What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

When do the "Packers are better w/Rodgers" rumblings start? (1 Viewer)

Only idiots would suggest that. Plain and simple. I'm no Packers fan but to suggest they'd be better than Favre based on one game when Favre's been otherwise brilliant all year is probably a sign of mental re_tardation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Only idiots would suggest that. Plain and simple. I'm no Packers fan but to suggest they'd be better than Favre based on one game when Favre's been otherwise brilliant all year is probably a sign of mental re-tardation.
You should see what the Favre haters have written here over the last few years. They have been silent this year but will chime in soon.
 
2007: Favre 10-1. Rogers 0-1 (though they were down 27-10 when he came in...)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You should see what the Favre haters have written here over the last few years.
I'm game. Link me to some of the worst comments about Favre. From what I have seen, posters around here have a tendency to be no more harsh towards Favre than some people in the media. In fact, even his largest detractors on this forum have a tendency to give the man his props.
 
Favre, even at this point in his career, is clearly the superior QB. However, it is looking as though maybe Rodgers isn't the 'bust' that many had declared him in the last year or two (based almost exclusively off of preseason games and camps). I never understood why he got that moniker; he hasn't played nearly enough to earn it.

Who knows?... Maybe his time playing behind a great like Favre has done Rodgers some good over the past 3 seasons and will have better prepared him to succeed at the NFL level. Or maybe Rodgers is a "bust?" Still to be determined.

As of today, GB is definitely better off with Favre at QB, imho. He has had a fantastic season.

 
[scooter] said:
Rodgers is to Favre as Feeley is to McNabb.andFavre is to McNabb as Rodgers is to Feeley.
:rolleyes: Well, the first part, Rogers and Feeley are both backups...woopity do.2nd part: Favre is MUCH better than McNabb could ever have hoped to be and the same might be able to be said for Rogers/Feeley, although the sample size is too small.If that's what you meant...right on!
 
This thread is no worse than you weak board-nazis knocking it. Is it a rediculous notion - that a. Favre is done and b. the Packers are better with Rodgers - yes. If Favre can't play are they better with Rodgers - obviously. But this pompous attitude that some of you have that leads to this rediculous arguement about what is good/bad/right/smart/stupid to post is what makes this board rediculous. Let them post what they want to post. If you don't like it - get out and go read something else. I was wondering myself what the sentiment was with Packer fans as to how comfortable you are with Rodgers in there. This is a good Packer team with a chance to do something this year. Can you do it without Favre? Rodgers didn't look like, well...Favre, but he didn't stink up the joint either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mlball77 said:
Favre, even at this point in his career, is clearly the superior QB. However, it is looking as though maybe Rodgers isn't the 'bust' that many had declared him in the last year or two (based almost exclusively off of preseason games and camps). I never understood why he got that moniker; he hasn't played nearly enough to earn it. Who knows?... Maybe his time playing behind a great like Favre has done Rodgers some good over the past 3 seasons and will have better prepared him to succeed at the NFL level. Or maybe Rodgers is a "bust?" Still to be determined.As of today, GB is definitely better off with Favre at QB, imho. He has had a fantastic season.
Agreed on all counts. I was impressed with Rodgers last night. Really impressed. Guys that have held the clipboard tend to have a shorter learning curve once they start ala Trent Green, Carson Palmer, Kitna whereas guys that have been thrown to the wolves early on have struggled - Leinart, Vinny, etc. I like what I saw but no way anyone should even suggest that Rodgers should be the man until Brett Favre and Brett Favre alone decides when he wants to quit playing...
 
When do they start? NEVER

Packer fans are very loyal. We would like to see Brett control himself more and stick with the gameplan. If they had we could have won this game. It was a good experience for a young team though.

 
[scooter] said:
Rodgers is to Favre as Feeley is to McNabb.andFavre is to McNabb as Rodgers is to Feeley.
:thumbdown: Well, the first part, Rogers and Feeley are both backups...woopity do.2nd part: Favre is MUCH better than McNabb could ever have hoped to be and the same might be able to be said for Rogers/Feeley, although the sample size is too small.If that's what you meant...right on!
Favre is a hall-of-famer with a superior backup QB. McNabb is a sometimes-all-pro with a mediocre backup. Rodgers' performance last night was much better than Feeley's performance last week.
 
The rumblings will start only when Favre is no longer an option due to injury or retirement...only then will the Packers be better w/ Rodgers.

 
How dare the Packers have more good QBs than the rest of the division combined.
Favre has had the following teammates throughout his career:Chris MillerBilly Joe TolliverMike TomczakDon MajkowskiKen O'BrienKurt WarnerMark BrunellJim McMahonSteve BonoAaron BrooksMatt HasselbeckAaron Rodgers
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top