PDA

View Full Version : Favre not reinstated today (Wed), BS reasoning by the NFL



Patler
07-30-2008, 03:56 PM
No reinstatement today. How about this reasoning:

“The commissioner is taking no action today,” league spokesman Greg Aiello said in an e-mail. “He wants to give both the Packers and Brett an appropriate amount of time to make decisions, including decisions impacting the team's roster and salary cap. When Brett is reinstated by the commissioner, we will announce it.”

I bet the Packers are really agonizing over which of the 80 players to cut and how to work Favre under their $30 million in cap space!

packers11
07-30-2008, 03:58 PM
It doesn't really matter. They have no practice on thursday. I expect him to be there by Friday to start the circus. :wink:

mission
07-30-2008, 03:59 PM
Well I think there's an interesting (existing) dynamic at Quarterback ... they said they wanted three... how it will impact the roster and salary cap ...

12 million dollars impacts finances. just because there is a salary cap, doesnt mean they had planned on using all that money. the packers are a business like any business... there arent many that can drop 12 million unplanned and not have it affect something else in the organization whether its a detrimental impact or not.

even just explanation to shareholders etc...

this is kind of a non story patler (aside from the league cooperation) and im surprised you're using it to stir the pot a bit. not really like you diggin that deep.

Rastak
07-30-2008, 04:02 PM
No reinstatement today. How about this reasoning:

“The commissioner is taking no action today,” league spokesman Greg Aiello said in an e-mail. “He wants to give both the Packers and Brett an appropriate amount of time to make decisions, including decisions impacting the team's roster and salary cap. When Brett is reinstated by the commissioner, we will announce it.”

I bet the Packers are really agonizing over which of the 80 players to cut and how to work Favre under their $30 million in cap space!


Yea, that sounded like a load of crap to me too. Work out what differences? The guy has a contract, Green Bay either enforces it or cuts him. If they want to renegotiate it, then do that after he reports.


edit: Or trade him of course, how does this delay help that?

BallHawk
07-30-2008, 04:03 PM
Why drag it on even more? Unless the guys calling the shots know more than we know, I see this as counter-productive and a waste of time.

Lurker64
07-30-2008, 04:06 PM
My guess is that Goodell sees the ridiculous circus and painful melodrama that will happen if Favre goes to camp as a black eye for the league and wants to avoid it. My guess is that he will be making phone calls for the rest of today and tonight to try to keep it from happening.

cpk1994
07-30-2008, 04:07 PM
Why drag it on even more? Unless the guys calling the shots know more than we know, I see this as counter-productive and a waste of time.Look, Goodell doesn't want a circus up in Packers training camp as much TT & M3 don't. Thats why they are doing what they are doing. TO sse if a resoluton can be found first.

On a side note, that Sunday deadline really sped things up didn't it Roger?

Patler
07-30-2008, 04:19 PM
12 million dollars impacts finances. just because there is a salary cap, doesnt mean they had planned on using all that money. the packers are a business like any business... there arent many that can drop 12 million unplanned and not have it affect something else in the organization whether its a detrimental impact or not.


That's just it, Favre's return doesn't impact finances one bit until the final roster cutdown at the end of TC. Until then it is just a number in a column, the total of which can not exceed the salary cap. Not a dime of it will be spent until Favre makes their final roster. Until then, all players are paid a modest per diem, and it doesn't matter if it is Favre or the player he replaces. There is no impact until the first of the 17 weekly checks are mailed after the start of the season. So long as they get rid of him before then, it has no effect.

If the Packers were close to the salary cap on paper, they would have to make adjustments to get under it. As it is, they will have to make no adjustments at all when Favre is reinstated, because they have $30 million in space available.

Patler
07-30-2008, 04:27 PM
Yea, that sounded like a load of crap to me too. Work out what differences? The guy has a contract, Green Bay either enforces it or cuts him. If they want to renegotiate it, then do that after he reports.

edit: Or trade him of course, how does this delay help that?

The only thing the delay might do is put things back into perspective a bit. Personally, I think Goodell butting his nose into it made it difficult for the Packers to deal with other teams, who felt the Packers were under pressure from the league for a quick resolution. They probably thought a good deal could be had. In reality, so long as they can put up with whatever media circus there is, the Packers have until the final roster cutdown to make a decision.

This was interesting to me, because Goodell had implied previously that Favre would be reinstated immediately.

Lurker64
07-30-2008, 04:44 PM
This was interesting to me, because Goodell had implied previously that Favre would be reinstated immediately.

Did he say that before or after he talked to Thompson/Favre? Perhaps those conversations influenced Goodell more than the other two parties.

Tyrone Bigguns
07-30-2008, 04:51 PM
I hope the NFL fines the Packers everyday for this "holdout."

What is good for the goose should be good for the gander. :roll:

Patler
07-30-2008, 04:51 PM
This was interesting to me, because Goodell had implied previously that Favre would be reinstated immediately.

Did he say that before or after he talked to Thompson/Favre? Perhaps those conversations influenced Goodell more than the other two parties.

I have absolutely no idea.

If anything, the Murphy/Goodell relationship might have caused him to change his stance a bit. Didn't Murphy work with Goodell on some advisory committees when Murphy was working for the NFLPA?

Patler
07-30-2008, 04:52 PM
I hope the NFL fines the Packers everyday for this "holdout."

What is good for the goose should be good for the gander. :roll:

So far it is the NFL that is holding out!

Lurker64
07-30-2008, 04:52 PM
I hope the NFL fines the Packers everyday for this "holdout."

What is good for the goose should be good for the gander. :roll:

Except, right now, the ball is in the NFL's court, not Brett Favre or the Packers. The Packers can't do anything until the NFL acts, and Favre can't do anything until the Packers act. If the NFL fines itself, that doesn't accomplish much.

Sparkey
07-30-2008, 04:55 PM
12 million dollars impacts finances. just because there is a salary cap, doesnt mean they had planned on using all that money. the packers are a business like any business... there arent many that can drop 12 million unplanned and not have it affect something else in the organization whether its a detrimental impact or not.


That's just it, Favre's return doesn't impact finances one bit until the final roster cutdown at the end of TC. Until then it is just a number in a column, the total of which can not exceed the salary cap. Not a dime of it will be spent until Favre makes their final roster. Until then, all players are paid a modest per diem, and it doesn't matter if it is Favre or the player he replaces. There is no impact until the first of the 17 weekly checks are mailed after the start of the season. So long as they get rid of him before then, it has no effect.

If the Packers were close to the salary cap on paper, they would have to make adjustments to get under it. As it is, they will have to make no adjustments at all when Favre is reinstated, because they have $30 million in space available.

I wouldn't call 1,200 a week modest, but to an NFL salary I guess it is.

Tyrone Bigguns
07-30-2008, 04:59 PM
I hope the NFL fines the Packers everyday for this "holdout."

What is good for the goose should be good for the gander. :roll:

So far it is the NFL that is holding out!

I know.

I just can't wait for the NFL to reinstate...then let the fines begin. :wink:

Patler
07-30-2008, 05:05 PM
I wouldn't call 1,200 a week modest, but to an NFL salary I guess it is.

With those Hummer payments to make, jewelry to buy, etc. it goes fast!

Good point though, if they release a rookie to bring Favre in it will cost them $425/week more.

bobblehead
07-30-2008, 05:15 PM
I hope the NFL fines the Packers everyday for this "holdout."

What is good for the goose should be good for the gander. :roll:

Except, right now, the ball is in the NFL's court, not Brett Favre or the Packers. The Packers can't do anything until the NFL acts, and Favre can't do anything until the Packers act. If the NFL fines itself, that doesn't accomplish much.

IT SENDS A MESSAGE DAMMIT!!

AV David
07-30-2008, 05:18 PM
I am guessing the Commissioner is stalling for a reason. It would be a circus for Favre to come back at any time. It would be a three ring circus if he came back just in time for family night.

Monday is a lot better from a PR standpoint than is Friday.

cpk1994
07-30-2008, 05:20 PM
I am guessing the Commissioner is stalling for a reason. It would be a circus for Favre to come back at any time. It would be a three ring circus if he came back just in time for family night.

Monday is a lot better from a PR standpoint than is Friday.Less than a week of camp and they are already having the scrimmage. Boy is this gonna be an ugly night, Favre or no Favre.

cheesner
07-30-2008, 05:36 PM
I am guessing the Commissioner is stalling for a reason. It would be a circus for Favre to come back at any time. It would be a three ring circus if he came back just in time for family night.

Monday is a lot better from a PR standpoint than is Friday.Same thinking here as far as stalling. I am hoping he is stalling because a trade is imminent.

Freak Out
07-30-2008, 05:43 PM
What a load of crap...there is no reason for the commissioner to mull this over for a couple of days. Reinstate #4 and let the Packers work a deal or release him.

Freak Out
07-30-2008, 05:44 PM
Besides it would be good for the GB economy. :lol:

Rastak
07-30-2008, 07:03 PM
From ESPN blogger:

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth


No evidence of a resolution

July 30, 2008 7:53 PM

Posted by ESPN.com's Kevin Seifert

GREEN BAY, Wis. - There are no indications that the Green Bay Packers reached a truce Wednesday with quarterback Brett Favre, setting up - at least for now - a Friday showdown between the sides.

Packers president Mark Murphy departed a daylong meeting with Favre and his agent without commenting to reporters. Agent James "Bus" Cook, meanwhile, said Favre still wants to be the Packers' quarterback but indicated the team hasn't budged from its position that Aaron Rodgers is the starter.

"He would love to go back to Green Bay," Cook told reporters in Hattiesburg, Miss. "That's why he started working out. But right now it looks like he'll be the quarterback at Oak Grove [Miss.] High School."

Favre worked out at Oak Grove as recently as Wednesday morning. If NFL commissioner Roger Goodell reinstates him Thursday, Favre could be in Green Bay as early as Friday.

"We're going to do whatever Brett wants to do," Cook said. "And right now his intention is to go back to Green Bay and play football."

Packerarcher
07-30-2008, 09:00 PM
There is NO good reason for the commish to delay reinstatement after he previuosly stated that he would reinstate Brett without delay. The guy is starting to sound like a big of a snake as TT.

boiga
07-30-2008, 09:12 PM
There is NO good reason for the commish to delay reinstatement after he previuosly stated that he would reinstate Brett without delay. The guy is starting to sound like a big of a snake as TT.According to Schefter, Goodell has been in contact with Brett and is merely waiting for his go ahead to accept the reinstatement. It's sounds like Goodell's backing the NFL's money maker in this one.

cpk1994
07-30-2008, 09:14 PM
There is NO good reason for the commish to delay reinstatement after he previuosly stated that he would reinstate Brett without delay. The guy is starting to sound like a big of a snake as TT.According to Schefter, Goodell has been in contact with Brett and is merely waiting for his go ahead to accept the reinstatement. It's sounds like Goodell's backing the NFL's money maker in this one.Brett already sent it in. If he is backing Favre, what is he waiting for?

AV David
07-30-2008, 09:17 PM
"The guy is starting to sound like a big of a snake as TT."

Packerarcher:

Yesterday I asked you why you so intensely disliked TT from the moment he was hired, even before he first sat down at his desk. You said you viewed TT as a snake from the moment he was hired. Now you are calling TT a snake again. Please tell us. Inquiring minds want to know.

Why did you have so much animosity for a guy you didn't know and who had not yet had time to do anything to piss you off?

boiga
07-30-2008, 09:20 PM
Brett already sent it in. If he is backing Favre, what is he waiting for?
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d8099eb81

Schefter says he's just waiting for a phone call from Favre. Considering that a lot of Schefter's info on this one is coming from the Favre camp, that should be accurate.

MJZiggy
07-30-2008, 09:28 PM
I am guessing the Commissioner is stalling for a reason. It would be a circus for Favre to come back at any time. It would be a three ring circus if he came back just in time for family night.

Monday is a lot better from a PR standpoint than is Friday.Less than a week of camp and they are already having the scrimmage. Boy is this gonna be an ugly night, Favre or no Favre.

Why would you think it's gonna be ugly? The guys have been working all offseason...

AV David
07-31-2008, 07:14 AM
Has anyone seen Packerarcher?

He is AWOL.

cpk1994
07-31-2008, 07:47 AM
Has anyone seen Packerarcher?

He is AWOL.look up about 6 posts.

Packerarcher
07-31-2008, 08:16 AM
"The guy is starting to sound like a big of a snake as TT."

Packerarcher:

Yesterday I asked you why you so intensely disliked TT from the moment he was hired, even before he first sat down at his desk. You said you viewed TT as a snake from the moment he was hired. Now you are calling TT a snake again. Please tell us. Inquiring minds want to know.

Why did you have so much animosity for a guy you didn't know and who had not yet had time to do anything to piss you off?

Did you ever see not even meet someone that you just get a bad vibe from,I get that from TT. I have always had this "gut" feeling about him,not just when the Favre fiasco started. I have heard him speak about players having ethics and truth and such. Well maybe someone should slide a mirror under that old snakes belly and he should stare into it long and hard before he starts to lecture young players about truth and ethics. Now on the whole Brett thing it's just the straw that broke the camels back with me as far as TT. Blame Brett on this all you want but in a world of sports where every other athlete is throwing fits and holding out for more money when most of them MAY not be worth it. HERE WE have a PRO BOWL QB,that doesn't want more money,or a better parking space,or anything outrageous. OH MY GOD HE WANTS TO PLAY, a pro athlete an icon at that wants only to play,no I WANT MORE MONEY,just give me my helmet and lets win some fuckin football games. Pretty simple right there when the guy has been doing it quite effectively for 16 seasons. So yes I hate TT for deals he has fucked up in the past,fa'sthat he has made little or no effort to sign and also I hated him from the start. But I have absolutely no problem saying that the Favre fiasco and the Grant deal to a little lesser extent has made me even more of a TT hater. Even if TT announced later today that he realized how much of an idiot he has been and to field the best team for 08 he is going to start Favre I would still hate TT nor would I trust him. I hope this helps answer your question.

AV David
07-31-2008, 01:28 PM
Packerarcher really said: " ...I have always had this "gut" feeling about him ... I hated him from the start"


I am sorry but that is bizarre. Think about it: PA knows little to nothing about a person, but immediately hates him because of a "gut feeling."

He wasn't "skeptical" from the beginning.

He wasn't "concerned" or even "apprehensive" from the beginning.

He hated someone he didn't know anything about.

Packerarcher tell me the truth, were you or were you not a big Mike Sherman enthusiast? That is the only benign explanation I can come up with. All the rest are kind of scary.

I am not saying this just to take a shot at you. It is just so difficult to understand this visceral hatred of someone you didn't even know.

boiga
07-31-2008, 01:34 PM
packer archer's gone for the next few weeks to move to Wyoming, so don't expect a response, AVD.