1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

This Year is Wasted ..Stick With Brett

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by WinnipegPackFan, Oct 31, 2005.

  1. WinnipegPackFan

    WinnipegPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,943
    Ratings:
    +0
    I will be the first one to admit that Brett pressed too hard today and had a bad game BUT I cannot believe that as soon as the man who has helped carry this team through thirteen winning seasons is now probably heading for a losing one and is at the lowest point of his career, some are saying "bench him". I am sorry, never been this pissed before but I think we owe Brett a little more then that. And for those that think he needs a tounge lashing to get him to understand he made a mistake, Do you really think with his confidence level at an all time low that this will help ? Brett knows when he has screwed up and is harder on himself then anyone. While we are all sleeping tonight Brett will be the one going over and over his mistakes and any real Packer Fan knows this.
     
  2. yooperfan

    yooperfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,900
    Ratings:
    +0
    Brett has no protection. He can't sit back in the pocket and go through his reads like Palmer and most other QB's do. He is rolling out and throwing on the run every time, that is a huge reason for Brett throwing 5 picks yesterday.
    If he tried being a pocket passer this year he would get killed.
    You don't bench a guy for trying his damndest to win by throwing on the run all the time.
     
  3. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    thank you yooper..

    finally..some common sense...

    (must be all that moose meat you eat up der...)
     
  4. vixtalkn

    vixtalkn Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    197
    Ratings:
    +0
    The last two weeks the munchkins posting here were referring to him as the great and powerful Favre. Now they want to bench him. This kind of addled thinking is what makes them munchkins.
     
  5. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    the picks had little to do w/ Brett being on the run. First, one of the few things the o-line is OK at is pass protection. Going into yesterday, Brett hadn't been sacked in 110 consecutive plays (I think-heard on wtmj)

    ..And, one of Brett's forte's has been throwing on the run, why else would the Pack design some plays where they pull a guard to block for him in the flat as he's rolling?

    Many ppl agree that Brett was the primary reason the Packers lost yesterday, but many on this board, in the media, and coaching staff are passing the buck and ignoring the problem. What would happen if MS, ahmad carroll, DD, or whomever was clearly the one who was prinicpally responsible for a loss (I'm not blaming this all on Brett...just saying if you had to pick 1 factor, he was the biggest reason)?

    I don't want to hear the "he has no players" garbage...Brett has been forcing it and jeapordizing the Packers (at times) ever since the Dallas playoff and MN dome games of the early '90s. He has just as much of a problem in big games as ppl suggest MS does...so why should he get a free pass? Bench him...NO!!!...but correct the problem and not allow him to play irresponsibly...YES!!!
     
  6. yooperfan

    yooperfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,900
    Ratings:
    +0
    Favre hadn't been sacked in 110 consecutive plays, not because of his stellar offensive line, but because of his legs. He has been able to run around ducking and avoiding sacks on pure will, and yes while he is running and ducking he is trying to get the ball to a less than mediocre cast of players who don't have that special chemistry with Favre that he has had with some players in the past.
    Yes he has usually been effective throwing on the run in the past but time is catching up with him just as it does with all of us.
    I'm not giving him a free pass. I was as PO'd as anyone else after that last play, but on "further review" I don't lay that egg on Brett Favre.
     
  7. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    yooper...you're right, Brett's scrambling has always made any o-line look better, but still, they've generally been OK at giving him time this year.

    But my concern is (this isn't directed at you, just a general statement) in any other game, if Ahman fumbles twice, if MS calls a questionable 4th down play, if Ahmad holds, etc. etc. then they get ripped on, and rightfully so.

    So now Brett had one of the ugliest games you will see, by his or anyone else's standards, and everyone is OK with it? How can ppl criticize MS for a "draw play" last week, and then overlook what happened on the last play yesterday?

    What he's done in the past, or the fact that he's trying hard to win shouldn't matter. If what he is doing right now is hurting the team, then MS, Bevell, the media, or whomever needs to recognize it, hold him accountable, and correct the error.
     
  8. NDPackerFan

    NDPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,253
    Ratings:
    +4
    The last play was garbage and it's hard to know who was at fault...it comes down to this, like it or not: If Favre decided not to clock the ball and 10 of the other offensive players on the field thought he was going to, I would suggest that Favre is to blame for that decision. If it was called by the coaching staff not to clock the ball (which I doubt but cannot prove), 10 players didn't get the message but #4 did...

    Favre is a warrior and I'm a huge fan who appreciates his ability. I hope he plays for another 3-4 years. I will not excuse him from any and all mistakes on this forum or anywhere else. The simple fact is that Favre won't either. He's never made excuses for himself, he leaves that up to Ryan Longwell, who has never missed a kick with a decent hold in his life.

    *I don't know why I threw that in there about Longwell, it is just a sore spot this season. :evil:
     
  9. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Team..what team..musscy..?

    There is no "team"..it's just Brett Favre and a bunch of guys...with lousy coaches...

    Yeah..his his passer rating and no interceptions really got the game won against the Vikings now..didn't it? When SherRossley blew that game by calling a draw...but you defended him to the death..now didn't you?

    What you don't seem to understand that right now, son is that...Brett Favre..more than anyone else...IS the Green Bay Packers..and until he retires..that iss how it will be...

    Sherman trying to correct Favre is laughible..because who's going to correct Sherman? He doesn't even know what he is doing out there...worst game coach i've ever seen...

    They should let Brett call the plays, try to get him some receivers..and stay out of the damn way...
     
  10. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Brett audibled for that final spike play and look what happened..it gave teh pack no chance to win?

    And yes there is a team...in spite of Brett's 5 picks and the last play, the team was within 7 points.

    Last time I checked NFL.com, this team is called the Packers, not the Brett Favres.
     
  11. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Why was the team within 7 points Musscy...

    Was it because of Sherman?

    Last time i checked..the team wasn't called the Green Bay Shermans...

    or should i say..Green BAy SherRossleys?
     
  12. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    The defense covered Brett's backside BIG TIME yesterday. After his play in the 2nd half, the score should have been a lot worse.

    My point about the Green Bay Brett Favres is that the team is not ONLY Brett...it is a TEAM...others contribute, and what's in Brett's best interests should not play a substantial role in decisions on how the team is built. Meaning, if TT feels that the team needs to move another direction, or not blow the salary cap just for Brett's last year (which is sort of what MS did,yet you won't acknowledge or credit him for that), then there is nothing wrong with that.

    I know what you're thinking right now, and to respond to that...other teams have won superbowls w/out a top 5 all time qb. It is conceivable for the TT et al to build a winning team w/out Brett.
     
  13. PPierce

    PPierce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +0
    Posts like this one don't give me much hope for our immediate future. As long as Brett wants to play, even if he loses it, he WILL play. I agree with that, but I don't think it's a good thing. First of all, I don't know if he's lost a step or it's the rest of the team, but one day he won't be able to play anymore or he'll retire and we really have nobody. Rodgers isn't getting a chance to play at all, and I wasn't too thrilled about his being the heir apparent anyways. I agree there are better possibilities to replace Favre. I also think it's a big mistake not to plan for the day when he will no longer be our QB. Since nobody else ever gets in the game, nobody is going to be ready to step in and take his place. I love Brett, just like everyone else, but it's time to plan for the future. Don't bench him, but if we're going with Rodgers next, an idea that sort of scares me, then at least get him used to the NFL. If not, let's draft a better QB heir We'll certainly have a high pick this time.
     
  14. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    I agree PPierce...most on this board are very opposed to the benching of Brett for any reason. However, given the appropriate situation (e.g. vs. the Bears last year when Nall played 2 or 3 quarters) I think it would be a good move. You can only learn so much by watching.
     
  15. arrowgargantuan

    arrowgargantuan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    3,645
    Ratings:
    +4
    nothing is more valuable than playing time for a rook, and i'd love for Rodgers to get as many snaps as possible during clean-up duty...but thats the only circumstance i'd be comfortable with. any talk of benching Brett, imo, is not clearly thought out.
     
  16. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
    The "Bring in Aaron Rodgers" school of thought makes no sense even if one has no regard for Favre and thinks Rodgers is going to be a great QB. Rodgers is MUCH better off riding the pines this year than he would be if thrown into live action. Think of Carson Palmer. He spent one year on the bench, and now he's in his second year starting and is already one of the better QB's in the league.

    Brett is our starter this year, and probably next year if he wants to come back. Rodgers' time will come, and his chances of success will be a lot better if he has to wait a year or two.
     

Share This Page