Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Montana/Young v. Favre/Rodgers
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Truman" data-source="post: 232947" data-attributes="member: 1168"><p>Excellent points. </p><p></p><p>Another point to consider: at the time, the 49ers also had Steve Bono as a third quarterback. When both Young and Montana were injured in 1991, Bono played very well during a 5-game stretch. So the 49ers knew that if they traded Montana to clear the way for Young, they still would have a backup that they knew could win games for them. The Packers, should they decide to go with Rodgers over Favre, and ultimately have to release or trade Favre because they cannot realistically have him as a backup, will have unproven Brian Brohm.</p><p></p><p>The Montana/Young situation also suggests how ridiculous it would be for Favre to be on the roster as the backup. Montana and Young came to really resent each other and there were ripple effects. Young, who had been in the league many years at the time (after previous starting stints in the USFL and Tampa Bay), had to be played or traded at that point in his career. And, as the original poster pointed out, Young had, through those years, demonstrated that he was truly a unique talent that performed well in games. The 49ers knew they had to move Montana because Young had proven his time had come. Given the feelings between Montana and Young, and the problems that would exist in the locker room and in fandom from demoting the greatest player in team history, the 49ers knew they had to do something with Montana. The 49ers, like today's Packers, wanted Montana to make things easy by retiring. But Montana wanted to keep playing (although he never waffled on that like our Brett has).</p><p></p><p>Also, people should not use the Montana trade as a basis for valuing Favre. At that time, the NFL had not established the free agency/salary cap system and player movement still was very restricted. And draft picks were not as valuable then as they are today, because they were not the source of cheap labor that makes them so prized in today's NFL.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Truman, post: 232947, member: 1168"] Excellent points. Another point to consider: at the time, the 49ers also had Steve Bono as a third quarterback. When both Young and Montana were injured in 1991, Bono played very well during a 5-game stretch. So the 49ers knew that if they traded Montana to clear the way for Young, they still would have a backup that they knew could win games for them. The Packers, should they decide to go with Rodgers over Favre, and ultimately have to release or trade Favre because they cannot realistically have him as a backup, will have unproven Brian Brohm. The Montana/Young situation also suggests how ridiculous it would be for Favre to be on the roster as the backup. Montana and Young came to really resent each other and there were ripple effects. Young, who had been in the league many years at the time (after previous starting stints in the USFL and Tampa Bay), had to be played or traded at that point in his career. And, as the original poster pointed out, Young had, through those years, demonstrated that he was truly a unique talent that performed well in games. The 49ers knew they had to move Montana because Young had proven his time had come. Given the feelings between Montana and Young, and the problems that would exist in the locker room and in fandom from demoting the greatest player in team history, the 49ers knew they had to do something with Montana. The 49ers, like today's Packers, wanted Montana to make things easy by retiring. But Montana wanted to keep playing (although he never waffled on that like our Brett has). Also, people should not use the Montana trade as a basis for valuing Favre. At that time, the NFL had not established the free agency/salary cap system and player movement still was very restricted. And draft picks were not as valuable then as they are today, because they were not the source of cheap labor that makes them so prized in today's NFL. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 10:10 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: milani
Yesterday at 7:06 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 5:34 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
S
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: Schultz
Yesterday at 1:59 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 10:55 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Montana/Young v. Favre/Rodgers
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
