NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND

[Pacopete4]

They should both be in GB, You need quality players. The Packers gave away one of the best QB's in the league. Rodgers is soft, and we have nobody that can lead this team behind him.

Favre woulda never been a back up and why should he have to? he's still one of the best in the game..

[Rastak]

They should both be in GB, You need quality players. The Packers gave away one of the best QB's in the league. Rodgers is soft, and we have nobody that can lead this team behind him.

Favre woulda never been a back up and why should he have to? he's still one of the best in the game..

The Packers owned his rights and could have said retire or accept your role.

[mmmdk]

Re: NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND

This is why you don't trade Favre. Rodgers goes down and the Pack is screwed.

TT should have brought in a vet backup.

Why did you not create a thread "NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND" after Rodgers had good games? Aren't the lessons there equally valid.

This is loser stuff.

This thread isn't about how either player played. It is about going into a season with one QB.

Flynn & Brohn are not QBs? ...so sneaky these rookies.

Are they. Did you think Flynn was going to take the team down the field to win the game?

To answer your Q: NO!

Do you understand what irony is? I'd say: No!

Irony: the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning.

Goodnight! It's 2:00am here! Please let me sleep.... That was ironic...again.

[LEWCWA]

They should both be in GB, You need quality players. The Packers gave away one of the best QB's in the league. Rodgers is soft, and we have nobody that can lead this team behind him.

Favre woulda never been a back up and why should he have to? he's still one of the best in the game..

I didn't say he would be the backup. Favre would beat him out, but we would have two NFL ready QB's.

[mmmdk]

They should both be in GB, You need quality players. The Packers gave away one of the best QB's in the league. Rodgers is soft, and we have nobody that can lead this team behind him.

Favre woulda never been a back up and why should he have to? he's still one of the best in the game..

I didn't say he would be the backup. Favre would beat him out, but we would have two NFL ready QB's.

Point taken!

[The Shadow]

Re: NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND

This is why you don't trade Favre. Rodgers goes down and the Pack is screwed. How can you go into a season knowing your going to have to count on a rookie at QB. You can spin it anyway you want. Fact is when Rodgers was hurt our chances of a comeback were done.

Crock of poopoo.

[mmmdk]

Re: NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND

This is why you don't trade Favre. Rodgers goes down and the Pack is screwed. How can you go into a season knowing your going to have to count on a rookie at QB. You can spin it anyway you want. Fact is when Rodgers was hurt our chances of a comeback were done.

Crock of poopoo.

Why can't you just say "point taken" like me?

[Jimx29]

yea shit, who needs a bum that was 2007 runner-up for league MVP, had 4000+ yards, 28 TD's, etc....hanging around?

[Gunakor]

yea shit, who needs a bum that was 2007 runner-up for league MVP, had 4000+ yards, 28 TD's, etc....hanging around?

Brett Favre is a starting quarterback. Aaron Rodgers is a starting quarterback. There is only room for one starting quarterback on a team. See the problem?

[cpk1994]

Re: NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND

This is why you don't trade Favre. Rodgers goes down and the Pack is screwed.

TT should have brought in a vet backup.

Why did you not create a thread "NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND" after Rodgers had good games? Aren't the lessons there equally valid.

This is loser stuff.

Becuae he is one that has been raking TT over the coasls for Favre and now the gutless wonder has come to gloat. Kind of funny he was nowhere to be found when ARod was doing well. Until they do, these idiots have no credibility.

[Pacopete4]

Re: NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND

This is why you don't trade Favre. Rodgers goes down and the Pack is screwed.

TT should have brought in a vet backup.

Why did you not create a thread "NOW WE SHOULD ALL UNDERSTAND" after Rodgers had good games? Aren't the lessons there equally valid.

This is loser stuff.

Becuae he is one that has been raking TT over the coasls for Favre and now the gutless wonder has come to gloat. Kind of funny he was nowhere to be found when ARod was doing well. Until they do, these idiots have no credibility.

so when he does bad... u have no credibility?

[red]

tt should have had a vet qb on the roster. then they could have been prepared to step in if needed

i think bringing in a vet FA at this point would be worthless. a new guy will not be able to pick up and execute the playbook in less then a week

we're stuck with what we got

[Bretsky]

tt should have had a vet qb on the roster. then they could have been prepared to step in if needed

i think bringing in a vet FA at this point would be worthless. a new guy will not be able to pick up and execute the playbook in less then a week

we're stuck with what we got

BINGO

[gex]

I knew this was going to happen with A-rod, his history proves that he is fragile.
Not having a veteran back-up is inexcusable.

[MJZiggy]

Yes but now the medical reports are saying Rodgers is going to be fine. And Hawk is injured.