Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

It's Long Past Time to Stop Comparing Rodgers to Favre

By Category

It's Long Past Time to Stop Comparing Rodgers to Favre

There have been a lot of different takes about moving on from Aaron Rodgers this offseason.  Some more immediate, some down the road, but all of them misguided.  They've ranged from wanting to take a quarterback with the 14th pick to refusing to extend his contract to outright trading the game's best quarterback to "open up cap space".  There are a number of reasons for these "takes", but today I'm just going to address one.

One of the arguments brought up when suggesting that the Packers start a "transition" from Rodgers is that Brett Favre was 35 when Green Bay drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005.  Favre's exit from Green Bay split the fan base apart, and the painful memory of that exit still lives in Packers fans.  The fear of the same thing happening with Rodgers, fueled by some comments made by Rodgers about his contract situation and the handling of personnel that could be seen as passive aggressive, have Packers fans drawing what they feel are logical conclusions.

Here are a number of reasons why these two things are just not the same.

1. Rodgers is a much better player than Favre.

Yes, the rules changed in the mid-2000s to make things easier on the passing game with the whole Colts / Patriots illegal contact "point of emphasis".  Since that time passing numbers have gone up across the league.  Part of that is because of the rule change, but part of it is a modernization of the game and the simple realization that even the best yards per carry back in the leauge (Alvin Kamara at 6.1) doesn't crack the top 25 in yards per attempt at quarterback.  It is literally more efficient to throw the football than it is to run it.  

Even adjusting for that, there is no statistical comparison that puts Favre in Rodgers' league, and most of that stems from his propensity to turn the ball over (a lot, and often at the worst possible times).  Favre's lore is largely due to the credit given to him for "rescuing" a Packers franchise that struggled mightily in the 70s and 80s and helping create the succesful franchise that started going to the playoffs in 1993 and hasn't really stopped 25 years later.  In reality, there should be quite a bit of credit for that achievement that goes to Ron Wolf, Bob Harlan, Mike Holmgren and frankly Reggie White.  Favre deserves his due, certainly, but the idea that he rescued the Packers lets him off the hook for some of his statistical shortcomings.

Let's just use a relatively simple advanced statistic.  A/YA or adjusted yards per attempt.  You can find the definition here.

Unsurprisignly, Rodgers is the NFL's all time leader in A/YA at 8.43.  There are quite a few ways in which it can be statistically determined that Rodgers is the best passer in the history of football.  This is just one of them.  Favre checks in at a tie for 47th, just ahead of Derk Carr and tied with Norm Van Brocklin, Michael Vick, Rich Gannon and some guy named Frank Ryan.  In fact, Favre has one season in his entire career, and zero with the Packers, that approach Rodgers' average of 8.43.

Beyond just the raw statistics, there are so many big spots in which Favre made critical, critical mistakes or had games that completely removed the Packers from contention in that game and often in that season.  The six INT game against the Rams. The ridiculous overtime INT after 4th and 26. The INT to end the 2007 NFCCG.  You can even throw in the INT made on behalf of the Vikings in 2009.  Those are just the playoff problems.  The worst playoff performance of Rogders' career is the 2014 NFC Championship game, and that was not Favre-esque, it wasn't even the worst QB performance in that game and it was against one of the best defenses ever assembled.  

Specifically, the 2005 and 2006 seasons for Favre were not great, which, in concert with Favre's performance in the 2007 NFCCG (after a great regular season) likely pushed Green Bay to move forward with Rodgers.

No matter how you slice it, though, there is no statistical case that can be made for Favre.

2. Favre was far more manipulative then than Rodgers is being now.

Favre told Peter King in 2002 (!), that he missed home and wished he could be on his lawn mower.  It was again addressed in 2005.  In 2006, he told Andrea Kremer "If today's my last game, I want to remember it." In 2007, he waited until Februrary to announce that he would come back and we all know what happened in 2008 as he reitred, unretired and then began his scheme to end up on the Vikings and stick it to Rodgers and Ted Thompson.  

Favre also did plenty of meddling in personnel.  Just as much or more as Rodgers is accused of doing now.  He pushed for Randy Moss, Tony Gonzalez among others during his time in Green Bay.  It also certainly needs to be taken into account just how different the media is now as opposed to when Favre was playing.  The things that Favre said were certainly dissected, even on the internet, but Twitter was not what it is now and the news cycle wasn't as obsessive as it is today.  

Rodgers has literally said, within the last few weeks, that his goal is to be indispensiable to the Packers into his 40s and retire a Green Bay Packer.  He understands how rare that is and it's important to him.  Rodgers' 40s are six full seasons away.  The longest rookie contract you can achieve is a four year 1st round pick deal with a fifth-year option, which is outside those parameters.

3.  There was more "mileage" on Favre than there is on Rodgers.

It is very likely that Favre was in worse physical condition at the same age than Rodges is now.  First of all, there's just attrition that goes into games played.  Favre became a starter during his first season in Green Bay, which was his second season as a pro.  We all know that Rodgers sat behind Favre for three seasons.  Rodgers has completed 13 years of service in the NFL.  He's started 142 games.  In the same stretch, Favre put on the mileage of 189 games. 

I know what you're going to say: that Favre never missed games due to injury.  I'm not going to tell you that a guy who took as many painkillers to stay on the field as Favre did and played through as many ailments as Favre did was doing his body any favors.  Should he be commended for his toughness?  Without question.  Is his consecutive start streak incredible? 100%.  Is it something I'm going to use "for" Favre in this discussion? No.

Rodgers plays in a far more conservative time.  I'm not saying Favre could have played through Rodgers' broken collarbones (he couldn't have) but Rodges was shut down for large parts of those seasons and the Packers were likely more conservative than Favre would have ever let them be.  The same thing stands for head injuries.  Favre literally went back into a game after a concussion, threw a touchdown (against the Giants I think) and was pulled.  He started the next game.  Who knows how many concussions he played through in the 90s and early 2000s when no one was paying attention.  That is not a "luxury" afforded to Rodgers. 

47 more games, everything Favre put his body through in the early 90s and all the ailments he played through paint a picture of a body that wasn't quite in the same shape as Rodgers' is now.

4.  Most importantly, Rodgers should be compared to his contemporaries and the time in which he plays.

I've mentioned the change in passing rules that occurred in the mid-2000s.  Beyond that, though, "points of emphasis" in personal fouls have protected quarterbacks far beyond anything the NFL has ever seen.  It's lengthened the careers of the league's best passers.  Frankly, it lengthened Favre's career towards the end.  Good quarterbacks are playing longer than they would have in the past.  Tom Brady is 40.  Philip Rivers is 36.  Drew Brees is 39.  Eli Manning (it can be argued that he's not playing well anymore) is 37 and Ben Roethlisberger is 36.  Peyton Manning played awesome football during his age 37 and 38 seasons, even after a career-threatening neck injury.  Quarterbacks can play longer now.  It's just the way it is.  

Here's the thing, too.  Rodgers is better statistically than all the guys I just named and a better athlete than all of his true contemporaries except for Russell Wilson. 

If you remove Favre from any thought about Rodgers (and you should) you'd just compare him to the elite players at his position and their career arcs. It's not like the other elite QBs have had clean injury histories either.  Brady tore his ACL.  Brees had a very serious shoulder injury that made San Diego give up on him and Miami pass on him for Daunte Culpepper.  Rodgers should be able to continue to perform at a higher level than these players and should be able to do it just as long or longer because of his athletic gifts.  

Is it a risk to assume this?  Of course, but it'd be a far greater risk to assume that this won't happen.  Aaron Rodgers has done nothing in his career to suggest that we as Packers fans should doubt him for any reason.

Bottom Line

The idea that the Packers can just "move on" from Aaron Rodgers is quite possibly born from Packers fans not knowing since 1993 what anything but Hall of Fame quarterback play looks like.  They've had it consistently except for stretches in 2013 and 2017 in which Rodgers was injured.  The bottom line is that it's foolish to have the best quarterback to ever play the game play for a different team just because he'll be the highest paid QB in the league. His new deal will likely take up the same percentage of the salary cap that his 2013 extension did. It will also likely be passed when young quarterbacks like Carson Wentz, Jared Goff and maybe even Mariota/Winston are re-upped.  Green Bay's best chances of a championship are still with Rodgers at the helm.  It's just time for that defense to give him a little help.  

Let DeShone Kizer develop and see what you have there.  If he's not the answer (he probably isn't) address the position again in the 2020 or 2021 draft.  You want a season or two of the successor to be on their rookie deal.  After all, four of the last eight Super Bowl winners have had QBs with cap hits less than $6.8M, which is what a rookie deal would look like.

  

 

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (53) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Qoojo's picture

I agree. I always gave Wolf, Holmgren, and Reggie White most of the credit for the franchise turn around. It was Holmgren that kept Favre in line, "No more rocket balls", and without Holmgren, Favre gave up any semblance of restraint because every coach afterward was in awe of Favre, until McCarthy at least.

Turophile's picture

I might just about be getting over my dislike of Favre for what he did at the tail-end of his career.

I loved watching him in the earlier years, but those last three years ruined everything.

This has been the first time since the breakup I've read about him and haven't had dislike of him coming out on top, as the main emotion. To be honest, I wasn't sure it ever would happen, but as long as it took (for me), it seems I'm reconciled to the whole thing now. Boy that took a long, LONG time, to fade out.

Time does (it seems) heal almost all wounds.

Savage57's picture

Wolf stated he staked his career on Brett Favre. Holmgren referred to him as the wild stallion he had to tame. Reggie went on the record saying Favre was a big part of why he chose Green Bay.

Give credit or discredit as you see fit, I guess, but if you're gonna do that, you then have to acknowledge where the guys you're giving credit to give theirs.

davfar's picture

Great post, says it all. Love ya Brett, but you're no Aaron Rodgers in terms of passer or ball management.

Interceptions killed him in big games. Ask any Vikings fan to confirm.

Savage57's picture

"Says it all." Funny.

What is mostly says to me is the author's still working through some unresolved Favre issues.

flackcatcher's picture

Favre, (sigh......) we all have are issues of one sort or another with him. A great player who broke your heart in one way, or another. His record speaks for it's self.

TheVOR's picture

People will always compare the QB's. In the end, both Brett and Aaron, all Lynn Dickey, Bart Starr, Tobin Rote, Don Majkowski, all great pieces of a Great Historic Franchise in my lifetime.

Comparisons are natural. I personally can except the greatness for what it was, with all these QB's during their tenures.

My preference has been Rodgers, I liked his game more than Favre because of the disciplines involved, but my gosh was Fare fun to watch. Favre was so freekin fun to watch.

In the end, we've been very fortunate to have back to back greatness. It's RARE in the NFL at the QB position. Enjoy it people!

Arthur Jackson's picture

I agree with you Vor.

Ferrari Driver's picture

I've been going to Packer games prior to Lambeau Field being built in 1957 and have watched most all the great ones play in person and the others I saw on TV.

The Packers have had some very good quarterbacks during that period including Rote, Starr, Dicky, Favre, and now Rodgers. I was impressed by a number of them who didn't wear the Packers uniforms including Archie Manning, Payton Manning, Marino, Montana, and a number of others.

In my opinion, Rodgers is simply the best quarterback I have ever watched play this game. I marvel at his knowledge of the game and his ability to read defenses at the line of scrimmage. Considering his arm strength, accuracy, ability to move in the pocket, and if necessary scramble, none were his equal.

I can't comment on his leadership qualities because there is no realistic way a fan such as I has access, but I suspect it is at least very good or excellent.

I lived through the Packers prior to Lombardi and also the 70's and 80's, so I know what it's like to be at/near the bottom of the barrel which allows me to appreciate how important a franchise quarterback is to a team and to have the best that has ever played the game at the helm should be appreciated by us all.

Finwiz's picture

Great picture above this story!

Ferrari Driver's picture

Also, Ross thanks for writing an interesting, well thought out article.

Ross Uglem's picture

You're very welcome and I appreciate the kind words.

flackcatcher's picture

Best overview of the Favre to Rodgers Packers I've seen. As you pointed out, Favre played in a very different NFL than the one Rodgers plays in today. It reminded me how much I have come to despise the NFL for pretending the concussion-head trauma did not exist. Fine article Ross. Well done.

CDC Dave Retired's picture

5: Don Majkowski
4: Lynn Dickey
3: Brett Favre
2: Aaron Rodgers
1: Bart Starr

Pack88's picture

Ross, I don't disagree that Rodgers is far and away a better QB BUT your use of statistics is sophomoric at best. Many things play into a realistic evaluation of QB play and each change of the rules modifies the playing field.

Team sports modify any matrix you use becaue (like life ) you are awarded points based on acheivements not just numbers therfore many players generate staggering numbers (Peyton Manning) but for a rainstorm and a great defense would be akin to DAn Marino with no champioship pelts.

Farvre's propensity to throw the untimely pick and incrediby stupid pass was often counterbalanced by his uncanny ability to throw the "holy christ did you see that" pass to win the game.

So please don't get me wrong- Aarons Rodgers is to my mind the most talented, disciplined guy I ever saw throw a football (bar none). Farve was the most exciting!

Just as Starr is located prominently in the Valhalla of Packer Greats, to the connosuier of flashy -Johhny Unitas was sooo much better in spite of choking in 3 title games (sound familiar)!

Will Aaron push Barts helment down the hall- only time will tell, but he has most definitley sent #4's to Folkfvangr!

I bleed green more's picture

How manyy teams fans have been spoiled as we have. From Starr to Rodgers it's been a great ride. I have so many memories many with snow on the field and turning the antenna cause the wind blew it, now those were the days.

Ferrari Driver's picture

Football is a team sport and the team wins when it is well stocked. I remember the Superbowl that the Packers won in 1996. We had a very good quarterback in Favre and very importantly, the Packers had the number one defense in the NFL with a defensive line with White, Jones, Dotson, and Brown that was a right up there with the "Fearless Foursome", The Purple People Eaters, and the '85 Bears defense.

The MVP of the game was not the quarterback or one of the defensive players, but a kick returner. Now that was a team.

I always thought Archie Manning was among the very best of quarterbacks who won very infrequently. The Saints had teams that had a super start at quarterback who had to run for his life. I remember times when he dropped back, defensive lineman were right with him in the backfield. It is a shame that he never got a chance to play with one of the better teams in the league.

That's why when some people may say about a quarterback "to be a Hall of Famer" or to be considered one of the best to play the game, he has to win at least one (two) more championships. Football is the consummate "Team Sport" as opposed to many sports like boxing, golf, tennis, etc where a single individual can be dominate.

Oppy's picture

If it's possible to agree with a post more than 100%, I would.

Wins and losses are a team statistic, not an indicator of individual play by any means.

4thand10's picture

I agree FD, and I even look recently to Jacksonville / Pat's game. They almost did it with Fornette and a defense as well. They dominated the Pat's in every phase of the game. If it was not for fantom PI calls they would have had the Pat's handily. There's a lot to be said for Defense and a strong running game in a "passing" league. All that being said, I have enjoyed watching Favre and Rodgers. Favre was exciting but I think Rodgers has been equally exciting... those multiple hail Mary's made me jump off the couch.

Fordham Ram's picture

On a statistical basis you can say Rodgers is better but on an excitement, get your adrenaline pumped basis the two stand toe to toe, like Mantle vs Mays, Ali vs Marciano. You can argue all day long which games produced to greatest rush but all I know is this, after having endured the lean years I thank the lord for giving me a team to root for that have had these two giants on them back to back. And it's still not over. Green Bay all the way!

4EVER's picture

Brett spent the first quarter of his career with a front office loaded with common sense, comprehensive talent evaluators. Then came the utterly useless Mike Sherman, followed by a hard-headed Ted Thompson, both - based on statistics - not very good at GM duties as a whole. Here's hoping Aaron's remaining years in GB ends with a front office that resembles Brett's early years. (Fire McCarthy)

Come from behind victory leaders: Brett Favre tied at 9th with Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers a distant 97th, and time will tell.

Super Bowl appearances/wins: Brett Favre: 2/1, Aaron Rodgers: 1/1. Low numbers = Sherman/Thompson/McCarthy

Fun to watch: Brett Favre - off the charts! Aaron Rodgers - catching up fast, but at times to machine like, throw the ball DUDE!

In the end...I've been laughing at the rest of the NFL since 1991...Go Pack Go!

I too feel "the author's still working through some unresolved Favre issues." Thanks Savage57 LOL!

4EVER's picture

Come from behind wins do not end with an interceptions, but rather with drive(s) with a makeup of OC creativity, fundamentals, precision, and a little luck. I have a problem with hail mary wins...their nature is cheap, lucky, lacking precision and 100% luck.

The ultimate come from behind win: research 'The Ice Bowl' at Lambeau Field on December 31, 1967 the temperature at game time registered a frigid 13 degrees below zero. With 4:50 left in the game the Packers were behind, 17-14.

Hall of Fame reenactment:

The Packers literally and figuratively "kept their cool." Behind the leadership of future Hall of Fame quarterback Bart Starr, they marched down field. With sixteen seconds remaining and the temperature down to eighteen below zero, the Packers found themselves about two feet away from victory. Starr called time out. The field was like a sheet of ice. The two previous running plays had gone nowhere. With no time outs left, a running play seemed totally out of the question. A completed pass surely would win it. Even an incomplete pass would at least stop the clock so the Packers could set up a field goal to tie the game and send it into overtime. After consulting with Packers coach Vince Lombardi, Starr returned to the huddle.

Starr took the snap from center Ken Bowman. Bowman and guard Jerry Kramer combined to take out Dallas tackle Jethro Pugh. With Pugh out of the way, Starr surprised everyone and dove over for the score. "We had run out of ideas," Starr said of the play. However, Lombardi put it another way, "We gambled and we won."

Go Pack Go!

Way to go Jerry!

holmesmd's picture

I think your statement regarding hail Marry’s May be try for many, certainly not Rodgers. Luck is throwing one, not multiple. There may only be a few people on the planet that could throw that bomb in Detroit. #12 is one of them.

4EVER's picture

Lacking precision leaves room for precision...still cheap and 100% luck.

Ferrari Driver's picture

I'll grant you that there is a lot of luck involved to complete one of those, but it takes a special talent to give yourself the chance to do so.

For example, the Rodgers to Rodgers Hail Mary required that the Aaron throw the ball a great distance, but equally important, he had to have great height on the ball to enable his receivers to get down under the throw and it had to be in the end zone. Additionally, the quarterback had to be elusive enough in the pocket to gain a little time.

Nick Perry's picture

I REALLY like your comments, right up to the ones where you diminish the the "Hail Mary's".

As someone mentioned above there's only one maybe two other QB's who could throw that pass in Detroit. I've watched that play 100 times at least. In Dallas it's probably no good because it would hit that stupid scoreboard though I'm guessing. How high and far that pass went was friggen unreal.

The not one but TWO to Jeff Janis, the second rolling to his LEFT and falling BACK with Patrick Peterson defending no less?? Yup 100% luck...NOT!!

2016 playoffs vs the Giants. After three previous "Hail Mary's", this making a 4th I'm not going to call it 100% luck. I mean HOW can you??

4EVER's picture

Did everyone get that out of there system. Geez, winning a game via a hail mary play does notta for me, but yes, I'll take the win. But I'm shocked...this isn't about the strength of an arm. And shocked again that there's this hoopla around an NFL QB hitting an area on the field of 50 yards by 10 yards.

Hail Mary: a forward pass, made in desperation, with only a very small chance of success and time running out on the clock.

Shocked...no further mention of the greatest come from behind win in Packer history!
Shocked...no further mention of the honoring the HOF Jerry Kramer blurb!
Packer fans?

Oppy's picture

"Come from behind wins" is perhaps the most ridiculous fabricated statistic people use to try and validate or devalue play, specifically QBs, that has ever been devised.

Exciting emotional roller coaster? Oh yeah. Great stuff from an entertainment standpoint... but when people start talking about it as a measure of competence or performance, I cringe.

Ross Uglem's picture

this 100%. The fetishization of come from behind victories is an intelligence test for football fans. There's a reason Skip Bayless talks about them constantly. To penalize a player for playing well so his team doesn't have to come from behind is mind boggling. How many of those come from behind wins were because of Favre INTs or even pick-6s?

4EVER's picture

The names on the list has to say something. And based solely on those names, one would have too include measurements of competence and performance, in a list that would also include longevity, attitude, and consistency (there are more). All attributes of a HOF character.

As a team they find themselves behind, say 25 points behind, I'm done here.

HankScorpio's picture

Late to the comments so I missed that you beat me to this point by a whole day.

HankScorpio's picture

"Come from behind victory leaders: Brett Favre tied at 9th with Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers a distant 97th, and time will tell."

So Rodgers hasn't been trailing all that much in the 4th quarter. Is that a bad thing?

Give me the guy that doesn't throw a couple of bone-headed picks to dig a hole that he has to pull them out of later. It might not be as heart-stopping but a win is a win.

4EVER's picture

I'm guessing that Brett will not be asking you over for a snack anytime soon, not that you'd accept.

Do you have the stats on your claim of Aaron not trailing all that much in the 4th?

HankScorpio's picture

In fact, I can think of few pro athletes I'd want to shoot the breeze more than Favre. He's entertaining, for sure. I'd just make sure to steer clear of his late-career diva years in GB. I can imagine he's got some great entertaining stories from the 90s, tho.

As for Rodgers, the record is self-explanatory and you know it as well as I do. One losing season when he was the primary starter. One non-playoff season.

As you mention, not a whole of those wins were comeback wins. He's famous for his poor ranking in that stat.

That math is pretty easy to figure.

4EVER's picture

Yes, it is clear, Rodgers is the better QB and I've never said any different. But the math…is not so clear. Rodgers with a couple of Sherman years would close the gap quickly.

www.pro-football-reference.com

Rodgers 9.06 years (10 years minus 15 games)
12 Fourth Quarter Comebacks (1.3 avg), 19 Game-Winning Drives (2.1 avg)

Favre 17.75 years (18 years minus 4 games (game 1 1992, and last 3 of 2010, yes, thats 300 games in sequential order)
30 Fourth Quarter Comebacks (1.6 avg), 45 Game-Winning Drives (2.5 avg)

The Sherman years, like Since61 said "I would argue that if Holmgren remained as Packers HC Favre and the Packers would have another SB or two."

Again, we are here because: "the author's still working through some unresolved Favre issues." Thanks Savage57 LOL!
Edit: and its also obvious, that there's good size number on this site with the same unresolved Favre issues. LOL

HankScorpio's picture

Unresolved issues are in the eye of the beholder, I guess. I thought the article did a fine job of dealing with the baggage that came along with Favre's greatness. And it didn't touch the details of Favre's addictive personality that left him in multiple rehab stints and popping Vicodin like they were PEZ, which is in the news now. Personally, I don't think you can separate those kinds of details out from the great things Favre did on the field. They are linked. The same personality trait that led to all those GW drives you love to cite took him to those rehab clinics. Like any other human (including Rodgers), you take the good with the bad.

4EVER's picture

Reading a fair or one sided article are in the eye of the beholder, I guess.

Finwiz's picture

I wonder about how those Vicodin's impacted his play on the field and it starts to make more sense why he threw so many ridiculously pathetic interceptions. He was high, half the time.

4EVER's picture

That's not my down vote...let the hate flow through you!

stockholder's picture

1 super -bowl win each. That says it all. Better Teams? (It's not just about the QB.) Arron Rodgers has not retired yet. He's a PR guy who wants money. And yet I think this article is more about who threw the better spiral. Yes A-Rod is text-book. Brett Emotional. Please look at how many qbs were drafted under these two. There were doubts. Lets be fair to both. They both played very well for the packers!

PAPackerbacker's picture

Yes they did both play well for the Packers!! It's not all about the QB. Team play wins games, championships, and Super Bowls. And a team with good defense wins championships. A QB can throw 5 touchdowns in a game but if the defense allows the other team to score 6 then it doesn't matter how good the QB is or was. Good QB play is crucial to a winning season and so is good defense!! It has to be a team effort from both sides of the ball to form a championship caliber team. Go Pack Go!!

Ferrari Driver's picture

Lynn Dicky is a perfect fit for you comments. He was truly one of the great passers in the NFL and the connection between Dicky and Lofton was one of the best the league and fans have ever seen. Take a look back at two games, one against Washington in 1983 with the Packers pulling that one out 49 to 48 and the other against Denver in the snowstorm and while Dicky and the Packers offense were terrific, the defense was a sieve.

If the team defense is good enough, the opportunities to perform a come from behind victory by the quarterback may be far and few between.

HankScorpio's picture

"1 super -bowl win each. That says it all."

I think a lot more needs to be said. Otherwise, you're lumping them with guys like Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon, Jeff Hostetler, Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco, Nick Foles and Brad Johnson--who all exceed guys like Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, Warren Moon, Dan Fouts and Fran Tarkenton.

John Galt's picture

Sorry, but who is comparing Favre and Rodgers? Straw man article. They are/were both great and like a true Packer fan I don't rank them.

If Rodgers plays into 2020/2021 that will be 4 decades with two HOF QB's as starters:
1990's
2000's
2010's
2020's

That's totally crazy.

LayingTheLawe's picture

I agree. My first thought when I saw we needed to stop comparing these guys Was that I didn't know we had started.

Ross Uglem's picture

all it takes is a quick search through twitter or facebook groups. I'm not going to blow up people's spots by putting their bad takes in an article. The idea that I would just write this to write it is hilarious, though. Thanks for the laugh.

LayingTheLawe's picture

The title starts by saying we should not compare these two players and then the author goes on to compare them anyway after a brief introduction. I stopped right there and didn't read the rest as I knew all I needed to know about the author after idiocy like that. A nice article could be made on this topic. This wasn't it.

Since '61's picture

First off, Rodgers is a better player than Favre. He plays much smarter than Favre. However, Favre made plenty of great plays.
Ross, writes about A/YA and Favre's mistakes, but let's not forget that when Favre retired he held just about every NFL passing record. Yes, he had the most interceptions but he also had most passes attempted, most completed, most games played, most games won and most TDs. Not to mention 3 league MVPs and a Super Bowl winner. He is not only a HOF player but he is one of the greatest QBs and players in NFL history. Compare him with Rodgers is fine but be fair about it and mention his positive accomplishments along with his negative accomplishments. Plus I would argue that if Holmgren remained as Packers HC Favre and the Packers would have another SB or two.

As for Rodgers he is a better player because he plays smarter than Favre, he is more accurate from the pocket and on the run and he rarely hurts the team. The author mentions that Rodgers worst game was the 2014 NFCCG!!!! Really??? You might remember that Rodgers played that game on one leg and yet he had a 16-0 lead at halftime and a 12 point lead with less than 4 minutes to play. There are at least a few other games that can be considered worst games for Rodgers, such as the loss in Buffalo in 2014. In any case Rodgers is the best player I have ever seen play QB and I've seen them all going back to Unitas, Starr, Van Brocklin etc. His mobility and his accuracy on the run separate him from everyone else. Not to mention his TD/Int ratio which is a much more important benchmark than average yards per attempt. Wins/Losses/TDs/Ints are the important stats for a QB. Favre and Rodgers have been two of the best ever and we've been fortunate to have them both in Green Bay for the past 26 seasons.

BTW Ross, I usually appreciate your articles but for your information, Frank Ryan had a 13 year career in the NFL as a QB with the Rams, Browns and Redskins. He led the Browns to the NFL championship in 1964 defeating the Baltimore Colts 27-0 in the championship game. There is this new thing now called Google. Just enter Frank Ryan QB and you will find the information above plus more. Frank Ryan was not just some guy, he was a good, not great, NFL QB. Michael Vick a convicted criminal does not belong in the same sentence with Ryan or the other QBs you mentioned.

This could have been a great article if written fairly about both Rodgers and Farve and if about 3 minutes of research was conducted. Too bad.
Thanks, Since '61

Since '61's picture

Jonathan - I agree about the 2017 Panther game. A much poorer performance than the 2014 NFCCG. Again in Rodgers defense he was still injured but very courageous in making the attempt to play and trying to keep the Packers season alive. Both Favre and Rodgers have given us everything they had whenever they have taken the field for the Packers.
Thanks, Since '61

LAS VEGAS-TOM's picture

I was always a Brett Favre fan. That doesn't mean I think he was the better of the 2 QB's. Each had their own claim to fame. No sense in going through all of them here. I will say that AR Talent Wise is better. The one thing you can't take away from Brett, He got Better at the end of his career. AR isn't there yet. Favre never had anything close to the Wide Receiving core that AR was handed. In my opinion, the Best ever assembled. AR's Hail Mary's were Great to see, but I don't know if it ever got any better than Favre to Jennings at Denver on the 1st play of OT. That one's on the High Light Reel somewhere.
LVT

croatpackfan's picture

Ah, good old times...

This is my opinion some of you might agree with, many might not:

Brett Favre had huge positive impact on the Packers organization, there is no doubt. He did not do that alone, but he was very important part. Favre statistic is what it is. He was the first who achieved 500 passing TD and he did that in the shortest time (Manning needed much longer time to overcome that number!). So, it is how you look at the data, not just data...

What ruined, in my eyes, all those wonderful achievements and his position in Packers history was his behavior at the end of the Packers journey (as player). His "spoiled diva" moments showed us he was immature and he was egomaniac... And that is pity.

Aaron Rodgers, on the other hand, was and is playing on the highest level and his best games are games when he is playing football with joy. When he is doing his job (QB), in that games he is not so good. What gives him clear advantage over Brett Favre is his mature behavior and his care of franchise. I believe he is not just acting like that, but I truly believe that he cares. And I believe time will give us confirmation of Aaron's maturity...

Ross, that was perfect article for the time of the year. Thank you!

Ross Uglem's picture

appreciate the kind words.

Bearmeat's picture

Great article, Ross. Thanks. Just a heads up though - it's long PAST time (not passed time - that is a homophonic error) :D

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"