No open competition...

[mission]

we KNOW this team isn't a super bowl team.

we didnt go to it last year and definitely didnt deserve it even if we had stumbled ass backwards into the super bowl. we had every chance to win that game 10 times and didnt ...

So none of that was because we had an extremely young, inexperienced roster mostly going through a playoff run for the first time?

We didn't go, so we should just scrap the whole thing and start over?

We went into overtime with the eventual SB winner. How can you say there is no chance the Packers could make a SB run in 2008?

Because this season, with Favre and all this distraction bullshit, is not BUILDING on last season.

Rodgers is a step forward (even if it's two steps back out of the gate) ... but Favre is not going to be *better* this season, it's not like his intense off season training and preparation has him ready to step it up an extra notch this season. Everything went right last season for us to be in that position ... everything, as I shouldnt have to explain, is not going right this season thus far.

If anything, I feel like his gunslinger, anything-goes mentality would be as pronounced this season as its ever been. Just to show everyone up ...

Fuck. It'll be just like those glorious Sherman years. Man, those were awesome.

[The Leaper]

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not Rodgers justifies the confidence in him. If he does, none of this will matter.

Yeah, I agree.

However...that's also partly my point. You KNOW Rodgers is going to have hiccups...he's a first time starter in the league. We aren't going to know for sure that Rodgers was worthy of the decision for quite awhile.

If he struggles in the meantime, and Favre is sitting there in camp...it ain't going to be good for Green Bay.

[The Leaper]

Because this season, with Favre and all this distraction bullshit, is not BUILDING on last season.

Neither is going with a first time starter. Just when the rest of your team gains valuable experience, you stick a guy out there in the most important spot who has none.

The situation is mess regardless at this point. I'm not sure any real good can be salvaged from this. In that respect, I can see your point.

[texaspackerbacker]

Because Thompson, McCarthy, Murphy, a large share of the players, and probably even most of our posters here KNOW that the team is better off with Rodgers at QB.

Really?

Evidence?

Well --

we KNOW this team isn't a super bowl team.

we didnt go to it last year and definitely didnt deserve it even if we had stumbled ass backwards into the super bowl. we had every chance to win that game 10 times and didnt ...

can you argue with the fact rodgers can AT LEAST *not* get us to the super bowl?

by standard logic, we're even there ... at least there's a *chance* that the outcome is different.

either we dont make it to the super bowl (that we know) or we do (that *could* happen)

this might sound stupidly obvious but think about it ... we already know the result of one path.

might as well try the other one and see where that road takes us...

thanks, drive thru.

we're outta fries.

Mission, I don't know you well enough to know if this is just a bunch of sarcasm, or if you really believe all that silly shit. "Stumbling ass backwards" into the Super Bowl? Uh that would be the Giants.

This Packer team is absolutely loaded with talent surrounding Rodgers. He doesn't have to be a superstar. All he has to do is not make a bunch of mistakes and lose games--as the Favre of two years ago did/as the Favre of this year--without the max preparation he did in '07 likely might.

As for "evidence", Thompson and McCarthy are pretty clearly on record saying just that. Several of the players have spoken out--mildly and tactfully, but gotten the point across. And reading the posts (and I think a couple of polls) in here indicates that well over half prefer that Favre be retired or a backup.

And as for Favre "holding the upper hand", no way in hell that is true--assuming the Packers are willing to cough up that $12 million for him to be a backup/insurance policy.

[Patler]

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not Rodgers justifies the confidence in him. If he does, none of this will matter.

Yeah, I agree.

However...that's also partly my point. You KNOW Rodgers is going to have hiccups...he's a first time starter in the league. We aren't going to know for sure that Rodgers was worthy of the decision for quite awhile.

If he struggles in the meantime, and Favre is sitting there in camp...it ain't going to be good for Green Bay.

A hiccup or two along the way won't mean much. Favre had those every year, as do most QBs. Rodgers needs to start out well, and have an overall good season. That's all. Of course many fans will remember only the "good Favre" and compare him only to the "bad Rodgers" as long as Favre is still around anywhere. Heck, some still haven't let go of Javon Walker!

[mission]

Because this season, with Favre and all this distraction bullshit, is not BUILDING on last season.

Neither is going with a first time starter. Just when the rest of your team gains valuable experience, you stick a guy out there in the most important spot who has none.

The situation is mess regardless at this point. I'm not sure any real good can be salvaged from this. In that respect, I can see your point.

That's what I'm sayin bruh.

Kind of a lesser of two evils thing.

As adament as Ive been the last couple weeks here, Im not stupid enough to think Rodgers is going to hop out and make us forget about Brett from Day One.

Obviously not. I just kind feel that "ok, brett comes back, we have a decent season" and then what?

Back to this again. At some point, we gotta get the hiccups you described out of the way and I'm not necessarily the biggest thinker that you need a Peyton Manning to win a super bowl.

Just a Dilfer... Brad Johnson... Eli...

Good defense, great receivers, improving line, great special teams ... a quarterback who can throw 6-8 yard passes all day and listens to his coach intently.

I dunno, I'm an armchair just like all of us, but that doesnt sound like such a bad deal (especially to BUILD ON).

We arent "building on" Brett at this point.

[Partial]

Settle it with a QB competition and man-off. Favre wins both hands down.

I'm wasnt exactly sure what a man-off was, so I hit up the urban dictionary, and yeah....its exactly what I thought it was.

1. man off

To masturbate, or to otherwise do something private and/or embarrassing.
Anthony: Steve, your a douche, why don't you just go man off in the corner.


P, you are turning into the forum douchebag. The one even people who agree with you skip over his posts. Gratz.

Whatever man. I had no idea thats what I man off was. I meant manly things like flexing muscles, impressing chicks, drinking beer, hunting deer, chasing bears, etc.


This whole thing is ridiculous. It's a shameful time to be a Packer fan, watching a once great organization bite its thumb at the player who made it what it was.

[boiga]

We arent "building on" Brett at this point.

Mission got to the crux of the issue right here.

If Brett comes back, the quality at the qb position will likely be in decline over the course of the season. With Rodgers, we will see improvement, progress, etc. That is why the Coaches think that Rodgers could be better for the team this year than Brett. By week 15, rodgers will still be a young improving quarterback, while Brett simply looked old and worn down at that stage.

[Partial]

This is more about "winning more games this season" than being "fair" by a long shot.

Really?

Then why isn't Favre the QB?

I already posted this in another thread, but I believe it's the answer I'd give here so I'll just c/p myself.

In the interest of complete honesty, I believe that in order for the Packers to win another Superbowl, we will have to have a QB that plays well in at least most of the following:

1) The Snow.
2) The Cold.
3) The Wind.
4) Dallas.

Last year, Favre saw all four conditions, played well in one of them (snow) and very poorly in the other three, so he's batting .250. Rodgers only got to see one of those conditions (Dallas), but be played very well.

So I'm not personally convinced that Favre is the best QB for the Packers in 2008. He probably would be the QB that wins the most games in September through November, but I'm not sure I trust him in the playoffs, in bad weather, or on the road in big games.

If I had seen Favre play well in extreme conditions or big games last year, I would be much more excited about having him back. As it stands, I'm worried that if Favre were annointed the starter we could win 11-12 games, but if we have to go to Dallas or if we have a home playoff game in adverse conditions, he just can't get us over the hump.

Last time I checked A-Rod didn't win in Dallas. Last time I checked Favre had 2 touchdowns and played a near perfect game in the snow of Lambeau.

Last time I checked the "cold" happened to be the coldest game in NFL history. Last time I checked he had the team of destiny reeling, and almost beat them. Didn't that game go into overtime!?!? Seems like it was a nail biter to me, and certainly not a typical "cold" game. We'll never see a game anywhere near that cold again.

Last time I checked it wasn't Favre fumbling punts or having them blocked and returned for Touchdowns. When you're down by 14+ points, you've got to start chucking the rock and trying to make things happen.

You all blame Favre for all these losses. I don't understand why. It's a TEAM game. Favre is the one that drives the engine.

Last time I checked Rodgers hasn't started a game, played well enough in a game to win, or has ever won a game. Favre won 14 more games than Aaron did last year. GMAFB.

Dallas was the most star stacked team in the league last year with half their starters being in the pro-bowl. Unfortunately, we started out badly against a great team on the road. A-Rod had the benefit of them not changing their gameplan to account for his scrambling.

We lost to the best team in the NFL in overtime of the championship game. Horrendous, I know.

Favre also single-handedly lost to the Bears both times!! Not MM for callign bad games. Not RG for not holding onto the rock. Not the punter for scoring points for the Bears!

[Chevelle2]

This is more about "winning more games this season" than being "fair" by a long shot.

Really?

Then why isn't Favre the QB?

Maybe because every time Rodgers has gotten the chance, he has outplayed Favre.

I was at the Packer/Patriot game 2 years ago.........Rodgers didn't outplay Favre, Rodgers broke his foot.

Favre didn't finish the game.

[Zool]

This whole thing is ridiculous. It's a shameful time to be a Packer fan, watching a once great organization bite its thumb at the player who made it what it was.

You might be living a little too much for a sports team. Just a thought.

[BallHawk]

Last time I checked A-Rod didn't win in Dallas. Last time I checked Favre had 2 touchdowns and played a near perfect game in the snow of Lambeau.

Last time I checked the "cold" happened to be the coldest game in NFL history. Last time I checked he had the team of destiny reeling, and almost beat them. Didn't that game go into overtime!?!? Seems like it was a nail biter to me, and certainly not a typical "cold" game. We'll never see a game anywhere near that cold again.

Last time I checked it wasn't Favre fumbling punts or having them blocked and returned for Touchdowns. When you're down by 14+ points, you've got to start chucking the rock and trying to make things happen.

You all blame Favre for all these losses. I don't understand why. It's a TEAM game. Favre is the one that drives the engine.

Last time I checked Rodgers hasn't started a game, played well enough in a game to win, or has ever won a game. Favre won 14 more games than Aaron did last year. GMAFB.

Dallas was the most star stacked team in the league last year with half their starters being in the pro-bowl. Unfortunately, we started out badly against a great team on the road. A-Rod had the benefit of them not changing their gameplan to account for his scrambling.

We lost to the best team in the NFL in overtime of the championship game. Horrendous, I know.

Favre also single-handedly lost to the Bears both times!! Not MM for callign bad games. Not RG for not holding onto the rock. Not the punter for scoring points for the Bears!

1. Nobody's saying Favre played bad against Seattle. Don't know what your point is there.

2. Yes, it wasn't Favre's fault on the punts, but we were backed up in our red zone each time. He wasn't moving the ball. That's also down on Grant and the rest of the offense, but when cold weather comes Favre just gets the "anywhere else but here" loook.

3. Rodgers played well enough to beat Dallas. Look at his stats against Dallas and then look at Favre's stats against Seattle (a near perfect game, as you said). Completions are equal, Aaron has more yardage, Favre has two more TDs, although it is worth mentioning that Aaron led the Packers to score on 2 of their first 3 drives. Add in an 18/26 passing performance with 200 yards and you cannot deny that's good enough to win the football game. You can't deny that, Partial, or at least you'd be foolish not to. Our defense lost us that game. And Favre's two early INTs didn't help.

4. And great job of contradicting yourself, P. You said

He's not a dual-threat quarterback by any stretch of the imagination. How did this fallacy come about?

He's average speed

Now, why would it matter if Dallas didn't gameplan for a QB that "Is not a dual-threat and has average speed?"

Make up your mind, P. You're making yourself look foolish.

Game. Set. Match.

[packinpatland]

This is more about "winning more games this season" than being "fair" by a long shot.

Really?

Then why isn't Favre the QB?

Maybe because every time Rodgers has gotten the chance, he has outplayed Favre.

I was at the Packer/Patriot game 2 years ago.........Rodgers didn't outplay Favre, Rodgers broke his foot.

Favre didn't finish the game.

Yes, I know that. You made the point that ARod 'outplayed' Favre......
Favre got hurt, Rodgers went in. Packers still lost..........

[mmmdk]

This whole thing is ridiculous. It's a shameful time to be a Packer fan, watching a once great organization bite its thumb at the player who made it what it was.

You might be living a little too much for a sports team. Just a thought.

Green Bay Packers Est. 1921

[BallHawk]

Yes, I know that. You made the point that ARod 'outplayed' Favre......Favre got hurt, Rodgers went in. Packers still lost..........

You think the fact that Favre threw 2 INTs and the defense allowed 37 points was part of the reason we lost?

Aaron did all you could of asked of him. He put us in a position to win the game after Favre crippled our chances of winning. Unfortunately, the defense just couldn't hold up.