Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cliff Christl article on nfl.com

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cliff Christl article on nfl.com

    The Packers likely will start training camp faced with a PR nightmare like none other in their history. But it's their history that suggests it could easily have been avoided ... and can easily be resolved.


    GREEN BAY, Wis. -- While it might seem contradictory, in truth, strong leadership often is exerted in subtle ways.

    That also happened to be Bob Harlan's style during his 19 years as the Green Bay Packers' principal executive.

    He rarely, if ever, overruled the people under him, but he influenced important decisions through his wisdom and guidance, especially in his areas of expertise -- public and community relations. And he did so in such a way that the Packers rarely were embroiled in bitter and enduring controversies during his reign.

    Perhaps his lasting legacy will be that he was the best goodwill ambassador this storied, 90-year old franchise ever had.

    That's why it's hard to imagine that the ongoing dispute between Brett Favre and the Packers would have dragged on this long or become this contentious if Harlan was still CEO. No matter how one slices it, the Packers likely will start training camp on Monday faced with a PR nightmare like none other in their history.

    There was a time in this ongoing soap opera when playing the blame game was senseless.

    There were no bad guys when Favre was waffling over his future -- theatrics and all -- and the Packers were deciding to move forward without him as their quarterback. It's still senseless to blame either side for anything that transpired from the time a choked-up Favre announced his retirement in early March until he asked for his release in a letter delivered July 12.

    Favre changed his mind about retirement. Big deal. How many coaches and athletes in the pro ranks haven't? Is there anyone who goes through life without wavering or changing course on any number of important decisions?

    At the same time, the Packers shouldn't be faulted for deciding to give Favre's job to Aaron Rodgers. Some might find that to be a rather curious decision, considering Favre was coming off a banner season, but it's not an unusual step in the National Football League. Teams are forever looking to replace older players, future Hall of Famers included. As the late George Young, general manager of the New York Giants' first two Super Bowl champions, was fond of saying: "It's a young man's game." The 38-year-old Favre, at least as a Packer, simply became a victim of that tenet.

    There are also plenty of historical precedents to defend each side's position.

    Favre isn't the first Packers star to retire and then want to unretire.

    The late Reggie White announced his retirement before the 1998 season, changed his mind the next day, played another year and announced his retirement again. This time, he sat out a season, returned for one with the Carolina Panthers and finally retired for good on his third try. Hall of Fame tackle Forrest Gregg retired five times -- after the 1965, '68, '69, '70 and '71 seasons -- but didn't follow through until after playing one final season in Dallas. The immortal Don Hutson announced his retirement before each of his last three seasons, only to change his mind each time. Before his last year, 1945, he didn't commit to playing until just 48 hours before the opener. Hutson also considered retiring before the 1939 season, but was coaxed back and reported to camp nine days late.

    In fact, Vince Lombardi's retirement as coach of the Packers and Favre's as a player have followed parallel tracks. Lombardi announced his retirement in an emotional press conference soon after Super Bowl II and essentially cited burnout as the reason. And, by all accounts, he regretted his decision by the time training camp arrived five months later. When the 1968 season ended, he asked out of his contract as general manager of the Packers and bolted to Washington to coach again.

    On the flip side, Favre also isn't the first Packers great to be pushed out the door. Hall of Famer Paul Hornung, team leader and most valuable player of the Packers' first two championship teams under Lombardi, was dumped in an expansion draft. The legendary Ray Nitschke was benched and essentially shamed into retirement. Hall of Fame tailback and Green Bay native Arnie Herber was waived at the age of 31 during the final week of training camp in 1941, when he was just a season removed from leading the Packers to an NFL title.

    But where this latest story line turned ugly was after Favre declared that he wanted to play again and general manager Ted Thompson responded by saying he'd take Favre back, but only as a backup. That's what has given this story life and given the Packers a black eye. It's what has embittered the greatest player in the franchise's history, invited a barrage of criticism from the national media and disaffected many of the team's fans.

    After all Favre has done for the franchise -- more than anyone, he rescued it from the misery of the 1970s and ‘80s that threatened its very existence -- the Packers are unwilling to offer him the same opportunity or courtesy they've extended to other older players whose services were no longer needed.

    When White decided he wanted to play again in 2000, the Packers willingly released him from his contract. When 12-year veteran William Henderson had the itch to play again last year after being told he no longer fit in the Packers' plans, Thompson released him, announcing that he was doing so to give Henderson a chance to "pursue other opportunities" with no strings attached.

    The hunch here is that there has been only one team for which Favre really wants to play, and that's the Minnesota Vikings. And the reason being is that's the only place where he'd have a legitimate shot at winning another Super Bowl.

    The Vikings had the No. 1-ranked run defense in the league last year and have added the best pass rusher in the game in defensive end Jared Allen. In Adrian Peterson, they have the NFL's most explosive runner. And their offensive line is good enough so that Favre shouldn't be constantly running for his life.

    All Minnesota needs to become the NFC's preseason favorite is a quarterback.

    With any other potential contender -- Tampa Bay, Chicago, Baltimore, the Jets -- Favre would have to carry a full load on offense. And he has suggested in the recent past that such a role would have little appeal to him.

    No doubt that also has been the Packers' greatest fear -- that Favre will sign with the Vikings. In all likelihood, it was the impetus for their cockamamie response to Favre's request to be released: That he could come back, but only to carry a clipboard.

    In other words, they're playing scared.

    If Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy truly believe the Packers are a better team with Rodgers at quarterback, they should have the courage of their convictions. If they have as much confidence in Rodgers and their team as they say they do, they shouldn't fear facing Favre in another uniform.

    The Packers could have defused this controversy and made this a much less messy divorce if they had given Favre his release soon after he asked for it. Had they exercised the kind of PR savvy that marked the Harlan administration, they would have released Favre and simply announced that they were doing so only to honor his request.

    They still could do that and eliminate what could be a major distraction throughout camp.

    Or they also could think outside the box and reap a nice return.

    Why not trade Favre to the Vikings? After all, that would be the team most likely to part with a high draft pick in return.

    Sure, there would be tremendous risk involved. It would substantially improve the Vikings' chances of winning the Super Bowl this coming season. Then again, New England's loss last February served as yet another reminder that championships aren't won on paper. Moreover, many of the Vikings' best players are on the downside of their careers, and such a trade might even hurt them in the long run, especially if they lose another draft pick over the Packers' tampering charge.

    Over the past three years, the Packers have said goodbye to two other key players, Darren Sharper and Ryan Longwell, knowing full well that both could sign with the Vikings, as both ultimately did. But rather than fret the consequences, the Packers responded by winning four of the six meetings between the two teams.

    If Thompson should have learned anything from his mentor Ron Wolf, it was that when faced with a tough decision, be bold. But he has been anything but as of late.

    The Packers have told Favre they don't want him back as a starting quarterback, yet they're acting as if they're terrified that he'll come back to haunt them.

    It just doesn't compute.

    Cliff Christl is an award-winning sports reporter and columnist who had covered the Green Bay Packers since 1970 before retiring last year.
    "When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time" Max McGee

  • #2
    The Packers aren't going to cut Favre. I don't think any team in the league would. He signed a contract and now the Packers can either use him as a backup (something I don't want but the team might) or sell him to the highest bidder outside the division.
    Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

    Comment


    • #3
      Favre looks out for Favre's best intrest

      The Packers look out for the Packers best interest



      Shouldn't all opinions be filtered through that before they are considered valid?
      Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

      Comment


      • #4
        Boy that was a good Cleft Crusty imitation. I can't say that I disagree with the logic. But he cites Lobardi, Reggie and William as examples of folks who have been released and left to pursue other oppotunities.

        But what about Hornung, Herber and Nitschke? They didn't get their release. Who falls into which category here Cliff? Isn't this ultimately about who holds the power?
        Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

        Comment


        • #5
          Right now, the Vikings just need a halfway decent QB. The Packers aren't going to give them the ammunition to take the division from them.

          Let Childress go with Jackson.

          I disagree that they're playing scared. They are tired of the "will he or won't he" gig. They, rightly or wrongly, want to see if Rodgers is the QB of the future. They can't go back now after they committed to him. Brett does have to live with his indecision.

          If they make the commitment to ARod and it succeeds, they're geniuses. If they don't succeed they'll be out of a job eventually. (especially if ARod bombs and Favre succeeds).

          They may not have the type of courage Crusty the clown wants. But they're doing what they need to do.
          -digital dean

          No "TROLLS" allowed!

          Comment


          • #6
            First off a lot of good points made in here; but to be honest this forum is so through we've been through all of them

            A few tidbits

            I agree if Harlan was in charge he might have found a way to make this go smoother

            While I want Favre back, it's clear TT does not.

            With that being said I've flipped on one view I had when this began.

            I'm fine with TT trading Favre to the highest bidder, and I don't care who that bidder is. Short term it might....might have a negative effect. But if TT wants AROD to start then why be a wuss and avoid certain teams if they offer the best pick ? Send him to the highest bidder. At worst Favre tears us apart for a year or two...if that long....big deal. We still get a better player for the future and that is part of why this decision is being made anyways.

            It's nuts that IMO that anybody thinks we can get a first. I've said from the start a 3rd is likely but if we can get a 2nd all the more power to TT.

            Favre not being as sharp due to the time he has missed is drivel to me

            On the other hand, I do give credibility to those who downgrade Favre and the chemistry he might lose by missing the time and upgrade Rodgers because he's been establishing that with him teammates.

            TT is showing stones by trying to send Favre away
            TT should show more stones by taking the highest draft pick he can get regardless of team for the teams best long term interests IMO
            TERD Buckley over Troy Vincent, Robert Ferguson over Chris Chambers, Kevn King instead of TJ Watt, and now, RICH GANNON, over JIMMY JIMMY JIMMY LEONARD. Thank you FLOWER

            Comment


            • #7
              I still don't know if that article was really written by James "bus" Cook or Cliff Christl
              Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

              Comment


              • #8
                All of you seem to be assuming that Favre will accept a trade. I have heard nothing from Favre or his agent stating that they want a trade.

                Now that Favre might actually show for camp, Thompson seems a lot more interested in making a trade happen. He seems to be far more enthusiastic about the trade idea than he was when he thought that ignoring Favre's desire to play was his best option.

                Face it, Thompson is not going to want to put up with the media circus and all of the second guessing involved with having Favre sitting on the bench.

                Now take into consideration that Favre can put a stop to any trade by simply not reporting, add to that the fact that the Commisioner is on Brett's side............

                That unconditional release is looking more and more possible.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Cliffy, Cliffy...As usual, I'd have expected better. The facts and logic are faulty. Firstly TT never said he'd have to be a backup and when the media started reporting that after his presser, he specifically called them on it and corrected them. He's just using it as propaganda now.

                  Reggie White took a year off before deciding to come out of retirement and didn't ask the Packers to sit his replacement so he could start. He wanted to go to a team that needed a DE and it's not like he was looking at the Bears. Henderson was CUT because he was no longer performing at the level the Pack expected. Of course they didn't care where he went. And the Packers never said Favre no longer played at a high level so they care where he goes. Again, Lombardi did not ask for his release as a GM so he could Manage the Bears front office. The dude just wanted to coach again and he wasn't willing to take the job away from his replacement. Hornung was moved because he was injured and still Lombardi hated doing it. He was not dumped because of age.

                  The Packers don't want to release Favre to go to the Vikings because even if they do want to play Rodgers, they still recognize that Favre is still a damn good quarterback and you don't want to hand your competition a good player that would make their team complete. Sharper and Longwell debatably could have made that team better, but neither was the piece that made them a contender either. Cliffy's also missed the ENORMOUS point that Favre still has trade value. Even White didn't have all that much value after being gone for a year.

                  This is why I don't miss Cristl.
                  "Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg Jennings

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    TT described Brett as an all pro QB who still has a couple-three years left. Why would he even consider giving that up for nothing even if he does want to move forward.

                    Brett is obviously a good player and obvioulsy a valuable piece to other teams. The Packers have him under contract. No way are they going to give him up for nothing.
                    Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by PackerBlues
                      All of you seem to be assuming that Favre will accept a trade. I have heard nothing from Favre or his agent stating that they want a trade.

                      Now that Favre might actually show for camp, Thompson seems a lot more interested in making a trade happen. He seems to be far more enthusiastic about the trade idea than he was when he thought that ignoring Favre's desire to play was his best option.

                      Face it, Thompson is not going to want to put up with the media circus and all of the second guessing involved with having Favre sitting on the bench.

                      Now take into consideration that Favre can put a stop to any trade by simply not reporting, add to that the fact that the Commisioner is on Brett's side............

                      That unconditional release is looking more and more possible.
                      True, TT will want Favre traded IF he comes to camp. If Favre gets traded, even if he doesn't ask for reinstatement, the rights to his services go to that team. If he doesn't report, that's their problem. Favre can not veto a trade because he doesn't have a "no-trade" clause. The team he gets traded to, can then decide to release him or trade him.

                      The Packers have a 1% chance to release him. I see more of a likelihood of the Packers trading him for far below market value than them releasing him outright.

                      No matter what has transpired between BF and the Packers, if Favre gets released and does go to the Vikings, it will affect his standing with a fair amt. of fans. The diehards on both sides won't be swayed, but if he goes running to one of our most-hated rivals, a lot of people are going to be upset. Just like those who were upset that BF wasn't welcomed back no matter what.
                      -digital dean

                      No "TROLLS" allowed!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JustinHarrell
                        TT described Brett as an all pro QB who still has a couple-three years left. Why would he even consider giving that up for nothing even if he does want to move forward.

                        Brett is obviously a good player and obvioulsy a valuable piece to other teams. The Packers have him under contract. No way are they going to give him up for nothing.

                        Completely agree; and another thing I flipped on. I was frustrated enough at first to say...fine TT...fck it.......release him and move on with this mess

                        No way should be give him up for nothing; get the highest pick you can...which often ends up being 2-3 players after TT's trade downs.

                        He's under contract and still a very good player. You want to go with AROD. Favre will play one or two more years.....trade him to the highest bidder. And if AROD is your man than be confident he can beat Favre if he's playing for your competitor.
                        TERD Buckley over Troy Vincent, Robert Ferguson over Chris Chambers, Kevn King instead of TJ Watt, and now, RICH GANNON, over JIMMY JIMMY JIMMY LEONARD. Thank you FLOWER

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JustinHarrell
                          The Packers aren't going to cut Favre. I don't think any team in the league would. He signed a contract and now the Packers can either use him as a backup (something I don't want but the team might) or sell him to the highest bidder outside the division.
                          So did Reggie White what is your logic behind that situation.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I agree with him that with Harlan here, this well may not have happened.

                            As far as granting releases vs holding on to the rights, I think we have to look at recent history opposed to what happened in the 50's to early 70's...how the team decided to treat situations with Nitschke, Hornung and Hutson can't be compared to today's NFL.

                            Yes, the Pack granted a release to Henderson and White, but won't to Favre. I think that speaks to the fact that they think (know?) that Favre has something left in the tank, and could start elsewhere, whereas the other two were pretty much done. Henderson couldn't stick, and although White started, it had a lot more to do with reputation than his play at that point in his career.

                            So, I think their behavior is twofold - as a potential starter, they want something for him (and they should get it), and his other statement, while exaggerated, is relatively true.
                            yet they're acting as if they're terrified that he'll come back to haunt them.
                            --
                            Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by digitaldean
                              Originally posted by PackerBlues
                              All of you seem to be assuming that Favre will accept a trade. I have heard nothing from Favre or his agent stating that they want a trade.

                              Now that Favre might actually show for camp, Thompson seems a lot more interested in making a trade happen. He seems to be far more enthusiastic about the trade idea than he was when he thought that ignoring Favre's desire to play was his best option.

                              Face it, Thompson is not going to want to put up with the media circus and all of the second guessing involved with having Favre sitting on the bench.

                              Now take into consideration that Favre can put a stop to any trade by simply not reporting, add to that the fact that the Commisioner is on Brett's side............

                              That unconditional release is looking more and more possible.
                              True, TT will want Favre traded IF he comes to camp. If Favre gets traded, even if he doesn't ask for reinstatement, the rights to his services go to that team. If he doesn't report, that's their problem. Favre can not veto a trade because he doesn't have a "no-trade" clause. The team he gets traded to, can then decide to release him or trade him.

                              The Packers have a 1% chance to release him. I see more of a likelihood of the Packers trading him for far below market value than them releasing him outright.

                              No matter what has transpired between BF and the Packers, if Favre gets released and does go to the Vikings, it will affect his standing with a fair amt. of fans. The diehards on both sides won't be swayed, but if he goes running to one of our most-hated rivals, a lot of people are going to be upset. Just like those who were upset that BF wasn't welcomed back no matter what.

                              Brett has one card left he could come out and say I will under no circumstance play for any team that trades for me, why would anyone give up even a 7th round pick then except for maybe Tampa those dumbass's did it once already!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X