RealGM

With all of the Favre threads, I questioned where to put this one, but I figured since the issue is at the heart of all of them (whether Favre has lost his edge and is just "average") it deserves its own thread.

Anyway, this article on the front page of ESPN discusses various columnists opinions on whether Favre has "lost it." This is a MUST READ for XTitan, Mags and DB, who all have claimed, to some degree or another, that Favre is no longer a top 15 QB and is no longer even an average QB (often throwing out his stats over the last two years as representative of his drastic fall).

The consensus is that he's not the same player he used to be, BUT that his numbers have been so poor in recent seasons b/c of the significant drop in talent around him (one point that that anti-Favre brigade continue to ridicule). EVERY single one of them mentions the drop in offensive talent as being the primary reason for his "demise".

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2872249

From Clayton: "That would put him in the top five in the NFC and among the best in the league. Favre still has it. "

From Len P: "But all the numbers aside, including just a dozen wins the past two seasons, Favre arguably remains among the league's top 10 quarterbacks. "

From Eric Allen: "That said, he's still better than a lot of quarterbacks in the league. He's just not one of the best anymore."

From Theismann: "Favre still has the tools to be a top quarterback and he definitely has the mind-set and knowledge, but I'm not sure he has the weapons surrounding him to take him and this team to the next level. That's why he's not a top-five quarterback in this league anymore. The elite quarterbacks are able to put a team on their backs and lead it to the playoffs, even without great playmakers. Just look at Tom Brady last season. Favre is still an outstanding quarterback and a dangerous playmaker on the field, but I'm not sure he's in that upper echelon anymore."
Please read. Maybe, just maybe you, particlarly titan and MAgs, will stop the "favre's lost it" crap, and maybe, just maybe, his play has been influenced by his deteriorating surrounding cast...

They all mention the surrounding cast. But they also say that he's a risk taker, makes poor decisions down the field, needs to manage games better, and that age is catching up with him.

You also didn't quote Mosley:

Matt Mosley: In the interest of self-disclosure, I should probably start by saying that Brett Favre is my favorite quarterback, which led to some very questionable fantasy draft decisions earlier this decade. That's why it pains me to say that he's no longer among the top quarterbacks in the league. Sure, there are still flashes of his past brilliance, but the truth is that he's now a slightly above-average quarterback in the league.

I could spend the next several paragraphs blaming this on Packers general manager Ted Thompson (not a bad idea), but for now, let's take a look at the facts.

Even after bouncing back from an awful 2005 season in which he threw 20 touchdowns and 29 interceptions, Favre was by no means great last season. He threw 18 touchdowns and 18 interceptions, and his quarterback rating ranked 25th in the league -- one spot behind Chicago's Rex Grossman.

Favre should be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but when you talk about the league's top quarterbacks right now, he probably doesn't crack the top 10.

His 56 percent completion percentage last season was caused, in part, by his team's horrendous start. The Packers were outscored 138-77 in their 1-4 start. The fact that Favre often makes poor decisions by trying to fit the ball into ridiculously tight spots is nothing new. It's just that he no longer has the ability -- or the offensive weapons -- to always dig his way out.

In my mind, Favre is one of the greatest quarterbacks in league history. But as hard as it is to acknowledge, he's in the middle of the pack right now.

You're also missing the first part of that John Clayton comment. It goes:

With a healthy receiving unit, Favre should be a 62 percent thrower again and have a chance for 20-25 touchdowns. That would put him in the top five in the NFC and among the best in the league. Favre still has it.

Notice he doesn't say, "With Randy Moss he'll be among the best in the league." He just thinks with healthy receivers he can do it.

DrugBust wrote:They all mention the surrounding cast. But they also say that he's a risk taker, makes poor decisions down the field, needs to manage games better, and that age is catching up with him.

You also didn't quote Mosley:

Matt Mosley: In the interest of self-disclosure, I should probably start by saying that Brett Favre is my favorite quarterback, which led to some very questionable fantasy draft decisions earlier this decade. That's why it pains me to say that he's no longer among the top quarterbacks in the league. Sure, there are still flashes of his past brilliance, but the truth is that he's now a slightly above-average quarterback in the league.

I could spend the next several paragraphs blaming this on Packers general manager Ted Thompson (not a bad idea), but for now, let's take a look at the facts.

Even after bouncing back from an awful 2005 season in which he threw 20 touchdowns and 29 interceptions, Favre was by no means great last season. He threw 18 touchdowns and 18 interceptions, and his quarterback rating ranked 25th in the league -- one spot behind Chicago's Rex Grossman.

Favre should be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but when you talk about the league's top quarterbacks right now, he probably doesn't crack the top 10.

His 56 percent completion percentage last season was caused, in part, by his team's horrendous start. The Packers were outscored 138-77 in their 1-4 start. The fact that Favre often makes poor decisions by trying to fit the ball into ridiculously tight spots is nothing new. It's just that he no longer has the ability -- or the offensive weapons -- to always dig his way out.

In my mind, Favre is one of the greatest quarterbacks in league history. But as hard as it is to acknowledge, he's in the middle of the pack right now.

You're also missing the first part of that John Clayton comment. It goes:

With a healthy receiving unit, Favre should be a 62 percent thrower again and have a chance for 20-25 touchdowns. That would put him in the top five in the NFC and among the best in the league. Favre still has it.

Notice he doesn't say, "With Randy Moss he'll be among the best in the league." He just thinks with healthy receivers he can do it.

1) didn't see the Mosely part, I wonder if the article was recently updated. I didn't intend to not include it. So mosely says he's "slightly above average"...while he's the only one that even remotely uses the word average, "slightly above avg." would suggest "top 15" since there are 32 teams in the league. That, at minimum, is what I've said ALL along. That's also what I've repeatedly argued with many here (Mags and titan in particular) and Mosely's opinion is the lowest out of all 5 of the columnists.

2) He's a "risk taker" "needs to manage games better" "age is catching up with him" etc...so what? He has and always will be a risk taker, and he can't stop the advancing age. But that hasn't precluded him from being in their top ten (or 15 in Mosely's case); and even though they point to those things as mostly negative, that STILL did NOT change their overall perception of him as a top 10 QB in the NFL.

So they're pointing out his "flaws" but still their final assessment is he's a top 10 QB in the game. That's the overall point. Reading some of the sh*t around here, you guys have made it seem like he' sone of the worst starting QBs in the NFL. I, and ALL of those writers, beg to differ. Go check out sports nation's rankings...earlier they had him at #6, not sure if it changed.

I would still put Favre in the 12-15 range.....really depends on the criteria you use to judge. Far from able to carry a team and just a bad fit for GB right now, who is going through a rebuilding phase...thats why if he wanted to keep playing he should have asked TT to trade him, would not have effected his legacy...didn't with Montana, Namath, Unitas, Rice....to name a few other hall of famers. Favre hides behind the excuse that he doesn't want to learn a new offense, i think he would also not want to face a much tougher local media market and fanbase who might not be as accepting of his gambling, throw it up for grab ways.

DrugBust wrote:
Notice he doesn't say, "With Randy Moss he'll be among the best in the league." He just thinks with healthy receivers he can do it.

Perhaps, but he does highlight the substantial overall decline in his surrounding cast. This whole article, and issue, is in response to Favre's comments about Moss and needing more talent around him. I think one can assume that Clayton does NOT feel that the Packers have surrounded Favre with enough talent.

I do believe Favre could still win like Elway did if

1.He had more weapons around him.Obviously Brett is nowhere good enough to carry a mediocre or below average supporting cast.

2.McCarthy could continue getting Brett to not be so overly reckless.I saw signs of that last season,he took far less silly chances as he did the prior season,particularily in games that were close enough to win.

I don't really think it's that important to find a specific rank of Favre with other QB's,for me at least it isn't.If the two points above were addressed,i do think Favre could lead a team to 10-11 wins.

We likely don't have the weapons he needs on offense though to reach that level and i have some fear that could lead to a few more issues on my point 2,him taking more chances than he should.If the running game struggles and no TE's can get open,that tightens the coverage on the WR's and Favre might start forcing passes in an attempt to get points.He no longer is good enough to force plays though like he could in his prime.

xTitan wrote:I would still put Favre in the 12-15 range.....really depends on the criteria you use to judge. Far from able to carry a team and just a bad fit for GB right now, who is going through a rebuilding phase...thats why if he wanted to keep playing he should have asked TT to trade him, would not have effected his legacy...didn't with Montana, Namath, Unitas, Rice....to name a few other hall of famers. Favre hides behind the excuse that he doesn't want to learn a new offense, i think he would also not want to face a much tougher local media market and fanbase who might not be as accepting of his gambling, throw it up for grab ways.

Perhaps he also loves Green Bay and couldn't imagine playing anywhere else. Some guys would rather retire than move on. Frankly, I dont' think Favre gives a sh*t about what the media thinks-you'd be hard pressed to find an elite athlete who does.

Some guys will just go out of their way to twist anything into bashing someone. Whether it's the guys who hate Rodgers and will always look for a reason to criticize him, or it's the guys who can't stand Favre and will twist any story into an anti-Favre slant. I guess it's just the nature of some fans.

Here's a site I like quite a bit and where Favre ranked last season:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php

As for where I think he ranks, I haven't really thought about it. I'd say average if pressed, meaning in the 12-15 range.

Guys who I think are without a doubt better at this point:

P. Manning
Bulger
Brady
Brees
Palmer
McNabb
Hasselbeck

Young guys who I could see being better this season

Rivers
Romo
E. Manning
Rothlisberger
V. Young
Losman

At this point I think you lump Brett in with guys like Trent Green, Steve McNair, Jake Delhomme, Mike Vick and Chad Pennington.

Losman, Rothlesberger, an dManning are in NO WAY better than Favre. No way (particularly Losman). Moreoever, ifyou want to go just on stats alone, Vince Young would also be below him. VY got a lot of hype last year b/c the Titans won a bunch of games down the stretch on the back of some unbelievable ST performances (his Houston run notwithstanding).

I'd say only the following are better:
P. Manning
Bulger
Brady
Brees
Palmer
McNabb
Hasselbeck
Rivers


Could Romo have a better year? Statistically, sure. But take a look at his numbers in the last month or so of the season. He was nearly the same QB that everyone made him out to be after the first month.

BuckPack wrote:Losman, Rothlesberger, an dManning are in NO WAY better than Favre. No way (particularly Losman). Moreoever, ifyou want to go just on stats alone, Vince Young would also be below him. VY got a lot of hype last year b/c the Titans won a bunch of games down the stretch on the back of some unbelievable ST performances (his Houston run notwithstanding).

I'd say only the following are better:
P. Manning
Bulger
Brady
Brees
Palmer
McNabb
Hasselbeck
Rivers


Could Romo have a better year? Statistically, sure. But take a look at his numbers in the last month or so of the season. He was nearly the same QB that everyone made him out to be after the first month.

Notice I did say, could bet better next season.

My justification:

Rivers - Obviously he went to the Pro-Bowl so he's already doing something right. But he wilted down the stretch. Leads me to believe he could go either way in '07. The bad play carries over, or he rebounds.

Romo - Same exact situation as Rivers. Looked good for the first two thirds of his time under center, not so great in the last third.

E. Manning - He's got all the tools and can look both brilliant and bad. I think he takes the leap this year.

Rothlisberger - Had two seasons with a QB rating of 98! Then the offseason from hell hit him last year and he didn't recover. But there's no reason to believe he doesn't go back to his early form, which was playing at a higher level than Brett has for years.

V. Young - Guy is just a winner. I certainly wasn't a believer but the stuff he can do on a football field is amazing.

Losman - Check out the jump between '05 and '06. from 49% comp percentage to 62%.35 passes of 20 or more yards. 10 of 40 or more.85 QB rating. He was better on the field than Brett last season and if he continues to progress he'll be a good one. There's a reason the Bills passed on Cutler, Leinart and Quinn.

BuckPack wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Perhaps he also loves Green Bay and couldn't imagine playing anywhere else. Some guys would rather retire than move on. Frankly, I dont' think Favre gives a sh*t about what the media thinks-you'd be hard pressed to find an elite athlete who does.

Some guys will just go out of their way to twist anything into bashing someone. Whether it's the guys who hate Rodgers and will always look for a reason to criticize him, or it's the guys who can't stand Favre and will twist any story into an anti-Favre slant. I guess it's just the nature of some fans.

If he loves GB then shut up and play...time to be a leader, Favre is not so stupid as to see they are rebuilding...if he wants to stay they are going to take there lumps, just the way it is.

I'm a bit lost on the supporting cast argument......Sure Favre would do better with a better team around him. But every other QB would do better as well also.......Kyle Orton won 10 games two years ago.....Grossman won a bunch of games this past year....Dilfer won the Super Bowl...

I mean what's the point? Favre would win a Super Bowl if he had the 2000 Ravens defense? Well, Dilfer won a Super Bowl with that defense as well.

Favre had his "Elway" moment chance in 2001-2004 and he wasn't able to deliver like Elway did. In 2001-02 the team had a decent defense and some good offensive weapons. In 2003-04 the team had arguably one of the greatest running games of all time. Again, it wasn't all Favre's fault, but he wasn't a difference maker like Brady and Peyton Manning are right now.....

He's moved from the #1 QB in the league in 1995 down to 7-10 from 2001-04......in 05-06 I'd put him about 15. His biggest strength right now is the fact he's dependable and injury free. You can plug him in, and he knows what to do. But he can't throw a pass more than 15 yards with any accuracy anymore.....

paulpressey25 wrote:Favre had his "Elway" moment chance in 2001-2004 and he wasn't able to deliver like Elway did. In 2001-02 the team had a decent defense and some good offensive weapons. In 2003-04 the team had arguably one of the greatest running games of all time. Again, it wasn't all Favre's fault, but he wasn't a difference maker like Brady and Peyton Manning are right now.....

That's why I find it so difficult to support him in recent offseasons when he's done his patented should I retire or shouldn't I, I'll wait and see if they get me weapons...he had weapons. He had arguably the 2nd best RB in football. He had the best line, the best red zone TE in the game and a pro bowl WR. But he underperformed in the playoffs and his chance passed him by.

DrugBust wrote:Here's a site I like quite a bit and where Favre ranked last season:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php

As for where I think he ranks, I haven't really thought about it. I'd say average if pressed, meaning in the 12-15 range.

Guys who I think are without a doubt better at this point:

P. Manning
Bulger
Brady
Brees
Palmer
McNabb
Hasselbeck

Young guys who I could see being better this season

Rivers
Romo
E. Manning
Rothlisberger
V. Young
Losman

At this point I think you lump Brett in with guys like Trent Green, Steve McNair, Jake Delhomme, Mike Vick and Chad Pennington.

Disagree.

1. Manning - Better than Favre for sure. Best in the game.

2. Bulger - Are you kidding me? So having the best receiver trio in the game hasn't helped him? Faulk and Jackson had nothing to do with his success? Look how well Warner did with the Rams and how he's doing now. Similarly, see Gus Frerotte, Jeff George, Daunte Culpepper, and Randall Cunningham, and how they benefited from a similar situation. And how they did afterwards. Bulger. Wow.

3. Brady - Second best in the game.

4. Brees - One of the best. Agree here.

5. Palmer - Ditto.

6. McNabb - When healthy, yes. But he's ended the last few seasons on the IR. Pretty much a wash at this point.

7. Hasselbeck - About the same, I'd say. Loss of Alexander exposed him, didn't it?

8. Rivers - Isn't asked to do much, and having the best RB and TE in the game doesn't hurt him either.

9. Romo - Owens and Glenn aren't bad weapons to have, but yeah, he's a pretty good one.

10. E. Manning - Inconsistent, hasn't won big games, and doesn't have leadership qualities.

11. Roethlisberger - This guy is not as good as advertised. First two seasons, not asked to do much. Just don't mess up, and let the defense and running game take care of you. When responsibilities increased, he fell on his face.

12. V. Young - Let's see what he does when teams figure him out. Would like to see him beat a team with his brain. Remember how amazing Vick was before teams figured out how to stop him.

13. Losman - Improving, but not even close.

That puts Favre in about a 6-7 range for me. Why do people keep forgetting that Favre threw 30 TDs and only 17 interceptions JUST THREE SEASONS AGO???

Then, he had:

Walker, Driver, Green, Ferguson (pre-injury), Wahle, and Rivera.

The following year, he had:

Driver, Taco Wallace, Thurman, Gado, Whitticker, and Klemm. He didn't do so well. Could anyone tell me why?

I meant, "one of the best" for Bulger.

So what would Bulger have to do to convince you that he's better than Favre right now? Play without Jackson and Holt?

Do well. When was the last time Bulger made any noise in the playoffs?

th87 wrote:
Disagree.

1. Manning - Better than Favre for sure. Best in the game.

2. Bulger - Are you kidding me? So having the best receiver trio in the game hasn't helped him? Faulk and Jackson had nothing to do with his success? Look how well Warner did with the Rams and how he's doing now. Similarly, see Gus Frerotte, Jeff George, Daunte Culpepper, and Randall Cunningham, and how they benefited from a similar situation. And how they did afterwards. Bulger. Wow.

3. Brady - Second best in the game.

4. Brees - One of the best. Agree here.

5. Palmer - Ditto.

6. McNabb - When healthy, yes. But he's ended the last few seasons on the IR. Pretty much a wash at this point.

7. Hasselbeck - About the same, I'd say. Loss of Alexander exposed him, didn't it?

8. Rivers - Isn't asked to do much, and having the best RB and TE in the game doesn't hurt him either.

9. Romo - Owens and Glenn aren't bad weapons to have, but yeah, he's a pretty good one.

10. E. Manning - Inconsistent, hasn't won big games, and doesn't have leadership qualities.

11. Roethlisberger - This guy is not as good as advertised. First two seasons, not asked to do much. Just don't mess up, and let the defense and running game take care of you. When responsibilities increased, he fell on his face.

12. V. Young - Let's see what he does when teams figure him out. Would like to see him beat a team with his brain. Remember how amazing Vick was before teams figured out how to stop him.

13. Losman - Improving, but not even close.

That puts Favre in about a 6-7 range for me. Why do people keep forgetting that Favre threw 30 TDs and only 17 interceptions JUST THREE SEASONS AGO???

Then, he had:

Walker, Driver, Green, Ferguson (pre-injury), Wahle, and Rivera.

The following year, he had:

Driver, Taco Wallace, Thurman, Gado, Whitticker, and Klemm. He didn't do so well. Could anyone tell me why?

Great post. Unfortunately too many people here think "surrounding talent" is a copout.

th87 wrote:2. Bulger - Are you kidding me? So having the best receiver trio in the game hasn't helped him? Faulk and Jackson had nothing to do with his success? Look how well Warner did with the Rams and how he's doing now. Similarly, see Gus Frerotte, Jeff George, Daunte Culpepper, and Randall Cunningham, and how they benefited from a similar situation. And how they did afterwards. Bulger. Wow.

Stopped reading right here.

So you're punishing a guy because he has a good weapons around him? Is Manning not that good either?

62% completion percentage
3 to 1 TD to INT ratio
4300 yards passing
60 passes of 20 or more yards
QB rating of more than 90 in 4 of the last 5 years

You've got to be kidding me.

th87 wrote:Do well. When was the last time Bulger made any noise in the playoffs?

I'll ask you the same question concerning Favre. No, check that. When was the last time Favre didn't kill our chances of winning in the playoffs?