The only way TT and M3 walk away winners...

[MadtownPacker]

...is if they can get ARod to do this:

http://imgs.sfgate.com/sports/49ers/pictures/2000/06/09/young-95superbowl.jpg


Jennings can take Rice's place for good measure. :D

[Scott Campbell]

Some said we'd never recover from the Walker fiasco either.

[MadtownPacker]

Some said we'd never recover from the Walker fiasco either.Cmon man, a one year wonder is not comparable to a guy who has put in work for almost 2 decades.

[The Leaper]

I don't think so...although that would obviously end the discussion once and for all.

However...is this "winners" in the long term sense or "winners" in the short term sense...or both?

To be winners short term, they need Rodgers to be capable enough to get GB to the playoffs in 2008. If the Packers miss the playoffs, I think TT and MM lose...because the Favre led Packers were 13-3 last year.

Long term, they just need the team to remain a playoff contender. As long as you are getting to the postseason, you have a chance to make some noise.

[BallHawk]

They win if Rodgers leads them to the playoffs.

They lose if they don't make the playoffs.

They lose even worse if Favre makes the playoffs on another team.

Do they lose their jobs over it? No. But it does increase the pressure for next year.

[imscott72]

I don't think so...although that would obviously end the discussion once and for all.

However...is this "winners" in the long term sense or "winners" in the short term sense...or both?

To be winners short term, they need Rodgers to be capable enough to get GB to the playoffs in 2008. If the Packers miss the playoffs, I think TT and MM lose...because the Favre led Packers were 13-3 last year.

Long term, they just need the team to remain a playoff contender. As long as you are getting to the postseason, you have a chance to make some noise.

Agreed. Anything less than a playoff appearance would be a loss for management and a lot of speculation on what could have been.

[Scott Campbell]

Some said we'd never recover from the Walker fiasco either.Cmon man, a one year wonder is not comparable to a guy who has put in work for almost 2 decades.



Walker should have had a lot more gas left in the tank when he left than Brett does now at almost 39 years old. This Favre melodrama is more about theatrics than long term implications.

[MadtownPacker]

People are saying #4 cant win the big games and none is bigger than the SB. It is the ultimate goal and no NFL career (GM, player or coach) without one can't be considered complete. Just ask Marino and Kelly.

[The Shadow]

I think an organization finally willing to say no to the demands of a self-indulgent athlete earns major 'winner' points.

[MadtownPacker]

They win if Rodgers leads them to the playoffs.

They lose if they don't make the playoffs.

They lose even worse if Favre makes the playoffs on another team.

Do they lose their jobs over it? No. But it does increase the pressure for next year.Im not talking about winning the SB this year, Im talking about ever. 2, 5 or even 10 years from now.

[boiga]

I agree. They'll need to at least make it to the Superbowl in the next 5 years or their legacy will be toast.

[MadtownPacker]

I think an organization finally willing to say no to the demands of a self-indulgent athlete earns major 'winner' points.Funny, you always say anything besides championships (like Starr) aint shit. Why you flip-flopping now??


Got a lil Favre in you after all huh? :lol:

[Zool]

I think an organization finally willing to say no to the demands of a self-indulgent athlete earns major 'winner' points.Funny, you always say anything besides championships (like Starr) aint shit. Why you flip-flopping now??


Got a lil Favre in you after all huh? :lol:

You must have flown to GB and had some Favre in you lastnight.

[BallHawk]

Im not talking about winning the SB this year, Im talking about ever. 2, 5 or even 10 years from now.

In that case I misinterpreted the poll.

Yes, the only way this works if if we win the Super Bowl. Without a doubt.

[The Shadow]

By the way :
Is their any way Brett Favre ever :
1. Redeems himself after the mess he created?
2. Walks away - mayne not a winner (which would be a mighty stretch) - but at least not a complete jerk?''

Just asking, to keep things fair.

[MadtownPacker]

By the way :
Is their any way Brett Favre ever :
1. Redeems himself after the mess he created?
2. Walks away - mayne not a winner (which would be a mighty stretch) - but at least not a complete jerk?''

Just asking, to keep things fair.Then make your own fucking thread.

Or is you time up on the senior center computer for today?

[cpk1994]

I think an organization finally willing to say no to the demands of a self-indulgent athlete earns major 'winner' points.Funny, you always say anything besides championships (like Starr) aint shit. Why you flip-flopping now??


Got a lil Favre in you after all huh? :lol:

You must have flown to GB and had some Favre in you lastnight.

ZING!

[The Shadow]

By the way :
Is their any way Brett Favre ever :
1. Redeems himself after the mess he created?
2. Walks away - mayne not a winner (which would be a mighty stretch) - but at least not a complete jerk?''

Just asking, to keep things fair.Then make your own fucking thread.

Or is you time up on the senior center computer for today?


OOOO! Touch mad nerve?

[Scott Campbell]

There aren't any winners in this mess, except for maybe the Bears and ESPN.

[Freak Out]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

[CaliforniaCheez]

The reputation of the Packers has been damaged.

I think if Brett had

1) Filed for reinstatement right away in June when he wanted back and

2) Not done the Greta interview until after reinstatement had been rebuffed with making him the 3rd string QB.

Things would have been better.

Bob Harlan with his retirement and 1 year extension had less power. Murphy is new to it and hasn't flexed any muscle but to support Ted way too early has taken himself out of the process.

Ted has all the power and his will reigns supreme. Brett's pride won't allow him to be benched.

This will still be discussed decades from now like the Jon Hadle trade, the near bankruptcy and the selling of stock, and the ousting of Curly Lambeau.

This is a historical event. No winners and everyone loses.

Too much power corrupts and Murphy blew it by speaking too soon.
Ted will not be permitted to retire.

[MadtownPacker]

OOOO! Touch mad nerve?Nah, just wanted to revive the old JSO rivalry we use to have. I get tired of being nice to a bunch of crackas.

[The Shadow]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

Hey!

[Scott Campbell]

I get tired of being nice to a bunch of crackas.


I must have missed that post.

[The Shadow]

OOOO! Touch mad nerve?Nah, just wanted to revive the old JSO rivalry we use to have. I get tired of being nice to a bunch of crackas.


I love you too, Mad.

[Freak Out]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

Hey!

Hows the band Opa?

[MadtownPacker]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.Thats is a better way of wording the question.

[The Shadow]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

Hey!

Hows the band Opa?

Well, it's hard getting the home to allow us to play. And we have to be back for applesauce before the 7:30 curfew.

[Freak Out]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

Hey!

Hows the band Opa?

Well, it's hard getting the home to allow us to play. And we have to be back for applesauce before the 7:30 curfew.

:lol: :lol:

[Partial]

If the Packers do not win a super bowl in the next 3 years, then they are big time losers. They have a very legitimate chance this year with Favre. By throwing that away and saying screw you to the vets of the team, they had better win one in the next few years. I suspect they won't, and M3 will go down with TT unfortunately, which is a shame because M3 seems like a good guy and good coach (read: not at all slippery or snake like).

[cpk1994]

If the Packers do not win a super bowl in the next 3 years, then they are big time losers. They have a very legitimate chance this year with Favre. By throwing that away and saying screw you to the vets of the team, they had better win one in the next few years. I suspect they won't, and M3 will go down with TT unfortunately, which is a shame because M3 seems like a good guy and good coach (read: not at all slippery or snake like).THey aren't saying screw you to the vets at all. They are sending a message that this TEAM values committment. Anything less and your ass is gone.

[hoosier]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

If Favre goes to another team this year and stinks it up (not that I'd ever wish that on him :wink: ) then I don't think there would even be a shadow. The only way there's a shadow is if Favre retires or lights it up while dressed in purple.

[Partial]

If the Packers do not win a super bowl in the next 3 years, then they are big time losers. They have a very legitimate chance this year with Favre. By throwing that away and saying screw you to the vets of the team, they had better win one in the next few years. I suspect they won't, and M3 will go down with TT unfortunately, which is a shame because M3 seems like a good guy and good coach (read: not at all slippery or snake like).THey aren't saying screw you to the vets at all. They are sending a message that this TEAM values committment. Anything less and your ass is gone.

Where is the commitment from the team to the vets who have been committed? Going with an essentially rookie quarterback who is extremely unproven over a guy who was selected by knowledgeable journalists (read: not your average Rodgers supporter here) to be the second best player in the NFL last year.

Respect and commitment are a two way street, and while Chad Clifton may have been extremely committed all off-season where is the team's commitment to his desire to win and reward for his commitment and hard work? What a joke.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The poll question is slanted against Thompson and McCarthy. Favre is good for one, maybe two years. Whatever happens after that would have happened either way--this sage has little bearing on it.

Considering we haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 12 years with Favre, it's a bit much to say the only way they win this sage is to win a Super Bowl.

[cpk1994]

If the Packers do not win a super bowl in the next 3 years, then they are big time losers. They have a very legitimate chance this year with Favre. By throwing that away and saying screw you to the vets of the team, they had better win one in the next few years. I suspect they won't, and M3 will go down with TT unfortunately, which is a shame because M3 seems like a good guy and good coach (read: not at all slippery or snake like).THey aren't saying screw you to the vets at all. They are sending a message that this TEAM values committment. Anything less and your ass is gone.

Where is the commitment from the team to the vets who have been committed? Going with an essentially rookie quarterback who is extremely unproven over a guy who was selected by knowledgeable journalists (read: not your average Rodgers supporter here) to be the second best player in the NFL last year.

Respect and commitment are a two way street, and while Chad Clifton may have been extremely committed all off-season where is the team's commitment to his desire to win and reward for his commitment and hard work? What a joke.The commitmment is there. Doesn't matter who your QB is there. He has the same shot at the SB. HOwever with Rodgers he also has total commitmment from a QB who isn't runnung his mouth to ESPN, throwing management under the bus and making a spectacle of himself. Also, you act as if Rodgers is totally incapable of getting to the SB. If Wrex Grossman can get to the SB, Rodgers is more than capable of doing the same.

[The Leaper]

Doesn't matter who your QB is there. He has the same shot at the SB.

So you are claiming that Green Bay would have the same chance at a Super Bowl regardless of who the QB was...be it Tom Brady or Rex Grossman?

[cpk1994]

Doesn't matter who your QB is there. He has the same shot at the SB.

So you are claiming that Green Bay would have the same chance at a Super Bowl regardless of who the QB was...be it Tom Brady or Rex Grossman?Absolutely, Every starting QB has the same chance of getting to the SB: 1/16. Doesn't matter if its Brady Manning, Favre or Rodgers. And seeing as the list of SB starting Qb's includes:

Trent Dilfer
Rex Grossman
Brad Johnson
Jeff Hostetler
and
Mark Rypien

Rodgers is more than capable of leading this team to the Super Bowl.

[boiga]

Doesn't matter who your QB is there. He has the same shot at the SB.

So you are claiming that Green Bay would have the same chance at a Super Bowl regardless of who the QB was...be it Tom Brady or Rex Grossman?The choice between these two QB's makes that question difficult.

Who has a better chance of leading us deep in the playoffs: an improving Rodgers or declining Favre? There is a reasonable argument for both candidates. It's not a one sided issue.

[Pugger]

The poll question is slanted against Thompson and McCarthy. Favre is good for one, maybe two years. Whatever happens after that would have happened either way--this sage has little bearing on it.

Considering we haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 12 years with Favre, it's a bit much to say the only way they win this sage is to win a Super Bowl.

There is no way to know if Brett will continue to play like he did last season. Every player once he reaches a certain age will hit a wall. (We all gotta pray Harris and Woodson won't this coming year!) And just because Brett has this incredible game starting streak there is no guarantee that he'll stay healthy this year either. The law of averages in a violent game will even out eventually.

[The Leaper]

Who has a better chance of leading us deep in the playoffs: an improving Rodgers or declining Favre? There is a reasonable argument for both candidates. It's not a one sided issue.

My take is that Favre offers a significant advantage over Rodgers in 2008.

If you want to support Rodgers as the starter, I think there are other logical points that make sense...Favre's constant waffling, focus on commitment, Favre's short term status, etc.

Favre remains a better option at QB than Rodgers IMO for 2008. Rodgers is going to have some major growing pains IMO...as most young QBs do.

[Partial]

The poll question is slanted against Thompson and McCarthy. Favre is good for one, maybe two years. Whatever happens after that would have happened either way--this sage has little bearing on it.

Considering we haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 12 years with Favre, it's a bit much to say the only way they win this sage is to win a Super Bowl.

Why? We were on the cusp of a super bowl last year with super Favre and incredibly young team. What reason is their to believe that our other players won't get better? Super bowl or bust.

[Partial]

If the Packers do not win a super bowl in the next 3 years, then they are big time losers. They have a very legitimate chance this year with Favre. By throwing that away and saying screw you to the vets of the team, they had better win one in the next few years. I suspect they won't, and M3 will go down with TT unfortunately, which is a shame because M3 seems like a good guy and good coach (read: not at all slippery or snake like).THey aren't saying screw you to the vets at all. They are sending a message that this TEAM values committment. Anything less and your ass is gone.

Where is the commitment from the team to the vets who have been committed? Going with an essentially rookie quarterback who is extremely unproven over a guy who was selected by knowledgeable journalists (read: not your average Rodgers supporter here) to be the second best player in the NFL last year.

Respect and commitment are a two way street, and while Chad Clifton may have been extremely committed all off-season where is the team's commitment to his desire to win and reward for his commitment and hard work? What a joke.The commitmment is there. Doesn't matter who your QB is there. He has the same shot at the SB. HOwever with Rodgers he also has total commitmment from a QB who isn't runnung his mouth to ESPN, throwing management under the bus and making a spectacle of himself. Also, you act as if Rodgers is totally incapable of getting to the SB. If Wrex Grossman can get to the SB, Rodgers is more than capable of doing the same.

The commitment is there? Where? I don't see the organization returning the commitment to win that the players are. How is starting an injury-prone (thus far), inexperienced qb who has never won any game he has played in a comittment to winning and a sign of respect to the vets who give it there all day in and day out?

You cannot say that about Rodgers until he does it. That's an awfully big assumption don't you think? Comparing a guy who has never started a game to Rex Grossman, who that year led the NFL in games with a QB rating above 100 and took his team to the super bowl, is idiotic at best.

[The Leaper]

There is no way to know if Brett will continue to play like he did last season.

And there is no way of knowing how Rodgers will play whatsoever. I think that is the larger point.

Favre = 15 of 16 seasons of at least 8 wins
Rodgers = ????

For 2008, Favre is a better option for success. However, because Rodgers is a better option for success long term, you can make the argument that going with Rodgers makes sense even if it is a step back short term.

[Harlan Huckleby]

A SB appearance/win is the only way for these guys to remove themselves from #4s shadow.

in a way, that would be true whether we had this Brett Favre nervous breakdown or not.

Every GM is expected to eventually take a team to the SB

[Packers4Glory]

the goal is to win. Favre gives them the best chance. why they are so anti-Favre now is beyond understanding.

If AR tanks they should both be canned if this keeps going like it is.

They don't want to trade or release brett, but they don't want him starting for the Packers??? Explain this to me. They think AR is the better option so why do they care who he plays for? we obviously have the better QB in AR

:roll:

[Bretsky]

They win if Rodgers leads them to the playoffs.

They lose if they don't make the playoffs.

They lose even worse if Favre makes the playoffs on another team.

Do they lose their jobs over it? No. But it does increase the pressure for next year.


Green Bay Is Making the playoffs with even below average QB play IMO
so I definitely would not be that soft on your judgment

This is long term and I don't think TT or MM win or lose either way

[Badgerinmaine]

The poll question is slanted against Thompson and McCarthy. Favre is good for one, maybe two years. Whatever happens after that would have happened either way--this sage has little bearing on it.

Considering we haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 12 years with Favre, it's a bit much to say the only way they win this sage is to win a Super Bowl.
Exactly. I think this kind of "who wins" speculation isn't healthy for anyone and just adds to the overflowing pile of media hype. Only one team wins a Super Bowl a year; to say everyone else is a failure makes no sense to me.

[Gunakor]

The Buffalo Bills have never won a Super Bowl. Are you going to tell me that Marv Levy wasn't a successful coach, or that his 4 consecutive AFC Championships are insignificant without the SB win? The man earned his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning the big one.

Not that I am predicting this to happen, because I'm not, but what if MM earns his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning a Super Bowl. Would you consider him to be a winner or a loser?

[gex]

And Favre bringing us to the playoffs 13+yrs?
Thanx but management doesn't want you anymore.

[MJZiggy]

And Favre bringing us to the playoffs 13+yrs?
Thanx but management doesn't want you anymore.

I wonder why that is. Gex, why do you think it is that they don't want him anymore?

[gex]

And Favre bringing us to the playoffs 13+yrs?
Thanx but management doesn't want you anymore.

I wonder why that is. Gex, why do you think it is that they don't want him anymore?

HUH?

[The Shadow]

And Favre bringing us to the playoffs 13+yrs?
Thanx but management doesn't want you anymore.

I wonder why that is. Gex, why do you think it is that they don't want him anymore?

HUH?


Perhaps there are reasons?

[Gunakor]

And Favre bringing us to the playoffs 13+yrs?
Thanx but management doesn't want you anymore.

I wonder why that is. Gex, why do you think it is that they don't want him anymore?

HUH?


I don't know, but I'll wager it's a combination of Favre not wanting to play here anymore, Favre publicly lashing out at the organization, and a commitment to Aaron Rodgers. And a whole bunch of other reasons that you will likely never know. Both sides are okay with it at this point, so I guess it's okay. Isn't it?

[MadtownPacker]

The Buffalo Bills have never won a Super Bowl. Are you going to tell me that Marv Levy wasn't a successful coach, or that his 4 consecutive AFC Championships are insignificant without the SB win? The man earned his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning the big one.

Not that I am predicting this to happen, because I'm not, but what if MM earns his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning a Super Bowl. Would you consider him to be a winner or a loser?When his name is brought up what is always mentioned? The great coach who lost 4 SBs in a row. Dont pretend it is not what history remembers him for.

[MadtownPacker]

The poll question is slanted against Thompson and McCarthy. Favre is good for one, maybe two years. Whatever happens after that would have happened either way--this sage has little bearing on it.

Considering we haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 12 years with Favre, it's a bit much to say the only way they win this sage is to win a Super Bowl.If you dont like it dont vote. That simple. The question isnt slanted any way. Just a straight up question if this is the only way they shine after all this.

I can tell you right now that NOT making the playoffs this year wont go over well with many of you who now hate Favre.

[Badgerinmaine]

The Buffalo Bills have never won a Super Bowl. Are you going to tell me that Marv Levy wasn't a successful coach, or that his 4 consecutive AFC Championships are insignificant without the SB win? The man earned his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning the big one.


Darned right. I get sick of hearing how athletes' (or coaches') careers are somehow flawed if they weren't on a world champion. It's an absurdly high standard that just makes people miserable.

[Gunakor]

The Buffalo Bills have never won a Super Bowl. Are you going to tell me that Marv Levy wasn't a successful coach, or that his 4 consecutive AFC Championships are insignificant without the SB win? The man earned his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning the big one.

Not that I am predicting this to happen, because I'm not, but what if MM earns his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning a Super Bowl. Would you consider him to be a winner or a loser?When his name is brought up what is always mentioned? The great coach who lost 4 SBs in a row. Dont pretend it is not what history remembers him for.

He's still in the Hall of Fame. He's still a great coach. Those were still great teams. Don't pretend they weren't. They made it to 4 consecutive Super Bowls, something that hadn't happened before and likely won't happen again. Give credit where it is earned.

[MadtownPacker]

The Buffalo Bills have never won a Super Bowl. Are you going to tell me that Marv Levy wasn't a successful coach, or that his 4 consecutive AFC Championships are insignificant without the SB win? The man earned his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning the big one.

Not that I am predicting this to happen, because I'm not, but what if MM earns his way into the Hall of Fame without ever winning a Super Bowl. Would you consider him to be a winner or a loser?When his name is brought up what is always mentioned? The great coach who lost 4 SBs in a row. Dont pretend it is not what history remembers him for.

He's still in the Hall of Fame. He's still a great coach. Those were still great teams. Don't pretend they weren't. They made it to 4 consecutive Super Bowls, something that hadn't happened before and likely won't happen again. Give credit where it is earned.Im not saying he wasdnt great. What I am saying is that the 4 losses are ALWAYS and I mean ALWAYS mentioned at some point. Four in a row was great but then losing four in a row is brought up.

[GBRulz]

Every player once he reaches a certain age will hit a wall. (We all gotta pray Harris and Woodson won't this coming year!)

Hopefully Harris has a chip on his shoulder and comes out swinging this year. Otherwise, I think he's well on the downside of his career.