It's come to my attention that an anonymous poster in the comments section believes all analyses to be equal. While it is true that you can compare anything you want, the closer you whittle down the comparisons, the more thoughtful and relevant the analysis. Thoughtful and relevant being the operative words, words not often in the vernacular of Favre fans. They fall back on simple comparisons and cliches, because that's all that's left of their Legend.
Case in point: comparing Favre and Rodgers' careers. Oh, sure you can do it. It's just not relevant or thoughtful. It doesn't give us much to chew on in an intelligent debate. So the comment yesterday about how you enjoy my comparisons between Favre and Rodgers is great. I'm glad you like it. Although it's no secret I hope Favre fails, it in no way impedes my rational thought to consider his performance thus far excellent. I've said so. Read the historical posts on the blog. Rodgers has been as good, surrounded by lesser talent and a failing offensive line. But those things, while relevant also seem like cop-outs, considering he's held onto the ball too long at times and caused some of his own problems. I'd absolutely LOVE one of you Favre lovers to jilt your Legend by saying something similar. But I know you're too bullheaded to do it, because your obvious blindness is evident in your inane comments.
My comparisons, as it were, are week-to-week comparisons or historical when they fit (as in last year). The analyses always have some factual basis. You'll see a lot of stats below, embedded video, quotes, etc., etc. What do Favre fans come with? Comments like: "Without Favre, the Vikings would be 3-3 at best." It's kind of the age-old adage about talking to a wall. Since you Favre fans love cliches, there's one you should understand.
I dare you to admit that Aaron Rodgers is as good a prospect at quarterback as Favre was back in his early years. Furthermore, surrounded with the kind of talent that Favre was surrounded with in the years of the Super Bowl runs, Rodgers just might be as good or better. He's shown accuracy, a very good arm, the ability to make plays in trouble and *GASP* the poise not to throw the ball all over the place. Yes, he's not been able to close the deal in many of the close games. Chalk it up to him, chalk it up to the defense not holding leads he's put on the board, whatever. I believe those wins will come with better talent around him, especially on defense. You saw it in the first game this year and I know that made you lovers stew.
Of course you won't admit it, but deep down you know it's accurate. The most ironic thing of all was when Favre struggled early on in his career, when he couldn't close the deal in the playoffs in Dallas, when he threw too many interceptions, the armchair QBs in this town of "the smartest football fans in the world" were calling for Mark Brunnell to replace Favre. "They should at least give him a shot to see if he can play. His contract's almost up, he'll leave and go play better for someone else." But that same sentiment carried out in actuality years later is met with ... the same reaction?
Perhaps Rodgers won't pan out to be the quarterback Favre was over the length of his career. You just can't seriously compare their careers at present and call it relevant analysis, and then turn around and act outraged when someone else says the comparison is silly by using my comparisons as proof.