Al Jones: Blame Thompson

[falco]

Agree; if TT does not want Favre that takes stones

And good or bad TT will be closely judged by his decision.

Good, bad or indifferent, I think it's pretty obvious that he's fearless and willing to put his job on the line for what he truely believes. Nobody, except Ted and Mike, have to answer for this. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt that they are looking out for their own best interests if not for the interest of the organization that they seem to have fully committed to. Maybe we don't understand, but they get paid to have forsight and their jobs are dependant on it. I think this, like the past crazy moves, will turn out to be a pro-Packer experience.

Let's keep in mind that willing to put his job on the line for what he believes is only a good thing if his beliefs are right. Doesn't matter how strong his convictions are, we need to succeed or he's on the road

[sheepshead]

al jones seems like a piece of shit

and the article sucks

couldn't agree more. i wrote him a friendly email telling him such. his email is listed on the bottom of the article if anyone else would like to do the same.

Plus Jones said the late-March-change-of-mind was "news to him" well if it is true that MM and TT were ready to hop a plane then Jones is operating in a bubble and should keep his yap shut and has very little cred at this point.

[Fritz]

I'm no TT leg humper - I sympathize with him in this situation, but I will judge him based on the decision he makes here, and how it pans out for the team. I hope something can be worked out for everyone.

That doesn't preclude me from saying that article was disgusting and served very little purpose other than to inflame tempers.

Agree; if TT does not want Favre that takes stones

And good or bad TT will be closely judged by his decision.

How true, Bretsky, how true. His reputation will ride on how this single act plays out, regardless of what else Thompson has done or will do.

[Bretsky]

I'm no TT leg humper - I sympathize with him in this situation, but I will judge him based on the decision he makes here, and how it pans out for the team. I hope something can be worked out for everyone.

That doesn't preclude me from saying that article was disgusting and served very little purpose other than to inflame tempers.

Agree; if TT does not want Favre that takes stones

And good or bad TT will be closely judged by his decision.

How true, Bretsky, how true. His reputation will ride on how this single act plays out, regardless of what else Thompson has done or will do.

If this decision is botched the ex haters will jump right back into their old club

[pbmax]

Rand, what would you say about any other player, Marvin Harrison, John Lynch, even Terrell Owens that waited to the last week of June to decide to commit to play?

Is playing catch with high school players the same thing as minicamp?

Is jogging with them the same thing as the offseason weightlifting program?

Mike Holmgren once scoffed at Dorsey Levens' very serious offseason training while he stayed in Atlanta (or somewhere) waiting for a new deal. What would Holmgren say about Favre's offseason so far?

Favre has started to fade in the second half of seasons as he gets older. Do you think this offseason regimen is helping him?

Working out is boring and repetitive and exhausting. Every moron who says Favre will get bored sitting on a tractor instead of being with the team forgets to mention the several things Favre doesn't like to do anymore with the team.

He is clearly bored with the preparation necessary to play at his highest level. Watching extra film doesn't help you go right to the sideline to escape the rush without falling down. His commitment has slackened. How many more years are you willing to bet on before it catches up to a 38 year old?

Now that he continues to waffle, his commitment is in question.

That's what NFL and PACKER 'SOURCES' tell us. And we all know that Favre's commitment has been in question in the past. Hmmm, I'l return. No wait. yes OK, I want to come back - WELL PISS OFF - YOU SUCK. YOU CHANGED YOU MIND ONE TOO MANY TIMES! WE'LL with the guy whop has never started instead!

[mraynrand]

I think he's saying the Packers are not doing what they think is best but rather teasing Brett Favre by going with Rodgers instead. I would never assume someone to have such a trait, but hey, maybe MrAynRand has some insight into human tendancy that we're unaware of. Is there something about yourself that you need to share, MrAyn?

My point is pretty simple: It makes no sense to want to go with Rodgers over Favre. It sure seems (based on ANONYMOUS SOURCES) that it's because he was indecisive. That to me is a really bad reason to make a really bad move.

The Best move would be to start Favre with Rodgers as backup - you replace Favre when he sucks or gets hurt.

But I could easily be wrong. MM and TT wouldn't be doing what they're doing if they didn't have a lot of confidence in Rodgers and think that the Favre circus was disrupting things.

But to me it's a big so what? Favre gives them the best chance to win until he starts to suck. And if he starts to suck, well that's why they drafted Rodgers.

Plus, as an organization, you don't flush the most popular guy in the sport, after one of his best years ever, ESPECIALLY since he worked his ass off to get better in the offense and reduce mistakes, and he bailed the entire team out in the first half of the season, when the O line and running backs sucked.

[Fritz]

I think he's saying the Packers are not doing what they think is best but rather teasing Brett Favre by going with Rodgers instead. I would never assume someone to have such a trait, but hey, maybe MrAynRand has some insight into human tendancy that we're unaware of. Is there something about yourself that you need to share, MrAyn?

My point is pretty simple: It makes no sense to want to go with Rodgers over Favre. It sure seems (based on ANONYMOUS SOURCES) that it's because he was indecisive. That to me is a really bad reason to make a really bad move.

The Best move would be to start Favre with Rodgers as backup - you replace Favre when he sucks or gets hurt.

But I could easily be wrong. MM and TT wouldn't be doing what they're doing if they didn't have a lot of confidence in Rodgers and think that the Favre circus was disrupting things.

But to me it's a big so what? Favre gives them the best chance to win until he starts to suck. And if he starts to suck, well that's why they drafted Rodgers.

Plus, as an organization, you don't flush the most popular guy in the sport, after one of his best years ever, ESPECIALLY since he worked his ass off to get better in the offense and reduce mistakes, and he bailed the entire team out in the first half of the season, when the O line and running backs sucked.

mraynrand, I completely disagree with your assessment, but I appreciate that you are trying to take the sentimentality out of this.

[MJZiggy]

I think he's saying the Packers are not doing what they think is best but rather teasing Brett Favre by going with Rodgers instead. I would never assume someone to have such a trait, but hey, maybe MrAynRand has some insight into human tendancy that we're unaware of. Is there something about yourself that you need to share, MrAyn?

My point is pretty simple: It makes no sense to want to go with Rodgers over Favre. It sure seems (based on ANONYMOUS SOURCES) that it's because he was indecisive. That to me is a really bad reason to make a really bad move.

The Best move would be to start Favre with Rodgers as backup - you replace Favre when he sucks or gets hurt.

But I could easily be wrong. MM and TT wouldn't be doing what they're doing if they didn't have a lot of confidence in Rodgers and think that the Favre circus was disrupting things.

But to me it's a big so what? Favre gives them the best chance to win until he starts to suck. And if he starts to suck, well that's why they drafted Rodgers.

Plus, as an organization, you don't flush the most popular guy in the sport, after one of his best years ever, ESPECIALLY since he worked his ass off to get better in the offense and reduce mistakes, and he bailed the entire team out in the first half of the season, when the O line and running backs sucked.

Imagine the PR nightmare that would cause too. Bring back Brett and then be the guy that benched him. How many games does he have to suck in before you make that call? How much of the season do you let slip by before you further inflame the fans by putting their MVP quarterback on the bench for an untested young quarterback. Didn't we already have this conversation in '92 or '93 somewhere?

[pbmax]

But keeping Favre comes with an opportunity cost. Rodgers can leave after 2009. In another thread people were decrying Green Bay becoming another Siberia if Favre left. But he is going to leave, eventually.

The best way to avoid a huge letdown is to prepare. If you keep Favre for one and certainly if he stays for two, then Rodgers is gone.

Which scenario leads to Siberia first, Favre followed by Brohm or Rodgers followed by Brohm?

Cristl an others have tried to explain that you just won't see another QB of his caliber pass this way for a generation. And that may be true. But I wouldn't want any of these folks running my business who believed there was no need to plan because after this product is retired, there is no hope.

Planning for a future without Favre seems like a guaranteed letdown. But it will be better than to sacrifice any planning.

My point is pretty simple: It makes no sense to want to go with Rodgers over Favre. It sure seems (based on ANONYMOUS SOURCES) that it's because he was indecisive. That to me is a really bad reason to make a really bad move.

The Best move would be to start Favre with Rodgers as backup - you replace Favre when he sucks or gets hurt.

[Gunakor]

Jones appears to be slightly more accessible than all the Packer and NFL SOURCES who told of Favre's Hamlet-like indecision.

OMG! 'SOURCES SAY' FAVRE CHANGED HIS MIND TWICE. TWICE!!! WEll, then #UCK HIM!! We blew a 7th round draft pick on a QB we never would have picked had Favre come back! We're going with the guy who never started a game. That'll show Favre. I can't believe he cost us a seventh round pick! Plus, he's an old washed upo piece of shit who obviously can't play at as high a level as Rodgers.

Mraynrand, we blew a SECOND round pick on a QB we never would have drafted if Favre were coming back. Flynn is irrelevant to this issue. It's Brohm that would not have been drafted.

[Gunakor]

I think he's saying the Packers are not doing what they think is best but rather teasing Brett Favre by going with Rodgers instead. I would never assume someone to have such a trait, but hey, maybe MrAynRand has some insight into human tendancy that we're unaware of. Is there something about yourself that you need to share, MrAyn?

My point is pretty simple: It makes no sense to want to go with Rodgers over Favre. It sure seems (based on ANONYMOUS SOURCES) that it's because he was indecisive. That to me is a really bad reason to make a really bad move.

The Best move would be to start Favre with Rodgers as backup - you replace Favre when he sucks or gets hurt.

But I could easily be wrong. MM and TT wouldn't be doing what they're doing if they didn't have a lot of confidence in Rodgers and think that the Favre circus was disrupting things.

But to me it's a big so what? Favre gives them the best chance to win until he starts to suck. And if he starts to suck, well that's why they drafted Rodgers.

Plus, as an organization, you don't flush the most popular guy in the sport, after one of his best years ever, ESPECIALLY since he worked his ass off to get better in the offense and reduce mistakes, and he bailed the entire team out in the first half of the season, when the O line and running backs sucked.

Let's look at it from another perspective. You can make the arguement that Favre bailed the Packers out the first half of the season. Fine. I'll make the arguement that I've been making since November of last year, which is that the WR's - Driver, Jennings, Jones, etc. - were the ones who made Favre look so good. Don't believe me? Look up which team led the league in yards AFTER the catch last year. And in the first half of the season - the one in which you credit Lord Favre alone for bailing the team out of - it wasn't even close. We were leading the league in number of 5 yard slants turned into 25 yard gains by a VERY wide margin. And in case you didn't know, those same guys are coming back to make defenders look foolish while leading the league in YAC again this year, Favre or no Favre.

[Packerarcher]

Agree; if TT does not want Favre that takes stones

And good or bad TT will be closely judged by his decision.

Good, bad or indifferent, I think it's pretty obvious that he's fearless and willing to put his job on the line for what he truely believes. Nobody, except Ted and Mike, have to answer for this. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt that they are looking out for their own best interests if not for the interest of the organization that they seem to have fully committed to. Maybe we don't understand, but they get paid to have forsight and their jobs are dependant on it. I think this, like the past crazy moves, will turn out to be a pro-Packer experience.

There you go thinking again,of course you are the most devoted TT leghumper on this forum so it wouldn't matter what he does you would think it was good. While Dumb fuck TT is running players out of town that will take this team to the play offs why stop at Brett. Let's get rid of Driver after all he is getting old. Don't give Grant a new contract,if he were packer people he would play for FREE. Kampman is my favorite D player but he prbably doesn't fit into the TT scheme either SHIP HIM. Jennings oughta be worth about 25 draft picks. I could go on but you get my point.

[Packerarcher]

I think he's saying the Packers are not doing what they think is best but rather teasing Brett Favre by going with Rodgers instead. I would never assume someone to have such a trait, but hey, maybe MrAynRand has some insight into human tendancy that we're unaware of. Is there something about yourself that you need to share, MrAyn?

My point is pretty simple: It makes no sense to want to go with Rodgers over Favre. It sure seems (based on ANONYMOUS SOURCES) that it's because he was indecisive. That to me is a really bad reason to make a really bad move.

The Best move would be to start Favre with Rodgers as backup - you replace Favre when he sucks or gets hurt.

But I could easily be wrong. MM and TT wouldn't be doing what they're doing if they didn't have a lot of confidence in Rodgers and think that the Favre circus was disrupting things.

But to me it's a big so what? Favre gives them the best chance to win until he starts to suck. And if he starts to suck, well that's why they drafted Rodgers.

Plus, as an organization, you don't flush the most popular guy in the sport, after one of his best years ever, ESPECIALLY since he worked his ass off to get better in the offense and reduce mistakes, and he bailed the entire team out in the first half of the season, when the O line and running backs sucked.

Let's look at it from another perspective. You can make the arguement that Favre bailed the Packers out the first half of the season. Fine. I'll make the arguement that I've been making since November of last year, which is that the WR's - Driver, Jennings, Jones, etc. - were the ones who made Favre look so good. Don't believe me? Look up which team led the league in yards AFTER the catch last year. And in the first half of the season - the one in which you credit Lord Favre alone for bailing the team out of - it wasn't even close. We were leading the league in number of 5 yard slants turned into 25 yard gains by a VERY wide margin. And in case you didn't know, those same guys are coming back to make defenders look foolish while leading the league in YAC again this year, Favre or no Favre.

Hey,Boywonder the receivers may have HELPED Favre look good but if you don't have a RELIABLE QB in there to take the snaps who the fuck throws it to the receivers. Having a QB that you can count on to play every game is HUGE,just ask the Bears. I think the majority of you Favre bashers really don't understand that this man has incredible mental toughness and heart. These are things that are VERY valuable to any good football player,but since you can't find it on a stat sheet there are those that never will understand it.

[Gunakor]

There you go thinking again,of course you are the most devoted TT leghumper on this forum so it wouldn't matter what he does you would think it was good. While Dumb fuck TT is running players out of town that will take this team to the play offs why stop at Brett. Let's get rid of Driver after all he is getting old. Don't give Grant a new contract,if he were packer people he would play for FREE. Kampman is my favorite D player but he prbably doesn't fit into the TT scheme either SHIP HIM. Jennings oughta be worth about 25 draft picks. I could go on but you get my point.

Archer, you might be the biggest BF leghumper on the forum. TT isn't running Driver or Jennings or Taucher or Clifton or Barnett or Kampman or any other player out of town. REMEMBER ARCHER THAT BRETT WALKED OUT OF TOWN ON HIS OWN. The Green Bay Packers didn't tell Favre that he was retired. Favre told the Green Bay Packers he was retired. And the team filled the position he vacated, same as any other company does with it's own retired employees. And any other person who retires only to come back to the company they retired from saying they want thier job back would be told the same exact thing. "The position has been filled Mr. Favre. Sorry."

[Scott Campbell]

I could go on but you get my point.

No, please, go on.