Jermaine Whitehead Jersey , it seems that Rodgers’ predecessor is concerned." />Skip to main contentclockmenumore-arrownoyesAcme Packing Company homepageHorizontal - WhiteAcme Packing Companya Green Bay Packers communityFollow Acme Packing Company online:Follow Acme Packing Company on TwitterFollow Acme Packing Company on FacebookFollow Acme Packing Company on InstagramLog in or sign upLog InSign UpSite searchSearchSearchAcme Packing Company main menuFanpostsFanshotsSectionsPackersOddsAboutMastheadCommunity GuidelinesStubHubMoreAll 321 blogs on Horizontal - WhiteFanposts Fanshots Sections The APC PodcastPackers Film RoomFantasy Football AdviceCDTShare this storyShare this on FacebookShare this on TwitterShareAll sharing optionsShareAll sharing options for:Brett Favre sounds worried about Rodgers-LaFleur audible dramaTwitterFacebookRedditPocketFlipboardEmailPhoto by Stacy Revere/Getty ImagesAaron Rodgers and Brett Favre are very different quarterbacks. One has avoided turnovers at a historic rate, while the other led the NFL in interceptions in three different seasons. One is considered to be one of the smartest, most cerebral quarterbacks in the league, while the other didn’t know what a nickel defense was in his third season.But what both legendary Green Bay Packers have in common is an ability to make something out of nothing — to make unbelievable plays outside the script of an offense. And it seems from recent comments that Favre is worried about whether Rodgers will be allowed to do so under a new head coach.At the heart of the discussion is a recent narrative that Rodgers and new coach Matt LaFleur are at odds, or at least unsure about their partnership, when it comes to audibles. Under Mike McCarthy, Rodgers had complete freedom to change a playcall in the huddle or at the line of scrimmage. LaFleur’s scheme does not allow for that, leading to comments from both men suggesting that they need to figure out how best to work together to each other’s strengths.But while the two men’s public comments are positive and suggest a fully collaborative attitude on both sides, the media is going through plenty of hand-wringing over a push-and-pull between the two. This weekend while speaking at the American Family Insurance Championship golf tournament, Favre weighed in, expressing a bit of concern about the idea that Rodgers could be limited in the new scheme. Here is the quote, from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:The tone of Favre’s comments — saying things like “you don’t want to change what’s working” implies a resistance to change and a bit of a defensive posture when it comes to his former protege. That he would approach the situation this way suggests that he believes there is reason to be concerned about LaFleur keeping Rodgers too much in check.Still, as far back as April, LaFleur was already talking about wanting Rodgers to still have some freedom at the line. This comment from an interview with The MMQB illustrates his approach and willingness to let his quarterback make changes when necessary: “Certainly Aaron Ripkowski Color Rush Jersey , if there’s a play that’s not gonna be good, yeah, please save us. That’d be great.”This was just one piece of Favre’s interview, as he spoke about a variety of topics. He gushed about the late Bart Starr — “A perfectionist. What a gentleman” — and addressed the recent post on his Instagram account saying he was planning a comeback (“I got hacked, absolutely”). But when it comes to his former teammate in Rodgers, it sounds like Favre thinks there’s nothing that needs to change about the way he plays quarterback — and that he’s expecting LaFleur to try to do just that, despite comments to the contrary. If attendance at the team’s annual shareholder meeting means anything (and it probably doesn’t), the Packers are currently moving in the wrong direction.The very last line of the article in the story regarding Wednesday night’s annual gathering points out that attendance as “well below normal at 4,200.”That would seem to require further analysis, or at least historical comparison. For example, the article could have mentioned that, in 2018,5,900 showed up. It could have mentioned that https://www.thepackersfanshop.com/Demetri-Goodson-Jersey , in 2017, 7,000 attended. It could have mentioned, as last year’s item in the same publication did, that the record attendance came in 1998, with 18,707.It’s unclear why the trend has begun moving so sharply in the wrong direction. Yes, the event can be viewed online; but home games can be seen on TV, too. Fans still show up for the real thing — and Packers fans used to show up in much bigger numbers to witness the annual shareholder meeting.Maybe two straight years of no playoffs and skepticism about where the team is going from here under a first-year, first-time head coach is starting to poke holes in hearts filled with cheese. Or maybe, given that it’s been several years since the team sold new shares of non-stock stock, the novelty that comes from legitimately being able to refer to the team as “we” has worn off.Regardless, the owners of the team aren’t as engaged as they were not that long ago — and definitely not as engaged as they were in 1998.