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.
"mi_keys" 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.
"Gravedigga" wrote: