The short of it-
Ahman Green is the all time leading rusher and gainer from scrimmage in Packer history. When Favre hurt his hand in 2003 and someone else needed to step up, Green did just that, compiling one of the best yards from scrimmage season in the last decade (8th best out 469 season performances >= 1,000 yards). Incidentally, I don't use yards from scrimmage as some sort of abstruse stat, given the Packers ****-dunk WCO system, the pass and the rush blended together in a non-traditional way so that stratifying between rush yards and receiving yards doesn't make sense for running backs.
The long of it (the tl/dr set is advised to stop here)-
http://pfref.com/pi/share/1lJD4
The table is for the Packers' Approximate Value (AV) as calculated by pro-football-reference from '01-'04 which I regard as the second window of opportunity for the Pack of the Favre Era. Green is #1. And for those who may be interested, the Packers' composite AV for the entire roster(s) from '01-'04 was the THIRD highest in the NFL, #1 being the Eagles and #2 being the Patriots. And neither of those two teams were packed with high individual AV guys, just a solid overall core roster and they made 7 conference championship games (CCG's) between them and four Super Bowl appearances. And the Pack could barely get out of a Wild Card round with a not too dissimilar construction) . Beating a drum, but I think Favre's 52.1 composite QB rating in those 4 washout games, and responsible for 14 of the 18 turnovers, is about as far as anyone needs to look (especially since the Packers had the 4th best regular season record and 3rd best against playoff caliber teams). His 70.1 QB rating in 2007, and 70.0 in 2009 (with the Vikings) in the next two playoff washout games doesn't help the narrative any.
So those who continue to pound the fantastical narrative that the Packer successes were singly and only Favre need give it a rest. Somehow with high AV rosters that depended on overall core quality and not a lot of superstars, New England and Philadelphia had a relatively high level of success, but the Packers washed out. And Favre was front and center on that front. But his lofty status had to be maintained so the rest of the team was run down (and guys like Ahman Green got swallowed up by The Shadow). I don't give much of rip about starting another Favre debate, but there needs to be a revisiting of the past and a proper appreciation given to the Greens and Sharpers and GM'ing for a start. I'd say HC'ing but Sherman was a mediocre head coach, though continuing with Holmgren's WCO system still paid dividends. Favre was indeed a star and the giving of credit to the rest of the team doesn't need to run him down, just that that artificially high pedestal for Favre had to be maintained, when washouts came, by running the rest of the team down unfairly. With the internet and some analysis, we can pretty easily correct the proper amount of credit (or discredit) that should have been allocated all around.
Favre didn't turn the team around single handedly (which can be shown pretty easily), he didn't win the Super Bowl single handedly (which too can be shown), and he wasn't the only worthy factor in that second window of opportunity ('01-'04). But he did give the ball away beyond tolerance in the playoffs nearly single handedly. And all that was, on net - upside and downside, an embraceable and creditable reality. But the results for putting Favre on a pedestal three notches higher than was necessary speak for themselves.
Suffice it to say Green and Sharper and KGB and Driver and Clifton were pretty good guys, and while Wolf stepped down a notch, he navigated the Packers to fairly consistently potent rosters even as plenty of changeover occurred as the free agents assembled in the mid-90's ran out of gas. The Packers weren't as great as '96 again, but they hung in there near the top of the NFL. Favre was a part of that, but the rest should be warmly regarded as well. The rest shouldn't constantly pay the penalty for a 52.1 composite QB rating in washout games.
