Favre will go out with a whimper

[Cleft Crusty]

For some time there has been optimistic speculation that the Packers might be able to pull of a Denver Broncos-like feat, and surround an ageing Brett Favre with a talented cast, particularly a zone-blocking running scheme that will take all the pressure off Favre, thus springboarding Favre to a great final hurrah, celebrated after a Superbowl victory.

Physically Favre may still be capable of such a feat. after all, John elway had (at the time) the worst QB rating of a victorious QB in SBXXXII. So why not Brett Favre. Well, there are two reasons.

Simply put, the Packers have nowhere near the horses (pun intended) that the Broncos had on offense in 1998. Not only do they have just one proven talent on offense in the playmaking category (Driver), but they dispensed with their only other talents, Green and Martin. Martin, although unreliable as far as injury was concerned, had succeeded last year in providing an alternative target when Jennings' ankle limited his speed and mobility. teams were able to focus on Driver and without Martin, the Packer offense was stagnant. Green was over the hill, but current running back Morency and Herron can't even locate the hill on Mapquest. Unless Thompson pulls off some minor miracle in the draft or finds a gem in the June 1 cutdown refuse, their will be zero talent on offense.

Now to Favre. Favre showed last year that he can still play. But interestingly, his play was inconsistent not so much within games but from game to game. It appeared that he would have up and down games. This variable play also seemed to directly correlate with games following difficult (physically) previous games. What this suggests is that Favre will probably not fade like other QBs, who lose it all at once and can't play. Rather, it's more likely that he'll have good and bad games, depending on whether he's more or less banged up from the previous week. If he really starts to go, he may have stretches of games where he plays porly, interspersed with solid performances.

Last year, Favre's worst stretch resulted from the combination of three things: 1) Difficult opposition, 2) Loss of playmakers/critical players, 3) Physical problems. In no game was this more apparent that against New England. The competition was difficult - the Patriots are a talented team with a superb coach and QB, while GB had an unproven coach and no talent. GB was missing Martin and Tausher and Jennings (as much as he could play) was essentially nullified with a bum ankle. Finally, Favre had a pulled groin from practice. The combination of these factors made the Packers look like a scrimmage partner for the Patriots.

So, it's likely that this year will bring more of the same. Favre, when he's rested and healty, should be able to beat up on pathetic team like Detroit, but without any talent, and the certainty of dips in performance due to the rigors of age, Favre will likely have at least several solid stinkers this season. So it won't be a terrible fade where fans will have to look the other way the entire season, but there will be a collection of games (the guess here is 3-6) where people will wonder why Favre returned. And there will absolutely be no glorious finale at the Superbowl. The Packers will finish week seventeen a dismal 6-10. Favre will retire with a quiet whimper.

[Packnut]

The sad thing is it did'nt have to be this way, and I agree with your prediction.

[woodbuck27]

A 6-10 record may be generously optimistic Mr. Crusty merely based on Ted Thompson's off season to date.

We are definitely in it Vs. Detroit and Minny (say three wins there) and toss in a win Vs. Oakland. That's just four.

Ted Thompson has to hit it on at least 2 picks next weekend; and we need an experienced playmaker brought in and come through for us on the 'O', to realistically hope for a successful season.

What does this ultimately seem now to add up to?

Yes unfortunately. :(

All signs indicate that this may well be Brett Favre's final season.

but what of his desire to compete and win and simply play football?

A contrary route. or to play 'the Devil'. :shock:

Brett Favre decides to shove it in Ted Thompson's face having signed to play for the Packers through what? . . . 2011. He's convinced by his agent that certain teams would love to have him. Compete with them in a system ready to win.

Favre asks for a trade to give him one more real shot at a ring.

As they say:

'' It's not over - till it's over ''. :idea:

[Green Bud Packer]

. Favre will retire with a quiet whimper. people have been saying this for the last 6 years. i'd bet favre plays out his contract.

[gbgary]

i agree with the 6-10 (maybe worse) prediction. i mentioned in an earlier post in another thread that the only thing to look forward to this upcoming season was Brett putting marino in his rear-view mirror.

[Jimx29]

Ya, I can see him "going out with a whimper', after owning all the major q-back records.....:roll:

[MJZiggy]

Good point. I'm sure no one will notice... :roll:

[Freak Out]

Pardon me? Old #4 is going out fighting, the Packers may not win it all in the end but he will not go out with a whimper. Barring any major injuries I still think the Packers will surprise us all this year.

[mmmdk]

For some time there has been optimistic speculation that the Packers might be able to pull of a Denver Broncos-like feat, and surround an ageing Brett Favre with a talented cast, particularly a zone-blocking running scheme that will take all the pressure off Favre, thus springboarding Favre to a great final hurrah, celebrated after a Superbowl victory.

Physically Favre may still be capable of such a feat. after all, John elway had (at the time) the worst QB rating of a victorious QB in SBXXXII. So why not Brett Favre. Well, there are two reasons.

Simply put, the Packers have nowhere near the horses (pun intended) that the Broncos had on offense in 1998. Not only do they have just one proven talent on offense in the playmaking category (Driver), but they dispensed with their only other talents, Green and Martin. Martin, although unreliable as far as injury was concerned, had succeeded last year in providing an alternative target when Jennings' ankle limited his speed and mobility. teams were able to focus on Driver and without Martin, the Packer offense was stagnant. Green was over the hill, but current running back Morency and Herron can't even locate the hill on Mapquest. Unless Thompson pulls off some minor miracle in the draft or finds a gem in the June 1 cutdown refuse, their will be zero talent on offense.

Now to Favre. Favre showed last year that he can still play. But interestingly, his play was inconsistent not so much within games but from game to game. It appeared that he would have up and down games. This variable play also seemed to directly correlate with games following difficult (physically) previous games. What this suggests is that Favre will probably not fade like other QBs, who lose it all at once and can't play. Rather, it's more likely that he'll have good and bad games, depending on whether he's more or less banged up from the previous week. If he really starts to go, he may have stretches of games where he plays porly, interspersed with solid performances.

Last year, Favre's worst stretch resulted from the combination of three things: 1) Difficult opposition, 2) Loss of playmakers/critical players, 3) Physical problems. In no game was this more apparent that against New England. The competition was difficult - the Patriots are a talented team with a superb coach and QB, while GB had an unproven coach and no talent. GB was missing Martin and Tausher and Jennings (as much as he could play) was essentially nullified with a bum ankle. Finally, Favre had a pulled groin from practice. The combination of these factors made the Packers look like a scrimmage partner for the Patriots.

So, it's likely that this year will bring more of the same. Favre, when he's rested and healty, should be able to beat up on pathetic team like Detroit, but without any talent, and the certainty of dips in performance due to the rigors of age, Favre will likely have at least several solid stinkers this season. So it won't be a terrible fade where fans will have to look the other way the entire season, but there will be a collection of games (the guess here is 3-6) where people will wonder why Favre returned. And there will absolutely be no glorious finale at the Superbowl. The Packers will finish week seventeen a dismal 6-10. Favre will retire with a quiet whimper.

Very plausible. One can only hope it turns out differently; what are the odds though!? You need playmakers; Packers don't have them.

[retailguy]

Pardon me? Old #4 is going out fighting, the Packers may not win it all in the end but he will not go out with a whimper. Barring any
major injuries I still think the Packers will surprise us all this year.

6-10 will surprise "a lot" of us, here, no? :wink:

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't think we'll be 6-10 bad. Teams usually do well because their 2nd and 3rd year players improve a lot, and the Packers are team that could see a jump because of it. They need to draft two solid starters, and fill a couple of other secondary needs in the offseason, but I'm not expecting a horrible year.

[RashanGary]

I don't think we'll be 6-10 bad. Teams usually do well because their 2nd and 3rd year players improve a lot, and the Packers are team that could see a jump because of it. They need to draft two solid starters, and fill a couple of other secondary needs in the offseason, but I'm not expecting a horrible year.

I agree; I expect a similar record to last year but a better team. I never expected it to get turned around overnight but if they go 8-8 against a tough schedule it will show that they are ready for the next step and they have a ton of flexibility to keep getting better.

[Packnut]

I just don't see how 8-8 is any kind of an accomplishment. Screw the schedule. If we're to believe Teddy is doing a good job, then there should be improvment record wise from year to year.

It's all well and good to believe in fairy tales, but the truth is this team has had a hard time in the red zone 3 straight years in a row. Until something is done to change that trend, we're going no where. May-be i missed something, but there has not been 1 damn thing done to fix the problem.

Perhaps that will change in the draft or from a trade, but right now NOTHING has changed.

[Brando19]

I don't think we'll be 6-10 bad. Teams usually do well because their 2nd and 3rd year players improve a lot, and the Packers are team that could see a jump because of it. They need to draft two solid starters, and fill a couple of other secondary needs in the offseason, but I'm not expecting a horrible year.

I agree; I expect a similar record to last year but a better team. I never expected it to get turned around overnight but if they go 8-8 against a tough schedule it will show that they are ready for the next step and they have a ton of flexibility to keep getting better.

It'll be tough to be a better team without Ahman Green at RB.

[RashanGary]

I'm really looking forward to the season. Like HW said above; players tend to improve most from 1st to 2nd year or 2nd to 3rd year and the Packers have a lot of those guys.

I'm open to the possiblity that the Packers don't make progress but I saw a lot of promise in many of their young guys and I think there is a good chance that we have some big performance from some guys that we're not used to seeing. The Packers had to eventually turn over and the time is now.

[retailguy]

Perhaps that will change in the draft or from a trade, but right now NOTHING has changed.

Not true. Ahman Green has left the building. That's a change.

[Pacopete4]

a wimper? A WIMPER!!>????!?!?!?!?!?!?!?@>@<Q!!!?



Has Favre ever wimpered a day in his life?

Did he wimper when his dad died?.. no he gave us the greatest peformance of his life..
did he wimper on SB sunday?.. no he play sick and was awesome.. played even better the next year..

did he wimper in ANY FU CK ING GAME that hes played... NO!!!!.. and hes NEVER MISSED A FU CK ING game.. go fu ck urself whoever wrote that article.. fu ck u and the minimum wage u should be making.. thats horrible

[retailguy]

a wimper? A WIMPER!!>????!?!?!?!?!?!?!?@>@<Q!!!?



Has Favre ever wimpered a day in his life?

Did he wimper when his dad died?.. no he gave us the greatest peformance of his life..
did he wimper on SB sunday?.. no he play sick and was awesome.. played even better the next year..

did he wimper in ANY FU CK ING GAME that hes played... NO!!!!.. and hes NEVER MISSED A FU CK ING game.. go fu ck urself whoever wrote that article.. fu ck u and the minimum wage u should be making.. thats horrible

Favre needs TALENT to pull off what you think he can do. WHO is going to help him? That was the point....

[Bretsky]

Bring back Taco Wallace ?

[Bretsky]

Good read

I was one who thought it was plausible to make one last run with Brett Favre at the helm; last year I often referred to the shore patrol to shore up as many weaknesses as they could with the 30 plus million in salary they had going into free agency. I was all about Weatherspoon, Chris Hope, an OG, Pickett, and a CB like Woodson (WITHOUT the frontloading to use up cap space last year)

I felt like using free agency aggressively last year along with good drafts could have landed us in the playoffs last year and then diving back into free agency this year and another good draft and we'd be legitimate contenders in 2008 and 2009 in what I felt would be Brett Favre's last two seasons.

Maybe I was dead wrong on all my beliefs; maybe even if GB did all that they'd still fall short and would not have all the cap space in two years that we will under Ted Thompson.

I subscribed to try to win one more SB theory while Favre was around.

It was either that or choose to reload this team for the future when Favre is not around. TT chose to go that route.

If we win a Super Bowl with that methodology then TT was clearly right.

If we don't win a Super Bowl I'll always believe we might have had a shot while Favre was around if Ted Thompson had taken a different approach.

[MJZiggy]

I subscribed to try to win one more SB theory while Favre was around.

It was either that or choose to reload this team for the future when Favre is not around. TT chose to go that route.

If we win a Super Bowl with that methodology then TT was clearly right.

If we don't win a Super Bowl I'll always believe we might have had a shot while Favre was around if Ted Thompson had taken a different approach.

If they make a good run at a Super Bowl this year, I am going to serve you the LARGEST slice of humble pie you have ever seen...

[Bretsky]

I subscribed to try to win one more SB theory while Favre was around.

It was either that or choose to reload this team for the future when Favre is not around. TT chose to go that route.

If we win a Super Bowl with that methodology then TT was clearly right.

If we don't win a Super Bowl I'll always believe we might have had a shot while Favre was around if Ted Thompson had taken a different approach.

If they make a good run at a Super Bowl this year, I am going to serve you the LARGEST slice of humble pie you have ever seen...


Don't turn the oven on; you'll burn a few cents with the electricity :lol:

[retailguy]

I subscribed to try to win one more SB theory while Favre was around.

It was either that or choose to reload this team for the future when Favre is not around. TT chose to go that route.

If we win a Super Bowl with that methodology then TT was clearly right.

If we don't win a Super Bowl I'll always believe we might have had a shot while Favre was around if Ted Thompson had taken a different approach.

If they make a good run at a Super Bowl this year, I am going to serve you the LARGEST slice of humble pie you have ever seen...

I know i'd gladly accept it to be wrong, the real question is, if I'm not wrong, will YOU accept it? :D

[MJZiggy]

Humble pie is no-bake so it can be served quickly when needed...

[RashanGary]

If the Packers win 9 or more games I think he should be eating some humble pie because they are not only getting better year after year but they are staying flexible with the big NFL equalizer *the cap*

[retailguy]

If the Packers win 9 or more games I think he should be eating some humble pie because they are not only getting better year after year but they are staying flexible with the big NFL equalizer *the cap*


And if they don't, then YOU should?

[MJZiggy]

If they don't, sorry, but I'll be too depressed to eat... :P

[Terry]

I'm surprised at the level of pessimism in here. The only thing I can agree with is that there is no superbowl on the cards.

But 6-10? You've got to be kidding! If we do worse than 10-6, I'll eat MY hat. I expect us to do a bit better, frankly.

Call them rose coloured glasses if you like - I'll just say you're wearing those mirror sunglasses... AND wearing them inside out.

[MJZiggy]

Oh, they just think that the ONLY way to improve the team is to drop a wad in free agency, and since we didn't do that, there obviously is no hope and no POSSIBLE way we could be any better than we were last year with the same group of guys. As a matter of fact, with the same group playing together for a second year, we will be worse...

[Bretsky]

If the Packers win 9 or more games I think he should be eating some humble pie because they are not only getting better year after year but they are staying flexible with the big NFL equalizer *the cap*


I'm about title contention; cap flexibility doesn't mean much to me. There are diffrent ways to reaching a title and cap flexibility is no the only one. Last year was our year to use the 35+ mil and have a great draft and make the playoffs. This year was about title contention. 9 wins means nothing to me. I'll eat crow if Ted Thompson brings us a championship, and I'll be more than happy to do that :lol:

[Bretsky]

I'm surprised at the level of pessimism in here. The only thing I can agree with is that there is no superbowl on the cards.

But 6-10? You've got to be kidding! If we do worse than 10-6, I'll eat MY hat. I expect us to do a bit better, frankly.

Call them rose coloured glasses if you like - I'll just say you're wearing those mirror sunglasses... AND wearing them inside out.


I don't consider myslef to be a pessimist by predicting the Packers will be between 7 and 9 wins. I just don't completely agree with the GM: doesn't make me a pessimist.

As for the 10 wins, I think you should renegotiate into a "hat cake". I wouldn't want you to get sick :lol:

And I hope you are right.

Cheers,
B

[Bretsky]

Oh, they just think that the ONLY way to improve the team is to drop a wad in free agency, and since we didn't do that, there obviously is no hope and no POSSIBLE way we could be any better than we were last year with the same group of guys. As a matter of fact, with the same group playing together for a second year, we will be worse...


I guess you selectively choose to ignore what we've been saying all along to put your own spin on things :roll:

[packrulz]

Nowhere does the guy mention there was a new coaching staff, new zone blocking scheme, and that 5 rookie draft picks started last year. He also didn't mention all the dropped passes when Brett hit them right in the hands, Bubba comes to mind. Hell, I thought Farve would've retired rather than going through all that, he doesn't need the money. They still improved over the 4-12 season the previous year, few posters here going into the season thought the Packers would go 8-8. This year the coaching staff & rookies will be in their 2nd year, hopefully TT will draft some young talent who can fit into their system, and they can draft a WR & TE who can catch the friggen ball when Favre whistles it to them. Favre isn't the problem, the rest of the team need to step it up. I agree with Terry, if the Packers do less than 10-6 this year I'll be suprised. Look at the NFC North:
Bears: Grossman? He can't carry Farve's jockstrap.
viqueens: They are going from bad to worse.
Lions: They are just messed up, why is Millen still there?

There rest of the schedule I'll admit is fairly tough, but there are question marks. Philly isn't as strong as they used to be, KC will probably trade Trent Green, and the Chargers will be hurting if they trade Turner and LT gets hurt. Who thought the Saints would do so well going into last season?

I think Favre played well last year, and proved he's still got it. If TT has a good draft with his 9 picks I don't think a Wild Card Playoff spot is out the the question.

[retailguy]

Love it guys. I'm "pessimistic" because i look at the RB position and see holes. Also, TE, FB, 3rd WR (possibly 2nd too), Safety, 3rd LB, DT, Special Teams, and issues with KR...

I keep being told, "just wait for the draft", it'll be better... OK, but we're going to fill SEVEN starters on the draft? C'mon, how realistic is that?

Last season we beat ONE team with a winning record, and that team had NOTHING but pride to play for. Does anyone here believe that if that game had been played a week later, as the first playoff game, that Chicago would have come out flat?

I realize the team is young and started a bunch of rookies, but last year we played the FOURTH PLACE schedule and beat ONE team with a winning record, this season we play the SECOND PLACE schedule with the SAME guys, with an extra season of experience, which all the rest of the veterans in the league have too....and without a starting caliber running back too...

Lots of questions, no answers and because I disagree with you, I'm a PESSIMIST? Whatever.

[MJZiggy]

There was an interview with Bob Sanders not too long ago in which he outlined what the problems with the running game were last season and for the most part it boiled down to changes that needed to be made to what the offensive line was doing. The question becomes, once those improvements are made, do we need a premier back or can we do it in the Denver/Atlanta mode and then Morency, Beach and Pope turn out better than we currently assume?

[Bretsky]

There was an interview with Bob Sanders not too long ago in which he outlined what the problems with the running game were last season and for the most part it boiled down to changes that needed to be made to what the offensive line was doing. The question becomes, once those improvements are made, do we need a premier back or can we do it in the Denver/Atlanta mode and then Morency, Beach and Pope turn out better than we currently assume?

I'd say the question is "if" those improvements are made do we need a premier back.

My view is we at least need a back talented enough to carry the load and right now we don't have that.

But......

Is our offensive line currently as solid as either Denver or Atlanta's ?

If you want to try to argue that our offensive line is superior to theirs you can try to make that work and say we don't need an upgrade at RB. I don't buy that our OL is superior to either unit, and I think it's pretty obvious that the RB position in among the weakest position on our roster.

Elite RB or not, I don't ever remember a time where Denver or Atlanta went into the season with talent as weak as Morency/Beach/Pope.

I cant' imagine the Snapper would ignore this position.

[BEARMAN]

I'm just looking forward to Brett Farve being pumled, crushed and broken by my beloved BEARS ! (yet Again!) this season. Your fudge wackers going 6 - 10 is way too optimistic. And yes, he is correct, "whimpering" into oblivion is the way he gose out. :twisted:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Love it guys. I'm "pessimistic" because i look at the RB position and see holes. Also, TE, FB, 3rd WR (possibly 2nd too), Safety, 3rd LB, DT, Special Teams, and issues with KR...

I keep being told, "just wait for the draft", it'll be better... OK, but we're going to fill SEVEN starters on the draft?

7 starters? I'm fine with Jennings, Miree, Poppinga, and Corey Williams. They were decent last year, and I would expect all of them to improve. It would be nice to get three new starters (RB, TE, and S) and fill depth at several other positions.

[b bulldog]

I think we will be a better team than last season but we'll end up 7-9.

[retailguy]

I think we will be a better team than last season but we'll end up 7-9.

If we wind up 7-9, we will CLEARLY be a better team than last year. 6-10 might even make us a better team than last year depending on where those wins come from.

I could build a case, however, based on where the team is TODAY, that we could be 0-6, or at best 2-4 at the bye week.... Thank GOD, we've got 4 more months to find someone who can run the damn ball...

[packerbacker1234]

Favre went 5-1 against the division despite the slumps and injuries/talent level. Chicago can say all they want they didn't try in that last game. I guess they forgot to try in the super bowl too. Thats incorrect, what happened is we "exposed" chicago and they used the "didn't try" card to shrug it off.

Yes, he played poor verse poor competition, HOWEVER if you noticed during the games it was all about the 1st quarter. Favre would be playing well then suddenly someone would drop a crucial first down pass.

As for the RB situation. Some could argue that Morency ignited the run game, more so then green. I do feel that Morency is not going to get the tough yards, however he was excellent in his cuts and showed good insticts and break away speed. He had more long runs then green. I think RB wise we just need a proven guy to give us a nice one two punch. Who knows the draft may fix that.

As for WR's, jennings should be good to go come this season barring another injury. Thats two weapons. Bubba may actually get to run routes, so as long as he works on his hands this offseason and not his blocking he could be a solid target. KR back around week 10 could be a nice addition to help a playoff push if we can stay in the running.

Now, moving to our defense, we got a good core and a little bit more depth then last year (who knows maybe even a new safety by the time draft is over). So, our defense may be able to keep us in games longer to give favre and company time to get there confidence.

Thats really the only issue. I've seen players on the current roster flash potentional. What they lack is confidence in themselves. Favre seems to never doubt himself, but if the WR he is throwing too is shaking, worried he wont make the catch, thats when mistakes and drops happen. It's all about quarter one.

If they offense can show confidence, things could be different. What are we short this year?

We lost green, OH NO. Green didn't do THAT well, just did ok. Morency with our line could do "ok". Lost Martin? So what, he is on;y here 4 games a year anyways. To note, we won more games after his injury then before it.

Defense? ALl starters return. Offense? All return but one. The offense will be just as good, and depending on a draft and any late pick ups, even better then last years offense.

Point in case, there is every reason to think we can do just as good, maybe even better, then last year. Yes favre is sparadic, has good games and bad games. Thats been his way throughout his career. he has always been sporadic. What favre is not use to is getting into the redzone 7 times a game and only getting three points.

If we did better in the redzone last year you can notch at least 2 or 3 more wins on our belt. Favre moved the chains still even in bad games. Once the field got condensed it showed that driver was the only viable option. Hopefully we address this in the draft and get bubba going in the redzone. That way he can't fumble... he just has to catch it in the endzone.

[MadtownPacker]

Lots of questions, no answers and because I disagree with you, I'm a PESSIMIST? Whatever.I wouldnt call you a PESSIMIST, more like a negative SOV.

Did an alarm go off when you realized you share the same prediction as bearman? :D

[retailguy]

Lots of questions, no answers and because I disagree with you, I'm a PESSIMIST? Whatever.I wouldnt call you a PESSIMIST, more like a negative SOV.

Did an alarm go off when you realized you share the same prediction as bearman? :D

Very funny. :roll:

We'll see what happens. I'll be there, watching every game, looking for improvement... Hopefully we'll compare notes at the bye week break, and you'll be saying "I told you so". I'll be only too grateful to hear that.

Now if it's the other way around.... :twisted:

[Packnut]

My biggest concern isthat those last 4 games have done more harm than good. If you go back to the sentiment on this board before those 4 games, it was very bleak. Even the most ardent TT backers were very quiet.

Now since those 4 games we have people here who believe 10-6 is possible. Also, with Teddy's absence in the FA market, I think he believes those last 4 games were some kind of signal that his plan is working. God help us all if he really believes this team as is, is anywhere near the talent of the upper echelon.

Look, I hate being negative but you have to be realistic and use some logic here. Some here act like it's a given our O lne improves. It's not. Go back and look at some games last year. Our line was THOROUGHLY dominated. You just can't have a convenient memory lapse and forget about those games. It's logical to expect a small amount of improvment but not the giant steps some here are expecting. The odds of getting through the entire season with our starters playing every game is just about ZERO and no one can make a case we have any depth.

Our offense has had red zone problems for the last 3 years. Every year we think it will improve and it does'nt. Since Thompson has done NOTHING in this area, can someone please explain to me how it's going to change? Do we just close our eyes and hope for the best yet again? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but ya need to score in the red zone in order to compete in this league.

Now you can hang your hats on those last 4 games but you also just can't ignore what happened against the Pats and Jets. That was 80's Packer football all over again. It looked like men against boys and it was thoroughly embarrassing to any Packer fan.

There is a disturbing trend on this board that guys like Bresky, retail-guy and myself just to name a few are called negative and pessimists. We've been given the label as "Thompson bashers". Well, there is a helluva lot more evidence on our side about where the Packers are at then the kool-aid drinkers. Yes, no doubt the Packers are trending upwards. That's not in dispute. But let's also remember this team was at the bottom and there was no where to go but up.

[retailguy]

Just a couple of comments.... :lol:


Look, I hate being negative but you have to be realistic and use some logic here. Some here act like it's a given our O lne improves. It's not. Go back and look at some games last year. Our line was THOROUGHLY dominated. You just can't have a convenient memory lapse and forget about those games. It's logical to expect a small amount of improvment but not the giant steps some here are expecting. The odds of getting through the entire season with our starters playing every game is just about ZERO and no one can make a case we have any depth.

Can you IMAGINE what would have happened over the course of the entire season, WITHOUT a back like Ahman Green behind that Oline? How about a Quarterback who's name was NOT Brett Favre? Oh yeah, we saw that one, his name was Aaron Rodgers and he broke his foot in less than a half of action...

Thank God we had Ahman Green last year, say what you all want about him being in decline... There is ample proof that he was the ONLY one that could run CONSISTENTLY behind our OL. 1,059 yards behind that line was a freaking MIRACLE, and something he should be VERY proud of.




There is a disturbing trend on this board that guys like Bresky, retail-guy and myself just to name a few are called negative and pessimists. We've been given the label as "Thompson bashers". Well, there is a helluva lot more evidence on our side about where the Packers are at then the kool-aid drinkers. Yes, no doubt the Packers are trending upwards. That's not in dispute. But let's also remember this team was at the bottom and there was no where to go but up.

The sad part is I actually like Ted Thompson. I appreciate his determination and his wherewithal to stick with what he believes. I simply disagree with the "short term" portion of his plan. I think we could bring in a few guys to make this a more competitive team while he "retools" the long term plan and talent level, and "take a chance" that this team could catch fire in Favre's last couple of years.

Favre keeps this team somewhat competitive all by himself. You don't need 21 other "weapons" to win some games and get to the playoffs. You probably sit about 4 guys short at this point. You definitely need a top flight running back, a better starting FB, at least a third WR, a better starting Safety, and perhaps a KR. Ok, that's 5, so sue me... :wink:

That's what I find frustrating...

[prsnfoto]

Favre keeps this team somewhat competitive all by himself. You don't need 21 other "weapons" to win some games and get to the playoffs. You probably sit about 4 guys short at this point. You definitely need a top flight running back, a better starting FB, at least a third WR, a better starting Safety, and perhaps a KR. Ok, that's 5, so sue me...

That's what I find frustrating...

You forgot a TE sorry to rain on your parade you were starting to be opptimistic for a second. 7-9,8-8,9-7 all possible the guy who said 10-6 please pass the bong I need some of that shit.

[Packnut]

Just a couple of comments.... :lol:


Look, I hate being negative but you have to be realistic and use some logic here. Some here act like it's a given our O lne improves. It's not. Go back and look at some games last year. Our line was THOROUGHLY dominated. You just can't have a convenient memory lapse and forget about those games. It's logical to expect a small amount of improvment but not the giant steps some here are expecting. The odds of getting through the entire season with our starters playing every game is just about ZERO and no one can make a case we have any depth.

Can you IMAGINE what would have happened over the course of the entire season, WITHOUT a back like Ahman Green behind that Oline? How about a Quarterback who's name was NOT Brett Favre? Oh yeah, we saw that one, his name was Aaron Rodgers and he broke his foot in less than a half of action...

Thank God we had Ahman Green last year, say what you all want about him being in decline... There is ample proof that he was the ONLY one that could run CONSISTENTLY behind our OL. 1,059 yards behind that line was a freaking MIRACLE, and something he should be VERY proud of.




There is a disturbing trend on this board that guys like Bresky, retail-guy and myself just to name a few are called negative and pessimists. We've been given the label as "Thompson bashers". Well, there is a helluva lot more evidence on our side about where the Packers are at then the kool-aid drinkers. Yes, no doubt the Packers are trending upwards. That's not in dispute. But let's also remember this team was at the bottom and there was no where to go but up.

The sad part is I actually like Ted Thompson. I appreciate his determination and his wherewithal to stick with what he believes. I simply disagree with the "short term" portion of his plan. I think we could bring in a few guys to make this a more competitive team while he "retools" the long term plan and talent level, and "take a chance" that this team could catch fire in Favre's last couple of years.

Favre keeps this team somewhat competitive all by himself. You don't need 21 other "weapons" to win some games and get to the playoffs. You probably sit about 4 guys short at this point. You definitely need a top flight running back, a better starting FB, at least a third WR, a better starting Safety, and perhaps a KR. Ok, that's 5, so sue me... :wink:

That's what I find frustrating...

Thompson does have the right philosophy about building through the draft and not loading up on free agents. His problem though is that free agency is a big part of today's NFL and you just can't ignore it. He also is right about keeping your own, although his biggest mistake is turning out to be the most costly.

This is a different team with Walker on it. Yeah, it's water under the bridge and beating a dead horse, but still a huge mistake is a huge mistake. Things would look totally different from an offensive point of view had Teddy not has his head up his ass on that one. He let Denver abuse him on that trade and I noticed in the same situation, NE got a first for Branch. No excuse for this kinda screw-up. No one is gonna convince me Teddy is some kind of genious cause a genious does'n t make mistakes, and Teddy has made his fair share!

[packerbacker1234]

Yeah our line blowed ballz

When Miree started, we averaged 145 rushing yards a game.

Favre again was int he top 3 least sacked QB's in the league.

Morency seemed to have no problem find the ten yard holes.

Green had 1000+ rushing yards.

I think our line showed MAJOR improvement. Why, against he bears at the end, were we able to pick them apart? We sent more out on routes and left the basic 5 man line to do the heavy blocking. They did just fine. You can say they didn't try, but go say to lovey's face. If they didn't try he'll kick everyone off the roster. In a interview done less then a year ago he said even with GB's struggles, beating the packers is almost better then winning hte super bowl.

Too bad they still have no answer for Favre at soldier field.

[Packnut]

Yeah our line blowed ballz

When Miree started, we averaged 145 rushing yards a game.

Favre again was int he top 3 least sacked QB's in the league.

Morency seemed to have no problem find the ten yard holes.

Green had 1000+ rushing yards.

I think our line showed MAJOR improvement. Why, against he bears at the end, were we able to pick them apart? We sent more out on routes and left the basic 5 man line to do the heavy blocking. They did just fine. You can say they didn't try, but go say to lovey's face. If they didn't try he'll kick everyone off the roster. In a interview done less then a year ago he said even with GB's struggles, beating the packers is almost better then winning hte super bowl.

Too bad they still have no answer for Favre at soldier field.


The problem is that there were many more instances of our line being dominated. The 1st Bears game, Buffalo, NE, NY and twice against Minny just to name a few.

[woodbuck27]

I'm surprised at the level of pessimism in here. The only thing I can agree with is that there is no superbowl on the cards.

But 6-10? You've got to be kidding! If we do worse than 10-6, I'll eat MY hat. I expect us to do a bit better, frankly.

Call them rose coloured glasses if you like - I'll just say you're wearing those mirror sunglasses... AND wearing them inside out.

Ehh ! Terry.

Nice to see you post again. :)

[woodbuck27]

Nowhere does the guy mention there was a new coaching staff, new zone blocking scheme, and that 5 rookie draft picks started last year. He also didn't mention all the dropped passes when Brett hit them right in the hands, Bubba comes to mind. Hell, I thought Favre would've retired rather than going through all that, he doesn't need the money. They still improved over the 4-12 season the previous year, few posters here going into the season thought the Packers would go 8-8. This year the coaching staff & rookies will be in their 2nd year, hopefully TT will draft some young talent who can fit into their system, and they can draft a WR & TE who can catch the friggen ball when Favre whistles it to them. Favre isn't the problem, the rest of the team need to step it up. I agree with Terry, if the Packers do less than 10-6 this year I'll be suprised. Look at the NFC North:
Bears: Grossman? He can't carry Favre's jockstrap.
viqueens: They are going from bad to worse.
Lions: They are just messed up, why is Millen still there?

There rest of the schedule I'll admit is fairly tough, but there are question marks. Philly isn't as strong as they used to be, KC will probably trade Trent Green, and the Chargers will be hurting if they trade Turner and LT gets hurt. Who thought the Saints would do so well going into last season?

I think Favre played well last year, and proved he's still got it. If TT has a good draft with his 9 picks I don't think a Wild Card Playoff spot is out the the question.

You make good points all around. Yet how many are in the Packers own destiny?

Your saying that there are many factors that could go the Packers way.

We still need this:

I just hope that soon TT steps it up to do something positive to set our 'O' in the right direction.

Of course he won't.

[CaliforniaCheez]

For some time there has been optimistic speculation that the Packers might be able to pull of a Denver Broncos-like feat, and surround an ageing Brett Favre with a talented cast, particularly a zone-blocking running scheme that will take all the pressure off Favre, thus springboarding Favre to a great final hurrah, celebrated after a Superbowl victory.

Physically Favre may still be capable of such a feat. after all, John elway had (at the time) the worst QB rating of a victorious QB in SBXXXII. So why not Brett Favre. Well, there are two reasons.

Simply put, the Packers have nowhere near the horses (pun intended) that the Broncos had on offense in 1998. Not only do they have just one proven talent on offense in the playmaking category (Driver), but they dispensed with their only other talents, Green and Martin. Martin, although unreliable as far as injury was concerned, had succeeded last year in providing an alternative target when Jennings' ankle limited his speed and mobility. teams were able to focus on Driver and without Martin, the Packer offense was stagnant. Green was over the hill, but current running back Morency and Herron can't even locate the hill on Mapquest. Unless Thompson pulls off some minor miracle in the draft or finds a gem in the June 1 cutdown refuse, their will be zero talent on offense.

Now to Favre. Favre showed last year that he can still play. But interestingly, his play was inconsistent not so much within games but from game to game. It appeared that he would have up and down games. This variable play also seemed to directly correlate with games following difficult (physically) previous games. What this suggests is that Favre will probably not fade like other QBs, who lose it all at once and can't play. Rather, it's more likely that he'll have good and bad games, depending on whether he's more or less banged up from the previous week. If he really starts to go, he may have stretches of games where he plays porly, interspersed with solid performances.

Last year, Favre's worst stretch resulted from the combination of three things: 1) Difficult opposition, 2) Loss of playmakers/critical players, 3) Physical problems. In no game was this more apparent that against New England. The competition was difficult - the Patriots are a talented team with a superb coach and QB, while GB had an unproven coach and no talent. GB was missing Martin and Tausher and Jennings (as much as he could play) was essentially nullified with a bum ankle. Finally, Favre had a pulled groin from practice. The combination of these factors made the Packers look like a scrimmage partner for the Patriots.

So, it's likely that this year will bring more of the same. Favre, when he's rested and healty, should be able to beat up on pathetic team like Detroit, but without any talent, and the certainty of dips in performance due to the rigors of age, Favre will likely have at least several solid stinkers this season. So it won't be a terrible fade where fans will have to look the other way the entire season, but there will be a collection of games (the guess here is 3-6) where people will wonder why Favre returned. And there will absolutely be no glorious finale at the Superbowl. The Packers will finish week seventeen a dismal 6-10. Favre will retire with a quiet whimper.

It is just a crying shame......

[swede]

Favre, when he's rested and healty, should be able to beat up on pathetic team like Detroit...

Detroit being pathetic looks a bit like old news. Poor Cleft. He's getting his nose rubbed in it now.


The Packers will finish week seventeen a dismal 6-10. Favre will retire with a quiet whimper.

Wasn't there also an ESPN writer whose nose we need to rub in some sh!t he wrore about Favre as well? I'd appreciate it if the loyal rat who posted that article could find it and bump it. I'd love to send it back to that blowhole.

[Zool]

Some great stuff in these threads.

Just dont dig up the threads where I thought B-Jax was going to be worth a shit.

[cpk1994]

Favre, when he's rested and healty, should be able to beat up on pathetic team like Detroit...

Detroit being pathetic looks a bit like old news. Poor Cleft. He's getting his nose rubbed in it now.


The Packers will finish week seventeen a dismal 6-10. Favre will retire with a quiet whimper.

Wasn't there also an ESPN writer whose nose we need to rub in some sh!t he wrore about Favre as well? I'd appreciate it if the loyal rat who posted that article could find it and bump it. I'd love to send it back to that blowhole.While you are at it, you should dig up the draft day footage lf Steve Young tearing into TT about not giving Favre weapons and rub his nose in that.

[4and12to12and4]

I love archives.

[Deputy Nutz]

Archives can make you look like a fucking idiot.

[Pacopete4]

cleftycrust is dogshit.. or whatever the hell his name is, doesnt even matter cuz hes trash at what he does... proven over and over again.. where are your bears u piece of dogshit

[RashanGary]

Retailguy really looks like an angry retard. Oh wait, that goes without saying :)


Just kidding old chap :) :P

[Rastak]

cleftycrust is dogshit.. or whatever the hell his name is, doesnt even matter cuz hes trash at what he does... proven over and over again.. where are your bears u piece of dogshit


Very eloquently stated. You do understand hyperbole?

[Deputy Nutz]

cleftycrust is dogshit.. or whatever the hell his name is, doesnt even matter cuz hes trash at what he does... proven over and over again.. where are your bears u piece of dogshit

Other than the poorly stated article, Cleft is one of a kind reporter.

[Cleft Crusty]

It's nice to see that 'Ole Clefty is having enough impact to get others to bring forward old threads. Thanks for remembering me. Pacopete, I appreciate your taking time to comment, although the hostility may be misplaced. Sorry 'Ole clefty wasn't here for the postgame chat after the Chiefs game, but I look forward to future chats and look forward to my article on the Detroit Lions, which I will post in the upcoming days. Keep the 'fan mail' coming - it's important to an old fossil like me, suffering from gout, to know that you all still tune in.

[CaliforniaCheez]

It's nice to see that 'Ole Clefty is having enough impact to get others to bring forward old threads. Thanks for remembering me. Pacopete, I appreciate your taking time to comment, although the hostility may be misplaced. Sorry 'Ole clefty wasn't here for the postgame chat after the Chiefs game, but I look forward to future chats and look forward to my article on the Detroit Lions, which I will post in the upcoming days. Keep the 'fan mail' coming - it's important to an old fossil like me, suffering from gout, to know that you all still tune in.

Well, Cleft we have all been incorrect in forecasting events. If the future was easily read there would be no gambling. I am happy the Packers have surpassed most offseason expectations.

Actually, I was looking for old threads regarding "Ted Thompson's failure to sign free agents" gripes when I spotted your article. Given Brett's fairly successful season I thought it would be fun to look at it again.

If I had written something similar I would have done it to myself. I did not do it to bring hostility to you or solicit it. It was done to get people to enjoy good fortune. Some will complain that 16-0 isn't good enough. Most have trouble looking around and saying "Things are good."

To cheer you up a bit, gout doesn't keep you off the keyboard. I recently broke and screwed up my right hand/arm. Typing left handed is slow and frustrating. It is costing me income also. We should all appreciate what we have before it is too late.

[Pacopete4]

ya my comments werent nice.. so sorry about that but i just cant stand the dumbass comments u made after the bears game.. and now that i read more.. there seems to be even more dumb things you have written.. everyone does it but u just seem to never be right

[Deputy Nutz]

ya my comments werent nice.. so sorry about that but i just cant stand the dumbass comments u made after the bears game.. and now that i read more.. there seems to be even more dumb things you have written.. everyone does it but u just seem to never be right

Clueless? NEWBIE!!!!! :D

That is who Cleft is, Sarcastic bad ass!

[packers11]

Cleft now that the season is over... Want to take back your comments??? :wink:

[Pacopete4]

he wont admit it.. he'l come back with something how Kyle Orton and Brian Griese outplayed Favre this year and how the Bears are the more talented and better team... hes a fraud i tell ya

[MJZiggy]

(you do realize he's a parody, right?)

[Pacopete4]

on some things he is.. yes, but he really felt that way after the first bears game, he'l say he's kidding so that he never has to admit he doesnt know a thing about football

[Cleft Crusty]

Hi Folks,

Cleft Crusty here, noting that some Favre criticism has sprung up on the Rodgers thread. In particular, Tarlam! wrote:



"Regardless of the numbers Favre sucked. Grant was worse. No wonder the Packer brass are struggling to sign Grant. That last game was abysmal.

And yes, Favre threw for 240. He still sucked. At no time during that game did I feel he was in a position to win. He played like a loser, he lost. Go ahead and stone me. I know what I saw. i saw a loser. I love Favre. I love my son and my daughter, too. Don't meen I am blind to their faults."

----

So true - Favre had a horrible second half against the Giants, but that was to be expected given Favre's late season swoons and playoff debacles over the past several years. Posted below is my column from right after the loss in Dallas - unpublished on Packerrats until this day.

[Cleft Crusty]

Aaron Rodgers Era Starts Now

The time for the Aaron Rodgers era must start now. Brett Favre is a tremendous quarterback having a tremendous year, but there’s just one fly in the ointment: he cannot and will not win in Dallas. Ever. This bears repeating: In the world of sports where ‘nothing is certain’ and on any given Sunday any team can defeat any other team, the horrible reality for Packer fans is the absolute certainty that they will never see Brett Favre defeat the Cowboys in Texas Stadium. During his tenure as Packer Field General,Favre has developed several bad habits that are all magnified on Cowboy FieldTurf. Most debilitating of these is that somewhere along the line Favre has developed a fear of getting hit. Favre used to relish hard hits; getting jacked up stoked Favre’s competitive fires. Obliterate Favre on a bootleg against Tampa Bay in the 90s and he’d come back three plays later with a TD strike to Antonio Freeman. ,But now, either because of old age, because of accumulated hard hits, or possibly even because there is no comforting vicodin or alcohol buzz to soften the blows, Favre would rather leave the field than take a hit. In the Divisional matchup with Philly in 2003, Favre saw a first down blitz headed his way and chose to bail out, tossing a prayer of a pass high into the still, silent frozen air of Lincoln Financial Field, hoping Irv Favre would somehow guide his errant lob to Javon Walker. The alternative, a devastating sack, was unthinkable. The next year, Favre had an opportunity to launch himself into the end zone against the hated Vikings on a QB scramble - A move he would never have second-guessed in 1994 when he defeated the Atlanta Hawks in the final game at County Stadium. But Favre passed on the run and passed beyond the line of scrimmage. Instead of winning with his feet and heart, Favre bailed out and was charged with a game-changing penalty, disheartening teammates and fans throughout Lambeau Field and PackerNation all over the globe. It was apparent then that the Favre beloved by so many for so many years was no more – he had become a mere specter of his former self, stripped of that unflappable uninhibited playmaker that formerly ruled the NFL. Why bail out on those game changing plays? After all, Elway sold out his body in SB XXXII, why couldn’t Favre do the same when a playoff game was on the line? Perhaps because he had never won it all, the urgency, the hunger was greater for Elway. But for Favre, who has achieved everything a QB can achieve, perhaps the thinking was: “Why get myself killed when I have the SB win, the MVPs, and most of the QB records?” The grit, determination, and willingness to toss himself in the fray for a critical yard, or the readiness to endure the savage sack – all these attributes Favre used to have were apparent not in Brett Favre, but in the vital play of Aaron Rodgers in Dallas last Thursday. Rodgers tossed his body forward and was propellered on a first down scramble, took the big hit in the pocket -and held the ball, and lived to throw another pass. Favre got hit a few times in the first quarter and in lieu of sacks mentally checked out, lobbing up tosses into the Dallas evening sky as though he was conducting pop fly practice for little leaguers.
General Manager Ted Thompson arrived in Green Bay with a philosophy that no veterans were safe from his critical scrutiny. If he thought a position needed an upgrade, he’d go out and get his guy. For him, that guy was Aaron Rodgers. Upgrading Favre was so critical to Thompson that he used his first pick ever as a GM to take him. Now that pick must pay dividends. Rodgers has all the qualities that the young Favre had – he’s fearless, he’ll scramble when necessary and he’ll hang in the pocket and take the massive hit if the pass isn’t open. Favre, on the other hand will reach and try to make the big throw when an easier option is available. Favre even said it himself in his “In their own words” segment that is also included as a DVD in his most recent money-making tome. Favre claims that he’d rather throw the harder pass to the covered receiver “because it’s more challenging.” This attitude had solidified itself in Favre’s psyche like the atherosclerosis in his middle -aged arteries. For a while this year, Packer fans had a respite from this behavior and some were convinced McCarthy had purged these self-destructive tendencies from Favre’s game. But it was a mere façade, and the awful truth is that these tendencies are encoded in Favre DNA and will never be expunged. To be sure, Favre has the ability to continue his great play that has been on display in all non-Bear and non-Cowboy games this year, and he is a better option than Rodgers in all remaining games, including a likely Divisional playoff game at home. But he won’t win in Dallas. Thus, McCarthy and Thompson must make the hard decision and replace Favre now. They can use his injury as an excuse to excuse him from playing. In five games, Rodgers can be groomed to play that all-important game in Dallas and perhaps against New England in the Superbowl. If McCarthy and Thompson don’t make this choice, they and all Packer fans may as well reserve seats for another tragic opera in Texas Stadium. Brett Favre has now had nine performances on that artificial stage and each performance bombed. It’s time for the understudy.

[The Leaper]

Favre had a horrible second half against the Giants, but that was to be expected given Favre's late season swoons and playoff debacles over the past several years.

So, is a brilliant performance against Seattle after Grant fumbled the ball away twice also part of the "expected debacle" that Favre turned in during last season's playoffs?

[Cleft Crusty]

Favre had a horrible second half against the Giants, but that was to be expected given Favre's late season swoons and playoff debacles over the past several years.

So, is a brilliant performance against Seattle after Grant fumbled the ball away twice also part of the "expected debacle" that Favre turned in during last season's playoffs?

Leaper,

Favre's performance and leadership in the Divisional game was outstanding. As was his performance at home against Seattle in 2003 and San Fran in 2001 (Some may forget, but in the OT against Seattle, Favre threw a beautiful deep ball across the field to Ahman Green, one play before the Packers had to punt the ball away. Green let the ball slip through his fingers, but it was a perfect pass. Read my article and comments carefully. My critique of Favre is harsh at times, but is not an all-or-none. I predicted Favre would have ups and downs in 2007, and that they would most likely be game by game. The Divisional Game was outstanding, while the Giants game was subpar. The Packers were playing a team that was playing better on that day and they needed the Brett Favre from the previous week, not a so-so Brett Favre. The same could be said about the Divisional game in 2001 and 2003, although in both those games, like the Giants game Favre was good enough in the first half, far worse in the second. Seems like there is a pattern there.

[Patler]

Favre had a horrible second half against the Giants, but that was to be expected given Favre's late season swoons and playoff debacles over the past several years.

So, is a brilliant performance against Seattle after Grant fumbled the ball away twice also part of the "expected debacle" that Favre turned in during last season's playoffs?

Not as a criticism of Favre's performance, but Grant's performance as a runner was more "brilliant" than Favre's as a passer. Grant had more yards, and both had 3 TDs. Grant even had more rushing attempts than Favre had passing attempts.

In spite of the early fumbles, Grant was "brilliant" in that game. The character of that game was decided by the Packers running game, and Grant in particular.

[Tarlam!]

Cleft Crusty quoted me. I have been knighted.

:knll:

[Cleft Crusty]

Not as a criticism of Favre's performance, but Grant's performance as a runner was more "brilliant" than Favre's as a passer. Grant had more yards, and both had 3 TDs. Grant even had more rushing attempts than Favre had passing attempts.

In spite of the early fumbles, Grant was "brilliant" in that game. The character of that game was decided by the Packers running game, and Grant in particular.

You make a good argument, Patler. But often stats don't tell the whole story. Or better stated, stats, in their proper context, tell a better story. The fumbles, in context, left Favre with the ball, a 14 point deficit, and a shaky RB behind him. He had to rally the troops for that all-important first TD drive, almost exclusively through the air. That was where Favre's leadership was crucial. But there is no doubt about the impact that Grant's running had on the game as it wore on - I was a memorable record-setting performance.

[The Leaper]

Not as a criticism of Favre's performance, but Grant's performance as a runner was more "brilliant" than Favre's as a passer. Grant had more yards, and both had 3 TDs. Grant even had more rushing attempts than Favre had passing attempts.

I disagree.

Grant got much of that yardage and most of those carries in the second half of a game that clearly was fully in Green Bay's control by halftime. I will admit that Grant had an excellent 2nd quarter...but Favre's steady hand early is what kept Green Bay in the game, not Grant. Favre completed 10 of his first 11 or something like that. He was hitting different receivers all over the field...and putting it right on the money so they could make plays after the catch.

Just because Favre more or less shut it down after halftime hardly means he was less of a factor in the game than Grant. Favre's leadership and focus when the team got behind was crucial.

[HarveyWallbangers]

In spite of the early fumbles, Grant was "brilliant" in that game. The character of that game was decided by the Packers running game, and Grant in particular.

I'm not so sure. My recollection could be bad, but I thought the Packers threw the ball to get back in the game. Then, Grant took over. I think Favre was huge in that game. He provided the veteran leadership and made the throws he had to. That first TD drive was huge in that game. It might have been a different game if the Packers had not gotten points there.

[Tarlam!]

IIRC, Favre was amazing against Seattle. It was middle of the night stuff for me, but I remember shocking my new fiancé to death running up and down my living room sreaming Favre!!!!!!

[Pacopete4]

You all make good points but I want to make a point of, if we dont have #4 all year... we are no where near 14-4 including playoffs. Do we forget the games he won basically carrying GB on his back when they had zero running game? I understand he stunk in the bears games and especially Dallas. But he threw game winning TD passes against KC and DEN back to back weeks AT THEIR PLACE. It's easy to sit back at say how bad he was in the games we lost, but without him.. the season probably was a wash.

[Cleft Crusty]

You all make good points but I want to make a point of, if we dont have #4 all year... we are no where near 14-4 including playoffs. Do we forget the games he won basically carrying GB on his back when they had zero running game? I understand he stunk in the bears games and especially Dallas. But he threw game winning TD passes against KC and DEN back to back weeks AT THEIR PLACE. It's easy to sit back at say how bad he was in the games we lost, but without him.. the season probably was a wash.

I think you're absolutely right. Without Favre, they never would have done what they did. The part I got wrong was that Favre really bought into the system and really made a huge effort to reduce the careless errors. He was like Gannon in 2002 for the Raiders - a coach on the field - and essentially played an MVP season, but he did fade near the end of the season, and he did struggle against the Giants. It's too bad for Packer fans (and football fans) since a truly epic matchup was one play away: Favre, the old gunslinger against undefeated Brady in the Superbowl. I would argue that had Favre convincingly led the Packers to a victory in that game, he would be in the top 3 QBs of all time, possibly perceived as first over time, instead of somewhere down at 7 or 8.

[Patler]

In spite of the early fumbles, Grant was "brilliant" in that game. The character of that game was decided by the Packers running game, and Grant in particular.

I'm not so sure. My recollection could be bad, but I thought the Packers threw the ball to get back in the game. Then, Grant took over. I think Favre was huge in that game. He provided the veteran leadership and made the throws he had to. That first TD drive was huge in that game. It might have been a different game if the Packers had not gotten points there.

I'm NOT discrediting anything Favre did in that game. The first TD drive was mostly all Favre, and it was huge. Grant had just one carry for 4 yards in that drive. But the second TD drive to tie it at 14-14 was mostly Grant. He had carries of 7, 26, 15, 0 and 1(for the TD) in the second drive. Favre had 15 yards passing in that drive in four attempts. To me, Grant shaking off his horrible start, and running like he did in that drive, established the physical presence that the Packers exhibited the rest of the game.

Following the Hasselbeck fumble on the 18, Grant had an 11 yard reception and a 5 yard run, followed by Favre's 2 yard TD to Jennings to make it 21-14.

Seattle came back to make it 21-17, and in the very next drive Grant was 5/25 yards, Jackson 1/6 and Favre picked up 45 passing for a better balanced drive, with Grant again getting the TD on a 3 yard run

Halftime score: 28-17, 2 TDs for Favre, 2 for Grant. 91 yards for Grant, 133 for Favre.

Next Drive (1st in 3rd quarter) - Grant has 30 yards running, Favre has 37 passing and a TD to Jackson.

The 2nd drive, second half, Grant has carries of 4, 43, -1, 2 and 1 for the TD. Favre has 3 yards passing.

Very next possession - Grant has carries of 28, 1, 3 and 0; Favre has no attempts. Jackson took over for Grant at that point.

Grant was pretty well balanced through out the game, with his longest run coming in the second half. He had 14 carries for 91 yards in the first half (with a long of 26), and 13 for 110 yards in the second (with a long of 43).

It wasn't all Favre followed by all Grant by any means.

[HarveyWallbangers]

In spite of the early fumbles, Grant was "brilliant" in that game. The character of that game was decided by the Packers running game, and Grant in particular.

I'm not so sure. My recollection could be bad, but I thought the Packers threw the ball to get back in the game. Then, Grant took over. I think Favre was huge in that game. He provided the veteran leadership and made the throws he had to. That first TD drive was huge in that game. It might have been a different game if the Packers had not gotten points there.

I'm NOT discrediting anything Favre did in that game. The first TD drive was mostly all Favre, and it was huge. Grant had just one carry for 4 yards in that drive. But the second TD drive to tie it at 14-14 was mostly Grant. He had carries of 7, 26, 15, 0 and 1(for the TD) in the second drive. Favre had 15 yards passing in that drive in four attempts. To me, Grant shaking off his horrible start, and running like he did in that drive, established the physical presence that the Packers exhibited the rest of the game.

Following the Hasselbeck fumble on the 18, Grant had an 11 yard reception and a 5 yard run, followed by Favre's 2 yard TD to Jennings to make it 21-14.

Seattle came back to make it 21-17, and in the very next drive Grant was 5/25 yards, Jackson 1/6 and Favre picked up 45 passing for a better balanced drive, with Grant again getting the TD on a 3 yard run

Halftime score: 28-17, 2 TDs for Favre, 2 for Grant. 91 yards for Grant, 133 for Favre.

Next Drive (1st in 3rd quarter) - Grant has 30 yards running, Favre has 37 passing and a TD to Jackson.

After this drive, the game was essentially over.

[Pacopete4]

You all make good points but I want to make a point of, if we dont have #4 all year... we are no where near 14-4 including playoffs. Do we forget the games he won basically carrying GB on his back when they had zero running game? I understand he stunk in the bears games and especially Dallas. But he threw game winning TD passes against KC and DEN back to back weeks AT THEIR PLACE. It's easy to sit back at say how bad he was in the games we lost, but without him.. the season probably was a wash.

I think you're absolutely right. Without Favre, they never would have done what they did. The part I got wrong was that Favre really bought into the system and really made a huge effort to reduce the careless errors. He was like Gannon in 2002 for the Raiders - a coach on the field - and essentially played an MVP season, but he did fade near the end of the season, and he did struggle against the Giants. It's too bad for Packer fans (and football fans) since a truly epic matchup was one play away: Favre, the old gunslinger against undefeated Brady in the Superbowl. I would argue that had Favre convincingly led the Packers to a victory in that game, he would be in the top 3 QBs of all time, possibly perceived as first over time, instead of somewhere down at 7 or 8.



The only part I have to say about that is how can one game determine where he is as a QB all time? I mean look at his 17 year career. I am one who strongly feels that Favre was the most overall talented QB to ever step foot on the football field. I know there are more guys with more rings than him but like the media tries to do is give too much credit when a qb wins and too much blame when they lose.

I love Favre, Elway and Marino as my overall top 3 qb's to ever play this game. They could move, had the guts, were smart and boy could they put a football where they wanted it. Also, they all won a lot of games and hold the top 3 spots in pretty much ever stat category there is. The only way you do that is become a great QB for a real long period of time.

[Cleft Crusty]

The only part I have to say about that is how can one game determine where he is as a QB all time?

Paco,

You have to know that a single game - even a single play can make an entire career. The reason I speculated that a Favre victory over Brady in the Superbowl could have possibly cemented Favre as #1 in many fans' minds is the import of the game and the significance of 1) Favre going against Brady head to head 2) NE being undefeated 3) Brady being MVP and in his prime 4) If Favre wins he has two championships and the final one really would be, as you pointed out, because of him. Look at Namath - a decent QB who had his legendary status generated by one guarantee and one game. Favre's entire career effort gets him in the argument for being the 'best of the best' after Montana, Elway, and Brady (in with the likes of Graham, Marino, and Unitas, etc.)_ but that one huge accomplishment - beating Brady and the best team (arguably EVER) in pro football history, would have put him - with all the records the longevity, the charisma, etc. into consideration for best ever. Give him a play or two in the SB to run on a highlight loop and it's even more certain that 10 years down the road no one would dispute his title as best ever. Sports legends grow and also get consolidated over time into single memorable plays or phrases like The Catch, The Guarantee, The ice Bowl QB sneak, The nicknames (Steel Curtain, etc.). Favre has one title and fair or not, it's just not enough to be considered best ever.

[Pacopete4]

When you rank your QB's are u ranking them as QB's over all or guys that have rings? As much as I love Montana, he dont belong in a category with Favre, Marino, Elway, Moon.. guys that could actually throw. Brady, Montana, Bradshaw are guys, to me, that belong in the "played on a good team, pretty hard to screw up" category. I say that cuz those 3 dont have the talent that Favre, Marino, Elway had in their left arms...

[Cleft Crusty]

As the next matchup with Dallas rapidly approaches, I pull out this article from the archives. I hope to have a new article up by Sunday. As always, post in the Crusty blog if you have questions that need answers, even if you know you won't like the answers you get.




Aaron Rodgers Era Starts Now

The time for the Aaron Rodgers era must start now. Brett Favre is a tremendous quarterback having a tremendous year, but there’s just one fly in the ointment: he cannot and will not win in Dallas. Ever. This bears repeating: In the world of sports where ‘nothing is certain’ and on any given Sunday any team can defeat any other team, the horrible reality for Packer fans is the absolute certainty that they will never see Brett Favre defeat the Cowboys in Texas Stadium. During his tenure as Packer Field General,Favre has developed several bad habits that are all magnified on Cowboy FieldTurf. Most debilitating of these is that somewhere along the line Favre has developed a fear of getting hit. Favre used to relish hard hits; getting jacked up stoked Favre’s competitive fires. Obliterate Favre on a bootleg against Tampa Bay in the 90s and he’d come back three plays later with a TD strike to Antonio Freeman. ,But now, either because of old age, because of accumulated hard hits, or possibly even because there is no comforting vicodin or alcohol buzz to soften the blows, Favre would rather leave the field than take a hit. In the Divisional matchup with Philly in 2003, Favre saw a first down blitz headed his way and chose to bail out, tossing a prayer of a pass high into the still, silent frozen air of Lincoln Financial Field, hoping Irv Favre would somehow guide his errant lob to Javon Walker. The alternative, a devastating sack, was unthinkable. The next year, Favre had an opportunity to launch himself into the end zone against the hated Vikings on a QB scramble - A move he would never have second-guessed in 1994 when he defeated the Atlanta Hawks in the final game at County Stadium. But Favre passed on the run and passed beyond the line of scrimmage. Instead of winning with his feet and heart, Favre bailed out and was charged with a game-changing penalty, disheartening teammates and fans throughout Lambeau Field and PackerNation all over the globe. It was apparent then that the Favre beloved by so many for so many years was no more – he had become a mere specter of his former self, stripped of that unflappable uninhibited playmaker that formerly ruled the NFL. Why bail out on those game changing plays? After all, Elway sold out his body in SB XXXII, why couldn’t Favre do the same when a playoff game was on the line? Perhaps because he had never won it all, the urgency, the hunger was greater for Elway. But for Favre, who has achieved everything a QB can achieve, perhaps the thinking was: “Why get myself killed when I have the SB win, the MVPs, and most of the QB records?” The grit, determination, and willingness to toss himself in the fray for a critical yard, or the readiness to endure the savage sack – all these attributes Favre used to have were apparent not in Brett Favre, but in the vital play of Aaron Rodgers in Dallas last Thursday. Rodgers tossed his body forward and was propellered on a first down scramble, took the big hit in the pocket -and held the ball, and lived to throw another pass. Favre got hit a few times in the first quarter and in lieu of sacks mentally checked out, lobbing up tosses into the Dallas evening sky as though he was conducting pop fly practice for little leaguers.
General Manager Ted Thompson arrived in Green Bay with a philosophy that no veterans were safe from his critical scrutiny. If he thought a position needed an upgrade, he’d go out and get his guy. For him, that guy was Aaron Rodgers. Upgrading Favre was so critical to Thompson that he used his first pick ever as a GM to take him. Now that pick must pay dividends. Rodgers has all the qualities that the young Favre had – he’s fearless, he’ll scramble when necessary and he’ll hang in the pocket and take the massive hit if the pass isn’t open. Favre, on the other hand will reach and try to make the big throw when an easier option is available. Favre even said it himself in his “In their own words” segment that is also included as a DVD in his most recent money-making tome. Favre claims that he’d rather throw the harder pass to the covered receiver “because it’s more challenging.” This attitude had solidified itself in Favre’s psyche like the atherosclerosis in his middle -aged arteries. For a while this year, Packer fans had a respite from this behavior and some were convinced McCarthy had purged these self-destructive tendencies from Favre’s game. But it was a mere façade, and the awful truth is that these tendencies are encoded in Favre DNA and will never be expunged. To be sure, Favre has the ability to continue his great play that has been on display in all non-Bear and non-Cowboy games this year, and he is a better option than Rodgers in all remaining games, including a likely Divisional playoff game at home. But he won’t win in Dallas. Thus, McCarthy and Thompson must make the hard decision and replace Favre now. They can use his injury as an excuse to excuse him from playing. In five games, Rodgers can be groomed to play that all-important game in Dallas and perhaps against New England in the Superbowl. If McCarthy and Thompson don’t make this choice, they and all Packer fans may as well reserve seats for another tragic opera in Texas Stadium. Brett Favre has now had nine performances on that artificial stage and each performance bombed. It’s time for the understudy.

[cpk1994]

When you rank your QB's are u ranking them as QB's over all or guys that have rings? As much as I love Montana, he dont belong in a category with Favre, Marino, Elway, Moon.. guys that could actually throw. Brady, Montana, Bradshaw are guys, to me, that belong in the "played on a good team, pretty hard to screw up" category. I say that cuz those 3 dont have the talent that Favre, Marino, Elway had in their left arms...You truly don't know what you are talking about when you say Montana couldn't throw. You also seem to forget all of Montana's 4th quarter comebacks as well. The rest of your post is BS and doens't dersvre any response.

[mission]

As the next matchup with Dallas rapidly approaches, I pull out this article from the archives. I hope to have a new article up by Sunday. As always, post in the Crusty blog if you have questions that need answers, even if you know you won't like the answers you get.




Aaron Rodgers Era Starts Now

The time for the Aaron Rodgers era must start now. Brett Favre is a tremendous quarterback having a tremendous year, but there’s just one fly in the ointment: he cannot and will not win in Dallas. Ever. This bears repeating: In the world of sports where ‘nothing is certain’ and on any given Sunday any team can defeat any other team, the horrible reality for Packer fans is the absolute certainty that they will never see Brett Favre defeat the Cowboys in Texas Stadium. During his tenure as Packer Field General,Favre has developed several bad habits that are all magnified on Cowboy FieldTurf. Most debilitating of these is that somewhere along the line Favre has developed a fear of getting hit. Favre used to relish hard hits; getting jacked up stoked Favre’s competitive fires. Obliterate Favre on a bootleg against Tampa Bay in the 90s and he’d come back three plays later with a TD strike to Antonio Freeman. ,But now, either because of old age, because of accumulated hard hits, or possibly even because there is no comforting vicodin or alcohol buzz to soften the blows, Favre would rather leave the field than take a hit. In the Divisional matchup with Philly in 2003, Favre saw a first down blitz headed his way and chose to bail out, tossing a prayer of a pass high into the still, silent frozen air of Lincoln Financial Field, hoping Irv Favre would somehow guide his errant lob to Javon Walker. The alternative, a devastating sack, was unthinkable. The next year, Favre had an opportunity to launch himself into the end zone against the hated Vikings on a QB scramble - A move he would never have second-guessed in 1994 when he defeated the Atlanta Hawks in the final game at County Stadium. But Favre passed on the run and passed beyond the line of scrimmage. Instead of winning with his feet and heart, Favre bailed out and was charged with a game-changing penalty, disheartening teammates and fans throughout Lambeau Field and PackerNation all over the globe. It was apparent then that the Favre beloved by so many for so many years was no more – he had become a mere specter of his former self, stripped of that unflappable uninhibited playmaker that formerly ruled the NFL. Why bail out on those game changing plays? After all, Elway sold out his body in SB XXXII, why couldn’t Favre do the same when a playoff game was on the line? Perhaps because he had never won it all, the urgency, the hunger was greater for Elway. But for Favre, who has achieved everything a QB can achieve, perhaps the thinking was: “Why get myself killed when I have the SB win, the MVPs, and most of the QB records?” The grit, determination, and willingness to toss himself in the fray for a critical yard, or the readiness to endure the savage sack – all these attributes Favre used to have were apparent not in Brett Favre, but in the vital play of Aaron Rodgers in Dallas last Thursday. Rodgers tossed his body forward and was propellered on a first down scramble, took the big hit in the pocket -and held the ball, and lived to throw another pass. Favre got hit a few times in the first quarter and in lieu of sacks mentally checked out, lobbing up tosses into the Dallas evening sky as though he was conducting pop fly practice for little leaguers.
General Manager Ted Thompson arrived in Green Bay with a philosophy that no veterans were safe from his critical scrutiny. If he thought a position needed an upgrade, he’d go out and get his guy. For him, that guy was Aaron Rodgers. Upgrading Favre was so critical to Thompson that he used his first pick ever as a GM to take him. Now that pick must pay dividends. Rodgers has all the qualities that the young Favre had – he’s fearless, he’ll scramble when necessary and he’ll hang in the pocket and take the massive hit if the pass isn’t open. Favre, on the other hand will reach and try to make the big throw when an easier option is available. Favre even said it himself in his “In their own words” segment that is also included as a DVD in his most recent money-making tome. Favre claims that he’d rather throw the harder pass to the covered receiver “because it’s more challenging.” This attitude had solidified itself in Favre’s psyche like the atherosclerosis in his middle -aged arteries. For a while this year, Packer fans had a respite from this behavior and some were convinced McCarthy had purged these self-destructive tendencies from Favre’s game. But it was a mere façade, and the awful truth is that these tendencies are encoded in Favre DNA and will never be expunged. To be sure, Favre has the ability to continue his great play that has been on display in all non-Bear and non-Cowboy games this year, and he is a better option than Rodgers in all remaining games, including a likely Divisional playoff game at home. But he won’t win in Dallas. Thus, McCarthy and Thompson must make the hard decision and replace Favre now. They can use his injury as an excuse to excuse him from playing. In five games, Rodgers can be groomed to play that all-important game in Dallas and perhaps against New England in the Superbowl. If McCarthy and Thompson don’t make this choice, they and all Packer fans may as well reserve seats for another tragic opera in Texas Stadium. Brett Favre has now had nine performances on that artificial stage and each performance bombed. It’s time for the understudy.

Well written and insightful. Hard to argue with the mentality side of it ... it's kinda like people asking what happened to Eminem (lol sorry about the rap reference). Nothing happened, he just got rich and fat, it's hard to be so pissed off and fired up when you got it all already.

[Scott Campbell]

When you rank your QB's are u ranking them as QB's over all or guys that have rings? As much as I love Montana, he dont belong in a category with Favre, Marino, Elway, Moon.. guys that could actually throw. Brady, Montana, Bradshaw are guys, to me, that belong in the "played on a good team, pretty hard to screw up" category. I say that cuz those 3 dont have the talent that Favre, Marino, Elway had in their left arms...You truly don't know what you are talking about when you say Montana couldn't throw. You also seem to forget all of Montana's 4th quarter comebacks as well. The rest of your post is BS and doens't dersvre any response.



Man. Montana played on a good team. Well, yeah, once he got there it became a great team. But prior to his arrival they were the 70's equivalent of the Millen led Lions.

Anybody that says something like this obviously isn't old enough to have watched him play.

[mraynrand]

Man. Montana played on a good team. Well, yeah, once he got there it became a great team. But prior to his arrival they were the 70's equivalent of the Millen led Lions.

Anybody that says something like this obviously isn't old enough to have watched him play.

Montana absolutely took teams apart. One mitigating factor is that teams hadn't seen that kind of an offense - but that's early - 1981-1984. by then, defenses were catching on. You want to see great QB play - watch Joe at Chicago in that terribly cold weather against a very good defense in 1988 (actually Jan 1989) in the NFC Championship. That's when it matters most. When it's cold as hell and you want to get to the Superbowl.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Interesting comments from Brett.


Favre actually allowed for the possibility that one of his former Green Bay receivers was correct in saying his belief that current Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers can throw the football with greater velocity than Favre can. "That might be true now," Favre told me. "Heck, I'm almost 40 years old. But I will tell you this: I could throw it harder than him when I was his age. And what does it matter? If you're throwing the ball 70 yards down the field, it's usually a Hail Mary, and that's not usually what you want to be doing."


When asked by Ed Werder, "Does it bother you to see the Packers having success without you."

Brett shrugs his shoulders, "After two games? After 16 give me a call."

Neither of these comments are horribly bad, but I think it's best for Brett to just move on--because to me he sounds a little bitter.

I hope this doesn't bring up old wounds and start another Favre-Thompson flame war, but I found the comments interesting and I'm just trying to give my take.

[boiga]

Neither of these comments are horribly bad, but I think it's best for Brett to just move on--because to me he sounds a little bitter.

I hope this doesn't bring up old wounds and start another Favre-Thompson flame war, but I found the comments interesting and I'm just trying to give my take.
I know what you mean. There were some other comments of his about Rodgers' talent and the quality of the over all Packers team that Rodgers "inherited" that sounded bitter to me as well.

But, honestly, the Favre situation was an emotional breakup and a little bit of bitterness won't do either side any harm. Hopefully in the end he'll come back home to us and we'll be a family again. Brett's the Packer's ex, and while some bitterness will always remain, he'll still come back for holidays and special occasions, you know, for the ki.... ahem, for the fans' sake.

[cpk1994]

Interesting comments from Brett.


Favre actually allowed for the possibility that one of his former Green Bay receivers was correct in saying his belief that current Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers can throw the football with greater velocity than Favre can. "That might be true now," Favre told me. "Heck, I'm almost 40 years old. But I will tell you this: I could throw it harder than him when I was his age. And what does it matter? If you're throwing the ball 70 yards down the field, it's usually a Hail Mary, and that's not usually what you want to be doing."


When asked by Ed Werder, "Does it bother you to see the Packers having success without you."

Brett shrugs his shoulders, "After two games? After 16 give me a call."

Neither of these comments are horribly bad, but I think it's best for Brett to just move on--because to me he sounds a little bitter.

I hope this doesn't bring up old wounds and start another Favre-Thompson flame war, but I found the comments interesting and I'm just trying to give my take.He certainly is bitter, and a little egotistical too.

[Scott Campbell]

His comments have sounded consistently bitter. He sounds bitter because his is bitter. I doubt that will change. The only difference will come when he decides to stop talking about it. But I doubt that would change how he truly feels about it - bitter.

The sad thing for Brett is that if had stayed retired, he could have enjoyed the success of the team. He was part of building it. But if the Packers and Jets continue on their current trajectories, the NY media will continue to throw the Packers success in his face. And he won't feel good about that.

[HarveyWallbangers]

He certainly is bitter, and a little egotistical too.

This is the response I was hoping we wouldn't get. Now, you sound like the bitter one.
:D

[mission]

He certainly is bitter, and a little egotistical too.

This is the response I was hoping we wouldn't get. Now, you sound like the bitter one.
:D

But if we take the blinders off a little bit, I feel it's exactly that. Bitterness mixed with a fair amount of ego. That's not to say none or all of it is undeserved. But it's there, can't deny that.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I caught that Werder interview.

Brett's body language and facial expression....there is no disputing his bitterness.

It was like talking to someone and letting them know that their ex is happy and getting married.

[mraynrand]

I caught that Werder interview.

Brett's body language and facial expression....there is no disputing his bitterness.

It was like talking to someone and letting them know that their ex is happy and getting married.

You're right on the ball with this one - again. Favre screwed it up - had he been on board from the beginning of the year - fired up to be with this up and coming team, he'd still be at the helm. It's gotta burn him. But, no more than tossing another unforced error to lose yet another NFC championship.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I caught that Werder interview.

Brett's body language and facial expression....there is no disputing his bitterness.

It was like talking to someone and letting them know that their ex is happy and getting married.

You're right on the ball with this one - again. Favre screwed it up - had he been on board from the beginning of the year - fired up to be with this up and coming team, he'd still be at the helm. It's gotta burn him. But, no more than tossing another unforced error to lose yet another NFC championship.

Yeah, brett is the spouse that wanted the separation...be it for real or trial. Then, when he decided that living on his own wasn't so great he wants back with his ex. However, the ex has discovered that even though the past was great and couldn't imagine a life without him....there does exist life without him.

The ex has moved on...and all brett can do is look longingly at the ex and think about how great it was. Even as he settles into his new relationship..sometimes, when the lites are dark..he imagines she is his old flame.

In honor of this...cheezy am gold by Paul Davis:

I realize that I was blind
Just when I thought I was over you
I see your face and it just ain't true
No it just ain't true

I go crazy
When I look in your eyes I still go crazy
That old flame comes alive, it starts burning inside
Way deep down inside
Oh baby, you know when I look in your eyes I go crazy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L886mjb0O8

[mraynrand]

classic.

[cpk1994]

He certainly is bitter, and a little egotistical too.

This is the response I was hoping we wouldn't get. Now, you sound like the bitter one.
:D

But if we take the blinders off a little bit, I feel it's exactly that. Bitterness mixed with a fair amount of ego. That's not to say none or all of it is undeserved. But it's there, can't deny that.Yep.

[SnakeLH2006]

He certainly is bitter, and a little egotistical too.

This is the response I was hoping we wouldn't get. Now, you sound like the bitter one.
:D

But if we take the blinders off a little bit, I feel it's exactly that. Bitterness mixed with a fair amount of ego. That's not to say none or all of it is undeserved. But it's there, can't deny that.Yep.

Don't get your jollies up as solid poster yet CPK. I've let up on you, but realize this your mom loves me. I don't recripocate that, but the head is awesome as she's payed back numerous Poker debts for me. I LUV THAT. As up as you are, just know there are sharks like me flying.

http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn2/swertel/FlyingSharks.jpg

[gex]

He certainly is bitter, and a little egotistical too.

This is the response I was hoping we wouldn't get. Now, you sound like the bitter one.
:D

Yep.

[esoxx]

Hopefully I'll go out with a hard-on.