Comments on: Ahhhh, That’s Better — Packers Tied for 1st Place

By: Ace

Ace — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:09:28 +0000

Hawk watch—poor in coverage but did job generally at MLB—will he move Nick to OLB? Could happen. Bears should have hit Forte out of the backfield all day long–Hawk (and others) couldn’t stay with him. Watch for HB as receiver big time in remaining games.

By: Ace

Ace — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:05:49 +0000

Disagree with Clifton criticism by Scott–at least in Bear game he did quite well. I was at the game and watched OL play–including Clifton– and thought Bears got little pressure from Clifton’s man. Agree that he hasn’t always looked so good this year but for 3-4 years he was probably our best OL. Question for Geeks–does Chad have a lingering injury??

By: sfhayes

sfhayes — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:07:59 +0000

What I want to know is why we haven’t read any stories on Aaron Rodgers dissing Brett Favre in public? I mean, a couple comments up he basically says Favre can’t play in bad weather. Wow.

By: Frank Metzke

Frank Metzke — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:04:42 +0000

I read on the JSonline that Greg Bedard asked the same question. The Packers are healthy now and didn’t need to spend the money on guy just to have a guy. We’ll see what they do, but they looked pretty good against Chicago. Nick Barnett is having surgery Thursday and will the go on IR.

By: DaveK

DaveK — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:02:20 +0000

Quick question for everyone – I noticed that Barnett was listed as inactive for the game and not yet out on IR. Why not just put him on IR so you can sign someone or promote someone from the practice squad to the active roster? Maybe it is a small thing but why waste a roster spot for a guy that is not going to play and will eventually go on IR?

By: Aaron Rogders

Aaron Rogders — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:10:05 +0000

You forgot about the Seattle Playoff Game. I think weather does affect Favre but it is more of a is Favre going to have a good game today or not.

By: Frank Metzke

Frank Metzke — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:33:21 +0000

How happy is everyone to not have to hear about perennial Favre drama in the off season this year?? That alone is reason enough to run him outta town. I mean he won SB 31..it’s going to be SB 43!! We, as Packer fans, should know better that anyone that he chokes in big games. I want Favre to do well, and I’d love to see the Jets to go to the SB (that way we get their #1 draft pick) but I don’t see the Jets doing very well down the stretch in the cold. Not with Favre anyway, he used to be the best cold weather QB, but not anymore. Remember how he played in Chicago last year? Or how about the NFC Championship game..

By: DaveK

DaveK — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:36:07 +0000

Bradshaw and Favre have had a close relationship over the years. It is no surprise that he would side with Favre over TT and MM. It seems to me the Favre backers have been waiting all year for the ‘I told you so’ moment and many of them pulled the trigger after that Vikings game last week including those in my own family! I think you can make an argument that Favre would be helping the Packers win more games this year then Rodgers. I just have this gut feeling with Favre’s experience and savvy that be would at times be better equipped to help out o-line and diagnose and dissect opposing defenses. I am not totally convinced of that though and honestly will need to see how this season plays out for both teams before making that call. Even if you think Favre would have been marginally better then Rodgers THIS year for the Packers I am not sure I would still fault TT and MM for the decision they made given how Favre handled himself and how Rodgers has proven to be a legit QB that can possible lead this team for years to come.

By: bucky

bucky — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:34:09 +0000

I saw Bradshaw’s segment. His was the same sort of argument that you make with your friends in a bar after three or four pitchers: the only difference between last years’ 13-3 so close to the Super Bowl ZOMG! team and this years’ 4-5 team is Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers. Of course, everything else is not the same; there’s a different schedule, a whole lot more injuries, etc.

But where he really lost me was this: Last year the Packers had one of the best O lines in the league, and this year the Packers have one of the best O lines in the league. Notwithstanding yesterday’s game, which he of course had not yet seen, no one who has actually watched any amount of Packer football this season would claim that they have one of the best offensive lines in the league. Period. That just showed me he didn’t do any preparation for his hit piece; that he hasn’t seen anything other than a few highlights.

I’m ok with him carrying water for his Gulf shore comrade in arms; but at least he ought to try getting some of his facts straight first. Then again, facts aren’t really Bradshaw’s strong suit.

By: PackerBelle

PackerBelle — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:56:34 +0000

I think they made the right choice going with Rodgers. There is no guarantee that we would be doing any better with Favre. And Rodgers is likely going to improve where as Favre isn’t, and is likely to get worse. There is also the fact that Rodgers is likely to be playing for longer than Favre will at this point. A guy in his 20s should play longer than a guy nearing 40.

Bradshaw’s comments didn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Most people seem to think that the Packers made the right choice between Rodgers and Favre. Yes, Favre is playing well this year. But so is Rodgers, and I think Rodgers has the harder position including a harder schedule, a porous O-line, lack of a running game until recently and lots of injuries. So I’ll stick with Rodgers.