...because Terry Bradshaw wants a spot so he can kiss Brett Favre's butt, too.

       Bradshaw's rant on Sunday's "NFL on Fox" pregame report will validate those who say the Packers should've kept Brett Favre, but his take is wholly uniformed for someone who knows football as well as he does.

        You had to figure that Favre's recent success with the New York Jets, timed with the Packers recent slide, was going to invigorate the nation of second-guessers who want Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy gone for letting Favre go this past summer.       To some, the argument never died, but it lost some of it's legs as Favre struggled in the Big Apple earlier this season, to the point where he was actually getting booed by the Jets' faithful as New York columnists flat-out said he should've stayed retired.

        That's changed now that Favre and the Jets lead the AFC East, having beaten the New England Patriots Thursday night.      Granted, the Pats aren't the same team without Tom Brady and are putting a banged up version of their usual Super Bowl caliber squad on the field of late, but a win at Foxboro is a win at Foxboro.      You can't take anything away from Favre  who seems to taking on the role of "Good Brett" of late--the one who makes smart choices rather than tossing the rocket balls of his youth.

        Bradshaw's take is simple: the difference between the Packers who were 4-5 heading into Sunday's game against the Bears and the team that made it to the NFC championship last season is....Favre.      Bradshaw says everything that Favre had to work with last season in Green Bay is still there in 2008, the only difference being the subtraction of the Hall of Famer in waiting and the addition of Aaron Rodgers at QB.

       Simple reasoning, and simply not true.       

        This ISN'T the same Packers team--certainly not at the start of the season when the offensive line and star running back Ryan Grant were hurt.     They didn't get to work together all summer long and it took several games for them to show any semblance of rhythm.      And, the o-line's woes began to creep into the passing game, culminating in last weekend's dismal display in Minnesota.     Chad Clifton is either playing hurt or lost it--or, maybe a combination of the two.     Others seem to have a hard time lining up properly or comprehending the snap count.         And, it's only NOW that Rodgers has all of his receivers to throw too.

         Then, there's the defense--the line was already missing Cullen Jenkins to a season-ending injury when linebacker Nick Barnett blew out a knee in Minnesota and joined him on the pines.      The ranks were so thin that the Packers had to rely on oft-injured potential bust Justin Harrell for a game or two.      The secondary had to go without two starters, Atari Bigby and Al Harris.    

        So Terry, how's THAT the same team?

       The Packers have had a bunch of issues nine games into this season but Rodgers hasn't been one of them.      Yes, he holds the ball a little too long sometimes.      He hasn't always made the most sound choices on some of his check-downs.        Rodgers got schooled by the unrelenting pass rush he faced in Minnesota, and probably learned a lot.     And, let the record show that the Metrodome was a personal house of horrors for Favre early in his Packers stay.     Look at any of the Packers losses this season--are ANY of them solely Rodgers' fault?      And, of Green Bay's four losses last season, at least two can be pinned on Number Four: the one at windy, cold Chicago where Favre played like an 90 year old man who wanted to get out of the weather and again at frosty Lambeau against the Giants where Favre, master of the cold weather game, got outplayed by Eli Manning and served up the game-ending pick.

         Favre chose to retire.   

       Favre then made noise about coming back, only to waive McCarthy and Thompson off when they were willing to head south and visit with him.      The Packers moved on, and Favre again changed his mind.      This time, the Green Bay brass wasn't going to cave and give Favre his way.       McCarthy wasted a day of camp talking with Favre, to see if he could put his personal animus aside and return on the team's terms and Favre couldn't do it.     It was only then that Thompson did what he had to do--get as much as he could for Favre while shipping him as far away as possible.       Bradshaw wonders why, if the Packers thought Favre was so bad and so done, the Packers just didn't let him go and play where he wanted.       That's just plain stupid: Favre was the one who said he was toast when he retired, but was there any doubt he still could play?      Why would you let him go without getting anything in return?      And, why would you allow him to go somewhere else in the conference or division where he could hurt you?     That would be malfeasance of the highest regard by Thompson.     Instead, he made the best of a bad situation.

        McCarthy and Favre would've lost all locker room cred had they allowed Favre to stroll back into the locker room last summer and take the starting job away from Rodgers.      His actions, including his arrival in Green Bay the night of the Lambeau scrimmage, proved that Favre was putting himself and his needs above those of his teammates.       Favre's denials about coming back ("just rumors...nothing to it") and his revisionist take on Thompson (who he'd always insisted he had no qualms with before dumping his bucket on Greta Van Sustren's couch) proved him to be, at least in my eyes, something less than the teammate/player I thought he was.     He showed himself to be just another self-centered superstar putting his own desires above the good of the Green Bay Packers, who, the last time I looked, had a "G" on the sides of their helmets, not the letter "F".

         The only thing more tiresome than talking about all this again is the fact that this debate won't end until the season is over or Favre retires.     The comparisons will go on and on, at every bar, deer camp, or gathering of Packers fans.      The subject is as toxic as politics and religion, splitting families and friends.       It's wholly unproductive, yet very engaging.       Who DOESN'T have an opinion?

        Terry Bradshaw does, and he's entitled to it.     But, as Charlie Sykes often says, he's not entitled to his own facts.     Maybe he's too big of a Favre fan to be objective.      Maybe it's the case of a vet sticking up for another vet.        Bradshaw's intellectual laziness, though, inexcusable and  beneath someone who commands such a big national stage.

        Go Aaron Rodgers!    Go Pack!