Favre Not a Sure Winner in the QB Competition

Lets assume for the moment that Brett Favre is a better, even MUCH better quarterback. Even so, it is not guaranteed he will win this competition. Why? Because the test is slanted in Rodgers' favor. 

A lot of Favre's greatness comes from inside himself: natural ability, mental toughness, a genuine love of the game. However, a significant fraction of it is also his comfort with the system and the near mental telepathy he has developed with his team mates.

The Packers have spent the entire off season revamping the offense around Rodgers' strengths. Rodgers and the rest of the team have had the OTAs to learn the new plays, to adjust to Rodgers' style of play. Will the receivers break for Rodgers' style or Favre's?  When a play breaks down, does the offensive line block for a run by the QB or to buy him time? In a straight up competition, Rodgers has an advantage, because the system has been developed around him.

Now let's assume, purely hypothetically of course, that you were an NFL football team. For some reason, that defies all common sense and logic, you did not want a guaranteed first round ballot hall of fame quarterback who was in the top 10 in every passer category last year and has played 275 games without an injury as your starting QB. Instead you wanted an unproven first round draft choice who has been injured twice. 

How might you "tweak" this competition? Would you give Favre a higher percentage of new plays? Or how about making the plays ones that suit Rodgers' strengths and/or Favre's weaknesses? 

You can give them both exactly the same selection of plays and say, "We were taking the high road in this situation and trying to be fair and impartial and evaluate them in the same scenarios." 

Need a bit more of an advantage for Rodgers? Give Favre an even higher percentage of new plays, but now you call the perfect defense for that play. For Rodgers, call his bread and butter plays and call the defense that gives those play the best chance of success.

I don't know where in that spectrum this will end up, but no matter what, Rodgers has an advantage. Whether or not it is enough of an advantage depends a lot on how much the play book has changed, how well the other offensive players can compensate for who is behind center, and how fair the distribution of plays really is. 

And lest we forget, this is not an objective measure. The Packers brass gets to decide who wins and unless it is completely lopsided, that means they get the QB they want.

What I do know is this. The real loser is the Green Bay Packers and the sooner they get this issue settled, and put one person behind center, the better off everyone will be.