yes, go right ahead. The thing with Brett is that general sentiment was that the pack needed him to win. no doubt he was a substanial reason they got to the NFC Champs that year but that final throw illustrated to me that he was no longer able to take the pack over the edge. So what's the point in hanging on to a price 37 Y.O. QB who had every opportunity to lead a team to a SB in the last 17 minutes of the game and couldn't pull through?

I don't know if Rodgers will come near the success that Brett did, but I'm certainly not sad to see Brett gone and Rodgers given the opportunity to prove that he is/isn't a suitable QB for this team.

<will be out of the brett section for the next month. adios!

Ok so if that one bad throw illustrates Brett was no longer to take the Pack over the edge why doesn't that one bad throw in the TB game this year with Rodgers tell you the same thing?

---

I'm saying that one of the main reasons the packers were holding on to an aging 14 million dollar QB was based on the premise that he could take them to the next level. He had about every opporunity imaginable in the last 15-20 min. of that game, and was not able to lead them. That's not to say that the blame is on his shoulders, but that also suggests to me, at least, that with him at the helm this team likely wasn't going to move beyond a mid-playoff contender.

This is why I don't hold it against Ted Thompson et al. for supposedly encouraging Brett to retire, or going with AR. Is AR the next hero? I don't know...and I agree that the justified knock on him this year was he was a great statistical QB, but couldn't seem to pull it off in the clutch. However, the same could have been said of Favre in the early 90s (see Dallas Cowboys) but with time he matured, grew, etc. and was able to achieve a lot of success, thus I think AR should be granted a similar grace period.

I can't find the logic in this Musccy and I'm not trying to be insulting.

Here we are in an OT game in the NFC Championship game and every other throw he made to get us to that point is immediately trumped by one bad throw.

He had us right on the verge and you think because he threw an INT at that point that showed he was done?

You don't think Brett would EVER make a better decision had he had 10 chances?

So you elect to just forgo any chance of getting to that point again in favor of not making the playoffs at all because Brett would NEVER make the right decision in that position?

---

Let's see...written by...Jamie Dukes....

yeah, that's the point where I stopped paying attention. A former player criticizing a soon-to-be current one? Only Tarkenton or Irvin has the stones to do that it seems.

---

DD...what I'm saying is that Brett didn't have a lot of upside remaining, his age makes that pretty clear. The main reason to stick with him was because he was viewed as someone that we needed in order to go to the SB, w/out him we're doomed...the 4th quarter really seemed to stagnate for both teams, either needed someone to step up and be a leader, and it didn't really seem like anyone did, more of a war of atrition ending, and Brett is included in that. He had a whole game to prove he was still the 3 time MVP, we needed him to lead us to the promise land, etc. and to me that didn't happen.

Very true that a lot of other packers didn't do anything phenomenal either, but a lot of other packers aren't 37 (at the time) and have a 14 mil contract with a 1st round draft pick sitting in the rearview, on the cusp of a contract year.

I understand to a point what you are saying and could agree had we'd gone 4-12.

However to say Brett didn't have enough when we were in the NFC championship game, one drive away from the SB, is bizarre to me.

It's like me running a 10 mile marathon. If I get to within an inch of the finish line and trip over a rock and break my leg does that mean the following year I'm going to trip again or I shouldn't run it because I came up an inch short last time.

I've proven I'm capable by being an inch away, perhaps next time I won't trip.

---

Well.........if you ran the race 16 times, and only finished once, i'd say you arn't as 'capable" as you thought.

---

I know it's asking a lot to say, "Brett, this could be the last shot you've ever got, don't trip over a rock near the finish line" (using your analogy), but to me, I felt that he was given a big leash for a long time with the organization, again under the premise that he would be the "x factor" when we needed it. He was given the chance to carry the team on his shoulders, and I wouldn't quite say he failed, but he also obvioulsy didn't lead the team to the SB when we needed him to.

And I don't think he was 'punished' for this, but I also think that the packers were in a bind with Rodgers...1 year from a contract year, and if brett comes back, he rides the pine again, and could very well want to leave after that. Brett had proven over the previous 5 offseaons that at any point he's liable to retire, so all you've got is an aging unreliable QB (based on retirement talk) who couldn't lead the team at crunch time, didn't necessarily screw them, but again, no SB appearance with game on his shoulders...and then maybe the future QB, maybe a dud, sitting on the sideline, who is subject to leave if you don't give him a shot.