Favre - Big Game Choke Theory

[RedSoxExcel]

I'm at work, its a Monday, I don't want to do anything. So I took the time to research the Favre "big game choke theory". I have come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, all our Packers teams off the past, just wern't that good to begin with regardless of Favre's "crucial" INT's. Note - looking back, what an awesome way to destroy an hour of work. It's already 1 something, I'm out of here in a few hours!

Whoever believes in the big game choke theory, please reply, I can be convinced, I'm not a Favre homer. I think he's great but he's not the greatest of all time.

2008 Playoffs - First off to who ever said in another thread that it was Grants 200+ yards that made Favre look good against Seattle. It was 14-0! Favre led two drives to make it 14-14. He palyed a perfect game, if you can't see that your blind. Giants game, YES, bad throw in OT. He played with NO rushing game in ice cold weather. Maybe just maybe, you shouldn't ask a QB to put hte game on his shoulders in weather like that. Yes Eli Manning burned Harris, but he also HAD a running game. The Giants made Romo and Brady look silly. You did not lose that game JUST because of Favre's "INT problem". He led the youngest team in the NFL to a 13-3 record! And stop saying it was Ryan Grant. The Packers were 6-1 when Grant started stepping up. Tehre are multiple games were Favre just plain dominated, including @ Giants and @ Broncos. That pass in OT against the Broncos?!

Minnesota Game - 2005 Playoffs - If you remember, the Vikings took a 14-0 lead in the first quarter. That defense was garbage, how many times have you seen ANY QB lead a team with a garbage defense to a Super Bowl title. It was 24-10 by the 2nd Q. Then Longwell misses a 27 yard FG. Yeah he threw INT's. Was that game his fault? With 24-17 in the 4th quarter, Randy Moss absolutely destroyed Al Harris one on one and 31-17 (WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH A FAVRE INT). Then Moss goes on to moon Lambeau field. That defense was terrible, the Vikings could score on will.

Philadelphia Game - 2004 Playoffs - After Favre wins against Seattle - 2 td's, no INT's - defense gives up 27 points against Seattle at home. This game is apprently blamed on Favre. Favre DOESN'T throw a single INT during regulation. ON THE ROAD IN PHILADELPHIA. Puts hte team in a position to win. 4th and f'n 26. If you defense can't stop a 4th and 26, you are not a Super Bowl team. Yes, STUPID throw by Favre in OT. You lead your team to a 4th quarter lead on the road against the #1 team, your defense has a 4th and 26 and you don't stop them.

Atlanta Game - 2003 Playoffs - Terrible game by Favre (in terms of execution not INT's) AND the Packers defense though - 2 INT's. Defense gives up a Vick 76 yard drive to start off game for a TD. I've looked back this game log. Favre's first INT, lead to NO points. Then we have a god d*mn PUNT blocked for a TD. 14-0 already. 2nd Quarter, FG missed by Longwell (pattern?). Vick goes and leads Falcons to a 67 yard drive. 21-0. Then Favre drives the team down to the Atlanta goaline. For some reason we run on 4th and 2. 4-2-ATL 2 (6:37) A.Green up the middle to ATL 6 for -4 yards (E.Johnson). VICK goes to lead the Falcons to a 90 yard drive! 90! For a FG luckily, its 24-0. 2nd Half. Favre leads packers to TD. 24-7. IMMEDIATELY AFTER, VICK LEADS the Falcons to an 80 yard drive that ends in a FG luckily, 27-7. Another Packers drive, again can't get in the end zone (lack of execution) - Longwell misses a FG (pattern?). Immediately after, Vick again leads the team 60 yards but luckily missed Feeley FG. Favre's 2nd INT comes 27-7, with 5 mins left in the 4th quarter. 4-11-GB 42 (3:39) (Shotgun) B.Favre pass intended for J.Walker INTERCEPTED by K.Carpenter (R.Buchanan) at ATL 37. K.Carpenter to ATL 40 for 3 yards (R.Ferguson). Leads to no points. MY GOD, OUR DEFENSE SUCKED. We were NOT going to the Super Bowl with a team that allows Vick to drive 80 yards on will. Someone explain to me how Favre's INT's lost us that game?

Also note in those 3 games, our defense provided no big turnovers. Or special team plays with Longwell missing crucial FG's and blocked f'n punt. Which if I remember correctly, if Sherman challenges it, the play turns out completely different?

St. Louis Rams - 2002 Playoffs - We beat SF. Go on to face the Rams in St. Louis. Favre stinks it up. I will give you that one. Though I think that Rams team was awesome that should have won the SB against the Pats. But yeah you can blame the reason why we didn't beat the Rams on the road was because of Favre. Every QB in the history of the game has had a bad game. I never claim Favre is the greatest of all time, he is human.

San Francisco - 1999 Playoffs - We have the lead. 27-23. Then there was Young. Then there was Owens. We had the lead ON the road in SF against a HOF QB and WR. Jerry Rice still fumbled the ball! How you can blame Favre not stepping up in that game is beyond me. He led the team on a drive to take the lead, then it was up to the defense.

Denver - 1998 Playoffs - We beat SF IN SF - Rice, Young. We go to the SB. Favre throws 3 TD's, 1 INT. You cannot possibly blame that loss on Favre choking in the big game and his INT costing us the game. Is it possible that Terrel Davis running for 150+ yards on us had something more to do with that loss than Favre's INT. Do you even remember when that INT was?

Denver - 1997 Playoffs- This is the biggest load of crap that Desmond Howard is the reason why the Packers won and without him Favre would have never won a Super Bowl. Favre had 3 huge TD's in that game and NO INT's.

Point being, maybe, just maybe, these Packers teams that a lot of you refer to as "Super Bowl" contenders that Favre ruined with his INT's just wern't that good to begin with. And Favre was a big reason that (being a top 10 QB of all time) got us to a point to where we were even in big games? Yes St. Louis Rams, I will give you that. But I want to hear you dispute the other games. Favre had amazing defenses in 1997 and 1998. Result, Super Bowl. And if it wasn't for Terrel Davis, we have two. Favre was never blessed with a HOF running back like Elway. He never had WR's (though solid) the class of Rice, Owens or Moss. Our defense was never that dominant other than the Reggie White years, which we did just fine with 2 Super Bowl trips. LOOK AT THAT FALCONS GAME. MICHAEL VICK?! Why not stop putting so much blame on Favre (some blame is warranted IMO), and start complaining more about how our defense has stunk it up in multiple big games.

Look at your past Super Bowl winners. Giants - that defense is unreal. Colts defense BAILED out Manning against the Ravens. He threw 2 INT's, no TD's, won 15-6. In the Super Bowl, you take away that Hester TD, they hold them to 10 points. That Steelers defense of 2006. The Pats dynasty defense (all those Super Bowl wins were not just because of Tom Brady). That Ravens defense, etc.

NOT TO MENTION COACHING. Tony Dungy, Bill Billichek, Bill Cowher, come on. Put Ray Rhodes or Mike Sherman with Joe Montana and see what happens. Favre needed a great coach like Holmgrom (like McCarthy). Joe Montana had Bill f'n Walsch, Tom Brady has Belichek, Manning has Dungy, Aikman had Jimmy Johnson, etc.

If you ever expected Favre to win without a great defense, your expectations were too high IMO. He is a top 10 QB (maybe top 5) of all time but it's a team game and he shouldn't get all the credit (he played with one of the most potent defenses I've ever seen in 1997 and 1998 - plus Mike Holmgrom was an awesome coach). but he shouldn't get all the blame.

MAYBE WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE COACHING OR DEFENSE TO WIN CHAMPIONSIHPS AFTER 1998 - And Favre "choking" in big games isn't the reason?

 

[Obi1]

Good post!

This makes me want to write the rebuttal to the book "How I turned $25 in cash into a million dollars in real estate..."

It would be kind of like the opposite theory, "How I turned a million dollars in real estate into $25 in cash"

Seriously, Favre carried the Packers vs. the Giants. Rest of the team stunk.

Favre threw the 90 yard TD, and another TD. Grant gained 28 yards in rushing and the defense was lousy.

Why did the game even fall into the hends of Brett Favre? Because he kept the team in it.

The 2 missed FGs by Giants just made the game seem closer than it was.

Again good points made, good post!

 

[Zombieslayer]

Excellent post!

 

[IronBMike]

Obviously he has more positives than negatives, but there are enough negatives to block us from the SB. We need a QB who makes one bad decision a game AT MOST. Yes we had bad defenses, but Favre hasn't looked spectacular in most of his playoff games since the beginning of the Sherman era.

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

 

[RedSoxExcel]

Obviously he has more positives than negatives, but there are enough negatives to block us from the SB. We need a QB who makes one bad decision a game AT MOST. Yes we had bad defenses, but Favre hasn't looked spectacular in most of his playoff games since the beginning of the Sherman era.

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

And you honestly feel with another QB you would be in that position with these teams that Favre had?

 

[JoshTheChild]

nice

 

[RedSoxExcel]

Obviously he has more positives than negatives, but there are enough negatives to block us from the SB. We need a QB who makes one bad decision a game AT MOST. Yes we had bad defenses, but Favre hasn't looked spectacular in most of his playoff games since the beginning of the Sherman era.

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

I'm curious as to who you think would be a QB that would lead the Packers teams that Favre had to Super Bowl victories?

I honestly think that Packers fans as a whole need to step back for a second and put things in perspective. We went to the NFC title game 4 out of the 16 years that Favre was our QB. How many other franchises in the NFL have had this kind of success in the past 16 years?

The other thing people forget about Favre is that you got a QB that has played in EVERY game. Do you realize how hard it is to find a durable QB? Look at the IR lists this year for QB's. Rodgers has been injured twice for prolonged periods already. Also, Favre has played his entire career at Lambeau in cold weather. YES, he put up those stats in December with cold weather. Manning and Romo play in a dome with HOF WR's in Owens and Harrison and Favre puts up similar numbers to them. Appreciate what you got the last 16 years.

IMO, he was a big reason that a lot of those post Holmgrom teams got to the playoffs in the first place. Like honestly speaking, which other QB's do you think would have got those teams to the spots they were in? Brady, Manning, Young? That's 3 QB's out of the 50+ that have probably played in the last 10 years. The defense stops 4th and 26, we'er in the conference championship game. The defense stops Young/Owens on that last second play, IMO, we beat the Falcons with that momentum. Things are relative, yeah Favre has had bad games but he's had more good than bad, appreciate what you got and compare it to what other teams have experienced in the last 16 years.

Think about our divison. Imagine being a Vikings, Bears or Lions fan. Look at their QB position in the same 16 years. What you got wiht Favre was someone special. He wasn't superman, he was human. He wasn't hte greatest of all time but he was pretty darn close given his circumstances.

Again IMO, we're lucky to have had hte memories we've had because I think our coaching + defense post Holmgrom era was terrible.

 

[mi_keys]

Obviously he has more positives than negatives, but there are enough negatives to block us from the SB. We need a QB who makes one bad decision a game AT MOST. Yes we had bad defenses, but Favre hasn't looked spectacular in most of his playoff games since the beginning of the Sherman era.

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

No quarterback in history, if he replaced Favre's career, brings us another championship in that era and most don't even get us SB XXXI. If you want to look at blocks to SB Championships look no further than Sherman or for several years our defense.

 

[DoddPower]

My opinion about the Seattle game is that when you're running that well, it makes it a WHOLE lot easier on the QB because the defense has to respect the run and what not.

If a defense KNOWS you're going to pass, it becomes a whole lot harder to complete one.

 

[IronMan]

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

Terry Bradshaw's playoff stats the 4 years they won the SB:

1974:
touchdowns:3 ints: 1
1975:
touchdowns:3 ints: 5
1978:
touchdowns:8 ints: 4
1979:
touchdowns:6 ints: 4

Now his playoff career totals:
touchdowns 30 ints: 26
Thats 26 ints in 19 games. He even threw 3 picks in SB XIV but they still won the game. Why did they win so many games? Because they had good TEAMS.

 

[PackOne]

Good points. I think Favre driving down the field to win the Superbowl yesterday should put this topic to rest. Uh ... oh yeah that was Eli.

 

[Heatherthepackgirl]

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

Terry Bradshaw's playoff stats the 4 years they won the SB:

1974:
touchdowns:3 ints: 1
1975:
touchdowns:3 ints: 5
1978:
touchdowns:8 ints: 4
1979:
touchdowns:6 ints: 4

Now his playoff career totals:
touchdowns 30 ints: 26
Thats 26 ints in 19 games. He even threw 3 picks in SB XIV but they still won the game. Why did they win so many games? Because they had good TEAMS.

Great post Midwest!!!

 

[PackinSteel]

Excellent analysis RedSox. Bottom line is one player does not a team make - Win or Lose. That said - could the Packers have done what they did since '92 without that player? Not likely IMO

 

[all about da packers]

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

To add to MidWest's post, Brady also threw three TDs against the Chargers yet the Pats won.

Why? When their passing game didn't get going, the Pats turned to their running game.

McCarthy indicated his strategy was to attack the Giants secondary. When his attacks failed in the second half, the Packers had no running game to fall back on. Essentially the Packers put all their eggs in one basket, and found themselves in trouble.

As RedSoxExcel said, the Hawks game was a big one, it was win or go home. Favre played phenomenal in that game before Grant got things going. Favre got us back into that game, with the help of the Greg one of course.

So it isn't as if Favre is a big game choker.

PS - anyone notice this discussion has not deteriorated to a bickering back and forth thread? Notice who hasn't posted in the thread....... That's all I gotta say about that.

 

[IronBMike]

Obviously he has more positives than negatives, but there are enough negatives to block us from the SB. We need a QB who makes one bad decision a game AT MOST. Yes we had bad defenses, but Favre hasn't looked spectacular in most of his playoff games since the beginning of the Sherman era.

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

And you honestly feel with another QB you would be in that position with these teams that Favre had?

Yes.

 

[IronBMike]

And to address a multitude of posts:

Why are you bringing up Favre's glory years? Obviously he was great in his MVP seasons, one of the best ever if not THE best. But now, in 2008, it doesn't matter if he won us the SB 12 years ago. I'm talking about right NOW, I'd rather have a QB conscious of bad decisions. Favre was good about it this year, save for a few situations, but he picks the wrong situations to lose his cool. The two picks he threw against the Giants were crushing and in NO circumstance would someone like Joe Montana or Tom Brady etc thrown those. And I don't care about Bradshaw, that team had a defense that was on another level and he could afford to do that. Favre should KNOW his defense is not on that level so he can't do it. Especially in the NFC Championship.

I'll state it again: I would rather see Rodgers starting. He may be worse than Favre, but he may not. None of us really know. But we do know what the 07/08 version of Favre will get us. Good play in general with bad decisions being made when it counts.

 

[Zombieslayer]

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

Terry Bradshaw's playoff stats the 4 years they won the SB:

1974:
touchdowns:3 ints: 1
1975:
touchdowns:3 ints: 5
1978:
touchdowns:8 ints: 4
1979:
touchdowns:6 ints: 4

Now his playoff career totals:
touchdowns 30 ints: 26
Thats 26 ints in 19 games. He even threw 3 picks in SB XIV but they still won the game. Why did they win so many games? Because they had good TEAMS.

Awesome! Good stats.

And that's what folks forget - it takes a team to win a football game.

 

[Zombieslayer]

A Favre was good about it this year, save for a few situations, but he picks the wrong situations to lose his cool. The two picks he threw against the Giants were crushing and in NO circumstance would someone like Joe Montana or Tom Brady etc thrown those.

Did not Brady throw 3 INTs in a Playoff game this year? Let's check the stats...

Now, Montana, I could agree with you. Brady stunk it up and got bailed out by Maroney. No Maroney, it would be Giants beating the Chargers in the SB.

 

[tromadz]

Why did the game even fall into the hends of Brett Favre? Because he kept the team in it.

Wow, really? I'd probably go with....nevermind. Forget it.

 

[DoddPower]

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

To add to MidWest's post, Brady also threw three TDs against the Chargers yet the Pats won.

Why? When their passing game didn't get going, the Pats turned to their running game.

McCarthy indicated his strategy was to attack the Giants secondary. When his attacks failed in the second half, the Packers had no running game to fall back on. Essentially the Packers put all their eggs in one basket, and found themselves in trouble.

As RedSoxExcel said, the Hawks game was a big one, it was win or go home. Favre played phenomenal in that game before Grant got things going. Favre got us back into that game, with the help of the Greg one of course.

So it isn't as if Favre is a big game choker.

PS - anyone notice this discussion has not deteriorated to a bickering back and forth thread? Notice who hasn't posted in the thread....... That's all I gotta say about that.

YES, I DO know what you're talking about AADP.

And may I add . . . THANK YOU!

 

[RedSoxExcel]

Why did the game even fall into the hends of Brett Favre? Because he kept the team in it.

Wow, really? I'd probably go with....nevermind. Forget it.

I don't agree that Favre kept hte Packers in the game against hte Giants. But Trom you are one of the people that is most critical of Favre and INT's. I really don't understand where this big game choke thing comes from.

Those teams were in my IMO just plain not that good. MICHAEL VICK, come on. When have you ever seen Vick put together drive after drive after drive against another defense, especially IN Lambeau. That defense was terrible.

 

[RedSoxExcel]

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

Terry Bradshaw's playoff stats the 4 years they won the SB:

1974:
touchdowns:3 ints: 1
1975:
touchdowns:3 ints: 5
1978:
touchdowns:8 ints: 4
1979:
touchdowns:6 ints: 4

Now his playoff career totals:
touchdowns 30 ints: 26
Thats 26 ints in 19 games. He even threw 3 picks in SB XIV but they still won the game. Why did they win so many games? Because they had good TEAMS.

Wow, didn't even know that. Excellent post!

Montana is a whole different story but whoever said Brady wouldn't have done that is not watching Pats games. As someone said, he threw 3 INT's against the Chargers, INCLUDING one in the endzone, which hurts your team but Maroney bailed him out that game.

I think the highest expectations of Favre are unrealistic (he's NOT Montana or has Rice for that matter) and from people that generally dislike his game. Which is ironic.

 

[tromadz]

Why did the game even fall into the hends of Brett Favre? Because he kept the team in it.

Wow, really? I'd probably go with....nevermind. Forget it.

I don't agree that Favre kept hte Packers in the game against hte Giants. But Trom you are one of the people that is most critical of Favre and INT's. I really don't understand where this big game choke thing comes from.

I never said Favre is a 'big game choker.' favre played great in some big games this year. I've just been upset cuz I expect more from Favre than Bears fans would Grossman and whatnot. I expected Favre and all his years of wisdom to know a dumb throw from a smart throw. We all know(unless you're in denial) Favre is a competitor and it gets the best of him sometimes. When the past GB teams were down early, he would try to throw 14 pt touchdowns and stuff. lol. We got into overtime in the conference game and Favre tried to win it with one rocket throw, instead of 4-5 smart throws. What amazes me the most(honestly amazed) is that he STILL has the PHYSICAL talents(how is that possible?!!?!) yet mentally....he's a rookie sometimes.

I love Favre. Hope he comes back next year.

 

[Zombieslayer]

I never said Favre is a 'big game choker.' favre played great in some big games this year. I've just been upset cuz I expect more from Favre than Bears fans would Grossman and whatnot. I expected Favre and all his years of wisdom to know a dumb throw from a smart throw. We all know(unless you're in denial) Favre is a competitor and it gets the best of him sometimes. When the past GB teams were down early, he would try to throw 14 pt touchdowns and stuff. lol. We got into overtime in the conference game and Favre tried to win it with one rocket throw, instead of 4-5 smart throws. What amazes me the most(honestly amazed) is that he STILL has the PHYSICAL talents(how is that possible?!!?!) yet mentally....he's a rookie sometimes.

I love Favre. Hope he comes back next year.

There was only one man on the Green Bay Packers who didn't deserve criticism that game. His name is Donald Driver.

Everyone else got beaten and made mistakes. Some quite costly.

I'm not excusing Favre. I'm just saying he did better than Brady did.

 

[PackCrazed4]

Obviously he has more positives than negatives, but there are enough negatives to block us from the SB. We need a QB who makes one bad decision a game AT MOST. Yes we had bad defenses, but Favre hasn't looked spectacular in most of his playoff games since the beginning of the Sherman era.

Fact of the matter is that we need a QB who doesn't throw INTs in overtime in the playoffs.

I'm curious as to who you think would be a QB that would lead the Packers teams that Favre had to Super Bowl victories?

I honestly think that Packers fans as a whole need to step back for a second and put things in perspective. We went to the NFC title game 4 out of the 16 years that Favre was our QB. How many other franchises in the NFL have had this kind of success in the past 16 years?

The other thing people forget about Favre is that you got a QB that has played in EVERY game. Do you realize how hard it is to find a durable QB? Look at the IR lists this year for QB's. Rodgers has been injured twice for prolonged periods already. Also, Favre has played his entire career at Lambeau in cold weather. YES, he put up those stats in December with cold weather. Manning and Romo play in a dome with HOF WR's in Owens and Harrison and Favre puts up similar numbers to them. Appreciate what you got the last 16 years.

IMO, he was a big reason that a lot of those post Holmgrom teams got to the playoffs in the first place. Like honestly speaking, which other QB's do you think would have got those teams to the spots they were in? Brady, Manning, Young? That's 3 QB's out of the 50+ that have probably played in the last 10 years. The defense stops 4th and 26, we'er in the conference championship game. The defense stops Young/Owens on that last second play, IMO, we beat the Falcons with that momentum. Things are relative, yeah Favre has had bad games but he's had more good than bad, appreciate what you got and compare it to what other teams have experienced in the last 16 years.

Think about our divison. Imagine being a Vikings, Bears or Lions fan. Look at their QB position in the same 16 years. What you got wiht Favre was someone special. He wasn't superman, he was human. He wasn't hte greatest of all time but he was pretty darn close given his circumstances.

Again IMO, we're lucky to have had hte memories we've had because I think our coaching + defense post Holmgrom era was terrible.

GREAT POST REDSOX!

It's so true, most people do not understand nor appreciate how good we have it. We need a QB that won't throw INTs in big games? Yeah, well Africa needs food to feed its starving children every day, need doesn't equal reality. We have it so well its not even funny. Does anyone recall the Quarterback carousel/frenzy that went on this year? How many teams stuck with one starting QB the ENTIRE year? The percentage is unbelievable. Brett makes mistakes because, wow, he's human, and the fact that he isn't the center of the greatest salary cap filled teams has something to do with it too. But I'm not putting down our team, we were unbelievable this year, and considering the youth and inexperience we had, what we did this year was practically unheard of. So maybe instead of complaining and whining about the flaws of a player that had brought us to the unthinkable, instead be grateful of how far we had come, and with this huge learning experience under our belts, imagine the possibilities that could come for us next year