Personally, I like to use my eyes and brains to analyze QBs. You can find a statistic to backup on any valid argument.
The knock on Favre throughout his career is his lack of consistency. That showed up after Mike Holmgren left. Hell, it even showed up during the early stages of the Holmgren era. Unlike Favre, Rodgers' best quality is arguably his consistency.
The point I am making here is that mid 90s Favre gets the nod over Rodgers and any QB I think that has ever played the game. To take away from the 1990s Brett Favre is to take away from the legacy of the Packers. He was amazing. However, Rodgers does have an opportunity to have a more consistent career.
Consistency = better career.
"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:
I would change it to Favre is the moste talented QB ever. But he lacked the discipline and focus to take advantage of that talent. Which is why he was a streaky player. Favre was not the go to player in his super bowl win. Reggie and Desmond were.
If Favre had Montana's work ethic, dedication and focus, he would easily be the best.
Starr was a go to guy. Rodgers is a go to guy. Favre was contained so he wouldn't screw it up.
Favre isn't equal to Rodgers in his abiliy to close the deal.
"porky88" wrote: