Van Susteren: Favre Felt Pressured

[Bretsky]

My Take:

MM and TT just signed extensions - they no longer had to immediately produce - and as thus, can take a few years of "learning" about the new QBs (with the additional losses that go with trying to find the next QB) and not worrying about a job. It was perfect timing (for them) for Favre to leave. This is the reason why they were indifferent on him leaving - this is why they are indifferent for him coming back.

They know they can have a bad year or two (just in case Arod doesn't pan out) - why do you think they picked up Broehm?

Favre feeling the pressure (since they really did have to plan), retired (feeling wrongly, that he would always be welcome back). When he started feeling around, he found out he was wrong.

There is no doubt in my mind that MM said you can't come back and you can't play for anyone else (which is why he asked for his release - I wouldn't expect anything else from any player who wants to come back). They don't want him to come back - they are not looking at having the best year next year - but what will produce in two to three years - so they are willing to "risk" this year.

While many are pissed at Favre - I can see his point - and while people are sceaming about making a decision so late in the game - how many players make the committment three weeks before the games start (i.e. Strahan).

[HarveyWallbangers]

I didn't think it was near as bitter as people made it out to be. It's kind of what I expected. Brett won't be playing in Green Bay, but I pretty much knew that before this interview.

[Bretsky]

I didn't think it was near as bitter as people made it out to be. It's kind of what I expected. Brett won't be playing in Green Bay, but I pretty much knew that before this interview.

It was strong and with conviction

We rarely see that in a Favre interview

[Kiwon]

I didn't think it was near as bitter as people made it out to be. It's kind of what I expected. Brett won't be playing in Green Bay, but I pretty much knew that before this interview.

It was strong and with conviction

We rarely see that in a Favre interview

I'm not getting Brett's reasoning....they wanted an answer in March before FA and the draft so he retired before he was totally ready.

Well, why give an answer at all if you are not ready? What can TT do to you one way or the other? The fans would have sided with Farve over TT especially after last season.

But WHATEVER happened in the past..... I don't think anything is beyond reconciliation at this point.

I think a third party can talk some sense into Brett and convince him to come back and compete for the starting job. As along as A-Rod keeps his wits and doesn't go nuts in the press I think that the two of them can co-exist as starter and back-up in either position.

[texaspackerbacker]

Maybe it's rose colored glasses or something, I didn't think Brett was quite as bitter and pathetic as some in here make him out to be. I guy has always impressed me as kind of naive and suggestive, and that's the way he looked tonight.

I think this fiasco had its roots in the long drawn out "to retire or not retire" thing before the '07 season. Obviously, the Packers told him not to pull that crap this year. So because he was rushed, he was "guilty of retiring too early".

You could say that he made that hasty decision out of spite because they rushed him. I don't see it that way, though. I believe what he says that he couldn't commit to a 100% effort in March. It was a stupid decision, but a sincere one.

Now he wants to play, and the Packers say no. I got the impression that he is resigned to the fact that his fate is up to the Packers. The bottom line is that if the Packers are willing to pay his salary, they can just let him sit--put him on inactive status. I get the impression that is exactly what will happen. They aren't gonna give in and release him, probably not even trade him, and he isn't gonna save them the $12 million or whatever by simply retiring.

[woodbuck27]

Favre suggests Packers haven't been telling truth

By Tom Pelissero • tpelisse@greenbaypressgazette.com • July 15, 2008

In what has evolved into a high-stakes staring contest between the Green Bay Packers and their longtime quarterback, Brett Favre did not blink on Monday.

Favre's first public comments since the team rejected his request for his release were strong, pointed and at times bitingly sarcastic, and he stated repeatedly that the team has told him he is no longer welcome in Green Bay.

The roughly 11-minute segment, which appeared on the Fox News program "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren," did nothing to disprove the perception that there is a growing schism between the three-time NFL MVP and the team for which he starred the past 16 seasons.

If anything, that gap opened wider as Favre suggested the team was lying publicly about its discussions with him, wants to prevent him from playing elsewhere — though he noted he "may not play anywhere" — and is patronizing him by suggesting publicly he could return but might not start.

"I'm guilty of one thing, and that's retiring early, and I have an answer for that," said Favre, who has made few televised remarks since his tearful retirement speech on March 6. "I knew that I would have second thoughts, and I think Mike (McCarthy, the Packers coach) has even made the comment that, 'You know, I knew Brett would go through this. I knew that he would have these second thoughts.'

"Well, I am. And so, I mean, you're telling me playing (in Green Bay) is not an option, but playing elsewhere, 'We just can't … we're trying to protect your legacy.' Well, thank you, I appreciate that. But apparently now, they want to protect my legacy by bringing me back and having me be a backup. Boy, that, that is really good."

Favre's remarks were a direct answer to those made Saturday by McCarthy and General Manager Ted Thompson, who told the Green Bay Press-Gazette he was open to Favre's return but "the scenery has changed."

Favre's wife, Deanna, e-mailed Van Susteren — an Appleton native and Packers shareholder who previously interviewed the Favres about Deanna's book — on Saturday to set up the interview after reading those comments.

While Favre repeatedly told Van Susteren he understood the team had to move on, he strongly suggested his decision to retire was impacted by the organization's insistence on having a decision early in the offseason.

"Am I mad at them for that? No," he said.

"And I think that's what needs to be cleared up, is that, hey, you wanted an answer? I gave you the honest answer at that time, as opposed to lying to you and saying, 'Yeah, oh yeah, I'll come back,' and giving you not what's expected of me, and that's 100 percent effort."

Favre described in detail his recollection of a June 20 phone conversation with McCarthy, which was the impetus for the comeback talk that has made waves the past two weeks. Favre said he told McCarthy he'd gotten over the mental hurdle, begun working out at a local high school and was thinking about returning, then asked for McCarthy's thoughts.

According to Favre, McCarthy said,

"'We moved on. I had to tell the team something. … You told me you were not 100 percent committed back, not only when you retired, but several weeks (after). We were talking about coming down there (in late March), and we've had that conversation, and you said you were not 100 percent committed.'

I said, 'You're right. You're absolutely right.'

"And I said, 'But Mike' — and it was a good conversation, and we've always had good communication, the two of us —

and I said, 'You're right. I totally agree. I was not 100 percent committed.' And I said, 'But you guys wanted an answer, in March, and I gave you the honest answer. … Had I been able to wait until training camp, that would have been great.'

He said, 'Well, why didn't you tell me that? We would have let you do it.'"

But Favre said he did tell the team that initially and was pushed to make up his mind before the NFL draft, in which the Packers selected two quarterbacks, Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn, to back up new starter Aaron Rodgers.

A second portion of the interview is to air tonight on "On the Record."

According to excerpts distributed by the network, Favre told Van Susteren the Packers have asked him for a list of teams to which he would accept a trade, but that he wants to be released so he can control his destination.

In Monday's excerpt, Favre called a trade — widely viewed as the most mutually beneficial option for resolving the escalating situation — as "a way-out-there possibility." He also said he has not and cannot envision playing for another team.

Van Susteren, who has interviewed Favre three times, said in a phone interview shortly before Monday's show the future Hall of Famer

"seemed like Brett Favre with a touch of, 'I want to play,' that level of enthusiasm. And also mixed in it with, I think there's a certain bit of, 'I wish it had been different.'"

It's too late for that, and Favre's statements erased any sense the sides might be approaching middle ground.

Instead, it seems things only can get messier and weirder from here.

Don't blink.

[sharpe1027]

He said, 'Well, why didn't you tell me that? We would have let you do it.'"

Same as every year...I can't fault them for trying to ask him to make up his mind as early as possible.

Look at it from their point of view, anytime you lose someone like Favre, you need to take a good hard look at your team and plan accordingly. You can't just plug someone in to do the job of a HoF QB. I'm willing to be they spent a lot of effort planning accordingly.

They didn't seem to have put the heat on intentionally, although Favre may have looked at it that way.

I still can't get over how little effort Favre has put forth in trying to make this work. He's makes one serious phone call about coming back, and when he wasn't given the red carpet treatment he immediately tries to force a release by using media to lay out a sob story about how much the Packers owe him.

[Sparkey]

If anything, that gap opened wider as Favre suggested the team was lying publicly about its discussions with him, wants to prevent him from playing elsewhere — though he noted he "may not play anywhere"

???? How is that comment a representation of 100% commitment to playing ?

[The Leaper]

Look at it from their point of view, anytime you lose someone like Favre, you need to take a good hard look at your team and plan accordingly. You can't just plug someone in to do the job of a HoF QB. I'm willing to be they spent a lot of effort planning accordingly.

Both sides have a legitimate gripe IMO.

The Packers need time to get the plans laid out for the post-Favre era...although personally I feel training camp is plenty of time for that to occur when you have the replacement ready and in place as Green Bay does.

Favre needs time to recover after giving everything he had during the course of the previous season. Calling him repeatedly (which the Packers did) in February and March is pointless. The guy is 38 and needs far more time to recover and determine if he can do it again than someone who is 25.

Neither side really seemed willing to see the other person's viewpoint. If the Packers had seen Favre's side, they wouldn't have come across as uncaring and apathetic to Favre's return. If Favre had seen the Packers side, he wouldn't feel so unwanted.

It is really disappointing as a Packer fan to see breakdowns on both sides contributing to a real mess.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I still can't get over how little effort Favre has put forth in trying to make this work. He's makes one serious phone call about coming back, and when he wasn't given the red carpet treatment he immediately tries to force a release by using media to lay out a sob story about how much the Packers owe him.

well said

[run pMc]

In one instance, Favre told Van Susteren that “I worked my butt off two years ago to try to get them to sign Randy Moss,” adding that he was willing to give up salary to land the talented receiver.

But Favre said Thompson denied publicly that Favre had lobbied to get Moss, which Favre said was not the case. Moss signed with the New England Patriots.

In a second instance, Favre said he once tried to convince Thompson to re-sign Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle, two key linemen, but the two got away and signed elsewhere.

In a third case, Favre told Van Susteren he tried to convince Thompson to interview Steve Mariucci, an old friend, for the head coaching job vacated by Mike Sherman. Favre said Thompson ended up hiring Mike McCarthy instead.

I'm sorry, but...this happens all the time in all the sports. Players lobby the coaches & staff to go after other players. The players will directly lobby other players at the Pro Bowl, etc.
Just because he didn't get the players he wanted on his team, he's going to accuse the team of being dishonest? Did I miss where they told him they were going to sign them?
Favre isn't the GM, coach, or salary cap guy. I think the team can listen to him, but I don't think they have to do anything he suggests...it comes off as selfish and short-sighted to me. It's a business, and Favre is a key employee, but hardly the guy who calls the shots. Furthermore, it's the NFL...hardly anything is done with complete honesty...look no further than Spygate.

As much as I like Favre and would like to see something worked out where he could play for GB, he really looks like a wanker to me in all this drama.
[/quote]

[HughC]

Apparently part two of the interview, a bit more mud will be slung.

In one instance, Favre told Van Susteren that “I worked my butt off two years ago to try to get them to sign Randy Moss,” adding that he was willing to give up salary to land the talented receiver.

But Favre said Thompson denied publicly that Favre had lobbied to get Moss, which Favre said was not the case. Moss signed with the New England Patriots.

In a second instance, Favre said he once tried to convince Thompson to re-sign Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle, two key linemen, but the two got away and signed elsewhere.

In a third case, Favre told Van Susteren he tried to convince Thompson to interview Steve Mariucci, an old friend, for the head coaching job vacated by Mike Sherman. Favre said Thompson ended up hiring Mike McCarthy instead.

“And none of those had anything to do with me retiring once again but, you know, it’s hard for me to trust, you know, this guy when I — either I’m told one thing and everyone else is told another, or he’s telling the public one thing and telling me another. And so — and that’s part of the reason for the release,” Favre said of his request to be released by the Packers to pursue other opportunities. “Not only was I told that playing here was not an option, we’re moving on — it’s kind of in their company line, moving on. That’s OK.”

Here's the link to the full JS story.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Did Thompson ever say that Favre didn't help recruit Moss? Maybe he did, but I get the feeling that Favre's cronies tell him a lot of rumors as if they were fact--and Favre believes them. There's so much rumor out there that what was actually said gets lost.

[texaspackerbacker]

exactly. I think you nailed it there, Harvey.

Favre is ........ suggestive, maybe a bit gullible, maybe even Not overly bright.

That led him to piddle around before deciding to play after the '06 season; It led him to mess around and actually retire prematurely after the '07 season; And it caused him to start acting weird now.

[PackerBlues]

Quite a few people have thought all along, and pointed out, that Thompson wanted Favre out from the very start. What I find so funny about this whole situation, is that it seems to validate that very point.

Then there are the people that have complained that when questioned by the media, Favre sent a message that everything was just rumor and there was no news. Yet the Packers organization was not saying anything either. It's a two way street, and Thompson and the rest of the organization also kept the fact that Favre wanted to come back quiet for at least a month before things started to get leaked to the press by those close to Favre. Yet Favre is being called a "Diva" now by complete ass-clowns, because he was forced to go to the media, while Thompson, his ego, and the rest of the organization tried to sweep everything under the rug, hoping that Favre would just give up and go away. Not very smart in my opinion. In fact, had they tried to work with Favre the way that they claim, this situation probably never would have come to a head the way it has.

I did not catch very much of the interview on fox, just what has been shown on ESPN, and what I have read here. The one thing that I agree with Favre 100% on, is that it is completely ridiculous for Thompson to tell Favre that he is welcome to come back to the Packers as a back-up. Who in the fuck does Thompson think he is dealing with? Is this asshole that out of touch with reality? What in the fuck could Rogers have possibly have done in the off-season to warrant a guaranteed start over Favre. Perhaps Thompson was just that impressed with Rogers telling Packer fans to "get on board or shut the hell up".

To hell with Thompson, and screw Aaron Rogers. Neither of them have done a damned thing that would impress me enough to take their side over Brett Favre's, and as far as I am concerned, Thompson should be ridden out of town on a rail for his mismanagement, and I think that Rogers should be traded for whatever could be gotten for him, simply because I am sick of hearing all the whining about "poor Aaron Rogers", who is nothing more, than one more of the many back-ups to Brett Favre.

Thompson needs to end his posturing and his bull shit, and trade Favre to a team that Favre would agree to go to. Thompsons overly large ego started this mess years ago, and it is time for him to pull his head out of his ass and do what is right.