12/25 - Chicago Bears @ Green Bay Packers

[Magnetic Curses]

I was listening to the Dan Patrick show this morning and I was shocked to hear so many Packers fans call in a stick up for him stating his problem is not enough talent around him or the running game hasnt been good. I'm thinking Gado was better than Ahman Green and others they are just trying to find excises. They don't want to believe their savior's career is coming to an end but when you think about it Favre is gone one way or another in about a year max. His decision making all year has been questionable and also has cost them a lot of points. I personally think he is done.

 

favre's career isn't over. if he insists on playing for the packers, it probably is. but the pack had a ton of injuries this season and not much to start with.

 

favre's really not that old.

Injuries or not his decisions are very questionable. He throws passes that no matter who you have as your WR they won't make. I highly doubt all of his INTs have to do with the talent around him.

 

well, first take into account the departures of wahle and rivera-- two excellent guards, the loss of his best receiver, the loss of his 3 top running backs, the periodic absences of bubba franks.

 

then, take into account that he's generally playing from behind because his defense can't stop the run at all--and you can start to understand why he's taking so many risks and why he's throwing so many picks.

 

he's desperate, and he's taking ridiculous chances--not unnecessarily.

 

favre is like 35 years old, his mind hasn't all of a sudden deserted him, he's not at risk for alzheimer's yet, his arm is just as good as it was during the 90's. i don't see what's changed other than his team, which is terrible,

 

favre has been forced to do it all--and he nearly did it for the packers against a much superior bears team on Christmas day.

[goonys evil twin]

favre is like 35 years old, his mind hasn't all of a sudden deserted him, he's not at risk for alzheimer's yet, his arm is just as good as it was during the 90's. i don't see what's changed other than his team, which is terrible,

 

I disagree. His arm is not as good. He's always been a risk taker, but he was so quick from the decision to make the throw to the time it got to the receiver that it didn't hurt him much. He's not as quick anymore. And the league's defensive players are faster than they were in the 90's.

 

I don't think he's done by any means. But his poor play this season cannot be blamed solely on teammates. Green Bay lost a lot of close games this year, it's not like they were always way behind and he was forced to take stupid chances. Without many of those INTs they could have won 3-4 more games, including either Bears game. But then again, maybe he purposefully played like crap to get a better draft pick to help him next year.

[YearofDaCubs]

I was listening to the Dan Patrick show this morning and I was shocked to hear so many Packers fans call in a stick up for him stating his problem is not enough talent around him or the running game hasnt been good. I'm thinking Gado was better than Ahman Green and others they are just trying to find excises. They don't want to believe their savior's career is coming to an end but when you think about it Favre is gone one way or another in about a year max. His decision making all year has been questionable and also has cost them a lot of points. I personally think he is done.

 

favre's career isn't over. if he insists on playing for the packers, it probably is. but the pack had a ton of injuries this season and not much to start with.

 

favre's really not that old.

Injuries or not his decisions are very questionable. He throws passes that no matter who you have as your WR they won't make. I highly doubt all of his INTs have to do with the talent around him.

 

well, first take into account the departures of wahle and rivera-- two excellent guards, the loss of his best receiver, the loss of his 3 top running backs, the periodic absences of bubba franks.

 

then, take into account that he's generally playing from behind because his defense can't stop the run at all--and you can start to understand why he's taking so many risks and why he's throwing so many picks.

 

he's desperate, and he's taking ridiculous chances--not unnecessarily.

 

favre is like 35 years old, his mind hasn't all of a sudden deserted him, he's not at risk for alzheimer's yet, his arm is just as good as it was during the 90's. i don't see what's changed other than his team, which is terrible,

 

favre has been forced to do it all--and he nearly did it for the packers against a much superior bears team on Christmas day.

Favre's decision-making has always been questioned. This year has been a lot worse because let's face it some of his throws make you wonder what he was thinking. The GB defense was ranked 8th overall and sure they couldn't stop the run but their defense wasn't that bad. 1st ranked pass defense. You say he lost his top 3 RBs and I say your top RB was Gado who was clearly doing more than Ahman Green(that's another story) or the others you had. It's a shame he got hurt but even with him tearing it up GB didn't exactly win all their games either. Favre hasn't thrown a TD in what 3 or 4 games? Something isn't right. Against the Bears, Favre would just throw the ball away and get called for intentional grounding instead of taking the sack? What was that? I found that very odd coming from Favre considering that was poor decision-making as well as hurt your team in the process. Not having your starting guards definitely hurt but that's not the entire story. I also think Sherman has to go. He really put a hurt on the GB franchise. GB last year had salary cap problems and some of Sherman's draft picks were very questionable. Even if Favre comes back the best thing GB can do is get rid of Sherman IMO.

[Magnetic Curses]

favre is like 35 years old, his mind hasn't all of a sudden deserted him, he's not at risk for alzheimer's yet, his arm is just as good as it was during the 90's. i don't see what's changed other than his team, which is terrible,

 

I disagree. His arm is not as good. He's always been a risk taker, but he was so quick from the decision to make the throw to the time it got to the receiver that it didn't hurt him much. He's not as quick anymore. And the league's defensive players are faster than they were in the 90's.

 

I don't think he's done by any means. But his poor play this season cannot be blamed solely on teammates. Green Bay lost a lot of close games this year, it's not like they were always way behind and he was forced to take stupid chances. Without many of those INTs they could have won 3-4 more games, including either Bears game. But then again, maybe he purposefully played like crap to get a better draft pick to help him next year.

 

his arm, imo, is just as good. i've seen him make the same accurate, crazy throws this season as he's made his entire career, his arm is the same.

 

green bay lost a lot of close games BECAUSE favre was playing and making them close. you can't put that much pressure on a player and expect him to win very much. he was doing everything in his power to win those games, they lost because he's all they got, quite frankly. the games have been close because favre was taking those risks in the first place, if he doesn't take those risks, the packers are getting beat badly, because they can't stop the run. i'll give you that the players are faster than they were in the 90's, but that only makes what favre did last year more amazing. don't forget that he had arguably his best year statistically in 2004.

 

what's the difference between this year and last? has favre slowed down SO significantly that he's just losing games left and right for the pack? i doubt it. what i see when i look at this year's team as opposed to last year's team is really what i don't see: mike wahle, marco rivera, javon walker, a healthy bubba franks, and an effective ahman green.

 

that's why the packers are terrible, that's why favre is having his worst season to date. subtracting his best players and then expecting him to win games by taking way more risks than he's taken in any year of his career, all the while also expecting him to keep his INT's low and TD's high, is foolish. favre is what he is, a qb that can be effective with minimal help, but when he has no help at all, even he can't do it.

[YearofDaCubs]

Sorry Sulley I just don't see it the way you do. I've seen quite a few GB games this year and I don't think the talent around him is what's hurting him the most. I think it's his decision-making. He has made a lot of questionable decisions. Even without Javon Walker he still has Driver as well as Ferguson(oft-injured) and I actually think Chatman looked pretty good for you guys. Your TEs also stepped up when Franks got hurt too. Gado was doing a much better job than Ahman Green was so I don't buy that either. Losing your guards will hurt of course but you still have two solid tackles. Guards are replaced easier and for the most part your line was pretty good against the Bears line on Sun.

[Magnetic Curses]

Favre's decision-making has always been questioned. This year has been a lot worse because let's face it some of his throws make you wonder what he was thinking. The GB defense was ranked 8th overall and sure they couldn't stop the run but their defense wasn't that bad. 1st ranked pass defense. You say he lost his top 3 RBs and I say your top RB was Gado who was clearly doing more than Ahman Green(that's another story) or the others you had. It's a shame he got hurt but even with him tearing it up GB didn't exactly win all their games either. Favre hasn't thrown a TD in what 3 or 4 games? Something isn't right. Against the Bears, Favre would just throw the ball away and get called for intentional grounding instead of taking the sack? What was that? I found that very odd coming from Favre considering that was poor decision-making as well as hurt your team in the process. Not having your starting guards definitely hurt but that's not the entire story. I also think Sherman has to go. He really put a hurt on the GB franchise. GB last year had salary cap problems and some of Sherman's draft picks were very questionable. Even if Favre comes backthe best thing GB can do is get rid of Sherman IMO.

 

can't blame anything on sherman either. the players might hate him, but players hate most coaches.

 

you can read my arguments for favre in the above post, i don't think i need to say much more about him.

 

the pass defense for green bay has been successful because no one passes on them, why should they when they can run all over the field? generally, teams gain less yards on the ground than in the air, but the yards are more important because of the ball possession game that the teams in the NFC north and NFC south employ. there really should be a separate statistic for rushing yards in conjuntion with total offense. if a team can't stop the run, they may give up less total yards, but their offense is, in turn, more effected--so the greater effect is more devastating.

 

let's also not forget that the green bay offense is VERY complicated--difficult to learn for new players thrown into the fray, gado has excelled because he's a bruising back that often misses holes but can simply run over smaller players. receivers cannot easily step in and expect to get 100 yards per game. this offense is geared for a veteran receiving corps that run great routes and can turn the intermediate pass plays into big gainers. driver and walker are the perfect tandem, but when walker went down, DBs can simply sit on the Driver's routes and bait Favre's throws.

[YearofDaCubs]

We agree to disagree then because I see it totally different from you which is fine.

[Magnetic Curses]

Sorry Sulley I just don't see it the way you do. I've seen quite a few GB games this year and I don't think the talent around him is what's hurting him the most. I think it's his decision-making. He has made a lot of questionable decisions. Even without Javon Walker he still has Driver as well as Ferguson(oft-injured) and I actually think Chatman looked pretty good for you guys. Your TEs also stepped up when Franks got hurt too. Gado was doing a much better job than Ahman Green was so I don't buy that either. Losing your guards will hurt of course but you still have two solid tackles. Guards are replaced easier and for the most part your line was pretty good against the Bears line on Sun.

 

i don't know where you got the idea that i'm a green bay fan. i know a lot about the team because i chat with corey williams and nick collins every monday or tuesday night. i'm also forced listen to packer radio and watch every packer game. most of my friends are packer fans, as well as most of the people that i have interactions with.

 

but i'm about the biggest bear fan on the planet.

[goonys evil twin]

Sulley when did John Madden take over your body.

 

As foolish as it is to place all the blame on Favre, it makes no sense to pretend he hasn't regressed. For a guy who has only one super bowl, I can't believe how hard it is for people to come to terms with the fact that QBs aren't as good in their late 30s as they are in their late 20s. While you might think you could argue his best year was 2004, you wouldn't have much of an argument. Any measurement from 2004 was beat at some point in his career, and it's easier to pass now than it used to be, with the increased emphasis on QB protection by the league and offensive incentives.

 

I'm not saying he's done. I am saying he's not nearly as good as he used to be, and next year you can't expect him to be at his best. He could probably go to any of the other division teams and win a lot of games. Dallas or Oakland could thrive under his direction. Jacksonville or Tampa could become favorites with him as QB. The Jets could go from 13 loss team to a 13 win team. Favre is still a good QB. But he's not great anymore, and he can't carry a team that doesn't have a lot of help around him. Green Bay won 10 games in each of the past 2 years, that's good, but nothing special. And he had lots of help those 2 years. He's going to keep declining, so he'll need all that much more help if he wants to win in GB.

[Magnetic Curses]

We agree to disagree then because I see it totally different from you which is fine.

 

it's not that simple, though. address my points. if the best you can do is say "we agree to disagree" then at least think about what i'm saying and ponder changing your stance. if you can't even give yourself a decent enough reason to believe what you do, then it may be time to change what you think.

[YearofDaCubs]

Sorry Sulley I just don't see it the way you do. I've seen quite a few GB games this year and I don't think the talent around him is what's hurting him the most. I think it's his decision-making. He has made a lot of questionable decisions. Even without Javon Walker he still has Driver as well as Ferguson(oft-injured) and I actually think Chatman looked pretty good for you guys. Your TEs also stepped up when Franks got hurt too. Gado was doing a much better job than Ahman Green was so I don't buy that either. Losing your guards will hurt of course but you still have two solid tackles. Guards are replaced easier and for the most part your line was pretty good against the Bears line on Sun.

 

i don't know where you got the idea that i'm a green bay fan. i know a lot about the team because i chat with corey williams and nick collins every monday or tuesday night. i'm also forced listen to packer radio and watch every packer game. most of my friends are packer fans, as well as most of the people that i have interactions with.

 

but i'm about the biggest bear fan on the planet.

I figured you were a Packers fan sorry.

[goonys evil twin]

We agree to disagree then because I see it totally different from you which is fine.

 

it's not that simple, though. address my points. if the best you can do is say "we agree to disagree" then at least think about what i'm saying and ponder changing your stance. if you can't even give yourself a decent enough reason to believe what you do, then it may be time to change what you think.

 

People have addressed your points. Some people choose to give veterans the benefit of the doubt until the very end. Others aren't afraid to point out a 35/36 year old QB isn't going to be as good as he is at 28/29. Peyton Manning is going to be worse in 5 years than he is right now. It doesn't mean a team can't win that declining QB. All it takes is average QB play for your team to have a chance in this league.

 

GB is in a live by the sword die by the sword situation. So much of their success was based on Favre's brilliant and risky play for so long that they were bound to suffer as he aged and his play declined.

[Magnetic Curses]

Sulley when did John Madden take over your body.

 

As foolish as it is to place all the blame on Favre, it makes no sense to pretend he hasn't regressed. For a guy who has only one super bowl, I can't believe how hard it is for people to come to terms with the fact that QBs aren't as good in their late 30s as they are in their late 20s. While you might think you could argue his best year was 2004, you wouldn't have much of an argument.

 

why not? his numbers from 2004 are, at the very least, on par with the rest of his career. his completion percentage was 64%, he threw for over 4,000 yards and 30 Tds. one could at least make an argument, and a very good one, that 2004 was his best season. but that's not the point, the point is that he gave no sign that he was slipping--which would make this year's performance all the more noteworthy in his rapid decline. favre's skills have not declined, his team has.

 

 

Any measurement from 2004 was beat at some point in his career, and it's easier to pass now than it used to be, with the increased emphasis on QB protection by the league and offensive incentives.

 

but i thought that the defensive players were faster. your own words.

 

I'm not saying he's done. I am saying he's not nearly as good as he used to be, and next year you can't expect him to be at his best. He could probably go to any of the other division teams and win a lot of games. Dallas or Oakland could thrive under his direction. Jacksonville or Tampa could become favorites with him as QB. The Jets could go from 13 loss team to a 13 win team. Favre is still a good QB. But he's not great anymore, and he can't carry a team that doesn't have a lot of help around him. Green Bay won 10 games in each of the past 2 years, that's good, but nothing special. And he had lots of help those 2 years. He's going to keep declining, so he'll need all that much more help if he wants to win in GB.

 

he never carried a team that had so little around him as this team, that's what i'm saying. you can't judge whether he's declining based on this team. whether he's had sterling sharpe, robert brooks, antonio freeman, or javon walker, he's always had a #1 receiver that could run the routes and gain yards after the catch. is he going to get better? probably not, but you cannot prove that he's declining, and you can't point to other great QB's at his age and say that they've declined significantly in the ensuing seasons because many great QB's have had the best seasons of their careers after the age of 35.

 

brett favre is not that old compared to his hitorical peers at this stage of his career.

[YearofDaCubs]

Favre's decision-making has always been questioned. This year has been a lot worse because let's face it some of his throws make you wonder what he was thinking. The GB defense was ranked 8th overall and sure they couldn't stop the run but their defense wasn't that bad. 1st ranked pass defense. You say he lost his top 3 RBs and I say your top RB was Gado who was clearly doing more than Ahman Green(that's another story) or the others you had. It's a shame he got hurt but even with him tearing it up GB didn't exactly win all their games either. Favre hasn't thrown a TD in what 3 or 4 games? Something isn't right. Against the Bears, Favre would just throw the ball away and get called for intentional grounding instead of taking the sack? What was that? I found that very odd coming from Favre considering that was poor decision-making as well as hurt your team in the process. Not having your starting guards definitely hurt but that's not the entire story. I also think Sherman has to go. He really put a hurt on the GB franchise. GB last year had salary cap problems and some of Sherman's draft picks were very questionable. Even if Favre comes backthe best thing GB can do is get rid of Sherman IMO.

 

can't blame anything on sherman either. the players might hate him, but players hate most coaches.

 

you can read my arguments for favre in the above post, i don't think i need to say much more about him.

 

the pass defense for green bay has been successful because no one passes on them, why should they when they can run all over the field? generally, teams gain less yards on the ground than in the air, but the yards are more important because of the ball possession game that the teams in the NFC north and NFC south employ. there really should be a separate statistic for rushing yards in conjuntion with total offense. if a team can't stop the run, they may give up less total yards, but their offense is, in turn, more effected--so the greater effect is more devastating.

 

let's also not forget that the green bay offense is VERY complicated--difficult to learn for new players thrown into the fray, gado has excelled because he's a bruising back that often misses holes but can simply run over smaller players. receivers cannot easily step in and expect to get 100 yards per game. this offense is geared for a veteran receiving corps that run great routes and can turn the intermediate pass plays into big gainers. driver and walker are the perfect tandem, but when walker went down, DBs can simply sit on the Driver's routes and bait Favre's throws.

Back to business then:

 

Sherman is a joke. He is the type of coach that lays blame on others before he looks at himself as the possible cause. How many D coordinators has he fired during his tenure? Why doesn't he bring up his questionable draft picks as well as what he did to the salary cap for GB? The reason why GB lost their starting guards is because of GB's dire salary cap situation. Looking back at the stats on GBs games I can tell you with confidence that indeed teams did throw passes against GB. QBs had a good amount of TDs as well as a decent yardage against them so I think blaming it all on the running defense is nonsense. How does GB expect to win the turnover ratio when their starting QB has thrown for more INTs than TDs? 19tds to 28 ints is VERY HIGH. And of those interceptions I wonder how many of those counted for points for the other team. I believe the number is high. I can understand if both Walker and Driver were both out but Driver has had more experience with the offense as well as Ferguson. If they really needed "veterans" to run the playbook then they should have done a better job of acquiring more of them during the offseason. I don't believe the offensive playbook is so complicated that the rookies don't get it. This is not a KC or Rams playbook we are talking about. How can you discount what Gado did? Your reasoning was he was good because he would run over defenders? That just proves my point he was their best RB. I don't doubt Favre still has most of his arm strength but I do doubt his decisions. It's not like some of these throws were tipped off the receivers hands and intercepted. He takes unnecessary risks that cause the defense to be on the field longer as well. His INTs are probably the cause of a good amount of points off turnovers. Maybe it's just a bad year for Favre but it's not always the lack of talent that is hurting him it's his decision making. The numbers don't lie.

[Magnetic Curses]

People have addressed your points. Some people choose to give veterans the benefit of the doubt until the very end.

 

like who? john elway, who after the age of 35 won 2 super bowls, threw for 3600 yards and 27 Tds and 2800 yards and 22 TDs?

 

or

 

warren moon who threw for over 4000 yards 4 times after reaching 34?

 

or

 

dan marino, who threw for 3500 yards and 23 Tds at the age of 37?

 

or

 

steve young, who threw for 4200 yards and 36 TD's at the age of 37?

 

or

 

rich gannon, who threw for 4600 yards and 26 Tds at the age of 37?

 

or

 

steve deberg, who threw for 3400 yards 23 TDs vs. only 4 INTs at the age of 36?

 

i know you have this bias against old players, no matter what the sport--but in some sports it simply does not apply.

 

favre could play for 3 more years at the same level he's been at, and be very valuable to the pack.

[YearofDaCubs]

And to add more proof to what I was saying.. GB's turnover margin is -23 which is dead last in the NFL. 42 total 29 from INTs which by the way also leads the league. Edited December 27, 2005 by YearofDaCubs

[goonys evil twin]

why not? his numbers from 2004 are, at the very least, on par with the rest of his career. his completion percentage was 64%, he threw for over 4,000 yards and 30 Tds. one could at least make an argument, and a very good one, that 2004 was his best season. but that's not the point, the point is that he gave no sign that he was slipping--which would make this year's performance all the more noteworthy in his rapid decline. favre's skills have not declined, his team has.

 

Just because you make the argument doesn't mean you have an argument. He's thrown for more yards, high completion percentage, more tds, a better TD/INT ratio and had higher ranking. Favre is in decline. He's at the age when you would expect a decline. I don't understand why some people are pretending this is not the case.

[YearofDaCubs]

People have addressed your points. Some people choose to give veterans the benefit of the doubt until the very end.

 

like who? john elway, who after the age of 35 won 2 super bowls, threw for 3600 yards and 27 Tds and 2800 yards and 22 TDs?

 

or

 

warren moon who threw for over 4000 yards 4 times after reaching 34?

 

or

 

dan marino, who threw for 3500 yards and 23 Tds at the age of 37?

 

or

 

steve young, who threw for 4200 yards and 36 TD's at the age of 37?

 

or

 

rich gannon, who threw for 4600 yards and 26 Tds at the age of 37?

 

or

 

steve deberg, who threw for 3400 yards 23 TDs vs. only 4 INTs at the age of 36?

 

i know you have this bias against old players, no matter what the sport--but in some sports it simply does not apply.

 

favre could play for 3 more years at the same level he's been at, and be very valuable to the pack.

Let's hope for GBs sake that the 3 years of same level you are talking about doesn't include the high amount of INTs he has thrown this year. I could care less what other QBs have done at what age. Everybody ages differently. How do you know what you will get in Favre 3 years from now? Like i said this year could be an anamoly or it could be a start of diminished skills. You don't know that.

[Magnetic Curses]

Sherman is a joke. He is the type of coach that lays blame on others before he looks at himself as the possible cause.

 

yep, a joke with acareer record of 56-39 with no losing seasons before this season. jeez, i wish the bears could hire that kind of joke.

 

Looking back at the stats on GBs games I can tell you with confidence that indeed teams did throw passes against GB. QBs had a good amount of TDs as well as a decent yardage against them so I think blaming it all on the running defense is nonsense.

 

one of your key freaking points was that their defense was good. why change horses in mid-stream? are you trying to make the point that the packers don't have a good team, now, so favre hasn't declined? either they have a good defense or they don't, don't change your mind to satisfy conflicting points.

 

if i were you, i'd concentrate on one point at once.

 

I don't believe the offensive playbook is so complicated that the rookies don't get it.

 

speaking as a guy who talks to actual packer players, i can assure you that the young players have a very hard time learning the playbook. one of their main criticisms of sherman's approach is that his system is so complicated. but don't take it from someone who knows anything.

 

How can you discount what Gado did? Your reasoning was he was good because he would run over defenders?

 

if you read the post in the first place, you would know that i wasn't dicounting what he did. just that he was a perfect fill-in for the job, he could run over defenders (i don't know, for the life of me, how saying that is "discounting what he did") if he missed the holes that he was supposed to hit. you can't expect gado to come in and hit every hole without knowing the playbook forward and backward. but who cares? i'm "dicounting" what he did. that's the JOKE.

 

Favre but it's not always the lack of talent that is hurting him it's his decision making. The numbers don't lie.

 

oh, okay. subtract his top receiver, top 3 RBs, 2 starting guards, and his pro-bowl TE and "numbers don't lie?"

 

are you serious?

[Magnetic Curses]

why not? his numbers from 2004 are, at the very least, on par with the rest of his career. his completion percentage was 64%, he threw for over 4,000 yards and 30 Tds. one could at least make an argument, and a very good one, that 2004 was his best season. but that's not the point, the point is that he gave no sign that he was slipping--which would make this year's performance all the more noteworthy in his rapid decline. favre's skills have not declined, his team has.

 

Just because you make the argument doesn't mean you have an argument. He's thrown for more yards, high completion percentage, more tds, a better TD/INT ratio and had higher ranking.

 

not in the same season. you can cherry pick those stats from all over his sheet, but you can't put them together, can you?

 

his best CP% was 65.3 in 2003, yet he put up more yards. he's thrown for more yards 3 times, but never had the CP%.

 

furthermore, in 2004, he was well above his career averages in CP%, yards, TD's, INT's, and yards per attempt.

 

i don't see how you can remain intellectually honest and tell me that he's declining after looking at thos stats. that's absolute nonsense. you're trying to make an anomaly fit your overall theory of age in sports, and it's not working.

 

Favre is in decline. He's at the age when you would expect a decline. I don't understand why some people are pretending this is not the case.

 

for great QB's, on the average, you CANNOT necessarily expect a decline at this stage, and repeating it over and over like some sort of mantra doesn't make it so.

[Magnetic Curses]

People have addressed your points. Some people choose to give veterans the benefit of the doubt until the very end.

 

like who? john elway, who after the age of 35 won 2 super bowls, threw for 3600 yards and 27 Tds and 2800 yards and 22 TDs?

 

or

 

warren moon who threw for over 4000 yards 4 times after reaching 34?

 

or

 

dan marino, who threw for 3500 yards and 23 Tds at the age of 37?

 

or

 

steve young, who threw for 4200 yards and 36 TD's at the age of 37?

 

or

 

rich gannon, who threw for 4600 yards and 26 Tds at the age of 37?

 

or

 

steve deberg, who threw for 3400 yards 23 TDs vs. only 4 INTs at the age of 36?

 

i know you have this bias against old players, no matter what the sport--but in some sports it simply does not apply.

 

favre could play for 3 more years at the same level he's been at, and be very valuable to the pack.

Let's hope for GBs sake that the 3 years of same level you are talking about doesn't include the high amount of INTs he has thrown this year. I could care less what other QBs have done at what age. Everybody ages differently. How do you know what you will get in Favre 3 years from now? Like i said this year could be an anamoly or it could be a start of diminished skills. You don't know that.

 

so, he's thrown a lot of picks this year? he's also lost all of those players, why not talk about them? i keep bringing those up and you keep sidestepping them.

 

the only stat that he's set a negative career mark in is INT's, and that's directly attributable to trying to do too much based on the talent around him. he's also above his career average in attempts and completions, which goes further to my argument.

 

he's right on his career averages for CP% and yards. below average in TDs and Y/A.

 

as for all QB's aging differently, the great ones remain great well into their late 30'2, that's the point i've made, and amply.

[YearofDaCubs]

Sherman is a joke. He is the type of coach that lays blame on others before he looks at himself as the possible cause.

 

yep, a joke with acareer record of 56-39 with no losing seasons before this season. jeez, i wish the bears could hire that kind of joke.

 

Looking back at the stats on GBs games I can tell you with confidence that indeed teams did throw passes against GB. QBs had a good amount of TDs as well as a decent yardage against them so I think blaming it all on the running defense is nonsense.

 

one of your key freaking points was that their defense was good. why change horses in mid-stream? are you trying to make the point that the packers don't have a good team, now, so favre hasn't declined? either they have a good defense or they don't, don't change your mind to satisfy conflicting points.

 

if i were you, i'd concentrate on one point at once.

 

I don't believe the offensive playbook is so complicated that the rookies don't get it.

 

speaking as a guy who talks to actual packer players, i can assure you that the young players have a very hard time learning the playbook. one of their main criticisms of sherman's approach is that his system is so complicated. but don't take it from someone who knows anything.

 

How can you discount what Gado did? Your reasoning was he was good because he would run over defenders?

 

if you read the post in the first place, you would know that i wasn't dicounting what he did. just that he was a perfect fill-in for the job, he could run over defenders (i don't know, for the life of me, how saying that is "discounting what he did") if he missed the holes that he was supposed to hit. you can't expect gado to come in and hit every hole without knowing the playbook forward and backward. but who cares? i'm "dicounting" what he did. that's the JOKE.

 

Favre but it's not always the lack of talent that is hurting him it's his decision making. The numbers don't lie.

 

oh, okay. subtract his top receiver, top 3 RBs, 2 starting guards, and his pro-bowl TE and "numbers don't lie?"

 

are you serious?

 

It's not just Sherman the coach that makes him bad it's Sherman the coach and GM that has crippled the team.

 

Their defense is ranked 8th overall. You said teams do not need to pass when their running defense was so bad and I'm proving the point that teams did throw against them as well.

 

I did read the post in the first place and one of the points you were making was Favre wasn't as good because he didn't have a running game.

 

You mentioned you talk to Packers players maybe that's why you are so sore about their season. You have friendships with players and maybe you feel you have the right to stick up for them. Or maybe because of the friendships you can't see the big picture and are completely discounting the INT/TD ratio Favre has and are using the lack of talent around him as an excuse.

 

I don't care what players Favre has around him you are completely discounting his INT/TD ratios as well as his questionable decision making because he supposedly lacks talent around him. I think he has enough talent to make the throws necessary. Why not mention what I brought to your attention regarding the turnover ratio GB has? Clearly those numbers are affected by Favre.

[Magnetic Curses]

Their defense is ranked 8th overall. You said teams do not need to pass when their running defense was so bad and I'm proving the point that teams did throw against them as well.

 

let's see here. the packers have had 405 passes attempted against them, that's 27 attempts per game, good for 2nd fewest in the NFL. but, i guess the exact opposite in your eyes?

 

they've also had 21 passing TDs against them, good for 24th in the NFL, and only 9 INT's, good for 29th in the NFL. meaning that their passing defense is terrible, but no one passes on them, unless in the red zone.

 

so both of my points are made. they're passing defense looks good, but is not good, and their rush defense is non-existent.

 

did you actually want to talk about the weather or were you just making chit-chat?

 

You mentione you talk to Packers players maybe that's why you are so sore about their season. You have friendships with players and maybe you feel you have the right to stick up for them. Or maybe because of the friendships you can't see the big picture and are comletely discounting the INT/TD ratio Favre has and are using the lack of talent around him as an excuse.

 

i'm not sticking up for packer players, i'm sticking up for favre, whom i've never met. i said that mostly what my contacts within the organization tell me is that the playbook is complicated and not conducive to backups or rookie plug-ins. that's all i said, and it's not really an emotional issue for me.

 

I don't care what players Favre has around him you are completely discounting his INT/TD ratios as well as his questionable decision making because he supposedly lacks talent around him. I think he has enough talent to make the throws necessary. Why not mention what I brought to your attention regarding the turnover ratio GB has? Clearly those numbers are affected by Favre.

 

i've already stated NUMEROUS times that the turnovers are directly related to favre trying to do too much with too little behind him.

 

he has one serviceable receiver, a 30th ranked rushing attack, an injured TE and no interior OL. you tell me how he's supposed to have a great turnover ratio with help like that?

 

and if i were concerned about defending my friends, why would i say that favre has no one around him to help him? that doesn't make a lick of sense.

[goonys evil twin]

i don't see how you can remain intellectually honest and tell me that he's declining after looking at thos stats. that's absolute nonsense. you're trying to make an anomaly fit your overall theory of age in sports, and it's not working.

 

I don't see how you can watch football games and not notice that Favre has declined. The guy has always taken risks, and as his body falls apart they are starting to haunt him. He was at his best in the mid to late 90's. He's not at his best anymore. It's completely asinine to look at GB's season and not put any blame on Favre and to look at his career and pretend he's the exact same player he used to be.

[YearofDaCubs]

You can make an argument that there are worse teams in the NFL like the Texans, Titans, 49ers as well as others. They probably lack talent around them as well and I don't see their QBs throwing INTs at a record pace. Driver has had 3 1000 yard seasons in 4 years how is that serviceable? That sounds better than serviceable to me. Bottom line I do not see that Favre having the lack of talent as an excuse for his decision making and high INTs especially considering so many teams out there with less of a O line and less talent at WR and QB not making the same mental mistakes as Favre does.