| Re: Why Brett Favre sucks...
Here's the thing, well actually a few of things:
1. Brett is not as good as he was, but is still considerably better than quite a few starters in this league, young and old, including Drew Bledsoe, Brad Johnson, Mark Brunell, John Kitna, David Carr, etc. Rodgers is not better than those guys and from what I've seen will never be worthy of the starting job, development or not.
2. The Packers are very bad right now for a number of reason including the play of their middle offensive lineman including 2 rookie starters and a 2nd year guy. Quarterbacks need offensive lines if they are going to do anything.
3. The Packers have serious running game issues because of: the aforementioned lineman, a new blocking scheme, and injuries to Henderson and Green. It's hard to have a good passing game when the defense knows you can't run.
4. Look at the teams that have beaten us: Bears 6-0, Saints 5-1, Eagles 4-2, Rams 4-2. All division leaders except the rams who have one more loss than the Seahawks. And we were very much in two of those games. Against NO Favre passed for 340 and 3 TDs to 1 INT. Detroit, 340, 3 TD's 0 INT. St. Louis, 220, 1 TD, 0 INT. He has as many TDs and INTs as Byron Leftwich who, most would agree, is a pretty good QB. He's thrown less picks than Eli Manning, Rex Grossman, and Matt Hasslebeck, and I don't hear many people calling for their heads.
The Packers are struggling for a lot of reasons, but to pin it all on Brett's age is flat out ignorant. To make the claim out of personal dislike is just pointless.
Why did you even start this thread? Maybe you should go try to learn the game of football before you make any more unintelligent comments.
Also, Oakland is the worst team in football right now. Hands down.
| 
Connect with Facebook
your neutral noob rep does NOTHING TO ME!!! 
