IS GB A LEADING SUPERBOWL CONTENDER EVEN W/O #4?

[mraynrand]

Bravo, Thunder Dan! You're absolutely right. Favre turned the ball over twice in the 1996 NFC Championship, leading to 10 Carolina points. And the final score of that game was......

Anyone?

[Scott Campbell]

if GB learns to play this guy a bit more, i think we have a good shot at the SB

heck, if we had let him cover Burress in the championship game, we might have gone last year

I think Burress should have drawn double coverage.

[Chevelle2]

While Brett Favre may be 3-6 in the last 10 years in playoff games. The difference between the 1st half of his career and the back half is a dominate defense.

In the mid-90's our D was great. We could easily hold teams to 10 points a game. We had one of the best front 4s and as we all saw with the Giants last year that can turn a pretty average team into a hard fought game every week.

Favre had to carry more and more weight on his shoulders as the defense declined. I think the last 2 years under TT we have started to rebuild our D. I hope our DC doesn't screw it up (Let's actually blitz this year).

Favre played great last year, but no QB will play great for all 16+ games a season (happens maybe once every 10 years). They need the D and the ST to help them not just not loose games but actually win a few.

I am excited to see what Arod will do this year. I also think we have the peices in place on D now to actually win some games if we can stay/get healthy.

*sigh*

Favre's playoff teams in the last 10 years, had an average win total of 11.53 wins per year.

Lets take a look at those defenses iregarding PA:

1998: 11th
2001: 5th
2002: 12th
2003: 11th
2004: 23rd
2007: 6thth

So we can see that in 5/6 years, Favre had a top 1/2 defense. In 2001, he had a top 5 defense, but still failed.

[HarveyWallbangers]

1998: 11th
2001: 5th
2002: 12th
2003: 11th
2004: 23rd
2007: 6th

Added 2007. He hasn't had great defenses, but outside of 2004, they haven't been bad either. 5 of the 6 have been in the top 12 in points allowed. A couple of those years (2002 and 2004) he had to deal with a plethora of injuries and in 1998 we were screwed by the non-fumble call on Jerry Rice, but 2003 and 2007 were games that a Hall of Fame QB should have won. I'm not laying the total blame on him, but he was the one who didn't get it done late. McNabb and Manning did.

[Chevelle2]

Bravo, Thunder Dan! You're absolutely right. Favre turned the ball over twice in the 1996 NFC Championship, leading to 10 Carolina points. And the final score of that game was......

Anyone?

Favre had a QB rating of 107 in that game you moron.

Now Favre apologists are shooting down his best performances, to make it seem like the poor performances aren't as bad. Wow.

[Chevelle2]

1998: 11th
2001: 5th
2002: 12th
2003: 11th
2004: 23rd
2007: 6th

Added 2007. He hasn't had great defenses, but outside of 2004, they haven't been bad either. 5 of the 6 have been in the top 12 in points allowed.

Good call, thanks

[gex]

While Brett Favre may be 3-6 in the last 10 years in playoff games. The difference between the 1st half of his career and the back half is a dominate defense.

In the mid-90's our D was great. We could easily hold teams to 10 points a game. We had one of the best front 4s and as we all saw with the Giants last year that can turn a pretty average team into a hard fought game every week.

Favre had to carry more and more weight on his shoulders as the defense declined. I think the last 2 years under TT we have started to rebuild our D. I hope our DC doesn't screw it up (Let's actually blitz this year).

Favre played great last year, but no QB will play great for all 16+ games a season (happens maybe once every 10 years). They need the D and the ST to help them not just not loose games but actually win a few.

I am excited to see what Arod will do this year. I also think we have the peices in place on D now to actually win some games if we can stay/get healthy.

*sigh*



Lets take a look at those defenses iregarding PA:

sigh

[Chevelle2]

While Brett Favre may be 3-6 in the last 10 years in playoff games. The difference between the 1st half of his career and the back half is a dominate defense.

In the mid-90's our D was great. We could easily hold teams to 10 points a game. We had one of the best front 4s and as we all saw with the Giants last year that can turn a pretty average team into a hard fought game every week.

Favre had to carry more and more weight on his shoulders as the defense declined. I think the last 2 years under TT we have started to rebuild our D. I hope our DC doesn't screw it up (Let's actually blitz this year).

Favre played great last year, but no QB will play great for all 16+ games a season (happens maybe once every 10 years). They need the D and the ST to help them not just not loose games but actually win a few.

I am excited to see what Arod will do this year. I also think we have the peices in place on D now to actually win some games if we can stay/get healthy.

*sigh*



Lets take a look at those defenses iregarding PA:

sigh

Explain to be what is wrong with looking at the Packers defenses, based on points allowed.

[mraynrand]

Bravo, Thunder Dan! You're absolutely right. Favre turned the ball over twice in the 1996 NFC Championship, leading to 10 Carolina points. And the final score of that game was......

Anyone?

Favre had a QB rating of 107 in that game you moron.

Now Favre apologists are shooting down his best performances, to make it seem like the poor performances aren't as bad. Wow.

The point was that the Packers gave up only 10 points to Carolina, off Favre turnovers. The defense didn't allow any other scores. You can't say that about a number of other Packer defenses, including the #5 ranked defense, which gave up tons of points at St. Louis, most before Favre's third INT. The point was to applaud T. Dan for recognizing that great defenses tend to win championships. Of course Favre played well in the Carolina game, but the defense was outstanding. And Harv is correct - Favre takes a huge amount of blame for blown games in 2003 and 2007.

Just a thought about that disaster in Philly. Favre should have gone in the huddle on fourth and one, where the plan was to try to draw Philly offsides and said "Guys, Sherm wants us to draw 'em off and punt after the penalty. We're gonna run the ball, stuff it down their throats, and Sherm will be so goddamn happy we won, he won't be too hard on us. But we'd better get it done. So let's stuff the damn ball down their throats and get the hell out of here." If he had done that, I think they would have won the game.

[Chevelle2]

Just a thought about that disaster in Philly. Favre should have gone in the huddle on fourth and one, where the plan was to try to draw Philly offsides and said "Guys, Sherm wants us to draw 'em off and punt after the penalty. We're gonna run the ball, stuff it down their throats, and Sherm will be so goddamn happy we won, he won't be too hard on us. But we'd better get it done. So let's stuff the damn ball down their throats and get the hell out of here." If he had done that, I think they would have won the game.

Although I think that Favre is NOT to blame for the Philly loss (it was Sherman) this is an interesting idea, which I have too thought of. I do agree that it would have been what Id like to see, but Im not sure you can blame Brett (which I don't think you are, Im just saying) I guess sometimes you SHOULD listen to your coach, and sometimes you shouldn't.

[mraynrand]

Just a thought about that disaster in Philly. Favre should have gone in the huddle on fourth and one, where the plan was to try to draw Philly offsides and said "Guys, Sherm wants us to draw 'em off and punt after the penalty. We're gonna run the ball, stuff it down their throats, and Sherm will be so goddamn happy we won, he won't be too hard on us. But we'd better get it done. So let's stuff the damn ball down their throats and get the hell out of here." If he had done that, I think they would have won the game.

Although I think that Favre is NOT to blame for the Philly loss (it was Sherman) this is an interesting idea, which I have too thought of. I do agree that it would have been what Id like to see, but Im not sure you can blame Brett (which I don't think you are, Im just saying) I guess sometimes you SHOULD listen to your coach, and sometimes you shouldn't.

Yep. I just think the huddle would have been so fired up about sticking it to the Eagles, that they might have just blown them out of the water. Think about it - You've got Favre all fired up, you got Ahman Green with his testosterone flushing (and we know how dangerous he can be) - you have the whole offensive line knowing that they have to make it work. Man I would have loved to have seen it. I really believe, to this day, that they would have kicked the shit out of the Eagle's line, and Ahman would have run it to the house. And another point - they should have run the ball down their throats when they got it in OT as well. That was a beat up, tired ass D-line. Geez, now I'm all fired up. I gotta go lift some weights or something!

[ThunderDan]

While Brett Favre may be 3-6 in the last 10 years in playoff games. The difference between the 1st half of his career and the back half is a dominate defense.

In the mid-90's our D was great. We could easily hold teams to 10 points a game. We had one of the best front 4s and as we all saw with the Giants last year that can turn a pretty average team into a hard fought game every week.

Favre had to carry more and more weight on his shoulders as the defense declined. I think the last 2 years under TT we have started to rebuild our D. I hope our DC doesn't screw it up (Let's actually blitz this year).

Favre played great last year, but no QB will play great for all 16+ games a season (happens maybe once every 10 years). They need the D and the ST to help them not just not loose games but actually win a few.

I am excited to see what Arod will do this year. I also think we have the peices in place on D now to actually win some games if we can stay/get healthy.

*sigh*

Favre's playoff teams in the last 10 years, had an average win total of 11.53 wins per year.

Lets take a look at those defenses iregarding PA:

1998: 11th
2001: 5th
2002: 12th
2003: 11th
2004: 23rd
2007: 6thth

So we can see that in 5/6 years, Favre had a top 1/2 defense. In 2001, he had a top 5 defense, but still failed.

*SIGH*

From 94 - 97 the Packers D averaged 17.0 ppg. If you get rid of 1995 when the allowed 19.6 ppg the average is 16.2 ppg.

Fom 98 - 07 the Packer D averaged 20.4 ppg. Get rid of 2004 when they allowed 23.8 ppg the average is 20.0 ppg.

The defense has on average been giving up 23% more points per year.

And if you only look at 02 - 07 the D has averaged 21.0 ppg. An increase of almost 5 points or a 30% increase

Would you rather have MM turn to AROD and say we need 3 TD and a FG to win or say we need 2 TD and a FG to win?

In the mid 90s I was comfortable with a 2 point lead in the 4th quarter. Our D was a monster. Not so in todays NFL. It does look like we have some players finally that could make our defense dangerous again if we stay healthly.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Giants won the Super Bowl last year. Their defense ranked 17th in PA at 21.9.

The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2006. Their defense ranked 23rd in PA at 22.5.

We know it takes a great all-around team to win the Super Bowl, but teams have gotten it done without having a dominating defense. We're not even talking about a failure to get to the Super Bowl, but a failure to even get to the NFC Championship Game more than once. To be fair, those defenses played better in the postseason. Most of the blame for the playoff failures falls on the defense or injuries. However, some of the blame goes on Favre. He had chances to extend two or three of those seasons, but he didn't get it done. Before 2001, he was mostly a stud in the postseason. Since 2001, he's been mostly a dud--although all of it isn't his fault. I'd say overall he's been an above average QB in the playoffs, but he hasn't been the all-time great that he's been during the regular season.

Don't get me wrong. If Favre were 30, 32, or even 35, I'd still love him to be the QB on the Packers over anybody else. However, he's about to turn 39, and I'm okay with moving on.

[mraynrand]

The Giants won the Super Bowl last year. Their defense ranked 17th in PA at 21.9.

The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2006. Their defense ranked 23rd in PA at 22.5.

We know it takes a great all-around team to win the Super Bowl, but teams have gotten it done without having a dominating defense. We're not even talking about a failure to get to the Super Bowl, but a failure to even get to the NFC Championship Game more than once. To be fair, those defenses played better in the postseason. Most of the blame for the playoff failures falls on the defense or injuries. However, some of the blame goes on Favre. He had chances to extend two or three of those seasons, but he didn't get it done. Before 2001, he was mostly a stud in the postseason. Since 2001, he's been mostly a dud--although all of it isn't his fault. I'd say overall he's been an above average QB in the playoffs, but he hasn't been the all-time great that he's been during the regular season.

Don't get me wrong. If Favre were 30, 32, or even 35, I'd still love him to be the QB on the Packers over anybody else. However, he's about to turn 39, and I'm okay with moving on.

Good post, especially about the defenses that peaked during the playoffs. I think the thing about Favre (and this is a guess - an opinion) is that when he really believed that the outcome of the game was solely up to him, as he got older, that he performed worse. Under those conditions, he was willing to take a lot of chances, slinging the ball, trying to make huge plays, instead of keeping within himself. I can't explain what happened on the horrible toss in Philly, and I can't imagine what was going on against the Giants.

I'm OK with moving on if Rodgers plays well enough to get the Packers to the playoffs and if Rodgers plays better in the playoffs than Favre would have. (sounds obvious, but the bottom line is that TT and MM have to be right - Rodgers has to play better than Favre at some point this season - OR, the team has to win even if Rodgers isn't as good).

[Chevelle2]

While Brett Favre may be 3-6 in the last 10 years in playoff games. The difference between the 1st half of his career and the back half is a dominate defense.

In the mid-90's our D was great. We could easily hold teams to 10 points a game. We had one of the best front 4s and as we all saw with the Giants last year that can turn a pretty average team into a hard fought game every week.

Favre had to carry more and more weight on his shoulders as the defense declined. I think the last 2 years under TT we have started to rebuild our D. I hope our DC doesn't screw it up (Let's actually blitz this year).

Favre played great last year, but no QB will play great for all 16+ games a season (happens maybe once every 10 years). They need the D and the ST to help them not just not loose games but actually win a few.

I am excited to see what Arod will do this year. I also think we have the peices in place on D now to actually win some games if we can stay/get healthy.

*sigh*

Favre's playoff teams in the last 10 years, had an average win total of 11.53 wins per year.

Lets take a look at those defenses iregarding PA:

1998: 11th
2001: 5th
2002: 12th
2003: 11th
2004: 23rd
2007: 6thth

So we can see that in 5/6 years, Favre had a top 1/2 defense. In 2001, he had a top 5 defense, but still failed.

*SIGH*

From 94 - 97 the Packers D averaged 17.0 ppg. If you get rid of 1995 when the allowed 19.6 ppg the average is 16.2 ppg.

Fom 98 - 07 the Packer D averaged 20.4 ppg. Get rid of 2004 when they allowed 23.8 ppg the average is 20.0 ppg.

The defense has on average been giving up 23% more points per year.

And if you only look at 02 - 07 the D has averaged 21.0 ppg. An increase of almost 5 points or a 30% increase

Would you rather have MM turn to AROD and say we need 3 TD and a FG to win or say we need 2 TD and a FG to win?

In the mid 90s I was comfortable with a 2 point lead in the 4th quarter. Our D was a monster. Not so in todays NFL. It does look like we have some players finally that could make our defense dangerous again if we stay healthly.

It goes both ways tho. Did Favre's interception total increase because he was playing from behind a lot? Or, did the defense's PA increase because Favre's increase in interceptions gave the opposing team easy field position and pick 6's?

Just something to think about.