I guess we need to give you a.......(are you ready for this???).........HEADS UP next time!!! :thumbright: :thumbleft:

---

I personally like the heads, and wish we had heads for DD & GJ as well.

It seriously gives a more "human" aspect to the posts. When I followed football as a kid, I only knew what James Lofton looked like. Everyone else, you only saw their faces, partially covered by the helmet so you didn't see that much unless you had their football card (which I had several of James Lofton, my favorite football player). Heck, Lynn Dickey could probably walk down the street and I wouldn't recognize him.

That of course changed with the internet, cable, etc., things we didn't have when I was a kid.

---

The heads aren't any worse than reading the initials.

---

Two points, my initial comment was that getting drilled by the Cowboys and justifying going with Rodgers have no bearing on one another. That doesn't say anything bad about Rodgers. It simply says this loss has nothing to do with whether that decision was justified. I see this as an overeager journalist trying to make a point with no facts to support it.

Regarding the Favre-Rodgers comparison, again I didn't say anything negative about Rodgers. I just thought it telling that a guy trying to make a story out of whole cloth didn't use one of the key stats people view for QBs: TD passes, which favored Favre. Personally, I think it's a wash. Favre has more TD passes, but more interceptions. Rodgers has more yards but a lower completion percentage. Given how close their QB ratings are, I would think it's obvious that both QBs have played well this season. And yes, I ignored Rodgers' rushing TDs because that has more to do with McCarthy's goal-line strategy than Rodgers' QB performance.

---

I agree with your post except for this last bit. Rodgers' ability and willingness to run the QB sneak is a significant weapon for our offense. Favre either did not want to run sneaks or McCarthy didn't want to risk getting him injured, and I believe that's part of the reason why the Packer offense was at or near the bottom of the league in short yardage situations last year.

Edit: Ah, I knew this thread was destined for the Brett Favre ghetto.

---

1st and goal pass for a td or a 1st and goal q/b sneak WTF is the difference damn

Point is the q/b had to make it happen, and it is points HE helped to create

If we are talking about a pass for a TD on the 1 vs a QB sneak. I think there's a large difference.

QB's like to have a little room for their targets to roam a bit. With being on the one yard line there's 20 so plus guys running around in a 50 yard by 11 yard space. or 11 by 50.. whatever you get the point.

With a QB sneak its about attitude and will and who wants it more. Will your OL push harder than the DL? Will you (the QB) find the hole and risk your ass and shove yourself in?

---

Yeah, took me a minute to find this again. Anyway, QB sneaks at the goal line says more about the coach's strategy or his lack of confidence in his running backs than a QB's ability. If Rodgers had scrambled for a TD, I'd count those because that speaks to his ability to create plays from nothing. Goal line sneaks says to me either the coach thinks he can surprise the D with a quick push or he has no healthy running backs so he's willing to risk his QB taking a shot.

---

Okay I see your point now..

but it brings up this point...

Grant or any rb gets a one yard or even a half yard td, can we use same argument and NOT include those in his final numbers?

Grant's job is to pound the ball and grind out tough yards. That's not Rodgers' job. The fact we're relying on Rodgers at the goal line says we're either trying to take the defense by surprise, or the coach doesn't think Grant or any other running back can get the job done. This is where I like to see a TJ Duckett or Brandon Jacobs style runner just pound it in rather than see our QB sneaking and potentially taking unnecessary hits, but that's just my personal preference.

---