OFFICIAL BRETT THE LIVING LEGEND THREAD

[Scott Campbell]

Not sure it's that really. He's an old, veteran player, who can play at a very high level. I think he just thought the respect for him was so deep that if changed his mind on retirement the packers would be elated to have him return. I mean, think if after elway's 2nd SB win, if he retired... but then as TC went on he wanted to come back - would denver of told him no, and then back peddle and say fine but you aren't guarenteed your starter spot? There are very, very few scenarios where a QB coming off a very good season (some argued MVP like at the time) in 2007 - been the franchise for 16 years, where a team would not welcome the player back.


There is no team that would have let Bert come back after what he did to them.

[falco]

Not sure it's that really. He's an old, veteran player, who can play at a very high level. I think he just thought the respect for him was so deep that if changed his mind on retirement the packers would be elated to have him return. I mean, think if after elway's 2nd SB win, if he retired... but then as TC went on he wanted to come back - would denver of told him no, and then back peddle and say fine but you aren't guarenteed your starter spot? There are very, very few scenarios where a QB coming off a very good season (some argued MVP like at the time) in 2007 - been the franchise for 16 years, where a team would not welcome the player back.


There is no team that would have let Bert come back after what he did to them.

You mean after he threw away the championship game and then faked retirement to get out of training camp? I think the Vikings might do it. :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Would Favre have hit Jennings first play of OT last season in arizona? Most likely, yeah....



Would Favre have been able to carry the team on his back to overtime? Most likely, no.

[packerbacker1234]

Not sure it's that really. He's an old, veteran player, who can play at a very high level. I think he just thought the respect for him was so deep that if changed his mind on retirement the packers would be elated to have him return. I mean, think if after elway's 2nd SB win, if he retired... but then as TC went on he wanted to come back - would denver of told him no, and then back peddle and say fine but you aren't guarenteed your starter spot? There are very, very few scenarios where a QB coming off a very good season (some argued MVP like at the time) in 2007 - been the franchise for 16 years, where a team would not welcome the player back.


There is no team that would have let Bert come back after what he did to them.

You mean after he threw away the championship game and then faked retirement to get out of training camp? I think the Vikings might do it. :lol:

Come now, does anyone think his first retirement was fake to get out of training camp? I think his first retirement was based solely on emotions. He was feeling like complete shit, like he alone let the packers down (despite the fact that the rest of the team did nothing to help most the game), let himself down, and that he just didn't have "it" anymore. He admitted the skills were there, his mind was not. he decided it quickly, and rather rashly at that. As time went on and he cleared his head (something the packers should of insisted he did to begin with) he changed his mind.

Would any team bring a player back that did "that" to his team? It happens all the time. Players come out and retire at the end of the season, and then in the middle of training camp they unretire. Favre wasn't the first to do it, and many times it happens because the team is trying to convince the player to unretire. It just happened last season with Derrick Mason of the Ravens. He retired, and the ravens convinced him during training camp to come back.

What about Junior Seau? He retired like 4 or 5 years straight and was convinced to come back every time. When favre initially made it public he wanted to come back - I think it became a push and shove situation. In most cases - when a player of favre's caliber goes public in train camp that he wants to return, the teams (as history has shown) welcome him back with open arms.

The packers initial reaction was more of a "piss off, favre. We moved on." From that point, it became a bitch fest. Favre attacking TT, The packers giving him the cold shoulder more. Then the packers say "we can let you compete for the starting job" - which is silly. If anything, thats worse for AR tbh. The whole thing was stupid. I don't think Favre really had any distaste for MM - it was all TT.

The truth is, none of us really know what happened - we just know what was released publicly - and both sides looked equally stupid.

[Scott Campbell]

Considering up to that point the pounding he had taken, and how he played before and after that pick, it was really irrelevant.


He inexplicably cost them a trip to the Superbowl, and totally ruined their season with one boneheaded choke job. But otherwise it was really irrelevant.

[gex]

What if he's dragging this out so he can use PED's and be away from testing?

I'm shocked he needs that much attention. I just can't buy that. It's just so bizarre and diva-like for a guy who's supposed to be so tough and man-like.

I think the magnitude of Favre's mental and physical toughness is matched only by his need for emotional reassurance.

+1

And because TT and MM wouldn't kiss Favre's...ring...that may have been the beginning of the end of #4 in GB. It is remarkable how a guy like that has such a need to feel wanted and loved.

Not sure it's that really. He's an old, veteran player, who can play at a very high level. I think he just thought the respect for him was so deep that if changed his mind on retirement the packers would be elated to have him return. I mean, think if after elway's 2nd SB win, if he retired... but then as TC went on he wanted to come back - would denver of told him no, and then back peddle and say fine but you aren't guarenteed your starter spot? There are very, very few scenarios where a QB coming off a very good season (some argued MVP like at the time) in 2007 - been the franchise for 16 years, where a team would not welcome the player back. Even with AR in the wings, you can't really say we knew what we had yet at that point. Favre just had his best seasons arguablly since the 90's, and was | | close to being in the SB again. Most teams would call it crazy to not be begging him to return.

And admit it - even with his int in OT, most of us most likely wanted him back. How could we not? NFC Champion game no one saw coming entering 2007, Favre played out of his mind in a lot of must win games (really, his 2007 season was one to remember). When the game was on the line throughout all of 2007, Favre seemed to come through every time. I mean, this was the sort of Favre we all wanted, the sort of #4 we expected. The man that with the game on the line is going to get it done. Then he threw the NFC Champ int. Sorry, I can safely say I wanted him back.

2 years later the packers look the wiser, even though Favre played legitimate MVP caliber player last season. Would Favre have hit Jennings first play of OT last season in arizona? Most likely, yeah, but AR would of never got that growing experience either. Long haul, it was good to have AR out there. Plus, AR is on the cusp too of being a super star, he just has to start coming through in those moments in the playoffs.


Favre "should" be coming back this season. The vikings drafted as if he was coming back. Everyone expects him to come back. The vikings are built to win now - their window is litterally now. ANd it's only really open for maybe another year after this. They are losing too many of their good players to age. Favre knows this, and that is why he wanted to go there anyways. The team is built perfectly for him to get it done.

I don't think he's dragging this out for attention... at least not this year. He said he most likely needed minor ankle surgery to play again on his site. So? He didn't call any media outlets to make some big deal of it. So him and childress have been texting all offseason. So? Not like he released that information either, it's just really common stuff.

I think the big shocker is if he DOESN'T come back.

And like someone else said - favre actually played really well in the saints game. Especially when you start to remember the beatdown he was given all game. A beatdown of which Peyton Manning can't even imagine. I wonder sometimes how he would of responded if he was beat down in a similar fashion. Favre just kept coming back. Could barely hobble around and was still running to make blocks on run plays, still in the middle of piles jumping all over the what was it, 4 fumbles his team had? He did throw two ints. One of them wasn't that costly, and is just one of those "it happens" plays. Considering up to that point the pounding he had taken, and how he played before and after that pick, it was really irrelevant.

The 2nd pick was obviously a game killer, even though the vikings admitted they were out of longwells range. That still doesn't excuse the throw. He could of ran forward even a yard and fell. At least given longwell a shot. No guarentee they win - he still could of missed the long FG, still went to OT, and Favre may have never had a chance in OT to win it. The int in 2007 was far worse - that int directly lead to the loss. The int last year didn't = the vikings were not in guarenteed winning position, and they still went to OT. Either way, one could argue the total lack of coaching discipline on the sidelines that lead to the 12 men in the huddle penalty is what really wrecked it for the vikings. That was 10x more embarassing than a forced throw pick when the vikings were out of range. They would of never needed to throw it. Good job, childress. It was almost as bad as the no call helmet to helmet on Rodgers the play before the fumble.

And... I'm not even sure the vikings stay in that game without Favre last season. Not sure jackson would of responded as well with the beatdown - favre was making up for fumbles the entire 2nd half. I mean - if AP grips the handoff at the goal line - vikings at least get a FG. They win. Harvin holds on - they get a FG - they win. Berrian holds on - they get a fg - they win.

It wasn't really just favre.

Maybe it was all karma, but barring his body not being able to handle it - I see #4 coming back for one more.

Your pissing in the wind there 1234, Harrel and his kind dont want to hear any good things about the Packer legend. They find it easier to just take your post line for line and tear it down.
They want everyone to conform to the what they believe or don't even bother coming to PR to post.
They are still very hurt and angry from the last 18 years of winning football in Green Bay.

[Scott Campbell]

Reassure him it wasn't all his fault - it's a team game and team loss. And let him know he would be a intrigal part in a SB run in 2008.

From all indications, the packers didn't do that.



1) You have no idea what they did or did not say to him
2) You don't beg players to come back if they're intent on retiring. I don't see the Cards groveling to Kurt Warner.

[packerbacker1234]

Would Favre have hit Jennings first play of OT last season in arizona? Most likely, yeah....



Would Favre have been able to carry the team on his back to overtime? Most likely, no.

See saints game. Yeah he threw the int, but it went to OT, and big reason the vikings were even able to be tied to go to OT was because of favre. Remember, the vikings fumbled it and lost the fumble 4 TIMES in the second half, the QB was getting hammered all game, and #4 kept getting up and leading the vikings down the field every time they had the ball. Would he of orchestrated the big comback rodgers did? No. I wasn't talking about that. I said the one throw over the middle to a wide open guy to win the game, some 20 yard pass? Yeah, a good veteran QB connects on that throw 99% of the time. An eager, inexperienced in big games, young, overexcited QB is most likely a 75% chance. You see that guy for your first time in a big game to WIN it and suddenly you just get super excited. Hard to calm that down to make sure that ball is not overthrown.

In many ways, it was much easier to orchestrate teh comeback then to make that throw. Once they were down 21 - there really was no pressure on him. The game was "lost", the defense played looser because thats just what happens when you have a big lead, and rodgers picked it apart. Then we get a gutsy onside kick... and it's a whole new game.

Rodgers gets credit for not pulling a favre - favre tends to just chuck it up when he's down big, they both have their good and bad qualities.

[Scott Campbell]

Your pissing in the wind there 1234, Harrel and his kind dont want to hear any good things about the Packer legend. They find it easier to just take your post line for line and tear it down.
They want everyone to conform to the what they believe or don't even bother coming to PR to post.
They are still very hurt and angry from the last 18 years of winning football in Green Bay.



Hey, how bout you stop taking personal shots at other posters?

[packerbacker1234]

Reassure him it wasn't all his fault - it's a team game and team loss. And let him know he would be a intrigal part in a SB run in 2008.

From all indications, the packers didn't do that.



1) You have no idea what they did or did not say to him
2) You don't beg players to come back if they're intent on retiring. I don't see the Cards groveling to Kurt Warner.

I bet you last season the cardinals were all over Kurt, doing anything they could to convince him to come back after that SB loss. Kurt also doesn't seem to have as hard of a time letting go either. I am sure he informed the cardinals of his decision to retire after the season even before the playoffs.

Favre we seem to only know of because the media is in love with the guy. They weren't in love with Kurt Warner for the most part. you certaintly were hearing stories of the cardinals "text messaging Kurt" last season - though I am sure it happened too. Look at the media first, then look at the people involved.

[Scott Campbell]

Yeah, a good veteran QB connects on that throw 99% of the time.



99%???? Jesus Christ himself doesn't have a 99% completion rate.

It was a tough deep throw, and good QB's connect at a 65% clip. Jennings was coming out of a double move. It was a difficult throw. Watch the tape.

[Scott Campbell]

I bet you last season the cardinals were all over Kurt, doing anything they could to convince him to come back after that SB loss. Kurt also doesn't seem to have as hard of a time letting go either. I am sure he informed the cardinals of his decision to retire after the season even before the playoffs.




You're projecting a lot, based on very little. Who knows what happened? I sure won't presume to.

[gex]

Reassure him it wasn't all his fault - it's a team game and team loss. And let him know he would be a intrigal part in a SB run in 2008.

From all indications, the packers didn't do that.



1) You have no idea what they did or did not say to him
2) You don't beg players to come back if they're intent on retiring. I don't see the Cards groveling to Kurt Warner.

And Scott has his finger on the pulse of Packer Nation for the middle of Utah..LOL...Gets a good feel for how Packer fans or even football fans in general feel about their team by hanging out and talking about the game with all his friends :glug: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[packerbacker1234]

Considering up to that point the pounding he had taken, and how he played before and after that pick, it was really irrelevant.


He inexplicably cost them a trip to the Superbowl, and totally ruined their season with one boneheaded choke job. But otherwise it was really irrelevant.

he threw two picks in the game. The first one was irrelevent to the outcome. Or if you want to think the first one was relevant, then sure the 4 fumbles all in saints territory were even more relevant.

So yeah, he signle handly cost them a SB... or maybe AP did botching the handoff... or flat out fumbling after getting hit on another drive. Or maybe it was percy harvin who fumbled it in saints territory... or benard berrian who also did the same thing - all while favre was repeatedly driving them into saints territory, in scoring range, to watch his fellow teammates drop the ball right back to the saints.

Did you even watch the same game? He made one bad throw - that has nothing to do with the fact that that throw is on par with every other player who turned it over in saints territory. Take ANY of those turnovers back, vikings win.

[Scott Campbell]

How many of those guys made $12M last year. Their leader let them down.

This is not Detroit man, THIS IS THE SUPERBOWL!

[RashanGary]

How about this old gem from Gex. . . Sounds like he's the angry one wanting people to conform to his opinion.


Jesus is droppimg hints that he might want to come back and save us peons, but all the HATERS say is "no thanks we are moving on without you with our science and technology" Don't listen to the HATERS, the selfish ones, the what have you done for me lately crowd. They seem to be the same one's always obsessed with THIS IS MY MONEY, ME,ME.ME. Favre gave everything he could for this franchise year in and year out, the MAN deserves better than the me,me,me, peons saying what they are saying.
Trade Aaron so he can start somewhere if you think he deserves it. You HATERS will be the first caliing for his head when things dont go so well anyways. NO sense of loyalty, fkn neo-cons. :!:

[Scott Campbell]

And Scott has his finger on the pulse of Packer Nation for the middle of Utah..LOL...


As opposed to what - aisle 3 - plumbing?

:lol:

[ThunderDan]

The problem is: BF did call TT and ask to unretire. TT and MM said fine we will fly down to Mississippi and discuss bringing you back. And then BF backed out again.

There is no way that TT and MM could have put BF on the bench after his 2007 season if he didn't retire and play the waffle game. The outrage after being 1 pass away from the Super Bowl would have been to much for the fans.

[ThunderDan]

You can't sit a QB who throws for 4,155 yards, 66.5%, 28 tds, 15 int and a 95.7 passer rating who takes your QB 1 game from the SB unless ..... he retires and waffles and in the end really didn't want to play under TT and MM anymore.

[RashanGary]

Here's another gex gem


BuBBLHEAD=HATER, :shock: Face it you don't like Favre, You have no sense of LOYALITY! What does a MAN who gave EVERTHING he had to give to a team, a city a state, have to prove anythng to a punk like you.

Yeah, looks like we're the ones who are angry that people don't share our opinions :)

[packerbacker1234]

Yeah, a good veteran QB connects on that throw 99% of the time.



99%???? Jesus Christ himself doesn't have a 99% completion rate.

It was a tough deep throw, and good QB's connect at a 65% clip. Jennings was coming out of a double move. It was a difficult throw. Watch the tape.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGAf2FCVaGo

Double move or not, Rodgers had all day to throw that ball, and Jennings was so open it was even funny. Trust me, really good veteran QB's hit that throw 99% of time. I just watched the film. It's a double move, it's a timing pattern, and the QB had all day. No excuse to not hit that throw.

[Scott Campbell]

Trust me, really good veteran QB's hit that throw 99% of time.



Sorry, I don't trust you. 99% is just your opinion, and one that I consider ridiculous.

I think Favre might have thrown 6 interceptions against that Cards defense, just like he did against St. Louis in one of his earlier playoff choke jobs.

[Zool]

Face it you don't like Favre, You have no sense of LOYALITY! What does a MAN who gave EVERTHING he had to give to a team, a city a state, have to prove anythng to a punk like you.

Who does he play for again? You wanna grab a Websters and look up loyalty?

[falco]

I think Favre might have thrown 6 interceptions against that Cards defense, just like he did against St. Louis in one of his earlier playoff choke jobs.

Or a nice lob up in the air to a cards defender without a receiver within 20 yards.

[packerbacker1234]

How many of those guys made $12M last year. Their leader let them down.

This is not Detroit man, THIS IS THE SUPERBOWL!

Thought you were talking about Adrian Peterson for a second there. The guy who was the cause of two fumbles in teh game, both in saints territory. I am not saying I wanted the vikings to win and I know it may sound that way, but Favre played a pretty good game. He threw the int, but his teammates fumbled the ball on seemingly every possesion in the second half. Litterally, the vikings kept going back to Favre, a guy who was barely able to get himself up off the ground in the 4th quarter, kept saying "win it for us brett" - he kept driving them, and his teammates kept handing it right back. You can only go to the Brett Favre well so much before he is bound to make a mistake. The vikings went to it the entire 2nd half and for the most part, he performed.

Hard to say he let them down. Did you see the lockerroom stuff after the game, when every player on the vikings went up to favre? I am fairly certain not a single vikings player in that locker room is blaiming their "leader" for that loss. They were sitting there thanking him for the ride and asking him for one more. Making sure he was okay from the beat down his OL allowed to happen. Picking him up off the ground.

I don't recall that happening in the packers locker room after the NFC Championship game in 2007. not a knock against the packers, but it is pretty clear where all of favre's viking teammates stand on the notion that #4 cost them the game. They pretty much all knew without him, they would of never been there.

[Scott Campbell]

I'll tell you what, Rodgers sure wouldn't have choked up that ball to Tracy Porter. He's much better with ball security than Favre ever was.

[falco]

I'll tell you what, Rodgers sure wouldn't have choked up that ball to Tracy Porter. He's much better with ball security than Favre ever was.

Rodgers throws less interceptions in a season than Favre throws in most playoff games. :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Hard to say he let them down.



No it's not. I had a blast reading posts at Vikings sites after the game from the masses of their fans who said exactly that. Heck. listen to what Paul Allen (the Viking color man) said about it. He had no problem letting all of America know just how let down he was by Bert Favre choke job.

[RashanGary]

I'll tell you what, Rodgers sure wouldn't have choked up that ball to Tracy Porter. He's much better with ball security than Favre ever was.

True. They would have kicked a field goal and won the SB with Rodgers.

[Scott Campbell]

Am I crazy, or do these homer announcers seem a little let down by that throw?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_zlgCIIZkw

[packerbacker1234]

Hard to say he let them down.



No it's not. I had a blast reading posts at Vikings sites after the game from the masses of their fans who said exactly that.

Letting the fans down, and letting the team down, are two different stories. And, after the initial fan reaction to what just occured... all the fans started to defend favre and began asking his return. Begging it. Teaming with radio stations to buy bill boards in his home town asking him to return.

While fans were all blaiming favre after teh game, his teammates were not. The camera's were in the lockerrom, you could witness what was happening. The team placed zero blame on brett. It was all "thank you for the ride" type stuff.

Just glance around today. People in packer nation are still solely blaiming favre for the 2007 NFC Championship game, yet most of viking nation is over it and realizing that that one play wasn't the whole game, and they want #4 back.

[sharpe1027]

I don't recall that happening in the packers locker room after the NFC Championship game in 2007. not a knock against the packers, but it is pretty clear where all of favre's viking teammates stand on the notion that #4 cost them the game. They pretty much all knew without him, they would of never been there.

Maybe, but without Favre they would have had Sage or T. Jack...that doesn't really say much.

[packerbacker1234]

I'll tell you what, Rodgers sure wouldn't have choked up that ball to Tracy Porter. He's much better with ball security than Favre ever was.

True. They would have kicked a field goal and won the SB with Rodgers.

Rodgers made the same boneheaded throw against the cardinals on what, the first play of the game? Even the people who are best known for taking care of the ball make that mistake on that sort of throw. When you roll out you are really narrowing the field down, and usually the open man is a throw across your body that every QB coach says is not worth the risk.

[Scott Campbell]

Hard to say he let them down.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMs4FSW9xuQ


They sure look let down to me. :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Rodgers made the same boneheaded throw against the cardinals on what, the first play of the game?



Sometimes its all about timing. If Rodgers had made that throw with the Superbowl hanging in the balance, it would be WAY worse than it was. Favre timed his choke PERFECTLY.

[falco]

Rodgers made the same boneheaded throw against the cardinals on what, the first play of the game?



Sometimes its all about timing. If Rodgers had made that throw with the Superbowl hanging in the balance, it would be WAY worse than it was. Favre timed his choke PERFECTLY.

I know I thought it came at the perfect time. :P

[sharpe1027]

Just glance around today. People in packer nation are still solely blaiming favre for the 2007 NFC Championship game, yet most of viking nation is over it and realizing that that one play wasn't the whole game, and they want #4 back.

There are still Vikings fans that blame Favre. Most Packer fans that don't "solely" blame Favre, but it wasn't just that one game or one throw. It was a whole series of similar F-ups at critical times. It's a lot easier to forget about one game than it is to forget about several years of games.

[Scott Campbell]

Just glance around today. People in packer nation are still solely blaiming favre for the 2007 NFC Championship game, yet most of viking nation is over it and realizing that that one play wasn't the whole game, and they want #4 back.

There are still Vikings fans that blame Favre. Most Packer fans that don't "solely" blame Favre, but it wasn't just that one game or one throw. It was a whole series of similar F-ups at critical times. It's a lot easier to forget about one game than it is to forget about several years of games.



There were many Viking mistakes in that game, but only one that lives in infamy.

[Scott Campbell]

Just glance around today. People in packer nation are still solely blaiming favre for the 2007 NFC Championship game, yet most of viking nation is over it and realizing that that one play wasn't the whole game, and they want #4 back.



If Brett manages to once again burn all his bridges on his way out of Minny, watch how their fan base reflect on his choker against the Saints.

[Scott Campbell]

While fans were all blaiming favre after teh game, his teammates were not. The camera's were in the lockerrom, you could witness what was happening.


I witnessed a bunch of upset players biting their tongues. 99% of their team realized that 99% of nursing home residents could have shuffled their walkers far enough forward for a Longwell fieldgoal. Every player in that locker room knew that Bert shouldn't have thrown the ball to Tracy Porter.

And last of all, Bert plead guilty to the charges. He freely admits that he should have ran.

[packerbacker1234]

While fans were all blaiming favre after teh game, his teammates were not. The camera's were in the lockerrom, you could witness what was happening.


I witnessed a bunch of upset players biting their tongues. 99% of their team realized that 99% of nursing home residents could have shuffled their walkers far enough forward for a Longwell fieldgoal. Every player in that locker room knew that Bert shouldn't have thrown the ball to Tracy Porter.

And last of all, Bert plead guilty to the charges. He freely admits that he should have ran.

Of course he admits it was a bad throw. Since when did I ever say it wasn't? I doubt teh players were really biting their tongues - with Brett they would of never been there, and almost every player in that locker room knows it.

[Scott Campbell]

Every single player and coach in that locker room knew that he cost them a Superbowl trip.

[packerbacker1234]

Every single player and coach in that locker room knew that he cost them a Superbowl trip.

ANd every single player and coach in that locker room knew that without Brett, they had no chance to even get to the Super Bowl, let alone the NFC Championship.

Your point?

[falco]

Actually, I recall a lot of talk during the offseason about players supporting the existing QBs. It wasn't until Favre officially showed up that the team "got behind him."

[Scott Campbell]

Every single player and coach in that locker room knew that he cost them a Superbowl trip.

ANd every single player and coach in that locker room knew that without Brett, they had no chance to even get to the Super Bowl, let alone the NFC Championship.

Your point?


My point?


I sure loved watching him screw them, especially after he had everyone believing that he'd will them to a championship. He was the ultimate tease last year. Watching him rip their hearts out in such dramatic fashion renewed my faith in karma - because Favre was so deserving of such a horrific fate.

[Freak Out]

The Campbell Crusade! :lol:

It's a team game where many mistakes are made throughout such contests by many different players.

You have reached bitter, jilted lover status in regards to LORD FAVRE.

:lol:

[Scott Campbell]

I make no bones about loathing the guy. He earned it. And I'm in good company:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t_65ueA2kA


But I do appreciate the way he screwed them in the end. :lol:

[retailguy]

Favre Has surgery

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5209161

Sources: Andrews operated on Favre

* Email
* Print
* Comments2

By Chris Mortensen
ESPN.com
Archive

Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre underwent arthroscopic surgery on his injured left ankle Friday morning by noted orthopedic specialist Dr. James Andrews, several sources told ESPN.com.

Favre had surgery at the Andrews Institute in Gulf Breeze, Fla., where Favre and his agent Bus Cook were spotted by a handful of people.

Dr. Andrews cleaned up scar tissue and other elements of the joint to allow Favre a better range of motion, sources said.

A source close to Favre said the 40-year-old signal caller would likely need four-to-six weeks of rehabilitation before beginning a running program that would put him on schedule to report to training camp "either at the beginning of camp or shortly thereafter."

Favre had said he would need the surgery if he were going to play in 2010. He was unavailable for comment.

[Freak Out]

I make no bones about loathing the guy. He earned it. And I'm in good company:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t_65ueA2kA


But I do appreciate the way he screwed them in the end. :lol:

I'm no Viking fan. :)

[packerbacker1234]

Every single player and coach in that locker room knew that he cost them a Superbowl trip.

ANd every single player and coach in that locker room knew that without Brett, they had no chance to even get to the Super Bowl, let alone the NFC Championship.

Your point?


My point?


I sure loved watching him screw them, especially after he had everyone believing that he'd will them to a championship. He was the ultimate tease last year. Watching him rip their hearts out in such dramatic fashion renewed my faith in karma - because Favre was so deserving of such a horrific fate.

So for you, it was Super Bowl or bust eh? To many others, last season was a massive success. A barely in the playoff team became one of the best in the league. They were one fo hte top 4 teams in the NFL. Thats saying something. Was it disapointing they fell short? Sure - whatever team favre is on it feels like almsot every eyar they are super bowl contedors.

Still, I think it was generally a success, especially if he is coming back this year. I am no viking fan - but I would rather the packers get bounced in the NFC Championship game then lose in the first round.

[packerbacker1234]

Favre Has surgery

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5209161

Sources: Andrews operated on Favre

* Email
* Print
* Comments2

By Chris Mortensen
ESPN.com
Archive

Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre underwent arthroscopic surgery on his injured left ankle Friday morning by noted orthopedic specialist Dr. James Andrews, several sources told ESPN.com.

Favre had surgery at the Andrews Institute in Gulf Breeze, Fla., where Favre and his agent Bus Cook were spotted by a handful of people.

Dr. Andrews cleaned up scar tissue and other elements of the joint to allow Favre a better range of motion, sources said.

A source close to Favre said the 40-year-old signal caller would likely need four-to-six weeks of rehabilitation before beginning a running program that would put him on schedule to report to training camp "either at the beginning of camp or shortly thereafter."

Favre had said he would need the surgery if he were going to play in 2010. He was unavailable for comment.

yeah, just further shows he is coming back. Just a matter of when he wants to start practice at this point.

[Pugger]

But I continue find it remarkable that a guy with a ring and 3 MVPs on his resume would still need to be begged to come back, even after that INT in OT. I don't believe for one moment that anyone pushed Favre into 'retirement' either. There is no way MM was gonna bench #4 in favor of Rodgers had Favre not retired. Why would a HC want his starting QB out the door after #4 had just lead his team to the conference championship game?? Favre played brilliantly in 07 and there would've been a lynch mob outside of MM's office at 1265 had he tried to bench Favre in 08. If Favre was feeling unloved that was his fault, no one else's.

[RashanGary]

This whole fantasy that teams can't do it without Brett is a built up fairytale. For years we heard how the Packers were going to drop off the National face as soon as we lost Favre. We were in the playoffs last year and are a national favorite to win the SB.

Two years ago the Jets missed the playoffs with Brett, but Favre's fans credited Brett with their whole turn around. Year after he leaves, they're in the playoffs.

The Vikings were in the playoffs aftter startering Ferrotte and Jackson the year before. Ferrotte was out of the leauge the next year. They made the playoffs with a QB that didn't even belong in the league.

Now they made it with Brett and he's the savior/hero. They wouldn't have been there without him.

Sorry, not buying it. Vikings are good with our without Favre. Jets were. Packers are. And that goes to all of the Rodgers fans too. QB's don't make teams SB contenders. QB's are fortunate enough to play on SB contenders and then take all of the credit for it because the camera follows the ball. It's easy to forget the whole game that goes on because we don't see it unless we really look. Without a good team, a QB is useless. Brett too, Rodgers too.

[Scott Campbell]

So for you, it was Super Bowl or bust eh? To many others, last season was a massive success.


Not at all. It was the horrific manner in which he choked away their season that made everything else irrelevant. That pass to Tracy Porter became the signature moment of his season, if not his career.

[pack4to84]

I was talking too some of my Viking friends at work. They say it still hurts having lost the way they did to the Saints. I told them us Packer fans know what your going through, because he did this to us every time we made the playoffs after the SB run.

[Scott Campbell]

I think Darren Sharper may feel the same way as I do about Bert.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/22/darren-sharper-on-brett-favre-surgery-x-marks-the-spot/

[PlantPage55]

This whole fantasy that teams can't do it without Brett is a built up fairytale. For years we heard how the Packers were going to drop off the National face as soon as we lost Favre. We were in the playoffs last year and are a national favorite to win the SB.


Agreed. The words "you wouldn't be there without him" are instantly vomit-inducing for me.

There's no way of proving that and to throw something like that out there so carelessly reveals a lot more about one's football knowledge than they clearly believe it does.

[Scott Campbell]

So for you, it was Super Bowl or bust eh? To many others, last season was a massive success.


That's a little like toasting the early success of the Hindenburg. All people remember is:

http://electivedecisions.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/hindenburg1.jpg

[Bretsky]

gosh for a while this thread was actual level headed; I see that's gone again

[falco]

gosh for a while this thread was actual level headed; I see that's gone again

Really? I don't think there is anyone level headed in this thread. Everyone pretty much leans one way or the other.

[digitaldean]

So Favre's coming back again, huh?

Well, I say bring it on. No reason to be down or worried about it.

Our team needs to take care of its own business and not worry who the QB is in Queens-land.

I admire his drive to want to try again. I just want our team to put the DAGGER into those hopes once and for all.

[Packerarcher]

I think Darren Sharper may feel the same way as I do about Bert.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/22/darren-sharper-on-brett-favre-surgery-x-marks-the-spot/

I am so shocked you condone dirty play,that's about your style.

[Packerarcher]

gosh for a while this thread was actual level headed; I see that's gone again

Level headed and Scott Cambell can not coincide in a Favre thread.

[Scott Campbell]

I think Darren Sharper may feel the same way as I do about Bert.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/22/darren-sharper-on-brett-favre-surgery-x-marks-the-spot/

I am so shocked you condone dirty play,that's about your style.



Well you wife sure seems to enjoy it. :lol:


But seriously, where did I say I condone dirty play? And speaking of dirty play, I'm reminded of this:



http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4446703


MINNEAPOLIS -- Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre was fined $10,000 by the NFL on Friday for his crackback block on Houston defensive back Eugene Wilson in a preseason game.

The play happened on Monday night at Houston in Favre's first extensive action since he signed with the Vikings on Aug. 18.

The 39-year-old lined up at receiver in Minnesota's version of the wildcat offense. Rookie receiver Percy Harvin took the snap and started running around the left end in Favre's direction. Despite playing with sore ribs, the quarterback crouched and threw his body at Wilson's legs to cut him down.

The game was televised nationally and the block caused an uproar in Houston and elsewhere around the league. Wilson injured his left knee on the play and defensive players have long considered that type of block a dirty play.

"What was up with that?" Wilson said after the game when asked about the block. "Seriously, what was up with that?"

[Tony Oday]

I think this could be the year that he finally starts breaking down. He is not young and keeps getting scar tissue cleaned up. I think this is great for the Pack he cant move around anymore and really he is in trouble behind that line.

That all being said thanks for the PAck Memories and hell the memory of the pick in last years NFC Champ game! :)

[pbmax]

... We were in the playoffs last year and are a national favorite to win the SB.
Don't ever write this again. Peter King is a black cat and a ladder all rolled into one specious column. Everyone here needs to believe everyone out there is against the Packers and no one is giving the squad a chance.

If I was McCarthy, I would hide Rodgers and spread a rumor that he tore ligaments in both knees while line dancing in Vegas with a country music singer. Then sign Kurt Warner, no, Jeff Garcia to convince people you are serious.

[pbmax]

gosh for a while this thread was actual level headed; I see that's gone again

Really? I don't think there is anyone level headed in this thread. Everyone pretty much leans one way or the other.
I think Bretsky means emotionally stable as opposed to seeing both sides of the issue.

As for me, I have always argued we should have traded Favre and not Aaron Brooks. :lol:

[packers11]

who else is glad we don't have to wait all off-season to see if our starting QB comes back...

I hated T.T. when he drafted Rodgers... but man, do I think that was the best move he has done as a GM... THANK YOU!!!

[packerbacker1234]

This whole fantasy that teams can't do it without Brett is a built up fairytale. For years we heard how the Packers were going to drop off the National face as soon as we lost Favre. We were in the playoffs last year and are a national favorite to win the SB.

Two years ago the Jets missed the playoffs with Brett, but Favre's fans credited Brett with their whole turn around. Year after he leaves, they're in the playoffs.

The Vikings were in the playoffs aftter startering Ferrotte and Jackson the year before. Ferrotte was out of the leauge the next year. They made the playoffs with a QB that didn't even belong in the league.

Now they made it with Brett and he's the savior/hero. They wouldn't have been there without him.

Sorry, not buying it. Vikings are good with our without Favre. Jets were. Packers are. And that goes to all of the Rodgers fans too. QB's don't make teams SB contenders. QB's are fortunate enough to play on SB contenders and then take all of the credit for it because the camera follows the ball. It's easy to forget the whole game that goes on because we don't see it unless we really look. Without a good team, a QB is useless. Brett too, Rodgers too.

Look, a lot of this is based on history. Are the Colts going to be good after Peyton retires? Chances are no. Most teams that lose there HOF QB do not recover like the packers did. The fact AR is so good is basically pure luck of the draw. This isn't knocking him, but look at history, It's very rare to transistion from Joe Montanna to Steve Young, or not Favre to Rodgers. It's a rare transition. Most teams take a long time to replace a legend and have many years of mediocrity after words.

Just look at Denver. How many QB's is it now since Elway? Thats the way it usually goes. The packers are the exception, not the rule. This isn't because of brett, it's just because he is a HOF QB - most teams can't "just replace" that. We were lucky we could.

And crediting the jets being so good last year to them just being good ignores the fact they ahve an entirely new coaching staff with an entirely new principle of being the baltimore ravens. Pound the rock and play stellar defense. That was not the mentality when favre was there. Yes, many of the same players, different style of play. Thats not brett's fault either direction. IF the defense when favre was there played like they did last season - they would of been in the playoffs. That defense was good when Favre was there - Rex Ryan made them great. Revis went from a pretty good corner, to under Ryan's reign becoming the elite of the elite - up there with a Charle's Woodson.

I am not taking things away from the players - Favre was not really a big reason for any sort of "turn around" for the Jets - that was firing Mangina and getting a real coach in. Rex Ryan so far appears to be the real deal.

I give all the credit to last seasons AFC Championship run to Rex Ryan and his staff.

The vikings are a good team without brett. No one has ever said otherwise. The question is, without him are they super bowl caliber?

The vikings went 9-7 and made the playoffs the year before brett with a QB rotation simply for the fact that no other team in the division had a winning record. The lions are generally never there, and the packers and bears had pretty bad seasons. Last year without brett, chances are tehe packers win the division - and the vikings are vying for another 9-7, 10-6 type WC position.

The vikings are a good team - having a RB like Adrian peterson with that OL and that Defense is going to win you games. Unfortunately, that generally wont win you SB's, and with a team like the packers in the division right now, and if jay cutler and the bears can turn it around in the next couple seasons - having a team that can go 9-7 every year isn't going to cut it. It may not even get you into the playoffs, let alone winning the division, first round bye, and NFC championship trips.

I am not saying Brett is solely responsible for them getting to the NFC Championship. To say that would be pure idiotic. AP, that offense, Sidney Rice coming into his own, Percy Harvin's fast development, solid defensive play - they all played a role. Brett could not get there on his own. It's also, in the end, generally true that they wouldn't of been there without him either. The colts are also a pretty good team, but without Peyton? They'll be teatering around .500 and a WC spot each season.

I mean, QB's do get too much credit, but it's understandibly so. Outside of the rare cases, most teams making SB runs are doing so with a QB thats is the elite caliber. Elite QB's do make a big difference on an offense.

[Scott Campbell]

Most teams that lose there HOF QB do not recover like the packers did. The fact AR is so good is basically pure luck of the draw.


:lol:


I guess it was pure luck that Ted hired an obscure offensive coordinator that pretty much had QB development as the only qualification on his resume.

[ThunderDan]

Most teams that lose there HOF QB do not recover like the packers did. The fact AR is so good is basically pure luck of the draw.


:lol:


I guess it was pure luck that Ted hired an obscure offensive coordinator that pretty much had QB development as the only qualification on his resume.

How about the NE Pats after Brady went down in game one in 2008? They went 11-5. Darn HOF QB getting injuried.

How about Steve Young after Joe Montana in SF?

It seems like if you have a good system with a good front office losing your HOF QB isn't as horrible.

[Tony Oday]

Most teams that lose there HOF QB do not recover like the packers did. The fact AR is so good is basically pure luck of the draw.


:lol:


I guess it was pure luck that Ted hired an obscure offensive coordinator that pretty much had QB development as the only qualification on his resume.

How about the NE Pats after Brady went down in game one in 2008? They went 11-5. Darn HOF QB getting injuried.

How about Steve Young after Joe Montana in SF?

It seems like if you have a good system with a good front office losing your HOF QB isn't as horrible.

Well those seem to be the exception to the rule. We got damn lucky that we have a guy that withstood the shadow and is playing great.

[ThunderDan]

But are they exceptions or is it because they had good systems with good coaches and a good GM?

NE has been the model of consistancy in the 2000s and SF was the king in the mid 80s to mid 90s.

[Tony Oday]

But are they exceptions or is it because they had good systems with good coaches and a good GM?

NE has been the model of consistancy in the 2000s and SF was the king in the mid 80s to mid 90s.

But look at SF since. I agree you have to have one hell of an organization to replace a hall of famer but also you need to have a hell of a lot of luck to find one much less two :)

[ThunderDan]

But are they exceptions or is it because they had good systems with good coaches and a good GM?

NE has been the model of consistancy in the 2000s and SF was the king in the mid 80s to mid 90s.

But look at SF since. I agree you have to have one hell of an organization to replace a hall of famer but also you need to have a hell of a lot of luck to find one much less two :)

SF went down after Walsh and Seifert left. Steve Mariuchi did OK but by 1999 SF was $24 million over the cap.

[Pugger]

I suppose we got lucky that Rodgers was passed over by all of those teams in that 2005 draft (and I'm sure there are more than a few GMs kicking themselves now) but TT didn't have to pull the trigger. QB wasn't a big need that year, even tho #4 was hemming and hawwing about 'retirement' back then. Packer fans should thank TT for considering the welfare of the franchise and its future. #4 wasn't going to play forever and now we are set at the most important position in football for years while MN will be stuck with god knows who once BF leaves. I still say they were stupid not to draft Clauson or McCoy last month - or were they fearful of upsetting #4 like TT did?

[packerbacker1234]

I suppose we got lucky that Rodgers was passed over by all of those teams in that 2005 draft (and I'm sure there are more than a few GMs kicking themselves now) but TT didn't have to pull the trigger. QB wasn't a big need that year, even tho #4 was hemming and hawwing about 'retirement' back then. Packer fans should thank TT for considering the welfare of the franchise and its future. #4 wasn't going to play forever and now we are set at the most important position in football for years while MN will be stuck with god knows who once BF leaves. I still say they were stupid not to draft Clauson or McCoy last month - or were they fearful of upsetting #4 like TT did?

Who knows what the vikings were thinking in the draft. It's doubtful even if they took a QB that it would of affected #4, when Favre knows even coming back this is most likely the last season anyways. Maybe they do believe Jackson is the answer? I mean, we all assume not because they already had Jackson and they went and got Favre anyways, but in the limited time Jackson had last season he looked like a different QB. Maybe it's truth, he said he learned things from Favre he hadn;t from any other QB, so maybe they really want to give him one more shot once favre retires?

[bobblehead]

Most teams that lose there HOF QB do not recover like the packers did. The fact AR is so good is basically pure luck of the draw.


:lol:


I guess it was pure luck that Ted hired an obscure offensive coordinator that pretty much had QB development as the only qualification on his resume.

People often use luck when they can't admit an individual had a lot to do with it. Remember how BF and Sherman pouted when TT took a QB with that first pick....well, the old saying is, time will prove who is right and who is wrong.

[packerbacker1234]

Most teams that lose there HOF QB do not recover like the packers did. The fact AR is so good is basically pure luck of the draw.


:lol:


I guess it was pure luck that Ted hired an obscure offensive coordinator that pretty much had QB development as the only qualification on his resume.

People often use luck when they can't admit an individual had a lot to do with it. Remember how BF and Sherman pouted when TT took a QB with that first pick....well, the old saying is, time will prove who is right and who is wrong.

Well, it was just one of those "odd" picks at the time. People figured that Brett was most likely still around for 2 or 3 more seasons, despite whatever the media kept blasting favre with the will he wont he questions - so naturally both were looking to draft players who make immediate impacts to improve the team to SB caliber. Rodgers was not that sort of player. Now, as time has moved on - Rodgers was clearly a great choice. However, I do understand the reasoning of not liking the pick at the time.

Afterall, we had needs in other areas to address - and who knows? Maybe if used the pick on something else, that someone else may have got us over the hump in the NFC Championship game and on our way to another ring in 2007? It's all a big what if game. I am happy we took rodgers today, but I admit I was sour when we initially took him, since it felt like we were "giving up" on getting back to the SB with #4.

[Scott Campbell]

Afterall, we had needs in other areas to address - and who knows? Maybe if used the pick on something else, that someone else may have got us over the hump in the NFC Championship game and on our way to another ring in 2007?


Who knows - maybe if we had traded the younger Favre earlier and gotten more in return than a 3rd rounder, we might have already won multiple Superbowls behind a more seasoned Rodgers.

[Tarlam!]

The way I interpret the Rodgers pick is TT took the BPA.

Suggesting a different player would have made the 2005 Packers a SB contender is ludicrous. One player will not vastly improve what turned out to be a 4-12 team.

Favre was definitely not commited to playing under a TT led front office. Sherman would have pouted whomever TT picked; he'd recently been stripped of the GM duties.

The Packers under Sherman/Favre were only close in the 4th & 26 season and both Sherman and Favre botched big time against Phillie. I believe the term "choked" is appropriate.

I highly doubt Rodgers would have faired any better than #1 overall, Alex Smith, had he been thrust into play as a rookie. His first two pre-seasons were anything but encouraging to Packer fans and probably coaching.

The Packers got lucky in that Favre played three more seasons to allow Rodgers to ripen and mature. M3 had ample time to prepare for the post Favre era and, the results have proven that the time was spent wisely.

I don't consider TT a genious for picking Rodgers, nor do I consider him woeful for picking Harrell or Hawk. I admire him for sticking to his BPA philosophie.

What I admire him more for is his ballsy stance vis a vis Bert. He rightly refused to be held hostage again. He relied obviously heavily on the coaching staff.

Favre has no one but himself and probably Bus Cooke to blame for his image demise. He should have been second string to the Almighty in Packerland. Instead he has become the most polarizing figure in the history of the game.

Great legacy.

[mraynrand]

The way I interpret the Rodgers pick is TT took the BPA.

Suggesting a different player would have made the 2005 Packers a SB contender is ludicrous. One player will not vastly improve what turned out to be a 4-12 team.


I think the argument is that TT could have picked a different player - say a pass-rushing DE, who would have helped them win it all in 2007. Maybe they could have drafted a bigger tight end that Favre would have been able to see coming out of the backfield on that last play against the NYG so he wouldn't have thrown the INT.

http://jasonjeffrey.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/favre_int1.jpg

http://product.images.fansedge.com/33-93/33-93468-F.jpg

[Scott Campbell]

As we saw last year, you can put Favre on the "most talented team" he's ever played on, and he'd still find a way to lose.

[Tarlam!]

I think the argument is that TT could have picked a different player - say a pass-rushing DE, who would have helped them win it all in 2007. Maybe they could have drafted a bigger tight end that Favre would have been able to see coming out of the backfield on that last play against the NYG so he wouldn't have thrown the INT.

OK, I'll play. Let's say the pick is different and more importantly, T-Murph doesn't have that spinal condition that ends his career. Which player, that went between the Rodgers pick and the Murphy pick would have put Sherman in a position to keep his job?

25 Washington Redskins (from Denver) Jason Campbell Quarterback Auburn
26 Seattle Seahawks (from New York Jets through Oakland) Chris Spencer Center Mississippi
27 Atlanta Falcons Roddy White Wide Receiver UAB
28 San Diego Chargers Luis Castillo Defensive Tackle Northwestern
29 Indianapolis Colts Marlin Jackson Cornerback Michigan
30 Pittsburgh Steelers Heath Miller Tight End Virginia
31 Philadelphia Eagles Mike Patterson Defensive Tackle USC
32 New England Patriots Logan Mankins Offensive Guard Fresno State
[edit]Round two
Pick # NFL Team Player Position College
33 San Francisco 49ers David Baas Center Michigan
34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool Safety Oklahoma
35 Philadelphia Eagles (from Miami) Reggie Brown Wide Receiver Georgia
36 Tampa Bay Buccaneers Barrett Ruud Linebacker Nebraska
37 Detroit Lions (from Tennessee) Shaun Cody Defensive Tackle USC
38 Oakland Raiders Stanford Routt Cornerback Houston
39 Chicago Bears Mark Bradley Wide Receiver Oklahoma
40 New Orleans Saints (from Washington) Josh Bullocks Safety Nebraska
41 Tennessee Titans (from Detroit) Michael Roos Offensive Tackle Eastern Washington
42 Dallas Cowboys Kevin Burnett Linebacker Tennessee
43 New York Giants Corey Webster Cornerback LSU
44 Arizona Cardinals J. J. Arrington Running back California
45 Seattle Seahawks (from Carolina) Lofa Tatupu Linebacker USC
46 Miami Dolphins (from Kansas City) Matt Roth Defensive End Iowa
47 New York Jets (from Houston through Oakland) Mike Nugent Placekicker Ohio State
48 Cincinnati Bengals Odell Thurman Linebacker Georgia
49 Minnesota Vikings Marcus Johnson Offensive Tackle Mississippi
50 St. Louis Rams Ron Bartell Cornerback Howard
51 Green Bay Packers (from New Orleans) Nick Collins Safety Bethune-Cookman
52 Jacksonville Jaguars Khalif Barnes Offensive Tackle Washington
53 Baltimore Ravens Dan Cody Defensive End Oklahoma
54 Carolina Panthers (from Seattle) Eric Shelton Running back Louisville
55 Buffalo Bills Roscoe Parrish Wide Receiver Miami (FL)
56 Denver Broncos Darrent Williams Cornerback Oklahoma State
57 New York Jets Justin Miller Cornerback Clemson

[Scott Campbell]

I think the argument is that TT could have picked a different player - say a pass-rushing DE, who would have helped them win it all in 2007. Maybe they could have drafted a bigger tight end that Favre would have been able to see coming out of the backfield on that last play against the NYG so he wouldn't have thrown the INT.

OK, I'll play. Let's say the pick is different and more importantly, T-Murph doesn't have that spinal condition that ends his career. Which player, that went between the Rodgers pick and the Murphy pick would have put Sherman in a position to keep his job?


43 New York Giants Corey Webster Cornerback LSU


.......though Bert probably would have found some other Giant to throw it too in OT. :lol:

[mraynrand]

. Which player, that went between the Rodgers pick and the Murphy pick would have put Sherman in a position to keep his job?


Again, the point wasn't about 2005 and saving Sherman's job - it was about picking someone who could help the revamped team win in 2007. Webster is a great selection. Not only is he unable to make the pick of Favre's horribly misguided pass, but he might have either 1) been on the field and shut Plexiglass down a bit or 2) Been on 'teams and fallen on or picked up that goddam fumble that Bush whiffed on.

[mraynrand]

Still, gotta like:

Heath Miller Tight End Virginia (Maybe Favre sees him!)
Mike Patterson Defensive Tackle USC (stop the NYG run?)
Logan Mankins better interior pass pro and possibly the Packers actually run the ball against the NYG?

Any three of those guys probably would have put the Packers over the top in 2007, unless Favre found another way to implode. Still, I'd rather have Rodgers, simply because the toughest position to fill is 'Franchise QB'

[Tarlam!]

Well, the comment I am answering is the one about Shermy's and Favre's grimaces after the pick. According to that comment, they were looking for immediate help to put them over the hump. To me, that means the 05' seaon.

Sherman would definitely not have had a much better 05' record, since the interior line fell apart. Maybe LM would have holed it up a tad. IIRC, Bubba was still playing OK. But if TT goes DL, he still has that disasterour OL.

So, Shermy was gone, despite his grimace. If TT didn't draft Rodgers, maybe he hires Payton instead of McCarthy. M3 is known to develop QB's. Payton just proved how well he can work with Vet QBs.

Maybe They go tp the SB in 07'. I dunno.

[mraynrand]

Well, the comment I am answering is the one about Shermy's and Favre's grimaces after the pick.

Right after the pick. Yep, I get this. After the draft and the spring, it was pretty clear the Packers were rebuilding, etc. I think most people still pretty much knew the team had reached the end with the current group. I don't think any amount of mortgaging of the future was going to get that 2005 squad anywhere near a championship, even with fewer injuries.

[LEWCWA]

I think the argument is that TT could have picked a different player - say a pass-rushing DE, who would have helped them win it all in 2007. Maybe they could have drafted a bigger tight end that Favre would have been able to see coming out of the backfield on that last play against the NYG so he wouldn't have thrown the INT.

OK, I'll play. Let's say the pick is different and more importantly, T-Murph doesn't have that spinal condition that ends his career. Which player, that went between the Rodgers pick and the Murphy pick would have put Sherman in a position to keep his job?

25 Washington Redskins (from Denver) Jason Campbell Quarterback Auburn
26 Seattle Seahawks (from New York Jets through Oakland) Chris Spencer Center Mississippi
27 Atlanta Falcons Roddy White Wide Receiver UAB
28 San Diego Chargers Luis Castillo Defensive Tackle Northwestern
29 Indianapolis Colts Marlin Jackson Cornerback Michigan
30 Pittsburgh Steelers Heath Miller Tight End Virginia
31 Philadelphia Eagles Mike Patterson Defensive Tackle USC
32 New England Patriots Logan Mankins Offensive Guard Fresno State
[edit]Round two
Pick # NFL Team Player Position College
33 San Francisco 49ers David Baas Center Michigan
34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool Safety Oklahoma
35 Philadelphia Eagles (from Miami) Reggie Brown Wide Receiver Georgia
36 Tampa Bay Buccaneers Barrett Ruud Linebacker Nebraska
37 Detroit Lions (from Tennessee) Shaun Cody Defensive Tackle USC
38 Oakland Raiders Stanford Routt Cornerback Houston
39 Chicago Bears Mark Bradley Wide Receiver Oklahoma
40 New Orleans Saints (from Washington) Josh Bullocks Safety Nebraska
41 Tennessee Titans (from Detroit) Michael Roos Offensive Tackle Eastern Washington
42 Dallas Cowboys Kevin Burnett Linebacker Tennessee
43 New York Giants Corey Webster Cornerback LSU
44 Arizona Cardinals J. J. Arrington Running back California
45 Seattle Seahawks (from Carolina) Lofa Tatupu Linebacker USC
46 Miami Dolphins (from Kansas City) Matt Roth Defensive End Iowa
47 New York Jets (from Houston through Oakland) Mike Nugent Placekicker Ohio State
48 Cincinnati Bengals Odell Thurman Linebacker Georgia
49 Minnesota Vikings Marcus Johnson Offensive Tackle Mississippi
50 St. Louis Rams Ron Bartell Cornerback Howard
51 Green Bay Packers (from New Orleans) Nick Collins Safety Bethune-Cookman
52 Jacksonville Jaguars Khalif Barnes Offensive Tackle Washington
53 Baltimore Ravens Dan Cody Defensive End Oklahoma
54 Carolina Panthers (from Seattle) Eric Shelton Running back Louisville
55 Buffalo Bills Roscoe Parrish Wide Receiver Miami (FL)
56 Denver Broncos Darrent Williams Cornerback Oklahoma State
57 New York Jets Justin Miller Cornerback Clemson

That guy at 43 woulda been a good one, LOL It seems he is in one of the pictures above!!

[packerbacker1234]

While they may have drafted in 2005 to win that season (or sherman wanted guys to win that season) - drafts could of changed slightly to get us over the hump in 2007. Remember, we also couldn't run the ball either that game, and the OL played horribly. It was the culmination of two missed FG's and a long favre to driver TD as being the real reason we were still in the game anyways.

No excuse for the pick, everyone was open... even driver was decently open if he threw it outside... like you're suppose to. Either Favre's timing was just way off on the throw, it slipped, he short armed it, or did it on purpose. I highly doubt it was on purpose. I think Driver was just his #1 read, he was decently open, and he just made a horrible pass.

[Tarlam!]

No excuse for the pick, everyone was open... even driver was decently open if he threw it outside... like you're suppose to. Either Favre's timing was just way off on the throw, it slipped, he short armed it, or did it on purpose. I highly doubt it was on purpose. I think Driver was just his #1 read, he was decently open, and he just made a horrible pass.

The Packers only had possession for 1/3 of the game. Their Defense was out in the cold an awfully long time. Yet the team was able to end regulation tied.

So, all things being equal at that point, it was Bert that choked. Again. Or, he was looking for personal glory. Again.

I continue to lay the blame squarely at Bert's feet. Apologists will point to "without him, the Packers wouldn't have tied the game up". Well, how about a few more first down to keep their Defense from running on empty.

[Gunakor]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

[Pugger]

While they may have drafted in 2005 to win that season (or sherman wanted guys to win that season) - drafts could of changed slightly to get us over the hump in 2007. Remember, we also couldn't run the ball either that game, and the OL played horribly. It was the culmination of two missed FG's and a long favre to driver TD as being the real reason we were still in the game anyways.

No excuse for the pick, everyone was open... even driver was decently open if he threw it outside... like you're suppose to. Either Favre's timing was just way off on the throw, it slipped, he short armed it, or did it on purpose. I highly doubt it was on purpose. I think Driver was just his #1 read, he was decently open, and he just made a horrible pass.

Unfortunately for him and the team he plays for since 1997 this has been his modus operandi. In spite of all of the great things he's done in his career he has had a propensity to make poor plays at the worst possible times in big games. This Achille's heel of his will most likely prevent him from being considered the greatest QB in league history.

[packerbacker1234]

No excuse for the pick, everyone was open... even driver was decently open if he threw it outside... like you're suppose to. Either Favre's timing was just way off on the throw, it slipped, he short armed it, or did it on purpose. I highly doubt it was on purpose. I think Driver was just his #1 read, he was decently open, and he just made a horrible pass.

The Packers only had possession for 1/3 of the game. Their Defense was out in the cold an awfully long time. Yet the team was able to end regulation tied.

So, all things being equal at that point, it was Bert that choked. Again. Or, he was looking for personal glory. Again.

I continue to lay the blame squarely at Bert's feet. Apologists will point to "without him, the Packers wouldn't have tied the game up". Well, how about a few more first down to keep their Defense from running on empty.

As I said, we couldn't run the ball, and Brett already showed that season, despite how fantastic he played, that his weakness was now cold weather. This meant the focus for our attack needed to be the rushing game, but the fact remains that we did try to run the ball and it went nowhere. 1/3 possesions doesn't fall squarly on brett.

OT was on him. It was a bad pass, and when you hit OT you look to your superstars to win the game for you. I am not debating OT. I am just saying it should of never been in OT.

[Packerarcher]

Funny how you all love to blame Favre for that loss when Harris deserves as much or more of the blame. Harris couldn't cover shit in that game,not even a hobbled Plax Burris. Quite conveniant of you all to blame Favre though.

[ThunderDan]

Of course not giving Harris help with Plax would be a coaching decision that wasn't done. BF had every WR on that play wide open and he threw it to the 1 that was covered.

BF played like shit that game. It was damn cold and you could tell from the Chicago game earlier in the year that he didn't want to be out in that cold anymore. I don't blame BF for the whole loss, the other part goes to Bush for not falling on the fucking ball. (Either way it was a team loss)

[Gunakor]

Funny how you all love to blame Favre for that loss when Harris deserves as much or more of the blame. Harris couldn't cover shit in that game,not even a hobbled Plax Burris. Quite conveniant of you all to blame Favre though.

Harris had no impact on what happened after regulation time expired and overtime began. The game was lost in overtime. Not in regulation time. When you score 20 points and give up 20 points, the game is not lost. I place a healthy share of blame on Harris for us being tied at the end of 60 minutes, but he did not lose that game. He may be mostly responsible for us not winning that game, but he's not at all responsible for us losing it. He didn't have the ball in his hands with the game on the line. Favre did.

[Scott Campbell]

Harris was abused by Burress in the first half of that game. Al played poorly against a very tough matchup, and McCarthy should have adjusted and gotten him help earlier.

But Al is not a future first ballot hall of famer, and wasn't making $10M to be the undisputed leader of the Packers either. We had the ball in OT with an opportunity to go to the Superbowl, and Brett choked up another one to Tracy Porter........errrrr.........Corey Webster.

[RashanGary]

To me, Favre was a really good QB, but not a guy who puts your team over the top. He's too unreliable to get through a playoff series with anything but the absolute best supporting cast around him. His durablity and longevity are the big reasons he's accomplished so much.

Now that he's gone, I think he's very replaceable. The Packers might never have a QB that plays as long, but there are a lot of QB's out there just as capable if not more capable than Favre at winning a championship. That's all I care about, so I don't care that he's gone.

[Pugger]

To me, Favre was a really good QB, but not a guy who puts your team over the top. He's too unreliable to get through a playoff series with anything but the absolute best supporting cast around him. His durablity and longevity are the big reasons he's accomplished so much.

Now that he's gone, I think he's very replaceable. The Packers might never have a QB that plays as long, but there are a lot of QB's out there just as capable if not more capable than Favre at winning a championship. That's all I care about, so I don't care that he's gone.

#4 couldn't even do it with what he declared was the most talented team he'd ever been on.

[packerbacker1234]

To me, Favre was a really good QB, but not a guy who puts your team over the top. He's too unreliable to get through a playoff series with anything but the absolute best supporting cast around him. His durablity and longevity are the big reasons he's accomplished so much.

Now that he's gone, I think he's very replaceable. The Packers might never have a QB that plays as long, but there are a lot of QB's out there just as capable if not more capable than Favre at winning a championship. That's all I care about, so I don't care that he's gone.

The fact that favre, virtually 20 years into his career and over 40, is still considered one of the top 5 QB's in the league speaks volumes to how good he really is, at least in the regular season.

[Scott Campbell]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/27/favre-calls-2009-the-best-season-ive-ever-had/

....Favre declared that his first year with the Vikings was "the best season I've ever had."

That quote comes courtesy of Richard Chin of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, who adds that Favre also said, "Physically, I don't feel great."

[Scott Campbell]

The ego on that guy. He destroys his teams season with one boneheaded choker and still says it's the best season he ever had. It must have been the other Viking players fault that he didn't win the Superbowl like he did in Green Bay.

[mraynrand]

It must have been the other Viking players fault that he didn't win the Superbowl

You have to know that he's sitting there all through the off season, with Lady MacBeth whispering in his ear, thinking that all those fumbles and mistakes by everyone else were the difference in the game.

THANKSFAVRE

[MJZiggy]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/27/favre-calls-2009-the-best-season-ive-ever-had/

....Favre declared that his first year with the Vikings was "the best season I've ever had."

That quote comes courtesy of Richard Chin of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, who adds that Favre also said, "Physically, I don't feel great."

Interesting considering he DID win a SuperBowl with the Packers and seemingly had a pretty good season along the way. But Jared Allen is a better teammate than Reggie White. Uh huh.

[LEWCWA]

This shit is getting so old. Favre was/is a great QB. Not the greatest, but great in his own right. He entertained us for years, was an integral part in putting winning seasons together year after year and for the most part endured himself to Packer fans. It ended ugly, most careers like his do. Big damn deal. Enjoy what Rodgers can do now and get over all this in fighting about a damn football player.

At least JH is starting to sound human. Someone must have knocked the shit outta him for being an ass. he has had some good posts lately....

[mraynrand]

This shit is getting so old. Favre was/is a great QB. Not the greatest, but great in his own right. He entertained us for years, was an integral part in putting winning seasons together year after year and for the most part endured himself to Packer fans. It ended ugly, most careers like his do. Big damn deal. Enjoy what Rodgers can do now and get over all this in fighting about a damn football player.

At least JH is starting to sound human. Someone must have knocked the shit outta him for being an ass. he has had some good posts lately....

That's a classic malapropism. So true, so true.

[mraynrand]

So for you, it was Super Bowl or bust eh? To many others, last season was a massive success.


Not at all. It was the horrific manner in which he choked away their season that made everything else irrelevant. That pass to Tracy Porter became the signature moment of his season, if not his career.

It did because it was number 3. What's that line from Bond (Goldfinger): Once is happenstance, twice is circumstance, and three times is enemy action. Favre literally threw away three NFCC games, not to mention his role in many other playoff losses. Favre throwing the critical, unforced INT in playoff games is the rule, not the exception.

[woodbuck27]

I just hope Favre comes back for his 20th season. :D

[Scott Campbell]

I just hope Favre comes back for his 20th season. :D


To once again rip the hearts out of Viking fans?

I'd be down with that.

:lol:

[BlueBrewer]

I just hope Favre comes back for his 20th season. :D


To once again rip the hearts out of Viking fans?

I'd be down with that.

:lol:

Thats a chance I would rather not take.....

[Bretsky]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

[packerbacker1234]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

and then fumbling the game away 2 plays later. Yes, it's not always the QB's fault for fumbling, but he obviously didn't feel the pressure.

I think were just more forgiving because it was his first playoff game, but... still.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

and then fumbling the game away 2 plays later. Yes, it's not always the QB's fault for fumbling, but he obviously didn't feel the pressure.

I think were just more forgiving because it was his first playoff game, but... still.

Dude's team put up 45 points and dude put up Packer playoff record stats. Favre had average games, at best, when he choked away the 3 playoff games late.

[Joemailman]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

and then fumbling the game away 2 plays later. Yes, it's not always the QB's fault for fumbling, but he obviously didn't feel the pressure.

I think were just more forgiving because it was his first playoff game, but... still.

I'm sure he felt the pressure. He had nowhere to go. He couldn't step up to avoid the blitzer because of pressure up the middle. Check out what he was facing at the 4 second mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8I4SXfr19b4

[Pugger]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

and then fumbling the game away 2 plays later. Yes, it's not always the QB's fault for fumbling, but he obviously didn't feel the pressure.

I think were just more forgiving because it was his first playoff game, but... still.

Exactly. If Rodgers still has issues like this in big games in the future we have a problem. But - a 20 year veteran should know better.

[mraynrand]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

and then fumbling the game away 2 plays later. Yes, it's not always the QB's fault for fumbling, but he obviously didn't feel the pressure.

I think were just more forgiving because it was his first playoff game, but... still.


Good point. Rodgers had some rough spots in his first playoff outing and blew a golden opportunity to win the game and then didn't protect the ball. One can only hope that this will be the exception, not the rule. Since Packer fans just experienced a HOF QB who routinely threw away big playoff games, we would hate to have the next guy do the same thing.

[Scott Campbell]

While his plays were poor, I don't think a comparison can be made between Rodgers bad passes and fumble and Favre's choke job. The significance of the stage was massive. It the immortal words of Paul Allen - THIS IS NOT DETROIT MAN, THIS IS THE SUPERBOWL.


Rodgers offending play was bad. Favre's offending play was absurdly horrific.

[pbmax]

Missing an open receiver on a 40 yd pass is bad, but its not an automatic play under any circumstance. Especially when you have had to step up a yard or two in the pocket under pressure.

The fumble WAS bad, since Rodgers either had taken responsibility for the unblocked man himself OR had called the wrong adjustment.

But even the fumble is not the same as a forced pass, when falling down would have kept your team in the game. No one had robotic control of Favre and made him attempt a bad pass. Rodgers at least was hit, even if he shared the blame.

But we are essentially arguing about the better way to die. I would rather not make that choice. Rodgers has shown the ability to learn from his mistakes. Something an older Favre seemed to stop doing around 1999.

[Scott Campbell]

Missing an open receiver on a 40 yd pass is bad, but its not an automatic play under any circumstance. Especially when you have had to step up a yard or two in the pocket under pressure.

The fumble WAS bad, since Rodgers either had taken responsibility for the unblocked man himself OR had called the wrong adjustment.

But even the fumble is not the same as a forced pass, when falling down would have kept your team in the game. No one had robotic control of Favre and made him attempt a bad pass. Rodgers at least was hit, even if he shared the blame.

But we are essentially arguing about the better way to die. I would rather not make that choice. Rodgers has shown the ability to learn from his mistakes. Something an older Favre seemed to stop doing around 1999.



And Rodgers was the brightest of the bright spots in that game. He appeared to carry the team for much of the game.

Some of this just sounds like sour grapes from those looking to diminish the magnitude Bert's meltdown.

[Pugger]

Missing an open receiver down field like Rodgers did in OT hurts but that particular play didn't hurt as much as turning it over like Favre did in NO. Rodgers pass fell harmlessly to the ground and we could come back for another play. In the NFC Champ game MN never saw the ball again after #4's INT.

[Gunakor]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

Rodgers didn't lose the game by missing Jennings. He could have won it there, I agree, but missing that throw didn't lose the game. Rodgers and his offense still had another shot. Favre's INT on the Packers side of the field pretty much was the final nail in that season's coffin.

That and Favre's INT was a 10 yard pattern while Rodgers' miss was a deep pattern, so the difficulty factor was much higher on Rodgers attempt.

Rodgers' fumble a few plays later lost the game, but it was different circumstances entirely. Look at that infamous photo of the Favre INT again. He was sitting comfortably in the pocket. He made an awful throw and it cost us the game. Rodgers had a defender's finger hooked around his facemask when he fumbled the ball and another guy right there too. Favre, nobody near him. Rodgers, under heavy duress. Huge difference.

Besides, Rodgers has played in just one playoff game in his career. Favre has played in a couple dozen of them now. You'd expect a veteran to handle that pressure better than a second year starter playing in his first postseason overtime would handle it.

[Scott Campbell]

Antrel Rolle after the game:

"Let me tell you something - that dude is scary. We have a great defense and we were up on him and ready to pounce, and he found ways to tear us apart.

"I don't ever want to face him again in my life. I am dead serious. I'll face Drew Brees any day of the week before I face him again."

[BlueBrewer]

Antrel Rolle after the game:

"Let me tell you something - that dude is scary. We have a great defense and we were up on him and ready to pounce, and he found ways to tear us apart.

"I don't ever want to face him again in my life. I am dead serious. I'll face Drew Brees any day of the week before I face him again."

That was my silver lining. I love that quote.

[Bretsky]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

Rodgers didn't lose the game by missing Jennings. He could have won it there, I agree, but missing that throw didn't lose the game. Rodgers and his offense still had another shot. Favre's INT on the Packers side of the field pretty much was the final nail in that season's coffin.

That and Favre's INT was a 10 yard pattern while Rodgers' miss was a deep pattern, so the difficulty factor was much higher on Rodgers attempt.

Rodgers' fumble a few plays later lost the game, but it was different circumstances entirely. Look at that infamous photo of the Favre INT again. He was sitting comfortably in the pocket. He made an awful throw and it cost us the game. Rodgers had a defender's finger hooked around his facemask when he fumbled the ball and another guy right there too. Favre, nobody near him. Rodgers, under heavy duress. Huge difference.

Besides, Rodgers has played in just one playoff game in his career. Favre has played in a couple dozen of them now. You'd expect a veteran to handle that pressure better than a second year starter playing in his first postseason overtime would handle it.


My point in this was misintepreted by most. I've noted AROD played a nice game multiple times. What I was pointing out was a simple point. We selectively enforce your above point when in reality you could have applied it to the AZ game as well.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game


And you won't find me criticizing the fumble; that was not on Rodgers IMO
Making the throw would have ended the game; Dagger

[Pugger]

It all comes down to decision making. Rodgers got blasted and maybe he didn't see the blitzer bearing down. Rodgers' biggest flaw in his game is holding onto the ball too long and Packer fans are hoping he won't be as prone to do this as he gets more experience. But the poor decisions Favre has made over many seasons is the difference here. We cut Rodgers a little slack when we discuss the AZ game because it was his first playoff game. When it comes to Favre as a 20 year veteran he should know better than attempting some of the passes he has thrown in big games all these years.

[mraynrand]

When it comes to Favre as a 20 year veteran he should know better than attempting some of the passes he has thrown in big games all these years.

I'm not always a big Jim Rome fan, but this pretty much sums it up accurately:

Uh Oh!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncoblvNQC48

[Gunakor]

Both teams had trouble moving the ball consistently up to that point. Both teams made mistakes on defense. Both FG kickers had trouble putting the ball through the uprights. Regulation time is a wash. Both teams had their chance to put the game away in regulation and neither could do it.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game. We got the ball. Favre gave it away on the Packers side of the field. Not because he was hurried, or pressured, or scrambling around trying to buy time. He planted, sitting comfortably in the pocket, and threw a ball that sailed right into the waiting hands of a NY defensive back looking for his 15 minutes of fame. We lost. That's what happened. There's really nothing else to say.

I don't agree with the logic.........but........if you are going to apply it

You can make a very similar argument for Aaron Rodgers missing a Wide Open Greg Jennings streaking free on the long ball that would have ended the game with a good throw.

Rodgers didn't lose the game by missing Jennings. He could have won it there, I agree, but missing that throw didn't lose the game. Rodgers and his offense still had another shot. Favre's INT on the Packers side of the field pretty much was the final nail in that season's coffin.

That and Favre's INT was a 10 yard pattern while Rodgers' miss was a deep pattern, so the difficulty factor was much higher on Rodgers attempt.

Rodgers' fumble a few plays later lost the game, but it was different circumstances entirely. Look at that infamous photo of the Favre INT again. He was sitting comfortably in the pocket. He made an awful throw and it cost us the game. Rodgers had a defender's finger hooked around his facemask when he fumbled the ball and another guy right there too. Favre, nobody near him. Rodgers, under heavy duress. Huge difference.

Besides, Rodgers has played in just one playoff game in his career. Favre has played in a couple dozen of them now. You'd expect a veteran to handle that pressure better than a second year starter playing in his first postseason overtime would handle it.


My point in this was misintepreted by most. I've noted AROD played a nice game multiple times. What I was pointing out was a simple point. We selectively enforce your above point when in reality you could have applied it to the AZ game as well.

But once the clock was reset and the OT period begins, the slate is wiped clean, there is no score, first team to score wins. Once we got there, the previous 60 minutes matter very little IMO. Brand new game


And you won't find me criticizing the fumble; that was not on Rodgers IMO
Making the throw would have ended the game; Dagger

You could apply it to every single game that goes into overtime. What's your point? Favre's fuck up in his 22nd playoff game is justified because of Rodgers' fuck up in his 1st playoff game?

We weren't talking about AZ. We were talking about NY NFCCG. This is about Favre, not Rodgers. I'm done comparing the two. I can hate Favre without bringing up Rodgers.

[falco]

I agree that Rodgers blew that threw to Jennings; I don't even call it acceptable because of his inexperience.

The difference is, Rodgers threw an incomplete pass and then was sacked for a fumble while trying to make a play on 3rd down.

On Favre's INTs against Philly, NYG and the Saints, they were unnecessary forced throws. I think that is the big difference. On all of them, Favre could have tucked the ball in and the team had another chance.
=

[Packerarcher]

I like Rodgers but his turnover in a playoff game is NO different than Favre turning it over.

[mraynrand]

I like Rodgers but his turnover in a playoff game is NO different than Favre turning it over.

Of course there is a difference - every turnover has a context. For example, in the past, I've been one of Favre biggest defenders in games like the playoff game at St. Louis. I still maintain that he played reasonably well that game, given the circumstances, and was only responsible for 1-2 of the first three interceptions. The last three occurred way after the game was in the bag for St. Louis.

Still, Favre has thrown some of the most absurd, laughable, horrible, unforced interceptions I have ever seen in playoff history. Certainly no other HOF QB has torpedoed three conference championship games and at least one divisional game with entirely unforced INTs. So far, Rodgers' INTs don't come close. I hope they never do.

[Scott Campbell]

I like Rodgers but his turnover in a playoff game is NO different than Favre turning it over.



Nobody shrieked "THIS IS NOT DETROIT MAN, THIS IS THE SUPERBOWL" after Rodgers play.

[Pugger]

I like Rodgers but his turnover in a playoff game is NO different than Favre turning it over.

Of course there is a difference - every turnover has a context. For example, in the past, I've been one of Favre biggest defenders in games like the playoff game at St. Louis. I still maintain that he played reasonably well that game, given the circumstances, and was only responsible for 1-2 of the first three interceptions. The last three occurred way after the game was in the bag for St. Louis.

Still, Favre has thrown some of the most absurd, laughable, horrible, unforced interceptions I have ever seen in playoff history. Certainly no other HOF QB has torpedoed three conference championship games and at least one divisional game with entirely unforced INTs. So far, Rodgers' INTs don't come close. I hope they never do.

No, Packerarcher. Rodgers fumble is much different than Favre's INT in NO because of decision making. Rodgers' INT in AZ was bad but I'll cut him some slack because it was his first playoff game and it was early in the game. He may have held onto the ball too long in OT and got hit and fumbled. But AR didn't force a dumb pass like Favre did with the game on the line.

mraynrand, I don't know if I'd be as generous as you are with Favre and that playoff game in St. Louis. He turned it over SIX times and that is horrendous no matter how you slice it.

[Joemailman]

There's really no defending Arod's early INT in that game. He could have easily stepped out of bounds, but instead threw the ball across his body into the middle of the field. Who knows? Maybe the Packers win that game if regulation if he doesn't throw that INT. The fumble in OT is actually more understandable because he needed to complete that pass or punt the ball back to Arizona.

Both Rodgers' early INT and Favre's late INT were foolish plays by QB's who should have known better.

[Fritz]

After reading that Jolly's trial has been postponed - again - this question popped into my head:

What will happen first, Jolly's trial or Favre's retirement?

[retailguy]

After reading that Jolly's trial has been postponed - again - this question popped into my head:

What will happen first, Jolly's trial or Favre's retirement?

global warming.

[cheesner]

I like the Packers defensive chances this year with the new influx of talent on the defensive line as well as the increased experience of our LB corps. I think adding another ball hawking S in Burnett will be the biggest defensive impact however. Burnett is still good in the box, but will add an additional dimension in the defensive passing game.







(There. After reading Vince's intelligent defensive analyst thread getting hijacked by Favre haters/lovers I wanted to turn the table and hijack a Favre thread for some football talk.)

[channtheman]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

[ThunderDan]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

Some of us still believed!!!

[mraynrand]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

That's not a bad point. It's pretty rare to come back from that kind of deficit. Rodgers should get a ton of credit for it.

I don't really want to revisit that St. Louis game all that much, but suffice it to say the the Packer O-line didn't show up - the running game was putrid, pass defense was marginal - and the Packers starting wide receivers were so awful that neither of them was on the roster the next fall.

[DannoMac21]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

That's not a bad point. It's pretty rare to come back from that kind of deficit. Rodgers should get a ton of credit for it.

I don't really want to revisit that St. Louis game all that much, but suffice it to say the the Packer O-line didn't show up - the running game was putrid, pass defense was marginal - and the Packers starting wide receivers were so awful that neither of them was on the roster the next fall.

I'd love to revisit some games. Suffice it to say, the Packer O-Line didn't show up for most of the season, the running game was putrid against Arizona, the WHOLE defense was below marginal (in the Arizona game).

[Joemailman]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

That's not a bad point. It's pretty rare to come back from that kind of deficit. Rodgers should get a ton of credit for it.

Rodgers nearly did what Favre has never done - lead a team to a win after trailing by 17 points or more. Favre's record when he/his team get off to a really bad start is not particularly good (The playoff game in the snow against Seattle being a notable exception). Rodgers' calm in the Arizona game was quite impressive, especially considering how poorly the Packer defense was playing. It must have been frustrating to put up a score and then have the defense give it back just as quickly.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Missing an open receiver on a 40 yd pass is bad, but its not an automatic play under any circumstance. Especially when you have had to step up a yard or two in the pocket under pressure.

Rodgers misses an open receiver, but throws it to the opposite side the defender was on (e.g. no chance for an int, live another play).

Contrast that to Favre's interceptions late in three NFC title games (Dallas, Giants, Minnesota) and once earlier in the playoffs (Philadelphia).

I'd take the former.

[packerbacker1234]

Missing an open receiver on a 40 yd pass is bad, but its not an automatic play under any circumstance. Especially when you have had to step up a yard or two in the pocket under pressure.

Rodgers misses an open receiver, but throws it to the opposite side the defender was on (e.g. no chance for an int, live another play).

Contrast that to Favre's interceptions late in three NFC title games (Dallas, Giants, Minnesota) and once earlier in the playoffs (Philadelphia).

I'd take the former.

All 4 losses. I'll take a win instead.

[RashanGary]

I like Rodgers big-game steadiness more than I liked Favre's big-game spazes. Time will be the only teller though. We've got a wide open, multi-year window for a (or several) championship(s).

The way Rodgers has played since coming here, just in terms of being a winning QB, if he gets one championship and continues his play, I put him on equal footing with Favre as an overall QB. If he gets more than one championship, I put him passed Favre. Favre played many, many, many years. He's been incredibly durable. Both of those qualities make him unique. But just playing winning QB, especially post-season QB, I think Rodgers has a chance to be better (ie win championships, rather than choke them away).

[Merlin]

Rodgers didn't choke the game away? He brought us back from a deficit? A deficit his play put us in?

He is better than Favre if he wins more than one championship?

Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

WOW, talk about homerism. Rodgers has been in 1, count them 1 playoff game and he isn't solely responsible for the loss but Favre is for all of his playoff losses? ARE YOU SERIOUS?

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's. You may not like Favre now but I promise you that all those years he was winning games for us, your attitude was a lot different.

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy. This is the mindless crap that keeps people from coming back here. It's one thing to state opinion, it's entirely another to have an opinion that has no supporting evidence unless you really slant reality to make it fit.

[RashanGary]

Look at Favre's playoff record and count the rings on his fingers. He hasn't been as good as you want to remember him.

Rodgers has come out and put up record numbers for 1st and 2nd year starter. He's showed a calm and steadiness that reminds you more of Tom Brady and Joe Montana than Jay Cutler or Brett Favre.

He's got a chance to win some big games on this good team. Sorry, but the way he played last year, especially down the stretch. I like it better than what we were used to. I think we have a better chance to win a championship with Rodgers and I don't think we'll need the #1 ST's and #1 defense to do it.

[mraynrand]

WOW, talk about homerism. Rodgers has been in 1, count them 1 playoff game and he isn't solely responsible for the loss but Favre is for all of his playoff losses? ARE YOU SERIOUS?


With a couple of exceptions, people weren't placing sole blame for any of the losses on Favre or Rodgers. The discussion was centered around the nature of the turnovers, with one critical point of debate being: Were they forced or unforced errors? With Rodgers, we have one playoff game to look at and with Favre we have a whole career worth. Favre threw (at least) 4 extraordinarily costly (game changing/ending) unforced INTs (3 in NFCC games and 1 in a Divisional game). The consensus is that these errors by Favre are far worse than Rodger's errors in his one playoff game. The hope is that Rodgers will have better luck in the future and (for many) that if Favre comes back to play for the Vikings, he will have more horrible INTs in the future (at least speaking for me :D).

And as always, if the Favre discussion turns you off, don't click on the thread with 'Favre' in the title.

[Administrator]

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy. This is the mindless crap that keeps people from coming back here. It's one thing to state opinion, it's entirely another to have an opinion that has no supporting evidence unless you really slant reality to make it fit.

What? I put all the Favre discussion in a thread labeled "FAVRE" and no one comes here because people have opinions on Favre? Huh?

Merlin, you have to let people have a point of view. Honestly, what I read in the above, is, "If you don't let my point of view be the ONLY point of view and be unchallenged, I refuse to patronize this site".

If that's the way it's gotta be, then I guess, that's the way it's gotta be. You can only do so much to control what people say. This whole site is based on people's opinions. If we didn't talk about that, there wouldn't be very much to say, now would there?

Your opinions are welcome, but so are others.

[Tarlam!]

You may not like Favre now but I promise you that all those years he was winning games for us, your attitude was a lot different.

Actually, no, that's very innaccurate for this site. Favre was ripped for his bonehead throws everytime around here. His prima ballerina attitude has been ripped around here. His commitment to the team has been ripped around here. All this ripping was when he was the Packers' QB.

As much ripping as there has always been, posters have defended him just as passionately. In those discussions, it was the Favre defenders that were labelled homers.

The venom that found its way into the discussion is due to his final acts as a Packer and ultimately, his playing for the "hated" rivals to the west. That's pretty legitimate for passionate Packer fans if you ask most pschycologists.

Claiming Rogers is > than Favre if he wins a single ring is one poster's opinion. I am not sure why you choose to collectively address the anti-Favre fraction on a single opinion.

One could objectively challenge the claim by simply requesting the list of parameters by which the inference has been made. But that would be a constructive way to go about contributing to the discussion and isn't as satisfying as chucking a bucket of shit.

[Gunakor]

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's.

The former is a grizzled veteran, the most experienced QB playing in the NFL today. The current was a second year starter playing in his very first playoff game in his professional career. I'd say it's legitimate at this point in both of their careers to hold them to different standards.


He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

Favre could have just taken a knee rather than toss those INT's too. You'd expect a 16, 17 year veteran to be more careful with the football than a 26 year old playing in his first ever playoff game. But there was something else at play with regards to AR's fumble at the end of that game:


Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

Did you?

Rodgers' fumble came on 3rd and 10, in overtime, so going down and securing the ball would have meant punting the ball away and likely losing anyway. Our defense couldn't make a stop all day long, and all AZ needed at that point was a FG.


I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy.

As long as we're talking about double standards, let's focus on that one play and compare it to Favre's season killing INT's. Favre's turnovers were routinely explained away by people like you by saying Favre was simply trying to make a play to win the game. Now you imply that Rodgers "choked" but in reality it's no different than Favre's season killing INT's where he was just trying to win the game, right? If Rodgers doesn't try to make a play there the Packers punt the ball to an offense that couldn't be stopped. Are you absolutely certain that you have entirely no patience whatsoever for the double standards?

[packerbacker1234]

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's.

The former is a grizzled veteran, the most experienced QB playing in the NFL today. The current was a second year starter playing in his very first playoff game in his professional career. I'd say it's legitimate at this point in both of their careers to hold them to different standards.


He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

Favre could have just taken a knee rather than toss those INT's too. You'd expect a 16, 17 year veteran to be more careful with the football than a 26 year old playing in his first ever playoff game. But there was something else at play with regards to AR's fumble at the end of that game:


Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

Did you?

Rodgers' fumble came on 3rd and 10, in overtime, so going down and securing the ball would have meant punting the ball away and likely losing anyway. Our defense couldn't make a stop all day long, and all AZ needed at that point was a FG.


I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy.

As long as we're talking about double standards, let's focus on that one play and compare it to Favre's season killing INT's. Favre's turnovers were routinely explained away by people like you by saying Favre was simply trying to make a play to win the game. Now you imply that Rodgers "choked" but in reality it's no different than Favre's season killing INT's where he was just trying to win the game, right? If Rodgers doesn't try to make a play there the Packers punt the ball to an offense that couldn't be stopped. Are you absolutely certain that you have entirely no patience whatsoever for the double standards?

So Rodgers is excused on the fumble, you say, because we would of punted and lost anyways? That's teh defense your throwing up? Okay then, then how was favre's int the reason they lost the game? They didn't score because of it, and they had to drive the length of the field in OT without favre ever touching the ball. So favre's was "far worse?" They were on the edge, and thats being friendly, of Longwells range. Favres team was fumbling the ball away every drive in the second half. Favre's coaching staff just screwed up on the play prior putting them IN the passing situation to begin with (because as longwell said, it was out of his range after the penalty). Favre's OL was letting him get pounded, a saints player got fined for an illegal hit on Favre. The saints were litterally detroying #4 in a fist fight using methods that are against the NFL rulebook.

And he kept getting back up, kept fight, and he willed that team to stay in that game. As much credit as you can give Rodgers for "bringing us back", you should be giving favre just as much credit for what he did for that team.

Oh, so it ended with an int? No, no it didn't. The other team still had to march what, 60, 70 yards? Meanwhile, rodgers fumble was scooped up and ran into the endzone. I am not going to sit here and debate which turnover was worse. Favre's worst enemy came back to bite him, and that is trying to force a play that isn't there. Not that I can blame him - it wasn't as if his offense did ANYTHING to help him all game.

Rodger's worst enemy came back to bite him as well, and that is holding the ball too long and being indecisive with the clock ticking. Thats not to say either QB is bad - thats clearly not the case. If they were bad QB's we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They both have faults at this point, and until rodgers can prove, consistently, that he can actually feel the pressure and get rid of the ball, how can you then turn around and say that last year favre's play was "the game".

Rodgers directly lead to a loss. Favre's lead to the saints needing to earn a fictory by driving the field against a defense that had done a pretty decent job.

I would argue both Rodgers and Favre put up pretty astounding play in the playoffs, and both made crucial mistakes at the end. Favre played like a warrior for his team, Rodgers played calm under the pressure until the final play.

Arguing which was worse isn't worth the effort. they both failed to get it done with the game on the line. THAT is the bottom line. This has nothing to do with who I like more (trust me, I am really happy to have AR as our QB) - but both made mistakes in crunch time.

"oh waht about the play before with the no helmet to helmet call!" - What about the play prior for favre where his coaches screwed the pooch with 12 men in the huddle?"

It's a team game, and I find it hard pressed you can place blame for teh loss in the last playoffs solely on favre or soley on rodgers. Favre didn't turn it over 6 times, rodgers didn't get push down by fitz twice for big plays either. It's a team game, and both teams lost as a team.

[Scott Campbell]

I'll gladly take my chances with the way Rodgers played against the Cardinals any day of the week.


28/42 for 428 yards. 4 TD's, 1 INT 121.3 QB rating

[Pugger]

Favre hasn't turned the ball over 6 times in a playoff game since 2001... :wink:

Folks here are cutting Rodgers some slack because it was his first playoff game. If he continues to have these issues in the future he'll be called out on the carpet too. But a 20 year vet shouldn't be making the same freaking mistakes over and over in big games. It is his DECISION making we are criticizing Favre for.

[Fritz]

That's putting a finger on it: decision making.

But what makes Favre so freakin' aggravating - those stupid, stupid interceptions - is also what makes him great at other times - those improbable, astounding bullets that he fits between three defenders.

My nature is to be more conservative, so I prefer Rodgers's style. I think it translates into more wins in the end.

But you can't be all one way or the other and succeed. You have to have elements of both for a QB to be successful. A QB who only ever dumps it off and always plays it safe isn't going to make it big, I don't think. Nor can a guy who always, always risks everything.

[Scott Campbell]

For as far back as I can remember, there were always a couple of games per year that Favre would play so horribly in that the team had no chance to win. Rodgers is not that type of QB.

Last year Favre played more like Rodgers than like Favre. Until that last play.

[Gunakor]

So Rodgers is excused on the fumble, you say, because we would of punted and lost anyways? That's teh defense your throwing up? Okay then, then how was favre's int the reason they lost the game? They didn't score because of it, and they had to drive the length of the field in OT without favre ever touching the ball. So favre's was "far worse?" They were on the edge, and thats being friendly, of Longwells range. Favres team was fumbling the ball away every drive in the second half. Favre's coaching staff just screwed up on the play prior putting them IN the passing situation to begin with (because as longwell said, it was out of his range after the penalty). Favre's OL was letting him get pounded, a saints player got fined for an illegal hit on Favre. The saints were litterally detroying #4 in a fist fight using methods that are against the NFL rulebook.

And he kept getting back up, kept fight, and he willed that team to stay in that game. As much credit as you can give Rodgers for "bringing us back", you should be giving favre just as much credit for what he did for that team.

Oh, so it ended with an int? No, no it didn't. The other team still had to march what, 60, 70 yards? Meanwhile, rodgers fumble was scooped up and ran into the endzone. I am not going to sit here and debate which turnover was worse. Favre's worst enemy came back to bite him, and that is trying to force a play that isn't there. Not that I can blame him - it wasn't as if his offense did ANYTHING to help him all game.

Rodger's worst enemy came back to bite him as well, and that is holding the ball too long and being indecisive with the clock ticking. Thats not to say either QB is bad - thats clearly not the case. If they were bad QB's we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They both have faults at this point, and until rodgers can prove, consistently, that he can actually feel the pressure and get rid of the ball, how can you then turn around and say that last year favre's play was "the game".

Rodgers directly lead to a loss. Favre's lead to the saints needing to earn a fictory by driving the field against a defense that had done a pretty decent job.

I would argue both Rodgers and Favre put up pretty astounding play in the playoffs, and both made crucial mistakes at the end. Favre played like a warrior for his team, Rodgers played calm under the pressure until the final play.

Arguing which was worse isn't worth the effort. they both failed to get it done with the game on the line. THAT is the bottom line. This has nothing to do with who I like more (trust me, I am really happy to have AR as our QB) - but both made mistakes in crunch time.

"oh waht about the play before with the no helmet to helmet call!" - What about the play prior for favre where his coaches screwed the pooch with 12 men in the huddle?"

It's a team game, and I find it hard pressed you can place blame for teh loss in the last playoffs solely on favre or soley on rodgers. Favre didn't turn it over 6 times, rodgers didn't get push down by fitz twice for big plays either. It's a team game, and both teams lost as a team.

Wow, that's a terribly long post all based on a complete misunderstanding of what I said, using an example I had never and would never consider.

First, let's start out with a basic understanding of the fact that I could give 2 shits about what Favre did or did not do in January against the Saints. He's wearing a purple jersey, he's playing against players wearing black jerseys, there wasn't a green jersey on the field. I don't care one way or the other about that game. My argument and comparison was to the Giants game or the Eagles game. Games that Favre lost in OT for the only team on the planet that matters in regards to my post. Never once did I mention anything about the Vikings/Saints game.

Second, the argument was about different standards being applied to Favre and Rodgers. I admitted that this was the case, and explained why I thought that difference in expectation was legitimate. They are held to different standards.

His fumble was no different than any of Favre's INT's. I never said that it was.


Favre's turnovers were routinely explained away by people like you by saying Favre was simply trying to make a play to win the game. Now you imply that Rodgers "choked" but in reality it's no different than Favre's season killing INT's where he was just trying to win the game, right?

See, I was using Merlins own logic. Now, either you see it your way, and Rodgers is excused for his fumble because Favre was excused for all of his INT's (because both were just trying to make a play to win the game), or you see it the other way and blame Rodgers for his fumble but also hold Favre accountable for all the interceptions he threw (because both lost the game). Either way, they're the same. Except they're not, at least in the eyes of some. The double standards, the hypocrisy swings both ways. I was merely pointing that out for our friend Merlin.


He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

Well he was just trying to make a play, just like Favre was. Right?

The rest of your post goes on and on about that Saints game where Favre was getting destroyed by the Saints. Again, I could care less. Nothing Favre did or didn't do in that game matters one bit to me. So the Saints still had to march down the field, big deal. The Giants didn't. The Giants didnt' even need a first down. Favre's INT lost that game for us because it happend IN field goal range for New York in sudden death overtime. And what's worse about it is that he wasn't hurried, pressured, forced... He was standing all by himself with a clear line of sight to an open Donald Driver and threw one of the most god awful throws at one of the most critical moments of his entire career. It most certainly led directly to the loss. It was the loss.

[Scott Campbell]

Rodgers fumble was the result of a blown protection, and an untouched blitzer nailing him. Favre's play was just an unforced brain fart.

[Fritz]

Rodgers fumble was the result of a blown protection, and an untouched blitzer nailing him. Favre's play was just an unforced brain fart.

This brings up an interesting question: is there such a thing as a forced brain fart?

[swede]

Rodgers fumble was the result of a blown protection, and an untouched blitzer nailing him. Favre's play was just an unforced brain fart.

This brings up an interesting question: is there such a thing as a forced brain fart?

A cerebral emission compelled?
A neural compulsion expelled?

When one's brain isn't working
Disaster is lurking

And if someone made you
Ignore brains the Lord gave you

Thus how the mighty are felled.

[MJZiggy]

Rodgers fumble was the result of a blown protection, and an untouched blitzer nailing him. Favre's play was just an unforced brain fart.

This brings up an interesting question: is there such a thing as a forced brain fart?

I suppose if you get hit hard enough.

[gex]

Rodgers didn't choke the game away? He brought us back from a deficit? A deficit his play put us in?

He is better than Favre if he wins more than one championship?

Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

WOW, talk about homerism. Rodgers has been in 1, count them 1 playoff game and he isn't solely responsible for the loss but Favre is for all of his playoff losses? ARE YOU SERIOUS?

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's. You may not like Favre now but I promise you that all those years he was winning games for us, your attitude was a lot different.

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy. This is the mindless crap that keeps people from coming back here. It's one thing to state opinion, it's entirely another to have an opinion that has no supporting evidence unless you really slant reality to make it fit.That and an unhealthy and freakish NEED to constantly rehash to each other how they are still upset that Brett left us.
Like anyone who reads these boards doesnt know how Sc or Harrell feel :roll: :roll:

[Gunakor]

I'm sure everybody knows how everybody feels by now. Yet here we are, 284 pages into this thread. And everybody - even you Gex - is still commenting in it.

I see more double standards, more hypocrisy. Like those with an unhealthy freakish need to defend Favre calling his detractors out for an unhealthy freakish need to bash him. And vice versa.

Either everybody is at fault or nobody is.

At least it's primarily kept to this one thread, so you can't even get pissed about it. This isn't a Favre worship thread or a Favre bashing thread. It's just a Favre thread. You don't like the tone of the discussion, stay out of the thread. You know what to expect by now.

[Scott Campbell]

Like anyone who reads these boards doesnt know how Sc or Harrell feel :roll: :roll:



Euphoric. :lol:

http://images3.everyjoe.com/files/2010/01/brett-favre-mistake-krtphotoslive393177-SPORTS-FBN-SAIN.jpg

[Fritz]

I wonder how that team is shaping up. Are the Williamses showing their age? How old is that team? How good are their young offensive lineman, like Loadholt? Will AP slow down any time soon?

We'll see, I suppose. I am hoping, if the Pack can stay healthy, that these waves of defensive lineman can provide a little more pressure on that Minnesota QB this year. And that if Jones stays healthy and improves, he can add to it.

[mngolf19]

I wonder how that team is shaping up. Are the Williamses showing their age? How old is that team? How good are their young offensive lineman, like Loadholt? Will AP slow down any time soon?

We'll see, I suppose. I am hoping, if the Pack can stay healthy, that these waves of defensive lineman can provide a little more pressure on that Minnesota QB this year. And that if Jones stays healthy and improves, he can add to it.

Kevin is not old, so no age to show other than being in his prime. Pat plays a third of the downs so while that's an indictment on his age, he has limited affect on the overall play of the defense.

As for the OL, since Loadholt was a rookie last year and Sullivan was playing for the first time, then they can only get better. The rest are coming off of injuries of one type or another. Chilly is saying that Hutch and Herrera we're especially limited last year due to their injuries and expects much greater things out of them this time.

[pbmax]

Rodgers didn't choke the game away? He brought us back from a deficit? A deficit his play put us in?You must have gone for a long bathroom break and missed being down by 17 points.


He is better than Favre if he wins more than one championship?You don't think a theoretical 2 time Super Bowl winner qualifies for the debate?


He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?Its a qualitatively different play than running free, having two options (run or pass to wheel route) and choosing to throw back across the field. A better comparison was Rodger's early INT and Favre's last pass. Bonus point: Rodgers will get better. Favre has been the same for a decade.


WOW, talk about homerism. Rodgers has been in 1, count them 1 playoff game and he isn't solely responsible for the loss but Favre is for all of his playoff losses? ARE YOU SERIOUS?No one seriously claims Favre is responsible for ALL playoff losses. But that would be true for the most of the recent ones.


It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's. You may not like Favre now but I promise you that all those years he was winning games for us, your attitude was a lot different.No it hasn't. Favre had correctable flaws that he failed to improve on since Homgrem left. Rodgers gives every indication of getting better.


I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy. This is the mindless crap that keeps people from coming back here. It's one thing to state opinion, it's entirely another to have an opinion that has no supporting evidence unless you really slant reality to make it fit.Blasting people for their opinions, whether you think they are based on facts or not is a losing proposition. It would be more effective to supply the facts that you think people are ignoring.

[Zool]

Sorry PB but replying to Merlin is a few minutes of your life you can never get back.

[Fritz]

Favre was greatly admired and loved here, but it is true there were whispers - nay, open talk - of his inability to reign himself in at crucial times. After the Giants game there was much gnashing of teeth over that last interception.

And there was lively discussion on this very board - a couple years before Favre "retired" - about Favre's seeming inability to make better decisions with age. Many fans felt, in the mid nineties, that as the kid got older and wiser he'd be greater and greater cuz he'd learn to reign it in at the right times, and thus had the potential to become the best ever.

Alas, it was not to be. Fave is what he is and he stayed that way. His gunslinger mentality won some games and gasps of admiration, and no one doubts that, but as his career wore on the risky dumb passes became, for me, more difficult to accept.

[Bossman641]

Favre was greatly admired and loved here, but it is true there were whispers - nay, open talk - of his inability to reign himself in at crucial times. After the Giants game there was much gnashing of teeth over that last interception.

And there was lively discussion on this very board - a couple years before Favre "retired" - about Favre's seeming inability to make better decisions with age. Many fans felt, in the mid nineties, that as the kid got older and wiser he'd be greater and greater cuz he'd learn to reign it in at the right times, and thus had the potential to become the best ever.

Alas, it was not to be. Fave is what he is and he stayed that way. His gunslinger mentality won some games and gasps of admiration, and no one doubts that, but as his career wore on the risky dumb passes became, for me, more difficult to accept.

Well said

[HarveyWallbangers]

Chilly is saying that Hutch and Herrera we're especially limited last year due to their injuries and expects much greater things out of them this time.

And didn't I tell everybody that Hutch's play wasn't up to par last year? I think still made the Pro Bowl. Tells you more about the Pro Bowl than anything. How old is Hutchinson?

[retailguy]

Chilly is saying that Hutch and Herrera we're especially limited last year due to their injuries and expects much greater things out of them this time.

And didn't I tell everybody that Hutch's play wasn't up to par last year? I think still made the Pro Bowl. Tells you more about the Pro Bowl than anything. How old is Hutchinson?

49? :P

[hoosier]

Hutchinson is 32, which with most OL means being on the downward slope of his career but not necessarily done. I don't know what his injury deal was last year but it wouldn't be too surprising if his best years were behind him in any case.

[Joemailman]

Hutch will turn 33 in November, which makes him about the same age as Tauscher, and a year younger than Clifton. Thing is, some of the hits Favre took against New Orleans shows he has lost some of his ability to make guys miss. He needs a good OL in front of him now.

[RashanGary]

Hutch will turn 33 in November, which makes him about the same age as Tauscher, and a year younger than Clifton. Thing is, some of the hits Favre took against New Orleans shows he has lost some of his ability to make guys miss. He needs a good OL in front of him now.

Perspective


Ain't it a bitch

[packerbacker1234]

Hutch will turn 33 in November, which makes him about the same age as Tauscher, and a year younger than Clifton. Thing is, some of the hits Favre took against New Orleans shows he has lost some of his ability to make guys miss. He needs a good OL in front of him now.

I say that's yes and no on the needing guys in front of him for an OL. Favre got hammered in that game due to very poor OL protection, but he seemed to always do enough to get the time he needed to get the pass off. Favre has always been a guy that seems to take a lot of hits every year. Nothing like that NO game, but if you watched any of the rest of the games he played he showed the same sort of movement and escapability we were accustumed too when he was in GB. The same sort of internal clock and ability to really feel out the rush.

It honestly amazes me how well Favre always seems to really feel the pressure from the outside and behind him, all while looking for the right receiver.

Every QB needs a solid pass blocking OL, so in that regards of course he needs his OL to play better. Rodgers needs it too. And heck, give Peyton Manning a below average OL and lets see what he can really do. It seems to me the few times people do get pressure on Manning, he falls under it. It was always one of the big reason NE had his number for so long was because they seemed like the only team who could pressure him.

Either case, the vikings if #4 comes back I think are still pretty dangerous. I'm not sure if they are as good as last year, but who knows? We should be better, the saints should be worse, etc etc. Should be a great battle for the NFC North crown.

[Scott Campbell]

I'll still give Bert the edge in pocket presence. That's never been an issue for him. Though plenty of times we ended up wishing he had just been sacked.


Rodgers got better as the year wore on, but it's an area where he leaves room for significant improvement.

[pbmax]

I'll still give Bert the edge in pocket presence. That's never been an issue for him.
Not since 1995 or so. Before that he ran around like a chicken with his head cut off at times. But it did eventually become one of his strengths.

[Deputy Nutz]

Like anyone who reads these boards doesnt know how Sc or Harrell feel :roll: :roll:



Euphoric. :lol:

http://images3.everyjoe.com/files/2010/01/brett-favre-mistake-krtphotoslive393177-SPORTS-FBN-SAIN.jpg

Was that a picture of Favre against Green Bay last year?



didn't think so. 2-0 against Green Bay, suck on that.

[Scott Campbell]

http://chronicle.dsgndvlp.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/shhhhhhh100x100.jpg


Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.................



































Hear that sound in space above? I didn't think so.


That's the sound of a traitor hiding in his cave for months after Favre's choke.


:lol:




.....suck on that little viking boy.

[Brando19]

Like anyone who reads these boards doesnt know how Sc or Harrell feel :roll: :roll:



Euphoric. :lol:

http://images3.everyjoe.com/files/2010/01/brett-favre-mistake-krtphotoslive393177-SPORTS-FBN-SAIN.jpg

Was that a picture of Favre against Green Bay last year?



didn't think so. 2-0 against Green Bay, suck on that.

No...that's a picture of Favre after every big game since 1997. You know...when the ball's in his hands and there's a couple seconds to go in the game...this pic is just the aftermath. You can photoshop a different jersey if you'd like...it's an ongoing process.

[Scott Campbell]

Do NOT watch this if you're a Bert fan. For the rest of us:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoJ_K4Mlt4w


:lol:

[Iron Mike]

Do NOT watch this if you're a Bert fan. For the rest of us:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoJ_K4Mlt4w


:lol:

That's me with the 34 thumbs up..... 8-)

[packerbacker1234]

On a tracy porter related note:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XzXTYjfbDk&feature=related

Way to win the SB manning.

Oh, and FOR HOW GOOD MANNING IS?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_OSmZc8ZXc&feature=fvw

naturally no one can say that favre isn't a choker... so I don't agree with this guy there, but lets be fair. If you're going to bash favre as a choker, peyton Manning has a big history of doing the same as well in the playoffs. He got over the hump one time, and it was against sexy rexy... and he didn't even play that well.

I know this isn't a peyton discussion, but to be fair to favre - Manning has the same issue too in the big games.

[Scott Campbell]

On Manning:

Bad throw? Absolutely.
Did he break every Cardinal Rule of Quarterbacking with it? - No.

Manning had a better game than Bert did. However, Peyton's pick was on an even bigger stage than Bert's blunder.

[Fritz]

What I've been thinking about lately is that Favre is pioneering a new way for important vets to skip training camp.

He started with the old retire-unretire scheme, practiced by luminaries such as Michael Jordan and The Who (I went to shows at two of their "last concert tour[s] ever"). However, in the NFL that's a labor-intensive practice. All that paperwork to fill out and file or not file, all the publicity you want and don't want. You have to retire and then retract.

Far simpler to simply say you are undecided. You get the "waffler" moniker briefly but once the public and media figure out what you're doing, they largely leave you be. No paperwork to fill out. No decision to have to undo and explain.

The injuries are no longer even necessary as a reason. You just don't know if you're going to retire or not. You're torn between your competitive fires and your family fires.

Then when training camp gets serious, the smack of pads and the tight butts of high school boys catching your well-placed balls fills you with the desire to play once more. So you catch a plane and boom - you're back. As good as new.

And since I believe training camp is too long anyway, I'm not being entirely critical here. It'd just be better if the coaches could give up a week or two of camp for the vets.

[gex]

On Manning:

Bad throw? Absolutely.
Did he break every Cardinal Rule of Quarterbacking with it? - No.

Manning had a better game than Bert did. However, Peyton's pick was on an even bigger stage than Bert's blunder.
Why don't you put down the entire Packer Franchise while your at at it.
By acting like a 10 year old and daily telling all of us how shitty a huge part of our Packer Legacy is please make us forget that we ever came close to greatness....... oh wise one from utah.....................who knows how true Packer fans feel.......And to see some posters have anything you say in their signature is the most disgusting thing a Wisconsinite has ever seen! 8-)

[Gunakor]

Why don't you put down the entire Packer Franchise while your at at it.
By acting like a 10 year old and daily telling all of us how shitty a huge part of our Packer Legacy is please make us forget that we ever came close to greatness....... oh wise one from utah.....................who knows how true Packer fans feel.......And to see some posters have anything you say in their signature is the most disgusting thing a Wisconsinite has ever seen! 8-)

You don't speak for true Packer fans, nor do you speak for everyone in the state of Wisconsin. You speak for yourself and other Brett Favre fans. PACKER fans made their voices heard when Favre returned to Lambeau last fall wearing a white jersey and a purple helmet with devil horns on the sides.

Besides, it's funny to me to hear you speak of the Packers legacy as if it started with Favre. That having Favre was the only time we EVER came close to greatness. You greatly disrespect the legacy and the history which preceeded him here when you make such statements. Our legacy was established and cemented before Favre ever tossed his first pigskin, and will continue long after Favre and Rodgers and the next guy and the guy after that and the guy after that have all retired. It's hard to imagine you as the true Packer fan which you believe yourself to be when you suggest that bashing Favre and bashing the Packers are the same thing.

Especially since the only time Favre ever steps onto the Lambeau Field grass nowadays he's wearing the uniform of an archrival.

In the end, the nowadays is all that matters. Yesterday belongs in a museum, the Packers HOF, which you're free to visit year round and relive your greatest Packer memories during the Favre era. While you're there be sure to take notice of all the players and memories that came before him that are as much a part of the Packers legacy as anything Favre did. A little perspective might be a good thing.

[vince]

Well said Gunk.

[b bulldog]

The booing when Brett entered Lambeau was the loudest I have ever heard Lambeau.

[Tarlam!]

The booing when Brett entered Lambeau was the loudest I have ever heard Lambeau.

Does that count as another milestone in his career? Is that a legit stat? Is the record official? :P

[Scott Campbell]

On Manning:

Bad throw? Absolutely.
Did he break every Cardinal Rule of Quarterbacking with it? - No.

Manning had a better game than Bert did. However, Peyton's pick was on an even bigger stage than Bert's blunder.
Why don't you put down the entire Packer Franchise while your at at it.
By acting like a 10 year old and daily telling all of us how shitty a huge part of our Packer Legacy is please make us forget that we ever came close to greatness....... oh wise one from utah.....................who knows how true Packer fans feel.......And to see some posters have anything you say in their signature is the most disgusting thing a Wisconsinite has ever seen! 8-)


:lol:

[Upnorth]

Why don't you put down the entire Packer Franchise while your at at it.
By acting like a 10 year old and daily telling all of us how shitty a huge part of our Packer Legacy is please make us forget that we ever came close to greatness....... oh wise one from utah.....................who knows how true Packer fans feel.......And to see some posters have anything you say in their signature is the most disgusting thing a Wisconsinite has ever seen!

Gex, that really bugs me. I grew up in Saskatchewan Canada and we have a team called the Riders here that has the same style of fan base as the Packers have, loyal and loud!

When I was a kid in the 70's we only had black and white TV. Sometimes we would get packer games but I thought they were the Riders, so I cheered my head off as only a 3 to 5 year old did. When I was 6 I found out it was the Packers I was cheering for also. Next thing I knew I got a book about Packer history from an uncle. Guess what, the team started before 1992.

If you are so proud to be from Wisconsin and be a true Packer fan, learn your history. Brett Farve was great, but he wasn't the only member of the team, and he isn't even the greatest Packer. That mantle could go too at least 3 people before him!!! (Lambeau, Starr and Hutson)

[packerbacker1234]

Well, it is notably not all packer fans were booing. I remember there be serveral signs held up BY PACKER FANS IN PACKERS ATTIRE that said good things about Brett at that game. There were more boos then cheers, but I think it showed fans are a bit divided. When he hangs it up for good, I think we'll all get over it and be appreciative of what he did for the packers.

[Tarlam!]

That mantle could go too at least 3 people before him!!! (Lambeau, Starr and Hutson)

Lambeau? I wouldn't have thought his contibutions as a player were as remarkable as that, but I don't know enough about it.

[Scott Campbell]

Well, it is notably not all packer fans were booing. I remember there be serveral signs held up BY PACKER FANS IN PACKERS ATTIRE that said good things about Brett at that game. There were more boos then cheers, but I think it showed fans are a bit divided. When he hangs it up for good, I think we'll all get over it and be appreciative of what he did for the packers.

I think he'll get boo'd for the rest of his life at Lambeau for being an ingrate and a traitor. If they're smart, they'll hold his Packer HOF enshrinement privately so that fans can't give him the Bronx cheer.

He is forever tainted. IMO.

[Zool]

He is forever tainted. IMO.

Specifically going to the Vikings has cemented this in the mind of a lot of Packer fans. I was fine with him on the Jets and watched a few of their games. I knew that he wanted to go to the Vikings but he wasnt there so it didnt matter.

To specifically WANT to go to MN....well thats just childish IMO.

[packerbacker1234]

He is forever tainted. IMO.

Specifically going to the Vikings has cemented this in the mind of a lot of Packer fans. I was fine with him on the Jets and watched a few of their games. I knew that he wanted to go to the Vikings but he wasnt there so it didnt matter.

To specifically WANT to go to MN....well thats just childish IMO.

Is it? Was it really? Guy wants that 2nd ring. Vikings appeared one player short. There were a lot of debates about how "no team is one player short" - next thing you know he has a MVP like season, is in the NFC Championship game... and on the cusp of a Super Bowl - and the entire game outside of the 6 turnovers, the vikings looked like a much better team than the saints did.

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

[Scott Campbell]

Sorry, but Bert wanted to stick it to Ted. And that sorry motivation explains all of the despicable tactics he utilized as he nepalmed his way out of town.

[ThunderDan]

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

Really???

The NY Jets were in the AFC Championship game with a QB who threw for 2,444 yards, 12 Tds, 20 INTs and a 63.0 qb rating for the season. Just think if BF had stayed another year?

[Scott Campbell]

Hint: They're not booing because he just wanted a shot at a ring.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-L5UyGDlVM

[Zool]

He is forever tainted. IMO.

Specifically going to the Vikings has cemented this in the mind of a lot of Packer fans. I was fine with him on the Jets and watched a few of their games. I knew that he wanted to go to the Vikings but he wasnt there so it didnt matter.

To specifically WANT to go to MN....well thats just childish IMO.

Is it? Was it really? Guy wants that 2nd ring. Vikings appeared one player short. There were a lot of debates about how "no team is one player short" - next thing you know he has a MVP like season, is in the NFC Championship game... and on the cusp of a Super Bowl - and the entire game outside of the 6 turnovers, the vikings looked like a much better team than the saints did.

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

Obviously it wasn't, and i put IMO in my statement so yes, IMO it really was. He specifically said IN HIS OWN WORDS that he wanted revenge against the Packers. Why you would ignore this is beyond me.

[Fritz]

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

[Scott Campbell]

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!


Bus?

http://www.packersplanet.com/forum/images/avatars/166166943149dc90e353935.jpg

[Gunakor]

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!


Bus?

http://www.packersplanet.com/forum/images/avatars/166166943149dc90e353935.jpg

:lol:

[RashanGary]

Dianna had the pictures with the, "thanks ted" guys. There is talk all over about Favre's family hating Thompson. Favre went on Gretta with a grudge. Favre talked about wanting to stick it to Ted. Favre talked to Millen about what the Packers try to do, to give the Lions an edge over his old team.

The Packers have been much quieter about the whole thing, but I think MM and AR would love to win one, not so much to show Brett wrong, but to show the league of doubters who knocked them down and said they couldn't do it without Brett wrong.

When it comes to Favre, the person, I think they're just glad he's gone and will be even happier when he hangs it up for good and they don't have to talk about him 2 times a year.

I don't think Thompson cares. I think Thompson is confident in his knowledge and decision making. I don't think he thinks about it unless he's asked about it and then he just avoids it anyway.

[packerbacker1234]

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

Really???

The NY Jets were in the AFC Championship game with a QB who threw for 2,444 yards, 12 Tds, 20 INTs and a 63.0 qb rating for the season. Just think if BF had stayed another year?

Um, care to give credit to the coach at all? Compeltely different team and defense was on the field last year then the year prior, and that falls on the coaching staff. The staff that was their prior... yeah not getting it done.

[ThunderDan]

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

Really???

The NY Jets were in the AFC Championship game with a QB who threw for 2,444 yards, 12 Tds, 20 INTs and a 63.0 qb rating for the season. Just think if BF had stayed another year?

Um, care to give credit to the coach at all? Compeltely different team and defense was on the field last year then the year prior, and that falls on the coaching staff. The staff that was their prior... yeah not getting it done.

Favre knew who the coach would be when he asked for his release. Why are you trying to rewrite history? We are talking about 2009 and BF had to know there would be a huge improvement on a team that should have made the playoffs the year before.

You don't think BF would have helped the Jets? A team with an absolutely sucky QB gets to the AFC Championship. The Jets averaged 24 yards more per game running than passing in 2009.

Shit, with a competent QB this year I would pick the Jets as the AFC favorites hands down. The Jets are 10-1 to win the Super Bowl next year starting a QB with a 63.0 QB rating from the 2009 season.

[GrnBay007]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

[channtheman]

^ Obviously you care enough to also read the 286 pages of the Favre thread and then weigh in on the issue again. :oops:

[Gunakor]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

OMG!!! I said the EXACT SAME THING over a year ago!

I was told primarily by the pro-Favre crowd gushing over his greatness that since Favre is such a huge part of our legacy that the Favre discussion was not only allowed but should be expected at a Packer site. It was even explained this way to me by our Admin (though I couldn't truthfully accuse him of taking a firm stance one way or the other on the discussion). The give and take was that the Favre discussion be contained to this one thread so that people could avoid the topic entirely should they choose to.

Now the tables have turned, and the pro-Favre crowd gushing over his greatness have decided it doesn't matter anymore. It's done, it's over. Let it go, it's all in the past now. ROFLMAO!!

Let me offer you the same advice I was given over a year ago. If you don't like the tone of the discussion, stay out of the thread. Don't post in it, don't even read it if it bothers you. We've followed the rules. For the most part we've kept the discussion to this one thread. Don't complain. If you don't want to take part in the rehashing of re-rehashed hatred and support (yes, both exist) for a guy that shouldn't matter anymore but does, simply skip over the thread and open the next one. That's perfectly okay too.

[RashanGary]

And if you still crave the Favre nut licking, don't go to a Packer board, you're not going to get much of it here.

[Bretsky]

Yup, for better or worse we've turned into TT lickers

[Patler]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

Well, actually, it does matter because there is such a thing as his legacy, which is more than just his stats as a Packer. It's also his relationship with the franchise and with the fans. The last chapters of that story are still being written. It won't be complete until he quits playing at least, maybe until he dies.

Many of the Packer greats from the '60s continued their relationships with the team and fans well into their retirements, for some until their deaths. The legacies of Starr, McGee, Hornung, Gregg and others continued to be written long after their playing days ended. Others had little to do with the team after they walked off the field for the last time. We don't know where Favre will fall on the scale, but while he is still playing, talking and moving off one team and then another to go where he talked about going while still a Packer, the chapters of his legacy will not be complete, because it still affects the Packers and their fans.

So of course it still matters to the fans. It affects "their" team. It matters to them whether it was Favre's fault, TT's fault or no one's fault; it matters who he plays for and how he and his team perform, because those are all factors in his legacy.

[Scott Campbell]

Yup, for better or worse we've turned into TT lickers


Well, at least he's wearing the right color jersey.

[Bretsky]

Yup, for better or worse we've turned into TT lickers


Well, at least he's wearing the right color jersey.


very true

[Packerarcher]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

You do know that if he let it go Scott Cambell would have absolutely nothing to post about. Who are we to take the one thing that matters in his life away?

[Scott Campbell]

Scott's saying mean stuff about Bert!


http://greenbabyguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/baby-crying-needs-emergency-diaper-bag-or-snacks.jpg







:lol:

[Pugger]

He is forever tainted. IMO.

Specifically going to the Vikings has cemented this in the mind of a lot of Packer fans. I was fine with him on the Jets and watched a few of their games. I knew that he wanted to go to the Vikings but he wasnt there so it didnt matter.

To specifically WANT to go to MN....well thats just childish IMO.

Is it? Was it really? Guy wants that 2nd ring. Vikings appeared one player short. There were a lot of debates about how "no team is one player short" - next thing you know he has a MVP like season, is in the NFC Championship game... and on the cusp of a Super Bowl - and the entire game outside of the 6 turnovers, the vikings looked like a much better team than the saints did.

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

If all he wanted was a second ring, why did he quit on a team that just weeks ago in 2008 was in the conference championship game?

[Pugger]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

If memory serves you've been a big defender of Favre on this site since The Divorce so I find your post curious. As long as Favre continues to play for a divisional rival it will matter what he does.

[falco]

If all he wanted was a second ring, why did he quit on a team that just weeks ago in 2008 was in the conference championship game?

+1

[Gunakor]

If all he wanted was a second ring, why did he quit on a team that just weeks ago in 2008 was in the conference championship game?

Because it wasn't his team anymore.

[Bossman641]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

OMG!!! I said the EXACT SAME THING over a year ago!

I was told primarily by the pro-Favre crowd gushing over his greatness that since Favre is such a huge part of our legacy that the Favre discussion was not only allowed but should be expected at a Packer site. It was even explained this way to me by our Admin (though I couldn't truthfully accuse him of taking a firm stance one way or the other on the discussion). The give and take was that the Favre discussion be contained to this one thread so that people could avoid the topic entirely should they choose to.

Now the tables have turned, and the pro-Favre crowd gushing over his greatness have decided it doesn't matter anymore. It's done, it's over. Let it go, it's all in the past now. ROFLMAO!!

Let me offer you the same advice I was given over a year ago. If you don't like the tone of the discussion, stay out of the thread. Don't post in it, don't even read it if it bothers you. We've followed the rules. For the most part we've kept the discussion to this one thread. Don't complain. If you don't want to take part in the rehashing of re-rehashed hatred and support (yes, both exist) for a guy that shouldn't matter anymore but does, simply skip over the thread and open the next one. That's perfectly okay too.

Agreed. It is hilarious how all those who were claiming they had the right to talk about Favre before are now the ones who want to shut down the talk.

[mraynrand]

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

Really???

The NY Jets were in the AFC Championship game with a QB who threw for 2,444 yards, 12 Tds, 20 INTs and a 63.0 qb rating for the season. Just think if BF had stayed another year?

Um, care to give credit to the coach at all? Compeltely different team and defense was on the field last year then the year prior, and that falls on the coaching staff. The staff that was their prior... yeah not getting it done.

Favre knew who the coach would be when he asked for his release. Why are you trying to rewrite history? We are talking about 2009 and BF had to know there would be a huge improvement on a team that should have made the playoffs the year before.

You don't think BF would have helped the Jets? A team with an absolutely sucky QB gets to the AFC Championship. The Jets averaged 24 yards more per game running than passing in 2009.

Shit, with a competent QB this year I would pick the Jets as the AFC favorites hands down. The Jets are 10-1 to win the Super Bowl next year starting a QB with a 63.0 QB rating from the 2009 season.

And think what the Jets could have gotten with that draft pick they wasted on a QB! Perhaps they could have drafted another weapon to help Favre get over the hump! It's sad that the Jets weren't willing to surround Favre with the talent he needed to win. He had to go somewhere where the GM was willing to make the critical moves to bring in enough talent to compliment Favre.

[GrnBay007]

I seriously can't believe some of you are STILL arguing this crap.

It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

Seriously.................DOES IT REALLY MATTER ANYMORE?????????

It's done. It's over. You can choose to move on with AR and be happy or live in your pissed off world because BF is a Viking. Who cares, right? If AR is as good as most think it should make no difference.

OMG!!! I said the EXACT SAME THING over a year ago!

I was told primarily by the pro-Favre crowd gushing over his greatness that since Favre is such a huge part of our legacy that the Favre discussion was not only allowed but should be expected at a Packer site. It was even explained this way to me by our Admin (though I couldn't truthfully accuse him of taking a firm stance one way or the other on the discussion). The give and take was that the Favre discussion be contained to this one thread so that people could avoid the topic entirely should they choose to.

Now the tables have turned, and the pro-Favre crowd gushing over his greatness have decided it doesn't matter anymore. It's done, it's over. Let it go, it's all in the past now. ROFLMAO!!

Let me offer you the same advice I was given over a year ago. If you don't like the tone of the discussion, stay out of the thread. Don't post in it, don't even read it if it bothers you. We've followed the rules. For the most part we've kept the discussion to this one thread. Don't complain. If you don't want to take part in the rehashing of re-rehashed hatred and support (yes, both exist) for a guy that shouldn't matter anymore but does, simply skip over the thread and open the next one. That's perfectly okay too.

Agreed. It is hilarious how all those who were claiming they had the right to talk about Favre before are now the ones who want to shut down the talk.

Actually you are both wrong. I have no problem with this thread....I'm very happy it's still here. I guess I just don't see the point in continuing to argue all the so called "facts". But then again, it is a fan forum of opinions/ideas. Everyone that frequents this site knows exactly how every other poster feels concerning the Favre situation. I highly doubt there is anyone on the fence with this topic...people's feelings concerning the topic are very solid. Yet the same things keep getting brought up....like people think they can seriously change someone's mind. I guess this thread is a lot like the FYI room in that respect. :D

Actually it's all pretty funny. It's the off-season and we don't have an answer whether the big guy will return or not....and this thread is still the hottest topic! I'll continue to follow his career as long as he keeps playing.

[Tarlam!]

I'll continue to follow his career as long as he keeps playing.

Well, there is little choice in the matter. The free press won't let anybody NOT follow his career. :oops:

[Gunakor]

I guess I just don't see the point in continuing to argue all the so called "facts".

Which facts are we arguing?


It is what it is....................The Packers No Longer Wanted Brett.......Brett No Longer Wanted The Packers!!!!!!! PERIOD! It happens....

The people that hate Brett are blaming it all on him going to the Vikings

The people that support Brett are blaming it all on TT/MM

This statement brings the argument back to the messy divorce back in the summer of 2008. But that's not the argument I saw taking place in this instance. The argument taking place here, as I read it, was about whether the Jets gave BF a better shot at that 2nd ring than the Vikings did.


OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring.


Really???

The NY Jets were in the AFC Championship game with a QB who threw for 2,444 yards, 12 Tds, 20 INTs and a 63.0 qb rating for the season. Just think if BF had stayed another year?

That debate has nothing to do with whether the Packers wanted BF anymore or if BF wanted the Packers anymore or who was more at fault for that divorce in the first place. The time period in which these events being argued took place was nearly a full year after the messy divorce from Green Bay had ended. So I'm confused as to which facts are okay to debate and which are not.

With no logical link between the BF vs TT debate and the NY vs MN debate I was left to assume that your frustration was with the Favre discussion in general. My apologies if this wasn't the argument you were referring to in your post.

[Scott Campbell]

Everyone that frequents this site knows exactly how every other poster feels concerning the Favre situation. I highly doubt there is anyone on the fence with this topic...people's feelings concerning the topic are very solid. Yet the same things keep getting brought up....like people think they can seriously change someone's mind.



Well I'm still undecided, and carefully considering both sides of the argument.

[retailguy]

Everyone that frequents this site knows exactly how every other poster feels concerning the Favre situation. I highly doubt there is anyone on the fence with this topic...people's feelings concerning the topic are very solid. Yet the same things keep getting brought up....like people think they can seriously change someone's mind.



Well I'm still undecided, and carefully considering both sides of the argument.

You do have that fence post securely lodged up your ass. Maybe that's the real problem. :P

[Scott Campbell]

Everyone that frequents this site knows exactly how every other poster feels concerning the Favre situation. I highly doubt there is anyone on the fence with this topic...people's feelings concerning the topic are very solid. Yet the same things keep getting brought up....like people think they can seriously change someone's mind.



Well I'm still undecided, and carefully considering both sides of the argument.

You do have that fence post securely lodged up your ass. Maybe that's the real problem. :P



RG, we both know those kinds of comments do nothing to help the healing. And I'm all about the healing.

[ThunderDan]

And think what the Jets could have gotten with that draft pick they wasted on a QB! Perhaps they could have drafted another weapon to help Favre get over the hump! It's sad that the Jets weren't willing to surround Favre with the talent he needed to win. He had to go somewhere where the GM was willing to make the critical moves to bring in enough talent to compliment Favre.

Wait a minute .... that seems familiar. :lol: Maybe the Jets should have traded for Randy Moss.

[Pugger]

If all he wanted was a second ring, why did he quit on a team that just weeks ago in 2008 was in the conference championship game?

Because it wasn't his team anymore.

BINGO! And that is why he is wanted to go to MN.

[pbmax]

Ryan did not want any part of Favre. he didn't even bother picking up the phone to recruit him to stay. Not saying he couldn't have helped, but someone did not like the match.

[Scott Campbell]

OF all the other teams in the NFL Favre could of played for, the vikings were teh best set up for him to have a chance to get that ring. People are so focused on "all he wanted to do was beat GB" - no, what he wanted to do was win a ring. As it was shown, the vikings were indeed set up to win a ring with a good/great QB at the helm. 6 turnovers and an OT later, it was not to be. Still, it was the best landing spot for Brett across the entire NFL to win one.

Really???

The NY Jets were in the AFC Championship game with a QB who threw for 2,444 yards, 12 Tds, 20 INTs and a 63.0 qb rating for the season. Just think if BF had stayed another year?



Well sure he probably could have won another Superbowl with the Jets, but how was that supposed to help him stick it to Ted?

[mraynrand]

Ryan did not want any part of Favre. he didn't even bother picking up the phone to recruit him to stay. Not saying he couldn't have helped, but someone did not like the match.

Are you really saying that someone didn't want Favre? Perish Forbid! Oh, the HUMANITY!

[Scott Campbell]

On Manning:

Bad throw? Absolutely.
Did he break every Cardinal Rule of Quarterbacking with it? - No.

Manning had a better game than Bert did. However, Peyton's pick was on an even bigger stage than Bert's blunder.
Why don't you put down the entire Packer Franchise while your at at it.
By acting like a 10 year old and daily telling all of us how shitty a huge part of our Packer Legacy is please make us forget that we ever came close to greatness....... oh wise one from utah.....................who knows how true Packer fans feel.......And to see some posters have anything you say in their signature is the most disgusting thing a Wisconsinite has ever seen! 8-)


Just $24.95. Have you ordered yet? :lol:

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/4thandfour.htm

[Tarlam!]

Just $24.95. Have you ordered yet? :lol:

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/4thandfour.htm

I laughed. Does this mean I'm gonna burn?

[Scott Campbell]

Just $24.95. Have you ordered yet? :lol:

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/4thandfour.htm

I laughed. Does this mean I'm gonna burn?


Wasn't that decided long before you watched? :lol:

[Bretsky]

Ryan did not want any part of Favre. he didn't even bother picking up the phone to recruit him to stay. Not saying he couldn't have helped, but someone did not like the match.


STOP MAKING SENSE

[Freak Out]

Just $24.95. Have you ordered yet? :lol:

http://www.bangcartoon.com/2009/4thandfour.htm

I laughed. Does this mean I'm gonna burn?

Was that Henry the VIII? :)

[pbmax]

Ryan did not want any part of Favre. he didn't even bother picking up the phone to recruit him to stay. Not saying he couldn't have helped, but someone did not like the match.


STOP MAKING SENSE
Well before you anoint me, remember that Brett retired and then asked out of his contract in January. Ryan may have been trying to avoid the drama.

[RashanGary]

Back on topic



http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2010/01/Brett-Favre-Interception.jpg

[Scott Campbell]

http://johnweldon.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/favre.jpg

[Bretsky]

Ryan did not want any part of Favre. he didn't even bother picking up the phone to recruit him to stay. Not saying he couldn't have helped, but someone did not like the match.


STOP MAKING SENSE
Well before you anoint me, remember that Brett retired and then asked out of his contract in January. Ryan may have been trying to avoid the drama.



ah, pfooeeyy

Get out of this thread; sense in not welcome

Now let the natives begin again :lol:

[Joemailman]

http://johnweldon.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/favre.jpg

Cheap shot.

[Iron Mike]

http://www.dumbfans.com/wp-content/uploads/deannapalm.jpg

[Patler]

Ryan did not want any part of Favre. he didn't even bother picking up the phone to recruit him to stay. Not saying he couldn't have helped, but someone did not like the match.


STOP MAKING SENSE
Well before you anoint me, remember that Brett retired and then asked out of his contract in January. Ryan may have been trying to avoid the drama.


But he talked it up well-enough the day he was introduced as the head coach: :lol:



“Anybody would want Brett Favre to be their quarterback,” Ryan said. “Not just me, but anybody. All that stuff we’ll get into later. I haven’t talked to Brett or anything yet. We’ll see how he’s feeling.”

Favre and the Jets got off to an 8-3 start before losing four of their last five games to finish out of the postseason. Favre, who was playing with an injured throwing shoulder, threw nine interceptions and two touchdown passes during that stretch.

“Sometimes you don’t have your best game for whatever reason,” Ryan said. “I know the respect that I have for Brett Favre is great and just comes from first-hand info. I’ve seen him up close and personal, and that’s enough for me.”

Favre "retired" just three weeks later on 2/11. I suspect Ryan had a preference, and it did not include Favre.

[Scott Campbell]

He's like a little kid out there.

http://images.smh.com.au/2010/01/25/1066214/favre-420x0.jpg

[Gunakor]

http://johnweldon.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/favre.jpg

Cheap shot.

Depends on the era. Once upon a time it was simply called football.