Vets want Favre back

[BallHawk]

"We Want Brett" - Chuck Woodson

He's screwing around with the media. Jesus Christ, P, become a politician or something. You're great at taking words completely out of context.

He still said it. I'm sure there is truth behind it. You act as if he didn't do it intentionally, full well knowing he probably got scoulded by MM for disrespecting for tarnishing the golden boys confidence.

I'm sure he has been whipped by Mike for saying that. But these guys look at the media circus and just laugh at the ridiculousness of it. They look at these guys, pleading for something, anything, to write in the paper. And I'm sure guys like Chuck figure "eh, what the hell, why not have some fun?"

I'm sure there are vets that would like Favre back. I'm sure there are vets that are tired of Favre's shadow and would like a new start. I'm sure there are youngins that want to roll with A-Rod. I'm sure there are youngins that want Brett.

However, I can say with confidence that this team has no problem with Aaron as their QB.

[Pacopete4]

"We Want Brett" - Chuck Woodson

He's screwing around with the media. Jesus Christ, P, become a politician or something. You're great at taking words completely out of context.

He still said it. I'm sure there is truth behind it. You act as if he didn't do it intentionally, full well knowing he probably got scoulded by MM for disrespecting for tarnishing the golden boys confidence.

I'm sure he has been whipped by Mike for saying that. But these guys look at the media circus and just laugh at the ridiculousness of it. They look at these guys, pleading for something, anything, to write in the paper. And I'm sure guys like Chuck figure "eh, what the hell, why not have some fun?"

I'm sure there are vets that would like Favre back. I'm sure there are vets that are tired of Favre's shadow and would like a new start. I'm sure there are youngins that want to roll with A-Rod. I'm sure there are youngins that want Brett.

However, I can say with confidence that this team has no problem with Aaron as their QB.

Confidence will be won and lost as the team wins and looses... just as it always has been

[boiga]

Agreed Ballhawk. If you watch those interviews, it would be hard to imagine the team getting divided over this. They are all big on doing their jobs and not making trouble. Arod's their guy until they are told differently.

Although, James Jones had a great interview today. He was begging the NFLN people to invite him on so that people would start being able to recognize him. Jennings was cracking up in the background.

[Merlin]

Players will guard their words carefully and not come out and say that they want Favre as the starter. There are too many things thatcan backfire on them. However, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who has a better change of leading the Packers to a successful 2008 and the veteran players know this. Too bad Ted is a rocket scientist....just ask him, he won't deny it...

[The Gunshooter]

Any NFL quarterback would of had good statistics for GB last year, even Rex Grossman. He got his records and he got to $hit the bed one last time so he has nothing to prove to me. I already knew he was a choker 13 years ago. Do we really need to watch him $hit the bed again to see the obvious?

Hey, maybe Rodgers is not a bedshitter, maybe he will be so brittle he won't get the chance to choke but I would sure like to see GB build into a dynasty around a young QB. That seems to make a heck of a lot sense to me.

Only idiots live in the past.

I agree but 8 months ago is not really much in the past.

Wasn't he winning a Super Bowl about 13 years ago

Last year he showed what he could do with good WR options

As far as Rex Grossman or any QB being able to put up good stats...hard to even comment on that. GB was 13-3 and IMO any QB would not have been able to bring out those results. Even the majority of anti Favre members would agree with that.

That's right, 13 years ago. That's 1996 and today is 2008. He would of been hard pressed to choke in his first Super Bowl seeing how GB was way better than NE that year. Don't forget 1995 when he threw the winning score in the NFC final, to the wrong team. That's when I realized he was no Montana.

In 2006 there was talk about Grossman for MVP. That lasted until Chicago started losing players to injury.

Remember how Favre used to start games and couldn't hit the broadside of a barn because he was so nervous? Well guess what? He will crack under pressure and TT and MM know it. In the Giants game the interception he threw late in the 4th quarter rolling left was due to age. A young Favre gets his body around quicker and gets more on the ball. The interception in overtime was typical of evenly matched huge games. The Dallas fiasco when he kept trying to force the ball down field was typical as well.

[The Gunshooter]

Any NFL quarterback would of had good statistics for GB last year, even Rex Grossman. He got his records and he got to $hit the bed one last time so he has nothing to prove to me. I already knew he was a choker 13 years ago. Do we really need to watch him $hit the bed again to see the obvious?

Hey, maybe Rodgers is not a bedshitter, maybe he will be so brittle he won't get the chance to choke but I would sure like to see GB build into a dynasty around a young QB. That seems to make a heck of a lot sense to me.

Only idiots live in the past.

I agree but 8 months ago is not really much in the past.

How can you say that?!? It has yet to be seen if the offense is nearly as productive without Favre. Furthermore, Favre did it without a running game for half the season and still played quite well. Teams were dropping 6 guys!!

How can I say that? I watched the preseason games and saw the best QB GB had was Aaron Rodgers and he proved it again in the Dallas game. Now I want to find out how Rodgers plays when he has a chance to decide the outcome of a huge game because I know Favre will choke everytime. Do you really believe TT and MM don't know this? I believe Rodgers has a chance to be really, really good and I will be suprised if he doesn't make the pro bowl this year.

[LEWCWA]

Of course the players want Brett back. He is the better player. This is a political decision and has nothing to do with who is the better player!

[cpk1994]

Re: Vets want Favre back

Barnett and Pickett have gone on record saying they want Favre to be the quarterback if he is better.

Source? Or are you just misconstruing words?

He is miscontuing words. What they really said is "Aaron Rodgers is our qurterback now, IF Brett becomes our QB, we are fine with that too." In no way did they go against Rodgers. like Partial thinks.

[cpk1994]

Players will guard their words carefully and not come out and say that they want Favre as the starter. There are too many things thatcan backfire on them. However, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who has a better change of leading the Packers to a successful 2008 and the veteran players know this. Too bad Ted is a rocket scientist....just ask him, he won't deny it...

No you don't. WE don't know becuase Rodgers hasn' been given a chance yet. And judging by previous camps over the last 10-15 years, Rodgers has a very good chance to beat out Favre as Favre hasn't had a good camp since 1997. IF there had been a true camp competition Matt Hasselback would be our starting QB right now. Only Favre jock sniffers would assume what you do. Of course, the first three letters describe you perfectly.

[The Leaper]

Re: Vets want Favre back

Barnett and Pickett have gone on record saying they want Favre to be the quarterback if he is better.

Any veteran is going to want the BETTER quarterback. Players want to win...NOW.

[The Leaper]

IF there had been a true camp competition Matt Hasselback would be our starting QB right now.

Which is why you thankfully aren't involved in the decision making for the Packers.

[The Leaper]

Hey, maybe Rodgers is not a bedshitter, maybe he will be so brittle he won't get the chance to choke but I would sure like to see GB build into a dynasty around a young QB. That seems to make a heck of a lot sense to me.

And Rodgers is still under contract through 2009...and the Packers could franchise him after that if need be.

The notion that 2008 is somehow the last chance to give Rodgers a chance is silly. If Rodgers doesn't start until 2009...but has a very good season and bonds with the offense...why would he leave the talented offensive roster we have to go somewhere else and start over? Chances are, he'd stay here...even with all the drama the last few years.

[Zool]

Or Favre starts again this year, has another good year, retires again in March. In June of 09 he says he wants to come back yet again......fucking circus is getting old.

[Lurker64]

IF there had been a true camp competition Matt Hasselback would be our starting QB right now.

Which is why you thankfully aren't involved in the decision making for the Packers.

I think it's also largely an indication that throughout his career "preseason performance" has never exactly been #4's forte.

In 2005 he was 26/45 for 250 yards 3 TDs and 2 INTs.
In 2006 he was 34/58 for 451 yards 3 TDs and 1 INT.
In 2007 he was 31/49 for 293 yards 2 TDs and 0 INT.

Nothing against Brett, but he hasn't exactly been setting the world on fire in preseason in recent memory. When you put up a completion percentage better than 60% once in three years of preseason play, that's not exactly something you brag about.

(For comparison in 2007 preseason play Aaron Rodgers was 37/59 for 382 yards 3 TDs and 0 INTs, so he wasn't exactly greatly outplayed by Favre.)

[The Leaper]

Or Favre starts again this year, has another good year, retires again in March. In June of 09 he says he wants to come back yet again......fucking circus is getting old.

I'm on record as saying that if the Packers bring Favre back that they make it clear this is his last year in Green Bay.

I agree...the circus is old, but I'd be willing to give Favre one last shot with a team that was on the doorstep in 2007.