Packers Not Nationally Relevant Without Favre

Discussion in 'Green Bay Packers' started by n1gbpackfan, Mar 12, 2008.

  1. n1gbpackfan

    n1gbpackfan Title Town USA

    Somewhere inside the NBC, ESPN and NFL Network programming departments, there were probably more than a couple of colorful words hurled about when they learned that Brett Favre was calling it a career.

    Programmers from all three networks were drooling over getting that Colts/Packers matchup with Manning facing off with Favre on their networks in prime time.

    If not that one, the Packers and Favre versus the Cowboys and Tony Romo would draw viewers.

    For that matter, any nationally televised Packers game with Favre at the helm has always been a ratings winner.

    Even the people in Tennesse, Jacksonville and New Orleans had to be excited about Favre coming to play in their stadiums in 2008.

    But then came the announcement.

    Favre was done and, for the moment, so are the Packers as far as being relevant on the national stage.


    It's all about marketability and with Favre gone the most marketable thing Green Bay has are the coal piles along the Fox River.

    OK, that may be a slight exaggeration.

    But seriously, who is on the Packers roster right now who is a recognizable figure at a national level?

    Donald Driver?

    Nice guy, great smile, does a nice job on the McDonalds and Time Warner Cable commercials.

    A.J. Hawk.

    He's more famous right now for having a bench-warming brother-in-law named Brady Quinn.

    Every NFL team that is recognized on a national stage has its personalities the Bears, Brian Urlacher; the Patriots, Tom Brady; the Saints, Reggie Bush; the Arizona Cardinals, Matt Leinert; the Indianapolis Colts, Peyton Manning and the New York Giants, the other Manning.

    But that's what the Packers now lack.

    A face of the franchise.

    Admittedly, it's hard to become a national personality on a team when the dominant personality casts as long of a shadow as Favre did.

    Even when one of the other players on the Green Bay roster had the opportunity to say something noteworthy, it usually ended up being very much "Yes, sir. No, sir. Why, thank you, sir." polite with not the least bit of hutzpah that would make one sit up on his couch and ask "he said what?"

    To quote Barry Manilow, it's all very nice but not very good.

    The Packers could go we hope 12-4 next year, but without any marketable personalities in a league that is driven by ratings and merchandise sales, that's not a good thing for the Green and Gold.
  2. burnout2oo7

    burnout2oo7 I Am Dawk's Broken Heart

    Yes. The almighty Matt Leinartwho is second to Kurt "the Patriots stole my Super Bowl" Warner and whose name you can't even spell correctlymakes the Cardinals, whose games weren't even televised in Arizona a couple years back, nationally relevant.

    This guy loses all credibility with that sentence.
  3. 86WARD

    86WARD -

    True that....
  4. 49erGenius

    49erGenius Banned

    So I guess we won't see the Packers 3 times on TV this year?:icon_eek: I wouldn't blame ESPN/NBC for staying far away from the Packers this year without Favre.
  5. pitzj5971

    pitzj5971 Starter

    What about Rodgers? or Jennings or Barnett? I think the media will find someone for the Packers to market around and my hunch says Rodgers.
  6. 49erGenius

    49erGenius Banned

    Rodgers=Alex Smith, and we know where that one was going.:icon_confused: I can't see how Rodgers will have any success.
  7. pitzj5971

    pitzj5971 Starter

    So tell me how is Alex Smith equal to Rodgers? They each seem to be in a different position dont you think? How can you say that Rodgers wont have any success?

    Lets break this down a bit, Rodgers has been studying for 3 years behind a HOF QB while Smith was thrown into the fire early. Rodgers has a good team behind him, Solid D ( can get better with some more experience at certain positions), Good Recieving Core, decent Oline ( they protected Favre just fine but didnt open space that they could have for Grant), Improving RBs ( Grant, Jackson, Wynn). I dont see him coming into a bad situation at all and will succede. I can see the Packers going 10-6 taking the NFC North. With a good draft I can see us at 11-5 maybe 12-4
  8. burnout2oo7

    burnout2oo7 I Am Dawk's Broken Heart

    First of all, I'd say you don't need to be "Nationally Relevant" to be successful. It's more the other way around. Hell, make it to the playoffs, and the nation has to watch you.

    Personally, I'd rather have a young core than a marketable face of the franchise. Lacking that face doesn't mean you lack a leader. The Pack still have leadership in guys like Driver and Barnett. What harm can young talent that's not in the spotlight present?

    As for Favre, he's a living legend. I'd be surprised if his jersey sales ever stopped. I think Green Bay will be synonymous with Favre more so than Rice or Montana with the Niners or Marino with the Dolphins, not just because of his career spanning generations but because he was more beloved by Wisconsin than any athlete in any sport was by their home crowd.
  9. DoubleC

    DoubleC i'm ready now...

    Maybe the Packers will become the northern Jacksonville Jaguars. They'll win but no one outside Wisconsin will care. :redface:
  10. ollysj

    ollysj iKraut

    Contrary to Jacksonville, the Packers have fans all over the US. So this and Rodgers will become a second Alex Smith is just wishful thinking of some 9ers fans.
  11. 49erGenius

    49erGenius Banned

    I don't think it's going to be that easy for Rodgers to proclaim himself a great QB. I don't think the packers will fully collapse either, but I can't see them winning the NFC North just like that. Teams are going to gamble more to rattle Rodgers because the same was done to the 49ers, as in they wanted Alex Smith to beat them after stuffing Gore. Long as you keep your Oline intact, I think you'll do OK, but I can't see more then 8 wins tops.
  12. reubenco

    reubenco Greenbelter

    On one hand, I agree that a lot of Pack fans rooted for them because of Favre and now they're gonna lose a lot of fans, but on the other hand, if any team really any less nationally relevant than another?
  13. ollysj

    ollysj iKraut

    They ain't fans, but Lambeau Field is sold out for decades now and I don't expect any changes here for the future, past prove it. Even in the bad years between Lombardi and Holmgren, GB never lost their fan support.
  14. packerboy

    packerboy Bugger off

    49er Genius, I present you the Dallas game. Up to the point where Rodgers left the game, he was doing bloody well. I can't remember the stats off the top of my head but it was around 200 yards, 18-25 or something. No picks off a pretty good pass rush. Given he took 3 sacks, but with more playing time, he'll develop how to avoid the rush. I'm pretty optimistic for the guy.
  15. ollysj

    ollysj iKraut

  16. 49erGenius

    49erGenius Banned

    But I still wouldn't put Rodgers in the same league as Warner in his first year, when he took the Rams to a Superbowl, and Warner didn't exactly warm a bench for 3 years. However if Rodgers did lead the Pack to the playoffs, then that will convince me that we started our QB way too soon and should've waited 3 years.
  17. Inclulbus

    Inclulbus WE ARE! .. Marshall!

    Yeah, no one could see how Ryan GRant would have any success either. this is just a dumb comment. Rodgers has had more success in one, coming off the bench game.. then Alex Smith has had his whole career.

    I stopped reading at that part. How do you put the cardinals on the ' national stage ' infront of Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Dallas, Washington, and especially Minnesota right now, with Adrian Peterson. I think of Arizona... And Matt Leinart doesn't even pop up, Adrian Wilson does. I agree with burnout, that dudes loses a lot of credibility with putting that one part into that paragraph, that's horrible.