Part II

[Deputy Nutz]

Is that it? repeated questions about coming into camp as a back up?

Favre doesn't want to compete for a starting job in Green Bay. There is that ego again. I think a competition between Rodger and Favre is the only fair way for Favre to comeback.

[Pacopete4]

Like he said "why?"


Why does he have to prove himself that he is the best QB? Do you think Tom Brady is having a training camp battle? How bout Carson Palmer? Tony Romo?... its a joke to even think he'd have to battle it out, it really is..

[BF4MVP]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

Either the JS is full of crap, or they realized how stupid of Brett it was to say those things...Totally irrelevant and unnecessary as I see it..Although I would have liked to see what context those comments were made in...

[Chevelle2]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

Are you for real? Hahaha even Faux Noise knows how dumb he was with that.

[Deputy Nutz]

Like he said "why?"


Why does he have to prove himself that he is the best QB? Do you think Tom Brady is having a training camp battle? How bout Carson Palmer? Tony Romo?... its a joke to even think he'd have to battle it out, it really is..

Did those guys vacate their position in the off-season? Maybe he isn't as good as Rodgers anymore, how do you know? It is the only way to shut everyone up. Rodgers loses the job, and he can be pissed about it, but then it is on him, he wasn't good enough to beat a 38 year old Brett Favre.

[Jimx29]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

I would lean more towards tha what they claimed was the transcript, was just more sportswriter speculation bullshit.

Same Shit, Different day

[Pacopete4]

He spent his whole career proving himself.. now that he missed a mini camp he, as a HOF QB coming off an amazing year, has to go back and prove to the Packers that he is better than a guy thats never taken an NFL snap?.. it dont add up, the only reason that could be is to keep Arod happy, but the NFL is not about keeping backups happy, its about winning games

[RashanGary]

Well, if it wasn't ego's and lines in the sand before it is now. Favre won't show up because he knows he's not wanted and he has pride (like anybody should). The Packers will not take him back because I think they see him as a bit of a cancer at this point and he challenged them. Football guys who make it in this league are pretty competitive. Somehow I don't see the Packers backing down one ounce after that. Call it man pride, but even if they wanted him a little bit I don't think they'll even consider now.

[Pacopete4]

So far that poll they are taking is 12,000 for him to come back as the starter and about 2,000 for them to trade or release

[RashanGary]

So far that poll they are taking is 12,000 for him to come back as the starter and about 2,000 for them to trade or release


In two weeks you'll have the answer Paco. It's going to be hard to accept but you might as well start getting used to not seeing him in the Green and Gold now. I really don't see any way out of this.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Brohm and Flynn are not even the roster.

Two weeks ago I was telling my Dad who lives in Wisconsin how Flynn has the least pressure on to make the roster.

Things change.

[Pacopete4]

There is still some time for TT/MM to feel the heat, its only going to get worse as training camp gets closer.. but yes, my life will go on if he is not the starter but it'l really tick me off if TT lets him play for someone else and not us. Other than that I'm backin the Packers no matter whos back there.. but right now its time to support Brett

[Bossman641]

It's pretty obvious Favre has no bombshells, no big secrets of how TT and MM screwed him over. He thinks he should be handed the starting job and is upset it's not happening. I just don't get how people can continue to defend Favre the way they have.

Looking purely at the facts:
Player A retires
Player A has chance to come back, is welcomed, and changes his mind
Player A decides a month before TC he wants back in
Organization tells him it's too late

How is this their fault? IMO, this entire situation is 90% Favre's fault. The problem is that people can't think coherently when Favre is involved. People are too emotionally attached. They remember the memories and can't think logically.

If you replaced Favre/MM/TT with Brady/Belichek/Kraft or Manning/Dungy/Polian, 99% of the people in this forum (everyone but Bulldog) would be saying fuck Brady/Manning and calling them selfish babies.

[MJZiggy]

He's never had a camp battle since he took over. I don't see the big deal if winning the job back would be so easy. Come in, put Rodgers in his place and take what's yours. That's what happens when you retire, they give your job away and you want to come back.

[Pacopete4]

It's pretty obvious Favre has no bombshells, no big secrets of how TT and MM screwed him over. He thinks he should be handed the starting job and is upset it's not happening. I just don't get how people can continue to defend Favre the way they have.

Looking purely at the facts:
Player A retires
Player A has chance to come back, is welcomed, and changes his mind
Player A decides a month before TC he wants back in
Organization tells him it's too late

How is this their fault? IMO, this entire situation is 90% Favre's fault. The problem is that people can't think coherently when Favre is involved. People are too emotionally attached. They remember the memories and can't think logically.

If you replaced Favre/MM/TT with Brady/Belichek/Kraft or Manning/Dungy/Polian, 99% of the people in this forum (everyone but Bulldog) would be saying fuck Brady/Manning and calling them selfish babies.


NOOOO WAAAAY.. now I really don't like those QB's but like us, those teams would be morons to not let Manning or Brady come back and play.. its that simple. Yes, Favre screwed up in retired, PRESSURED OR NOT, but he's back, 100%, he said it tonight... there should be ZERO hold up now in having him back

[Partial]

Because its stupid Red...

He missed the optional practices.. Big F'in whoop.

There is still time.

It's not like they've been practicing daily and are about to start games tomorrow.

No, they're about to start getting in shape in about two weeks, and start practicing in pads in another 3 or 4. Gimme a break. He hasn't missed anything of importance to this point.

With that said, he has competed in years past (not really), and shouldn't be afraid to do it again.

[Bossman641]

It's pretty obvious Favre has no bombshells, no big secrets of how TT and MM screwed him over. He thinks he should be handed the starting job and is upset it's not happening. I just don't get how people can continue to defend Favre the way they have.

Looking purely at the facts:
Player A retires
Player A has chance to come back, is welcomed, and changes his mind
Player A decides a month before TC he wants back in
Organization tells him it's too late

How is this their fault? IMO, this entire situation is 90% Favre's fault. The problem is that people can't think coherently when Favre is involved. People are too emotionally attached. They remember the memories and can't think logically.

If you replaced Favre/MM/TT with Brady/Belichek/Kraft or Manning/Dungy/Polian, 99% of the people in this forum (everyone but Bulldog) would be saying fuck Brady/Manning and calling them selfish babies.


NOOOO WAAAAY.. now I really don't like those QB's but like us, those teams would be morons to not let Manning or Brady come back and play.. its that simple. Yes, Favre screwed up in retired, PRESSURED OR NOT, but he's back, 100%, he said it tonight... there should be ZERO hold up now in having him back

I'm not saying now, I'm saying 38 year old Manning and Brady.

[Pacopete4]

If they play as well as Favre did at 38.. whats the problem? I could totally understand if he was shitty last year, but he wasnt..

[digitaldean]

If he's back, file for reinstatement, come back to GB for training camp and bury this issue.

If he does all this posturing, he will be going nowhere.

They made the two rallies sound like they filled Lambeau Field. They didn't even break 250!! Not exactly what I'd call a groundswell.

I'd take Favre back if he came back. But somehow I don't think he'll be coming back.

[PackerTimer]

Really nothing new tonight. This was one of the worst and most pointless interviews I've ever seen. So many questions that could have been asked and weren't. What a waste. He should have just let Al Jones write another article.

[Harlan Huckleby]

There is still some time for TT/MM to feel the heat, its only going to get worse as training camp gets closer.

Maybe they will just do what they think is right and weather the storm.

What is this "heat" really going to consist of? PEople burning their season tickets in protest?

This is not an easy decision with an clearly superior choice. IF some very stupid people can't see beyond their own point of view, to hell with them.

[RashanGary]

The problem is that the Packers told him they moved forward, effectively telling him they didn't want him back. He's hurt right now, badly. He feels slighted and he wants to fight back.

He's doing everything he can, but at the end of the day there is nothing he can do. The Packers are a very savvy organization. They'll get through till TC, then they'll let the football do the talking and while this will not go away completely it will become less and less of a distraction as time goes on.

[Pacopete4]

Harrell I agree... You're right, BUT ONLY if we win.. that will be the only thing that takes this away.. and if Rodgers plays well

If Rodgers looks like he is holding this team back, it will not be pretty with Favre sitting at home or playing for someone else

[PackerTimer]

The problem is that the Packers told him they moved forward, effectively telling him they didn't want him back. He's hurt right now, badly. He feels slighted and he wants to fight back.

He's doing everything he can, but at the end of the day there is nothing he can do. The Packers are a very savvy organization. They'll get through till TC, then they'll let the football do the talking and while this will not go away completely it will become less and less of a distraction as time goes on.

I agree. The Packers will have no comment until training camp. If he shows up then they'll have a decision. If he doesn't want to compete and doesn't show up the Packers really have nothing to gain and they won't say anything.

He kind of hinted tonight that he doesn't believe that they might be considering a trade. But really they have nothing to trade. He's still retired. If he really wants anything to happen, he'll have to force their hand. The only way he can do that is by filing for reinstatement. If he doesn't do that, he has nothing to complain about.

[Bossman641]

Is Fox News gonna interview TT to have fair and balanced coverage? Only seems fair. :D

[RashanGary]

If the Packers bomb without Brett, TT and MM will likely lose their jobs within a year or two. If they win, they'll get all of the credit.

Right now it's sit back and watch. I have a lot of confidence in TT and MM. I think we have the right guys to bring this team to many years of success. I think they have confidence in themselves and made this decision with that at the top of mind. I'm looking forward to a fun new era of football and wish Brett the best in whatever he does. Change is always tough, but it can be interesting if you embrace it rather than fight it.

[Brando19]

Brohm and Flynn are not even the roster.

Two weeks ago I was telling my Dad who lives in Wisconsin how Flynn has the least pressure on to make the roster.

Things change.

Why in the blue hell would you think Flynn has the least pressure to make the roster? A 7th round pick should always be worried about making the roster.

[Pacopete4]

Ya, I hope they are right too.. cuz I really don't want to go through a shitty period of Packer football

[Pacopete4]

Brohm and Flynn are not even the roster.

Two weeks ago I was telling my Dad who lives in Wisconsin how Flynn has the least pressure on to make the roster.

Things change.

Why in the blue hell would you think Flynn has the least pressure to make the roster? A 7th round pick should always be worried about making the roster.

I think his thinking was that they have 3 QB's.. and 3 QB's are going to be on this team and a week ago, Favre wasn't an issue which left him at #3, easily....

[RashanGary]

Ya, I hope they are right too.. cuz I really don't want to go through a shitty period of Packer football

:)

I think TT and MM will be the first to agree with that. They have jobs and livelyhoods at stake. I'm sure they knew that when they told Brett it was time to move on. It's hard to accept, but this current regime has done a lot of good things. I think we're about to see the next big thing and it might shock a lot of Packer nation.

[Pacopete4]

I really wish I had the optimism u did, I just cant see it... time will tell I guess

[bobblehead]

Because its stupid Red...

He missed the optional practices.. Big F'in whoop.

There is still time.

It's not like they've been practicing daily and are about to start games tomorrow.

No, they're about to start getting in shape in about two weeks, and start practicing in pads in another 3 or 4. Gimme a break. He hasn't missed anything of importance to this point.

With that said, he has competed in years past (not really), and shouldn't be afraid to do it again.

MM has grabbed the riegns on this team by holding all the veterans accountable and ensuring they show up at minis, if he folds on this one good luck next year when barnet, jenkins, kampman, ect decide they don't want to show.

If he blows it and we lose out because our QB is really bad you get to hold MM and TT accountable just like they are holding brett accountable right now. BUT, at this moment they get to make the call and they aren't caving, they are doing what they believe is best for the green bay packers which also coincides with what they believe is best for their career.

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

[Packerarcher]

[quote="JustinHarrell"]If the Packers bomb without Brett, TT and MM will likely lose their jobs within a year or two.

Well TT and MM better start sticking money away,because after this season they will be unemployed.

[Brando19]

Brohm and Flynn are not even the roster.

Two weeks ago I was telling my Dad who lives in Wisconsin how Flynn has the least pressure on to make the roster.

Things change.

Why in the blue hell would you think Flynn has the least pressure to make the roster? A 7th round pick should always be worried about making the roster.

I think his thinking was that they have 3 QB's.. and 3 QB's are going to be on this team and a week ago, Favre wasn't an issue which left him at #3, easily....

True, but what if the Packers brought in a veteran to sit behind Rodgers and help him out. We're not cutting Brohm, so Flynn would go to the practice squad and probably be gone from the Packers.

[RashanGary]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade. They obviously don't. They're going with Rodgers because they think it's right, not becasue every fan agrees. Fans don't have to agree with everything. TT has said that many times.

[Brando19]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

[MJZiggy]

If the Packers bomb without Brett, TT and MM will likely lose their jobs within a year or two.

Well TT and MM better start sticking money away,because after this season they will be unemployed.

If I had any money, I'd be laying a bet down about now. TT and M3 are not going to lose their jobs even if the Pack bombs this season. The fans may be crying, but they will be fine.

[Pacopete4]

Ya, I think they are banking on Arod to be the guy for a long time coming... boy thats a lot to ask especially since we just had a QB that never missed a game... luck runs out sooner or later

[RashanGary]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

I dont' know what will happen, but I think Rodgers is going to make you eat your words. Not in a bad way, but I think he's going to be everything Brett was last year at age 38. I don't think the Packers would move on if they didn't think he gave them the best chance. 12 mil is not that much for just a year to year deal. The Packers are confident in their guy. I think that much is obvious by their actions.

[Pacopete4]

Back to how bad the interview was... why didnt she ask him:

Hey if the Packers ask you back week 4 if Arod is hurt, would you?

[PackerTimer]

Well TT and MM better start sticking money away,because after this season they will be unemployed.

God you've said some dumb shit over the last few days. I find it hard to believe you're a Packer fan. We've had to listen to idiots essentially root for three years for the Packers to fail because for some reason they don't like TT. Guess what, you were wrong then and you'll be wrong if you continue to believe he'll fail. This organization is in good hands. Brett Favre had to go sometime. I'm glad we've got somebody who knows what he's doing and won't let the inmates run the asylum like you would.

[Pacopete4]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

I dont' know what will happen, but I think Rodgers is going to make you eat your words. Not in a bad way, but I think he's going to be everything Brett was last year at age 38. I don't think the Packers would move on if they didn't think he gave them the best chance.


If that were true then why weren't they completely moved on when they went to Brett's after he already retired?

[Brando19]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

I dont' know what will happen, but I think Rodgers is going to make you eat your words. Not in a bad way, but I think he's going to be everything Brett was last year at age 38. I don't think the Packers would move on if they didn't think he gave them the best chance.
Fair enough. Good answer.

[RashanGary]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

I dont' know what will happen, but I think Rodgers is going to make you eat your words. Not in a bad way, but I think he's going to be everything Brett was last year at age 38. I don't think the Packers would move on if they didn't think he gave them the best chance.


If that were true then why weren't they completely moved on when they went to Brett's after he already retired?

I think they felt it was close. Brett played well enough last year to clearly get his job back. He gave it up though and someone took it. The Packers are comfortable with the change. If they thought they needed Brett he'd be on the starting QB right now.

[Lurker64]

If they play as well as Favre did at 38.. whats the problem? I could totally understand if he was shitty last year, but he wasnt..

The problem is that with Favre back annointed at the starter, you have to hand 52 guys new playbooks, since McCarthy already installed the offense in minicamp and the offense for Rodgers is different than the offense for Favre.

Quarterback is not just an interchangeable part, you can't just show up because you know some plays, everybody else has to be on the same page as you or nothing happens.

[Pacopete4]

the playbook from last year worked pretty well, didnt it?

[Lurker64]

the playbook from last year worked pretty well, didnt it?

Except the problem is that the other 27 or so offensive players who will make the roster have not been working out of that playbook this offseason, they have been working out of the new playbook. If you install a different playbook in training camp, you lose all the benefit of the preparation you did in minicamp and OTAs. Some of our offensive players (who are expected to contribute this year) don't even have a copy of last year's playbook.

Plus, when you just throw people mixed messages they get confused. Remember how much better this defense got just as a result of being in the same system for two years in a row? Continuity leads to execution.

[Deputy Nutz]

If they play as well as Favre did at 38.. whats the problem? I could totally understand if he was shitty last year, but he wasnt..

The problem is that with Favre back annointed at the starter, you have to hand 52 guys new playbooks, since McCarthy already installed the offense in minicamp and the offense for Rodgers is different than the offense for Favre.

Quarterback is not just an interchangeable part, you can't just show up because you know some plays, everybody else has to be on the same page as you or nothing happens.

First I have heard the Packers where doing their regular install of the playbook in OTAs and mini-camp with some changes due to having Aaron Rodgers at QB. Not a whole new playbook, that is a ridiculous statement.

[Pacopete4]

I think its complete BS... well there might be a couple of new plays the west coast offense is set off of base plays that are run over and over...

[pbmax]

Everyone just seems to miss the point with Thompson. He believes there is no ONE player that a team should be willing to do anything for. You can see it in his approach to FA, in his approach to drafting sometime regardless of need, trading down, and in the approach to acquiring depth.

He isn't betting the farm on Rodgers. He doesn't hang on to his flop draft picks like grim death (ala Sherman).

If Rodgers doesn't get it done, then he will keep swapping guys in until they find one. Maybe Brohm, maybe Flynn, might be someone you have never heard of.

But one thing I can guarantee you, Thompson isn't doing this because he thinks Rodgers is a sure thing. He knows the odds are its going to be a hard search. People who substitute mind reading Thompson for actual thinking keep thinking this is about Rodgers. Its not, its about the next good QB.


Ya, I think they are banking on Arod to be the guy for a long time coming... boy thats a lot to ask especially since we just had a QB that never missed a game... luck runs out sooner or later

[Pacopete4]

The way you put it, you have some very valid points... but I really think it boils down to his stamp on the team whether its Arod or someone else.. he wants credit

[Tarlam!]

He isn't betting the farm on Rodgers. He doesn't hang on to his flop draft picks like grim death (ala Sherman).

If Rodgers doesn't get it done, then he will keep swapping guys in until they find one. Maybe Brohm, maybe Flynn, might be someone you have never heard of.

But one thing I can guarantee you, Thompson isn't doing this because he thinks Rodgers is a sure thing. He knows the odds are its going to be a hard search. People who substitute mind reading Thompson for actual thinking keep thinking this is about Rodgers. Its not, its about the next good QB.


Ya, I think they are banking on Arod to be the guy for a long time coming... boy that's a lot to ask especially since we just had a QB that never missed a game... luck runs out sooner or later

:bclap:

This is EXACTLY my view and I have posted it in the past. TT is not an egomaniac. This is not about "I told ya so".

I know the TT bashers will vehemently disagree. There are enough egomaniacs around the league to point to as benchmarks and TT does not act like those people. TT does nothing flashy, is difficult to get in front of a microphone, always uses the "we" form and rarely, if ever says "I".

Unlike Sherman, TT listens to his scouts. I could go on.

If A-Rod sucks, he gets benched.

To reiterate an earlier comment, TT was a perennial "cut" possibility in his playing days, but by all accounts, he worked his butt off. I just bet he hates the star allures a guy like Brett Favre brings to the party and has sworn the 53 guys on this roster will have a similar dedication as he once displayed. For a guy with TT's background, Favre's indecision must be salt on an open wound.

[BallHawk]

Everyone just seems to miss the point with Thompson. He believes there is no ONE player that a team should be willing to do anything for. You can see it in his approach to FA, in his approach to drafting sometime regardless of need, trading down, and in the approach to acquiring depth.

He isn't betting the farm on Rodgers. He doesn't hang on to his flop draft picks like grim death (ala Sherman).

If Rodgers doesn't get it done, then he will keep swapping guys in until they find one. Maybe Brohm, maybe Flynn, might be someone you have never heard of.

But one thing I can guarantee you, Thompson isn't doing this because he thinks Rodgers is a sure thing. He knows the odds are its going to be a hard search. People who substitute mind reading Thompson for actual thinking keep thinking this is about Rodgers. Its not, its about the next good QB.

Shame on you Max, for having a fair and logical opinion. Get with the trend, start getting into internet flame wars. It seems to be the new thing on here.

100% agree with you.

[th87]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

Yup, because you know for sure. Tell me tomorrow's lottery numbers too, please.

[cpk1994]

He's never had a camp battle since he took over. I don't see the big deal if winning the job back would be so easy. Come in, put Rodgers in his place and take what's yours. That's what happens when you retire, they give your job away and you want to come back.OF cousre hes never had a camp battle. If he had, Matt Hasselback would be your starter. Don't automatically assume that Brett would win the battle. His training camps have been less than stellar for the most part. Rodgers has a lot better chance of beating out Brett than you are willing to give him credit for.

[twoseven]

Back to how bad the interview was... why didnt she ask him:

Hey if the Packers ask you back week 4 if Arod is hurt, would you?She DID.

He completely waffled right over it. She said, why not go back and be the backup, that AR has shown he is injury prone and you (Brett) could be right back in there. He completey ignored it and started blabbing on about a totally different subject. Hell, she straight up asked him if he would be willing to go back and compete to win a job that he GAVE AWAY. He said WHY and appeared angry that she even asked it, she said 'I'm just asking' in a don't shoot the messenger tone, IMO. He is pissed and has a big ego, he will do only one thing..have the job HE GAVE AWAY handed to him without a fight. They did give it back to him back in March after he retired, he turned right back around and gave it right back. Just how many times should the team have to give it back to him only to have him continue to waffle on his level of commitment and hand it right back before they finally decide to stop, an infinite number? C'mon, even when he had the itch on June 20, MM asked if he then was 100% committed, HE SAID NO. Hell, even last night when Gretta asked if he was 100% today he hemmed and hawed. She had to ask him more than once before he finally (unconvincingly, IMO) said yes.

You might want to switch arguments and ask why he should have to, for the first time in his career, have to compete to win a job he GAVE AWAY, you have already done so numerous times. Don't bother. You asked why she didn't ask him a particular question.. SHE DID, I pointed it out. You might come back with, that wasn't what I said, I said in week 4. To which I would reply, so we are going to call him off his tractor in October after he has been away from the team since January? Brett Favre approaching 39 years old is so damn good that he doesn't even have to practice with the team and can just hop off the couch and play well? Yah right. This is the only thing that could happen based on your week 4 inquiry because Brett has already said he refuses to be in GB if he is NOT handed the ball with no questions asked.

[MJZiggy]

He's never had a camp battle since he took over. I don't see the big deal if winning the job back would be so easy. Come in, put Rodgers in his place and take what's yours. That's what happens when you retire, they give your job away and you want to come back.OF cousre hes never had a camp battle. If he had, Matt Hasselback would be your starter. Don't automatically assume that Brett would win the battle. His training camps have been less than stellar for the most part. Rodgers has a lot better chance of beating out Brett than you are willing to give him credit for.

Actually, I agree with you. I was speaking to those who say that Favre is such a good player that he shouldn't HAVE to have a camp battle, but the fact is that he's not on the roster which makes him the odd man out until he proves his way back in. TT chose another QB to replace him, and now if Favre wants his job back, he has to take it (that was my point--apologies if that didn't come across).

[Rastak]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

Either the JS is full of crap, or they realized how stupid of Brett it was to say those things...Totally irrelevant and unnecessary as I see it..Although I would have liked to see what context those comments were made in...


BF4MVP, looks like they did not air it per the Wisconsin State Journal. I obviously didn't hear these non aired comments but my honest opinion is that he didn't really burn any bridges with what was aired. Just my take. I did think the Arod thing was interesting. Bolded below. Sounds like Favre isn't exactly a guy you bring to mentor a young QB. It also sounds like he kinda tossed the OL coach under the bus, maybe inadvertantly.



http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/sports/packers/296380


Packers: Favre slams GM Thompson
By JASON WILDE
608-252-6176
jwilde@madison.com
GREEN BAY — If Brett Favre's comments about the Green Bay Packers in the first half of his interview with Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren didn't burn whatever bridge remained between the legendary quarterback and the organization, his comments that didn't air Tuesday night during Part II of the interview certainly will make matters worse.


The second half of Van Susteren's interview with Favre was shortened — apparently due to other breaking news — during Tuesday night's edition of "On The Record."


Van Susteren had said in an interview earlier Tuesday that the full interview, which she taped Monday morning at agent James "Bus" Cook's Mississippi office, was 45 minutes long.


In the portion that aired, Favre said he's tempted to apply for reinstatement from the reserve/retired list and report to the Packers' training camp on July 27, just to call Thompson's "bluff."


Favre also told Van Susteren he is now 100 percent committed to playing this year.


"(But) I very well might not play (because of) the circumstances," Favre said.


Asked by Van Susteren if being a backup — as the Packers have suggested — is unacceptable to him, Favre replied, "I think so. I've had a lot of people (say), 'Go back and hold them to it.' I don't see it that way. It's tempting just to — because everyone's (saying), 'Call their bluff' or whatever. I think it's going to be a circus in itself already, whether I go there (or not). ... I don't want to make it any worse than it is.


"Do I play somewhere else? (That) remains to be seen. But I don't want to go back there just to stick it to 'em."


Favre also acknowledged that a trade "may be our only option," but said he couldn't trust the Packers to be actively trying to send him elsewhere. Asked about playing for the Minnesota Vikings — Van Susteren referred to the team as "Minneapolis" — Favre said,


"I've never envisioned that. I've heard all the talk like everyone else. It's hard not to.


"I don't know if other teams would make a play for me. ... It may not work out. But we won't know unless we're released. And how am I supposed to trust that they're working on a trade after the things that have been told to me in the past? Teams may have called and said, 'Hey, we're interested.' They may never tell us. And the longer this goes on, the less likely I am to play for someone because of the time factor."


But it's what Favre said that didn't run during Tuesday night's show that was particularly critical of general manager Ted Thompson. While Van Susteren's "GretaWire" on foxnews.com promised a full transcript would be posted, portions of the transcript leaked throughout the day Tuesday.


Regarding his relationship with Thompson, Favre said: "Ted and I, I thought, have always had a good relationship. We don't talk a whole lot, we don't go out and eat and shoot the bull. But on three different occasions ... I don't want to say (he) lied — I think that's kind of a harsh word — but I think 'untruth' or whatever is (a) better (word)."


Favre also chronicled what he felt were mistakes Thompson made — not signing wide receiver Randy Moss; letting Pro Bowl guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle leave via free agency; and not interviewing ex-San Francisco and Detroit coach Steve Mariucci for the head-coaching job in 2006.


While "none of those had anything to do with me retiring," Favre said in the transcript, "it's hard for me to trust this guy (Thompson) when either I'm told one thing and everyone else is told another, or he's telling the public one thing and telling me another. ... That's part of the reason for (asking for) the release (from the Packers)."


Favre also put his friend, offensive line coach James Campen, in a tough spot with the organization by saying his former teammate told him he could "force their hand" by applying for reinstatement and coming back to the team.


Favre also said he warned Thompson during what he considered an awkward visit to Mississippi in May that he might do exactly what he's doing as training camp approached.


"I said, 'Ted, I just want to give you a heads-up that, hey, say July rolls around, I wake up and I say, man, I made the wrong decision. I have to play,"' Favre said. "I said, 'I just want you to have a plan.'


"And he said, 'OK, Don't worry about that.' And that was it. He didn't say good, bad, indifferent, whatever. He just said, 'No problem. OK.'"


When Van Susteren intimated during the aired portion of the interview that Aaron Rodgers, whom the Packers have backed publicly as their 2008 starting quarterback, probably won't stay healthy after suffering injuries the past two seasons, Favre replied, "I do feel bad for Aaron a little bit."


Favre also acknowledged that he hasn't talked to Rodgers and that, "I never gave him advice, really."

"I know this has been tough on him," Favre said of Rodgers. "And this has nothing to do with him, this whole deal. If they want to make (me) a backup ... how does that protect my legacy if I'm a backup? If (they say), 'Brett, we'll welcome you back, we'll pay you $12 million, but you've got to hold the clipboard and ball cap?' That's probably better for them as opposed to letting me go somewhere and me coming back (with another team). Then their legacy, the management, would, you know, could be in jeopardy.


"You don't worry about my legacy. It's a bunch of bull. It's all it is."

[Bossman641]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

Either the JS is full of crap, or they realized how stupid of Brett it was to say those things...Totally irrelevant and unnecessary as I see it..Although I would have liked to see what context those comments were made in...


BF4MVP, looks like they did not air it per the Wisconsin State Journal. I obviously didn't hear these non aired comments but my honest opinion is that he didn't really burn any bridges with what was aired. Just my take. I did think the Arod thing was interesting. Bolded below. Sounds like Favre isn't exactly a guy you bring to mentor a young QB. It also sounds like he kinda tossed the OL coach under the bus, maybe inadvertantly.



http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/sports/packers/296380


Packers: Favre slams GM Thompson
By JASON WILDE
608-252-6176
jwilde@madison.com
GREEN BAY — If Brett Favre's comments about the Green Bay Packers in the first half of his interview with Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren didn't burn whatever bridge remained between the legendary quarterback and the organization, his comments that didn't air Tuesday night during Part II of the interview certainly will make matters worse.


The second half of Van Susteren's interview with Favre was shortened — apparently due to other breaking news — during Tuesday night's edition of "On The Record."


Van Susteren had said in an interview earlier Tuesday that the full interview, which she taped Monday morning at agent James "Bus" Cook's Mississippi office, was 45 minutes long.


In the portion that aired, Favre said he's tempted to apply for reinstatement from the reserve/retired list and report to the Packers' training camp on July 27, just to call Thompson's "bluff."


Favre also told Van Susteren he is now 100 percent committed to playing this year.


"(But) I very well might not play (because of) the circumstances," Favre said.


Asked by Van Susteren if being a backup — as the Packers have suggested — is unacceptable to him, Favre replied, "I think so. I've had a lot of people (say), 'Go back and hold them to it.' I don't see it that way. It's tempting just to — because everyone's (saying), 'Call their bluff' or whatever. I think it's going to be a circus in itself already, whether I go there (or not). ... I don't want to make it any worse than it is.


"Do I play somewhere else? (That) remains to be seen. But I don't want to go back there just to stick it to 'em."


Favre also acknowledged that a trade "may be our only option," but said he couldn't trust the Packers to be actively trying to send him elsewhere. Asked about playing for the Minnesota Vikings — Van Susteren referred to the team as "Minneapolis" — Favre said,


"I've never envisioned that. I've heard all the talk like everyone else. It's hard not to.


"I don't know if other teams would make a play for me. ... It may not work out. But we won't know unless we're released. And how am I supposed to trust that they're working on a trade after the things that have been told to me in the past? Teams may have called and said, 'Hey, we're interested.' They may never tell us. And the longer this goes on, the less likely I am to play for someone because of the time factor."


But it's what Favre said that didn't run during Tuesday night's show that was particularly critical of general manager Ted Thompson. While Van Susteren's "GretaWire" on foxnews.com promised a full transcript would be posted, portions of the transcript leaked throughout the day Tuesday.


Regarding his relationship with Thompson, Favre said: "Ted and I, I thought, have always had a good relationship. We don't talk a whole lot, we don't go out and eat and shoot the bull. But on three different occasions ... I don't want to say (he) lied — I think that's kind of a harsh word — but I think 'untruth' or whatever is (a) better (word)."


Favre also chronicled what he felt were mistakes Thompson made — not signing wide receiver Randy Moss; letting Pro Bowl guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle leave via free agency; and not interviewing ex-San Francisco and Detroit coach Steve Mariucci for the head-coaching job in 2006.


While "none of those had anything to do with me retiring," Favre said in the transcript, "it's hard for me to trust this guy (Thompson) when either I'm told one thing and everyone else is told another, or he's telling the public one thing and telling me another. ... That's part of the reason for (asking for) the release (from the Packers)."


Favre also put his friend, offensive line coach James Campen, in a tough spot with the organization by saying his former teammate told him he could "force their hand" by applying for reinstatement and coming back to the team.


Favre also said he warned Thompson during what he considered an awkward visit to Mississippi in May that he might do exactly what he's doing as training camp approached.


"I said, 'Ted, I just want to give you a heads-up that, hey, say July rolls around, I wake up and I say, man, I made the wrong decision. I have to play,"' Favre said. "I said, 'I just want you to have a plan.'


"And he said, 'OK, Don't worry about that.' And that was it. He didn't say good, bad, indifferent, whatever. He just said, 'No problem. OK.'"


When Van Susteren intimated during the aired portion of the interview that Aaron Rodgers, whom the Packers have backed publicly as their 2008 starting quarterback, probably won't stay healthy after suffering injuries the past two seasons, Favre replied, "I do feel bad for Aaron a little bit."


Favre also acknowledged that he hasn't talked to Rodgers and that, "I never gave him advice, really."

"I know this has been tough on him," Favre said of Rodgers. "And this has nothing to do with him, this whole deal. If they want to make (me) a backup ... how does that protect my legacy if I'm a backup? If (they say), 'Brett, we'll welcome you back, we'll pay you $12 million, but you've got to hold the clipboard and ball cap?' That's probably better for them as opposed to letting me go somewhere and me coming back (with another team). Then their legacy, the management, would, you know, could be in jeopardy.


"You don't worry about my legacy. It's a bunch of bull. It's all it is."



Why doesn't he just come right out and say what he thinks the lies are that were made to him? If he thought he was being lied to about Moss who gives a fuck, he's not the GM anyways.

Everytime he opens is mouth he makes me lose more respect for him. He expected them to have a plan just in case he decided to come back in July? What were they supposd to do? "Hey Aaaron, you're our new starting QB, but don't get too comfortable, you're just keeping that seat warm in case Favre decides in July that he wants to play this year."

[The Leaper]

This is EXACTLY my view and I have posted it in the past. TT is not an egomaniac. This is not about "I told ya so".

Neither is Favre.

Both sides are to blame here. Favre is certifiably guilty in being unable to make a decision regarding retirement. However, you can understand why a guy who is 38 years old and coming off an MVP caliber season is having a difficult time deciding on coming back. McCarthy reported admitted that he was convinced Favre would have second thoughts throughout the offseason...so the notion that this is somehow a stunning development to the Packers is hogwash.


To reiterate an earlier comment, TT was a perennial "cut" possibility in his playing days, but by all accounts, he worked his butt off. I just bet he hates the star allures a guy like Brett Favre brings to the party and has sworn the 53 guys on this roster will have a similar dedication as he once displayed. For a guy with TT's background, Favre's indecision must be salt on an open wound.

Well, then Thompson is a dumbass.

Favre has given his all for the Packer organization. He has left everything he has on the field in every game. Brett Favre IS different from the other players...he's a bona-fide NFL LEGEND. Sorry, Ted...but Favre IS bigger than anyone else on the roster. That's just the way it is...and no amount of hardline attitude or drill instructor rhetoric is going to change that. Rather than despising that, Thompson should EMBRACE it...within reason. Favre is a great leader, a great teammate, a strong presence in the community, and he isn't out getting in barfights like Barnett or busting his wife in the face like Ahman.

Unfortunately, Ted seems to despise it...and that is unfortunate.

That said, Favre shouldn't be able to hold the team hostage...and I don't think he is trying to. As he said in his interview...he wants to be 100% committed if he is going to play, to be fair to himself and the Packers. That 100% commitment at his age will come much later than it did when he was 25.

The Packers as an organization have to recognize and respect that IMO. Favre has earned that much after 250+ consecutive starts. Making an "example" of Favre isn't going to change anything in the locker room, so why do it?

[The Leaper]

Why doesn't he just come right out and say what he thinks the lies are that were made to him?

Maybe he has too much respect for the organization to mention details.

The point is that he feels a level of distrust from the organization...for whatever reason. I don't see the need to take this further into the gutter and list all the juicy details publically. Thankfully, Thompson and Favre don't seem to see the reason either. The situation is bad enough for all involved as it is.

[Tarlam!]

Making an "example" of Favre isn't going to change anything in the locker room, so why do it?

I think the contrary. I think they are demonstrating management loyalty and delivering on promises. They publicly commited to the new guy. just because the legend wants to come back doesn't give them a sound reason to go back on their commitment.

That's the issue at hand here and Favre, unfortunately, doesn't give a toss about management's commitments or what anybody else thinks. He says, I am Favre and I will start here or give me my release.

But, that's not in the best interest of the Packers.

[The Leaper]

Sounds like Favre isn't exactly a guy you bring to mentor a young QB.

I don't think he is.

He's not a cerebral guy. He's an instinctive guy. Those kind of guys make poor mentors...because they rely on talents and instincts that most other guys won't have.

When you look at the QBs who go on to be coaches and mentors, they are the cerebral guys...not the instinctive guys. You ain't going to see John Elway or Brett Favre out there teaching people.

That's why NFL teams have QB coaches. It isn't Favre's job to mentor a young QB. If he can do it and likes to do it, great. Added bonus. I'm not going to be upset with Favre for not doing it though. They seemed to get along OK...and I'm guessing Favre provided insight for Rodgers in ways that he might not even recognize...just in terms of how to be a pro and how to lead.

[The Leaper]

I think the contrary. I think they are demonstrating management loyalty and delivering on promises. They publicly commited to the new guy. just because the legend wants to come back doesn't give them a sound reason to go back on their commitment.

So Rodgers is the guy regardless? If he stinks in camp, oh well. We've given him the job.

This is professional football, not amateur hour. No one is guaranteed anything.

If Favre provides the team a better chance at winning in 2008, he should be the QB. There is no other truth than that. The NFL is about WINNING, not commitments to the new guy.


That's the issue at hand here and Favre, unfortunately, doesn't give a toss about management's commitments or what anybody else thinks. He says, I am Favre and I will start here or give me my release.

No, he's saying if the Packers have moved on and are going another way, that's fine. Just give Favre his freedom to continue his career elsewhere if he so chooses...give FAVRE control of his future. He wants to play, and if Green Bay doesn't want him to play there, he feels it is unfair that they can just basically shut down his career. He feels he's done enough for the organization that they owe him the ability to move on himself if they've moved on. I agree with him.

If Thompson feels it is in the best interest of the Packers to move on, then release Favre. It doesn't matter where he ends up, because the best move for the Packers was to move on without Favre.

[Tarlam!]

This is professional football, not amateur hour. No one is guaranteed anything.

Ah. Now, there's an interesting point.

[PackerTimer]

So Rodgers is the guy regardless? If he stinks in camp, oh well. We've given him the job.

This is professional football, not amateur hour. No one is guaranteed anything.

Yet Favre thinks he should come in and be handed the starting job.

[Tarlam!]

It doesn't matter where he ends up, because the best move for the Packers was to move on without Favre.

That's plain stupid. Thompson will not allow Favre in a uniform not of his choosing and NOTHING that Favre has done for the organization says he should simply be released.

BTW, while he was doing all this for the Packers, he was earning more money than he can ever spend in a few lifetimes. The Packers have paid Favre. All debts are settled.

[The Leaper]

It doesn't matter where he ends up, because the best move for the Packers was to move on without Favre.

That's plain stupid.

I know it is stupid.

That is why you KEEP Favre and make him your starter. He's one of the 5 best QBs in the NFL. If the guy wants to play for your team, WTF do you stonewall him? To make an "example" of him? That's dumbass.

[Tarlam!]

The NFL is about WINNING, not commitments to the new guy.


And you honestly believe by breaking commitments easily management can create the environment for a winning NFL Franchise? That's just such a pathetic statement.

[The Leaper]

Yet Favre thinks he should come in and be handed the starting job.

Over a guy with zero NFL starts, zero MVP awards, and 59 career pass attempts?

I can see why.

[The Leaper]

And you honestly believe by breaking commitments easily management can create the environment for a winning NFL Franchise? That's just such a pathetic statement.

You are right. It worked out HORRIBLY for the Giants with Strahan last year.

This shit happens ALL THE TIME in the NFL...usually with players who are 1/100th the player Favre is. That is why this is a joke.

[Tarlam!]

I know it is stupid.

That is why you KEEP Favre and make him your starter. He's one of the 5 best QBs in the NFL. If the guy wants to play for your team, WTF do you stonewall him? To make an "example" of him? That's dumbass.

I think you answer it best yourself why this is not the right way:


[quote=The Leaper]This is professional football, not amateur hour. No one is guaranteed anything.

[Tarlam!]

It worked out HORRIBLY for the Giants with Strahan last year.

This shit happens ALL THE TIME in the NFL...usually with players who are 1/100th the player Favre is. That is why this is a joke.

I know nothing about what happened with the Giants. I do know we are talking about the QB and not the DE position and I would greatly differentiate.

I would be hesitant to think the Giants were as split as we are(Fans and Locker). I also don't know if they had been grooming a replacement for 3 years that they finally committed to.

I just don't know.

[The Leaper]

I know nothing about what happened with the Giants.

It is simple. Strahan rode the fence on retirement THROUGH TRAINING CAMP. The Giants ultimately welcomed him back and Strahan's dominance on the DL helped them win a title.

Claiming the position matters is ridiculous. I thought your position was that it was about the TEAM...that everyone had to pull their weight regardless.

[The Leaper]

I know it is stupid.

That is why you KEEP Favre and make him your starter. He's one of the 5 best QBs in the NFL. If the guy wants to play for your team, WTF do you stonewall him? To make an "example" of him? That's dumbass.

I think you answer it best yourself why this is not the right way:


This is professional football, not amateur hour. No one is guaranteed anything.

I did answer it. Rodgers is not guaranteed anything, nor should he be.

[Tarlam!]

No, I said commitment matters. Did the Giants commit to a 3 year trainee and say publicly "the sacks are all yours now kid, go take over our defence"?

Because that would make your comparison reasonable. Otherwise, it is just you yapping your chops like a toothless dog on a chain.

[Tarlam!]

I know it is stupid.

That is why you KEEP Favre and make him your starter. He's one of the 5 best QBs in the NFL. If the guy wants to play for your team, WTF do you stonewall him? To make an "example" of him? That's dumbass.

I think you answer it best yourself why this is not the right way:


This is professional football, not amateur hour. No one is guaranteed anything.

I did answer it. Rodgers is not guaranteed anything, nor should he be.

By the same argument, neither should Favre.

[The Leaper]

By the same argument, neither should Favre.

Fine.

So why did the Packers tell Favre he did not have the option of returning?

[Tarlam!]

By the same argument, neither should Favre.

Fine.

So why did the Packers tell Favre he did not have the option of returning?

Totally different discussion. I think you'll find a lot of support here if you start suggesting a fair camp battle. I did say and mean FAIR.

But I, for one, simply don't think that it is healthy to renege on a commitment outright.

[The Leaper]

But I, for one, simply don't think that it is healthy to renege on a commitment outright.

I don't think it is healthy to make outright commitments on starting QBs in March. The time to make that decision is the week before the first game of the season...and not before.

Who the fuck cares who the "starting QB" is in the summer?

[Tarlam!]

I don't think it is healthy to make outright commitments on starting QBs in March. The time to make that decision is the week before the first game of the season...and not before.

Who the fuck cares who the "starting QB" is in the summer?

Well, until Favre retired, we pretty much knew 365 days a year who the starter was. In retrospect, maybe TT/M3 shouldn't have opened their mouthes.

My guess is they wanted the fans and players to get accustomed to the new guy over the course of the off season. My further guess is they were interviewing vets and wanted to reassure the kid it was his job. Not wanting his confidence gnawed at.

So, I guess a lot of people might feel differently than you about who the starter is in Summer, Leap.

[The Leaper]

My guess is they wanted the fans and players to get accustomed to the new guy over the course of the off season. My further guess is they were interviewing vets and wanted to reassure the kid it was his job. Not wanting his confidence gnawed at.

It isn't "his" job until he earns it. That's the point. That's life in the NFL.

Thompson and McCarthy made a huge blunder on this one.

[Tarlam!]

My guess is they wanted to get rid of Favre. It makes more sense.

I would have agreed with that until I learned they were prepared to take him back as late as April and Favre cancelled again.

[Tarlam!]

My guess is they wanted the fans and players to get accustomed to the new guy over the course of the off season. My further guess is they were interviewing vets and wanted to reassure the kid it was his job. Not wanting his confidence gnawed at.

It isn't "his" job until he earns it. That's the point. That's life in the NFL.

Thompson and McCarthy made a huge blunder on this one.

You edited this post, didn't you!?! No matter.

It is "his" job if that's what the coach says. That's also life in the NFL. Whether they blundered, time will tell.

[sharpe1027]

I don't understand the logic behind people saying that Favre shouldn't have to compete for the starting QB spot because he is so much better than Rodgers. If that is the case, what harm can come from having a competition that he can't lose?

Personally, I think that Favre wins any competition, but at least it forces him to commit early and shows that the Packers believe in Rodgers. Nobody would fault Rodgers for getting beat out by a HoF QB.

[twoseven]

I don't understand the logic behind people saying that Favre shouldn't have to compete for the starting QB spot because he is so much better than Rodgers. If that is the case, what harm can come from having a competition that he can't lose?

Personally, I think that Favre wins any competition, but at least it forces him to commit early and shows that the Packers believe in Rodgers. Nobody would fault Rodgers for getting beat out by a HoF QB.To me this is all looking more and more like pissing off the fans and the organization IS THE PLAN to get him sent elsewhere. Asking for a release is the big bonus, they know they won't get it, but hell, why not ask, you never know. He said as much last night (about what Bus told him). Why would he whine about not getting back in only to have his convenient 'reasons' (they don't want me, i don't want to add to the circus) for not showing up in camp if they offered to let him compete for the job?

I am thinking more every day that this fiasco is too much of a hack job to kill it for Brett in GB to be just be a coincidence, getting him traded elsewhere by publically burning bridges being the ultimate goal maybe? If so, what a fucked up way of handling things. Brett's apparent loathing for TT (as evident with his unhappiness with TT's non-moves concerning Moss, Whale/Rivera, Marriuchi) appears to be at the heart of this matter..and if the timeline suggests anything it's that Brett has had some issues with how TT has done his job from day one.

[Harlan Huckleby]

That is why you KEEP Favre and make him your starter. He's one of the 5 best QBs in the NFL. If the guy wants to play for your team, WTF do you stonewall him? To make an "example" of him? That's dumbass.

We don't know if we will see the 2007 version of Favre or the 2005-2006 version. He's 39, it's not at all certain where he's at. If he were 30 years old, you would be justified in saying he is in top 5.

I don't believe you are suggesting that MM & TT are poor football guys, they certainly have proven otherwise. So that leaves the explanation that they are being petty, putting their egos ahead of good judgement.

I don't buy this. They've shown themselves to be supremely flexible in accomodating Prince Favre. There are other factors besides Favre's 2007 stats to consider: team chemistry, their perception of where Rodgers is at, risk factors associated with Favre, longterm plans. (BTW, we don't hear of teams around the NFL drooling over Favre, maybe other evaluators see risk factors too.)

I do think you make a good argument, I'm not dismissing it. But there is another valid perspective. And I give MM & TT the slack to pursue their judgement on this one.

[The Leaper]

We don't know if we will see the 2007 version of Favre or the 2005-2006 version.

I disagree. When has Favre not been highly productive when surrounded with talent? If you can point out an instance, I'll concede your point.

2005? Do you really expect Favre to light up the league throwing to guys like Taco Wallace? That year was a complete disaster due to injuries. Is it Favre's fault he was the only guy that didn't get hurt?

2006? Favre wasn't his best, but again he didn't have much to work with. The OL was a complete mess in 2006, and Favre had little time to stand in the pocket and make decisions.

[The Leaper]

BTW, we don't hear of teams around the NFL drooling over Favre, maybe other evaluators see risk factors too.

Perhaps. I think the biggest reason why Favre isn't wanted elsewhere is that there always is a period of adjustment when switching teams. It is impossible to just plug a QB into a new team and system and get instant results.

The only place where it truly makes sense for Favre to play is Green Bay. He knows the players and system. He can make the greatest impact there by far.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Sounds like Favre ought to draw a cool #1 pick in a trade. Ought to be a cinch to find an AFC trading partner.

[Sparkey]

I know nothing about what happened with the Giants.

It is simple. Strahan rode the fence on retirement THROUGH TRAINING CAMP. The Giants ultimately welcomed him back and Strahan's dominance on the DL helped them win a title.

Claiming the position matters is ridiculous. I thought your position was that it was about the TEAM...that everyone had to pull their weight regardless.

Strahan rode the fence ....

Favre RETIRED!

This is not just semantics .... He retired or more harshly worded .. Quit !

[The Leaper]

Strahan rode the fence ....

Favre RETIRED!

Strahan rode the fence DURING TRAINING CAMP.

Favre is ready to go BEFORE TRAINING CAMP.

Huge difference.

[svh1962]

We don't know if we will see the 2007 version of Favre or the 2005-2006 version.

I disagree. When has Favre not been highly productive when surrounded with talent? If you can point out an instance, I'll concede your point.

2005? Do you really expect Favre to light up the league throwing to guys like Taco Wallace? That year was a complete disaster due to injuries. Is it Favre's fault he was the only guy that didn't get hurt?

2006? Favre wasn't his best, but again he didn't have much to work with. The OL was a complete mess in 2006, and Favre had little time to stand in the pocket and make decisions.

Then why wouldn't Aaron be highly productive with the same talent that Brett had last year?

[The Leaper]

Then why wouldn't Aaron be highly productive with the same talent that Brett had last year?

Favre: 250+ starts in the NFL
Rodgers: 0 starts in the NFL

I still don't get the people who seem to think going from Favre to Rodgers is going to be some seamless, easy transition. Do you watch what happens to other teams when they make switches to inexperienced kids?