OFFICIAL BRETT THE LIVING LEGEND THREAD

[denverYooper]

Former Almost-Packer LaVar Arrington tweets:

LaVar Arrington[/url]]They will be coming after favre it will be unbelievable to me if he makes it through the season

.

I guess this makes sense, I mean... why not? If you let him stand there, he's going to throw completions. Why not see if you can hit the old man so he plays like he doesn't want to get hit anymore? I'm pretty sure he's not going to get up, start jawing with Warren Sapp, and throw touchdowns to Antonio Freeman.

It does make sense. And This year could be trouble for the Vikes offensively in general because their line looked in disarray no matter what string. The 9ers were all over the backfield last night.

Also, we are likely going to find out Chester Taylor's value as a 3rd down back in that offense.

The usual disclaimer about drawing inferences from preseason applies but I have a feeling that Favre's going to see more guys in his face this year.

[Bossman641]

Is it my imagination or were the 49er fans booing when Favre came out? Not just normal booing, but really giving it to him when the offense walked out.

They were and they went absolutely berserk when Patrick Willis spiked him into the turf.

His days of guys pulling up at the end out of respect are over. I think Favre will get a little extra hot sauce on every hit this year.

I agree. I think there are going to be a lot of players gunning for Favre this year, and I think he will find out that a lot of football fans in general are sick of his act.

[get louder at lambeau]

Can you imagine being a defensive player and going from being some no-name below average starter or decent backup to "The guy who ended Brett Favre's career?" That's a game changer.

[mraynrand]

Can you imagine being a defensive player and going from being some no-name below average starter or decent backup to "The guy who ended Brett Favre's career?" That's a game changer.

A certain notoriety comes from KOing a famous QB, especially if it's a cheap shot.

[Patler]

The usual disclaimer about drawing inferences from preseason applies but I have a feeling that Favre's going to see more guys in his face this year.

I think one thing that was evident last year was that Favre can't elude rushers as easily as he did in the past. As a result, coming hard after him isn't as risky as it was just a few years ago when he would sidestep, or retreat and throw without even getting hit. He seems to get caught flat footed more often now, and does get hit more now even when he gets throw off. Blitzing and getting hits on him early might pay more dividends late in the game than it did through most of his career when blitzes didn't get to him that much.

[packerbacker1234]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the way to beat any good QB is to go after them? People act like this is some new strategy or something to beat Favre - welcome to the NFL folks. You ALWAYS go after good QB's, no matter the age. Thats how you win.

Why it doesn't work? Most teams don't have the personel to pull it off all game long. They get down 3 scores and then the winning team sits on it. Just saying it is what it is. I agree he can't scramble as well as he use too, but he showed plenty of ability to extend plays still just last season.

Yeah, he got hit, ona double blitz up the middle that wasn't even blocked. 99% of all QB's get wrecked in that situation. I think favre is fine with his mobility. This ankle isn't some new injury, it's been there for awhile. He's fine.

[Lurker64]

For young or erratic and impulsive QBs, you often are best off doing your damnedest to confuse them. So zone blitzes, and making sure that receivers aren't where they're expected and defenders are where they're unexpected is very effective. Then again, getting in their face is too, but a zone blitz doesn't reduce the number of people in coverage like a casino blitz does.

For wily veterans and QBs with excellent recognition, blitzing is often very dangerous. It reduces the effectiveness of coverage, and if the quarterback is able to make a read and get the ball off before a defender can get to him, the defense is prone to give up big plays (Kurt Warner was brilliant at this). Most defensive coordinators hate giving up big plays almost to a pathological degree (c.f. some of Capers' more conservative game plans, Mike Nolan's affection for the Big Nickel, etc.).

Gregg Williams' big idea for the NFC Championship game was that he knew that he couldn't necessarily get to Favre before he gets the ball off, and he couldn't necessarily prevent the Vikings offense from making plays (big or otherwise), but he knew that if he blitzed emphatically enough he could make sure that he could hit the quarterback; and nobody (least of all 40 year old quarterbacks) likes getting hit. That ended up working out well for New Orleans.

So what this does is it presents a sort of blueprint that some NFL teams can execute (but not all). Specifically, if you can score enough points against the Vikings D to overcome all the plays you're going to give up while blitzing, and you can blitz creatively and aggressively enough, you can change the Vikings offense by hitting the old man. This might seem dirty, or against the spirit of the modern NFL's treating quarterbacks with kid gloves, but remember that the intent is not to injure the opposing quarterback, merely to get in his head and render him relatively ineffective. The thing is though, that the sort of hit a 30 year old quarterback can bounce right up from, might be the sort of hit that would injure a man 10 years his senior; and teams who play against the Vikings aren't really going to be overly saddened if they can usher #4 into a somewhat-premature(-and-permanent) retirement due to clean and legal hits, though obviously no football player wants to cause permanent damage to another.

The fact that Minnesota doesn't have a single running back adept at picking up the blitz, and neither Brad Childress nor Darrell Bevell (nor Brett Favre) are particularly innovative or brilliant playcallers, this could be problematic for the Vikings. The counter, of course, will be if Adrian Peterson plays out of his mind and teams have to worry about him more than Favre. The two Minnesota-Green Bay games last year demonstrated that, at least with last year's Vikings, it wasn't sufficient to shut down Peterson because Favre can beat you. The story of a lot of this year's Vikings games will probably be "Can Peterson beat you if you work to shut down Favre."

[Bossman641]

Good points Lurker. I don't think that the loss of Chester Taylor can be overstated - the dropoff between Taylor and AP seems to be pretty large when it comes to blitz pickup. Do the Vikings have a designated 3rd down back at this point or are they counting on AP for that role? Gerhart certainly isn't a 3rd down back. I suppose Albert Young could maybe fill the role

[Patler]

Yeah, he got hit, ona double blitz up the middle that wasn't even blocked. 99% of all QB's get wrecked in that situation. I think favre is fine with his mobility. This ankle isn't some new injury, it's been there for awhile. He's fine.

I don't think his ankle injury is the problem, I just think he isn't as nimble and as mobile as he once was, which is to be expected. I thought he showed that somewhat in NY and more last year. In 2007, behind a suspect Packer's O-line he was sacked just 15 times. His ability to negate the rush was obvious. In 2008 in NY with a decent line he was sacked 30 times. Last year, with a great running game and all-pros on the line, he was sacked 34 times, the most sacks he has had in 10 years The most since he quit running with the ball.

[sharpe1027]

I think favre is fine with his mobility. This ankle isn't some new injury, it's been there for awhile. He's fine.

He might be fine, but I think the point is he isn't where he used to be. He was always great at using a quick shift in the pocket to make a guy miss and then firing a strike down field. To some of us, he seems to have lost a lot of that quick movement over the past few years. All too often you see him back pedaling and either taking a big sack or hoisting the ball off his back foot. It's just not the same Favre.

Not that anyone in their right mind would expect him to play the same 10 years later, but it is still a factor in how well he will do.

[packerbacker1234]

Yeah, he got hit, ona double blitz up the middle that wasn't even blocked. 99% of all QB's get wrecked in that situation. I think favre is fine with his mobility. This ankle isn't some new injury, it's been there for awhile. He's fine.

I don't think his ankle injury is the problem, I just think he isn't as nimble and as mobile as he once was, which is to be expected. I thought he showed that somewhat in NY and more last year. In 2007, behind a suspect Packer's O-line he was sacked just 15 times. His ability to negate the rush was obvious. In 2008 in NY with a decent line he was sacked 30 times. Last year, with a great running game and all-pros on the line, he was sacked 34 times, the most sacks he has had in 10 years The most since he quit running with the ball.

Yeah but wasn't it noted last year, on many of the sacks he took, it wasn't because he couldn't extend the play, but because it was better he take the sack than scramble and make a poor decision? Taking sacks I think is part of what lead him to having such a better season statiscally. Despite the fact he use to be one of the best QB's int he league at avoiding pressure, bottom line is a lot of his ints happen on the same plays that he is scrambling around on.

Less scrambling, taking sacks when nothing is there = less turnovers. He also, on mayn of the sacks, pulled a peyton manning to avoid hits.


He seems to have finally learned how to play smartly as a QB, and it sucks it took this long for him to "get it".

[HarveyWallbangers]

Yeah but wasn't it noted last year, on many of the sacks he took, it wasn't because he couldn't extend the play, but because it was better he take the sack than scramble and make a poor decision? Taking sacks I think is part of what lead him to having such a better season statiscally. Despite the fact he use to be one of the best QB's int he league at avoiding pressure, bottom line is a lot of his ints happen on the same plays that he is scrambling around on.

Less scrambling, taking sacks when nothing is there = less turnovers. He also, on mayn of the sacks, pulled a peyton manning to avoid hits.

He seems to have finally learned how to play smartly as a QB, and it sucks it took this long for him to "get it".

Funny since Rodgers gets criticized any time he takes a sack. There's an option besides taking a sack and throwing an interception, and that's throwing the ball away. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. I think Brett didn't force a lot of balls last year. That's good. I think he wasn't quite as able to avoid the pressure and throw the ball. That's not so good. I think Rodgers just had to learn the happy medium between holding onto the ball too long and trying to make a play.

[Fritz]

I was actually thinking along the lines of Packerbacker1234's first post - gee, isn't that everyone's strategy for every QB? - when I read Patler's and Lurker's assessments. And they both explain it well.

So I agree with them - this is, in some respects, a new strategy.

As for Packerbacker's claim that Favre has finally learned to play smartly, may I be the first to politely suggest that you go back and take a look at the last pass Favre threw last season?

[packerbacker1234]

I was actually thinking along the lines of Packerbacker1234's first post - gee, isn't that everyone's strategy for every QB? - when I read Patler's and Lurker's assessments. And they both explain it well.

So I agree with them - this is, in some respects, a new strategy.

As for Packerbacker's claim that Favre has finally learned to play smartly, may I be the first to politely suggest that you go back and take a look at the last pass Favre threw last season?

SUre it was a poor decision, but of any time in his career to make a bad choice, that was one time I just can't blame him per say. THere was a penalty the play before that even put the ball in his hands, he already HAD THEM in position to win with what is a easily makeable FG for Longwell, and the coaches screwed that one up.

The pass was a bad decision, but the man was beaten. All day long. He played very well, especially given the damaging, and illegal, hits he was taking. He should of ran, should of thrown it away, should of never one back across his body - but man, I was surprised he was still standing at that point. They already had the game won and the coaches fuck up was far more inexcusable than favre's. You do NOT get a 12 man in the huddle penalty when your in game winning FG range. Ever. There is no excuse. At least favre can say he was "trying to make a play".


Seriously, if I am a vikings fan, I would of been calling for the OC's head for that 12 man penalty, or whoever the fuck was in control of it, be it childress, or whatever> just like against philly for us the one year on 4th and 27 - I blame the defensive coordinator for that loss, not favre. Favre should not be required to win you every game, especially after he already did what he needed to do TO win.

[Pugger]

Good points Lurker. I don't think that the loss of Chester Taylor can be overstated - the dropoff between Taylor and AP seems to be pretty large when it comes to blitz pickup. Do the Vikings have a designated 3rd down back at this point or are they counting on AP for that role? Gerhart certainly isn't a 3rd down back. I suppose Albert Young could maybe fill the role

We all saw how horrid Peterson was in that lone series #4 was in at picking up the blitz. Unless AP improves in this area it might be a long season for Grandpa.