nneece Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 I know this is a crazy hypothetical. But I think it drives home a point. Would the Redskins be a better team with Brett Favre as our starting QB? Hear me out, lots of sports commentators (Colin Cowherd the most vocal) and fans are calling for Brett Favre to retire for the good of that franchise. They are saying that his best days are behind him and he has become a liability. However Brett, unlike Mark Brunell, can still throw the ball even if he sometimes makes ill advised throws. Lets look at the stats from week 2: Mark Brunell: 67.7 overall QB rating, 54 Comp %, 197 Yards, 0 TD, 1 INT Brett Favre: 70 overall QB rating, 56 Comp %, 340 Yards, 3 TD, 1 INT The numbers are pretty similiar except Brett threw for 3 TD's and a lot more yards. You could argue that Brett would be more effective in Washington because he would have more weapons, Greenbay has a lot of issues beyond Brett Favre. Now the fact that I can even make this argument and it not be a totally half-baked idea should concern Brunell homers, Joe Gibbs, anyone saying that we should stick with Brunell. On one side we have a 37 year old, HOF QB who has probably played past his prime as a starter. On the other side we have a 36 year old, non HOF QB who has definitely played past his prime as a starter. Which would you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santana_4_prez Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 ummmm.....duh, we'd be much better with Favre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 jbooma that you? Farve is a turnover machine, Gibbs wouldn't want him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Of course, that's silly at least he would try to get the ball to a reciever. At least give our guys a chance to get the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Redskins Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 The Redskins would be better off with the QB they drafted.. Farve is way overrated!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatant Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Good question TO.... ...NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan81 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 To answer your question in one word - NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewU Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 for the past 2 games yes, we probly would have won the minnesota game, but neither favre or brunell is any good in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadirtbags Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 I would imagine Brett is a better QB ....It would be a matter of when Brett could catch up if we did go after him....we are two games into the season.....new offense to Brett as well as everyone else....The only reason why I would see the skins going after Brett would be to improve this team "now/today/this season" ....not sure if Brett would or could make a difference for this season so I would say nah...let him retire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinzFanatic Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Yeah, Favre seems to like to throw the ball anywhere downfield and hope one of his players catches it. Gibbs would never go for that. At this point I would but im not the HOF head coach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins4481 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 umm.....HELL YEA!!! Favre is a gunslinger and take a lot of chances. THat means he WOULD THROW THE BALL DOWNFIELD. Yes he would probably average 1-2 INTS a game but he would also average 250 yards and 2-3 TDs a game too. I'd be willing to live with a couple mistakes AS LONG AS HE TRIES TO THROW THE DAMN BALL 10 YARDS DOWN THE FIELD!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sith lord Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 I was discussing this very issue last night with a friend and I think we would be better with Farve than we are with Brunell. I'm in no way a big fan of Farve and he is holding the Packers back, but he still has a arm and will try to make plays unlike Brunell who can only throw to RB's and out of bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waleo32 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 To answer your question in one word - NO! You can't Compare a Hall of Fame QB to Brunell! That's too much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashmowf Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 With our recievers?.....anybody that has the strength to push the ball down the field would be better....in my opinion....but I have not won three superbowls with three different qbs either....so who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 jbooma that you?Farve is a turnover machine, Gibbs wouldn't want him :laugh: I did not start this one but Bubba 350 yards 3 tds and 1 pick last week with inferior weapons, but wait he is bad :doh: If Farve were are QB we would be Superbowl Bound, the reason is the other team would respect him more then anything else and would open the game up for all of our weapons. To think differently then it is clear you do not understand football and how good he is. Unlike GB he wouldn't have to force anything here with the talent we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dccat Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Of course, that's silly at least he would try to get the ball to a reciever. At least give our guys a chance to get the ball. Yeah the DB on the other team....Farve is shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kleese Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Read this....a little trip down memory lane......and this was TWO years ago http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47304 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfan_70 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Let's just see: Brett Favre: Future Hall of Famer 8 Time Pro-Bowler Super Bowl Winner (XXXI) NFL MVP Winner 3 times ('95, '96, '97) - NFL record Numerous NFL Passing records Mark Brunell: Was once a back-up to Brett Favre... OK... verdict? Duh! Favre has more talent in his small left toe than Brunell has in his entire body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 As of right now I would say yes..however with the picks that BF throws Gibbs might have a heart attack so since we love our coach maybe it wouldn't be a good idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Terrell Owens says we would be undefeated if we had Brett Favre taking snaps instead of Donovan ... I mean ... Mark Brunell. Michael Irvin immediately jumped in though and apologized for T.O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUskins Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Favre needs to retire. He doesnt have the physical tools anymore to go along with the desire. That said he would still be better than Brunell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Skins would be better off with almost any other QB right now. I think Favre would be much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfan_70 Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Favre in a wheelchair would be better than Brunell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonoman Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 I think NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImmortalDragon Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Yes, although Gibbs would have a heart attack each week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.