Favre is still better

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
True, Favre having started more games than any other quarterback in league history aside of Brady definitely factors into him having thrown the most interceptions all-time.

It's interesting to note that out of the 200 quarterbacks with the most interceptions in NFL history 139 have a higher percentage of INTs per attempt than Favre.



True, and yet there are many fans who would have preferred to move on from Rodgers by now. They will be in for a rude awakening once the Packers don't feature an elite quarterback anymore.
Yeah as far as Favre's INTs, there are a lot of ways to look at it. In the end, he did get GB to the SB twice, won once, won a lot more games than he lost, and was a lot of fun to watch. Did he throw some INTs at the worst possible time? Yeah he sure did. But he was consistent and we lived with him or died with him. I think in the end everyone would say he was a great QB for GB.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,581
Reaction score
485
Agreed. And he threw an INT against the Giants in a frigid NFCCG in 2008 I think, and when he was with the Vikes, he again threw a late INT against the Saints when all he had to do was fall down for a FG to win the game. Well, at least he was consistent.
He had a long stretch there where he ended each season with an INT, many in the playoffs. His last throw of each year would be a pick.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
He had a long stretch there where he ended each season with an INT, many in the playoffs. His last throw of each year would be a pick.
Yeah there was a pattern there. Even the great ones fail when they decide only they can engineer a win.

And Rodgers is the exact opposite as far as INTs.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661

It's nice to see Favre agrees with what I've been saying about Davante in Vegas.

It's also nice to see Favre acknowledging the greatness of Aaron Rodgers. There's room for two at the top.
I don't think Adams cares as much about his production going forward as his income. He won't produce as well in Vegas. It's kinda simple - he's going from Rodgers to Carr. Carr is an above average QB, but still only about 60% as good as Rodgers.

Does Adams care if he makes it to the HOF? If that was a priority he would have stayed in GB. No, he wanted a lot more money, and he got it, and he wanted to go to Vegas to play football with his pal Carr, and he got that. I doubt he's worried much about a slight drop in production versus GB. And he probably doesn't care as much about a SB ring. His chances for that were clearly better in GB.

I'll miss him because he was a great WR for GB, and he was unassuming, modest, and pretty much kept to himself. Nothing wrong with that. And who knows, the Raiders have become a pretty good team. Maybe a SB ring isn't so far fetched. I do wish him well. He was a great Packer and will be missed.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,581
Reaction score
485
Maybe a SB ring isn't so far fetched. I do wish him well. He was a great Packer and will be missed.
I don't think it's any more far fetched than it is for the Packers. I feel like GB really blew their best chances these last few years, and earlier in the decade. This is admittedly my pessimism talking, but squandering two consecutive #1 seeds broke something in me, somewhere. And Aaron Rodgers not being able to get past Jimmy Garoppolo, it doesn't seem right.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
1,206
Reaction score
541
Adams could have made similar money in GB. The Raiders have to make the playoffs before they can win a SB. That division is brutal. KC-LAC-DEN-LV. Forget about it.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
I don't think it's any more far fetched than it is for the Packers. I feel like GB really blew their best chances these last few years, and earlier in the decade. This is admittedly my pessimism talking, but squandering two consecutive #1 seeds broke something in me, somewhere. And Aaron Rodgers not being able to get past Jimmy Garoppolo, it doesn't seem right.
Agree with all - and couldn't get past Garrapalo in January at home in the snow. Ouch. Yeah as long as Rodgers is around a SB is in the cards. But GB is running out of cards.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
Adams could have made similar money in GB. The Raiders have to make the playoffs before they can win a SB. That division is brutal. KC-LAC-DEN-LV. Forget about it.
Good point. He's gonna miss the powder puffs from the NFC North....... Jared Goff, Justin Fields, Kirk Cousins. Lions and vikings and bears, oh my!
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,581
Reaction score
485
Good point. He's gonna miss the powder puffs from the NFC North....... Jared Goff, Justin Fields, Kirk Cousins. Lions and vikings and bears, oh my!
On the other hand, maybe he's the type of player who likes to challenge himself against the best.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
On the other hand, maybe he's the type of player who likes to challenge himself against the best.
That could very well be. An immensely talented guy whose critics might say, "Yeah but you played in the NFC North." I don't think that's a just criticism, but Adams is a driven guy. He molded himself into a star. Yeah he had Rodgers throwing to him but his style is all his own. Anyway, interesting point. And if he's successful, maybe that's a better path to the HOF. At a minimum, it would be ironic if he got a SB ring before Rodgers. I don't think that will happen, but who knows?
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
14,095
Reaction score
2,240
Adams faced some good defenses while he was here too. Bears may have sucked on offense, but their D has been pretty good mostly for a long time. I'm sure he doesn't mind leaving Trevathan behind. MN has had a great D for a long time. Even the lions have had some good defenses, or at least some good DB's. Darius Slay was as good as they come.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
Adams faced some good defenses while he was here too. Bears may have sucked on offense, but their D has been pretty good mostly for a long time. I'm sure he doesn't mind leaving Trevathan behind. MN has had a great D for a long time. Even the lions have had some good defenses, or at least some good DB's. Darius Slay was as good as they come.
Yep, all good points. And as far as the AFC West - they have four great QBs. Not so sure about the quality of their Ds.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
27,281
Reaction score
4,956
Location
Madison, WI
Good point. He's gonna miss the powder puffs from the NFC North....... Jared Goff, Justin Fields, Kirk Cousins. Lions and vikings and bears, oh my!
Those QB's never really had a lot of effect on Davante, unless you are talking about the Packer offense getting more opportunities due to division offenses being so so, for much of his career.

The 2 big changes for Davante this season will be his QB and the players around him. I think both will have positive, as well as a negative effects on his season and may just balance out. While Carr is not the QB that Rodgers is, I think he will be familiar enough with Davante, to get him the ball. I also think that the receivers (WR and TE's) playing around Davante are going to be harder for defenses to cover, than that the Packers threw at them in the last 3 or so years. This might give Davante more opportunities. Basically, the Raiders have more weapons than the Packers, but given Carr is the guy playing QB and not A-Rod, that might negate the advantage.
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
Those QB's never really had a lot of effect on Davante, unless you are talking about the Packer offense getting more opportunities due to division offenses being so so, for much of his career.

The 2 big changes for Davante this season will be his QB and the players around him. I think both will have positive, as well as a negative effects on his season and may just balance out. While Carr is not the QB that Rodgers is, I think he will be familiar enough with Davante, to get him the ball. I also think that the receivers (WR and TE's) playing around Davante are going to be harder for defenses to cover, than that the Packers through at them in the last 3 or so years. This might give Davante more opportunities. Basically, the Raiders have more weapons than the Packers, but given Carr is the guy playing QB and not A-Rod, that might negate the advantage.
Yeah, with better receivers around him, he may not get as many double teams. He'll be fine. I'm gonna miss him though.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,581
Reaction score
485
it would be ironic if he got a SB ring before Rodgers.
Ironic wouldn't be the word I would use (it would be something more profane). But it appears Adams just wanted to play for the Raiders, so what are you going to do? I just hope this results in Rodgers spreading the ball around more.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
Ironic wouldn't be the word I would use (it would be something more profane). But it appears Adams just wanted to play for the Raiders, so what are you going to do? I just hope this results in Rodgers spreading the ball around more.
Yeah I understand. Rodgers will get the ball to a lot of different guys. The Packers will be fine, and easily better than the Raiders.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,581
Reaction score
485
Yeah I understand. Rodgers will get the ball to a lot of different guys. The Packers will be fine, and easily better than the Raiders.
Sure the Packers will be fine. But they haven't won a Super Bowl in eleven years, with the best quarterback in football (arguably). Some would consider that underperforming. So while they will certainly be fine, that doesn't mean they will meet their potential.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
Sure the Packers will be fine. But they haven't won a Super Bowl in eleven years, with the best quarterback in football (arguably). Some would consider that underperforming. So while they will certainly be fine, that doesn't mean they will meet their potential.
Agreed. GB has lost 4 NFCCGs in a row. They should have won two of those. Lots of excuses, no answers. I know it's hard to win a SB, but with 30 years of HOF players at QB, it's fair to expect more championships.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,593
Reaction score
2,352
And Aaron Rodgers not being able to get past Jimmy Garoppolo, it doesn't seem right.

The Niners won both playoff games with Garoppolo against the Packers despite of and not because of him. He was a combined 17-for-27 for 208 yards, 0 TD and 1 INT in those two games.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
661
The Niners won both playoff games with Garoppolo against the Packers despite of and not because of him. He was a combined 17-for-27 for 208 yards, 0 TD and 1 INT in those two games.
Yeah I equate Jimmy G with Trent Dilfer. Except I think Jimmy knows he's not a star whereas Trent is still waiting for his HOF invitation. The best you can say about Jimmy is that he doesn't screw up, he's not a liability. At least that's my observation. I don't know his stats but he plays on winners.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,593
Reaction score
2,352
Yeah I equate Jimmy G with Trent Dilfer. Except I think Jimmy knows he's not a star whereas Trent is still waiting for his HOF invitation. The best you can say about Jimmy is that he doesn't screw up, he's not a liability. At least that's my observation. I don't know his stats but he plays on winners.

Garoppolo is good enough to win games while being surrounded by a very good supporting cast. He's not a quarterback being able to carry his team though.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,581
Reaction score
485
Garoppolo is good enough to win games while being surrounded by a very good supporting cast. He's not a quarterback being able to carry his team though.
And Rodgers hasn't been able to carry his team to the Super Bowl either, in the last eleven years.
 

Voyageur

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
937
Reaction score
580
I don't get hung up on how many Super Bowls a QB is in. It's just one of the games that's played, and to get there, it takes a team effort, and good coaching. It's not all on the QB's shoulders.

After watching Packer and other NFL QBs since the 40s, I am going to rate Rodgers the best we've had, and by a wide margin. Reason? He does not throw the ball away, and give the opportunity to the other team to score. As for where he stands, among all QBs, he's one of about 10 guys that I think can all be called the best in their own rights, and you wouldn't be far off, if you even were.

The game has evolved, and the players have evolved with it, so you need to consider who is best in their era. Three, from this era, that need to be counted for sure, would be Manning, Brady, and Rodgers.

But, that's just my opinion. You're entitled to yours, even though you'd be wrong. ;)
 

Members online

Top