Are the Packers Finished?

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

I think this is a bit

 

+1

 

But I like the topic.

 

[whomper]

 

I can sift through all these pages but has anyone commented on the fact that this is a hugh fishing expedition ?

[electricrelish]

Rest assured that I am not poking fun at anyone here.

 

Thanks for your response. I apologize for misinterpreting your objective. Perhaps, I projected my own.

 

Steve Young won a Super Bowl and that's the only reason why the 49ers don't regret letting Montana go. I don't see Rodgers pulling that one off. I think it would be a miracle at this point. Montana moved on and still played pretty well in KC. Had Young fell on his face, that decision would have been just as bad for the 49ers.

 

I'm confused by this point. I thought that you were critical of the Green Bay Packers organization because you didn't like the way they treated their future Hall of Fame player after everything he had done for them. In other words, let him change his mind for gawd sake's. He's been the face of the Packers for so long and can still play at a high level, why wouldn't you want him back? Are you saying that as long as you win with someone else, then it's OK to dump your starting QB? If Steve Young had failed, then would you call San Francisco a terrible organization? After everything, that Montana did for the 49ers, and the fact that he could still perform at a high level, do you think it was right for the 49ers to let him go? This idea that it was OK to let Montana go because they won with Young seems to contradict the notion of seeing Manning retire a Colt and Big Ben retire a Steeler. Shouldn't Montana have been able to finish his career as a 49er? Obviously, he could still play at a high level and may have led the 49ers to more Super Bowls had he been given his old job back.

 

Or do you think the Packers made a mistake because they had a losing season, while Favre went on to win and actually contend for his division? Did the Packers make a mistake based on wins and loses? Or did they make a mistake based on how the treated the QB who did so much for the organization?

Edited September 21, 2009 by electricrelish

[Randall]

You guys are getting away from the topic.

 

Drop all your Packer players(especially Jennings and Rodgers) before it's too late!

[gilthorp]

[budlitebrad]

In relevant news, McCarthy said he's anticipating playing without Clifton in week 3.

[Medal of Honor]

Troll? This is an NFL board, right?

 

The Packers suck so just get over it. They have a lot of house cleaning to do. They should have never let Favre go. He wins everywhere he goes.

 

You know you're a troll when... you have 5 posts in the top 9.

[alexgaddis]

I can sift through all these pages but has anyone commented on the fact that this is a hugh fishing expedition ?

see post above yours

[DaFreak]

I think the o-line of the Packers has been a little bit exposed. Rodgers is a different QB under pressure, as would be expected. If they dont come up with a way to take some of the pressure off of him he will not make it through the season. The Packers have some obvious problems on both sides of the ball but most teams do. Superbowl bound-I dont think so, playoff bound-maybe.

[Mr Hammock]

Thanks for your response. I apologize for misinterpreting your objective. Perhaps, I projected my own.

 

Not a problem and thank you as well for your thought out responses.

 

I'm confused by this point. I thought that you were critical of the Green Bay Packers organization because you didn't like the way they treated their future Hall of Fame player after everything he had done for them. In other words, let him change his mind for gawd sake's.

 

I am very critical of the Packers organization. They have done an awful job handeling Brett Farve. They should have never drafted a QB in the first round of 2005 and instead just let Brett play his days out. Yeah, he retired and came back. A lot of players have done that. It's tough to let go for them and I can see why. On one hand you want to play and on the other you know that your skills are diminishing. But where is the middle ground in how you can play? Can you still play effective enough to be productive for your team? Unless you have a last season like Marino then questions are still unanswered. Brett had earned his position to call the shots at the end of his career and the fans deserved it too.

 

He's been the face of the Packers for so long and can still play at a high level, why wouldn't you want him back? Are you saying that as long as you win with someone else, then it's OK to dump your starting QB? If Steve Young had failed, then would you call San Francisco a terrible organization? After everything, that Montana did for the 49ers, and the fact that he could still perform at a high level, do you think it was right for the 49ers to let him go? This idea that it was OK to let Montana go because they won with Young seems to contradict the notion of seeing Manning retire a Colt and Big Ben retire a Steeler. Shouldn't Montana have been able to finish his career as a 49er? Obviously, he could still play at a high level and may have led the 49ers to more Super Bowls had he been given his old job back.

 

I think you misunderstood me. I don't think it was the right move to let Montana go either, but the 49ers were lucky enough that it worked out for them. As much as that situation is like the Favre/Green Bay situation, it is still very different as well. Montana suffered what many thought was a career ending injury and Steve Young had proven himself on the field with the 49ers. The concensous of every NFL fan I talked to during that time was that Steve Young was very capable of keeping the engine running along just fine. Now, on the flipside, if Young did not win a Super Bowl then that decision would have haunted the 49ers for years. They got off the hook only because they won. I am not a 49ers fan, but as you are well aware, we got our ears filled with 49er mania all the time back then. It was sad to see Montana in KC. I thought it was wrong.

 

Or do you think the Packers made a mistake because they had a losing season, while Favre went on to win and actually contend for his division? Did the Packers make a mistake based on wins and loses? Or did they make a mistake based on how the treated the QB who did so much for the organization?

 

They made a mistake on both Pushing Favre out the door and Not winning.

 

What is the worst that could have happened if the Packers never drafted Rodgers and kept Favre until he retired and stayed retired?

 

I'll give you my answer:

 

They would have had to keep a veteran like Jeff Garcia on the team. That's pretty easy to do in this league. So let's say Favre played last year and the Packers went 3-13. For all we know they could have won 10 games with Favre but for the sake of looking at this with worst case scenario lets say they went 3-13 in 2008. Would Favre be able to really come back and play after a season like that? I don't he would want to. Problem for him is that he keeps winning wherever he goes. And we know that is not all him, but he does a his part in winning. The point is that he would have walked away from the game as a Packer, who played his last season as a Packer and that would have meant more than the 3 game difference that the team would have hypotheically saw in the win column.

 

The Packers made many mistakes:

 

1. They should have never drafted Rodgers and instead used that first round pick to win in 2005. Go back and look at everyone they passed on who could have helped them then and could still be helping them now.

2. They should have brought in a guy like a Garcia, just in case Favre decided to really retire. They would be covered. Either way they were going to have a down season somewhere. It was inevitable.

3. They should have worried about drafting a QB after Brett was gone. Drafting his replacement when he is not ready to walk away and then telling him to teach the Rookie is uncool.

4. Why didn't they ask Favre ahead of time how he felt befiore they drafted Rodgers? If they did and he said he was unsure then see number 2.

5. The Packers overlooked the Chemistry they were breaking down by deciding to Push Favre out the door.

6. The Packers put way too much on the shoulders of an overrated QB in Rodgers. How did they expect him to be able to deal with this?

7. The Packers forgot that they are owned by their fans and should have done what was best for them.

8. The Packers should have let Favre retire when he was ready and they would have had glorious celebrations (way overdoing it of course) but it would have been what the Packer fans deserved.

9. The Packers orgainization got greedy and thought they were bigger than the game.

10. The Packers orgainzation let their entire fan base down by forcing them to choose between Favre and the Packers.

[Randall]

I think the o-line of the Packers has been a little bit exposed. Rodgers is a different QB under pressure, as would be expected. If they dont come up with a way to take some of the pressure off of him he will not make it through the season. The Packers have some obvious problems on both sides of the ball but most teams do. Superbowl bound-I dont think so, playoff bound-maybe.

 

 

Yes and one way is for the receivers to catch quick passes. The 3 step drops were going right through their hands.

 

Minnesota is one game up on them but they have played the easiest schedule possible so far. The Packers simply need to start playing better.

[Mr Hammock]

Sending out opinions as facts isn't a debate.

 

I think I have clearly seperated the two and I have added a good mixture of both. Some of this is my opinion and some is fact. You can choose to ignore that or jump in the debate. Something tells me that you are only interested in pop shotting without any substance though. Have fun with that.

[Favreforlife]

Good debate............I think. Should add my 2 cents maybe. Tough to decide. Oh well....................................

[Sunday Couch Potatoe]

I feel like Im in the movie groundhogs day with Mr. Hammock playing the role of Bill Murray! With all the repetitive opinions and insistence of all of them being right! Just tell me one thing that You have not really cleared up for me yet....... Do You Think The Packers Bleeped Up Or Not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2009 by Sunday Couch Potatoe

[Mr Hammock]

How do you know what is going to happen? Maybe he'll pull an Emmitt Smith and get signed to a 1 day contract so he can retire as a Packer. He repeatedly insinuated that he was going to retire. He was getting old, in pain. The Packers drafter a replacement. Are you suggesting they should have let Rodgers go and keep Favre?

 

Signing him for one day is just not even close to being the same thing.

 

To answer your question, they should have never drafted Rodgers to begin with.

[Mr Hammock]

I feel like Im in the movie groundhogs day with Mr. Hammock playing the role of Bill Murray! With all the repetitive opinions and insistence of all of them being right! Just tell me one thing that You have not really cleared up for me yet....... Do You Think The Packers Bleeped Up Or Not?

 

Well I keep answering the same questions so I can see how you feel that way.

[gbpfan1231]

Not a problem and thank you as well for your thought out responses.

 

 

 

I am very critical of the Packers organization. They have done an awful job handeling Brett Farve. They should have never drafted a QB in the first round of 2005 and instead just let Brett play his days out. Yeah, he retired and came back. A lot of players have done that. It's tough to let go for them and I can see why. On one hand you want to play and on the other you know that your skills are diminishing. But where is the middle ground in how you can play? Can you still play effective enough to be productive for your team? Unless you have a last season like Marino then questions are still unanswered. Brett had earned his position to call the shots at the end of his career and the fans deserved it too.

 

 

 

I think you misunderstood me. I don't think it was the right move to let Montana go either, but the 49ers were lucky enough that it worked out for them. As much as that situation is like the Favre/Green Bay situation, it is still very different as well. Montana suffered what many thought was a career ending injury and Steve Young had proven himself on the field with the 49ers. The concensous of every NFL fan I talked to during that time was that Steve Young was very capable of keeping the engine running along just fine. Now, on the flipside, if Young did not win a Super Bowl then that decision would have haunted the 49ers for years. They got off the hook only because they won. I am not a 49ers fan, but as you are well aware, we got our ears filled with 49er mania all the time back then. It was sad to see Montana in KC. I thought it was wrong.

 

 

 

They made a mistake on both Pushing Favre out the door and Not winning.

 

What is the worst that could have happened if the Packers never drafted Rodgers and kept Favre until he retired and stayed retired?

 

I'll give you my answer:

 

They would have had to keep a veteran like Jeff Garcia on the team. That's pretty easy to do in this league. So let's say Favre played last year and the Packers went 3-13. For all we know they could have won 10 games with Favre but for the sake of looking at this with worst case scenario lets say they went 3-13 in 2008. Would Favre be able to really come back and play after a season like that? I don't he would want to. Problem for him is that he keeps winning wherever he goes. And we know that is not all him, but he does a his part in winning. The point is that he would have walked away from the game as a Packer, who played his last season as a Packer and that would have meant more than the 3 game difference that the team would have hypotheically saw in the win column.

 

The Packers made many mistakes:

 

1. They should have never drafted Rodgers and instead used that first round pick to win in 2005. Go back and look at everyone they passed on who could have helped them then and could still be helping them now.

2. They should have brought in a guy like a Garcia, just in case Favre decided to really retire. They would be covered. Either way they were going to have a down season somewhere. It was inevitable.

3. They should have worried about drafting a QB after Brett was gone. Drafting his replacement when he is not ready to walk away and then telling him to teach the Rookie is uncool.

4. Why didn't they ask Favre ahead of time how he felt befiore they drafted Rodgers? If they did and he said he was unsure then see number 2.

5. The Packers overlooked the Chemistry they were breaking down by deciding to Push Favre out the door.

6. The Packers put way too much on the shoulders of an overrated QB in Rodgers. How did they expect him to be able to deal with this?

7. The Packers forgot that they are owned by their fans and should have done what was best for them.

8. The Packers should have let Favre retire when he was ready and they would have had glorious celebrations (way overdoing it of course) but it would have been what the Packer fans deserved.

9. The Packers orgainization got greedy and thought they were bigger than the game.

10. The Packers orgainzation let their entire fan base down by forcing them to choose between Favre and the Packers.

Do you also suggest that they change the name of the team to The Green Bay Favres? Everything you keep saying is contradictory to a team approach. One player is not above a team - untl you realize that you will always be wrong in thinking the Packers made such a horrible mistake.

[tosberg34]

Not a problem and thank you as well for your thought out responses.

 

 

 

I am very critical of the Packers organization. They have done an awful job handeling Brett Farve. They should have never drafted a QB in the first round of 2005 and instead just let Brett play his days out. Yeah, he retired and came back. A lot of players have done that. It's tough to let go for them and I can see why. On one hand you want to play and on the other you know that your skills are diminishing. But where is the middle ground in how you can play? Can you still play effective enough to be productive for your team? Unless you have a last season like Marino then questions are still unanswered. Brett had earned his position to call the shots at the end of his career and the fans deserved it too.

 

 

 

I think you misunderstood me. I don't think it was the right move to let Montana go either, but the 49ers were lucky enough that it worked out for them. As much as that situation is like the Favre/Green Bay situation, it is still very different as well. Montana suffered what many thought was a career ending injury and Steve Young had proven himself on the field with the 49ers. The concensous of every NFL fan I talked to during that time was that Steve Young was very capable of keeping the engine running along just fine. Now, on the flipside, if Young did not win a Super Bowl then that decision would have haunted the 49ers for years. They got off the hook only because they won. I am not a 49ers fan, but as you are well aware, we got our ears filled with 49er mania all the time back then. It was sad to see Montana in KC. I thought it was wrong.

 

 

 

They made a mistake on both Pushing Favre out the door and Not winning.

 

What is the worst that could have happened if the Packers never drafted Rodgers and kept Favre until he retired and stayed retired?

 

I'll give you my answer:

 

They would have had to keep a veteran like Jeff Garcia on the team. That's pretty easy to do in this league. So let's say Favre played last year and the Packers went 3-13. For all we know they could have won 10 games with Favre but for the sake of looking at this with worst case scenario lets say they went 3-13 in 2008. Would Favre be able to really come back and play after a season like that? I don't he would want to. Problem for him is that he keeps winning wherever he goes. And we know that is not all him, but he does a his part in winning. The point is that he would have walked away from the game as a Packer, who played his last season as a Packer and that would have meant more than the 3 game difference that the team would have hypotheically saw in the win column.

 

The Packers made many mistakes:

 

1. They should have never drafted Rodgers and instead used that first round pick to win in 2005. Go back and look at everyone they passed on who could have helped them then and could still be helping them now.

2. They should have brought in a guy like a Garcia, just in case Favre decided to really retire. They would be covered. Either way they were going to have a down season somewhere. It was inevitable.

3. They should have worried about drafting a QB after Brett was gone. Drafting his replacement when he is not ready to walk away and then telling him to teach the Rookie is uncool.

4. Why didn't they ask Favre ahead of time how he felt befiore they drafted Rodgers? If they did and he said he was unsure then see number 2.

5. The Packers overlooked the Chemistry they were breaking down by deciding to Push Favre out the door.

6. The Packers put way too much on the shoulders of an overrated QB in Rodgers. How did they expect him to be able to deal with this?

7. The Packers forgot that they are owned by their fans and should have done what was best for them.

8. The Packers should have let Favre retire when he was ready and they would have had glorious celebrations (way overdoing it of course) but it would have been what the Packer fans deserved.

9. The Packers orgainization got greedy and thought they were bigger than the game.

10. The Packers orgainzation let their entire fan base down by forcing them to choose between Favre and the Packers.

 

Fortunately you don't actually run a pro football franchise. Yours would consist of 38+ year old players because you would feel that they "earned" the right to call their shots.

 

For everyone else they have to stay viable and that means looking toward the future. Rodgers is that future because Favre f'ed it up for himself. According to you teams are supposed to forgo their future in order to satisfy one man. There will NEVER be any way to know how Favre would have done had he NOT decided to retire x number of times. All you can do is speculate. For the rest of us, we look at recent history and that clearly suggests Favre was on the downside of his career. So how can you fault GB for drafting for the future? The ViQueens are certainly a good fit for him because all they need is a QB to hand the ball off to AP. They are a running team. When you have a team that likes to air it out AND run it then Favre simply cannot do that anymore. The Packers are that type of team. He throws way too many ints. The INT he threw in the playoff game against the Giants 2 years ago was the nail in the coffin. Except for that season, he had not been doing it for years prior. He looked old and out of gas, exactly how he has looked every year since then and probably 2 years before that. Most superstars alway go out bad because their egos simply will not allow them to realize the end is upon them.

 

You cannot trash the GB organization without trashing Favre as well. You see NO fault whatsoever in what he did by stringing GB along but are the first to jump at someone's throat for suggesting it. I say you need to step back and re-evaluate you outlook as you clearly, CLEARLY, cannot separate fact from fiction.

[Pkillebr]

To answer your question, they should have never drafted Rodgers to begin with.

 

This is the part I don't get. If you think they treated him badly last year when he wanted to play again, fine. But the fact is, Favre gave every indication that he was seriously considering retirement. They didn't go draft a QB to come start week one of his NFL career like we've seen in the last two seasons with high draft pick rookie QBs getting the starting job week 1. They went and got a real talent to work with Favre, learn under him, and be mentored by until Favre was ready to retire. They were trying to be prepared, not knowing if he would retire the next season or in three years. That way, when Favre does retire, they have a very skilled and educated QB to take over.

 

That's just the way I saw it. I'm not a Packers fan and while I respect Favre's career, I don't really care one way or the other about his media circus over the last two seasons.

[tosberg34]

Do you also suggest that they change the name of the team to The Green Bay Favres? Everything you keep saying is contradictory to a team approach. One player is not above a team - untl you realize that you will always be wrong in thinking the Packers made such a horrible mistake.

 

That's what i've been spelling out for Mr Hamhock all along but he seems to thing that the meaning of team means "one".

Edited September 21, 2009 by tosberg34

[Ed Hoyle]

That's what i've been spelling out for Mr Hamhock all along but he seems to thing that the meaning of team means "one".

 

 

I think Mr. Hammock is just trying to say GB made a mistake.

 

Is Favre innocent? NO.

 

But, no one will ever address the timeline of "Favre wavering". He did not start to waver (Or Hold GB Hostage) until TT came on board. TT made it quite clear he did not want Favre, or anyone else brought in by Wolf or Sherman, for that matter. He was making this "HIS TEAM". Drafting Rogers was his choice.

 

Favre NEVER should have retired in the first place. If he felt they were pushing him out the door, then he should have called a meeting with the FANS and let them decide.

 

Either way, it is just as much TT's fault as it is Favre's with the whole circus. Both sides should have handled it better.

 

The only bad thing now is that the "Annointed Rodgers" is proving that he's still got a lot to learn. Everyone was predicting that GB is the team to beat in the NFC North. It's clearly not that cut-and-dried is it? They have glaring problems and the Bears exposed that. Teams will key on this and Rodgers will be lucky to repeat last year's numbers, let alone stay alive.

 

The OL is not going to help him at all, but who drafted the players who make up that line? Who made the decision of who plays where?

 

That is who we should blame for the present. Don't dig up the past. Favre is gone. Let it go. Just quit calling Favre fans nuthuggers if they criticize the GB organization. Come up with something original like placing the "Present Blame" on the correct people....MM and TT.

 

It is WAY too early to say they are done. But, if they don't fix this soon, they may end up in the NFC North Cellar. There doesn't seem to be any one team who is a clear-cut favorite in the North.

Edited September 21, 2009 by Ed Hoyle

[piratesownninjas]

How many times cans Hammock and Ed Hoyle post the same thing over and over again?

[bushwacked]

How many times cans Hammock and Ed Hoyle post the same thing over and over again?

 

I'm thinking they will do it as long as they keep getting Packer fans to respond.

[Mr Hammock]

Do you also suggest that they change the name of the team to The Green Bay Favres? Everything you keep saying is contradictory to a team approach. One player is not above a team - untl you realize that you will always be wrong in thinking the Packers made such a horrible mistake.

 

Funny and No.

 

The team would have been thinking about itself if it would have kept Favre. Why? Because the fans are who, in the end, determine success. They are either on board or they are not. You must take care of the fans and the Packers did not take care of anyone, even the team. It's a Tri-pisser.

[Ed Hoyle]

How many times cans Hammock and Ed Hoyle post the same thing over and over again?

 

 

How many times "Can" we post it? Well, until the Packer Fans who hate Favre will admit that TT was just as wrong in the situation.

Favre should be blamed, as should TT, it was a circus from the get-go. Plus, we'd most likely quit posting once people quit bashing anyone who questions TT or MM.

 

But, no one will do that now will they?