1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Favre is overrated

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Yared-Yam, Nov 26, 2007.

  1. yourout

    yourout Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    352
    Ratings:
    +0
    There is not a single team in the NFL that would not have...

    given their right arm to have had Favre.

    Think the Bears would have turned down a chance to roll back the clock and had Favre at the helm for the last 15 years.
     
  2. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,883
    Ratings:
    +3,965
    A lot of truth to what sal said and not just about Brett.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. fanindaup

    fanindaup Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Ratings:
    +58
    I was waiting to see if any of the posters from 2007 would recant their posts since Favre 'betrayed' us. In some ways he was overrated, especially at the tail end of his career, but he sure as hell was fun to watch. He also could turn nothing into something or the other way around faster than any quarterback I've watched.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. slaughter25

    slaughter25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Ratings:
    +211

    Thats a good way to put to words the enigma of Brett Favre. This man could take a blown play dodge a sack throw the ball off his back foot for a TD and the next drive throw a pick six forcing a ball into double coverage. We just had to take the good with the bad. Our current QB does the same thing but his bane is the big sack instead of the backbreaking INT.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +1,398
    Overrated? I can't imagine such a scenario. The guy one three straight MVPs while playing in two Super Bowls. The only time one could make an argument was during the Mike Sherman years when Favre was less disciplined and our running game was superb. He as much overrated then but just remembered more for past accomplishments...because he still had the tools and skills. MM brought those skills back out and Favre proved from 2007-09 that he was likely underrated. The guy should have picked up a fourth MVP during that final span.

    Why did someone dig up this dinosaur thread?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  6. slaughter25

    slaughter25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Ratings:
    +211
    Something to talk about in the painful 22 days left until we have something worthwhile to post about is my guess. It is always strange to see how many 2k+ posters have come and gone since the Favre saga.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,883
    Ratings:
    +3,965
    I was searching to see if a topic I was thinking of starting already existed. It had nothing to do with favre but this did pop up and I found it interesting.

    Looking at his numbers in the post season they definitely were awful the 2nd half of his career. I see some lists where he is ranked among the top 3 QBs of all time, over 500 TDs doesn't hurt, but personally I don't see him in the top 10.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. metallicblaze

    metallicblaze Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    132
    Ratings:
    +19
    Haters gonna hate. No need for an ancient thread to be revived.
     
  9. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,429
    Ratings:
    +1,749
    In the 'if you had to win one game and have to pick any QB, who would you take?' scenario, you would have to be a fool to take Favre. Although he could generate some nifty highlight-ESPN plays, he was also prone to the completely stupid 'rookie' level mistake. IMHO, he was also prone to the "I'm tired and want to go home" attitude towards the end of his career. Therefore, I would take a Rodgers or Brady or someone who I knew was going to very likely give me a great game.

    Was Brett overrated? Not really, I don't think many would put him in the top 10 of all time. I sure wouldn't. As for his records, the iron man duration record is the most significant and a part of the reason he was able to put up all those other big numbers.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    Wonder why many of the posters in this thread no longer post here? Some had a lot of posts. :confused:
     
  11. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    807
    Ratings:
    +381
    Agreed. Favre's greatness in football is like Cal Ripken's greatness in baseball. He isn't really among the very best ever but his accomplishments are unique and he deserves respect for them nonetheless.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. fanindaup

    fanindaup Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Ratings:
    +58
    I've seen plenty of top 10 lists that had Favre in them. I've even debated a lot of people who would put him at no. 1. I agree with Amish about the head-slapping rookie mistake thing. I often wonder how his numbers would have turned out had he a Sharpe or Jennings his entire career, or had Holmgren stuck around longer. At least the Vikings fans know what it feels like to have their championship flushed down the drain by a stupid pick.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Poppa San

    Poppa San SB I trophy First of four Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    4,296
    Ratings:
    +992
    fixed your autocorrect error for ya
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  14. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,103
    Ratings:
    +1,057
    There is a lot of truth in the two concepts I isolated for effect. Yeah, yeah ... I know ... selective editing is roughly the same as the "Frankenstein Veto" power given to an elected official during budgetary debates. There were a lot of things at play after Mike Sherman was asked to move on and Thompson/McCarthy took over, but there can be little debate that Brett was allowed to be reckless with the ball by Sherman - and I believe that a carry-over of that mentality is what resulted in Favre's losing his job in Green Bay.

    I'm not about to bash what Brett Favre brought to Green Bay ... but, I'm not going to knight him neither. I've always been of the opinion that were it not for Holmgren, Brett would have been teaching Special Ed in Hattisburg, MS. That does not minimize for a minute that the guy was here ... put up some damned exciting games for the Packers and is due his props showing up on game day - good, bad and otherwise. Over-rated? Not in my opinion. His career speaks for itself. I'm giving him that, he deserves it and he earned his place in Packer folklore.

    Aaron Rodgers is still MY kind of QB1. Smart and protects the ball.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. toolkien

    toolkien Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    97
    Ratings:
    +66
    Overrated depends on severity. If someone says he's the 2nd best QB all time and you have the two hours and statistics to convince that someone that he's only the 3rd best QB all time, then there's probably been a whole lot of time wasted. If someone believes that Favre was not only the greatest QB ever but the greatest player period, who single handedly saved franchises and instantly turned the '86 Packers into the '96 Packers all by himself and he's on an existential plane all his own above the mere mortals like the Montana's, Brady's, and Graham's of NFL history, while actually being a Jim Kelly caliber QB around the 17th best all time, and perhaps around the 85th best player ever, then maybe time isn't being wasted. Because it's those former people who have formed their cult around Favre based on erroneous assessments (which they are welcome to in the quiet conduct of their lives like any religion) and they get up into other peoples' grill ("you're not a real Packer fan if you don't like Favre anymore") that corrections to the severity of their overrating are necessary. They use their massive overrating to either refuse to acknowledge Favre's dingleberriness beginning in at least 2005, or if they do acknowledge his behavior, he was entitled to act that way. Even as everything Favre whined about (with perhaps the exception of Wahle for one season) was proven wrong, Favre was STILL due all and everything he wanted and the Packers were wrong in denying him his mandates, because he "saved franchises", "when your three time MVP tells you to hop, you ask how high", yada yada yada...

    To keep it simple, Favre is overrated because there are plenty of people wowwed by gross-weight statistics rather than detecting, era for era, when a QB played very much above average. The last four record holders and the only current QB pushing at records (Unitas, Tarkenton, Marino, Favre, and P Manning) have only four championships between them, covering 88 NFL seasons over 57 years. Meanwhile, the QB's who measure the highest in AY/A (adjusted yards per attempt, which simply combines elements of QB rating efficiency with a factor for risk taken) have eleven. A little broader, the top ten QB's in yards thrown have a total of eight championships versus the top ten in AY/A have twenty-two (twenty-eight if you include the six that were won in "feeder leagues" that put teams into the NFL (AAFL and AFL)). The top ten QB's are those who took risks and succeeded more often and won championships. The second ten are made up QB's who took risks and didn't succeed as often, and they kept plugging away at more championships and failing but gathering buckets of statistics along the way. Does it take away the fact that they are HoFer's? No, just that when ordering HoFer's, a lot of people default to the shiny tinsel of gross-weight statistics instead of pound for pound quality of output. And therefore the statistic gathering guys tend to be overrated. Favre falls into that category. Then take that tendency to overrate statistic gathering guys and add in a whole extra narrative of "saving franchises" and a psychosis is born.

    Having said all this, I'd easily take a Jim Kelly caliber guy over a randomly picked QB any day. I'm not trying to downplay Favre, his talent, and his contribution to the success of my favorite team. All I wanted in the late 70's was my team to be the Cowboys. And they effectively did (at least as close as a team could get in the post '92 free agency/salary cap NFL) and Favre had a lot to do with it. But a boatload of other people had a hand in it as well. And I'd be more than happy to embrace Favre if he hadn't been such a dingleberry starting in 2005. Too much whining and too much sulking and too much disruptiveness, and ultimately too much revenge seeking, for my tastes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. fanindaup

    fanindaup Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Ratings:
    +58
    Ouch. Jim Kelly? Although I recall he was smart with the ball...
     
  17. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,421
    Ratings:
    +1,976
    I find myself coming back to a Favre-Jurgensen equivalency in the historical view...stylistic similarities, one title each, gaudy numbers. Jurgensen broke the single season passing yards record...twice. Lombardi called him the best QB he'd ever seen.

    Their raw numbers cannot be compared, of course. The rule changes favoring passing in the Favre era cannot be underestimated, particularly the 5 yard bump rule.

    Another obvious comparison is Marino. Both racked up the big career numbers; neither would ever be considered football geniuses; the legacy for both rests largely on the first 1/3 of their careers where the MVP's, All-Pro awards and Superbowl appearances reside. After that, they certainly remained above average QBs, got to be one of the 6 Pro Bowl QBs named each year on several occasions, racked up more raw stats, and didn't fare well in the playoffs.

    By the early 2000's Favre's weaknesses started looking like liabilities. He started looking like a guy who could find HIS zone but not THE zone.

    Favre's legacy will, in time, be that of a mid-tier HOF QB.

    At least two current QBs will be looked upon more favorably by history...Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Perhaps Brees as well, depending how long he plays and the quality of his supporting cast. If Rodgers plays out his new contract approximating the level of play we've had the extreme pleasure of experiencing so far, he'll easily pass Favre in Packer lore, but that's a long way off.

    Mentioning Favre in the same breath as Baugh, Graham, Unitus, Montana or Brady isn't just a stretch...it's football heresy.
     
  18. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,421
    Ratings:
    +1,976
    As a quarterback, not merely a passer of the football, Favre is not in Kelly's class. Kelly ran that offense from the line of scrimmage in that non-stop no-huddle in a way Favre couldn't touch. Kelly's legacy suffers only from the 4 SB losses...if only that Norwood kick had been a couple feet to the left....
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,421
    Ratings:
    +1,976
    I'd laugh watching Favre blow the first series or two with high throws. I'd turn to my wife and say, "watch, he needs to get hit to jar his gyroscope loose." It was almost comical the frequency with which that was the case.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. toolkien

    toolkien Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    97
    Ratings:
    +66
    http://pfref.com/pi/share/pFYzn

    And to Hardrightedge- perhaps raw numbers can't be compared, but pfref.com has gone through the trouble to index several QB stats (e.g. the "advanced passing" stats in the table linked above). IMO, does a remarkable job helping common size QB's between eras.

    As far as Kelly versus Favre, Kelly was 11% better than peers in AY/A+ (indexed) while Favre was 6%. Favre wasn't as good overall skillwise, but certainly did it for much longer, which does count up to a certain point. But certainly not to a point that would push Favre up into the Baugh, Graham, Montana, Brady level. That's how I conclude being at a Jim Kelly caliber level - the combination of three vectors; overall skill, longevity, and championshipiness. Kelly decently better in skills, Favre much better in longevity, and championshipiness somewhat of a push (0-4 versus 1-1). Favre's about the 17th best QB all times, Kelly is 18th. Favre's longevity pushes him past Kelly even though Kelly was a better QB for a shorter period.
     
  21. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,421
    Ratings:
    +1,976
    Average yards per attempt "index"? Is it a black box formulation or do they actually disclose specifically how it's calculated? If it's the former, how do we evaluate that? I think we have to seriously question a methodology that ranks Philip Rivers the #12 QB of all time while Johnny U. sits at 24. What, did I see Tony Romo at #10?!

    I fail to see how a statistical calculation can rank Baugh, the grandfather of the modern passing game throwing what amounted to a modified rugby ball, relative to contemporary QBs. Or QBs before O-Linemen could use their hands to QBs that followed. Or QBs before the 5 yard chuck rule to those that followed.

    About the only way to do it is to compare each to his peers and put a number on the spread. That would be a sketchy proposition.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    Favre made mistakes. He did some really boneheaded stuff that might have cost us more chances. I hated how he screwed with the Packer organization at the end. But how many of us enjoyed the ride he gave us? After years of oblivion we became a force again in the NFL. No it wasn't just him but I appreciate that Super Bowl after years in purgatory.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  23. DevilDon

    DevilDon Inclement Weather Fan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,391
    Ratings:
    +445
    Shouldn't that be spelled with a capital "C"?
     
  24. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,421
    Ratings:
    +1,976
    That about sums it up. We must compare him to the alternative. I gotta say, though, by 2001 his schtick was getting tedious and the boneheadedness (that's lower case, Don) quotient surpassed tolerable annoyance.

    His screwing with the organization was bush league...all just because he did not want to prepare and practice. I'm more annoyed with Favre-backer fans who sided against the organization after it was clear it was time to move on from Mr. No Show.

    Murphy wants to have #4 retired before Favre's 2016 HOF induction.

    http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/214493641.html

    It will happen at such time Murphy / the board / whoever gets a say are comfortable Favre's introduction at mid-field will not be met with a mix of boos. They might not make that deadline.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  25. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,883
    Ratings:
    +3,965
    Alot in common with the QBs who held the volume records. Tarkington then Marino then Favre.

    I think Peyton gets more praise than he should, "greatest of all time" I hear alot including from his peers but look at the post season and its for the most part a big disappointment.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page