Aaron Rodgers 4400+ yds passing, 30 TDs, 7 interceptions, 345 yds rushing and 5 rushing TDs. Not too shabby.
The Packers lost nothing by giving Aaron Rodgers the helm.
The Vikings gained EVERYTHING by giving Brett Favre the helm. 
Notice that everything is bigger than not losing anything. 
The first 2 paragraphs of this column pretty well sum up my feelings as I was watching the Bears-Lions finale today.
Props to the Packers for actually playing - we’ll see if that pays off next week.
I have to admit I gave up on them after the Tampa Bay game. Guess it was a kick in the pants they needed.
Brian
Yep. I know that feeling well.
All wounds are cured through the draft, though. Here’s to the standings flip-flopping in the NFC North.
That assumes that the Vikings wouldn’t have improved their quarterback situation some other way had Favre not become available. I know Cutler had a shitty year and everything but he’d have been awfully effective with all Favre’s weapons.
I’d much rather have Favre. Cutler does not have anything close to Favre’s knowledge, experience, leadership, toughness and intangibles. Hell, I think Favre still even has a better arm.
With the brilliance that has marked the Lion management, they played Daunte the whole game after he made it clear he would be gone next year. They confounded the fans by saying Stanton is good enough to keep as backup. But not good enough to play in a throw away game. I am so confused.
I would disgaree with this completely.
The Packers gained what appears to obe 12-15 years of top level quarterbacking.
The Vikings are TBD since they did win the Division and made the payoffs last year. They got a bye this year, which is a marginal improvement, but to say they gained EVERYTHING is premature. You really need to see how they do in the playoffs.
The Packers had Rodgers for 12 - 15 years (you ARE joking about that, right??) regardless of whether they booted Favre before last season or not. So they didn’t gain that at all. The only thing that is different about the Packers this year from if they had retained the services of Favre is that they have Rodgers playing THIS season, not, say, next year for the first time.
They spanked your little bitch, Rodgers, in back to back games.
I think it’s just a tad premature to start projecting 12-15 year, HOF future on Rodgers, by the way. He’s had one good statistical season. Big deal.
Two seasons, and I while I may be a tad premature, it is not easy to find a QB you can feel comfortable with for your future. Ask the 49ers and the Raiders and the Browns and countless other teams. So I am very happy with the move to let Favre go.
And yes the Vikes “spanked [my] little bitch” whatever that means. I hardly think Rodgers got personally spanked, but what-the-fuck ever, I could care less. I don’t see why you are so offended, I simpy was pointing out that the Vikings are a wait and see on the Favre experiment. If they lose in their first playoff game would you say they gained EVERYTHING? I wouldn’t and that was the only point I was making.
Well, Favre basically wasn’t available, and the best they could do was Rosenfells. They didn’t even pursue Cutler. As a result, Childress had to swallow his dignity and pursue a course of events that ultimately led to him being Favre’s personal taxi service.
I believe the phrase from this thread for what Childress is to Favre is “his little bitch”.
Rodgers would have been a free agent after last season. There was no way he was going to re-sign with Favre still in Green Bay.
“One good statistical season”?
He’s been a starter for two seasons. He’s thrown for more than 8,000 yards, 58 touchdowns and thrown just 20 total interceptions. His career quarterback rating (including his three seasons of occasional mop up duty) is a 97 - better than Favre, better than Peyton, better than Marino, better than Elway.
In fact, that 97 is better than Favre’s season rating in all but two of his years in the league.
Didn’t the Cutler thing happen at the end of the offseason?
That just proves the passer rating is an overrated stat. Let Rodgers play for 19 years and then we’ll se what his passer rating is.
One stat you didn’t mention from last season is 6-10. he got a lot of passing yards because he was playing from behind all the time. That always inflates passing stats.
Or it proves that Favre threw way too many boneheaded picks during his career.
Are you jumping into the Dreamiest Packers QB Evah!!!1! debate? WTF do the last 19 years have to do with whether the Packers made the right call making a change when they did? In the long run, the Packers are better off with a young Rodgers than an old Favre. I’ve said this before, but I suspect most Vikings fans would rather have Rodgers, too.
Yeah, maybe Rodgers won’t match Favre’s career numbers. Maybe he will, but it won’t matter because the offensive scheme and rules are different enough to make it an apples-and-oranges comparison. Maybe Bart Starr really was the best of the three. And maybe the Vikings will win more games than the Packers in the next five years – but I wouldn’t bet on it.
No maybe about it. 
Y’know, my grandpa froze his ass off watching the most famous TD of Starr’s career, but that was a running team first and foremost. Including that TD, come to think of it