Monday, December 29, 2008

Packers Management Was Right

Not much went right for Green Bay this year. The close games, injuries, and schedule just didn't go their way. However, the one thing that the Packers were correct on was the preseason change at quarterback. An old, tired topic, right? Well, now that all the dust has settled, it's time to look at the results.

I know, I know...the Favre zealots are already screaming: "Look at the results? 6-10 versus 9-7. Wins and losses are all that matter! End of discussion!" Really? Would you honestly take Kerry Collins over Phillip Rivers? Or how about Tavaris Frerotte instead of Drew Brees or Don McNabb?

Two things have been established by 99.9 percent of rational football fans:

1) Green Bay's defense (not QB play) is the root of it's 6-10 record. They gave up nearly 100 more points this year than in 2007. One. Hundred.
2) Brett Favre was not very good this year. 22 TDs, 22 INTs (led the league - shocking). Despite playing the 27th hardest schedule (how did they lose to the entire AFC West?), adding all sorts of high priced free agents, Brett bringing all that "leadership" and "quiet aura" to the table, starting out 8-3.......the Jets lost 4 of their last 5. Ole #4 had 2 TDs, 9 picks, a QB rating lower than Bogut's field goal percentage as the Jets missed the playoffs and Mangini gets fired. No, the "he didn't have time to mesh with his team" argument doesn't work when Chad Pennington had the same amount of time, with much worse receivers. Favre looked old, graying, past-his-prime, and out of shape because, well...he's old, graying, past-his-prime and out of shape (off season workout? Who needs that?).

Knowing points 1, and 2, it's pretty obvious the Packers record if they kept Favre this year would be...6-10. Maybe 8-8...I'll give you two games because I'm in a giving holiday mood and generally a pretty nice guy.

What's the point? There couldn't have been a BETTER time to make the QB transition??

Just look at the scenarios.

Packers Keep Favre:
1) They end up with the same/similar record.
2) You still don't know exactly what they have in Rodgers, with a good chance he comes to next training camp demanding a new contract. Sound crazy? Well, he wouldn't come into the season with 1 year left on his deal with holding all the cards: Brett would be retired (you would think) and Chuck knows young, budding, franchise QBs are hard to come by. He could also say "F-it. I want out" and demand a trade.
3) They have to put up with another upcoming "summer of Brett"
4) With Rodgers possibly gone, I guess they could bring Brett back in '09, at age 40. Good luck with that.

Packers Trade Favre, Insert Rodgers:
1) Finish 6-10
2) You finally know what you have in Rodgers - a good, mobile, strong arm, accurate QB, who's a good decision maker. Your QB for the present, short and long-term future. We have the best QB in the NFC North (and one of the best in the NFL) for the next decade! Not only is he really good now, how many QB's would you rather have 6 years from now? Peyton, Brady, and Brees will be sort of long in the tooth by then. Matty Ryan. Maybe Flacco, Cutler, Eli, or Rivers. Sam Bradford, perhaps. That's about it.
3) Chuck and his young teammates take some lumps together this season, rather than next.
4) Get a gift 3rd rounder from the Jets.

Was there a BETTER season to make the QB switch and push God#4 out the door? No chance.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Get used to losing. Next year won't be much different.

Jared said...

The Favre apologists have a million reasons why Favre struggled this year, but the telling numbers to me (and the ones the blind Favre backers can't deny) are the ones below:

Favre '07: 66.5%, 4,155 yards, 28 TD, 15 INT, 95.7 QB rating

Rodgers '08: 63.6%, 4,038 yards, 28 TD, 13 INT, 93.8 QB rating

Rodgers had essentially the same offense as Favre did in '07 (although Grant was much more effective in '07) and Rodgers produced almost exactly the same numbers. If the results are the same, who would you rather have? A declining QB coming in and out of retirement or a young QB who is almost certain to improve? I can't believe anyone questions this move after the season Rodgers had. How many first-year starters in the history of the NFL have thrown for 4,000 yards? And if he was this good in his first year as a starter, how good will he be once he gets a few more games under his belt?

Oh yeah, this is also interesting:

Favre's First Full Season as a Starter (1993): 60.9%, 3,303 yards, 19 TD, 24 INT, 72.2 QB rating

The bottom line is Rodgers was one of the best parts of this year's Packers' team, not a liability. The defense on the other hand...

garcia said...

Why...after looking at the daunting schedule...does anyone think that the Pack is going to lose next year like they did this year?

Charlie Marlow said...

anonymous is so astute.

Hey, fucktard, how about you provide some analysis. Oh wait, your 'name' is a microcosm for this blog, right?

My balls fit nicely on your chin.

In other news, no one in all of professional football fails to understand where the Packers area of opportunity is this offseason. If Teddy bear fucks it up, then there's no keeping his job.

But, if my ball musk really permeates your nostrils and forces you to not be able to think logically, anonymous, I'll lay it out for you here: its the defensive line in particular, and the defense in general that needs work.

I hear Dove makes a good soap that can take swamp crotch off your upper lip. Just FYI.

D'Amico's one good year said...

Chuck Marlow, everybody!

Sometimes i wish we could remove the Anonymous option, just so there'd at least be a screen name to launch our screeds against....

And this article is absolutely fab. AND Jared is CORRECT, too.

Justin said...

I really hope these "Packer Fans"/Favre Zealots aren't reading thejetsblog.com or listening to WFAN...it's not pretty over there.

Althouh, I'm sure both are highly inaccurate and just have an agenda against Brett

Anonymous said...

I firmly believe if they would have dicked Rodgers around and let Favre come back to be the starter that Rodgers would have said "I'm done" regardless when his contract was up and went somewhere else. That was the #1 reason why they didn't let Favre come back. You lose Rodgers and you have zero talent at QB. One year of Favre wasn't worth losing Rodgers.

Matt said...

Someday Brad will redirect his anger away from Brett Favre and towards the correct target - Ted Thompson.

Until then, we get to keep enjoying these cute little love letters about Ted, his favorite 31-33 GM.

Brad said...

Matt - I notice you (or anybody, for that matter) didn't disagree with this post. Even anonymous mentioned losing next year instead of something like "The Packers made the wrong decision." Odd.