I say let him go

[Gunakor]

In blunt terms, the Packers OWN Brett Favre. The Packers tell Favre how things work, not the other way around. We may have the choice to go to the competitior, but Favre does not unless TT gives him that choice.

I agree. The Packers have every right to ensure that Brett does not go to Minnesota if they so choose. I'm personally not saying otherwise.

However, Favre can certainly apply pressure to get his way if he so chooses...and the current pressure of his reporting to camp is one of the ways he can apply that pressure.

Oh I absolutely agree. All I'm saying is that if he's going to try to stick it to the Packers he shouldn't expect the Packers to give him everything he wants. If I'm TT, and Favre comes in to cause problems and try to force me to deal him, I trade him to Tampa for a 5th round pick and a brand new 7 man sled before I trade him to Minnesota.

[imscott72]

Favre wants to win...and he figures the Vikings are his best shot, and he has relationships with several of their coaches.

I could see why he would want to go there. NFL players aren't as attached to a team as fans are. Favre was once a Falcon.

You are such an idiot. I'll attempt to present reality to you in a way that you can comprehend but somehow I think your blissfull ignorance is rooted too deep to make a difference.

Favre said if he can't play with the Packers he wants to play against them. How hard is that for you to comprehend?

If you were told by your employer that you weren't wanted anymore, wouldn't you go to the compitition and try to get back at them? I would and have! This just makes Favre like most of the rest of us!

And if I retire and they fill my position, I don't get to slide back in if I change my mind. Doesn't work like that in the real world either.

[Freak Out]

Just a, ahem, thought - to ruin Packers 2008 season would be better than handing the Vikings a shot at any championship.

You are off your Danish rocker my friend. Ruin the Packer season just so the Vikings don't have a shot? That's crazy.

What's your sane idea? Let the Vikings have Favre and the NFC North crown or more? - only for a 1st pick or a 2nd pick plus a 6th. Or let Favre rot on the bench.

I'm not saying it but one could argue that the 2008 Packer season is a long shot to be Championship-like.

EAT GREEN'N'GOLD, PURPLE!

"Ruining" the packer season just so Favre does not play for the Vikings is crazy....I still think we beat them with or without Favre playing QB for them.

[]{ilr]3]

Favre wants to win...and he figures the Vikings are his best shot, and he has relationships with several of their coaches.

I could see why he would want to go there. NFL players aren't as attached to a team as fans are. Favre was once a Falcon.

You are such an idiot. I'll attempt to present reality to you in a way that you can comprehend but somehow I think your blissfull ignorance is rooted too deep to make a difference.

Favre said if he can't play with the Packers he wants to play against them. How hard is that for you to comprehend?

If you were told by your employer that you weren't wanted anymore, wouldn't you go to the compitition and try to get back at them? I would and have! This just makes Favre like most of the rest of us!

Well, I had to sign a non-compete contract to work for my employer. Even if they fire me I cannot go work for a direct competitor of theirs for the next 3 years. These types of contracts are very common in my field and I do not make any thing near what a rookie Pro-football player does. Farve was paid a kings ransom to do what he does and he signed a contract to only do for the Packers unless they decide differently. I don’t understand why anyone would think that Favre should simply be released????

[mmmdk]

Just a, ahem, thought - to ruin Packers 2008 season would be better than handing the Vikings a shot at any championship.

You are off your Danish rocker my friend. Ruin the Packer season just so the Vikings don't have a shot? That's crazy.

What's your sane idea? Let the Vikings have Favre and the NFC North crown or more? - only for a 1st pick or a 2nd pick plus a 6th. Or let Favre rot on the bench.

I'm not saying it but one could argue that the 2008 Packer season is a long shot to be Championship-like.

EAT GREEN'N'GOLD, PURPLE!

"Ruining" the packer season just so Favre does not play for the Vikings is crazy....I still think we beat them with or without Favre playing QB for them.

I see your point.

[texaspackerbacker]

Gosh some of you guys are pathetic.

A little bit of summer stress that really doesn't affect any of us all that much, and you guys--some of you--are ready to throw in the towel? Idiocy like "let him go"? Negativity like we're headed for a less than championship season? Come on!

I have to admit, on some level, seeing Favre flop with the Vikings or Bears is an attractive prospect. However, are we forgetting, this is the same Brett Favre we have LOVED and ADMIRED for more than a decade and a half for all the wonderfulness he has given us. Do we really want to see him fail? I don't. And then there's the possibility that he WOULDN'T fail with those teams--fairly unlikely IMO, but possible.

Favre must not and will not be allowed to go to the Bears or Vikings.

[Freak Out]

Just a, ahem, thought - to ruin Packers 2008 season would be better than handing the Vikings a shot at any championship.

You are off your Danish rocker my friend. Ruin the Packer season just so the Vikings don't have a shot? That's crazy.

What's your sane idea? Let the Vikings have Favre and the NFC North crown or more? - only for a 1st pick or a 2nd pick plus a 6th. Or let Favre rot on the bench.

I'm not saying it but one could argue that the 2008 Packer season is a long shot to be Championship-like.

EAT GREEN'N'GOLD, PURPLE!

"Ruining" the packer season just so Favre does not play for the Vikings is crazy....I still think we beat them with or without Favre playing QB for them.

I see your point.

I love the Packers and have enjoyed the excitement all of #4s career in GB but if he wants to play and we have no need of him just let him go...its that easy. Give him his chance to gain fame and glory once again even if it is with another team.....but I'll always be a Packer fan first and will trust that the guys running the show know what is best as far as player/personnel issues go so if they want to move on then fine.....but give him his chance.

[Gunakor]

Just a, ahem, thought - to ruin Packers 2008 season would be better than handing the Vikings a shot at any championship.

You are off your Danish rocker my friend. Ruin the Packer season just so the Vikings don't have a shot? That's crazy.

What's your sane idea? Let the Vikings have Favre and the NFC North crown or more? - only for a 1st pick or a 2nd pick plus a 6th. Or let Favre rot on the bench.

I'm not saying it but one could argue that the 2008 Packer season is a long shot to be Championship-like.

EAT GREEN'N'GOLD, PURPLE!

"Ruining" the packer season just so Favre does not play for the Vikings is crazy....I still think we beat them with or without Favre playing QB for them.

I see your point.

I love the Packers and have enjoyed the excitement all of #4s career in GB but if he wants to play and we have no need of him just let him go...its that easy. Give him his chance to gain fame and glory once again even if it is with another team.....but I'll always be a Packer fan first and will trust that the guys running the show know what is best as far as player/personnel issues go so if they want to move on then fine.....but give him his chance.

And what does Green Bay get in return for the remaining 3 years on his contract? We can't just go giving Favre what Favre wants just because it's what Favre wants. We have to do what is best for the Packers, which means to hell with what Favre wants. Favre obviously does not want what is best for Green Bay if he is trying to stick it to Thompson. "Let me play for you or let me play against you" means "Let me play for you or let me beat the hell out of you for not letting me play for you". Why the hell would you reward an attitude like that?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Favre must not and will not be allowed to go to the Bears or Vikings.

Amen

[The Gunshooter]

Obviously no one is going to get their way 100% so here is what I think gives everyone about 99% of what they want except for Minnesota who we all want to screw anyway. TT and MM get Rodgers as their starter and Favre gets 12 million to back him up. Favre lovers just know Rodgers won't make it to the 2nd quarter of game 1 without getting injured so the only trade off for them is Favre's consecutive game streak is ended for the satisfaction of seeing Rodgers written off forever.

[Harlan Huckleby]

sure, gunshooter, that would be great. But Favre has talked very negatively of being a backup, unfortunately it doesn't appear to be an option.

[Freak Out]

And what does Green Bay get in return for the remaining 3 years on his contract? We can't just go giving Favre what Favre wants just because it's what Favre wants. We have to do what is best for the Packers, which means to hell with what Favre wants. Favre obviously does not want what is best for Green Bay if he is trying to stick it to Thompson. "Let me play for you or let me play against you" means "Let me play for you or let me beat the hell out of you for not letting me play for you". Why the hell would you reward an attitude like that?

It sure sounds like they are trying to reward just that by giving him 20 million or so to not play. I say save the damn money and pay Grant and others and let Favre go. If you can get something out of a trade fine but if #4 refuses to budge then the commissar has no choice and has to reinstate him and things will really heat up then. It sure sounds like he is not just going to sit on the bench and be the good back up while you try and trade him. I just don't get why so many are intent on punishing Favre because he doesn't react the way so many of you want him to.

[Gunakor]

Obviously no one is going to get their way 100% so here is what I think gives everyone about 99% of what they want except for Minnesota who we all want to screw anyway. TT and MM get Rodgers as their starter and Favre gets 12 million to back him up. Favre lovers just know Rodgers won't make it to the 2nd quarter of game 1 without getting injured so the only trade off for them is Favre's consecutive game streak is ended for the satisfaction of seeing Rodgers written off forever.

We've thrown this one around before. I'd support it, but Brett will never agree to do this. He doesn't wanna be the #2 hoping and praying that Rodgers gets hurt so he can play again. Neither should anyone else. If Brett were to agree to be our backup this season, I truly hope that Rodgers stays healthy and productive so Favre doesn't have to come in. Moot issue, however, because Favre would never go for it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I just don't get why so many are intent on punishing Favre because he doesn't react the way so many of you want him to.

He is not entitled to be a free agent. Why is holding him to his contract "punishing him"?

[Gunakor]

It sure sounds like they are trying to reward just that by giving him 20 million or so to not play. I say save the damn money and pay Grant and others and let Favre go. If you can get something out of a trade fine but if #4 refuses to budge then the commissar has no choice and has to reinstate him and things will really heat up then. It sure sounds like he is not just going to sit on the bench and be the good back up while you try and trade him. I just don't get why so many are intent on punishing Favre because he doesn't react the way so many of you want him to.

Freak Out, they are talking about an administrative salary. As in a coaches salary or executives salary. It would not count against the player cap. It would come out of Green Bay's coffers, just like Mike McCarthy's salary or Ted Thompson's salary or Bob Sander's salary. At least that's how I understand it. We'd still have the same amount of money under the cap to sign players either way. That comes from NFL shared revenue, not the Packer's coffers.