zombieslayer
13 years ago
Rodgers had a better performance. That's not what we're arguing.

My argument is you and NSD are completely discounting Favre's performance.

0 mistakes. No INTs. No fumbles. Sacks because let's face it, that OL was below average. That may piss off a few people saying it but facts are facts. Our OL that year was below average. Bennett/Levens fought for every yard they got rushing and Favre took a lot of hits he shouldn't have taken that year. Be glad we had the toughest QB there ever was.

On the plus side, like Porky said, don't discount how important perfect placement is in a "catch and run" pass. You have to hit your WRs perfectly to set up YAC. Favre was great at it. So was Aaron.

And I'm not at all discounting our D. Like I said - #1 D. It played like a #1 D in that game.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Greg C.
13 years ago
Packers Home Instruction Kit

With these simple steps, you can tilt the stats in your favor:

If you don't like a QB: Take away his receivers' YAC
If you don't like a RB: Take away his longest run
If you don't like a pass rusher: Take away sacks he got against "bad" O-linemen
blank
macbob
  • macbob
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
13 years ago

Packers Home Instruction Kit

With these simple steps, you can tilt the stats in your favor:

If you don't like a QB: Take away his receivers' YAC
If you don't like a RB: Take away his longest run
If you don't like a pass rusher: Take away sacks he got against "bad" O-linemen

"Greg C." wrote:



Reminds me of a Tshirt I own:

If all else fails, manipulate the data...
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago

If you don't like a QB: Take away his receivers' YAC

"Greg C." wrote:



For the record, I have done nothing of the sort. I have stated one undeniable fact: Brett Favre was not a factor in the second half of Super Bowl XXXI. I have not seen anyone put forth any sort of credible refutation to that statement.
UserPostedImage
porky88
13 years ago

Rodgers had a better performance. That's not what we're arguing.

My argument is you and NSD are completely discounting Favre's performance.

0 mistakes. No INTs. No fumbles. Sacks because let's face it, that OL was below average. That may piss off a few people saying it but facts are facts. Our OL that year was below average. Bennett/Levens fought for every yard they got rushing and Favre took a lot of hits he shouldn't have taken that year. Be glad we had the toughest QB there ever was.

On the plus side, like Porky said, don't discount how important perfect placement is in a "catch and run" pass. You have to hit your WRs perfectly to set up YAC. Favre was great at it. So was Aaron.

And I'm not at all discounting our D. Like I said - #1 D. It played like a #1 D in that game.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



To add a little to what you said...

Why does one game take away from the mid 90s Brett Favre all of a sudden? He still played well in the Super Bowl. I agree that he did not play as well as Rodgers did in Super Bowl XLV, but if you compare the seasons of the two, Favre had a better year no question. That isnt discounting what Rodgers did in 2010. People have simply forgotten just how good Brett Favre was during a five-season run in the 90s. For the record, part of that is Favres own fault.

Nonetheless, that span was unbelievable.

I would go as far to say that the 96 Packers were among the best Super Bowl teams ever assembled. I would place them in the top 15. Favre was one of the three key variables of that team along with special teams and defense. Id also factor in that we saw better quality football in the 90s than in the 2000s, which means the 96 Packers played against better opposing players.

As I said earlier in the thread, the 96 Packers were the peak of that specific era in Packer history. If the 2010 Packers are the peak of this current era, then Packer football will have underachieved in the next few seasons.

If we want to make comparisons, lets do them in a year or two when this current crop of Packers have peaked themselves. Then the real debate can begin.
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago
Because they said Favre in the '96 super bowl was as good as Rodgers in the '10 super bowl.

Which is wrong.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago

Packers Home Instruction Kit

With these simple steps, you can tilt the stats in your favor:

If you don't like a QB: Take away his receivers' YAC
If you don't like a RB: Take away his longest run
If you don't like a pass rusher: Take away sacks he got against "bad" O-linemen

"Greg C." wrote:



It isn't just the YAC. It is the incompletions, dropped int and low production.

The ineffectiveness for more than half the game.

35 minutes, 33 yards. With YAC.

2 yards to the WRs, again with YAC.

Scores set up by great field position because of 4 picks and more yards in returns than passing.

Saying Favre was as good in the Super Bowl as Rodgers is giving Favre more credit than he deserves.

A lot more.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
vegOmatic
13 years ago
1996 team had skill/talent. 2010 team was cerebral.

Proof you can get the job done with either brains or brawn.
blank
porky88
13 years ago

Saying Favre was as good in the Super Bowl as Rodgers is giving Favre more credit than he deserves.

A lot more.

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:



I read much of this thread up and down and I don't think anyone is saying that. In case I am misunderstood, Rodgers had the better Super Bowl performance, but Favre had the better overall season. I think that is pretty clear.
Dexter_Sinister
13 years ago
Would anyone want the ball in Favres hands when it is score or go home a loser?

I wouldn't.

But I would want it in Rodgers hands.

When it is in the regular season, Favre is loose and care free. When the chips are down, he chokes. I would rather have a QB that gets better in the critical situation like Starr or Rodgers than a guy who's rating goes down when you need him most.

In the regular season, Favre's rating falls in the last 2 minutes when protecting a lead or trying to come back from a one score or less deficit. His rating also falls during the playoffs.

I would not call that a push for comparing super bowl contenders. I would take the better playoff QB over the better regular season QB every time. There is a lot more room for error in the regular season. There is none in the playoffs. If you choke you are done. Rodgers wins that one easily.

Favre had a 95.8 rating and Rodgers had a 101.2 rating. Actually, Rodgers had a better regular season. Favre lacked the accuracy Rodgers had.

I also think Rodgers would have had a 105 or better rating without the excessive drops by Driver, Jones and Nelson. I think there were probably 5-8 TDs that were 20+ yard passes that were perfect strikes and flat out dropped. Every QB has passes dropped, but 6-7% by those 3 WRs is a bit excessive. Rodgers already had 65.7% completions. An extra 2-3% would have been pretty remarkable.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : don't care
Zero2Cool (17h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?
packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (22-Apr) : now 3
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?
beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

51m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17h / Packers Draft Threads / Zero2Cool

19h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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