Can a great QB make an average team great

[dissident94]

I say yes. We have been spoiled to think anyone could walk in and tak this team over. I have been saying this over and over. The little things Farve brings to an offense like pre snap reads, leadership in the huddle,the confidence the others feel knowing Favre is there will be greatly missed and seems already apparent with the Jets.

I have felt this all summer. The talent on this team is not as deep and as good as many here feel it is. Our O-line has hole. Our Rbs are a question mark. Our WR while deep do not have that one feared weapon like a TO or Moss. the Defensive line is not as strong.

Do not underestimate the play of QB. We have been spoiled and may now be paying for it.

We will see. And I am not bashing Rodgers. It will take him at least a year.
But when you almost made the super bowl you do not replace your QB. Pretty obvious

[MJZiggy]

It's over. And the regular season hasn't even started. "Shoulda" ain't worth shit at the moment.

[packerbacker1234]

While no one really wants to keep comparing rodgers and favre.. as someone who saw both paly last night:

Favre did a lot of three step drop, decision, throw. Went 5/6 with a TD. Rodgers did a lot of three step drop, no decision, take a sack... or run around, throw ball away.

As they said "coverage sacks". No, it's called indecision on where to throw the ball. The quick throw offense, the one the packers ran this year, and almost every NFL team has, requires presnap defensive reads, so you know where to put the ball right off the threep step drop. He appearently isnt' getting good reads of the defense, or is just thinking too much. It's one thing to stare at a primary reciever, it's another thing to over think it. "ok, so DD is double covered on the slant... thats the mlb who has underneath... so that means I should throw it too... damnit" It's gotta be instinct, as favre so gracefully put it this week.

The nfl, for QB's, is a read and react league. It's instinct, there isn't time to think back there. Three step drops are sometimes all you get to get rid of a ball, and Rodgers was not reacting last night. Even last week, he didn't really react, he was just given time all game long, something we know with our line wont happen. I think we took for granted how man sacks Favre not only avoided with his scramble ability, but also with his quick reactions. Manning has it, Brady, Romo, even McNabb. Those reaction passes is what makes and breaks a crappy QB, from a Good one. Rodgers needs mroe time, but he apparently is not confident in himself. A confident QB gets rid of the ball fast, especially when the rush is right in your face.

[dissident94]

Like it or not we must compare Farve with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB. We will always have to compare the QBs. If we go 6-10 and the only thing that changed was QB it logical to say there is a correlation there.

Also very funny. Many on here talk about the offseason work is so important for chemistry.

This team has absolutely no chemistry right now. While Favre with the JEts for one week seems to have more.

[ND72]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.




wrong...no we don't. Only the most ignorant will, because they have to live in the past, or play the "what if's". it's stupid, because it's done. We don't have to compare Rodgers to anyone else, but Aaron Rodgers. They are 2 different people, and now, on 2 different teams. get over it and move on.

[MJZiggy]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

[ND72]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

From the mind of a genius...

nice response Zig

[packerbacker1234]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

Favre, back in 1992, and 1993, was all instinct. He had no idea what defenses he was facing (as was obvious by the "whats a nickle mean" comment), so it was all take the snap, get rid of the ball, he's covered, second giuy is coverd... ok run around and just keep the head up. Someone will get open. Thats how he played then, and still really how he plays now. Favre has never, nro will really ever, be that good at presnap defensive reads. He has, however, always been good at getting rid of that ball fast. Not just due to his arm strength, but due to pure reaction.

In fact, I remember Tom Brady coming in for Beldsoe int he playoffs and doing the same thing to win a super bowl. Manning did it. (peyton). McNabb did it (thats why he wasn't booed all the way out of philly), and if you look at the career of any qb who is starting for a team for 5+ seasons, you will see a guy that when put into the game, had success on the field, even if the team didn't win. Eli Manning was reaching hte end of the line in NY till he came on last season, which is proof that yes, it can take a couple years to get to that point for some.

Rodger's just isn't at this point, and it will be a miracle if he makes it to midseason.

I am not expecting hall of fame performance, and as a true packer fan I support rodgers and hope he does well so we can win ball games, but if your willing to get rid of a guy wh o lead you to 13 - 3 just because of some indecisions he had in the offseason and you commit to Rodgers, then you naturally expect Rodgers to play better then he did. Especially given that he did have time to throw the ball, and couldn't make much happen. I am not expecting Rodgers to be all world, but by all means he better play good enough for us to contend for a playoff birth, because we gave up somebody who would of to go with the guy. I know, first season he gets breaks, and it's NOT HIS FAULT IN THE LEAST BIT. i applaud rodgers for how he has handled everything. But, Managment put him in aposition where as packer fans, we have to expect him to do decent this season... because thats the type of confident vote TT gave him. Your the best guy for the job.

Well, he is now... and I am not impressed. As any packer fan, we don't like throwing seasons when we don't have too... and this may turn into it.

I hope not, but more games like last night and god forbid we win even 6 games.

[Scott Campbell]

If we go 6-10 and the only thing that changed was QB it logical to say there is a correlation there.


The only thing? The ONLY thing????

Here's a partial list of things that have changed since last year.


1) Jordy Nelson
2) Brian Brohm
3) Josh Sitton
4) Jerimichael Finley
5) Craig Nall is gone.
6) Corey Williams is gone.
7) Jarrett Bush is about to be gone.
8) Donald Driver is a year older.
9) Charles Woodson is a year older.
10) Chad Clifton is a year older.
11) Al Harris is a year older.


etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc...........................



Your analysis is a gross oversimplification. There are lots and lots of variables at play, of which Favre being gone is probably the most significant.

[TravisWilliams23]

Quarterback play is obviously very important to a teams fortunes but it's not the end all.

Dan Marino, Hall of Famer, had all those passing records, could read defenses better than most, but NO SUPER BOWL RING!

Peyton Manning, to be Hall of Famer, didn't get his ring until Tony Dungy brought a DEFENSE to Indy.

Brett Favre, soon to be Hall of Famer, hasn't won a Super Bowl in 10 + years because of what? TEAM just not good enough and questionable coaching.

In last nights game A-rod had a td pass dropped and a bomb to Driver dropped. Who knows how the game unfolds IF either one of those receivers makes the catch on those plays.

I'm sure MM is holding his cards for the regular season. This is still training camp and this is where management needs to see just what they have. The roster will be cut and this is how you see who makes the team.

Give it some time.

[Bretsky]

If we go 6-10 and the only thing that changed was QB it logical to say there is a correlation there.


The only thing? The ONLY thing????

Here's a partial list of things that have changed since last year.


1) Jordy Nelson
2) Brian Brohm
3) Josh Sitton
4) Jerimichael Finley
5) Craig Nall is gone.
6) Corey Williams is gone.
7) Jarrett Bush is about to be gone.
8) Donald Driver is a year older.
9) Charles Woodson is a year older.
10) Chad Clifton is a year older.
11) Al Harris is a year older.


etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc...........................



Your analysis is a gross oversimplification. There are lots and lots of variables at play, of which Favre being gone is probably the most significant.


Wait, wouldn't all the players, and their competitors, be a year older :?: :lol:

I say BRING BACK NALL :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Wait, wouldn't all the players, and their competitors, be a year older :?: :lol:




And Brett too. All that was covered with the 3rd etc.


The point is that it's overly simplistic to take something this complex and try to pin it down to one variable.

[Bretsky]

Wait, wouldn't all the players, and their competitors, be a year older :?: :lol:




That was covered with the 3rd etc.


since we're one of the youngest teams in the NFL......theoretically shouldn't players being a year older help us ? :idea:

ah, forget it.......I'm just giving you crap cause I'm bored and didn't get to see the game and this is more fun than cleaning :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Wait, wouldn't all the players, and their competitors, be a year older :?: :lol:




That was covered with the 3rd etc.


since we're one of the youngest teams in the NFL......theoretically shouldn't players being a year older help us ? :idea:


Yes. I'm not making the case that they're better or worse than last year. I'm saying it's a different team (not just one player), as is every team in the NFL.


In response to the original question, I say no. A great QB can make an average team better, but can't take the team all the way to greatness all by himself.

[imscott72]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

[oregonpackfan]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

To add to MJZiggy's strong post, Packer fans need Patience with Aaron Rodgers. You cannot expect to replace a starting HOF quarterback who has started every game for 16 consecutive seasons and expect a smooth transition.

In addition, if you look back at the past 6 preseasons, even Favre did not perform that well. Why all the panic from just 1 preseason game? Besides, Rodgers was impressive in his game against the Bengals.

Other posters made strong points that winning comes about because of many variables in the game--blocking, tackling, running, avoiding key injuries, etc. The quarterback gets too much credit when a team is winning and takes too much blame when a team is losing.

I have posted several times that Rodgers may not be consistently performing well until the mid-season point.

[Fosco33]

Regardless if management decided to not let Favre come back or if he would've stayed retired, the Packers would've been the same team.

Meaning...

It's not worth your electric synapses or lung power to thing/speak about these sort of comparisons.

Who knows, Brett comes back and ANY of the following could've happened:
1. Madden curse holds up, Favre gets hurt by wk 3 and is on IR - ARod plays
2. Favre plays good or bad, Packers record is good or bad (as it's varied greatly from 4-12 to 8-8 to 13-3 in last 3 years)
3. Favre is a distraction, ARod leaves when he can during FA - team never really comes together and play poorly

And now - NONE of the above CAN happen or are worth pissing/moaning about.

I'll continue to be a fan of Brett and will watch Jet games too.
But the Packers record THIS year has nothing to do with Favre now...

[Partial]

Yeah, a great QB can make an average team great because the defense constantly has to account for what he is doing. That opens up the run game, which results in longer drives, which keeps the defense fresher and the opposition drained.

[Fosco33]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

To add to MJZiggy's strong post, Packer fans need Patience with Aaron Rodgers. You cannot expect to replace a starting HOF quarterback who has started every game for 16 consecutive seasons and expect a smooth transition.

In addition, if you look back at the past 6 preseasons, even Favre did not perform that well. Why all the panic from just 1 preseason game? Besides, Rodgers was impressive in his game against the Bengals.

Other posters made strong points that winning comes about because of many variables in the game--blocking, tackling, running, avoiding key injuries, etc. The quarterback gets too much credit when a team is winning and takes too much blame when a team is losing.

I have posted several times that Rodgers may not be consistently performing well until the mid-season point.

Agree 100%.

Mark Rypien
Trent Dilfer
Brad Johnson
Eli Manning (lol)

[packerbacker1234]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Twice? I'de like to hear this, because according to brett the one time the packers claim they had a jet ready to bring him back, Favre said that wasn't even close to how it went down. The only time, apparently, they were ready to welcome him back was when he was reinstated. Remember, after he filed his papers WHY did it get delayed? Because the packers wanted time to find a trade for favre, or to convince him to stay retired.

Thats not welcoming him back, in the least bit. When reinstated, it was MM who was open to welcoming him back into the locker room. not managment. Your perception of Favre beign welcomed back at all boggles my mind. The fact you think they did it twice boggles it even more.

MM welcomed him back. Management tried to pay him off.

[dissident94]

YEs we did choose Rodgers over Favre. Are you telling me Favre could not be the QB of this team right now. If you can say he coud be then we chose Rodgers.

What I am saying is that Favre's play may be the reason for 13-3. Without great QB play this may be a borderline playoff team.

Thats fine for a rebuilding team. Not a team that jsut a year ago contended for the Super Bowl. So for me Rodgers better be good enough to contend for the Super Bowl. Because with Favre we probably would be. Simple.

Most of my non Packer friends since I live in Tucson Az think the Packers are complete fools. You do not switch QBs from an all-pro to an inferior one when you can contend.

Also like I said before. This offseason stuff is not as important for veterans as you guys keep saying. They are already polished players who do not need it. That was the argument for many on here to stay with Rodgers. Its proving to be bull.

[Scott Campbell]

Most of my non Packer friends since I live in Tucson Az think the Packers are complete fools.



I guess that settles it then. You sure could have saved a lot of arguments by letting us in on this earlier.

:lol:

[dissident94]

I knew someone would rip me for saying that. I thought since I live outside the state I would give some insite to some who only hear frm other Packer fans.
I seriously hope Rodgers proves me wrong. But when I saw Brett play for the Jets and play well. I was pissed. I haven't been really pissed about his all until then. Thinking of the last run we could have made this year. Instead it looks like rebuilding could be the option. If that is the case ask Miami, 49ers, and Denver how that has gone since they have lost their HOF Qbs

When you have a great one hang onto them as long as you can and in any way you can. To think anyone can play great QB play in the NFL is ignorant.

[Scott Campbell]

You do not switch QBs from an all-pro to an inferior one when you can contend.


You also don't let one player hold the franchise hostage with yearly performances of "should I, or shouldn't I". For all of T.O.'s antics, I never remember his Mommy leaking stuff to the press.

[3irty1]

A consistently good QB puts you in every game. Truth is that I'd rather be lucky than good.

[Scott Campbell]

........

[Bretsky]

I knew someone would rip me for saying that. I thought since I live outside the state I would give some insite to some who only hear frm other Packer fans.
I seriously hope Rodgers proves me wrong. But when I saw Brett play for the Jets and play well. I was pissed. I haven't been really pissed about his all until then. Thinking of the last run we could have made this year. Instead it looks like rebuilding could be the option. If that is the case ask Miami, 49ers, and Denver how that has gone since they have lost their HOF Qbs

When you have a great one hang onto them as long as you can and in any way you can. To think anyone can play great QB play in the NFL is ignorant.


I won't rip you for this view
Outside of the state is where we get the non bias views
NFL is a now league

[dissident94]

You do not switch QBs from an all-pro to an inferior one when you can contend.


You also don't let one player hold the franchise hostage with yearly performances of "should I, or shouldn't I". For all of T.O.'s antics, I never remember his Mommy leaking stuff to the press.


Really? How about other past greats like Don hutson who is revered. For his past 6 years he waffled about coming back once up to the final week. Or abotu Michael Strahan. Or how about Michael Jordan who signed 1 year contracts for his past 3 years with Chicago. I think we know how that turned out.

Was Favre wrong for jerking the team around sure. But does that mean you compromise a chance at the Super Bowl this year. I think not.

In my opinion when you have someone who can play QB at Farve's level you do whatever it takes to keep him around.

[Scott Campbell]

I knew someone would rip me for saying that. I thought since I live outside the state I would give some insite to some who only hear frm other Packer fans.
I seriously hope Rodgers proves me wrong. But when I saw Brett play for the Jets and play well. I was pissed. I haven't been really pissed about his all until then. Thinking of the last run we could have made this year. Instead it looks like rebuilding could be the option. If that is the case ask Miami, 49ers, and Denver how that has gone since they have lost their HOF Qbs

When you have a great one hang onto them as long as you can and in any way you can. To think anyone can play great QB play in the NFL is ignorant.


I won't rip you for this view
Outside of the state is where we get the non bias views
NFL is a now league


His circle of friends in Tuscon are hardly a representative sampling of everyone outside WI. Lots of us live outside WI.

[Bretsky]

You do not switch QBs from an all-pro to an inferior one when you can contend.


You also don't let one player hold the franchise hostage with yearly performances of "should I, or shouldn't I". For all of T.O.'s antics, I never remember his Mommy leaking stuff to the press.

I've never bought into the "hold the team/franchise" verbiage that this forum has seemed to embrace so well. Seems like a drama queen type of phrase that that many seem to embrace to overstate the annual effect it has actually had on our team.

Reality is our starter has been sitting behind Favre for a few years now. Surely Favre's waffling didn't hurt the franchise before the 13-3 year.

But now since we didn't like Favre's antice (neither did I) we conveniently use that phrase like it's fact. Favre's delay last year or the year before didn't hurt one bit. Nobody liked the drama; but it didn't hold anybody or anything hostage.

The antics this offseason just sucked. Overall I'm pretty surprised on June 20th when Favre made that intial call to MM...........I'm just surprised they weren't on a jet the next day to figure out how to settle this one way or the other. Would seem to have salvaged a lot of hassle and bad feelings

[Partial]

You do not switch QBs from an all-pro to an inferior one when you can contend.


You also don't let one player hold the franchise hostage with yearly performances of "should I, or shouldn't I". For all of T.O.'s antics, I never remember his Mommy leaking stuff to the press.

I've never bought into the "hold the team/franchise" verbiage that this forum has seemed to embrace so well. Seems like a drama queen type of phrase that that many seem to embrace to overstate the annual effect it has actually had on our team.

Reality is our starter has been sitting behind Favre for a few years now. Surely Favre's waffling didn't hurt the franchise before the 13-3 year.

But now since we didn't like Favre's antics (neither did I) we conveniently use that phrase like it's fact. Favre's delay last year or the year before didn't hurt one bit. Nobody liked the drama; but it didn't hold anybody or anything hostage.

The antics this offseason just sucked. Overall I'm pretty surprised on June 20th when Favre made that initial call to MM...........I'm just surprised they weren't on a jet the next day to figure out how to settle this one way or the other. Would seem to have salvaged a lot of hassle and bad feelings

A money shot from the banker.

[dissident94]

The guy I thought would be for the move was my brother in law who is a Pittsburgh fan and someone who probably knows knwo about football than most on here. I really thought he would have a business side of it. But he surprised me when he was really confused by it and was wondering if I thought it was personal.

He said if Pitt did that to Rothlesburger he would call for the GMs head. And I agree. Really no logic behind the move.

[lod01]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

they air the 1st game of Favre's vs Cincinnati once in a while on NFL network. The difference is night and day between that and Favre now. It will take time for anyone. Rodgers, whoever. To expect anything remotely close to Favre of last year is a dream only.

[Scott Campbell]

The whole summer was high drama in Packer land. I've never witnessed more. McCarthy admitted that all the drama was having an effect on the team at the end, and that they needed to get back to football.

[Scott Campbell]

...........

[The Gunshooter]

The way GB played last night is cause for concern but more importantly will be how they bounce back in the 3rd game. That is the game the starters play into the 3rd quarter. If they are getting their asses handed to them by Denver then I can understand people getting bent out of shape. Until then, cackling hens need to get a grip. The sky is not falling. That game didn't count.

When you have a young QB like Rodgers, the receivers must come up with the catch. If they can't get open, and they can't catch it when they do the guy is going to press.

All we know now is Bush sucks even though we always knew that, and not having Pickett, Grant, Harris, Hawk, Jennings, and KGB is big trouble.

[Bretsky]

The whole summer was high drama in Packer land. I've never witnessed more. McCarthy admitted that all the drama was having an effect on the team at the end, and that they needed to get back to football.


Going back to my point he did not hold the Packers hostage "annually" with his will I or won't I.

If you want to state it has had an effect this year I will agree

[Bretsky]

The way GB played last night is cause for concern but more importantly will be how they bounce back in the 3rd game. That is the game the starters play into the 3rd quarter. If they are getting their asses handed to them by Denver then I can understand people getting bent out of shape. Until then, cackling hens need to get a grip. The sky is not falling. That game didn't count.

When you have a young QB like Rodgers, the receivers must come up with the catch. If they can't get open, and they can't catch it when they do the guy is going to press.

All we know now is Bush sucks even though we always knew that, and not having Pickett, Grant, Harris, Hawk, Jennings, and KGB is big trouble.


I agree; way too early to tell anything.....although it would be nice of individual performances were crisper

[RashanGary]

I don't think a great QB can make an average team look great. A great QB can make an average offense look good but that is before you mix in ST's and defense.

QB is a very important position and is really the center piece of any great offense but without a good/great defense and st's the QB is pretty much screwed no matter what he does.

[Bretsky]

I don't think a great QB can make an average team look great. A great QB can make an average offense look good but that is before you mix in ST's and defense.

QB is a very important position and is really the center piece of any great offense but without a good/great defense and st's the QB is pretty much screwed no matter what he does.


:bclap:


Dan Marino would agree

[RashanGary]

Haha, Bretsky. I go off the deep end on this team and suddenly we're on the same page ;)

[GrnBay007]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

True. But Favre was thrown into the fire relatively soon after he joined the team. Rodgers has been with this team for 3 years.

[LEWCWA]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Wrong----Favre did come back, Packers chose to trade him...

[Gunakor]

I don't think a great QB can make an average team look great. A great QB can make an average offense look good but that is before you mix in ST's and defense.

QB is a very important position and is really the center piece of any great offense but without a good/great defense and st's the QB is pretty much screwed no matter what he does.

And to expand on this a bit, a top tier defense can make up for very average QB play also. Just ask Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson or Jeff Hostetler. This applies to Green Bay and Aaron Rodgers as well, because I truly believe that we have a top tier defense here.

The Niners scored 34 points against us yesterday, but not a single one of them came against the first team defense. There's no way San Fransisco walks all over us in a regular season game. Not a chance. They'd be lucky to score 10 points for the game, a number than even an average offensive performance could easily top.

The argument I made last preseason is that the defense would keep us in games and we'd make the playoffs. Week 1, the defense won the game. Defense beat the Skins last year too. Yeah, even our 13-3 team last year struggled offensively at times. Brett Favre looked like shit on more than one occasion, and we finished 13-3 anyhow. Even if Aaron Rodgers looks like shit from time to time, this team should win at least 10 games this year. The defense is up to the challenge.

[Gunakor]

True. But Favre was thrown into the fire relatively soon after he joined the team. Rodgers has been with this team for 3 years.

This is a very different team than the one Rodgers was drafted by in 2005. New coach, new philosophy, new players. So I'm not sure Rodgers being with the team for 3 years really applies here.

Certainly his first season under Mike Sherman as HC is a wash, and the team around him has changed so drastically since then that I don't see him having been able to get all that comfortable. Even today, they can't decide who is going to make up the line protecting him. That's changing practically every day.

On this offense there are 3 guys who were on the #1 unit when Rodgers was drafted. Cliffy and Tauch, and Donald Driver. That's it. And Rodgers hasn't been able to work on his timing with Driver in practice until this year. He's worked with Jennings a bit, but Jennings hasn't been on the field yet. He's worked with Jones alot, so it's no suprise that Jones has the lone TD reception for the first team unit this preseason.

[Iron Mike]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

True. But Favre was thrown into the fire relatively soon after he joined the team. Rodgers has been with this team for 3 years.

Chick fight. :drma:

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00376/charley1_280_376645a.jpg

[pbmax]

It took Favre 2 and 1/2 years (just shy of 37 games) of starting to figure out pro football and play to his level of ability (19 games as backup). Its good that Rodgers had three years to develop, grow, get smarter and stronger. He still has zero Regular Season starts. Say it with me, Favre had 37 before people agreed he was going to be worth it.

It will take a year, minimum, to know what we will have with him as a veteran starter. More likely, 1 and 1/2 to 2 years. The patience paid off with Favre. It can still pay off with Rodgers.

Remember that Favre was 9-7 for three years with Holmgren and Wolf at the helm. Just ask Bretsky how many people in the state were screaming for a veteran or Brunell before the 2nd half of the 94 season.

[imscott72]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Twice? I'de like to hear this, because according to brett the one time the packers claim they had a jet ready to bring him back, Favre said that wasn't even close to how it went down. The only time, apparently, they were ready to welcome him back was when he was reinstated. Remember, after he filed his papers WHY did it get delayed? Because the packers wanted time to find a trade for favre, or to convince him to stay retired.

Thats not welcoming him back, in the least bit. When reinstated, it was MM who was open to welcoming him back into the locker room. not managment. Your perception of Favre beign welcomed back at all boggles my mind. The fact you think they did it twice boggles it even more.

MM welcomed him back. Management tried to pay him off.

There's no sense rehashing this. It's a waste of time. We'll never know how exactly it went down, but as TT said both sides could of done better in their communication. Brett didn't need to run to his "sources" everytime him and MM spoke either. It's water under the bridge. Move on..

[imscott72]

Thinking of the last run we could have made this year. Instead it looks like rebuilding could be the option.

So after two preseason games we're in rebuilding mode? Holy smokes thank goodness you aren't running the team.. :roll:

[GrnBay007]

It took Favre 2 and 1/2 years (just shy of 37 games) of starting to figure out pro football and play to his level of ability (19 games as backup). Its good that Rodgers had three years to develop, grow, get smarter and stronger. He still has zero Regular Season starts. Say it with me, Favre had 37 before people agreed he was going to be worth it.

It will take a year, minimum, to know what we will have with him as a veteran starter. More likely, 1 and 1/2 to 2 years. The patience paid off with Favre. It can still pay off with Rodgers.

Remember that Favre was 9-7 for three years with Holmgren and Wolf at the helm. Just ask Bretsky how many people in the state were screaming for a veteran or Brunell before the 2nd half of the 94 season.

I realize this...took Favre some time to come out really strong. My point was that he was thrown into the fire shortly after arriving to GB.....and Rodgers being with the same team, even through their changes, should have benefited him....and maybe it will regular season, we will see. He's had a lot to deal with. I'm sorry, I want to see Rodgers succeed because he's a Packer, but I just have a bad feeling about it right now.

[pbmax]

One more thing about Rodgers play. No turnovers that I recall. That's important. And I lied, total of two things about Rodgers.

His play the first two or three series was fine. It wasn't lights out, but he was playing alright, found some open receivers and had two big drops of catchable balls and took a clean shot on a blitz we didn't pickup and he didn't throw away fast enough.

After that, once he had been knocked around and was no longer seeing open receivers, he then started to hang on to the ball. The 49er D is not the joke that the Bengals D is. he got rattled and made some poor decisions or plain just got indecisive. He couldn't pull it down to run and he couldn't pull the trigger. He is young and playing against starters is mostly new. Its going to take him time to figure out what he can do when the play he has called isn't producing any open receivers.

[imscott72]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Wrong----Favre did come back, Packers chose to trade him...

What?? Did you follow along at all? When MM and Brett met, MM was ready to welcome him back, but Favre is the one who said he couldn't get past the negatives things that were said. Favre wasn't in the right mindset to play for the Packers. What else were they suppose to do with him?

[pbmax]

I gotcha double ought. It will benefit him. :)

But we might not see the result until later this year. If his three years of prep work cuts his learning curve in half, then by Favre's timetable we are talking mid-season NEXT year.

[GrnBay007]

But we might not see the result until later this year. If his three years of prep work cuts his learning curve in half, then by Favre's timetable we are talking mid-season NEXT year.

Sure hope the rest of the team is ready, when he's ready.

[mission]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply. :lol:

[cpk1994]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Twice? I'de like to hear this, because according to brett the one time the packers claim they had a jet ready to bring him back, Favre said that wasn't even close to how it went down. The only time, apparently, they were ready to welcome him back was when he was reinstated. Remember, after he filed his papers WHY did it get delayed? Because the packers wanted time to find a trade for favre, or to convince him to stay retired.

Thats not welcoming him back, in the least bit. When reinstated, it was MM who was open to welcoming him back into the locker room. not managment. Your perception of Favre beign welcomed back at all boggles my mind. The fact you think they did it twice boggles it even more.

MM welcomed him back. Management tried to pay him off.So what you are telling is me because Favre says they didn't welcome him back that that must be the truth becuase Favre said so? Newsflash, Favre hasn't been real honest the last 3 months. It is of total ignorance to automatically assume Favre is being 100% truthful becuase he has already shown not to be.

EDIT: Favre agreed to delay reinstatement so that part of your argument is BS.

[GrnBay007]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply. :lol:

Too bad, I'm sure we'd love to hear your opinion. That's what threads are generally made for.....to get other's opinions.

[mission]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply. :lol:

Too bad, I'm sure we'd love to hear your opinion. That's what thread are generally made for.....to get other's opinions.

Well you got my opinion didn't you?

Doesn't take a lot of data extrapolation to convert my post above to an opinion.

But thanks again! :wink:

[Gunakor]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Wrong----Favre did come back, Packers chose to trade him...

What?? Did you follow along at all? When MM and Brett met, MM was ready to welcome him back, but Favre is the one who said he couldn't get past the negatives things that were said. Favre wasn't in the right mindset to play for the Packers. What else were they suppose to do with him?

This is a waste of time. Don't argue with them anymore. They'd rather see TT and MM and the entire Board of Directors and Executive Committee and coaching staff and janitors and concession workers and cashiers at the pro shop and 52 other players on the roster get traded before Favre, regardless of the circumstances. It's pointless to convince them otherwise, and it's really not fair to force our point of view upon them. Let them believe what they want.

[GrnBay007]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply. :lol:

Too bad, I'm sure we'd love to hear your opinion. That's what thread are generally made for.....to get other's opinions.

Well you got my opinion didn't you?

Doesn't take a lot of data extrapolation to convert my post above to an opinion.

But thanks again! :wink:

You missed my point, obviously. If a thread is made seeking opinions and you have nothing to contribute but negative comments, then why bother taking the time to post? Creates a bad atmosphere for this site. ....you know, Packer fans coming together.

[cpk1994]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Wrong----Favre did come back, Packers chose to trade him...

What?? Did you follow along at all? When MM and Brett met, MM was ready to welcome him back, but Favre is the one who said he couldn't get past the negatives things that were said. Favre wasn't in the right mindset to play for the Packers. What else were they suppose to do with him?

This is a waste of time. Don't argue with them anymore. They'd rather see TT and MM and the entire Board of Directors and Executive Committee and coaching staff and janitors and concession workers and cashiers at the pro shop and 52 other players on the roster get traded before Favre, regardless of the circumstances. It's pointless to convince them otherwise, and it's really not fair to force our point of view upon them. Let them believe what they want. Amen!
:knll:

[Pugger]

What?? Did you follow along at all? When MM and Brett met, MM was ready to welcome him back, but Favre is the one who said he couldn't get past the negatives things that were said. Favre wasn't in the right mindset to play for the Packers. What else were they suppose to do with him?

I think this is closer to the truth than any of the other things I've read on various Packers forums all summer. Unfortunately a lot of folks still cannot let this go. Some of the stuff I see on other forums is disgraceful! On the Press-Gazette football forum some creep is hoping somebody breaks Rodgers leg!!! :shock: Some others hope the Packers fall on their face so the Executive Committee will then be forced to fire TT and company. :doh: Can these people really be Packers fans?? :cnf:

[Gunakor]

I think this is closer to the truth than any of the other things I've read on various Packers forums all summer. Unfortunately a lot of folks still cannot let this go. Some of the stuff I see on other forums is disgraceful! On the Press-Gazette football forum some creep is hoping somebody breaks Rodgers leg!!! :shock: Some others hope the Packers fall on their face so the Executive Committee will then be forced to fire TT and company. :doh: Can these people really be Packers fans?? :cnf:


I wish the Executive Committee could fire some of these so called Packer fans. If only ALL of us could get behind this team 100%, rather than cause unnecessary distraction by telling our 6 year old kids to shout "Fuck you, we don't love you, you suck" at our new starting quarterback, who knows how much better this team might be. And as if losing wasn't bad enough, now some people are wishing for injuries to our players?! FFS I don't know what to say...

[Zool]

Complainers/glass half empty people will always be more vocal. Thats just the way it is.

[GrnBay007]

I gotcha double ought. It will benefit him. :)



PB, it's been years since I heard the word "ought" used... brings back memories. :D

[Iron Mike]

I gotcha double ought. It will benefit him. :)



PB, it's been years since I heard the word "ought" used... brings back memories. :D

Yep......the "double naught spy car."

http://www.misterpants.com/01/images/maxbaerjr.jpg

[dissident94]

My main point is we may have overestimated the talent on this team. maybe greta play by our QB last year was the difference from 8-8 to 13-3. Thats the main point I am trying to make. Not sure. We will see.

Also when you are 13-3 and have a chance to bring back your QB who was second in MVP. I don't care the circumstances I would bring him back at all costs. Some of you may think different and only time will tell.

[dissident94]

And you guys are right. Rodgers will need time to develop. I will not pass judgement on Rodgers until he plays at least a year. That is different than the decision to go with him. If we were 6-10 last year yes you go with Rodgers even if Favre wants back. But at 13-3 no way.

[GrnBay007]

And you guys are right. Rodgers will need time to develop. I will not pass judgement on Rodgers until he plays at least a year. That is different than the decision to go with him. If we were 6-10 last year yes you go with Rodgers even if Favre wants back. But at 13-3 no way.

:tup:

[The Gunshooter]

Here is something I learned 10+years ago when GB used to be almost impossible to beat at Lambeau. GB was never as good as they looked at home and never as bad as they looked on the road.

[The Gunshooter]

GB isn't going anywhere without Ryan Pickett and he hasn't played yet.