FAVRE CAN COMPETE FOR STARTING JOB

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
jpigeon said:
Brett Favre will be the starting QB in the home opener on Monday night against the Vikes.

I guess I'll have to modify my signature then... :)

So I curious. What happens if/when Fav-re comes in, wins the starting job, and leads the Pack to another 4-12 season ala 2005?

We are a MUCH better football team than the '05 team so the likelyhood of this is very low. As Mike McCarthy said "this is a very good football team."

I don't know why people always relate the record to the QB. In '05 we lost about every guy that could run or catch to injury on top of just not being very good.

In '07 we suited up 45 guys that can play at a high level and did.

It's funny because when I hear of other 4-12 teams most of the talk is about how BAD the FOOTBALL TEAM is but in our case it's about how bad Brett Favre was. Then when we are a GOOD football team it's about how good Brett Favre is.

The CONSTANT over the last three years has been Brett Favre was the QB. What has been SHIFTING since then is the rest of the team has gotten a whole lot better.
 

PackerFreak

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
I think if Brett isnt the starter on opening day, somebody is gonna lose thier job. I think TT knows this and that is why he is lrtting them compete for the stating job. Hell, why not throw Brohm in the mix too. :shrug:
 

jpigeon

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
That even makes it more intriguing. The fact that the team is that much better. Is it possible this may be as good a team as the one that won XXXI? Still 13-3 last year and 1 pass away from the Super Bowl. I'd be much more willing to see #4 line up at QB than #12.

We still jave to wait however to see if Favre applies for reinstatement. What he should do is apply immediately, get reinstated by the commish and get his butt to Green Bay, this week. Start working out with the receivers and get in shape. Compete for the job and we're back where we were last year at this time. God forbid he starts the game against the Vikes and screws up. Then again, the alternative might be worse. Rodgers starts the first game, the Pack goes 3 and out in the first series, or Rodgers throws an INT, can't even imagine what the place might be like if Favre is his back up.

That's why Favre will be the starter.

Heck Rodgers might not even be on the opening day roster. If they bring Favre in to camp, and I'm AR, I'd be in TT's office so fast asking for them to let me go, why would he want to stay around?

We can't believe all this happy BS about Aaron's our guy, we changed the offense to suit him etc.....That's the company line. They have to say that.

The really telling line in all of this is that TT and MMC both wanted #4 back, and still do, because deep down they know he's the best option for them to get back to the Super Bowl.

And because of that 1 reason, this is bigger than #4 or #12, this is about getting to the big game, and what's best for the team and the franchise and the fans of the Green Bay Packers.
 

Pack93z

You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
4,855
Reaction score
8
Location
Central Wisconsin
Greg C. said:
I seriously doubt that the QB competition is actually going to happen. On paper, it seems like the most simple and reasonable solution, but in reality, it would be messy and would probably result in a divided locker room regardless of who won. It would be fine if these were two young guys competing for the job, or two vets who were on equal footing, but to pit the legend against the young guy, after the legend has already retired, would be awkward to say the least, all the more so because both players play are very good. Rodgers played just as well as Favre in the preseason last year.

I agree that it would probably be a locker room divider, but in reality, don't you have to believe that no matter what the direction taken, there is going to be a fallout?

None of this is optimal, actually it is the worst thing to happen to the Packers in many moons.. it sucks. It is damage control mode on all accounts.. which solution creates the least fallout and lingers into the season?


Greg C. said:
The situation right now is that Favre has asked to be released. It is possible that he has asked for release because he does not want to come back to a team where he could be a divisive figure, not only among players, but among management and fans. Remember, the Favre camp has been saying all along that one reason for Brett's retirement is that he was not sure if management was fully behind him anymore. Brett has denied this, but it probably was a factor, at least. Having to enter a QB competition is probably not Brett's idea of having management fully behind him.

Actually I think this move was by Brett was more PR than desire to go elsewhere.. if Brett truly wanted to force the issue he would have filed the offical papers with the league and made the Packers make a choice within 24 hours. He didn't do that, instead he is playing his popularity card and pressuring the Packers to publicly deal with the issue, which they have done all weekend long. Got them to go on record in the press and now the world knows where things lie.

Brett very well might be doing this to gain attention, but in reality, I think it is a tactic to force the Packers to take him back.. whether that works or not is to be seen.

If I had to guess, the Packers are playing it up in the press to give Aaron a complete show of support and minimize the team vs player damage the return of Brett will cause.. It also is a sign in public that Brett is not forcing the Packers to do anything.. but IMO.. he has got the hammer on this one.

If I am Ted, and I am sold on Rodgers.. I pull the trigger on a trade to end this lingering and take my chances.. if I miss on Rodgers ability.. then I start filling out my resume, because life will become unbearable for me in Green Bay.. it will always go back to the Brett decision.
 

TOPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
It really wouldn't surprise me to see Rodgers win the job. While Brett had an overall great season last year, he really was ineffective from the Dallas game on (except for the Seahawks playoff game that is).
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
From a fan's standpoint, all that matters is winning the Super Bowl. To a lot of people, getting a Super Bowl win today is worth greatly increasing your odds of losing seasons for the next few years.

From a GM/CEO/Head coach/owner's standpoint, it's about winning the Super Bowl, yes. Eventually. But in the meantime, you have to retain as much visibility and prominence and credibility as a decent franchise as you can. It's all about the steady growth/income of your franchise. So to a Front Office-type, the big game is important. But equally important is making the playoffs 8 out 10 years, and picking up a few wins here and there.

BTW: Good job, everyone, keeping this thread clean. Some great discussion and points made by everyone. Good to see the tide of emotional outburst is receeding..
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
It really wouldn't surprise me to see Rodgers win the job. While Brett had an overall great season last year, he really was ineffective from the Dallas game on (except for the Seahawks playoff game that is).

Wrong. Maybe he wasnt perfect. Maybe he wasnt as good as tom brady but he did play very well. Maybe his freaking arm was hurt?

G QBRat Comp Att Pct Yds Y/G Y/A TD Int Rush Yds Y/G Avg TD Sack YdsL Fum FumL
Last 4 Games 4 85.5 60 96 62.5 743 185.8 7.7 6 5 7 18 4.5 2.6 0 1 4 1 0
Week 14 '07 (OAK) 1 115.5 15 23 65.2 266 266.0 11.6 2 1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 15 '07 (@STL) 1 80.6 19 30 63.3 225 225.0 7.5 2 2 3 -3 -3.0 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 16 '07 (@CHI) 1 40.2 17 32 53.1 153 153.0 4.8 0 2 3 0 0.0 0.0 0 1 4 1 0
Week 17 '07 (DET) 1 143.8 9 11 81.8 99 99.0 9.0 2 0 1 21 21.0 21.0 0 0 0 0 0
 

DGB454

Cheesehead
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
636
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
de_real_deal said:
I will state what I did before. If there is an open competition and Favre wins then we can say goodbye to Rodgers in 2009. I also believe Favre will leave again after this coming season. If Rodgers wins then we can say goodbye to Brett right now.

So which scenario is better?


Now if Favre were willing to renegotiate his contract to a more reasonable 2-3 million for 1 year and they could lock up Rodgers for another 5 years giving him some of that left over 10 million as a signing bonus then hopefully all would be happy.

#1, they can afford to make Rodgers the highest paid player in the league and still carry Favres contract. They have plenty of cap space.

#2, the biggest leverage Favre has is his salary. It allows him to decide where he wants to play if at all. It almost forces the GM to start him or release/trade him soon. Also, no team is going to give up a draft pick knowing that Favre does not want to play there and will just retire. Especially at 13 mil per year.

If he renegotiates, TT can sit him on the bench for 3 years with no problem.


#1, Thay may be able to do that but no way in hell will they.

#2, No-one in the NFL will be willing to pay him $12 million for 1 year service. So if he is traded it better be to a stupid team with a lot of cap room or a very, very desperate team with a lot of cap room. If he is released I'm guessing his best offer will be closer to $2-3 million if that.

If he sit's on the bench it will be for 1 season and he will retire again.
problem solved.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
Let the best man win!

My whole argument. I want the best 11 players on the field. I want to see the Lombardi Trophy back in Green Bay where it belongs. I will fully support whomever is in Packer uniform, and that also includes our backups because everyone's gonna get reps.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
de_real_deal said:
It really wouldn't surprise me to see Rodgers win the job. While Brett had an overall great season last year, he really was ineffective from the Dallas game on (except for the Seahawks playoff game that is).

Wrong. Maybe he wasnt perfect. Maybe he wasnt as good as tom brady but he did play very well. Maybe his freaking arm was hurt?

G QBRat Comp Att Pct Yds Y/G Y/A TD Int Rush Yds Y/G Avg TD Sack YdsL Fum FumL
Last 4 Games 4 85.5 60 96 62.5 743 185.8 7.7 6 5 7 18 4.5 2.6 0 1 4 1 0
Week 14 '07 (OAK) 1 115.5 15 23 65.2 266 266.0 11.6 2 1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 15 '07 (@STL) 1 80.6 19 30 63.3 225 225.0 7.5 2 2 3 -3 -3.0 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 16 '07 (@CHI) 1 40.2 17 32 53.1 153 153.0 4.8 0 2 3 0 0.0 0.0 0 1 4 1 0
Week 17 '07 (DET) 1 143.8 9 11 81.8 99 99.0 9.0 2 0 1 21 21.0 21.0 0 0 0 0 0

He was near flawless against both Detroit and Oaklan. He was good enough against St Louis. He was horrible against da Bears.

Keep in mind, we played 2 playoff games too and he was near perfect against the Seahawks as well, plus, he produced more than Tom Brady did against the Super Bowl Champs (and with arguably less to work with - not dissing our beloved Packer offense but come on, the Pats O was the best O ever).
 

Timmons

Cheesehead
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
623
Reaction score
0
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Good call on the clean thread.

If Brett comes back, I don't know how he can't be the starter, even though I'd much rather the Packers move on with Rodgers now.
 

TOPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
de_real_deal said:
It really wouldn't surprise me to see Rodgers win the job. While Brett had an overall great season last year, he really was ineffective from the Dallas game on (except for the Seahawks playoff game that is).

Wrong. Maybe he wasnt perfect. Maybe he wasnt as good as tom brady but he did play very well. Maybe his freaking arm was hurt?

G QBRat Comp Att Pct Yds Y/G Y/A TD Int Rush Yds Y/G Avg TD Sack YdsL Fum FumL
Last 4 Games 4 85.5 60 96 62.5 743 185.8 7.7 6 5 7 18 4.5 2.6 0 1 4 1 0
Week 14 '07 (OAK) 1 115.5 15 23 65.2 266 266.0 11.6 2 1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 15 '07 (@STL) 1 80.6 19 30 63.3 225 225.0 7.5 2 2 3 -3 -3.0 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 16 '07 (@CHI) 1 40.2 17 32 53.1 153 153.0 4.8 0 2 3 0 0.0 0.0 0 1 4 1 0
Week 17 '07 (DET) 1 143.8 9 11 81.8 99 99.0 9.0 2 0 1 21 21.0 21.0 0 0 0 0 0

Read your own stats. 6 TDs vs. 6 INTs vs. some pretty substandard competition is not "playing very well", it's ineffective at best.

We won those games on defense and special teams, not the arm of Brett Favre (hurt or not).
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
de_real_deal said:
TOPackerFan said:
It really wouldn't surprise me to see Rodgers win the job. While Brett had an overall great season last year, he really was ineffective from the Dallas game on (except for the Seahawks playoff game that is).

Wrong. Maybe he wasnt perfect. Maybe he wasnt as good as tom brady but he did play very well. Maybe his freaking arm was hurt?

G QBRat Comp Att Pct Yds Y/G Y/A TD Int Rush Yds Y/G Avg TD Sack YdsL Fum FumL
Last 4 Games 4 85.5 60 96 62.5 743 185.8 7.7 6 5 7 18 4.5 2.6 0 1 4 1 0
Week 14 '07 (OAK) 1 115.5 15 23 65.2 266 266.0 11.6 2 1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 15 '07 (@STL) 1 80.6 19 30 63.3 225 225.0 7.5 2 2 3 -3 -3.0 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 16 '07 (@CHI) 1 40.2 17 32 53.1 153 153.0 4.8 0 2 3 0 0.0 0.0 0 1 4 1 0
Week 17 '07 (DET) 1 143.8 9 11 81.8 99 99.0 9.0 2 0 1 21 21.0 21.0 0 0 0 0 0

Read your own stats. 6 TDs vs. 6 INTs vs. some pretty substandard competition is not "playing very well", it's ineffective at best.

We won those games on defense and special teams, not the arm of Brett Favre (hurt or not).

9/11 2 td's & no int's vs detroit

15/25 266 yards, 2td's 1 int vs oakland

19/30 225 yds, 2td's/1int vs st louis

Bitter cold game vs the Bears. If you want to look at his stats in this game, i have nothing else to say to you. Just wont waste my time again.

That said, his stats were not great but certainly not "ineffective"
 

TOPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
de_real_deal said:
9/11 2 td's & no int's vs detroit

15/25 266 yards, 2td's 1 int vs oakland

19/30 225 yds, 2td's/1int vs st louis

Bitter cold game vs the Bears. If you want to look at his stats in this game, i have nothing else to say to you. Just wont waste my time again.

That said, his stats were not great but certainly not "ineffective"

Nice that you're ignoring the worst game that he had because it was cold (a completely irrelevant factor when evaluating a QB from GB as it's rarely cold there :roll: ).

And by the way Mr. Enstein, it's genius, not genious (I'm not letting Arrow's editing of your post save you from that one).
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
NodakPaul said:
jpigeon said:
Brett Favre will be the starting QB in the home opener on Monday night against the Vikes.

I guess I'll have to modify my signature then... :)

So I curious. What happens if/when Fav-re comes in, wins the starting job, and leads the Pack to another 4-12 season ala 2005?

We are a MUCH better football team than the '05 team so the likelyhood of this is very low. As Mike McCarthy said "this is a very good football team."

I don't know why people always relate the record to the QB. In '05 we lost about every guy that could run or catch to injury on top of just not being very good.

In '07 we suited up 45 guys that can play at a high level and did.

It's funny because when I hear of other 4-12 teams most of the talk is about how BAD the FOOTBALL TEAM is but in our case it's about how bad Brett Favre was. Then when we are a GOOD football team it's about how good Brett Favre is.

The CONSTANT over the last three years has been Brett Favre was the QB. What has been SHIFTING since then is the rest of the team has gotten a whole lot better.

It would take injuries to quite a few key players for the Packers to go 4-12 again. They've had only one losing season since 1992. I think we all need to just stop and think.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
'05 was a fluke season. EVERYONE was injured except for Donald Driver. I've never seen a year like that in all my years as a Packers fan.

I think Favre needs a little bit more credit there. Sure it's a team game. I'm not disputing that.

The other thing is, he had one bad game against da Bears, a game that if you remember, EVERYONE had a bad game. It was another fluke. Against Oakland and Detroit, he was outstanding. Against the Rams, he was decent. Against the Hawks, we could have lost that game, but Favre kept his head level, calmed down Grant, and proceeded to have a brilliant day (as did Grant once he calmed down and held on to the football). Why are we even discussing this?
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
de_real_deal said:
9/11 2 td's & no int's vs detroit

15/25 266 yards, 2td's 1 int vs oakland

19/30 225 yds, 2td's/1int vs st louis

Bitter cold game vs the Bears. If you want to look at his stats in this game, i have nothing else to say to you. Just wont waste my time again.

That said, his stats were not great but certainly not "ineffective"

Nice that you're ignoring the worst game that he had because it was cold (a completely irrelevant factor when evaluating a QB from GB as it's rarely cold there :roll: ).

And by the way Mr. Enstein, it's genius, not genious (I'm not letting Arrow's editing of your post save you from that one).

Lol, we got the word police out today i guess. I rarely spell a word incorrectly. So nice of you to point it out when i do though. I guess there are many quarterbacks who would go 27/35 360 yards 4td's and no int's in weather like that. Why dont you name some of them for me. Cuz its so easy to play in 10-15 degree weather with 22mph winds with gusts up to 40mph and wind chill in the negative. I could do that really easy. Im sure you could too.
 

Raider Pride

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
1,868
Reaction score
2
Location
Portland, OR Local Packer Fans P.M me.
de_real_deal said:
de_real_deal said:
TOPackerFan said:
It really wouldn't surprise me to see Rodgers win the job. While Brett had an overall great season last year, he really was ineffective from the Dallas game on (except for the Seahawks playoff game that is).

Wrong. Maybe he wasnt perfect. Maybe he wasnt as good as tom brady but he did play very well. Maybe his freaking arm was hurt?

G QBRat Comp Att Pct Yds Y/G Y/A TD Int Rush Yds Y/G Avg TD Sack YdsL Fum FumL
Last 4 Games 4 85.5 60 96 62.5 743 185.8 7.7 6 5 7 18 4.5 2.6 0 1 4 1 0
Week 14 '07 (OAK) 1 115.5 15 23 65.2 266 266.0 11.6 2 1 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 15 '07 (@STL) 1 80.6 19 30 63.3 225 225.0 7.5 2 2 3 -3 -3.0 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0
Week 16 '07 (@CHI) 1 40.2 17 32 53.1 153 153.0 4.8 0 2 3 0 0.0 0.0 0 1 4 1 0
Week 17 '07 (DET) 1 143.8 9 11 81.8 99 99.0 9.0 2 0 1 21 21.0 21.0 0 0 0 0 0

Read your own stats. 6 TDs vs. 6 INTs vs. some pretty substandard competition is not "playing very well", it's ineffective at best.

We won those games on defense and special teams, not the arm of Brett Favre (hurt or not).

9/11 2 td's & no int's vs detroit

15/25 266 yards, 2td's 1 int vs oakland

19/30 225 yds, 2td's/1int vs st louis

Bitter cold game vs the Bears. If you want to look at his stats in this game, i have nothing else to say to you. Just wont waste my time again.

That said, his stats were not great but certainly not "ineffective"

ONE THING... We have to remember about last years weeks 14, 15, 16, 17 is...

Those games were against teams that were basically out of the playoff race. Nothing to play for but beating the Pack. It was a sweet final 4 game schedule.

I do not see this season's schedule ending as easy as last yeras.
 

Danreb

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Messages
574
Reaction score
0
Location
San Jose, CA
"Brett's one of the competitive athletes in professional sports."

If he is, then he'll have to beat our rising star out of California.
 

TOPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
de_real_deal said:
de_real_deal said:
9/11 2 td's & no int's vs detroit

15/25 266 yards, 2td's 1 int vs oakland

19/30 225 yds, 2td's/1int vs st louis

Bitter cold game vs the Bears. If you want to look at his stats in this game, i have nothing else to say to you. Just wont waste my time again.

That said, his stats were not great but certainly not "ineffective"

Nice that you're ignoring the worst game that he had because it was cold (a completely irrelevant factor when evaluating a QB from GB as it's rarely cold there :roll: ).

And by the way Mr. Enstein, it's genius, not genious (I'm not letting Arrow's editing of your post save you from that one).

Lol, we got the word police out today i guess. I rarely spell a word incorrectly. So nice of you to point it out when i do though. I guess there are many quarterbacks who would go 27/35 360 yards 4td's and no int's in weather like that. Why dont you name some of them for me. Cuz its so easy to play in 10-15 degree weather with 22mph winds with gusts up to 40mph and wind chill in the negative. I could do that really easy. Im sure you could too.

It's not about whether you or I could put up good numbers in that weather, it's whether Brett could (and he clearly didn't). If you want the name of a QB that didn't have a problem with that weather, how about Kyle Orton, who badly outplayed Brett that day.

I only pointed out the error because you called me a moron or something along those lines before Arrow edited your post.
 

Latest posts

Top