Yerko
15 years ago
Bottom line is 'right here and now'

...and right here and now I would take Rodgers over Favre in a heartbeat.

Rodgers has shown he is an excellent quarterback behind a semi-average offensive line (with top quality receivers). I seriously could not imagine what would have happened if Favre was behind the Packers offensive line this last season.

Favre was surrounded with a lot more weapons in Minnesota, a better offensive line, and a cute dome with air conditioning.

Rodgers was surrounded with some weapons (mainly our WRs), a semi-average offensive line, and outdoor conditions.

I'll never take away what Favre did for the Pack, but here and now...Rodgers is the better quarterback and we are lucky we landed another quality one.
UserPostedImage
wamj2008
15 years ago
I see Rodgers as giving the team an opportunity to win multiple SB's, as he doesn't turn the ball over and make stupid plays. He's definitely made in the Tom Brady/Joe Montana/Mr. Cool mode, versus the Favre/Elway/Gunslinger style of play.

2 out of the last 3 years, Favre could have QB-ed the NFC contender if he hadn't thrown season-ending rookie picks.
blank
Greg C.
15 years ago

We forget that the early years of the "streak" were enabled in part by a Vicodin addiction.

"Wade" wrote:



I've never heard anyone say this. The way I understand it, the Vicodin addiction was a byproduct of injuries that required pain relief medication, but I wouldn't think that the Vicodin addiction "enabled" the consecutive game streak in any way.

Another point in this thread that I don't agree with is that Favre had an advantage over Rodgers because he played in a dome. I don't think it was a significant advantage. I don't remember any Packer home games played in bad weather last year.
blank
Brettizzle
15 years ago
Well he is right for the most part, Rodgers got burned by Favre on a lot of throws and Favre picked Rodgers off a few times last year.
Jermichael Finley

We will be in Indianapolis

bozz_2006
15 years ago

I'm not sure why, but when I watched him occasionally via videos at NFL.com, Dukes struck me as one of the better talking heads out there. Probably my OL bias (I also like Ross Tucker).

Not to mention the alternatives against which he is compared are typically so very, very bad, that anything remotely articulate seems good by comparison.

As to the substantive point. I would rather have Rodgers right now than Favre. In fact I can't think of a quarterback I'd rather have than Rodgers, save perhaps Bart Starr c. 1965. Not Favre. Not Brady. Not Brees. Not M*nning.

I think this is part of the reason I continue to be so damn unreasonable about the OL. I think about what Rodgers would do with a topflight line, instead of one I considered servicable at best at the end of last year, and it almost makes me drool. And I worry that, because of that line, there's too high a likelihood of that one low hit or cheap shot (can you say "New Orleans"?) away from the quarterback equivalent of Eddie Lee Ivery or Gale Sayers.

We Packer fans are so spoiled from the F*vre years of never missing a game. We forget that the early years of the "streak" were enabled in part by a Vicodin addiction. That the years of Favre's career did not all take place behind a dominant line, and that without his freakish durability, we would have had to make do without him more than once.

I think Rodgers has something that could make him the greatest quarterback ever. But not if he's on the sideline in street clothes.

"Wade" wrote:


Did someone say Ross Tucker? 
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

We forget that the early years of the "streak" were enabled in part by a Vicodin addiction.

"Greg C." wrote:



I've never heard anyone say this. The way I understand it, the Vicodin addiction was a byproduct of injuries that required pain relief medication, but I wouldn't think that the Vicodin addiction "enabled" the consecutive game streak in any way.

Another point in this thread that I don't agree with is that Favre had an advantage over Rodgers because he played in a dome. I don't think it was a significant advantage. I don't remember any Packer home games played in bad weather last year.

"Wade" wrote:



I'm not making a moral judgment.

But the reason people take Vicodin is for pain. Severe pain. To lessen the pain.

There is no doubt that Favre has one of the highest pain thresholds out there. That he is able to play through pain that would bench any other quarterback. But he still has some pain threshold that he won't be able to handle. Everyone does. If he's taking Vicodin at time X, its because without it he's got concern that the pain is at/near a level he considers "too high" to perform at.

If he's taking too many Vicodin, there's a pain issue there.

The fact that he played with the help of Vicodin doesn't make him any less of "the NFL ironman to define NFL ironmen". But if he's not taking the hgh powered pain medication, he would have been more likely to pass whatever that "pain-threshold-beyond-which-even-Favre-couldn't-have-played".

But again, my main point is not that Favre wouldn't have had the streak. My main point is that we should not assume that Rodgers is an out-of-this-world ironman. It's better to assume that, when it comes to being able to play with injury, Rodgers is closer to the "average NFL quarterback" than he is to "the greatest ironman in NFL history".

My point is that if he gets hit too much, he's likely going to go down to injury sooner than Favre. And if he goes down unnecessarily (e.g., because he plays too many plays behind a sub-standard OL), the Packers will be losing what may be the best QB in the league.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Gravedigga
15 years ago



Favre was surrounded with a lot more weapons in Minnesota, a better offensive line, and a cute dome with air conditioning.

Rodgers was surrounded with some weapons (mainly our WRs), a semi-average offensive line, and outdoor conditions.

"G-Force" wrote:




Here we go again with you guys. You say he had a lot more weapons which couldnt be further from the truth. His weapons coming into the season were much worse, esepcially considering he never played with them. I would definitely take the Packers weapons on offense over Minnesotas. For all the talk of Minnys "great" O-line, they couldn't run block worth shit and it was all on Favres shoulders at the end of the year. That o-line provided him with multiple ass kickings at the end of the year(Arizona, Chicago, New Orleans) off the top of my head.

Receivers.........are you kidding. The packers had and still have the best group of receivers in the league IMO. Jennings, Driver, Jones, Nelson and the two tight ends vs Harvin(rookie), Rice(nothing before Favre showed up), Berrian(overrated, one trick pony), Schianko(nothing before Favre showed up).

Grant vs Peterson I give you that but Peterson fumbled away games with his 7 fumbles while Grant stayed consistent and got good in the 2nd half of the year and fumbled once. Also, for all this talk, Grant had 4.4 yards per carry and 1253 yards vs Petersons 4.4 yards per carry and 1383 yards. Not a significant difference. 11 TD's vs 18 but that's more reflective of field position than anything else.

Stop trying to discount what Favre did by making stuff up about weapons. Only makes you look bitter.
--------------------------------------------
UserPostedImage


A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d
Tezzy
15 years ago
First, I don't think in anyway is Jamie Dukes stupid. And certainly not for these Favre comments. Plain and simple, Rodgers went 0-2 against Favre and was 0-1 in the playoffs while Favre was 1-1. Call that butt licking if you like, but I don't see it. If that's not someones criteria for what says one QB is better than another, so be it. But it definetely isn't a stupid opinion if you ask me. Either you agree or disagree, but I don't understand the ad hominem.
On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."
go.pack.go.
15 years ago

Bottom line is 'right here and now'

...and right here and now I would take Rodgers over Favre in a heartbeat.

Rodgers has shown he is an excellent quarterback behind a semi-average offensive line (with top quality receivers). I seriously could not imagine what would have happened if Favre was behind the Packers offensive line this last season.

Favre was surrounded with a lot more weapons in Minnesota, a better offensive line, and a cute dome with air conditioning.

Rodgers was surrounded with some weapons (mainly our WRs), a semi-average offensive line, and outdoor conditions.

I'll never take away what Favre did for the Pack, but here and now...Rodgers is the better quarterback and we are lucky we landed another quality one.

"G-Force" wrote:



I disagree with one thing in this post. Favre was NOT surrounded with more weapons. Yes, he had the best RB in the NFL and a few good receivers, but I don't think that Minnesota's receivers are anywhere close to the talent that the Packers have. Add Jermichael Finley in the contest and it's not even close.

The Vikings offensive line IS better though. I'll give you that.

Just remember: Favre makes just about any receiver look good. Just look at Sidney Rice for an example. He wasn't all that great before he got Brett as his QB.
UserPostedImage
Packers_Finland
15 years ago

First, I don't think in anyway is Jamie Dukes stupid.

"Tezzy" wrote:



After saying Peppers > Allen. I'd say he is stupid. Well that, and the fact that he thinks Vick deserves a second chance as a starter but Clausen doesn't deserve a starting spot (after displaying "immaturity" in college).

Edit: I think he's not wrong in saying Favre is better than Rodgers. That's a credible opinion. But the way he acted during that Favre vs Rodgers segment was the definition of being a biased idiot.
This is a placeholder
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (10h) : Both LB Quay Walker and Rookie DB Micah Robinson have passed their physicals
Zero2Cool (10h) : Happy to see site feels more snappy snappy
Zero2Cool (10h) : No sir. I did not.
dfosterf (10h) : You didn't get free childcare when you were at work?
wpr (11h) : These guys make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Pay for their own childcare.
dfosterf (12h) : 2nd issue. Number 1 issue was no gameday childcare. 1 of 3 teams not providing it
Zero2Cool (12h) : Suppose if locker room is main issue, we sitting pretty
wpr (12h) : I thought so Mucky. In those useless player polls GB always rates high overall. Locker is a part of it.
Mucky Tundra (13h) : Wasn't the locker room just updated like 6 or 7 years ago?
Zero2Cool (14h) : I have forum updated on different site. We'll see how this one goes before going to that
Zero2Cool (14h) : Elgton Jenkins has a back injury, is expect to end contract dispute
wpr (16h) : It's funny the PA complained about the locker room. It wasn't that long ago it was top shelf. Things change in a hurry.
wpr (16h) : The site is much more better.
Zero2Cool (17h) : NFLPA report said Packers lockerroom needed upgrade. Whining bout where you change?
Zero2Cool (17h) : I saw that and thought it was kind of lame.
dfosterf (17h) : Packers new locker room is pretty awesome. Great for morale, imo
Zero2Cool (17h) : Shuffled things on the web server. Hope it makes it faster.
Zero2Cool (18h) : Other times, it's turtle ass
Zero2Cool (18h) : Sometimes it's snappy, like now.
beast (19h) : I feel like it's loading at the top of the next minute, or something like that.
beast (19h) : Also the thanks/heart takes FOREVER to load, and posting in the shout box takes three times FOREVER!
beast (19h) : Thanks for saying something, I thought it was slow, but assumed it was on my end
beast (19h) : Thanks for saying something, I thought it was slow, but assumed it was on my end
Zero2Cool (19h) : Yeah, I noticed that too. Is it slow for PackerPeople.com too?
wpr (19h) : I don't know what you IT guys call it but the page loading is very slow for me today.
Zero2Cool (19h) : SSL might be settled now.
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Still working through SSL cert issues
wpr (23-Jul) : Glad to be back
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I think PH original finally working.
dfosterf (22-Jul) : Can tell you are having a fun day Kev
Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Yep, I had to manually move them. It'll fix itself after more posts.
Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Same deal with the songs/videos thread, says you replied last but when I go there it's what I posted earlier is last
Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : I had to manually move three posts.
Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : But when I go it, Martha's is the last reply
Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Still a little screwy; it shows on the main forum that you were the last person to reply to the Jenkins trade thread
Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Host issues, been crazy day
Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Connect 4?
Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Connecting to new database
Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : What the hell
beast (22-Jul) : Packershome going to the Whiteout unis again
Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : Oh wait, they got Cam Ward. 1st overall right? haha oops
Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : They could send Packers a 1st for a QB they are familiar with
Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : Titans QB Will Levis to have season-ending shoulder surgery
Zero2Cool (19-Jul) : Their season did kind of start there, so 🤷
dfosterf (19-Jul) : Eagles put an engraved Brazil flag on their super bowl rings
Zero2Cool (18-Jul) : Benton unsigned no more
Zero2Cool (17-Jul) : That's good analysis, yes you are getting old. It'd a blessing!
dfosterf (14-Jul) : *analysis* gettin' old
dfosterf (14-Jul) : One of the best analyisis I"ve ever watched at this time of an offseason
dfosterf (14-Jul) : Andy Herman interviewed Warren Sharp on his Pack a day podcast
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
1h / Around The NFL / beast

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

4h / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

18-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.