Brett during the 07 NFCCG/Bench him now?

Bogart

Duke Mantee
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
839
Location
Mobile, AL U.S.
Completely agree.

There was no possibility of Favre being benched, not with the way he played all season, had played at the half, the situation we were win, and Rodgers' innexperience.

If that wasn't Favre and was, say, Jake Plummer who had just had that season, then yes, but only knowing know what kind of QB Rodgers were in early 08.


Just like I said, at the time, it was not a question at all. There is NO WAY on earth he would have benched his starting quarterback that got them there to start with.
 
OP
OP
longtimefan

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,381
Reaction score
4,105
Location
Milwaukee
Just like I said, at the time, it was not a question at all. There is NO WAY on earth he would have benched his starting quarterback that got them there to start with.


Unless Brett was not following the game plan ;)

And that is rumor I heard
 

neilfii

Hall of Fame Fan
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,676
Reaction score
680
Location
NW Indiana
Unless Brett was not following the game plan ;)

And that is rumor I heard

Even then MM would have been ridden out of GB on a rail. There was more confidence in Favre at that time then there was in MM.
Today? Different story altogether. I think today people would have supported MM if Favre had gone rogue.
 
L

Lunchboxer

Guest
If MM did bench favre. Would Rodgers be able to play under the sudden pressure like that.

Its Damned if you do and Damned if you dont.


If the Rodgers of today was the Rodgers of back then I would Pull Brett in a heartbeat. Rodgers of today has the experence of Playoffs and the Super Bowl.
 

greenandgold

I'm Dirty Hairy Callahan
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
1,826
Reaction score
424
Location
Mobile, AL.
If MM did bench favre. Would Rodgers be able to play under the sudden pressure like that.

Its Damned if you do and Damned if you dont.


If the Rodgers of today was the Rodgers of back then I would Pull Brett in a heartbeat. Rodgers of today has the experence of Playoffs and the Super Bowl.

Well, Rogers almost saved the Dallas game when Favre took a seat.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I do believe we were done with him after that game. Retiring and coming back had nothing to do with us finally breaking ties with him. Even had Favre not retired, I believe we would have traded him.

I don’t think so. Remember within a month of his “retirement”, it was reported he had changed his mind and the Packers were going to send a plane to bring him to Green Bay for the announcement. Of course he changed his mind again but if he hadn’t I think he would have been the Packers starting QB on opening day 2008. IMO: The reason Favre “retired” when he did in March was the Packers wanted a commitment from him to attend most of the off season stuff and he wasn’t ready to make that commitment. He pretty much said that in his interview with Greta Van Susteren. From his point of view he felt unfairly pressured by the Packers. I think his subsequent behavior reveals he thought he could skip all the minicamps and OTAs and show up for training camp and claim his job. However if, instead of announcing his retirement in March, he had committed to the team or after he “retired” had made that commitment in April, I think he’d have been the starting QB.

IMO again based upon their subsequent behavior, particularly McCarthy and probably Thompson were ready to move on to Rodgers as the starting QB but I think it would have been nearly impossible to do so without Favre’s “retirement” and facilitation until late June that year. From Thompson’s point of view he probably had heard or read about Favre’s “dance with retirement” even before he arrived as GM in 2005. And Thompson had another reason for moving on: Remember in the interview with Greta Favre admitted to telling Thompson how to do his job shortly after Thompson took over as GM. He told him he had to keep both Wahl and Rivera. And while Favre was pressuring Thompson, he hadn’t yet committed to playing the season. After Thompson fired Sherman, Favre pressured him into signing his friend, Mariucci as head coach. And later Favre pressured Thompson to acquire Moss. The head coach is the QB’s “boss”. The GM is the head coach’s “boss”, so in effect Favre was telling his boss’s boss how to do his job and that began shortly after Thompson got the job. Yes, Favre is a first ballot hall of famer and a legend. Even so, IMO that was over the top and I would not blame Thompson for being fed up with that behavior, in addition to having put up with the annual off-season nonsense.

IMO it was Favre who created the opportunity for McCarthy and Thompson to commit to Rodgers and had he not done so it would have been extremely difficult to damn near impossible for them to have done so.
 

Bogart

Duke Mantee
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
839
Location
Mobile, AL U.S.
I don’t think so. Remember within a month of his “retirement”, it was reported he had changed his mind and the Packers were going to send a plane to bring him to Green Bay for the announcement. Of course he changed his mind again but if he hadn’t I think he would have been the Packers starting QB on opening day 2008. IMO: The reason Favre “retired” when he did in March was the Packers wanted a commitment from him to attend most of the off season stuff and he wasn’t ready to make that commitment. He pretty much said that in his interview with Greta Van Susteren. From his point of view he felt unfairly pressured by the Packers. I think his subsequent behavior reveals he thought he could skip all the minicamps and OTAs and show up for training camp and claim his job. However if, instead of announcing his retirement in March, he had committed to the team or after he “retired” had made that commitment in April, I think he’d have been the starting QB.

IMO again based upon their subsequent behavior, particularly McCarthy and probably Thompson were ready to move on to Rodgers as the starting QB but I think it would have been nearly impossible to do so without Favre’s “retirement” and facilitation until late June that year. From Thompson’s point of view he probably had heard or read about Favre’s “dance with retirement” even before he arrived as GM in 2005. And Thompson had another reason for moving on: Remember in the interview with Greta Favre admitted to telling Thompson how to do his job shortly after Thompson took over as GM. He told him he had to keep both Wahl and Rivera. And while Favre was pressuring Thompson, he hadn’t yet committed to playing the season. After Thompson fired Sherman, Favre pressured him into signing his friend, Mariucci as head coach. And later Favre pressured Thompson to acquire Moss. The head coach is the QB’s “boss”. The GM is the head coach’s “boss”, so in effect Favre was telling his boss’s boss how to do his job and that began shortly after Thompson got the job. Yes, Favre is a first ballot hall of famer and a legend. Even so, IMO that was over the top and I would not blame Thompson for being fed up with that behavior, in addition to having put up with the annual off-season nonsense.

IMO it was Favre who created the opportunity for McCarthy and Thompson to commit to Rodgers and had he not done so it would have been extremely difficult to damn near impossible for them to have done so.


Fave was TRADED when he did come back.

IMO he wanted one more year, and we were done with him. Probably after that game the choice was made. Rodgers had been drafted by TT and MM as the future of this franchise. Favre just proved in the twilight of a career you can still have another great season or two as he did (2007 and 2009).

His time was up with us. They can't play forever. Montana wanted one more year as a starter, and he got his wish in KC, while everyone believed the delusion that SF would have beat Dallas in the playoffs had he been there.

Favre to Rodgers is kinda like Montana to Young. I doubt the 'Niners could have beat Dallas in either of their championship losses even if Joe Cool was in the starting lineup. Montana still had enough to stick one great year up in KC, because he was determined, just as Favre was in '09, but he also was past his prime. Things happen for a reason, and by the recent events this season, it was a blessing we knew Favre was in his twilight.
 

Jess

Movement!
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,112
Reaction score
467
Location
Killing the buzz.
Imagine if we'd stuck with Favre one more year. Rodgers probably leaves via free agency, and we're left with.... who knows what? For all intents and purposes we'd be the Vikings right now. Minus the ****** purple.

Ditching Favre was both one of the riskiest and one of the best decisions in the history of this franchise.
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
Back then: Regrets of Green Bay getting rid of Favre or not letting him come back when he Favred.
Now: No regrets and thinking that Green Bay did the right thing after all.
 

neilfii

Hall of Fame Fan
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,676
Reaction score
680
Location
NW Indiana
Maybe TT is more of a genius than we think and he allowed Favre to orchestrate his own exit; hoisting Favre on his own Petard knowing that BF could not forego the retirement drama. Surely TT and MM had analyzed Rodgers' ability and readiness and were ready to pull the trigger on Rodgers' ascension to starting QB. It would appear that Favre may have been a little too smart for his own good.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Bogart you posted you don’t believe McCarthy contemplated removing Favre from the NFC Championship game and that it was “unreal” believing McCarthy would pull him out of that game at halftime. Imagine if Favre hadn’t announced his “retirement” in March and instead showed up for all the off season activities. Do you disbelieve the Packers did welcome him back in April of 2008?

The same pressure that would have made it near impossible for McCarthy to remove him at halftime would have made it near impossible for Thompson and McCarthy to trade him except for his “retirement” and indecision until June 20, 2008. IMO Favre’s actions, as predictable as they were, had everything to do with his being traded.
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,818
Maybe TT is more of a genius than we think and he allowed Favre to orchestrate his own exit; hoisting Favre on his own Petard knowing that BF could not forego the retirement drama. Surely TT and MM had analyzed Rodgers' ability and readiness and were ready to pull the trigger on Rodgers' ascension to starting QB. It would appear that Favre may have been a little too smart for his own good.
Lol...... that is the one and only time I've heard Favre accused of being too smart.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,660
Reaction score
1,312
on a blustery night at Lambeau Field, where the game-time temperature was 1 below with a minus-23 wind chill, there were signs Favre was on the verge of freezing up. His body language suggested he simply didn't want to be on the field.
I don't question McCarthy's concern about Favre, but how often do quarterbacks get pulled because of body language?
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top