Thompson is a two-faced liar!

[Harlan Huckleby]

ya, I wish we could return to the days of that open-book, straight shooter Ron Wolf.

[Deputy Nutz]

If what Favre said was true, and we have really no reason to believe he is lying, not really Favre's style, and that is what we have to go on so far, then Thompson's mistake in all this was to even entertain Brett Favre and his needs for the Green Bay Packers. Now Favre says, "hey he told me this or that. he agreed with me, said he was going to go after so and so, and interview so and so, and then never did."

The funny thing is Thompson thinks for the long term and short term future of this football team, Favre as an aging player, can only think one season at a time. This simply doesn't work. I am sure that Thompson is not the first GM, that has had to hear what is thought to be advice coming from an aging superstar about how to build a franchise, exuse me, to build a winning team going for broke in one season.

Trust, Favre say he can't trust Thompson, and that is the problem, I hasn't Thompson proven to Favre that he can build a winning team? Proof is on the field not in the notebook or in the newspapers.

[The Leaper]

Trust, Favre say he can't trust Thompson, and that is the problem, I hasn't Thompson proven to Favre that he can build a winning team? Proof is on the field not in the notebook or in the newspapers.

I see your point. However, I think it is possible for Favre to not trust Thompson but still think he does a good job as a GM. As I said somewhere else today...TT is a shrewd GM, and that requires conveniently some deception and not always telling the full truth.

I think Donald Trump is very good at making money. Do I trust him? No.

[Deputy Nutz]

Trust, Favre say he can't trust Thompson, and that is the problem, I hasn't Thompson proven to Favre that he can build a winning team? Proof is on the field not in the notebook or in the newspapers.

I see your point. However, I think it is possible for Favre to not trust Thompson but still think he does a good job as a GM. As I said somewhere else today...TT is a shrewd GM, and that requires conveniently some deception and not always telling the full truth.

I think Donald Trump is very good at making money. Do I trust him? No.

You don't pacify your own players with deception, in fact in my opinion you don't even entertain the conversation especially about a player that could be in negotiations with same agent as Favre.

[Merlin]

Say that John Elway changed his mind and wanted to go back to the Broncos after Brian Greise was groomed and tagged as the starter. For certain the Broncos would have taken Elway back as the starter. Even though Elway had just won two super bowls, he wasn't near the player he was in his prime. But, he was a good leader and a decent QB.

Favre changes his mind and he is told he may have a different role with the team because they have moved on. The is a player coming off of one of the best seasons in his career, and NFC championship appearance and by all signs, not showing his age at all. Easily a top 10 if not top 5 QB in the league last year. He has more in the tank then Elway, is coming off of a successful season, and the Packers attitude is "different role", "we have moved on"?

Sounds like there is a lot more to what is being said then meets the eye. Favre can still play, he still has it and can play at a high level. John Elway was very much not the same but stuck in it for two final years while his team carried him to the Super Bowl. Brett asks to come back, the Packers have a cold shoulder. If Elway would have wanted back, you kow the Broncos would not have handled it anywhere near how the Packers are.

Something isn't right here and although I don't have any idea what it is, I am sure Thompson has not been upfront and honest about his beliefs and this team.

[bobblehead]

If what Favre said was true, and we have really no reason to believe he is lying, not really Favre's style, and that is what we have to go on so far, then Thompson's mistake in all this was to even entertain Brett Favre and his needs for the Green Bay Packers. Now Favre says, "hey he told me this or that. he agreed with me, said he was going to go after so and so, and interview so and so, and then never did."

The funny thing is Thompson thinks for the long term and short term future of this football team, Favre as an aging player, can only think one season at a time. This simply doesn't work. I am sure that Thompson is not the first GM, that has had to hear what is thought to be advice coming from an aging superstar about how to build a franchise, exuse me, to build a winning team going for broke in one season.

Trust, Favre say he can't trust Thompson, and that is the problem, I hasn't Thompson proven to Favre that he can build a winning team? Proof is on the field not in the notebook or in the newspapers.

Its possible that favre is telling the truth as he PERCIEVES it yet is way off base on reality. There are people like that.....posting on this very thread even.

[Spaulding]

While I mostly disagree with the purpose of your rant, I can't help but say that a few of your points have merit.

Thompson's handling of Sherman was certainly baffling to say the least, and cost Green Bay a lot of cash.

The Moss thing was strange too...especially when Thompson acknowledged that he thought they had a deal in place.

Thompson is a shrewd GM...not being completely honest is part of the job requirement. So, I can understand how Favre or any player could feel like not trusting Thompson at his word.

Sorry for ranting, I am at the library with a half hour limit to get out what I want to say. That being said, now that all of this has been aired publicly/nationally, what does that say to not just the veterans on the team and league wide about the Packers front office, but also to the up and coming stars that Thompson himself has drafted? If I were Barnett, or Hawk, or Jennings, I would be looking to get out of GB as soon as my contract expires. It seems to me, that Thompson himself is preaching that it is all business and that loyalty for past deed mean nothing, so why would anyone want to come to, or stay in GB?

Contrary to that post, TT looks to have taken care of the vital veterans during his tenure. It is only with Favre that the drama has played it's way out.

If he felt forced out in March then why lie at his conference? To keep the peace when he felt otherwise? If so that's a PR nightmare for him as people look back and consider future comments to have less meaning as he hasn't been truthful in the past.

Step up and tell the truth, the full truth, nothing but the truth. If he felt forced out at that time and he truely felt he might want to play down the road then what made him think they'd want him back two or three months later?

[cheesner]

While I mostly disagree with the purpose of your rant, I can't help but say that a few of your points have merit.

Thompson's handling of Sherman was certainly baffling to say the least, and cost Green Bay a lot of cash.

The Moss thing was strange too...especially when Thompson acknowledged that he thought they had a deal in place.

Thompson is a shrewd GM...not being completely honest is part of the job requirement. So, I can understand how Favre or any player could feel like not trusting Thompson at his word.

Sorry for ranting, I am at the library with a half hour limit to get out what I want to say. That being said, now that all of this has been aired publicly/nationally, what does that say to not just the veterans on the team and league wide about the Packers front office, but also to the up and coming stars that Thompson himself has drafted? If I were Barnett, or Hawk, or Jennings, I would be looking to get out of GB as soon as my contract expires. It seems to me, that Thompson himself is preaching that it is all business and that loyalty for past deed mean nothing, so why would anyone want to come to, or stay in GB?

It says no prima donna football player, no mattter who the hell you are, is going to come to Green Bay and put himself above the team.

I won't respond to much from your original incoherent hissy fit, but this:

TT had a deal in place with the Oakland Raiders. Not Moss. It doesn't matter what Moss felt or wanted, his fate was in the hands of Al Davis. Your argument makes absolutely no sense. But there is an interesting theme going with your (or what will have to pass for) logic. You put the player's feelings as more important than the team.

[Gunakor]

Say that John Elway changed his mind and wanted to go back to the Broncos after Brian Greise was groomed and tagged as the starter. For certain the Broncos would have taken Elway back as the starter. Even though Elway had just won two super bowls, he wasn't near the player he was in his prime. But, he was a good leader and a decent QB.

Favre changes his mind and he is told he may have a different role with the team because they have moved on. The is a player coming off of one of the best seasons in his career, and NFC championship appearance and by all signs, not showing his age at all. Easily a top 10 if not top 5 QB in the league last year. He has more in the tank then Elway, is coming off of a successful season, and the Packers attitude is "different role", "we have moved on"?

Sounds like there is a lot more to what is being said then meets the eye. Favre can still play, he still has it and can play at a high level. John Elway was very much not the same but stuck in it for two final years while his team carried him to the Super Bowl. Brett asks to come back, the Packers have a cold shoulder. If Elway would have wanted back, you kow the Broncos would not have handled it anywhere near how the Packers are.

Something isn't right here and although I don't have any idea what it is, I am sure Thompson has not been upfront and honest about his beliefs and this team.

The situation in Denver was very different. First of all, Green Bay hasn't won a SB since 1996, whereas Denver was coming off of 2 consecutive SB victories. Second, and more importantly, the Broncos did not prepare well for Elway's retirement. They did not have a replacement that they'd been grooming for several years to be the future QB and were extremely confident in like we do. If Elway had asked for his job back and Denver gave it to him, that would probably be the biggest reason for doing so.

But Elway didn't ask to come back, thus Denver didn't tell him he could. So without seeing it for ourselves, how can we know for sure how Denver would have handled that situation?

[Merlin]

When you look at it, the situation in Denver was similar accept Elway announced that his last season was his last season before the season. I am a huge Elway fan and his following is much like Favre's and their careers were both full of disappointments and triumphs. The only difference is that Favre is playing at a high level and Elway most certainly was not. I stopped watching Denver games and following the team when he did retire. He was a joy to watch, even in his last two seasons when he really didn't have it anymore.

You can bank on Denver taking Elway back if he chose to un-retire at the time because the ownership respected and revered all that Elway had done and he was still a decent QB. With Favre, you know you have a good to great QB and yet you are cold to his return in favor of someone who hasn't started a game in the NFL and has proved nothing.

The Packers respect and revere Favre, it is becoming increasingly clear that Thompson does not. And since he is the one that is calling the shots, his opinion is all that matters. Conventional wisdom is that you take the sure thing, but Thompson has always tried to be smarter then everyone else. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it does not. In something this high profile, he needs to do the sure thing.

[Gunakor]

You can bank on Denver taking Elway back if he chose to un-retire at the time because the ownership respected and revered all that Elway had done and he was still a decent QB. With Favre, you know you have a good to great QB and yet you are cold to his return in favor of someone who hasn't started a game in the NFL and has proved nothing.

We are merely fans Merlin. You are correct, Rodgers has proved absolutely nothing to us fans. The coaches and players on the Packers roster have had plenty of time to evaluate. You can bet the farm that Rodgers has proven plenty to those who actually make the decisions. And that's all that matters.

[Patler]

The Packers respect and revere Favre, it is becoming increasingly clear that Thompson does not.

Revere any player? No GM can do that. His objectivity would be gone. Revering is best left to the fans.

[mission]

You can bank on Denver taking Elway back if he chose to un-retire at the time because the ownership respected and revered all that Elway had done and he was still a decent QB. With Favre, you know you have a good to great QB and yet you are cold to his return in favor of someone who hasn't started a game in the NFL and has proved nothing.

We are merely fans Merlin. You are correct, Rodgers has proved absolutely nothing to us fans. The coaches and players on the Packers roster have had plenty of time to evaluate. You can bet the farm that Rodgers has proven plenty to those who actually make the decisions. And that's all that matters.

He's proved to me that he's way better of a talent than I ever knew him to be ... runs well, stands tall, can complete 17+ straight passes in an NFL game.

Just because Brett won a Super Bowl like 29 years ago, doesnt mean he's proved anything to me about this year moving forward.

Besides he's wavering and hates playing football in the cold to the point where he makes poor decisions and looks like he's annoyed to even be there.

[Deputy Nutz]

Say that John Elway changed his mind and wanted to go back to the Broncos after Brian Greise was groomed and tagged as the starter. For certain the Broncos would have taken Elway back as the starter. Even though Elway had just won two super bowls, he wasn't near the player he was in his prime. But, he was a good leader and a decent QB.

Favre changes his mind and he is told he may have a different role with the team because they have moved on. The is a player coming off of one of the best seasons in his career, and NFC championship appearance and by all signs, not showing his age at all. Easily a top 10 if not top 5 QB in the league last year. He has more in the tank then Elway, is coming off of a successful season, and the Packers attitude is "different role", "we have moved on"?

Sounds like there is a lot more to what is being said then meets the eye. Favre can still play, he still has it and can play at a high level. John Elway was very much not the same but stuck in it for two final years while his team carried him to the Super Bowl. Brett asks to come back, the Packers have a cold shoulder. If Elway would have wanted back, you kow the Broncos would not have handled it anywhere near how the Packers are.

Something isn't right here and although I don't have any idea what it is, I am sure Thompson has not been upfront and honest about his beliefs and this team.

The situation in Denver was very different. First of all, Green Bay hasn't won a SB since 1996, whereas Denver was coming off of 2 consecutive SB victories. Second, and more importantly, the Broncos did not prepare well for Elway's retirement. They did not have a replacement that they'd been grooming for several years to be the future QB and were extremely confident in like we do. If Elway had asked for his job back and Denver gave it to him, that would probably be the biggest reason for doing so.

But Elway didn't ask to come back, thus Denver didn't tell him he could. So without seeing it for ourselves, how can we know for sure how Denver would have handled that situation?

In Elways last year he missed several games and Bubby Brister filled in for him and played decently. They believed that Brister would be able to fill in the gap between Griese and Elway. Brister was terrible in 1999.

The Packers simply tried to groom Rodgers behind Favre and he was also a safety precaution in case Favre would retire, the Packers then wouldn't have to find a replacement, and they wouldn't have to leap at an over priced back up QB.

[woodbuck27]

Say that John Elway changed his mind and wanted to go back to the Broncos after Brian Greise was groomed and tagged as the starter. For certain the Broncos would have taken Elway back as the starter. Even though Elway had just won two super bowls, he wasn't near the player he was in his prime. But, he was a good leader and a decent QB.

Favre changes his mind and he is told he may have a different role with the team because they have moved on. The is a player coming off of one of the best seasons in his career, and NFC championship appearance and by all signs, not showing his age at all. Easily a top 10 if not top 5 QB in the league last year. He has more in the tank then Elway, is coming off of a successful season, and the Packers attitude is "different role", "we have moved on"?

Sounds like there is a lot more to what is being said then meets the eye. Favre can still play, he still has it and can play at a high level. John Elway was very much not the same but stuck in it for two final years while his team carried him to the Super Bowl. Brett asks to come back, the Packers have a cold shoulder. If Elway would have wanted back, you kow the Broncos would not have handled it anywhere near how the Packers are.

Something isn't right here and although I don't have any idea what it is, I am sure Thompson has not been upfront and honest about his beliefs and this team.

What's difficult or to use your term... 'somethings not right here' is that this whole affair puts a lot of stress on anyone that believes Favre should have been given time to get over his burnout and then decide on his committment to this season.

Difficult to entirely prove, but it appears to me as if Packer management decided, that depite anyting positive regarding Brett Favre last season, it was time to change the starting QB. It's too in OUR face as that's it.

Favre needed time to say he was committed to 2008, and he felt he needed more rest than in 2007 to get to that. He was pressured to say yes or no to 'are YOU 100% committed'... a YES or NO response was all that was needed, not any waffling. Packer management knew full well that Favre being Favre would need more time. Favre felt the pressure and bought into 'the saving your legacy' crap.

He prematurely announced his retirement, and set what we see today into motion. A nice sell job got Packer management looking ALL RIGHT.

Favre 'of course ' wanted to play but he had to get to himself. He did and now he's making a complete mess of it. Well at least last I read. It changes daily fr. his side but not fr. Packer Managements and the way it exists nothing will change for favre or OUR team as in terms of getting something for Brett Favre.

There will be a change in that I expect. It's a stay tuned situation that he has to help himself solve for his best interests. I hate the way this has gone and going.

KARMA Packerrats.

I hate the way this forum is bouncing crap posts from one side to the other. You toss shit and some will fly back at you. It's time for OUR Packer forum to collectively calm down. People have emotions and loyalties and feelings and some posters here are absolutely displaying hatred and ignorance of their own misdirections.

Don't attack the poster. Attack or argue for or against 'the post'. Otherwise put a clamp on it. This forum is bigger that the Favre Vs Packer management mess.

Isn't it?