Yerko
15 years ago
Bottom line is 'right here and now'

...and right here and now I would take Rodgers over Favre in a heartbeat.

Rodgers has shown he is an excellent quarterback behind a semi-average offensive line (with top quality receivers). I seriously could not imagine what would have happened if Favre was behind the Packers offensive line this last season.

Favre was surrounded with a lot more weapons in Minnesota, a better offensive line, and a cute dome with air conditioning.

Rodgers was surrounded with some weapons (mainly our WRs), a semi-average offensive line, and outdoor conditions.

I'll never take away what Favre did for the Pack, but here and now...Rodgers is the better quarterback and we are lucky we landed another quality one.
UserPostedImage
wamj2008
15 years ago
I see Rodgers as giving the team an opportunity to win multiple SB's, as he doesn't turn the ball over and make stupid plays. He's definitely made in the Tom Brady/Joe Montana/Mr. Cool mode, versus the Favre/Elway/Gunslinger style of play.

2 out of the last 3 years, Favre could have QB-ed the NFC contender if he hadn't thrown season-ending rookie picks.
blank
Greg C.
15 years ago

We forget that the early years of the "streak" were enabled in part by a Vicodin addiction.

"Wade" wrote:



I've never heard anyone say this. The way I understand it, the Vicodin addiction was a byproduct of injuries that required pain relief medication, but I wouldn't think that the Vicodin addiction "enabled" the consecutive game streak in any way.

Another point in this thread that I don't agree with is that Favre had an advantage over Rodgers because he played in a dome. I don't think it was a significant advantage. I don't remember any Packer home games played in bad weather last year.
blank
Brettizzle
15 years ago
Well he is right for the most part, Rodgers got burned by Favre on a lot of throws and Favre picked Rodgers off a few times last year.
Jermichael Finley

We will be in Indianapolis

bozz_2006
15 years ago

I'm not sure why, but when I watched him occasionally via videos at NFL.com, Dukes struck me as one of the better talking heads out there. Probably my OL bias (I also like Ross Tucker).

Not to mention the alternatives against which he is compared are typically so very, very bad, that anything remotely articulate seems good by comparison.

As to the substantive point. I would rather have Rodgers right now than Favre. In fact I can't think of a quarterback I'd rather have than Rodgers, save perhaps Bart Starr c. 1965. Not Favre. Not Brady. Not Brees. Not M*nning.

I think this is part of the reason I continue to be so damn unreasonable about the OL. I think about what Rodgers would do with a topflight line, instead of one I considered servicable at best at the end of last year, and it almost makes me drool. And I worry that, because of that line, there's too high a likelihood of that one low hit or cheap shot (can you say "New Orleans"?) away from the quarterback equivalent of Eddie Lee Ivery or Gale Sayers.

We Packer fans are so spoiled from the F*vre years of never missing a game. We forget that the early years of the "streak" were enabled in part by a Vicodin addiction. That the years of Favre's career did not all take place behind a dominant line, and that without his freakish durability, we would have had to make do without him more than once.

I think Rodgers has something that could make him the greatest quarterback ever. But not if he's on the sideline in street clothes.

"Wade" wrote:


Did someone say Ross Tucker? 
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

We forget that the early years of the "streak" were enabled in part by a Vicodin addiction.

"Greg C." wrote:



I've never heard anyone say this. The way I understand it, the Vicodin addiction was a byproduct of injuries that required pain relief medication, but I wouldn't think that the Vicodin addiction "enabled" the consecutive game streak in any way.

Another point in this thread that I don't agree with is that Favre had an advantage over Rodgers because he played in a dome. I don't think it was a significant advantage. I don't remember any Packer home games played in bad weather last year.

"Wade" wrote:



I'm not making a moral judgment.

But the reason people take Vicodin is for pain. Severe pain. To lessen the pain.

There is no doubt that Favre has one of the highest pain thresholds out there. That he is able to play through pain that would bench any other quarterback. But he still has some pain threshold that he won't be able to handle. Everyone does. If he's taking Vicodin at time X, its because without it he's got concern that the pain is at/near a level he considers "too high" to perform at.

If he's taking too many Vicodin, there's a pain issue there.

The fact that he played with the help of Vicodin doesn't make him any less of "the NFL ironman to define NFL ironmen". But if he's not taking the hgh powered pain medication, he would have been more likely to pass whatever that "pain-threshold-beyond-which-even-Favre-couldn't-have-played".

But again, my main point is not that Favre wouldn't have had the streak. My main point is that we should not assume that Rodgers is an out-of-this-world ironman. It's better to assume that, when it comes to being able to play with injury, Rodgers is closer to the "average NFL quarterback" than he is to "the greatest ironman in NFL history".

My point is that if he gets hit too much, he's likely going to go down to injury sooner than Favre. And if he goes down unnecessarily (e.g., because he plays too many plays behind a sub-standard OL), the Packers will be losing what may be the best QB in the league.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Gravedigga
15 years ago



Favre was surrounded with a lot more weapons in Minnesota, a better offensive line, and a cute dome with air conditioning.

Rodgers was surrounded with some weapons (mainly our WRs), a semi-average offensive line, and outdoor conditions.

"G-Force" wrote:




Here we go again with you guys. You say he had a lot more weapons which couldnt be further from the truth. His weapons coming into the season were much worse, esepcially considering he never played with them. I would definitely take the Packers weapons on offense over Minnesotas. For all the talk of Minnys "great" O-line, they couldn't run block worth shit and it was all on Favres shoulders at the end of the year. That o-line provided him with multiple ass kickings at the end of the year(Arizona, Chicago, New Orleans) off the top of my head.

Receivers.........are you kidding. The packers had and still have the best group of receivers in the league IMO. Jennings, Driver, Jones, Nelson and the two tight ends vs Harvin(rookie), Rice(nothing before Favre showed up), Berrian(overrated, one trick pony), Schianko(nothing before Favre showed up).

Grant vs Peterson I give you that but Peterson fumbled away games with his 7 fumbles while Grant stayed consistent and got good in the 2nd half of the year and fumbled once. Also, for all this talk, Grant had 4.4 yards per carry and 1253 yards vs Petersons 4.4 yards per carry and 1383 yards. Not a significant difference. 11 TD's vs 18 but that's more reflective of field position than anything else.

Stop trying to discount what Favre did by making stuff up about weapons. Only makes you look bitter.
--------------------------------------------
UserPostedImage


A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d
Tezzy
15 years ago
First, I don't think in anyway is Jamie Dukes stupid. And certainly not for these Favre comments. Plain and simple, Rodgers went 0-2 against Favre and was 0-1 in the playoffs while Favre was 1-1. Call that butt licking if you like, but I don't see it. If that's not someones criteria for what says one QB is better than another, so be it. But it definetely isn't a stupid opinion if you ask me. Either you agree or disagree, but I don't understand the ad hominem.
On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."
go.pack.go.
15 years ago

Bottom line is 'right here and now'

...and right here and now I would take Rodgers over Favre in a heartbeat.

Rodgers has shown he is an excellent quarterback behind a semi-average offensive line (with top quality receivers). I seriously could not imagine what would have happened if Favre was behind the Packers offensive line this last season.

Favre was surrounded with a lot more weapons in Minnesota, a better offensive line, and a cute dome with air conditioning.

Rodgers was surrounded with some weapons (mainly our WRs), a semi-average offensive line, and outdoor conditions.

I'll never take away what Favre did for the Pack, but here and now...Rodgers is the better quarterback and we are lucky we landed another quality one.

"G-Force" wrote:



I disagree with one thing in this post. Favre was NOT surrounded with more weapons. Yes, he had the best RB in the NFL and a few good receivers, but I don't think that Minnesota's receivers are anywhere close to the talent that the Packers have. Add Jermichael Finley in the contest and it's not even close.

The Vikings offensive line IS better though. I'll give you that.

Just remember: Favre makes just about any receiver look good. Just look at Sidney Rice for an example. He wasn't all that great before he got Brett as his QB.
UserPostedImage
Packers_Finland
15 years ago

First, I don't think in anyway is Jamie Dukes stupid.

"Tezzy" wrote:



After saying Peppers > Allen. I'd say he is stupid. Well that, and the fact that he thinks Vick deserves a second chance as a starter but Clausen doesn't deserve a starting spot (after displaying "immaturity" in college).

Edit: I think he's not wrong in saying Favre is better than Rodgers. That's a credible opinion. But the way he acted during that Favre vs Rodgers segment was the definition of being a biased idiot.
This is a placeholder
Fan Shout
dfosterf (16h) : I'm going to call that a good move.
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Packers sign CB Corey Ballentine
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : I'm not sure how to kill the draft order just yet so it's not so confusing.
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : *to be able
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : and because it's not a dynasty league (which makes a lot more sense to be ability to trade picks)
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Oh I know; I was just exploring and it blew my mind that you could trade picks because of the whole reordering thing
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Zero, I think I preferred my offer: your 1st for my 15th rounder
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Keep in mind, we do a draft reorder once all members locked in
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : You can have my 12th Rd for your 2nd round
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Hey i didn't know we could trade picks in fantasy
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Update: Rock has tried a cheese curd, promises it's not his last
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : watch it!! lol
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : you're right, we never did leave, the site just went down :P
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Rock claims to have never eaten a cheese curd
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : We did not leave.
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Family Night! WE ARE SO BACK!
Mucky Tundra (2-Aug) : To this day, I'm still miffed about his 4 TD game against Dallas on Thanksgiving going to waste
Martha Careful (2-Aug) : Congratulations Sterling Sharpe. He was terrific and I loved watching him play.
beast (2-Aug) : I believe it's technically against the CBA rules, but Jerry just calls it a simple unofficial chat... and somehow gets away with it.
beast (2-Aug) : Jerry Jones is infamous for ̶n̶e̶g̶o̶t̶i̶a̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ chatting with players one on one... and going around the agent.
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Oo just saw a blurb saying that Dallas negotiated directly with Parsons and not through his agent
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : I assumed that both guys will get paid, just a matter of when or how we get there
Zero2Cool (1-Aug) : McLaurin nor Micah going anywhere. They will get money
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : the Synder years or do they take care of one of their own?
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Do the Commanders risk losing a top WR with an emerging QB just because he's turning 30 and potentially risk damaging the rebuild from
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Turns 30 this September, plays at a high level and Washington has some cap space I believe
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : More interesting is Washington with Terry McLaurin
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : I would imagine Dallas will resolve this issue with a truckload of money
Zero2Cool (1-Aug) : Micah pulling a Myles with trade request
beast (1-Aug) : Packers should make some cheese forks
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : GRAB THE PITCHFORKS~
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : CUT HIM
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : Socieltal collapse imminent
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : The West has fallen
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : After starting off camp with 25 straight made field goals, Brandon McManus has missed one
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : But it should be stable
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : It's probably gonna be slower.
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : We're gonna just full go on to the new host.
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : What crap. Site issues galore
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : if PH dies, there is packerpeople com available
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : database is on new host, eventually website will follow
Mucky Tundra (30-Jul) : Zero, regarding Ewers, you are correct.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Sadly, this might be our life for awhile. I could put it on another host, but seems it was slower, although more stable
beast (30-Jul) : How long will it be down?
beast (30-Jul) : RIP site 😭
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site will die, I have to restart it.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Quinn stinks. Lot of underthrows. (my guess)
beast (30-Jul) : How did Quinn Ewers effect where Golden was drafted?
dfosterf (30-Jul) : All I've experienced was late at night or early morning. I just figured you were doing something in the background
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site sure seems to be down more than up
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

15h / Fantasy Sports Talk / packerfanoutwest

4-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

28-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

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