Where are the papers?

[packers11]

I'm waiting everyday to wake up to ESPN saying Bus Cook has sent Favre's reinstatement papers. I mean if hes dying to play whats taking so long??? Does he have to get them in before training camp or is there no deadline for these papers???

As the days keep passing, I think Favre is rethinking his decision and the longer it takes the better the possibility that he just stays retired.

[LL2]

Good point! If Favre is for real that he wants to play send those papers to Goodell, then show up in GB and get ready to training camp. During that time his agent can discuss a possible trade. In Peter King's article he said Favre has gone underground and that Favre and his agent has not returned calls or test messages. If Favre was serious about playing then come out and say it publicly, and not through his buddy sports reporter of the Biloxi news.

I was reading an article over the weekend (not sure where as there are so many damn articles on this subject right now) where Siefert said they went through the same thing with Montana. They decided to trade Montana to the Chiefs as we all know, but Siefert and the 49ers brass were heckled for a long time, but then Steve Young wins a Super Bowl and everyone was like Joe Who? Rodgers can only hope for a similar turn out. I wish Favre would stop acting like some Diva!

[Harlan Huckleby]

Papers - ver are zee papers? Vee must see your papers.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/hh/images/thumb/d/d1/Major_Hochstetter2.jpg/250px-Major_Hochstetter2.jpg

[Pacopete4]

Ya, I really think he should come out and say something to the press about his intentions or put in his papers if he really does want to play. And once he does, get his butt up to GB early and start getting ready for the season and let the best QB win! (which will be Favre)

[Merlin]

Who knows, maybe they are negotiating with the Packers. On one hand that would make sense so it doesn't turn into more of a circus then it has already been. On the other it does make it appear that Favre isn't serious.

[Pacopete4]

PS. My guess is you will see something before this weekend due to him having to be in Green Bay July 19th for the Packers HOF inductions to Winters and Brown.

[The Leaper]

As the days keep passing, I think Favre is rethinking his decision and the longer it takes the better the possibility that he just stays retired.

I'm guessing that is the hope of Thompson at this point.

[texaspackerbacker]

All these days? What has it been, 2, maybe 3 days since the story broke? Really, today is the first business day.

I think there is a chess game going on here. The Packers would still prefer that Favre stay retired. Brett and his agent know that, and know also that a trade is probably more likely than actually going back to the Packers.

I wouldn't expect any paperwork very soon--not until things get sorted out a little more.

[The Leaper]

I wouldn't expect any paperwork very soon--not until things get sorted out a little more.

Tex...the Packers won't trade Favre unless he asks for reinstatement. They have no reason to trade him if he isn't an active player...unless someone offers a crazy deal.

[texaspackerbacker]

I wouldn't expect any paperwork very soon--not until things get sorted out a little more.

Tex...the Packers won't trade Favre unless he asks for reinstatement. They have no reason to trade him if he isn't an active player...unless someone offers a crazy deal.

I sort of agree with you--that's why it's a chess game. All sides will want the agreement in place before any paperwork, but if a trade is agreed to, then bang bang--reinstatement papers and formal paperwork for a trade.

If there is no trade, then Favre has to be the one to blink first, because he is the one wanting to depart from the status quo.

[Carolina_Packer]

I wouldn't expect any paperwork very soon--not until things get sorted out a little more.

Tex...the Packers won't trade Favre unless he asks for reinstatement. They have no reason to trade him if he isn't an active player...unless someone offers a crazy deal.

I sort of agree with you--that's why it's a chess game. All sides will want the agreement in place before any paperwork, but if a trade is agreed to, then bang bang--reinstatement papers and formal paperwork for a trade.

If there is no trade, then Favre has to be the one to blink first, because he is the one wanting to depart from the status quo.

Can you imagine if we trade his rights to someone else before he's reinstated and he changes his mind and retires on his new team? :-) I'm sure, given his indecision that any trade would be very conditional.

[The Leaper]

If there is no trade, then Favre has to be the one to blink first, because he is the one wanting to depart from the status quo.

I think even if there is a trade, Favre has to blink first. Thompson has no incentive to trade Favre until he becomes an active member of the Packer roster. Why would he talk with anyone else before Favre reactivates himself as a player?

[Ballboy]

I really don't think it is any kind of chess game.


The Packers are in the drivers seat and in a winning situation.

The brass have said Brett is more than welcome to come back as a back-up which does two things for the Packers:

1) Vet behind Rogers
2) When Rogers gets hurt, we have a past MVP to take over.

Packers have been looking for a veteran backup. We have the money to pay Brett if he decides to come back.

Packers other option is to trade him and get something(maybe a 3rd rounder) in return...we all know what TT does with 3rd round picks.

Brett has really tarnished his legacy by working the media on this. He should've met face to face with the brass and found out what the Packers were thinking. Once he realized that they had moved on, he should've kept his mouth shut and stayed retired.

I love Brett(as much as a man can love a man) for everything he has done not only on the field but charity as well. Would I have loved him to come back this year PRIOR to him saying he was retired...YES!!! Things didn't work out that way.

[Gunakor]

Ya, I really think he should come out and say something to the press about his intentions or put in his papers if he really does want to play. And once he does, get his butt up to GB early and start getting ready for the season and let the best QB win! (which will be Favre)


Are you sure it would be Favre?

Think really hard back to last year. If there was a fair and open competition for the starting QB job, Favre would have lost. Rodgers outplayed Favre during the preseason last year. Then he didn't see any game time until Dallas where, once again, he outplayed Favre. Rodgers outplayed Favre in every opportunity he was given last season. So how can you be so sure that Favre would win a fair competition?

This isn't to discount what Favre did last year. You don't have to rant about it to me, I already know. What I don't know is if Rodgers can have the same kind of success, but given what I saw from Rodgers last season and preseason I think he can.

[The Leaper]

If there was a fair and open competition for the starting QB job, Favre would have lost.

There wasn't a competition, so no one knows how that would've changed Favre's approach. Without a competition, there was no pressure on Rodgers in training camp. He also never really faced 1st string defensive talent. That changes the equation a lot.

Claiming Rodgers outplayed Favre at every turn last year is quite a stretch. There still is no adequate evidence of what Rodgers will do under the pressure of being "the man".

[Gunakor]

If there was a fair and open competition for the starting QB job, Favre would have lost.

There wasn't a competition, so no one knows how that would've changed Favre's approach. Without a competition, there was no pressure on Rodgers in training camp. He also never really faced 1st string defensive talent. That changes the equation a lot.

Claiming Rodgers outplayed Favre at every turn last year is quite a stretch. There still is no adequate evidence of what Rodgers will do under the pressure of being "the man".


You are correct Leaper, it would have changed the equation. That's not the point I was making. I was addressing the notion that Favre would FOR SURE win such a competition. Nothing is certain, which is what I was implying.

It's not a stretch that Rodgers outplayed Favre either, it's fact. Now don't go reading between the lines to make up shit I didn't say. I never said Rodgers was a better QB, I said Rodgers played better when given the opportunity. And he did in fact see 1st string defensive talent last year, in Dallas, and STILL played better than did Favre against those same players on defense. Yes, Leaper, that actually happened. Therefore it's possible that Rodgers beats Favre in an open competition. That could actually happen too. Favre is no lock to win it.

[The Leaper]

And he did in fact see 1st string defensive talent last year, in Dallas, and STILL played better than did Favre against those same players on defense. Yes, Leaper, that actually happened.

Sure it did...because Dallas GAMEPLANNED to take Favre's long passes out of the game. Rodgers came in, and Dallas wasn't ready for the short dink-and-dunk game or Rodger's mobility. If Rodgers had been the starter, Dallas would've changed their defensive plan accordingly.

Being a starter in the NFL is significantly more difficult than sitting on the sideline with a clipboard. It is the PRESSURE that comes with being a target week after week that determines who survives or fails. Rodgers has yet to take a snap under that kind of pressure. That is where the greatest question about him lies...and it won't be answered until he actually gets a chance at being "the man".

If you think Rodgers can play at an MVP caliber level, as Favre did in 2007, at his level of experience, you are on the far end of the bell curve.

[Gunakor]

And he did in fact see 1st string defensive talent last year, in Dallas, and STILL played better than did Favre against those same players on defense. Yes, Leaper, that actually happened.

Sure it did...because Dallas GAMEPLANNED to take Favre's long passes out of the game. Rodgers came in, and Dallas wasn't ready for the short dink-and-dunk game or Rodger's mobility. If Rodgers had been the starter, Dallas would've changed their defensive plan accordingly.

Being a starter in the NFL is significantly more difficult than sitting on the sideline with a clipboard. It is the PRESSURE that comes with being a target week after week that determines who survives or fails. Rodgers has yet to take a snap under that kind of pressure. That is where the greatest question about him lies...and it won't be answered until he actually gets a chance at being "the man".

If you think Rodgers can play at an MVP caliber level, as Favre did in 2007, at his level of experience, you are on the far end of the bell curve.


First off, don't pretend to know what Dallas gameplanned for. Second, don't pretend that Favre wasn't dinking and dunking EVERYBODY up until that point, so I'm sure Dallas had gameplanned against the short passing game too. Third, I never EVER said Rodgers was at an MVP level. Find where I said that and quote it please. I told you once to stop reading between the lines so I suggest you do that.

[The Leaper]

First off, don't pretend to know what Dallas gameplanned for.

I saw the game. It was pretty clear from the first 15 plays what their defense had planned.


Second, don't pretend that Favre wasn't dinking and dunking EVERYBODY up until that point

I never said anything about that. Now I'm telling you to stop reading between the lines.

[texaspackerbacker]

And he did in fact see 1st string defensive talent last year, in Dallas, and STILL played better than did Favre against those same players on defense. Yes, Leaper, that actually happened.

Sure it did...because Dallas GAMEPLANNED to take Favre's long passes out of the game. Rodgers came in, and Dallas wasn't ready for the short dink-and-dunk game or Rodger's mobility. If Rodgers had been the starter, Dallas would've changed their defensive plan accordingly.

Being a starter in the NFL is significantly more difficult than sitting on the sideline with a clipboard. It is the PRESSURE that comes with being a target week after week that determines who survives or fails. Rodgers has yet to take a snap under that kind of pressure. That is where the greatest question about him lies...and it won't be answered until he actually gets a chance at being "the man".

If you think Rodgers can play at an MVP caliber level, as Favre did in 2007, at his level of experience, you are on the far end of the bell curve.

That's an over-simplification. You're giving the Packers credit for being able to completely modify their gameplan on a fly with a very inexperienced QB, and not giving the Cowboys credit for making similar modifications on defense. Just a plain vanilla defense with the quality of personnel Dallas had should have been good enough. And if the Packers were able to do that with Rodgers, why weren't they able to make the same adjustments even easier with Favre at QB?

For that one game, at least, the inescapable conclusion was that Rodgers was the better QB. Whether that can be generalized to a whole season remains to be seen, but I wouldn't bet against it.

[Gunakor]

First off, don't pretend to know what Dallas gameplanned for.

I saw the game. It was pretty clear from the first 15 plays what their defense had planned.


Second, don't pretend that Favre wasn't dinking and dunking EVERYBODY up until that point

I never said anything about that. Now I'm telling you to stop reading between the lines.


Ya, coz you can tell everyting about an opponent from the first 15 plays. FFS you can't honestly believe that. Those first 15 plays are scripted. The adjustments and improvisation starts afterwards. Just because Brett kept heaving up moonballs early on that day and Dallas picked them off doesn't mean that's what Dallas had gameplanned for. It says more about the Packers offensive gameplan than the Cowboys defensive gameplan.

Besides, if Favre had been so effective with the short passing game leading up to Dallas, why would you assume that Dallas didn't pay any attention to it during practice that week? And if they did, then why was Rodgers so effective using it against them? I'm not trying to read between the lines here, so how about you offer an explaination as to why that happened.

[Pacopete4]

From just watching the highlights and if someone has recently watched the game, but it seemed as though Brett went to DD and he was covered a lot while Rodgers threw 5 yrd passes to Jennings and he basically did the work.

[texaspackerbacker]

If it was that easy, why didn't Favre do it?

[Gunakor]

From just watching the highlights and if someone has recently watched the game, but it seemed as though Brett went to DD and he was covered a lot while Rodgers threw 5 yrd passes to Jennings and he basically did the work.


VERY GOOD OBSERVATION

Except you forgot to mention all the work that Jennings and Driver and Jones and Lee and everyone else did for Favre in the other 15 games that year. That wasn't the only game that Jennings turned a 5 yard slant into a 25 yard gain. It happened frequently. It happened to Favre. All season long. So why is it that when the recievers do the work for Favre that Favre gets all the credit, but when the recievers do the work for Rodgers then Rodgers gets none?

[Pacopete4]

I guess I didnt mean to give the credit to Rodgers, he played well... I think his play is blown outta proportion a little bit but he did do better than expected. And yes, those receivers were gold mines last season but Brett Favre's play was absolutely amazing in more than just 5 yard slant passes (see Denver, KC on the road as just two examples or the fact that we were 8-1 without an running game at all)

[Gunakor]

I guess I didnt mean to give the credit to Rodgers, he played well... I think his play is blown outta proportion a little bit but he did do better than expected. And yes, those receivers were gold mines last season but Brett Favre's play was absolutely amazing in more than just 5 yard slant passes (see Denver, KC on the road as just two examples or the fact that we were 8-1 without an running game at all)

I see your point about the 60 yard bombs that Favre connected on. But Rodgers hasn't even had the opportunity yet. You can't say someone CAN'T do something without even letting him try. I haven't seen him for myself, but I believe the players and coaches that have worked with him at practice when they say A-Rod is very accurate and has a very strong arm. Very accurate and very strong arms should have little problems connecting on 60 yard bombs, so I don't see any reason why he is incapable of going downfield at times.

Remember also that Favre wasn't perfect going downfield. It was his 60 yard moonballs that Dallas was picking off that day. For as good as he was, he could be just as bad at times.

We'll see. Again, I don't know for certain. But I do know without a doubt that Rodgers can effectively run WCO. Ive seen him do it. And if the Grant deal gets done by TC then we don't have to worry about going 8-1 without a running game. We ended the season last year very balanced on offense, so assuming we start '08 with a running game then I don't see a reason why Rodgers would fail.

[Packerarcher]

If there was a fair and open competition for the starting QB job, Favre would have lost.

There wasn't a competition, so no one knows how that would've changed Favre's approach. Without a competition, there was no pressure on Rodgers in training camp. He also never really faced 1st string defensive talent. That changes the equation a lot.

Claiming Rodgers outplayed Favre at every turn last year is quite a stretch. There still is no adequate evidence of what Rodgers will do under the pressure of being "the man".


You are correct Leaper, it would have changed the equation. That's not the point I was making. I was addressing the notion that Favre would FOR SURE win such a competition. Nothing is certain, which is what I was implying.

It's not a stretch that Rodgers outplayed Favre either, it's fact. Now don't go reading between the lines to make up shit I didn't say. I never said Rodgers was a better QB, I said Rodgers played better when given the opportunity. And he did in fact see 1st string defensive talent last year, in Dallas, and STILL played better than did Favre against those same players on defense. Yes, Leaper, that actually happened. Therefore it's possible that Rodgers beats Favre in an open competition. That could actually happen too. Favre is no lock to win it.

You would base Rodgers being the BETTER of the two on THAT. I will take that bet in a heartbeat. Not only do I hope Brett comes back,I hope they DO make him compete for Hangnail Rodgers for the starting job. Favre thrives on competition,it would be classic to see him school the "rookie".

[Gunakor]

If there was a fair and open competition for the starting QB job, Favre would have lost.

There wasn't a competition, so no one knows how that would've changed Favre's approach. Without a competition, there was no pressure on Rodgers in training camp. He also never really faced 1st string defensive talent. That changes the equation a lot.

Claiming Rodgers outplayed Favre at every turn last year is quite a stretch. There still is no adequate evidence of what Rodgers will do under the pressure of being "the man".


You are correct Leaper, it would have changed the equation. That's not the point I was making. I was addressing the notion that Favre would FOR SURE win such a competition. Nothing is certain, which is what I was implying.

It's not a stretch that Rodgers outplayed Favre either, it's fact. Now don't go reading between the lines to make up shit I didn't say. I never said Rodgers was a better QB, I said Rodgers played better when given the opportunity. And he did in fact see 1st string defensive talent last year, in Dallas, and STILL played better than did Favre against those same players on defense. Yes, Leaper, that actually happened. Therefore it's possible that Rodgers beats Favre in an open competition. That could actually happen too. Favre is no lock to win it.

You would base Rodgers being the BETTER of the two on THAT. I will take that bet in a heartbeat. Not only do I hope Brett comes back,I hope they DO make him compete for Hangnail Rodgers for the starting job. Favre thrives on competition,it would be classic to see him school the "rookie".

Ya, he sure thrived on the competition of two 10-1 teams vying for home field advantage throughout. Or the competition of the NFC Championship game.

You should read the whole thing you blind, emotional, arrogant ass. I never said Rodgers was the better QB. I had to already emphasise that once, so read the whole fucking thread and you'll see. I said Rodgers played better. He played better than Favre in the preseason, and he played better than Favre in Dallas. You can look up the results if you'd like, or if you can find video you can watch those games again and see for yourself. THAT HAPPENED.

Does this mean that Rodgers is a better QB? Hell no. But does it mean he should have a chance to compete against Favre? Does it mean he has a chance to win it? Absolutely.

[oregonpackfan]

Papers - ver are zee papers? Vee must see your papers.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/hh/images/thumb/d/d1/Major_Hochste
tter2.jpg/250px-Major_Hochstetter2.jpg

I heard Sgt. Schultz lost the papers! :)

[Harlan Huckleby]

ah, the world's most adorable nazis!

[RashanGary]

Favre is more accomplished, but it is true that last year Rodgers outplayed him with every opportunity.

Rodgers had a better preseason
Rodgers outplayed Brett in Dallas

All you can ask him to do is kick butt when he plays. Everyone knows Brett is a hell of a player and a proven commodity but I think the way the Packers have stopped kissing Favre's butt shows that they're not worried about losing him. To me that shows their confidence in teh guy they have.