Brett Favre Appreciation Thread

He has already won a superbowl. His place in history is secure.

And stop making excuses for Marino. He had five seasons where they won 12 or more games and he couldn't get it done. The team around him was just fine. He wasn't.

 

Favre is the reason,actually. Defenses have to respect his ability. That, as you know has a trickle down effect. It makes the defense play the pass first.This opens up the whole offense. Makes every facet of it work better.So while Favre hasn't thrown for 400yds a game, just his presence behind center makes this offense open up.

 

His place as an all-time great is secure, if he even wants top get int he top 5 discussion a SB trip w/ the Jets wuld likely do the trick.

You help marino's case w/ the statement b/c he elevated avreage teams to heights they wouldn't have come close to reaching w/o him.

When was that quote from? Favre has been a major reason the past 2 weeks and played well for 3-4 weeks but for most of the year he hasn't been a major reason. I expect he'd get better and he has, I expect he'll continue to play well and when we look back I think we will be able to say he was a major reason but right now I wouldn't say he's a major reason we have played well outside of the last 2 weeks.

 

Why do you think this statement to be true for Marino, but not Favre?

Some of us who watched EVERY single Packer game for those 16 years might think Favre did some major elevating too. Packers 5-6 this year, mostly same team

Here's what I appreciate, being able to still watch him play on Sunday, with a good football team around him. No matter the outcome of this season, clearly, he still has some game left, the decision to un-retire was not wrong.

 

I would say they elevated him. He always had a great team around him and he had one of the great coaches of all time coaching them. One player doesn't get you to the playoffs 10 out of 17 years. I can see you are infatuated with him but give it up.

 

Marino never played on teams as good as the mid 90s packers. he never had a reggie White on defense. Did favre elevate his team? Absolutely but you don't think GB could have won that SB w/ Marino? You think Miami would have made more SBs w/ Favre?

There's no question the man can still play, he looks like he can play a few more years. He is playing excellent football and he has put most of my fears to rest.

Yep, they elevated Marino. Marino was terrible. Could you imagine what Miami would have been able to do w/ a good QB?:rofl: Do you ever read your posts back?

 

Don Shula built some great teams. As far as coaching, he won less SB with more talent than any coach in NFL history.

Marino was an unbelivable QB arguable the best of all time. I personally like Stabauch more but Favre as good as he is is a level down from Dan Marino. I just think Favre is in the second rung from guys like Marino, Elway, Staubach, Unitas, Montana, Bradshaw, Brady and Manning.

That's no knock on Favre either.

 

Marino did have some good talent around him. But it's really hard to argue that he didn't elevate those Miami teams. Marino could pick apart any defense. It's too bad Joe Walton decided to draft...eh nevermind...

 

I find it interesting how Brett Farve in a way reminds me of Mike Piazza. What I mean is that here are two hall of famers, all time greats at their positions, yet both have/had such poor mechanics in what they do best. Piazza had such great power, but hardly used his legs when hitting. He was almost all upper body. Farve mostly throws off of his "wrong" leg, but releys on a powerful arm (despite his mechanics). It makes you wonder if they could have been even better, if they had good mechanics.

 

How would Kenny O turned out with Marino's O-line?

 

Whoa -- an on topic post to this thread!

Yeah, that's been wondered a long time. Holmgren and Mariucci tried to "fix" him early on, I know, but for whatever reason they decided ultimately to "leave well enough alone."

It was pretty hard to get Favre to listen/pay attention to anyone back then, so maybe a project like that seemed way too big to take on.

 

You know, I don't know what Marino would have done with the Packers, Favre with the Dolphins. I expect both would have success, as both ars great QBs who could, and did, elevate the players around them

As for Reggie, he was terrific, never forget his play at the end of the SB.. And, except for him and Favre, there weren't many stars on that 96 team, Bennett and Levens were the RBs, wideouts Freeman, Rison picked up late in the season.

We did have Desmond Howard and Hentrich as punter, the special teams were great. I think the Jets good special teams give them a big advantage, I remember how important they were that year to Pack.

So, I appreciate Leon a great deal, too. :beer:

 

c'mon guys just ignore junc. we've already stated all the facts out there that clearly puts Favre in the discussion of top 5 but he still doesn't listen. you can't change what he already thinks obviously so just leave it alone and maybe he'll stop dissin favre in this thread.

 

Have you noticed how the knowledgable Favre fans keep posting w/ me while you just hurl insults and whine?

 

that wasn't meant to be an insult. just a matter-of-fact thing. what's the point of arguing if neither side is gonna compromise? and arguing in the first place is counter-productive to the original intent of the thread. it would be nice to keep at least one thread clear of all this clutter

 

I enjoy arguing, I enjoy learning new things. Sometimes it gets heated but those are some of the best arguments. This board would not be fun if all of us agreed about everything.

 

If Dan Marino had a decent Running back He would have won multiple superbowls. As far as picking apart a defense he was the best there ever was.

 

1) Never? What a horribly inaccurate generalization. I guess if it suits your factless argument then carry on....
And I wouldn't guarantee Dan would win with the 1996 packers. Sure, the defense would have helped A LOT. Regardless.....its a stupid argument IMO. I could argue that Trent Dilfer could have won the SB if he replaced Montana on the 1984 and 1989 SF teams. Would I be wrong? Probably not. Those teams were loaded on offense and had a top 3 defense. I could make the same argument about replacing Aikman for your QB of choice on those SB teams. Ridiculous argument. Using this particular argument of yours serves only 1 purpose.....to completely discredit a man's accomplisments.

2) Brett was VERY GOOd in the 1996 postseason. How many QBs play great all postseason long? I'll tell you this much........Favre's productivity in the 1996 postseason was better than Elway in all 5 of his SB runs, better than 2 of Brady's SB runs and definitely better than Peyton Manning in his SB year.
What's your point by hammering this home that Brett wasn't great in 1996 postseason? A QB doesn't have to throw for 300 yards and 3 TDs per game to have played great. There's really only one point you're trying to make and that is that Brett's contributions were somewhat minimal in the 1996 SB run. You are wrong.

3) Can you name me a player who did carry his team to the SB title? You can't do it. Know why? Because its a team game. You act as if QBs are single handedly winning championships all the time, but Favre didn't do it so he must be overrated. Get a clue.
Closest you can come to one player carrying a team is Montana in the 1988 and 1989. But if you had a hard-on for Joe and wanted to discredit him, you'd point out that in both of those postseasons, the combined scores of the 49ers' opponenets was under 30 in 3 games, with no team scoring more than 16.
Think about that.........3 games. Combined points given up was less than 30. In consecutive postseason Super Bowl runs.
I guess Joe carried those teams all the way, huh? No defensive help there, was there?
Again.......name me your list of individuals who did it all themselves en route to a SB title. I'm anxiously waiting.....
LOL

4) Umm......DUH. That and because he's top 5 great. BTW, Favre's TD numbers were virtually similar to Marino's. I followed this closely and Brett threw TD # 420 in the same number of games played as Dan, give or take 1 game if I'm not mistaken. Pass attempts were similar also. Yardage was in Dan's favor though. He was more of a vertical passer than Brett.

5) I never considered Brady as part of Brett's generation but I guess so. I've got a lot more respect for Tom after last season because I always felt that was a defense driven team. He proved that he can put up elite level #s when he's got serious talent around him.
I'd still like to see Brady play on a few teams in which the defense just isn't very good. Then we'll find out more about him. We'll see how he reacts when he feels the pressure to score because he knows his defense can't stop anyone. Guys like Montana and Tom never had to deal with that. We saw how good Aikman was when he had no defense and the O line wasn't dominating. We know Favre, Marino and Elway can still win and put up big numbers behind suspect O lines and marginal/bad defenses.

6) So you rate Starr ahead of Favre, huh? To me, this is like rating Rocky Marciano ahead of someone like Lennox Lewis, simply because of his record. Its a no contest when you look at the guy in front of you. Rocky was a tough as nails, but crude and archaic fighter. Same applies to Starr as a QB. Great leader, great winner, but was never asked to do too much.....although he did come through a lot when he had to. You just can't compare the old with the new. Favre (like Lennox) is physically much more gifted and can do everything better than Starr. Think about this.......if you were going to start a franchise today and you had to choose between Favre and Starr. You telling me you'd take Starr? Clearly you're basing your opinion on win totals only and not on physical abilities.
Christ, if Favre had the 1996 team in tact for the better part of a decade, he'd have multiple SB titles as well. I can't even believe we're having this discussion it so damn laughable. Go watch some film of Starr. Not highlights....actual film of an entire game. Starr would get owned by today's players. He can't run that well his arm strength is average at best. And we don't even know how he'd react to the speed of today's game.

7) Really? Probably because he played so long......kinda like Favre owning so many records as well because of the length of his career. Ya take the good with the bad. Was Ruth strikeout prone? No. He averaged a little over 70 Ks per year, which is nothing like today's sluggers, despite having a tight strike zone in their favor.

 

He would have made their OL look a lot worse.