There's no question that the drama between Brett Favre and the Green Bay Packers has been well-documented. Whenever a franchise decides to trade it's most popular player ever—especially coming off a season where they were one game from the Super Bowl—there is going to be some negative public backdraft, and that's been the case here.
Everyone knows that when Packers General Manager Ted Thompson traded Favre to the New York Jets, he said goodbye to the NFL's statistical quarterback king; a legendary football player who has never missed a start, and probably still had another year or two of solid football in him.
But he also sent away one of the NFL's premier divas, a man who has handcuffed the Packers for years and has thrown more interceptions than any quarterback in the league's history.
In all fairness, however, Thompson never had a good relationship with Favre. He ignored Favre's unwise managerial wishes—namely signing Randy Moss and hiring Steve Mariucci as head coach—and because of that, Favre couldn't shake his fleeting resentment for Thompson and the rest of his staff.
But through the years, Thompson still winced through the interceptions, and cheered for the touchdowns. Yet, this summer, he couldn't stand anymore of Favre's self-centered actions. We all heard what Favre said that teary April morning: It was getting too hard to be Brett Favre. He couldn't handle it anymore. He wasn't committed to this football team.
Faced with that egocentrical distraction to his football team, Thompson did what he had to: He sent Favre packing.
And guess what? Even with the Packers at 4-5, it's still the right decision. Not even the great Brett Favre would have altered that record as is stands today.
If you think I'm crazy, I challenge you to make a list of the Packers problems in 2008. Now tell me where Aaron Rodgers ranks on that list. If you've watched any Packer games this season, you'll find him somewhere near the bottom. Green Bay's problem isn't who is behind center, I'll guarantee you that.
Let's compare the two seasons, shall we? First off, the Packers were as close to injury-free last season as any team in the NFL. This season, however, the Packers would rank somewhere near the top, with two defensive starters out for the season (Cullen Jenkins, Nick Barnett) and several other significant contributors missing action this season.
Injuries are a part of the game, but they've really hurt Green Bay this season.
Next, look at the defense. Last season the Packers were ranked 11th in total defense; a year later they rank 21st. The most dramatic drop off has been run-defense, where that unit has dropped 14 spots from 14th last season to 28th this season. This is probably a result of the injuries, but Favre didn't do it alone last season, he got a lot of help from one of the league's better defenses.
And don't even get me started on the offensive line. Last season, there were three games where teams got significant pressure on Brett Favre. Guess which games? If you guessed the Packers' four losses, you nailed it.
In both Bears' games, the Dallas debacle, and the NFC Championship game, Favre had pressure seemingly every drop back, and he played terrible in those games. In 2008, Rodgers has met the same fate. Dallas, Tampa Bay, Tennessee, and Minnesota are all games where Rodgers was under heavy duress, and we lost all four.
Atlanta put moderate pressure on Rodgers, but that was statistically one of his best games in a losing effort. If there's one constant in the ever changing NFL game, it's that teams that don't protect their quarterback don't win games. Favre and Rodgers are solid proof of that.
comments (112) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
Zach,
As much as I do love Brett Favre, you are correct on this one. I think Aaron Rodgers has been nothing but spectacular and will only get better.
Truth is, the Pack have lost most of their games in the last 5 minutes....am I not right? I don't watch many of their games, but the ones I have, they always seem to barely lose.
I still love Brett though. When I heard he didn't throw an interception last Sunday I had to make sure my ears were clean ;) Gotta love him.
Big game on THUR!!
from about 1 month ago
Oh I love Brett too, I think I mentioned I have a man-crush on him, but I'm a Packer fan first. I really just wanted to get my opinion about the matter out there, and with over a half seasons worth of evidence I thought I could really make my point.
Also, Rodgers has put the team in position to win each week. Atlanta, at the end, was his fault for throwing a pick. But in all the others he's put them in position.
But yeah, I'm rooting for Brett Thursday, knock off the Pats!
from about 1 month ago
On Brett's picks
1) I'm willing to bet 50 of them are off receivers not being able to handle his rocket balls. Who remembers 2006?
2) Probably 100 of Brett's picks are not miscommunications, but Favre having that kind of confidence in his arm. Sometimes they are TDs sometimes they are picks. Hell, he wouldn't have half the TDs he has now if he didn't sling it.
from about 1 month ago
David--I agree with you--it''s just funny with how many picks he does throw and he still doesn't let it get to him...he just gets right back out there like nothing happened. I LOVE that about him
from about 1 month ago
I think it takes a lot to get to Brett Favre, and thats why he's been so good.
from about 1 month ago
Yes, but he would have 200 other picks that rocket off defender's hands because of his arm strength: if you're chalking up interceptions as not his fault because of that awesome ability, you have to give him ones it avoided. The bottom line is that a QB who doesn't throw so hard has fewer drops (unless TO or Braylon Edwards is on the receiving end).
And trusting your receivers gets you plays if it's smart, and interceptions if it's not. Everyone talk about how great Favre played after his dad died, and he did, but he trusted his receivers who made great catches for him. Two of those touchdowns were incredible catches, including one in double coverage. SO I'm no more giving him a pass on his picks there as I am taking away his TDs.
However, Brett is #2 on my list all-time because he did NOT have the surrounding talent of the highly overrated (and yet still #6 on my list) Joe Montana. So David's examples may not be the best, but his point is valid.
from about 1 month ago
After watching the Legend of Farve on thursday night, you have to wonder what was Green Bay thinking. He still has good 2 years in him and If the Packers would have stuck with him in the NFC, they would be playing for the CHAMPIONSHIP for the next 2 years.
( Remember John Elway )
What Farve brings to a team is LEADERSHIP and SWAGGER and you cant teach that to any quarterback. You have it or you dont. Aaron Rodgers is good but he is not Brett Farve. You dont self destruct a 13 - 3 championship team. Great job Packer Management. You screwed your present for a hopeful future.
A 13 - 3 team of 2007 is a pathetic 4 - 5 in 2008. It is not Aaron's fault but it is because packers dont have an identify now. They dont have a Leader. Jets a 4- 12 team is 7 - 3 now, Reason:- they have a Leader.
Being a Packer fan I am angry how Packer Management handled a Legend. And by end of the season all Packer fans will realize what I am talking about.
about 1 month ago
The defense has been abominable this year. I don't know how it could possibly have gotten this bad. Injuries aside, the team has played terrible. They need some linemen, badly. Especially a legititimate compliment to Cody Pickett. The guy is a beast with no help.
God save Rodgers, none of this is his fault.
from about 1 month ago
"Ryan" Pickett I think your referring to. But I agree with you..
Thanks for the read Ray
about 1 month ago
Interesting points you make.
Protection problems aren't ALL the o-lines fault. The quarterback has to show them blitzes and audible to a different play to counteract that blitz (remember Favre's 421st TD pass?) Rodgers isn't doing that, so he is getting mauled cause he is sticking with a play that can't work against what the defense is running.
Also like you said on one of my articles, he can't find the receivers that make route adjustments. He has his set routes and thats it. I rarely see Rodgers adjust to a wide receiver. Usually its the receivers adjusting to Rodgers.
I'm not stupid and I know the Packers problems are far deeper than the absence of Favre. However, I do think his absence has had a "hidden" effect on the team. There is such a lack of experience on both sides of the ball. Last year it didn't matter on offense, because Favre could change plays INTELLIGENTLY at the line of scrimmage and burn defenses. He passed on his experience to the rest of the offensive unit. Rodgers doesn't have that, therefore they go into an NFL game with a gameplan. If the gamplan fails, so does the team.
Sorry for such a long comment....I hate reading and typing those...lol
from about 1 month ago
I can't counter the hot route argument, because that's something that Brett does much better then Aaron. Rodgers has outplayed Brett all season, and I'll say it again—if Rodgers had 12 interceptions this season like Brett does, we'd be even worse off this season.
from about 1 month ago
Your probably right.
But lets be real, Favre would not have 12 picks with an offense that he led so well last year. He has 12 picks because he feels he has to make the plays for a 4-12 team. Last year he knew the talent he had, so he didn't force as many balls.
from about 1 month ago
Rodger's inexperience showed during the Vikings game.
When Brett realized he would have 3 seconds to throw the ball and execute, Aaron is simply holding onto the ball for 5 or 6 seconds which was clearly too long. He got hit, took sacks and added to the problem.
It's a rookie mistake and Aaron is taking a NFC Championship caliber team below .500. This will be the second time in four years the organization has allowed this to happen
from about 1 month ago
Here I agree Don--he held the ball too long. I will grant that this is the first game I believe Favre would have won that Rodgers didn't...he might have won another (perhaps Tampa), but almost surely would have been Bad Brett, forcing the ball and costing us one other Rodgers won. But yeah, this one I will say would be the extra win we would have with Favre under center, I totally agree there.
about 1 month ago
Zach, I'm sorry, but I think you are in denial.
Isn't this the same O-Line that was problematic in 2007? Favre got sacked 15 times, Rodgers 19 and counting. Favre has always pulled Hudini moves to escape many sacks. I thought Rodgers did too, but not lately. This year, the offense has started numerous games 3 & out, 3 & out... That puts it all on the defense. The 2008 offense is HORRIBLE compared to the Favre led team last year.
The Packers had injuries to running backs, tight ends, and wide receivers as the 2007 season began. That's why they traded for Ryan Grant. The running game was 32nd in the league until week 9 in 2007. But they were 8-1 and had pretty much clinched the NFC North (Without a threat of a running game). They won five games decided by 7 points or less. The 2007 team was #2 in offense right behind the Patriots.
The 2008 Packer offense is healthy but not pulling its load. They added another deep threat receiver to go with Driver, Jennnings, and Jones. Grant and Jackson are healthy. 2008 the offense ranks 19th in total yards. This year the Packers are 1-3 in games decided by 7 points or less.
The Defense is giving up lots of yards on the ground, while the offense gives the ball back without moving it at all to start out games. That wears a defense down. No defense can be expected to hold up. This years defense has 16 interception and 6 TDs versus 19 and 1 TD for all of last year. The defense is scoring for the Packers. The offense isn't.
#2 in Offense vs #19 Offense
"Even with the Packers at 4-5, it's still the right decision." -- Zach Kruse -> DENIAL :(
from about 1 month ago
You can say I'm in denial, but you're just as blinded by Favre. Brett hasn't been good this year—he's lucky he has Thomas Jones to hand off to because he's a game manager now.
Here's your injuries in the start of 07--Jennings missed two games, Wynn went on IR later on, Brandon Jackson missed two games. I don't see how you could even begin to compare 07 to this year.
You made my point with the 15-19 sacks comparison. It's actually 21 sacks but thats not the point. Rodgers is better in escaping the rush, so don't even give me this "Houdini" talk. Offenses are going to go 3 and out when you can't protect your quarterback.
I give it to you on the offense part, they haven't been as good. But that isn't because #4 isn't starting for Green Bay. The Packers rank higher then the Jets in every passing category besides completion percentage.
from about 1 month ago
Zach,
You watched Favre, he was a master at avoiding sacks and making plays. You remember week 1 last year? Or how about the memorable NFC divisional game? Hell just go to youtube and Favre avoiding sacks is all you will find.
Thomas Jones is hardly a premier running back. He isn't even top 10 in the league. So don't use that excuse.
Zach isn't in denial, he is just really backing up Rodgers which is fine. I support Rodgers too, but we all know who is the better quarterback.
from about 1 month ago
Yeah, I'm not saying Rodgers is better. But I'm a strong supporter of what Thompson did, and I said my reasons why.
from about 1 month ago
Douglas, give me a break! Our line was not at ALL "problematic" last year. Your selective memory is unbelievable. Your lack of objectivity is stunning in ignoring all facts that don't line up with your prejudice. You can make only one salient argument: I do think Rodgers youth has led to him holding the ball a little and getting a FEW more of the sacks, and (this one's for you, David) I don't think he's squirmed out of any more or less than Favre--to me both are AWESOME at that. Rodgers may turn more of them into gains, but that's not about sacks.
Otherwise, I WILL say Rodgers is better than Favre RIGHT NOW:
FACT: the line has suffered significant injuries this year, and suffered nothing significant last year.
FACT: Rodgers has not had a full compliment of receivers this year, Favre had almost no missed games in that unit last year.
FACT: Rodgers has this offense producing, and he has produced more yards on fewer plays than Favre did through this point last year because he has the ability to run, even IF you count the sacks against him.
FACT: YOU FREAKIN WIN AND LOSE AS A TEAM! STOP BRINGING UP WINS--did you blame Favre in '05? He was A LOT more responsible for our problems then than Rodgers is for them now, but I don't blame him, I blame injuries.
And even if he's not better right now (and I NEVER said he has or will top Favre for a CAREER, so don't throw any history at me!), he will win more games for the REST of his career than Favre will for the REST of his. He would have been doing it for someone else if we had kept Favre.
Yeah, and Favre has played a schedule of teams that are UNDER .400, Rodgers OVER .500. Sorry guys, that matters. In fact, Zach pointed out that all but ONE of the Packers wins last year came against .500 or lower teams.
about 1 month ago
You forgot wins!
from about 1 month ago
Maybe you didn't read my article, but I showed why the Jets have the wins they do. Blinded by Favre...open your eyes.
from about 1 month ago
He has you here Zach.
As the great Bill Parcells once said
"You are what your record says you are"
from about 1 month ago
It's hard to discount the record, but strength of schedule HAS to be considered.
about 1 month ago
I'll take lucky over good every time.
from about 1 month ago
The quote is actually..."it is better to be lucky than good"
about 1 month ago
Zach, it's the same offensive line with one more year of experience. This year's offense has all the parts sitting right there.
How about this? The Packers get buried Sunday by the Bears. Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy are fired and replaced by Frank Winters, interim coach. The Packers go on to win six games in a row and take the NFC North. Driver and Jennings both go over 1,000 yards receiving, while Grant get five 100 yard games. Collins and Woodson get 3 more TDs each via interceptions and make the Pro Bowl. Yeah, I can dream too.
from about 1 month ago
What? Not sure what you're getting at in that second part.
What does it matter if it's the same line? It's the same line that isn't performing. Ryan Grant is still Ryan Grant, but he's not performing at the same level as last season.
It doesn't matter if you have the parts if the parts aren't performing.
from about 1 month ago
And it's NOT the same line. Wells and Clifton have missed time and played hurt, just off the top of my head.
about 1 month ago
You cited how the Defense fell from #11 to #21 so that must be the problem...
But the Packers Offense is #19 in 2008. It was the #2 Offense in 2007 with same O-line that you are complaining about. Why aren't the parts performing? Favre was the heart of the team. You can replace all the statistics you want, but now the Jets have heart and the Packers don't.
I think Grant performed so well because everyone had to game plan for Favre. Favre has Thomas Jones now. Jones got 1 TD in 2007, but now he has 8 TDs since Favre is behind center.
I think your article is totally wrong. Sorry, but that's my opinion, and I will argue it to death.
from about 1 month ago
Zach, in reguards to his offensive line arguement.
I think he is trying to say what i was saying. Just not in the same articulate, factual syntax I did.
Favre called the neccesary protection audibles when he saw something in the defense. That helped avoid breakdowns. Rodgers doesn't do that so whenever the protection scheme that is on the field is doomed pre-snap, he doesn't recognize it and does not change it.
Terrible pre-play reads will always = SACK LUNCH
from about 1 month ago
So now you're saying that Favre had an effect on defense? He took away the heart of the defense? The reason the Packers aren't winning is run-defense—and i'll fight that to the death. Favre leaving had absolutely NO EFFECT ON THE DEFENSE. He's NOT the reason we couldn't stop Earnest Graham, Michael Turner, Marion Barber, Felix Jones, Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson, LenDale White.
And are you telling me Rodgers doesn't have to be game planned for?
about 1 month ago
I'm going to give it a rest for now, but later on I'm tackling the following subjects:
1. NFL's premier divas
2. unwise managerial wishes—namely signing Randy Moss
3. the man who has handcuffed the Packers
4. has thrown more interceptions than any quarterback in the league's history
from about 1 month ago
Douglas,
I think me and you are on the same Favre love boat.
Here is something that could help your arguement (Sorry Zach, I need to train this kid to use facts...LOL)
Brett Favre's TD/INT differential is +158. The highest in NFL history is +168, Dan Marino.
Tom Brady's is +111. Peyton Manning's is +159
John Elway is only +74. Unitas is a lowly +37
Even Joe Montana's is only +137.
So only Manning and Marino have better TD/INT differentials...hmmm....
from about 1 month ago
That isn't a good marker of TD to INT. You have to look at the ratio. Could you look that up David? I'd be interested to see what that is
from about 1 month ago
Douglas, I am NOT looking forward to your total denial analysis. Debating you is like debating the drunk guy at the end of the bar--pointless and frustrating because you can not make sensible points. Let David handle your arguments--he may be wrong but at least he can make a case.
As for you, David, I would point out that it is not TD/int DIFFERENTIAL that matters, but RATIO. Now, Favre is still about 1.5:1 there, WAY better than a lot of Hall of Famers. Rodgers is over 2:1 in his career, and while it is early, players usually get BETTER, not worse.
from about 1 month ago
Montana's is best ever, over 2:1.
from about 1 month ago
MJ,
Brett Favre has thrown 9,040 passes! (not counting thursday night)
Aaron Rodgers has thrown 347!
You cannot honestly take that 2:1 ratio seriously.
Players do get better, but not always their stats. It was Favre's later years that piled up his INT count. Manning is just reaching those later years in his career and we are all noticing it. It comes with age.
So Rodgers will get better, but when he reaches his later years he will struggle all the same.
Also, I'm not wrong....I don't think anybody is here.
I'm not blaming the 4-5 record on Rodgers. I've only said we would have a better record with Favre. How much better? I don't know, but we would.
You can't use Favre's stats this year to say how good or bad he would be doing right now. Because if he was on the Packers the circumstances would be different. Rather than being with a brand new offense he would be with an offense he knows damn well.
from about 1 month ago
David: "and while it is early, players usually get better, not worse." Please don't take my comments out of context and refute them if I actually addressed the thing you are refuting.
from about 1 month ago
Guys it's not the love boat. It's realizing you cannot replace 16 years experience with a rookie and expect the same results.
Everyone on here is simply an apologist for Aaron.
I think Aaron has potential and should have been used when the team as a whole was in decline or average. But you don't take an above average team, release probably the best QB in NFL history and expect the same or better results.
Aaron is leanring, painfully slow, on our watch. That last game broke my heart emotionally and I cannot stand to watch us only win 6 maybe 7 games this year.
I think I am done with BR until my bitterness subsides.
from about 1 month ago
An apologist for Rodgers? First of all, I think David and Douglas would dispute that--they are arguing pretty strongly for Favre. Secondly, I don't have to be an apologist for Rodgers--he has played well enough not to need an apologist.
His numbers project to better than Favre has had in all but one-fourth of his years with the Packers, and it's just his first year starting. He's gonna get better, and I'm REALLY excited about our future; our other option was to lose him and be worried about what the heck we were going to do without Favre.
No way having Brett makes us better than the Giants even if you deny that none of our losses were Rodgers' fault. Meaning we don't win an NFC Championship (Favre couldn't beat the Giants when we WERE better than them) with Favre, meaning it doesn't even matter if he's the better choice. But we'll get MANY chances with Rodgers, long after Favre retires for good.
from about 1 month ago
David, you have trained him well: Douglas started these arguments spewing emotion, but now is using facts. I don't have to agree with them and have been able to refute most of them, but this has become a substantive debate.
from about 1 month ago
My young padawan has crossed the bridge from ignorance to competence.
Douglas, I free you from my watchful eye. You can now sustain productive (well...this particular debate is far from that) and intelligent debates.
about 1 month ago
Zach, could not disagree more. I think the only two stats that should be looked at are the number big plays the Pack has had this year vs. last year, even vs. the current pace Brett is on with the Jets. Additionally, the bottom line is wins and well we all know the Pack is down right now and the Jets (who were down last year) are up this year. This is not a slam on Aaron Rodgers, it is a slam on the Packers brass however, sorry to say they don't know what they're doing.
from about 1 month ago
I'm guessing if you looked at that number (big plays 07 to big plays 08), it'd be somewhat similar.
I really get a kick out of people who say "the Packers Brass doesnt know what they're doing." Got a question for you Chaz...how long have you been an NFL GM? How many games have you played in the NFL? How bout even college? Is the number somewhere around ZERO? It's the living room GM's like you that say these ludicrous things.
Ted Thompson has been around along time, and he knows more about running this team than you ever will sir
from about 1 month ago
Hey Zach, I'll give you props for being young and dumb. Trust me if Favre is the Green Bay QB you are at the very least a winning football team this season. You were in the NFC Championship and could have had a shot at the Super Bowl. Now you'll be watching the likes of the NFC East rep or a to Tampa or Carolina in the Super Bowl. The Pack won't even be getting a sniff. I tell you what, since the Packers have a unique situation and are owned by the fans, have a meeting hire me as your new GM and see how soon you get the dumb moves behind you. I'll even tell you my first move would be to can the coach and I'll work from there. Sorry as long as he's your coach the Pack isn't going anywhere. His claim to fame will be the fact that he got rid of Favre. Meanwhile Brett is going to be competing for a division title, playoff spot, home-field, and possible Championship and Super Bowl the remainder of the season. Sorry Zach, I go more years than you, and you don't know the NFL like I know the NFL.
from about 1 month ago
Saying you may know more about football than me is somewhat reasonable—you've been around this world longer than me. But you saying you know more about it then Ted Thompson? Now you're flirting with absolute insanity. You wouldn't know the first thing about running an NFL franchise, so get over yourself.
And news flash for you, the Packers are ONE game out in their division, despite their struggles so far. So don't say its only Brett who will be competing, next week the Packers could be leading the division, and the Jets could be one game out...
from about 1 month ago
Zach, I think I'm trying to get across a couple of points here. One if you're going to write an article like this one you have to be open to an opposing view. You clearly weren't. On the GM front, I promise you I know a great deal about what it takes. I think I was very direct in what I would do. I think the reason I took that approach was very simply because I have been opposed to the Packers angle on the Favre deal all along.
Does Brett have blame, absolutely. But I'm just going to tell you a real life example that might sink home with you a little more.
After John Elway retired from the back to back team, there was pressure from the team and fans for him to return. He couldn't, so he didn't. Had John chose to return he would have been welcomed back and the Broncos would have at least competed better than they did under Brian Griese in his first year. Additionally the Broncos might not have lost Terrell Davis the way they did (he was injured making a tackle on a dubious Brian Griese INT).
We all understand there is a time to stay and a time to move on in life, but here is the point.
The difference is Denver fully appreciated having Elway and Green Bay did not fully appreciate Favre.
If the Packers did fully appreciate Brett, in particular what he could do for them this season, he would be in a Packers jersey this year. They did not appreciate what he brought to their football team.
I don't think anyone felt worse about the Packers losing to the Giants last year than Brett did after throwing his costly interception. However, without him they would not have even been there last year and they are not going this year.
If the Packers make it to the NFC Championship and it's in Green Bay I'll gladly sit in Lambeau in my swim trunks, tevas, and Hawaiian shirt.
from about 1 month ago
What are your GM credentials?
—I said in my article, I love Brett. But I think it was a good move to trade him.
It wasn't about appreciation. You can't flip flop that many times, handcuffing an organization, and expect a month before training camp to just be given the starters job back. The Packers moved on, and they had a more then suitable player behind him to play (which Denver didn't).
If the Packers make it to the NFC Championship game, I don't want you there. Don't even go near Lambeau, your not a Packer fan.
from about 1 month ago
No, Chaz, your assumption is faulty. Based on your picture, I am guessing we are about the same age, and I played football, so I doubt you know more than I do. And it isn't an opposing view Zach was not expecting, it was someone saying he is young and dumb. If you cannot give an opposing view any respect, don't bother weighing into a serious debate.
Exactly which game would Favre have won that Rodgers didn't? He's only had one bad game, and it was the one he was hurt in. Plus you are completely and conveniently forgetting that Favre was good for blowing two or three a year for us.
Rodgers' numbers project to be better than Favre's in all but four of his fifteen years of his career, and that's in his first year as a starter. As far as wins go, do you assume that only the quarterback earns them, and the team around him doesn't matter? Does Rodgers play defense and miss all those tackles? Kerry Collins is unbeaten, does that make him the best QB in the league?
Don't deride someone for being dumb when it is you who are ignoring all facts that back up that "dumb" person's point.
from about 1 month ago
Zach & MJ,
For starters Zach - MJ is right, I owe you an apology, so in all seriousness I am sorry for saying what I said, it doesn't need repeating. It just wasn't nice.
To follow-up and tie this one up ~
I think if you saw the last drive in OT of the Jets-Pats game tonight Brett showed exactly what he has left in the tank. Brett was being forced out by the coach and there were reports of that as far as two years ago. So Brett wasn't the only person flip-flopping, I think a coaches ego got in there as well. That is exactly why I would fire him if I were the GM. Even though he has sold it as a team thing it wasn't. The same thing took place in Denver when Dan Reeves drafted Tommy Maddox. Dan Reeves eventually was fired in part because of that poor move. That was just two years removed from an AFC Championship and three years from a Super Bowl.
The Packers knew within a month after Brett retired, they let it drag out instead of making a clean decision and cutting ties. They totally lacked class. I have a lot of friends that are Packer fans and I sort of liked them until they pulled that garbage over the summer. The reason being it looks really bad on the league. So they were doing the very thing they were preaching about Brett. No team is bigger than the league. That is why they all lacked class in those moves and that is why I think the end result will eventually be the coach, possibly the GM get canned. And that may be what they are remembered for.
So you guys are right in saying: No guy is bigger than the team, but the point is to win and the Packers did know much sooner than what's been mentioned here.
"You play to win the game!" ~ Herman Edwards
As for the Broncos, they could have gone deep in the playoffs in '99-2000 because at that point in time they only lost Elway ~ until TD was injured. The Rams were the best team in football that year no question.
I think when you guys compare Brian Griese's efficiency to Elway's he may have actually passed John in a number of stats, but he could not win a single playoff game. Rogers was a highly proficient QB in college and has been that in the NFL. That's not the point, he may be the next Peyton Manning, but until he wins playoff games, he needs to step up and prove it. So just remember.
"You play to win the game!" ~ Herman Edwards
If you don't GM or coach to win then you shouldn't be in the NFL.
from about 1 month ago
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong, Chaz, and I had to do it in this discussion to Donald. And Brett had a great game tonight (David, can I put a vote in already for Brett over Aaron this week?) and I also think might have won us one more game (this week against Minnesota) than Rodgers so far, despite the defensive problems we are having.
I didn't have time to read all your comment, but as for Herm Edwards' quote, you also play past this year. I still like the move because if we keep Favre we'd have lost Rodgers, and now we won't have to worry about our QB position in another year or two.
from about 1 month ago
Zach & MJ,
Zach, I forgot to mention nice job sparking the wildfire, a good job at causing the readers to think and respond. MJ, you are right about thinking past this year, and so on etc., my whole contention is the fact that this Packers team probably had a shot to be better than they are now and possibly go deep into the playoffs again had Brett been there. It's hard to cut ties with players, let alone All-Pro and Hall of Fame caliber people who have helped your organization excel for much of their career. There really is no template for absolute success one way or the other, that's what makes this a great thread. Have a great weekend!
about 1 month ago
THANK YOU ZACH!! I read the headline and was ecstatic, because I just knew I would not only love the article, but completely agree. And I did.
All through the off-season, as I looked at this team, it became more and more apparent that Green Bay played some "out of their mind" football last year. They went 13-3, but I didn't see them as a 13-3 team. They looked good, but not THAT good. And while Favre's wonderful season no doubt helped that, I was confident giving Rodgers the ball this year, and really didn't see the teams overall talent suffer because of it.
And wouldn't you know it, the team isn't playing that "out of their mind" football. They look like an average team, as the record indicates. And since the big difference between the two teams was the change at QB, that's the fashionable arguement as the problem. But it most certainly is not, as you effectively referrence here.
I also love the talking heads on the sports shows who love talking about how the Jets are better off with Favre than we are with Rodgers, so we "have to" question the decision of replacing Favre. First of all, we're fine with Rodgers. And secondly, at season's end, I'll be ecstatic when Favre makes the playoffs and gets us that second round pick, and we are left with a young, talented QB and a draft pick, while the Jets are back to square one, sans that pick.
And so I say, Thank you Ted Thompson!
As always, great article!!
Go! Pack! Go!
from about 1 month ago
thanks for the read Justin, I had a feeling you might like this one.
That draft pick will be nice!
about 1 month ago
zach, you are so on the money here. rodgers is far from the problem.
look at what favre's done in new york this year and you tell me if you think things would have been different in green bay. i doubt it.
from a franchise stand point, it may have been better to let favre return to green bay and struggle through this year (which looking at the schedule, many believed would happen), but i respect the packers' front office for making the decision to go with rodgers. favre couldn't get out of his own way and his self-indulgent wishy washy ways were hampering the franchise. it was time to move on.
it's still a shame it ended that way, he's still a pretty likeable (sp?) guy and what he brought to that team is undeniable.
you also can't discount the impact ryan grant's down season has had. he was a beast last year. this year, not so much...rodgers has actually OVERCOME quite a bit to get the packers to where they are.
the kid deserves so much credit...
from about 1 month ago
thanks so much daniel, always good to get your seal of approval!
I love Brett just as much as the next guy, but I can see what Ted was doing and thinking, and it was the right move.
about 1 month ago
Good points, the Jets also added Alan Faneca and Tony Richardson to their lineup. Favre is a piece of a larger puzzle in NY. Honesly, Favre and his risk-taking habits are something the Jets aren't used to, and those attributes in many ways have hurt the Jets since this is not ordinary quarterbacking for them.
The Packers are better off with Rodgers and the reasons are clear. Nobody expected the Pack to go undefeated and Rodgers has put his team in positions to win consistently. What has hurt them is they haven't capitalized on opportunities which falls back on the team, not on one player. The Jets would have been great had they kept Chad. In my opinion, I think the Jets would have beat the Pats under Chad in week 2 giving them a better record than they have now, but that is all speculation. But the point is, is that the Jets added alot to their roster and were poised to win long before the Favre trade.
Rodgers brings youth and vitality to the Packers and in a few seasons he will be a great QB.
FYI, when you discuss the Jets acquistions you typed "accusations". Just wanted to let you know in case you want to edit the typo. It still reads perfectly fine, but i just thought you would want to know
from about 1 month ago
ahhhh THANK YOU! The Jets are nowhere near talent wise the team that went 4-12 last year....and everyone thinks that's all Brett Favre. Well, it isn't—so thanks for pointing that out.
Thanks for the typo notice too!
from about 1 month ago
Patriots had beaten the Jets 11 out of the last 12 times. That means Chad was 1-10. Right now Brett is 1-1 with the Jets against the Pats. Yes, the Jets added lots of veterans and new talent. But did anyone see them going 7-3? Did you imagine that with Chad?
from about 1 month ago
Yes I did. The Jets are a good team
from about 1 month ago
I did not imagine the Jets winning 7 of 10, but had them about 8-8. However, that was with Brady giving them two losses; if you told me they'd be playing Matt Cassell twice, I'd have said 10-6 or 9-7 at worst, and they'll finish about a game better than that.
about 1 month ago
The other thing the Packers won't have to deal with this offseason is the playoffs. They can watch the playoffs, the Super Bowl, and the Favre retirement saga all from the comfort of their own home. Personally with as many games as Favre won over the years I would have put up with the saga for another 3 years if I knew that meant the Pack would be in the playoff hunt. Guy played hard every Sunday, which is all that matters.
I get a kick out of the take the Packers wouldn't have a better record without Favre. In the preseason this was a Super Bowl contender. When Super Bowl contenders don't contend, two people get blamed, 1) Head Coach & 2) QB. Except for this team where the O & D Line are the most accountable on the team.
Rodgers has done well for himself, but I've never seen someone who has proven nothing treated with such kid gloves. The Packers have had 4 winnable games in the 4th quarter and have come out on the short end of all of them, but the man with 41 career come from behind victories wouldn't have gotten any of them. To me I think it's a bunch of Favre haters digging for anything they can to justify why the Pack got rid of him. Enjoy losing football, because it is here to stay. Fire Ted the Tool.
from about 1 month ago
The Jets will get beat out in the first round, so Brett can enjoy the rest of the playoffs and Super Bowl too.
Let me get this straight, if this sounds like a dis article on Brett, I didn't mean it to be. I absolutely love the man, and I hope he has a great second half and playoffs.
But the Packers aren't struggling this season because Brett is gone, and maybe you didn't read the article, but I laid out why. I really didn't have to "dig" at all to find them either.
about 1 month ago
Wow I can't believe I missed this monumental argument. I have noticed stats flying back and forth like crazy.
I back up Zach on this one. Rodgers is far from Green Bay's problems this year. After all that nice media coverage about Favre's messy divorce with the Packers...all the hype of nobody can replace him? Coming out and playing through a tougher schedule then the Packers had the year before....how can you honestly say that the toughness of a team's schedule has no effect on them? Seriously did I miss something...Rodgers has more then performed beyond expectations this year.
I am 100% with the idea of trading Favre away. I love Brett Favre just as much as any Packer fan...he was the only quarterback I could see playing for the green and gold...and when I heard that he was going to retire...I felt just as awful as every Green Bay fan around the world.
Those past months following their loss in the NFC Championship..and Favre's retirement...I decided it was time to look on the bright side. Aaron Rodgers was more then ready to take the helm..and I felt that decision was final after I saw him come in for Brett during the Dallas game. McCarthy and Thomson gave Favre once chance to come back and play for the team.....and of course...Brett had to play patty cake back and forth.
I love the man and I will always hold him in high regard...but during the off season I lost a huge amount of respect for him as a person. Brett just might have a couple years left in the tank for him...but for god's sake Aaron Rodgers is performing like a veteran QB only several games into his career. I'm thankful that he knows as much as he does for one thrust into the situation. His poor performances this year have come from a lack of protection by the O line....which yes..is the same as last year. Just because the line is the same however is not an excuse for performance...as mentioned by Zach before.
I thought Rodger's was going to lose his head in that Minnesota game. That team was just licking their chops on every down...because I saw NO protection at all! It was a free for all hit Rodgers as hard as you can field day. Yes his performance was once again dismal....but he gutted it out and made something from nothing. He has more then earned respect in my eyes.
The Jets are off to a rather good start this year....but it is not all about Favre...as mentioned once more before. The Jets have made huge off season picks....the most recent now being TY LAW...who is taking the field just in time to play against his old team. (how convenient)
I have read Zach's articles...and he has as much respect for Favre as the rest of you. The guy is a god among quarterbacks and always will be. Rodger's has outperformed while trying to pull himself free of Favre's shadow...and all of their losses have NOT been by that many points.
Compared to Favre 17 years ago...Rodgers has performed even better...and that without much help from the O line or the linebackers. The run is killing their season....and if I see another performance from the big guys up front like I did last Sunday...I'm gonna hope Rodger's avoids the hospital. But after that performance I can honestly say the kid has heart.
Rodger's is going to pay off in the future no doubt. This season is not that important in my mind...the Packers still have they youngest team in the NFL...and they are doing WELL despite the schedule and the off season hype. I will always admire Favre as a player...but as a person? His decisions this year have really put a dent in his legacy. Regardless if you hate him or love him...Favre does make a team better...but I'm glad that he has finally moved out and brought his pitty party to a different team.
Aaron Rodgers is the guy for the future...If you can't picture him performing at MVP level with guys actually blocking for him and a strong defense at his back...then your views are seriously misguided. 2008 is just the break in season folks...you just wait until a solid team has this Quarterback's back...we will see who remembers who then.
Great Article Zach!
Green and Gold Forever!
about 1 month ago
Well said Carter. Thanks for the support!
about 1 month ago
Just to start, Favre is 10/13, 136 yards, 2 TDs against the NE Patriots in 2nd quarter.
from about 1 month ago
ah I hate NFL Network! I can't watch it! But I'm glad for Brett...and Douglas—this isn't personal I hope. This article has far too much personal attacking so far.
about 1 month ago
Well, Zach, I will take each of your points one by one, since you can't see the forest for the trees.
#1 Injuries
You whined that the 2008 team had lots of injuries