Analysis: Favre Wouldn't Have Saved '...

Analysis: Favre Wouldn't Have Saved '08 Packers from Struggles

There are 74 comments on the Today's TMJ4 story from Nov 12, 2008, titled Analysis: Favre Wouldn't Have Saved '08 Packers from Struggles. In it, Today's TMJ4 reports that:

When Green Bay sent Brett Favre packing in training camp, team officials knew they were trading away a wildly popular, remarkably tough player who might still have a good year or two left in him.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Today's TMJ4.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
jack

United States

#62 Dec 1, 2008
That is why I am saying that type of logic is wrong for any QB. Many things through a game make the out come. But people blame Favre for every loss if GB had the ball last and an INT happened or they didn't score. So if they want to do it with him do it with rodgers too. And the ones blaming Favre seem to forget he did lead the offense to wins many times.And alot of the INTs at the end were on 3rd and long or 4th long.
Joe

United States

#63 Dec 1, 2008
jack wrote:
You are a fool.This is the first time i had to call someone a name. Use your same logic with Rodgers as with Favre at the ends of games. Rodgers had 4 chances at the ends of games and threw INTS. so then using what you are saying he lost those games. Favre won games like those in 92 his first year. And did about 40 times in GB. And part of GB problem is they do not believe Rodgers can finish. Even Emitt Smith sees and says Rodgers cracks under presure. In using your logic any QB that throws an INT at the end threw the game away and it was only their fault for the loss.And that is why I say FOOL.
I would say that AR is pretty cool under pressure. You can hit him or he can get picked off and he does not seem to be affected as Favre used to.

Let's put it this way, Rodgers will play the same if he is up by 30 pts or down by 30 pts, while Favre gets shaken very easily or has little success closing games.

Now what would be nice is if the Packer supporting cast would step up. I don't know if you got to see Peyton Manning play in CLE last weekend, but that was a prime example of a QB controlling the game. He had only 125 yrds and 2 INTs, but he closed the game when it counted in a hostle CLE environment doing the critical things that help his team - throwing the ball away, making audibles and controlling the clock.

I can see Rodgers getting to that point in his career - a controlling QB, but 4 now this is his 1st yr as a starter & he is light yrs ahead of the previous GB QB is skill and composure.

I think if the team as a whole can rise up to AR's level, they are extremely dangerous in the playoffs.
Joe

United States

#64 Dec 1, 2008
I don't know why Emmitt Smith would say AR gets shaken. That does not make sense.
Pack Fan in Sea of Purple

Mankato, MN

#65 Dec 1, 2008
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say that AR is pretty cool under pressure. You can hit him or he can get picked off and he does not seem to be affected as Favre used to.
Let's put it this way, Rodgers will play the same if he is up by 30 pts or down by 30 pts, while Favre gets shaken very easily or has little success closing games.
Now what would be nice is if the Packer supporting cast would step up. I don't know if you got to see Peyton Manning play in CLE last weekend, but that was a prime example of a QB controlling the game. He had only 125 yrds and 2 INTs, but he closed the game when it counted in a hostle CLE environment doing the critical things that help his team - throwing the ball away, making audibles and controlling the clock.
I can see Rodgers getting to that point in his career - a controlling QB, but 4 now this is his 1st yr as a starter & he is light yrs ahead of the previous GB QB is skill and composure.
I think if the team as a whole can rise up to AR's level, they are extremely dangerous in the playoffs.
So what do you call the INT Rodgers threw with 1:30 left to go in the game? He had a golden opportunity to drive the team down to win the game and silence his critics, but again threw a game ending INT (vs Atlanta, vs. Tampa...etc)

You are a bold faced liar, and you know damn well you would never give Favre the pass that you are giving Rodgers for throwing games away. You are just like many of the other bandwagon AR fans that infest this board, your transparency is sicking.
Joe

United States

#66 Dec 1, 2008
Pack Fan in Sea of Purple wrote:
<quoted text>
So what do you call the INT Rodgers threw with 1:30 left to go in the game? He had a golden opportunity to drive the team down to win the game and silence his critics, but again threw a game ending INT (vs Atlanta, vs. Tampa...etc)
You are a bold faced liar, and you know damn well you would never give Favre the pass that you are giving Rodgers for throwing games away. You are just like many of the other bandwagon AR fans that infest this board, your transparency is sicking.
Well if you're going to put the blame on a single play (LOL), you may want to look at the defense giving up the S. Smith play w/ under 2 min. The INT was a last ditch effort deal - misleading INT.

The last 2 wks have been frustrating - no doubt. Brees has a career day then D. Williams; it can get tiring.

As far as AR, he threw 45 passes and managed the offense extremely well with Grant not providing run support as JAX came in to play. In that situation, Favre would have gone in the tank as we are all accustomed to in the past (& present w/ NYJ fans).

The point is, AR is a 1st yr starter who is playing extremely well and playing solid in tough situations. As a 1st yr starter, AR has fullfilled all the expectations. The standard was not set 2 high as Green Bay basically had a "lame duck" as a QB in Favre. So let's rejoice with having a competant QB and wish the JETs a happy off season LOL.
Joe

United States

#67 Dec 1, 2008
The Packers can still win the division (and must to get in as the East & South are strong). If the surrounding players step up, the Packers will be the '07 Packers w/ a good QB!

Trust me, I think they will win WILD CARD & knock the GIANTs out in the DIVISIONAL round. DAL is not that good and we see how beatable CAR, TB & ATL can be.
Pack Fan in Sea of Purple

Mankato, MN

#68 Dec 1, 2008
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Well if you're going to put the blame on a single play (LOL), you may want to look at the defense giving up the S. Smith play w/ under 2 min. The INT was a last ditch effort deal - misleading INT.
The last 2 wks have been frustrating - no doubt. Brees has a career day then D. Williams; it can get tiring.
As far as AR, he threw 45 passes and managed the offense extremely well with Grant not providing run support as JAX came in to play. In that situation, Favre would have gone in the tank as we are all accustomed to in the past (& present w/ NYJ fans).
The point is, AR is a 1st yr starter who is playing extremely well and playing solid in tough situations. As a 1st yr starter, AR has fullfilled all the expectations. The standard was not set 2 high as Green Bay basically had a "lame duck" as a QB in Favre. So let's rejoice with having a competant QB and wish the JETs a happy off season LOL.
If Favre was the QB yesterday, and threw the exact same pick AR did, you would be blaming him for losing the game. Just like many of the other two-faced bandwagon AR fans on this board. If you say anything otherwise you are lying.
Leo

Annandale, VA

#69 Dec 1, 2008
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say that AR is pretty cool under pressure. You can hit him or he can get picked off and he does not seem to be affected as Favre used to.
Let's put it this way, Rodgers will play the same if he is up by 30 pts or down by 30 pts, while Favre gets shaken very easily or has little success closing games.
Now what would be nice is if the Packer supporting cast would step up. I don't know if you got to see Peyton Manning play in CLE last weekend, but that was a prime example of a QB controlling the game. He had only 125 yrds and 2 INTs, but he closed the game when it counted in a hostle CLE environment doing the critical things that help his team - throwing the ball away, making audibles and controlling the clock.
I can see Rodgers getting to that point in his career - a controlling QB, but 4 now this is his 1st yr as a starter & he is light yrs ahead of the previous GB QB is skill and composure.
I think if the team as a whole can rise up to AR's level, they are extremely dangerous in the playoffs.
Yeah, he is just wonderful... except he is a major stoner with no will to win. 5 close games; 0-5. Take another bong hit Aaron... there is always next year.
Lyn Dicky bestPack qb

Green Bay, WI

#70 Dec 1, 2008
We've had years to scrutinize Favre's play and guess at what goes through his head. Pro or con, we think we know him and his play.

For AR it is not so much yet.

I do believe with Favre the Packers would have more wins. At this point last year the running game was just getting going and the Packers did a lot of 5 receiver sets. More than I'd ever seen on a tv outside of a video game.

With AR, this is definitely a first year.
I do not expect any qb to be all pro their first year. Such is the rare exception even for future hall of famers. Rogers said he would rather have the wins than have the learning experience.
Well, this entire year will have to be chalked up as a learning experience. Sorry.
Even if the Packers win the division to get into the play-offs, I cannot say I believe they will go very far. They simply have not proven to be consistent enough. Damn you 07 Giants!

No sooner than 1/2 way into next year, I believe, will we be able to tell where AR is.

Still, how much change was there from last year?
The defense was decent. No 96 Pack for sure. Just look at the score differences.

Off season:
d-line, o-line, running back

And what happened to the d-backs during N.O.?
Not enough pressure from the d-line?
Joe

United States

#71 Dec 2, 2008
Lyn Dicky bestPack qb wrote:
We've had years to scrutinize Favre's play and guess at what goes through his head. Pro or con, we think we know him and his play.
For AR it is not so much yet.
I do believe with Favre the Packers would have more wins. At this point last year the running game was just getting going and the Packers did a lot of 5 receiver sets. More than I'd ever seen on a tv outside of a video game.
With AR, this is definitely a first year.
I do not expect any qb to be all pro their first year. Such is the rare exception even for future hall of famers. Rogers said he would rather have the wins than have the learning experience.
Well, this entire year will have to be chalked up as a learning experience. Sorry.
Even if the Packers win the division to get into the play-offs, I cannot say I believe they will go very far. They simply have not proven to be consistent enough. Damn you 07 Giants!
No sooner than 1/2 way into next year, I believe, will we be able to tell where AR is.
Still, how much change was there from last year?
The defense was decent. No 96 Pack for sure. Just look at the score differences.
Off season:
d-line, o-line, running back
And what happened to the d-backs during N.O.?
Not enough pressure from the d-line?
You also have to factor in that MIN & CHI are more competative this yr.

As far as the Giants game last season, we all know who ended that game for the Packers - crucial INT. Even with Favre as the starting QB, the Packers almost went to the SB, but BF cracked under pressure.

That is why with Rodgers at the helm, I think the Packers stand a great chance to in the playoffs. The surrounding talent needs to step it up and most importantly (as you stated), the running game needs to get going like last season.
Pack Fan in Sea of Purple

Hamel, MN

#72 Dec 2, 2008
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Well if you're going to put the blame on a single play (LOL)
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
As far as the Giants game last season, we all know who ended that game for the Packers - crucial INT. Even with Favre as the starting QB, the Packers almost went to the SB, but BF cracked under pressure.
I guess your criticism of placing blame for a loss on a single player/play can be overlooked when it comes to blaming Favre. At least make an attempt to try not sounding like a hypocrite.
dewy

United States

#73 Dec 3, 2008
Pack Fan in Sea of Purple wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I guess your criticism of placing blame for a loss on a single player/play can be overlooked when it comes to blaming Favre. At least make an attempt to try not sounding like a hypocrite.
PFISOP good to see you are here. because I gave up trying to get some to use their logic the same for both. Try all you can it will not work. Anyway I missed Bradshaws rant about the Packers 2 weeks ago. But i did get to read what he said. It was interesting,at least he got on MM about his coaching .I think he is the first to do that.Good luck with theses guys.
exhp

Minneapolis, MN

#74 Dec 3, 2008
Joe wrote:
I don't know why Emmitt Smith would say AR gets shaken. That does not make sense.
He gets shaken cuz he wasn't stirred..lol
dewy

United States

#75 Dec 3, 2008
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say that AR is pretty cool under pressure. You can hit him or he can get picked off and he does not seem to be affected as Favre used to.
Let's put it this way, Rodgers will play the same if he is up by 30 pts or down by 30 pts, while Favre gets shaken very easily or has little success closing games.
Now what would be nice is if the Packer supporting cast would step up. I don't know if you got to see Peyton Manning play in CLE last weekend, but that was a prime example of a QB controlling the game. He had only 125 yrds and 2 INTs, but he closed the game when it counted in a hostle CLE environment doing the critical things that help his team - throwing the ball away, making audibles and controlling the clock.
I can see Rodgers getting to that point in his career - a controlling QB, but 4 now this is his 1st yr as a starter & he is light yrs ahead of the previous GB QB is skill and composure.
I think if the team as a whole can rise up to AR's level, they are extremely dangerous in the playoffs.
Favre had little success in closing games? 40 thats right 40 fourth quarter come from behind wins(and in OT).So you think that is not finishing a game. Rodgers had 5 chances to do that this year and came up with O. So use the same reasoning for both .If an INT ended the game by either and you guys want to say it was Favre's fault then do the same when its Rodgers who throws one at the end. But no you don't do that then all kinds of other things that happened during the game. As I have said its a TEAM sport. One player does not lose or win the game.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Nick Barnett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ben Reiter: Postcard from camp: Bills (Aug '11) Aug '11 Pajamas 1
News Green Bay Packers 2011: 5 Players Who Could Be ... (May '11) May '11 Laughing Bear Fan 2
News Agent: LB Hawk close to new deal with Packers (Mar '11) Mar '11 JOC-12 1
News Packers say goodbye to fans after Super season (Feb '11) Feb '11 Beecharmer 2
News Packers QB Aaron Rodgers weighs in on team phot... (Jan '11) Jan '11 PackerBacker-Wich... 9
News Rodgers: Some injured players didn't stay here (Jan '11) Jan '11 PR and Proud 14
News Injured Packers will be in Super Bowl team photo (Jan '11) Jan '11 GBPfan 1
More from around the web