The official Brett Favre for QB in 2008 thread

[MJZiggy]

We got a rally going: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8...Favre?MSNHPHMA


Clayton says who's starting week 1:
ESPN's John Clayton reports if Green Bay Packers QB Brett Favre is in shape and willing to make the time commitment as he did last year, he's going to beat out QB Aaron Rodgers for the starting job. That's a no-brainer.

Go Favre!!!!!!!!!!

Seems to be a big if. (I believe he's in shape--not football shape--but I do question his commitment)

That said, Clayton just made a grand statement that said absolutely nothing.

[GoPackGo]

I notice few videos posted of the Bears, Rams or Dallas games. Were those all just bad calls by the coach?

Sorry, but if you're gonna show one, you have to show the other one.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSdtkMiAKak&feature=related

I can watch that season killing play and know that it never would have happened if Brett wouldn't have led the Pack to the NFC championship game. Its a moot point. Nice try though

Agreed.

blaming the coach is woodbuck's thing. Brett played poorly in the games you mentioned. The Denver video is the one to watch to see Favre in his glory and remind all of what he can do

[Bretsky]

From ESPN, an article that supports your opinion.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3485214&sportCat=nfl

The World Series of Poker isn't being played in Las Vegas. It's being played in Green Bay, Wis., and Hattiesburg, Miss. And so far, a very amateurish Ted Thompson is trying to show strength in his hand.


Feel free to laugh the next time Green Bay Packers management, both past and present, starts talking about "preserving" Brett Favre's legacy and cherishing Favre's place in the team's "family." It means nothing.



The Packers are about the Packers, and that's fine, even expected, but at least say so from the beginning. Don't pretend you're genuinely concerned about Favre's standing in franchise lore when, in reality, you're more concerned about damage and image control.



Favre wants to unretire. And yeah, it's a bit of a diva-ish thing to do. Tears in March. Text messages in July.



But Favre has earned his share of diva currency, enough for one Get Out Of Retirement card. He's played hurt. He's played with his heart heavy with grief. And he's played for the moment, not the money. There are bits and pieces of his body all over Lambeau Field.



Thompson, the Packers' general manager, doesn't see it that way. His solution -- and remember, the Packers are the self-appointed guardians of Favre's football reputation -- is to announce that one of the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history, the guy only seven months removed from the NFC Championship Game, can return but may be a second-stringer. Think about it: Favre wearing a baseball cap and holding a clipboard.



Some legacy.



Packers management wants it both ways. It says it wants to protect Favre from himself, but mostly it wants to protect Favre from becoming a free agent, signing with the Minnesota Vikings and possibly kicking the Packers' butts twice in the regular season. That's the reason behind not granting Favre his release -- nothing else.



Management says the "finality" of Favre's retirement prompted the Packers to "move forward with our football team.'' But how can you move forward if Favre is still on the depth chart? If you don't want him as your starter, which is beyond astounding, then why want him at all?



Thompson has mixed a football Molotov cocktail. A short pour of Favre. A long pour of Aaron Rodgers. Topped off by Packers teammates and fans torn by their allegiances. Now light and throw.



Favre could make it easy on Thompson by staying retired. Of course, that's what Thompson is counting on: The great Brett Favre would never come back here as a backup. He wants Favre to fold.



But I'd love to see Favre report to Packers training camp later this month. I'd love to see the beads of sweat form on Thompson's forehead as he realizes he miscalculated the situation. Again.



If Favre shows up, Thompson has created an instant quarterback controversy. And by doing so, he has created the beginnings of a divided locker room. You don't think there are going to be pro-Favre guys vs. pro-Rodgers guys on that roster? You don't think the Lambeau crowd will start chanting No. 4's name the first time Rodgers struggles (and he will -- zero starts, 35 completions and one touchdown throw in three seasons)? You don't think Rodgers, Thompson's very first pick as GM in 2005, will be looking over his shoulder pads every time he makes a mistake?



Favre isn't blameless in this mess. He miscalculated, too. And for that, some Packers followers now consider him a whiner, not worth the trouble. Let's hear what they say if Rodgers bombs.



Thompson doesn't really want Favre back, unless it's for ribbon-cutting ceremonies or 20-year anniversaries. He wants the Rodgers Era to begin as soon as possible, preferably with Favre watching from his living room in Mississippi.



But sometimes you make exceptions for the exceptional. Favre has his faults, beginning with his penchant for changing his mind, but he still gives the Packers the best chance to win. Somehow that's been lost in the chaos. If Thompson wants to honor Favre's legacy, then grant him his release. If he signs with the Vikings and beats you, then that's how it goes. After all, Thompson had first crack at him as the Packers' starter.



Or if Favre truly wants to make this an amicable farewell, then he should tell the Packers he won't sign with an NFC North team. The wink-wink understanding might not be officially allowed by the league, but who has to know, right? The more likely scenario: The Packers could manipulate the trade process by making the price reasonable for, say, AFC teams, but cost-prohibitive for teams such as the division rival Vikings, Chicago Bears and Detroit Lions, or even 2008 NFC opponents Tampa Bay (Sept. 28 road game) and Carolina (Nov. 30 game at Lambeau) -- both rumored landing spots for Favre.



The whole situation is messier than eating barbecue ribs with your knuckles. And it could only get worse.



In the end, Thompson and the Packers are the ones jumping off the cliff without the bungee cord securely attached. They're betting everything on Rodgers' potential and Favre's sense of pride.



I'll bet on Favre. Lesser cards, better player.





Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com.

GOOD READ

[Scott Campbell]

Is it MM's fault or Favre's fault? Did DD run the correct route to the outside? It's a tough analysis and therefore difficult to assign blame.

Especially when you're in denial. That pick sucked ass.

[TravisWilliams23]

Yea, I still remember spotting Ryan Grant all alone coming out of the backfield on that play an NO ONE 10 yards around him. Still makes me sick to watch that replay but it still is nice to see the OT bomb vs Denver and the KC bomb and the SD laser. That's why I'm kinda in limbo over Brett coming back or staying retired or being traded. I am tired of the post season will he or won't he drama. I do trust TT and M3 to do what is best for the Green Bay Packers. Whatever that is I can live with their decision. I've been a Packers fan since the mid 60's so I do know the agony of the 70's & 80's and I think this organization is prepared to compete post Favre if need be.

[australianpackerbacker]

I wasn't trying to do anything. I'm just saying if you wanna glorify the good, you have to look at the bad too or your vision gets fuzzy.

The bad? You mean a wobbly pass in the coldest game in NFL history to an open receiver? You can't really blame him for that, it was happening to everyone all game long. It was a heck of a play by the DB.

hahaha. Funniest post ive read all day. Youve been clutching at straws ever since this whole favre fiasco came up. Thanks for the laugh partial. Coldest game in NFL history? Source? Open receiver? You must mean Greg Jennings and Ryan Grant. Did you watch the game? Tell me partial, what was seemingly happening to "everyone all game long" that didnt seem to effect eli manning or plaxico buress? Heck of a play by the DB? IMO it wouldve been a heck of a catch by driver if he were to adjust to it, ball was underthrown and the DB didnt even have to move. Want to see a heck of a play by a DB?

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=A5H4Oq2iSF8

All you Brett Favre fans need to get back on OUR TEAMS bandwagon again. Everyone seems to be of the perception that favre led this team to a 13-3 record. IMO its a two-sided coin, here are just a few examples:

Gred Jennings: 53 rec 920 yards 12 TDs. Thompson guy.
Ryan Grant: 188 car 956 yards 5.1 avg 8 TDs. Thompson guy.
Donald Lee: 48 rec 575 yards 6 TDs. Thompson guy.

Can you honestly look yourself in the mirror and say that the packers wouldve went 13-3 without these 3 Thompson guys? Can you still give favre all the credit for 2000+ yardage by his receivers after the catch?

Dont get me wrong favre was a HUGE factor in determining our record last year, but to give little or no credit to thompson for the players that he bought shows a lack of logical thinking and renders any arguement to the contrary quite useless in my opinion.

[The Leaper]

Those were all golden oppurtunities to bring home another championship and he couldn't capitalize.

I grow extremely tired of the "he couldn't capitalize" crap. The last time I checked, this was a TEAM sport.

Favre played one of his best games in Super Bowl 32...it wasn't his fault we lost that game.

Was 4th-and-26 Favre's fault?

Was our lack of any running game against the Giants Favre's fault?

Sure, Favre has made some miscues. The rest of the team has also had some doozies. If you expect your QB to be the one constantly carrying the load, you aren't going to win many titles.

[The Leaper]

Dont get me wrong favre was a HUGE factor in determining our record last year, but to give little or no credit to thompson for the players that he bought shows a lack of logical thinking and renders any arguement to the contrary quite useless in my opinion.

I would agree, but also would point out that it is highly unlikely that a kid like Rodgers could pull out the wins like Favre did against SD, Den, or Sea. Favre's level of experience raised the abilities of all these "Thompson" players who you point out. Rodgers doesn't not have that level of experience or leadership at this point.

For a team built to take advantage of a great mix of talent RIGHT NOW to gun at a title, Brett Favre is the logical choice to put at the helm. Sure, sticking Rodgers in there let's him start getting up to speed with a young offense...but 2-3 years out (when Rodgers will likely really start hitting his prime) we likely won't have the services of key guys like Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Harris, Woodson...and guys like Barnett and Kampman might be starting to decline too.

Teams don't get many chances to gun for a title in the NFL. We have a chance in 2008 with Favre at the helm. That's a point that too many Packer fans seem to conveniently ignore.

[sharpe1027]

Favre was never told that the Packers wouldn't take him back, yet he asked for a release. At best, the Packers were hesitant. Basically, it is OK for Favre to do a complete 180, but the second the Packers show the least bit of uncertainty he wants out....whatever.

If he shows up for camp and works his ass off to get prepared, I have no doubt he will be the starter. Otherwise he has nobody to blame but himself.

[australianpackerbacker]

Dont get me wrong favre was a HUGE factor in determining our record last year, but to give little or no credit to thompson for the players that he bought shows a lack of logical thinking and renders any arguement to the contrary quite useless in my opinion.

I would agree, but also would point out that it is highly unlikely that a kid like Rodgers could pull out the wins like Favre did against SD, Den, or Sea. Favre's level of experience raised the abilities of all these "Thompson" players who you point out. Rodgers doesn't not have that level of experience or leadership at this point.

For a team built to take advantage of a great mix of talent RIGHT NOW to gun at a title, Brett Favre is the logical choice to put at the helm. Sure, sticking Rodgers in there let's him start getting up to speed with a young offense...but 2-3 years out (when Rodgers will likely really start hitting his prime) we likely won't have the services of key guys like Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Harris, Woodson...and guys like Barnett and Kampman might be starting to decline too.

Teams don't get many chances to gun for a title in the NFL. We have a chance in 2008 with Favre at the helm. That's a point that too many Packer fans seem to conveniently ignore.

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers, and in my view that is the only reason that favre is not being welcomed back with open arms. In my opinion they have tailored the offence to rodgers strengths, so we will likely be seeing a different offence than we saw last year. If mccarthy saw any reason to remove rodgers from the no.1 spot, i think he wouldnt hesitate because it would be for the good of the team, and in my opinion that is what ted and mike have shown to be their biggest asset, putting the team before their own egos.

[The Leaper]

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers

Rodgers has never started an actual game and has made 59 pass attempts in his career.

No one is smart enough to "know what they have" in that kind of situation. You might have a "good feeling" or "educated guess", but to claim that it is some kind of full knowledge is outright stupidity.

On the other hand, I DO KNOW what I have in Favre. He just got finished with an MVP caliber season.

[sharpe1027]

Personally, i'm of the opinion that thompson and mccarthy are smart enough to know what they have in aaron rodgers

Rodgers has never started an actual game and has made 59 pass attempts in his career.

No one is smart enough to "know what they have" in that kind of situation. You might have a "good feeling" or "educated guess", but to claim that it is some kind of full knowledge is outright stupidity.

On the other hand, I DO KNOW what I have in Favre. He just got finished with an MVP caliber season.

Yep. Although, it looks more and more likely that Favre has been looking for an excuse out of Green Bay, but would rather pin it on someone else so he can look good.

[The Leaper]

If he shows up for camp and works his ass off to get prepared, I have no doubt he will be the starter. Otherwise he has nobody to blame but himself.

I agree with that. Call Thompson's bluff.

If Favre comes to camp, I can't imagine any way that he wouldn't be the starter opening night...other than injury, of course.

As I said previously, I'd love to see both QBs utilized. Rodgers brings such a different element with his mobility...having him come in for just a series or two during the game would really change the dynamic and make it difficult for the defenses to adjust and game plan. Plus, it reduces wear and tear on Favre over the course of the season. I think he is ready for it...and I think it could be done, and if Favre returns it SHOULD be done.

Typically, that would be a nightmare for an NFL team...but rarely does a team have a legend like Favre and a talented young gun raring to go like Rodgers.

[The Leaper]

Yep. Although, it looks more and more likely that Favre has been looking for an excuse out of Green Bay, but would rather pin it on someone else so he can look good.

I think Favre wants to go somewhere that he doesn't have to look over his shoulder and is constantly pressed to make a decision on his future the minute a season ends.

Ultimately, he will never find what he is looking for...all NFL teams have to look toward the future to some extent, although I suppose all NFL teams won't have a ready-to-go reserve right on his ass.

[sharpe1027]

If he shows up for camp and works his ass off to get prepared, I have no doubt he will be the starter. Otherwise he has nobody to blame but himself.

I agree with that. Call Thompson's bluff.

If Favre comes to camp, I can't imagine any way that he wouldn't be the starter opening night...other than injury, of course.

As I said previously, I'd love to see both QBs utilized. Rodgers brings such a different element with his mobility...having him come in for just a series or two during the game would really change the dynamic and make it difficult for the defenses to adjust and game plan. Plus, it reduces wear and tear on Favre over the course of the season. I think he is ready for it...and I think it could be done, and if Favre returns it SHOULD be done.

Typically, that would be a nightmare for an NFL team...but rarely does a team have a legend like Favre and a talented young gun raring to go like Rodgers.

Is it a bluff or just common sense? How can they be certain that Favre isn't going to change his mind again? Should they drop all their work with Rodgers and just hope this decision is more certain than all of his other decisions? Favre has never been told that he couldn't come back for the Packers, yet he wants out. I find that rather telling.