Dont sell the Patriots short. That was a defense lead by Bill Belichick and Bill Parcells, though the latter may have mentally checked out by then. Nonetheless, I think the adjustments they made had something to do with the lack of offense in the second half.

---

Could be some truth to that, Porky. Belichick, as much as everyone hates him, is a genius. They may have adjusted to Favre lighting them up in the first half. 27 points is a lot for a half.

After that, Favre threw a lot of incompletions that NOBODY could have caught. It was intentional. Just don't turn the ball over and have faith in the D.

Did we want to score more? Sure. I have a hard time believing Holmgren held Favre back. Belichick is a smarter man than Holmgren, with all due respect to Holmgren. Him making adjustments that took out of O would make more sense than Holmgren handcuffing Favre.

---

Unless you know Favre will take chances that he shouldn't.

Looking at 20 years of examples, it seems like a logical conclusion.

Favre started throwing them away with 5 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter, before they adjusted. The only completions he got after that were dump off passes to the backs and TEs with one 2 yarder to Freeman.

Fave has never let a D stop him from throwing it where ever he wanted to before or since.

Into triple coverage late over the middle or not.

Favre only completed 52% of his passes. That isn't exactly lighting them up. Almost half of the Pass yards in the first half were RAC. Freeman and Rison took 33 yard and 26 yard passes and turned them into 136 yards. It was more a case of bad angles and man coverage than anything Favre did. He had a good drive where he ran it in... after 7 straight running plays. The 2 field goals were set up by a pick and a return.

The D had 4 ints, Reggie had his triple sacks after the 99 yard kick off return plus one sack each by Butler and Dotson. Favre was not the guy to carry the team like people say.

He didn't do anything great, or spectacular. The best thing you can really say is he didn't screw up too much. Because when he did screw up and throw one up for grabs inside our own 20, New England dropped the pick.

He was along for the ride.

---

Dexter - I think you and NSD are going the other extreme.

It's somewhere in the middle. Favre threw a pretty good game. He didn't make mistakes. Yes, Reggie got 3 sacks. Yes, Howard was amazing. But you can't discount those stats. They speak for themselves. Both SBs he played in, he outplayed the other QB by a lot.

Hitting someone in a perfect angle is a good thing. It's what made Montana's QB rating so high. Should we downplay Montana too?

---

I think there was also a clear indication the Packers wanted to go down field with the football. Obviously, they felt their WRs could outrun New Englands DBs on turf. Regardless, complaining about Favre in the Super Bowl is kinda over the top in my view.

He was the best overall player in the NFL that season. He may not have had the A+ performance in the Super Bowl, but he definitely is one of the three key components to the 96-championship team.

---

the 96 team may have an edge in straight position by position comparison but I think the 2010 team would win a game. Mostly because I think the 2010 secondary could handle the 96 WRs much easier than the 96 secondary could handle 2010 WRs. I also believe Rodgers would handle facing a Defense filled with some playmakers much better than Favre would have.

The only edge I would give to 96 head to head really is KR (Masthay was doing a good job nullifying punt returns last season) and I don't think that would be enough to take over the game.

---

I know QB rating isn't the end all/be all stat, but Favre had a 107.9 rating in the SB we won compared to 46.6 for Drew Bledsoe. In the next SB, Favre had a 91.0 rating (3 TDs vs 1 INT) vs Elway's 51.9. Elway only threw for 123 yards that game and completed 12 passes. Their OL line killed us though in that game.

Now in 2 SBs, Favre threw 5 TDs and ran in for another vs 1 INT. That's pretty freaking good. I'd have to watch it again, but I think Porky's point makes the most sense that Belichick's D toughened up in the 2nd half and forced Favre to throw the ball away. I do remember him throwing the ball away a lot in the 2nd half. Better to punt than to throw an INT.

96 vs 2010, I'd put money on '96. That D was sick. #1 D, #1 O has never lost a SB. I think only two teams have ever had a #1 O and #1 D in the SB years and both times won it. Plus the wild card of Desmond Howard.

---

I broke it down play by play once a while back, Favre dropped back to pass 20 times in the first half. I think it was 213 yards and 100 of it was in RAC. He completed 8, had 3 sacks, a 2 yard scramble and 8 incompletions. One incompletion was from inside our 20 and nearly picked off. It was the 4th possession or something. I don't have it written down so I am trying to remember.

Our D had a total of 5 sacks. Reggie, Santana and LeRoy. The field position was set up buy 4 picks and a great return game. Bledsoe was harried and pressured the whole game.

Favre had only 5 attempts to the WRs in the second half. Only 1 completion for 2 yards. I think his completion percentage went up because all the rest were dump off passes to TEs or RBs.

The only thing I can say is that starting 10 minutes into the second quarter, all he did was not fill his pants. 33 yards in 35 minutes of play.

2 pretty good throws in a game. I wouldn't call that throwing a good game.

I am not saying he sucked or was a waste of meat. Just that after those 2 catches where the WRs did most of the work, Favre didn't do much.

He is much more talented than he played in that game. He usually makes up for the mistakes with unbelievable performance. But he didn't this game. He made up for an insignificant performance by not having his few mistakes capitalized on. For which I give credit where it is due. To Holmgren.

Montana had a high completion percentage and low ints. RAC isn't the only reason he is better than Favre.

---

Those two throws were perfect passes. His throw to Rison was spot on and his throw to Freeman was even better. Both didnt have to stop to make the catch. The most important part of YAC is the accuracy of the throw. Youre underselling Favres value in this game. The offense still put up three touchdowns in large part because of Brett Favre. Certainly, the defense played the biggest role and Desmond Howard put the Pack over the top, but Favre made some major plays that resulted into points.

---

The 3rd touchdown was set up by a pick or a return (can't remember which right now) and 7 straight runs including that 2 yard scramble by Favre. The 2 field goals were set up by a pick and a return, Howard's TD was a return and the 55 yard TD pass was set up by a return (maybe a pick ). Favre's scoring was in large part due to the D and the ST setting him up.

Field position, RAC and D won the game. Favre had a couple good plays AND a couple bad plays. NE failed to capitalize on the mistakes. Then our D shut them down.

2 good throws a game won't get anybody a MVP.

Rodgers gets 65% completions, with huge drops. He made 4 of those throws in the 3rd quarter of the super bowl. Favre is better only throwing 2 in a whole game and 52% completions?

Rodgers is much better under duress than Bledsoe ever was. The chances of him having that bad of a game against the '96 D is pretty slim. He also ran one in. With the performance Favre had, there is no way that he wins a shoot out.

---