Bench Favre?

[bc2k]

Should the Packers give their first-round draft pick, Aaron Rogers, the chance to get some experience this year at the expense of team legend, Brett Favre?

 

The Packers are 2-7 and aren't going to the playoffs.

 

IMO, with the season already over, they might as well get Rogers some experience this year so he's better prepared when he takes over the team next year.

[biittner77]

They should keep playing Favre until they win enough games to not be able to draft Reggie Bush at which point they should definitely disrespect the best QB they'll ever have so he can go win a super bowl with whatever team he plays for next season.

 

The only flaw in that plan as I see it is that it requires the Packers to win more than 2 games. I guess I can live with that.

 

In all seriousness, what the Packers should do and what they can do are two different things. Looking to the future is tempting but hasn't Brett Favre earned the right to play until he doesn't want to anymore? Is it even fair to Rogers to ask him to be the guy that replaced Favre?

 

They'd probably be better off starting next season with Rogers so they can solve their biggest problem- their offensive line- during the offseason.

[SouthSideRyan]

Yes so that I can pick the Bears over them in my survivor pool without fear.

[CubRock2]

Why? Brett Farve deserves to play, and isn't the problem with that crappy team.

 

Actually, I think he still looks pretty good.

[TruffleShuffle]

No, you don't do that to a guy who is one of the best players in the history of your franchise. It might be a better move for the future to play Rodgers, but there are just some things that you don't do, and one of those is mistreat a legend. It's like JoePa at Penn State when a lot of people wanted him gone after the past few years of mediocrity. Even if they had been right and the game passed him by, there's so much that he's done for that team and the school that it would be a crime to boot him out the door.

 

If Favre offers to sit to get Rodgers some experience, I'd take him up on his offer. But he has earned the right to leave on his own terms.

[bc2k]

Why? Brett Farve deserves to play, and isn't the problem with that crappy team.

 

Actually, I think he still looks pretty good.

 

He still looks pretty good? He threw 2 interceptions last night, one which was run back for a touchdown in a game where his team lost by 3.

 

Favre's 2005 decline is visible.

[bc2k]

No, you don't do that to a guy who is one of the best players in the history of your franchise. It might be a better move for the future to play Rodgers, but there are just some things that you don't do, and one of those is mistreat a legend. It's like JoePa at Penn State when a lot of people wanted him gone after the past few years of mediocrity. Even if they had been right and the game passed him by, there's so much that he's done for that team and the school that it would be a crime to boot him out the door.

 

If Favre offers to sit to get Rodgers some experience, I'd take him up on his offer. But he has earned the right to leave on his own terms.

 

I don't agree with that mindset. It's one thing to applaud and appreciate a great team legend, but it's not acceptable to "respect" him at the expense of the team and franchise.

 

The bottom line is winning, and if I were a GB fan, I'd be pissed that Rogers wasn't getting game experience for next season. The learning curve for NFL quarterbacks takes a while (save for freaks like Big Ben) and I'd definately want Rogers to start that process in a season when the team is eliminated from the playoffs.

 

And you don't have to be wearing JoePa's glasses to see that he has a few marbles rolling around in there. Somebody give him a recliner and some pudding; he's done.

[MattyJLCC]

Why? Brett Farve deserves to play, and isn't the problem with that crappy team.

 

Actually, I think he still looks pretty good.

 

He still looks pretty good? He threw 2 interceptions last night, one which was run back for a touchdown in a game where his team lost by 3.

 

Favre's 2005 decline is visible.

 

I would disagree with this statement...He's 4th in the league in passing yards and tied for 2nd in TD's with 18. He's still one of the elite QB's of the league. Farve is not declining in skill or play level, he's trying to carry a team completely on his shoulders with the loss of 2 recievers and 3 running backs to injury. Consequently, he's forcing passes, he's trying to push the offense and right now he's really the only offensive threat the Pack has so people are geared up to stop him more than normal.

 

Farve's still Farve. If he decides to come back next year, and I'm hoping that he does, with a healthy supporting staff, I see no reason for him to not still be an elite QB in the NFL. With a year or two more under his belt I believe Farve will go down as one of the top 5 QB's of all time. No way you bench him...

[YearofDaCubs]

I voted NO because #1 the fans still want him to play #2 he hasn;t regressed to the point where you or he can finally say he is retiring. The man can still play and it would be a travesty if he was benched. The Packers will not bench him though. When Favre is ready to step down as QB is when he retires.

[NCCubFan]

No. It's not his fault that Walker and Green went down for the season and he suffered from a lack of talent surrounding him. It doesn't matter how great a quarterback is, he can't do the job without a decent supporting cast. Peyton Manning would probably look horrible if the Colts lost James, Harrison, and Wayne.

 

P.S. I'm a Bears fan, not a Packers fan, but that still seems right to me.

[goonys evil twin]

No. It's not his fault that Walker and Green went down for the season and he suffered from a lack of talent surrounding him.

 

It's not a matter of placing blame on Favre. It would be done so the team could hedge their bets against Brett's annual will I or won't I retire drama, and to get their first round draft pick QB some playing time, which is the only way to develop a QB.

[Mark_R]

Playing Aaron Rodgers would almost guarantee the number one overall pick.

 

I fail to see the downside.

[Careless]

Yes, but only because I'm bitter because of his past greatness

[CubRock2]

Why? Brett Farve deserves to play, and isn't the problem with that crappy team.

 

Actually, I think he still looks pretty good.

 

He still looks pretty good? He threw 2 interceptions last night, one which was run back for a touchdown in a game where his team lost by 3.

 

Favre's 2005 decline is visible.

 

Just like Earned Runs in baseball, INT's arent' always a QB's fault. I don't remember much of the game Monday night, but I can specifically remember 1 not being his fault. I did also see 3 dropped passes. I didn't see the one where it was run back for a TD, but Farve's always thrown a few INT's. If his team had a running game (or perhaps some defense - how does and offense run by Brad Johnson score 20 points?!)

 

Oh, and I'm a Bears fan, too. I just don't like the idea of seeing a great QB being benched for the sake of his successor being "developed." If he's a good QB, he'll be ready when asked. See: Orton, Kyle; Brady, Tom; Roethlesberger, Ben. "Groomed" QB's like Ryan Leaf and Cade McNown didn't work out so well. If you're good, you'll succeed, no matter how you're developed. Unless Dusty allows you to throw over 100 passes a game. :wink: