 7 years and 3 in a row. Having Lombardi is only part of the equation... Football back then was a different animal. The previous incarnation of NFL football was blood and guts and mental toughness. While I don't think the NFL players of yesteryear could match up athletically to today's muscle-bound prima donnas, I also don't believe today's NFL player would survive the beating the old guys were allowed to inflict on each other. Today's game is a pussified mix of Madden/Arena/Fantasy football compared to bloodbath of the 60's and 70's and 80's. To a lesser degree...the 90's.
Picture Brett's beating from the Saints in the NFC Championship game a few years back...that was week-in and week-out back then...but the QB still lined up.
Starr was just plain mentally tough in a man's game. Favre COULD have played then...except Lombardi probably would have sent him to Canada... Rodgers... Well...he's good for today's game...and I love his mental approach to the game... It all comes back to 5 in 7 years.
So... Starr.
In my world, the measuring stick...the benchmark...is 5 championships in 7 years and 3 in a row. Having Lombardi is only part of the equation... Football back then was a different animal. The previous incarnation of NFL football was blood and guts and mental toughness. While I don't think the NFL players of yesteryear could match up athletically to today's muscle-bound prima donnas, I also don't believe today's NFL player would survive the beating the old guys were allowed to inflict on each other. Today's game is a pussified mix of Madden/Arena/Fantasy football compared to bloodbath of the 60's and 70's and 80's. To a lesser degree...the 90's.
Picture Brett's beating from the Saints in the NFC Championship game a few years back...that was week-in and week-out back then...but the QB still lined up.
Starr was just plain mentally tough in a man's game. Favre COULD have played then...except Lombardi probably would have sent him to Canada... Rodgers... Well...he's good for today's game...and I love his mental approach to the game... It all comes back to 5 in 7 years.
So... Starr.
MajikMan7
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2016
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 5
I don't think you can really compare Rodgers to Favre until Rodgers career is over, but to this point he has made it an interesting discussion at the very least.
yooperpackfan
Cheesehead
The short answer is neither.
Bart Starr is the greatest Packers QB.
Curly Calhoun
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2015
- Messages
- 2,046
- Reaction score
- 498
Starr. Five world championships in a seven year span.
And that is the whole point, is it not?
Robert Mason
Cheesehead
I agree, Unless we want to say Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, etc... sucked
mradtke66
Cheesehead
Define what you mean by the best and then we can argue. I don't like using championships as football is such a team game, so I tend not to say Starr. Was he good? Sure. However, he probably wasn't even the most important player on Lombardi's teams. Hourning probably was, at least until he was used up and Lombardi let him go.
I think Starr is over-valued because the modern game values quarterbacks and we can get and understand his role and project it to the modern game. Triple threat HBs like Hourning? Most people don't even know what a triple thread HB is. And let's consider a 1960s FB (Taylor) who was a primary ball carrier and the modern FB who is a battering ram and might get 10 carries in a season (Henderson/Kuhn/et al.)
In terms of mechanics, throwing the ball well, hitting the whole route tree, and general athleticism, I'd put Starr about 5th--I have zero confidence in his ability to throw a deep out, for example. His greatest strength, calling his own game, would be minimally used (at best) in the modern game.
I'd rate our QBs roughly: Rodgers, Favre, ****ey/Majkowski (tied), Starr.
In a similar vein, I don't think Starr was ever (statistically, anyway) the best QB in the league when he played. His best rating was in 1961 when he was 5th. 6th in 1957. The rest of his career? 10th or worse. Pulled from here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1972/passing.htm
I think Starr is over-valued because the modern game values quarterbacks and we can get and understand his role and project it to the modern game. Triple threat HBs like Hourning? Most people don't even know what a triple thread HB is. And let's consider a 1960s FB (Taylor) who was a primary ball carrier and the modern FB who is a battering ram and might get 10 carries in a season (Henderson/Kuhn/et al.)
In terms of mechanics, throwing the ball well, hitting the whole route tree, and general athleticism, I'd put Starr about 5th--I have zero confidence in his ability to throw a deep out, for example. His greatest strength, calling his own game, would be minimally used (at best) in the modern game.
I'd rate our QBs roughly: Rodgers, Favre, ****ey/Majkowski (tied), Starr.
In a similar vein, I don't think Starr was ever (statistically, anyway) the best QB in the league when he played. His best rating was in 1961 when he was 5th. 6th in 1957. The rest of his career? 10th or worse. Pulled from here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1972/passing.htm
