Brutal

[Scott Campbell]

http://www.steelertribute.com/countdown36.htm

America Loves Countdowns
Countdown #36: Worst Brett Favre Collapses


Interesting that 7 of these 10 performances came since 2001. This would seem to indicate a player in decline.

[cpk1994]

I have a feeling the Favre cult will not repsond to this thread. :lol:

[Bretsky]

Who is keeping track of the threads started relating to Favre ? I don't really care enough anymore to read any of them...but
Chalk another one up on the score card :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Chalk another one up on the score card :lol:



CAN YOU HEAR MY FOOTSTEPS GUNNY?

[Gunakor]

Chalk another one up on the score card :lol:



CAN YOU HEAR MY FOOTSTEPS GUNNY?

Damn you're persistent. You even went and started a thread to bolster your post count on the subject. How can I compete with that, after so vehemently stressing the fact that I don't start threads about the Favre deal. You win, but you cheated. :D

[Bretsky]

Chalk another one up on the score card :lol:



CAN YOU HEAR MY FOOTSTEPS GUNNY?


I don't think he's been around in a while; hopefully he doesn't leave cuz he was a sound poster.........but I still think his scorecard was jaded

To be honest, the number of threads started by the Anti Favre group should be far more than the people who have not thrown Favre under the bus. Because percentage wise it appears that people seemed to be lined up in much greater numbers waiting for more buses

As usual I'm in the minority

[Scott Campbell]

Chalk another one up on the score card :lol:



CAN YOU HEAR MY FOOTSTEPS GUNNY?


I don't think he's been around in a while; hopefully he doesn't leave cuz he was a sound poster.........but I still think his scorecard was jaded

To be honest, the number of threads started by the Anti Favre group should be far more than the people who have not thrown Favre under the bus. Because percentage wise it appears that people seemed to be lined up in much greater numbers waiting for more buses

As usual I'm in the minority


I ran through it quickly the first time. Then I read it again, and it was a pretty interesting read. But painful. I like the stories of his comebacks better. And thankfully there are more of those.

[Gunakor]

but I still think his scorecard was jaded

We're catching up.

You know as soon as Favre officially becomes a Viking there will be 3 new threads started by Mobb alone, as well as countless others. We'll be so deep in the hole we won't be able to see above ground.

[Pacopete4]

When you've played as many games as he has and as many seasons, it's easy to disect them any way u want to make it look.. It just gives CPK and SC some good feeling that over 16 years of service, Favre like any human.. Had his share of bad games...

[Bretsky]

but I still think his scorecard was jaded

We're catching up.

You know as soon as Favre officially becomes a Viking there will be 3 new threads started by Mobb alone, as well as countless others. We'll be so deep in the hole we won't be able to see above ground.


I know everybody would disagree; but Mobb should have his own scorecard.
He's really on his own level of extemeness

Glad you are still around.....when you do a recount I bet you'll find it's at least 5-3 in favor the anti's

[Gunakor]

I know everybody would disagree; but Mobb should have his own scorecard.
He's really on his own level of extemeness

Glad you are still around.....when you do a recount I bet you'll find it's at least 5-3 in favor the anti's

The last couple of weeks it has been. Overall... Well, maybe if Mobb has his own scorecard. :lol:

[th87]

To be fair, Freeman shouldn't have dropped that pass in the Super Bowl. I wonder how differently Favre's career turns out if they go on to win that game.

[Fritz]

This just kills me:

"Favre belongs in that exclusive group because no one performed better in the clutch.... Joe Montana was brilliant in Bill Walsh's West Coast offense, but if there's a minute left on the clock and my team needs to go 80 yards for a score, give me Favre."
- Matt Mosley on ESPN.com
Feb 11, 2009

WTF? Brett Favre was a lot of things, but picking him over Montana if you had two minutes left and needed the score? I mean, yes, Favre would be better than Joey Harrington or maybe Phillip Rivers even and I'm not saying he was awful, but he is not the guy you'd pick from any all-time list as the QB to take your team down the field with two minutes left.

Montana would be far and away my first choice. He had this sense of the game, like he was watching it from above. He knew exactly what the situation was at all times, and he seemed to see the whole field. Favre seemed to have that quality at times, then at other times he seemed to freak out a little and force a play that didn't need to be forced.

Based on my own sad history as a Packer fan, Steve Young seemed to be pretty good at the last-minute stuff, too. I think though I have no numbers that Peyton Manning is the type of QB who would be good at this sort of thing.

I'd be curious to hear what other old-time QB's had this quality.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'd be curious to hear what other old-time QB's had this quality.

Unitas and Elway come to mind. Not sure about Otto Graham, but his teams won at a ridiculous rate.

[Badgerinmaine]

Ask anyone who lives in Cleveland about John Elway's comeback ability... :doh:

I have no axe to grind, but I would say that part of why someone can write a top ten list like that is because of the length of Brett Favre's career and that his teams were usually in the playoffs or in contention for them. There's just an awful lot of big games to pick from there.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ask anyone who lives in Cleveland about John Elway's comeback ability... :doh:

I have no axe to grind, but I would say that part of why someone can write a top ten list like that is because of the length of Brett Favre's career and that his teams were usually in the playoffs or in contention for them. There's just an awful lot of big games to pick from there.

This is true. Favre had some great moments also. I'd say he was pretty average in the clutch in big games. Best regular season QB ever maybe, but he's had enough of these stinkers for me not to rank him in my top 3 QBs. I'd put Elway, Montana, and Unitas. I'd throw Graham in there also, if we are going way back. Brett is in that next group for me--with the likes of Baugh, Starr, Manning, and Brady. I'd put him slightly above the likes of Marino, Staubach, Bradshaw. I'd probably put him at #4 or #5 right now, but Manning and Brady have a solid chance at surpassing him.

[cpk1994]

This just kills me:

"Favre belongs in that exclusive group because no one performed better in the clutch.... Joe Montana was brilliant in Bill Walsh's West Coast offense, but if there's a minute left on the clock and my team needs to go 80 yards for a score, give me Favre."
- Matt Mosley on ESPN.com
Feb 11, 2009

WTF? Brett Favre was a lot of things, but picking him over Montana if you had two minutes left and needed the score? I mean, yes, Favre would be better than Joey Harrington or maybe Phillip Rivers even and I'm not saying he was awful, but he is not the guy you'd pick from any all-time list as the QB to take your team down the field with two minutes left.

Montana would be far and away my first choice. He had this sense of the game, like he was watching it from above. He knew exactly what the situation was at all times, and he seemed to see the whole field. Favre seemed to have that quality at times, then at other times he seemed to freak out a little and force a play that didn't need to be forced.

Based on my own sad history as a Packer fan, Steve Young seemed to be pretty good at the last-minute stuff, too. I think though I have no numbers that Peyton Manning is the type of QB who would be good at this sort of thing.

I'd be curious to hear what other old-time QB's had this quality.
You really shouldn't be suprised about that comment. It comes from a guy at BSPN. I would expet nothing less than someone from there blowing Favre.

I agree with you and would take Montana with 2:00 minutes left also. Montana did it in the Super Bowl. Favre didn't. Case closed.

[Patler]

I really hate this type of discussion because there really is no answer without looking at every big game every one of the individuals ever played. That said, I will make a few comments but won't bother arguing about them. Everyone has their own opinion, and you may agree or disagree with mine. Have at it! My comments:

I can remember no situation at the end of an important game that I felt Starr blew it. If the Packers were not successful, I can't remember ever feeling that Starr was the reason, that he had come up short in his performance. I never worried that he would make a bone head play.

On the other hand, ever since shortly after the turn of the century, I almost expected Favre to fail in a clutch drive at the end of a big game, it had become that commonplace. My family still reminds me of my comment in the Giants playoff game, just before the Packers drive started, when I said Favre would throw an interception. I'm not claiming any great foresight, but that was my attitude about Favre. (It is also why I predicted on here that the Giants would win. I had no faith in Favre in big games anymore.)

I wonder if the players still had as much faith in Favre as the media would have you believe when it came to a game winning drive in a big game?

[Pugger]

I'd put Starr above Favre, frankly. HE played great in the clutch. Starr should be ranked in with the Elways and Montanas of NFL history.

I will say the Falcon playoff game isn't all on BF. I was at that game and if memory serves half of our offensive starters ended up limping off the field one by one that night. It was a truly awful evening. I still steam when I think of Sherman not throwing his red hanky on that muffed punt... :evil:

[Packnut]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

[HarveyWallbangers]

My family still reminds me of my comment in the Giants playoff game, just before the Packers drive started, when I said Favre would throw an interception. I'm not claiming any great foresight, but that was my attitude about Favre. (It is also why I predicted on here that the Giants would win. I had no faith in Favre in big games anymore.)

I felt the same way. Actually, I had that feeling from the moment I saw the look on Brett's face before the game. I think I told dabootski at the time that I was worried. Totally different look than the week before. Not sure if it was the cold or the moment, but Brett didn't look like somebody who was about to play a great game.

[Patler]

I felt the same way. Actually, I had that feeling from the moment I saw the look on Brett's face before the game. I think I told dabootski at the time that I was worried. Totally different look than the week before. Not sure if it was the cold or the moment, but Brett didn't look like somebody who was about to play a great game.[/quote]

Yup. We discussed that before the game too. He looked like he would rather be anywhere but there, and he kept an almost disinterested look through out the game.

[cpk1994]

I'd put Starr above Favre, frankly. HE played great in the clutch. Starr should be ranked in with the Elways and Montanas of NFL history.

I will say the Falcon playoff game isn't all on BF. I was at that game and if memory serves half of our offensive starters ended up limping off the field one by one that night. It was a truly awful evening. I still steam when I think of Sherman not throwing his red hanky on that muffed punt... :evil:I was steamed about that too. I got even angrier when Sherman proceded to blame the referees for the non-challenge saying they misinformed him instead of taking responsibibilty himself. Form that day I wanted Sherman fired. :evil:

[Patler]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

I disagree. While it might have an impact on overall results, you can separate the QBs performance from it. The talent of the team didn't cause Favre to make bad decisions in the face of better options, or perform his role poorly. The talent level didn't cause Montana to make good decisions in the face of worse options, or perform his role well.

Plenty of QBs have failed with talented teams. Others have succeeded with not so talented teams.

[Scott Campbell]

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!


You've tried this stuff before, and it never goes well for you.

[Gunakor]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Montana had Jerry Rice, something Favre never had, but to out and out say that Montana had far better overall talent around him is a bit of a stretch. Montana never had a TE duo like Chumura and Jackson. He never had a RB quite as good as Ahman Green in his prime (not a knock against Roger Craig, who was also very good). He never had as deep a WR corps as Favre had to finish his tenure here in Green Bay. Favre had weapons. Montana had his go to guy, who was arguably the best ever to play the game, but when you look at his complete list of weapons I don't think top to bottom it was any better than Favre had.

[HarveyWallbangers]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Elway had WAY less talent around him than Favre, and he came through more than Favre. That's why I rank Elway higher. Elway took three average teams to a Super Bowl, and then won two Super Bowls with great teams. Favre won a Super Bowl with a great team and took the Packers to the Super Bowl with a very good team. It isn't a big slap in the face to be called the 5th best QB of all-time. I do get tired of the whining about the offensive players around Favre. He had Sharpe, Brooks, Rison, Freeman, Driver, Walker, and Jennings. He had Keith Jackson, Mark Chmura, Jackie Harris. Bennett was a plodder, but was a winning football player. Levens was solid. Ahman was a stud for most of his time in Green Bay.

[cheesner]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Montana had Jerry Rice, something Favre never had, but to out and out say that Montana had far better overall talent around him is a bit of a stretch. Montana never had a TE duo like Chumura and Jackson. He never had a RB quite as good as Ahman Green in his prime (not a knock against Roger Craig, who was also very good). He never had as deep a WR corps as Favre had to finish his tenure here in Green Bay. Favre had weapons. Montana had his go to guy, who was arguably the best ever to play the game, but when you look at his complete list of weapons I don't think top to bottom it was any better than Favre had.
Favre was more 'clutch' earlier in his career, but the 2nd half he was not. That wasn't his game, and I am not sure why people take offense to those comments. As stated above, it seems like he threw away more opportunities than he capitalized on.

Favre was the BEST, in my opinion, when things broke down and he needed to improvise. I always thought he threw the better while on the move.

Montana, OTOH, was best in the clutch. I felt he was only a good QB most of the time, but when it really mattered, he became great.

As far as being a come from behind QB, I never had an appreciation for that status. If you were a good QB, why do you have to come from behind? Most of the great QBs did not have opportunities to 'come from behind' because they were usually winning at the end of the game.

As far as the Giants game goes .. . Same here. I told my brother the moment I saw Brett, before the game, looking like he didn't want to be there, that the Packers were going to loose and he would have a poor game. Getting outplayed by Eli Manning was embarrassing.

[Scott Campbell]

Montana, OTOH, was best in the clutch.


Hey, there's John Candy.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

I remember when I lost my faith for Favre in big games. 6 int's in St. Louis. However, I still havent lost love for the guy. Though if he went to the 'Queens it would be a real "Et tu Brute?" moment.

It's really funny so many people saw the same thing before the Giants game. My friend and I also talked about how it looked like he didn't even want to be there. His eyes just looked glassy, like he was thinking about something else.

[Fritz]

I was thinking this morning it would be fun if there were a stat called something like "percentage of comebacks." It would be pretty random - you'd pick some parameters - say, with less than three minutes left, and needing a score to tie or win, what percentage of the time did a given QB bring his team back for that score?

It would be complicated - more points for bringing your team back for a touchdown than a field goal, for one example - but it might be fun. What percentage of the time, given the opportunity, did your favorite QB bring his team back to tie/go ahead? You'd also have to have some arbitrary cut off - if your QB gets the ball back with, say, eight seconds left and no timeouts, is that a "fail"?

Unlike Patler, I enjoy these discussions. Opinion-based, for sure, but fun if you can discuss it intelligently and not just let it droop into bashing. For example, now I'm piqued about Otto Graham. Hmmm. Also, I remember reading about Y.A. Tittle as hugely underrated - I wonder if he was a big comeback QB?

As for Packnut's assertion that it's dependent on the talent around the QB, isn't every statistic pretty much dependent upon that? If you're a great QB but you have a crap offensive line, your stats will suffer. If you're a great pass-rushing defensive end but your defensive line mates suck, you'll get double-teamed a lot more and your stats could suffer.

I think a comeback QB needs a kind of cold-bloodedness, like a serial killer. The need to step outside any given situation and see it from above. Favre's great strength was very different than that - he made, as someone noted earlier, something out of nothing; he was the great improviser. He was the spectacular and unexpected - thus the joy and the heartbreak of watching Brett Favre.

It's not that he couldn't read defenses and all that - he could, as he got into his career. But he lost the cold-bloodedness at key moments. He seemed to get emotional and try to get it all at once, often at great risk. In a sense, you could argue that he was too human.

[Patler]

Unlike Patler, I enjoy these discussions. Opinion-based, for sure, but fun if you can discuss it intelligently and not just let it droop into bashing.


...and therein lies the problem! :lol:

[Patler]

Favre's ability to make a huge play out of nothing was tremendous.
It may have been his greatest attribute.
It also may have been his biggest weakness, because the unsuccessful attempts on early downs in late game drives killed a lot of opportunities. If he could have controlled that just a little more, this discussion might be very different.

[TravisWilliams23]

I can remember no situation at the end of an important game that I felt Starr blew it. If the Packers were not successful, I can't remember ever feeling that Starr was the reason, that he had come up short in his performance. I never worried that he would make a bone head play.

On the other hand, ever since shortly after the turn of the century, I almost expected Favre to fail in a clutch drive at the end of a big game, it had become that commonplace. My family still reminds me of my comment in the Giants playoff game, just before the Packers drive started, when I said Favre would throw an interception. I'm not claiming any great foresight, but that was my attitude about Favre. (It is also why I predicted on here that the Giants would win. I had no faith in Favre in big games anymore.)

I wonder if the players still had as much faith in Favre as the media would have you believe when it came to a game winning drive in a big game?

Spot on Patler. Watching Starr in all those championship games, the thought never entered your mind that Bart would be the reason the Packers lost. On the other hand, you prayed Brett wouldn't pull one of his bonehead plays at just the wrong moment in the game.

My biggest disappointment with Favre was that as his career grew longer, his game didn't get better. As a matter of fact, the Oh God plays seemed to increase. Still loved that he was the Packers quarterback but wanted more championship rings out of him.

[Scott Campbell]

My biggest disappointment with Favre was that as his career grew longer, his game didn't get better. As a matter of fact, the Oh God plays seemed to increase. Still loved that he was the Packers quarterback but wanted more championship rings out of him.


I kind of feel the same way - like he didn't fulfill his potential.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Before somebody (Partial) accuses me of being bitter. Here's what I wrote in March of 2008--before Favre unretired and all of the shenanigans went on.

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=11801&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20


Personally, I think it's a great list--although I wouldn't put Manning or Brady on the list at this point.

My top 5 would be Montana, Unitas, Graham, Elway, and Favre. Not sure about Baugh.

Brett didn't play with great defenses, but his offensive talent wasn't bad. He didn't play with the talent around him that Starr did, but his offensive talent was probably above average overall. His defenses hurt him in a lot of years. However, Favre was a primary reason for some of the playoff losses. Not all. Maybe not even most. However, he was more miss than hit in the second half of his career in the playoffs. That's why I can't rank him higher than Montana, Elway, Unitas.

[RashanGary]

I agree to an extent. I think Favre could have been less stubborn, but he believed/believes he is better than anyone and did it his way. That arrogance is probably my #1 knock on him.

Still, I believe it's a team game. Most of Favre's career I think he was good enough to win a SB with an elite defense/ST's.

Favre got over glorified for every win and every stat and now he's getting overblamed IMO for every loss. He did make the 4th quarter mistakes, but the team wasn't great so he had to do more than humanly possible. Turns out he can't do more than humanly possible and he needed a great team. That's no knock on him, that goes for Brady, Montana, Aikman and Starr. They all needed great teams.

Favre is a great HOF QB. As far as I'm concerned, to debate who is greater is impossible with any degree of accuracy. You can name 20 names that could be better than Brett but Brett could be better than them all. I find zero value in trying to name them 1, 2, 3. Just list the top 20 and they're all great.

The QB position is just way over hyped IMO. Very important, but not nearly important enough to credit wins to. Pitchers in baseball or superstars in basketball/Hockey are the guys who deserve credit for carrying their teams. Being one of 40 isn't as special as being 1 of 5 (offense and defense) or being a Pitcher.

As far as the last 5 years, Favre was just OK. I've seen several QB's I think are better and have been better for a while. I think we have one right now.

[Fritz]

John Elway just demoralized the entire city of Cleveland for almost a decade after he picked them apart, what, two years in a row right at the ends of playoff games?

[Joemailman]

Unlike Patler, I enjoy these discussions. Opinion-based, for sure, but fun if you can discuss it intelligently and not just let it droop into bashing.


Shut up moron. Watch football much? Get a life.

[Fritz]

Unlike Patler, I enjoy these discussions. Opinion-based, for sure, but fun if you can discuss it intelligently and not just let it droop into bashing.


Shut up moron. Watch football much? Get a life.

Hey! You shut up too! You're a poopy head and stuff!

[The Shadow]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Um, the ONLY time he got the job done was the year Wolf assembled the most talented team in the NFL together.
Exactly what did he win with 'less'?
Just asking....

[Bretsky]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Montana had Jerry Rice, something Favre never had, but to out and out say that Montana had far better overall talent around him is a bit of a stretch. Montana never had a TE duo like Chumura and Jackson. He never had a RB quite as good as Ahman Green in his prime (not a knock against Roger Craig, who was also very good). He never had as deep a WR corps as Favre had to finish his tenure here in Green Bay. Favre had weapons. Montana had his go to guy, who was arguably the best ever to play the game, but when you look at his complete list of weapons I don't think top to bottom it was any better than Favre had.

Just a couple side notes; Favre didn't have Chewy and Jackson togther for long

Roger Craig in his prime was pretty amazing also

Rice and Taylor would be a duo nearly everybody would be jealous of having. Heck, just Rice.... Add Roger Craig as a receiver out of the backfield......wow

Favre's last year was certainly the deepest WR core of them all; but he didn't have long with them and he didn't have a run of the same consistent weapons year after year that Joe did.

[Fritz]

You bozos naturally miss a key point in the question of who had a better supporting cast: whose wife was hotter??

[Bretsky]

You bozos naturally miss a key point in the question of who had a better supporting cast: whose wife was hotter??


No, the big picture is did either of wives bring another gal into the covers as well :evil:

[Joemailman]

Well, I'm pretty sure Deanna brought Greta...

[Fritz]

You bozos naturally miss a key point in the question of who had a better supporting cast: whose wife was hotter??


No, the big picture is did either of wives bring another gal into the covers as well :evil:

Bretsky, Bretsky, Bretsky. Wouldn't a wife get hotness points for doing such a thing?

This however does bring up an awkward question - if it's cool and all to like that and have a wife do that, then what if she tells you she'd love to see you under the covers with another man? Is turnabout fair play?

Ruh-roh, Rastro.

[The Leaper]

Elway had WAY less talent around him than Favre, and he came through more than Favre.

He also played in the conference that lost about 15 Super Bowls in a row. He played against inferior talent. Favre played against several of the greatest teams of all-time in the 90s 49ers and Cowboys. Elway wouldn't have reached all those Super Bowls he did if he had played in the NFC.

For most of the 80s/90s, the best game of the year was the NFCC game, not the Super Bowl.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Well, I'm pretty sure Deanna brought Greta...

If Brett could get it up for Greta....he wins. Talk about comebacks with a lesser supporting cast.

[HarveyWallbangers]

He also played in the conference that lost about 15 Super Bowls in a row. He played against inferior talent. Favre played against several of the greatest teams of all-time in the 90s 49ers and Cowboys. Elway wouldn't have reached all those Super Bowls he did if he had played in the NFC.

For most of the 80s/90s, the best game of the year was the NFCC game, not the Super Bowl.

And yet Elway led one of those inferior teams over the superior Favre-led Packers in the Super Bowl.

[Bretsky]

You bozos naturally miss a key point in the question of who had a better supporting cast: whose wife was hotter??


No, the big picture is did either of wives bring another gal into the covers as well :evil:

Bretsky, Bretsky, Bretsky. Wouldn't a wife get hotness points for doing such a thing?

This however does bring up an awkward question - if it's cool and all to like that and have a wife do that, then what if she tells you she'd love to see you under the covers with another man? Is turnabout fair play?

Ruh-roh, Rastro.


No way Jose; guys are dam ugly; the extra body brought into the picture must be one of curves and beauty. And only one ugly banana is allowed :lol:

[Noodle]

Packnut, I get a little tired of this meme.

Check out the post that had video of all of Favre's early touchdowns. Watch Sterling make sick plays of pure magic. Watch Brooks sacrifice his body time and time again. Watch Freeman make simply amazing catches. Watch Keith Jackson out-athlete everyone around him. Hell, watch Don Bebe motor past everyone on the field.

No question, Montana played with receivers I would rank above those who played with Favre (though Sterling isn't far behind). But don't don't forget Favre's backfield mates, Dorse the Horse, William Henderson, and Ahman Green among them, who were better than any backfield Montana had, IMO.

It ain't like Favre was chuckin' it up to beer leaguers.

[Fritz]

Packnut, I get a little tired of this meme.

Check out the post that had video of all of Favre's early touchdowns. Watch Sterling make sick plays of pure magic. Watch Brooks sacrifice his body time and time again. Watch Freeman make simply amazing catches. Watch Keith Jackson out-athlete everyone around him. Hell, watch Don Bebe motor past everyone on the field.

No question, Montana played with receivers I would rank above those who played with Favre (though Sterling isn't far behind). But don't don't forget Favre's backfield mates, Dorse the Horse, William Henderson, and Ahman Green among them, who were better than any backfield Montana had, IMO.

It ain't like Favre was chuckin' it up to beer leaguers.

On the whole I agree with you, Noodle, but your last line did remind me of Billy Schroeder and Terry Mickens...

[Gunakor]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Montana had Jerry Rice, something Favre never had, but to out and out say that Montana had far better overall talent around him is a bit of a stretch. Montana never had a TE duo like Chumura and Jackson. He never had a RB quite as good as Ahman Green in his prime (not a knock against Roger Craig, who was also very good). He never had as deep a WR corps as Favre had to finish his tenure here in Green Bay. Favre had weapons. Montana had his go to guy, who was arguably the best ever to play the game, but when you look at his complete list of weapons I don't think top to bottom it was any better than Favre had.

Just a couple side notes; Favre didn't have Chewy and Jackson togther for long

Roger Craig in his prime was pretty amazing also

Rice and Taylor would be a duo nearly everybody would be jealous of having. Heck, just Rice.... Add Roger Craig as a receiver out of the backfield......wow

Favre's last year was certainly the deepest WR core of them all; but he didn't have long with them and he didn't have a run of the same consistent weapons year after year that Joe did.

Well yeah, I know. But the examples I gave were all from different stages of his Packer career. They were given to show that Favre had weapons throughout his time here.

Rice/Taylor is only slightly better than Sharpe/Brooks. And that was followed by Brooks/Freeman. Then Freeman/Driver. Then Driver/Walker (when he was a weapon). Then Driver/Jennings. Favre never had a poor 1-2 WR combo either.

Roger Craig never had 1800 yards rushing to go along with his 50 catches. Green was one of the team leaders in catches in 2000 and 2001 as well. For 4 straight seasons Green accounted for nearly or over 2000 yards from scrimmage. Craig was very good, but for a 3 or 4 year stretch Green was better.

[Zool]

Not that I disagree that Green was better than Craig, but for 1 season Craig did something I don't think anyone has matched.

1050 rush 4.9/carry
1016 receiving on 92 catches.

The guy was an absolute beast in 85.

[channtheman]

I remember when I lost my faith for Favre in big games. 6 int's in St. Louis. However, I still havent lost love for the guy. Though if he went to the 'Queens it would be a real "Et tu Brute?" moment.

It's really funny so many people saw the same thing before the Giants game. My friend and I also talked about how it looked like he didn't even want to be there. His eyes just looked glassy, like he was thinking about something else.

Earlier that year, I believe, when we played in Chicago he had the same look on his face. He didn't want to be there and that Chicago game would have clinched us home field advantage I believe, though looking back maybe it would have been better to have to go to Dallas for the Championship game.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Not that I disagree that Green was better than Craig, but for 1 season Craig did something I don't think anyone has matched.

1050 rush 4.9/carry
1016 receiving on 92 catches.

The guy was an absolute beast in 85.

Ahman was pretty beastly in 2003.

1883 rushing yards, 5.3/carry, 15 TDs
367 receiving yards on 50 catches, 5 TDs
2250 total yards, 20 TDs

[Fritz]

What would be the opposite of being "beastly"?

Being "plantly"?

That might be a good word to coin for a terrible player. "He was very plantly during the '93 season."

[Gunakor]

What would be the opposite of being "beastly"?

Being "plantly"?

That might be a good word to coin for a terrible player. "He was very plantly during the '93 season."

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[RashanGary]

Montana, Brady and Aikman had top 10 defenses for many years in a row. Favre had two early in his career (won 1 SB, went to 1 SB). Favre had one late in his career 9th ranked but getting worse every game as the year went on after teh DL injuries (jolly/KGB who never came back the same). He ended up in the NFC Championship game that year.


Favre was a great QB that could have won the SB every year he played (except last year when he wasn't himself). He had really good offensive talent that helped him rack up stats and regular season wins. He had really average defenses that prevented him from winning more SB's. .

As far as I'm concerned, he's right there with all of the HOF QB's. If I could separate coaching, defense, ST's and surrounding talent from the equation, maybe I could list them in a one by one order. I just think he was a great QB for a long time. HE wasn't as good late in his career and we moved on to something younger and better (at the time) but Favre's whole career shouldn't be knocked because his defenses weren't championship caliber. Like Arod, those losses were not on his shoulders but many will blame one guy.

[Scott Campbell]

I lived in the Bay Area for a good portion of Montana's career, and saw a lot more of him than most people. This was long before Direct TV. I'd take him over Favre.

Brett's career got off to a better start, but he puked up all over himself too many times as an older player.

[Joemailman]

Favre was 9-5 in the postseason with Holmgren, 3-5 after Holmgren. Is it that simple?

[Scott Campbell]

Montana 14-5 post season with the Niners. 2-2 with the Chiefs.

Cut and paste from Wikipedia:

"In his four Super Bowls, Montana completed 83 of 122 passes for 1,142 yards and 11 touchdowns with no interceptions, earning him a passer rating of 127.8."

[Pacopete4]

Favre was 9-5 in the postseason with Holmgren, 3-5 after Holmgren. Is it that simple?


yes.. because his teams were better in the mid 90's and his coaching or I should say lack there of was not like it was with Holmgren. Had Holmgren stayed around.. who knows how it woulda turned out

[Fritz]

I lived in the Bay Area for a good portion of Montana's career, and saw a lot more of him than most people. This was long before Direct TV. I'd take him over Favre.

Brett's career got off to a better start, but he puked up all over himself too many times as an older player.

I thought he puked up all over himself early in his career, when he was out drinking with Chewy and Frankie.

But what if he puked up all over himself on the sideline, then ran back into the game and threw a t.d. while wearing his vomit-stained jersey? That'd be cool. The stuff of legends. You could sell that jersey for bookoo bucks on e-bay.

[Scott Campbell]

Favre was 9-5 in the postseason with Holmgren, 3-5 after Holmgren. Is it that simple?


yes.. because his teams were better in the mid 90's and his coaching or I should say lack there of was not like it was with Holmgren. Had Holmgren stayed around.. who knows how it woulda turned out


George Seifert was no Bill Walsh. Yet Montana didn't let that slow him down.

[Fritz]

Who was the coach in K.C. when Montana was there? Schottenheimer?

[RashanGary]

Montana 14-5 post season with the Niners. 2-2 with the Chiefs.

Cut and paste from Wikipedia:

"In his four Super Bowls, Montana completed 83 of 122 passes for 1,142 yards and 11 touchdowns with no interceptions, earning him a passer rating of 127.8."

I would argue strong defense, ST's and a good supporting cast allow a QB to not have to put it all on his own shoulders. Montana is obviously an all time great, maybe the all time great but I think it's all debatable. Once a guy is in the conversation, I lump them all together. There are just too many variables. It's too much of a team game.

[RashanGary]

Who was the coach in K.C. when Montana was there? Schottenheimer?

I think so. Shotty and McCarthy was QB coach.

[SnakeLH2006]

Who gives a fuck about this topic? Scott I really supported ya overall, but now I know why you got kicked. WTF?

Really? Favre kept us with a winning record/contention (where we even cared EVERY year for 15 years straight late in the year) so who care's about collapses from some guy trying to get web hits? I remember the good/not the bad with Brett. I don't hate the guy (he didn't fuck my sister or piss in my Cheerios) so fuck it.

What's the point other than to stir up some shit Scott? Dude did wonders for us and he's gone, so let it be. This is like digging up some shit on some ex that blew ya everyday and you were gaga over and gonna marry then she said fuck it, you are a jerk. Who cares, get over her/him. BS thread. Quit the bashing, it gets old.

[Scott Campbell]

I don't really care what you think Snake. If you don't like it - don't read it. Or read it, and then whine about it like a little b!tch. I don't care.

[pbmax]

Who was the coach in K.C. when Montana was there? Schottenheimer?
Yes, and Paul Hackett (former 49ers QB coach[I don't think they originally carried an O coordinator in Walsh's tenure]) and Mike McCarthy as QB coach for Joe Montana, Steve Bono and Rich Gannon.

[Brando19]

Who gives a fuck about this topic? Scott I really supported ya overall, but now I know why you got kicked. WTF?

Really? Favre kept us with a winning record/contention (where we even cared EVERY year for 15 years straight late in the year) so who care's about collapses from some guy trying to get web hits? I remember the good/not the bad with Brett. I don't hate the guy (he didn't fuck my sister or piss in my Cheerios) so fuck it.

What's the point other than to stir up some shit Scott? Dude did wonders for us and he's gone, so let it be. This is like digging up some shit on some ex that blew ya everyday and you were gaga over and gonna marry then she said fuck it, you are a jerk. Who cares, get over her/him. BS thread. Quit the bashing, it gets old.

Geesh...a little harsh don't you think? Scott's back so why do you have to bring up the past over a silly thing like this? Everyone can have an opinion.

[falco]

I don't really care what you think Snake. If you don't like it - don't read it. Or read it, and then whine about it like a little b!tch. I don't care.

damn, and scott puts the smack down just like that. there are three people on this board I wouldn't pick a fight with, and they are scott campbell, scott campbell, and skinbasket (in that order).

[woodbuck27]

This is the perfect example of football stupidity! Gee, "I'll take Montana with 2 minutes left". DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who would'nt with all the talent and brilliant coach he had.

ANYONE who's going to argue Favre had the same talent around him that Montana did, is an out and out MORON!

Does'nt it stand to reason if you have 2 QB's who are very good, that the one with the most talent around him is going to stand out?

Favre did more with less and that is his legacy. It's something the haters are to stupid to understand although why I don't know. It's not that hard of a concept to fathom.

Hear! Hear!! Way to tell it straight man.

[woodbuck27]

I don't really care what you think Snake. If you don't like it - don't read it. Or read it, and then whine about it like a little b!tch. I don't care.

damn, and scott puts the smack down just like that. there are three people on this board I wouldn't pick a fight with, and they are scott campbell, scott campbell, and skinbasket (in that order).

A view from the outside.

Legends:

Davey Crockett
Daniel Boone
George's. . . Washington and Patton
Brett Favre

Scott Campbell and Skinbasket . . . . . . tougher than the WWF :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

.......................

[Scott Campbell]

Welcome home Woody.

http://www.kitten-pictures.com/images/Kitten-Pictures-46.jpg

[falco]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_m3lKiZKA9kw/RyOe93WLsUI/AAAAAAAAAA4/pgcOqa1Ikfk/S570/scared+cat.jpg