I'm still a little confused. Are you saying he wouldn't have played as well as Favre or just as well as he's played in the era he's in? If it's the later, I think that would go for literally every other QB playing. Mahomes would have been great, but nothing like he is right now if his career started when Favre's did. The QB is just so protected now and on top of that, they keep making it easier to throw the ball, etc..all things we all know. I took it to mean you thought if Rodgers and Favre played in the same era, Rodgers wouldn't have been as good as Favre. I mean that if Rodgers had started his career in 1991 instead of 2005, I think he would've still been a good QB. But I think he would not have reached the peak he did in this era. Likewise, if Favre had started in 2005 instead of 1991, I think he would've been a good QB, just not as good as he was. Simply put, trying to compare QBs at different times is hard. Yes, they overlapped, but the two eras were different. I love having both of them as Packers. They were both great in different ways and different styles. Why does one need to be better than the other? No way for either of us to prove it either way. Just fun