Have many reached the wrong conclusion in Favre/Rodgers?

[RIPackerFan]

I think the Leaper made some great points - but I think there is one point that was missing.

Both TT and MM signed extensions last year. While signing an extension to not mean someone would not be let go - it does provide both MM and TT some extra rope. As thus, if there was a time to take additional risk (i.e. start Rogers), now is the time to do it.

I don't think that either MM or TT think Rogers is better than Favre for next year. However, they know they have to make a transition at some point and take on the risk of the unknown. They are much more comfortable taking that risk after they received their extension (and after last year's excellent season). Also, if they do start Favre this year - they will basically have to wait another year to see what Rogers can do - and that will be his contract year. We all know that if Rogers does well in a contract year - we will be spending big bucks to retain him - as opposed to extending him if he does well this year.

I think this is one of the reasons why they were not actively pursuing Favre to come back. I think they were indifferent - due to the fact that in the long run for them - it is better to see what they have in Rogers now (even at the expense of immediate wins/losses) than to wait another year.

[mraynrand]

Good point about the contract extension. Adding to that, what about the ego factor? Look, Holmgren left for Seattle (family issues aside) because he wanted the challenge of building a Superbowl winner - and getting credit for it. I also think that if you have a pretty good ego, and you're coaching Favre, you'd like to show that you can win it all without Favre. Favre casts a huge shadow. TT and MM both seem to have pretty strong egos. MM has a great history of improving QB play (and his role in improving Favre should not be dismissed at all). So from their perspective, they'd love to show that they can win without Favre. And what better time to do it - after you get contract extensions. You know Favre isn't going to be a significant factor in your second contract, so may as well start now.

[RIPackerFan]

Good point mraynrand.

I have thought to myself privately that every new business CEO likes to put their stamp on the company - which usually means significant changes. I am sure that TT wants to put his stamp on Green Bay - and while Favre is still there, the "old school" is ever present - and he won't ever get the credit.

[Carolina_Packer]

I'd also put an end to the notion that the Packers would take him back under any circumstances. Just come out and say what we know they already mean...they've moved on, and will welcome moving Favre for an acceptable price to a team that isn't in the NFC North if he so desires. Point out that a flat out release is an unreasonable demand...considering the Packers own his contract rights and like any business have the right to receive fair compensation for those rights.

Perhaps the only thing wrong with that from the organizations standpoint is that you don't want to weaken your negotiating chances. If the front office shows any kind of attitude of being an anxious seller, they might not get fair value for him. I certainly hope they don't do what Billy King did to Allen Iverson in Philly, because it puts you behind the 8 ball for negotiation, IMO. If the Packers keep up the front that they might hold onto him and actually play him, then teams might be willing to be the anxious buyer, which would work out better for a trade.

I don't want a trade to happen. In my pipe dream, the team realizes that they are better off at QB right now from a wins/losses standpoint with Favre and will extend an olive branch to him, whether he deserves it or not to settle the situation and alleviate the legacy killing for both sides. Right, I know it's a pipe dream, but it's mine, and I'll hold onto it until something is decided.

[Carolina_Packer]

again i say--NO SHIT! There is no question thats what they think-what other conclusion can you come to? This baffles me.

What other conclusions?

Maybe they were thought that Favre didn't want to play for the Packers anymore.

Maybe they weren't sure he was committed and that he might back out again.

Maybe they were trying to work a trade for someon else that we don't know about and his salary number would be problematic.

Maybe they were just pissed at him for all the crap he pulled.

Maybe there were playing hardball to leverage a contract restructuring.

Maybe they were trying to show support for Rodgers, while they were fine with him coming back.

Maybe they were just unsure of which was the better option at QB and wanted to make sure that Favre understood that there weren't any guarantees.

Relax. When people come to different conclusions than you did, they might not be idiots. They may have just thought of something you didn't. This is far from a black and white issue.

The thing I wonder about is when did their change of heart concerning Favre finally take place? You COULD NOT argue that they were glad to see him retire and that it happened then and they slammed the door shut because there were talks about a month after he retired at his press conference. So, when did the "moving on" actually take place where Brett couldn't just call them in June and say he wanted back in? Was it right after the April draft? Sometime in May or June after the OTA's and Mini-camps? I don't know.

Again, I don't know if Favre is mad about the door being closed to him to not just announce his comeback and have the Packers accept him back as the starting QB, or if he's upset about being put in a position where he can't go where he wants to go (release) or that they considering a different role (clipboard).

[The Leaper]

Again, I don't know if Favre is mad about the door being closed to him to not just announce his comeback and have the Packers accept him back as the starting QB, or if he's upset about being put in a position where he can't go where he wants to go (release) or that they considering a different role (clipboard).

I'm not sure if Favre knows what he is mad at either. That's the sad part.

[mraynrand]

Again, I don't know if Favre is mad about the door being closed to him to not just announce his comeback and have the Packers accept him back as the starting QB, or if he's upset about being put in a position where he can't go where he wants to go (release) or that they considering a different role (clipboard).

I'm not sure if Favre knows what he is mad at either. That's the sad part.

After watching those pathetic interviews with Greta, it really seems as though he's a guy who really isn't sure what he wants, and is dismayed to find that the team is moved on. He seems like the high school grad who doesn't have a job and isn't going to college, who heads back to the old ball field only to find that the Junior who was his backup is now the starter, and the rest of the guys are giving him looks like "what are you doing here?"

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm not surprised that there are few trade rumors. Other teams have to be wondering if he really wants to play too.

[Pugger]

Brett may have been pissed when he was told the team has moved on but they weren't gonna just release him outright. No GM in his right mind would let a player with that much value go for free and get no compensation. Is Brett opposed to a trade? Brett probably fears he'll be traded to a bottomfeeder.

But I don't think the reason MM and TT are going with Rodgers this year is because Brett can't play in the cold. I think it's because Brett will not committ 100% to football this season! Even when Greta asked him last week if he was ready to come back he paused. If he truly wanted to play and force TT's hand he would've filed those reinstatement papers yesterday. I think he went on national TV just to stick it to TT.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Brett probably fears he'll be traded to a bottomfeeder.

If you think it through, it is not in the Packers interests to trade FAvre to a team where he won't be happy. That might just lead to him being released or traded again. If a trade does happen, it will be a three-way decision.

I think it increasingly looks like Favre's best option to play is to accept the Packers terms and give GB a shot. Not sure if he has it in him to make that attitude adjustment.

I think when Favre decided he wanted to play again, it was with the idea of returning to a solid GB team that was thrilled to receive the returning hero. If I'm betting, I'd say Favre is now most likely to stay retired - too many hassles with the other options.

[Carolina_Packer]

I think when Favre decided he wanted to play again, it was with the idea of returning to a solid GB team that was thrilled to receive the returning hero. If I'm betting, I'd say Favre is now most likely to stay retired - too many hassles with the other options.

I wouldn't mind that outcome either. I am not in the middle like the Packers management, either he retires or if you bring him back, you play him. The whole different role thing is limbo, and no player, especially a celebrated, great player like Favre would come back to hold a clipboard. It's that same ego that has led him to his great career, but we are seeing the downside of that ego too.

[sheepshead]

again i say--NO SHIT! There is no question thats what they think-what other conclusion can you come to? This baffles me.

What other conclusions?

Maybe they were thought that Favre didn't want to play for the Packers anymore.

Maybe they weren't sure he was committed and that he might back out again.

Maybe they were trying to work a trade for someon else that we don't know about and his salary number would be problematic.

Maybe they were just pissed at him for all the crap he pulled.

Maybe there were playing hardball to leverage a contract restructuring.

Maybe they were trying to show support for Rodgers, while they were fine with him coming back.

Maybe they were just unsure of which was the better option at QB and wanted to make sure that Favre understood that there weren't any guarantees.

Relax. When people come to different conclusions than you did, they might not be idiots. They may have just thought of something you didn't. This is far from a black and white issue.

touchy feely? posturing?? I dont think so. WTF? You think these guys belong on Dr Phil. None of this is applicable.

[sharpe1027]

touchy feely? posturing?? I dont think so. WTF? You think these guys belong on Dr Phil. None of this is applicable.

My mistake, I didn't realize that "you don't think so." That clears it up and gives you every right to be dismissive of others. Who are they to think something different from you? Bastards! Preach to us from your mountain oh great one!

Moving on.

[Fritz]

Brett may have been pissed when he was told the team has moved on but they weren't gonna just release him outright. No GM in his right mind would let a player with that much value go for free and get no compensation. Is Brett opposed to a trade? Brett probably fears he'll be traded to a bottomfeeder.

But I don't think the reason MM and TT are going with Rodgers this year is because Brett can't play in the cold. I think it's because Brett will not committ 100% to football this season! Even when Greta asked him last week if he was ready to come back he paused. If he truly wanted to play and force TT's hand he would've filed those reinstatement papers yesterday. I think he went on national TV just to stick it to TT.

I think this might answer the question posed on the last page as to when the Packers got tired of it all. Of course I do not know, but based on what I've read - the interviews w/ TT and Favre and the newspaper articles - it appears the Packers were ready and willing to fly down to Kiln and finalize the comeback - when was that? Late March? Whenever that was. And then, when Favre backed out of that, I imagine the warning flags (and a little bit of anger) might have gone up. And as the interview with Favre himself suggests, he's STILL not sure he's committed to coming back.

[sheepshead]

touchy feely? posturing?? I dont think so. WTF? You think these guys belong on Dr Phil. None of this is applicable.

My mistake, I didn't realize that "you don't think so." That clears it up and gives you every right to be dismissive of others. Who are they to think something different from you? Bastards! Preach to us from your mountain oh great one!

Moving on.

Jees - Ok..TT gets paid to put the best team on the field that he can. MM gets paid to win games and work closely with said GM. Of course they "are of the opinion that their chances of ultimate success are no less with Rodgers than with Favre?"

If that wasnt the case, would any of this be going on?

Do you REALLY think this is all based on ego and hurt feelings instead of people doing their jobs? While we can debate whether or not TT should suck it up at this point, there is no question he feels he is doing whats best for the Packers.