prophet Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Do you think it was worth it for the Packers to let favre go with the talent on that team? It seems the Jets are heading towards a divison title, and the playoffs, and GB will be sitting home. Favre as taken a horrid team from last year, and made them win. And in ten games has 20 tds, and is completing almost 70% of his passes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Do you think it was worth it for the Packers to let favre go with the talent on that team? It seems the Jets are heading towards a divison title, and the playoffs, and GB will be sitting home. Meh. Favre isn't getting any younger. In the short term it may have been better for them to keep Favre. But long term, i think they made the right decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 The Packers learned that they already have their QB of the future. Rodgers was in a contract year. They made the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da#1skinsfan Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 The Packers learned that they already have their QB of the future. Rodgers was in a contract year. They made the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideshow24 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Rodgers has done very well. His stats would be even better without a bum shoulder. They did what they had to do. Favre for one more year or Rodgers for the future? Its tough to find a good QB and had Rodgers gone elsewhere after this season and Favre retire, Packers would have a big problem at passer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Favre can't play forever. The Jets won't go anywhere in the post-season, even with him. They'll be scrambling again to find a new QB soon enough. Green Bay needed to move on either now or very, very soon. If he returned to GB, he'd just be delaying the inevitable, which is what the Jets are currently doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Yes. It was absolutely the right move. How they (and Favre) handled the move, not so much. But the move was the right thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 The Jets would be winning if they had Rodgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishisthegreatstuff Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Packers made the right move. It was best for both teams. I don't think that packers would be better with Favre at all right now. they have had so many injuries on defense. That has been their main problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stugein Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Yeah I can't wait to see Jason Campbell throw for th...wait, what? In all seriousness though, I like Favre and I'm happy he'd doing well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 It was the right move on both parties. The Packers were able to lock up Rodgers and the Jets got a high profile QB to boost the team from 6-10, 7-9 to 9-7, 10-6 type team. Favre has a lot left in the tank, but will he play beyond next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Meh. Favre isn't getting any younger. In the short term it may have been better for them to keep Favre. But long term, i think they made the right decision. that is my assessment as well Rodgers has done very well. His stats would be even better without a bum shoulder. They did what they had to do. Favre for one more year or Rodgers for the future? Its tough to find a good QB and had Rodgers gone elsewhere after this season and Favre retire, Packers would have a big problem at passer. Not if you listen to some of the Packer forums. Many think it was a mistake to reup Rodgers so Soon, but truthfully the problems are not entirely his fault. GB is seeing how their O-line's weaknesses were once hidden by a great guy named Favre, so this was probably good for them long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 If Brady was playing, the Jets wouldn't be 7-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFan48 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 So what would they be 6-4 big difference wow. Brady has nothing to do with the jets winning or losing. Brady probably would of one that one last night but that would leave the Jets at 6-4 still pretty good if you ask me. Actually not sure Brady would of won last night. Cassell looked pretty good last night with 400 yards of passing and 3 TDs, not sure Brady could on done much better than that. If Brady was playing, the Jets wouldn't be 7-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGreenistheBest Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 I think it was a winning move for both teams. It was time for GB to usher in a new era and it seems that Rodgers will do well as long as he is kept healthy and learns to avoid some of those young QB mistakes. On the other hand the Jets were a team without any kind of QB prospect. At least now they have time to find someone young to train while Favre is at the helm for a short time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 The move was good for everyone. Including one of the 2008 Pro Bowl quarterbacks, Chad Pennington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted November 15, 2008 Author Share Posted November 15, 2008 ;5816526']The move was good for everyone. Including one of the 2008 Pro Bowl quarterbacks' date=' Chad Pennington.[/quote']Do you think Chad will be in the pro bowl? Favre, Manning, Cutler, Rivers, have the better stats, Chad has only 8tds. And since it's a popularity contest Roethlisberger has a better shot than Chad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Absolutely the right move. Green Bay (now 5-5 after a huge blowout against the bears) has played better than their record shows. Their loss last week was by one point which they missed by a field goal. their loss the week before was against the only team in the NFL that has yet to lose a game, but they were the only team to force the game into overtime. If the kick hadn't gone wide, and maybe if they won that OT coin-toss, they could very well be 7-3 as well. They also could have potentially won the game against Dallas had Al Harris not injured his spleen mid-game. Those two Dallas TD's that won the game happened to come from the WR that was supposed to be covered by him. Note: I am not making excuses, just saying that they're not playing as bad as their record shows. As for Aaron Rodgers' play, its been great for his first year as starter. He has been one of the better-performing QBs of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Absolutely the right move. Green Bay (now 5-5 after a huge blowout against the bears) has played better than their record shows. Their loss last week was by one point which they missed by a field goal. their loss the week before was against the only team in the NFL that has yet to lose a game, but they were the only team to force the game into overtime.If the kick hadn't gone wide, and maybe if they won that OT coin-toss, they could very well be 7-3 as well. They also could have potentially won the game against Dallas had Al Harris not injured his spleen mid-game. Those two Dallas TD's that won the game happened to come from the WR that was supposed to be covered by him. Note: I am not making excuses, just saying that they're not playing as bad as their record shows. As for Aaron Rodgers' play, its been great for his first year as starter. He has been one of the better-performing QBs of the league. I disagree the play calling, and blocking up front have really ben problems. I believe if you don't win in the trenches chances are you don't deserve to win anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.