Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

ESPN: Who would you rather have, Brett Favre or Aaron Rodgers?


amfootball

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No question it's Rodgers.  Farve was a good quarterback who played for a really really long time.  Rodgers is an all time great statistically speaking.

 

Honestly the only advantage over Rodgers you can give to Farve is durability.  Rodger's isn't nearly as durable as Farve was.  But when he is in the game he's better then Farve ever was.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, am!

Favre - 508 Career TDs - 336 INTs - 20 years

Rodgers - 226 Career TDs - 57 INTs - 10 years

Let's roll the dice and play a little monopoly here. The projection of Rodgers playing an additional 10 years based upon the above numbers as status quo would result in - Rodgers - 452 TDs - 114 INTs - 20 years.

No question who would be the most "accurate" QB by stats coupled with Rodgers' arm strength. Assuming his career takes the path of least resistance (which could result in even better stats), it's a no-brainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe what short memories so many people have. Favre was better than Rodgers in every phase of the game in his prime, and that includes those that he lost a step in in the 2000s.

I agree. No doubt he was a great QB who played with so much guts and heart and soul, and for a long time.

Not to say that Aaron doesn't ~ his stats show that he's probably the best in the game right now.

I think these comparisons between QB's from different decades and eras are hard to do, the way the game has changed and such.

And sad to say, people seem to remember the circus surrounding Brett at the end, with the retiring, and then not retiring back and forth. This is what some choose to remember instead of player he was and the excitement he brought to the game. I admired his love for the game and his determination and will. I remember the incredible game he played after losing his father. I remember watching in tears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we really going to make this a statfest this early in the thread? Stats are inflated. We've been over that so many times on this forum.

Meanwhile it's like people don't even remember the 90s NFC Central that produced 4 playoff teams twice, 4 winning season teams more than twice and 2 coMVPs the 1 time Favre didn't win it straight up. And the remainder of the Packer's schedule was 1 easy game (Bengals), the 49ers, Cowboys and Eagles. That's why the stats don't pan out and it's also why they don't ultimately decide whose the greatest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't go wrong with either.  Packers are lucky have had them both back-to-back and add in Starr have had more than great QBs than most franchises can dream off.  The Colts are also in the same boat as they have had two of the all-time greats in Johnny U and Manning and Luck might very well be the next one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we really going to make this a statfest this early in the thread? Stats are inflated. We've been over that so many times on this forum.

Meanwhile it's like people don't even remember the 90s NFC Central that produced 4 playoff teams twice, 4 winning season teams more than twice and 2 coMVPs the 1 time Favre didn't win it straight up. And the remainder of the Packer's schedule was 1 easy game (Bengals), the 49ers, Cowboys and Eagles. That's why the stats don't pan out and it's also why they don't ultimately decide whose the greatest.

Favre played during a time when the AFC was dominant. It was his Packers actually that more or less passed the torch to the AFC with Denver's win over him in 1997 SB - it was pretty much all Pats, Colts and Steelers after that. Rodgers has played when the NFC has been the more dominant conference in terms of QB play and coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Favre played during a time when the AFC was dominant. It was his Packers actually that more or less passed the torch to the AFC with Denver's win over him in 1997 SB - it was pretty much all Pats, Colts and Steelers after that. Rodgers has played when the NFC has been the more dominant conference in terms of QB play and coaching.

The 49ers were dominant and there is no team more dominant than the early 90s cowboys..

Without those two teams, the packers would have more SBs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe what short memories so many people have. Favre was better than Rodgers in every phase of the game in his prime, and that includes those that he lost a step in in the 2000s.

Favre can't touch ARod's accuracy or turnovers man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure but Favre came into the league right in 1991, starter in 1992. The majority of his career was post Cowboys run ...

And the nfc is far less superior in recent years than it was in the 90s. Favre had a tougher road to the superbowl than ARod has had

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the nfc is far less superior in recent years than it was in the 90s. Favre had a tougher road to the superbowl than ARod has had

I disagree. The last few years the favorites in the NFC to win the SB have been at the top of the lists to win the SB over the top AFC teams the last few years with the Niners, Seahawks .... Still though Rodgers is only half way through. We will see how the next 5-8 years pan out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. The last few years the favorites in the NFC to win the SB have been at the top of the lists to win the SB the last few years with the Niners, Seahawks .... Still though Rodgers is only half way through. We will see how the next 5-8 years pan out.

90s cowboys, 49ers, redskins and giants were dominant. There was no salary cap for a portion of that time. Green Bay held their own in a very small market

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't really compare the stats.....Favre came up in a somewhat different era than Rodgers. I don't think it's coincidence that Favre had his best statistical season when he was almost 40.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe what short memories so many people have. Favre was better than Rodgers in every phase of the game in his prime, and that includes those that he lost a step in in the 2000s.

 

Rodgers easily. Brett Favre was by far the most overrated QB who ever played the game. Many seasons, he had higher INTs than TDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Favre played the entire Cowboys SB run, and on a forum where people write off playoff losses when they come at the hands of future SB champions, the Packers lost to those Cowboys twice after beating the team in the playoffs that the Cowboys beat in their first NFCCG. Then the Packers (plus Vikings in 2009) lost to the future SB champions 4 more times.

I'm not saying I justify all ^^^ of that garbage but people everywhere put spins like that on other players, games etc.

BOTT's point stands. Favre's best statistical season came at 40 and his best statistical game came at 39 in 2008. It was against a SB team too, not the 2014 Bears. Then he could have topped that game more than once in 2009 at 40 but he sat after 3 quarters most games...and still yielded career best stats!!!!!

Favre had 4 seasons where he threw more ints than TDs and 2 of them were his worst postprime years. I'll even spot you an int stat that exposes how dumb the int thing is. In 1998, he led the league in the behind Peyton and Plummer (who won a playoff game) and was going to his 3rd SB had the Jerry Rice phantom catch and TO catch not happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't really compare the stats.....Favre came up in a somewhat different era than Rodgers. I don't think it's coincidence that Favre had his best statistical season when he was almost 40.

Not volume stats although Favre has those but over QB passer efficiency it is Rodgers and it is not even close ... that being said Favre was much more clutch IMO than Rodgers. He could make the bone headed pick like he did vs the Giants and Vikes but he pulled many a game out of his hat ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not volume stats although Favre has those but over QB passer efficiency it is Rodgers and it is not even close ... that being said Favre was much more clutch IMO than Rodgers. He could make the bone headed pick like he did vs the Giants and Vikes but he pulled many a game out of his hat ...

Of course it's not close....I would bet passing efficiency has skyrocket over the last 10-15 yrs. I'm still taking Rodgers, but you you might as well throw the stats out the window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it's not close....I would bet passing efficiency has skyrocket over the last 10-15 yrs. I'm still taking Rodgers, but you you might as well throw the stats out the window.

Even with the different eras Favre had the most picks all time. It is hard to ignore that regardless of era. I am taking Rodgers too but in a must have game I am more inclined to go with an in prime Favre over Rodgers.

 

4th quarter comebacks/GWDs - Favre 30 comebacks/45 GWDs

 

4th quarter comebacks/GWDs - Rodgers 8 comebacks/12 GWDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that Favre has generally had more clutch time performances in his career when he seemingly makes everything out of nothing... and the fact that he predominately played with less offensive weapons than Rodgers are huge arguments for picking Brett over Aaron.... but honestly, watching Rodgers play, i think the biggest reason he looks weaker on 4th quarter and 4th down  is because he plays so efficiently that he doesn't allow himself to be PUT into situations where he has to reach into a bag of tricks and hope to find a miracle. He's just a better player and he makes those who play with him better. ( not to mention the comparative QB ratings)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers would be crippled if he played in the era Favre played, IMO. It is harder to be accurate when more contact is allowed on QBs with ends and LBs barreling at you plus more contact allowed on wideouts, IMO. So, I would have to say Rodgers' INTs would have been more and completion percentage less if he did play in Favre's era. Only thing that can put Rodgers over Favre is another SB and breaking Favre's TD record with longevity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...