Favre to stay RETIRED. Per Yahoo sports.

[falco]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

[cpk1994]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

[falco]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

[Gunakor]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

It could also mean you want to add more competition for the job. A career 3rd stringer isn't going to push Tavaris Jackson for the starting job. Sage will.

[falco]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

And the Chicago Bears...

[cpk1994]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

THere is a reason he isn't coaching....

[falco]

THere is a reason he isn't coaching....

[cpk1994]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

And the Chicago Bears...

Umm Jay Cutler is going to be their starter. Thanks for proving my point.

[falco]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

And the Chicago Bears...

Umm Jay Cutler is going to be their starter. Thanks for proving my point.

Right.....except when Rex Grossman was their starter, they traded for Brian Griese (who had been a starter), to back him and/or compete for the QB job. Thanks for being a cock.

[cpk1994]

THere is a reason he isn't coaching....

roll your eyes if you must, but having a carosuel at the most important postion on the team usually ends up getting the coach fired.

[Gunakor]

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

THere is a reason he isn't coaching....

Gruden was just the coach. McKay is the GM, and he was the one who made the trade. Gruden wasn't the one who made the trade, and that trade isn't the reason he's not coaching anymore. Neither example is very good IMO.

[falco]

Childress on Rosenfels:


"We need to put somebody in place that will push [Jackson] and compete with him, and I think competition is the nature of the game," Childress told reporters at the NFL combine last week in Indianapolis. "At some places it may not be ... [but] in our situation, we need to have a good, healthy competition because I think that makes everybody better."

[cpk1994]

]You don't trade for a QB unless you are planning to make him your starter.

Really? QB is a position where depth is irrelevant?

IF the QB you are trading for is a career 3rd stringer, then yes that is for depth. But when you bring in a Qb who has been a starter, usually that means you want him to be your starter.

Someone should tell Jon Gruden then.

And the Chicago Bears...

Umm Jay Cutler is going to be their starter. Thanks for proving my point.

Right.....except when Rex Grossman was their starter, they traded for Brian Griese (who had been a starter), to back him and/or compete for the QB job. Thanks for being a cock.

I think they wanted him to be the starter, but blew enough that Rex was the option even though he stunk as well.

[Rastak]

I think Childress handled this very poorly. It had to be an all or nothing move. EIther say no from the start, or put an all out blitz on Favre. Now he is stuck with having try to tell Sage "You are my guy" after his actions clearly showed he didn't think Sage was that at all.

Completely disagree. If the dude doesn't want to play, he doesn't want to play. No "all out blitz" is going to change that. Chilly was quite up front. He said he'd likely talk to him to see if he had any interest. Sage has been promised NOTHING to this point. He has nothing to explain unless he publicly offered Favre the starters job with no competition. Sage was told you'll have a fair shot to win the starters job....and that's what he's got. He was interviewed earlier this week and indicated he could care less about the Favre stuff. He said he needs to worry about getting himself ready and nothing else.

On a final note, part of me is dissapointed because of all the fun storylines that would have ensued. But from a football standpoint, I think it worked out for the best.

I'd agree with you if not for the fact that they just TRADED FOR Sage. Traded is the key word. Its not like he was playing for the Vikes last year and didn't play to expectations. You just brought in a guy to compete with the job only to pull out the rug rom him becuase if Favre signed, Sage has no shot. You are basically telling Sage, "We know we traded for you, but you still suck, so we are going to bring someone else in and automatically give them the job." It was a huge mistake on Childress part.

I'd buy your argument but they also TRADED for Kelly Holcom and Brooks Bollinger. TRADING means NOTHING unless you just coughed up a bunch of high picks....or maybe even one for that matter. He was never told he was the starter, in fact, rumor is Jackson has the edge due to age and mobility. I think Rosnefelds will win the job but this Favre non-meeting means nothing.

[falco]

Gruden was just the coach. McKay is the GM, and he was the one who made the trade. Gruden wasn't the one who made the trade, and that trade isn't the reason he's not coaching anymore. Neither example is very good IMO.

Fine then, tell Rich McKay. Either way, the bucs continually traded for former starting QBs to add their roster.