Oszuscik wrote: ↑Thu Aug 07, 2025 9:46 am
I do think some onus has to be put on the quarterbacks. Maybe it's something about the small market of Green Bay and the hero worship that our MVP quarterbacks receive, but by the time Ron Wolf had left and Mike Sherman became Head Coach/General Manager I think Brett Favre was feeling pretty invincible within the organization. Matt Hasselbeck had been traded away and Favre received what was essentially a lifetime contract. I don't know that he respected Sherman the way he respected Mike Holmgren. Sherman certainly didn't help deflate Favre's ego, as I remember press conferences after big victories where Sherman would comment on Brett's performance "adding to the legend of Brett Favre." I don't think he could hold Brett to account, which led to Favre playing more the way he wanted to play, which was to take chances. In his five playoff elimination games after Holmgren left Favre threw a total of 15 interceptions.
As for Rodgers, it kind of cut the other way. He won his Super Bowl in his 3rd year starting, and in his 4th year he won league MVP with 45 passing touchdowns. After all the drama that Favre's unretirement had brought, fans were elated with what Rodgers had become and soon gave him the same hero treatment that Favre enjoyed. Rodgers' problem was that he always felt he was one of, if not THE, smartest person in the room, and after his quick success and the ensuing hero worship he got more assertive in expressing that belief. He questioned personnel, he questioned his head coach. He tried to show up McCarthy when play-calls didn't work. If his receivers weren't precise with routes or if they missed a signal Rodgers would throw his hands up and stare them down. He stopped questioning whether there was anything he could change or improve upon with his approach, it was always his teammates and coaches that failed when things went wrong.
So yes, there are many reasons why the Packers underachieved during their run of back-to-back HOF QBs (subpar defenses, overreliance on younger players, and so on) but Favre and Rodgers were just as culpable.
I don't disagree about the general assessment of the flaws of Favre and Rodgers. I have presented the overall data of the playoff performance of the teams.
I would still look at what the teams really should achieved and what they could have possibly achieved with supposedly better QB play.
Favre produced even in the losses under Holmgren, including SB 32. 2001-2004 were some bad turnover games. But the only real winnable game there is against the Eagles in 2003. Which they should have won. But Favre is mostly okay there until OT. They blew the game in other places. 2007 against the Giants they got butts kicked in regulation but make it to OT.
For Rodgers the unheralded team is probably 2009. The defense, before the SB year was actually pretty good. But the division championship went to the Vikings and the Packers went on the road to Arizona where the defense did not play well.
In 2014 the Seahawks were the better team, yes the door was open with Seahawks mistakes. Packers defense was not good and couldn't stop Lynch or defend key passes either, they did the one thing they did well and got turnovers. Packers wound up kicking two sub 20 yard FGs early which arguably cost them though that was early in the game. But Rodgers had nothing to do with the ST mistakes, he wasn't on the field, and got the tying FG to send it to OT.
The LaFleur teams honestly likely overachieved in the regular season, were efficient, could rely on Rodgers not turning the ball over but weren't capable of beating other teams up. 2020 Buccaneers were still better. And the Packers were behind that whole game, partially because Rodgers threw a first half INT with 30 seconds left, then a blown coverage gave up a TD. Yes Rodgers had chances late but Brady didn't do much late in that game either.
2021, again the ST gives away 10 points and you can't afford to do that in the playoffs.
Rodgers and Favre with the Packers were combined 1-5 in OT in the playoffs. That hurt. But Rodgers didn't even get the ball twice and got strip sacked the other time. Favre you can blame for the two INTs; they won the other one when the Packers got their own pick six.
So if Favre doesn't throw the INTs the Packers still probably win only one of those games, I am guessing 2003 is the easier one to win. Problem is I don't see them winning the next week against Carolina, who held the Eagles to 3 points. Which is something the Packers didn't do.
I do think that honestly the record is mostly not great for anyone not Favre or Rodgers in any year but 1996 and 2010. In those years other parts of the team stepped up more. Mostly otherwise they didn't. I don't see other championships for the Packers based on what the entire team actually delivered in the playoffs.
