A better question--out of current Packers players, who could end up on the all-time team for the Pack?
Great idea! If this gets rep, I'll stick it!
Here I go:
Offense:
QB - Starr
RB - Hornung
FB - Taylor
WR1 - Don Hutson
WR2 - Sterling Sharpe
TE - Coffman
OT - Gregg
OG - Kramer
C - Ringo
OG - Thurston
OT - Skoronski
Defense:
DE: Reggie White
DT: Gravedigger
DT: Henry Jordan
DE: Willie Davis
OLB: Dave Robinson
MLB: Ray Nitschke
OLB: Lee Roy Caffey
CB: Herb Adderley
CB: Charles Woodson
S: LeRoy Butler
S: Willie Wood
ST:
K: Chester Marcol
P: Max McGee (Couldn't remember anyone, so I put a HOF WR that did punting)
KR: Desmond Howard
ST: Travis Jervey
HC: Lombardi
OC: Holmgren
DC: Shurmur
ST: Cromwell
GM: Ron Wolf
Wha!!! The golden boy should be on every list. You need someone to score? Call Hornung. It only helps that he's from ND.I like Clark Hinkle at running back instead of Hornung. The Golden Boy had too small a window of productive years. Don't think you can put two guys from the same backfield on the all-time team. Jim Taylor outrushed Hornung every year. Ahman Green is the team's all time leading rusher....perhaps even him instead of the Golden Boy.
I'm sorry, are Longwell or Jacke on the Packers' HoF?Chester Marcol? Are you kidding? How about Jacke or Longwell? Marcol barely made 62% of his field goals. Jacke and Longwell were far better kickers.
I I had to make a all-time Packers roster that I've seen play, Favre would no doubt be #1...TUT TUT TUT
Your Kickers are wrang but thats another story LOL, Yes LT I do need to stop with the joke I know!
I amazed no 1 has Favre at QB just throwing it out there straight to Charles Woodson
Ok ill stop trying to make jokes because im not funny
I see, for the kicker he has to be a Packer HOF'er but for other positions it doesn't matter. (Woodson and Howard.) Jacke made more field goals in 8 years then Marcol attempted in 9 with the Packers. Better kicking percentage in both FG and EP. But hey, it's your list.I'm sorry, are Longwell or Jacke on the Packers' HoF?
Longwell is a ******, BTW. "Oh, it was te holder. Oh, it was the snapper. Oh, it was the wind. Oh, my *** was sore from all the action last night."
I could think about Chris Jacke, but went with the polish guy.
I didn't see them, BTW, Jacke and Marcol. I didn't see 80% of the guys on my list. So my argument is based on what I know from Packers history.
I see, for the kicker he has to be a Packer HOF'er but for other positions it doesn't matter. (Woodson and Howard.) Jacke made more field goals in 8 years then Marcol attempted in 9 with the Packers. Better kicking percentage in both FG and EP. But hey, it's your list.
I also don't see much love fo McGee at WR. I would take him over Lofton.
I see an OL as a whole.Frankie Winters getting no love at center? That O-line in 96 was pretty damn good. Aaron Taylor....Adam Timmerman....
Desmond Howard was a kick returner only. Noone is inducted as a KR.I see, for the kicker he has to be a Packer HOF'er but for other positions it doesn't matter. (Woodson and Howard.) Jacke made more field goals in 8 years then Marcol attempted in 9 with the Packers. Better kicking percentage in both FG and EP. But hey, it's your list.
I also don't see much love fo McGee at WR. I would take him over Lofton.
FWIW, I thought you were only using what he did with the Packers.I agree. Chris Jacke is the Packers best kicker. No doubt about it.....in my opinion, an argument can't even be made for anybody else. Status as a Packer Hall-of-Famer doesn't matter to me.
I wouldn't take Max McGee over James Lofton. Lofton had around 400 more career receptions, 25 more touchdowns, and almost 8000 more career receiving yards. I know he played like 2 or 3 more years, but he played on some pretty weak teams for the Packers and he still put up those numbers. James Lofton is one of the best receivers in the history of the NFL. McGee was great, don't get me wrong, but I would much rather have Lofton.
Top two receivers: Lofton and Hutson. Sharpe is third.
FWIW, I thought you were only using what he did with the Packers.
Lofton's Packer only stats. 530 rec, 9656 yards, 18.2 per, 49 tds.
Mcgee, only played with the Packers. 345 rec, 6349 yards. 18.4 per, 50 tds.
Of course if you throw in what Lofton did after he left the Packers, then he has 75 tds.
But again, it's your list.
Actually, Starr possesses the BEST post-season qb rating OF ALL TIME. That combined with 2 time SB MVP makes for an impecable argument, in my point of view.I think the Favre/Starr debate is much closer than you guys seem to think it is. It all comes down to how you view a great QB, great stats or championships. Favre has the stats, he has a championship and went to another one, and he's the NFL's all time leader in wins.
Starr, on the other hand, has 5 NFL championships and 2 Super Bowls. Do we count the NFL Championships? Who knows how many Favre would've won if he only had like 12 other teams in the league? Stats wise, they aren't great. A 152-138 TD to INT ratio (Favre's: 497–317). 24,718 passing yards (to Favre's 69,329).
It's a tough decision and it's not as clear cut as you guys make it out to be. Starr's number of titles dwarfs Favre's, but Favre's stats dwarf Starr's.
I think the Favre/Starr debate is much closer than you guys seem to think it is. It all comes down to how you view a great QB, great stats or championships. Favre has the stats, he has a championship and went to another one, and he's the NFL's all time leader in wins.
Starr, on the other hand, has 5 NFL championships and 2 Super Bowls. Do we count the NFL Championships? Who knows how many Favre would've won if he only had like 12 other teams in the league? Stats wise, they aren't great. A 152-138 TD to INT ratio (Favre's: 497–317). 24,718 passing yards (to Favre's 69,329).
It's a tough decision and it's not as clear cut as you guys make it out to be. Starr's number of titles dwarfs Favre's, but Favre's stats dwarf Starr's.