Can a great QB make an average team great

[Iron Mike]

What you're comparing right now is Favre's instinct after 16 years to Rodgers first season. I'm guessing here that if you go back to 1992-93 you might find a few plays there where Favre wasn't throwing it by instinct. We can't give the kid a break at least until the season starts before we start expecting Hall of Fame performance out of him every game?

True. But Favre was thrown into the fire relatively soon after he joined the team. Rodgers has been with this team for 3 years.

Chick fight.

[pbmax]

It took Favre 2 and 1/2 years (just shy of 37 games) of starting to figure out pro football and play to his level of ability (19 games as backup). Its good that Rodgers had three years to develop, grow, get smarter and stronger. He still has zero Regular Season starts. Say it with me, Favre had 37 before people agreed he was going to be worth it.

It will take a year, minimum, to know what we will have with him as a veteran starter. More likely, 1 and 1/2 to 2 years. The patience paid off with Favre. It can still pay off with Rodgers.

Remember that Favre was 9-7 for three years with Holmgren and Wolf at the helm. Just ask Bretsky how many people in the state were screaming for a veteran or Brunell before the 2nd half of the 94 season.

[imscott72]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Twice? I'de like to hear this, because according to brett the one time the packers claim they had a jet ready to bring him back, Favre said that wasn't even close to how it went down. The only time, apparently, they were ready to welcome him back was when he was reinstated. Remember, after he filed his papers WHY did it get delayed? Because the packers wanted time to find a trade for favre, or to convince him to stay retired.

Thats not welcoming him back, in the least bit. When reinstated, it was MM who was open to welcoming him back into the locker room. not managment. Your perception of Favre beign welcomed back at all boggles my mind. The fact you think they did it twice boggles it even more.

MM welcomed him back. Management tried to pay him off.

There's no sense rehashing this. It's a waste of time. We'll never know how exactly it went down, but as TT said both sides could of done better in their communication. Brett didn't need to run to his "sources" everytime him and MM spoke either. It's water under the bridge. Move on..

[imscott72]

Thinking of the last run we could have made this year. Instead it looks like rebuilding could be the option.

So after two preseason games we're in rebuilding mode? Holy smokes thank goodness you aren't running the team..

[GrnBay007]

It took Favre 2 and 1/2 years (just shy of 37 games) of starting to figure out pro football and play to his level of ability (19 games as backup). Its good that Rodgers had three years to develop, grow, get smarter and stronger. He still has zero Regular Season starts. Say it with me, Favre had 37 before people agreed he was going to be worth it.

It will take a year, minimum, to know what we will have with him as a veteran starter. More likely, 1 and 1/2 to 2 years. The patience paid off with Favre. It can still pay off with Rodgers.

Remember that Favre was 9-7 for three years with Holmgren and Wolf at the helm. Just ask Bretsky how many people in the state were screaming for a veteran or Brunell before the 2nd half of the 94 season.

I realize this...took Favre some time to come out really strong. My point was that he was thrown into the fire shortly after arriving to GB.....and Rodgers being with the same team, even through their changes, should have benefited him....and maybe it will regular season, we will see. He's had a lot to deal with. I'm sorry, I want to see Rodgers succeed because he's a Packer, but I just have a bad feeling about it right now.

[pbmax]

One more thing about Rodgers play. No turnovers that I recall. That's important. And I lied, total of two things about Rodgers.

His play the first two or three series was fine. It wasn't lights out, but he was playing alright, found some open receivers and had two big drops of catchable balls and took a clean shot on a blitz we didn't pickup and he didn't throw away fast enough.

After that, once he had been knocked around and was no longer seeing open receivers, he then started to hang on to the ball. The 49er D is not the joke that the Bengals D is. he got rattled and made some poor decisions or plain just got indecisive. He couldn't pull it down to run and he couldn't pull the trigger. He is young and playing against starters is mostly new. Its going to take him time to figure out what he can do when the play he has called isn't producing any open receivers.

[imscott72]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Wrong----Favre did come back, Packers chose to trade him...

What?? Did you follow along at all? When MM and Brett met, MM was ready to welcome him back, but Favre is the one who said he couldn't get past the negatives things that were said. Favre wasn't in the right mindset to play for the Packers. What else were they suppose to do with him?

[pbmax]

I gotcha double ought. It will benefit him.

But we might not see the result until later this year. If his three years of prep work cuts his learning curve in half, then by Favre's timetable we are talking mid-season NEXT year.

[GrnBay007]

But we might not see the result until later this year. If his three years of prep work cuts his learning curve in half, then by Favre's timetable we are talking mid-season NEXT year.

Sure hope the rest of the team is ready, when he's ready.

[mission]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply.

[cpk1994]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Twice? I'de like to hear this, because according to brett the one time the packers claim they had a jet ready to bring him back, Favre said that wasn't even close to how it went down. The only time, apparently, they were ready to welcome him back was when he was reinstated. Remember, after he filed his papers WHY did it get delayed? Because the packers wanted time to find a trade for favre, or to convince him to stay retired.

Thats not welcoming him back, in the least bit. When reinstated, it was MM who was open to welcoming him back into the locker room. not managment. Your perception of Favre beign welcomed back at all boggles my mind. The fact you think they did it twice boggles it even more.

MM welcomed him back. Management tried to pay him off.

So what you are telling is me because Favre says they didn't welcome him back that that must be the truth becuase Favre said so? Newsflash, Favre hasn't been real honest the last 3 months. It is of total ignorance to automatically assume Favre is being 100% truthful becuase he has already shown not to be.

EDIT: Favre agreed to delay reinstatement so that part of your argument is BS.

[GrnBay007]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply.

Too bad, I'm sure we'd love to hear your opinion. That's what threads are generally made for.....to get other's opinions.

[mission]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply.

Too bad, I'm sure we'd love to hear your opinion. That's what thread are generally made for.....to get other's opinions.

Well you got my opinion didn't you?

Doesn't take a lot of data extrapolation to convert my post above to an opinion.

But thanks again!

[Gunakor]

Like it or not we must compare Favre with Rodgers.

We were 13-3 last year and we changed QB.

You make it sound like the Packers chose to change QB's. Not to beat a dead horse, but Brett retired. Brett forced the Packers to make a change, not once, but twice. They were prepared to welcome him back twice but were told each time "no thanks". Nothing else they could do.

Wrong----Favre did come back, Packers chose to trade him...

What?? Did you follow along at all? When MM and Brett met, MM was ready to welcome him back, but Favre is the one who said he couldn't get past the negatives things that were said. Favre wasn't in the right mindset to play for the Packers. What else were they suppose to do with him?

This is a waste of time. Don't argue with them anymore. They'd rather see TT and MM and the entire Board of Directors and Executive Committee and coaching staff and janitors and concession workers and cashiers at the pro shop and 52 other players on the roster get traded before Favre, regardless of the circumstances. It's pointless to convince them otherwise, and it's really not fair to force our point of view upon them. Let them believe what they want.

[GrnBay007]

Just the name of this thread makes me laugh in a "well, duh captain obvious" tone every time I see it... can't be bothered to give it a serious reply.

Too bad, I'm sure we'd love to hear your opinion. That's what thread are generally made for.....to get other's opinions.

Well you got my opinion didn't you?

Doesn't take a lot of data extrapolation to convert my post above to an opinion.

But thanks again!

You missed my point, obviously. If a thread is made seeking opinions and you have nothing to contribute but negative comments, then why bother taking the time to post? Creates a bad atmosphere for this site. ....you know, Packer fans coming together.