tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post115988124951370924..comments2024-03-17T03:18:56.070-04:00Comments on Dan Shanoff: MNF: Brett Favre Should Quit NOWUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159974193289424032006-10-04T11:03:00.000-04:002006-10-04T11:03:00.000-04:00cl9699:The point is not whether the numbers lie. ...cl9699:<BR/><BR/>The point is not whether the numbers lie. Of course the numbers can be misleading - you can prove anything with numbers if you try hard enough. But there's a reason every NFL contract incentive has numbers in it: it's objective. So unless you're an NFL scout, and can verify that you are, I can't just take your word that Favre is still good. I'm only willing to accept an authority argument if you are, in fact, an authority. Otherwise, all we can do is talk numbers.<BR/><BR/>So I think the Packers and the NFC North have been propping Favre up, (as you point out, the Packers had the best D because they were in the NFC North). And I guess you think Favre is better than his numbers, but you give no real reason.<BR/><BR/>Whether I played ball doesn't make me automatically wrong. Either I'm right or I'm wrong, and if you know why I'm wrong because you played ball, then speak up.<BR/><BR/>And I'm not making this a color thing so much as a perception thing. Favre relies on people so it's obviously NOT his fault? No, more people rely on him, and he's paid accordingly and the best way to measure his effectiveness is the Packers' points scored. No one on that team is paid as much (except Bubba Franks, bizarrely, is paid nearly the same)(2005 figures, USAToday). He needs to accept responsibility for the fact his offense is bad. What he gets paid is part of the problem. To be fair, he brings in a lot of money for the organization, more so than, say, Bubba Franks. But that's the business side.<BR/><BR/>What kills me is the argument that he would go to the Super Bowl with Baltimore. Yes, IF he only had to score 2 touchdowns a game, he would be a winner. Um... doesn't that prove that's he's not very good?<BR/><BR/>Don't make excuses for millionaires. How hard is that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159942321248357532006-10-04T02:12:00.000-04:002006-10-04T02:12:00.000-04:00funny that GB just cut Caroll today. Too bad they...funny that GB just cut Caroll today. Too bad they didn't do it on Saturday, maybe they would have covered the spread.Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11087094908297676378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159904438269204562006-10-03T15:40:00.000-04:002006-10-03T15:40:00.000-04:00eric, there's a difference between trying to irrit...eric, there's a difference between trying to irritate you and disagreeing with you. We disagree, that's it, it isn't personal. If you think the world is magically going to agree with you, may I refer you to Dan's original post, where he has NOT changed his mind. These comments are in part for disagreement. That's part of sharing ideas.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you're irritated because if we talk about numbers, I win. If we argue subjectively (since you have no numbers) there's no basis for us to agree.<BR/><BR/>I don't have to watch last night's game, because I've seen the Packers for the last 3 years and I have his statistics. So, are you going to argue that he's better than the numbers indicate (and I argue that he's worse)? There's no resolution possible without numbers, and the numbers agree: he's not very good.<BR/><BR/>Losing 31-9 is not a dropped ball issue, that's a desperate fan(s) making excuses. 9 points is hard to swallow when your QB is the best part of your team. 9 points shows that Detroit and Minnesota have been propping Favre up for years.<BR/><BR/>And there are no moral victories. If Favre played well enough to win, they would have won. His offense didn't score 32 points, it scored 9, so he loses. David Carr managed 10 against the same Eagles.<BR/><BR/>Favre just isn't very good, and Shanoff is about the millionth person to wish he would retire. You know what? It's his life, and I don't blame him for taking the money and gunning for records. But I don't admire him. <BR/><BR/>And I'm not going to make excuses for a millionaire manager who isn't good at his job and can't make the people around him better. I'm shocked at how lenient people are for bad white quarterbacks and critical of black wide receivers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159899425630525342006-10-03T14:17:00.000-04:002006-10-03T14:17:00.000-04:00@solomonrex:He has no futureWow, remind me not to ...@solomonrex:<BR/><BR/><I>He has no future</I><BR/><BR/>Wow, remind me not to name you in my living will.Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159896179907334022006-10-03T13:22:00.000-04:002006-10-03T13:22:00.000-04:00For the last 3 years, I'd rather have Trent Dilfer...For the last 3 years, I'd rather have Trent Dilfer. He never hurt your team and he made 3rd downs. He's just HORRIBLY underrated. Favre makes dumb decisions, and he hasn't really cared enough to stop in the last 3 years or so. If we found out he's regressed as an alcoholic since 2001, would any of us be surprised?<BR/><BR/>And let me defend fantasy stats, because that's the ONLY way Favre begins to look good. Fantasy stats under-count interceptions and turnovers. And I still think fantasy stats are fine for giving a quick judgement to QBs.<BR/><BR/>But in the real world, Favre is even worse. He has no future. He has no willingness to play conservative (i.e. terrible for contenders like Ravens and Chicago). He has few physical skills that stand out. In the real world, no one wants Favre except the Packers (and maybe the Raiders would consider it). I'd rather have Losman, same arm, same dumb decisions, but he's more athletic AND HE'S TEACHABLE.<BR/><BR/>Look at the teams that took a gamble on old, used-to-scramble QBs: Ravens got McNair, Raiders took Brooks and these are desperate, desperate teams.<BR/><BR/>There aren't even 12 GMs that want Favre, let alone would rank 24 QBs below him. Saying he could go to the Super Bowl with the Ravens is silly, you can't prove it, it's 100% conjecture. The fact is, QBs just like Favre (same age, similar history and skills) aren't valued by the league.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159895352245659642006-10-03T13:09:00.000-04:002006-10-03T13:09:00.000-04:00Ok, here's my list, why not?potential/future HoF (...Ok, here's my list, why not?<BR/><BR/>potential/future HoF (3):<BR/>T. Brady <BR/>P. Manning <BR/>D. Brees <BR/>No debate possible, based on last couple season's numbers (5):<BR/>C. Palmer <BR/>J. Kitna <BR/>B. Roethlisberger <BR/>J. Plummer <BR/>T. Green <BR/><BR/>QBs who don't kill their team like Favre, and occasionally win games(4):<BR/>M. Hasselbeck - vastly underrated<BR/>M. Bulger - He's had MVP seasons much more recently than Favre.<BR/>C. Pennington - Kurt Warner 2.0<BR/>J. Delhomme - vastly underrated.<BR/>Potential and current performace alone is better than Favre(2):<BR/>P. Rivers - low sample size, looks fantastic though.<BR/>R. Grossman - ditto.<BR/><BR/>Toss-up with Brett(4):<BR/>E. Manning - kills his team, can bring his team back.<BR/>K. Warner - bad O-line.<BR/>D. Bledsoe - Experience similar to Favre, but still gets it down the field.<BR/>Charlie Batch - who knows? Better numbers, but I doubt anyone really believes those numbers.<BR/>B. Favre<BR/><BR/>So Favre is _maybe_ 15th on my list. Considering that he only has 1-2 more years of playing, no actual GM should pick him up, unless your other option is Culpepper, Brooks or Harrington.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159895261550898072006-10-03T13:07:00.000-04:002006-10-03T13:07:00.000-04:00All previous posts by someone posing as "Dan Shano...All previous posts by someone posing as "Dan Shanoff" have been removed. They weren't from me.<BR/><BR/>Whoever is doing that, could you please stop? It's completely uncool. Why not post as yourself and join the conversation, instead of impersonating me?<BR/><BR/>-- DanDan Shanoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08126386161198401693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159894197504604102006-10-03T12:49:00.000-04:002006-10-03T12:49:00.000-04:00Good enough Eric? This isn't a panel at Stats Inc...Good enough Eric? This isn't a panel at Stats Inc, you know? <BR/><BR/>I don't know any casual fan that would take Favre 12th in a draft, and I doubt any GM would place him that high. It's not just offensive stats, because the entire team is built around him.<BR/><BR/>You think that's still too glib? For a comment on a sports column that has no statistics? Really?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159893914722480352006-10-03T12:45:00.000-04:002006-10-03T12:45:00.000-04:00To be absolutely clear, Favre is only 16th among f...To be absolutely clear, Favre is only 16th among fantasy QBs in my league, even though he's played New Orleans and Detroit. To be fair, not everybody has played Chicago.<BR/><BR/>But the key is that you're not going to the Super Bowl with brett favre. The team needs to be re-done, and a new quarterback has to be a part of that.<BR/><BR/>And every decision should be made with the Super Bowl in mind. That's the real goal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159893735909613512006-10-03T12:42:00.000-04:002006-10-03T12:42:00.000-04:00I like how ESPN.com was lauding Favre's "Monday Ni...I like how ESPN.com was lauding Favre's "Monday Night Magic" until the wheels came off in the third quarter. Now he's a washed-up has-been again.<BR/><BR/>Inconsistency, thy name is sportswriter.Shumshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12427294708952512804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159892783064477072006-10-03T12:26:00.000-04:002006-10-03T12:26:00.000-04:00So football is a team game right?2005 Passer ratin...So football is a team game right?<BR/><BR/>2005 Passer rating for Kyle Orton, 59.7<BR/><BR/>Bears made it to 2nd round of playoffs?<BR/><BR/>Tell me why none of the blame falls on the front office for not having the guts to give Favre his release and going with Rogers and admitting they are rebuilding?<BR/><BR/>Favre has better passing stats this season than Hasselbeck, Vick, Big Ben, and your 1/4 MVP McNair. And he's not that far behind Leftwich...anyone out there want to start screaming for Garrard to start?<BR/><BR/>And in response to all the personal shots, fighting on the internet is like the special olympics.Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11087094908297676378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159892547665372682006-10-03T12:22:00.000-04:002006-10-03T12:22:00.000-04:00I usually think it's silly to say a player SHOULD ...I usually think it's silly to say a player SHOULD decide to retire. He's making millions!!! Of course he's making the right decision!!! Like any of us would turn down money!<BR/><BR/>BUT, fact is, the Packers CAN'T cut him or trade him for business reasons, either. Once he's off the roster, they have to admit they have an awful team to their core fans (the ones who think Favre is 12th best QB?!? In what league?!?)<BR/><BR/>So they're stuck. But he won't retire, and he should know they can't trade him. He should find a football-related job with decent pay and get out that way. <BR/><BR/>As a QB, he's awful, horrible and really, really bad. And it's not the Packers, it's him. He was shaky when he entered the league, and now he's the same. Everyone forgets this, but he ALWAYS took TOO many chances. But with Holmgren coaching, the rough spots were smoothed out and they got receivers who could help nullify his gunning.<BR/><BR/>The Packers _just_ _barely_ won the Super Bowl, in part, because of Favre. He was no Tom Brady, even at his peak. You put him behind a good offensive line, and what do you have? Marc Brunell. You have the 2006 Redskins O, and that's it.<BR/><BR/>I love Brett Favre dearly, I was on his bandwagon in college, when he was ALWAYS interesting. Not always good, ALWAYS interesting! Now he's always bad. If the Packers weren't in the NFC North, this would be a lot easier to see.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159891700362691042006-10-03T12:08:00.001-04:002006-10-03T12:08:00.001-04:00@salsa shark:Some of last year needs to be blamed ...@salsa shark:<BR/><BR/>Some of last year needs to be blamed on Brett. For example, Robert Ferguson is not Javon Walker. Never was, never will be. Yet too often last season Favre threw the ball to Ferguson thinking Ferguson could catch it. Walker could have (and Jennings looks like he might be able to). Ferguson couldn't. And so an INT occurs, or a drive-killing incompletion. And yes, some of the blame goes to Ferguson, or the coaching, but at the same time, Brett Favre needs to step back and say, oh wait, Javon is injured, maybe I shouldn't throw jumpballs to Fergie.Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159891274355370382006-10-03T12:01:00.000-04:002006-10-03T12:01:00.000-04:00*hug*I LOVE YOU BIG GUY!(Obviously. Trust me, I d...*hug*<BR/><BR/>I LOVE YOU BIG GUY!<BR/><BR/>(Obviously. Trust me, I don't waste my time on other blogs)Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159890852602071802006-10-03T11:54:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:54:00.000-04:00dan, as I said over in the mlb post, I didn't thin...dan, as I said over in the mlb post, I didn't think I took any. Which post are you referring to? I'll edit/delete if necessary. I pride myself on limiting cheap shots to Skip Bayless.Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159889658750406802006-10-03T11:34:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:34:00.000-04:00On McCarthy:After Game 1 of this season (before we...On McCarthy:<BR/><BR/>After Game 1 of this season (before we all realized how good Da Bears were), I called for McCarthy's firing. How's that for Instant History? Anywho, I was pissed. I wanted Jim Bates. I wanted him to become DC after Miami dumped him, and he did. And I said, <I>Great! Green Bay has their coaching successor to Sherman!</I> And then Sherman gets let go and the Packers interview Bates and I'm all happy and then ... they hire McCarthy.<BR/><BR/>Now, my criticism of McCarthy's hiring had nothing to do with his previous jobs; Bill Walsh could've been last in the league as OC of San Fran last year. But what I saw in the preseason and game one was a very lackluster game plan. Short, conservative, uninspired. BLAND.<BR/><BR/>I'm willing to change my mind now, though. I was actually impressed with the game plan he put together last night. Granted, there was a lot of luck--the two fumbles--but I thought they showed some good fundamentals out there (until Ahmad Carroll showed up, of course). Maybe I was wrong to call for his firing. Other coaches would've said 'we can't beat them with our defense so we'll need to outgun them' and set Brett loose. But he didn't, and that impresses me. I'm willing to give McCarthy the benefit of the doubt for the remainder of the season.Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159888799897391192006-10-03T11:19:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:19:00.000-04:00So, we can all agree that the Packers are done for...So, we can all agree that the Packers are done for the year. Right? Okay, great. Let's move on.<BR/><BR/>So 2006 is the start of, what, probably a four to five season rebuilding process? If that's the case, then we know after at least one more year, McCarthy is out. End of story. Dan even pointed out that Aaron Rogers might not be the answer (and look at him. He's not. Point out one quarterback with his body type in the NFL right now who is good. Peyton Manning maybe? But as we've seen in those commercials, Peyton is pretty built, oddly enough). I digress.<BR/><BR/>Rebuilding isn't always about the quarterback position. It's a huge part of it, clearly, but on a team that is starting this many first year guys, what difference is the quarterback position going to make if you don't have the guy of the future? If the Packers had drafted Matt Leinart, for example, he'd have a much better chance of playing soon than Aaron Rogers.<BR/><BR/>So, with that being said, until they get the quarterback that will lead this franchise into the next decade, who is better to teach the young wide receivers and offensive lineman, on the field, in real-time game experience? <BR/><BR/>Aaron Rogers? So, wide receivers can learn about running routs and catching balls and avoiding hits when their quarterback can't get to them? And offensive lineman can learn to read defenses better from a guy who can't read them all that well himself? <BR/><BR/>Okay. Cool. Sit Brett Favre.<BR/><BR/>But what about learning from a man who's won 3 MVP's and a Super Bowl? Yeah, he really does stink, I'll be the first to admit, and he makes bad decisions probably 52% of the time he drops back, but you can't tell me that it's better on their younger players to have Aaron Rogers leading them down the field, when he may very well be the next Joey Harrington. Sure, we'll never know until he tries, but won't having better linemen and WR's help him when he does finally get under center. He looked bewildered and a little scared last night, and that's not what you need to help your team grow.<BR/><BR/>So why not let it be Favre's call? If he's in it for the record, more power to him. But he's not making the Packers any worse than they would be without him, and in ways that we don't see on TV every Sunday, he's probably helping out a lot more than we think. If he wants to stand there and get killed and decimate his legacy, again, it's his call. <BR/><BR/>I mean, when people think of Joe Montanna, do they really think about the years in Kansas City? If Derek Jeter got traded to the Devil Rays tomorrow, would you ever consider him anything other than a Yankee?<BR/><BR/>Throw the legacy argument in the trash. When Favre gets inducted into the hall of fame, people are going to talk about the MVPs, the Mike Holmgren days, the Super Bowl Ring, and then ultimately the starts streak. They're going to forget Michael Vick beating them in Lambeau in January. They're going to forget 2004, 2005, and especially 2006 (except for the asterix where he broke the all time TD record).<BR/><BR/>I'm not saying leave him alone, because he's in the public eye, and scrutiny comes with the territory. It's just that...well, I guess the Packers could actually be a lot worse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159888387537446882006-10-03T11:13:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:13:00.000-04:00Kurt, Go easy on him. Maybe he's just from Missis...Kurt,<BR/> Go easy on him. Maybe he's just from Mississippi.Brave Sir Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15219327624473687797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159888295805908112006-10-03T11:11:00.001-04:002006-10-03T11:11:00.001-04:00Isnt' that why where all hear? To read his opinion...<I>Isnt' that why where all hear? To read his opinion...tards.</I>-bryan<BR/><BR/>its always fun being called a tard by someone who spells we're "where" and here "hear".Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14615862536072857322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159888294494639302006-10-03T11:11:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:11:00.000-04:00All I know is, Brett Favre has been my favorite qu...All I know is, Brett Favre has been my favorite quarterback of all time. It still means something to see him go out there. Is he tainting his legacy? Maybe, but I doubt it. We're going to remember the good things, not these last couple seasons. Just like we'll forget about teh Wizard years for Jordan, the gimpy Bird seasons, Willy Mays farting around in centerfield at the end of his career.<BR/><BR/>When I get older, I'm going to tell my kids about Favre (I'm not a Packers fan or from Wisconsin). Why? Because he was something else to watch. His numbers will not be extraordinary (especially with these last years of 30 picks), but the toughness of the guy is just riveting to watch. I still think about throws I've seen him make.Brave Sir Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15219327624473687797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159888228818520922006-10-03T11:10:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:10:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14615862536072857322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159888182333192132006-10-03T11:09:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:09:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14615862536072857322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159887730519369612006-10-03T11:02:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:02:00.000-04:00ChrTh, I definitely think the bigger share of the ...<B>ChrTh</B>, I definitely think the bigger share of the blame goes to the media, but I'm not convinced that Brett doesn't contribute his share, and I tend to suspect he's believing his own (stratospheric) hype, regardless of what his stats over the last few years say. I mean, when you're sitting at a press conferences to face the media and say..."I have nothing to say, still haven't made up my mind yet," that's not any reporter's fault. That's Brett being a jerk to the media (which is fine in my book ;)), and to the fans (both those who really are invested in whether he stays or not, and those, like me, who don't want to see a big story on a press conference about nothing). To me, that was just a whole different level of arrogance, and that should be pinned on him -- even if he didn't call the conference himself, why not just cancel it instead of going there and making a big deal about saying nothing?<BR/> <BR/>I have no problem with Favre continuing to play, in Green Bay or whatever, and generally agree that players should do what they want (and that the media goes overboard in screeching about who ought to do what when, though everyone's entitled to their own opinions). But this high-profile, gushing dilly-dallying on his part and the media's part drives me crazy.mattiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13140791869711206907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159887677295023312006-10-03T11:01:00.000-04:002006-10-03T11:01:00.000-04:00What? You must be a pretty die-hard fan to say th...What? You must be a pretty die-hard fan to say that Brett Favre is one of the top 10 quaterbacks in the NFL. How can you qualify such a claim? Certainly this year's (and last year's) stats don't back that up! And, of course, an interception is a turnover, so comparing it to a missed shot is basketball is pointless.<BR/><BR/>The thing is, Favre's best years are quickly fading in the rear-view mirror. If Packers fans don't mind sacrificing the future of the team to let him have fun on the field, that's fine with me. Its not my team. Maybe they secretly want to lose to get Brady Quinn as Favre's replacement (of course, with the way the Raiders are playing, that doesn't seem possible). Should Favre have retired or gone to a different team? Probably. He had a horrible year in '05, and despite his claims to the contrary, it's not like the Packers are a better team this season. It's obvious that he's not playing to win (unlike Jordan, or Elway, for that matter), he's just there for adulation of his fans and to stick around long enough to break some individual records.<BR/><BR/>Of course, the fact of the matter is that it isn't Favre's fault, really. The GM and coach are the ones who decide who is on the team and who starts. Therefore, it's their fault if they continue to pay and start a player that is holding back the success of their franchise. So if they let Favre play 'till he's 90, then good for Brett. Is he still a great QB? No. But why should he quit? He still enjoys the game, the fans still come to see him, and the team keeps cutting his check. Seems like a pretty easy decision when you look from his perspective.aikeharahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05129519727639271961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33624629.post-1159886807093477832006-10-03T10:46:00.000-04:002006-10-03T10:46:00.000-04:00@mattie:I don't think it's Brett's fault, honestly...@mattie:<BR/><BR/>I don't think it's Brett's fault, honestly. You know the media. They've been asking him about retiring for 4 years now. If Brett was interested in publicity, he wouldn't go down to his farm every offseason.<BR/><BR/>Dammit, I said I was going to shut up. Grrrr.<BR/><BR/>@paul:<BR/><BR/>Dan (and others) have been arguing since last year that Rodgers should play in games so the Packers coaching staff can see if he's the QB of the future or if they need to draft/sign someone else. There are two problems with this argument.<BR/><BR/>1> There have been five QBs who have left the Packers system to become starters without starting a game for Green Bay: Ty Detmer. Mark Brunell. Aaron Brooks. Doug Pederson. Matt Hasselbeck. Craig Nall was almost 6th on this list, but the Bills stuck with Losman. Now, not all of them did very well (Detmer and Pederson especially; Brooks was actually good his first couple seasons out). If these guys didn't need to start garbage games before becoming starters, why would Rodgers?<BR/><BR/>2> Rodgers plays against NFL-caliber defenses every day. If the coaching staff can't judge him on the basis of his work in practice/pre-season, they're not worthy coaches. No one criticized Fisher for Volek, did they? No one said, <I>Shouldn't Billy Volek have started a couple meaningful games first before being benched?</I> So why would it be any different with Rodgers? The coaches will judge him based on what he does in practice; how he absorbs the playbook, etc. Everyone else in the league does it, why wouldn't the Packers?Christian Thomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16552580025935909875noreply@blogger.com