piratesownninjas Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 You could've thrown Tavaris Jackson on that cowboys team and they would've won 3 super bowls. Do you not remember the 49ers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 You could've thrown Tavaris Jackson on that cowboys team and they would've won 3 super bowls. One of the sorriests, most idiotic statements I've read in a long time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Trent Dilfer "won" a superbowl.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Trent Dilfer "won" a superbowl.... Trent Dilfer was a bus driver. There is a massive distinction between what He or Roethlisberger in his first super bowl did compared to what Brady against the Panthers, or Rodgers this past year did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) The more I read the thread title the more it confuses me. Favre has a ring. Rodgers has a ring. Favre was League MVP numerous times. Rodgers none. Favre holds many passing records. Rodgers - not sure but safe to assume he holds many less than Favre. So did Rodgers get the mokey off of his back. Absolutely. Dude is a bona fide stud. "eclipsed" Favre. meh . not so sure about that. Believe me, I have no pony in the race and am no Favre hater or Rodgers hater. Just an observation Edited February 13, 2011 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 The more I read the thread title the more it confuses me. Favre has a ring. Rodgers has a ring. Favre was League MVP numerous times. Rodgers none. Favre holds many passing records. Rodgers - not sure but safe to assume he holds many less than Favre. So did Rodgers get the mokey off of his back. Absolutely. Dude is a bona fide stud. "eclipsed" Favre. meh . not so sure about that. Believe me, I have no pony in the race and am no Favre hater or Rodgers hater. Just an observation I don't think Packer fans are saying that he eclisped Favre. I've said that all that matters to me is rings. If Rodgers wins a second, he'll then eclipse Favre to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hoyle Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I don't think Packer fans are saying that he eclisped Favre. I've said that all that matters to me is rings. If Rodgers wins a second, he'll then eclipse Favre to me. Â We'll have to disagree on this one. Two rings will elevate him for sure. But, his teams need to be divisional leaders and etc. for a long time just IMHO. Â But, this debate has Joe Montana vs. Steve Young written all over it. Eventually every star has to step down and be passed up by the next generation. Â As for being elite, Rodgers has proven that he can handle it. No more debate on that. As for eclipsed, that's a debate that will take time no matter your view or philosophy. Â Damn, I hate the off-season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) We'll have to disagree on this one. Two rings will elevate him for sure. But, his teams need to be divisional leaders and etc. for a long time just IMHO. So you'd take a career in which you owned every stat and had a ring over having great year to year numbers for 6-8 years and multiple rings? Interesting. Give me the rings. Â Edit--- The statement about Rodgers eclipsing Favre was made by a niner fan. Edited February 14, 2011 by piratesownninjas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hoyle Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 So you'd take a career in which you owned every stat and had a ring over having great year to year numbers for 6-8 years and multiple rings? Interesting. Give me the rings. Edit--- The statement about Rodgers eclipsing Favre was made by a niner fan.  The rings will be a big deal, but years of success would be a lot too. Heck, if the Packers win two rings (possibly more with their team youth) and that to me is great as well. But if they have two good years and then drop off the face of the earth...that's not successful either.  As for the Niners Fan making that comment, don't they wish they'd taken AR over A Smith. Dang that is a definite FUBAR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 And to get back on target, Rodgers hasnt even come close to eclipsing Favre. The streak alone is one of the most impressive feats in football history. Actually this feat is one that describes Favre the best. So many times he was injured and played and actually hurt his team by doing so. He owns the streak in large part because he is an incredible arrogant individual. He would not step aside and let a healthy QB play when he knew he wasn't able to get the job done. It's very frustrating that this record holds so much weight in his otherwise amazing career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Actually this feat is one that describes Favre the best. So many times he was injured and played and actually hurt his team by doing so. He owns the streak in large part because he is an incredible arrogant individual. He would not step aside and let a healthy QB play when he knew he wasn't able to get the job done. It's very frustrating that this record holds so much weight in his otherwise amazing career. Â Refresh my memory and tell me who the healthy QB's behind Favre were at the time of his injuries that gave his team a better chance to win than an injured Favre did at the time? I don't see it in Minnesota for damn sure. Not in NY either. In Green Bay? Was Rodgers even ready at that point? To me this is a pretty weak argument that Favre bashers love to throw out there with nothing to back it up. Â I can't believe it take a freaking Vikings fan, a guy who was on the other side of a rooting interest with Favre for so many years, to throw out a little common sense on this one. The hate for the guy is very irrational IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Refresh my memory and tell me who the healthy QB's behind Favre were at the time of his injuries that gave his team a better chance to win than an injured Favre did at the time? I don't see it in Minnesota for damn sure. Not in NY either. In Green Bay? Was Rodgers even ready at that point? To me this is a pretty weak argument that Favre bashers love to throw out there with nothing to back it up. Â I can't believe it take a freaking Vikings fan, a guy who was on the other side of a rooting interest with Favre for so many years, to throw out a little common sense on this one. The hate for the guy is very irrational IMO. Â You've changed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 You've changed... Â Yeah, i've gotten older, fatter, and wiser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Yeah, i've gotten older, fatter, and wiser. Â Fixed. You seem to forget you're a Vikings fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Refresh my memory and tell me who the healthy QB's behind Favre were at the time of his injuries that gave his team a better chance to win than an injured Favre Matt Hasselbeck went to the super bowl. Rodgers won one. And for the sake of it, Mark Brunell and Kurt Warner all had stints on the Pack during Favre's run... I'm not arguing here, just being a smartass. Â But I agree with you. You can't knock Favre's legacy in his time in Green Bay. He wasn't perfect, but his wreckless schoolyard style brought Green Bay back from a bad bad place in the early 90's. His Iron man record was awesome to watch, and it's something that I'm not sure we'll see again... as long as some guy named Manning decides to play 6 or so more years. Even when it looked like he shouldn't be playing, he still raised the level of his teammates just by being on the field. You can't teach, learn, or test for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Refresh my memory and tell me who the healthy QB's behind Favre were at the time of his injuries that gave his team a better chance to win than an injured Favre did at the time? I don't see it in Minnesota for damn sure. Not in NY either. In Green Bay? Was Rodgers even ready at that point? To me this is a pretty weak argument that Favre bashers love to throw out there with nothing to back it up. Â I can't believe it take a freaking Vikings fan, a guy who was on the other side of a rooting interest with Favre for so many years, to throw out a little common sense on this one. The hate for the guy is very irrational IMO. I really don't care who his backup was. When you can barely throw the ball because your arm is messed up like in NY, your hurting your team. Favre lovers always point to this as the best feat ever in football history mostly because they don't understand that football is a team sport and when one arrogant individual hurts their team by playing, well, that's just too bad. Because playing is the most important thing, right, I forgot. Being healthy enough to actually help your team win doesn't matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I really don't care who his backup was. When you can barely throw the ball because your arm is messed up like in NY, your hurting your team. Favre lovers always point to this as the best feat ever in football history mostly because they don't understand that football is a team sport and when one arrogant individual hurts their team by playing, well, that's just too bad. Because playing is the most important thing, right, I forgot. Being healthy enough to actually help your team win doesn't matter. Â Kellen Clemens and Brett Ratliff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 If Aikman would have played for the Colts he would be less than Dan Pastorini. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 In the eyes of anyone who actually has a clue about the NFL, Rodgers essentially eclipsed Favre the very first year he took over. It was THAT clear that he was simply a much better quarterback. Who the hell cares how enormous Favre's career "stats" were (he also holds the record for the most career INTS by a ton). He only played like 50 years in the NFL as the most over-rated QB, might have something to do with it. Dude choked under pressure and ended more seasons for his teams with his boneheaded INTs than any other QB in the history of the game, or that will likely ever play the game. The one Superbowl he did win was only had because he went up against Drew Bledsoe, an equally overrated and boneheaded QB. Had Denver made it that year Favre's SB total would equal 0. He has easily been the most over-rated QB of all time. Rodgers did it this year at the age of only 26, and without even having a running game. I just shake my head that there are people out there who still think Favre was a better quarterback. Great QBs rise up to adversity, they don't choke year after year in the clutch and end the season for their teams the way Favre ALWAYS did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Kurt Warner all had stints on the Pack during Favre's run.. Â Whoa now. Warner was released before the regular season even began after being undrafted in 1994. Its nice to group the HOF'r into the discussion but lets be realistic here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Hell if Green Bay were ever in a real division they wouldn't have even been in the playoffs that often to begin with. Year after year of competing with last place Detroit, Culpepper's Minnesota and a Chicago team that hadn't had a half-decent QB since its Superbowl XX days certainly didn't hurt Green Bays chances any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I'm not arguing here, just being a smartass. Â Â Whoa now. Warner was released before the regular season even began after being undrafted in 1994. Its nice to group the HOF'r into the discussion but lets be realistic here Taz, the fail is strong with you in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Taz, the fail is strong with you in this thread. Â Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 In the eyes of anyone who actually has a clue about the NFL, Rodgers essentially eclipsed Favre the very first year he took over. It was THAT clear that he was simply a much better quarterback. Who the hell cares how enormous Favre's career "stats" were (he also holds the record for the most career INTS by a ton). He only played like 50 years in the NFL as the most over-rated QB, might have something to do with it. Dude choked under pressure and ended more seasons for his teams with his boneheaded INTs than any other QB in the history of the game, or that will likely ever play the game. The one Superbowl he did win was only had because he went up against Drew Bledsoe, an equally overrated and boneheaded QB. Had Denver made it that year Favre's SB total would equal 0. He has easily been the most over-rated QB of all time. Rodgers did it this year at the age of only 26, and without even having a running game. I just shake my head that there are people out there who still think Favre was a better quarterback. Great QBs rise up to adversity, they don't choke year after year in the clutch and end the season for their teams the way Favre ALWAYS did. Wow. While I have to disagree with you that Favre is the most overrated QB in the history of the NFL I have to say that I agree with you on most everything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.