How good was Majkowski??

[Bossman641]

I'm only 22 so my first Packer memories are of the very early 90's right before Favre emerged. I remember the Majik Man a little, but nothing specifically.

Was he actually a Pro-Bowl type player, or was it more of a fan favorite with a cool nickname on a crappy team type of thing?

What player, from today or the past couple of years, would you compare him to?

Just wondering...and trying to pass the days til training camp

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm only 22 so my first Packer memories are of the very early 90's right before Favre emerged. I remember the Majik Man a little, but nothing specifically.

Was he actually a Pro-Bowl type player, or was it more of a fan favorite with a cool nickname on a crappy team type of thing?

What player, from today or the past couple of years, would you compare him to?

Just wondering...and trying to pass the days til training camp

He was a fan favorite who had a cool nickname and was very good for a Cardiac Pack team for one year. Unfortunately, it was the year before they added a third Wild Card team, and they missed out on the playoffs at 10-6. I have nothing against Majik, but it really made the Packer Hall of Fame look bad when they let him in.

[Iron Mike]

He was good enough so that thousands of kids in NEW in the early '90s got cheesy mullets, just like the "Majik Man" :razz:

http://images.nfl.com/photos/img8019290.jpg

[Patler]

Majkowski was a much better QB than Harvey lets on, unfortunately, he had shoulder problems even in college and ultimately injuries brought down his career. He started to really come into his own in 1989:

353 completions in 599 attempts for 4318 yards and 27 TDs. He also rushed 75 times for 358 yards and 5 TDs. He was a legitimate running threat as a QB. He was a Pro Bowl player in 1989 and finished second in the MVP voting to Joe Montana.

That was his last healthy season. The shoulder problems came back. He had a significant leg injury etc. But he was always a dynamic leader.

Majkowski played in 68 games for the Packers over 6 seasons, and is 5th all time in career passing yardage for the Packers and 4th in career completions behind only Favre, Starr and Dickey. He brought no shame to the Packers HOF by being admitted.

[Badgepack]

I remember the feeling that the Packers were finally going in the right direction during the Majik years. Other than the strike year playoffs, that was about it. The rest of the years, it was basically try to beat the Bears to make a season.

[Patler]

I remember the feeling that the Packers were finally going in the right direction during the Majik years. Other than the strike year playoffs, that was about it. The rest of the years, it was basically try to beat the Bears to make a season.

You are right about that. I also remember the great disappointment when Majkowski's injuries started becoming routine in 1990 and 1991. It felt like the QB to build around was there, but injuries were preventing it from happening.

[Row 67]

He was good. He had an air of confidence about him and his play lifted the play of those around him. Favre is known for 4th QB comebacks, but Majik seemed to bring them from behind every game.

I still remember the play he got hurt on, which effectively ended his career. It was actually a cheap shot out of bounds at Arizona. The guy rode him out of bounds and landed on him, driving him into the ground.

Majik was no Favre, but he was without a doubt, a bona-fide starting quality NFL QB.

[Deputy Nutz]

You are right about that. I also remember the great disappointment when Majkowski's injuries started becoming routine in 2000 and 2001. It felt like the QB to build around was there, but injuries were preventing it from happening.


Shamrock you might want to edit this part. I guess you could be right, but the injuries weren't from playing in the NFL, more like at a country club in Georgia.


Majik was an ok QB, but until 89, he was always in a battle for the starting job with another 2nd rate QB, Blair Kiel, or Anthony Dilweg. He had one good year for the Packers, then he held out and then got injured. He couldn't throw the ball over 50 yards, weak armed QBs that throw picks just don't stick in the NFL.

[KYPack]

He was a fan favorite who had a cool nickname and was very good for a Cardiac Pack team for one year. Unfortunately, it was the year before they added a third Wild Card team, and they missed out on the playoffs at 10-6. I have nothing against Majik, but it really made the Packer Hall of Fame look bad when they let him in.

I'd disagree with Harve on his Pack HOF statement (more on that later).

Any discussion of Majik has to include his great comeback win over the Bears in their first meeting in '89. In the last 32 seconds of the game, Don tossed a 14 yd pass to Sterling Sharpe that "won" the game. An official on the field ruled Majkowski was over the line of scrimmage and flagged the play. The call was eventually overturned by the Replay Official and the Pack won the game 14 - 13. Ditka went absolutely berserk. For many years the Bears media guide had an asterisk next to the game and listed "Instant replay game" next to the win.

For that & that alone, Majik deserves to be in the Pack HOF.

But also, Don had a briliant season in '89.

He had a good career, fifth all time in GB history behind, Favre, Starr, Dickey, and Tobin Rote.

Team HOF's also include players with great years (Travis Williams) or fan favorites (Elijah Pitts, Max McGee). Don qualifies on both counts. He deserves to be in the Packer HOF.

[The Leaper]

I agree KY...Majkowski is a reasonable selection to the HOF. Starr, Dickey and Favre are no-brainers...guys who do not fall in this category need to have either a lengthy career in team colors or took part in significant events in team history. The entire 1989 season was noteworthy in Packer annals...and Majkowski was the primary reason. The team HOF isn't supposed to have the same rigid criteria as Canton.

I can understand people who would disagree with his inclusion...but I don't see how you can label it as being "bad" for the HOF.

[FavreChild]

Majikowski is in the Packers Hall of Fame for what he symbolized. Majik represented a significant turning point in team history, after two decades of nearly uniform futility. Especially for someone my age, the Majikowski years were the first time I was ever interested in the Packers, because growing up in the 80s....well, there wasn't much of a reason to take an interest before the Majik Man.

Sure, in retrospect, the Majik-lead teams didn't accomplish all that much, but weren't we filled with hope and excitement during those years? And luckily, the Favre era carried us to more than a decade of consecutive winning seasons. Add the fact that every time the history of Favre's career is recounted, you can't go without mentioning the Majikowski injury...

Majik is part of Packers lore. Pure and simple.

[Patler]

Majik was an ok QB, but until 89, he was always in a battle for the starting job with another 2nd rate QB, Blair Kiel, or Anthony Dilweg. He had one good year for the Packers, then he held out and then got injured. He couldn't throw the ball over 50 yards, weak armed QBs that throw picks just don't stick in the NFL.

It wasn't quite as Nuts implies either. Majkowski was a rookie in 1987, and played enough in place of Randy Wright to get 127 attempts. Wright of course was in his 4th season at the time and had been the #1 QB exclusively the year before in 1986. Kiel and Dilweg weren't even there. In Majkowski's second year, 1988, he took over as the #1 QB in game 6, played in 13 games and had 336 attempts to Wright's 244. Time wasn't as divided as it looks statistically, because as I said Majkowski became the starter in game 6, but missed a game late in the season, Wright started and had 52 attempts. In Majkowski's third season, 1989, he was the exclusive QB, having 599 attempts to Dilwegs 1 (yes, one attempt). No other QB played in 1989.

So, the only QB Majkowski competed with was Randy Wright, the incumbant starter. It was a fairly rapid transition. He had a lot of playing time as a rookie in 7 games, and became the starter in game 6 of his second year and was the clear #1 after that.

Dilweg, Kiel and Tomczak got playing time in 1990 and 1991 only because Majkowski was injured. Majkowski was the clear #1 QB ever since early in his second season.

Majkowskie didn't have a great arm, but he could make plays with his arm and his legs. A guy doesn't throw for 4,300+ yards in a single season without being a decent passer.

[Fritz]

He really was a good quarterback. I think lots of people's opinions get jaded because we've been spoiled by #4, but if you compare Majik to other QB's around the league at the time, he was definitely in the top five of the league for that wonderful year, and there's no reason to think it was a fluke. Injuries just did him in.

I don't think he was as good as Lynn Dickey, but he was better than Tobin Rote, in my estimation.

[retailguy]

[quote="FavreChild"]Especially for someone my age, the Majikowski years were the first time I was ever interested in the Packers, because growing up in the 80s....well, there wasn't much of a reason to take an interest before the Majik Man.

/quote]


AAAAHHHHHHHHHH! No reason for interest? HERETIC! :mrgreen:

[Fritz]

Uh, maybe that "top five" was a slight exaggeration. There was Marino, Moon, Esiason, Montana, Kelly. I'd put him in the next tier, though, with the likes of Randall Cunningham and Bernie Kosar.

[Merlin]

I loved watching him play. However, he skipped the pro bowl as to not get injured so he could get a huge contract, then got it and promptly got injured in the first game => Enter Bret Favre. The moment all the contract crap started I knew he wasn't going to last long in Green Bay.

[mngolf19]

Majikowski is in the Packers Hall of Fame for what he symbolized. Majik represented a significant turning point in team history, after two decades of nearly uniform futility. Especially for someone my age, the Majikowski years were the first time I was ever interested in the Packers, because growing up in the 80s....well, there wasn't much of a reason to take an interest before the Majik Man.

Sure, in retrospect, the Majik-lead teams didn't accomplish all that much, but weren't we filled with hope and excitement during those years? And luckily, the Favre era carried us to more than a decade of consecutive winning seasons. Add the fact that every time the history of Favre's career is recounted, you can't go without mentioning the Majikowski injury...

Majik is part of Packers lore. Pure and simple.

This is my take as well. Growing up Vikes fan, I barely noticed the Packers on the schedule until he came along. He started a turn for the better and made those Pack/Vikes games more interesting.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Majik could move around and avoid the pass rush. Rather refreshing after years of Lynn Dickey, Randy Wright, etc.

He was pretty good, and as others have pointed out, diminished by injuries.

I think he is a GREAT football analyst, I love his interviews.

[Murphy37]

Majik was an ok QB, but until 89, he was always in a battle for the starting job with another 2nd rate QB, Blair Kiel, or Anthony Dilweg. He had one good year for the Packers, then he held out and then got injured. He couldn't throw the ball over 50 yards, weak armed QBs that throw picks just don't stick in the NFL.

It wasn't quite as Nuts implies either. Majkowski was a rookie in 1987, and played enough in place of Randy Wright to get 127 attempts. Wright of course was in his 4th season at the time and had been the #1 QB exclusively the year before in 1986. Kiel and Dilweg weren't even there. In Majkowski's second year, 1988, he took over as the #1 QB in game 6, played in 13 games and had 336 attempts to Wright's 244. Time wasn't as divided as it looks statistically, because as I said Majkowski became the starter in game 6, but missed a game late in the season, Wright started and had 52 attempts. In Majkowski's third season, 1989, he was the exclusive QB, having 599 attempts to Dilwegs 1 (yes, one attempt). No other QB played in 1989.

So, the only QB Majkowski competed with was Randy Wright, the incumbant starter. It was a fairly rapid transition. He had a lot of playing time as a rookie in 7 games, and became the starter in game 6 of his second year and was the clear #1 after that.

Dilweg, Kiel and Tomczak got playing time in 1990 and 1991 only because Majkowski was injured. Majkowski was the clear #1 QB ever since early in his second season.

Majkowskie didn't have a great arm, but he could make plays with his arm and his legs. A guy doesn't throw for 4,300+ yards in a single season without being a decent passer.


Ha ha, Nutz just got kicked in the nuts. Nobody rips the Majik man and gets away with it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Majik had one year where he wasn't below average. Everything broke is way, and he had a great year. I think it was a fluke.

In 1989 he completed 58.9%, 4318 yards, 27 TDs, 20 interceptions

The rest of his career:
77 games, 53.7% completion, 8382 yards, 39 TDs, 47 interceptions

Face it. He mostly sucked.

Brent Fullwood made the Pro Bowl that year also. Does that make him a good RB? Hell no! One year wonder.

[RashanGary]

I think Sterling Sharpe had a lot to do with his success.

I was 9 years old or whatever. I had a book. It was "Montana/Rice, Majik/Sharpe.

As a kid, I idolized Sharpe. My impression of him was that he was a dominating force. I didn't feel that way about Majik. That was a 9 year olds view though, so it might not be very insightfull.

[Murphy37]

Brent Fullwood made the probowl that year? Holy shit I don't remember that.
Nobody here is saying Majk was a superstar. But when you look back on the history of the Pack, he was a significant piece of it. His stats alone are questionable career wise, but he gave fans a reason to cheer again, and helped turn around a team that was in the gutter for how long? Fluke, or shoulder problems, who cares. All I know, is that I remember the Packers finally getting some national attention when he played the game.

[Patler]

I think Sterling Sharpe had a lot to do with his success.

I was 9 years old or whatever. I had a book. It was "Montana/Rice, Majik/Sharpe.

As a kid, I idolized Sharpe. My impression of him was that he was a dominating force. I didn't feel that way about Majik. That was a 9 year olds view though, so it might not be very insightfull.

Certainly Sharpe played an important role in 1989, but in 1989 Majkowski completed 263 passes for 2895 yards and 15 TDs to players other than Sharpe, including the likes of Keith Woodside, Perry Kemp, Herman Fontenot, Jeff Query and Ed West, the 2nd-6th leading receivers on the team.

Swann and Stallworth had a lot to do with Bradshaw's suuccess.
Raymond Berry and John Mackey with Unitas'.
Rice with Montana's.
etc., etc.

Brett Favre has had only one season in which he threw for more yards than Majkowski did in 1989. Lynn Dickey only had one season in which he threw for more yards than Majkowski did in 1989. No other Green Bay QB has exceeded Majkowski's yardage in 1989.

[HarveyWallbangers]

One year wonder.

[Patler]

One year wonder.

Naw, more like "One year healthy!" :D

[HarveyWallbangers]

The guy played 10 years in the league. I'm sure he'd like to blame his 9 below average years on injuries, but I won't. Part of being a great player is durability.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Majik. Oh the memories. I've been a fan of the Pack all of my life, but returned to the United States in 1988 and was able to watch my beloved Pack. Thus, my true "memories" of the early Pack aren't from the horrid 70s/80s, but from this Majikal period where he reingivorated the Packer Nation with his heroics. He wasn't the best QB the Packers have had, but he got the job done with reckless abandon and wild fashion. Does he belong in the Packer HoF? Due to his single season, perhaps. He is one of the most recognizeable names in Packer history. As FavreChild said, he is credited with turning around a franchise that had been horrible for decades. But he didn't do it alone. And his Majik was short-lived.

He was a one-year wonder, but I am thankful that he was. If he didn't get injured, Favre may never have gotten his chance to be one of the best QBs in NFL history.

tyler

[chain_gang]

Brent Fullwood, man those were the days. Fullwood really stuck it to them that year. How about a guy named Clint Didier TE for the packers. I believe he had the first TD reception in the famous 89 replay game. That's about all he did for his career i think. Spagnola was another TE, always liked his name but he sucked. Ed West seemed alright. Wow stroll down memory lane, but my favorite game during that 89 season was the one in Nov. against the 49ers. Majik to Sharpe and Montana to Rice. Great game with the Pack winning. It was the last game the 49ers lost the rest of the way, blowing out Denver 55-10. Only Green bay and the Rams beat the 49ers that year I believe.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Brent Fullwood, man those were the days. Fullwood really stuck it to them that year. How about a guy named Clint Didier TE for the packers. I believe he had the first TD reception in the famous 89 replay game. That's about all he did for his career i think. Spagnola was another TE, always liked his name but he sucked. Ed West seemed alright. Wow stroll down memory lane, but my favorite game during that 89 season was the one in Nov. against the 49ers. Majik to Sharpe and Montana to Rice. Great game with the Pack winning. It was the last game the 49ers lost the rest of the way, blowing out Denver 55-10. Only Green bay and the Rams beat the 49ers that year I believe.

I remember that 49ers game. I remember that we had no business making a game of it, much less winning. It was amazing.

tyler

[Patler]

The guy played 10 years in the league. I'm sure he'd like to blame his 9 below average years on injuries, but I won't. Part of being a great player is durability.

If the other 9 were below average, how is it that he is 4th on the Packers all time list for completions (behind only Favre, Starr and Dickey) and 5th in yardage? Give the guy some credit. His Packer career was realtively brief, but effective when he was in the game.

I agree, durability is a factor. (see my comments on Ferguson) But Majkowski was good in GB whenever he played, unlike ferguson who hasn't delivered even when in the lineup.

[Bossman641]

just want to say thanks to everybody for the history lesson on Majik.

Like I said earlier, I don't remember much of him, but I do remember the excitement he brought and the shift in attitude he seemed to bring.

[Chester Marcol]

Anyone else remember they couldn't play a highlight of Majkowski without hearing "He's a maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagic man by Heart?

[chain_gang]

Anyone else remember they couldn't play a highlight of Majkowski without hearing "He's a maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagic man by Heart?


Yeah that sure got annoying after a while. Never did like that song.

[KYPack]

One year wonder.

You are right Harve, Don really only had that one year.

But that is OK, it's enuff to get in a team HOF.

The other one year wonder in the pack HOF is KR/RB Travis Williams. He really only had one great year, but it was so brilliant, he made the Pack HOF.

As far as Majik's inclusion in the GB HOF somehow demeaning or weakening the GB HOF, I strongly disagree.

Every team or even sport's HOF's have players whose membership is questionable. People are put in HOF's that don't deserve it for political or popular reasons all the time. It doesn't mean the entire Hall is bogus.

Look up end Wayne Millner's record and tell me:

1. Why is he in the Pro Football HOF?

2. Does his presence in that hall somehow weaken or lessen the PFHOF?

Don Majkowski was put in the Packer HOF because more people named their dogs "Majik" than any other player name in history. Or something like that.

[Tony Oday]

Majik Man and the Wizard :) hehe

I love Majik he was a guy that should have been much better if not for the fact he got cheap shotted but what the heck it was fun to watch him.

Didnt Fullwood screw us on a contract or something?

[GBRulz]

Majik wasn't anything great, but like a couple said - he marked a turning point for the Packers, which boosts his popularity.

OMG, I don't remember Fumblewood making the Pro Bowl???

[HarveyWallbangers]

If the other 9 were below average, how is it that he is 4th on the Packers all time list for completions (behind only Favre, Starr and Dickey) and 5th in yardage? Give the guy some credit. His Packer career was realtively brief, but effective when he was in the game.

I know you know this, but I'll bite. How about because the Packers have only had three decent QBs since the passing era began in the NFL? The rest of the QBs were suckwads that couldn't last more than a couple of years as starting QB.

[Iron Mike]

I know you know this, but I'll bite. How about because the Packers have only had three decent QBs since the passing era began in the NFL? The rest of the QBs were suckwads that couldn't last more than a couple of years as starting QB.

Anthony Dilweg???? :wink:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Thus, my true "memories" of the early Pack aren't from the horrid 70s/80s, but from this Majikal period where he reingivorated the Packer Nation with his heroics.

Actually, the 80s weren't that bad compared to the 70s. The Packers actually were over .500 over a 5 year stretch (four 8-8 seasons and a 5-3-1 strike season record). The Majik period mostly sucked also. I don't believe the Packers won more than 6 games in the other 4 years he was with the team before Favre came, and he started 0-2 in 1992 before Brett turned them around with a 9-5 finish.

The Packers were 11-21-1 in the games that Majik started in outside of the 1989 season.

[Patler]

If the other 9 were below average, how is it that he is 4th on the Packers all time list for completions (behind only Favre, Starr and Dickey) and 5th in yardage? Give the guy some credit. His Packer career was realtively brief, but effective when he was in the game.

I know you know this, but I'll bite. How about because the Packers have only had three decent QBs since the passing era began in the NFL? The rest of the QBs were suckwads that couldn't last more than a couple of years as starting QB.

So Bart Starr, Lynn Dickey and Brett Favre were/are "decent" and the other 21 who started games for the Packers since the late 1950s were just "suckwads". I guess that would make Majkowski's seasons in Green Bay better than the "average" wouldn't it?

Being the 4th best QB in Green Bay over the last 50 years is decent in my book, especially when two of the three better are/will be NFL HOFers. 4th out of 25 should merit some respect.

[AtlPackFan]

You are right about that. I also remember the great disappointment when Majkowski's injuries started becoming routine in 2000 and 2001. It felt like the QB to build around was there, but injuries were preventing it from happening.


Shamrock you might want to edit this part. I guess you could be right, but the injuries weren't from playing in the NFL, more like at a country club in Georgia.


Majik was an ok QB, but until 89, he was always in a battle for the starting job with another 2nd rate QB, Blair Kiel, or Anthony Dilweg. He had one good year for the Packers, then he held out and then got injured. He couldn't throw the ball over 50 yards, weak armed QBs that throw picks just don't stick in the NFL.

The holdout is what I remember. I guess I don't remember the details of why he held out but I remember the injury shortly after he came back and he pretty much sucked after that. Wasn't it a shoulder injury? I don't know why but I seem to remember a tackle out of bounds where he landed on his shoulder??? Anyone remember the details.

[red]

majik looked like a god after having to watch randy wright. he did have one monster year, then a bunch of injuries. so we can't really know if it was a one year fluke or not, but you have to have some talent to put up those numbers in 89

these were the infante years where the team turned into something more then just the butt of all football jokes, and majik had a lot to do with it.

and face it. if it wasn't for majik getting hurt, we might not ever have found out what favre could do. it was majikal

[Chester Marcol]

and face it. if it wasn't for majik getting hurt, we might not ever have found out what favre could do. it was majikal

Favre would have seen the field one way or another. It wasn't like Majik was leading us to the promise land. I doubt you invest a first round pick on a back up QB.

[gureski]

The bottom line on Majikowski is that he WAS (pre-injury) one of the best young QB's in the NFL. It's a flat-out true statement to say that Majikowski was one of the top young QB's in the game during his short stint as a starter. After the injury things were never the same but before the injury...he was a budding star and that was recognized througout the NFL.

Before his injury he showed flashes of everything you want in a QB. He was mobile, he could throw, he was a leader and he had a knack for making something out of nothing. He led a team that had little talent and no running game and still managed to help the team compete. I think Harvey is disrespecting Majikowski and the impact he had on the Packers during his heyday. Majikowski was never the same after the shoulder injury. He just couldn't make the throws he used to be able to make. He stuck around as a back up and had a nice long career but his days as a starter went down in flames amidst that injury in 1990 (I think that was the year, may have been 1991). The post-injury Majikowski shouldnt' diminish the ability of the pre-injury Majikowski. The guy was good and created a spark on a team that was considered the Siberia of the NFL because the talent was so lacking.

And one more thing....a Team Hall of Fame should have different standards then the League Hall of Fame. There is nothing at all wrong with having Majikowski in the Packer Hall of Fame. He was a big part of the teams history and he always will be. Though his stay was short, he created alot of Magic (excuse the pun) and the Bears still have an astrick in their yearbooks next to that instant replay game! The 10-6 team that didn't make the playoffs was directly responsible for the League going to a format that allowed an extra team to make the playoffs. None of that happens if not for Majikowski. He was a huge fan favorite and still is. He's exactly the kind of guy you put into a TEAM hall of fame.

[Fosco33]

Majik was a decent QB but he also helped put a face on a seemingly faceless team. Being more of a defense oriented fan, I was big on Brian Noble and Chuck Cecil - plus it was the time when Butler started to shine.

[Chester Marcol]

And one more thing....a Team Hall of Fame should have different standards then the League Hall of Fame. There is nothing at all wrong with having Majikowski in the Packer Hall of Fame. He was a big part of the teams history and he always will be.

I couldn't agree more. I remember that one year more than I did Favre's first couple years. Was probably the most fun season I'd experienced as a Packer fan to that point. Majik atleast helped pick us up and dust us off a bit. Wasn't that the season we were branded the cardiac Pack? People were watching again. Came for the Majik, stayed for the Favre.

[red]

and face it. if it wasn't for majik getting hurt, we might not ever have found out what favre could do. it was majikal

Favre would have seen the field one way or another. It wasn't like Majik was leading us to the promise land. I doubt you invest a first round pick on a back up QB.

if it wasn't for majiks injuries would we have even traded for him?

[MJZiggy]

and face it. if it wasn't for majik getting hurt, we might not ever have found out what favre could do. it was majikal

Favre would have seen the field one way or another. It wasn't like Majik was leading us to the promise land. I doubt you invest a first round pick on a back up QB.

if it wasn't for majiks injuries would we have even traded for him?

Yes. Wolf liked him from the time he was in college.

[The Leaper]

Another question...

If Majkowski doesn't revive the Packer faithful in 1989, can Ron Wolf successfully lure Mike Holmgren to Green Bay? You have to imagine that the impact Majkowski and the Packer fans had on the 49ers (and Holmgren) during their 1989 victory against the Niners meant something. Similar to how Favre's play against Reggie when he was still with the Eagles meant something in luring White to Green Bay.

[Patler]

It becomes real interesting when you play to "what if game"

If Majkowski has not been injured, no matter how much he liked Favre, Wolf might not have seen the need to spend a 1st round pick on an unproven QB. He might have been satisfied with Majik for the time being and used the pick to strengthen other weaknesses. Who might he have drafted with that pick

Without the chance in GB what would have happened to Favre? Would he have had a chance somewhere else, or would he have continued along the path he established as a rookie? Would he have been traded elsewhere? Did anyone else want him? Would he ever have had a chance in Atlanta? Could he have succeeded somewhere other than small town GB, or under a staff other than Holmgren's

Would White have ever come to GB? Would he have won his Super Bowl before retiring?

If Favre had succeeded in Atlanta, where would Michael Vick be?

What other QB might have followed Majkowski in GB. Would Brunnell have taken over as Majik's career faded? or would Majik have lasted until Hasselbeck? Would someone else have been drafted?

Yup, those Majkowski injuries may have turned out for the best for a lot of people! :smile:

[GrnBay007]

Shamrockfan, you are our facts and stats guy. What's up with all these "what ifs" ?

Are u ill?

:wink:

[red]

and face it. if it wasn't for majik getting hurt, we might not ever have found out what favre could do. it was majikal

Favre would have seen the field one way or another. It wasn't like Majik was leading us to the promise land. I doubt you invest a first round pick on a back up QB.

if it wasn't for majiks injuries would we have even traded for him?

Yes. Wolf liked him from the time he was in college.

see, but i think if majik would have stayed healthy, and put up numbers anywhere near what he did in 89 in 90 and 91 then wolf wouldn't have made the trade. i find it very hard to think that wolf would have traded a 1st rounder for a raw qb when he already had a very good qb on the roster. and if majik had 1 good year after 89 it might have made wolf stall on making the trade, and maybe that would have given the falcons time to find out just how good he was. of course JMO

[MJZiggy]

Could someone remind me what the name of the Atlanta coach that got caught on tape ridiculing Favre on game day? He hollered out "Mississippi! You gonna play today? Favre answered, "I will if you let me." Then said coach listed of a number of catastrophes and natural disasters that would have to happen before he put #4 in the game. I don't think he'd have been recognized by that particular coaching staff. He might never have settled down either.

[Harlan Huckleby]

That sure sounds like Jerry Glanville.

[MJZiggy]

I believe that's the guy. What's he up to these days?

[Harlan Huckleby]

he is somebody's defensive coordinator.

I kinda like Glanville, although as a game commentator he was too much.

[KYPack]

And one more thing....a Team Hall of Fame should have different standards then the League Hall of Fame. There is nothing at all wrong with having Majikowski in the Packer Hall of Fame. He was a big part of the teams history and he always will be.

I couldn't agree more. I remember that one year more than I did Favre's first couple years. Was probably the most fun season I'd experienced as a Packer fan to that point. Majik atleast helped pick us up and dust us off a bit. Wasn't that the season we were branded the cardiac Pack? People were watching again. Came for the Majik, stayed for the Favre.

I agree with you guys. Harve is being a little bit of a sourpuss about Majik's inclusion in the GBHOF. The top 5 Packer passers are Favre, Starr, Dickey, Rote ( a great player, now forgotten) and Majkowski. All 5 are in the GBHOF, as they should be.

'89 was a Majik year. Pack set a NFL record 4 1 point victories. Don led 5 come from behind victories. That win in SF was a big time win over the then top team in the league. Don and Sterling Sharpe developed special chemistry and couldn't be stopped when they got on a roll.

[billy_oliver880]

he is somebody's defensive coordinator.

I kinda like Glanville, although as a game commentator he was too much.

He is the DC for the University of Hawaii.

[MJZiggy]

Wow. Nice gig.

[billy_oliver880]

Wow. Nice gig.

No flipping kidding!

[HarveyWallbangers]

So Bart Starr, Lynn Dickey and Brett Favre were/are "decent" and the other 21 who started games for the Packers since the late 1950s were just "suckwads". I guess that would make Majkowski's seasons in Green Bay better than the "average" wouldn't it?

Being the 4th best QB in Green Bay over the last 50 years is decent in my book, especially when two of the three better are/will be NFL HOFers. 4th out of 25 should merit some respect.

So, Erik Kramer is a Bears Hall of Famer because he's been one of the better QBs in Chicago? Give me a break. It just means there have been bad QBs in Chicago. Outside of 2 great ones (Favre, Starr), 1 solid one (Dickey), and 1 QB who was slightly below average, but better than the other 21 suckwads (Majik), the Packers have had terrible QB play since the 50s.

[HarveyWallbangers]

11-21-1 as starting QB outside of 1989 with a 53 completion %, 36 TDs, and 47 interceptions. Are our standards that low?

Scott Mitchell had a great year in Detroit. Like, Majik he was a one year fluke.

Scott Mitchell in 1995:
59.3 completion %, 4338 yards, 32 TDs, 12 interceptions, team made playoffs with 10-6 record

Don Majkowski in 1989:
58.9 completion%, 4318 yards, 27 TDs, 20 interceptions, team just missed playoffs with 10-6 record

Scott Mitchell the rest of his career:
54 completion %, 63 TDs, 69 interceptions

Don Majkowski the rest of his career:
53 completion %, 36 TDs, 47 interceptions

SCOTT MITCHELL HAD A BETTER CAREER THAN MAJIK. If you look up one year wonder in the dictionary, Majik's picture is in there.

It's an absolute joke that Majik is in the Packer Hall of Fame.

[HarveyWallbangers]

BTW, I liked the Majik man just like anybody else when he played, but let's analyze him for what he was. Apparently, extremely overrated among Packer fans.

[Scott Campbell]

he is somebody's defensive coordinator.

I kinda like Glanville, although as a game commentator he was too much.

He is the DC for the University of Hawaii.

Is the head coach at Hawaii June Jones? Is that the June Jones who was his OC at ATL when Brett and Glanville were there?

[billy_oliver880]

he is somebody's defensive coordinator.

I kinda like Glanville, although as a game commentator he was too much.

He is the DC for the University of Hawaii.

Is the head coach at Hawaii June Jones? Is that the June Jones who was his OC at ATL when Brett and Glanville were there?

You are correct the head coach at the U of H is June Jones. He joined the falcons in '94 as a HC and departed after the '96 season.

[esoxx]

Majkowski was a dynamic player who was just coming into his prime when he suffered the shoulder injury against the Cardinals. He was never the same after that and it's a shame. But the guy was quite talented pre-injury and had a piss poor O-line, horrible run game and basically one guy to throw to. Majkowski was not like the Dilweg's, Kiel's, Wright's, Cambell's, etc.. that came through, he was actually talented.

If Edgar Bennett is deserving of the Packer HOF, believe me Majkowski certainly is.

[KYPack]

SCOTT MITCHELL HAD A BETTER CAREER THAN MAJIK. If you look up one year wonder in the dictionary, Majik's picture is in there.

It's an absolute joke that Majik is in the Packer Hall of Fame.

Tons of QB's have better career numbers than Joe Namath.

Lot's of pitchers have better career numbers than Sandy Koufax.

Both of them belong in their respective HOF's regardless of their statistics.

Why? Because they were great players who made a tremendous influence on their game and made a strong connection with the fans.

Scott Mitchell has never been considered for any HOF because he was a bum who had a great year. He isn't in the Detroit Lion Hall of Fame because there is no Detroit Lion Hall of Fame.

Majik is in the Green Bay Packer Hall because he was a great impact on Packer Football and made a true connection with the fans. He also deserved to be inducted.

I'll leave this bump as my final word on the subject.

[gureski]

I'll go a step further and broach one thing to Harvey...

Harvey..

Are the standards for a Team Hall of Fame different (in your view and opinion) then the standards are for the League Hall of Fame?

That's the question I have for you. If you're bothered by guys getting in with subpar stats then you're obviously placing great emphasis on statistics much like the League Hall of Fame.

For those of us that feel there is a big difference in criteria between the league Hall of Fame and a Team's Hall of Fame we can see that there is room in a Team Hall of Fame for a guy like Majikowski.

Hank Aaron's number is retired for the Milwaukee Brewers. Do you have a problem with that? Afterall, Aaron spent the bulk of his career with the Braves in Milwaukee and Atlanta. He finished his career with the Brewers and didn't do much of anything spectacular. If you go by stats with the Brewers, Aaron shouldn't have his number retired by the Brewers. If you look at other factors, such as Aaron's status in the game and his place in Milwaukee history....it's a no-brainer that his number be up on the wall.

For a team hall of fame you have to look at more then stats. There are many other factors that come into play that would never come into play when considering a player for the league hall of fame.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'll go a step further and broach one thing to Harvey...

Harvey..

Are the standards for a Team Hall of Fame different (in your view and opinion) then the standards are for the League Hall of Fame?

No, but I think a guy should have more than one good year. I don't think Desmond Howard, Keith Jackson or Ted Hendricks should be in the Packer Hall of Fame either.


Hank Aaron's number is retired for the Milwaukee Brewers. Do you have a problem with that? Afterall, Aaron spent the bulk of his career with the Braves in Milwaukee and Atlanta. He finished his career with the Brewers and didn't do much of anything spectacular. If you go by stats with the Brewers, Aaron shouldn't have his number retired by the Brewers. If you look at other factors, such as Aaron's status in the game and his place in Milwaukee history....it's a no-brainer that his number be up on the wall.

Nah, I think this was a tip of the cap for what he did for Milwaukee, so I don't have a problem with this. Different situation though.

[gureski]

What about Joe Montana and the Chiefs? Should Montana be in the Cheifs Hall of Fame?

He wasn't exactly the Hall of Fame QB that he was in S.F. while in K.C.. Would it be wrong for the Chiefs to include Montana in their Hall of Fame? (if he isn't already...I have no idea)

I'm just broaching the subject of whether or not you feel guys who played for a team and made an impact, albeit not necessarily in stats, deserve inclusion into a certain Team's Hall of Fame?

To me, and many others, Majikowski had a huge impact on the Packers franchise. He led a team that sparked the NFL to change its rules and allow an extra playoff team into the playoffs. He pissed off the Bears so much that they have an astrick next to a game vs the Packers in their year book. He brought positive press and hope to a team that was desolute. His impact, to me and many others, isn't all in stats. It was the entire package. Why not put a guy like that into the Hall of Fame?

The Keith Jackson thing.....I"m not sure about that one. The guy didn't even want to come here and played less then 2 years with the team before leaving. That's harder to make a case for then Majikowski.

[HarveyWallbangers]

What about Joe Montana and the Chiefs?

I don't think so.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Keith Jackson thing.....I"m not sure about that one. The guy didn't even want to come here and played less then 2 years with the team before leaving. That's harder to make a case for then Majikowski.

I'd argue that he had as much importance on the franchise as Majik though. He was very instrumental in a Super Bowl winning team. I don't think he should make it either though.

[billy_oliver880]

The Keith Jackson thing.....I"m not sure about that one. The guy didn't even want to come here and played less then 2 years with the team before leaving. That's harder to make a case for then Majikowski.

I'd argue that he had as much importance on the franchise as Majik though. He was very instrumental in a Super Bowl winning team. I don't think he should make it either though.

If he was inducted for being a instrumental part of a SB winning team then shouldn't the whole team get inducted? I mean they all had to be there for the wins and participated. Hell the staff was instrumental in those winning seasons too. Even the people who are working on the building and on the field. Where is their recognition? They all had part in making this a winning team?

[cpk1994]

Wow. Nice gig.

No flipping kidding!

After seeing Glanville during the Badgers Hawaii game last december, I'd say he has been frequenting many Luaus :mrgreen:

[billy_oliver880]

Wow. Nice gig.

No flipping kidding!

After seeing Glanville during the Badgers Hawaii game last december, I'd say he has been frequenting many Luaus :mrgreen:

Ya it doesn't look like he has missed many of them. :lol: