Would Favre have all records now if...

[packers11]

He played in a dome???

"(Manning himself has shrugged off some of his records, telling friends that he thinks Brett Favre would hold the single-season touchdown pass mark if he played in a dome.)"

Playing in a dome does let you throw the ball a lot better because there is no conditions to affect your pass... But Favre historically does good in bad weather...

Interesting say the least...

Thoughts???

[Brandon494]

Are you kidding me? Favre is horrible in domes.

[oregonpackfan]

I agree it is an interesting thought. There is certainly more passing for a Dome game than a game played in the pour rain or snow.

Passing well during inclement weather may partly be a mindset. Besides Favre playing well in bad weather, I remember Lynn Dickey passing very well in the infamous "Snow Bowl" against Tampa Bay.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I actually studied this pretty closely. Playing in Green Bay has hurt Favre. Probably not quite to the extent that some make it out to be, but I figure by 1/2 way into last season, Favre would have had all of the records if he had played in better climate or dome--when you study his stats in good weather compared to inclimate weather. It definitely helps Manning, but having Harrison and Wayne have helped him even more.

[packinpatland]

I hate 'what if's'. Alot like 'why me's'

Waste of time.

[Patler]

I actually studied this pretty closely. Playing in Green Bay has hurt Favre. Probably not quite to the extent that some make it out to be, but I figure by 1/2 way into last season, Favre would have had all of the records if he had played in better climate or dome--when you study his stats in good weather compared to inclimate weather. It definitely helps Manning, but having Harrison and Wayne have helped him even more.

Had Favre not come to GB, not played for Holmgren, Mariucci, and Reid and not been in the total small town football absorbed atmosphere of GB, he may never have evolved past what he was his rookie year.

I have often wondered if he could have become what he has anywhere else. GB seems to suit him well.

[packinpatland]

I actually studied this pretty closely. Playing in Green Bay has hurt Favre. Probably not quite to the extent that some make it out to be, but I figure by 1/2 way into last season, Favre would have had all of the records if he had played in better climate or dome--when you study his stats in good weather compared to inclimate weather. It definitely helps Manning, but having Harrison and Wayne have helped him even more.

Had Favre not come to GB, not played for Holmgren, Mariucci, and Reid and not been in the total small town football absorbed atmosphere of GB, he may never have evolved past what he was his rookie year.

I have often wondered if he could have become what he has anywhere else. GB seems to suit him well.

Now, this is a 'what if' that I don't mind dwelling on. :)

[HarveyWallbangers]

Well, I guess I needed to be more clear for some people. If you look at his stats, playing in "the climate" in Green Bay hurt Favre's stats to the tune of approximately a 1/2 year's worth of stats--if you adjusted his stats for the inclimate weather games to something similar to his stats in non-inclimate weather games.

I thought this was a discussion of how much playing in inclimate weather affects players compared to those that play in ideal weather or domes.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Are you kidding me? Favre is horrible in domes.

Not really. The team lost a lot of games at Dallas and at Minnesota for awhile, but that's outdated. His career passer rating is actually higher in a Dome than at Lambeau.

[packinpatland]

Are you kidding me? Favre is horrible in domes.

Not really. The team lost a lot of games at Dallas and at Minnesota for awhile, but that's outdated. His career passer rating is actually higher in a Dome than at Lambeau.

And then there's that Super Bowl......................in a dome. :)

[GBRulz]

If he had a GM that actually went out and got him some weapons, the records would have been shattered by now. Imagine his stats if he had a Wayne/Harrison like duo. I'd say that would be a more deciding factor vs if he had played in a dome or not.

[Patler]

Well, I guess I needed to be more clear for some people. If you look at his stats, playing in "the climate" in Green Bay hurt Favre's stats to the tune of approximately a 1/2 year's worth of stats--if you adjusted his stats for the inclimate weather games to something similar to his stats in non-inclimate weather games.

I thought this was a discussion of how much playing in inclimate weather affects players compared to those that play in ideal weather or domes.

I guess I need to be more clear for some people. My point is simply, its not worth debating. For every, "what if he hadn't..." there is a "what if he had..." that cancels it out. If he hadn't played in Green Bay, he would have had to play somewhere else. Weather aside, he might have been worse.

Did you factor in how bad he has been at times in domes?
How about hot weather, if he had been in the south?
Or were you just assuming picture-perfect football weather 16 games each year in an outdoor stadium like GB?

[Patler]

If he had a GM that actually went out and got him some weapons, the records would have been shattered by now. Imagine his stats if he had a Wayne/Harrison like duo. I'd say that would be a more deciding factor vs if he had played in a dome or not.

What if he had played with better defenses, so the other team didn't have the ball so long?

But then, the Packers would have been ahead, and would have passed less!

[Partial]

Are you kidding me? Favre is horrible in domes.

Not really. The team lost a lot of games at Dallas and at Minnesota for awhile, but that's outdated. His career passer rating is actually higher in a Dome than at Lambeau.

How can that be? I can think of a few real stinkers in the domes.

[CaliforniaCheez]

What if:

1) Terrence Murphy had not been injured.

2) An OG was draft with the first pick in 2005 instead of Rodgers.

3) Someone other than Ray Rhodes had been hired in 99.

4) Mike Holmgren had been more patient and taken over GM duties from Wolf instead of Sherman.

5) Dan Marino retired a year earlier.

6) Robert Brooks didn't suffer his knee injury.

7) Sterling had not suffered his injury.

8) Chris Chambers had been drafted instead of Ferguson.

9) Mike Wahle had not been cut.

10) An RB other than Davenport had been drafted.


That is a lot of "what if's" for which there is no correct or sure answer.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Are you kidding me? Favre is horrible in domes.

Not really. The team lost a lot of games at Dallas and at Minnesota for awhile, but that's outdated. His career passer rating is actually higher in a Dome than at Lambeau.

How can that be? I can think of a few real stinkers in the domes.

He's also had some of his best games in Domes. Many at Detroit, recently at Minnesota, both games at Indianapolis he had great stats. Two of his three best games last year were in domes (Detroit, Minnesota). Three of his five dome games in 2004 he had QB rating of 102.6 or higher (Detroit, Indianapolis, Minnesota). Two of his three dome games in 2003 he had QB rating of 104.7 or higher (St. Louis and Minnesota). His best game in 2000 was a dome game (Detroit).

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/1025/splits;_ylt=AnC5Um7CDgtSR8j_ouOAzUb.uLYF?year=care er

88.7 indoors
87.1 at home
85.6 outdoors
67.5 in frigid temps
80.6 in cold temps

[PackerBlues]

I just wanted to put my two cents worth in here.

I shoot a lot of pool. I usually play on a regular 6' bar table. Once in a while, I get to shoot on a 9' table of far better quality than the old bar table. Before I can start shooting consistant on the larger table, it takes time to adjust my stroke, and get the angles down. Then, no matter what the size of the different table, you have to get used to the speed of the table.
I imagine, that going from playing in Lambeau field to a dome would be very much the same. Due to the turf being artificial, the speed and timing of routes could easily be thrown off. Complete lack of wind could cause the ball to carry more than you are used to. Whatever.
Sometimes when I switch from a 6' table to a 9' table, I am able to adjust my game within minutes. Other times, it takes far more time. On the flip side, when I go back to a 6' table from a 9', my shots become more precise, and the game becomes almost to easy.
I am not trying to make excuses for Favre at all, I am just pointing out something that I didnt see anyone else mention in the thread. There is a huge difference between playing QB in a dome, and playing QB outside in the elements. Sometimes adjusting your game will come quickly, other times you may struggle with your timing for a lot longer period of time than you may like.

[Merlin]

IF Favre played in a dome for at least 8 games a season (at home), his stats would be better then they are. It's a fact that the weather has a lot to do with the game. Kickers, QB's, RB's, DL, all benefit from being indoors. More speed, no weather, better traction, etc.

Face it, Favre plays football the way it was meant to be played, balls out, outdoors.

[SudsMcBucky]

What if:

1) Terrence Murphy had not been injured.

2) An OG was draft with the first pick in 2005 instead of Rodgers.

3) Someone other than Ray Rhodes had been hired in 99.

4) Mike Holmgren had been more patient and taken over GM duties from Wolf instead of Sherman.

5) Dan Marino retired a year earlier.

6) Robert Brooks didn't suffer his knee injury.

7) Sterling had not suffered his injury.

8) Chris Chambers had been drafted instead of Ferguson.

9) Mike Wahle had not been cut.

10) An RB other than Davenport had been drafted.


That is a lot of "what if's" for which there is no correct or sure answer.

You forgot one "what if".....what if Sherminator had gone for it on 4th and 1? BF may just have a 2nd SB ring..... :(

[Bretsky]

What if:

1) Terrence Murphy had not been injured.

2) An OG was draft with the first pick in 2005 instead of Rodgers.

3) Someone other than Ray Rhodes had been hired in 99.

4) Mike Holmgren had been more patient and taken over GM duties from Wolf instead of Sherman.

5) Dan Marino retired a year earlier.

6) Robert Brooks didn't suffer his knee injury.

7) Sterling had not suffered his injury.

8) Chris Chambers had been drafted instead of Ferguson.

9) Mike Wahle had not been cut.

10) An RB other than Davenport had been drafted.


That is a lot of "what if's" for which there is no correct or sure answer.

You forgot one "what if".....what if Sherminator had gone for it on 4th and 1? BF may just have a 2nd SB ring..... :(


OMG; LOVE THAT AVATAR !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[esoxx]

The easy answer is.... Yes.

[Little Whiskey]

i'll bet you i could catch more fish or shoot a bigger buck if i hunted and fished indoors too. logistics be damned!!

[Creepy]

Yes, if had James running when he started as a rookie. Yes, if he had Marvin Harriosn, Clark and the other Colts receivers. Yes, if had played QB like manning in college and in his early years in the NFL.

The truth is no. The only team that could have given him half a chance to do it was the 49ers. They are the only team who ran a WC offnese and had the receivers Brett would need to make that record. Problem is that neither Walsh or Siefert would have let him throw as much as he has in GB.

Let Manning have his record and let Brett have his.