Part II

[Pacopete4]

the playbook from last year worked pretty well, didnt it?

[Lurker64]

the playbook from last year worked pretty well, didnt it?

Except the problem is that the other 27 or so offensive players who will make the roster have not been working out of that playbook this offseason, they have been working out of the new playbook. If you install a different playbook in training camp, you lose all the benefit of the preparation you did in minicamp and OTAs. Some of our offensive players (who are expected to contribute this year) don't even have a copy of last year's playbook.

Plus, when you just throw people mixed messages they get confused. Remember how much better this defense got just as a result of being in the same system for two years in a row? Continuity leads to execution.

[Deputy Nutz]

If they play as well as Favre did at 38.. whats the problem? I could totally understand if he was shitty last year, but he wasnt..

The problem is that with Favre back annointed at the starter, you have to hand 52 guys new playbooks, since McCarthy already installed the offense in minicamp and the offense for Rodgers is different than the offense for Favre.

Quarterback is not just an interchangeable part, you can't just show up because you know some plays, everybody else has to be on the same page as you or nothing happens.

First I have heard the Packers where doing their regular install of the playbook in OTAs and mini-camp with some changes due to having Aaron Rodgers at QB. Not a whole new playbook, that is a ridiculous statement.

[Pacopete4]

I think its complete BS... well there might be a couple of new plays the west coast offense is set off of base plays that are run over and over...

[pbmax]

Everyone just seems to miss the point with Thompson. He believes there is no ONE player that a team should be willing to do anything for. You can see it in his approach to FA, in his approach to drafting sometime regardless of need, trading down, and in the approach to acquiring depth.

He isn't betting the farm on Rodgers. He doesn't hang on to his flop draft picks like grim death (ala Sherman).

If Rodgers doesn't get it done, then he will keep swapping guys in until they find one. Maybe Brohm, maybe Flynn, might be someone you have never heard of.

But one thing I can guarantee you, Thompson isn't doing this because he thinks Rodgers is a sure thing. He knows the odds are its going to be a hard search. People who substitute mind reading Thompson for actual thinking keep thinking this is about Rodgers. Its not, its about the next good QB.

Ya, I think they are banking on Arod to be the guy for a long time coming... boy thats a lot to ask especially since we just had a QB that never missed a game... luck runs out sooner or later

[Pacopete4]

The way you put it, you have some very valid points... but I really think it boils down to his stamp on the team whether its Arod or someone else.. he wants credit

[Tarlam!]

He isn't betting the farm on Rodgers. He doesn't hang on to his flop draft picks like grim death (ala Sherman).

If Rodgers doesn't get it done, then he will keep swapping guys in until they find one. Maybe Brohm, maybe Flynn, might be someone you have never heard of.

But one thing I can guarantee you, Thompson isn't doing this because he thinks Rodgers is a sure thing. He knows the odds are its going to be a hard search. People who substitute mind reading Thompson for actual thinking keep thinking this is about Rodgers. Its not, its about the next good QB.

Ya, I think they are banking on Arod to be the guy for a long time coming... boy that's a lot to ask especially since we just had a QB that never missed a game... luck runs out sooner or later

This is EXACTLY my view and I have posted it in the past. TT is not an egomaniac. This is not about "I told ya so".

I know the TT bashers will vehemently disagree. There are enough egomaniacs around the league to point to as benchmarks and TT does not act like those people. TT does nothing flashy, is difficult to get in front of a microphone, always uses the "we" form and rarely, if ever says "I".

Unlike Sherman, TT listens to his scouts. I could go on.

If A-Rod sucks, he gets benched.

To reiterate an earlier comment, TT was a perennial "cut" possibility in his playing days, but by all accounts, he worked his butt off. I just bet he hates the star allures a guy like Brett Favre brings to the party and has sworn the 53 guys on this roster will have a similar dedication as he once displayed. For a guy with TT's background, Favre's indecision must be salt on an open wound.

[BallHawk]

Everyone just seems to miss the point with Thompson. He believes there is no ONE player that a team should be willing to do anything for. You can see it in his approach to FA, in his approach to drafting sometime regardless of need, trading down, and in the approach to acquiring depth.

He isn't betting the farm on Rodgers. He doesn't hang on to his flop draft picks like grim death (ala Sherman).

If Rodgers doesn't get it done, then he will keep swapping guys in until they find one. Maybe Brohm, maybe Flynn, might be someone you have never heard of.

But one thing I can guarantee you, Thompson isn't doing this because he thinks Rodgers is a sure thing. He knows the odds are its going to be a hard search. People who substitute mind reading Thompson for actual thinking keep thinking this is about Rodgers. Its not, its about the next good QB.

Shame on you Max, for having a fair and logical opinion. Get with the trend, start getting into internet flame wars. It seems to be the new thing on here.

100% agree with you.

[th87]

In the past all I heard was "if rogers was better MM would play him". Well, now he is and everyone thinks he got stupid all of a sudden.

I think this is where we are at. The Packers have someone they'd rather start at QB. It's hard to imagine with all of the great years of Brett, but this organization takes him back if they think he's the clear upgrade.

Listen, honestly, don't sound ignorant. Brett is a clear upgrade for the next year or two. No doubt. Now your argument may have some leverage if you say Rodgers is the upgrade for the next decade. There's no way Rodgers is a better QB than Favre right now, or next year for that matter.

Yup, because you know for sure. Tell me tomorrow's lottery numbers too, please.

[cpk1994]

He's never had a camp battle since he took over. I don't see the big deal if winning the job back would be so easy. Come in, put Rodgers in his place and take what's yours. That's what happens when you retire, they give your job away and you want to come back.

OF cousre hes never had a camp battle. If he had, Matt Hasselback would be your starter. Don't automatically assume that Brett would win the battle. His training camps have been less than stellar for the most part. Rodgers has a lot better chance of beating out Brett than you are willing to give him credit for.

[twoseven]

Back to how bad the interview was... why didnt she ask him:

Hey if the Packers ask you back week 4 if Arod is hurt, would you?

She DID.

He completely waffled right over it. She said, why not go back and be the backup, that AR has shown he is injury prone and you (Brett) could be right back in there. He completey ignored it and started blabbing on about a totally different subject. Hell, she straight up asked him if he would be willing to go back and compete to win a job that he GAVE AWAY. He said WHY and appeared angry that she even asked it, she said 'I'm just asking' in a don't shoot the messenger tone, IMO. He is pissed and has a big ego, he will do only one thing..have the job HE GAVE AWAY handed to him without a fight. They did give it back to him back in March after he retired, he turned right back around and gave it right back. Just how many times should the team have to give it back to him only to have him continue to waffle on his level of commitment and hand it right back before they finally decide to stop, an infinite number? C'mon, even when he had the itch on June 20, MM asked if he then was 100% committed, HE SAID NO. Hell, even last night when Gretta asked if he was 100% today he hemmed and hawed. She had to ask him more than once before he finally (unconvincingly, IMO) said yes.

You might want to switch arguments and ask why he should have to, for the first time in his career, have to compete to win a job he GAVE AWAY, you have already done so numerous times. Don't bother. You asked why she didn't ask him a particular question.. SHE DID, I pointed it out. You might come back with, that wasn't what I said, I said in week 4. To which I would reply, so we are going to call him off his tractor in October after he has been away from the team since January? Brett Favre approaching 39 years old is so damn good that he doesn't even have to practice with the team and can just hop off the couch and play well? Yah right. This is the only thing that could happen based on your week 4 inquiry because Brett has already said he refuses to be in GB if he is NOT handed the ball with no questions asked.

[MJZiggy]

He's never had a camp battle since he took over. I don't see the big deal if winning the job back would be so easy. Come in, put Rodgers in his place and take what's yours. That's what happens when you retire, they give your job away and you want to come back.

OF cousre hes never had a camp battle. If he had, Matt Hasselback would be your starter. Don't automatically assume that Brett would win the battle. His training camps have been less than stellar for the most part. Rodgers has a lot better chance of beating out Brett than you are willing to give him credit for.

Actually, I agree with you. I was speaking to those who say that Favre is such a good player that he shouldn't HAVE to have a camp battle, but the fact is that he's not on the roster which makes him the odd man out until he proves his way back in. TT chose another QB to replace him, and now if Favre wants his job back, he has to take it (that was my point--apologies if that didn't come across).

[Rastak]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

Either the JS is full of crap, or they realized how stupid of Brett it was to say those things...Totally irrelevant and unnecessary as I see it..Although I would have liked to see what context those comments were made in...

BF4MVP, looks like they did not air it per the Wisconsin State Journal. I obviously didn't hear these non aired comments but my honest opinion is that he didn't really burn any bridges with what was aired. Just my take. I did think the Arod thing was interesting. Bolded below. Sounds like Favre isn't exactly a guy you bring to mentor a young QB. It also sounds like he kinda tossed the OL coach under the bus, maybe inadvertantly.

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/sports/packers/296380

Packers: Favre slams GM Thompson
By JASON WILDE
608-252-6176
jwilde@madison.com
GREEN BAY — If Brett Favre's comments about the Green Bay Packers in the first half of his interview with Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren didn't burn whatever bridge remained between the legendary quarterback and the organization, his comments that didn't air Tuesday night during Part II of the interview certainly will make matters worse.


The second half of Van Susteren's interview with Favre was shortened — apparently due to other breaking news — during Tuesday night's edition of "On The Record."


Van Susteren had said in an interview earlier Tuesday that the full interview, which she taped Monday morning at agent James "Bus" Cook's Mississippi office, was 45 minutes long.


In the portion that aired, Favre said he's tempted to apply for reinstatement from the reserve/retired list and report to the Packers' training camp on July 27, just to call Thompson's "bluff."


Favre also told Van Susteren he is now 100 percent committed to playing this year.


"(But) I very well might not play (because of) the circumstances," Favre said.


Asked by Van Susteren if being a backup — as the Packers have suggested — is unacceptable to him, Favre replied, "I think so. I've had a lot of people (say), 'Go back and hold them to it.' I don't see it that way. It's tempting just to — because everyone's (saying), 'Call their bluff' or whatever. I think it's going to be a circus in itself already, whether I go there (or not). ... I don't want to make it any worse than it is.


"Do I play somewhere else? (That) remains to be seen. But I don't want to go back there just to stick it to 'em."


Favre also acknowledged that a trade "may be our only option," but said he couldn't trust the Packers to be actively trying to send him elsewhere. Asked about playing for the Minnesota Vikings — Van Susteren referred to the team as "Minneapolis" — Favre said,


"I've never envisioned that. I've heard all the talk like everyone else. It's hard not to.


"I don't know if other teams would make a play for me. ... It may not work out. But we won't know unless we're released. And how am I supposed to trust that they're working on a trade after the things that have been told to me in the past? Teams may have called and said, 'Hey, we're interested.' They may never tell us. And the longer this goes on, the less likely I am to play for someone because of the time factor."


But it's what Favre said that didn't run during Tuesday night's show that was particularly critical of general manager Ted Thompson. While Van Susteren's "GretaWire" on foxnews.com promised a full transcript would be posted, portions of the transcript leaked throughout the day Tuesday.


Regarding his relationship with Thompson, Favre said: "Ted and I, I thought, have always had a good relationship. We don't talk a whole lot, we don't go out and eat and shoot the bull. But on three different occasions ... I don't want to say (he) lied — I think that's kind of a harsh word — but I think 'untruth' or whatever is (a) better (word)."


Favre also chronicled what he felt were mistakes Thompson made — not signing wide receiver Randy Moss; letting Pro Bowl guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle leave via free agency; and not interviewing ex-San Francisco and Detroit coach Steve Mariucci for the head-coaching job in 2006.


While "none of those had anything to do with me retiring," Favre said in the transcript, "it's hard for me to trust this guy (Thompson) when either I'm told one thing and everyone else is told another, or he's telling the public one thing and telling me another. ... That's part of the reason for (asking for) the release (from the Packers)."


Favre also put his friend, offensive line coach James Campen, in a tough spot with the organization by saying his former teammate told him he could "force their hand" by applying for reinstatement and coming back to the team.


Favre also said he warned Thompson during what he considered an awkward visit to Mississippi in May that he might do exactly what he's doing as training camp approached.


"I said, 'Ted, I just want to give you a heads-up that, hey, say July rolls around, I wake up and I say, man, I made the wrong decision. I have to play,"' Favre said. "I said, 'I just want you to have a plan.'


"And he said, 'OK, Don't worry about that.' And that was it. He didn't say good, bad, indifferent, whatever. He just said, 'No problem. OK.'"


When Van Susteren intimated during the aired portion of the interview that Aaron Rodgers, whom the Packers have backed publicly as their 2008 starting quarterback, probably won't stay healthy after suffering injuries the past two seasons, Favre replied, "I do feel bad for Aaron a little bit."


Favre also acknowledged that he hasn't talked to Rodgers and that, "I never gave him advice, really."

"I know this has been tough on him," Favre said of Rodgers. "And this has nothing to do with him, this whole deal. If they want to make (me) a backup ... how does that protect my legacy if I'm a backup? If (they say), 'Brett, we'll welcome you back, we'll pay you $12 million, but you've got to hold the clipboard and ball cap?' That's probably better for them as opposed to letting me go somewhere and me coming back (with another team). Then their legacy, the management, would, you know, could be in jeopardy.


"You don't worry about my legacy. It's a bunch of bull. It's all it is."

[Bossman641]

Looks like they didn't air the part where Favre bashed TT for some of his personnel decisions..

Either the JS is full of crap, or they realized how stupid of Brett it was to say those things...Totally irrelevant and unnecessary as I see it..Although I would have liked to see what context those comments were made in...

BF4MVP, looks like they did not air it per the Wisconsin State Journal. I obviously didn't hear these non aired comments but my honest opinion is that he didn't really burn any bridges with what was aired. Just my take. I did think the Arod thing was interesting. Bolded below. Sounds like Favre isn't exactly a guy you bring to mentor a young QB. It also sounds like he kinda tossed the OL coach under the bus, maybe inadvertantly.

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/sports/packers/296380

Packers: Favre slams GM Thompson
By JASON WILDE
608-252-6176
jwilde@madison.com
GREEN BAY — If Brett Favre's comments about the Green Bay Packers in the first half of his interview with Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren didn't burn whatever bridge remained between the legendary quarterback and the organization, his comments that didn't air Tuesday night during Part II of the interview certainly will make matters worse.


The second half of Van Susteren's interview with Favre was shortened — apparently due to other breaking news — during Tuesday night's edition of "On The Record."


Van Susteren had said in an interview earlier Tuesday that the full interview, which she taped Monday morning at agent James "Bus" Cook's Mississippi office, was 45 minutes long.


In the portion that aired, Favre said he's tempted to apply for reinstatement from the reserve/retired list and report to the Packers' training camp on July 27, just to call Thompson's "bluff."


Favre also told Van Susteren he is now 100 percent committed to playing this year.


"(But) I very well might not play (because of) the circumstances," Favre said.


Asked by Van Susteren if being a backup — as the Packers have suggested — is unacceptable to him, Favre replied, "I think so. I've had a lot of people (say), 'Go back and hold them to it.' I don't see it that way. It's tempting just to — because everyone's (saying), 'Call their bluff' or whatever. I think it's going to be a circus in itself already, whether I go there (or not). ... I don't want to make it any worse than it is.


"Do I play somewhere else? (That) remains to be seen. But I don't want to go back there just to stick it to 'em."


Favre also acknowledged that a trade "may be our only option," but said he couldn't trust the Packers to be actively trying to send him elsewhere. Asked about playing for the Minnesota Vikings — Van Susteren referred to the team as "Minneapolis" — Favre said,


"I've never envisioned that. I've heard all the talk like everyone else. It's hard not to.


"I don't know if other teams would make a play for me. ... It may not work out. But we won't know unless we're released. And how am I supposed to trust that they're working on a trade after the things that have been told to me in the past? Teams may have called and said, 'Hey, we're interested.' They may never tell us. And the longer this goes on, the less likely I am to play for someone because of the time factor."


But it's what Favre said that didn't run during Tuesday night's show that was particularly critical of general manager Ted Thompson. While Van Susteren's "GretaWire" on foxnews.com promised a full transcript would be posted, portions of the transcript leaked throughout the day Tuesday.


Regarding his relationship with Thompson, Favre said: "Ted and I, I thought, have always had a good relationship. We don't talk a whole lot, we don't go out and eat and shoot the bull. But on three different occasions ... I don't want to say (he) lied — I think that's kind of a harsh word — but I think 'untruth' or whatever is (a) better (word)."


Favre also chronicled what he felt were mistakes Thompson made — not signing wide receiver Randy Moss; letting Pro Bowl guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle leave via free agency; and not interviewing ex-San Francisco and Detroit coach Steve Mariucci for the head-coaching job in 2006.


While "none of those had anything to do with me retiring," Favre said in the transcript, "it's hard for me to trust this guy (Thompson) when either I'm told one thing and everyone else is told another, or he's telling the public one thing and telling me another. ... That's part of the reason for (asking for) the release (from the Packers)."


Favre also put his friend, offensive line coach James Campen, in a tough spot with the organization by saying his former teammate told him he could "force their hand" by applying for reinstatement and coming back to the team.


Favre also said he warned Thompson during what he considered an awkward visit to Mississippi in May that he might do exactly what he's doing as training camp approached.


"I said, 'Ted, I just want to give you a heads-up that, hey, say July rolls around, I wake up and I say, man, I made the wrong decision. I have to play,"' Favre said. "I said, 'I just want you to have a plan.'


"And he said, 'OK, Don't worry about that.' And that was it. He didn't say good, bad, indifferent, whatever. He just said, 'No problem. OK.'"


When Van Susteren intimated during the aired portion of the interview that Aaron Rodgers, whom the Packers have backed publicly as their 2008 starting quarterback, probably won't stay healthy after suffering injuries the past two seasons, Favre replied, "I do feel bad for Aaron a little bit."


Favre also acknowledged that he hasn't talked to Rodgers and that, "I never gave him advice, really."

"I know this has been tough on him," Favre said of Rodgers. "And this has nothing to do with him, this whole deal. If they want to make (me) a backup ... how does that protect my legacy if I'm a backup? If (they say), 'Brett, we'll welcome you back, we'll pay you $12 million, but you've got to hold the clipboard and ball cap?' That's probably better for them as opposed to letting me go somewhere and me coming back (with another team). Then their legacy, the management, would, you know, could be in jeopardy.


"You don't worry about my legacy. It's a bunch of bull. It's all it is."

Why doesn't he just come right out and say what he thinks the lies are that were made to him? If he thought he was being lied to about Moss who gives a fuck, he's not the GM anyways.

Everytime he opens is mouth he makes me lose more respect for him. He expected them to have a plan just in case he decided to come back in July? What were they supposd to do? "Hey Aaaron, you're our new starting QB, but don't get too comfortable, you're just keeping that seat warm in case Favre decides in July that he wants to play this year."

[The Leaper]

This is EXACTLY my view and I have posted it in the past. TT is not an egomaniac. This is not about "I told ya so".

Neither is Favre.

Both sides are to blame here. Favre is certifiably guilty in being unable to make a decision regarding retirement. However, you can understand why a guy who is 38 years old and coming off an MVP caliber season is having a difficult time deciding on coming back. McCarthy reported admitted that he was convinced Favre would have second thoughts throughout the offseason...so the notion that this is somehow a stunning development to the Packers is hogwash.

To reiterate an earlier comment, TT was a perennial "cut" possibility in his playing days, but by all accounts, he worked his butt off. I just bet he hates the star allures a guy like Brett Favre brings to the party and has sworn the 53 guys on this roster will have a similar dedication as he once displayed. For a guy with TT's background, Favre's indecision must be salt on an open wound.

Well, then Thompson is a dumbass.

Favre has given his all for the Packer organization. He has left everything he has on the field in every game. Brett Favre IS different from the other players...he's a bona-fide NFL LEGEND. Sorry, Ted...but Favre IS bigger than anyone else on the roster. That's just the way it is...and no amount of hardline attitude or drill instructor rhetoric is going to change that. Rather than despising that, Thompson should EMBRACE it...within reason. Favre is a great leader, a great teammate, a strong presence in the community, and he isn't out getting in barfights like Barnett or busting his wife in the face like Ahman.

Unfortunately, Ted seems to despise it...and that is unfortunate.

That said, Favre shouldn't be able to hold the team hostage...and I don't think he is trying to. As he said in his interview...he wants to be 100% committed if he is going to play, to be fair to himself and the Packers. That 100% commitment at his age will come much later than it did when he was 25.

The Packers as an organization have to recognize and respect that IMO. Favre has earned that much after 250+ consecutive starts. Making an "example" of Favre isn't going to change anything in the locker room, so why do it?