Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 55
  1. #31
    aaeyers's Avatar
    aaeyers is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    436

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "benjamite" wrote:
    Favre was overrated. He was only good becuase he had Robert Ferguson.

    ;D ;D LMAO



  2. #32
    midgensa's Avatar
    midgensa is offline Jersey Retired Free Kick Specialist 3 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,308

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "Schutz" wrote:
    "StillPurple" wrote:
    No doubt. You would think that Favre would keep the arm strength and lose the INTs.

    I mean, I compare Favre to Elway, because in some ways, they are similar: roll-out, 'take the game on my shoulders' kind of QBs, who liked the post pattern deep ball, and who had horrendous arm strength.

    The only difference for me: Elway's decision-making was about a zillion times better. His ability to manage a drive and be a team player without blowing up the drive and the team were far superior to Favre's. Also, we all knew how tough John Elway was, without constantly having to hear about it again and again...

    Plus, let's do the math (for those of us counting rings): 2 rings to 1...
    Wait, which way do you want it?
    In an earlier post you were saying that Favre couldn't find a way to repeat his superbowl win so he was a bad QB, then you were saying that QBs like Dan Marino who didn't win a SB ring(which if Favre was bad for only winning one Marino must be on T-Jack's level) are better than Favre, so rings don't matter.
    But now you say rings do matter when it involved comparing other QBs to Favre.
    Strange.

    Favre is a top 5 all time QB, first ballot HoFer, and the definition of iron man football.
    You may have some sort of man hate for who he is, but that doesn't change the fact that he holds a crap load of records, won a superbowl, and like I said is a top 5 QB.
    Eh ... you cannot get through to people like this. Favre is superior to every QB he keeps throwing out there. Even Mr. Elway. The INT % is comparable (Elway 3.1 to Favre's 3.3), but everything else is all Favre ... YPG, TDs, WINS, MVPs, Passer rating (which Elway is BELOW 80 on) and Favre is a better playoff performer (rating, TDs, Yards and Completion % all higher ... though Elway has an amazing 14-8 playoff record). These guys are very comparable. But for someone to discount Favre as compared to Elway and start comparing him to Dan Fouts, Jim Hart, Ken Anderson and Archie Manning is someone who absolutely cannot be reasoned with.

  3. #33
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "midgensa" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "StillPurple" wrote:
    No doubt. You would think that Favre would keep the arm strength and lose the INTs.

    I mean, I compare Favre to Elway, because in some ways, they are similar: roll-out, 'take the game on my shoulders' kind of QBs, who liked the post pattern deep ball, and who had horrendous arm strength.

    The only difference for me: Elway's decision-making was about a zillion times better. His ability to manage a drive and be a team player without blowing up the drive and the team were far superior to Favre's. Also, we all knew how tough John Elway was, without constantly having to hear about it again and again...

    Plus, let's do the math (for those of us counting rings): 2 rings to 1...
    Wait, which way do you want it?
    In an earlier post you were saying that Favre couldn't find a way to repeat his superbowl win so he was a bad QB, then you were saying that QBs like Dan Marino who didn't win a SB ring(which if Favre was bad for only winning one Marino must be on T-Jack's level) are better than Favre, so rings don't matter.
    But now you say rings do matter when it involved comparing other QBs to Favre.
    Strange.

    Favre is a top 5 all time QB, first ballot HoFer, and the definition of iron man football.
    You may have some sort of man hate for who he is, but that doesn't change the fact that he holds a crap load of records, won a superbowl, and like I said is a top 5 QB.
    Eh ... you cannot get through to people like this. Favre is superior to every QB he keeps throwing out there. Even Mr. Elway. The INT % is comparable (Elway 3.1 to Favre's 3.3), but everything else is all Favre ... YPG, TDs, WINS, MVPs, Passer rating (which Elway is BELOW 80 on) and Favre is a better playoff performer (rating, TDs, Yards and Completion % all higher ... though Elway has an amazing 14-8 playoff record). These guys are very comparable. But for someone to discount Favre as compared to Elway and start comparing him to Dan Fouts, Jim Hart, Ken Anderson and Archie Manning is someone who absolutely cannot be reasoned with.

    FYI generally. If people are going to compare & downplay Favre's interception record to other great QB's that have played on a per games played/per passes thrown basis, They need to make sure they do that with ALL his records.

    For example, Favre surpassed many of Tarkenton's records, but Tark played his entire career, with the exception of 1 season, in a league that played only 14 games a season.

    Favre played a lot more games than many great QB's.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  4. #34
    Purple Mk1's Avatar
    Purple Mk1 is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    84

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    I know that everybody is probably getting sick of all of the Favre coverage, but Sal Paolantonio has an interesting take on it on the ESPN website in an article called Overhyped: Favre didn't deliver in second half of career. The title says it all.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...sal&id=3281535

  5. #35
    AngloVike's Avatar
    AngloVike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Sandhurst, UK
    Posts
    6,778
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "Purple" wrote:
    I know that everybody is probably getting sick of all of the Favre coverage, but Sal Paolantonio has an interesting take on it on the ESPN website in an article called Overhyped: Favre didn't deliver in second half of career. The title says it all.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...sal&id=3281535
    I reads that article and have to give the author credit for having the nuts to write that on ESPN given all the media fawning that has taken place this week over Favre. I've been trying to catch up with NFL news for the time I was away and it was refreshing to see someone reflect the real contribution that he made to the Packers in terms of team achivements. Just shows how much media hype and adulation can blind the fans to what someone really offers.
    Time spent annoying a Packer fan is never time wasted...


  6. #36
    KrackerJack's Avatar
    KrackerJack is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,502

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "benjamite" wrote:
    Favre was overrated. He was only good becuase he had Robert Ferguson.
    I agree completely...if it wasn't for future first time ballot receiver Robert Ferguson, Favre would have been nothing...Brett with his soft puppy love passes, and purely short passes only arm he was a gutless man who couldn't take risks... hewasn't that great, Ferguson made him, i mean seriously, last season wouldn't have been so good without Ferguson out there catching passes for him...

  7. #37
    midgensa's Avatar
    midgensa is offline Jersey Retired Free Kick Specialist 3 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,308

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "singersp" wrote:
    "midgensa" wrote:
    "Schutz" wrote:
    "StillPurple" wrote:
    No doubt. You would think that Favre would keep the arm strength and lose the INTs.

    I mean, I compare Favre to Elway, because in some ways, they are similar: roll-out, 'take the game on my shoulders' kind of QBs, who liked the post pattern deep ball, and who had horrendous arm strength.

    The only difference for me: Elway's decision-making was about a zillion times better. His ability to manage a drive and be a team player without blowing up the drive and the team were far superior to Favre's. Also, we all knew how tough John Elway was, without constantly having to hear about it again and again...

    Plus, let's do the math (for those of us counting rings): 2 rings to 1...
    Wait, which way do you want it?
    In an earlier post you were saying that Favre couldn't find a way to repeat his superbowl win so he was a bad QB, then you were saying that QBs like Dan Marino who didn't win a SB ring(which if Favre was bad for only winning one Marino must be on T-Jack's level) are better than Favre, so rings don't matter.
    But now you say rings do matter when it involved comparing other QBs to Favre.
    Strange.

    Favre is a top 5 all time QB, first ballot HoFer, and the definition of iron man football.
    You may have some sort of man hate for who he is, but that doesn't change the fact that he holds a crap load of records, won a superbowl, and like I said is a top 5 QB.
    Eh ... you cannot get through to people like this. Favre is superior to every QB he keeps throwing out there. Even Mr. Elway. The INT % is comparable (Elway 3.1 to Favre's 3.3), but everything else is all Favre ... YPG, TDs, WINS, MVPs, Passer rating (which Elway is BELOW 80 on) and Favre is a better playoff performer (rating, TDs, Yards and Completion % all higher ... though Elway has an amazing 14-8 playoff record). These guys are very comparable. But for someone to discount Favre as compared to Elway and start comparing him to Dan Fouts, Jim Hart, Ken Anderson and Archie Manning is someone who absolutely cannot be reasoned with.

    FYI generally. If people are going to compare & downplay Favre's interception record to other great QB's that have played on a per games played/per passes thrown basis, They need to make sure they do that with ALL his records.

    For example, Favre surpassed many of Tarkenton's records, but Tark played his entire career, with the exception of 1 season, in a league that played only 14 games a season.

    Favre played a lot more games than many great QB's.
    Deal ...
    Favre per game TDs- 1.72
    YDs- 239.9 INTs- 1.12 Rating per game - 85.7
    Tarkenton per game TDs- 1.39
    YDs - 191.1
    INTs- 1.08 Rating per game - 80.4
    Elway per game TDs - 1.28 YDs- 220.0 INTs- .97 Rating per game - 79.9

    Yeah, Favre played ALOT more games than these guys
    : ... a whole 11 more than Fran the Man and 23 more than Elway.
    He throws slightly more picks a game (though I am surprised Elway's number was so low), but is good for plenty more yards and more TDs than both guys I mentioned. They are all very comparable in Yds/Att. but Elway is not even close in TD % with Fran or Favre (which Fran does have a higher percentage of his throws go for TDs).
    But if you want the bottom line on comparing Favre to Tark ... just look at Tark's deplorable playoff numbers. I love Fran the Man ... but he didn't perform when it mattered most.

  8. #38
    Rattz's Avatar
    Rattz is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    56

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    It is very difficult to compare era's ie. Favre to Tark.
    Tark and that generation of QB's called their own game - every play.
    I think Tark's numbers are even more impressive as they came at a time where running the football was all they did and the defenses could grab and be more physical with the receivers.
    In today's NFL, you can't touch the QB or the WR - of course numbers are going to be off the charts today, they should be.
    All of Favre's records will be shattered shortly by Peyton anyway.



  9. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK
    Posts
    1,148

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "Schutz" wrote:
    "StillPurple" wrote:
    Hey Shutz, Brad Johnson has a Super Bowl ring, does that make him "great" ? So does Trent Dilfer and Jeff Hofstelter. Would you call them "great" because of that ?

    Remember that game about 5 years ago ? NFC Playoffs, Packers at the Rams. Favre absolutely sank the team by throwing I think 5 interceptions. It was ridiculous. And he has done that more than once (I remember him doing it against us). I think to judge Favre's record, you have to look specifically at what he did or did not do for his team in the playoffs. I don't have the stats, but I just wonder what Favre's overall playoff record is, and how many picks he threw.

    And yes, he often at least appeared more personal-stat-driven than team-driven.

    Yes, the Packers won the Super Bowl, but if you are such a great QB, why not more than just one ? My argument is that they could have had more than that.

    The point is that the great QBs control the game, and that sometimes means sitting on the ball and handing off.

    BTW, I disagree about Eli. Throughout the playoffs, he threw zero INTs, and he had to throw some of those passes in the Show, because the game was so tight. Eli learned to throw shorter, high-percentage passes as the season went on. Eli threw those longer balls in the Super Bowl, but they were more like jump balls, because the Giants had decided that their own WRs were taller than the Pats corners, and so throwing those passes made sense, because the Pats corners were getting "owned" in that game.

    I also think that Favre's lame attempt to get Randy Moss was bad. No sense of team or history, especially after Moss mooned Lambeau. Can you imagine Tom Brady saying something like "We can't win and I will retire if we don't get Javon Walker ?". Or Joe Montana saying "I walk if we don't get Michael Irvin" ? Lame.
    Wow, go ahead and compile how many records Brad Johnson and company had.

    Season
    Team
    Passing
    Rushing
    Fumbles
    G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost
    2007 Green Bay Packers 16 16 356 535 66.5 4,155 7.8 28 15 15 93 95.7 29 12 0.4 0 9 3
    2006 Green Bay Packers 16 16 343 613 56.0 3,885 6.3 18 18 21 134 72.7 23 29 1.3 1 8 5
    2005 Green Bay Packers 16 16 372 607 61.3 3,881 6.4 20 29 24 170 70.9 18 62 3.4 0 10 7
    2004 Green Bay Packers 16 16 346 540 64.1 4,088 7.6 30 17 12 93 92.4 16 36 2.3 0 4 1
    2003 Green Bay Packers 16 16 308 471 65.4 3,361 7.1 32 21 19 137 90.4 18 15 0.8 0 5 2
    2002 Green Bay Packers 16 16 341 551 61.9 3,658 6.6 27 16 26 188 85.6 25 73 2.9 0 10 4
    2001 Green Bay Packers 16 16 314 510 61.6 3,921 7.7 32 15 22 151 94.1 38 56 1.5 1 16 6
    2000 Green Bay Packers 16 16 338 580 58.3 3,812 6.6 20 16 33 236 78.0 27 108 4.0 0 9 5
    1999 Green Bay Packers 16 16 341 595 57.3 4,091 6.9 22 23 35 223 74.7 28 142 5.1 0 9 4
    1998 Green Bay Packers 16 16 347 551 63.0 4,212 7.6 31 23 38 223 87.8 40 133 3.3 1 8 2
    1997 Green Bay Packers 16 16 304 513 59.3 3,867 7.5 35 16 25 176 92.6 58 187 3.2 1 7 4
    1996 Green Bay Packers 16 16 325 543 59.9 3,899 7.2 39 13 40 241 95.8 49 136 2.8 2 11 4
    1995 Green Bay Packers 16 16 359 570 63.0 4,413 7.7 38 13 33 217 99.5 39 181 4.6 3 8 4
    1994 Green Bay Packers 16 16 363 582 62.4 3,882 6.7 33 14 31 188 90.7 42 202 4.8 2 7 3
    1993 Green Bay Packers 16 16 318 522 60.9 3,303 6.3 19 24 30 199 72.2 58 216 3.7 1 14 6
    1992 Green Bay Packers 15 13 302 471 64.1 3,227 6.9 18 13 34 208 85.3 47 198 4.2 1 12 4
    1991 Atlanta Falcons 2 0 0 4 0.0 0 0.0 0 2 1 11 0.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
    TOTAL 5,377 8,758 61.4 61,655 7.0 442 288 439 2,888 85.7 555 1,786 3.2 13 147 64


    Brad Johnson

    Season
    Team
    Passing
    Rushing
    Fumbles
    G GS Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost
    2007 Dallas Cowboys 16 0 7 11 63.6 79 7.2 0 0 1 9 85.0 5 -5 -1.0 0 -- --
    2006 Minnesota Vikings 15 14 270 439 61.5 2,750 6.3 9 15 29 200 72.0 29 82 2.8 1 9 4
    2005 Minnesota Vikings 15 9 184 294 62.6 1,885 6.4 12 4 23 134 88.9 18 53 2.9 0 5 3
    2004 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 4 4 65 103 63.1 674 6.5 3 3 8 55 79.5 5 23 4.6 0 2 1
    2003 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 16 16 354 570 62.1 3,811 6.7 26 21 20 111 81.5 25 33 1.3 0 6 2
    2002 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 13 13 281 451 62.3 3,049 6.8 22 6 21 121 92.9 13 30 2.3 0 8 2
    2001 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 16 16 340 559 60.8 3,406 6.1 13 11 44 269 77.7 39 120 3.1 3 4 2
    2000 Washington Redskins 12 11 228 365 62.5 2,505 6.9 11 15 20 150 75.7 22 58 2.6 1 5 3
    1999 Washington Redskins 16 16 316 519 60.9 4,005 7.7 24 13 29 177 90.0 26 31 1.2 2 12 6
    1998 Minnesota Vikings 4 2 65 101 64.4 747 7.4 7 5 4 30 89.0 12 15 1.3 0 1 1
    1997 Minnesota Vikings 13 13 275 452 60.8 3,036 6.7 20 12 26 164 84.5 35 139 4.0 0 4 1
    1996 Minnesota Vikings 12 8 195 311 62.7 2,258 7.3 17 10 15 119 89.4 34 90 2.6 1 5 1
    1995 Minnesota Vikings 5 0 25 36 69.4 272 7.6 0 2 2 18 68.3 9 -9 -1.0 0 2 0
    1994 Minnesota Vikings 4 0 22 37 59.5 150 4.1 0 0 1 5 68.5 2 -2 -1.0 0 -- --
    1993 Minnesota Vikings 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
    1992 Minnesota Vikings 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
    TOTAL 2,627 4,248 61.8 28,627 6.7 164 117 243 1,562 83.1 274 658 2.4 8 63 26


    But no you're right comparing a bunch of mediocre QBs to Brett Favre is a great example of why he was such a "terrible" QB.
    Please, I know some of the Vikings fans don't like anybody that isn't currently playing for the Vikings, but it's just said that someone would try to compare Brad Johnson to Brett Favre.

    If Brett Favre didn't play football his way he probably wouldn't have been have the QB he was.
    Kind of like telling Fran Tarkenton, well I think he would have been a good QB if he didn't run so much.


    Was Brett Favre the best to ever play?
    Probably not
    , there's a couple guys I'd put ahead of him.
    Was he one of the top 5 to ever play?
    I would say yes, and to sit around and nit pick at a QB who broke so many records and made so much history is just dumb.
    Take off the Purple tinted wonder land glasses and acknowledge he was a great QB.
    He may have had some faults, but that doesn't mean we should sit around trying to convince people that makes him a bad QB.

    This announcer is still and idiot with nothing more than a grudge or some sort of look at me personality who wanted to tear Favre down to make himself look smart.
    He was not even the best "packer" qb. That title belongs to B.Starr. Championships, qb rating: B.Starr. He deserves props for playing as long as he did, and the records are by-products of his longevity. Everyone is tied up with the records. P.Manning plays that many seasons and will smash the records. Greatest of all time? What a joke. There are several ahead of him Easy. They just all knew when to quit, mostly.
    Like someone else said, Eli, Payton, D.Williams, Elway, B.Jofnson, and Dillhole all have the exact same # of Lombardi trophies. Favre just kept playing. The last decade of his career was mediocre except for last year. Greatest ever? I think Montana and Brady are it. You can't even put Favrays name next to those guys except for his longevity.
    Tuco the world.....

  10. #40
    vikinggreg's Avatar
    vikinggreg is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    4,770

    Re: ESPN Analyst tears into Favre

    "Schutz" wrote:
    "StillPurple" wrote:
    No doubt. You would think that Favre would keep the arm strength and lose the INTs.

    I mean, I compare Favre to Elway, because in some ways, they are similar: roll-out, 'take the game on my shoulders' kind of QBs, who liked the post pattern deep ball, and who had horrendous arm strength.

    The only difference for me: Elway's decision-making was about a zillion times better. His ability to manage a drive and be a team player without blowing up the drive and the team were far superior to Favre's. Also, we all knew how tough John Elway was, without constantly having to hear about it again and again...

    Plus, let's do the math (for those of us counting rings): 2 rings to 1...
    Wait, which way do you want it?
    In an earlier post you were saying that Favre couldn't find a way to repeat his superbowl win so he was a bad QB, then you were saying that QBs like Dan Marino who didn't win a SB ring(which if Favre was bad for only winning one Marino must be on T-Jack's level) are better than Favre, so rings don't matter.
    But now you say rings do matter when it involved comparing other QBs to Favre.
    Strange.

    Favre is a top 5 all time QB, first ballot HoFer, and the definition of iron man football.
    You may have some sort of man hate for who he is, but that doesn't change the fact that he holds a crap load of records, won a superbowl, and like I said is a top 5 QB.
    I'd say top ten but 5 is hard. As for Elway and Favre, SB 32 Elway has a torn bicep tendon, not a pinky or thumb injury or bruised elbow. With his 37 year old football limp help bet the 11.5 favored Favre lead Packers.
    Elway didn't freeze up at 38 and was able to repeat.

    [img width=450 height=326]http://i.a.cnn.net/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0611/gallery.nfl.10.greatest.moments/images/a10.helicopter.jpg[/img]

    Didn't see Favre do this in the last years of his career to make a drive

    I did see him lay ont the turf holding his neck when the breeze from Udeze's knee came close to his head



    drawing a flag and instantly healing his lordship

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ESPN.com poll of the night. What to do with Favre
    By Turboe in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-29-2008, 11:01 PM
  2. ESPN fires baseball analyst Reynolds
    By Vikes in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-27-2006, 03:55 AM
  3. Brett Favre on ESPN Radio
    By Vikes in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-28-2006, 06:53 AM
  4. Favorite ESPN analyst
    By sdvikefan in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-07-2005, 03:23 AM
  5. seeing Favre on the verge of tears....
    By ADubya26 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-09-2005, 08:48 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •