Favre . Wanted or not?

[Tarlam!]

I'm a "no". I love the guy and I want to be cheering on a SB winner this season as much as anybody.

I am not as convinced as others that a 39 year old QB is our best chance to win. Brett played some awful games last season. Of course he played his lights out in some others, no denying it.

What he lacked was consistency IMHO. If Brett came back, would we get the Seattle or Giants Brett?

Obviously there is no evidence yet as to whether A-Rod will be consistently good. And we don't know if he really is a Hangnail Rodgers either. But in naming him the starter after Brett's retirement, the real experts have spoken on this.

[packers11]

Interesting poll so far... I was thinking 60/40 in the 'yes' when I first started the thread...

[Bretsky]

Lot of very pro TT posters in here and they will side with TT; I think nearly all of us figure TT does not want Favre back now

[Patler]

Lot of very pro TT posters in here and they will side with TT; I think nearly all of us figure TT does not want Favre back now

What about MM? It has been implied in many circles that he does not either.

[MJZiggy]

What about those who are voting one way or the other because that is what's best for the PACKERS without regard to TT or BF? And if you're thinking that everyone has to choose sides between TT and Favre on a forum, imagine how it must be in the locker room...

[Harlan Huckleby]

FAvre is starting to sound like the old maid card.

[Patler]

What about those who are voting one way or the other because that is what's best for the PACKERS without regard to TT or BF? And if you're thinking that everyone has to choose sides between TT and Favre on a forum, imagine how it must be in the locker room...

If neither TT nor MM want Favre back at this point, there is not much chosing to be done in the locker room if the players want jobs in Green Bay!

[sheepshead]

If I had to bet, I'd say he comes back and they deal with Rodgers later. Brett plays for us one last time.

[texaspackerbacker]

Having Favre at QB meant going to an unconventional gameplan--limiting a lot of things the offense could do--needing to protect Favre from the rush by quick pass plays, etc. With all the weapons the Packers have, I'm looking forward to seeing the whole arsenal--from two TEs both capable of going deep to five wideouts and not having to keep somebody in to block.

If Favre does come back, I, like most everybody else, will get psyched up to win that way. I think the most direct route, though, to a great season is with Rodgers.

I say again, though, there is NO EVIDENCE Favre is even seriously interested in coming back. It's all another fiasco generated by the God damned media.

[Packnut]

Offense

Having Favre at QB meant going to an unconventional gameplan--limiting a lot of things the offense could do--needing to protect Favre from the rush by quick pass plays, etc. With all the weapons the Packers have, I'm looking forward to seeing the whole arsenal--from two TEs both capable of going deep to five wideouts and not having to keep somebody in to block.

If Favre does come back, I, like most everybody else, will get psyched up to win that way. I think the most direct route, though, to a great season is with Rodgers.

I say again, though, there is NO EVIDENCE Favre is even seriously interested in coming back. It's all another fiasco generated by the God damned media.

I would totally dis-agree on the offense being limited. In fact, it was just the opposite. Farve's pre-snap recognition and freedom in adjusting plays allowed for a wide open style. MM went to 4 and 5 wide because of Favre's strengths.

Now if you wanna say it was limited because of Favre's lack of mobility in rolling out, then I would would remind you that MOST coaches do not use it because it puts your QB on an island and in serious harm's way.

If anything, a 1st season Rodger's offense will be more limited than Favre's ever was for a myriad of reasons with the #1 being game experience. Also, MM can guess all he wants as to what Rodger's strengths will be, but until they are applied in a game, it's all conjecture at this point.

[texaspackerbacker]

I can't strongly disagree with anything you said, but I just think it was and would be a lot easier for teams to gameplan against Favre than against Rodgers. As for the experience factor, hopefully, after three years of grooming and a little bit of game time last year, he will come through like something other than a rookie.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Offense

Now if you wanna say it was limited because of Favre's lack of mobility in rolling out, then I would would remind you that MOST coaches do not use it because it puts your QB on an island and in serious harm's way.

Favre rolls out all the time. He has plenty of mobility left for that. He's just not mobile enough or stupid enough to scramble for a bunch of first downs at 38 years old.

[Scott Campbell]

I say again, though, there is NO EVIDENCE Favre is even seriously interested in coming back.

There's lots of evidence. But no proof.

[Scott Campbell]

Lot of very pro TT posters in here and they will side with TT; I think nearly all of us figure TT does not want Favre back now

LOL

It's always got to be about Ted - huh B?

[Zool]

Lot of very pro TT posters in here and they will side with TT; I think nearly all of us figure TT does not want Favre back now

LOL

It's always got to be about Ted - huh B?

Makes for an easy target. Brett can do no wrong, so someone must be wrong in the situation. I've been avoiding this crap for the whole weekend. Wish I had waited longer. What happens if he does come back this year? Same BS around the March-June time frame 2009.