Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline RedSoxExcel  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 1:33:27 PM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

Joined: 9/30/2007(UTC)
Applause Received: 3
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.
Offline RedSoxExcel  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 1:38:42 PM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

Joined: 9/30/2007(UTC)
Applause Received: 3
" said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


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.
Offline TOPackerFan  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 1:57:45 PM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post

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?


I'm sure Ryan Grant's franchise playoff record rushing performance had nothing to do with the comeback....
Offline musccy  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:00:42 PM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania
Applause Given: 752
Applause Received: 737
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.
Offline RedSoxExcel  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:01:58 PM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

Joined: 9/30/2007(UTC)
Applause Received: 3
" said: Go to Quoted Post
" said: Go to Quoted Post

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?


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


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.
Offline doddpower  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:02:49 PM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2015

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA
Applause Given: 3,360
Applause Received: 929
Always nice when RedSox comes around for his soap box Favre postings!!

=)
Offline RedSoxExcel  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:07:44 PM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

Joined: 9/30/2007(UTC)
Applause Received: 3
" said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


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.
Offline RedSoxExcel  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:09:52 PM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

Joined: 9/30/2007(UTC)
Applause Received: 3
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Always nice when RedSox comes around for his soap box Favre postings!!

=)


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?
Offline DakotaT  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:41:32 PM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

United States
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1,049
Applause Received: 2,116
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.
Offline Zero2Cool  
#10 Posted : Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:43:02 PM(UTC)
Rank: Premier Member

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2015Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,446
Applause Received: 3,860
/me kicks self in nuts and tosses hands up in air
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Fan Shout
Pack93z (2h) : In one league I went from 2-5 to 8-5 and clinched a playoff spot... #Believe Best I have for the Packers at the moment.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Sweet. I backed my sweet ass into the playoffs. 8th and final seed.
Smokey (15h) : Thank you Zero, I also just finished the Reg. Fantasy season at #1 . (Tailgaters Fantasy Football League ) .
The_Green_Ninja (20h) : Same ol' Jay xD
Zero2Cool (22h) : Aaron Rodgers over the last 7 games: 302 passing yards/game, 19 TDs, 3 INTs, 104.6 passer rating. 212 rushing yards, TD.
Zero2Cool (5-Dec) : Nice! I noticed you rocked your NFL Picks this week too! Nice work!!
Smokey (5-Dec) : Yes, he got me 29 fantasy points !
Zero2Cool (5-Dec) : Didn't David Johnson have a really good game though?
DarkaneRules (4-Dec) : cardinals run game looks worse than ours
Zero2Cool (4-Dec) : Packers inactives v Texans: WR Trevor Davis CB Makinton Dorleant ILB Blake Martinez OLB Kyler Fackrell RG Lang C Tretter DT Christian Ringo
buckeyepackfan (4-Dec) : GOOD MORNING PACKER FANS! GAMEDAY! GO! PACK! GO!
Zero2Cool (2-Dec) : lol
TheKanataThrilla (2-Dec) : That's a better description Zero thanks.
Zero2Cool (2-Dec) : I wasn't cheering for Cowboys. I was just hoping Vikings lose lol
Smokey (2-Dec) : NFLshop.com
TheKanataThrilla (2-Dec) : Seems best for our divisional prospects
hardrocker950 (2-Dec) : then don't
TheKanataThrilla (2-Dec) : It feels awful to cheer for the Cowboys.
Zero2Cool (30-Nov) : You know you don't have a Google sign in, so ... ahh ... don't click it :-) (having fun with ya)
Laser Gunns (30-Nov) : I don't mean to make the dupe, it happens when I try to sign in using the google account link thing.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Erik Walden has as many sacks as Nick Perry.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Most players fly "home" for offseason.
Porforis (29-Nov) : Or they just don't want to beat their bodies to hell to get a bunch of money and not having stuff around to enjoy with said money
Cheesey (29-Nov) : Well, i guess it just shows who thinks their football job is less important then going out to party.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Green Bay is a smaller town, and it's cold as crap here.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : What I've heard and read, more likely true than we care to admit.
hardrocker950 (29-Nov) : If that is true... they don't know what is good for them hehe
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : That was from Brady Poppinga.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Ted has always been aggressive & proactive in FA.It's just that a lot of big time free agents have taken less to play in bigger cities.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Gunnar, QUIT creating that duplicate account! lol
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Reggie ragland was on IR early too.
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Seems anyone and everyone related to Packers is hurt lol
wpr (29-Nov) : Boy it's a good thing GB didn't sign Trevthan. Uncle Teddy is a genius. 8-l
The_Green_Ninja (29-Nov) : Silent from Nerdmann tonight :)
Zero2Cool (29-Nov) : Davante Adams turns 6 targets into 5-113-2 in MNF win
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
54m / Green Bay Packers Talk / mi_keys

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr


Packers Headlines