The Rodgers/Favre debate continues

[Steve Foss]

Some great perspective here.

[Jim Uran]

Is Tom Silverstein your pen name Steve? Great article, you Packer fans are lucky, two great Quarterbacks in succession is flat out LUCKY lol.

[Steve Foss]

Thanks Jim. Hmmmmm, a pen name. Never thought of that.

We Packers fans tend to think two elite QBs in a row is a little too coincidental to be written off to luck. Might have something to do with the GM and the rest of the organization.

[DonBo]

Seriously? Rogers has started what, like 30 games? Yes, he's been good, but isn't it a bit early to be comparing him to Favre?

Step away from the green cool-aid.

[Steve Foss]

Seriously? Rogers has started what, like 30 games? Yes, he's been good, but isn't it a bit early to be comparing him to Favre?

Step away from the green cool-aid.

People started doing that last year even before the playoff run. Now the comparison is really picking up steam, as Rodgers has shown he's the real deal. But I do remember all of the Favre years, not just the last couple/three when he embarrassed the Pack and himself, and he was a blast to watch and one of the best QBs.

Personally, I don't care which side a person comes down on. For Pack fans, it is the best of times.

[Surface Tension]

IMO there isn't anyway you can compare, not when you have different players.

For that matter, not when your playing against teams that are not the same.

Rodgers is off to a great start. The question is, can he keep it up?

[JosMN]

Dont get me wrong, I love/loved Favre, but he worried the [PoorWordUsage] out of me all of the time. He could break your heart in the worst way at the worst time, but at the same time look like a god on the field. You viking fans can relate from the pick thrown by him in New Orleans. How many times did he do that to me when he was with the Pack? Many.

Rodgers isn't near the ironman Favre was, but if the game is on the line, I would want Rodgers at the helm of my sqaud hands down rather than Brett.

I'm not going to lie and say I'm not a little bitter towards Brett now days, but he did bring a lot of happiness back to Packer land in the mid 90's. We were in a loooonnng slump before him.

[RiverFish]

Dont get me wrong, I love/loved Favre, but he worried the [PoorWordUsage] out of me all of the time. He could break your heart in the worst way at the worst time, but at the same time look like a god on the field. You viking fans can relate from the pick thrown by him in New Orleans. How many times did he do that to me when he was with the Pack? Many.

Most passing yards, career 71,838 Brett Favre 1992–2010

Most Passing Touchdowns, Career 508, Brett Favre, 1991–2010

Most Games 4+ TD Passes, Career 24, Brett Favre, 1991–2010

Most touchdown passes of 80+ yards 9, Brett Favre

Most passes intercepted, career: 336, Brett Favre, 1991–2010

[pikestabber]

Let me preface this by saying I am a Viking's fan (no, I am not seeking therapy). That said, my hatred for Green Bay runs deep; however, I cannot deny how good they are, and that starts and ends with Aaron Rodgers. We can't know how Rodgers' career will play out. He could do what many predict and shatter every record there is; or he could blow his knee out or bonk his noggin next week and never take another snap. What we can do, however, is compare what we have for data, and that would be their respective stats in the beginning years of their careers.

THROUGH THEIR FIRST THREE FULL SEASONS (15 starts or more)

Now who in their right mind would say Favre is every bit as equal as Rodgers in any capacity in his first three years? He is blown away in every statistical category, save pass attempts, and all the extra tosses did for Favre was net more picks, less yards, and help land a worse completion percentage, so I hardly call that a victory. No, I don't think it's too early to draw parallels or make comparisons. As long as Rodgers stays healthy (or uses a bottle of pain killers a week like "Iron Man" did), he eventually will erase all doubt as to who the best Packer QB ever is/was. Until he is around 20 years, however, there will be doubters.

And a final thought about the article, the author isn't citing stats from Favre's first three full years (which would be fair); instead, he is taking stats from a stretch of games at the end of Favre's 4th year and into the beginning of his 5th year... In his 4th year, Favre threw 38 TDs and 13INTs. In Rodgers' 4th year, he sits at 28TDs and 3 INTS after 9 games. Anyone think we won't throw more than 10 TDs the rest of the way? Anyone think he will throw more than 10 picks? I highly doubt it. Let's wait until the same point in the 5th year where Favre's stats were drawn from and see if Rodgers' stats aren't every bit as good as Favre's were. I predict an all out trump in every category is what you'll find.

[ted4887]

IMO there isn't anyway you can compare, not when you have different players.

Or the same league for that matter. Nowadays it's more like two-hand-touch football. Remember the days when receivers had to worry about going over the middle and getting crushed by a safety? The league is much, MUCH more QB friendly nowadays. I'm not trying to take anything away from Rodgers, as I think the way he's playing as good as anyone I've seen in my lifetime, but still. The league is way to QB and pass friendly now.

[Steve Foss]

my hatred for Green Bay runs deep

All I need to hear. Hatred clouds reason every time.

I've been a Pack fan since shortly after birth. Well, some could say it actually was part of the genetics of someone born in Wisconsin during the Lombardi era. But I don't hate any division rival. Why waste time on hate?

Haters. All they know is hate.

[Big Dave2]

All I need to hear. Hatred clouds reason every time.

I've been a Pack fan since shortly after birth. Well, some could say it actually was part of the genetics of someone born in Wisconsin during the Lombardi era. But I don't hate any division rival. Why waste time on hate?

Haters. All they know is hate.

I agree! I have never understood why most people can't be a fan of thier favorite team and not hate the rivals? It's just a game folks!

[Big Dave2]

We Packers fans tend to think two elite QBs in a row is a little too coincidental to be written off to luck. Might have something to do with the GM and the rest of the organization.

How do you explain Don Majkowski?

[SkunkedAgain]

And a final thought about the article, the author isn't citing stats from Favre's first three full years (which would be fair); instead, he is taking stats from a stretch of games at the end of Favre's 4th year and into the beginning of his 5th year

I tend to think that the article's author (Silverstein) used a better data set for evaluation. Favre started with a bad team and they eventually got great. Rodgers started with a good defense, solid o-line, and already had a great receiving corps. Therefore comparing their first three years seems to skew the data. Comparing their best years, as the author did, seems to be the best way to decide who was best. Now, I'll concede that there are many other factors so one couldn't say definitively one way or the other, but it gets you close.

No matter what. Rodgesr vs Favre is an interesting yet useless debate. Both have been great and that's all that matters.

[mrklean]

i dont think we can judge anything for another 10 years Brett will go donw as one of the best QB's of all time the numbers speak for themselves, including INT's which is why many like Rodgers more now he isnt the gunslinger who tosses it up there and hopes a guy comes down with it. The packers still scare me because i keep having the flashbacks to the NFC title game where Favre tossed the INT in overtime and the many other times he did that. If Rodgers can keep up what hes done the past 2 years or even stay close to it if he breaks records or not he will go down probably as the best packer QB, just my opinion, and if he doesnt go to the vikes to

[zepman]

Honestly people...you can't be serious on this discussion are you?

Get back to me in 15 years and then let's revisit this conversation.

Roger's has NOTHING over Favre right now...period.

Plus, he's a Bobbyhead and Favre wasn't.

[Steve Foss]

This from Chris Chase today in a Yahoo Sports blog:

Quote:

According to a polling firm, the only two people more popular in Wisconsin than Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers are Abraham Lincoln and Jesus.

A few weeks ago, Public Policy Polling found that reigning Super Bowl MVP was viewed favorably by 89 percent of people in the state, the highest mark for any individual in the country. Pollsters wondered if any figure could top that mark, so they added a few people with "near universal appeal" into a recent national poll to test out Rodgers' popularity. Only the 16th president (91 percent favorably rating) and Jesus (90 percent) finished ahead of the quarterback.

That means Rodgers outpolled George Washington (86 percent), Mother Theresa (83), Martin Luther King Jr. (74), Santa Claus (67), Gandhi (64), Nelson Mandela (64) and Steve Jobs (62), and is in no way an indication that we Americans take our sports heroes way too seriously.

How PPP passed on the chance to ask Wisconsinites their opinions of Brett Favre(notes), Tim Tebow(notes) and Ralph Bruno (founder of the Cheesehead) is a mystery. Opportunity missed.

[CAMAN]

According to a polling firm, the only two people more popular in Wisconsin than Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers are Abraham Lincoln and Jesus.

A few weeks ago, Public Policy Polling found that reigning Super Bowl MVP was viewed favorably by 89 percent of people in the state, the highest mark for any individual in the country. Pollsters wondered if any figure could top that mark, so they added a few people with "near universal appeal" into a recent national poll to test out Rodgers' popularity. Only the 16th president (91 percent favorably rating) and Jesus (90 percent) finished ahead of the quarterback.

That means Rodgers outpolled George Washington (86 percent), Mother Theresa (83), Martin Luther King Jr. (74), Santa Claus (67), Gandhi (64), Nelson Mandela (64) and Steve Jobs (62), and is in no way an indication that we Americans take our sports heroes way too seriously.

How PPP passed on the chance to ask Wisconsinites their opinions of Brett Favre(notes), Tim Tebow(notes) and Ralph Bruno (founder of the Cheesehead) is a mystery. Opportunity missed.

Favre was probably the most popular guy in the state 15 years ago also. NOW look where he is. If Rodgers really is so similar to Favre, the whole state will hate him in about 15 years anyway.

[Steve Foss]

Favre was probably the most popular guy in the state 15 years ago also. NOW look where he is. If Rodgers really is so similar to Favre, the whole state will hate him in about 15 years anyway.

Oh, absolutely!

Public opinion is fickle, bird-brained and vindictive. Today's hero is tomorrow's chump, and shortly after the public runs a chump into an early grave, they'll learn new things about how amazing the chump was, and they'll promptly elevate him as a god.

Public opinion polls like the one quoted are for good fun only. So, for that matter, is the Rodgers/Favre debate. They have little lasting meaning.

[FISHINGURU]

Thanks Jim. Hmmmmm, a pen name. Never thought of that.

We Packers fans tend to think two elite QBs in a row is a little too coincidental to be written off to luck. Might have something to do with the GM and the rest of the organization.

Don't get it twisted, Rodgers was projected to be the #1 or #2 player to be drafted that year. After he slipped no one needed a QB until the Packers drafted at #24.

[Steve Foss]

Don't get it twisted, Rodgers was projected to be the #1 or #2 player to be drafted that year. After he slipped no one needed a QB until the Packers drafted at #24.

And the Packers organization snapped him up. Beyond mere coincidence but short of prescience. A very smart move by a smart organization. How did I get it twisted in my previous comment? All I said was we figure it was more than just coincidence.

[CJH]

Don't get it twisted, Rodgers was projected to be the #1 or #2 player to be drafted that year. After he slipped no one needed a QB until the Packers drafted at #24.

He was rated as one of the top players, but it definitely was NOT considered a lock or THE #1 or 2 player. Secondly, the plenty of teams needed QB's and passed, the Vikes being one of them - twice (Troy Williamson & Erasmus James).

[Antero]

As of now there is not any real debate, #4's record and longevity make him #1. However, a few more yrs of this guy and a couple more long playoff runs will move the dial in his direction. For me, the way Rodgers protects the ball and does not throw picks means a lot. #4 tossed way too many up for grabs, especially when it counted.

And as others have said, his act got old. Real old.

[FISHINGURU]

"Might have something to do with the GM and the rest of the organization."

I just meant it's not like the GM targeted Rodgers and did anything to get him, they were looking for Farves replacement and the #1 or #2 QB on the draft board was still there all the way at pick #24. That is luck and a no brainer pick, nothing wrong with luck, I even consider us getting lucky with AP at pick #7.

CJH- Nice try, he was ranked the #1 or #2 QB in the draft in 05 and was considered a possibility as the #1 pick but Mike Nolan the head coach of the 49ers didn't think him and Rodgers would get along so he went with the other QB Alex Smith.

Look on the Mock drafts from 05 you'll see Rodgers in the top 5. He was on alot of the Mocks as the player to get taken #1 until Nolan said that stuff about him and Rodgers, after that it was almost a lock he would take Smith.

Gruden the Bucs head coach at the time called Rodgers and told him if he slips to #5 he was talking him, instead they went with Cadillac. After that there was no team in the draft in dying need of a QB in their opinion.

And no we didn't need a QB in the teams opinion, We had our "Franchise QB StinkPepper" and was looking for Moss's replacement because we had just traded him. I'm sure many teams wish they had taken him now but that's how it goes in the draft.

[Steve Foss]

Rodgers was projected to be the #1 or #2 player to be drafted that year.