Favre Food For Thought

tank72

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I heard this opinion while watching one of the Packer games on TV.
I cant quote it word for word, or give you the name of the announcer, but to paraphrase the statement, Favre is just hurting the franchise in the long run because he is prolonging the start of a first round QB and is just going to leave the QB spot up in the air when he is done. I think to a certain extent this is true. I know Rodgers hasnt really showcased any real talent yet, but I think the announcer had a valid point. What are some other opinions to this?
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
I've heard this opinion before. It's true that this is the downside to Favre continuing to play, but as long as he's still the best QB on the roster he will be helping the team overall. Rodgers is under contract for about five years, I think. He's not going anywhere, at least not in the next year. If Favre plays another year or two after this, though, it is possible that the Packers may need to trade Rodgers to get some value for him.
 

retiredgrampa

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
804
Reaction score
0
Location
phoenix AZ
If Favre stays...Rodgers doesn't play. How much do you think he'd bring in a trade after holding a clipboard for 3-4 years? Maybe a 7th rounder. And then only from a team with a severe problem at QB.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
If Favre stays...Rodgers doesn't play. How much do you think he'd bring in a trade after holding a clipboard for 3-4 years? Maybe a 7th rounder. And then only from a team with a severe problem at QB.

If he plays well in the preseason, or even (God forbid) gets some opportunities in the regular season and takes advantage of them, he could be worth a higher round pick. A lot of teams would rather have a QB like that than a rookie who will be likely to need a few years to get up to speed.
 

packedhouse01

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1
I believe that comment was made by some dumb former offensive lineman who masquerades as an announcer. He's also wrong. I may be one of the few who thinks Rogers has a high upside. but I believe that. Having said that, there is no way the Rogers is good enough replace Brett Favre. It's that simple and there is seriously no other way to look at it.
 

CaliforniaCheez

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Citrus Heights CA
I heard this opinion while watching one of the Packer games on TV.
I cant quote it word for word, or give you the name of the announcer, but to paraphrase the statement, Favre is just hurting the franchise in the long run because he is prolonging the start of a first round QB and is just going to leave the QB spot up in the air when he is done. I think to a certain extent this is true. I know Rodgers hasnt really showcased any real talent yet, but I think the announcer had a valid point. What are some other opinions to this?

The announcer knows that he eventually will die. There is no reason to put off the inevitable. Just climb in the casket and wait. It is selfish to not give your children their inheritance now.

Why should Aaron Rodgers play? He will only get replaced and he is keeping his replacement from playing time....
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
tank72 said:
I heard this opinion while watching one of the Packer games on TV.
I cant quote it word for word, or give you the name of the announcer, but to paraphrase the statement, Favre is just hurting the franchise in the long run because he is prolonging the start of a first round QB and is just going to leave the QB spot up in the air when he is done. I think to a certain extent this is true. I know Rodgers hasnt really showcased any real talent yet, but I think the announcer had a valid point. What are some other opinions to this?

The announcer knows that he eventually will die. There is no reason to put off the inevitable. Just climb in the casket and wait. It is selfish to not give your children their inheritance now.

Why should Aaron Rodgers play? He will only get replaced and he is keeping his replacement from playing time....
OHHH! GOOD post!!!
Kind of like looking in your wallet, seeing a somewhat old wore out one hundred dollar bill, and saying "Maybe i should throw out this old $100, so i can get to this brand new ONE DOLLAR bill behind it!"
The $100 STILL has more value, so use it while you can!
Favre is a once in a lifetime future hall of famer. He STILL has, as i have heard said, "Alot left in his tank." So ride it out with HIM at the controls, until he shows that he DOESN'T have it anymore. Rodgers might NEVER have "it". So why be in such a hurry to find out if he does, when you KNOW you have Favre?
 

Since69

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
422
Reaction score
0
So Aaron sits on the bench... so what? He's not good enough to beat out the guy who's starting. Boo-friggin'-hoo. Wait your turn. Didn't hurt Phillip Rivers any.

[marq=right]This is marquee right...[/marq]

[marq=left]This is marquee left...[/marq]

[marq=up]This is marquee up...[/marq]

[marq=down]This is marquee down...[/marq]

Sorry... just wondering what the buttons were for.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
So Aaron sits on the bench... so what? He's not good enough to beat out the guy who's starting. Boo-friggin'-hoo. Wait your turn. Didn't hurt Phillip Rivers any..

Didn't hurt Carson Palmer either.
 

Hammer

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
651
Reaction score
0
Location
Durham, NC
Steve Young was drafted by TB, he sucked because TB sucked. He then went to SF, and sat on the bench for a few years. Bench time doens't necessarily mean that some one is wasting away or not progressing in some way.
Edit: I looked up Young's career stats, etc. He started his career in 1984 in the USFL, went to the Niners in 1987, and didn't start there until 1991. He won MVP awards in 92 and 93, and a superbowl in 1994, his 11th year in Pro Football.
 

Obi1

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
0
I look at this in the following way.

Who is the better QB right now?
Who is more easily replaceable?

I believe Favre is the better QB right now and will be better in these declining years than Rodgers on the upswing. Favre, as weknow gives the Packers the BEST chance of winning.

Rodgers, will be given the chance to produce when Favre is done... for a game, season, ccareer, whatever.

IF Rodgers can not produce, another QB will take his place and will probably be as good or better. Can the same be said about Brett?
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
If Rodgers was playing good in both preseason and training camp I would agree with this. However he's not. He has been very average at best where as Favre has been better. It's as simple as that. Until Rodgers gets better than Favre, I rather have Favre. As soon as Rodgers surpasses Favre then he should be the QB. I actually am hoping that this is similar to Steve Young taking over for Joe Montana. Hopefully Rodgers can be our Young.
 

Timmons

Cheesehead
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
623
Reaction score
0
Location
Phoenix, AZ
If that's the case, then Favre's been hurting the Packers for 15 years now. Look at all the QB's behind him whom we could have had playing for us!

That's **** poor logic, first round draft choice or not. Rodgers came to us cheap as he fell down the board.

Jeff Healey would sum this up correctly as a "Nice problem to have."
 

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
I look at this from a totally opposite perspective. The Packers will not ****** dally around wasting a lot of time on Rodgers now that he has had the luxury of being brought up slowly.

The frigging Bears look like they are going to go with Grossman until FA takes apart any chance they have of winning a SB. They are going to "one more year with Rex" themselves to death.

Thanks to Favre giving Rodgers the time to get where he needs to be will ultimately lead to less waste of time to stay with him or move on.
 

Bobby Roberts

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
770
Reaction score
0
It takes a long time for any player to get to the point that Favre is at in his career. Why would anyone be in a rush to start an inexperienced player over that?

GB has invested a lot in Favre and gotten a lot out of that investment. It would be extremely foolish to think that milking this investment would end up hurting the team.

In fact I'm of the opinion that this is actually helping Rodgers along with putting the best player on the field. Rodgers was obviously not ready to start as a rookie. The season behind Favre and MM's QB camp really helped him progress. He got more experience this season before getting injured. Now he needs time to fully recover and Favre coming back provides that. He can go through learning more of the playbook, so that when he does get a chance, he will truly have the knowledge to be a captain on the field.

Another benefit is that the team around Rodgers should be better when he does get a chance. TT has been building a strong defense so that the team won't need to relay on the offense so much. This means that Rodgers shouldn't be asked to carry the load, which will make it easier for him to be successful.

That being said, anymore time sitting on the bench will actually take away from Rodgers career. Three years is plenty and pushing it. He will need to take the next step and get true game experience.

GO PACK GO!!!
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,381
Reaction score
4,105
Location
Milwaukee
Couldn't agree more with what war and bobby said..

When Rodgers gets his chance to start an entire season or at least a good portion of one, he needs to show he can handle it all w/o really costing the team games..As long as he does that he will be the new q/b...

But if he does things like some unnamed Chicago q/b I would hope the team would look else where for a new q/b
 

Members online

Top