RedSoxExcel
14 years ago
Dexter, you pick out stats like thats the end all. You only look at one side of the coin. I just don't understand how people cannot concede a single point.

If the Packers only got to SuperBowl XXXII in spite of Favre, how about that Seattle/Packers game. With that logic, if Favre hadn't took over (IN snow), the Packers wouldn't have got to that Giants game, so is that mean that mean that the Giants game is a wash? You can't say that the D didn't suck in SuperBowl XXXII because they "saved" Favre in a previous playoff game.

Go back and look at past SuperBowl winners, I bet you anything a lot of the time the QB had bad games and they still won. I remember when Brady threw for 140 yards against the Colts and they still won 20-6 or something. Or all the bad games Big Ben had. When Peyton won his Super Bowl, he beat the Ravens with a game with 15-30, 150 yards, 0 TDs and 2 INTs. Is that mean that Peyton's SB means anything less? NO, of course not, his defense saved him, plain and simple.

Btw, the Vikings game, go look at Culpepper's stats and what the score was 5 minutse into the game. And how is too much to ask that your team stop a 4th and 27, I still don't understand. Regardless of what they did, its a 4th and 27! 4th and 27!

I just don't understand how anyone can argue that those teams were that great and Favre screwed them. Keep overrating Favre's O too, how many HOF'ers did Favre have on that O throughout those years? Plus I also assume you thought that Favre's coaches were awesome too (Sherman). He did more with less and then when the playoffs came and you play better teams, the Packers were exposed a lot of the time.

Is Favre perfect? NO, not even close. He was a big part of the losses in the playoffs, just like any other player on a team. Just like Rodgers was part of the blame for the Cardinals game. You can keep dreaming in this world where he gets a pass but he sucked in the 1st half and missed a wide open Jennings to win the game. He's part of the reason for the loss. BUT WHO CARES, that D was not winning a SB.

Overall, I'm also getting sick of the obsession with just looking at Box Scores and stats to prove arguments in Football. It's not baseball. There is so much more at play.
blank
RedSoxExcel
14 years ago

You can pull up offensive/defensive/special teams/water boy stats to prove anything you want, but the last 3 years, Brett's last pass of the year was a pick, same is true of the Philly 4th 26 game, might as well have been true in the St. Louis game.

Rodgers is a statistical stud, which is great, but more importantly, in spite of the fumble vs. AZ, has started to demonstrate that he can win a game, and produce under pressure (best 3rd down rating last year)...We can argue about how good/bad a team was, who carried who, etc. and they're all relevant arguments, but one of the key variables is what do you do when your team needs you to produce - 2min drill, end of game, etc. Aaron Rodgers has a lot to prove yet, but seems to demonstrate the capacity to be a winner in this respect.

"musccy" wrote:



I'm not saying that. I'm just saying your can't cherry pick arguments. If the argument is that Rodgers would have won more SBs in those years (based on a 17-15 career record), I just don't understand it.

At the end of the day, the Cardinals game, he sucked in the 1st half and he missed a wide open jennings to win the game. Thats a fact but people cherry pick arguments.

Bottom line is that Rodgers WAS part of the blame for that game, just like any other player but WHO CARES, that D was not winning a SB. They would have got destroyed by the Saints.

Isn't it possible at all that out of those Packers teams that lose in the early 2000's, they just weren't that good to begin with, talent wise and coaching and Favre being great elevated them to winning?

Even look at the Jets season, before the injury, they were 8-3 under MANGENIUS. Favre makes teams better for whatever reason, there's a reason he's only had ONE losing season in 19 years. It is possible that SOME of these teams just didn't cut it but people cherry pick arguments. He's not perfect, that Giants game, that was a horrible throw, he choked, he's part of the blame but he also took the youngest team to a 13-3 record and beat the Seahawks. That team out performed, as shown by a drop to 6-10 in one year.

Who's say that if Favre played the Cardinals, he wouldn't have had first time playoff jitters and sucked in the first half or hit Jennings in OT like he did against the Broncos? But overall, WHO CARES, because that D was not winning a SB.
blank
TOPackerFan
14 years ago


If the Packers only got to SuperBowl XXXII in spite of Favre, how about that Seattle/Packers game. With that logic, if Favre hadn't took over (IN snow), the Packers wouldn't have got to that Giants game, so is that mean that mean that the Giants game is a wash?

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:



I'm sure Ryan Grant's franchise playoff record rushing performance had nothing to do with the comeback....
Show me a good loser, I'll show you a loser - Vince
musccy
14 years ago
This whole argument involves interpreting a number of shades of grey.

For Rodgers, I agree, he blew it by missing Jennings and fumbled. I wasn't trying to cherry pick at all. But at the same time, he did keep the team in the game in the 2nd half. I'm being a bit of a hypocritical rodgers apologist, but last year we all wanted to see if he was more than just a statistical wonder, that he could actually WIN a game for a team, and he seemed to make great strides in that, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for missing to Jennings because it was only his 2nd year as a starter, and we've seen a maturation towards an elite level quarterback in so many other aspects...plus, even though he did have those two errors in OT, IMO, they pale in comparison to some of the game ending bone-headed picks Brent has thrown.

With Brent, someone else said it best...he was a phenomenal regular season qb, and only 1 losing season does speak volumes. However he was notorious for being a moron when you needed him to prevail. I'm not ready to say rodgers > brett by any means - he has a lot of years and wins to prove that yet, but I certainly think the potential is there for him to prove to be a better QB than Brett and many other elites.
RedSoxExcel
14 years ago


If the Packers only got to SuperBowl XXXII in spite of Favre, how about that Seattle/Packers game. With that logic, if Favre hadn't took over (IN snow), the Packers wouldn't have got to that Giants game, so is that mean that mean that the Giants game is a wash?

"TOPackerFan" wrote:



I'm sure Ryan Grant's franchise playoff record rushing performance had nothing to do with the comeback....

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:



What? You did watch the game and Grants two fumbles in the first 5 minutes to make it 14-0???

Are we seriously not even going to give credit to Favre for that Seahawks game either? It was a young inexperienced team, you don't think Favre's presence, being down 14-0 in the first five minutes had anything to do with that comeback?

If you honestly can watch that game and not say Favre's calm and play was the biggest reason for that win, I don't know what to say.
blank
doddpower
14 years ago
Always nice when RedSox comes around for his soap box Favre postings!!

=)
RedSoxExcel
14 years ago

This whole argument involves interpreting a number of shades of grey.

For Rodgers, I agree, he blew it by missing Jennings and fumbled. I wasn't trying to cherry pick at all. But at the same time, he did keep the team in the game in the 2nd half. I'm being a bit of a hypocritical rodgers apologist, but last year we all wanted to see if he was more than just a statistical wonder, that he could actually WIN a game for a team, and he seemed to make great strides in that, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for missing to Jennings because it was only his 2nd year as a starter, and we've seen a maturation towards an elite level quarterback in so many other aspects...plus, even though he did have those two errors in OT, IMO, they pale in comparison to some of the game ending bone-headed picks Brent has thrown.

With Brent, someone else said it best...he was a phenomenal regular season qb, and only 1 losing season does speak volumes. However he was notorious for being a moron when you needed him to prevail. I'm not ready to say rodgers > brett by any means - he has a lot of years and wins to prove that yet, but I certainly think the potential is there for him to prove to be a better QB than Brett and many other elites.

"musccy" wrote:



Thank you, I agree. Rodgers has the potential to be great but its still very early. With Favre, all I'm saying is that yes, he choked but its a team game.

I just don't get the double standard. If the 2000 Packers lost in the playoffs, its Favre's fault, if the 2000 Packers won a playoff game, it was with help (e.g., Ryan Grant). If Rodgers goes 6-10, "hey, its a team game!", if Rodgers sucks in 1/2 of a playoff game and chokes in OT, "hey, he got the team that far".

I believe overall, its a team game, you win and lose as a team - Colts/Ravens, Peyton won with a game with 150 yards, 0 Tds, 2 INTs and won the Super Bowl. I think the QB is more important than other positions and I think Rodgers inexperience (NOT his talent) led to the 6-10 season and I think Favre would have done better. And that is where the Rodgers apologies kill me, how can you honestly say that a 17 year vet coming off a 13-3 season with chemistry on that offense wouldn't have done better than 6-10 with a rookie QB. NO one is saying Rodgers sucked, its just about experience. But people cherry pick arguments and for some reason it would kill them to concede anything.

I also think zero percent chance Favre makes that comeback in AZ because he has trouble playing from behind but maybe they never get in that position because Favre wouldn't have had first time playoff jitters. It's all give and take IMO.
blank
RedSoxExcel
14 years ago

Always nice when RedSox comes around for his soap box Favre postings!!

=)

"doddpower" wrote:



Haha, what can I say, I enjoy it. Its always fun to be Scott Pilgram v. The Forum, haha. The off-season is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO boring, I hate preseason, I hate training camp (like Favre), I hate it all. This is by far to me the most entertaining thread.

All these preseason stuff means nothing to me, so why not have some fun in here.

As far as I know, its all in good fun with Dexter and NSD? If you can't debate sports arguments, whats the point right?
blank
DakotaT
14 years ago
All I know about the Favre era in Green Bay is that with the players we had along with the talent at quarterback, there should be hardware in the trophy case. I'm hoping that with the new leadership behind our current talented quarterback, some of those problems will be erradicated.

I think the 49ers and Cowboys have quietly stocked their teams as well, so it should be fun going forward.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
14 years ago
/me kicks self in nuts and tosses hands up in air
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Martha Careful (22m) : quick analysis, Philly Oline, for the most part, is what our Oline should strive to be
Zero2Cool (1h) : I just saw score. Teams are really struggling with place kicks.
Martha Careful (1h) : nevermind...its on NBC
Martha Careful (1h) : does anyone have a thread to a broadcast? I do not have Peacock.
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Baltimore-Buffalo line has been BAL -1 to -1.5. Gotta be rare that a divisional home team that won 13 games is an underdog at home
Martha Careful (8h) : Ironically, our QB played the best of all 3
beast (15h) : 0-3 NFC North Dominated the Regular season and shutout in the post season
Mucky Tundra (16h) : Burn Detroit to the ground over losing to the Commanders? Bit extreme
packerfanoutwest (17h) : Burn your city Lion fans!!
packerfanoutwest (17h) : suck it lions!!!
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Knew that playoffs loss for the Lions would hit like crack but I could absolutely OD on this
TheKanataThrilla (17h) : Gonna sleep better after that game
Mucky Tundra (17h) : goodnight!
Martha Careful (17h) : goodnight
Mucky Tundra (17h) : (not you Martha, it's a saying lol)
Martha Careful (17h) : America loves an underdog
Mucky Tundra (17h) : That'll do pig, that'll do
Martha Careful (17h) : 4 turnovers by Goff
Mucky Tundra (17h) : that INT was definately on Goff!
Martha Careful (17h) : we arent the only guys who blow contain
Martha Careful (17h) : it should be 4th down
Martha Careful (17h) : I can't blame the call, Ijust would have gone for it
Martha Careful (17h) : miss
TheKanataThrilla (17h) : I had the feeling he was gonna miss
Mucky Tundra (17h) : The football gods chortled
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Absolutely! Rip their heart out a la The Temple of Doom!
Martha Careful (17h) : a first down wins the game
Martha Careful (17h) : do you go for FG on 4th?
Martha Careful (17h) : 3 guys open
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Go for the TUD! Want a 50 bomb especially after how Detroit constantly ran up the score this year
Martha Careful (17h) : bad play called against blitz
Mucky Tundra (17h) : another clutch throw!
TheKanataThrilla (17h) : Daniels is spectacular!!!!
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Washington uses a time out?
Martha Careful (17h) : I hate it when owners are on the field
Martha Careful (17h) : great game
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Detroit not officially dead but the Fat Lady is warming up
Martha Careful (17h) : more people should spike it
TheKanataThrilla (17h) : I still don't feel good yet. Ghost of bad Washington team past I guess
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Probably is
Martha Careful (18h) : Campbell looks like he is crying
Mucky Tundra (18h) : I could REALLY use another Pick 6 right now
TheKanataThrilla (18h) : 3 score lead and their D can't stop you
Martha Careful (18h) : and that play FB screwed up
Mucky Tundra (18h) : DAGGER!!!!!!!
Martha Careful (18h) : wow!!! 4th down mesh pass
Mucky Tundra (18h) : except for that goofy 4th down play to Mariota in the 1st Washington has been on fire with there play calls
TheKanataThrilla (18h) : 4th down killer again
Martha Careful (18h) : Kliff Kingsbury stock is rising
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Detroit crumbling right now
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
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
21m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

8h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23h / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

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