The official Brett Favre for QB in 2008 thread

[GoPackGo]

I challenge anyone to watch this video from 9 months ago, look in the mirror at yourself and say out loud...."Aaron Rodgers would be a better QB for the Packers this year, let Brett Favre go QB somewhere else"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_6LcGbHxR8

At the end of the day, TT and Coach won't be able to do that. I question anyone who could.

Despite the waffling, despite the hurt feelings, Brett will return and reclaim his position as the starting QB for the Green Bay Packers.

[arcilite]

Listen,


nobody here is questioning how good Favre is. We all know he is awesome.



But the man is still retired.



RE fucking tired.


And he is causing a shitload of unneccessary drama. He needs to man up and make up his fucking mind.

[Rastak]

From ESPN, an article that supports your opinion.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3485214&sportCat=nfl


The World Series of Poker isn't being played in Las Vegas. It's being played in Green Bay, Wis., and Hattiesburg, Miss. And so far, a very amateurish Ted Thompson is trying to show strength in his hand.


Feel free to laugh the next time Green Bay Packers management, both past and present, starts talking about "preserving" Brett Favre's legacy and cherishing Favre's place in the team's "family." It means nothing.



The Packers are about the Packers, and that's fine, even expected, but at least say so from the beginning. Don't pretend you're genuinely concerned about Favre's standing in franchise lore when, in reality, you're more concerned about damage and image control.



Favre wants to unretire. And yeah, it's a bit of a diva-ish thing to do. Tears in March. Text messages in July.



But Favre has earned his share of diva currency, enough for one Get Out Of Retirement card. He's played hurt. He's played with his heart heavy with grief. And he's played for the moment, not the money. There are bits and pieces of his body all over Lambeau Field.



Thompson, the Packers' general manager, doesn't see it that way. His solution -- and remember, the Packers are the self-appointed guardians of Favre's football reputation -- is to announce that one of the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history, the guy only seven months removed from the NFC Championship Game, can return but may be a second-stringer. Think about it: Favre wearing a baseball cap and holding a clipboard.



Some legacy.



Packers management wants it both ways. It says it wants to protect Favre from himself, but mostly it wants to protect Favre from becoming a free agent, signing with the Minnesota Vikings and possibly kicking the Packers' butts twice in the regular season. That's the reason behind not granting Favre his release -- nothing else.



Management says the "finality" of Favre's retirement prompted the Packers to "move forward with our football team.'' But how can you move forward if Favre is still on the depth chart? If you don't want him as your starter, which is beyond astounding, then why want him at all?



Thompson has mixed a football Molotov cocktail. A short pour of Favre. A long pour of Aaron Rodgers. Topped off by Packers teammates and fans torn by their allegiances. Now light and throw.



Favre could make it easy on Thompson by staying retired. Of course, that's what Thompson is counting on: The great Brett Favre would never come back here as a backup. He wants Favre to fold.



But I'd love to see Favre report to Packers training camp later this month. I'd love to see the beads of sweat form on Thompson's forehead as he realizes he miscalculated the situation. Again.



If Favre shows up, Thompson has created an instant quarterback controversy. And by doing so, he has created the beginnings of a divided locker room. You don't think there are going to be pro-Favre guys vs. pro-Rodgers guys on that roster? You don't think the Lambeau crowd will start chanting No. 4's name the first time Rodgers struggles (and he will -- zero starts, 35 completions and one touchdown throw in three seasons)? You don't think Rodgers, Thompson's very first pick as GM in 2005, will be looking over his shoulder pads every time he makes a mistake?



Favre isn't blameless in this mess. He miscalculated, too. And for that, some Packers followers now consider him a whiner, not worth the trouble. Let's hear what they say if Rodgers bombs.



Thompson doesn't really want Favre back, unless it's for ribbon-cutting ceremonies or 20-year anniversaries. He wants the Rodgers Era to begin as soon as possible, preferably with Favre watching from his living room in Mississippi.



But sometimes you make exceptions for the exceptional. Favre has his faults, beginning with his penchant for changing his mind, but he still gives the Packers the best chance to win. Somehow that's been lost in the chaos. If Thompson wants to honor Favre's legacy, then grant him his release. If he signs with the Vikings and beats you, then that's how it goes. After all, Thompson had first crack at him as the Packers' starter.



Or if Favre truly wants to make this an amicable farewell, then he should tell the Packers he won't sign with an NFC North team. The wink-wink understanding might not be officially allowed by the league, but who has to know, right? The more likely scenario: The Packers could manipulate the trade process by making the price reasonable for, say, AFC teams, but cost-prohibitive for teams such as the division rival Vikings, Chicago Bears and Detroit Lions, or even 2008 NFC opponents Tampa Bay (Sept. 28 road game) and Carolina (Nov. 30 game at Lambeau) -- both rumored landing spots for Favre.



The whole situation is messier than eating barbecue ribs with your knuckles. And it could only get worse.



In the end, Thompson and the Packers are the ones jumping off the cliff without the bungee cord securely attached. They're betting everything on Rodgers' potential and Favre's sense of pride.



I'll bet on Favre. Lesser cards, better player.





Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com.

[MJZiggy]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

[Lurker64]

If Brett Favre elects to unretire, I trust the judgement of Mike McCarthy in terms of what to do with him. There's no point crusading for him to start or not right now.

If Brett Favre stays retires, Rodgers is our starting QB.
If Brett Favre unretires, the coaches will figure out what to do.

What I think about this is largely immaterial.

[GoPackGo]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

[Partial]

I challenge anyone to watch this video from 9 months ago, look in the mirror at yourself and say out loud...."Aaron Rodgers would be a better QB for the Packers this year, let Brett Favre go QB somewhere else"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_6LcGbHxR8

At the end of the day, TT and Coach won't be able to do that. I question anyone who could.

Despite the waffling, despite the hurt feelings, Brett will return and reclaim his position as the starting QB for the Green Bay Packers.

I really, really, really hope you're correct.

[woodbuck27]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

Who called that play MJ? Can you tell us that?

[Partial]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

Agreed.

[MJZiggy]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

[digitaldean]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

Let's face facts here instead of sniveling about this. Favre had a great season and saved the team's butt with great plays of his own. By the same token, it is a TEAM game, isn't it? Remember all the seasons when the Packers had no real talent on offense other than him? Yup, those were the years the Packers didn't make the playoffs.

But the Packers in 2007 and 2008 have a darn good defense and a whole bunch of weapons at WR plus a stud RB. (also don't have a darn K who doesn't blame the holder all the time, but I digress).

The TEAM got to the championship game and yes, Favre was the larger ingredient in that equation. But Favre never would have gotten to the NFC title game either if he didn't have a supporting cast around him.

Will Rodgers lead them to the NFC title game or beyond this year? Who knows. Maybe Rodgers will, maybe he'll be hurt. But he at least will be 100% committed to playing regardless of the weather. He made sure he attended the OTA's, the offseason weight program. And he damn sure doesn't need his own locker room. Right now, Brett's actions are more of "I only care about myself, not how it may divide the team or the fans."

If Favre wouldn't have waffled back and forth the Packers would've planned for him to come back and run the team. But when he aborted his unretirement and was using words like adding "closure" to this (McCarthy quoting Favre), that pretty much tells me he's done. Even when he asked on June 20th that McCarthy to "give me my helmet or give me my release" Favre STILL couldn't tell McCarthy that he was 100% committed to playing. WHAT THE HELL DO YOU WANT???? TT and M3 to kneel on broken glass waiting for the chance to kiss #4's backside?

Thompson already stated that Favre would be part of the team if he asks for reinstatement. IMO, I don't think Favre would be the backup if he came back to the Packers. But the going back on his word, the using of his mom, brother and the bo-hunk reporter in Biloxi to say what he doesn't have the guts to say would eat at most anybody that has any integrity.

Favre could end this debacle right now, sack it up like a man and have a press conf. outlining why he did what he did. But his silence is deafening.

[GoPackGo]

There's no point crusading for him to start or not right now.

If Brett Favre stays retires, Rodgers is our starting QB.
If Brett Favre unretires, the coaches will figure out what to do.

What I think about this is largely immaterial.

I agree. There is no point to crusade for him now. I'm just going on the forum's record with my opinion, and seeing how many others here feel the same way I do.

[Bossman641]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

Who called that play MJ? Can you tell us that?

Who cares who called it? Who executed it? Who called the plays on the 28TD's Brett threw? MM. Should he get the credt for those as well.

My god, some of you people are unbelievable.

[The Shadow]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

Who called that play MJ? Can you tell us that?

Who cares who called it? Who executed it? Who called the plays on the 28TD's Brett threw? MM. Should he get the credt for those as well.

My god, some of you people are unbelievable.

There is often just no end to the jock-sniffing around here.

[GoPackGo]

Dean-
your right on all points. The one thing you left out though, is that Favre has that little extra magic in his game that gets the Packers wins instead of losses in overtime. We(fans) know he has it. We need him to use it to help the Packers win as long as he's able.

[woodbuck27]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

Who called that play MJ?

[The Shadow]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

Who called that play MJ?

So you throw the ball up - even if your man is covered - because "it's the play"??????????

[woodbuck27]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

Who called that play MJ? Can you tell us that?

Who cares who called it? Who executed it? Who called the plays on the 28TD's Brett threw? MM. Should he get the credt for those as well.

My god, some of you people are unbelievable.

There is often just no end to the jock-sniffing around here.

NO jock sniffing just the facts that all add up to a pick.

Is it MM's fault or Favre's fault? Did DD run the correct route to the outside? It's a tough analysis and therefore difficult to assign blame.

That means don't piss all over Favre on that pick, and extend that to supporting the end of his career on our team. PLEASE. :)

[MJZiggy]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

Who called that play MJ?

Was it called or was it an audible? Who chose to make that throw with 2 open receivers on the other side of the field? You cannot exonerate Favre for that throw by trying to blame M3 for it. Favre had 3 options. He took the one that got him killed. And that wasn't my point to begin with. You can't base an opinion solely on the Denver throw without realizing that it's not always like that with him. And that the older he gets, the less likely you get Denver and the more likely you get NY. Especially at the end of the season in the cold.

[Fred's Slacks]

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

You are right. Had Favre not been leading the way, this team probably would not have been in the Championship game. However the point is not moot. Favre has brought the only championship to Green Bay in my lifetime and for that I am appreciative. However he has had numerous other chances and has not capitalized. We can point to the Giants last year, the Eagles in 03 and the Broncos in 97. Those were all golden oppurtunities to bring home another championship and he couldn't capitalize. There were always plays like this one that stuck out. I am not trying to say that those losses were all his fault but we also can't say he is the only reason we got that far.

I agree that Favre at 100% gives us our best chance. But Favre at anything less than 90%? I am not so sure.

[woodbuck27]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

Who called that play MJ?

Was it called or was it an audible? Who chose to make that throw with 2 open receivers on the other side of the field? You cannot exonerate Favre for that throw by trying to blame M3 for it. Favre had 3 options. He took the one that got him killed. And that wasn't my point to begin with. You can't base an opinion solely on the Denver throw without realizing that it's not always like that with him. And that the older he gets, the less likely you get Denver and the more likely you get NY. Especially at the end of the season in the cold.

Is it MM's fault or Favre's fault? Did DD run the correct route to the outside? It's a tough analysis and therefore difficult to assign blame.

That means don't piss all over Favre on that pick, and extend that to supporting the end of his career on our team. PLEASE. :idea:

[MJZiggy]

It also means don't pretend Favre is a god because the throw in Denver landed where it was supposed to. Everyone else had just as much to do with that success as they did in the failure. You don't get one without the other.

[Partial]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

The bad? You mean a wobbly pass in the coldest game in NFL history to an open receiver? You can't really blame him for that, it was happening to everyone all game long. It was a heck of a play by the DB.

[GoPackGo]

I agree that Favre at 100% gives us our best chance. But Favre at anything less than 90%? I am not so sure.

right on Fred. But why wouldn't Brett be at 100%? Strahan pulled the same shit with the Giants last year. I fault Brett 100% for this fiasco and I think TT has handled it beautifully. These things happen. Both sides need to forgive and move on together

[MJZiggy]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

The bad? You mean a wobbly pass in the coldest game in NFL history to an open receiver? You can't really blame him for that, it was happening to everyone all game long. It was a heck of a play by the DB.

I think you need to watch the video again, there, P. And I believe the Chicago game was colder IIRC, I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

And if you're going to go all the way down to blaming the weather, you can also say that the ball travels farther in the thin Denver air.

[lod01]

We got a rally going: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8341300/Rally-held-to-pressure-Packers-to-reinstate-Favre?MSNHPHMA


Clayton says who's starting week 1:
ESPN's John Clayton reports if Green Bay Packers QB Brett Favre is in shape and willing to make the time commitment as he did last year, he's going to beat out QB Aaron Rodgers for the starting job. That's a no-brainer.

Go Favre!!!!!!!!!!

[The Shadow]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

The bad? You mean a wobbly pass in the coldest game in NFL history to an open receiver? You can't really blame him for that, it was happening to everyone all game long. It was a heck of a play by the DB.

The point is : it happened to him - AGAIN!!!!
The DB received yet another generous gift from Favre's neverending largesse.

[pbmax]

I notice few videos posted of the Bears, Rams or Dallas games. Were those all just bad calls by the coach?




Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

Agreed.

[The Shadow]

We got a rally going: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8341300/Rally-held-to-pressure-Packers-to-reinstate-Favre?MSNHPHMA


Clayton says who's starting week 1:
ESPN's John Clayton reports if Green Bay Packers QB Brett Favre is in shape and willing to make the time commitment as he did last year, he's going to beat out QB Aaron Rodgers for the starting job. That's a no-brainer.

Go Favre!!!!!!!!!!

That's what the inmates always say as they attempt to take over the asylum.

[pbmax]

But it is not difficult for you to credit Favre for the good, and withhold judgment over the bad. You have to account for everything, not just the feel good plays.


Is it MM's fault or Favre's fault? Did DD run the correct route to the outside? It's a tough analysis and therefore difficult to assign blame.

[MJZiggy]

We got a rally going: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8341300/Rally-held-to-pressure-Packers-to-reinstate-Favre?MSNHPHMA


Clayton says who's starting week 1:
ESPN's John Clayton reports if Green Bay Packers QB Brett Favre is in shape and willing to make the time commitment as he did last year, he's going to beat out QB Aaron Rodgers for the starting job. That's a no-brainer.

Go Favre!!!!!!!!!!

Seems to be a big if. (I believe he's in shape--not football shape--but I do question his commitment)

That said, Clayton just made a grand statement that said absolutely nothing.

[GoPackGo]

I notice few videos posted of the Bears, Rams or Dallas games. Were those all just bad calls by the coach?




Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

Agreed.

blaming the coach is woodbuck's thing. Brett played poorly in the games you mentioned. The Denver video is the one to watch to see Favre in his glory and remind all of what he can do

[Bretsky]

From ESPN, an article that supports your opinion.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3485214&sportCat=nfl


The World Series of Poker isn't being played in Las Vegas. It's being played in Green Bay, Wis., and Hattiesburg, Miss. And so far, a very amateurish Ted Thompson is trying to show strength in his hand.


Feel free to laugh the next time Green Bay Packers management, both past and present, starts talking about "preserving" Brett Favre's legacy and cherishing Favre's place in the team's "family." It means nothing.



The Packers are about the Packers, and that's fine, even expected, but at least say so from the beginning. Don't pretend you're genuinely concerned about Favre's standing in franchise lore when, in reality, you're more concerned about damage and image control.



Favre wants to unretire. And yeah, it's a bit of a diva-ish thing to do. Tears in March. Text messages in July.



But Favre has earned his share of diva currency, enough for one Get Out Of Retirement card. He's played hurt. He's played with his heart heavy with grief. And he's played for the moment, not the money. There are bits and pieces of his body all over Lambeau Field.



Thompson, the Packers' general manager, doesn't see it that way. His solution -- and remember, the Packers are the self-appointed guardians of Favre's football reputation -- is to announce that one of the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history, the guy only seven months removed from the NFC Championship Game, can return but may be a second-stringer. Think about it: Favre wearing a baseball cap and holding a clipboard.



Some legacy.



Packers management wants it both ways. It says it wants to protect Favre from himself, but mostly it wants to protect Favre from becoming a free agent, signing with the Minnesota Vikings and possibly kicking the Packers' butts twice in the regular season. That's the reason behind not granting Favre his release -- nothing else.



Management says the "finality" of Favre's retirement prompted the Packers to "move forward with our football team.'' But how can you move forward if Favre is still on the depth chart? If you don't want him as your starter, which is beyond astounding, then why want him at all?



Thompson has mixed a football Molotov cocktail. A short pour of Favre. A long pour of Aaron Rodgers. Topped off by Packers teammates and fans torn by their allegiances. Now light and throw.



Favre could make it easy on Thompson by staying retired. Of course, that's what Thompson is counting on: The great Brett Favre would never come back here as a backup. He wants Favre to fold.



But I'd love to see Favre report to Packers training camp later this month. I'd love to see the beads of sweat form on Thompson's forehead as he realizes he miscalculated the situation. Again.



If Favre shows up, Thompson has created an instant quarterback controversy. And by doing so, he has created the beginnings of a divided locker room. You don't think there are going to be pro-Favre guys vs. pro-Rodgers guys on that roster? You don't think the Lambeau crowd will start chanting No. 4's name the first time Rodgers struggles (and he will -- zero starts, 35 completions and one touchdown throw in three seasons)? You don't think Rodgers, Thompson's very first pick as GM in 2005, will be looking over his shoulder pads every time he makes a mistake?



Favre isn't blameless in this mess. He miscalculated, too. And for that, some Packers followers now consider him a whiner, not worth the trouble. Let's hear what they say if Rodgers bombs.



Thompson doesn't really want Favre back, unless it's for ribbon-cutting ceremonies or 20-year anniversaries. He wants the Rodgers Era to begin as soon as possible, preferably with Favre watching from his living room in Mississippi.



But sometimes you make exceptions for the exceptional. Favre has his faults, beginning with his penchant for changing his mind, but he still gives the Packers the best chance to win. Somehow that's been lost in the chaos. If Thompson wants to honor Favre's legacy, then grant him his release. If he signs with the Vikings and beats you, then that's how it goes. After all, Thompson had first crack at him as the Packers' starter.



Or if Favre truly wants to make this an amicable farewell, then he should tell the Packers he won't sign with an NFC North team. The wink-wink understanding might not be officially allowed by the league, but who has to know, right? The more likely scenario: The Packers could manipulate the trade process by making the price reasonable for, say, AFC teams, but cost-prohibitive for teams such as the division rival Vikings, Chicago Bears and Detroit Lions, or even 2008 NFC opponents Tampa Bay (Sept. 28 road game) and Carolina (Nov. 30 game at Lambeau) -- both rumored landing spots for Favre.



The whole situation is messier than eating barbecue ribs with your knuckles. And it could only get worse.



In the end, Thompson and the Packers are the ones jumping off the cliff without the bungee cord securely attached. They're betting everything on Rodgers' potential and Favre's sense of pride.



I'll bet on Favre. Lesser cards, better player.





Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com.










GOOD READ

[Scott Campbell]

Is it MM's fault or Favre's fault? Did DD run the correct route to the outside? It's a tough analysis and therefore difficult to assign blame.



Especially when you're in denial. That pick sucked ass.

[TravisWilliams23]

Yea, I still remember spotting Ryan Grant all alone coming out of the backfield on that play an NO ONE 10 yards around him. Still makes me sick to watch that replay but it still is nice to see the OT bomb vs Denver and the KC bomb and the SD laser. That's why I'm kinda in limbo over Brett coming back or staying retired or being traded. I am tired of the post season will he or won't he drama. I do trust TT and M3 to do what is best for the Green Bay Packers. Whatever that is I can live with their decision. I've been a Packers fan since the mid 60's so I do know the agony of the 70's & 80's and I think this organization is prepared to compete post Favre if need be.

[australianpackerbacker]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

The bad? You mean a wobbly pass in the coldest game in NFL history to an open receiver? You can't really blame him for that, it was happening to everyone all game long. It was a heck of a play by the DB.

hahaha. Funniest post ive read all day. Youve been clutching at straws ever since this whole favre fiasco came up. Thanks for the laugh partial. Coldest game in NFL history? Source? Open receiver? You must mean Greg Jennings and Ryan Grant. Did you watch the game? Tell me partial, what was seemingly happening to "everyone all game long" that didnt seem to effect eli manning or plaxico buress? Heck of a play by the DB? IMO it wouldve been a heck of a catch by driver if he were to adjust to it, ball was underthrown and the DB didnt even have to move. Want to see a heck of a play by a DB?

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=A5H4Oq2iSF8

All you Brett Favre fans need to get back on OUR TEAMS bandwagon again. Everyone seems to be of the perception that favre led this team to a 13-3 record. IMO its a two-sided coin, here are just a few examples:

Gred Jennings: 53 rec 920 yards 12 TDs. Thompson guy.
Ryan Grant: 188 car 956 yards 5.1 avg 8 TDs. Thompson guy.
Donald Lee: 48 rec 575 yards 6 TDs. Thompson guy.

Can you honestly look yourself in the mirror and say that the packers wouldve went 13-3 without these 3 Thompson guys? Can you still give favre all the credit for 2000+ yardage by his receivers after the catch?

Dont get me wrong favre was a HUGE factor in determining our record last year, but to give little or no credit to thompson for the players that he bought shows a lack of logical thinking and renders any arguement to the contrary quite useless in my opinion.

[The Leaper]

Those were all golden oppurtunities to bring home another championship and he couldn't capitalize.

I grow extremely tired of the "he couldn't capitalize" crap. The last time I checked, this was a TEAM sport.

Favre played one of his best games in Super Bowl 32...it wasn't his fault we lost that game.

Was 4th-and-26 Favre's fault?

Was our lack of any running game against the Giants Favre's fault?

Sure, Favre has made some miscues. The rest of the team has also had some doozies. If you expect your QB to be the one constantly carrying the load, you aren't going to win many titles.

[The Leaper]

Dont get me wrong favre was a HUGE factor in determining our record last year, but to give little or no credit to thompson for the players that he bought shows a lack of logical thinking and renders any arguement to the contrary quite useless in my opinion.

I would agree, but also would point out that it is highly unlikely that a kid like Rodgers could pull out the wins like Favre did against SD, Den, or Sea. Favre's level of experience raised the abilities of all these "Thompson" players who you point out. Rodgers doesn't not have that level of experience or leadership at this point.

For a team built to take advantage of a great mix of talent RIGHT NOW to gun at a title, Brett Favre is the logical choice to put at the helm. Sure, sticking Rodgers in there let's him start getting up to speed with a young offense...but 2-3 years out (when Rodgers will likely really start hitting his prime) we likely won't have the services of key guys like Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Harris, Woodson...and guys like Barnett and Kampman might be starting to decline too.

Teams don't get many chances to gun for a title in the NFL. We have a chance in 2008 with Favre at the helm. That's a point that too many Packer fans seem to conveniently ignore.

[sharpe1027]

Favre was never told that the Packers wouldn't take him back, yet he asked for a release. At best, the Packers were hesitant. Basically, it is OK for Favre to do a complete 180, but the second the Packers show the least bit of uncertainty he wants out....whatever.

If he shows up for camp and works his ass off to get prepared, I have no doubt he will be the starter. Otherwise he has nobody to blame but himself.

[australianpackerbacker]

Dont get me wrong favre was a HUGE factor in determining our record last year, but to give little or no credit to thompson for the players that he bought shows a lack of logical thinking and renders any arguement to the contrary quite useless in my opinion.

I would agree, but also would point out that it is highly unlikely that a kid like Rodgers could pull out the wins like Favre did against SD, Den, or Sea. Favre's level of experience raised the abilities of all these "Thompson" players who you point out. Rodgers doesn't not have that level of experience or leadership at this point.

For a team built to take advantage of a great mix of talent RIGHT NOW to gun at a title, Brett Favre is the logical choice to put at the helm. Sure, sticking Rodgers in there let's him start getting up to speed with a young offense...but 2-3 years out (when Rodgers will likely really start hitting his prime) we likely won't have the services of key guys like Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Harris, Woodson...and guys like Barnett and Kampman might be starting to decline too.

Teams don't get many chances to gun for a title in the NFL. We have a chance in 2008 with Favre at the helm. That's a point that too many Packer fans seem to conveniently ignore.

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers, and in my view that is the only reason that favre is not being welcomed back with open arms. In my opinion they have tailored the offence to rodgers strengths, so we will likely be seeing a different offence than we saw last year. If mccarthy saw any reason to remove rodgers from the no.1 spot, i think he wouldnt hesitate because it would be for the good of the team, and in my opinion that is what ted and mike have shown to be their biggest asset, putting the team before their own egos.

[The Leaper]

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers

Rodgers has never started an actual game and has made 59 pass attempts in his career.

No one is smart enough to "know what they have" in that kind of situation. You might have a "good feeling" or "educated guess", but to claim that it is some kind of full knowledge is outright stupidity.

On the other hand, I DO KNOW what I have in Favre. He just got finished with an MVP caliber season.

[sharpe1027]

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers

Rodgers has never started an actual game and has made 59 pass attempts in his career.

No one is smart enough to "know what they have" in that kind of situation. You might have a "good feeling" or "educated guess", but to claim that it is some kind of full knowledge is outright stupidity.

On the other hand, I DO KNOW what I have in Favre. He just got finished with an MVP caliber season.

Yep. Although, it looks more and more likely that Favre has been looking for an excuse out of Green Bay, but would rather pin it on someone else so he can look good.

[The Leaper]

If he shows up for camp and works his ass off to get prepared, I have no doubt he will be the starter. Otherwise he has nobody to blame but himself.

I agree with that. Call Thompson's bluff.

If Favre comes to camp, I can't imagine any way that he wouldn't be the starter opening night...other than injury, of course.

As I said previously, I'd love to see both QBs utilized. Rodgers brings such a different element with his mobility...having him come in for just a series or two during the game would really change the dynamic and make it difficult for the defenses to adjust and game plan. Plus, it reduces wear and tear on Favre over the course of the season. I think he is ready for it...and I think it could be done, and if Favre returns it SHOULD be done.

Typically, that would be a nightmare for an NFL team...but rarely does a team have a legend like Favre and a talented young gun raring to go like Rodgers.

[The Leaper]

Yep. Although, it looks more and more likely that Favre has been looking for an excuse out of Green Bay, but would rather pin it on someone else so he can look good.

I think Favre wants to go somewhere that he doesn't have to look over his shoulder and is constantly pressed to make a decision on his future the minute a season ends.

Ultimately, he will never find what he is looking for...all NFL teams have to look toward the future to some extent, although I suppose all NFL teams won't have a ready-to-go reserve right on his ass.

[sharpe1027]

If he shows up for camp and works his ass off to get prepared, I have no doubt he will be the starter. Otherwise he has nobody to blame but himself.

I agree with that. Call Thompson's bluff.

If Favre comes to camp, I can't imagine any way that he wouldn't be the starter opening night...other than injury, of course.

As I said previously, I'd love to see both QBs utilized. Rodgers brings such a different element with his mobility...having him come in for just a series or two during the game would really change the dynamic and make it difficult for the defenses to adjust and game plan. Plus, it reduces wear and tear on Favre over the course of the season. I think he is ready for it...and I think it could be done, and if Favre returns it SHOULD be done.

Typically, that would be a nightmare for an NFL team...but rarely does a team have a legend like Favre and a talented young gun raring to go like Rodgers.

Is it a bluff or just common sense? How can they be certain that Favre isn't going to change his mind again? Should they drop all their work with Rodgers and just hope this decision is more certain than all of his other decisions? Favre has never been told that he couldn't come back for the Packers, yet he wants out. I find that rather telling.

[GBRulz]

We will forever be debating faults of the Giants game. I have a question / comment though. IF Tynes had made the FG in regulation and we don't even go to OT, obviously Favre doesn't throw the INT.

With that being said, do you think more people would be wanting Favre to come back this year? It just seems to me that so many people are throwing away his awesome season based on that bad pass.

With everything that has happened, I almost wish Tynes have would made the first FG to begin with.

[australianpackerbacker]

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers

Rodgers has never started an actual game and has made 59 pass attempts in his career.

No one is smart enough to "know what they have" in that kind of situation. You might have a "good feeling" or "educated guess", but to claim that it is some kind of full knowledge is outright stupidity.

On the other hand, I DO KNOW what I have in Favre. He just got finished with an MVP caliber season.

Can you please show me where in my post i "claimed full knowledge"?

Also how can you be so sure what you have in a 38 turning 39 y.o QB? While i do think he still has it, by your reasoning you cant be so sure as to what you think have in favre as what mccarthy and thompson think/know they have in rodgers. Your opinion is about as speculative as mine.

[australianpackerbacker]

We will forever be debating faults of the Giants game. I have a question / comment though. IF Tynes had made the FG in regulation and we don't even go to OT, obviously Favre doesn't throw the INT.

With that being said, do you think more people would be wanting Favre to come back this year? It just seems to me that so many people are throwing away his awesome season based on that bad pass.

With everything that has happened, I almost wish Tynes have would made the first FG to begin with.

I think people get too caught up in the events of one play, rather than analysing the entire game. This is a team game, one play didnt take us out of the superbowl. There were probably a handful of plays that couldve shifted momentum for either team, giants capitalized on more of them and the better team on the day won, in my opinion. No use blaming favre for one bad play when he was a big factor as to why we were there in the first place.

[The Leaper]

Is it a bluff or just common sense?

Well, both at this point. Favre hasn't asked for activation from the commissioner, so the Packers should go forward at this point as if Rodgers is the QB.

However, I certainly think the Packers are taking the stance they are hoping that Favre will recognize this process might just not be worth putting himself through and stay retired. In that sense, the Packers are bluffing...because they are secretly hoping that Favre doesn't come back, even if they aren't publically stating it.

[Bossman641]

Yep. Although, it looks more and more likely that Favre has been looking for an excuse out of Green Bay, but would rather pin it on someone else so he can look good.

I think Favre wants to go somewhere that he doesn't have to look over his shoulder and is constantly pressed to make a decision on his future the minute a season ends.

Ultimately, he will never find what he is looking for...all NFL teams have to look toward the future to some extent, although I suppose all NFL teams won't have a ready-to-go reserve right on his ass.

Pressed to return? Are you joking?

The Packers have given Favre more than enough time, every offseason that he has been pulling this crap. Of course they have to give him some deadline, but even in those cases they have pushed it back and told him to think it over even further before making a decision.

What are they supposed to do? Give him all offseason and tell him they'll have a locker ready for him if he decides to show up at TC?

[The Leaper]

Can you please show me where in my post i "claimed full knowledge"?

You said thompson and mccarthy know what they have in Rodgers...thus, that they have full knowledge. They "know".

I pointed out that they don't know...they have an educated guess based on very limited playing time and practice, but whether or not Rodgers will pan out to be a very good QB...they do not know with certainty.

[GoPackGo]

If I'm Ted Thompson and Coach, I'm working to welcome Brett back into the fold ASAP. Even though this whole thing is Brett's Fault, TT needs to manage the situation aggressively. If one of us was the GM of an NFL team and one of the top 5 QB's in the world want to QB your team you have to take him. Its not like he's a top 5 QB who committed a crime. He's a top 5 QB who had a chang of heart. You can't hedge all of your bets on a QB that hasn't proven to be a Top 5 QB.
Getting 100% behind Rodgers was the right thing to do at the time, but the playing field has changed. As if the pressure of replacing Brett Favre wasn't enough, the pressure on Arod to perform at a high level is higher than ever. What type of reaction will Arod, Coach, and TT get if the Packers go 6-10 this year?

[The Leaper]

Pressed to return? Are you joking?

My post was from FAVRE'S PERSPECTIVE.

I agree that the Packers have seemingly handled this fine on their end. I'm just saying that it seems Favre wants to go somewhere where he feels less pressure to commit right away. That is why I also said he wouldn't be likely to find it.

[sharpe1027]

However, I certainly think the Packers are taking the stance they are hoping that Favre will recognize this process might just not be worth putting himself through and stay retired. In that sense, the Packers are bluffing...because they are secretly hoping that Favre doesn't come back, even if they aren't publically stating it.

I think the only reason they would feel that way is if Favre doesn't want to be there. Otherwise, I get the feeling that they would be fine to have Favre as an option even if it was as a 12 million dollar backup. Now, if Favre won't comit enough time or doesn't want to be there, that's a different story.

Favre forced their hand by requesting to be released. I don't think they are "bluffing," I think that if he wants to play for the Packers he can. I don't blame the for not being sure they can rely on his word at this point.

[australianpackerbacker]

Can you please show me where in my post i "claimed full knowledge"?

You said thompson and mccarthy know what they have in Rodgers...thus, that they have full knowledge. They "know".

I pointed out that they don't know...they have an educated guess based on very limited playing time and practice, but whether or not Rodgers will pan out to be a very good QB...they do not know with certainty.

Knowing doesnt necessarily mean "full knowledge", thats just your interpretation of my post.

So your trying to tell me that after 3 years a coach and a gm of the year have no idea what they have in rodgers? Why would they be keeping him around then? Might as well bring back Ingle Martin and give him some playing time in the regular season, to see if he has the talent to make it before cutting him, because "they dont know" what they have in him.

I dont know about you, but id be a little uncomforatable with a gm and coach who make "educated guesses" about the most important position on the roster. The point im trying to make is that your giving perhaps two of the most imortant members of the organization baically zero credit in talent evaluation, when time and time again, they have proven more than capable on a consistent basis.

[The Leaper]

I dont know about you, but id be a little uncomforatable with a gm and coach who make "educated guesses" about the most important position on the roster. The point im trying to make is that your giving perhaps two of the most imortant members of the organization baically zero credit in talent evaluation, when time and time again, they have proven more than capable on a consistent basis.

Sometimes, you can only make an educated guess. Often educated guesses are correct...because they are educated. Thus, your "zero credit" point ignores the essence of an educated guess entirely.

Rodgers is a first round pick. He has plenty of talent. However, the QB position is one of the most difficult positions in sports to correctly assess in terms of how a player will succeed before they are given the chance to do so.

McCarthy and Thompson probably feel that Rodgers has all the necessary tools to succeed. He does. However, tools are just one aspect of the position. How Rodgers will handle adversity and pressure is mostly unknown...because he hasn't faced either anywhere near the level he would as a starting QB in the NFL. Handling adversity and pressure is perhaps the most crucial component to being a successful QB.

We KNOW Favre can do it. We don't know whether Rodgers can...and even if he can, it could take him half a year or more to get comfortable enough to start doing it. That isn't a knock on Rodgers...it happens with just about all young QBs when they get their first chance.

With a team coming off a 13-3 season with nearly all of the roster still intact, it seems odd that the team is so quick to usher Favre out the door when a title run in 2008 is still very possible.

[The Shadow]

Yep. Although, it looks more and more likely that Favre has been looking for an excuse out of Green Bay, but would rather pin it on someone else so he can look good.

I think Favre wants to go somewhere that he doesn't have to look over his shoulder and is constantly pressed to make a decision on his future the minute a season ends.

Ultimately, he will never find what he is looking for...all NFL teams have to look toward the future to some extent, although I suppose all NFL teams won't have a ready-to-go reserve right on his ass.


I agree. And what organization out there places the needs and desires of the quarterback far above the welfare of the team? That would be our logical trading partner.

[sharpe1027]

Sometimes, you can only make an educated guess. Often educated guesses are correct...because they are educated. Thus, your "zero credit" point ignores the essence of an educated guess entirely.

Rodgers is a first round pick. He has plenty of talent. However, the QB position is one of the most difficult positions in sports to correctly assess in terms of how a player will succeed before they are given the chance to do so.

McCarthy and Thompson probably feel that Rodgers has all the necessary tools to succeed. He does. However, tools are just one aspect of the position. How Rodgers will handle adversity and pressure is mostly unknown...because he hasn't faced either anywhere near the level he would as a starting QB in the NFL. Handling adversity and pressure is perhaps the most crucial component to being a successful QB.

We KNOW Favre can do it. We don't know whether Rodgers can...and even if he can, it could take him half a year or more to get comfortable enough to start doing it. That isn't a knock on Rodgers...it happens with just about all young QBs when they get their first chance.

With a team coming off a 13-3 season with nearly all of the roster still intact, it seems odd that the team is so quick to usher Favre out the door when a title run in 2008 is still very possible.

Excellent analysis right up until the last sentence. Favre ushered himself out the door while letting his family and agent try to blame the Packers organization who is still willing to take him back after all that has happened.

[australianpackerbacker]

I dont know about you, but id be a little uncomforatable with a gm and coach who make "educated guesses" about the most important position on the roster. The point im trying to make is that your giving perhaps two of the most imortant members of the organization baically zero credit in talent evaluation, when time and time again, they have proven more than capable on a consistent basis.

Sometimes, you can only make an educated guess. Often educated guesses are correct...because they are educated. Thus, your "zero credit" point ignores the essence of an educated guess entirely.

Rodgers is a first round pick. He has plenty of talent. However, the QB position is one of the most difficult positions in sports to correctly assess in terms of how a player will succeed before they are given the chance to do so.

McCarthy and Thompson probably feel that Rodgers has all the necessary tools to succeed. He does. However, tools are just one aspect of the position. How Rodgers will handle adversity and pressure is mostly unknown...because he hasn't faced either anywhere near the level he would as a starting QB in the NFL. Handling adversity and pressure is perhaps the most crucial component to being a successful QB.

We KNOW Favre can do it. We don't know whether Rodgers can...and even if he can, it could take him half a year or more to get comfortable enough to start doing it. That isn't a knock on Rodgers...it happens with just about all young QBs when they get their first chance.

With a team coming off a 13-3 season with nearly all of the roster still intact, it seems odd that the team is so quick to usher Favre out the door when a title run in 2008 is still very possible.

Good point about the question of whether rodgers can handle the adversity, although he has physically shown us that he has what it takes, albeit in just one game, it is true that we have not seen if he can mentally hold up a full season as the guy. But in my opinion thats where you have to trust the coaches that are around this kid 24 hours a day, that they know what they see in him.

Favre can still more than likely do it, thats true enough, but the teams willingness to go in a different direction when they have an excellent QB that wants to come out of retirement, in my mind, gives us more than just a strong hint that they have the confidence and belief in rodgers to get it done. I think it would be extremley negligent and foolish of someone in ted and mikes position to not accept favre back if they did not, in my opinion, think rodgers was their man. Thats just my view though, we will find out very soon.

[sharpe1027]

I think it would be extremley negligent and foolish of someone in ted and mikes position to not accept favre back if they did not, in my opinion, think rodgers was their man. Thats just my view though, we will find out very soon.

Ted and Mike have repeatedly stated they are willing to accept Favre back and have shown it through their attempts to get him to delay his reteirement announcement and putting together a plan to bring him back in March...Even now, they say they would take him back.

[The Leaper]

Excellent analysis right up until the last sentence. Favre ushered himself out the door while letting his family and agent try to blame the Packers organization who is still willing to take him back after all that has happened.

I'm not sure that Favre orchestrated all the comments from his family. Perhaps he has, but there is no proof of that. His brother and mother are in the press because the media goes looking for them because they are more accessible than Brett...and known within the Packer community.

Scott and Bonita did not call a press conference themselves. Some media members just came to their door and starting asking a bunch of questions. In those instances, when someone is trying to describe the feelings or opinions of another...even if they are close to the person...things get misconstrued or turned around.

Favre may feel some level of discomfort with the organization, and expressed it privately to his family...who was then too honest and not bright enough to keep it private. Considering Favre's openness with his feelings, it isn't hard to think the rest of his family might be the same way. Sometimes, it isn't a good idea to make your own feelings public...and it certainly isn't a good idea to make another person's feelings public, because you normally won't get them right or state them properly.

That is a lesson that the Favre family still hasn't seemed to learn.

[sharpe1027]

Excellent analysis right up until the last sentence. Favre ushered himself out the door while letting his family and agent try to blame the Packers organization who is still willing to take him back after all that has happened.

I'm not sure that Favre orchestrated all the comments from his family. Perhaps he has, but there is no proof of that. His brother and mother are in the press because the media goes looking for them because they are more accessible than Brett...and known within the Packer community.

Scott and Bonita did not call a press conference themselves. Some media members just came to their door and starting asking a bunch of questions. In those instances, when someone is trying to describe the feelings or opinions of another...even if they are close to the person...things get misconstrued or turned around.

Favre may feel some level of discomfort with the organization, and expressed it privately to his family...who was then too honest and not bright enough to keep it private. Considering Favre's openness with his feelings, it isn't hard to think the rest of his family might be the same way. Sometimes, it isn't a good idea to make your own feelings public...and it certainly isn't a good idea to make another person's feelings public, because you normally won't get them right or state them properly.

That is a lesson that the Favre family still hasn't seemed to learn.

No disagreement there, but his choice to remain silent amounts to a tacit agreement with their statements and puts all invovled in ackward situations. He may or may not be to blame for the statements themselves, but he choice to let them hang out there is telling.

[The Leaper]

No disagreement there, but his choice to remain silent amounts to a tacit agreement with their statements and puts all invovled in ackward situations. He may or may not be to blame for the statements themselves, but he choice to let them hang out there is telling.

I would agree with that. However, Favre seemed to retire and not really think much of making a public announcement to that end either. All kinds of stuff were flying around then too, if you recall.

Favre is not a public guy. He's not the massive ego trip that some here would like to claim he is. If he was, he'd be out in front of the camera right now soaking it all in.

[Bossman641]

Pressed to return? Are you joking?

My post was from FAVRE'S PERSPECTIVE.

I agree that the Packers have seemingly handled this fine on their end. I'm just saying that it seems Favre wants to go somewhere where he feels less pressure to commit right away. That is why I also said he wouldn't be likely to find it.

I see. Well I can agree with that perspective. If that is the case, Favre just wanting to play somewhere to play and have fun but without the pressure, then he is not the competitor I thought he was. I don't blame him, but I would think he would be more interested in winning than having fun. It's not really a surprise though, considering how often he said last year that he couldn't even really enjoy the big wins.

If that is the case though, and this is all just speculation, then I don't understand why he wouldn't just be upfront about it.

[australianpackerbacker]

I think it would be extremley negligent and foolish of someone in ted and mikes position to not accept favre back if they did not, in my opinion, think rodgers was their man. Thats just my view though, we will find out very soon.

Ted and Mike have repeatedly stated they are willing to accept Favre back and have shown it through their attempts to get him to delay his reteirement announcement and putting together a plan to bring him back in March...Even now, they say they would take him back.

Yes, they did say they would take him back, but only as a backup. The only reason they are saying that, in my opinion, is because it is too late for them to just hand over the reigns back to favre. In march, its no big deal because rodgers(like everone else) is expecting him to come back for another year. Now that they've officially handed him the job, it would be a bad move for not only the locker room, but for the confidence of our future QB to send him a message like that, that he will always play second fiddle to "the man".

But again, rodgers might not see it that way, but in no way will he take such an action in a positive manner. Some are screaming for an open QB competition, but again i think it would shatter his confidence losing to favre, because everyone would expect favre to win the job.

[The Leaper]

If that is the case, Favre just wanting to play somewhere to play and have fun but without the pressure, then he is not the competitor I thought he was.

I don't think he minds the pressure ON THE FIELD. It is the off the field stuff that he wants to avoid.

He may think it would be different elsewhere...but it would not. The grass always look greener...

[The Leaper]

Yes, they did say they would take him back, but only as a backup.

I haven't seen that comment from Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy anywhere. They've only said they will address that situation if and when Favre shows up at camp.

[australianpackerbacker]

Yes, they did say they would take him back, but only as a backup.

I haven't seen that comment from Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy anywhere. They've only said they will address that situation if and when Favre shows up at camp.

Correct, there is no direct quote from either TT or MM, although ted did state that aaron rodgers is the starter, and that if/when favre does return it would be a specified role. Theres only one starting QB job per team so id assume he means backup.

"We've communicated that to Brett, that we have since moved forward," Thompson said Saturday. "At the same time, we've never said that there couldn't be some role that he might play here. But I would understand his point that he would want to play."

[swede]

Yes, they did say they would take him back, but only as a backup.

I haven't seen that comment from Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy anywhere. They've only said they will address that situation if and when Favre shows up at camp.

Thanks for catching that, Leaper.

TT said that Rodgers was the starter as a way of emphasizing that, for all the talk, Brett was out of the league and not on the Packers' roster.

The media consequently took the liberty of calling Favre the de facto backup, a position which was either disingenuous or obtuse.

[Lurker64]

Correct, there is no direct quote from either TT or MM, although ted did state that aaron rodgers is the starter, and that if/when favre does return it would be a specified role. Theres only one starting QB job per team so id assume he means backup.

This may be bordering on overly pedantic, but I believe when Thompson says that "Aaron Rodgers is our starter", since he's speaking in the present tense he's referring to the fact that the Quarterbacks on the active roster are Aaron Rodgers, Brian Brohm, and Matt Flynn. Brett Favre cannot be considered in the quarterback rotation right now as he is currently retired, and of those three Rodgers is clearly the starter.

Thompson has basically said "If Favre comes back, we'll figure out how to play him then" but has refused to comment on what capacity that would be in.

Nothing I've heard precludes Favre from being the starter, I believe that's still possible depending on what happens in camp.

[The Leaper]

Correct, there is no direct quote from either TT or MM, although ted did state that aaron rodgers is the starter, and that if/when favre does return it would be a specified role.

Rodgers is the starter because he's on the active roster and Favre is not. That was Thompson's direct comment on the situation.

If Favre shows up at camp, he is going to be the starter in 2008 IMO. The question is whether or not Favre will come to camp without 100% certainty that he will be GIVEN the starting job back without having to work for it.

That is how the Packers are going about trying to keep Favre in retirement...and they are wise to do so, as it allows them to gauge Favre's true desire to return. If he is willing to come back without guarantees, it probably is a good sign he's 100% committed to playing football.

[sharpe1027]

Correct, there is no direct quote from either TT or MM, although ted did state that aaron rodgers is the starter, and that if/when favre does return it would be a specified role.

Rodgers is the starter because he's on the active roster and Favre is not. That was Thompson's direct comment on the situation.

If Favre shows up at camp, he is going to be the starter in 2008 IMO. The question is whether or not Favre will come to camp without 100% certainty that he will be GIVEN the starting job back without having to work for it.

That is how the Packers are going about trying to keep Favre in retirement...and they are wise to do so, as it allows them to gauge Favre's true desire to return. If he is willing to come back without guarantees, it probably is a good sign he's 100% committed to playing football.

It is a very smart move. If Favre stays retired, they show to Rodgers that they believe in him. If Favre shows up ready to play, they can start him and it would be difficult to argue that Rodgers deserves to start over Favre.

No reason to burn your bridges with Rodgers until Favre truly shows comittment.

[Packerarcher]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

The game should not even have came down to O.T. and that pick. Everyone wants to blame that loss on Brett,that was a total team loss but mostly they were VERY under prepared by the coaching staff. BUT if you want to blame one player for the playoff game loss,blame Al I got burned Harris. He could not even cover a mediocre receiver with a bad ankle. Had Harris actually play as good as he runs his mouth the Packers would have won that game.

[The Shadow]

I just sent emails to Mark Murphy & Ted Thompson expressing my support for their handling of a very difficult issue.
It's pretty crummy that they are being seen as 'bad guys' by many.

[GBRulz]

Too cheap to send a Hallmark card? :wink:

[australianpackerbacker]

so who still wants favre over rodgers!?

[Packers4Glory]

I would have been in the pro-Favre camp had I commented in this thread. But in the end when they made the choice I was ok w/ the decision simply for the fact that Brett had put the team in the position by either not knowing until late whether he was coming back, or in this instance actually retiring and then deciding to come back. The team did what they had to and I can't fault them for sticking to the plan once he retired. This was a situation where I felt both sides had a case and both sides where right and somewhat justified in their positions.

[Scott Campbell]

so who still wants favre over rodgers!?



I do. Everyone around here should know what a huge supporter of Bert Favre I am by now.

[bobblehead]

so who still wants favre over rodgers!?

Look, I bash Favre for sunday breakfast, but you have 67 total posts on this forum and one of them is bumping this thread?

Go away Troll.

[LEWCWA]

I would have been in the pro-Favre camp had I commented in this thread. But in the end when they made the choice I was ok w/ the decision simply for the fact that Brett had put the team in the position by either not knowing until late whether he was coming back, or in this instance actually retiring and then deciding to come back. The team did what they had to and I can't fault them for sticking to the plan once he retired. This was a situation where I felt both sides had a case and both sides where right and somewhat justified in their positions.

Couldn't agree more. Obviously, we don't know much about what makes a good/great football player. Good thing Ted and MM do. Rodgers looks like he is going to go down as one of the best ever, so at the end of the day the Pack wins.

[Freak Out]

Where in the Fv*k did this come from? Wanker vote for APB.

[pbmax]

Where in the Fv*k did this come from? Wanker vote for APB.

That acronym probably says it all.

[Fritz]

Let's put out an APB on him.

[AtlPackFan]

Where in the Fv*k did this come from? Wanker vote for APB.

Shit...I had to look twice. ABP vs. APF. I thought you were talking about me for a second and I was trying to figure out what I did to get a Wanker vote?! Just out of curiosity, WTF is with all the bumped threads???

[pbmax]

Shit...I had to look twice. ABP vs. APF. I thought you were talking about me for a second and I was trying to figure out what I did to get a Wanker vote?! Just out of curiosity, WTF is with all the bumped threads???

Old people looking to settle scores or score cheap and easy shots/points. Kind of like the internet version of the Lions defense.

[MadScientist]

Need to lock all threads with more than one year since the last post. If it is truly worth bringing up again (draft threads can often be interesting a couple of years down the road) then ask Madtown to unlock it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I like bumps. Keeps everybody honest--although the context of wanting Favre over Rodgers has change considerably since the original post.

[Freak Out]

No reason to lock any threads.....well...maybe not any thread :) but I agree with Harvey. It can be pretty funny to see the stuff that we posted years past.

[Smeefers]

Yeah! Like remember that time I made that really good point?



Anybody?
Anybody?

[Scott Campbell]

HUGE entertainment value!

BRING BACK DA BUMPS!!!!!!!

[Upnorth]

Yeah! Like remember that time I made that really good point?



Anybody?
Anybody?

There are so many great ones, which one in particular are you talking about?

[MJZiggy]

There are so many great ones, which one in particular are you talking about?Suckup...

[Lurker64]

If Brett Favre elects to unretire, I trust the judgement of Mike McCarthy in terms of what to do with him. There's no point crusading for him to start or not right now.

If Brett Favre stays retires, Rodgers is our starting QB.
If Brett Favre unretires, the coaches will figure out what to do.

What I think about this is largely immaterial.

Hey, look! I was right!

[australianpackerbacker]

feels good to know what im talking about!

feels even better knowing half of you have no fucking idea whats going on with your own team, in DEPTH.

then again, people who enjoy football usually have lower IQs than the rest of the population, this board seems stoop beyond that level.

[Upnorth]

Suckup...

You made your point so clearly and eloquently, you truly are a master to this forum! (Hows that for sucking up?)

[Zool]

feels good to guess right once in a while!

feels even better knowing half of you have no fucking idea whats going on with your own team and neither do I but I guessed right this time.

then again, people who enjoy football usually have lower IQs than the rest of the population, this board seems stoop beyond that level. I am a prime example of this edict.

FTFY

[Joemailman]

I didn't post in this thread, but if I had I would have said "Screw Favre! Go with Rodgers and Pack will be Super Bowl champs in 3 years".

[gbgary]

I didn't post in this thread, but if I had I would have said "Screw Favre! Go with Rodgers and Pack will be Super Bowl champs in 3 years".


hehe

[MadtownPacker]

Gratitude to Zool for taking it upon himself to issue a bitchslapping.

[mraynrand]

feels good to know what im talking about!

feels even better knowing half of you have no fucking idea whats going on with your own team, in DEPTH.

then again, people who enjoy football usually have lower IQs than the rest of the population, this board seems stoop beyond that level.


You are a beautiful person


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SH9xyJN47VU/TSycmZfLS-I/AAAAAAAAACg/VkubHanA_R4/s1600/DogPoopILOVEU.img_assist_custom.jpg

[gbgary]

feels good to know what im talking about!

feels even better knowing half of you have no fucking idea whats going on with your own team, in DEPTH.

then again, people who enjoy football usually have lower IQs than the rest of the population, this board seems stoop beyond that level.


no...that would be rugby.

[mraynrand]

no...that would be rugby.


Score!

[Deputy Nutz]

I didn't post in this thread, But regardless 2008 would have been a much better season with Favre at QB than the 6-10 Rodgers led team. Fools

[vince]

Favre's unbelievable leadership ability would have motivated the defense to play worth a shit that year.

[Joemailman]

I didn't post in this thread, But regardless 2008 would have been a much better season with Favre at QB than the 6-10 Rodgers led team. Fools

Yes. They would have been 8-8.

[Deputy Nutz]

Right, still Favre managed to win 13 games with that defense the year before.

[vince]

Right, still Favre managed to win 13 games with that defense the year before.
And of course the defense would have performed the same as the previous year if Favre had been quarterbacking on offense. I guess Bob Sanders can blame Rodgers for losing his job that year. Check the defense's peformance year over year once.

[mraynrand]

Right, still Favre managed to win 13 games with that defense the year before.


And of course the defense would have performed the same as the previous year if Favre had been quarterbacking on offense. I guess Bob Sanders can blame Rodgers for losing his job that year. Check the defense's peformance year over year once.


I agree. I think J-mail had the number about right - 8-8 with Favre. The defense gave a number of games away. Even with 10-6, they weren't going anywhere. But that's old news. TT and Stubby saw the future in Rodgers - and in Capers - and they were ultimately right - on both accounts.

[pbmax]

Of course Brett would have done better with the same defense in 2008. Look at his second year with the Vikings. These things always stay consistent.

[Zool]

I didn't post in this thread, But regardless 2008 would have been a much better season with Favre at QB than the 6-10 Rodgers led team. Fools

How would the 2009 and 2010 seasons have gone with Flynn at QB? Fool

[RashanGary]

Right, still Favre managed to win 13 games with that defense the year before.


My .02, not that you want it. . . .

- I'm with ya on Favre being better than AR at that point in their careers. I'd call Favre a 9 and AR a 6.5 at that point. Significant difference.
- I'm not with ya on Favre winning 13 games with the same defense. Jolly and Kabeer were having fantastic years for the first 9 games or so. I believe Kamp and KGB were the leading sack duo and Jolly was a heck of a player. We were a top 5 D I think until week 9. We finished somewhere in the 20's. I remember b_bulldog & others talking about how we'd be lucky to win playoff games with the way the D was playing. Also all our lost games came after or DL fell apart.

2008 We did not have KGB or Jolly at all. Harrell was a total bust. Our DL fell apart before the season even started.

The ST's in 2007 was a top 10 or 12 unit. I think it was dead last or maybe 31st in 2008.



Favre was better, but I think all of us exaggerate our views because it's such a big fucking fight, we have to.

[MadtownPacker]

Right, still Favre managed to win 13 games with that defense the year before.

Oh look, australianpackdingo has a buddy to troll with!!

[Deputy Nutz]

My .02, not that you want it. . . .

- I'm with ya on Favre being better than AR at that point in their careers. I'd call Favre a 9 and AR a 6.5 at that point. Significant difference.
- I'm not with ya on Favre winning 13 games with the same defense. Jolly and Kabeer were having fantastic years for the first 9 games or so. I believe Kamp and KGB were the leading sack duo and Jolly was a heck of a player. We were a top 5 D I think until week 9. We finished somewhere in the 20's. I remember b_bulldog & others talking about how we'd be lucky to win playoff games with the way the D was playing. Also all our lost games came after or DL fell apart.

2008 We did not have KGB or Jolly at all. Harrell was a total bust. Our DL fell apart before the season even started.

The ST's in 2007 was a top 10 or 12 unit. I think it was dead last or maybe 31st in 2008.



Favre was better, but I think all of us exaggerate our views because it's such a big fucking fight, we have to.

Great post. Didn't really expect you it from you, but their might be a little sugar in your stocking after all. Not one of you cared to argue that it was a move for the future, not for 2008, which I totally get. You just want to get into a pissing contest which I also understand but I have a tremendous arch that always lands me in first place.

The Packers got to the NFC Championship under Favre in 2007. It was a bold move for the Packers to shun Favre, but outside of the 2008 season it would be hard to argue that the Packers should have kept accepting Favre's retirement and then unretirement, or the lets wait to see and I will give you all an answer in July. Favre was still a better QB than Rodgers in 2009, but the reality was the Packers kept the course and probably won a championship sooner than anyone expected in 2010. Rodgers is All World right now and this type of production would have been seriously postponed by another Favregate. There has never been an offense in Green Bay that has been this dominant, not even the 1996 or 1997 teams that were led by Favre. This might just be the best core of receivers in NFL history, and you have an great passer to make the most out of all the talent. The Packers walk into the Super Bowl outside of some terrible injury, and even if say Rodgers went down late in the season, I still wouldn't be suprised to see Flynn take this team deep into the playoffs.

[Deputy Nutz]

How would the 2009 and 2010 seasons have gone with Flynn at QB? Fool

2009 Favre would have started again, and 2010 Favre still would have started. Favre Favre Favre and more Favre until you decided to root for the Cowboys.

[pbmax]

2009 Favre would have started again, and 2010 Favre still would have started. Favre Favre Favre and more Favre until you decided to root for the Cowboys.

Nice to see Coach Sherman still posting while coaching A&M :)

[Deputy Nutz]

I am sure that Sherman had checked with the NCAA to see if Favre had any elgibility left

[pbmax]

I would be more willing to buy the present versus future argument if Favre was more willing to buy into that present. He choose to exercise his leverage which took him even farther away from the team and farther away from preparing himself. It took the prospect of rubbing Thompson's nose in the dirt to motivate him fully in 2009.

And please understand, I wasn't sure Rodgers was ready either in 2008. But Rodgers was fully committed to the team and org that year, Favre wanted it on his terms.

[Guiness]

Since this is the currently active Favre thread, I'll mention in here that on PFT's front page, the featured video is titled "Is is Favre time in Houston"

I did not watch it.

[Deputy Nutz]

I would be more willing to buy the present versus future argument if Favre was more willing to buy into that present. He choose to exercise his leverage which took him even farther away from the team and farther away from preparing himself. It took the prospect of rubbing Thompson's nose in the dirt to motivate him fully in 2009.

And please understand, I wasn't sure Rodgers was ready either in 2008. But Rodgers was fully committed to the team and org that year, Favre wanted it on his terms.

I think Rodgers was ready, I don't know if the team was ready for the transition. Regardless it had to happen. Personally I wanted another year of Favre, it was hard to root for the Jets and the Vikings.

[Deputy Nutz]

Since this is the currently active Favre thread, I'll mention in here that on PFT's front page, the featured video is titled "Is is Favre time in Houston"

I did not watch it.

That is just plan ridiculous... Although they have a good runnning game and Andre Johnson is coming back.....to be continued......

[Guiness]

That is just plan ridiculous... Although they have a good runnning game and Andre Johnson is coming back.....to be continued......

It is, and I wonder what they do?

I'm going to assume Leinart is going to stick up the joint (it's a reach, I know). So what does the team do? Do they reload for next year, despite having a very good team right now, or do they try and save something from this year? Before the injury to Schaub, it was plausible that Houston was the team coming out of the AFC this year.

As far as Favre being a helpful there, I have no idea.

[australianpackerbacker]

You are a beautiful person


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SH9xyJN47VU/TSycmZfLS-I/AAAAAAAAACg/VkubHanA_R4/s1600/DogPoopILOVEU.img_assist_custom.jpg

How sweet, i love you too. Is it raining at your place?

p.s. you still havent shown me any football talk of interest here. We just smashed the vikings and there is not one good thread to read about it here, or anything else for that matter.

[australianpackerbacker]

Score!

Really?? Why on earth would i be offended by that? I suppose your going to come out with a kangaroo joke next.

And all americans hate muslims.

Spoken like a true wisconsinite.

[Fritz]

Check out the winners and losers thread, and the offensive line thread. There's less to discuss when the team is going so good, but several posters made salient points regarding both threads.

[australianpackerbacker]

Oh look, australianpackdingo has a buddy to troll with!!

Never met a more wound up stoner. Why do you get high for?

[australianpackerbacker]

Check out the winners and losers thread, and the offensive line thread. There's less to discuss when the team is going so good, but several posters made salient points regarding both threads.

Thanks

[MadtownPacker]

Check out the winners and losers thread, and the offensive line thread. There's less to discuss when the team is going so good, but several posters made salient points regarding both threads.
Why you trying to reason with the bitch for? He said you MFers are boring/stupid. End of story.

[Joemailman]

How sweet, i love you too. Is it raining at your place?

p.s. you still havent shown me any football talk of interest here. We just smashed the vikings and there is not one good thread to read about it here, or anything else for that matter.

Then why don't you start one?

[MadtownPacker]

Never met a more wound up stoner. Why do you get high for?
Not sure what you mean. Never touched the stuff.

I have never met a better troll. Talks shit about everything we discuss here yet has read every word. I think I like you after all.

[australianpackerbacker]

Then why don't you start one?

Because im a lurker!

[australianpackerbacker]

Not sure what you mean. Never touched the stuff.

I have never met a better troll. Talks shit about everything we discuss here yet has read every word. I think I like you after all.

Im just saying this place isnt as good as it was 4 years ago. If thats "talking shit about everything", so be it. If you could point me to a forum with better packer talk im their.

[MJZiggy]

Im just saying this place isnt as good as it was 4 years ago. If thats "talking shit about everything", so be it. If you could point me to a forum with better packer talk im their.

You claim to have seen them. Said they're so much better, yet here you are.

[retailguy]

Im just saying this place isnt as good as it was 4 years ago. If thats "talking shit about everything", so be it. If you could point me to a forum with better packer talk im their.

Somebody pee'd in your wheaties today? Or what?

You're like all those folks that steal songs and pirate movies. You want everyone else to give you something for FREE, but not do any of the work. 80 posts in 5 years speaks wonders. You want to take, take, take, but you don't want to contribute. We should just entertain YOU. I've got news for you, we're entertaining OURSELVES.

You get what you give....

[australianpackerbacker]

You claim to have seen them. Said they're so much better, yet here you are.

Did i now? ;)

[australianpackerbacker]

Somebody pee'd in your wheaties today? Or what?

You're like all those folks that steal songs and pirate movies. You want everyone else to give you something for FREE, but not do any of the work. 80 posts in 5 years speaks wonders. You want to take, take, take, but you don't want to contribute. We should just entertain YOU. I've got news for you, we're entertaining OURSELVES.

You get what you give....

Yes i am. why would you pay for anything? In that case we should all chip in $100 each to this forum cos were all taking each other for a free ride.

[MJZiggy]

Yes i am. why would you pay for anything? In that case we should all chip in $100 each to this forum cos were all taking each other for a free ride.
His point is you get what you give.

[MJZiggy]

Did i now? ;)

Great. So we've established that there's nothing better out there, so quit bitching.

[australianpackerbacker]

so who still wants favre over rodgers!?

I nailed this one! :)

[pbmax]

From ESPN, an article that supports your opinion.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3485214&sportCat=nfl

Rastak stirring up trouble as usual. :D

Gene Wojciechowski was basically right in his read of the quality of the Packers arguments, but dead wrong about who would come out on top.

Still one of the gutsiest, if terribly executed decisions, I have ever witnessed by a team. Even in retrospect, it looks dumb at a first read :lol:

Thinking about it now, I think the Packers hamstrung themselves publicly by basically refusing to say what they were all thinking: Rodgers will be better for longer. The original cheaper now and for the next 5 years. No one wanted to put that kind of pressure on the kid. The most remarkable thing about Rodgers might be that he survived it. Would crush most people.

Even at the time, I thought it was a hell of a long shot bet. McCarthy to this day might be expecting a big 5th year jump from Nick MacDonald or Poppinga. But in reality, 3 years of him in practice running the scout team told them the truth.

[pbmax]

I challenge anyone to watch this video from 9 months ago, look in the mirror at yourself and say out loud...."Aaron Rodgers would be a better QB for the Packers this year, let Brett Favre go QB somewhere else"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_6LcGbHxR8

At the end of the day, TT and Coach won't be able to do that. I question anyone who could.

Despite the waffling, despite the hurt feelings, Brett will return and reclaim his position as the starting QB for the Green Bay Packers.


Shaun Bodiford sighting!

[gbgary]

I like bumps. Keeps everybody honest--although the context of wanting Favre over Rodgers has change considerably since the original post.

me too. lol

[australianpackerbacker]

Rastak stirring up trouble as usual. :D

Gene Wojciechowski was basically right in his read of the quality of the Packers arguments, but dead wrong about who would come out on top.

Still one of the gutsiest, if terribly executed decisions, I have ever witnessed by a team. Even in retrospect, it looks dumb at a first read :lol:

Thinking about it now, I think the Packers hamstrung themselves publicly by basically refusing to say what they were all thinking: Rodgers will be better for longer. The original cheaper now and for the next 5 years. No one wanted to put that kind of pressure on the kid. The most remarkable thing about Rodgers might be that he survived it. Would crush most people.

Even at the time, I thought it was a hell of a long shot bet. McCarthy to this day might be expecting a big 5th year jump from Nick MacDonald or Poppinga. But in reality, 3 years of him in practice running the scout team told them the truth.

My point from yesterday was i saw it coming, and KNEW, based on play and lots of other factors, that Rodgers would be better than Favre. Id take 2008 struggles for what Rod has produced over the last 10 years. Hes top 5 BEST of all TIME. Hes better than Mahomes, unless Mahomes goes next level beyond what hes been showing.

How did i KNOW? How did you KNOW you were in love with your partner? You just KNEW. No explanation necessary. Intuition is running everyones show.

[Zool]

Don't hurt that shoulder.

[Fritz]

My point from yesterday was i saw it coming, and KNEW, based on play and lots of other factors, that Rodgers would be better than Favre. Id take 2008 struggles for what Rod has produced over the last 10 years. Hes top 5 BEST of all TIME. Hes better than Mahomes, unless Mahomes goes next level beyond what hes been showing.

How did i KNOW? How did you KNOW you were in love with your partner? You just KNEW. No explanation necessary. Intuition is running everyones show.

I knew, intuitively, that the Packers were going to go 6 - 10 this year. The fact that that's not going to happen is not a problem of my intuition, but a problem of the Packers not understanding how bad they actually are.

[mraynrand]

My point from yesterday was i saw it coming, and KNEW, based on play and lots of other factors, that Rodgers would be better than Favre.

Favre outplayed Rodgers head to head twice in 2009.

[mraynrand]

I knew, intuitively, that the Packers were going to go 6 - 10 this year. The fact that that's not going to happen is not a problem of my intuition, but a problem of the Packers not understanding how bad they actually are.

I knew intuitively that Diane Lane would date me in 1990. My intuition overrode the fact that we lived in different cities, she was a movie star, and I was a schlub living off a 14K stipend in a Menlo Park ghetto.

[pbmax]

I knew, intuitively, that the Packers were going to go 6 - 10 this year. The fact that that's not going to happen is not a problem of my intuition, but a problem of the Packers not understanding how bad they actually are.

If you really believe it, its not a lie.

[Fritz]

I knew intuitively that Diane Lane would date me in 1990. My intuition overrode the fact that we lived in different cities, she was a movie star, and I was a schlub living off a 14K stipend in a Menlo Park ghetto.


Details, details.

[texaspackerbacker]

I knew, intuitively, that the Packers were going to go 6 - 10 this year. The fact that that's not going to happen is not a problem of my intuition, but a problem of the Packers not understanding how bad they actually are.

Is that kinda like bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly, yet they do?