Has your opinion of Favre changed?

[Patler]

Let's not argue in this thread who is right, who is wrong, what should or shouldn't be done. Let's not argue if he can or can not perform at a high level on the field. Let's limit it to a discussion of Favre the person. I'll pose this question:

Based on what has occurred since the end of the 2007 season and Favre's own statements and actions, has your opinion changed about Brett Favre as a person/team mate, and if so, how?

Consider the following:

All that has occurred since his retirement press conference.
His comments over his career regarding team, players commitment to the team, players' holdouts (Sharpe, MacKenzie, Walker, etc.) and how the team should respond to their holdout threats, etc.

As further discussion, how significant were his ramblings in the VanSustern "interview" in you changing or not changing your opinion of him?

[RashanGary]

I've felt this way about him since the 2005 season. I think he showed his true colors that year.

[Patler]

I've felt this way about him since the 2005 season. I think he showed his true colors that year.

What did he do then that affected your opinion, and how would you describe your opinion of him?

[woodbuck27]

Other than the fact he caused a mess for himself by announcing his retirement when he needed more time to decide on that 'in reality'.

NO!

[Tarlam!]

No, not really. Doesn't mean I'm not disappointed by what he has created with his actions or those of his camp. But heck, he disappointed me when he retired in the first place.

I admit to be angry. But I get pissed at things my kids do or colleagues or whatever and i get over it.

I think he will one day look back and have regrets at what he has done and how he did them in the last 4 months.

He is still my favourtite, though.

[Patler]

Woody & Tarlam:

Are you able to justify in your own mind his current stance and statements regarding the organization and what they should do for him with his comments in previous years about the situations I mentioned involving his disgruntled teammates? Is he being at all two-faced? If not, why not?

[mraynrand]

A little. I didn't think he was the type to triangulate. He doesn't seem to have done a lot of it, but I expected him to be more of a direct guy. Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy are giving you mixed signals and/or the wrong signals? You fly up to Green Bay and tell them in person where you're coming from rather than talking to Al Jones or Greta, etc.

[Tarlam!]

I have observed quite often that the individual, BF, is an emotional and highly strung guy. I would also assume he is being brainwashed to some degree by those around him and he believes his own publicity.

Why am I so sure? The way he's acting reminds me a helluva lot like I have. I would say I am emotional and highly strung. My wife used to be in my ear day in day out telling me I earned this promotion or that pay increase until I finally believed it myself and went and demanded (and 99% got) it from my boss.

He's not being 2 faced because it's not about money for him. The other examples are squarely about money. For Favre, it's a "I should be allowed to go out on my terms" deal. So, he sees a discrepancy and I can, too.

[Carolina_Packer]

I am OK with Brett taking the time he needs to decide if he's fully committed to playing. I am not OK with the apparent lack of communication, and communication through other spokespeople (until now), and the cryptic messages apparently from him that trickled in during the off-season. I think he would have been better served to get out in front of the issue before it became a misunderstanding.

I don't know if management had "a secret hope" that Favre would just retire. When you read the timeline given, it appears there was hope until the team was rebuffed in late March/early April and then they just took him at his word that he was retiring. I think it would have been irresponsible not to move on with who was going to be there and plan the draft accordingly.

I think it was somewhat assumptive on Brett's part to think that once he finally made up his mind to play that the Packers would just accept his indefinite time-table. Sometimes you do have to work within the constructs of the team and what they are trying to accomplish, rather than just thinking about what works best for you, even if you are a much accomplished player.

Going back to the communication issue, I wish Favre had laid it out to management how he wishes he could have waited until camp to decide. I don't know if they would have let him do that without a definite answer, but I think it caused some issues when he finally made his wishes known to MM June 20th to which MM said, "Well, why didn't you just say that?" Again, no guarantee that would have been acceptable.

To me, the way a guy handles his off-season, retirement business is secondary to the way he's capable of playing for the team and the result he is able to produce. But, that does not excuse being less than professional and handling your business through others and in the media. All this could have been avoided if Brett could have just made up his mind sooner. He's a big boy and should take full responsibility for retiring and not put that on the Packers at all. Yes, they may have been looking for an answer, however, if you feel like you hold the cards, why not just level with them and say, I'm not ready to make a final decision and won't be until x date/timeframe? Were the Packers supposed to not believe him when he said he was not fully committed? Were they supposed to wait until/if he was? Hard to make plans for an upcoming season under such unknowns.

[Patler]

A little. I didn't think he was the type to triangulate. He doesn't seem to have done a lot of it, but I expected him to be more of a direct guy. Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy are giving you mixed signals and/or the wrong signals? You fly up to Green Bay and tell them in person where you're coming from rather than talking to Al Jones or Greta, etc.

That is what I find amazing. I assumed him to be a more direct person than that in dealing with the team. Dealing through the media and/or others is not what I expected from him. He also seems to expect the Packers to come to him, rather than him going to them. It's kind of wimpy.

[Carolina_Packer]

He's not being 2 faced because it's not about money for him. The other examples are squarely about money. For Favre, it's a "I should be allowed to go out on my terms" deal. So, he sees a discrepancy and I can, too.

And, I think he did go out on his own terms and used his own words. Now I think he's being somewhat disingenuous to say that the team needed an answer at the time and that was the best one I had. If he knew that he wasn't ready to fully commit either way, he should never have done it and should have let management know that instead of retiring to satisfy their need for closure. It makes his original decision seem poorly conceived. A player can go out on their terms if they really know what those terms are, and I don't know if Brett did or does.

[Tarlam!]

Carolina, to keep my view in the perspective from where it was written, I differentiate BF's situation from Walker's/ McKenzie's.

I think Favre really believes what he's saying. I disgree with him, but, this is unlike the other examples Patler proposes as "benchmarks" IMHO.

I know myself, and when the dust settles on this, I will have fond memories left an the current sour taste in my mouth will be gone.

But if Brett and I die tonight and I happen to meet him on some cloud, I'll give him a serious finger lashing!

[mraynrand]

A little. I didn't think he was the type to triangulate. He doesn't seem to have done a lot of it, but I expected him to be more of a direct guy. Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy are giving you mixed signals and/or the wrong signals? You fly up to Green Bay and tell them in person where you're coming from rather than talking to Al Jones or Greta, etc.

That is what I find amazing. I assumed him to be a more direct person than that in dealing with the team. Dealing through the media and/or others is not what I expected from him. He also seems to expect the Packers to come to him, rather than him going to them. It's kind of wimpy.

Agreed. The warning signs were there. The biggest warning sign was Favre retiring'cold.' I was certain he would play until he got hurt or they yanked him because he started to suck. Plus it looks like he really did get to the point where he thought he was bigger than the team. (and THE REASON Harlan let Sherman go). The GM is in charge. Harlan had to pick a tough as nails GM who would put the team concept first. Looks like Brett forgot how to deal with that. (The GM decides who to interview for coach, the GM decides which FAs to resign, the GM decides whether to sign a FA WR). The QB studies the playbook and runs the offense.

[Patler]

His round about approach since June is absolutely baffling to me, and his gig with VanSustern to me was a childish response to what has happened.

I have to admit, his "the team comes first" proclamations in other situations now seem a bit hollow to me. Now that he has a conflict with the team, whether it be over money, playing time or his retirement, all of a sudden the team is doing wrong by him. However, he didn't see that in the situations for the others.

If Sharpe, Walker or others were supposed to trust the team to take care of their money situations why shouldn't he just trust the team with respect to his roster position? He should come out of retirement, report to camp and let the team take care of it.

.... or, maybe he should have kept his opinions to himself in the other situations. I wonder how he would respond if teammates went to the media with comments that Favre should just report and shut up? What if they said, "I hope the team doesn't give in to him. Others can take his place." After all, that is what he said about Walker.

I do see inconsistencies in his positions.

[Carolina_Packer]

I think Favre hoped/expected to be welcomed back as the starter no matter when he decided and is surprised that the team didn't keep his place for him, rather than pretending to move on without him and guessing that he might come back. What if he had stayed retired? Then that guessing game would have looked foolish. They were in a tough spot no matter what Brett decided because they did give Rodgers the opportunity and would now have to bench him if they really want Favre back at all. It doesn't sound like Brett will accept coming back and competing for his starters job back because again, I think he hoped/expected they'd take him back no matter when he decided. Surprise, Brett! They could still do it, but at this point, there is no reason to think they will reverse themselves and bench Rodgers, so they're at the proverbial impasse.