Thread: Favre returns one more year

one of the top 5 quarterbacks of all time

I like Favre's heart, but his overratedness keeps on going just like his career...

He may not have what he had in the seasons of 96 and 97, but he is still better then any other qb that the packers could find to replace him. I would trust him over some rookie, he is a great guy and football player. He just loves the game, not the money, not the fame, just has a great love of the game.

Originally Posted by Flex

I like Favre's heart, but his overratedness keeps on going just like his career...

overratedness? are you nuts. last year the guy threw for over 4000 yards (again) more than 30tds (again) he has twice as many 30+ td seasons than any other quarterback. brett favre is hardly overrated. he is only 35 and could easily play another 3 or 4 years at a pro-bowl caliber level. i would put him number 3 behind elway and marino. the only quarterback in the league i would want over him right now would be manning

i agree with every single the thing Rock just said.


But Bio,
the guy gets all the credit when his team wins, and none when his team loses.

Perfect example last year was when he was running for the corner of the endzone and threw the ball to a guy knowing he was way over the line of scrimmage. Had that been any other QB they would've been torn apart for not lowering their shoulder and trying for the TD (which looked VERY gainable). But it was Favre, so the commentators laughed it off.

and take him over ANY QB in the league except Manning? That's funny.

any qb except manning. absolutly. without hesitation. 4000 yards 30+ tds and its not like he has one of the premier recieving corps in the league to throw to

All Favre needs is some damn good recievers, and there is no stopping him. Some recievers that can catch the ball he throws at them at the speed of light.

the only absolutly amazing reciever he has ever had was sterling sharpe and his carreer was ended early.(sadly)

Originally Posted by bio-chem

any qb except manning. absolutly. without hesitation. 4000 yards 30+ tds and its not like he has one of the premier recieving corps in the league to throw to

well, he did have Javon Walker, who had one of the best 3 WR's this year. Plus Driver, who was in the top 15 or 20. (Not even to mention a top 10 TE in Bubba). Oh ya, and an all-pro RB in Ahman Green, who's also one of the top pass recieving backs outta the backfield.

the guy has a NASTY offense. Don't try and pretend he does it all himself.

everyone of those guys disappears without brett favre. you put them on another team and none of those guys does what they did with favre. im not exactly sure but were you saying javon walker was one of the 3 best wide recievers this year in the league? because all three of mannings revievers are better than walker. i disagree with your arguement

Originally Posted by bio-chem

everyone of those guys disappears without brett favre. you put them on another team and none of those guys does what they did with favre. im not exactly sure but were you saying javon walker was one of the 3 best wide recievers this year in the league? because all three of mannings revievers are better than walker. i disagree with your arguement

Disappears w/o Favre? Ya, ok. Now you're just being ridiculous.
Ahman Green, a top 5 RB in the NFL, would be nothing w/o Favre.

You could argue who's better than whom all day long. What i was saying is that Javon Walker had one of the top 3 best statistical years for WR's this past year (89rec, 1382yds, 12td's).

So don't tell me Favre has no offense around him. Get off his jock.

if i remember right ahman green started out with the seahawks but didnt do anything special there. top 5 in the nfl? behind corey dillon, curtis martin, sean alexander, tomlinson, clinton portis, edgerrin james, priest holmes, rudi johnson, jamal lewis, and anyone the denver broncos put in their back field .and walker had a great statistical year, but he is not near the caliber reciever as the #1 reciever on half a dozen teams. and think about it if favre is throwing for over 4000 yards that year someone is catching the balls. favre is elevating javon walkers game not the other way around.

Originally Posted by bio-chem

if i remember right ahman green started out with the seahawks but didnt do anything special there. top 5 in the nfl? behind corey dillon, curtis martin, sean alexander, tomlinson, clinton portis, edgerrin james, priest holmes, rudi johnson, jamal lewis, and anyone the denver broncos put in their back field .and walker had a great statistical year, but he is not near the caliber reciever as the #1 reciever on half a dozen teams. and think about it if favre is throwing for over 4000 yards that year someone is catching the balls. favre is elevating javon walkers game not the other way around.

Curtis Martin had his career year this year, see if he does it again. Edge had the best Offense in the NFL behind him, Priest has a top Offense not to mention THEE best O-line (considering thier 2nd and 3rd string backs come in and average 175yds and 3td's/game), same as Denver (like you said). Rudi Johnson? Sorry. Alexander is soft. So WTF, now that Ahman comes to GB he becomes good? does Favre run for Ahman? As soon as he hands the ball off to him does he use special mind powers to move his feet?

no but favre is one of the only quarterbacks in the leage to fake the play action. most quarterbacks after they hand the ball off stop, but favre keeps it going like he still has the ball. he goes the extra mile. does it do anything? thats not worth the debate. but you didnt talk about how he did spend his first two years as a back up.
curtis martin: has been doing it for a decade now, hall of famer as he is either top 5 or 6 in career rushing yards currently.
Edge: came in and did it as a rookie when they had no offense and he was a top 5 pick
Alexander: soft? missed the rushing title by one yard and is soft? the guy is an animal.
Priest: only because of his o-line? the second string back was a first round draft choice and a damn good back himself. oh yeah priest does hold the record for most tds in a season rushing doesnt he?
rudi johnson: less of a supporting cast yet does a lot more.
denver: ill give you that one. their schemes are so good it's hard to see how good a back really is until he does it somewhere else

ahman green is just not a top 5 rb in my book

sorry about that i meant you didnt talk about how ahman greens first 2 years where as a back up. i just type sometimes and my ideas run together

you left out clinton portis, corey dillon, tomlinson, and jamal lewis are those your first 4? in what order?

Originally Posted by bio-chem

no but favre is one of the only quarterbacks in the leage to fake the play action. most quarterbacks after they hand the ball off stop, but favre keeps it going like he still has the ball. he goes the extra mile. does it do anything? thats not worth the debate. but you didnt talk about how he did spend his first two years as a back up.
curtis martin: has been doing it for a decade now, hall of famer as he is either top 5 or 6 in career rushing yards currently.
Edge: came in and did it as a rookie when they had no offense and he was a top 5 pick
Alexander: soft? missed the rushing title by one yard and is soft? the guy is an animal.
Priest: only because of his o-line? the second string back was a first round draft choice and a damn good back himself. oh yeah priest does hold the record for most tds in a season rushing doesnt he?
rudi johnson: less of a supporting cast yet does a lot more.
denver: ill give you that one. their schemes are so good it's hard to see how good a back really is until he does it somewhere else

ahman green is just not a top 5 rb in my book

So now it's Favre's play action that makes Green run so well?

The only ones i'd say are better are definitely w/o question better are LT and Priest.
After that, it's a toss up.

like i said whether it helps or not isnt really worth the debate. but if the guy (ahman) is really a top 5 back he wouldnt have been on the bench for 2 years in seattle of all places

Originally Posted by bio-chem

like i said whether it helps or not isnt really worth the debate. but if the guy (ahman) is really a top 5 back he wouldnt have been on the bench for 2 years in seattle of all places

being on the bench in the past has nothing to do with him being a top 5 back in the NFL now.

Doesn't it have alot to do with the type of offense the team they are on run? And alot also has to do with the coaching as well. Look at Favre, who was the black coach the packers had, for one year? Favre had his WORST year every when that guy was coaching the packers. Because he didn't know how to control Favre. I feel a guy is good, has skills, but it has alot to do with the surroundings as well. Look at the Patriots, an OK team, but an awesome coaching staff, awesome enough to take them to the super bowl and win.

Originally Posted by RoCk79

Look at the Patriots, an OK team, but an awesome coaching staff, awesome enough to take them to the super bowl and win.

HAHAHAHAHAH, an "OK" team.

That shows the extent of your football knowledge. Bill Belichik is really in Brady's uniform during the game taking the snaps and making the throws. That was really Romeo Crenel dressed as Corey Dillon gaining 1600yds.

Dude, you can have the BEST coaching staff in the world who PERFECTLY caters to the players strong points, but it's the players who hafta make plays, plain and simple.

and BTW, they won 28 outta 30 games and 2 Superbowls. ya, they're "ok".

Originally Posted by Flex

HAHAHAHAHAH, an "OK" team.

That shows the extent of your football knowledge. Bill Belichik is really in Brady's uniform during the game taking the snaps and making the throws. That was really Romeo Crenel dressed as Corey Dillon gaining 1600yds.

Dude, you can have the BEST coaching staff in the world who PERFECTLY caters to the players strong points, but it's the players who hafta make plays, plain and simple.

and BTW, they won 28 outta 30 games and 2 Superbowls. ya, they're "ok".

Whatever dude, I never said I was a football genious. And I certainly dont think you are either. In my (ok, ready for this one?) OPINION, it has ALOT to do with the coaching. Not just the players. Favre is a PERFECT example of this, he is a very wild player, and he needs a good coach to control him, to keep his head in the game, and not just throw the ball away to other players (even tho he is good at it).

And yes, I think the Pats are an OK team, nothing more. And I'm most definatly sure I am not the ONLY one here or in the world who thinks so.

Originally Posted by RoCk79

Whatever dude, I never said I was a football genious. And I certainly dont think you are either. In my (ok, ready for this one?) OPINION, it has ALOT to do with the coaching. Not just the players. Favre is a PERFECT example of this, he is a very wild player, and he needs a good coach to control him, to keep his head in the game, and not just throw the ball away to other players (even tho he is good at it).

And yes, I think the Pats are an OK team, nothing more. And I'm most definatly sure I am not the ONLY one here or in the world who thinks so.

Bottom line, you know little about football.

Just curious, if the Pats are okay, who is a "good" team then?

btw, if the coaches were so important, THEY'D be making the millions, not the players.

Originally Posted by Flex

Bottom line, you know little about football.

Just curious, if the Pats are okay, who is a "good" team then?

Bottom line is... DUH, I'M NOT SAYING I DO

But I know enough to make me happy, and thats all that really matters. And I gave my opinion on what I think.

The pats dont have just one superstar, they have many decent players, which make them a good team. And I feel alot of that has to do with how the coaches bring these players together to work so well with each other. (I dont know where the hell you got that I said the coaches were playing in the players uniform, but oh well) So maybe they are a better team then just ok. I still think the pats have the best coaching staff around, and again, my OPINION, is if they didn't have those coaches, they probably wouldn't be going to the superbowl and winning so much. ANYBODY else agree with me on this???

Brett played best in the west coast offense. As great as his arm is, he throws too many balls up for grab. He doesn't play intelligently on a consistent basis. Give me a Joe Montana or Tom Brady any day. I've been a packer fan since 1978 and I'm grateful for Brett bringing a superbowl trophy home in '96.

Flex,

Why do you always sound so rude and mean when someone disagrees with you man? I'm just curious bro.

Originally Posted by RoCk79

Flex,

Why do you always sound so rude and mean when someone disagrees with you man? I'm just curious bro.

You're mistaking rudeness with passion.

I'm a huge football fan, and my team is the Pats. When someone says the Pats are ok and that football coaches have so much to do with a team's success, it makes me a little angry, and i may come off as rude.

28/30 games and 2 SB's in two years. Well damn, if that's "ok", i don't understand what you're "good" is.

and sure, we had probably the best coaching staff in the league. my point of saying our coaches weren't in uniform was exactly that, sure they call the plays, but they don't MAKE the plays. Brady hasta still throw that ball, Dillon hasta run, Bruschi hasta intercept, McGinest hasta sack etc. etc. etc. My point was, is that you can have all the best coaches in the entire world on one team, but it's the players who hafta to make the plays to win ball games, plain and simple.