Sherm deserves a nod for saving Favre & the fans this ci

[gureski]

A thought occurred to me today regarding the Favre retirement circus. I'm hearing this morning on the news about some JS poll that has 80+ percent of fans saying they'd like to see Favre traded. People left and right are filling air time by ripping Favre and demanding he make a decision. Fans are irate and were irate less then a month after the season ended. Former and current players (and broadcasters) are lining up to call Favre selfish and take shots at him. All this and Favre hasn't missed a single team workout or hampered the teams ability to function in any way. If anything, he's urged the team to get better and put some, albeit little, external pressure on Thompson to pull the trigger on some FA moves.

Back on track though....all that is going on because of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy.

Think about it. Mike Sherman shielded the fans and Favre from having this retirement decision turn into the media circus that it's become. Last year Sherman stated right up front that he wanted Favre to stay away. He took the heat for that decision. In hindsight, Favre was going through the same decision process last year that he is going through this year yet it never reached the fever pitch because Sherman headed all that off by letting the heat stop with him. Sherman brushed aside suggestions about Favre's retirement decision last year and played it up with a positive spin and humor.

In contrast, Thompson and McCarthy, to me, add fuel to the fire by pushing all the heat onto Favre. When the press comes running for stories and they push the press towards Favre.....well....connect the dots. They don't want the heat and they don't want to protect Favre from that heat. They directed the media towards Favre instead of stopping the story before it became one. Why not push the deadline on that bonus back months right off the bat instead of nickel and diming it with week or two week extensions?

The point I'm making is that Thompson and McCarthy could've done alot more to squelch this retirement circus before it every started. They could've given Favre a more quiet and less pressured environment to make his decision. From where I'm sitting, I don't think they care and that bothers me. It bothers me because they should care and they should be taking the heat up front. It's their job. Favre is the face of the franchise. What good has it done to the organization's image and Favre's image for things to have gone down this way?

And why have things gone down this way? Because the Packers didn't have someone running interference the way Sherman did for Favre last year. Think what you will of Sherman and whether he deserved to be fired but realize that he saved the Packers and Favre this retirement circus over the past couple seasons.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Thompson was the GM last year.

I don't think McCarthy is asking any more from Favre than Sherman--other than wanting him at mini-camp. I think that's the right course of action. It sets a good example for the rest of the team (I thought it was a dumb move by Sherman), and he's installing his offense. McCarthy is in a tough situation. This has drug out a lot longer than last year, so it's different. Last year, Favre made a decision at the start of FA, and that gave the team enough time to find a replacement if he didn't come back. That being said, if Favre wants to take his time, then so be it. I just don't think this says anything about McCarthy or Thompson.

[Patler]

Thompson was the GM last year.

I don't think McCarthy is asking any more from Favre than Sherman--other than wanting him at mini-camp. I think that's the right course of action. It sets a good example for the rest of the team (I thought it was a dumb move by Sherman), and he's installing his offense. McCarthy is in a tough situation. This has drug out a lot longer than last year, so it's different. Last year, Favre made a decision at the start of FA, and that gave the team enough time to find a replacement if he didn't come back. That being said, if Favre wants to take his time, then so be it. I just don't think this says anything about McCarthy or Thompson.

I agree Harvey, and perhaps TT realized because of things we are not privy to that hands-off treatment of Favre was not a good thing for the team as a whole. Maybe it isn't good for Favre either, as evidenced by his growing undisciplined play under Sherman.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think the situation is different this year, in that Favre and the Packers are coming off a terrible season. Favre sounds much more likely to retire now, you didn't hear Favre talk about the team being non-competitive in previous offseasons. Sherman had good reason to not set deadlines, it smoothed Favre's likely return.

I'm sorry that talk of trading Favre has turned into some sort of punshment, that's really lousy. I think trading Favre is a good idea both for Favre and the Packers, but only if Favre can be convinced to go with it.

[Rastak]

Thompson was the GM last year.

I don't think McCarthy is asking any more from Favre than Sherman--other than wanting him at mini-camp. I think that's the right course of action. It sets a good example for the rest of the team (I thought it was a dumb move by Sherman), and he's installing his offense. McCarthy is in a tough situation. This has drug out a lot longer than last year, so it's different. Last year, Favre made a decision at the start of FA, and that gave the team enough time to find a replacement if he didn't come back. That being said, if Favre wants to take his time, then so be it. I just don't think this says anything about McCarthy or Thompson.


I agree, he needs to be at minicamp for the reasons you stated. I also agree McCarthy is in a tough spot...a rookie coach who doesn't know if his HOF QB is coming back or not, all the while preparing two plans for FA and the draft....neither TT or McCarthy will admit that of course. Hey McCarthy has been given a tremdous opportunity by TT. Although it's a tough situation I'm sure he'll give it his all.

I don't agree on the so be it. I think McCarthy would be better off seeing what he has in Rodgers in year one....maybe that's the big elephant on the table that Favre, TT and McCarthy are sitting around but because of his stature no one wants to talk about it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Who are the Packer QB's for the May minicamp if Favre isn't onboard?

AFAIK, just Aaron Rodgers is on the roster. You have to beleive that a QB taken in the draft is a sure thing. But even then, don't college players have to finish school?

[gureski]

Thompson was the GM last year.

I don't think McCarthy is asking any more from Favre than Sherman--other than wanting him at mini-camp. I think that's the right course of action. It sets a good example for the rest of the team (I thought it was a dumb move by Sherman), and he's installing his offense. McCarthy is in a tough situation. This has drug out a lot longer than last year, so it's different. Last year, Favre made a decision at the start of FA, and that gave the team enough time to find a replacement if he didn't come back. That being said, if Favre wants to take his time, then so be it. I just don't think this says anything about McCarthy or Thompson.

I agree Harvey, and perhaps TT realized because of things we are not privy to that hands-off treatment of Favre was not a good thing for the team as a whole. Maybe it isn't good for Favre either, as evidenced by his growing undisciplined play under Sherman.

I'd like to respond to both guys comments...

First, Thompson had just came aboard last year and Sherman had already, in his capacity as coach, begun taking the heat off Favre. This is the first year Thompson had his shot at doing this with no Sherman in the picture to run interference and what has he done? He's shoved all attention back at Favre. The nickel and dime deadline changes did nothing but bring fans and the media to a fever pitch on this issue and cause over-coverage. As soon as Thompson saw that it was unlikely Favre would have a decision by the first deadline he should've bumped it back by a couple months by his own suggestion to head off the circus that ensued. He didn't need to conduct this openly in the media......especially Thompson...a guy who is secretive about everything. Why is he so up front and public about the Favre issue?

You say Favre made his decision earlier last year but the fact is that he wasnt' badgered last year like he's been this year. He had time to himself to think it out and make his decision away from the cameras. This year, from the very start...less then a month after the season ended....the spotlight has been pushed onto Favre and management has done nothing to take that spotlight away. In some ways....via the short bonus extensions...comments to the media...they've added fuel to the fire and increased the scrutiny. Had Favre had a solid month to himself in private....maybe he'd have made a decision already? Unless you don't think the media's scrutiny and overcoverage has affected Favre's ability to just sit back and think this over at his own pace, you can't say that more private time wouldn't have helped Favre make a decision already.

I do give props to Sherman for what he did for Favre last year by protecting h im from this crap circus. What good has been done to the organization's image and that of Favre himself for things to be like they are right now? Is it good for the franchise to have Favre badmouthed on National TV and radio every day? Is it good for the franchise for the guy who will be the face of the franchise for the next 30 years to be painted at as a selfish player? Sherman's move last year ran interference and kept the retirement story from being the circus it is this year. That was a good thing. In hindsight, it's clear that Sherman's decision

And on the other comments made regarding the old regime's 'hands-off' approach to Favre and how they're realing him in now ... That's ridiculous and if the management of this team is treating Favre in the way you describe then my biggest fears about the team losing their status as one of the top franchises in the NFL is occurring before my eyes. If Thompson and McCarthy can't recognize what Favre means to the Packers, the fans, and the NFL as a whole and treat him with the respect he has earned......if they caused this whole thing to try and show Favre that they're going to be tough on him then they're the biggest idiots in the NFL. You've got a QB who is about to eclipse some major QB records and is the key to your team being competative next year....he's a sure-fire hall-of-famer....and you're going to send him a signal that you don't want him back or that you are wanting to go hard on him?

If that's the case then tell me if you think it's been worth it because now the face of the Packers....one of the top faces of the entire NFL is being trashed on a daily basis on National television and radio and for what? Because he's making up his mind as to whether he wants to play for people that are sending him messages that they either don't want him or want to go hard on him in his final year?

Bottom line, management is doing nothing to help take the heat off Favre. They're doing nothing to allow him the quiet time....out of the spotlight....to make his decision. Management could've in the past and can right now do more to stop this circus.

[mraynrand]

I think if you look at the history of Sherman with regard to Favre, it has been a history of protecting Favre. Sherman was the guy to place a premium on protecting Favre from pressure in the pocket - either through keeping intact a solid offensive line or through concentrating on the run. One thing that seems constantly glossed over with Favre was the fact that Sherman started as coach in Favre's 10th year in the league (9th with the Packers). The guy had already played a ton of football and was certainly getting older. The second part was the injury suffered in 2002. The Packers were 8-1 in 2002 before all the injuries, and if you watch the tape carefully - even if you watch the way Favre has warmed up ever since the Redskins game in 2002, you will notice he is not delivering the ball the same way. Sherman understood this. Sherman also understood the mental wear and tear of 14 years in the NFL. Despite all the problems Sherman coached Favre to a year in 2004 that was statistically almost identical to 1997, Favre's last MVP season, despite an awful 'supporting' defense. Why am I writing this? To applaud the two things Sherman did very well - protect Favre and design a great offense.

I really don't think McCarthy and Thompson are doing anything all that terrible. It's their team and Thompson is rebuilding. I don't see anything wrong with Favre taking a bunch of time either. If he quits, I'm certain Rodgers will be prepared by McCarthy and Thompson will bring in a veteran and draft a number 3 guy. If he stays, Thompson will still draft the number 3 guy but probably not bring in a veteran back-up.

The bottom line is there's no harm either way.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't think they have two plans of attack because of Favre. That has more to do with Rodgers. I don't know why that is hard to understand. Favre has no long-term bearing on this team. The fact he was coming back last year didn't seem to affect their draft board. They took Rodgers. Favre's future is even less of an influence on this draft. If they feel Rodgers is the answer, they won't take a QB. If they aren't sure, they they will (and should) think long and hard about taking a QB. That will be a direct reflection on Rodgers and on how they feel this crop of QBs grades out.

[HarveyWallbangers]

You say Favre made his decision earlier last year but the fact is that he wasnt' badgered last year like he's been this year

Who says the team has badgered Favre? The media? Fans? Arm-chair GMs? Everything that has come from the coach or GM has shown they are being very patient with him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If they feel Rodgers is the answer, they won't take a QB. If they aren't sure, they they will (and should) think long and

It is not a yes/no question. They may think very highly of Rodgers, but still want to develop another QB. Look at all the decent QBs that were developed behind Favre. You always need a backup plan.

[gureski]

You say Favre made his decision earlier last year but the fact is that he wasnt' badgered last year like he's been this year

Who says the team has badgered Favre? The media? Fans? Arm-chair GMs? Everything that has come from the coach or GM has shown they are being very patient with him.

As of today...what can you say Thompson or McCarthy have done to squash the Favre retirement circus?

The multiple short deadline extensions did more to call attention to the story in the media and with the fans then they did to squash the story.

The constant 'ball is in his court' comments that direct the attention back to Favre have not taken the heat off Favre.

Can we not agree that this circus would be different today if Thompson and/or McCarthy had come out in front of the cameras and stated that this is not a big deal and that Favre taking time to decide isn't affecting the team's decisions or holding the team back? Wouldnt' it have helped take pressure off Favre if the coach and GM had both highlighted the fact that they don't even have team workouts scheduled til May and thus Favre taking time right now is no big deal?

Had Thompson and McCarthy done more to squash this story...and they could've...then it wouldnt' be the circus it is today. Their job is to do what's best for the franchise. I ask you whether the current media circus is best for this franchise right now? Is it in the best interests of this franchise and for the man who is the heir apparent to Bart Starr as the face of the franchise to be repeatedly trashed and painted as selfish? ....is it in the best interest of the franchise for things to have gone down the way they have thus far?

It didn't have to be this way. Thompson and McCarthy could've done what Sherman did....they could've kept this circus from coming to town. As it stands...they didn't and the image of the franchise and the image of Favre are sufferring because of it. IF in the end Favre reacts negatively to this pressure and hangs up the cleats.....then the fans will suffer too as a result of their decision.

[MJZiggy]

You say Favre made his decision earlier last year but the fact is that he wasnt' badgered last year like he's been this year

Who says the team has badgered Favre? The media? Fans? Arm-chair GMs? Everything that has come from the coach or GM has shown they are being very patient with him.I think sitting on a couple of hundred acres in rural Mississippi affords Favre the opportunity to shut the media out when he feels he needs to. He may very well be enjoying baseball season and completely ignoring what our impatient, idiotic national media has to say about him. Does he even feel the heat? Does TT feel any of the heat for his FA decisions. I doubt they truly care too much about what is being said. I think at his golf tournament Favre made a very clear statement that said 'just because you ask the question doesn't mean I'll give you the answer.' Perhaps that's why he let them all come and told them they were wasting their time.

He is talking with TT and M3. I think at the beginning of the season they said 'no deadline' and have reiterated that point innumerable times. I don't see where they've done anything wrong. Favre knows they want him back. They didn't throw him under a bus, but I don't think M3 sees the need to stand in for him and speak for him either. He does that well himself. He's a big boy. He can either deal with it or ignore it, my money's on the latter.

mraynrand, welcome to the forum. Always great to see new faces and fresh ideas. (and, might I add, that's a very cool avatar).

[gureski]

Let's make it short and simple...

IF you could choose...would you prefer for the Favre retirement story to be handled the way it was last year?...low key....low pressure...you hardly saw Favre. No negative affects to the franchise's image or that of Favre...

OR

Would you rather have things go down the way they have thus far this year where Favre (and the Packers organization) are being trashed left and right by every idiot with a pen or microphone? the constant scrutiny...the short bonus extensions...press conferences at charity golf outings...

Which way would you prefer to have things...if you could choose?

I dare you to say you wouldn't prefer things to have gone down more like the first option. If you choose option one then you have to ask why Option one worked? If you ask that question then I think you will eventually stumble upon Mike Sherman as the "X" factor. Sherman did us all a favor by taking the heat over Favre last year. I wish McCarthy and Thompson would start doing the same and save us all this crap.

[gureski]

You say Favre made his decision earlier last year but the fact is that he wasnt' badgered last year like he's been this year

Who says the team has badgered Favre? The media? Fans? Arm-chair GMs? Everything that has come from the coach or GM has shown they are being very patient with him.I think sitting on a couple of hundred acres in rural Mississippi affords Favre the opportunity to shut the media out when he feels he needs to. He may very well be enjoying baseball season and completely ignoring what our impatient, idiotic national media has to say about him. Does he even feel the heat? Does TT feel any of the heat for his FA decisions. I doubt they truly care too much about what is being said. I think at his golf tournament Favre made a very clear statement that said 'just because you ask the question doesn't mean I'll give you the answer.' Perhaps that's why he let them all come and told them they were wasting their time.

He is talking with TT and M3. I think at the beginning of the season they said 'no deadline' and have reiterated that point innumerable times. I don't see where they've done anything wrong. Favre knows they want him back. They didn't throw him under a bus, but I don't think M3 sees the need to stand in for him and speak for him either. He does that well himself. He's a big boy. He can either deal with it or ignore it, my money's on the latter.

mraynrand, welcome to the forum. Always great to see new faces and fresh ideas. (and, might I add, that's a very cool avatar).

Last year people were wondering where Favre was? YOu didn't see him or hear from him. Sherman was the point man for communication on that front and he downplayed the entire issue and stated up front that nothing was expected from Favre til Training Camp.

Thompson and McCarthy have not done that. They've not poo-poo'd the story the way Sherman did. They've consistantly given 'the ball is in his court' comments to the media which in-turn flare the situation and send the cameras flocking towards Favre.

The short term bonus extensions instead of one long extension right off the bat also was a huge mistake that brought the story up every couple weeks instead of burying it. A direct result of the short-term extensions is that the media got to revisit the story every couple weeks.

What can anyone say Thompson or McCarthy have done to squash the hype around the Favre retirement story? Can anyone think of anything they've done to squash the story or take the legs out from under the story the way Sherman did for Favre last year?

Finally....this past week...they pushed the bonus extension back to the start of training camp. That's the first thing they've done to squash the story and it came after multiple short term extensions threw gas on the fire.

[MJZiggy]

Thompson and McCarthy have not done that. They've not poo-poo'd the story the way Sherman did. They've consistantly given 'the ball is in his court' comments to the media which in-turn flare the situation and send the cameras flocking towards Favre.

I'm sure he's got a shotgun on the farm and the new pup will learn to guard the perimeter well. Hattiesburg, I'm sure also has a fine PD that would be more than willing to charge the press with tresspassing should they become a nuisance.



What can anyone say Thompson or McCarthy have done to squash the hype around the Favre retirement story? Can anyone think of anything they've done to squash the story or take the legs out from under the story the way

Brett could also have squashed the story. He's a big boy. He can well take care of himself.

[Patler]

And on the other comments made regarding the old regime's 'hands-off' approach to Favre and how they're realing him in now ... That's ridiculous.

OK, fine gureski, a statement I make as a POSSIBLE factor because of things we may not know as fans is ridiculous, and only your opinions have any value. I did not ridicule your opinion, just agreed with anothers opinion, and offered another thought. Why must you ridicule my thoughts (By the way, when you have time, look up the meaning of the phrase "pompous jerk".) However, since that is how you wish to debate:

1. We have no way of knowing what other players thought about Favre being excused from off season camps. To think perhaps we do... is naive.

2. Pinning the blame for this offseason circus on MM and TT ... That's just plain stupid. It ignores the facts in front of your face. Favre is as much responsible as anyone for creating it by continually responding with elaborate statements about his "indecision". Favre has been more public about this whole thing than either MM or TT. Favre has put them in the spot of HAVING to be public about it because Favre has been so public about it.

3. Your comments on the bonus situation ... just plain ridiculous. Postponing a bonus is a proposal to "take away" from the player. That should come from the player, not the team. Why didn't Favre propose moving the bonus back immediately? The team can't do it unilaterally.

4. Blaming TT for focusing the spotlight on Favre ... that's dumb. Favre attracts the spotlight all by himself by continually and frequently blaming TT for Favre's own indecision, forcing writers and commentators to give time to the "what has TT done to entice Favre to return" stories. Favre is hurting the image of the Packers right now more than any other individual. As you stated, Favre is the face of the Packers. What has Favre done as the face of the Packers? He has told the press that many players are not worthy to play with him. He has criticised the organization that has paid him handsomely and surrounded him with decent players every year except last year when injuries were a big part of what happened.

The bottom line is that Favre his damaging his own image, not because he hasn't made a decision, but by his own statements about his teammates and his very open criticism of the organization. This situation would not have arisen if he had simply avoided the elaborate answers he has given.

Favre is doing an immense disservice to the organization by trashing them in the press after the team has supported him tremendously throughout his career.

[gureski]

And on the other comments made regarding the old regime's 'hands-off' approach to Favre and how they're realing him in now ... That's ridiculous.

OK, fine gureski, a statement I make as a POSSIBLE factor because of things we may not know as fans is ridiculous, and only your opinions have any value. I did not ridicule your opinion, just agreed with anothers opinion, and offered another thought. Why must you ridicule my thoughts (By the way, when you have time, look up the meaning of the phrase "pompous jerk".) However, since that is how you wish to debate:

1. We have no way of knowing what other players thought about Favre being excused from off season camps. To think perhaps we do... is naive.

2. Pinning the blame for this offseason circus on MM and TT ... That'is just plain stupid. It ignores the facts in front of your face. Favre is as much responsible as anyone for creating it by continually responding with elaborate statements about his "indecision". Favre has been more public about this whole thing than either MM or TT. Favre has put them in the spot of HAVING to be public about it because Favre has been so public about it.

3. Your comments on the bonus situation ... just plain ridiculous. Postponing a bonus is a proposal to "take away" from the player. That should come from the player, not the team. Why didn't Favre propose moving the bonus back immediately? The team can't do it unilaterally.

4. Blaming TT for focusing the spotlight on Favre ... that's dumb. Favre attracts the spotlight all by himself by continually and frequently blaming TT for Favre's own indecision, forcing writers and commentators to give time to the "what has TT done to entice Favre to return" stories. Favre is hurting the image of the Packers right now more than any other individual. As you stated, Favre is the face of the Packers. What has Favre done as the face of the Packers? He has told the press that many players are not worthy to play with him. He has criticised the organization that has paid him handsomely and surrounded him with decent players every year except last year when injuries were a big part of what happened.

The bottom line is that Favre his damaging his own image, not because he hasn't made a decision, but by his own statements about his teammates and his very open criticism of the organization. This situation would not have arisen if he had simply avoided the elaborate answers he has given.

Favre is doing an immense disservice to the organization by trashing them in the press after the team has supported him tremendously throught his career.

First off, put my full comments up there so that the word 'ridiculous' is in proper context. I didnt' try to insult you but I'm not above that, if the situation calls for it. I hate it when guys like you go off on me and then proceed to do the same things you accused me of doing. You called some of my ideas dumb and stupid above. Should I cry about that? You called me dumb...boo hoo. Just get over it. If I was going to insult you I'd come right out and do it by calling you an idiot. And if I did call you an idiot at some point that doesn't mean anything deep...okay? Don't be so damn sensitive.

On to the meat of your comments...

1. Other players feelings towards Sherman giving Favre the time to decide last year have nothing to do with the topic I'm talking about. I never inferred anything about other players feelings. You're out in left field on this one.

2. and some 4. My assertion is that there wouldn't have been countless interviews and stories ..aka this circus... if McCarthy and THompson had downplayed and squashed the story from the start. In reality, All they did was shove the focus back onto Favre time and time again which caused the media to keep fishing at Favre. If Thompson and/or McCarthy did what Sherman did last year....and simply downplayed the situation and asserted that Favre not making a public decision now does nothing negative to the team....that would've helped kill the story. There's no juicy story if management says Favre isn't hurting the team and that they don't need to hear anything from him til May or June, is there now? The point is that there was a different...proven way to handle this and the current Packers brass chose otherwise. That's their mistake.

3. Favre was rather clear in public comments that he would not have an answer by the time each short-term deadline came around. He was sure of that much and only that much so why wasn't the deadline moved farther back right away? Are you saying Favre wanted the short term deadlines? He knew he didn't have a decision and yet somehow asked for short deadlines? Would that scenerio make any sense? And even if he was..(which I don't believe) asking for short extensions....the money isn't paid out til fall or winter. Why not, from the management standpoint, request the issue be wiped out via a long extension? Why keep going with short extensions? This is absolutely a management issue. It's their money.

4. You've got to be kidding me if you are going to really state that you cant' think of anything that Favre has done for the Packers and their image? You can't make that case so don't even go there. Just admit you got wrapped up in arguing. It happens to all of us.

Furthermore, can you tell me exactly what comments Favre has made that criticized the organization? Or can you tell me exactly what comments you're talking about when you stated that Favre told the media that certain players aren't worthy of playing with him? I don't recall Favre taking an anti-team stance or anti-organization stance at all. Not with his words. People may have blown his comments into something that you talk of but Favre himself hasnt' criticized the organization in the fashion you suggest.

And last but not least...Favre isn't destroying his image or the teams image. I ask again for you to lay out all these negative comments and statements that you keep alluding to. I don't know of any. Saying you want the team to be the best it can be isn't a negative. Saying you want to win is not a negative. Saying you want the team to improve is not a negative or a cut on anyone. Maybe you know something I dont or maybe you don't realize that Favre's actual comments...word for word...are not scathing attacks on the organization.

I go back to the topic I brought up.... and I ask you whether Thompson and McCarthy have done ANYTHING to squash the circus that has become the Favre retirement story? Can you bring up anything that they've done to quiet this story and downplay it and take the feet out from under the story? Favre has consistantly said he's unsure. He told people to go watch baseball and stop thinking about him. Why can't Thompson and McCarthy do the same? If they did....it would kill the underlying juice to the story and the circus would go away. The juice in the story of Favre's retirement involves his ability to co-exist and his relationship with Thompson. That's what the reporters are chasing. That relationship and its dynamics are what the reporters are hungry for. If that were taken away.....the media would sit and wait for Favre to call a press-conference to announce his decision. Sherman understood that the GM and coach needed to shield Favre and the organization from the media circus. Thompson and McCarthy obviously dont' get that.

[swede]

I decided a few weeks ago not to let the Favre retirement thing bother me anymore. Mostly this is the media doing what they do. Partly Brett is at fault for linking his decision to what the team will do in FA and the draft. Brett gets into trouble like this because he is way more honest than smart.

I'm happy if he stays.

I'm happy if he's traded to Tampa Bay or the Raiders or New Orleans before the draft for at least a 2nd, but I really don't see that happening. He'd only do this if he felt he really needed another SB ring and he didn't care where it came from. I don't think he feels that way and I don't hink he wants to learn a new offense.

I'm happy for him if he retires. The legend for me was only partly about the arm and the winning. It was always about what a neat, refreshing, and honest personality he brought to professional sports. And he was ours.

[Patler]

And on the other comments made regarding the old regime's 'hands-off' approach to Favre and how they're realing him in now ... That's ridiculous.

OK, fine gureski, a statement I make as a POSSIBLE factor because of things we may not know as fans is ridiculous, and only your opinions have any value. I did not ridicule your opinion, just agreed with anothers opinion, and offered another thought. Why must you ridicule my thoughts (By the way, when you have time, look up the meaning of the phrase "pompous jerk".) However, since that is how you wish to debate:

1. We have no way of knowing what other players thought about Favre being excused from off season camps. To think perhaps we do... is naive.

2. Pinning the blame for this offseason circus on MM and TT ... That'is just plain stupid. It ignores the facts in front of your face. Favre is as much responsible as anyone for creating it by continually responding with elaborate statements about his "indecision". Favre has been more public about this whole thing than either MM or TT. Favre has put them in the spot of HAVING to be public about it because Favre has been so public about it.

3. Your comments on the bonus situation ... just plain ridiculous. Postponing a bonus is a proposal to "take away" from the player. That should come from the player, not the team. Why didn't Favre propose moving the bonus back immediately? The team can't do it unilaterally.

4. Blaming TT for focusing the spotlight on Favre ... that's dumb. Favre attracts the spotlight all by himself by continually and frequently blaming TT for Favre's own indecision, forcing writers and commentators to give time to the "what has TT done to entice Favre to return" stories. Favre is hurting the image of the Packers right now more than any other individual. As you stated, Favre is the face of the Packers. What has Favre done as the face of the Packers? He has told the press that many players are not worthy to play with him. He has criticised the organization that has paid him handsomely and surrounded him with decent players every year except last year when injuries were a big part of what happened.

The bottom line is that Favre his damaging his own image, not because he hasn't made a decision, but by his own statements about his teammates and his very open criticism of the organization. This situation would not have arisen if he had simply avoided the elaborate answers he has given.

Favre is doing an immense disservice to the organization by trashing them in the press after the team has supported him tremendously throught his career.

First off, put my full comments up there so that the word 'ridiculous' is in proper context. I didnt' try to insult you but I'm not above that, if the situation calls for it. I hate it when guys like you go off on me and then proceed to do the same things you accused me of doing. You called some of my ideas dumb and stupid above. Should I cry about that? You called me dumb...boo hoo. Just get over it. If I was going to insult you I'd come right out and do it by calling you an idiot. And if I did call you an idiot at some point that doesn't mean anything deep...okay? Don't be so damn sensitive.

On to the meat of your comments...

1. Other players feelings towards Sherman giving Favre the time to decide last year have nothing to do with the topic I'm talking about. I never inferred anything about other players feelings. You're out in left field on this one.

2. and some 4. My assertion is that there wouldn't have been countless interviews and stories ..aka this circus... if McCarthy and THompson had downplayed and squashed the story from the start. In reality, All they did was shove the focus back onto Favre time and time again which caused the media to keep fishing at Favre. If Thompson and/or McCarthy did what Sherman did last year....and simply downplayed the situation and asserted that Favre not making a public decision now does nothing negative to the team....that would've helped kill the story. There's no juicy story if management says Favre isn't hurting the team and that they don't need to hear anything from him til May or June, is there now? The point is that there was a different...proven way to handle this and the current Packers brass chose otherwise. That's their mistake.

3. Favre was rather clear in public comments that he would not have an answer by the time each short-term deadline came around. He was sure of that much and only that much so why wasn't the deadline moved farther back right away? Are you saying Favre wanted the short term deadlines? He knew he didn't have a decision and yet somehow asked for short deadlines? Would that scenerio make any sense? And even if he was..(which I don't believe) asking for short extensions....the money isn't paid out til fall or winter. Why not, from the management standpoint, request the issue be wiped out via a long extension? Why keep going with short extensions? This is absolutely a management issue. It's their money.

4. You've got to be kidding me if you are going to really state that you cant' think of anything that Favre has done for the Packers and their image? You can't make that case so don't even go there. Just admit you got wrapped up in arguing. It happens to all of us.

Furthermore, can you tell me exactly what comments Favre has made that criticized the organization? Or can you tell me exactly what comments you're talking about when you stated that Favre told the media that certain players aren't worthy of playing with him? I don't recall Favre taking an anti-team stance or anti-organization stance at all. Not with his words. People may have blown his comments into something that you talk of but Favre himself hasnt' criticized the organization in the fashion you suggest.

And last but not least...Favre isn't destroying his image or the teams image. I ask again for you to lay out all these negative comments and statements that you keep alluding to. I don't know of any. Saying you want the team to be the best it can be isn't a negative. Saying you want to win is not a negative. Saying you want the team to improve is not a negative or a cut on anyone. Maybe you know something I dont or maybe you don't realize that Favre's actual comments...word for word...are not scathing attacks on the organization.

I go back to the topic I brought up.... and I ask you whether Thompson and McCarthy have done ANYTHING to squash the circus that has become the Favre retirement story? Can you bring up anything that they've done to quiet this story and downplay it and take the feet out from under the story? Favre has consistantly said he's unsure. He told people to go watch baseball and stop thinking about him. Why can't Thompson and McCarthy do the same? If they did....it would kill the underlying juice to the story and the circus would go away. The juice in the story of Favre's retirement involves his ability to co-exist and his relationship with Thompson. That's what the reporters are chasing. That relationship and its dynamics are what the reporters are hungry for. If that were taken away.....the media would sit and wait for Favre to call a press-conference to announce his decision. Sherman understood that the GM and coach needed to shield Favre and the organization from the media circus. Thompson and McCarthy obviously dont' get that.

Why do I have to quote your entire post? I copied the entire phrase in which you stated what was ridiculous, "And on the other comments made regarding the old regime's 'hands-off' approach to Favre and how they're realing him in now ... That's ridiculous." Your direct words.

Yes, I called your comments, "naive", "ridiculous" and 'stupid". Did you not perceive my purpose in doing that? Did you not read my statement, "However, since that is how you wish to debate:" I was treating your remarks with the same disdain you gave mine. Get it????

I guess it is proper for Gureski to call Shamrockfans comment "ridiculous" but not for Shamrockfan to return the favor.

[Rastak]

I'm not sure how much more Thompson and McCarthy could shut down the story. The firestorm starts everything someone talks to Favre...they don't ask anyones permission. I think the majority of folks believe Favre has basically stated unless Green Bay is a better team, I don't want to be involved. I'm paraphrasing but it's been the general tone.


I don't think anyone really though he'd quit last year so I'm not sure the media persued it as hard.

[Patler]

1. Other players feelings towards Sherman giving Favre the time to decide last year have nothing to do with the topic I'm talking about. I never inferred anything about other players feelings. You're out in left field on this one.

2. and some 4. My assertion is that there wouldn't have been countless interviews and stories ..aka this circus... if McCarthy and THompson had downplayed and squashed the story from the start. In reality, All they did was shove the focus back onto Favre time and time again which caused the media to keep fishing at Favre. If Thompson and/or McCarthy did what Sherman did last year....and simply downplayed the situation and asserted that Favre not making a public decision now does nothing negative to the team....that would've helped kill the story. There's no juicy story if management says Favre isn't hurting the team and that they don't need to hear anything from him til May or June, is there now? The point is that there was a different...proven way to handle this and the current Packers brass chose otherwise. That's their mistake.

3. Favre was rather clear in public comments that he would not have an answer by the time each short-term deadline came around. He was sure of that much and only that much so why wasn't the deadline moved farther back right away? Are you saying Favre wanted the short term deadlines? He knew he didn't have a decision and yet somehow asked for short deadlines? Would that scenerio make any sense? And even if he was..(which I don't believe) asking for short extensions....the money isn't paid out til fall or winter. Why not, from the management standpoint, request the issue be wiped out via a long extension? Why keep going with short extensions? This is absolutely a management issue. It's their money.

4. You've got to be kidding me if you are going to really state that you cant' think of anything that Favre has done for the Packers and their image? You can't make that case so don't even go there. Just admit you got wrapped up in arguing. It happens to all of us.

Furthermore, can you tell me exactly what comments Favre has made that criticized the organization? Or can you tell me exactly what comments you're talking about when you stated that Favre told the media that certain players aren't worthy of playing with him? I don't recall Favre taking an anti-team stance or anti-organization stance at all. Not with his words. People may have blown his comments into something that you talk of but Favre himself hasnt' criticized the organization in the fashion you suggest.

And last but not least...Favre isn't destroying his image or the teams image. I ask again for you to lay out all these negative comments and statements that you keep alluding to. I don't know of any. Saying you want the team to be the best it can be isn't a negative. Saying you want to win is not a negative. Saying you want the team to improve is not a negative or a cut on anyone. Maybe you know something I dont or maybe you don't realize that Favre's actual comments...word for word...are not scathing attacks on the organization.

I go back to the topic I brought up.... and I ask you whether Thompson and McCarthy have done ANYTHING to squash the circus that has become the Favre retirement story? Can you bring up anything that they've done to quiet this story and downplay it and take the feet out from under the story? Favre has consistantly said he's unsure. He told people to go watch baseball and stop thinking about him. Why can't Thompson and McCarthy do the same? If they did....it would kill the underlying juice to the story and the circus would go away. The juice in the story of Favre's retirement involves his ability to co-exist and his relationship with Thompson. That's what the reporters are chasing. That relationship and its dynamics are what the reporters are hungry for. If that were taken away.....the media would sit and wait for Favre to call a press-conference to announce his decision. Sherman understood that the GM and coach needed to shield Favre and the organization from the media circus. Thompson and McCarthy obviously dont' get that.

Re:

1. It has everything to do with the topic, because it might explain the difference in handling this year, and consequently the error in Sherman's handling previously. Less reason to give credit to Sherman for what he did.

2&4. Actually TT and MM have made those types of statements, time and time again. There was an entire article a week ago with TT saying Favre is not hurting them MM too. My assertion is that Favre's actions on several fronts is what has kept the circus rolling. If he wouldn't continually shove the blame for his decision on TT's actions, it would soon die down.

#3. I'm not saying he wanted short deadlines, but the proposal should have come from him.

#4. The comment was directed at his actions this offseason, which is wht your original discussion was about. Favre has done much more harm to the organization this offseason with his comments than the good he has done during that same period.

He's called out his linemen,per a quote in another thread on here last week. I asked the same question you asked, and someone provided the answer referencing the article in which he said it.

He was quoted as saying to the effect "Have they signed anyone" in what was presented as a sarcastic comment by him.

He called this team as being closer to 4-12 than to a winning record, I heard that in one of his interviews.

My asserion is that TT and MM can not stop the fire of controversy, because Favre keeps feeding it. I referenced there attempts in "2&4" above.

[MJZiggy]

I think the part that a lot of people are forgetting is that this is a story that does not take a lot to feed. Brett farts in a press conference and it makes national news. The blame oftentimes lies with neither Brett nor TT and M3.

Let's take a look at my new nemesis, John Clayton. He told Brett Favre before the SuperBowl that he wanted to interview him for a story about Matt Hasselbeck, Brett's former backup. As Hass and Brett are frends, he agreed. I defy anyone to go back through that interview or the ensuing article and find a single reference to Matt Hasselbeck. After a few days, Clayton again gave us all his "expert" opinion based on the interview we all saw and starting the whole firestorm up again. A week or so later, Clayton was on again spouting more bull, based on, (guess what) that same interview. The rest of the media, not to be scooped, (did what) quoted Clayton since they didn't have the direct quotes from Favre. Check about 2 weeks after the SuperBowl and you will find Clayton quoted everywhere, not Favre. So Brett speaks once and the story carries for more than a month, torn apart, shredded analyzed and put back together to say what everyone wanted to say (Oh my God, he doesn't want the ball with 2 minutes left--he should retire). He did not speak again until the Havel interview a week or so ago where he directly answered every question he was asked and said nothing except in response to the questions and because it was so direct, got little play. However, when he spoke at the golf outing, he said why he was hesitating. Let's remember he was asked. These are the only times I can even think of that he said ANYthing to the media at all. The media just has the habit of thinking,"well, it's a slow news day, what can the Packers possibly do to make Favre do something and make a story? That is what they then write about. The circus is an ESPN invention because they are not creative enough to come up with new things to write about for their football page.

[gureski]

"Yes, I called your comments, "naive", "ridiculous" and 'stupid". Did you not perceive my purpose in doing that? Did you not read my statement, "However, since that is how you wish to debate:" I was treating your remarks with the same disdain you gave mine. Get it????

I guess it is proper for Gureski to call Shamrockfans comment "ridiculous" but not for Shamrockfan to return the favor"

end quote

Now I'm calling you an idiot. You were offended that I would dare call something you said 'ridiculous' yet you had no problem jumping in yourself and calling my ideas dumb, stupid, and ect... The point that you obviously don't get is that you had no problem stooping to that low level of which you painted me and therefore you yourself are proven to not be above that.

Whether you realized it or not, you took a stance as if you're above such behavior and then proceeded to engage in such behavior. I believe the word is hypocrite.

[gureski]

"1. It has everything to do with the topic, because it might explain the difference in handling this year, and consequently the error in Sherman's handling previously. Less reason to give credit to Sherman for what he did. "

end quote

It has nothing to do with the topic. Your point is 100% speculation. Can you name any players on the team that said they were ticked that Favre didn't have to go to last years mini-camps? No, you can't. You made up a fact to support your stance.

"2&4. Actually TT and MM have made those types of statements, time and time again. There was an entire article a week ago with TT saying Favre is not hurting them MM too. My assertion is that Favre's actions on several fronts is what has kept the circus rolling. If he wouldn't continually shove the blame for his decision on TT's actions, it would soon die down. "

end quote

I disagree with you and I'm calling on you to Stop going generic and talk about the specific comments in which Favre blames his decision on Thompson's actions and the specific comments or statements that you say McCarthy and Thompson have made time and time again... I missed that. Enlighten me. You name one article to support the statement of 'time and time and time again'. If there are so many, as you say, you should have an easy time finding them to quote.

"#3. I'm not saying he wanted short deadlines, but the proposal should have come from him. "

end quote

How do you know it didn't? I do know that management didn't want to pay him til he made a decision. I know Favre was pretty up front and honest about not being ready to meet the deadlines set in front of him. If he wasnt' ready to make a decision then why would he ask for a 1 week extension? It doesn't make sense. Regardless that ...management DID know that they didnt' want to pay him til he decided and they DID know he wasnt' ready to decide so why not do the smart thing and delay the bonus for a couple months instead of a week here and a couple weeks there? It doesn't make sense, does it?

"#4. The comment was directed at his actions this offseason, which is wht your original discussion was about. Favre has done much more harm to the organization this offseason with his comments than the good he has done during that same period.

He's called out his linemen,per a quote in another thread on here last week. I asked the same question you asked, and someone provided the answer referencing the article in which he said it.

He was quoted as saying to the effect "Have they signed anyone" in what was presented as a sarcastic comment by him.

He called this team as being closer to 4-12 than to a winning record, I heard that in one of his interviews.

My asserion is that TT and MM can not stop the fire of controversy, because Favre keeps feeding it. I referenced there attempts in "2&4" above"

end quotes

And once again you say all this stuff with nothing to back it up. No quotes...no reference to specific interviews... You just say things. You quoted a bunch of stuff I said but left out the part where I challenged you to include specifics. If you have nothing than say so. I do not see one single shred of proof from you where Favre criticized his teammates by name. I don't see a single area where Favre ripped the organization. These are things you said happened. Show me.

[Rastak]

"1. It has everything to do with the topic, because it might explain the difference in handling this year, and consequently the error in Sherman's handling previously. Less reason to give credit to Sherman for what he did. "

end quote

It has nothing to do with the topic. Your point is 100% speculation. Can you name any players on the team that said they were ticked that Favre didn't have to go to last years mini-camps? No, you can't. You made up a fact to support your stance.

"2&4. Actually TT and MM have made those types of statements, time and time again. There was an entire article a week ago with TT saying Favre is not hurting them MM too. My assertion is that Favre's actions on several fronts is what has kept the circus rolling. If he wouldn't continually shove the blame for his decision on TT's actions, it would soon die down. "

end quote

I disagree with you and I'm calling on you to Stop going generic and talk about the specific comments in which Favre blames his decision on Thompson's actions and the specific comments or statements that you say McCarthy and Thompson have made time and time again... I missed that. Enlighten me. You name one article to support the statement of 'time and time and time again'. If there are so many, as you say, you should have an easy time finding them to quote.

"#3. I'm not saying he wanted short deadlines, but the proposal should have come from him. "

end quote

How do you know it didn't? I do know that management didn't want to pay him til he made a decision. I know Favre was pretty up front and honest about not being ready to meet the deadlines set in front of him. If he wasnt' ready to make a decision then why would he ask for a 1 week extension? It doesn't make sense. Regardless that ...management DID know that they didnt' want to pay him til he decided and they DID know he wasnt' ready to decide so why not do the smart thing and delay the bonus for a couple months instead of a week here and a couple weeks there? It doesn't make sense, does it?

"#4. The comment was directed at his actions this offseason, which is wht your original discussion was about. Favre has done much more harm to the organization this offseason with his comments than the good he has done during that same period.

He's called out his linemen,per a quote in another thread on here last week. I asked the same question you asked, and someone provided the answer referencing the article in which he said it.

He was quoted as saying to the effect "Have they signed anyone" in what was presented as a sarcastic comment by him.

He called this team as being closer to 4-12 than to a winning record, I heard that in one of his interviews.

My asserion is that TT and MM can not stop the fire of controversy, because Favre keeps feeding it. I referenced there attempts in "2&4" above"

end quotes

And once again you say all this stuff with nothing to back it up. No quotes...no reference to specific interviews... You just say things. You quoted a bunch of stuff I said but left out the part where I challenged you to include specifics. If you have nothing than say so. I do not see one single shred of proof from you where Favre criticized his teammates by name. I don't see a single area where Favre ripped the organization. These are things you said happened. Show me.


I heard the 4-12 12-4 comment too...I heard the whole press conference but didn't take it down shorthand. He also gave a backhanded shot at his lineman...basically said "we lost guys and didn't replace them, not to say anything about the guys we have, they play hard and want to win". I'm paraphrassing but it is essentially what he said. Gureski, did you watch his press conference or read the last two interviews he did? I'm sure there are more than just Shamrock which will vouch for what he basically said.

[Rastak]

"1. It has everything to do with the topic, because it might explain the difference in handling this year, and consequently the error in Sherman's handling previously. Less reason to give credit to Sherman for what he did. "

end quote

It has nothing to do with the topic. Your point is 100% speculation. Can you name any players on the team that said they were ticked that Favre didn't have to go to last years mini-camps? No, you can't. You made up a fact to support your stance.

"2&4. Actually TT and MM have made those types of statements, time and time again. There was an entire article a week ago with TT saying Favre is not hurting them MM too. My assertion is that Favre's actions on several fronts is what has kept the circus rolling. If he wouldn't continually shove the blame for his decision on TT's actions, it would soon die down. "

end quote

I disagree with you and I'm calling on you to Stop going generic and talk about the specific comments in which Favre blames his decision on Thompson's actions and the specific comments or statements that you say McCarthy and Thompson have made time and time again... I missed that. Enlighten me. You name one article to support the statement of 'time and time and time again'. If there are so many, as you say, you should have an easy time finding them to quote.

"#3. I'm not saying he wanted short deadlines, but the proposal should have come from him. "

end quote

How do you know it didn't? I do know that management didn't want to pay him til he made a decision. I know Favre was pretty up front and honest about not being ready to meet the deadlines set in front of him. If he wasnt' ready to make a decision then why would he ask for a 1 week extension? It doesn't make sense. Regardless that ...management DID know that they didnt' want to pay him til he decided and they DID know he wasnt' ready to decide so why not do the smart thing and delay the bonus for a couple months instead of a week here and a couple weeks there? It doesn't make sense, does it?

"#4. The comment was directed at his actions this offseason, which is wht your original discussion was about. Favre has done much more harm to the organization this offseason with his comments than the good he has done during that same period.

He's called out his linemen,per a quote in another thread on here last week. I asked the same question you asked, and someone provided the answer referencing the article in which he said it.

He was quoted as saying to the effect "Have they signed anyone" in what was presented as a sarcastic comment by him.

He called this team as being closer to 4-12 than to a winning record, I heard that in one of his interviews.

My asserion is that TT and MM can not stop the fire of controversy, because Favre keeps feeding it. I referenced there attempts in "2&4" above"

end quotes

And once again you say all this stuff with nothing to back it up. No quotes...no reference to specific interviews... You just say things. You quoted a bunch of stuff I said but left out the part where I challenged you to include specifics. If you have nothing than say so. I do not see one single shred of proof from you where Favre criticized his teammates by name. I don't see a single area where Favre ripped the organization. These are things you said happened. Show me.


I heard the 4-12 12-4 comment too...I heard the whole press conference but didn't take it down shorthand. He also gave a backhanded shot at his lineman...basically said "we lost guys and didn't replace them, not to say anything about the guys we have, they play hard and want to win". I'm paraphrassing but it is essentially what he said. Gureski, did you watch his press conference or read the last two interviews he did? I'm sure there are more than just Shamrock which will vouch for what he basically said.

[Patler]

"Yes, I called your comments, "naive", "ridiculous" and 'stupid". Did you not perceive my purpose in doing that? Did you not read my statement, "However, since that is how you wish to debate:" I was treating your remarks with the same disdain you gave mine. Get it????

I guess it is proper for Gureski to call Shamrockfans comment "ridiculous" but not for Shamrockfan to return the favor"

end quote

Now I'm calling you an idiot. You were offended that I would dare call something you said 'ridiculous' yet you had no problem jumping in yourself and calling my ideas dumb, stupid, and ect... The point that you obviously don't get is that you had no problem stooping to that low level of which you painted me and therefore you yourself are proven to not be above that.

Whether you realized it or not, you took a stance as if you're above such behavior and then proceeded to engage in such behavior. I believe the word is hypocrite.

No the word is PARODY or perhaps even SARCASM. Look at how I presented it. I used the same format you used, including "(statement) ... (characterization)" and even the same phraseology when it was within the realm of reasonable grammer.

[Patler]

"1. It has everything to do with the topic, because it might explain the difference in handling this year, and consequently the error in Sherman's handling previously. Less reason to give credit to Sherman for what he did. "

end quote

It has nothing to do with the topic. Your point is 100% speculation. Can you name any players on the team that said they were ticked that Favre didn't have to go to last years mini-camps? No, you can't. You made up a fact to support your stance.

Of course it is speculation, why do you think I wrote, "perhaps TT realized because of things we are not privy to that hands-off treatment of Favre was not a good thing for the team as a whole. Maybe it isn't good for Favre either, as evidenced by his growing undisciplined play under Sherman.

Its called an opinion, which really is all that your initial post was.

[Patler]

I disagree with you and I'm calling on you to Stop going generic and talk about the specific comments in which Favre blames his decision on Thompson's actions and the specific comments or statements that you say McCarthy and Thompson have made time and time again... I missed that. Enlighten me. You name one article to support the statement of 'time and time and time again'. If there are so many, as you say, you should have an easy time finding them to quote.

Article of 4/11 entitled, "Thompson: Favre isn't holding up the team"

From article of April 1, ""Anything as far as preparation of our team, particularly on the offensive side of the ball, will not be affected by this decision," McCarthy said Friday." (referring to Favre's decision.

From March 31 - "Friday afternoon, Thompson said he was OK with that." (Referring to Favre's statement that he would not have an answer by the weekend.

Also from March 31 - "Said Thompson: "I think Brett's just going through a decision-making process and all along I felt like he'll come up with a decision when he comes up with it. To gnash your teeth over it really doesn't do any good so we just try to go about our business."

That's just in the last few weeks

[MJZiggy]

I hate when perfectly good Clayton bashing gets ignored. :sad:

[Patler]

"

"#3. I'm not saying he wanted short deadlines, but the proposal should have come from him. "

How do you know it didn't? I do know that management didn't want to pay him til he made a decision. I know Favre was pretty up front and honest about not being ready to meet the deadlines set in front of him. If he wasnt' ready to make a decision then why would he ask for a 1 week extension? It doesn't make sense. Regardless that ...management DID know that they didnt' want to pay him til he decided and they DID know he wasnt' ready to decide so why not do the smart thing and delay the bonus for a couple months instead of a week here and a couple weeks there? It doesn't make sense, does it?

Ignoring the SPECULATION on your part, the date is actually somewhat irrelevant because it is accrued on the initial date, but he has to be on a roster in December for it to be paid. Thus, if he retires, it is never paid. One article implied that the only difference the date makes is it would have to be paid if accurued even if he is traded and not playing for the Packers.

It is more appropriate for Favre to offer moving it because it is potentially taking money away from him. His agent may (speculation!!!) have been unwilling to agree to the big move initially as not being in Favre's best interest.

[Patler]

#4. The comment was directed at his actions this offseason, which is wht your original discussion was about. Favre has done much more harm to the organization this offseason with his comments than the good he has done during that same period.

He's called out his linemen,per a quote in another thread on here last week. I asked the same question you asked, and someone provided the answer referencing the article in which he said it.

He was quoted as saying to the effect "Have they signed anyone" in what was presented as a sarcastic comment by him.

He called this team as being closer to 4-12 than to a winning record, I heard that in one of his interviews.

My asserion is that TT and MM can not stop the fire of controversy, because Favre keeps feeding it. I referenced there attempts in "2&4" above"

end quotes

And once again you say all this stuff with nothing to back it up. No quotes...no reference to specific interviews... You just say things. You quoted a bunch of stuff I said but left out the part where I challenged you to include specifics. If you have nothing than say so. I do not see one single shred of proof from you where Favre criticized his teammates by name. I don't see a single area where Favre ripped the organization. These are things you said happened. Show me.

April 8:
"So what’s going on up there?" Favre asked. "What are they doing? Have they signed anybody?"

"Thompson has stuck to his guns in building the team in a more traditional way - through the college draft - and hasn’t brought in anyone of significance on offense through free agency and trades. Given that the free agent market has pretty much gone dry, there isn’t much Favre can hope for in regard to outside help.
"Reminded of that fact, Favre said, "It may be over then, huh? I’m sort of thinking that right now. I don’t know."

"But he (Favre) made it clear that he doesn’t want to come back to a hopeless situation."

March 31:

"Favre told reporters Thursday at a charity event in Mississippi that if he didn't like the direction the team is headed, he will not return."

" Favre said. "If I don't tell them by Saturday, what will they do, cut me? We have talked the last month and there are some things that I have to sort out. If they don't come together, I guess I won't play. I don't know if my decision will be made by Saturday."

"But there are some things I have to sort out. There are some things I'm looking for in the team and what they're trying to do. I guess if those don't come together, I guess I won't play. It's just kind of wait and see.”

[retailguy]

No the word is PARODY or perhaps even SARCASM. Look at how I presented it. I used the same format you used, including "(statement) ... (characterization)" and even the same phraseology when it was within the realm of reasonable grammer.

I believe the word is "grammar"..... :wink:


But, in all, I do appreciate the debate guys. From a dyed in the wool Sherman supporter, I see points on both sides of the aisle. Sherman was a much better political animal than Thompson will ever be. It is just not his make-up. If Thompson is a better evaluator of talent then perhaps this has been a good switch at the top. I agree wholeheartedly with guerski's point, Sherman had no problem taking the criticism and focus of the questions last season and the season before. Remember last year when Favre basically said that Sherm talked him out of retiring in 03?

Shamrock, I cannot disagree with you when you say that Favre is damaging his own "legacy". He appears to be a spoiled BRAT at the moment. Most of the things he accused JW of last season, he is now guilty of, if we have a clear picture of what the current situation actually is.

As I've stated before, I think the decision has already been made. I think that the NFL has shown us, via the schedule, that Favre is playing. If Favre doesn't play, the NFL has cost itself a TON of money by showcasing the Packers last regular season game on NFL network. If Favre is NOT going to play, then who the hell is going to watch that game? Besides us true packer fans, no one else will care less. They'll want to see the looming playoff matchups, and even with Brett, that is not likely us this season. Think about it.

Ziggy - Clayton is a PUTZ. Not even worth responding to. :roll:

[MJZiggy]

I completely agree that Clayton is, as you put it, a PUTZ, but in the context of a media-based argument in this situation, it is worth noting his role in fueling the frenzy and speculation. He has zero credibility with me, but he sure did take advantage of Favre this offseason didn't he (thus causing a lot of these arguments)? I don't blame Favre or Thompson. I blame Clayton.

[gureski]

Shamrock....

Do you realize that I don't consider anything you wrote (that Favre said) to be diragatory towards the team or negative? I don't. You want to see negative or diragatory then go see J.Walker's latest comments on how he will never play here again or Owens comments about his last two teams. That's negative...that's diragatory... Owens rips teammates.

Everything Favre said was true and none of it was directed at individuals. He didn't call anyone out and he didn't flame anyone the way you said he did. He made some observations that happen to be true and he didn't single out anyone on the team in the form of players. He talked about generic positions and the desire for the team to improve. Why is that anti-team? Furthermore, it's all true so why is it wrong to say it so long as he doesn't attack anyone or call people out in the media? He hasnt' called out any linemen or teammates. He hasn't even mentioned Thompson by name when talking about whether the team signed anyone. He says...did 'THEY' sign anyone yet 'UP THERE'.

I'm not going to continue the point by point because you're off in your own little world on some of those. Half the crap you wrote has nothing to do with what I was talking with. You were responding to my points when we started this. Now you're seemingly staking claim to your right to state your opinion on things I didn't comment on. Go nuts in those areas. I don't care. If I see something and have time...I'll chime in but my fight right now concerns whether or not Thompson and McCarthy have done anything to shield Favre from the situation that has turned into a circus today. I don't think they have in the same way Sherman did in the past. You obviously not only feel that they shouldnt' have to, you feel Favre is the cause of it. I'm completely on the other end of the spectrum. It could've been managed better and that would've turned out better for the organization, the fans, Favre, and the entire NFL.

[Patler]

Shamrock....

Do you realize that I don't consider anything you wrote (that Favre said) to be diragatory towards the team or negative? I don't. You want to see negative or diragatory then go see J.Walker's latest comments on how he will never play here again or Owens comments about his last two teams. That's negative...that's diragatory... Owens rips teammates.

Everything Favre said was true and none of it was directed at individuals. He didn't call anyone out and he didn't flame anyone the way you said he did. He made some observations that happen to be true and he didn't single out anyone on the team in the form of players. He talked about generic positions and the desire for the team to improve. Why is that anti-team? Furthermore, it's all true so why is it wrong to say it so long as he doesn't attack anyone or call people out in the media? He hasnt' called out any linemen or teammates. He hasn't even mentioned Thompson by name when talking about whether the team signed anyone. He says...did 'THEY' sign anyone yet 'UP THERE'.

I'm not going to continue the point by point because you're off in your own little world on some of those. Half the crap you wrote has nothing to do with what I was talking with. You were responding to my points when we started this. Now you're seemingly staking claim to your right to state your opinion on things I didn't comment on. Go nuts in those areas. I don't care. If I see something and have time...I'll chime in but my fight right now concerns whether or not Thompson and McCarthy have done anything to shield Favre from the situation that has turned into a circus today. I don't think they have in the same way Sherman did in the past. You obviously not only feel that they shouldnt' have to, you feel Favre is the cause of it. I'm completely on the other end of the spectrum. It could've been managed better and that would've turned out better for the organization, the fans, Favre, and the entire NFL.

No, I was not responding to your posts. Don't flatter yourself. My initial post was in response to Harvey. My entire post was:

"HarveyWallbangers wrote:
Thompson was the GM last year.

I don't think McCarthy is asking any more from Favre than Sherman--other than wanting him at mini-camp. I think that's the right course of action. It sets a good example for the rest of the team (I thought it was a dumb move by Sherman), and he's installing his offense. McCarthy is in a tough situation. This has drug out a lot longer than last year, so it's different. Last year, Favre made a decision at the start of FA, and that gave the team enough time to find a replacement if he didn't come back. That being said, if Favre wants to take his time, then so be it. I just don't think this says anything about McCarthy or Thompson."


"I agree Harvey, and perhaps TT realized because of things we are not privy to that hands-off treatment of Favre was not a good thing for the team as a whole. Maybe it isn't good for Favre either, as evidenced by his growing undisciplined play under Sherman."

Notice, I did not mention you, did no refer to your arguments at all. I was referring to Harvey.

Favre's backhanded criticism of the team and it's GM are certainly not team-building. Publicly criticising your employer, even if there is truth in what you say, is not a good thing to do, especially in a very public, fan-fanatic business like pro-sports. What positive thing for the team can come out of Favre's comments.

Sherman really didn't have to do much to protect Favre. Favre decided within a reasonable time, and other than a few comments about thinking about retiring, Favre really did not say much before making his announcement. Contrast that with his comments this year in which he gave some very clear indications that retirement was more likely than not (His infamous comment about not being sure if he wants the ball) In the interview that was supposed to be about Hasselbeack before the Super Bowl he really sounded like a guy who was retiring. Then, essentially saying things that sound like it's up to GB to make enough changes for it to be worth his time to come back got everything going before anyone had a chance to even think about the situation.

If Favre had simply kept a lower profile, this would not be what it is. He has mostly brought it on himself.

It really isn't hard to interpret Favre's quotes about who "they" have signed to realize "they" means TT. Who else would it be?? He once referenced the departures of Wahle and Rivera and referred to the replacements. Can you really argue that this was not a comment about specific players, namely Whittaker, Klemm and Wells? Again, who else would it be?

I'm not arguing my right to state an opinion. You started this whole thing with your opinion/interpretation of the situation, but then tried to discredit me for having given an opinion. You are the one out in left field.

BTW, why no response from you on the TT and MM quotes in which they have tried to take the pressure off Favre?

[Patler]

By the way, my "point by points" were in specific response to remarks you made in preceding postings. I did it that way because you suggested that I was avoiding responding to you statements. I did it that way to make it clear I was avoiding nothing.

[gureski]

"No, I was not responding to your posts. Don't flatter yourself. My initial post was in response to Harvey"

end quote

Who is pompous and arrogant now? I didn't realize you had a private party going there on this open forum. If you didn't notice, the topic was started by me expressing some thoughts about this topic. I was kind of part of things....I guess next time I should try to remember that some of you have your own private club going. I keep forgetting that and then I start thinking this is an open forum.

"BTW, why no response from you on the TT and MM quotes in which they have tried to take the pressure off Favre?"

end quote

I said I don't agree with you. Your quotes are meaningless. They show nothing. Through your view, I can see why you'd think a generic statement means something. To me, it's pushing the ball back into Favre's court. Also, your quotes are from the past few weeks. Show me quotes from them in January and February and March (not the last day in March) where they squash the story. You can't squash the story the last week in March and first week in April when it's at a fire pace. When you make statements to squash the story after you've let it become a beast then that's called damage control. You'd have to cut it off in Jan or Feb to make a difference, wouldnt' you? So, go back to the drawing board and show me how McCarthy and Thompson were squashing this story back in Jan and Feb. What I heard and saw from them were constant comments that pushed the ball back into Favre's court. At no time did I see them take it on their shoulders the way Sherman did for Favre in the past.

I can't figure out what's more intriguing to me about you...

It's either:

1. That you think we're in a pissing match of some sorts as opposed to some friendly debate

or

2. That everything you've accused me of doing to you on a personal basis (being rude...arrogant...pompous...a jerk) are things that you've proceeded to engage in yourself. You've even one-up'd it by referring to yourself in the third person at one point.

I know you say you're just proving a point to me or something but that in itself is a pompous stance, isnt' it? The idea that you're the designated person to put me in my place and you're going to try and utilize my format and language to show me how it feels? But I'm self bloated in my view of myself? If you want to put me in my place via the facts on an issue then by all means....you should. We all share that responsibility. When it comes to personality and such....nobody designated you the board personality police. If you don't like my writing and tone then don't read me. To decide that you're just the man to put me in my place is arrogant and pompous on your part. It appears that's part of your goal in our conversations.

I was just jawing with you about football. You became offended. I'm still not really fired up right now. If you've ever read me before you know this isn't fired up. I'm more perplexed by you. I don't get it. If you just want to have a knock-down, drag out debate/fight then I can do that. Right now, I'm just talking football with you. So...I guess what I'm trying to say is that this fight isn't a two-way fight right now. Calm down and have some fun with me. If it's not fun for you then maybe you should stop.

[swede]

Gentlemen,

This was a good heated discussion. Up until the point that eyes start getting gouged out a good fight is always fun to watch.

Gureski, as I have told you in the past, I think you are above average in the information and argumentation department. I have had two disagreements with you--one was on Nall and the other regarding whether or not forum posters were trying to be stylish in believing that TT would trade down. In both cases I had begun to regret arguing with you because my mother taught me that it is more important to be kind than right and tempers seemed to be flaring.

It seems clearer to me now that you like a good posting brawl and nothing personal is meant in the exchange.

Unless, of course, I am wrong and you really do think I am a dick rather than simply posting like a dick. Apologies if that is the case.

[Patler]

"No, I was not responding to your posts. Don't flatter yourself. My initial post was in response to Harvey"

end quote

Who is pompous and arrogant now? I didn't realize you had a private party going there on this open forum. If you didn't notice, the topic was started by me expressing some thoughts about this topic. I was kind of part of things....I guess next time I should try to remember that some of you have your own private club going. I keep forgetting that and then I start thinking this is an open forum.

"BTW, why no response from you on the TT and MM quotes in which they have tried to take the pressure off Favre?"

end quote

I said I don't agree with you. Your quotes are meaningless. They show nothing. Through your view, I can see why you'd think a generic statement means something. To me, it's pushing the ball back into Favre's court. Also, your quotes are from the past few weeks. Show me quotes from them in January and February and March (not the last day in March) where they squash the story. You can't squash the story the last week in March and first week in April when it's at a fire pace. When you make statements to squash the story after you've let it become a beast then that's called damage control. You'd have to cut it off in Jan or Feb to make a difference, wouldnt' you? So, go back to the drawing board and show me how McCarthy and Thompson were squashing this story back in Jan and Feb. What I heard and saw from them were constant comments that pushed the ball back into Favre's court. At no time did I see them take it on their shoulders the way Sherman did for Favre in the past.

I can't figure out what's more intriguing to me about you...

It's either:

1. That you think we're in a pissing match of some sorts as opposed to some friendly debate

or

2. That everything you've accused me of doing to you on a personal basis (being rude...arrogant...pompous...a jerk) are things that you've proceeded to engage in yourself. You've even one-up'd it by referring to yourself in the third person at one point.

I know you say you're just proving a point to me or something but that in itself is a pompous stance, isnt' it? The idea that you're the designated person to put me in my place and you're going to try and utilize my format and language to show me how it feels? But I'm self bloated in my view of myself? If you want to put me in my place via the facts on an issue then by all means....you should. We all share that responsibility. When it comes to personality and such....nobody designated you the board personality police. If you don't like my writing and tone then don't read me. To decide that you're just the man to put me in my place is arrogant and pompous on your part. It appears that's part of your goal in our conversations.

I was just jawing with you about football. You became offended. I'm still not really fired up right now. If you've ever read me before you know this isn't fired up. I'm more perplexed by you. I don't get it. If you just want to have a knock-down, drag out debate/fight then I can do that. Right now, I'm just talking football with you. So...I guess what I'm trying to say is that this fight isn't a two-way fight right now. Calm down and have some fun with me. If it's not fun for you then maybe you should stop.


I never said you weren't a part of things, couldn't repond. You said about me, and I quote, "You were responding to my points when we started this." I simply respondd that no, I did not start this by esponding to you. I responded to Harvey. If anything was "started" between us, it was started by you when you summarized my statement and called it "ridiculous". Thereafter I simply responded to your other comments about my statements.

You keep changing your requirements of me for supporting my position. First you asked:

"I ask you whether Thompson and McCarthy have done ANYTHING to squash the circus that has become the Favre retirement story? Can you bring up anything that they've done to quiet this story and downplay it and take the feet out from under the story?"

You asked for "ANYTHING", so I referenced the recent article. You changed your request to:

"I disagree with you and I'm calling on you to Stop going generic and talk about the specific comments in which Favre blames his decision on Thompson's actions and the specific comments or statements that you say McCarthy and Thompson have made time and time again... I missed that. Enlighten me. You name one article to support the statement of 'time and time and time again'. If there are so many, as you say, you should have an easy time finding them to quote."

In response to your request for more than one, I searched backward to March 31, identified 4 for you. Of course you again change your request, now demanding:

"So, go back to the drawing board and show me how McCarthy and Thompson were squashing this story back in Jan and Feb."

You can twist words all you want; however, I have given you what you asked for each time, so you simply changed what you consider a proper reply to your argument. After all, you intially asked for "ANYTHING". Can you actual say that I did not give that to you?

I do not think we are in "a pissing match". I thought we were now simply responding to each others.

How does one time referring to myself as Shamrockfan one-up anything? In that statement I also referred to you as "Gureski" It is simply a literary approach that is used quite often. It was a relatively short post (for us!), referring to "you" and "your" or "I" and "mine" throughout the entire post until the last sentence in which I referred to "Gureski" and "Shamrock" by stating,"I guess it is proper for Gureski to call Shamrockfans comment "ridiculous" but not for Shamrockfan to return the favor." I do not understand how that "one-up'd" anything.

Where do you get the idea that I think I am "designated" for anything. What I have done has nothing to do with arrogance or pomposity. I have simply used a common debate technique. Respond to the other with their approach, but in support of your own arguments. It seems to be working, because you do come across to me as frustrated with it. You have ceased making points, have provided little if anything in support of your own arguments and have twisted in the wind in your own defense.

By the way, I'm thoroughly enjoying myself. All I have done is responded to your exact statements time and time again, regardless of how you have changed your position.

[Patler]

Oh, almost forgot! For your requst, Gureski, for earlier evidence of GB trying to dillute the Favre firestorm:

A writers opinion, Jan. 25, 2006:

"Thompson's low-key approach and McCarthy's coyness are understandable.

They don't want a media circus. They don't want to create an expectation among fans that a summit meeting is going to take place in Hattiesburg, where some huge announcement is going to be issued from a podium next to Favre's sit-down mower."


More efforts by GB to water-down the controversy, Jan. 30, 2006:

"The latest act in this ongoing production came when Favre, Green Bay's legendary quarterback, told ESPN on Sunday, "Right now if I had to pick, if someone said make a damn decision and live with it, I would say I'm not coming back."

Monday, Packers officials weren't planning for life after Favre. Instead, they reiterated that Favre didn't have to make a decision now. And most thought there was still at least a 50-50 chance the 36-year-old Favre would return.

"Let's not read too much into it," Green Bay President Bob Harlan said. "We'll just wait and see what happens."

'Said new coach Mike McCarthy: "I'm not into soap operas, daytime or nighttime. He's a Hall of Fame quarterback. He deserves the time to sit down with his family and make a decision. And that's where we are. And I'm perfectly comfortable with that."


Remember too that Favre actually started the controversy all the way back in November, long before the season ended, with his comment about not wanting to learn a new offense and seemingly putting his support behind Sherman. Supporting Sherman was a good thing in my opinion, but even hinting that his return to GB was somehow connected to Sherman guaranteed the start of an off-season media circus. It was not a smart interview by Favre. His off-season comments (which I referred to above) continually revive the controversy.