OFFICIAL BRETT THE LIVING LEGEND THREAD

[mraynrand]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

That's not a bad point. It's pretty rare to come back from that kind of deficit. Rodgers should get a ton of credit for it.

I don't really want to revisit that St. Louis game all that much, but suffice it to say the the Packer O-line didn't show up - the running game was putrid, pass defense was marginal - and the Packers starting wide receivers were so awful that neither of them was on the roster the next fall.

[DannoMac21]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

That's not a bad point. It's pretty rare to come back from that kind of deficit. Rodgers should get a ton of credit for it.

I don't really want to revisit that St. Louis game all that much, but suffice it to say the the Packer O-line didn't show up - the running game was putrid, pass defense was marginal - and the Packers starting wide receivers were so awful that neither of them was on the roster the next fall.

I'd love to revisit some games. Suffice it to say, the Packer O-Line didn't show up for most of the season, the running game was putrid against Arizona, the WHOLE defense was below marginal (in the Arizona game).

[Joemailman]

In regards to the St. Louis playoff game in which Favre turned the ball over 6 times and most of them were allegedly when the game was out of hand I have to be happy we have Rodgers as our QB even more. When we were down 31-10 most would agree the game was out of hand. Does Rodgers start chucking up 40 yard bombs to nobody that get picked off though? No, he leads his team all the way back to tie the game and give them a chance to win it.

That's not a bad point. It's pretty rare to come back from that kind of deficit. Rodgers should get a ton of credit for it.

Rodgers nearly did what Favre has never done - lead a team to a win after trailing by 17 points or more. Favre's record when he/his team get off to a really bad start is not particularly good (The playoff game in the snow against Seattle being a notable exception). Rodgers' calm in the Arizona game was quite impressive, especially considering how poorly the Packer defense was playing. It must have been frustrating to put up a score and then have the defense give it back just as quickly.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Missing an open receiver on a 40 yd pass is bad, but its not an automatic play under any circumstance. Especially when you have had to step up a yard or two in the pocket under pressure.

Rodgers misses an open receiver, but throws it to the opposite side the defender was on (e.g. no chance for an int, live another play).

Contrast that to Favre's interceptions late in three NFC title games (Dallas, Giants, Minnesota) and once earlier in the playoffs (Philadelphia).

I'd take the former.

[packerbacker1234]

Missing an open receiver on a 40 yd pass is bad, but its not an automatic play under any circumstance. Especially when you have had to step up a yard or two in the pocket under pressure.

Rodgers misses an open receiver, but throws it to the opposite side the defender was on (e.g. no chance for an int, live another play).

Contrast that to Favre's interceptions late in three NFC title games (Dallas, Giants, Minnesota) and once earlier in the playoffs (Philadelphia).

I'd take the former.

All 4 losses. I'll take a win instead.

[RashanGary]

I like Rodgers big-game steadiness more than I liked Favre's big-game spazes. Time will be the only teller though. We've got a wide open, multi-year window for a (or several) championship(s).

The way Rodgers has played since coming here, just in terms of being a winning QB, if he gets one championship and continues his play, I put him on equal footing with Favre as an overall QB. If he gets more than one championship, I put him passed Favre. Favre played many, many, many years. He's been incredibly durable. Both of those qualities make him unique. But just playing winning QB, especially post-season QB, I think Rodgers has a chance to be better (ie win championships, rather than choke them away).

[Merlin]

Rodgers didn't choke the game away? He brought us back from a deficit? A deficit his play put us in?

He is better than Favre if he wins more than one championship?

Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

WOW, talk about homerism. Rodgers has been in 1, count them 1 playoff game and he isn't solely responsible for the loss but Favre is for all of his playoff losses? ARE YOU SERIOUS?

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's. You may not like Favre now but I promise you that all those years he was winning games for us, your attitude was a lot different.

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy. This is the mindless crap that keeps people from coming back here. It's one thing to state opinion, it's entirely another to have an opinion that has no supporting evidence unless you really slant reality to make it fit.

[RashanGary]

Look at Favre's playoff record and count the rings on his fingers. He hasn't been as good as you want to remember him.

Rodgers has come out and put up record numbers for 1st and 2nd year starter. He's showed a calm and steadiness that reminds you more of Tom Brady and Joe Montana than Jay Cutler or Brett Favre.

He's got a chance to win some big games on this good team. Sorry, but the way he played last year, especially down the stretch. I like it better than what we were used to. I think we have a better chance to win a championship with Rodgers and I don't think we'll need the #1 ST's and #1 defense to do it.

[mraynrand]

WOW, talk about homerism. Rodgers has been in 1, count them 1 playoff game and he isn't solely responsible for the loss but Favre is for all of his playoff losses? ARE YOU SERIOUS?

With a couple of exceptions, people weren't placing sole blame for any of the losses on Favre or Rodgers. The discussion was centered around the nature of the turnovers, with one critical point of debate being: Were they forced or unforced errors? With Rodgers, we have one playoff game to look at and with Favre we have a whole career worth. Favre threw (at least) 4 extraordinarily costly (game changing/ending) unforced INTs (3 in NFCC games and 1 in a Divisional game). The consensus is that these errors by Favre are far worse than Rodger's errors in his one playoff game. The hope is that Rodgers will have better luck in the future and (for many) that if Favre comes back to play for the Vikings, he will have more horrible INTs in the future (at least speaking for me ).

And as always, if the Favre discussion turns you off, don't click on the thread with 'Favre' in the title.

[Administrator]

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy. This is the mindless crap that keeps people from coming back here. It's one thing to state opinion, it's entirely another to have an opinion that has no supporting evidence unless you really slant reality to make it fit.

What? I put all the Favre discussion in a thread labeled "FAVRE" and no one comes here because people have opinions on Favre? Huh?

Merlin, you have to let people have a point of view. Honestly, what I read in the above, is, "If you don't let my point of view be the ONLY point of view and be unchallenged, I refuse to patronize this site".

If that's the way it's gotta be, then I guess, that's the way it's gotta be. You can only do so much to control what people say. This whole site is based on people's opinions. If we didn't talk about that, there wouldn't be very much to say, now would there?

Your opinions are welcome, but so are others.

[Tarlam!]

You may not like Favre now but I promise you that all those years he was winning games for us, your attitude was a lot different.

Actually, no, that's very innaccurate for this site. Favre was ripped for his bonehead throws everytime around here. His prima ballerina attitude has been ripped around here. His commitment to the team has been ripped around here. All this ripping was when he was the Packers' QB.

As much ripping as there has always been, posters have defended him just as passionately. In those discussions, it was the Favre defenders that were labelled homers.

The venom that found its way into the discussion is due to his final acts as a Packer and ultimately, his playing for the "hated" rivals to the west. That's pretty legitimate for passionate Packer fans if you ask most pschycologists.

Claiming Rogers is > than Favre if he wins a single ring is one poster's opinion. I am not sure why you choose to collectively address the anti-Favre fraction on a single opinion.

One could objectively challenge the claim by simply requesting the list of parameters by which the inference has been made. But that would be a constructive way to go about contributing to the discussion and isn't as satisfying as chucking a bucket of shit.

[Gunakor]

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's.

The former is a grizzled veteran, the most experienced QB playing in the NFL today. The current was a second year starter playing in his very first playoff game in his professional career. I'd say it's legitimate at this point in both of their careers to hold them to different standards.

He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

Favre could have just taken a knee rather than toss those INT's too. You'd expect a 16, 17 year veteran to be more careful with the football than a 26 year old playing in his first ever playoff game. But there was something else at play with regards to AR's fumble at the end of that game:

Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

Did you?

Rodgers' fumble came on 3rd and 10, in overtime, so going down and securing the ball would have meant punting the ball away and likely losing anyway. Our defense couldn't make a stop all day long, and all AZ needed at that point was a FG.

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy.

As long as we're talking about double standards, let's focus on that one play and compare it to Favre's season killing INT's. Favre's turnovers were routinely explained away by people like you by saying Favre was simply trying to make a play to win the game. Now you imply that Rodgers "choked" but in reality it's no different than Favre's season killing INT's where he was just trying to win the game, right? If Rodgers doesn't try to make a play there the Packers punt the ball to an offense that couldn't be stopped. Are you absolutely certain that you have entirely no patience whatsoever for the double standards?

[packerbacker1234]

It's funny watching a bunch of haters try and justify to themselves by conveniently applying two different standards to our former and current QB's.

The former is a grizzled veteran, the most experienced QB playing in the NFL today. The current was a second year starter playing in his very first playoff game in his professional career. I'd say it's legitimate at this point in both of their careers to hold them to different standards.

He hangs onto the ball too long (which is what he does) and instead of just going down and securing the ball, he fumbles it, game over but he didn't choke?

Favre could have just taken a knee rather than toss those INT's too. You'd expect a 16, 17 year veteran to be more careful with the football than a 26 year old playing in his first ever playoff game. But there was something else at play with regards to AR's fumble at the end of that game:

Did anyone watch the only playoff game we were in against Arizona?

Did you?

Rodgers' fumble came on 3rd and 10, in overtime, so going down and securing the ball would have meant punting the ball away and likely losing anyway. Our defense couldn't make a stop all day long, and all AZ needed at that point was a FG.

I have no patience for the double standards and/or the hypocrisy.

As long as we're talking about double standards, let's focus on that one play and compare it to Favre's season killing INT's. Favre's turnovers were routinely explained away by people like you by saying Favre was simply trying to make a play to win the game. Now you imply that Rodgers "choked" but in reality it's no different than Favre's season killing INT's where he was just trying to win the game, right? If Rodgers doesn't try to make a play there the Packers punt the ball to an offense that couldn't be stopped. Are you absolutely certain that you have entirely no patience whatsoever for the double standards?

So Rodgers is excused on the fumble, you say, because we would of punted and lost anyways? That's teh defense your throwing up? Okay then, then how was favre's int the reason they lost the game? They didn't score because of it, and they had to drive the length of the field in OT without favre ever touching the ball. So favre's was "far worse?" They were on the edge, and thats being friendly, of Longwells range. Favres team was fumbling the ball away every drive in the second half. Favre's coaching staff just screwed up on the play prior putting them IN the passing situation to begin with (because as longwell said, it was out of his range after the penalty). Favre's OL was letting him get pounded, a saints player got fined for an illegal hit on Favre. The saints were litterally detroying #4 in a fist fight using methods that are against the NFL rulebook.

And he kept getting back up, kept fight, and he willed that team to stay in that game. As much credit as you can give Rodgers for "bringing us back", you should be giving favre just as much credit for what he did for that team.

Oh, so it ended with an int? No, no it didn't. The other team still had to march what, 60, 70 yards? Meanwhile, rodgers fumble was scooped up and ran into the endzone. I am not going to sit here and debate which turnover was worse. Favre's worst enemy came back to bite him, and that is trying to force a play that isn't there. Not that I can blame him - it wasn't as if his offense did ANYTHING to help him all game.

Rodger's worst enemy came back to bite him as well, and that is holding the ball too long and being indecisive with the clock ticking. Thats not to say either QB is bad - thats clearly not the case. If they were bad QB's we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They both have faults at this point, and until rodgers can prove, consistently, that he can actually feel the pressure and get rid of the ball, how can you then turn around and say that last year favre's play was "the game".

Rodgers directly lead to a loss. Favre's lead to the saints needing to earn a fictory by driving the field against a defense that had done a pretty decent job.

I would argue both Rodgers and Favre put up pretty astounding play in the playoffs, and both made crucial mistakes at the end. Favre played like a warrior for his team, Rodgers played calm under the pressure until the final play.

Arguing which was worse isn't worth the effort. they both failed to get it done with the game on the line. THAT is the bottom line. This has nothing to do with who I like more (trust me, I am really happy to have AR as our QB) - but both made mistakes in crunch time.

"oh waht about the play before with the no helmet to helmet call!" - What about the play prior for favre where his coaches screwed the pooch with 12 men in the huddle?"

It's a team game, and I find it hard pressed you can place blame for teh loss in the last playoffs solely on favre or soley on rodgers. Favre didn't turn it over 6 times, rodgers didn't get push down by fitz twice for big plays either. It's a team game, and both teams lost as a team.

[Scott Campbell]

I'll gladly take my chances with the way Rodgers played against the Cardinals any day of the week.


28/42 for 428 yards. 4 TD's, 1 INT 121.3 QB rating

[Pugger]

Favre hasn't turned the ball over 6 times in a playoff game since 2001...

Folks here are cutting Rodgers some slack because it was his first playoff game. If he continues to have these issues in the future he'll be called out on the carpet too. But a 20 year vet shouldn't be making the same freaking mistakes over and over in big games. It is his DECISION making we are criticizing Favre for.