So, in the end, who would you rather have?

Who would you rather have?

  • Rodgers for the next 10 years

    Votes: 33 71.7%
  • Favre for the next 2

    Votes: 13 28.3%

  • Total voters
    46

JeffQuery

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
244
Reaction score
3
You mean, "Other than the fact that Favre went 14-3 with the same team 2 years ago"?

I can't understand why you guys keep your head in the sand, the way you do...
 

Skol guy

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
766
Reaction score
1
Well yeah.. I'll take someone with no illusions about who they are over a traitor any day.
well spoken, atleast we know where we stand from the get-go. I will keep it real and not bend stats in sake of an arguement.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,353
Reaction score
4,083
Location
Milwaukee
You mean, "Other than the fact that Favre went 14-3 with the same team 2 years ago"?

I can't understand why you guys keep your head in the sand, the way you do...

Post the starting line up from Jax game last year and then post the starting lineup from the the rams game in 07

Then tell me its the same team
 

Skol guy

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
766
Reaction score
1
My point about the fans needing to support Rodgers like they did Favre is b/c he is your starting QB and a damn good one at that. Rodgers is not the reason why this team has lost to the Vikings twice so far. Super Man Favre himself could not have avoided the hits Rodgers has been taking. He no doubt would be avoided most of the sacks, b/c he would have thrown the ball up for grabs like a 3rd grader on recess when the pressure came. I just don't understand why anyone thinks that this team would be any better off with Favre as QB, other than the fact that he would not be playing for the Vikings right now. Last year the Packers and Vikings were pretty close (talent wise). The Packers O-line took a major step back and Grant has never regained form. What people fail to look at is the average starting field position for the Vikings, Favre constantly has a short field to work with. When Green Bay starts a drive off on their 35-40 yard line it is a big deal, but the Vikings get to do it time and time again. This team needs to improve on O-line, special teams and running back. The only thing it seem that they fixed from last year is the D-line, they need a lot of help in the draft. Favre is having a great year, but a great O-line has made it easier for him. I do think that he is playing at a very high level (one of this better years), still think that TT made the right choice. Rodgers will be the leader of the team for many years, look at some of the teams around the league and not many have a QB they can build around. Cleveland has been looking for that since Kozar, it is not easy to find. The Pack has a young future star who is taking a A-- wooping every week and people keep whining about Favre, lets fix what is broken on the team and move on. How about making as much stink about the TERRIBLE O-LINE, and **** pore running game, if you do that might get fixed.
As an outsider I think Rodgers has kept you in both games. O-line help needed bad and rodgers will win a bunch of games with his arm alone
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,353
Reaction score
4,083
Location
Milwaukee
You mean, "Other than the fact that Favre went 14-3 with the same team 2 years ago"?

I can't understand why you guys keep your head in the sand, the way you do...

17 games when they played 18? Why did you omit the BIGGEST loss of the year?

you want to add in the Seattle playoff win, then add in the Giants playoff loss
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
You mean, "Other than the fact that Favre went 14-3 with the same team 2 years ago"?

I can't understand why you guys keep your head in the sand, the way you do...
Actually, 14-4. I think you "unintentionally" remembered to put the playoff victory, but forgot to put the NFCC loss where he threw that pick.

You see, it's things like that that makes me see you as a little bit biased...
 

JeffQuery

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
244
Reaction score
3
This is where you guys lose me. Favre WAS ON THE SAME TEAM Rodgers is currently playing for. Remember when you guys crucified Brett for the NFCCG - even though the Packers managed 27 yards rushing on the day? Why was it all Favre's fault then and now suddenly the only reason Favre is better is because he has far superior talent? Are you kidding me???

This is the danger you guys get yerselves into when you give all the credit and cast all the blame to ONE player. Well, the pigeons are all coming home to roost now and suddenly you guys wanna change the rules on how you judge QB play. What's good for da goose should be good for da gander.

This is the kind of thing that makes me think that YOU GUYS are biased...

See..it works both ways!
 

Skol guy

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
766
Reaction score
1
I would still take Rodgers for the next 10 years... Favre played as good as he ever will with Greenbay in 07 and they lost in the playoffs... Rodgers is fully capable of taking this team to the playoffs and I think he will. We still dont know how Favre will do down the stretch.... Minnesota has a tough schedule ahead.... They have to play Chicago twice, Carolina, Arizona, Cinncinanti, and end with the Giants. Brett Favre looked awesome with the Jets half way through the season as well.

Although the Pack finished with a losing record last year Rodgers still had a solid season and didnt fold down the stretch. He played consistent all year. And he is doing the same this year. I think the Pack will go 10-6 this year. Minnesota will probably go 12-4.
What the puck are you talking about? Next 3 games at the dome against lower tier teams including your seahawks and we have played baltimore and the steelers already which is something the pack has coming their way so really our schedule is easier and in case you haven't noticed we just swept our biggest rival:jester:
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,353
Reaction score
4,083
Location
Milwaukee
This is where you guys lose me. Favre WAS ON THE SAME TEAM Rodgers is currently playing for. Remember when you guys crucified Brett for the NFCCG - even though the Packers managed 27 yards rushing on the day? Why was it all Favre's fault then and now suddenly the only reason Favre is better is because he has far superior talent? Are you kidding me???

This is the danger you guys get yerselves into when you give all the credit and cast all the blame to ONE player. Well, the pigeons are all coming home to roost now and suddenly you guys wanna change the rules on how you judge QB play. What's good for da goose should be good for da gander.

Stop the same team stuff..

There were at least 5 starters out for extended periods of time in 08 that played all year in 07..

so lets see..

14th game

07 starters 08 starters
Jennings Jennings
Driver Driver
Grant Grant
Hall Hall
Lee Lee
Cliff Cliff
Spitz Sptiz
Wells Wells
Coston Colledge
Tauch Tauch
Brett Aaron

Kamp Kamp
Pickett Pickett
C Williams Jolly
Jenkins Montgomery
Popp Popp
Barnett Hawk
Hawk Bishop
Woodson Woodson
Harris Harris
Bigby Williams
Collins Collins

Different punter, different kick off returners as well

might think not a big difference..but tell me if the Vikings lost the Williams wall ( we lost Jenkins and Williams) would they be as good? Not on your life
 

ColtsSeahawks

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
What the puck are you talking about? Next 3 games at the dome against lower tier teams including your seahawks and we have played baltimore and the steelers already which is something the pack has coming their way so really our schedule is easier and in case you haven't noticed we just swept our biggest rival:jester:
You completely missed my point.... I said Favre could fold DOWN the stretch... I didnt say now. And when the hell did I say Minnesota would lose to Seattle.... Yes they play teams like Seattle and Detroit that should be winners.... However I said the 2 games against Chicago will be very tough as they always are, Arizona (In Arizona), Carolina (looked awesome last week) , the Bengals, and the Giants.... The Giants might be playing their *** off in that last game especially if it means winning the division...

Chances are Favre is going to play solid all season long, but I wouldnt be surprised if he blows out his arm because he is getting old and starts playing the way he did at the end of last year.

Going into week 12 Favre and the jets were 8-3 and Favre looked like the Favre of old.... Beating tough teams like Buffalo Bills (And Buffalo was good at the start of the season regardless what anyone says) Buffalo wasa 5-2 when they play the Jets, then they beat the Patriots, and finally they beat the absolute crap out of the undefeated Titans. Then Favre hurt his arm and played like crap down the stretch and the Jets lost to my Seahawks.

Am I saying it will happen this year, NO... I am saying it could though and more chance with him because he is so old... Rodgers very very unlikely because he is so young.. Look at the beating Aaron has taken and yet he is out on the field every week. Although the Packers went 6-10 last year which IMO had nothing to do with Rodgers he had an excellent year.
 

ColtsSeahawks

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
My point about the fans needing to support Rodgers like they did Favre is b/c he is your starting QB and a damn good one at that. Rodgers is not the reason why this team has lost to the Vikings twice so far. Super Man Favre himself could not have avoided the hits Rodgers has been taking. He no doubt would be avoided most of the sacks, b/c he would have thrown the ball up for grabs like a 3rd grader on recess when the pressure came. I just don't understand why anyone thinks that this team would be any better off with Favre as QB, other than the fact that he would not be playing for the Vikings right now. Last year the Packers and Vikings were pretty close (talent wise). The Packers O-line took a major step back and Grant has never regained form. What people fail to look at is the average starting field position for the Vikings, Favre constantly has a short field to work with. When Green Bay starts a drive off on their 35-40 yard line it is a big deal, but the Vikings get to do it time and time again. This team needs to improve on O-line, special teams and running back. The only thing it seem that they fixed from last year is the D-line, they need a lot of help in the draft. Favre is having a great year, but a great O-line has made it easier for him. I do think that he is playing at a very high level (one of this better years), still think that TT made the right choice. Rodgers will be the leader of the team for many years, look at some of the teams around the league and not many have a QB they can build around. Cleveland has been looking for that since Kozar, it is not easy to find. The Pack has a young future star who is taking a A-- wooping every week and people keep whining about Favre, lets fix what is broken on the team and move on. How about making as much stink about the TERRIBLE O-LINE, and **** pore running game, if you do that might get fixed.
Great post , I couldnt agree more!!
 

dansz15

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
600
Reaction score
14
Location
Hershey, PA
This is a fun debate, but I think that Brett today would not be able to carry this team with the way they are playing. If the O Line was this poor with Favre, I would almost guarantee he would be sacked far less, but the teams turnover ratio would be astronomical. Bottom line: With how crappy this O Line has been and lack of running game I am not sure if there is another QB in the NFL that is handling it this well other than Rodgers. He really is making the best of a bad situation. With Brett, this team is under .500.
 

spack84

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Voted Rodgers. It's better for the Packers long term.

Packers could've lost Rodgers if Favre was still with the team. Would have forced the Packers to look for another QB, and thats not easy to do.
 

hummyjohnson

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
I think the obvious choice is take Favre for two years. No question, NONE, the Packers would have won more games last year and this year with him behind center. Maybe another shot at the SB.

TT could have traded AR and then drafted another QB. He would look like a genius now.

Of course this is with the benefit of hindsight.
 

realoatesman

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 21, 2009
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
Location
Currently going to college in Minnesota, but origi
I think the obvious choice is take Favre for two years. No question, NONE, the Packers would have won more games last year and this year with him behind center. Maybe another shot at the SB.

TT could have traded AR and then drafted another QB. He would look like a genius now.

Of course this is with the benefit of hindsight.

Yeah let someone else get Rodgers, and consider we have a great season like everyone thinks we would so we get stuck with a low drafted rookie as our QB. :comando:
 

ThinkICare

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
711
Reaction score
15
Hummy, really? You're gonna say that with all your confidence that you'd wanted them to do that? I know you've just been trolling around here, but even that was a bit far.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
I think the obvious choice is take Favre for two years. No question, NONE, the Packers would have won more games last year and this year with him behind center. Maybe another shot at the SB.

TT could have traded AR and then drafted another QB. He would look like a genius now.

Of course this is with the benefit of hindsight.

Oh you make it sound so simple.. Keep Brett (Who didn't want to be a Packer anyway,) trade Rodgers and we'll just magically find our franchise QB in the draft. Have you taken a moment to realize just how preposterous that sounds? Franchise QB's don't just come from out of nowhere, and picking a QB is more of a crap shoot than any other position. Sure, there are exceptions, but there's no guarantee we'd get one of them. That's a huge gamble to take.

Besides, did you watch ANY of our games last season? If so, you'd realize that Rodgers wasn't anywhere close to the reason we didn't win more games and make the playoffs. We were pretty depleted on defense, and they were unable to make the stop when it mattered several times. In fact, Carolina, Tennessee, Houston and Atlanta are just three instances that come readily to mind where we held a lead in the closing minutes of the game and gave it up at the end due to some big play made by our opponents.

Then two missed FG's at the closing minutes cost us games against Minnesota and Chicago. Had those FG's gone our way and our defense stepped up like they were supposed to, we probably win 4 or more of those 6 games I just outlined.
 

RobsPics

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Franchise QB's don't just come from out of nowhere, and picking a QB is more of a crap shoot than any other position.


But your above quote can also be attributed to Rodgers himself. Picking a QB can be, and usually is, a crap shoot.

So there's no need to take that sort of crap shoot gamble early (drafting Rodgers in 2005 and starting him) especially when a proven QB (Favre) was still producing.
 

JeffQuery

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
244
Reaction score
3
People..there is no GUARANTEE that you'll ever win a championship or SB with Aaron Rodgers.....NONE.

However, there was a much better chance that you could have won one with FAVRE...if Tee Tee just would have given him some weapons to work with. Built a team around him, like they built a team around John Elway at the end of his career.

But no, Ted Thompson, the egotist, had to do it his way. By being the "draft guru" who was going to do it on the cheap.

Besides, other good QB's do come into the NFL...Like in Atlanta, Baltimore, etc., etc..

Why did Rodgers fall so far in the draft if he was so "great"?

He may be pretty good, but there are flaws with him.

You guys treat him like he's the second coming of Johnny Unitas, and let me tell you that he's not.

Tee Tee traded away a chance to be a CHAMPION after the bumbling Mike Sherman left, only to draft alot of mediocrity because of his own damn EGO in believing he could do it ALL through the draft.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top