Poll: So if you could have 15 more years...

[tynimiller]

I don't want fifteen years of either...first ten of Rodgers for sure over first ten of Favre for me...but both I got sick of....

I don't agree. I don't care at all about Rodgers' personal life, and I still consider myself a fan, even if he's on the Jets. On paper, the answer would appear to be Rodgers, but I still picked Favre. You can't really directly compare the stats, because they are different eras. I can certainly understand picking Rodgers, but to say it's no contest is a bit too much. I think it's a very tough choice.

In today's NFL with these DBs Favre would have 50 more INTs I bet.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Sherman did win 3 straight division titles and 4 total playoff appearances with a less talented team than what Holmgren had in the 90s. Giving him the GM spot spread him too thin and he could not do either job any longer.

Yes, he did fine as HC, but he never should have been GM.

 

[BrokenArrow]

In today's NFL with these DBs Favre would have 50 more INTs I bet.

Come on now. The gold standard for cornerbacks are still Darrell Green and Deion Sanders. The way the rules are skewed to favor the offense these days Favre would also probably have 50 more TDs. Quarterbacks also didn't wear skirts in the Tagliabue era.

 

[Half Empty]

The only reason the answer isn’t Rodgers is if you just don’t like the person. Otherwise, it’s no contest.

#12. He played a cleaner game. Easy as that. No comparative stats ... no personalities ... period.

Always dislike seeing phrases like this (and "game over", et. al.). There obviously is a contest, there obviously isn't a period, because there were and continue to be posts with both sides. "I'm right, you're wrong" just doesn't seem to be the right approach for a discussion board.

 

[Dantés]

Always dislike seeing phrases like this (and "game over", et. al.). There obviously is a contest, there obviously isn't a period, because there were and continue to be posts with both sides. "I'm right, you're wrong" just doesn't seem to be the right approach for a discussion board.

I always dislike seeing posts like this. The poll is asking for our opinions. Mine is that there isn't even a real debate to be had. Others have different opinions.

 

[El Guapo]

Like I said, unless you just don’t like the person, it’s no contest. Rodgers played the position at a much higher level.

I don't know. They both won a Super Bowl, Favre won three MVPs, Rodgers won two. I'm sure that the QB stats favor Rodgers, but he wasn't able to win big games in the same way that Favre could do.

I compare the two this way. Both my mother and my grandmother were great cooks and bakers. My mom studied chemistry and understands the science of cooking and baking. My grandmother was of the ilk where you take a handful of this and a pinch of that. Rodgers is more the scientist working on perfection while Favre was more the winging-it QB. Different styles.

Luckily this thread is about who we would each rather have, rather than trying to determine who would be the best.

 

[Dantés]

I don't know. They both won a Super Bowl, Favre won three MVPs, Rodgers won two. I'm sure that the QB stats favor Rodgers, but he wasn't able to win big games in the same way that Favre could do.

I compare the two this way. Both my mother and my grandmother were great cooks and bakers. My mom studied chemistry and understands the science of cooking and baking. My grandmother was of the ilk where you take a handful of this and a pinch of that. Rodgers is more the scientist working on perfection while Favre was more the winging-it QB. Different styles.

Luckily this thread is about who we would each rather have, rather than trying to determine who would be the best.

Both Favre and Rodgers were exactly 12-10 in the playoffs. Favre had a winning percentage of 63% as a packer; Rodgers was at 66%. They both won 1 Super Bowl. So I don't think there's much basis for arguing that one was better than the other at winning big games.

A lot of people dismiss the statistical superiority of Rodgers based on era, but that doesn't hold water for me. Rodgers broke a passer rating of 100 twice while Favre was still in the league. They weren't playing in dramatically different eras. The actual reason for statistical superiority is that Rodgers was much better when it came to throwing touchdowns and protecting the football (i.e. the stats are illustrating an on-field superiority).

Rodgers: 6.2 TD %; 1.4 INT %
Favre: 5.0 TD %; 3.3 INT %

Throwing touchdowns and not throwing interceptions are far and away the two biggest ways that quarterbacks can contribute to winning football. And Rodgers smokes Favre in both.

And then you have dramatic difference in ancillary stuff that just widens the gap.

Rodgers: ~3500 yards rushing; 35 rushing touchdowns; 92 career fumbles
Favre: ~1786 yards rushing; 13 rushing touchdowns; 166 career fumbles

This is why I say there just really isn't any contest. Rodgers was clearly the superior player. Hence, why the count-arguments tend to be about Rodgers as a person (berating receivers, not trusting young players, etc.) or about stylistic preference (e.g. someone just loved Favre's gunslinger mentality).

But the bottom line is this: Favre is easily a Hall of Famer and in conversation for one of the 10 best QB's of all time; Rodgers is in the conversation for the single best QB of all time. That's a big difference.

 

[Magooch]

Both Favre and Rodgers were exactly 12-10 in the playoffs. Favre had a winning percentage of 63% as a packer; Rodgers was at 66%. They both won 1 Super Bowl. So I don't think there's much basis for arguing that one was better than the other at winning big games.

A lot of people dismiss the statistical superiority of Rodgers based on era, but that doesn't hold water for me. Rodgers broke a passer rating of 100 twice while Favre was still in the league. They weren't playing in dramatically different eras. The actual reason for statistical superiority is that Rodgers was much better when it came to throwing touchdowns and protecting the football (i.e. the stats are illustrating an on-field superiority).

Rodgers: 6.2 TD %; 1.4 INT %
Favre: 5.0 TD %; 3.3 INT %

Throwing touchdowns and not throwing interceptions are far and away the two biggest ways that quarterbacks can contribute to winning football. And Rodgers smokes Favre in both.

And then you have dramatic difference in ancillary stuff that just widens the gap.

Rodgers: ~3500 yards rushing; 35 rushing touchdowns; 92 career fumbles
Favre: ~1786 yards rushing; 13 rushing touchdowns; 166 career fumbles

This is why I say there just really isn't any contest. Rodgers was clearly the superior player. Hence, why the count-arguments tend to be about Rodgers as a person (berating receivers, not trusting young players, etc.) or about stylistic preference (e.g. someone just loved Favre's gunslinger mentality).

But the bottom line is this: Favre is easily a Hall of Famer and in conversation for one of the 10 best QB's of all time; Rodgers is in the conversation for the single best QB of all time. That's a big difference.

Yeah, pretty much this. I love Favre; he’s pretty much who made me fall in love with the sport. But I don’t think it’s that big of a debate.

If you did a “blind” test (which is of course not possible, but imagine with me)… pretend you got exact copies Favre and Rodgers in generic nondescript jerseys and had them wear helmet visors or something to obscure their features. If you compared them side by side - PURELY on their on-field play - removing all “personality” or off-field behaviors/beliefs/mannerisms/etc…. I don’t think there’s anyone who would honestly pick Favre in that circumstance. And that’s fine; we live in the real world and that includes the player’s personality and attitude and all that. But strictly on a sporting basis I think it’s a fairly easy decision to make.

Consider the big games that we lost in recent years. Rodgers got heavy criticism for not doing enough to help us win. Does anyone honestly believe those games would’ve gone any differently with Favre at QB in the same circumstances? Again, I love Brett, but if he’s our starting QB against SF, Tampa, etc we’re probably talking less about how he “didn’t do enough when it counted” and more about how he actively hurt our chances by giving the ball away or etc.

 

[Magooch]

Or perhaps a simpler way of looking at it is that I’d argue that an “average” performance from Rodgers is better than an “average” performance from Favre AND Rodgers’ “peak” performance level is better than Favre at his peak.

And if Player A has a better “average” performance AND a better “peak” performance than Player B then I can’t think of many *sporting* reasons to pick 15 more years of Player B rather than 15 of Player A.

 

[OldSchool101]

Come on now. In the 2021 playoffs we held the Niners to 13 points. What more do you want from your defense in a playoff game? Rodgers simply didn't play well and that was a pattern with both guys in the playoffs over their last 5 or 6 years.

I said Defense or Special Teams held us back significantly in those seasons. You probably just missed that.
In the 2021 postseason game it was our Teams that didn’t show up to play

 

[BrokenArrow]

I said Defense or Special Teams held us back significantly in those seasons. In that game it was ST

My point is, the reason we didn't advance further in 2021 was the offense. When you hold the other team to 13, you expect to win.

 

[tynimiller]

I said Defense or Special Teams held us back significantly in those seasons. You probably just missed that.
In the 2021 postseason game it was our Teams that didn’t show up to play

How can you say that...when the offense literally did less than teams did? At minimum it was 50% teams and 50% offense SUCKING.

 

[OldSchool101]

My point is, the reason we didn't advance further in 2021 was the offense. When you hold the other team to 13, you expect to win.

I’m not so sure about that. I’d argue adverse weather was a significant factor and it worked against both teams.
Even Kittle was dropping passes

 

[OldSchool101]

How can you say that...when the offense literally did less than teams did? At minimum it was 50% teams and 50% offense SUCKING.

I fully realize people are sore about that game. The fact remains our ST was responsible for a 10 point swing

My argument was NEVER that our Offense didn’t have some up n down games. However at 9 degrees and windy few teams (if any) leaguewide would run up the score on either Defense imo.

In low scoring games played in inclement weather and against a good Defense, the importance of field position is heightened and Teams got an F. 263 yards offense and 20/29 for 198 yards is not an F grade for Rodgers. Not at 9 degrees
I suppose it’s Rodgers fault that Lewis fumbled on 1st down at the SF41? That’s 4 down territory and likely kissed away points. Was it also Rodgers fault we Kicked on 4th down from SF21 yard line and had a FG blocked??
It was an absolute ST disaster

 

[Pugger]

When Rodgers said “Jordan is a Master of the Offense” I think last year? I think we can safely say he was correct. He got to see him go through progressions and saw what we are seeing now (in practice).

Obviously no one can prove Rodgers would’ve had more than 1 SB ring. However there’s at least 3-4 seasons that I believe we advance at minimum 1 more contest.

2014,2016,2020,2021 are the 4 most likely seasons we advance 1 or more games with a better D or ST or both.

There were a handful of playoff games (besides the last 2 seasons) where Rodgers never got a chance to finish the job. How many times did ST - remember Bostick? - or the defense screw up in OT and AR never saw the ball again?

 

[BrokenArrow]

I fully realize people are sore about that game. The fact remains our ST was responsible for a 10 point swing
Missed FG
Blocked Punt

My argument was NEVER that our Offense didn’t have some up n down games. However at 9 degrees and windy few teams of any leaguewide would run up the score on either Defense imo.

Bottom line, Rodgers was never again a clutch player after breaking his clavicle. When we needed a big drive to win an elimination game, his performance went in the shltter, including the Lions game last year.

I'll never forget him *****ing at the defense on the sideline to "Just get the f__king ball back!" So they did, two turnovers and a 3 and out and Rodgers did nothing worthy of note the rest of that game.

 

[AmishMafia]

Don Majkowski

If Wolf hadn't run him out of town and spent that 1st round pick on an offensive weapon for the polish messiah, we would have won 3 superbowls. At least!

 

[AmishMafia]

Bottom line, Rodgers was never again a clutch player after breaking his clavicle. When we needed a big drive to win an elimination game, his performance went in the shltter, including the Lions game last year.

I'll never forget him *****ing at the defense on the sideline to "Just get the f__king ball back!" So they did, two turnovers and a 3 and out and Rodgers did nothing worthy of note the rest of that game.

Come on, there was soooo much on the mans plate. With his Packer GM duties, Bears ownership responsibilities, on the fly scheme changes, and 2nd guessing all the coaches, he hardly had time to work on being a QB.

 

[tynimiller]

I fully realize people are sore about that game. The fact remains our ST was responsible for a 10 point swing
Missed FG
Blocked Punt

My argument was NEVER that our Offense didn’t have some up n down games. However at 9 degrees and windy few teams (if any) leaguewide would run up the score on either Defense imo.

In low scoring games played in inclement weather and against a good Defense, the importance of field position is heightened and Teams got an F. 263 yards offense and 20/29 for 198 yards is not an F grade for Rodgers. Not at 9 degrees
I suppose it’s Rodgers fault that Lewis fumbled on 1st down at the SF41?

We do understand both things can be true - Rodgers and the offense sucked and blew chances PLUS the Teams play sucked and blew.

 

[Schultz]

Bottom line, Rodgers was never again a clutch player after breaking his clavicle. When we needed a big drive to win an elimination game, his performance went in the shltter, including the Lions game last year.

I'll never forget him *****ing at the defense on the sideline to "Just get the f__king ball back!" So they did, two turnovers and a 3 and out and Rodgers did nothing worthy of note the rest of that game.

Wait a minute. So Rodgers did go up and down the sideline talking to other players.

 

[Schultz]

We do understand both things can be true - Rodgers and the offense sucked and blew chances PLUS the Teams play sucked and blew.

My biggest beef with the offense that day was the Lewis fumble. 2nd was Jones not getting out of bounds on the wheel route near the end of the 1st half.

 

[rmontro]

In today's NFL with these DBs Favre would have 50 more INTs I bet.

When he was playing his best, he wasn't throwing INTs excessively. I think Favre was more in need of good coaching than Rodgers was. If Favre could have had Holmgren longer, I think he would have thrown fewer picks. I don't think Rodgers thought he needed coaching. Not that Favre always listened either lol.

 

[rmontro]

You talk like someone who never actually saw Favre play.

That's what I thought, I was going to ask if he ever saw Favre play. I don't, and never have, disliked either player. They both had their issues, but nobody's perfect, and I don't expect them to be.

 

[weeds]

Always dislike seeing phrases like this (and "game over", et. al.). There obviously is a contest, there obviously isn't a period, because there were and continue to be posts with both sides. "I'm right, you're wrong" just doesn't seem to be the right approach for a discussion board.

From my vantage point, there is "a period". The end of my opinion. I'm not right. You're not right. Neither are wrong. Just opinions that when combined with a bus token, won't get either of us across town.

I prefer 12, because he protected the ball where #4 didn't....and here is where I add my period again. I don't care that Rodgers chose to look like a guy who would rob my bank and I don't care that Favre shot ****** pics or went to the Vikies.

 

[weeds]

I think sometimes he tried to play TOO clean though. It often resulted in him taking way too many sacks.

I get it and don't completely disagree.