Originally posted by GrnBay007
Really, no need to put a positive spin on things to feel better. It is what it is and I think if he had the choice he would have left Green Bay a year or two earlier than he did, for a team that ran a Sherman-like offense he was familiar with, like the Vikings. Maybe on his own terms.....which wasn't an option at that time, but I truly believe he simply was no longer happy in Green Bay under McCarthy and wanted to play a few more years somewhere else.
You see, that scenario doesn't make me angry, it doesn't make me happy. It simply fits what I observed to be facts (rightly or wrongly). It answers all of my questions.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Favre no longer being happy in, or fulfilled by Green Bay. There is nothing inherently wrong with him wanting to play for the Vikings (unless it was based only on spite). In the business world, long time employees often leave an employer that did well by them for decades. Sometimes they leave for a "hated" rival in the same field. My only issue is how they go about achieving that change. Sometimes employees have unexpired non-compete clauses which prevent them from doing what they really want to do. In effect, that's what Favre's contract was with the Packers. An unexpired non-compete contract for which he had been paid very, very well. I don't particularly respect how Favre went about getting what he wanted, getting out of the non-compete provisions.
To be honest, expressing that doesn't make me feel better, just the opposite, it makes me sort of sad.

Comment