August 19, 200917 yr That's two different years, and I believe the Packers had a ton of injuries last year. Rodgers was better than Favre was with the Jets. That's fact. Rodgers was w/ a better overall team that's the fact. Favre had a team that was terrible the year before sitting at 8-3 and they were playing the best football in the AFC. Fact. Rodgers had a team that was in the NFC title game the year before watching when the playoffs started. Fact
August 19, 200917 yr Favre loves the media attention. He's retired and un-retired too many times not to love it... There is absoultely nothing to back up this claim that Favre loves the attention. It seems pretty obvious that he just goes back and forth alot on what he wants to do. And there's nothing wrong with that.
August 19, 200917 yr :lol: Wow. The only way these two things are similar (your grandpa and Brett Favre) is that they are both people. I do not know your grandpa and I do not see him on TV every other second. Brett Favre is on TV every other day talking about retiring and then talking about coming back. He's crying, saying it's been fun, and then he's smiling and talking about how his daughter wanted him to play again. I do not know your grandpa, and quite frankly I don't care what decisions he makes about his future. Same for Favre. I don't care what Favre does, I just wish he'd make up his mind and quit taking up time on TV. I'm sick of seeing him. I honestly think if it wasn't for the media talking about it all the time, that he might not have retired and came back like he has the last few years. With everyone talking about is he going to retire or is he coming back, probably puts pressure on him to make a decision when he really is not ready to or not sure what he for sure wants. I mean both times he retired it was shortly after the season, so of coarse at that time you are burnt out and would make you lean towards retiring. So I really think if he was never pressured into making decisions, he probably would have never retired the last few years. He has been playing football his whole life, so its pretty hard to just make a decision that you definitely will stick with when you getting pressured to decide. I think its silly how some people on here talk about how they are sick of seeing it. If you are sick of it, then just turn the channel. No one forces people to have to watch it or listen about it. Just like no one forces people to get on here and talk about it. Obviously people aren't as sick of it as some of you all say, because people get on here and then still talk about it some more. You would think if people are sick of it, then wouldnt want to talk about it either.
August 19, 200917 yr That's two different years, and I believe the Packers had a ton of injuries last year. Rodgers was better than Favre was with the Jets. That's fact. Rodgers was not better than Favre when Favre's arm was fine. Now after he hurt his arm, yeah Rodgers was better. Which is a good thing, because that would have been pretty sad if he couldn't be better than a QB with a hurt arm. The thing is though Favre still led his team to a better record in a better conference, than Rodgers was able to do.
August 19, 200917 yr HB let's play who signed a $100M contract: QB A: 07/08 stats avg: TD's 25 INT's 18.5 YDS 3814 % 66.1 Rating 88.35 QB B: 07/08 stats avg: TD's 22 INT's 15.0 YDS 3287 % 58.2 Rating 80.15 What does this have to do with the thread?
August 19, 200917 yr Rodgers was not better than Favre when Favre's arm was fine. Now after he hurt his arm, yeah Rodgers was better. Which is a good thing, because that would have been pretty sad if he couldn't be better than a QB with a hurt arm. The thing is though Favre still led his team to a better record in a better conference, than Rodgers was able to do. Favre has consistently played bad towards the end of the year for the last few years. So why would I want a QB who's almost guaranteed to fall off at the end of the year? Found this on another site, enjoy.
August 19, 200917 yr How is that not applicable? What does it matter who signed a $100 million contract? Favre signed a two year $25 million contract...if that helps.
August 19, 200917 yr Rodgers was not better than Favre when Favre's arm was fine. Now after he hurt his arm, yeah Rodgers was better. Which is a good thing, because that would have been pretty sad if he couldn't be better than a QB with a hurt arm. The thing is though Favre still led his team to a better record in a better conference, than Rodgers was able to do. Why not look at the individual schedules? It doesn't matter what conference you play in. Green Bay played 10 teams with winning records (6 with 10 wins or more) and only four of their opponents finished below .500. The Jets played 6 teams with winning records (5 with 10 wins or more) and 8 of their opponents finished below .500. Whether the AFC is more difficult or not doesn't matter, the Packers schedule was significantly tougher. The Packers lost 7 games by 4 points or less, 5 to playoff teams, and 2 of the other 3 were .500 or better...you don't think getting twice as many losing teams on the schedule would have made a difference? Not to mention, Rodgers had to carry the load in Green Bay for much of the season because Ryan Grant underperformed, especially early. Meanwhile, Favre had the benefit of a running game that averaged 4.7 ypc and got a career year from Thomas Jones.
August 19, 200917 yr Why not look at the individual schedules? It doesn't matter what conference you play in. Green Bay played 10 teams with winning records (6 with 10 wins or more) and only four of their opponents finished below .500. The Jets played 6 teams with winning records (5 with 10 wins or more) and 8 of their opponents finished below .500. Whether the AFC is more difficult or not doesn't matter, the Packers schedule was significantly tougher. The Packers lost 7 games by 4 points or less, 5 to playoff teams, and 2 of the other 3 were .500 or better...you don't think getting twice as many losing teams on the schedule would have made a difference? Not to mention, Rodgers had to carry the load in Green Bay for much of the season because Ryan Grant underperformed, especially early. Meanwhile, Favre had the benefit of a running game that averaged 4.7 ypc and got a career year from Thomas Jones. Great points. I believe the Packers were the only team with a losing record who outscored their opponents at the end of the year :lol:. They lost a lot of close games and had a lot of injuries...Rodgers had a better year and he played better than Favre. Having Favre on the Packers last year would have resulted in nothing all that different IMO.
August 19, 200917 yr But he could have come back if he wanted even after he retired. Favre should not have had to decide by the draft IMO. If they thought he wasn't good enough they shouldn't have been scared to death of him going to Minnesota. If they thought his time was up they should have given him his release like he asked. They didn't treat him w/ the respect he deserved for turning the franchise around. They were awful w/o him and he made them relevant again. Im going to look like a hypocrite here due to many posts complaining somewhat about proper respect. Looking back at the Packer's decision I can't fault them for giving him a deadline. He has done everything he can to avoid the grind work and milking publicity since. This makes it hard for me to be convinced the Packers weren't familiar with this behind the scenes. I understand where you are coming from, but on this one, in retrospect, I would have done the same.
August 19, 200917 yr Favre has consistently played bad towards the end of the year for the last few years. So why would I want a QB who's almost guaranteed to fall off at the end of the year? Found this on another site, enjoy. That is good stats you pulled up there. What website do you go to, to get that because I would just be interested in seeing that for all QB's and how they do at the end of the year compared to the beginning.
August 19, 200917 yr Why not look at the individual schedules? It doesn't matter what conference you play in. Green Bay played 10 teams with winning records (6 with 10 wins or more) and only four of their opponents finished below .500. The Jets played 6 teams with winning records (5 with 10 wins or more) and 8 of their opponents finished below .500. Whether the AFC is more difficult or not doesn't matter, the Packers schedule was significantly tougher. The Packers lost 7 games by 4 points or less, 5 to playoff teams, and 2 of the other 3 were .500 or better...you don't think getting twice as many losing teams on the schedule would have made a difference? Not to mention, Rodgers had to carry the load in Green Bay for much of the season because Ryan Grant underperformed, especially early. Meanwhile, Favre had the benefit of a running game that averaged 4.7 ypc and got a career year from Thomas Jones. A few things your numbers don't make to much of an argument here. Yeah they played more teams with better records, but those teams like the Bears, Cowboys, and Tampa Bay who had a 9 and 7 records were not as good as their records and benefited from being in the NFC. Those teams in the AFC don't has as good of a record. Teams like the Chargers and Broncos last year if they were in the NFC would have had better records than their 8 and 8 records that they had last year most likely. So just going by record of teams doesn't always show who played the better teams, because all those teams didn't play the same level of competition. If anything the teams they had to play probably were more even than anything or if at worst the Packers schedule slightly better. Yet Favre while hurt for awhile still got his team a better record, and got the players around him to perform better. As for making up the excuse for Rodgers not having a run game because Grant underperformed and Thomas Jones had a great year kinda hurts your argument don't you think? I mean when Favre was the QB in Green Bay Grant did great, and could that have been because teams were more worried about Favre than Rodgers last year? So that is why Grant couldn't do as well. Or how about since teams were worried about Favre for the Jets last year, so that is what led to Thomas Jones having a career year? So don't you think how the runningbacks did, had to do a lot with Favre being there and in Grants case Favre not being there. I mean that is a pretty strange coincedence that Grant did bad when Favre left, and Jones did great once he had Favre as his QB. So I think that shows that Favre makes the running game better as well, so yeah that probably would have made the Packers better than they were last year. Its not hard to see that Favre made the Jets team better while he was there, and him being there was the reason why they were even in a race for the playoffs last year. Without him there, they probably don't have a winning record and wouldn't have had an even opportunity to blow it and miss the playoffs. While Rodgers in Green Bay had players get worst around him when he took over. So who is better for a team? I think its obvious its still Favre right now.
August 19, 200917 yr Great points. I believe the Packers were the only team with a losing record who outscored their opponents at the end of the year :lol:. They lost a lot of close games and had a lot of injuries...Rodgers had a better year and he played better than Favre. Having Favre on the Packers last year would have resulted in nothing all that different IMO. They lost a lot of close games? Could that have been because Rodgers couldn't them over the top to win those close games like Favre might have been able to do? Also Rodgers really didn't play much better than Favre when Favre was healthy, if he played better at all. However in your honest opinion of the two guys. Who was able to make the players around them better, and even get the team to overachieve. That answer is obviously Favre. So if someone makes his teammates around him better, which helps get the team to overachieve. How is a guy who didn't make his teammates better, and had his team underachieve better than the other guy? Favre made the team he went to better and got the players around him to do better, while the opposite happened for Rodgers. I think that shows that Favre still overall was the better QB.
August 19, 200917 yr FYI...here's some QB stats over the last six games of 2008 (Brady's stats are 2007)... Brees - 147/237 (62.0%), 16 TD, 6 Int McNabb - 118/189 (62.4%), 9 TD, 3 Int Romo - 129/223 (57.8%), 11 TD, 7 Int Warner - 131/217 (60.4%), 10 TD, 7 Int Brady - 148/240 (61.7%), 12 TD, 4 Int Big Ben - 107/189 (56.6%), 7 TD, 4 Int Palmer - 123/195 (63.1%), 8 TD, 6 Int Peyton - 137/175 (78.3%), 10 TD, 3 Int Cutler - 154/247 (62.3%), 6 TD, 7 Int Rivers - 121/182 (66.5%), 13 TD, 1 Int
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.