Aaron was the right choice

[Pugger]

"The legend of Favre is dead and Aaron Rodgers killed it" LMFAO. . . . . You know who really killed it, who set this whole thing in motion? Ted Thompson. As Brett Favre stands today, outplayed, embarassed, dominated by the guy who replaced him. . . None of it would have happened if Ted would have just gotten in line and drafted a guy to help Favre's cause.

As a Packer fan I'm glad he didn't.


THANKSTED!

No, FAVRE killed it, not TT. #4 was the one who quit on a 13-3 team and "retired" and started the whole mess back in 2008.

[channtheman]

Not a bad post, and kudos to you for showing up even after yesterdays drubbing.

1) I'm fine with Manning winning the MVP last year. He was awesome.
2) Rodgers will have a significant edge on the superiority comparisons just by avoiding all the drama.

If Favre didn't win the MVP last year, Brees should have won it. And the year before it should have been Brees or Rivers. The media love for Manning is sickening.

[Patler]

The media love for Manning is sickening.

Second only to the media love for Favre, until perhaps this season.

[pbmax]

Pack1234 comes to bury Favre, not to praise him;
The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,
So let it be with Favre ... The noble Rodgers
Hath told you Favre was interceptious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Favre answered it ...
Here, under leave of Rodgers and the rest,
(For Rodgers is an honourable man;
So are they all; all honourable men)
Come Pack1234 to speak in Favre's funeral ...
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Rodgers says he was interceptious;
And Rodgers is an honourable man….
He hath brought many captives home to Rome,
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Favre seem interceptious?
When that the poor have cried, Favre hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Rodgers says he was interceptious;
And Rodgers is an honourable man.
You all did see that on the Lupercal
Pack1234 thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Rodgers says he was interceptious;
And, sure, he is an honourable man.
Pack1234 speaks not to disprove what Rodgers spoke,
But here Pack1234 is to speak what Pack1234 does know.
You all did love him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then to mourn for him?
O judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason…. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Favre,
And Pack1234 must pause till it come back to me.

[channtheman]

Second only to the media love for Favre, until perhaps this season.

The media love for Favre has really turned in the last few years. Now he's a big story, but they don't love him (as evidenced by Manning winning the MVP over him - Favre was lights out last year and should have won the MVP).

[packrulz]

Pack1234 comes to bury Favre, not to praise him;
The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,
So let it be with Favre ... The noble Rodgers
Hath told you Favre was interceptious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Favre answered it ...
Here, under leave of Rodgers and the rest,
(For Rodgers is an honourable man;
So are they all; all honourable men)
Come Pack1234 to speak in Favre's funeral ...
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Rodgers says he was interceptious;
And Rodgers is an honourable man….
He hath brought many captives home to Rome,
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Favre seem interceptious?
When that the poor have cried, Favre hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Rodgers says he was interceptious;
And Rodgers is an honourable man.
You all did see that on the Lupercal
Pack1234 thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Rodgers says he was interceptious;
And, sure, he is an honourable man.
Pack1234 speaks not to disprove what Rodgers spoke,
But here Pack1234 is to speak what Pack1234 does know.
You all did love him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then to mourn for him?
O judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason…. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Favre,
And Pack1234 must pause till it come back to me.

Good stuff!

[Patler]

The media love for Favre has really turned in the last few years. Now he's a big story, but they don't love him (as evidenced by Manning winning the MVP over him - Favre was lights out last year and should have won the MVP).

I agree that the media love for Favre has changed, I disagree that Favre was a clear MVP choice over Manning.

[bobblehead]

There was little doubt, really, that AR was the right choice after his first season. The only thing that deterred that was how Favre was 8-3 with the jets before hurting his throwing shoulder, and how last year he put together one of the best seasons by a QB ever statistically. He should of been the MVP last year over manning, and everyone knew that.

However, just because he had a good 11 games for the jets and MVP numbers last year never really meant that Rodgers wasn't the right choice. All that meant was that yeah, Favre had a couple years left him and sure, he knows how to play the game. We knew this - he did it for us in 2007. We knew favre could still play at the time that we went AR over him. AR has done just about as well for us as favre would of. Even last year, with the MVP numbers Favre put up, AR almost matched them. He was right there, neck and neck, except that Rodgers had more rushing TD's.


The only reason, at this point, to even say Favre would of been the better choice over Rodgers is because Rodgers hasn't won a playoff game yet. Where as, Favre has a ring. Sure, that ring was over a decade ago, but he's also been to the NFC Championship game 2 times in the last 3 seasons.

Now, does Rodgers sustain this over the course of his career? That has yet to be seen. One thing you can say about Favre is outside of maybe 2 or 3 years of his playing career, he consistently played at a very high level. Sure, he may have had his falls in the playoffs, but for the regular season he was amazing in general. Rodgers has had 3 statistically good years and it loosk like 2 great winning record years. I am happy. He is younger, more willing to run the ball when he has too, and less prone to making the bad throws.

Sure, Favre still does a couple things better - or at least - there were things Favre did better before he came back and stayed one year too long that most feel Rodgers will never be able to do - and that is fine. Every QB is their own ordeal, and Favre is a HoF player. OF course he has some things he does very well most can't do, such as his uncanny ability to hit the slant dead on. This may all be gone well, but it was always the one play that defined his career. One of the best slant throwers I have ever seen.

Rodgers was the right choice 3 years ago, and he's obviously still the right choice now. Sure, favre may have put together two more good seasons for us, but we would of lost Rodgers in the process, and thus after those two seasons we could be scrambling for another decade. Rodgers has a better sart to his career statistically - but it's all about wins and a ring. If AR never gets a ring, for many, it will be hard to say long haul he was the superior QB to favre.

very good post and classy. Let evryone know its ok to love favre, as long as you can keep a clear head and not extend that to hating TT, MM, and all who critcize him. BF won us a superbowl, and I'll always remember him for the holmgren years. The other wounds healed a bit sunday. I'll be even happier when ARod's "joe Montana" coolness extends to the playoffs....and with this D behind him I expect it will.

[Fritz]

Brilliant, PB.

[bobblehead]

I agree that the media love for Favre has changed, I disagree that Favre was a clear MVP choice over Manning.

I was hating on him at the time, but he got my vote....I still think it was his finest season ever.....I also thought he did it by doing exactly what MM begged him to do. Getting in shape and playing within himself.

[Patler]

I agree that the media love for Favre has changed, I disagree that Favre was a clear MVP choice over Manning.

I was hating on him at the time, but he got my vote....I still think it was his finest season ever.....I also thought he did it by doing exactly what MM begged him to do. Getting in shape and playing within himself.

I agree that it may have been Favre's best year statistically, and that he did it by playing within himself as MM begged him to. But I also think all of that happened because Favre no longer had to be the offensive focus. The Vikings got as far as they did because they had a very good defense, Percy Harvin on STs, Adrian Peterson to run the ball, and good receivers. Favre was able to be just a piece of the overall puzzle, rather than the primary part for scoring points. While he played exceptionally well, his value to the Vikings may have been less than his value to the Packers in some of those years when it was Favre and not much more for points. Would the Vikings have gone as far without Favre? Probably not, but I think offensively Peterson may be a more important part than Favre. AFter all, they weren't bad before Favre got there.

The Colts without Manning would be a totally different team, I think. Therefore, I think Manning might be more valuable.

Just my feeling, but I can understand yours as well.

[sheepshead]

Payton Manning runs an offense like few I have ever seen. I hate to admit it but he will likely go down as one of the greatest QBs of all time.

[sheepshead]

Just proved it on the field.

1. Better legs
2. Better arm
3. Better head


This debate was settled on the field.

I thought this was settled years ago.

[Joemailman]

I thought this was settled years ago.

Well, some might have argued otherwise after what happened last year. Favre did beat the Packers twice last year. However, that now appears to be a bump in the road leading to a number of years of the Packers being an elite team led by an elite quarterback.

[Zool]

I agree that it may have been Favre's best year statistically, and that he did it by playing within himself as MM begged him to. But I also think all of that happened because Favre no longer had to be the offensive focus. The Vikings got as far as they did because they had a very good defense, Percy Harvin on STs, Adrian Peterson to run the ball, and good receivers. Favre was able to be just a piece of the overall puzzle, rather than the primary part for scoring points. While he played exceptionally well, his value to the Vikings may have been less than his value to the Packers in some of those years when it was Favre and not much more for points. Would the Vikings have gone as far without Favre? Probably not, but I think offensively Peterson may be a more important part than Favre. AFter all, they weren't bad before Favre got there.

The Colts without Manning would be a totally different team, I think. Therefore, I think Manning might be more valuable.

Just my feeling, but I can understand yours as well.

The Colts had a better receiving corps but not by that much. The Vikings run game was light years better than the Colts and their D was better. Both teams lost to the Saints, but I'd still give the nod to old Sourpus Manning. As Patler said, take him off the Colts and I doubt they win 8 games.