Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Farve on Rodgers
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="toolkien" data-source="post: 451165" data-attributes="member: 4637"><p>Rocky - But, again, it's not Favre himself, it's the righteousness by the Favre-La-La Landers of which there is still way too much. I don't go around muttering under my breath invectives against Favre, nor do I start threads to pick fights, or even if I see people ganging up on a Favre hater who obviously was once a Favre La-La Lander and emigrated only because Favre donned The Purple. I suppose one could simply shift the concept and replace "Favre getting to you" with "Favre Lovers getting to you" if it ALSO didn't perpetuate the myths about the Era itself. It angers me, right or wrong, that guys like Ahman Green can become the all time leading rusher/gainer from scrimmage in team history and it barely be acknowledged by anyone, particularly the local media and fans. How much the team, post-98, got run down by so many "packer fans" when the seasons would get washed out (and the fact that Favre had a composite 59.5 QB rating in the 6 washouts between '98 and '07 go un-examined). All the credit had to be reserved for Favre, there was ultimately failure, ergo everyone else had to take a lashing. And out of all this came an extremely distorted view of pretty much the entire Favre Era.</p><p> </p><p>I suppose one can ask why that matters, but then my whole buy in into following a sports team has to have some unexplainable or justifiable component to it (perhaps my own La-La Land). The actual content of any sport is pretty silly if you stop and think about it - driving around in a circle for 5 hours to be right back where you started, hit a "rock" with a "stick" and try not to get caught of the safe zone thingy, or try and push an inflated bladder over a sector of grass. It's the competition and struggle that has meaning, struggling against adversity. And it is formed into an entertainment package that we can safely watch while drinking a beer, and so feel like we are overcoming our own struggles. But it has meaning, and has had for millennia since people went apes--t over charioteers. </p><p> </p><p>So there's a whole lot involved, but it stands that Favre La-La Landers tend to get the whole narrative wrong on so many levels, and it is THAT that affects my enjoyment of our shared team. Favre doesn't affect me anymore, unless he says something else stupid, which is pretty rare. He's actually made mostly sense in those NFLN snippets. Some may say to let it go, but I am a firm believer in "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". There is an emerging sector of fans who bury Favre TOO far and say that he never had a period like Rodgers, which is untrue, and I supply facts to back it up (and that there is then an over-hype beginning for Rodgers). I'm not anti-Favre, I am pro FACT, and therefore anti-Favre Lover. It IS a fact that I dislike Favre, but that is mostly put away. It's the people who continue to pound fantasy, for or against, or whatever. My mission is facts (and opinion based in fact) and there dispersion against fallacies (or least to debate variations in opinion based on fact versus NFL marketing over-hype). </p><p> </p><p>What is lost in all the debates is the fact that the Packers are arguably the best team in the league the last 20 years. Favre was certainly a part of that, but not the whole, and he did his level best to destroy the enjoyment of his particular contribution. But, again, I sense a completely distorted appreciation of the last 20 years by a disturbingly large portion of the fan base and way too many people have been marginalized - in the front office, in the coaching/assistant coaching level, and the other players, particularly the record setting guys in the 2000's which has all but been erased. If it didn't involve Favre, it must not have happened, and it is that distortion that feeds the schism in the debate. So, once again, it's not Favre per se, but the assessment of the last 20 years, incorrectly, that leads to how to handle the fact that Favre was a major ****** the last six years of his career. Some may hate, some may not, but as long as it is judged in the blue sky, green grass world of reality I don't have near as big a problem than the asinine proclamations from those in the pink sky, purple grass world. And that's because that condition will continue on into to tomorrow, and god forbid it start the process all over again. </p><p> </p><p>I suppose in some no small way, I simply don't want Rodgers getting the royal treatment so far out of proportion that we get right back where we started. I don't have a problem that stars/super stars get SOME cache, but the fan base and local media got so carried away with Favre that it pretty much created the environment that was 2008. If Favre had faced any criticism for his poor play, or faced some barrier when he began overstepping his bounds, then it all may have been avoided. But all that happened is people flooded message boards and asked why Thompson was trying to force Brett out when Favre decided to issue ultimatums. Or why when Favre proclaimed he didn't feel like learning new playbooks, the local media decided that articles about what the Packers have to do to keep Favre happy was the proper response. Let's not go that route again, then maybe we won't have Favre La-La Land on one side, and the foundation of a Rodgers La-La Land on the other. If Rodgers wants to end his career with a couple years in San Fran, just because, so be it. But if we create a monster that decides revenge while on the Bears is necessary, I don't have the intestinal fortitude to deal with it. I don't care if Rodgers helps win three more Super Bowls in a row, he's not above the Packers. Let's hope he's still around, still happy, come the 100th anniversary, and not a storm cloud on the horizon.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="toolkien, post: 451165, member: 4637"] Rocky - But, again, it's not Favre himself, it's the righteousness by the Favre-La-La Landers of which there is still way too much. I don't go around muttering under my breath invectives against Favre, nor do I start threads to pick fights, or even if I see people ganging up on a Favre hater who obviously was once a Favre La-La Lander and emigrated only because Favre donned The Purple. I suppose one could simply shift the concept and replace "Favre getting to you" with "Favre Lovers getting to you" if it ALSO didn't perpetuate the myths about the Era itself. It angers me, right or wrong, that guys like Ahman Green can become the all time leading rusher/gainer from scrimmage in team history and it barely be acknowledged by anyone, particularly the local media and fans. How much the team, post-98, got run down by so many "packer fans" when the seasons would get washed out (and the fact that Favre had a composite 59.5 QB rating in the 6 washouts between '98 and '07 go un-examined). All the credit had to be reserved for Favre, there was ultimately failure, ergo everyone else had to take a lashing. And out of all this came an extremely distorted view of pretty much the entire Favre Era. I suppose one can ask why that matters, but then my whole buy in into following a sports team has to have some unexplainable or justifiable component to it (perhaps my own La-La Land). The actual content of any sport is pretty silly if you stop and think about it - driving around in a circle for 5 hours to be right back where you started, hit a "rock" with a "stick" and try not to get caught of the safe zone thingy, or try and push an inflated bladder over a sector of grass. It's the competition and struggle that has meaning, struggling against adversity. And it is formed into an entertainment package that we can safely watch while drinking a beer, and so feel like we are overcoming our own struggles. But it has meaning, and has had for millennia since people went apes--t over charioteers. So there's a whole lot involved, but it stands that Favre La-La Landers tend to get the whole narrative wrong on so many levels, and it is THAT that affects my enjoyment of our shared team. Favre doesn't affect me anymore, unless he says something else stupid, which is pretty rare. He's actually made mostly sense in those NFLN snippets. Some may say to let it go, but I am a firm believer in "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". There is an emerging sector of fans who bury Favre TOO far and say that he never had a period like Rodgers, which is untrue, and I supply facts to back it up (and that there is then an over-hype beginning for Rodgers). I'm not anti-Favre, I am pro FACT, and therefore anti-Favre Lover. It IS a fact that I dislike Favre, but that is mostly put away. It's the people who continue to pound fantasy, for or against, or whatever. My mission is facts (and opinion based in fact) and there dispersion against fallacies (or least to debate variations in opinion based on fact versus NFL marketing over-hype). What is lost in all the debates is the fact that the Packers are arguably the best team in the league the last 20 years. Favre was certainly a part of that, but not the whole, and he did his level best to destroy the enjoyment of his particular contribution. But, again, I sense a completely distorted appreciation of the last 20 years by a disturbingly large portion of the fan base and way too many people have been marginalized - in the front office, in the coaching/assistant coaching level, and the other players, particularly the record setting guys in the 2000's which has all but been erased. If it didn't involve Favre, it must not have happened, and it is that distortion that feeds the schism in the debate. So, once again, it's not Favre per se, but the assessment of the last 20 years, incorrectly, that leads to how to handle the fact that Favre was a major ****** the last six years of his career. Some may hate, some may not, but as long as it is judged in the blue sky, green grass world of reality I don't have near as big a problem than the asinine proclamations from those in the pink sky, purple grass world. And that's because that condition will continue on into to tomorrow, and god forbid it start the process all over again. I suppose in some no small way, I simply don't want Rodgers getting the royal treatment so far out of proportion that we get right back where we started. I don't have a problem that stars/super stars get SOME cache, but the fan base and local media got so carried away with Favre that it pretty much created the environment that was 2008. If Favre had faced any criticism for his poor play, or faced some barrier when he began overstepping his bounds, then it all may have been avoided. But all that happened is people flooded message boards and asked why Thompson was trying to force Brett out when Favre decided to issue ultimatums. Or why when Favre proclaimed he didn't feel like learning new playbooks, the local media decided that articles about what the Packers have to do to keep Favre happy was the proper response. Let's not go that route again, then maybe we won't have Favre La-La Land on one side, and the foundation of a Rodgers La-La Land on the other. If Rodgers wants to end his career with a couple years in San Fran, just because, so be it. But if we create a monster that decides revenge while on the Bears is necessary, I don't have the intestinal fortitude to deal with it. I don't care if Rodgers helps win three more Super Bowls in a row, he's not above the Packers. Let's hope he's still around, still happy, come the 100th anniversary, and not a storm cloud on the horizon. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Firethorn1001
DABIGZ
Capitol 8805
GreenBaySlacker
Latest posts
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: GreenBaySlacker
15 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Prior to Training Camp - Predicting the 53 Man Roster
Latest: GreenBaySlacker
24 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
M
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: mradtke66
36 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: milani
58 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 10:10 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Farve on Rodgers
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
