Can Someone Explain something to me?

[Rastak]

As the other guy above pointed out, the trade was renegotiated. The Bucs could have just canceled it.

[retailguy]

As the other guy above pointed out, the trade was renegotiated. The Bucs could have just canceled it.

From what I remember this is correct. The trade was renegotiated primarily because Gruden thought he could talk Jake out of retirement. In the event that failed, I think the Broncos got a 7th round pick and the Bucs got the right to recoup the bonus, so in essence the Bucs traded a 7th round pick to Denver for $3.5million dollars....

[retailguy]

Lurker, what I meant by Favre being different is that he's in demand if he's released by A LOT of organizations. So if he doesn't show and subsequently gets waived then he has options. Now substitute Taco Wallace. If he refuses a trade, then gets waived, what's next?

That's the difference to me. Desirability.

[pbmax]

Yes, it is true. But Favre is unique in many ways. He doesn't want the payday here. He is not missing accruing years for FA or gaining on incentives. So he can miss the checks. Most players choose not to do that. He does not need another contract, so goodwill goes out the window.

Plummer retired rather than report, then the Broncos and Bucs redid the deal. If I recall, the Bucs knew this was possible before the deal. The Bucs kept his rights and recovered the bonus money.

That is why, if Favre is not on board, the best offer will be conditional and initially contain a low pick.

So does that mean that it's essentially impossible to trade a player to a team he is unwilling to play for? I'm not sure what's unique about the Favre situation here.

[vince]

Like Favre, plummer never turned in his retirement paperwork. The bucs did try to convince him to unretire.

The bucs originally wanted to give a 4th for him. Instead they gave the Broncos a conditional draft pick for Plummer and nothing for him if he no showed for training camp.

The Bucs also retained his rights....

So in this case then, the Packers could trade Favre to the Bucs for a conditional second round pick (if Favre shows up - nothing if he doesn't) and retain his rights even if Favre retires again right away, correct?

[pbmax]

Its not the players choice to go back to the old team. The only way that happens is if the trade is voided, which happens at the behest of a team.

If the team hasn't protected itself (say it didn't anticipate the problem and doesn't have a conditional option) then it may feel this is the best thing.

I hear you but how exactly do you suggest they force a player to play for a team?

Gun point? They aren't slaves.

They can't. The player either plays for that team or retires. He shouldn't have the option to go back to the old team.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Like Favre, plummer never turned in his retirement paperwork. The bucs did try to convince him to unretire.

The bucs originally wanted to give a 4th for him. Instead they gave the Broncos a conditional draft pick for Plummer and nothing for him if he no showed for training camp.

The Bucs also retained his rights....

So in this case then, the Packers could trade Favre to the Bucs for a conditional second round pick (if Favre shows up - nothing if he doesn't) and retain his rights even if Favre retires again right away, correct?

Well, i would expect us to get something regardless..the plummer precedent certainly shows that. IF he is worth a 7th for never playing...then brett is worth at least a 6th.

I think if we trade him..the bucs retain his rights...if i'm getting the gist of your question. If he is traded retired..then bucs keep his rights...as he never unretired.

IF he unretires and we trade him...i don't see your scenario ever coming to frution..as TT would want the pick. But, i guess we could word it so that we retain his rights.

[vince]

Like Favre, plummer never turned in his retirement paperwork. The bucs did try to convince him to unretire.

The bucs originally wanted to give a 4th for him. Instead they gave the Broncos a conditional draft pick for Plummer and nothing for him if he no showed for training camp.

The Bucs also retained his rights....

So in this case then, the Packers could trade Favre to the Bucs for a conditional second round pick (if Favre shows up - nothing if he doesn't) and retain his rights even if Favre retires again right away, correct?

Well, i would expect us to get something regardless..the plummer precedent certainly shows that. IF he is worth a 7th for never playing...then brett is worth at least a 6th.

I think if we trade him..the bucs retain his rights...if i'm getting the gist of your question. If he is traded retired..then bucs keep his rights...as he never unretired.

IF he unretires and we trade him...i don't see your scenario ever coming to frution..as TT would want the pick. But, i guess we could word it so that we retain his rights.

I don't think the Packers really want his rights. They've moved on. They just don't want his rights to fall into the wrong hands. So if Brett applies for reinstatement, worst case - they could trade him for a (conditional) song to a team that he may or may not play for. Brett's options then would be to play for that team or retire.

That's what pb said too. That's the way it should work, IMO, but that's different than what the original article says as I understand it.

[Rastak]

Like Favre, plummer never turned in his retirement paperwork. The bucs did try to convince him to unretire.

The bucs originally wanted to give a 4th for him. Instead they gave the Broncos a conditional draft pick for Plummer and nothing for him if he no showed for training camp.

The Bucs also retained his rights....

So in this case then, the Packers could trade Favre to the Bucs for a conditional second round pick (if Favre shows up - nothing if he doesn't) and retain his rights even if Favre retires again right away, correct?

Vince, that should work. Assuming you meant the Bucs retain his rights. If he doesn't report and the Bucs aren't out anything then I'm sure they would do it. In fact, in this case THEY would be the ones who could turn around and trade Favre's rights again for what they could get if he didn't want to report. I would think they'd do that, or try the ole "get some signing bonus trick". Either way, they would get a commodity for free.

[cpk1994]

So does that mean that it's essentially impossible to trade a player to a team he is unwilling to play for? I'm not sure what's unique about the Favre situation here.

It certainly doesn't sound right to me either.

Who would make a trade that wasn't contingent on the guy reporting and passing a physical?

The point that Lurker is making is that any player traded to a team he doesn't want to play for can just not show up, thereby rescinding the trade and sending him back to his original team. That gives the player a strong veto power that isn't right.

I hear ya but it is right. How many times has a player trade been canceled due to a player not passing a physical? The rights revert back. No report, no physical, no trade.

Unless the team waives it and keeps the player. Perhaps the Bucs thought they could convince him to play?

I can give you an example Ras. Eric Dickerson to the Packers. E.D. failed the physical and the trade was voided.

[vince]

So IF the Packers are set to "move on," as they've said, they could facilitate a trade such as that, along with a conditional 7th for a 6th or something like that and a wink and a handshake to another team to keep his rights. The trade would obviously have to be to a team who would LOVE for him to "threaten" to show up in camp, unlike the Packers have maintained since the end of June up to now....

If both sides maintain their current entrenched positions, and push comes to shove, Brett is the one who's painted into a corner here.

That would explain a lot of what we heard (and what was edited out) in his interview with Greta.

[Rastak]

So IF the Packers are set to "move on," as they've said, they could facilitate a trade such as that, along with a conditional 7th for a 6th or something like that and a wink and a handshake to another team to keep his rights. The trade would obviously have to be to a team who would LOVE for him to "threaten" to show up in camp, unlike the Packers have maintained since the end of June up to now....

If both sides maintain their current entrenched positions, and push comes to shove, Brett is the one who's painted into a corner here.

That would explain a lot of what we heard (and what was edited out) in his interview with Greta.

Right, and if the Favre told the team he wouldn't report, they'd not do the wink and the handshake part. If they thought he would report, I would guess they might agree to keep the rights.

[vince]

I just read about Brett getting set to apply for reinstatement. If that report is true, I think he's going to be a Buc.

[PackerBlues]

another thing to consider about Favre holding off on applying for re-instatement is that by doing so, he is avoiding an aweful lot of bs that Thompson would throw his way. How many times have we seen coaches or players fined for voicing their opinions publicly? As it stands, Favre is untouchable until he is re-instated, so it kind of makes sense for him to hold off until he has aired his side of the argument to his satisfaction.

[The Leaper]

another thing to consider about Favre holding off on applying for re-instatement is that by doing so, he is avoiding an aweful lot of bs that Thompson would throw his way. How many times have we seen coaches or players fined for voicing their opinions publicly? As it stands, Favre is untouchable until he is re-instated, so it kind of makes sense for him to hold off until he has aired his side of the argument to his satisfaction.

That is a very good point that I had not thought of.