Favre v. Rodgers

[Infamous]

Who do posters feel is the better runner/scrambler? I wonder what the stats look like.....but im more interested in posters' opinions about aesthetics, timeliness, and effectiveness...Aaron looks more fluid and would probably beat brett in a foot race...Favre more dramatic lik underhand toss in snow while stumbling...Favre's superbowl TD jaunt was basically a game-clincher psychologically and gave me goose bumps!!

[denverYooper]

Rodgers.

It's not even close.

[red]

i still have night terrors of favre trying to run with the ball, it just never looked natural

[Pugger]

Rodgers.

It's not even close.

Favre was the ultimate warrior and gave it his all. He was fun to watch and helped resurrect this franchise from the dregs. Folks will talk about his arm strength for years to come. His Achilles' heel was he was prone to throw INTs, especially in big games. The Majik Man was special too and I will always wonder how his career would have turned out if he didn't get hurt.

But Aaron is the whole package. He has the arm, the legs and the brains. He is loathe to turn the ball over and will carve up defenses like a surgeon if he has enough time in the pocket. Look how this team is reeling with him injured. Some consider him the best player in the game today, not just QB and if he continues to play like he is he could very well end up the best QB in NFL history.

[Joemailman]

Rodgers was a better runner. Favre was better at avoiding getting sacked in the pocket. Not sure what the poll is looking for.

[MJZiggy]

Rodgers.

It's not even close.
This. Rodgers does not throw underhand in the snow, because he can (and does) get those couple yards with his feet.

[George Cumby]

Favre was breathtaking in his ability to avoid the rush and make something happen. He was also breathtaking in his ability to cock it all up.

As I've said before, I think Rodgers spent his time well as the understudy well: he picked up the good Brett but didn't learn the bad Brett.

[pbmax]

Young Favre simply refused to be taken down behind the LOS. It was like watching a bigger, less nimble Tarkenton back there. Looked like a game of keep away.

[Patler]

As a runner? Rodgers #1, Majik #2 and Favre #3. When Favre was at his most productive as a runner, he too often ran when he didn't need to. For quite a few of his early years he looked for one receiver (usually Sharp), and if he didn't like what he saw he would take off running. He would take off even when protection was good and there were other receivers open. He just didn't see them. It was a big criticism of Holmgren's when he would offer critiques of the young Favre. The best thing for Favre's development might have been Sharpe getting injured.

[Joemailman]

As a runner? Rodgers #1, Majik #2 and Favre #3. When Favre was at his most productive as a runner, he too often ran when he didn't need to. For quite a few of his early years he looked for one receiver (usually Sharp), and if he didn't like what he saw he would take off running. He would take off even when protection was good and there were other receivers open. He just didn't see them. It was a big criticism of Holmgren's when he would offer critiques of the young Favre. The best thing for Favre's development might have been Sharpe getting injured.

Your post got me looking at Sharpe's career stats. In his three years with Favre, (1992-1994) he caught 314 passes for 3854 yards and 42 TD's. Makes you wonder what his career numbers would have been like if he hadn't had to retire at age 29. You're probably right that Favre became better when he had to spread the ball around. It didn't happen right away though as in 1995 Robert Brooks had a season comparable to Sharpe's best numbers with 102-1497-13.

[Patler]

Your post got me looking at Sharpe's career stats. In his three years with Favre, (1992-1994) he caught 314 passes for 3854 yards and 42 TD's. Makes you wonder what his career numbers would have been like if he hadn't had to retire at age 29.

Michael Irvin and Sterling Sharpe were drafted the same year. Until he was forced to retire, Sharpe led Irvin in career stats, partly because Irvin had missed some time in his early seasons.

[bobblehead]

As a runner? Rodgers #1, Majik #2 and Favre #3. When Favre was at his most productive as a runner, he too often ran when he didn't need to. For quite a few of his early years he looked for one receiver (usually Sharp), and if he didn't like what he saw he would take off running. He would take off even when protection was good and there were other receivers open. He just didn't see them. It was a big criticism of Holmgren's when he would offer critiques of the young Favre. The best thing for Favre's development might have been Sharpe getting injured.

I was young, but I thought Majik was a much better runner than Rodgers.

[Tony Oday]

Majik was the best ever.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'd take Rodgers at his best over Favre. Easily. He gives you what Favre does... minus the turnovers. I'd take Favre's career at this point, but Rodgers will surpass him with longevity.

[pbmax]

Majik had good legs but I just don't remember it being as productive as Rodgers. Wasn't paying too much attention as I would be watching the AFC games at the games at the same time if Browns were on.

Don't want to hijack the thread but .... The difference between players at the same time plays a role in my memory too. At one point, didn't Dilweg beat Majik out? But when Anthony was in there, he looked more poised and less likely to do something dumb than Majik. But Dilweg was the kind of QB that would no do anything dumb and would score a lot of punts. If there was a holding, he never converted.

Majik might hurt you other ways, but there was a chance his offense would beat the penalty or convert unlikely 3rd downs and get into scoring position.

[Fritz]

I think Dilweg won out because Infante wanted him to, not because he was better. Dilweg was truly a "I won't screw up" quarterback, which meant that he did not move the offense because he didn't have the ability - the arm, the vision - to get the ball to the right people. Rodgers doesn't want to screw up, but he's got the talent to move the team and not make big mistakes.

Majik was pretty damn fun to watch. Not the greatest arm, but he was fun to watch, and pretty effective until he got hurt.

[King Friday]

Rodgers is a better pure runner...Favre was built like a Sherman tank. However, Favre's pocket awareness and agility in the pocket to avoid the rush was probably second to none.

The philosophy and approach on offensive of Holmgren is vastly different when compared to McCarthy. Holmgren really did run a balanced offense. McCarthy sells out to the passing game at times, which up to this year was partly due to the horrendous talent at RB. The Packers in the last 3-4 years had become a team where opposing defenses did not fear the run whatsoever, which gave Rodgers massive open areas within 6-8 yards of the LOS to run. Holmgren's WCO was not a deep strike offense that stretched the defense, outside of the brilliance of Favre in evading pressure and extending plays.

Favre's scrambles often went parallel to the LOS, letting his receivers get behind the defense for big plays. Rodgers' scrambles are perpendicular to the LOS, because his receivers are often already well downfield, opening up areas to run. In that way, they were both unique fits for their specific offenses. I don't think Favre would be nearly as good in this current offense...and I'm not sure Rodgers would've been as good as Favre on the mid 90s teams.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Favre was breathtaking


Majik had good legs

This is all subjective, but I'm a sucker for Rodger's cute smile.


http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ARodgersPost_185.jpg

[bobblehead]

Rodgers is a better pure runner...Favre was built like a Sherman tank. However, Favre's pocket awareness and agility in the pocket to avoid the rush was probably second to none.

The philosophy and approach on offensive of Holmgren is vastly different when compared to McCarthy. Holmgren really did run a balanced offense. McCarthy sells out to the passing game at times, which up to this year was partly due to the horrendous talent at RB. The Packers in the last 3-4 years had become a team where opposing defenses did not fear the run whatsoever, which gave Rodgers massive open areas within 6-8 yards of the LOS to run. Holmgren's WCO was not a deep strike offense that stretched the defense, outside of the brilliance of Favre in evading pressure and extending plays.

Favre's scrambles often went parallel to the LOS, letting his receivers get behind the defense for big plays. Rodgers' scrambles are perpendicular to the LOS, because his receivers are often already well downfield, opening up areas to run. In that way, they were both unique fits for their specific offenses. I don't think Favre would be nearly as good in this current offense...and I'm not sure Rodgers would've been as good as Favre on the mid 90s teams.

The differences you mention weren't MM vs. MH, but rather Rodgers v. Favre. Favre threw a beautiful screen, electric slant, and got a 15 yard hook into the numbers in record time. He was incredibly inaccurate deep, usually underthrowing. Rodgers is about as ying/yang as you can get. He is money deep, but doesn't like to throw slants, and is below average on screens...although I think they should work on screens as it would help the offense a lot.

[MJZiggy]

This is all subjective, but I'm a sucker for Rodger's cute smile.


http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ARodgersPost_185.jpg Brown hair and blue eyes. MmmMmmmMmmm!

[Patler]

Might as well throw some stats at it:

Rodgers has played 93 games. He has 1,557 yards on 332 carries for a 4.7 yard average.
Majik played in only 90 games. He had 1,114 yards on 248 carries for a 4.5 yard average.
Favre - 302,996,798,216 games. He had 1,844 yards on 602 carries for a 3.1 yard average.
Looking at Favre's first 97 games played, 1,120 yards on 293 carries for a 3.8 yard average.

[George Cumby]

Brown hair and blue eyes. MmmMmmmMmmm!

We're all just pieces of meat to you and your kind!

[LP]

We're all just pieces of meat to you and your kind!

If this is true, does that make lesbians vegetarians?

[Pugger]

Brown hair and blue eyes. MmmMmmmMmmm!

Yes, he is pretty hot. :hrt:

[Deputy Nutz]

Now I truly know why I hate this fucking place. You guys can't even answer a poll question correctly.

Which quarterback out of the three never missed a start because he could take a hit like a man? I though only preadolescent children break their collarbones.

I know you all are mostly incompetent yokels, and can't consider the fact on how offenses have change over the past 15 years, and how the Packers now run a spread offense that provides huge running lanes for the qb. Maybe that has something to do with it? Ya think!

Overall athleticism isn't even close. Favre was the superior athlete to Rodgers. Hard for the lot of you to comprehend but there is a website called YouTube that has 100s of Favre's highlights.

[woodbuck27]

Now I truly know why I hate this fucking place. You guys can't even answer a poll question correctly.

Which quarterback out of the three never missed a start because he could take a hit like a man? I though only preadolescent children break their collarbones.

I know you all are mostly incompetent yokels, and can't consider the fact on how offenses have change over the past 15 years, and how the Packers now run a spread offense that provides huge running lanes for the qb. Maybe that has something to do with it? Ya think!

Overall athleticism isn't even close. Favre was the superior athlete to Rodgers. Hard for the lot of you to comprehend but there is a website called YouTube that has 100s of Favre's highlights.

Maybe those who don`t know what favre did for the Green Bay Packers and in his NFL career overall might gleen this LINK:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_career_achievements_by_Brett_Favre

List of career achievements by Brett Favre

It`s a good .... long ............ read.

[pbmax]

...

And not being here has softened your head.

Things the poll was NOT about:

1. Missing starts
2. Collarbone injuries
3. Athleticism

If this was a racetrack, that would be a trifecta of glue factory candidates.

You would have been on better ground arguing that early in his career he was a die hard scrambler always looking to throw.

[pbmax]

I knew this poll was troll-bait.

[woodbuck27]

I knew this poll was troll-bait.

No.

If anyone starts a fire.

Doesn`t that fire need to be put out ?

[George Cumby]

I knew this poll was troll-bait.

Yet, here we are.

[Pugger]

Now I truly know why I hate this fucking place. You guys can't even answer a poll question correctly.

Which quarterback out of the three never missed a start because he could take a hit like a man? I though only preadolescent children break their collarbones.

I know you all are mostly incompetent yokels, and can't consider the fact on how offenses have change over the past 15 years, and how the Packers now run a spread offense that provides huge running lanes for the qb. Maybe that has something to do with it? Ya think!

Overall athleticism isn't even close. Favre was the superior athlete to Rodgers. Hard for the lot of you to comprehend but there is a website called YouTube that has 100s of Favre's highlights.

Evidently you never broke a bone in your body. Preadolescent indeed. Sorry if your hero isn't winning this silly poll. He's gonna be a first ballot HOFer. He is a legend and helped resurrect this franchise from the dregs of the 70s and 80s. However, if Favre were playing today I can think of at least one instance where his streak would have been in jeopardy because of the change in concussion protocol. You did hear Bret is having memory issues. Does that make him more of a man? I also disagree that Favre was the superior athlete. I can't think of a throw Bret made that Aaron can't and Bret didn't have Aaron's running ability. If I had to choose between Favre and Rodgers to be my starter in a big game I know who I would choose without hesitation and he isn't in MS.

[LEWCWA]

Rodgers is a better pure runner...Favre was built like a Sherman tank. However, Favre's pocket awareness and agility in the pocket to avoid the rush was probably second to none.

The philosophy and approach on offensive of Holmgren is vastly different when compared to McCarthy. Holmgren really did run a balanced offense. McCarthy sells out to the passing game at times, which up to this year was partly due to the horrendous talent at RB. The Packers in the last 3-4 years had become a team where opposing defenses did not fear the run whatsoever, which gave Rodgers massive open areas within 6-8 yards of the LOS to run. Holmgren's WCO was not a deep strike offense that stretched the defense, outside of the brilliance of Favre in evading pressure and extending plays.

Favre's scrambles often went parallel to the LOS, letting his receivers get behind the defense for big plays. Rodgers' scrambles are perpendicular to the LOS, because his receivers are often already well downfield, opening up areas to run. In that way, they were both unique fits for their specific offenses. I don't think Favre would be nearly as good in this current offense...and I'm not sure Rodgers would've been as good as Favre on the mid 90s teams.

That's the way to straddle that fence. your nuts sore? Actually thought the post was pretty good, just had to bust your balls a little....whoops you already did that!

[Deputy Nutz]

And not being here has softened your head.

Things the poll was NOT about:

1. Missing starts
2. Collarbone injuries
3. Athleticism

If this was a racetrack, that would be a trifecta of glue factory candidates.

You would have been on better ground arguing that early in his career he was a die hard scrambler always looking to throw.

Who is arguing?