Great reason to be a PackerFan

[Upnorth]

Was reading TMQ for the first time since the superbowl and found this link

http://www.620wtmj.com/sports/green-bay-packers/213609631.html

Give it a read. We are truley lucky as fans to have that kind of QB sucsess and continuity. Add in the Wolfe/TT and Holmgren/MM continuity and is it any question why we have had two decades of near constant sucsess!

Go Pack Go!

[Patler]

Having Favre and Rodgers back to back is sure a treat. I don't mean to minimize it. But I think back to my 50+ years of being a Packer fan, with Starr for about 10 years, Dickey for about 9 and Majkowski for 3 or 4, and I realize that during very few seasons was QB a problem on the team. Dickey missed an entire season in the middle of his career, and Majik was hurt a lot during the few years he played, but when they played they were truly fine QBs. The team didn't lose because Dickey was their QB (in fact, for 10 years he made games fun to watch even when their record was lousy.) In a lot of ways, Majik was Favre before Favre, a gunslinger who would do anything to win. His injuries were downers, but exciting when he played

In the early '70s before they got Dickey, QB play was a weakness, and for a couple years after Dickey left, but those were just a drop in the bucket over the last almost 55 years. For all but about 10 seasons or since 1960, QB was not a worry so long as the starter was in there.

[hoosier]

Patler's memory is clouded by the patina of time. I will give you the Dickey years, or at least the second half of his career after he finally recovered from his 1977 broken leg: from 1980-85, when he started all but 14 games and was generally a very effective (if totally immobile) force. But the remainder of the post-Starr years (1971-80, 1986-92) were generally miserable. Majik had his one great year in '89 but other than that he was mediocre (27/34 TD/INT ratio, QB ratings hovering in the 60s). And David Whitehurst (replacement during Dickey's two year convalescence) and Randy Wright would struggle to get playing time with the Buffalo Bills. Aside from 1989 and the five or so years of a semi-healthy Lynn Dickey, the QB position between Starr and Favre was a festering wound that refused to respond to repeated and increasingly desperate experimental treatments (Rich Campbell, Randy Wright, Robbie Bosco, Anthony Dilweg).

[Patler]

Hoosiers memory is clouded by the stench of the few years the Packers did not have a decent QB on their roster. Those few seasons have mushroomed in his recollection to a prominence they don't deserve. Did the backups suck? For the most part, yes, but they would have if Favre had gone down, and they will if Rodgers goes down. Bratkowski filled in capably for Starr, and Flynn did for Rodgers and for at least partial games, Rodger did for Favre. Most years that won't be the case.

Dickey was in GB from 76 to 85. In his early years he was a young QB with talent who lacked experience (not unlike the young Favre, who was as erratic as heck). During none of those years did I agonize about the QB play going into a season, When Dickey went down to injuries, sure the performance was bad. The unfortunate part was that Dickey's early years were injury plagued.

Majik arrived in '87, and, of course, hung around until Favre arrived. Why they didn't turn the reigns over to him quicker is still puzzling to me. They even rotated starts for a time. But Majik wasn't called Majik just because of his name. But, the compound effect of many injuries greatly affected his career.

From Starr to Dickey there was a void of about 5 years. From Dickey to Majik there was a void of 2 years. During the careers of Dickey and Majik there were voids created by injury, but when they were on the roster and playing, there were much bigger problems than the play of the QB.

When you look at what some teams have had to put up with for QBs, the Packers haven't had it so bad over the last 55 years or so.

[Pugger]

When we had Dickey it was because we had lousy defenses that we lost - not QB play.

[gbgary]

Hoosiers memory is clouded by the stench of the few years the Packers did not have a decent QB on their roster. Those few seasons have mushroomed in his recollection to a prominence they don't deserve. Did the backups suck? For the most part, yes, but they would have if Favre had gone down, and they will if Rodgers goes down. Bratkowski filled in capably for Starr, and Flynn did for Rodgers and for at least partial games, Rodger did for Favre. Most years that won't be the case.

Dickey was in GB from 76 to 85. In his early years he was a young QB with talent who lacked experience (not unlike the young Favre, who was as erratic as heck). During none of those years did I agonize about the QB play going into a season, When Dickey went down to injuries, sure the performance was bad. The unfortunate part was that Dickey's early years were injury plagued.

Majik arrived in '87, and, of course, hung around until Favre arrived. Why they didn't turn the reigns over to him quicker is still puzzling to me. They even rotated starts for a time. But Majik wasn't called Majik just because of his name. But, the compound effect of many injuries greatly affected his career.

From Starr to Dickey there was a void of about 5 years. From Dickey to Majik there was a void of 2 years. During the careers of Dickey and Majik there were voids created by injury, but when they were on the roster and playing, there were much bigger problems than the play of the QB.

When you look at what some teams have had to put up with for QBs, the Packers haven't had it so bad over the last 55 years or so.

I like this version.

When we had Dickey it was because we had lousy defenses that we lost - not QB play.

damn right!!

[mraynrand]

I'm totally tuned into the Hoosier viewpoint. My Father, who is likely closer to Patler's age, sees it even more negatively than Hoosier, and I think it's because he experienced the entire Starr/Lombardi era, and saw what a good team looked like and what a consistent, great leader at QB looked like. Dickey was fantastic to watch when healthy, but the shine was taken off his great years (especially 1983) because of the absolutely abysmal play of the defense (1982 was a bright, sunny day in the Cleveland Winter that was the 70s and 80s Packers). There is no doubt about Dickey's greatness though. No other Packer QB has ever thrown as consistently beautiful and accurate deep ball. Not Rodgers, not Heber not Isbell, and certainly not Starr or Favre. (Rodgers is probably the closest to Dickey, but Heber and Isbell just chucked it up and Hutson could get to everything).

[Guiness]

increasingly desperate experimental treatments (Rich Campbell, Randy Wright, Robbie Bosco, Anthony Dilweg).

You mention desperate treatments and neglect to include Hadl in the list???

[Harlan Huckleby]

When we had Dickey it was because we had lousy defenses that we lost - not QB play.

Dickey was the man.

The last time I saw him, he was in a luxury booth at Lambeau, and the camera cut to him just as he was jamming a giant hot dog into his maw. Not a bad way to remember a guy.

[mraynrand]

withdrawn. weird, wrong thread...

[Patler]

Patler's memory is clouded by the patina of time. I will give you the Dickey years, or at least the second half of his career after he finally recovered from his 1977 broken leg: from 1980-85, when he started all but 14 games and was generally a very effective (if totally immobile) force. But the remainder of the post-Starr years (1971-80, 1986-92) were generally miserable. Majik had his one great year in '89 but other than that he was mediocre (27/34 TD/INT ratio, QB ratings hovering in the 60s). And David Whitehurst (replacement during Dickey's two year convalescence) and Randy Wright would struggle to get playing time with the Buffalo Bills. Aside from 1989 and the five or so years of a semi-healthy Lynn Dickey, the QB position between Starr and Favre was a festering wound that refused to respond to repeated and increasingly desperate experimental treatments (Rich Campbell, Randy Wright, Robbie Bosco, Anthony Dilweg).

For me, the painful years were the Scott Hunter, Jerry Tagge, Jim De Gazio, John Hadl years between Starr and Dickey. That period felt longer than it was, 5 years. Between Dickey and Majik was just a blip.

[mraynrand]

For me, the painful years were the Scott Hunter, Jerry Tagge, Jim De Gazio, John Hadl years between Starr and Dickey. That period felt longer than it was, 5 years. Between Dickey and Majik was just a blip.

From this you'd think the Majic years were just awesome. '88 and '90 were ten wins total. '89 there were I think 4 games decided by last second Jacke kicks. Sure some excitement with Majic, but really it was a total vacuum from 83 to 92, even with Gregg's 8-8 "strong finish after we're eliminated" "try hard with undersized garbage Tom Flynn" teams they just really sucked. Good God man, they started "Bounce Pass" Zorn in 1985. Guy couldn't throw 30 yards in the air.

[Patler]

I'm totally tuned into the Hoosier viewpoint. My Father, who is likely closer to Patler's age, sees it even more negatively than Hoosier, and I think it's because he experienced the entire Starr/Lombardi era, and saw what a good team looked like and what a consistent, great leader at QB looked like. Dickey was fantastic to watch when healthy, but the shine was taken off his great years (especially 1983) because of the absolutely abysmal play of the defense (1982 was a bright, sunny day in the Cleveland Winter that was the 70s and 80s Packers). There is no doubt about Dickey's greatness though. No other Packer QB has ever thrown as consistently beautiful and accurate deep ball. Not Rodgers, not Heber not Isbell, and certainly not Starr or Favre. (Rodgers is probably the closest to Dickey, but Heber and Isbell just chucked it up and Hutson could get to everything).

I, too, experienced the entire Lombardi era. You are correct, that is what made the '70s and '80s so frustrating (and also the '00s and '10s at times), the inability to have balance, especially 2011. The 15-1 record was a salve, but I think we all felt the team was living on borrowed time with a defense so inept.

[Patler]

From this you'd think the Majic years were just awesome. '88 and '90 were ten wins total. '89 there were I think 4 games decided by last second Jacke kicks. Sure some excitement with Majic, but really it was a total vacuum from 83 to 92, even with Gregg's 8-8 "strong finish after we're eliminated" "try hard with undersized garbage Tom Flynn" teams they just really sucked. Good God man, they started "Bounce Pass" Zorn in 1985. Guy couldn't throw 30 yards in the air.

What does team records have to do with it?

I was referring only to QB play, not team play, seasons records and all that. My point is very simple and very straight forward, for a great many of the last 50+ years the Packers have been very fortunate to have a quality QB on their roster. A pro-bowl caliber QB, A QB who could do what was expected from an NFL QB. Unfortunately, for many of the Dickey and Majik years, injuries interrupted it, and even when they did play the overall roster was so weak that team won/loss records suffered.

[hoosier]

For me, the painful years were the Scott Hunter, Jerry Tagge, Jim De Gazio, John Hadl years between Starr and Dickey. That period felt longer than it was, 5 years. Between Dickey and Majik was just a blip.

And ignorance truly was bliss as far as I was concerned during those years. I didn't start paying attention to the Packers until 1977 or 78, so I had neither the well-oiled Lombardi/Starr machine nor the post-Lombardi dysfunction to compare to. Whereas what you call a blip was for me my first two years of college--precisely the time when football is more important than life or death.