This is a good debate...
On Starr. How many Hall of Fame players were on his teams? The number is staggering... Not to mention being coached by some dude named Vince.
Favre had one guy on his level, Reggie White.
I'll take AR over bert any day of the week.
JJSD - thanks for the youtube. a beautiful pairing.
JJSD - thanks for the youtube. a beautiful pairing.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:...Favre had one guy on his level, Reggie White.
This is another subject that could be debated forever, but there were many damn good players during the years when Favre played for us that directly affected his play. A few examples on offense:
Sterling Sharpe
Robert Brooks
DD
Edgar
Dorsey
quote:Originally posted by Tdog:
I'll take AR over bert any day of the week.
Agree (so far) his head is screwed on straight and he hates turning the ball over.
I'm not counting players that haven't finished their career or aren't near the end of their career. Sample size isn't fair yet but agree about Rodgers. His decision making is impeccable, on par with Brady's and Montana's.
Here's something I've been pondering for a while: How much talent did Favre possess, and how much of his success was pure luck when he chucked it up for grabs?
quote:Originally posted by Boris:
His decision making is impeccable, on par with Brady's and Montana's.
Agree.
It's a primary reason why I rate both of the above higher than Favre, and why I prefer Rodgers.
Rodgers also make plays with his legs, and he throws a better deep ball then Brent ever did.
He won't set as many records, but by the time he's done I'd be willing to bet #12 has more rings.
All I know is the regular season Favre of 1995-1998 played as well as any QB I can remember. The will to win was incredible and you'd lose count of the number of plays where he made something out of nothing.
Agree with you, though, Boris. Rodgers is as physically talented a quarterback as any who has played, indeed, think of a better throwing Montana. He needs more titles to be considered at that level but he's certainly on the track towards all-time great status.
Agree with you, though, Boris. Rodgers is as physically talented a quarterback as any who has played, indeed, think of a better throwing Montana. He needs more titles to be considered at that level but he's certainly on the track towards all-time great status.
quote:Originally posted by Timmy!:quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:...Favre had one guy on his level, Reggie White.
This is another subject that could be debated forever, but there were many damn good players during the years when Favre played for us that directly affected his play. A few examples on offense:
Sterling Sharpe
Robert Brooks
DD
Edgar
Dorsey
There is a substantial difference between damn good players and Hall of Fame players.
Would any of the HOF players from the 60's prevented any of those idiotic gag jobs on the video? You can define great QB in many different ways, but IMHO you can't exclude performance in the clutch as a variable. There's really no debate that in the second half of his career, Brent was extremely vulnerable to horrible, horrible games and terrible decisions that cost his teams several seasons. I'm not saying he's not a great QB, as he is. But when you're talking top 5 of all time, you're reduced to splitting hairs because everyone is that good.
I'd put Brent in the second 5 along with guys like Tarkenton and Marino. Eliminate his bed-crappings and he'd easily be in the top 5. That factor, though, bumps him out.
I'd put Brent in the second 5 along with guys like Tarkenton and Marino. Eliminate his bed-crappings and he'd easily be in the top 5. That factor, though, bumps him out.
quote:IMHO you can't exclude performance in the clutch as a variable
This is why Starr and Montana are the best big game quarterbacks ever. Starr remains tragically underrated.
quote:Originally posted by cuqui:
All I know is the regular season Favre of 1995-1998 played as well as any QB I can remember. The will to win was incredible and you'd lose count of the number of plays where he made something out of nothing.
Yep, that's the Favre I choose to remember. The Favre of the post-Holmgren era was a different guy. Who can forget in 1999 when Favre went against Holmgren's 1st Seattle team and completely melted down when trying to show he didn't need Holmgren anymore? He and Holmgren were the perfect marriage. Both had some success without eachother, but they were better together. If they had stayed together, there's no telling what they could have done.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:
There is a substantial difference between damn good players and Hall of Fame players.
Packer Nation would agree. Substantial!
quote:IMHO you can't exclude performance in the clutch as a variable
Fair enough. Define "performance in the clutch"
I define it as all football games, not just playoffs. Favre has nearly as many 4th quarter comebacks as Elway & more than anyone else after that I believe.
If Rodgers stays healthy, I definitel believe that he'll work his way into the GOAT debate. He's got Montana's cool, Young's mobility, and Marino's arm. The real deal.
quote:Originally posted by Rusty:
Here's something I've been pondering for a while: How much talent did Favre possess, and how much of his success was pure luck when he chucked it up for grabs?
C'mon man. You don't throw that many TDs and win that many games based upon "luck." This game is too hard to make it on luck for that many years.