What should the Packers do if Favre returns?

[twoseven]

but the object is still to win, and if your best chance at that is Favre and he wants to come back, let him.

The object should be to win AND make sure that trend continues the year after, and the next, etc. If throwing Brett back in there means AR is alienated even further to the point that he'll wave bye bye to GB when he's a FA in a couple years, what did we gain be hanging on with Favre? A trip to the SB would justify the gamble, or a 100% from AR that he's ok to sit on the bench for yet another season. The odds of those? Is it worth the damage it could cause for 09', 10' 11'?

[Patler]

Patler is the only prediction that counts around here.

He's playing with the PatlerVoodoo Doll now

He predicted the Giants would beat the Packers
then
He predicted that Brett Favre would retire

We all await Patler; he is the only one who KNOWS

Come on now, give me FULL credit!
I also predict NCAA Hockey Championships for both the UW men and women.
I predicted Atlas Herrion would ....(wait, forget that one!)

My only prediction now for Favre is that he will not play for the Packers. If he insists on continuing his career, it will be with another team either by trade or outright release. There are many, many examples of teams choosing to go different directions when future Hall of Famers no longer fit in their plans but insist on continuing to play. I think the Packers are there.

Old athletes are hard to predict. I can name a long list of players who I thought would never play for other teams, but did. The Favre "camp" is starting to sound like Reggie White's after he retired from GB. White wasn't as iconic in GB as Favre is, but you never know.....

I could see GB giving Favre his outright release. In some ways for PR purposes it could be made to sound pretty good, "We respect and cherish all he has meant to the Packers...blah, blah, blah. When Brett first talked about retirement four years ago, we had to face the reality that at some time he would not be the Packers QB. When Brett announced that he would retire, we very reluctantly had to move forward with our plan. We can not now go back. If Brett wants to continue to play a few more years, for all that he has meant to the Packers, he deserves to end his career with a team of his own choosing. For that reason we have decided to grant him his outright release, so that he can find a situation that is best for him and his family."

[Bretsky]

Patler is the only prediction that counts around here.

He's playing with the PatlerVoodoo Doll now

He predicted the Giants would beat the Packers
then
He predicted that Brett Favre would retire

We all await Patler; he is the only one who KNOWS

Come on now, give me FULL credit!
I also predict NCAA Hockey Championships for both the UW men and women.
I predicted Atlas Herrion would ....(wait, forget that one!)

My only prediction now for Favre is that he will not play for the Packers. If he insists on continuing his career, it will be with another team either by trade or outright release. There are many, many examples of teams choosing to go different directions when future Hall of Famers no longer fit in their plans but insist on continuing to play. I think the Packers are there.

Old athletes are hard to predict. I can name a long list of players who I thought would never play for other teams, but did. The Favre "camp" is starting to sound like Reggie White's after he retired from GB. White wasn't as iconic in GB as Favre is, but you never know.....

I could see GB giving Favre his outright release. In some ways for PR purposes it could be made to sound pretty good, "We respect and cherish all he has meant to the Packers...blah, blah, blah. When Brett first talked about retirement four years ago, we had to face the reality that at some time he would not be the Packers QB. When Brett announced that he would retire, we very reluctantly had to move forward with our plan. We can not now go back. If Brett wants to continue to play a few more years, for all that he has meant to the Packers, he deserves to end his career with a team of his own choosing. For that reason we have decided to grant him his outright release, so that he can find a situation that is best for him and his family."

There you have it; no needs to get any hopes up

Patler has spoken; Favre is done in GB

[DonHutson]

FAVRE CAN EASILY PUT PACKERS IN A BIND
Posted by Mike Florio on July 3, 2008, 6:02 p.m.

Favre currently is on the reserve/retired list. To be activated from it, Favre only has to send written notice to the Packers and to the league of his desire to play. The Packers would then have 24 hours to reinstate Favre, or to release him.

The other possibility would be to activate Favre and then attempt to trade him, if the Packers don’t want him back on the team. But they would be required to use a roster spot on him until he is traded.

So for 7/17ths of Favre's salary and a roster spot you could hold on to Favre's rights all the way to the trade deadline. If the Packers show a willingness to do that, that lights a fire under Favre and other teams to make a deal sooner rather than later. Obviously a team won't want to wait until the season is almost half over before they bring in their new starting QB if they can help it.

Point being, contrary to the headline the Packers can put Favre in a bind as well. So if Favre wants out, the Packers want to trade him, and some teams are interested - I don't see why a deal can't be made without a lot of screwing around.

[DonHutson]

I could see GB giving Favre his outright release. In some ways for PR purposes it could be made to sound pretty good, "We respect and cherish all he has meant to the Packers...blah, blah, blah.

I think it's more likely the company line would be "For all Brett has done for the Packers we will work with him to trade him to a team that will be a better situation for him and his family... yadda, yadda."

I don't see any reason to just give him away.

[Scott Campbell]

I could see GB giving Favre his outright release. In some ways for PR purposes it could be made to sound pretty good, "We respect and cherish all he has meant to the Packers...blah, blah, blah.

I think it's more likely the company line would be "For all Brett has done for the Packers we will work with him to trade him to a team that will be a better situation for him and his family... yadda, yadda."

I don't see any reason to just give him away.

I think they could do that without looking bad, if that's what they wanted.

[Patler]

...and the team hand selected by Favre, who knows the Packers don't want him, would be willing to give up any significant compensation, why????

That would just drag things out as "adequate" compensation is determined. The Packers would be the team that "gave up Brett Favre for a 7th round pick (or whatever)". "After 16 years, all he was worth to them was a ______ round pick." Etc., etc., etc. A low pick compensation would also be a little embarrassing to Favre. No need for any of that. The Packers are not losing anything they thought they would have. They don't need to be compensated.

If it comes to it, I think they will want to make the situation go way as quickly as possible. They can do it and look like they are presenting absolutely no obstacle to Favre continuing his career by granting him his outright release. Total freedom.

TT has said as much with William Henderson, Koren Robinson and others. He has said they owed that much to veterans. He should with Favre, too.

[Scott Campbell]

TT has said as much with William Henderson, Koren Robinson and others. He has said they owed that much to veterans. He should with Favre, too.

That might have been a little bit easier with those guys, as they had no trade value anyway.

[Bretsky]

TT has said as much with William Henderson, Koren Robinson and others. He has said they owed that much to veterans. He should with Favre, too.

That might have been a little bit easier with those guys, as they had no trade value anyway.

On the other hand, if the GM's know that TT does not want Fave in Green Bay, they will get lowballed anyways

[DonHutson]

...and the team hand selected by Favre, who knows the Packers don't want him, would be willing to give up any significant compensation, why????

To get him into training camp as opposed to waiting until the season started, or later. And that's assuming there's only one acceptable team. If he's that specific then he should just come out with that info. Otherwise, he can put together a list of teams or the Packers can give him a list of teams that they won't trade him to, and figure out something that works.

And yes I realize Favre is 38, but he's also a legend coming off an MVP runner up season. I don't think you're talking about 6th or 7th round picks here. Moss generated a 4th after playing like shit for years. Many here are open to a Jason Taylor trade for a 2nd. Favre should have equal value to Jason Taylor (at least).

As for the arguments about releasing William Henderson or Koren Robinson, well I'm not worried that some team will sign Koren Robinson and he'll lead them deep into the playoffs. Favre could do that, and if the Packers can control where he goes then they should. Patler, you say the Packers aren't losing anything that they expected to have should they release Favre. I would argue that's not true. They expected the main competition in their division to have inadequate starting QB's - something they could definitely lose if Favre signed with Minnesota or Chicago.

Any arguments Favre had about getting released for services rendered and goodwill for all go out the window if he is indeed attempting to strong arm his way back into football. He's attempting to use the leverage he has, and the Packers should use the leverage they have. It shouldn't be business as usual for Favre/Cook and hugs and kisses from the Packers.

[Scott Campbell]

TT has said as much with William Henderson, Koren Robinson and others. He has said they owed that much to veterans. He should with Favre, too.

That might have been a little bit easier with those guys, as they had no trade value anyway.

On the other hand, if the GM's know that TT does not want Fave in Green Bay, they will get lowballed anyways

I don't think that matters, as there would still be more buyers than sellers. If your a GM and badly needed a QB, who would you rather have? Favre, or Culpepper? Its slim pickings out there.

[packrulz]

...and the team hand selected by Favre, who knows the Packers don't want him, would be willing to give up any significant compensation, why????

To get him into training camp as opposed to waiting until the season started, or later. And that's assuming there's only one acceptable team. If he's that specific then he should just come out with that info. Otherwise, he can put together a list of teams or the Packers can give him a list of teams that they won't trade him to, and figure out something that works.

And yes I realize Favre is 38, but he's also a legend coming off an MVP runner up season. I don't think you're talking about 6th or 7th round picks here. Moss generated a 4th after playing like shit for years. Many here are open to a Jason Taylor trade for a 2nd. Favre should have equal value to Jason Taylor (at least).

As for the arguments about releasing William Henderson or Koren Robinson, well I'm not worried that some team will sign Koren Robinson and he'll lead them deep into the playoffs. Favre could do that, and if the Packers can control where he goes then they should. Patler, you say the Packers aren't losing anything that they expected to have should they release Favre. I would argue that's not true. They expected the main competition in their division to have inadequate starting QB's - something they could definitely lose if Favre signed with Minnesota or Chicago.

Any arguments Favre had about getting released for services rendered and goodwill for all go out the window if he is indeed attempting to strong arm his way back into football. He's attempting to use the leverage he has, and the Packers should use the leverage they have. It shouldn't be business as usual for Favre/Cook and hugs and kisses from the Packers.

If Brett went to an NFC rival fans would be calling fot TT's head on a stick, there's no way he would let that happen. If some team like the Dolphins traded for Favre they would instantly sell out every game and get national exposure, that has monetery value, and TT loves stockpiling picks, I won't be suprised if he got a #1 pick for Favre. ARod will do fine, he looks great so far, he deserves his shot.

[texaspackerbacker]

I hope nothing at all comes of this.

I wouldn't mind much if Favre came back and played.

I could even live with the idea that we trade him if we get a high enough draft pick.

But I would be EXTREMELY pissed off if the Packers just gave him a release.

The Packers hold all the cards here. If Favre insists on playing by the terms of his contract, fine. Let him come back and be the backup QB. If Rodgers gets hurt or fails miserably, having Favre is a great insurance policy. And with all the cap space, the Packers could pay him his $10 million and not be hurt. I think, though, merely TELLING him that is the way it would be would be enough to discourage any comeback itch.

As others have said, this is a team game. Somebody even said long ago, "Winning isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing". Regardless of how much Favre has done for the Packers for so long, you don't just get all sentimental and let him sign with somebody, getting nothing for him.

[Joemailman]

TT has said as much with William Henderson, Koren Robinson and others. He has said they owed that much to veterans. He should with Favre, too.

That might have been a little bit easier with those guys, as they had no trade value anyway.

On the other hand, if the GM's know that TT does not want Fave in Green Bay, they will get lowballed anyways

Not necessarily if you have more than one team interested in acquiring him. The idea is to get the other teams to bid against each other.

I would actually be intrigued with the idea of bringing Favre back and grooming Brohm if you could get decent compensation for ARod. Bringing Favre back and sitting down Rodgers could be divisive though. Several veterans have stated their confidence in Rodgers. You could have pro-Favre and pro-Rodgers factions develop on the team, although the preferences would not be spoken publicly.