Skip to content

Should Favre be on Packers Mt. Rushmore, or shouldn’t he?

Favre Getty Images

The annual game of should-I-or-shouldn’t-I retire played by Brett Favre from 2002 through 2011 has yielded a broader question for Packers fans everywhere.

Should he, or shouldn’t he, be on the team’s Mt. Rushmore?

On Wednesday’s edition of Pro Football Talk on NBCSN, yours truly and the extremely wise (after all, he went to an Ivy League school) Ross Tucker argued Favre should be left off the short list of four all-time great Packers.  PFT Planet and the extremely misinformed (after all, he went to an Ivy League school) Erik Kuselias believe Favre should make it.

The official PFT Mt. Rushmore consisted of Vince Lombardi, Curly Lambeau, Don Hutson (Google him), and Bart Starr.  Voters replaced Lambeau and Hutson with Reggie White and Favre.

Watch the segment to see Kuselias lose the debate.  And then make your case below.

To Favre or not to Favre.  Fire away.

Permalink 195 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
195 Responses to “Should Favre be on Packers Mt. Rushmore, or shouldn’t he?”
  1. higgy1 says: Jun 12, 2013 7:54 PM

    Yes !

  2. thefox61 says: Jun 12, 2013 7:54 PM

    No, wait, Yes, No, I don’t know, maybe?

  3. peopletrains says: Jun 12, 2013 7:55 PM

    Arguably the most exciting player in NFL history deserves a spot.

  4. GenXJay says: Jun 12, 2013 7:56 PM

    Yes. 1st face on the left of everyone else.

  5. thesanchizekid says: Jun 12, 2013 7:57 PM

    Yes. No questions asked.

  6. rxv5854 says: Jun 12, 2013 7:58 PM

    Would be a complete joke if he isn’t on there

  7. kwjsb says: Jun 12, 2013 7:58 PM

    Rings? TD’s?
    Nuff said.

  8. talkintrashallday says: Jun 12, 2013 7:58 PM

    Bart Starr over Brett Favre??!! Such disrespect to one of the all-time greats. That #4 is a LEGEND.

  9. sdffa11 says: Jun 12, 2013 7:59 PM

    yes.

  10. iluvbears says: Jun 12, 2013 7:59 PM

    Yes.

  11. reeggss says: Jun 12, 2013 8:00 PM

    What about the magic man?

  12. packattack1967 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:00 PM

    The best football player to wear green and gold. Period. He may not be number 1 in your heart but he’s the best damn football player Ive ever seen on the pack. End of argument.

  13. mssaintsfan76 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:01 PM

    Not a Packer fan but you got to give credit were credit is due. Got to give it up to him. Give him a spot!

  14. theycallmehof says: Jun 12, 2013 8:02 PM

    Without Lambeau the Packers do not exist (in 2013) in the great state of Wisconsin. They would be playing in L.A. or somewhere else a greedy owner wanted to place them. Thank You Earl, you sir made “Titletown”

  15. sdcameron says: Jun 12, 2013 8:03 PM

    Of course he should be. It shouldn’t even be a question.

  16. packerpride03 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:03 PM

    No freaking way Favre deserves to be on there. Idc what he did for them. He put us thru hell the last couple years with the whole retirement thing. Not to mention the pointless INT’s he threw. The biggest if them all is the sin of putting on that purple uni. Screw him

  17. thestrategyexpert says: Jun 12, 2013 8:03 PM

    The Packers franchise made a series of moves that are analogous to setting off demolition explosives over their Mt. Rushmore, and thus naturally Favre’s carving has been dismantled. The team voluntarily cut him out of the picture. So they got a good deal on Aaron Rodgers, that’s great, but they don’t get to keep Favre on the mountain as they chose to cut his legacy down for something more important.

    100% NO.

  18. bigks77 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:04 PM

    Pack sucks! Go vikes!

  19. wbwisconsin says: Jun 12, 2013 8:04 PM

    Anybody who holds the NFL record for MOST INTERCEPTIONS certainly belongs!

  20. bobonmycob says: Jun 12, 2013 8:04 PM

    Is this a real question? LOL of course he belongs!

  21. herlies says: Jun 12, 2013 8:05 PM

    The short answer is no.

    Green Bay has won 13 championships, and Favre was part of just one.

  22. dondada10 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:06 PM

    Yes, but Rodgers will end up taking his spot.

  23. touchdownroddywhite says: Jun 12, 2013 8:06 PM

    Ridiculous question… Of course he should be. He made the game fun and exciting to watch, and knock him for it or not, he played the game like it was a game.

  24. jayovalentine says: Jun 12, 2013 8:07 PM

    Its a stupid question. Of course he should.

  25. packattack1967 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:07 PM

    Mike, you spend too much talking football monday to saturday to be objective on this one.

  26. thegreatgabbert says: Jun 12, 2013 8:09 PM

    Favre can’t be bothered coming to pose for Mount Rushmore, so they’re sending Mount Rushmore to Hattiesburg.

  27. wsperegoiv says: Jun 12, 2013 8:09 PM

    Considering he won 3 consecutive MVPs and was the face of the franchise for over a decade I’d say yes. With out a doubt.

  28. m3dman3 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:10 PM

    My question is, why is one of the best qbs in history not on his teams Mt. Rushmore?

  29. bla bla bla says: Jun 12, 2013 8:11 PM

    No. The “official” PFT version is correct.

  30. mssaintsfan76 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:12 PM

    If they named a street after the guy you might as well put him on there.

  31. packerjer says: Jun 12, 2013 8:13 PM

    It’s really close between Starr and Favre. I probably give the nod to Starr, but Kuselias made a pretty strong case for Favre.

    White getting on there over Lambeau and Hutson tells me they need to start teaching Packers history in Wisconsin schools.

  32. iceburgskin202 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:14 PM

    YES!!! As a skins fan I can understand how some diehard cheeseheads will never forgive him for wearing the purple…. but he and Reggie made them cool in the 90s. Plus his stats are undeniable!!

  33. srackis says: Jun 12, 2013 8:14 PM

    Yes – if Bart Starr played for any one else but the Packers. Favre was entertaining, but Bart delivered titles to – Title Town! Green Bay does not have this name without Lambeau, Lombardi, Starr, and Hutson! Green Bat was Title Town 20 plus years before Favre!

  34. wozzmann1955 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:16 PM

    Too bad for Brett that he ended up playing for a storybook team .Vince,Curley ,Hutson and Starr’s achievements trump Favre’s..

  35. gohawks89 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:19 PM

    how could you have a mt Rushmore with out Brett farve???? please

  36. rhinojr says: Jun 12, 2013 8:20 PM

    Has to be on it

  37. wamj2008 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:22 PM

    IDK, when I look at that picture, it’s hard to choose who I would remove to add Favre.

  38. justintuckrule says: Jun 12, 2013 8:23 PM

    First blush yes until I saw the PFT winners and now I say, no way. Those 4 on there are the Packers. If Rodgers wins another SB and plays another 7 years, he still don’t make it.

  39. lionpride10 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:27 PM

    It’s funny how people tend to vote for recent players and not the all time greats. Brett Farve was a great QB but hardly in the top 4 Green Bay players of all time. Also, I hate the Packers!

  40. beerbratscheese says: Jun 12, 2013 8:32 PM

    If I was around age 30 or younger, I’d probably say yes. But, since I am older than that, I’ve seen and know a lot more Packers history than the youngsters.

    Lambeau, Lombardi and Hutson are three locks; really no debate about that. Now, Nitschke, Hornung, Taylor, Gregg, Kramer, among others also deserve consideration. However, it does ultimately come down to Starr or Favre.

    Starr doesn’t have the sexy stats, but he was the perfect field general. He went 9-1 in playoff games and won five out of six Championships/Super Bowls.

    The nod goes to Starr. Sorry, Brett.

  41. jeff3646 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:33 PM

    Reggie, rest in peace, but does not belong on this list. With that being said the other 5 do; Lombardi, Lambeau, Hudson, Starr AND Favre. There is no way the list can be smaller.

  42. coltswerestolen says: Jun 12, 2013 8:37 PM

    How in the world did the fans leave off Don Hutson? He was probably the greatest WR to ever play the game.

  43. lionsfaninthe505 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:39 PM

    Put him on the Vikings’ & Jets’ Mt. Rushmore as well while you’re at it.

  44. bender4700 says: Jun 12, 2013 8:43 PM

    This whole thing is turning into a joke.

    Favre is one of the greatest players EVER.

    The old guys are great, but really, modern football is SO much more tough.

    Modern football is so much tough. Yes, without Lambeau and all those guys there is not football, but that doesn’t mean they are the GREATEST players in the sports history. History includes EVERY single player.

    Isn’t Vick on the Falcons Mt Rushmore? Come on…

  45. marktroy says: Jun 12, 2013 8:44 PM

    PFT got it right

  46. girlsinthesouthlovefootball says: Jun 12, 2013 8:46 PM

    Favre all the way. MS fan here. Without Favre, we wouldn’t even know who the Packers are!

  47. wholelottaawesome says: Jun 12, 2013 8:52 PM

    Brett Favre brought relevance and excitement back to Wisconsin. It remained the entire time he was there. He deserves to be on there. If it wasn’t for playing as a jet or Vike this discussion probably wouldn’t even take place.

  48. greymares says: Jun 12, 2013 8:54 PM

    for me the Mt. Rushmore would have to be about 25 deep.

  49. matzahballz says: Jun 12, 2013 8:56 PM

    Does a one legged duck swim in a circle?

  50. textexington says: Jun 12, 2013 9:02 PM

    Who?!?

  51. Chad Bartel says: Jun 12, 2013 9:03 PM

    Brett Favre is the Ronald Reagan of the Packer Mt Rushmore

  52. orangejynx says: Jun 12, 2013 9:03 PM

    Yes he belongs on it. Second face after Lombardi. That said the guy was probably for blowing as many crucial games as he won.

  53. packerjer says: Jun 12, 2013 9:04 PM

    If you think the question is “ridiculous”, you don’t know Packers history.

    Without Lambeau there is no Packers. He coached the Packers to 6 NFL championships and kept this team from going under several times. It’s crazy the Packers made it this far as a franchise, and he’s a big part of the reason why they have.

    Lombardi is greatest coach in NFL history.

    Hutson was the Babe Ruth of his era. As the graphic in the video shows, he lapped the rest of the field…twice! Won 3 championships.

    Starr QB’d his team to 5 championships. He was 9-1 in the playoffs, and was twice a Superbowl MVP.

    If you want to give Favre the benefit of the doubt over Starr, I can see that, but it’s hardly the slam dunk some of you are making it out to be.

  54. jjh1982 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:05 PM

    Packers = 13 championships, Vikings = 0 championships but Packers suck, gotta love them Vikings fans

  55. hottubtodd says: Jun 12, 2013 9:06 PM

    Please stop the madness. Just because he waffled on retirement for several years doesn’t take away from the player that put 16 good years in for 1 team. Name another QB that started as many games that wouldn’t be the top 1 or 2 players ever to play for that team.

  56. cballlv11 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:08 PM

    20 years as the starting QB and that’s a question that needs to be asked?? Really?

  57. pftjunkie says: Jun 12, 2013 9:11 PM

    Absolutely!! The list isn’t legitmate unless Favre is on it!

  58. scytherius says: Jun 12, 2013 9:16 PM

    I don’t like him but … absolutely.

  59. jerichoholic86 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:17 PM

    The idea that you are even asking this question is unbelievable. Mike Florio, you are clearly unqualified to be judging any of these Mt. Rushmores.

  60. majikbullet says: Jun 12, 2013 9:17 PM

    No!

    Greatest coach of all time Lomabrdi is a given!

    The man they named the greatest venue in all of sports after Curly Lambeau deserves a spot!

    Greatest Packer player of all time Don Hutson is also a given, he also has his name on the practice facility, Favre might get a street someday but not in the same league as Hutson!

    And the greatest Packer QB of all time Bart Starr deserves a spot!

    To put anyone else in the top 4 would be a joke, Favre might get a street named a street after him but he doesn’t deserve to be in the top 4, he also has done things to take away from the Pack, the rest of these class acts deserve it more than him!

  61. myasylum11 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:18 PM

    Rogers is a great studious quarterback, however their is no way he’s as interesting, or tough as Farve… then again? Who is?

    So the answer is a yes!

  62. antalicus says: Jun 12, 2013 9:18 PM

    Should this even be a question? Future Hall of Fame Player that played for 18 years with the Packers… Would be like leaving Lombardi off the mountain.

  63. packerfantastic says: Jun 12, 2013 9:18 PM

    You nailed the four. Lambeau – without him there wouldn’t be a team. Lombardi – voted top coach of all-time. Don Hutson – greatest skill player of his era and it isn’t even close. And Starr – led the team to 5 championships and was a key figure in one of the most talked about plays ever.

  64. 49erstim says: Jun 12, 2013 9:18 PM

    Yes. Without a doubt. Lombardi, Lambeau, Starr & Favre.

  65. bigtimepackfan says: Jun 12, 2013 9:19 PM

    No favre shouldnt make the pack mt. Rushmore. Its about championships in packer country so sorry brett one championship doeant cut it.

  66. antalicus says: Jun 12, 2013 9:20 PM

    or however many years Brett played with them, dude was old

  67. orivar says: Jun 12, 2013 9:23 PM

    Absolutely. I’m an Eagles fan so I can actually relate (McNabb made us relevant no matter what the loud mouths say). You’re talking about the guy who made the Packer’s relevant again. The Packers, “Title down” went through a damn near historic drought for a franchise that has had as much success as it did and absolutely nobody cared about them. To even quote wikipedia, “In the 24 seasons from 1968 to 1991, the Packers had only five seasons with a winning record!”

    That’s bad. Favre made the Packers into competitors and not only that but he made the game exciting to watch for everybody. Favre is a Hall Of Fame lock, he is the face of a football era much like Joe Namuth yet his stats and career were much better.

    11 Pro-Bowls back when they meant something. 3x First Time All Pro. 3x Second Team All Pro. 3x AP All Pro. 5x NFC Player of the year. And Won a Superbowl

    If anybody says that all of that isn’t worth a Packers Mt. Rushmore lock needs to get a head check and learn how to evaluate things in perspective.

  68. orivar says: Jun 12, 2013 9:25 PM

    Reggie White over Lambeau however is very insane.

  69. underlinebmx says: Jun 12, 2013 9:25 PM

    Packer’s Mt. Rushmore… No
    NFL’s Mt. Rushmore… Yes

  70. theclaim says: Jun 12, 2013 9:25 PM

    To Favre!

  71. supergruby says: Jun 12, 2013 9:26 PM

    The fact that your having this debate tells me that packer fans have been too spoiled over the years. Or too stupid. He’s a lock for the NFL Mt Rushmore in my book.

  72. mblue24 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:28 PM

    Yes. Best QB Greenbay has ever had. Much better than Stuck on hisself Rodgers.

  73. emoney826 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:28 PM

    This is the dumbest thread. I’m sorry but as great as Hudson was in his time, I cannot put him ahead of Starr or Favre. As much as Favre pissed me off, he belongs up there. Starr is just a champion. 5 rings should automatically put him up there. QBs get all of the glory and are usually the faces of their franchise. Hudson played at a time when their were a handful of teams.

    Lambeau, because he created this franchise.

    Lombardi, because of the obvious.

    sStarr, because he was the best QB of his time who led this team to 5 championships.

    And Favre, because he was the face of this franchise for almost 20 years.

  74. Wisconsin77 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:29 PM

    No question. Holds all the records, was the integral part of the group that brought the Packers back to NFL prominence, and did it without a single hall of famer on offense throughout his whole career (unlike Montana, Young, Manning, Starr).

    Should be:

    Curly Lambeau
    Don Hutson
    Vince Lombardi
    Brett Favre

    Starr being the 5th, but can’t bring him ahead of Favre despite the championships since he was on stacked teams with the best coach of all time. Favre had Ray Rhode, Sherman, and McCarthy during the early years.

  75. emoney826 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:31 PM

    And when speaking of Packer greats, it should be about who was at the last supper, not four faces on a mountain. Too many greats for this storied franchise.

  76. whatjusthapped says: Jun 12, 2013 9:34 PM

    If were most other teams, the answer is Yes. But the Packers have such a long history and frankly, more deserving candidates.

    It has nothing to do with his sexting and retirement shuffle, its simply that he isn’t even close to the top 4 in Packer history. Not when two of the spots have to go to coachers, one is a pioneer of the NFL, the other has the Superbowl trophy named after him.

  77. mcba1n says: Jun 12, 2013 9:41 PM

    Hutson, Lombardi and Lambeau were the easy ones – those are locks. I had a really good debate with a trusted fan and he took Starr – I took Favre. It’s really between those 2 QBS to make this list. Both have amazing arguments and neither SHOULD be left off of the list – but one must.

    I respect the Starr voters – initially I did 5 picks to do the 3+ Favre/Starr. It’s so hard to pick.

    Brian Bartlett Starr deserves to be on the Mount Rushmore of Packer lore. He’s a better man OFF of the field than he was on it – anyone who follows his work off the field knows this – and he’s an all time great on the field.

  78. srackis says: Jun 12, 2013 9:41 PM

    Bart 5 – Brett 1!

  79. circuscivics says: Jun 12, 2013 9:47 PM

    Kuselias is an idiot. McNabb didn’t force his way off the Eagles. He was traded on Easter following the playoff loss to Dallas.

  80. nomesayin says: Jun 12, 2013 9:48 PM

    Yes. Of course he should

  81. nomesayin says: Jun 12, 2013 9:49 PM

    No. I don’t think he should be

  82. nomesayin says: Jun 12, 2013 9:51 PM

    Yes. He is a 1st ballot hof-er. He won a Superbowl. He was NFL MVP 3 times!

  83. nomesayin says: Jun 12, 2013 9:51 PM

    No. I don’t think he should be on the Rushmore thingie

  84. byzr says: Jun 12, 2013 9:52 PM

    Lombardi
    Favre
    White/Holmgren/Wolf (it’s difficult)

    yeah Favre made the franchise relevant for the past twenty years. without him it would be players and coaches from 40-50 years ago.

  85. charger383 says: Jun 12, 2013 9:53 PM

    No He was good but Lombardi, Lambeau, Starr and a few others were more important in Packer history

  86. padraighansen says: Jun 12, 2013 9:56 PM

    @mssaintsfan

    They named a street after Starr (Bart Starr Drive) as well.

  87. In the Weeds says: Jun 12, 2013 10:01 PM

    Wow–It’s exciting to think that generations who love football today, never got to enjoy the days of Bart Starr.

    As a Cowboys Fan, who died at the Cotton Bowl and then 365 terrible days later, DIED AGAIN during the Ice Bowl, anyone who chooses Favre over Starr simply isn’t doing his homework.

    Besides, people seem to forget how Favre treated the Packers org, his teammates who kept him Alive in Green Bay, and the Packer fans he screwed over.

    Favre has always been about Favre–and Starr was Always about The Packers.

  88. swagjag says: Jun 12, 2013 10:01 PM

    Brett. Yes. Little Brett. No.

  89. dannyreneau says: Jun 12, 2013 10:02 PM

    And Babe Ruth had the strike out record, but no one would deny him a place on the Yankees Mt Rushmore.

  90. padraighansen says: Jun 12, 2013 10:05 PM

    Here’s the thing with this – too many misinformed people voting.

    As great as Favre & White were in Green Bay – and they were – do their accomplishments trump the others?

    Lambeau – Lock. He’s one of the fathers of the NFL. His name is synonymous with the Packers, and is responsible, along with George Calhoun, for the Packers being founded, and sustained.

    Lombardi – Lock. Duh.

    Hutson – Absolute lock. Don Hutson was to the NFL in the 1930’s what Babe Ruth was to baseball in the 1920’s. Along with Arnie Herber, they redefined pro football with the forward pass.

    Starr – On pure individual accomplishments, it’s tough to overlook Favre. People say Favre is responsible, along with Reggie White, for the resurgence in Green Bay.
    The problem with that is that those who use that rational have no idea what the Packers were like before Starr & Lombardi. They were, in a word…horrendous.
    To me, it’s also about who represented the franchise the best. And let’s be honest – Favre ruined it for himself at the end.

    So, I’d put Starr on over Favre.

    And, in the role of Gutzon Borglum: Bob Harlan.
    Harlan made two key decisions, amongst the many he made, that have had a huge impact on the franchise. The first was firing Tom Braatz and hiring Ron Wolf, giving him complete control of the football operations. The second was doing the same thing with Ted Thompson.

  91. drjoemck says: Jun 12, 2013 10:05 PM

    What were Starr & Hutson’s consecutive games played streaks? Ridiculous!

    Or do you disagree with every coach in the history of sport that the most important ability is availability?

  92. raiderapologist says: Jun 12, 2013 10:07 PM

    Why would you have to Google Hutson? Favre was special, but on a team with that much history, he would only make the “modern era” cut.

  93. slobmykolb says: Jun 12, 2013 10:10 PM

    One of the best players of all time. I’m a falcons fan that still thinks about what could’ve been and I still think he’s one of the true greats of the game. Put him up there!

  94. geniusesq says: Jun 12, 2013 10:10 PM

    Yes, he should be on it. Crazy that it’s even up for debate.

  95. geniusesq says: Jun 12, 2013 10:12 PM

    Yes, then in 20 years, Aaron Rodgers will replace him, just like in real life.

  96. skinsrock says: Jun 12, 2013 10:13 PM

    No doubt. Everybody was disappointed the way he left the game, but Mt Rushmore is earned on the field. He deserves it.

  97. aa1829 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:14 PM

    No way on the hill billy. Lombardi of course, Starr kus he won 2 Super Bowls, the first two, and quarterbacked one of the best teams during a given decade in history. Hutson because he dominated his day, and did a lot of stuff I can’t remember, and I think Forest Gregg. He was the best football player Lombardi ever coached. No to dip stick.

  98. stankytoes12 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:15 PM

    Vince is the only person more deserving than Favre to be on this list IMO, of course he belongs, but someones gonna have to clear way for Rodgers pretty soon.

  99. steelers88 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:16 PM

    Of course Brett Favre should he won the Green Bay Packers a Superbowl he deserves to be on the mount Rushmore for the Packers.

  100. dirtydrew says: Jun 12, 2013 10:19 PM

    Favre, Lombardi, Horning, Nitchki (sp). Can’t all be ghosts.

  101. wipackman1265 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:26 PM

    Rushmore means 4…..

    Viking fans……that’s the number after 3

    Lambeau and Lombardi…locks

    Starr, Hornung, Favre or Reggie White.

    I personally do not like Brett but based on his football played in Green Bay I would pick

    Bart Starr and Brett Favre

  102. srackis says: Jun 12, 2013 10:26 PM

    Lambeau Field;
    Vince Lombardi Trophy;
    Don Hutson retired in 1945 and still holds 8 receiving records;
    Bart 5 titles in Titletown; Brett 1!

    Bob Harlan, Ron Wolf, and Mike Holmgren had more to do with the Packers resurgence than Brett Favre!

  103. steveop24 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:28 PM

    If Favre doesnt deserve a spot, then what would any modern day player have to do to earn a spot. In my opinion he was one of the best players to ever play the game. Forget all the drama that happened toward the end of his career, his career statistics speak for themselves. So i ask again, is it even possible for a modern day player to ever earn a spot? Because if Favre hasnt, then its likely that no current of future Packer ever will.

  104. johnnycamparm says: Jun 12, 2013 10:33 PM

    As a kid growing up in the 90’s, you had YOUR team, then you had a few players that you HAD to tune in to, to witness their play…. In the the 90’s, those few players were Barry Sanders and Brett Favre. Sanders was unanimous as a MT Rushmore rep, and he QUIT on the Lions… The Packers couldn’t get Brett to RETIRE for good,… and THIS is a question?

  105. vfan76 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:45 PM

    Only Packers fans would be dumb enough to keep him off the list. He’s one of the best QB’s of all time, and this is coming from a Vikings fan.

  106. gobrutus says: Jun 12, 2013 10:47 PM

    Hats off to Florio, he makes a compeling argument against Favre. But how do you not represent the team that turned around the Packers? They were the Browns before Holmgren, White and Favre. Favre became a disaster under Mike Sherman. The 2002 Divisional game is a classic example. Bart Starr was a lousy cotch, why is that forgiven?

  107. fordman65 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:47 PM

    Not even close
    Star is 8th all time in yards per attempt which is amazing given his era. Plus 5 titles

    Lambeau top 10 coach of all time.
    Lombardi top coach of all time
    Hudson, most prolific wide out of his era,

    Favre, most exciting qb to watch of all time, but that doesn’t mean he deserves to be there. One forgets while he has all the yards and td’s he also has the most ints .

  108. cavemanna says: Jun 12, 2013 10:50 PM

    An I high? Bart Starr was a better Qb than Favre? You really think that? This is about indudual accomplishments, so quit rattling off Bart Starr stats when they’re not Bart Starr stats but Green Bay packer stats. Favres stats far outweigh Starrs. Starr played on better teams with less talented opponents.

  109. jiggy3198 says: Jun 12, 2013 10:55 PM

    Let’s be relevant of course he does

  110. packerfantastic says: Jun 12, 2013 10:56 PM

    For those who use the argument that Favre won them a Super Bowl … Reggie and the defense were the undisputed leaders of that team. Without Reggie, Brett never wins the Super Bowl. Conversely, if Holmgren had decided to go with Brunnel over Favre, i think the Packers still would have won the Super Bowl. That defense made up for a lot of Brett Favre mistakes. Yes he was exciting. Yes he helped make the Packers relevant again. But the overall results just don’t compare to Starr.

  111. Corey Jeppesen says: Jun 12, 2013 11:01 PM

    Wth?! Yes!

  112. buckybadger says: Jun 12, 2013 11:08 PM

    vfan76 says:
    Jun 12, 2013 10:45 PM
    Only Packers fans would be dumb enough to keep him off the list. He’s one of the best QB’s of all time, and this is coming from a Vikings fan.

    ——————–

    Only a Vikings fan wouldn’t be able to read that Favre was on the fan vote.

  113. buckybadger says: Jun 12, 2013 11:14 PM

    Yes of course Favre is on the Mountain for the Packers. You can argue people from different eras but all 3 eras need to be represented [soon to be four]. From the first great era you can take either Hutson or Lambeau. This is probably the hardest choice because Hutson was possibly the best player to ever put on the Green and Gold and one of the best WRs of all time, really only Rice can be argued as better. Lambeau is critical of the franchise’s existence but he also tired to move the team to LA so I go with Hutson.

    Next is between Starr and Ray Nitschke. I side with Starr just because I feel with the old Packer fans he is still the most highly regarded of all the players. Class act all the way and still gives back to the community.

    The others are no-brainers. Of course Lombardi is on there, without him the Packers don’t have the extended history they have now and wouldn’t sustain themselves as a franchise they are. The other era is Holmgren, Favre and White. Favre played the longes while Holmgren left and White is really an Eagle. I go with Lombardi, Hutson, Favre and Starr.

  114. SilentMajority says: Jun 12, 2013 11:16 PM

    Who wanted to go to Green Bay before Favre and White? Nobody, that’s who. I’m not being biased either, the Packers were a very bad team back then. Then Reggie White signed with the packers, and they traded for Favre, and suddenly it was cool to play there. If those two players didn’t go to Green Bay who knows if they would have been competitive much less won a few Super Bowls. That’s why Favre and White deserve to be on your Mt Rushmore.

  115. buckybadger says: Jun 12, 2013 11:18 PM

    wipackman1265 says:
    Jun 12, 2013 10:26 PM
    Rushmore means 4…..

    Viking fans……that’s the number after 3

    Lambeau and Lombardi…locks

    ———————-

    Is Curly a lock over Hutson? I think we can only take on from that era since we had 3 great ones. As I just explained for Curly trying to move the teamI take Hutson.

  116. baldeagle6 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:31 PM

    Lambeau was the founder. Hutson is still the greatest Packer player ever. Lombardi was just certified by ESPN as the Greatest Coach in NFL History–still.

    A handful of other players won multiple championship rings during their time in Green Bay. One stayed in Green Bay for his entire career and won five of those rings in the so-called “modern” era of the years after the 1958 NFL Championship Game (Colts over Giants in OT) or 1960, whichever you prefer. He also played QB.

    Frankly, Bart Starr is a no-brainer for anyone who lived in Green Bay, saw the pre-Lombardi years and then watched Lombardi make NFL history for nine seasons of sustained excellence (1959-67) before he stepped down–a choice he soon came to regret before he moved to Washington, DC for one final season.

  117. bender4700 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:41 PM

    STOP SAYING “without *insert old name* there is no..”

    That’s like saying without oxygen we can’t life, so Oxygen is the greatest thing ever.

    So without George Hallas is there Pro Football?

    Without Lamar Hunt is there an AFL?

    Please. Stop this stupid “I’m old so I have to remind you of that” bull.

    Favre played and won against some of the most physical and biggest players in history. Would Bart Starr beat the Ravens D in their height? Tampa? Hell, the Bears in 85?!

    I love the guys that started it all. I love em a lot, Drew Brees is a total idiot for acting like they are just out of luck regarding NFL Pensions for former players. But for crying out loud, this country has so many old people that ignore the fact that Babe Ruth hit home runs before african american’s could even PLAY THE SPORT!! *thank you Daniel Tosh*. In the 1910s, 1920s, etc they couldn’t even play night games.

    It’s like saying the Beatles first album is their best because without it, no other albums. NO idiot. That’s not how life operates. Sometimes, a person, art, sport, or industry produces the BEST in that field many years later.

    Mt Rushmore is not “the Founding Fathers”, it’s 4 of the most important Presidents at the time it was created. If it was built today, FDR probably replaces Teddy.

    So stop old people. We get it, some of us do RESPECT and love what our predecessors did, but for crying out loud, don’t tell me Bart Starr would out perform Favre.

    Watch the tape. Check the stop watch. Those dudes chasing down Starr are not running nearly as fast as they do now or even during Brett’s best seasons (which were when he was in his 40s ironically).

    Seriously, dude plays for nearly 20 years, misses his FIRST game in his FINAL season?!?!

    COME ON!

  118. bender4700 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:44 PM

    What next?

    Dan Marino not on the Dolphins Mt Rushmore because of some guy that played the sport in 1910?

    I mean really. So stupid.

    Favre NOT on the Packer Mt Rushmore just completely undermines the whole thing.

    But really, some of the results have been really puzzling as it is anyway.

  119. spedman24 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:50 PM

    Any packers fan that says yes isn’t a packers fan. He completely ruined his legacy when he “had to play” for minni…it’s places like this where he no longer belongs

  120. steagles66 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:50 PM

    No if u put him on then u have to put Reggie White on there

  121. hallzi43 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:52 PM

    Too many old guys with crazy notions of how “great” football used to be. The streak for Favre is absolutely unheard of.

    @padraighansen

    You want to talk about how horrendous the Packers franchise was for 12 years? How about we talk about how horrendous it was for the 23 after the Lombardi era? Favre led the Packers to 2 superbowls during an era with arguably the hardest foes the NFC will ever see in San Fran and Dallas. Plus a 3 time MVP in the 90’s? That is just ridiculous.

    You guys talk about the old days like it is a Royal Flush if you played in that Era. It really isn’t even close. But I will give Bart Starr is due.

  122. geoffthames says: Jun 12, 2013 11:55 PM

    Hey PFT, stop trying to get a rise out of people, you know #4 belongs on there. Reggie White was great but when you think of the Packers, Favre is one of the first names that pops in your mind. My god, you put Mike Vick on the Falcons Mt Rushmore and left off Deion Sanders, one of our only Hall Of Famers. You took the good and bad of Vick, do the same here. This is silly

  123. hallzi43 says: Jun 12, 2013 11:56 PM

    And we continue to talk about how Brett treated us. Enough with that nonsense. The guy gave us 16 seasons and never missed a game. You should be ashamed of yourselves for even feeling “mistreated” by Brett.

  124. leroysbutler says: Jun 12, 2013 11:56 PM

    In the Weeds says:

    Favre has always been about Favre–and Starr was Always about The Packers.

    ———————————————————-
    I wholeheartedly agree but that’s not why Favre’s not on Mt Rushmore. I also agree that he’s one of the best QBs in NFL history. Favre’s problem is his playoff/SB record and the long rich history of the Pack.

    It comes down to Hutson/Starr or Favre. Hutson is the best player in Packer history. Starr was 9-1 in the playoffs with 5 championships inc 2 SBs.

  125. mikebrownistheworstownerinprosports says: Jun 13, 2013 12:01 AM

    Championships are a TEAM effort. Dan Marino didn’t win any, and I’m sure he’s on the Dolphin’s Rushmore over Griese. Just ask yourselves this: when discussing the top 10 QBs of all time, where does Favre rank? Now where would you rank Starr? Starr probably wouldn’t even make the list.

  126. steagles66 says: Jun 13, 2013 12:01 AM

    Reggie White is the ONLY reason green bay won it figure use had to bring a great eagles player to do it

  127. msclemons67 says: Jun 13, 2013 12:08 AM

    I would have put Favre on the Packers’ mountain but i’m far more offended by the snub of Nitschke.

    Nitschke was a PACKER. All caps, bold, 72 point font.

  128. silverandblack052099 says: Jun 13, 2013 12:12 AM

    Are you fu#@ing kidding me!? Of course he should be up there! No question! How many straight games did he play for the team, injured or not? How many wins did he get for the team? Let’s not forget he was forced out in Green Bay when he could clearly still play. He was one bad pass away from taking the division rival Vikings to the Super Bowl 2 seasons after the ultimate disrespect of being asked to back up Rodgers when he could clearly STILL PLAY!
    After all that he did for the team and you ask if he was one of the 4 most important and best individuals for the franchise! Are you fu#@ing kidding me!

  129. melissata says: Jun 13, 2013 12:31 AM

    The “problem” with teams like the Packers or Bears is that they have just too many great people — Favre is a great player, but he probably ranks #5 among the all-time greats in Packerland. He and many of the others who got left out (Ray Nischke, Jim Taylor, Elijah Pitts) would have made the Mount Rushmore of almost any other team in the NFL.

    Think of the baseball analogy — would Joe DiMaggio have made the “Mount Rushmore” of the Yankees? (what about Ruth, Gehrig, Stengel, …)

  130. safeisdangerous says: Jun 13, 2013 12:35 AM

    I’m a Packer fan and I voted for: Lombardi, Curly Lambeau, Hutson, Bart Starr.

    It was a tough decision. This is not a dig on any other players. They’re all great.

    Not including Favre had NOTHING to do with the way he left. But simply because there aren’t enough spots.

    I can see why fans from other teams might not get it, because they don’t have quite the history the Packers do.

    Lombardi, Lambeau and Hutson are immediate ins. No question, no argument, no debate.

    So the 4th spot is between Starr and everyone else.

    Did Starr set TD records? Games played records? Yards? INTs? No. He didn’t set any of those records. But he won 5 NFL championships. 5.

    Including, the first two super bowls.

    Favre was great. Easily a better athlete than Starr. More exciting. Set more records. And is much more top of mind.

    But Starr gets the nod here. For the championships. For the history. For making Green Bay Titletown.

  131. mattblairfan59 says: Jun 13, 2013 12:36 AM

    Packers = 13 championships, Vikings = 0 championships but Packers suck, gotta love them Vikings fans

    OK, the first 6 “Championships” the Packers won were done so before the MN Vikings came to exist. In those first six championship seasons,there were never more than ten teams in the league. So they had a one in ten chance of winning – ooh, sounds tough! They went another 17 years before winning another one. And then there was the 70’s and 80’s (the “Glory Days” as I call them). The Packers made the playoffs a grand total of TWO times between 1970 and 1992. The Vikings only missed the playoffs nine times in that same 22 years period. Vikings longest playoff drought since their inception has been 4 years. The Packers went 9 consecutive and 10 consecutive years without making the playoff in that same time frame. THE PACKERS HAD FOUR (4!!!!) WINNING SEASONS IN A 22 YEAR PERIOD!!! One of those was a strike shortened season, and another was an 8-7 -1 year.

    That all changed once Favre became you’re QB. No more perennial losers. Before Favre came along, your team was on the path to irrelevance in the NFL. You’re damn right Favre belongs on your Mt. Rushmore!

  132. mountaindont says: Jun 13, 2013 12:38 AM

    Why is that all everyone mentions is the “Rings” ? If this is what matters then Bart Starr is the greatest QB of all time. Starr led the Packers to 5 World Championships. Starr also is one of the classiest men you will ever meet in any walk of life. He deserves to be on the NFL ‘s Mount Rushmore let alone the Packers. Also Don Hutson dominated his position during his era like no one else ever has.

  133. hallzi43 says: Jun 13, 2013 12:59 AM

    @melissata

    Why wouldn’t Joe DiMaggio make the Yankee Mt. Rushmore? DiMaggio and Ruth would be locks.

  134. pack15forever says: Jun 13, 2013 1:02 AM

    PFT got it right on all counts. I could care less that Favre played for the Vikings and Jets. He doesn’t deserve to be on the Packers Mount Rushmore because he did not deliver in the clutch in the playoffs. He threw interceptions at the most inopportune times. Favre was flashy and a gunslinger who seemed to put his stats ahead of the team. Starr had the highest QB rating in NFL playoff history and has more rings than anybody. He also called his own plays and was a team player. If Favre had been the QB in the Ice Bowl he probably would have thrown an interception on the game winning drive. Just see what he did in the Mini Ice Bowl against the Giants in the 2007 NFC Championship game when he threw an interception in OT to Cory Webster and there were countless others in the playoffs…Brian Dawkins interception in OT, six interceptions against the Rams, etc.

  135. jayniner says: Jun 13, 2013 1:07 AM

    This is like asking if Joe Montana should be on the 49ers “Mt. Rushmore”

    Are you kidding me?!?

  136. grandsonofcoach says: Jun 13, 2013 1:18 AM

    Why are we debating where Favre belongs on a fake mountain? He’ll be inducted first ballot into the hall of fame and have his number retired in Green Bay. Real honors that take nothing away from those who came before him or those who will come after him. Nuff said.

  137. bretbski says: Jun 13, 2013 1:18 AM

    Mike Florio, the fact that you even pose this question is a joke… and anyone who opposes putting Brett Favre on this list is just a fan and knows NOTHING about football. Favre made Green Bay relevent again and drew free-agents to Green Bay frickin Wisconsin to play football. (I don’t care what profession you’re in but when you have the option to go play anywhere & you chose Green Bay because you want to play for with Brett Favre that’s saying something. Hell, even Randy Moss said he would have came here to play with Favre in 2007 and we all know how much he loves Green Bay.) Anyone who leaves Favre off this list is simply just an ignorant fan who knows NOTHING about football!

  138. granadafan says: Jun 13, 2013 1:36 AM

    Not until Favre has properly and genuinely acknowledges what a douche he was to the organization and Aaron Rodgers who did absolutely nothing wrong. Apologize to Rodgers for not mentoring or even acknowledging his presence. Apologize to the team for creating a circus atmosphere by retiring, unretiring numerous times and forcing the Packers’ hand and then whining about it. He pitted the Packers fans against Rodgers, who again, did nothing wrong.

  139. lawyermalloy says: Jun 13, 2013 1:38 AM

    No question about it!

  140. creamsiclecannon says: Jun 13, 2013 1:40 AM

    Hey if you guys don’t want him I’ll get in my time machine and take him on the Bucs we might have won a few more Super Bowls with our defense

  141. The Prophet says: Jun 13, 2013 1:40 AM

    The issue of retirement is completely irrelevant for determing Favre’s legacy in GB. Ask yourselves this, if this poll was taken in Spring 2008, would anyone at PFT or give more votes for any player other than Favre? Favre has been touted as the “greatest Packer ever” for most of the 2000’s and that doesn’t go away because he left. The removal of Favre is based purely on personal feelings of media hatred and fans hatred based on a PR campaign begun in Fall of 2008.

    Remove the emotion and ask again if Favre deserves to be there. It’s not like Favre murdered or raped anyone after 2008. His crimes were only in making some people mad. That is not reason to omit him from anything.

  142. The Prophet says: Jun 13, 2013 1:43 AM

    Put it this way. There are plenty of NFL players that I don’t like for personal reasons. But this didn’t override my ability to assess a players legacy for a given team. And therefore people should put their feelings aside and intelligently realize that no player did more for, or as a Green Bay Packer than Brett Favre. And if this was 2007 you’d all put him in unanimously. Put feelings aside.

  143. greenmeattruck says: Jun 13, 2013 1:51 AM

    NONONONONONONONONONONONONO!!!

    Signed,
    Those who remember all the picks (yeah, that’s right, the most picks in a career…EVER!)

  144. lambeaufieldwest says: Jun 13, 2013 1:55 AM

    Yes. Absolutely. And his number should be retired soon.

    However, his move to the Vikings showed me who the Packers fans were and who the Brett Favre fans were.

  145. jaypza says: Jun 13, 2013 4:03 AM

    This is really stupid to debate. I am a diehard Packer fan and have loved football my whole life. I lived through the tail end of the misery that was Packer football prior to Favre and believe me that was the worst drought of winning our team ever went through, we were pathethic. Favre changed that won us a Superbowl, won three MVPs and rewrote the entire qb record book and played 16 straight yrs for us without one single Hall of Famer on offense and many times hurt. Not to mention he is the Toughest quarterback and possibly toughest player to ever play this game. Was the drama at the end of his career crappy, without a doubt, yes. But 3 yrs cant change 16. He was Green Bay for too long and did too much for the game of football to be kept off of this list. Favre over Starr, who is definitely my 5th if there was one. Sorry Florio, your hatred of Favre can’t stop the fans from telling you what you knew all along.

  146. ncaafollower says: Jun 13, 2013 4:35 AM

    I have a compromise: Go with PFT’s four for the Packer Mt. Rushmore, and add Brett Favre’s infamous & photogenic Crocs at the base of the mountain.

  147. jammer88 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:07 AM

    As much as I dislike Favre for the dirt bag he is as a father, husband and human being, I still cannot let my opinion of him interfere with the truth about his QB playing while with GB. It was with the Packers that Favre came into his own and took this team to 2 SB’s and got at least one piece of bling, not to mention his most productive years came behind the center for the GB packers, so with that being said, yes, unfortunately you have to include this dirt bag on the packers Mt. Rushmore.

  148. chalkruz1989 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:11 AM

    As the starting quarterback of the Green Bay Packers Brett Favre won a Super Bowl, three MVP awards, and led the Packers to eight division championships. Check please.

    You can harbor all of the hatred you want for the way he handled his last years playing at Lambeau Field but truth of the matter is he made the organization relevant in the 90s and early 2000s.

    You should also be thankful for Favre sticking around as long as he did. Because of Favre, whether it’s a pro or con, Aaron Rodgers matured and became a better player.

    If Favre isn’t on Mt. Rushmore, the conversation isn’t legit.

  149. calvinhobbes5000 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:17 AM

    The fact that PFT Planet picked Reggie White over Don Hutson shows that most people don’t remember anything that happened before they were born. Hutson dominated like no player before or since, with the possible exception of Jim Brown. White played most of his time with the Eagles.

  150. isthereanyusernamesleft says: Jun 13, 2013 7:21 AM

    Not a fan of Bret at all but he has to be up there

  151. hodag54501 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:26 AM

    Lambeau, Lombardi, Don Hutson, Starr.

    Anyone who would put Favre ahead of Starr is out of their minds. The NFL is full of guys with great stats. The Hall of Fame is full of guys who are winners.

    Bart Starr was the MVP(twice) of the same Super Bowl game that’s played today.

    My Mt. Rushmore has the two most legendary coaches in the Packers’ long history along with their two MVP players.

  152. rjd23456 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:31 AM

    Green Bay = Titletown

    Titletown = Starr (THE greatest QB in NFL history) Hutson, Lambeau, and Lombardi.

    Farve does NOT have the chops over Starr; sorry. Starr has the VICTORIES in post season to prove it. Farve does not; mostly threw the big brick when it really counted. He set up the biggest Titletown disappointments ever. Lost at home in the playoffs. Starr never did. VERY selfish player.

  153. nightofthehipple says: Jun 13, 2013 7:36 AM

    White and Favre over Lambeau and Hutson? Apparently not enough voters have knowledge or appreciation of the history of the NFL.

  154. janisal says: Jun 13, 2013 7:39 AM

    I was first gonna go with Starr…..but changed my mind. Favre it is.

    Why? ‘Cause the team’s resurgence in the 90s is such a significant event, it should be represented. That success has carried to this day.

    The representatives of that era are Favre, who brought back the offense and White, who sparked the defence. And Favre is the longer tenured Packer of the two.

  155. Wisconsin77 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:57 AM

    packerfantastic says: Jun 12, 2013 10:56 PM
    For those who use the argument that Favre won them a Super Bowl … Reggie and the defense were the undisputed leaders of that team. Without Reggie, Brett never wins the Super Bowl. Conversely, if Holmgren had decided to go with Brunnel over Favre, i think the Packers still would have won the Super Bowl. That defense made up for a lot of Brett Favre mistakes.

    I and the statistics of that season disagree that the defense was the main part of that winning team. You mean the fact that Favre and the offense broke the NFL record (at that time) of scoring on their opening drive of the game didn’t help that defense become #1? If you remember that Superbowl, that number one defense let New England right back into the game despote 3 first half TDs from Favre. It astounds me how some “fans” forget about those TDs which forced NE to play from behind the whole game. look it up. And what mistakes did that defense make up for Favre that year during his NFL MVP season?

  156. iamapatsfan says: Jun 13, 2013 8:19 AM

    The Packers have so many great players, no matter what happens, snubs will be had.

    Favre, while he may not have the rings of Starr, nevertheless was the face of the Packers for essentially a generation. Couple that with his ironman playing time and numerous other records, I think you have to put him up there.

    A couple seasons at the end of his career shouldn’t sink all the stuff he did to make himself so loved at Lambeau while he was there.

  157. lagg1 says: Jun 13, 2013 8:34 AM

    This is a tough one since the Packers have so much rich history. After Lombardi, I would even consider placing a face showing a ‘cheesehead’ on the teams Mt Rushmore. Classy team and classy fans.

    from a Ravens fan

  158. whysomanylosers says: Jun 13, 2013 8:40 AM

    The Packers were a football “footnote” after Lombardi left. Then Favre (and Reggie) showed up and made the franchise relevant again.

    Packer fan seems to forget how crappy they were for a LONG time.

    Farve belongs even though he can be a real DB.

  159. tallyhooo says: Jun 13, 2013 9:06 AM

    I know the guy has the most int’s in history but he also has the most td’s (508), the most passing yards (70,000), the most wins (186), the most consecutive starts (297, 321 including playoffs), 11 pro-bowls, 3 consecutive mvp’s (only person to ever accomplish that), and a Superbowl ring (2 apperances and 5 conf. title games)…….I would say he deserves a spot. I’m not taking anything away from Bart Starr (he is one of the greats) but I don’t think he would’ve been that successful if he played in Favre’s era.

  160. letemplay says: Jun 13, 2013 9:19 AM

    How can you possibly decide this without getting John Madden’s opinion?

  161. finsguy says: Jun 13, 2013 9:25 AM

    Personally I would have no problem putting Favre on over Starr or Reggie White. Starr was just basically a glorified Trent Dilfer style game manager with a stomper team IMO and Reggie did a lot of his best work in Philadelphia so even though one of the all time greats I can’t see him going on a Packer Rushmore over Brett Favre.

    That said I don’t see any possible scenerio where Don Hutson can be left off. If it honestly has to come down between Hutson and Favre then I almost have to go with Hutson.

  162. filthymcnasty1 says: Jun 13, 2013 9:27 AM

    Favre wasn’t nearly good enough to crack the Top 4 in Green Bay. He spent his last decade in Green Bay choking in the clutch.

    And that finally qualified him to be a Viking, where he again choked in the clutch.

  163. jcampshure says: Jun 13, 2013 9:38 AM

    Gah! These people are so stupid. Just because you weren’t around for the early years doesn’t mean you should forget who won multiple championships and who formed the team. It wasn’t Brett Favre.

    How can you put him above Bart Starr? I was under the impression that championships mattered in sports. Silly me….it should be records and keeping you on the edge of your seat.

  164. chrldr12 says: Jun 13, 2013 11:05 AM

    Here’s the problem folks. You who say Farve should be up there are just looking at his numbers. Numbers alone don’t make it.

    The biggest problem with Farve is that he alienated himself from Packer fans. They hate him. I’m a Packer fan and I hate him. As much for his changing teams, the way he did, as for the blown big games.

    Maybe Farve does belong on the Packer Mt. Rushmore, but it would be Farve’s ass that should be up there, not his face.

  165. propertyofthebroncos says: Jun 13, 2013 11:11 AM

    you HAVE to have Favre. no way anyway thinks of the Packers without remembering one the best qbs to play the game.

  166. Rick Spielman is a Magician says: Jun 13, 2013 11:36 AM

    The Packers were irrelevant for 2.5 decades before Favre showed up. I’m surprised Packer fans were smart enough to vote him in. Of course, they also thought Reggie White should be in ahead of Curly Lambeau, who I thought they would have heard of.

  167. uwsptke says: Jun 13, 2013 1:12 PM

    It’s a resounding “No”. You have to understand the history of the franchise in its entirety, not just on the limited history you’ve seen in your lifetime. Favre was an exciting player, and maybe the best you’ve ever seen. But he doesn’t compare to Bart Starr.

  168. packerfantastic says: Jun 13, 2013 2:30 PM

    @Wisconsin77 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:57 AM

    I and the statistics of that season disagree that the defense was the main part of that winning team. You mean the fact that Favre and the offense broke the NFL record (at that time) of scoring on their opening drive of the game didn’t help that defense become #1? If you remember that Superbowl, that number one defense let New England right back into the game despote 3 first half TDs from Favre. It astounds me how some “fans” forget about those TDs which forced NE to play from behind the whole game. look it up. And what mistakes did that defense make up for Favre that year during his NFL MVP season?
    ————————————————————-
    Since you are into stats, take a look at Favre’s playoff record with Reggie and after Reggie. After Reggie he was sub .500. Look at the playoff failures – 6 INT against the Rams, first ever playoff loss in Lambeau against the Falcons, OT INT against Philly to setup game winning FG,last play as a Packer was INT against Giants in 2007. If you want to evaluate Favre, look at the whole picture. Yes he won a SB, but he missed his opportunities to win 3 or 4 more. And for those who say Starr wouldn’t have been as good in Favre’s era, don’t forget the rule changes that benefited the QB and the passing game. if Favre had played under the rules Starr had to play under, he would have thrown even more INTs.

  169. deltaoracle says: Jun 13, 2013 4:10 PM

    For almost any other franchise, of course Favre would be a no-brainer. But this is the Green Bay Packers. Lambeau – father of the team. Lombardi – greatest coach ever. Hutson – STILL holds a bunch of NFL WR records. Starr – played when QBs and WRs got mugged almost every play, but still helped lead the team to five world championships in seven years and went 9-1 in the playoffs. So no, sorry, but #4 is #5 for this franchise.

  170. padraighansen says: Jun 13, 2013 5:03 PM

    @hallzi43 says:
    Jun 12, 2013 11:52 PM
    Too many old guys with crazy notions of how “great” football used to be. The streak for Favre is absolutely unheard of.

    Let’s see…I’m 41, so I grew up mainly through those 23 years that you talk about.

    Age is not an acceptable excuse for ignorance of history. I didn’t bash your God, Favre. I simply pointed out that since the choice is essentially between Favre & Starr – and each made their contributions to the franchise – that I’d go for Starr’s legacy & impact on the team over Favre’s.

    If their were 5,6,7 slots…Favre would be a no brainer.

    Trying do the same exercise with the Yankees. Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, Jeter….who goes? There’s a few others that you could throw into the same mix and ask the same question.

    But your thinly veiled insult aside, I suggest you learn your history before you pop off.

  171. Wisconsin77 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:41 PM

    packerfantastic
    Since you are into stats, take a look at Favre’s playoff record with Reggie and after Reggie. After Reggie he was sub .500. Look at the playoff failures – 6 INT against the Rams, first ever playoff loss in Lambeau against the Falcons, OT INT against Philly to setup game winning FG,last play as a Packer was INT against Giants in 2007. If you want to evaluate Favre, look at the whole picture. Yes he won a SB, but he missed his opportunities to win 3 or 4 more. And for those who say Starr wouldn’t have been as good in Favre’s era, don’t forget the rule changes that benefited the QB and the passing game. if Favre had played under the rules Starr had to play under, he would have thrown even more INTs.
    ——————————————-

    Since you want to look at the whole picture, let’s do just that. Favre would have won 3 or 4 more SBs? With what? Ray Rhodes, Sherman, or the early McCarthy era after TT dismantled the team? With defences giving up 4th and 28 conversions, over 100 rushing yards and 21 1st qtr points to Vick in the Pack’s first ever playoff loss, or those 24 first down and 8 minutes TD drives to the Giants?

    I am not saying Favre is free of mistakes, but he was forced to carry teams with weak defenses and weak coaching. Manning, Brady, or even Rodgers in his prime would not have been able to win SBs with those teams.

    As far as the relaxed rules for QBs, that did not happen until late in Favre’s career. During his MVP years, it still favored DBs and the Defensive line very much. Only the last 5 to 8 years has it changed dramatically to promote offense. That is why you see so many 4000 and 5000 yard passers these days, QBs have benefited greatly (including Rodgers). Back in the 90s and early 00s, those numbers were unheard of.

  172. packerfantastic says: Jun 13, 2013 10:45 PM

    Wisconsin77 says: Jun 13, 2013 7:41 PM

    Since you want to look at the whole picture, let’s do just that. Favre would have won 3 or 4 more SBs? With what?
    ———————-
    Well, to start, how about the one they lost to Denver in a game in which they were favored. I’m not saying the loss is the fault of Favre, just that it was a missed opportunity. The following year when they lost to SF, they still had enough talent to compete for the SB. How about 2003 when they lost to the Eagles. That was a good team that was peaking near the end of the season winning 7 of their last 9 regular season games. Finally, 2007 when Eli outplayed him at Lambeau. Again, I am not saying Favre is the reason for those losses, just that he had more legitimate opportunities to get another SB win and wasn’t successful. Look, I think Favre was a great QB that did a lot for the Packer franchise. I don’t hate Favre but I also don’t view his career through rose-colored glasses. When I compare the two, Starr and Favre, my conclusion is that Starr had a more significant impact than Favre did. 5 rings to 1.

  173. pistolpete0903 says: Jun 14, 2013 6:37 AM

    Even the most ardent hater of Favre has to admit (and that includes yours truly) that he was the face of the franchise (even though much of it was media driven). Knock him on his play and attitude, but credit to his longevity.

  174. Blake Renaud says: Jun 14, 2013 12:22 PM

    If there were 5 spots, then Brett should absolutely be #5. But Green Bay was called Titletown way before Favre ever strapped on a helmet, so read up on your Packers history, youngsters…

  175. youhavenoclue says: Jun 14, 2013 1:46 PM

    One of a few franchises where you might need two Mt. Rushmores.. along with Pittsburgh and Oakland.. but If I had to say:

    Vince Lombardi
    Curly Lambeau
    Don Hutson
    Bart Starr

  176. farvite says: Jun 14, 2013 3:57 PM

    Lambeau
    Hutson
    Lombardi
    Favre

    Those are the pillars of this organization, regardless of how butt hurt some fans are.

  177. twayward says: Jun 14, 2013 4:07 PM

    He only deserves to be on the ESPN Overhyped Mt Rushmore — Brett Favre, Tim Tebow, Chad Johnson and Terrell Owens

  178. farvite says: Jun 14, 2013 4:07 PM

    Starr played with 10 other HOFrs, and a guy who routinely gets snubbed. Quite possibly the greatest teams ever assembled. He SHOULD have 5 Titles.

    Starr himself says Favre was the better player.

  179. jeremycrowhurst says: Jun 15, 2013 1:00 AM

    There’s an argument to be made that Hutson was a system guy — the beneficiary of a visionary coach, and during his biggest years, the beneficiary of the real football players being overseas in the war. But at the end of the day, the pre-war numbers alone earn him his spot.

    Those 60’s teams… hard to really say Starr was the engine that made that team run. (What was the signature play again? The Power Play-Action Pass?)

    Other than Sterling Sharpe, none of those Packer receivers would have been anything without Favre. He gets the spot over Starr.

  180. corvusrex96 says: Jun 15, 2013 2:06 PM

    No worries Favre already has a spot on the JETS Mt Rushmore. I mean after Namath NY is still legally required to have those 3 other spots filled .

  181. fasteddie43 says: Jun 16, 2013 1:29 AM

    PFT has it right, Lambeau, Hutson, Lombardi and Starr. All of those guys one multiple championships, Favre got one in 1996 and then choked away at least 5 more chances to end up being the only QB with 5 SB rings. Won a lot of games, sold a lot of seats, made a lot of money, a great showman, but, as even the 2009 Vikings found out , he is not the one you want with the ball in his hands with the game on the line because he will throw it to the other team!!! NO WAY he is on the Packers’ Mt. Rushmore!! Too Many Playoff losses!!

  182. boover3 says: Jun 16, 2013 1:55 AM

    I’ll be 32 in October. My father, who is 64, debate this all the time. He was there when the Pack won many of those 13 NFL Championships. To this day he says the greatest competitor of all time is #4. However, do you remove Hutson, Lombardi, Lambeau or Starr? You can’t…or can you?

    Go Pack Go.

  183. filthymcnasty1 says: Jun 16, 2013 9:24 AM

    Thankfully PFT got it right and left Favre off.

  184. purpwalk says: Jun 16, 2013 4:58 PM

    favre will go into the hof as a phacker, but he liked the vikings more

  185. vegasvike says: Jun 17, 2013 12:01 PM

    Packer fans, don’t think about what he did TO you, think about what he did FOR you and there should be no question. Grow a backbone and quit crying that you got kicked to the curb by the greatest.

  186. skcrooge says: Jun 18, 2013 6:43 AM

    Brett would be Numba One on an NFL Mt Rushmore! C’mon, people!

  187. tomdace says: Jun 18, 2013 10:40 AM

    Many are missing the gist of what this argument should be. It’s not whether or not Favre has the legacy to belong….because he does….instead it’s how do you take one of the other four off? You simply can’t.

    The Favre/Starr debate is ludicrous especially if you try and throw stats around. Fewer games, tighter rules, QB’s were calling their own plays, etc. Starr played in an era when an 80 passer rating was great but in the post season his passer rating was over 104. He is still the leader in this category.

    PFT got it absolutely right with Lambeau, Lombardi, Hutson, and Starr.

  188. cavemanna says: Jun 18, 2013 12:52 PM

    About 80 percent of you are talking out the side of your neck. Quit using wins and losses and Superbowls to measure individuals. Those are TEAM accomplishments. Favre > Starr…. And it’s really not even close. The only thing that keeps this discussion alive is the delusion some of you have to measure individual greatness by team accomplishments.

  189. gravedigger93 says: Jun 18, 2013 4:50 PM

    Personal feelings aside, he embarrassed the organization off the field far too many times to be considered for this kind of esteem. That’s what guys like Starr and Hutson represent, they’re arguably the greatest players in the history of the organization. They not only had great on field accomplishments, but they also were/are good men off the field. Did you ever hear of Bart Starr going to rehab for a pain killer addiction? Or Don Hutson send pictures of his junk to younger women? Was Curly Lambeau well known for his out of control partying? Did Vince Lombardi ever give rivals detailed information to help them beat the Packers after he wasn’t welcomed back? Did Don Hutson badmouth the organization to a major news outlet? Absolutely NOT. Sure Favre accomplished a lot as a player, but he’s not the caliber person I consider to be “Mount Rushmore Quality”.

    Keep in mind that Favre’s career almost didn’t happen. Mike Holmgren didn’t want to deal with him any longer and almost had him traded. He had Mark Brunell behind Favre and was all set to make him the franchise QB. Ron Wolf convinced Holmy to keep him.

  190. bubba703 says: Jun 19, 2013 3:26 PM

    Favre’s face should be there, except with a muzzle over his mouth. He was great, but never knew when to stop talking.

  191. mrqwag says: Jul 3, 2013 2:13 PM

    If you have to Google who Don Hutson is, you shouldn’t even be allowed to vote on this.

  192. dgt178 says: Jul 3, 2013 3:38 PM

    Starr—5 Titles
    Favre–1 Title

    Starr over the vindictive crybaby anyday….

  193. duckhead431 says: Jul 3, 2013 11:00 PM

    Why does it matter that he unretired and then played for a different team? You know who else did the exact same thing? Reggie White. He announced his retirement shortly after Green Bay lost in Super Bowl XXXII and then unretired less than two days later. Then he retired after the following (1998) season. And then he unretired and played for the Carolina Panthers for the 2000 season. And guess who else unretired and went to a different team? None other than Vince Lombardi, who retired following the 1967 season, then went to the Washington Redskins and coached their team in 1969 (and passed away shortly after). Did those two men “betray” the Packers?

  194. doughboy11 says: Jul 3, 2013 11:26 PM

    You people make me sick… Bret Favre was Green Bay for damn near 20 yrs and because ownership pushed him you clowns think he doesn’t deserve being on the list???? Wow!!!!!!

  195. packerfantastic says: Jul 4, 2013 8:25 PM

    Green Bat was called Titletown long before Favre came to Green Bay. I think the 5 titles Starr led his teams to had a lot to do with that.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!