Super Bowl win opens flood gates....

[RashanGary]

If Favre was special and carried this team, it would have dropped when he left. The Packers won a SB 3 years later and playoffs 2 out of three. The Jets made the playoffs both years after he left and not teh year he was there. The Vikings will probably be better next year than they were this year.


He's not a difference maker. Rodgers is. He played for a long time, has some numbers, but always screwed it up. Any team is better off without him as long as they don't have NFLE scrubs behind him.

This definitely diminishes how we think of Favre. Now he was the screw up, not everyone else.

And him as a person, we don't even have to open that can of worms.

[LEWCWA]

It did drop from NFC championship game to 6-10. Your words not mine!

[bobblehead]

bullshit, part of the reason Rodgers fell in the draft was NFL people thought he was too arrogant for his own good!

Never heard this anywhere....ever. Honestly, I love AR cuz he is confident yet humble. I never liked BF because he is an ass and I saw it in person as well as otherwise. I cheered for BF cuz he was our QB and we made it back to the SB in large part due to his talent. I likely would never cheer for him again and I don't ever want to see him be part of this organization again. Just my two cents, you are entitled to yours.

PS...I never like Andre Rison either, but I cheered like hell when he caught the pass in the superbowl....never want to see him be part of the Packers again either.

[LEWCWA]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakam...om-april-2005/

Christ it is right here in this column, i'm sure you can find plenty more!

[Patler]

That is a strong opinion, but flawed in my opinion. A great QB goes a long way to building a championship type team. You speak as if great QB's just fall off trees. I don't think that is the case! Hell the Bears have been looking for one forever! I will agree that Harlen, Wolf, Holmgren, etc... deserve much credit for what happened in GB, but make no mistake BF was a huge part of it as well. Just like Rodgers is a huge part of why this team won the Super Bowl.

I think with better roster building, the Packers could have been very, very successful with Lynn Dickey or with Don Majkowski if he had stayed healthy. If they had not had Favre, they could have been very, very successful under Wolf with Brunnel or with Hasselbeck. Sherman might have had more success with Hasselbeck than he did with Favre, whom he could not manage.

Competent QBs are out there, you just have to find them. The Packers have had at least 7 that would have been good enough with more complete rosters. Is it better to have a better QB? Sure, but a lot of the bad years for the Packers were because of the roster as a whole and not the QB

[Smidgeon]

bullshit, part of the reason Rodgers fell in the draft was NFL people thought he was too arrogant for his own good!

Confidence can come across as arrogance even if it isn't arrogance.

[RashanGary]

haha, LEWCWA

I'm exaggerating. I think it looks bad on Favre for everyone to be better off without him, but if you don't, that's fine. We're all going to have differing view points.

And I'm not saying he wasn't good, but he was supposed to be the best ever, the guy carrying the team. How do you just replace that in one try (both us and the Jets did it in one try). Seems like either he was overrated or we just hit another one in a million magical player and then the Jets hit another one in a million player too. AR is good, excellent really, but one in a million, I don't know. Sanchez? I'm pretty sure no.

I'm pretty sure Favre isn't as special as we used to believe but apparently you still do.


AR is lucky to be on a great team and maybe many more. Brett was lucky too. The Packers have been run right since Harlan Hired Wolf and got out the way. The only thing we can really judge is what they do. Does AR throw TD's or picks when it counts? Brett's legacy has been iced. WE already know what he did when it mattered most.

[bobblehead]

If Favre was special and carried this team, it would have dropped when he left. The Packers won a SB 3 years later and playoffs 2 out of three. The Jets made the playoffs both years after he left and not teh year he was there. The Vikings will probably be better next year than they were this year.


He's not a difference maker. Rodgers is. He played for a long time, has some numbers, but always screwed it up. Any team is better off without him as long as they don't have NFLE scrubs behind him.

This definitely diminishes how we think of Favre. Now he was the screw up, not everyone else.

And him as a person, we don't even have to open that can of worms.

JH, I admire the Favre bashing, but now your just reaching. We are blessed that we followed a very good QB with a great one. Don't cheapen your intellectual argument by saying Favre sucked. He was very good. You need a very good QB to win in the NFL. History has proven him to be an asshat and nothing you say is going to change LEW's mind. For my money (and I'm guessing you agree) I'll take AR anyday over #4. Don't get dragged into this garbage discussion anymore than you already have. Hey, how about them brewers.

[Guiness]

bullshit, part of the reason Rodgers fell in the draft was NFL people thought he was too arrogant for his own good!

Without a doubt the first time I've heard that, and I think I've read quite a lot of stuff about him, and the Packers.

He fell because of the failures of a few QB's ahead of him. The so-called 'Tedford QB's', the failings of Carr and Harrington pushed him down in the draft as much as anything else. The thinking was that he played in a very QB friendly system that made him look better than he was. Rodgers was thought to be unathletic, and a little short (6'2"). Smith is 6'4", Campbell is 6'5". That's one of those measurables people get worked up about.

[mission]

I agree, Aaron needs no propping up given he just got MVP of the superbowl. We can bash Brett without any motive other than our dislike for a player that has made it abundantly clear that he wanted the Packers to lose.

This is really what it's about for me as well as what bobble is sayin'. We're Packer fans, we love the team and like certain players based on what they do on the field and how they're respected off of it. Some players we like more than others because we admire their character and that kind of thing. Once we really got to know Favre - and how he wanted the Packers to lose, he wanted to beat us himself - then he was no longer aligned with the same interests as the Green Bay Packers (and my household).

When you're a Packer, you're a Packer, even if you have to play a couple years at the end of your career for another team. There are ways to handle it as a professional and Brett didn't go about it that way. No one hates Aaron Kampman, right?

Anyway, we just witnessed an amazing postseason w/12 leading us to a World Championship and it's fair for the majority of us to feel a sense of relief that maybe we can go on now, being fans of the Packers and no longer "the team that Brett Favre used to run".

It's just about the Packers for me.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Offense 40%
Defense 40%
ST's - 20%


Breaking the offense down further

WR's/TE's - 25%
RB's/FB's - 25%
OL - 25%
QB - 25%

So the QB is a big part of the offense, 25% of 40% or 10% total.

Brett Favre had a 10% impact on that 96 team. The other 90% was already great. Anyone who suited up would have won a lot of games. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson or Jay Cutler could have won with that team. He was not a hero, LEWCWA, he was a physically gifted player with a mentally stunted game that you related to in some way, but he was not as big of a part as you think.

We'll win without Brett. We're better without him. That's a fact. Deal with it.

I agree with much of what you are trying to get across--although I think the manner in which you are saying it is just to get people riled up. I would disagee with this though. It's a team game, but a QB means way more to a team's success then this. I think the whole playoff run is proof of how much a QB means. Rodgers outplayed the opposing QB in all 6 games and he was the biggest difference in probably 5 of those 6 games.

Favre was a great QB. The best regular season QB in history perhaps. His Packers team had one losing season in 16 seasons. That's with great personnel, average personnel, and below average personnel around him. If he had choked in the playoffs a couple times fewer, he'd rightfully have a spot in the games top 5 QBs. Maybe top 3. He didn't though, and that knocks him out of the top 5 for me. Maybe the top 10 once Brady and Manning retire. Manning's career is kind of following Favre's career.

[mission]

JH, I admire the Favre bashing, but now your just reaching. We are blessed that we followed a very good QB with a great one. Don't cheapen your intellectual argument by saying Favre sucked. He was very good. You need a very good QB to win in the NFL. History has proven him to be an asshat and nothing you say is going to change LEW's mind. For my money (and I'm guessing you agree) I'll take AR anyday over #4. Don't get dragged into this garbage discussion anymore than you already have. Hey, how about them brewers.

Ahhhhhh..... isn't it nice that we can talk like this now?

[3irty1]

Offense 40%
Defense 40%
ST's - 20%


Breaking the offense down further

WR's/TE's - 25%
RB's/FB's - 25%
OL - 25%
QB - 25%

So the QB is a big part of the offense, 25% of 40% or 10% total.

Brett Favre had a 10% impact on that 96 team. The other 90% was already great. Anyone who suited up would have won a lot of games. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson or Jay Cutler could have won with that team. He was not a hero, LEWCWA, he was a physically gifted player with a mentally stunted game that you related to in some way, but he was not as big of a part as you think.

We'll win without Brett. We're better without him. That's a fact. Deal with it.

I love when you assign subjective numerical values to things then use those numbers to make a point.

[HarveyWallbangers]

As far as Aaron being cocky during the time leading up to the 2005 draft, he admits that he was. He has said that he was advised to be that one in the interview process. He said it was bad advice, and he should have remained true to himself.

[Guiness]

its an interesting question as to weather favre brought us out of the stone age

packers drafted mark brunell in 1993, he or don majikowski probably still would have been the qb when the packers went to the super bowl in 96 and 97. now for those 2 super bowls we had either the top defense or the second best defense in the nfl and were just downright dominate.

now brunell was never favre, but its an interesting question to ask if a mark brunell led packers still could have made those super bowls with that killer D and awesome special teams.

we may not have gotten to the super bowls or won them, but i don't think we would have been a complete joke either. we would have at least been a solid playoff team without favre

Too hard to look at that 'what if' scenario.

If BF wasn't here, does Reggie White come? Without Reggie White, our defense doesn't dominate. Keith Jackson probably can't be convinced to come. You can't take one piece of the puzzle out, and expect the rest to remain in place.