Packers Huddle

These two arent even in the same conversation. IMO opinion Favre had significantly better teams. That 96 Packer team is recognized as one of the greatest teams all time. I dont think anyone sees the 2010 team that way.

If I could clone one of them and start with a 21 YO Favre or Rodgers it would be Rodgers. Favre was more fun, but you can win more with Rodgers. Favre, as has been stated, made a lot of stupid plays that cost us games. Fans seem to only remember the incredible plays that won us games.

The biggest Stat difference between the two is the number of picks. If Rodgers plays 2 more years he will pass Favre in yardage, the only good Stat Brett leads in.

It is what it is, people like to "live in the glory days". I consider Starr the Glory days, but it is all subjective. In another 10 years, Rodgers will be the glory days and it will be hip and trendy to think he was the best.

Rodgers is a far, far better QB than Favre. Not close. Grit and toughness? You go to Favre, not close.

Packfntk wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 08:11

It is what it is, people like to "live in the glory days". I consider Starr the Glory days, but it is all subjective. In another 10 years, Rodgers will be the glory days and it will be hip and trendy to think he was the best.

Rodgers is a far, far better QB than Favre. Not close. Grit and toughness? You go to Favre, not close.

I count my lucky stars often that I wasn't born in Detroit

So grateful to have watched Starr, Favre, and now Rodgers, all 3 unique to themselves, and also 3 of the greatest to ever play.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

25 Jul 2022 11:55

Also gotta remember Favre was slangin it in an era when that wasn’t really the most common way to play. I would Marino was also ahead of his time in terms of throwing long and often. But Favre too was doing it when the rules weren’t set up for it. Favre and Marino both would destroy the current era with the rules that tilt success toward offense.

Fave also probably would have played longer as he would be dealing with Less CTE most likely.

But his consecutive streak would not have occurred if he was playing now with today's concussion protocols.

For me their styles of play are so different. One was tough as nails and built like a brick outhouse who could take a ton of punishment but was rather careless with the ball in crucial situations that cost us games. The other is much more cerebral and surgical in his throws but not as durable. In the regular season AR is crazy good but in the post season a lot of unfortunate things have happened since 2010 (fumbles, defensive breakdowns, ST screwups so if AR isn't perfect we were screwed). We have been a lucky fan base. Only one other team I can think of has had this kind of elite QB play over 16+ seasons (18 seasons in SF). And we still have AR so his story is still being written.

Then, just when you say it's not close, you get something like this to even the scales.

Just saw this is Rodgers dressing up as Nick Cage from Con Air. Classic.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 05:51

IMO opinion Favre had significantly better teams.

I disagree. Ray Rhodes, Sherman GM teams were pretty mid. Rodgers had, what, two bad years of McCarthy at HC? And TT at his worst was better than Sherman at his best. Rodgers had way better consistent WR and OL talent than Favre, not to say Rodgers' teams were NEVER weak there but this was rarer than the same for Favre. IMO, Rodgers generally had better talent around him than Favre did.

With all that being said, Rodgers is hands-down the better thrower of the football than Favre was.

Rodgers's most impressive feats can outdo Favre's, and his biggest fails are still nowhere near as ugly (or numerous) as BrINT"s.

Favre wasn’t as into dress up and costumes as Rodgers. Little more into attempting to win rings.

It's more fun not to compare and just enjoy the fact that we had both back to back for 30 years.

Acrobat wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 14:03

It's more fun not to compare and just enjoy the fact that we had both back to back for 30 years.

I like to compare, for fun.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 13:43

Favre wasn’t as into dress up and costumes as Rodgers. Little more into attempting to win rings.

I think Favre was into being the Good Ol Boy from Kiln who loved the exposure doing Wrangler Jeans comms did for his ego trip, his persona exudes Southern Hillbilly, and he's proud of it, now who wants some catfish

Rodgers is a west coast progressive, and changing style is a annual event, although lately it's the grunge look, greasy hair and face stubble, prior it was this Tex thing with western hats, Larry boots, and custom western shirts.

Funny how quickly this stuff becomes back burner when they succeed at throwing the football, I've nearly forgotten about the lies concerning the vaccine, the talk of holdout just prior to the draft, and Favre's constant threats of retirement, just go out and WIN.

Yoop wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 15:11

Drj820 wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 13:43

Favre wasn’t as into dress up and costumes as Rodgers. Little more into attempting to win rings.

I think Favre was into being the Good Ol Boy from Kiln who loved the exposure doing Wrangler Jeans comms did for his ego trip, his persona exudes Southern Hillbilly, and he's proud of it, now who wants some catfish

Rodgers is a west coast progressive, and changing style is a annual event, although lately it's the grunge look, greasy hair and face stubble, prior it was this Tex thing with western hats, Lowery boots, and custom western shirts.

Funny how quickly this stuff becomes back burner when they succeed at throwing the football, I've nearly forgotten about the lies concerning the vaccine, the talk of holdout just prior to the draft, and Favre's constant threats of retirement, just go out and WIN.

Funny post. I completely agree with your last 5 words. Southern hillbilly Kinda rude tho

Labrev wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 11:14

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 05:51

IMO opinion Favre had significantly better teams.

I disagree. Ray Rhodes, Sherman GM teams were pretty mid. Rodgers had, what, two bad years of McCarthy at HC? And TT at his worst was better than Sherman at his best. Rodgers had way better consistent WR and OL talent than Favre, not to say Rodgers' teams were NEVER weak there but this was rarer than the same for Favre. IMO, Rodgers generally had better talent around him than Favre did.

With all that being said, Rodgers is hands-down the better thrower of the football than Favre was.

Rodgers's most impressive feats can outdo Favre's, and his biggest fails are still nowhere near as ugly (or numerous) as BrINT"s.

Yeah. I really didn't start loving and understanding football until 1999. 1999 was my real first season of being an avid fan (I was just too young prior to this to appreciate anything)

So my childhood knowledge of the Packers starts with the 1999 season. Obviously I adored Favre and the Packers but when my test bank of knowledge is the 1999 Packers and beyond...I can really only say the 2003 and 2007 Packers gave me any sort of "we can do this thing" feeling going into the post season.

I think the 2001 and 2002 were good teams, but the Rams and Bucs were just clearly superior to us those seasons.

When comparing Favre's Packers of 1999 - 2007 to Rodgers Packers of 2011 - 2019, Rodgers had far superior teams.

Labrev wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 11:14

Rodgers's most impressive feats can outdo Favre's, and his biggest fails are still nowhere near as ugly (or numerous) as BrINT"s.

I think most will agree that AR's biggest fail is his tendency to hold on to the ball too long. Maybe I'm in the minority with this opinion but I absolutely cannot stand watching QB's take sacks or throw the ball away because they are too afraid to give a teammate a chance to make a play. It is the most demoralizing thing to see and it often is a total momentum changer- even moreso than an INT. At least when a QB takes a shot downfield it sends the message to his teammates that he trusts them to make a big play. Playing scared as a leader just sends the wrong message in a lot of different ways.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 15:16

Yoop wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 15:11

Drj820 wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 13:43

Favre wasn’t as into dress up and costumes as Rodgers. Little more into attempting to win rings.

I think Favre was into being the Good Ol Boy from Kiln who loved the exposure doing Wrangler Jeans comms did for his ego trip, his persona exudes Southern Hillbilly, and he's proud of it, now who wants some catfish

Rodgers is a west coast progressive, and changing style is a annual event, although lately it's the grunge look, greasy hair and face stubble, prior it was this Tex thing with western hats, Lowery boots, and custom western shirts.

Funny how quickly this stuff becomes back burner when they succeed at throwing the football, I've nearly forgotten about the lies concerning the vaccine, the talk of holdout just prior to the draft, and Favre's constant threats of retirement, just go out and WIN.

Funny post. I completely agree with your last 5 words. Southern hillbilly Kinda rude tho

Goggle defines hillbilly as such

haha, if Favre lived in Northern Michigan I'd have called him a Northern Hillbilly, never quite understood why people refer to southerners as Hillbillies, hills are not exclusively a southern thing, nor are people that lack social graces, you should meet some of my friends at the senior center on bingo night

Yoop wrote: ↑

27 Jul 2022 17:11

Drj820 wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 15:16

Yoop wrote: ↑

26 Jul 2022 15:11

I think Favre was into being the Good Ol Boy from Kiln who loved the exposure doing Wrangler Jeans comms did for his ego trip, his persona exudes Southern Hillbilly, and he's proud of it, now who wants some catfish

Rodgers is a west coast progressive, and changing style is a annual event, although lately it's the grunge look, greasy hair and face stubble, prior it was this Tex thing with western hats, Lowery boots, and custom western shirts.

Funny how quickly this stuff becomes back burner when they succeed at throwing the football, I've nearly forgotten about the lies concerning the vaccine, the talk of holdout just prior to the draft, and Favre's constant threats of retirement, just go out and WIN.

Funny post. I completely agree with your last 5 words. Southern hillbilly Kinda rude tho

Goggle defines hillbilly as such

haha, if Favre lived in Northern Michigan I'd have called him a Northern Hillbilly, never quite understood why people refer to southerners as Hillbillies, hills are not exclusively a southern thing, nor are people that lack social graces, you should meet some of my friends at the senior center on bingo night

Hillbilly is a term to describe unsophisticated country folk. The term originates when talking about people who lived in the Appalachian mountains or Appalachia.

Hillbilly is a term primarily reserved for those who reside in states of West Virginia, Virginia, Carolinas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia. I wouldn't put the deep south in the Hillbilly description. It is an Appalachia term.

So the term "hill" absolutely fits when you use it for the correct description.

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

27 Jul 2022 16:49

Maybe I'm in the minority with this opinion but I absolutely cannot stand watching QB's take sacks or throw the ball away because they are too afraid to give a teammate a chance to make a play. It is the most demoralizing thing to see and it often is a total momentum changer- even moreso than an INT.

It would be interesting to compare the number of drive-killing plays between the two of them, whether it's sacks, INTs, or whatever.

Sacks really suck, but I can't agree; picks are still way worse and bigger momentum-shifters, like, 9 times out of 10, IMHO. The 1 exception being when you're in a true "do or die" situation and need to make a play, then it's better to throw a prayer and hope your guy comes down with it.

It's hard to appreciate how bad INTs are after over a decade of Rodgers, who throws them so rarely that even when he does, we don't get that mad and they're often not too costly. When we inevitably regress to the mean at INTs by our QB, I think we will start to appreciate again how bad INTs are.