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

[milani]

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

Why Wolf did that I will never know. He could have just as easily offered it to Holmgren in 1999.

 

[OldSchool101]

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

Yes It’s always a team effort.
But points are points and it can’t be disputed that we allowed 7 on a punt block. That alone wins the game.
But yes It’s always a team effort and I’ve argued that since I was in diapers

It is what it is. Both QB’s had strengths n weaknesses. Rodgers played cleaner but Favre was more durable. Not missing time is a huge factor. Put Brett on the current 49ers and the mere fact he’s playing every week above average and they’d be stout. Rodgers was a little more brittle, but better when he played (in general)

 

[OldSchool101]

I want 15 more years of Love and let’s start with a Win At Lambeau

A win tonight would be absolutely huge. Everyone has the Lions in that top 10 power ranking. If we beat them we’re in playoff conversation going forward.

Let’s do this!!

 

[milani]

I want 15 more years of Love and let’s start with a Win At Lambeau

A win tonight would be absolutely huge. Everyone has the Lions in that top 10 power ranking. If we beat them we’re in playoff conversation going forward.

Let’s do this!!

We may get that. But it is clear that we get 0 more years of Bahktiari.

 

[BrokenArrow]

I get it and don't completely disagree.

Bottom line, if we could get either one all over again, I'd be tickled pink either way. They're both great, just in different ways.

 

[BrokenArrow]

It is what it is. Both QB’s had strengths n weaknesses. Rodgers played cleaner but Favre was more durable. Not missing time is a huge factor. Put Brett on the current 49ers and the mere fact he’s playing every week above average and they’d be stout. Rodgers was a little more brittle, but better when he played (in general)

As I alluded to in a different post though, they had different responses to clutch situations. Again, if I need one long drive to win the game with 1:30 left and no time outs, Rodgers is my guy, hands down. But if we needed three scores to win in the 4th quarter, Rodgers had a tendency to go into panic mode and become too conservative with the ball and get tunnel vision on his favorite receiver.

Brett never panicked in any situation and always believed he could pull out the victory and he often did. Down 3 scores he would kick the aggressiveness up a notch. He didn't care about stats and for big comebacks, you need big plays. That means taking risks. Sometimes that would result in an INT but you lose anyway if you don't try. Favre always went down swinging.

 

[Schultz]

1. This question in itself shows just how spoiled we have been.
2. Some of the answers show just how ultra spoiled we have been.
There a multiple fan bases that would sell their soul to just have the last 5 years of either Favre or Rodgers as their QB.
3. I did not like the Love pick. I am beginning to become cautiously optimistic.
4. I hated the first 3 picks in totality. That needle has not moved much if at all.

 

[Schultz]

As I alluded to in a different post though, they had different responses to clutch situations. Again, if I need one long drive to win the game with 1:30 left and no time outs, Rodgers is my guy, hands down. But if we needed three scores to win in the 4th quarter, Rodgers had a tendency to go into panic mode and become too conservative with the ball and get tunnel vision on his favorite receiver.

Brett never panicked in any situation and always believed he could pull out the victory and he often did. Down 3 scores he would kick the aggressiveness up a notch. He didn't care about stats and for big comebacks, you need big plays. That means taking risks. Sometimes that would result in an INT but you lose anyway if you don't try. Favre always went down swinging.

Good points. I have to ask though, isn't it better to stay up swinging by completing a few Hail Mary's?

 

[BrokenArrow]

Good points. I have to ask though, isn't it better to stay up swinging by completing a few Hail Mary's?

Favre completed a few too.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Rodgers is far and away the better QB...so I want the best QB in recent memory (beside maybe Marino or Manning) to be the Packers QB going forward.

 

[OldSchool101]

I’d take either QB right now and I’d be happy. What I learned is it takes a well rounded team to be ultra successful.
What exactly was the Defensive rankings in the only 2 Superbowls they combined to Win?
You can’t put it all on the QB anymore. You have to have balance in all 3 phases.
Peaking at A top #9 Defense won’t get it done.

 

[Pugger]

I want 15 more years of Love and let’s start with a Win At Lambeau

A win tonight would be absolutely huge. Everyone has the Lions in that top 10 power ranking. If we beat them we’re in playoff conversation going forward.

Let’s do this!!

Unfortunately the Lions are better than we are right now. We are at least a year away from being a playoff caliber team. I did like the way the guys kept battling in the second half.

 

[milani]

Unfortunately the Lions are better than we are right now. We are at least a year away from being a playoff caliber team. I did like the way the guys kept battling in the second half.

Now if we played Frisco, Dallas, or Philly the score might even be worse. I had the Lions by 14 and we delivered. If only each team had 4 points less.

 

[Schultz]

I teased the Pack up to + 7.5. Loser. I also started a parlay with over 45.5!

 

[PikeBadger]

So now that both eras are over, if you could bring in a young Favre for the next 15 years or a young Rodgers for the next 15, which would you rather see? I've been curious what the results of that question would be given an anonymous poll.

Rodgers. But I'd trade both of them after 8 years. Neither one was very good at handling fame and fortune. They both became a huge pain in the buttocks.

 

[rmontro]

Rodgers. But I'd trade both of them after 8 years.

I wonder what we could have gotten for them at the eight year point? Seems like they would command a lot of value.

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

So now that both eras are over, if you could bring in a young Favre for the next 15 years or a young Rodgers for the next 15, which would you rather see? I've been curious what the results of that question would be given an anonymous poll.

Rodgers the last 4 years...we saw the real character and player. He was everything everyone said Favre was...Favre was no where NEAR the problem Rodgers was. I voted Favre but NOT for that reason. I voted Favre because under Favre there were 2 Superbowl appearances, with Rodgers only 1.

 

[milani]

Rodgers the last 4 years...we saw the real character and player. He was everything everyone said Favre was...Favre was no where NEAR the problem Rodgers was. I voted Favre but NOT for that reason. I voted Favre because under Favre there were 2 Superbowl appearances, with Rodgers only 1.

That IS a fact.

 

[Schultz]

Rodgers the last 4 years...we saw the real character and player. He was everything everyone said Favre was...Favre was no where NEAR the problem Rodgers was. I voted Favre but NOT for that reason. I voted Favre because under Favre there were 2 Superbowl appearances, with Rodgers only 1.

That is the same reason I voted Rodgers. He never lost a SB game.

 

[OldSchool101]

I don’t know if this is the best time to tell you guys this or not?
I stayed in a holiday inn last night.

 

[milani]

I don’t know if this is the best time to tell you guys this or not?
I stayed in a holiday inn last night.

Talk about Old School! Next time I stay in GB I will pick the Howard Johnson for old school sake.

 

[rmontro]

That is the same reason I voted Rodgers. He never lost a SB game.

Never understood that reasoning. It's more successful to advance further than not to. It's like making the playoffs versus not making the playoffs.

 

[DarkHelmet]

I'd be thrilled to have either one. Favre was a lot of fun to watch, but also frustrating with the INTs. Rodgers in his prime was magnificent to watch, though it was frustrating to watch him hold the ball too long and take unnecessary sacks. I voted for Rodgers because of his overall efficiency. However, I think coaching matters a lot. Give me Holmgren as coach and I might prefer Favre. If MLF is the coach I'm definitely going with Rodgers. I don't think MLF could have managed Favre at all.

Side note: Favre's consecutive start record was otherworldly. He truly was the ironman.

 

[DarkHelmet]

Why Wolf did that I will never know. He could have just as easily offered it to Holmgren in 1999.

Could have and should have offered it to Holmgren. That was our best chance of a Super Bowl repeat. It was a glaring error to offer it to Sherman, as I think many of us knew at the time.

 

[rmontro]

Could have and should have offered it to Holmgren. That was our best chance of a Super Bowl repeat. It was a glaring error to offer it to Sherman, as I think many of us knew at the time.

Yeah, the thing that irritated me most about that is Ron Wolf retired a year later anyway.