Pennington vs Favre

As JWWS stated, if Favre were that good, why aren't the Packers doing cartwheels over the fact he wants back?

This right here is an excellent point..WHY is the Pack not bringin him Back? Hell, he is a HOF who just brought them to the NFC championship game.. Because they feel sorry for Aaron Rogers who's been waiting for his chance and it wouldn't be fair?.....Come on.. this is the NFL and as cold as any big Corperation in America..do the job or good bye..bottom line..There is a reason they don't want him back in GB...I don't know what it is but it could be they figured he's done and have grown tired of "It's all about Brett Show" I want to know GB's reason.

 

I'll give you two reasons:

1) Favre simply retired and they moved on...which is the Packers' right. They prepared for a season without Brett.

and

2) When Ted Thompson was hired....who was the first guy he drafted as GM. Aaron Rodgers. Simply put, Rodgers is Thompson's guy...he wants to see a return on his investment...and I'm sure if Thompson just made Favre the starter on a whim this season...Rodgers would defenitly leave GB after his contract up.....granted, they have Brohm...but if Brohm doesn't pan out....GB is screwed at the QB position for the future.

 

I figured you were, but it's not fair to ignore his injuries. If you want to pick and choose seasons and compare, we can try that too.

Looking at the stats I see Favre having better 2004 and 2006 seasons. I guess it's debatable. The fact that it's debatable whether Penny's good seasons are better than Favre's bad ones says a lot, doesn't it?

Esaison saying that pretty much put the deal to bed for me. I would like to hear confirmation from another NFL QB but his comments are pretty telling.

My whole reasoning for wanting to get him is that I thought he could make us a superbowl contender. If it's impossible for him to learn even a scaled down version of the offense in time, then it's a moot point. I think many supporters of this move would feel the same.

 

While I agree that his performance that night was incredible, but your using at a reason the Jets should acquire him or should want to acquire him is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this board. Something that happened that long ago in one game is completely irrelevant to what Favre can do in 2008. I can name dozens of great one game accomplishments that happened 5 or more years ago - does that mean the Jets should go out and get those players also???

 

I'll add the third, and most significant reason Brett Favre is not being welcomed with open arms at training camp.

When the Packers were looking for a new head coach, Brett Favre put all of his weight behind Steve Mariucci. When Mike McCarthy was chosen, Favre was vocal about his utter disappointment at the choice.

There's a damned good reason McCarthy has chosen to move his team out of the Brett Favre era: the Favre era doesn't support him.

 

The Jets were never even in a position to move with him, as were the Packers. The Jets have built this team and prepared for this season without Favre as much if not more than the Packers. At least Favre knows the offense and the team. As a Jet, he would be lost.
No matter what you say, the most telling point is that the Packers are willing to move on after coming within one possession of the Super Bowl.

Let me ask you this. If Favre is so great now in 2008, and is such an upgrade at QB, why aren't those teams that are clearly Super Bowl contenders not falling all over each to get him?

Let's go down the list:

Jacksonville - this is a win now team. Is Garrard for real? Wouldn't Favre be an upgrade over him for one year?

San Diego - Rivers is coming off an injury and just an ok season. Why not give his knee another season to heal while you bring in Favre for one year to take this stacked team to the SB?

Baltimore -they have been a QB away from contending for years now. Why aren't they in the running?

Washington - lots of talent, but Jason Campbell? Isn't Favre an upgrade?

Tampa - It's a no brainer there, isn't it?

Buffalo - they are supposedly improved, but QB is a question. Edwards can wait a year or two while Favre brings a sure SB to Buffalo, right?

 

I believe that the Green Bay Packers have changed their offense to take advantage of somebody's strengths other than a strong armed quarterback who specializes in hard throwing between the hash marks, who regularly flings INTs outside the numbers.

The Green Bay Packers offense will try to reorganize to give more players a chance to play better.

This "stubborness" on the part of the Green Bay Packers FO and CS has more to do with their strategy than with their feuding. These are grown men who are trying to succeed doing their jobs, by the way.

I suspect that a lot of the team has bought into the new direction of the CS and the locker room will be a foreign place for Brett when he returns. Some people will know his name, but he may not even recognize the playbook.

 

With that said I would take every Qb on this list in a heartbeat over Chad right now. I would even take the Baltimore Rookie and stick him on the bench for a season. Rivers, Gerrard, Campbell, Edwards and even JP Lousy are better options than 10!

 

I actually think that Chad is underrated and under appreciated as a QB. I dont think he can stay healthy and the injuries have taken a toll on him. At his best -- he didnt have a strong arm -- and won games with accuracy/decision making.

Unfortunately, at this point, he is better than KC.

More unfortunatley, BF is way ahead of both of them -- and for one season, a much better alternative.

 

I would not take the Qb on the Chiefs or Dolphins over 10. Other than that I would take ever other starting Qb in the NFL over Chad. And there are some backups I would take over him as well.

 

Then explain why Kc had a better record than him last year without the luxury of starting against the Mighty Bills Twice, Bengals and Eagles then?

 

KC beat the KC's and the Dolphins -- with a nice win against Pitt. You watched the games -- he was terrible. The problem i have with him is he did not (at least to me) show flashes -- where youd say -- once he learns to make better decisions hell be great -- or he needs to do this or that. He was just bad, game in and game out.

He was the worst QB in the league statistically last year. (It wasnt nearly all his own fault). I still that Chad is better.

 

I'm not disputing them having moved on. McCarthy already stated that the other day during his press conference. They moved on the day Brett announced his retirement. As well they should have.

The point is, no one was begging him to come back this time around. They handed him his rope, and allowed him to hang himself with it.

 

He had more than a Flash against the Ravens? As a matter of fact Chad has not flashed like that ever. At no time in his six years has he ever had a defense like the Ravens Back peddling. When we played the Dolphins we destroyed the worst team in Football not Dink and Dunk our way to a 17-14 win. Kc S**ked against the Chiefs. Chad is a 6 year vet and he was outright disgusting every time he took the field and has been for years.

 

KC played well against the ravens.
The Pennington Jets made the playoffs in 02, 04, 06. Plus, two playoff wins. (Which as sad as it is -- is good for the jets) Best run of ANY jet qb.
He did not play in 05 and missed half the season in 03.
Not quite disgusting.

 

02 + 04 = CURTIS MARTIN. Do you really believe 06 didn't have to do with a weak schedule and the stars aligning perfectly. We played 4 games with teams over 500 and lost 3 of them and beat NE in a Monsoon. We got stomped by the Jags who were 8-8 in a better division than us. Chad beats bad teams and folds like a deck of cards against the good ones.

 

I dont disagree about 06--easy schedule. Giants had a joke of schedule when they made the superbowl against the ravens -- but who cares. But at some point -- you cant look at one (the only one) good game of KC -- and explain away three playoff seasons by Chad -- the only three seasons where he was healthy. They should have beaten the Steelers in 04. They were not as good as the pats in 06. And, they lost on the road against the raiders in 02 (who went to the superbowl that year i think).

 

I can not complain about 02 we just got beat in a game where the Raiders were better. In 04 we would have beaten the Steelers if Chad would have done anything at all in that game. The bottom line is Chad has taken us as far as he can go. If he even reverted back to the Chad of 02 he still does not have the talent to beat the better teams in the Afc. People can scream it is a team sport until they are blue in the face but the bottom line is the Majority of the Sb's won in the last 30 years have been won by teams with good to great play from their Qb. In the Nfc maybe there is a shot in the dark but in the Afc it is not going to happen with Chad.