Favre > Rodgers > Love

[Schultz]

Jfc

I swear people can't stop the round and round debate of what I said what I meant and what you think I said

Just effing stop

If you guys can't I'll stop it for you

Now that's some good darn communicating right there.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There are some dbags on here who think they know everything and always think that we care about their opinions. Most of us just want to discuss our team..not have someone jump on us if they don't agree with our posts!

Unfortunately there are way too many posters around here who completely misunderstand disagreeing with someone's opinion as jumping on them.

 

[Team Ronny]

When you think you have to constantly "correct" people that is jumping on them. You don't like my post..don't reply..simple as that.

 

[Schultz]

What fun is that. My rule of thumb is hit the like button on posts I agree with and respond with my opinion to posts I disagree with.

 

[longtimefan]

When you think you have to constantly "correct" people that is jumping on them. You don't like my post..don't reply..simple as that.

Or..

Maybe people should be like Aaron. When he talked about the media.
He did say this Tuesday

If you don't like it and you think it's drama, you think I'm being a diva or whatever, then just tune it out.

People should follow his lead and not cause drama here because "they don't like negative posts to Aaron"

After all..dont they say that about the media? Can't that apply to posters here being negative? Or doesn't that count?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

When you think you have to constantly "correct" people that is jumping on them. You don't like my post..don't reply..simple as that.

It's not about correcting people, it's debating about something I have a different opinion about. This forum, and every other for that matter, would be an awfully boring place to visit if everybody would just reply to others while agreeing with them.

As a side note, if you don't like being corrected when posting "facts" then double check them before. Otherwise don't be surprised if there's someone pointing out that the information you provided wasn't accurate.

 

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

You mention Favre and Rodgers, both hall of fame quarters.
Here's my question fans seem to shy away from:

During all their playing time in GB, we only have one Super Bowl for each of them, WHY?

Somehow Green Bay as a origination dropped the ball to add a supporting cast to these QB's
for over 20 some years they both played for us.

 

[tynimiller]

You mention Favre and Rodgers, both hall of fame quarters.
Here's my question fans seem to shy away from:

During all their playing time in GB, we only have one Super Bowl for each of them, WHY?

Somehow Green Bay as a origination dropped the ball to add a supporting cast to these QB's
for over 20 some years they both played for us.

Because outside of what Patriots did it’s extremely freaking hard to win a SB.

And we’ve failed to have elite level defenses during playoffs.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You mention Favre and Rodgers, both hall of fame quarters.
Here's my question fans seem to shy away from:

During all their playing time in GB, we only have one Super Bowl for each of them, WHY?

Somehow Green Bay as a origination dropped the ball to add a supporting cast to these QB's
for over 20 some years they both played for us.

Actually, the Favre lead Packers appeared in back to back Super Bowls, winning only one.

So why only 2 wins?

Brandon Bostick
Dom Capers
Ron Zook
Drayton
Shawn Mennenga
TT
Gute
Bad luck
Good luck
bad bounce
good bounce
timing
schedule
weather
Salary Cap
injuries

I'm out of ink and have at least 1000 more reasons why the Packers have only won 2 Super Bowls in the last 28 years or so. Let's switch to why the Bears haven't won one since 1985 or even Better, why haven't the Vikings won one EVER and even better, the Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions, Jacksonville Jaguars, and Houston Texans have never even played in a Super Bowl.

It is easy to cherry pick the one really good thing that the team had over most of those years, a HOF QB and ask "why not more SB's?" One, QB's alone don't always win SB's and I would put some of the blame for only 2 SB wins, on both of our QB's as well.

 

[OldSchool101]

Because outside of what Patriots did it’s extremely freaking hard to win a SB.

And we’ve failed to have elite level defenses during playoffs.

Agreed.
We held into Capers too long. Had we went out and gotten a substantial DC earlier we’d likely have a couple more SB Wins. Also our ST coordinators have been bordering awful to miserable.

Let’s look at NE since Brady’s start.
They have had just 7 Defenses ranked outside the top #8. Here are the finishes to those Patriots seasons and tell me if they sound familiar?
Pats 2002 Defense #17 MISSED
Pats 2005 Defense #17 Lost Divisional
Pats 2011 Defense #15 Lost SB
Pats 2012 Defense #9 Lost AFC Game
Pats 2013 Defense #10 Lost AFC Game
Pats 2015 Defense #10 Lost AFC Game.
Pats 2023 Defense #11 MISSED (Jones QB)
So I think it’s safe to infer that Brady needed his Defenses perform top #8 to best in league ti help him Win those SB’s. In Golf it’s called getting a handicap

Conversely. Brady Won Superbowls with these Defenses.
#6, #1, #2, #8, #1, #7, #8.

Brady also had 7 seasons with a top 8 Defense that didn’t win SB’s
2006 #2 Defense Lost AFC
2007 #4 Defense Lost SB
2008 #8 Defense MISSED
2009 #5 Defense Lost WC
2010 #8 Defense Lost Divisional
2017 #5 Defense Lost SB
2019 #1 Defense Lost WC

Brady is 7 for 14 with top #8 D
Rodgers is 1 for 2 with top #8 D
Exactly the same success rate if we level the playing field

 

[Magooch]

Winning a Super Bowl is just tough. Winning multiple in a (relatively) short span is even tougher.
Favre played 16 seasons in GB and won one.
Rodgers has played (started) 15 seasons in GB and won one.
Brees played 15 (I think) seasons in New Orleans and...won one.
Manning played 14 seasons in Indy and...you guessed it...only won one.

It's of course unfortunate that we have had two back-to-back HoF QBs and only managed to win one Super Bowl with each of them, but at the same time a HoF QB winning just one SB in ~15 years is not unprecedented either. In fact the "average" HoF QB only has two championships and I'm sure that is brought up a bit by guys like Brady, Starr, Montana, etc.

That said I do think (and I have said it before) that GB seems to often be a little too hesitant to change and/or make tough choices that are sometimes required to push yourself further towards a championship. I have always got the sense that GB as an organization has a more "family-like" feel than many other teams and that's something I appreciate in a lot of ways - and I think many players do, too (IIRC, I was just reading the other day about a player survey that listed GB as one of the most "player friendly" places to play or something like that). But at the same time it is a business and I have to think if we were a bit more cutthroat at times we would probably have a few more titles to show for it.

The Patriots for instance have probably been "the standard" (and maybe that is an unfair bar to measure against given they've arguably had the GOAT QB and one of the best coaches ever) and I have to think that guys in recent memory like Drayton, Capers, Mennenga, Barry, etc would not be given nearly as many chances in New England as we've given them. I think our management is really strong in a lot of ways, but at the same time I suspect if we weren't so lenient with underperforming coaches/players then we may well have a couple more titles to show for it. In recent years at least it seems like we are unwilling to make the hard choice to move on from a player/coach until it's too late. Barry is still here, and it took Drayton's special teams unit literally getting us eliminated from the playoffs to finally be the straw that broke the camel's back (Even though it was so obvious to so many for so long that it was a glaring weakness). A guy like Amari probably doesn't get as many chances elsewhere. And so on. But it's hard to say. There's a lot of it that often seems to come down to just plain old bad luck, although I'm sure some would also contend that you make your own luck to an extent...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I feel in the last half of Rodgers career in GB, he has almost been his own worst enemy. He is so good, that both TT and Gute, were able to put very little assets into WR's and Rodgers was able to make up for it most of the time. I will always wonder, if Rodgers had the group of receivers that Favre had most of his career, would the Packers have won at least 2 more SB's?

 

[swhitset]

Correct.

I have to laugh that there are actually people in this forum that don't understand what opinions are. Almost funnier how twisted their undies get when your opinion isn't aligned with theirs.

Some people are very good at disseminating facts, but are very bad at understanding interpersonal Relationships. Not everything that is stated in black and white terms is intended to be taken literally.

 

[Schultz]

One possibility is they saw Favre only win 1 SB with good WRs and bad defense so they decided to try and get Rodgers better defenses. Unfortunately many top defensive picks and or their D-coordinators didn't pan out.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

One possibility is they saw Favre only win 1 SB with good WRs and bad defense so they decided to try and get Rodgers better defenses. Unfortunately many top defensive picks and or their D-coordinators didn't pan out.

Always a possibility, but I think Rodgers is a better QB than Favre ever was and had TT and Gute, given him more to work with, the offense might have helped the defense to be better. All one has to do is look at the Chiefs. Their defense wasn't the best, but Mahomes had an embarrassing amount of assets on offense. How many times have we seen Rodgers run into a really good defense and just had a hard time scoring points? But I also agree with you, when your defense is giving up 30+ points in playoff games, you aren't going to win many of those track meets.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Nice update on Love:

NFL Network's Cameron Wolfe: What Green Bay Packers quarterback Jordan Love has been up to in 2023 NFL offseason amid rumors surrounding Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers

www.nfl.com

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Patriots for instance have probably been "the standard" (and maybe that is an unfair bar to measure against given they've arguably had the GOAT QB and one of the best coaches ever) and I have to think that guys in recent memory like Drayton, Capers, Mennenga, Barry, etc would not be given nearly as many chances in New England as we've given them.

In my opinion Brady wasn't any better than most HOF quarterbacks who have won two or less titles but he found himself in the perfect situation for most of his career.

 

[longtimefan]

Nice update on Love:

NFL Network's Cameron Wolfe: What Green Bay Packers quarterback Jordan Love has been up to in 2023 NFL offseason amid rumors surrounding Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers

www.nfl.com

Love dislocated Jamal Williams pinky with a throw in practice. Williams said you can hear the football whistle it was thrown so hard

 

[PikeBadger]

Winning a Super Bowl is just tough. Winning multiple in a (relatively) short span is even tougher.
Favre played 16 seasons in GB and won one.
Rodgers has played (started) 15 seasons in GB and won one.
Brees played 15 (I think) seasons in New Orleans and...won one.
Manning played 14 seasons in Indy and...you guessed it...only won one.

It's of course unfortunate that we have had two back-to-back HoF QBs and only managed to win one Super Bowl with each of them, but at the same time a HoF QB winning just one SB in ~15 years is not unprecedented either. In fact the "average" HoF QB only has two championships and I'm sure that is brought up a bit by guys like Brady, Starr, Montana, etc.

That said I do think (and I have said it before) that GB seems to often be a little too hesitant to change and/or make tough choices that are sometimes required to push yourself further towards a championship. I have always got the sense that GB as an organization has a more "family-like" feel than many other teams and that's something I appreciate in a lot of ways - and I think many players do, too (IIRC, I was just reading the other day about a player survey that listed GB as one of the most "player friendly" places to play or something like that). But at the same time it is a business and I have to think if we were a bit more cutthroat at times we would probably have a few more titles to show for it.

The Patriots for instance have probably been "the standard" (and maybe that is an unfair bar to measure against given they've arguably had the GOAT QB and one of the best coaches ever) and I have to think that guys in recent memory like Drayton, Capers, Mennenga, Barry, etc would not be given nearly as many chances in New England as we've given them. I think our management is really strong in a lot of ways, but at the same time I suspect if we weren't so lenient with underperforming coaches/players then we may well have a couple more titles to show for it. In recent years at least it seems like we are unwilling to make the hard choice to move on from a player/coach until it's too late. Barry is still here, and it took Drayton's special teams unit literally getting us eliminated from the playoffs to finally be the straw that broke the camel's back (Even though it was so obvious to so many for so long that it was a glaring weakness). A guy like Amari probably doesn't get as many chances elsewhere. And so on. But it's hard to say. There's a lot of it that often seems to come down to just plain old bad luck, although I'm sure some would also contend that you make your own luck to an extent...

You make some good points but I think great coaching goes a long way in winning multiple championships as well.

 

[OldSchool101]

Love dislocated Jamal Williams pinky with a throw in practice. Williams said you can hear the football whistle it was thrown so hard

Love it. We just need him to work on those softer, touch passes and he’ll be good.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[rmontro]

In my opinion Brady wasn't any better than most HOF quarterbacks who have won two or less titles but he found himself in the perfect situation for most of his career.

Speaking of Brady (and apologies that this is a little off topic), a lot of people had thought that Bill Belichick had overtaken Vince Lombardi as "greatest coach of all time". Does Belichick's declined performance after losing Brady affect that perception at all?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Speaking of Brady (and apologies that this is a little off topic), a lot of people had thought that Bill Belichick had overtaken Vince Lombardi as "greatest coach of all time". Does Belichick's declined performance after losing Brady affect that perception at all?

I don't think so. I mean how was Lombardi after he left Green Bay? How would he have been without Bart Starr and several other stars?

 

[rmontro]

I don't think so. I mean how was Lombardi after he left Green Bay? How would he have been without Bart Starr and several other stars?

We never really found out because he passed away shortly after. So while you say he wouldn't have been as successful, it's only conjecture.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

We never really found out because he passed away shortly after. So while you say he wouldn't have been as successful, it's only conjecture.

I didnt say Lombardi wouldn't be successful, but that he wasn't after he left and yes, sadly, limited data.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that great coaches need great players, as much as great players need great coaches to obtain successful team results. In the case of BB and Brady, things aligned for them both quite well In New England. Sure Brady won a SB without BB, but I wouldn't put it past BB to do the same.