Brett Favre: A User's Guide

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 18, 2009 9:00 PM CDT Comment 43 comments

Packer fan here. I hate you, you hate me, blah blah blah.

Ok, so now that I've gotten that out of the way, here are 10 tips for rooting for Brett Favre:

10. Never, NEVER turn off a game late. Dude has a ton of comeback victories. Thirty-nine at last count, though the pace has slowed significantly in the last few years.

9. Never, NEVER turn off a game late. Dude will occasionally throw a game deciding INT late when you least expect it.

8. Get your wins early. Going back over the last 5 years, Favre has shown a dramatic tendency to fade late in the season. Ask the Jets. Now I know he was banged up last year, but the truth is that if you go into the last month of the season needing 3 wins to make the playoffs, you're in trouble. He just isn't a guy who can throw a team on his back in December and carry them to the playoffs anymore.

7. Accept now the fact that you will lose to Chicago on December 28th. The Brett Favre that played better in cold weather is gone. Long gone. His last dozen cold weather games (including blowout losses against Chicago, in Lambeau in 2007, and of course the NFC championship game in 2007, in Lambeau) were train wrecks for Favre.

6. Get ready to watch him embrace the dome. The correlary to #7 above. I know he's 6-10 in the dome over his career, but things are different now, and not just because he's wearing purple. Dude doesn't like to be cold anymore and barring unseasonable weather in Pittsburgh in late October or Green Bay in early November, he should only have to play one cold weather game all year. He'll excel in the dome, particularly early in the season, in part because it'll protect from elements he can no longer handle.

5. All Day is still, by far, the most important guy on your team. But you better hope that Mr. Noodle (Childress) saves some wear and tear on him early in the season. Come December, Favre's arm will be all but spent, and your defense and All Day will have to carry you into the playoffs and beyond.

4. "Brett Favre loves football." Get used to that phrase. I know you've heard it a lot already, but you're about to hear it: Every. Damn. Week.

3. Accept right now the fact that you're going to be treated to some stories of locker room hijinx. Brett's a towel snapper and apparently last year he hid a mounted rodent in the locker of a team mate. Be prepared for the fact that everyone will pretend to love it, while the players will secretly think he's a dick, and be prepared for the fact that he's not going to gel with every personality on your team. Because he won't. It's just a question of whether you win enough so that no one says anything. And you'll see him in his maudlin moments. They come a lot more often than they used to. He may love football, and he wants to win, but it's not life or death for him anymore, and he'll "cherish the moment" on the field after losses just as readily as he will after wins.

2. Enjoy the highs, because there will be some. He'll have a 300yd, 4TD day at some point, and maybe more than one, and it'll feel like you can't lose with him at QB. It'll feel like he's 30 and not 40. And you'll be overjoyed that he's your QB. You'll laugh at his jokes, his dirty red hat, at his silly grin, and all will seem right with the world. Until it's not. And then:

1. Accept the Interceptions. They're coming and you know it. He's going to have a 4 pick day at some point. Most games he'll throw at least one pick, and even when he doesn't, there will be 2-3 passes that will make you say "what the f***" as they bounce off the hands of wide open defenders. If you're lucky, he won't have a 6+ pick day like he did against the Rams in the playoffs all those years ago now, but he might, and it might come at the worst possible moment. Favre believes, I mean he REALLY believes he can make any throw at any time no matter the coverage, and given the opportunity he'll try to prove it. Age hasn't changed that and Darell Bevel wasn't able to hammer it out of him in Green Bay and he won't be able to hammer it out of Favre in Minnesota either. The man honestly does not care about stats other than his consecutive game streak. I mean, when people note a milestone stat for him, he likes it. That's obvious. But when I say he does not care about stats, I mean he just does not give a damn how many picks he throws in a game, in a season, in a career, or even in a row. He just doesn't care and no amount of criticism or coaching will make him care. If he thinks he has to make plays to win the game, he'll continue to chuck the ball into coverage maddeningly, and he just.... won't.... care... when you call him on it later. He'll shrug his shoulders and say he was trying to make a play and that if he couldn't make a play they wouldn't win anyway, and at some point you have to take chances. And that's when Mr. Noodle will have to take the ball out of his hands and rely on All Day to get you the win, if he can. Essentially, he's John Elway in 97 and 98, only he won't admit it. That's not quite right, but it's close. in 97 and 98, Elway knew what he was. He squeezed enough plays out of his body to keep the defenses honest and he gave the ball to TD again and again. He didn't force things. He didn't try to make plays when they weren't there. And he won two titles. Bevell will try to convince Favre that's the route he should take. And he'll fail. The only quesstion is will your defense and and All Day be good enough to get Favre, a sporadically very good, frequently average and sporadically terrible QB a title?

Have fun finding out!

This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.

7 recs | Comment 43 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yeah…..we know. Good post.

by Hoss-Drone on Aug 18, 2009 9:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

LOLOLOL!

Thanks Ted, awesome post! :)

Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!

by DCPurple on Aug 18, 2009 9:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Well said

Enjoyed the post and will enjoy finding out. Certainly more than the alternative.

by PurpleJesus on Aug 18, 2009 9:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice post!

stretch to say we ‘hate’ you… don’t want to see your team win, dislike the dickheads from any team who just want to come in and talk shit… not just the packers. maybe a little more, but not only. ;-)

I accept Brett, warts and all…

I believe the 'push off' cost us 'our' SuperBowl...
I believe you 'go for the win'... instead of 'taking a knee'...

by ArizonaVikingsFan on Aug 18, 2009 9:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Favre is the Greatest QB in NFL History.

Goodnight!

by REVENGE4FAVRE on Aug 18, 2009 10:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Great post

I just hope a dome environment dampens his INTs..a lot.

"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any one of us." -Kirby Puckett

by less cowbell, more 'neau on Aug 19, 2009 12:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Favre's INTs

His aren’t as bad as some because they tend to be way downfield, almost like a punt with coverage slightly better than last year’s Viking special teams.

But an INT on a 2-yard prayer to the Norse god of YAC? Yikes!

by KC Viking on Aug 19, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Brett Favre a user's guide= idiot

In my Packer’s sleepwear (with booties) in the Wisconsin winter, as a child, I didn’t see you. When I cried at age 9 when Lynn Dickey, John Jefferson, James Lofton, and company lost to Dallas- I didn’t see you. When we paid Rich Campell ridiulous money to do nothing, I didn’t see you. When Brett Favre ignored a conservative Mike Holmgren and won games (and a Super Bowl), I suddenly saw you. Were you a closet fan? Just couldn’t get on the Randy Wright bandwagon and were waiting for something better? Or are you the type of Packer fan that has no sense of decencey and respect for accomplishment? This man delivered a trophy to your doorstep after decades of sucking- are you kidding me? He deserved to play until he was DONE in Green Bay and not until Ted Thompson (no nada whole lata) said he was. Don’t believe the crap that you think is intellectual that comes out your you know what- Brett Favre is just like all the rest of us: we work our jobs, we work hard, but as we grow older we are not as fast as the new hires, but we still retain the fire that drew us to our careers. He doesn’t want to quit yet and there is no problem with that- there should of been no problem with that in G.B. since he paid for the remodel of our stadium with his Jersey sales. When an employee DOES for the company like Brett has, the company should return the favor. Instead, Ted Thompson kicked him out on his ass like so many employers do these days. God love the Vikings for giving Brett a chance, god love the Packers because they’re are going to need it on Oct 5th, and thank god somebody respects experience, time served, and the tradition that the NFL was built on. I am ordering a John Randle Jersey so that I can cut it down the middle and sew it onto my Packer’s Favre jersey- because those are two men who know how the game is susposed to be played- not from your armchair quarterback spoiled 90’s Packer fan second guessing position on the wrong side of history- but from the trenches. GOD BLESS THE VIKINGS AND GOD BLESS BRETT FAVRE!

by Brett Starr on Aug 19, 2009 2:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Wow.

Actually, I’ve been a Packer fan since 1974 when I was about five. Where were you when John Brockington hit the wall, Mr. Johnny-come-lately?

“and thank god somebody respects experience, time served, and tradition that the NFL was built on”.

Uh, yeah. Because I’m sure if the Vikings’ other QBs weren’t awful, they STILL would have brought Favre in, not because it was the best thing for their team, but because of his experience, his time served and NFL tradition.

Time to go back on your meds, pal.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 19, 2009 6:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Spoiler Alert

Skip this post if you’re still a football virgin and want to keep that pretty lil’ cherry :)

Where were you when John Brockington hit the wall, Mr. Johnny-come-lately?

I saw that. Also saw Darryl Stingley get crunched. The ref get nailed in the head by a stray bottle at the Met on a grim day when Tark’s dad died. Watched as Tatum adjusted his stride so that he and Thomas could nail Sammy White at full speed between them.

Football’s a violent sport, moreso than hockey, I think.

I can understand Brett Starr’s angst, and respect it. I’d’ve felt the same way if the Vikings had let Tark go in the end and he was snapped up by the Cowboys; mad as hell at the Vikings, but supportive of Tarkenton. It’s tough, even for long-time fans to always remember that the NFL is no longer the mostly pure sport it once was. And yeah, I think it used to be that. Sure, the franchises made money, but they never made truly big money til about 1970 when they got the big contracts with the networks. Once that happened, things started to change, become more business-like because there was more money at stake. Silly, old-fashioned notions that live within a lot of fans, stuff like honor and revenge and courage and loyalty, those all became commodities on the table, to buy and sell and trade. Rivalries between franchises mean something to us, but to the NFL those are market values. Do you think that the Colts would have moved if there had been a great rivalry tradition between them and the Redskins? Irsay could have drummed up a lot of patronage if he had that to gin up his sales. To the league, the franchises, and to the players, football is a business and a career. To us fans, caught up in the joy and thrill of the game, things taken on the image that the NFL wants us to see and experience. The drama of wondering if the old gladiator will return out of retirement to stride the coliseum once more like a giant, or will he be content with his legend.

Favre has issues with the GB management and once he works that out of his system, he’ll probably be ready to retire for real. The Vikes signed him for 2 years, I’ll be happy if we get 1 good year out of him. The Vikings didn’t sign Favre because they have a hate-on for GB… they didn’t sign him because they’ve been seduced by his boyish charm. They signed him because they have two so-so QBs wrangling over a bone, and both of them are hurt as we go into week 2 of the preseason.

Nothing personal, Brett Starr…. unfortunately.

by DCPurple on Aug 19, 2009 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Best thread ever.

The number of heartfelt fanposts and comments has increased exponentially since Favre signed on the dotted line. I’m a lowly whipper snapper, and I see the Favre signing as a very high-risk but potentially high reward proposition. I’d like a Lombardy trophy but I’d settle for a come-from-behind, skin-of-your-teeth, did-that-just-happen, wasn’t-he-lying-on-his-back victory in Lambeau from Brett if that’s all he and I can get from this.

Anyway, it’s good to see excitement so high. It should be an interesting season.

Fire Childress!

by dwarg on Aug 21, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

obviously

I think it’s safe to say that virtually all Vikings fans are aware of Brett’s tendencies after watching him play for the last umpteen years. It’s not like he played the bulk of his career in another division. Sure he throws Int’s but he also throws a lot of TD’s. I think all Vikings fans also know he is past his prime but he is also still effective. The bottom line is that he is a major improvement for the team because now there’s a legitimate passing threat and teams will have to actually think before they show an 8 man front.

I hope by some miracle the team can keep 4 QB’s because this is just a short term solution but I wonder how much real mentoring the other guys would get from Favre.

I wonder if Chilly will play the others a bit this year (in games where the team already has things wrapped up) to limit the wear and tear on the old man. Could his ego take that?

by ZakInOmaha on Aug 19, 2009 7:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Just one objection to this post

In a cold weather game at Soldier Field in December…do you think there’s going to be a lot of passing going on? No, its going to be a run duel. Matt Forte is a good back, but come on, who’s going to win in a run dominated game….the Vikings

by Loki The Viking God on Aug 19, 2009 8:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Haha

Well you better hope for some reason you guys don’t get down. Because Ted is exactly right about the things he said about Brett playing in the cold.

by packallday555 on Aug 21, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good post. Sincerely.

I’m hoping you’re wrong about #1 though. And I think there is some evidence that you are. Come on, admit that McCarthy got Favre to do things more his way in his last years in Green Bay. Favre whined in PCs that he wasn’t getting to chuck the ball downfield like he think he should have been doing, but … in the end, he did what McCarthy’s game plan called for. And in that final game, what was McCarthy doing? It sure as heck wasn’t running the ball, if I recall Ryan Grant only had a dozen carries and, worse yet, THIRTY YARDS on them. In conditions that absolutely SUCKED for passing. Yes, favre should not have been throwing that last ball. But if he didn’t … who else was gonna get anything done?

The difference between the Packers and the Vikes is that Favre won’t be put in that position often, if at all. You guys gave him, what, two decent years of Green and a couple more of Levens/Bennet in the 16 years he was there? He did what you said in #1 because the Packers rarely gave him a viable alternative. The Vikings will, and you will find your #1 is more about the Green Bay Packers, than it is about Brett Favre.

Have fun with Ryan Grant! ;)

by puddnhead on Aug 19, 2009 8:31 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

There is some truth to the notion that McCarthy did a better job of controlling Favre than Sherman.

I’ll agree with that.

The rest of your first paragraph is essentially the argument Favre made every time he got ripped for a pick from about 1998 on. I’m not saying there’s no sense to the argument at times. I’m just saying that it can’t be true every time he throws a pick.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 19, 2009 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thaks for the reply

You’re kinda dodging my main point though. What was the deal with Ryan Grant only getting 29 yards on 13 carries in NFC Championship game (I’ve looked it up now). No, Favre should not have been throwing it up there (what you got on his case for), especially being a 38 years old QB playing in 25 below weather in overtime in week 20 … but, come on, fess up, what choice did the Packers leave him really? What was it that was supposed to be happening, and why again was it Favre‘s fault that it wasn’t?

There are high stakes on both sides of the border in this my firend. If Favre falls flat on his face, yeah it really sets the Vikings back, nto only is this season blown, but their QB situation is maybe twice as precarious going into next year. But on the other hand, if he doesn’t, if he plays smart a la Elway and game manages an AP-led team to the Superbowl, you Pack fans who are honest with yoruselves will have to ask yourselves … how many more rings would we have gotten if our post-Ron Wolf GMs had gone all out to put a more decent team together around this guy? Did li’l old frugal, FA & trade averse Ted Thompson just piss away your last best chance to win it all? You went all the way to OT in the NFC championship on no run game whatsoever, on nothing more than Favre trying to will his aging body to carry his team one more time in absolutely brutal conditions, because his GM gave him no other option, he wouldn’t even give up a 4th to bring in a publically willing Randy Moss after all. You will have to ask, how many potential rings did we squander because he was so focused on going into “rebuilding mode.”

Just sayin’, your stakes here with how Favre does here may be higher than ours, in the big picture.

by puddnhead on Aug 19, 2009 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

On Grant:

He wasn’t the only RB that the Giants shut down in that Superbowl run. Grant had been tearing it up over the last 8 weeks of the season and into the playoffs but they couldn’t get anything going against the Giants. McCarthy didn’t commit to the ground game either (evidenced by Grant’s 13 carries), in part, I suspect, because he had Favre as his QB in Lambeau in a cold weather game. Favre had a very good first half and very bad, in my opinion, second half and overtime, and the last pick handed the Giants the ball on the Packers 34 in overtime.

In any event, you’re focusing on one game, or even one interception, that I threw out as an example of a larger pattern of increasingly poor performances late in games and in bad weather. Don’t lose sight of the bigger picture just because you disagree with the example I threw out.

I don’t dispute that the Vikings have exceptional talent at the RB spot, though I think the Packers in 2007 (to continue the example) had better talent at WR. I completely agree with the notion that AP and your defense (assuming healthiness for both) puts Favre in a significantly better position to win in spite of being past his prime. The problem is getting Favre to agree with it, because if he doesn’t, he could cost you games when you can’t afford to lose them.

Getting back to the notion that McCarthy got him to play under control better than Sherman, keep in mind that it was under Sherman that Bevell served as Favre’s QB coach from 03-05, which coincided with some. Favre’s pick totals in those seasons were 21, 17 and 29! And in 2003, Green had 1800+yds rushing for GB at a rate of 5.3yds per carry, while Favre threw 21 picks. Does that mean it will happen again in spite of AP’s presence? I don’t know. But it’s possible if Mr. Noodle, Bevell and the rest of the staff don’t persuade Favre to stay within the gameplan.

On Thompson:

Many, many Packer fans have already concluded that GB would have won more titles with Favre if Thompson had been more aggressive in free agency. I’m not sure I’m convinced, but I certainly could be wrong. If Minnesota wins it all it might prove Thompson’s critics correct. It depends how it happens, if it happens. I think the guy on the hook for blowing the chance to win it all with Favre again is Sherman. He was a terrible GM when Favre was still at or near his peak, whereas Thompson’s tenure began more or less at the same moment that Favre’s skills (especially late in the year) began showing signs of diminishing.

It’s going to be a fun season to watch. That’s for sure.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 19, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks again for the reply

On Sherman vs. Thompson: I think the difference is (if I remember correctly) that Sherman just had bad judgement as a GM. Didn’t he go after FAs, just he picked busts? And didn’t he try to trade up in drafts, etc, just did it dumbly (he traded up for a puntr that didn’t even make the team, right?)

Whereas Thompson seems to have conciously decided “I’m not even gonna try to make moves.” Presumably because he thought he was rebuilding & it wasn’t worth it. Oops. the difference is between stupidity and negligence. If you’re stupid (have bad judgement), you can’t just decide you’re gonna stop being stupid. But if you’re negligent … you could have done something, but for whatever reason didn’t bother.

On Favre in 2003: I’m not totally certain, but wasn’ that the year he played most of the year with a broken throwing thumb on his hand, even wearing a splint?

Thanks again for the reply, I’m glad you posted here, I’m sincerely enjoying the exchange, and I can see you know your stuff.

by puddnhead on Aug 19, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's possible that Favre was hurt that year. I don't recall.

Sherman did trade often for earlier picks that didn’t pan out and players that just weren’t very good. Like I said, he was a terrible GM and he had the success he had based almost entirely on the players he inherited from Wolf’s run as GM.

As for Thompson, I don’t think he’s negligent. I just think he believes that free agents aren’t the best way to build a team when you can draft and use the money you save on free agents to retain your best draftees. Not saying I agree with that, but it’s what he thinks. If he’s wrong, I think that makes him more dumb than negligent. I will say that his few ventures into free agency have a tendency to work out well: see Woodsoon and Pickett, by way of example.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 19, 2009 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks again for reply

All I was saying is, I think he may have cost you guys a Super Bowl berth in 2007 with that approach.

by puddnhead on Aug 20, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

McCarthy in control

I agree, that no coach after Holmgren has been able to get to Brett as well. Point is, however, that McCarthy is the exception to the rule, and I really don’t think Childress will be able to duplicate it. During the 2007 season McCarthy managed to push Favre to work out hard in the off-season and participate fully in training camp etc. That was both the foundation of his last good season and a sign he took coaching seriously.

Things leading up to Favre signing with the Vikings doesn’t exactly fit that mold.

by hythlodaeus on Aug 20, 2009 7:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If I could wade in for a moment

Just a couple of things— your post above makes it sound like Brett rarely had a running game during his time in Green Bay. The Packers did get 6 good years out of Ahman, one that included a season where he rushed for 1883 yards. When you factor in the Bennet/Levens years there were only a couple of times where Brett was left wanting in the running game department. He also had a good running game last year.

On the NFC Championship game; there was lots of blame to go around that day, not just for Brett. That said I don’t think running the ball more would have been the answer. When you’re running for two yards a clip all that does it set up 2nd and long and 3rd and long. And regarding the conditions, there was another quarterback on the field that day who attempted more passes than Brett did that day without throwing an interception.

by Phoenix138 on Aug 21, 2009 1:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually

In some post here in the last coupel days (not sure exactly where) I did specificlaly single out about 4-5 years of Levens/Bennett and Green. In the context of those being years that Favre’s INT totals were lower. In other words, proving my point, not destroying it.

Also note that the comment you were replying to was about 2007 specifically. Not 96-97 or the early 2000s

by puddnhead on Aug 21, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok

In 1994 Brett threw only 14 interceptions to 33 touchdowns. The leading rusher was Edgar Bennett with 623 yards.

In 2003 Brett thew 22 interceptions. The leading rusher was Green with 1883 yards.

If you want to look for a correlation to make a case as to why Brett might be able to keep his turnovers in check, think defense. If Brett is able to go into a game thinking that it’s OK to punt every now and then he’s less likely to force throws into coverage.

by Phoenix138 on Aug 21, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, Defense...

and perhaps not so much that Brett was comfortable with a punt…
but perhaps because the defense put the ball into Brett’s hands more frequently…

I believe the 'push off' cost us 'our' SuperBowl...
I believe you 'go for the win'... instead of 'taking a knee'...

by ArizonaVikingsFan on Aug 21, 2009 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good points

MM did get him to play more conservative and it turned out very well for us. If only he could have played that way every year for us…I have a feeling we would have had a lot more successful years.

Yes, we only had 30 yards rushing but that was for two reasons. First, the Giants were playing the run, forcing us to pass the ball. (Which is probably because they saw how Favre played at Soldier Field, in almost the exact same weather conditions.) Secondly, the Giants probably had the best run defense, and best defensive line in the league that year. (As they proved in the SB. Being the only team who could actually get pressure on Brady the entire year, aside from Philly and Baltimore.) They shut down the run early and the only way we were going to win was passing the ball. After all, passing was what had got us to that point. Favre couldn’t get it done in the passing game, and honestly it didn’t seem like he wanted to be out there.

You are right about our teams situations being different. With AP, Favre won’t have to be the gunslinger he has been, but he IS going to want to be. How successful your season is this coming year will depend on what mentality Favre takes on throughout the year. If he is conservative, and manages the game, you guys have a good shot at a SB. If he is the gunslinger of old, you guys will probably go 1-2 games into the playoffs.

" He did what you said in #1 because the Packers rarely gave him a viable alternative."

I gotta disagree here. Like Ted said Favre thinks he can make ANY throw, and when I say ANY I really mean it. Watching him in years in GB that became apparent too me rather early. If a WR is triple covered and he sees the slightest opening, and he thinks the team needs to “make a play” then he is going to throw it. Sometimes it will work, and he will look spectacular, and sometimes it won’t and he will look like an idiot. The bottom line is he doesn’t care. He is confident in his ability, and at times that’s a great thing, while other times it’s a horrible thing.

by packallday555 on Aug 21, 2009 5:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

THIS is the first post I’ve ever seen get bumped up to “rec’d” status?

rolling my eyes

Not that I think it’s a bad post… it isn’t, but… meh, whatever.

"Call it the three B's. What a Blatant, Brazen and Brilliant ploy to skip training camp and still be given the reins to a Super Bowl-caliber team." - Kevin Seifert

Brett Favre proves he is a total piece of garbage.

by TheViking83 on Aug 19, 2009 8:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

A Pack fan comes here

and posts something entertaiing, clever, and mostly respectful. Not to mention, fair-minded about their “Purple Judas” & our current starting QB, somthing that not many Pack fans are able to do right now I bet. Don’t see anything wrong with encouraging that.

by puddnhead on Aug 19, 2009 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

not that there is

and I even said, “not that I think it’s a bad post… it isn’t”

Its just that over the past year or so I’ve been coming here, I have seen a million PHENOMENAL posts, and I am just wondering why this one was the first to make people realize there is a “rec” button.

You love giving me hell, don’t you pudding?

"Call it the three B's. What a Blatant, Brazen and Brilliant ploy to skip training camp and still be given the reins to a Super Bowl-caliber team." - Kevin Seifert

Brett Favre proves he is a total piece of garbage.

by TheViking83 on Aug 19, 2009 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

only when you deserve it ;)

seriously, almost all your posts recetnly have been negative (this sucks, that sucks). It’s getting a little tiresome.

Things are what they are. If you can’t bring yourself to get on board … at least stop throwing yourself in front of the tracks?

by puddnhead on Aug 19, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

get over yourself

"Call it the three B's. What a Blatant, Brazen and Brilliant ploy to skip training camp and still be given the reins to a Super Bowl-caliber team." - Kevin Seifert

Brett Favre proves he is a total piece of garbage.

by TheViking83 on Aug 19, 2009 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

my IE wouldn’t let me use the ‘rec’ button… I had to switch to FF to get ’ir to work.

I believe the 'push off' cost us 'our' SuperBowl...
I believe you 'go for the win'... instead of 'taking a knee'...

by ArizonaVikingsFan on Aug 19, 2009 11:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Best Cheesehead Post Ever!

Apparently Green Bay has at least one fan with a 3 digit IQ and sense of humor. Thanks for sharing.

by ChemErik on Aug 19, 2009 8:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

You’re talking about the December game in Soldier field? We’ll have our 2nd and 3rd stringers in by then. Other than that game the weather is as favorable as you can get with 8 home dome games. 1 dome game against detroit. 1 dome game against St. Louis. 63% of season in domes. December game in the frozen tundra of Arizona. I love our schedule.

by dsludo on Aug 20, 2009 12:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Favre is still a huge upgrade

It seems like everyone wants to talk about Favre’s negatives and the fact that he isn’t the same player he was 10-15 years ago (a fact he acknowledges) but what they ignore is comparing him to the other options available to the team.

Over the last 3 years Favre has averaged 240 yards per game, 62.7 comp%, 4.1 TD%, 3.3 INT%, 83.1 QB rating while TJ has averaged 137 yards per game, 58.4 comp%, 3.8 TD%, 3.4 INT%, 76.5 QB rating and Rosenfels career averages are 129.9 yards per game, 62.5 comp%, 5.3 TD%, 5.2 INT%, and 81.2 QB rating.

Obviously Favre is an upgrade over TJ. Rosenfels looks comparable until you look at the yards per game and he’s a good 100 yards less per game. So is Favre an upgrade, yes. I think the Vikings have as good of a shot at winning the Super Bowl as anyone with Favre at the helm. Go Vikings!

by ZakInOmaha on Aug 20, 2009 8:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I didn't mean to suggest he wasn't.

I loved watching Favre as the Packers QB, though at this point I’d rather have Rodgers. I meant the positive stuff above. He’s going to have some big games as a Viking and he’s a major upgrade, if he can stay healthy, over Rosenfels and Jackson. There’s no question in my mind that the Vikes are a more dangerous team with Favre as their QB than either of the alternatives. The only argument otherwise is that Rosenfels might have less of a problem being a “manage the game” QB than Favre when their in a game where your ground game and Defense are good enough to win it.

My point with the negative stuff is that you sort of have to prepare for the wild ride that is being a fan of a Brett Favre quarterbacked football teams. There will be times you want to throttle him. It’s just the kind of player that he is. That’s all I meant.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 20, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gotcha

It’s true that Favre has his moments but at least there’s more hope now than when the decision was TJ or Rosenfels. I wish Rosenfels could stay healthy because he looks like he could be good.

It would be nice if NFL QB ego’s could handle being swapped out like MLB pitchers. If ones having a rough day then put in someone else but look at the uproar that occurred when Reid did that to McNabb last year.

by ZakInOmaha on Aug 21, 2009 7:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So now that this conversation has more or less played out...

… I want to thank you for the recs and the compliments in the comment thread. I’m glad you took the post in the spirit it was intended. And thanks for the interesting exchanges in the comment thread itself.

I really do hate the Vikings. Mostly because when I became a Packer and football fan in the 70’s they crushed GB every time they played them. But I don’t see any reason why that antipathy has to carry over to the fanbases.

Have fun this year!

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 20, 2009 8:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Mr. Noodle...

The best part of the whole thing.

by keomr on Aug 21, 2009 4:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Favre who

End the madness he is done kaput it is over. The biggest phooney in the free world has been exposed. it is all ABOUT him all the time. how were we so blind, good luck Viking fans for as long as you have your frnachise he will be your biggest regret in 2009. Trust me been there done that. He is like the old girlfriend that just won’t go away. yes, you are correct packer fans hate Viking fans and we resoect bears fans because they repect the game. i can not think of a better spot for the favre circus than minnesota don’t ya know… 7-9 and favre throws at least 20 picks if he plays all 16 games.

by SFP574 on Aug 27, 2009 10:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Just can’t get over that he’s your old girlfriend, can you? ;)

This fixation usually says a lot more about the “guy” than the “girl.”

by puddnhead on Aug 27, 2009 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ha Ha

yeah it’s really funny that this guy comes to the site, signs up, and posts this one comment just to depressurize his pent up feelings of jealousy. I sure hope he feels better…NOT!

"Skol pa fiskande"

by NobleSavage on Aug 28, 2009 9:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs