Favre would be missed

One thing is sure if Brett Favre does decide to retire and that is the Packers better be winning or they will fall off the face of the NFL planet. I doubt there has ever been a player that has meant so much to the rise of a franchise than Brett Favre. His style of play and the success he has had made him a media superstar.

While I don’t think he will be missed so much as a player when he retires, but what Brett Favre does for the city of Green Bay and the Green Bay Packers will be hard to replace. Two players, Reggie White and Brett Favre, put the Packers back on the NFL map. If Brett hangs it up the Packers’ marketing department is going to have to work overtime, or in reality, might have to finally actually work. With a guy like Favre around there can’t be a whole lot to do.

Brett Favre is a star of epic proportions and I can’t see anybody on the roster right now being able to reach that level. The Packers had Reggie White, they still have Brett Favre now. Can this team survive without a superstar player? We might find out sooner than later. It is my gut feeling that Brett does indeed hang it up, but I’m an idiot and I don’t know anything about football, so take it with a grain of salt. I just think he doesn’t want to go through the offseason stuff and I think he has the Packers’ best interest at heart as well.

Never in a million years could anyone think the Packers would be blessed with two such stars in Reggie and Brett. Reggie’s shoes have not been filled, and if the Packers cannot replace Brett, the future could be dim. Green Bay is not Hollywood, or in this season’s case, Dallas. Paparazzi is not a fan of 40-below wind chills.

The Packers appear to be on solid ground right now with a young team and chip on their shoulder after the loss to the Giants. Head coach Mike McCarthy has turned the franchise around, but has to factor in the fact that he won’t have Brett Favre as his quarterback every year. That is why I thought the extension being worked out for McCarthy might be a tad long. Let us see what he does without Favre before we go throwing money at him.

The Packers did seem to get a lot of respect by media and players this week at the Super Bowl. I feel a little better about the Packers’ chances next year. The stats certainly point out that the loser of the conference championship game is more likely to return than the loser of the Super Bowl. I think the Giants are going to get hammered and I know the feeling of losing a Super Bowl, you never get over it, and I don’ think the Packers could have beat New England had they beat beat the Giants.

OK, the cat is out of the bag. I think New England wins the Super Bowl in a rout. I think 60 points is possible, but I will go on the conservative side and say Patriots 56, Giants 28. Of course, I know nothing about football and never will, so bet on the Giants.

More to come…

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 31st, 2008 at 9:43 pm and is filed under Al Davis. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • TRIP

    I hope the Patriots win so I can believe they were the inevitable victor.

  • Scott S.

    Don’t be so hard on yourself, Al. You’re a great fan who only wants to see the Packers win. Thanks for the site.

  • Jeremy S

    he won’t be missed as a player?

  • http://n.a. Tom

    I agree that if they don’t consistantly make the playoffs they may indeed fall off the face of the earth in such a small market. I don’t agree about McCarthy. I think in McCarthy they see a guy who leads the team with attention to detail and holds his players and his coaches accountable. I wasn’t crazy about his last game plan but I think he fields as good a team as anybody, with or with out Favre. He usually has a good game plan. He is significantly better than his predessessor.

  • JeffN

    Guys let’s look at what really happened in the game vs the Giants. Giants had all there Linebackers up on the line of scrimmage. No kidding the running game is not going to work and no kidding the screen pass is not going to work. So why didn’t the Pack try the slant and mid field passes that worked so well for them all year? They hardly tried it. Those are play calling mistakes. McCarthy is the coach of the future and I’ve been a big fan of him all year and still am but his play calling in that game should be chalked up to young coaching mistakes and that is why the game was lost. The pack is a pass first team and they would have gotten those linebackers off the line of scrimmage real quick if they would have thrown the passes that they were good at which would of opened up the running game. I really think that sums up the whole game just my 2 cents. One more thing McCarthy and Thompson has gotten the Pack to NFC Championship game much quicker than Wolf and Holmgren every. Ok that’s my 4 cents.

    Take it easy everyone the Pack will be back bigger and stronger next year. It’s just that we are going to have to wait another year. In the mean time we can watch the Giants lose by 3 touchdowns in the superbowl. I don’t want the Pats to win either but their going to.

    Jeff

  • Jimm G

    I agree that it will be hard to replace what Fave brings for name recognition but winning has a way of making up for that, someone like Hawk, for instance, may be the next “name” player. Kampman should be considered, two pro bowls keeps adding sacks every year, and if Atari Bigby keeps hitting the way he did at the end of the year he could be included also. The problem with those two is they play defense and its harder to be a “name” on that side of the ball.

    We won’t know until he is gone how much Favre meant to the wins this year, I for one am not in a hurry to find out. I think Rodgers could be good replacement (if he stays healthy) but we need a running game to help his ascention, which means we need guards.

    All I can hope for is that the Packers continue to build a competative team that can challenge for a Super Bowl. I for one think we have the makings of a good team for a long time with and without Favre.

  • JackH

    He wont be missed as a player?? WOW. Absolutly amazing.

  • Jon

    29 yards of rushing offense in the NFC title game was more than enough. What more could Favre ask for? I say cut him.

    I mean, no QB in the history of the NFL has ever had such a great running game – 29 yards! – in a title game and not been able to pull off a win. Just look at Bradshaw, Montana, Aikman, Brady, all those guys won their title games with far less than 29 yards rushing offense. Favre is the first to lose a title game with such a great running game. That clearly makes him the worst of the lot, and worthy of being cut, I say.

    Indeed, think of it this way. His stellar offensive line and single running back gave him 29 yards of rushing offense in only 4+ quarters (!) and he couldn’t pull off a win in -4 degrees. Cut him, I say!

    And, as terrific as Green Bay’s rushing offense was, the defense was even better! Especially the corners! Especially Al Harris! Especially when Harris covered Plaxico Burress on critical downs! I mean Plaxico never made the play! Harris always batted the ball away, got the interception, or stopped Burress short of the first down! In fact Harris and the defense shut down Burress and the rest of the Giants offense so well that the Giants had the ball for only 40:01!

    Favre clearly ruined the season by going 13-3 and not 16-0; and he clearly lost the NFC title game, what with all the rushing offense (29 yards!) and terrific defense behind him.

    I long for the days when we didn’t have Favre. I do, I do.

  • Jon

    You have said three things that go hand in hand, and say all there really is to know about you:

    1. “I think the Giants are going to get hammered”.

    2. “I think New England wins the Super Bowl in a rout”.

    3. “Brett, please just go away”.

  • http://www.packernet.com admin

    You got a problem man.

  • Jon

    Well, well. What have we here? Could it be?

    Yes! Now that the Giants beat the Cheatriots, the final 2007 post-season statistics are out for the 4 quarterbacks who played in the AFC and NFC Championship games: Favre (GB), Brady (NE), Manning (NY), and Rivers (SD).

    Given the vitriol directed at Favre on this forum, it cannot possibly be that Favre has the highest 2007 post-season quarterback rating of these 4 quarterbacks, can it?

    I mean, that just can’t be; he’s supposed to retire or be cut, right?

    Well, it can be, and it is!

    Here are the final 2007 post-season quarterback ratings for the 4 quarterbacks who played in the AFC and NFC Championship games, straight from ESPN.Com:

    Favre – 63.8% completion, 7.05 yards per attempt, 5 TD, 2 INT = RATING 99.0

    Brady – 70.6% completion, 6.76 yards per attempt, 6 TD, 3 INT = RATING 96.0

    Manning – 60.5% completion, 7.18 yards per attempt, 6 TD, 1 INT = RATING 95.7

    Rivers – 60.5% completion, 8.92 yards per attempt, 4 TD, 4 INT = RATING 85.8

    For those of you who struggle with numbers, allow me to interpret these numbers for you: FAVRE PERFORMED BETTER IN THE 2007 POST-SEASON THAN RIVERS, MANNING, AND, YES, EVEN BRADY!

    Let me repeat that: FAVRE HAD A HIGHER 2007 POST-SEASON QUARTERBACK RATING THAN THE BELOVED BRADY!

    I am more convinced than ever: Favre needs to go!!!

  • Servius

    Can we say, now that the Giants have won the Super Bowl, that we just lost to a really good team? That we still have the youngest team, a very talented team with a Hall of Fame quarterback?

    If and only if Brett sticks around, we have a shot at winning it all next year.

  • Jon

    As I noted above, Favre has the highest post-season quarterback rating of the 4 quarterbacks who played in the AFC and NFC Championship games.

    Well, it turns out Favre leads ALL of the quarterbacks in the 2007 NFL playoffs in post-season quarterback rating:

    2007 NFL Post-Season Quarterback Ratings

    Brett Favre 99.0
    Peyton Manning 97.7
    Tom Brady 96.0
    Eli Manning 95.7
    Philip Rivers 85.8
    Ben Roethlisberger 79.2
    David Garrard 77.5
    Matt Hasselbeck 76.6
    Todd Collins 69.2
    Tony Romo 64.7
    Jeff Garcia 60.5
    Vince Young 53.5

    Favre, having PERFORMED BETTER IN THE NFL PLAYOFFS THAN EVERY OTHER QUARTERBACK IN THE NFL, obviously should retire or be forced to retire.

    Or, perhaps Green Bay should trade Brett Favre for Jeff Garcia, who had a terrific quarterback rating of 60.5 this playoff season; or better yet, trade for Vince Young, who had a historic 53.5 quarterback rating in the playoffs – these are the type of guys Green Bay needs.

  • ashanti

    its sad to sit here and listen to whay you guys are saying.mccarthy is great coach they finished last season 8-8 & now 15-4.but idk i think favre want retire until he another champioship ring & he jus wants the green bay to have that feeling for once and rogers i think should be traded good kid.but needs improvement.i think they should pick up that qwb in denver i think his name is jay cutler.he’s a good qb in the making and reminds me of favre in similar way.

  • http://www.packernet.com admin

    When they give out Super Bowl championships just for quarterback rating, let me know.

  • Jon

    Admin,

    The point that sails over your head is that when you have one of the best performing – no, THE best performing – quarterback in the NFL playoffs (Favre), and you lose (Green Bay), perhaps the problem is NOT the quarterback but the offensive line; or the running backs; or the defensive line; or the defensive coverage; or some combination of the above.

    Once again, when you are able to identify a single quarterback in the history of the NFL who was able to win a title game with only 29 yards of rushing offense, let me know!

    Waiting . . .

    Waiting . . .

  • Mark

    Jon,

    Your an idiot. There is one problem with the stupid QB rating. It does not take into account critical mistakes at critical times in the game and big time plays in the biggest games of the season. Favre’s nice interception essentially lost it against the Giants and then Eli Manning leading the Giants drive down the field to beat the undefeated Pats. I’m not a fan of Eli, but I would take his four playoff wins on the road and a MVP trophy and Super Bowl win to boot. You can have Favre’s 3.3 higher QB rating. Again your an idiot.

  • Mark

    Oh and if you want to get more than 29 yards rushing in a game then maybe get a guy who knows how to run the ball instead of this no name you have.

  • Jon

    Mark,

    It’s “you’re”, not “your”.

    And, you’re the idiot.

    You say “maybe get a guy who knows how to run the ball instead of this no name you have”. First, by saying “you have”, you have revealed yourself not to be a Packer fan. And second, as I wrote, “perhaps the problem is . . . the running backs”. Can’t you read, junior?

    Further, the point about quarterback rating is that, your rant notwithstanding, it certainly does indicate how well or poorly a quarterback is playing. And when a playoff quarterback (Favre) plays better than all other playoff quarterbacks (Manning, Brady, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Garrard, Hasselbeck, Collins, Romo, Garcia, and Young) but his team still loses, perhaps there are problems other than at quarterback, eh?

    Perhaps if we had an offensive line that could open holes we would have won in regulation and not force the quarterback to try to win it all himself in overtime (as he did in Denver), eh?

    Perhaps if we had running backs that could run for more than 29 yards (New York ran for 134 yards) we would have won in regulation and not force the quarterback to try to win it all himself in overtime (as he did in Denver), eh?

    Perhaps if we had a defense that could have kept the Giants off the field, instead of allowing them on the field for 40:01 minutes, we would have won in regulation and not force the quarterback to try to win it all himself in overtime (as he did in Denver), eh?

    Perhaps if we had a defensive cover scheme that didn’t allow Plaxico Burress 11 receptions for 154 yards in -4 degrees, we would have won in regulation and not force the quarterback to try to win it all himself in overtime (as he did in Denver), eh?

    Eh?

    Or, are you too idiotic to address these issues?

  • Jon

    One more thing, Admin.

    You said, “When they give out Super Bowl championships just for quarterback rating, let me know.”

    But I say, “When they give out Super Bowl championships to the quarterback, let me know.”

    Get it? It’s the TEAM that wins the Super Bowl, NOT the quarterback. Sunday night the scoreboard read “Giants 17 – Patriots 14″, not “Manning 17 – Brady 14″.

    It’s your obstinate failure to acknowledge the many serious TEAM deficiencies that led to Green Bay’s loss to the Giants that leads you to place the blame on an INDIVIDUAL who performed better at his position in the playoffs than every other INDIVIDUAL in the NFL.

  • TRIP

    I have another comment. I agree with Jon above me, even though I haven’t read the whole conversation. It was a TEAM loss versus the Giants and it so happens that the Packers scored the MOST on offense versus the Giants. Their defense was immaculate. And our defense simply was not. Had Al Harris and the D-Line played better, we would have had our chance versus the Patriots. This is definitely a TEAM game, and how can you blame Favre when the offense put up more points than any other team in the postseason with the least amount of offensive yards?

  • Jon

    Trip,

    That’s a great point about Green Bay scoring more points against the Giants than any other team in the 2007 playoffs, including the Beloved Brady & The Cheatriots.

    Here are the points scored by the playoff teams against the Giants:

    Green Bay 20
    Dallas 17
    New England 14
    Tampa Bay 14

    So not only did Favre have the highest post-season quarterback rating (99.0) of all the quarterbacks in the playoffs, but the Green Bay offense scored more points (20) against the Super Bowl Champion Giants than any other team that played the Giants!

    Unfortunately, looking at how the teams who played the Giants fared DEFENSIVELY, we see that GREEN BAY WAS THE WORST TEAM DEFENSIVELY AGAINST THE GIANTS. The total offensive yards allowed by the defenses of the Giants’ playoff opponents are:

    Dallas 230
    Tampa Bay 277
    New England 338
    Green Bay 380

    In short, Green Bay’s offense scored more points against the Giants than anyone else (20), and its quarterback had a higher playoff rating (99.0) than any other quarterback in the playoffs; however Green Bay’s defense gave up more yards to the Giants than anyone else (380), and allowed the Giants to control the ball longer than anyone else (40:01).

    And the geniuses on this forum say the problem with Green Bay is the quarterback?

  • matt

    Jon,

    You are a loser.

    Al,

    Thanks for the site.

  • Jon

    Matt,

    The ad hominem attack is the hallmark of the intellectual lightweight.

  • http://www.packernet.com admin

    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black…

  • Jeff

    I too think Brett played a pretty fair game given the circumstances (wretched weather and solid opponent) except for a few passes, but we only scored our touchdowns because of a blown tackle on the Driver catch and a very good return by Williams. I don’t really agree with using that scoring argument to support Favre – the offense didn’t move the ball consistently all night.

    I think the decision to practice exclusively inside was wrong.
    I do think the play calling was suspect.
    I do think the o-line got pushed around by better athletes.
    I don’t think we got what we needed out of our TEs.
    There were at least two dropped passes that were potential game changers.
    The defense just couldn’t get off the field. 20 points should have won that game.

    But as a team, we needed to score one more touchdown and just didn’t get it done. Favre certainly played his part in that, but I’d be happy to have him back with an improved line, more experience at WR (we could be great there), and is anybody coming out at TE, S or CB who could make an impact right away?

    TT has done an amazing job building this team, but this might be the time to use a couple key acquisitions to put this team over the top. Pardon me talking outta my backside, but that’s the way I see it.

  • Jon

    Admin,

    I have many posts above, each laden with statistics to prove my point.

    Neither you nor your minions here have bothered to respond substantively to my posts: you remain silent, while your minions call me names.

    In all of my posts, only once did I insult another poster, and that was because he had first called me an “idiot”. See Mark’s post above: “Jon, You’re an idiot. . . . Again you’re an idiot.”

    Once again, I invite you to respond to my posts. How about the first question I posed, which you have neither answered nor acknowledged: Identify one team that has won an AFC or NFC Championship game with 28 yards of rushing offense?

  • Jeff

    I’m not completely missing your point, but your beating of this drum is getting tiresome.

    You’re refusing to deal with the reality of the game and are hiding behind stats. The Giants had 39 rush attempts to our 13 – they had 20 first downs to our 12 – they had a 3rd down efficiency rating of 37% to our 10%. They whupped us.

    Yes, we only had 29 yards rushing and only held the ball 20 minutes of the game. This has something to do with us not being able to convert 3rd downs and giving the ball back to the Giants. Favre bears some responsibility for that failure. He’s the leader. Yes it was a team loss, but the burden falls heaviest on the front men Favre and Coach Mike.

    I disagree with the folks who want Favre out, but I understand the frustration of people who see that we were so close and had it all fell apart because our veteran HOF QB got impatient and threw an ill-advised pass there at the end. The 29 rushing yards you keep carping about does not mitigate that failure. The game was there for us on the last two 4th quarter drives and in OT, but we couldn’t get it done. Couldn’t even get a first down. A big part of that does fall on Favre.

    He’s a big boy – he can handle this. I expect to see him back and the Packers strong next year.

  • Jon

    First, my posts have dealt with many different issues (rushing offense, defensive coverage, time-of-possession, points scored, quarterback rating, etc.), none of which the Admin has responded to, so you’re wrong to say I’m “beating a drum”. Indeed I have discussed many more varied issues here than anyone else.

    Second, it is I who has been dealing “with the reality of the game”, as it is I who understands that the “game” is played by a “team”. It is the Admin and the other Favre haters who focus not on the “game” or the “team” but on a single pass in overtime. THEY are the ones who refuse to address any of the many team issues (rushing offense, defensive coverage, time-of-possession, points scored, quarterback rating, etc.) and focus only on a 4-second play in a 60+ minute game. So, you’re wrong again.

    Third, you’re right when you say we “couldn’t even get a first down” late in the fourth quarter or in overtime, but you fail to see the connection between our 29 total yards rushing and our inability to get a first down. The former is the cause of the latter.

    Finally, for you to suggest that, in those conditions and with zero running game, “a big part of” our inability to get a first down “does fall on Favre” is absurd. What does Favre have to do with the running game? Is he now an offensive lineman? Or is he now a running back? Were his handoffs inadequate? Where exactly did Favre fail in the running game?

    Once again I ask (because no one has answered): What quarterback in the history of the NFL was able to win an AFC or NFC title game with only 29 yards of rushing offense? If you can’t name one, then you must concede you are blaming Favre for not doing what has never been done.

  • Jeff

    Responding paragraph by paragraph:

    OK – I shouldn’t have made the drum comment. My apologies – for what they’re worth in a forum like this.

    The reality of the game is that we could not move the ball consistently all night long through the air or on the ground. The reality is that Favre (as a veteran QB) bears some responsibility for that failure. Don’t sweat that – he wants it – wouldn’t have it any other way. That’s one of the reasons why he’s my favorite.

    At that point of the game (especially when we got the ball at 2:30) it’s mostly the job of the QB to move the ball down the field. We didn’t get it done. I can just as easily say that Favre’s inability to move the ball effectively through the air allowed the Giants to stuff the running game. It’s a chicken and the egg kinda thing. I’m not hanging this entirely on Favre, but you sure seem to be trying to absolve him of everything.

    You’re quoting me somewhat out of context in this paragraph. Favre’s part of not getting a first down was in his inability to complete a pass on the last two drives that got past the sticks. You don’t see the failure of those last three drives as having anything at all to do with our QB? Does any defense really honor the run much when it’s down to 2:30?

    I’m blaming Favre only for having a fair to midlin game rather than a superstar game. If he could have moved the ball more effectively in the passing game, the running game MIGHT have loosened up; we MIGHT have had the ball for more plays and had a chance to roll up more yardage. It’s a roundabout influence, but saying that a QB’s play does not impact the running game just isn’t entirely accurate.

    I’ll be happy to have Brett back next year as I still think he’s our best chance. The Giants (being the best in the NFL) showed us where we need to improve. I’m done, Jon. I’ll read what you have to say if you want to take the time to reply, but after that, I’m putting this season where it belongs. Let the coaches reflect on it as they need to – I’m just watching for the offseason moves and looking forward to training camp.

  • Jon

    How can Favre “bear some responsibility” for the anemic running game? What exactly did Favre do or not do that hindered the running game? What, he didn’t block?

    To the extent you are suggesting Favre’s passing adversely affected the running game, well, that certainly can’t be since from the very outset of the game the running game was completely shut down. Indeed the only part of the Green Bay offense that was functioning in the first half was the passing game!

    Here’s how Green Bay’s offense performed in the first half:

    1ST QUARTER:

    Favre – 5 of 7, 34yds

    Grant – 3 runs, 7 yds

    2ND QUARTER:

    Favre – 5 of 11, 143 yds, 1 TD

    Grant – 5 runs, 5 yds

    FIRST HALF TOTALS:

    Favre – 10 of 18, 177yds, 1 TD, 0 INT

    Grant – 8 runs, 12 yds, 1.5 yds per carry

    Clearly, with the running game averaging 1.5 yards per carry, Favre was the ONLY part of the Green Bay offense that did ANYTHING in the first half. In fact Favre’s first-half performance was quite good, especially considering the conditions.

    Once the Giants completely shut down Green Bay’s running game in the first half, however, in the second half they didn’t have to defend against the run and could focus only on defending the pass.

    And so the reality is the opposite of what you suggest: it was the running game that adversely affected Favre’s passing!

    Nor is this a novel concept –

    Look at Marino: Never had a running game, never won a Super Bowl.

    Look at Bradshaw and Montana: Always had strong running games, won four Super Bowls each.

    And, finally, look at Elway (a favorite of the Admin): This veritable Fran Tarkenton of the modern era lost three Super Bowls before finally beating Green Bay in 1997 with a terrific running game and DESPITE his personal lousy, lousy performance. Get this: that day Elway was 12 for 22, 123 yds, 0 TD, and 1 INT; Favre was much better, going 25 for 42, 256 yds, 3 TD, and 1 INT (for the record Favre’s first-half INT led to a Denver TD; Elway’s second-half INT led to a Green Bay TD).

    The history books don’t lie, folks. Teams win Super Bowls, not individuals. And then it’s only teams with a strong defense and at least a respectable running game that do so. Green Bay had neither this year.

  • http://www.packernet.com admin

    What color is the sun in your world?