Favre saga update

[BallHawk]

Is it just me, or is it rather hypocritical for Favre to question the Packer's commitment.

Favre's messed up. He doesn't see things rationally like normal people do.

Welcome to the forum.

[boiga]

The Packers DID try to buy Favre off.

The reports I've seen suggest the price continued to go up. Initially (back in March) it was $10M...then it went to $20M and reports even stated it was as high as $25M.

The Packers conveniently tried to brush this off as something that has been in the works since March...but if they have been upping the price ever since in an effort to get Favre to retire, how is that not a bribe?

I personally think Favre is absolutely 100% correct about the Packers trying to pay him off. It was the one way they could get out of this mess without sustaining PR damage or fan basklash.

Sigh.. I haven't seen anything directly confirming this because we're going to have to pay Favre for his media rights eventually anyways. I'm also not sure if Favre was pissed that they tried to buy him off, or that the media thought they were trying to buy him off when they really weren't.

If that is the case though, Murphy ought to have a short tenure as team president. Throughout this process, I've felt that Ted was inept at dealing with the emotional needs of a prima donna athlete and if he really tried to buy him off, Murphy comes out as a tool.

McCarthy comes out smelling like roses though. He's the true leader of this operation it seems.

[cpk1994]

I'm still confused why he blames the Packers for the "paying him not to play" story line when they kept their mouths shut during the whole process and the leaks of pay not to play came from "sources close to Favre."

The Packers DID try to buy Favre off.

The reports I've seen suggest the price continued to go up. Initially (back in March) it was $10M...then it went to $20M and reports even stated it was as high as $25M.

The Packers conveniently tried to brush this off as something that has been in the works since March...but if they have been upping the price ever since in an effort to get Favre to retire, how is that not a bribe?

I personally think Favre is absolutely 100% correct about the Packers trying to pay him off. It was the one way they could get out of this mess without sustaining PR damage or fan basklash.

Kind of funny that you claim reports that paint management in a bad light are 100% fact and info painting Favre in a bad light is 100% BS.

And you're exactly the opposite due to your blinding hate for Favre.

Not really seeing as how I have blasted management more than any Favre apologist will ever bash Lord Favre in the last two days.

[Patler]

I'm still confused why he blames the Packers for the "paying him not to play" story line when they kept their mouths shut during the whole process and the leaks of pay not to play came from "sources close to Favre."

The Packers DID try to buy Favre off.

The reports I've seen suggest the price continued to go up. Initially (back in March) it was $10M...then it went to $20M and reports even stated it was as high as $25M.

The Packers conveniently tried to brush this off as something that has been in the works since March...but if they have been upping the price ever since in an effort to get Favre to retire, how is that not a bribe?

I personally think Favre is absolutely 100% correct about the Packers trying to pay him off. It was the one way they could get out of this mess without sustaining PR damage or fan basklash.

I fail to see how it constitutes a "bribe" or "buying him off". They presented an alternative that would allow him to remain connected to football, the Packers and the NFL. It was simply an alternative. I'm not sure why it has to have a negative connotation to it.

What alternatives has Favre presented other than:
1. release him
2. release him
3. release him
4. (maybe) reinstate him as the starter.

[Scott Campbell]

I'm still confused why he blames the Packers for the "paying him not to play" story line when they kept their mouths shut during the whole process and the leaks of pay not to play came from "sources close to Favre."

The Packers DID try to buy Favre off.

The reports I've seen suggest the price continued to go up. Initially (back in March) it was $10M...then it went to $20M and reports even stated it was as high as $25M.

The Packers conveniently tried to brush this off as something that has been in the works since March...but if they have been upping the price ever since in an effort to get Favre to retire, how is that not a bribe?

I personally think Favre is absolutely 100% correct about the Packers trying to pay him off. It was the one way they could get out of this mess without sustaining PR damage or fan basklash.

Or maybe they just want hin to go away and were willing to give him a lollipop to disappear.

Without knowing for sure the exact motivation of the organization, I personally believe the money was for A) licensing, as stated B) to protect Favre's legacy from Brett himself.


Characterizing it as a bribe seems to me an extreme stretch.

[MadtownPacker]

Or maybe they just want hin to go away and were willing to give him a lollipop to disappear.

You just described a bribe old timer.

[The Shadow]

Or maybe they just want hin to go away and were willing to give him a lollipop to disappear.

You just described a bribe old timer.

Absolutely! I do think it was bribe - to allow him to save face.

[cpk1994]

I'm still confused why he blames the Packers for the "paying him not to play" story line when they kept their mouths shut during the whole process and the leaks of pay not to play came from "sources close to Favre."

The Packers DID try to buy Favre off.

The reports I've seen suggest the price continued to go up. Initially (back in March) it was $10M...then it went to $20M and reports even stated it was as high as $25M.

The Packers conveniently tried to brush this off as something that has been in the works since March...but if they have been upping the price ever since in an effort to get Favre to retire, how is that not a bribe?

I personally think Favre is absolutely 100% correct about the Packers trying to pay him off. It was the one way they could get out of this mess without sustaining PR damage or fan basklash.

I fail to see how it constitutes a "bribe" or "buying him off". They presented an alternative that would allow him to remain connected to football, the Packers and the NFL. It was simply an alternative. I'm not sure why it has to have a negative connotation to it.

What alternatives has Favre presented other than:
1. release him
2. release him
3. release him
4. (maybe) reinstate him as the starter.

you forgot:

5. Trade to Vikings.

[The Leaper]

Kind of funny that you claim reports that paint management in a bad light are 100% fact and info painting Favre in a bad light is 100% BS.

This is not true at all.

Unlike you, I've admitted to seeing logic in management's side of the equation...even if I disagree with them. I've pointed out that Favre has acted like a dumbass numerous times. My viewpoint has always been that both sides share in this debacle far more than most on here try to let on.

The one closest to being a 100% apologist on here is you.

[imscott72]

I'm still confused why he blames the Packers for the "paying him not to play" story line when they kept their mouths shut during the whole process and the leaks of pay not to play came from "sources close to Favre."

The Packers DID try to buy Favre off.

The reports I've seen suggest the price continued to go up. Initially (back in March) it was $10M...then it went to $20M and reports even stated it was as high as $25M.

The Packers conveniently tried to brush this off as something that has been in the works since March...but if they have been upping the price ever since in an effort to get Favre to retire, how is that not a bribe?

I personally think Favre is absolutely 100% correct about the Packers trying to pay him off. It was the one way they could get out of this mess without sustaining PR damage or fan basklash.

I fail to see how it constitutes a "bribe" or "buying him off". They presented an alternative that would allow him to remain connected to football, the Packers and the NFL. It was simply an alternative. I'm not sure why it has to have a negative connotation to it.

What alternatives has Favre presented other than:
1. release him
2. release him
3. release him
4. (maybe) reinstate him as the starter.

Because of the timing. They just happen to reiterate the offer just about the time he was due to file for reinstatement and show up to camp. It's not like they made the offer again two months ago.

[The Leaper]

I fail to see how it constitutes a "bribe" or "buying him off". They presented an alternative that would allow him to remain connected to football, the Packers and the NFL. It was simply an alternative. I'm not sure why it has to have a negative connotation to it.

I'm not saying it is negative, Patler. Does a bribe always have to be negative? Coupons are a bribe...and they are positive.

[Patler]

Because of the timing. They just happen to reiterate the offer just about the time he was due to file for reinstatement and show up to camp. It's not like they made the offer again two months ago.

Murphy said he wanted to emphasize to Favre that regardless of what happens in the immediate future, it was a relationship the Packers still want when he is retired. From that perspective it was an olive branch to repair bad feelings. They also claim its been discussed off and on since March, not simply presented in March and dropped until a week ago. Of course, we don't know for certain who to believe.

[Scott Campbell]

I fail to see how it constitutes a "bribe" or "buying him off". They presented an alternative that would allow him to remain connected to football, the Packers and the NFL. It was simply an alternative. I'm not sure why it has to have a negative connotation to it.

I'm not saying it is negative, Patler. Does a bribe always have to be negative? Coupons are a bribe...and they are positive.

Coupons aren't a bribe, they're a discount.

[PackerTimer]

Disturbing to me is the fact Favre has learned nothing; he is still shooting his mouth off when he should be quiet.
Distraction to the team?
Please!

I completely agree. It has become apparent to me that Favre cares nothing for this team. Actions speak louder than words and he contradicts himself with his actions. He says all of the right things about not wanting to distract the team but then turns aournd and runs to his ESPN buddies to create a distraction. Him shooting off his mouth and leaking the details of a private meeting is a distraction. He just does not get it.

[FritzDontBlitz]

So, who do you guys think TT will choose with the #1 overall pick in next year's draft?