Favre: the man, the legend. Are we having fun yet?

[pbmax]

Andrew Brandt on Favre:

Forget the Media Dance, Its a Contract Negotiation Now

Brandt posted this Monday, before the Buck interview I believe, but there isn't a time stamp that I can see. His basic point is that public concern over the arm, trainer's visit, willingness to play, willingness of the Vikings to hand him the job, are distractions over the basic point: a contract.

His quote: "In this case, it’s how the money is structured and who takes the risk."

[Zool]

[Fritz]

Andrew Brandt on Favre:

Forget the Media Dance, Its a Contract Negotiation Now

Brandt posted this Monday, before the Buck interview I believe, but there isn't a time stamp that I can see. His basic point is that public concern over the arm, trainer's visit, willingness to play, willingness of the Vikings to hand him the job, are distractions over the basic point: a contract.

His quote: "In this case, it’s how the money is structured and who takes the risk."

Another local article - maybe the JSO lead today - suggested differently - that the "distractions" may all be part of contract negotiations...

Don't know if I'm buying that, but I suppose it's possible. If the Vikings want butts in seats and public support (for a new stadium?) Favre might be helpful, as he was in NY for one year. If Favre can fan the flames of desire in Vikings' fans, that might make him appear more valuable.

Maybe.

[pbmax]

Andrew Brandt on Favre:

Forget the Media Dance, Its a Contract Negotiation Now

Brandt posted this Monday, before the Buck interview I believe, but there isn't a time stamp that I can see. His basic point is that public concern over the arm, trainer's visit, willingness to play, willingness of the Vikings to hand him the job, are distractions over the basic point: a contract.

His quote: "In this case, it’s how the money is structured and who takes the risk."

Another local article - maybe the JSO lead today - suggested differently - that the "distractions" may all be part of contract negotiations...

Don't know if I'm buying that, but I suppose it's possible. If the Vikings want butts in seats and public support (for a new stadium?) Favre might be helpful, as he was in NY for one year. If Favre can fan the flames of desire in Vikings' fans, that might make him appear more valuable.

Maybe.

I think that was Brandt's point, and perhaps my summary made that unclear. He was stating that the reporting was failing to understand that the jockeying was no longer a question over if or when, but how much and how to pay it. Basically one side trying to maneuver the other through public pressure to accept the other's terms.

[Pugger]

I agree with plantpage. There is zero good evidence that Thompson has done anything wrong. By all accounts he's a great man and a hard worker who's job puts him in the line of fire, sadly.

Brilliant! Thompson needs his nuts polished, get to work.

This post had very little in terms of thought and care, do better next time.

No, but seriously. Brett retired and Thompson AND McCarthy set in motion a plan to move on from there. Brett coming back was throwing a wrench into that plan and they did nothing wrong THAT WE KNOW OF (there, are you happy?) in the process of keeping their own plans going forward.

I think I even spelled a word wrong as well.

they did make mistakes, I think they blew the whole thing of Favre wanting to come back and play in April out of proportion, telling the media they had scheduled a flight from Atlanta from the owners meeting in Atlanta to meet with Favre to bring him back in the fold. I think this was total propaganda on their part, and Favre as well. He was embarrassed by this and this made him look wishy washy to everyone. When Favre made the decision in late June to play football he didn't make a statement or do anything until he met with the Packers, they are the ones that started the back and forth through the media when they released the time line of the Brett Favre retirement saga.

Going back further than that Thompson didn't handle Favre well. He never had to work with a player of Favre's magnitude, never in Seattle when he was Vice President of Player Personel, or any of his other jobs as a scout. Favre apparently was used to having his opinion validated by his other coaches or GMs. Thompson certainly isn't one to listen to opinions of his players, which is totally fine, but Favre gave his opinions and instead of Thompson nipping it in the bud, he acted liked he took what Favre had to say seriously, and then as soon as Favre left or hung up the phone he shut the book on it. Favre asked if Thompson was going to interview Mooch for the head coaching position, Thomspon said he was and will give it some more thought and it was a possibility, Favre worked for getting Randy Moss into Green Bay, he was willing to restuctrure his own contract, work through his agent to get Moss wililing to come to Green Bay. Thompson did look at trading for Moss, but in the end they thought they needed to lecture him, and ask him if he was going to be a "good boy". Favre took that as a slap in the face, why because Thompson should have just told Favre "hey, I respect you as a player Brett, but I gotta do my job, and it is my believe that it is just easier to do if I don't take opinions from players, I will do my best to surround you and the rest of the guys with as much talent as I can deliever, thats my job." It is my prospective that Thompson didn't do that.

Step foward now, Thompson and McCarthy told Favre, we can't use you in Green Bay, but we can't invision you playing anywhere else. That was the biggest bunch of BS I have ever heard, Favre has the right to play football and not to be sat on by the front office of the Packers. I have no problems with the Packers moving on from Favre, but then they should have stepped up right away and said Brett we can't use you anymore, we moved on, but we will do our best to trade you as soon as possible, if that is what you want." They did just about everything they could not to have to move Favre they waited until the third week of training camp to make the trade, and Favre had to fly up to Green Bay at the end of the second week to make the trade go through. It was a touchy situation I understand that, but they decided to draw it out for the entire summer. It would have been easier on everyone if they would have gone ahead and just traded him in July, given him a list of teams and told him these are the teams we will be willing to trade you to, and these are the teams that have shown interest. They didn't they tried to play this thing out for as long as possible by sticking their head in the sand hoping Favre would just reconsider and go away. Hell they even offered him 20 million to stay put in Mississippi.

There is one gigantic hole in your synopsis. Favre didn't ask for reinstatement util almost August. IF Brett had signed his reinstatement papers in June when he supposedly first wanted to comeback, the PAckers would have been forced to do something then. You forget the Packers did n't have to do anything becuase Brett didn't sign the reinstatement papers make him STILL RETIRED. The Packers had no move to make until Brett actually came out of retirement. The Packers didn't drag it out. Brett did.

ding ding ding ding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Brett did!

[mraynrand]

I like the picture on the wall in the background.

[woodbuck27]

If you had to say which player Howard or Favre played a stronger role in Packer history who would you vote for MJ?

My precise point was that what happened in history has no bearing on the team's future going forward. That's the part you don't get. What happened in that Super Bowl is completly irrelevant to the queation of whether TT should have gone with A-Rod. It's about maximizing your potential for the best outcome and a Super Bowl from a decade past means nothing to that objective.

Can anyone still be unglued over the fact the Packers chose Aaron Rodgers over Favre? Once past the initial shock it's long past time for us all to move forward.

ARod is our QB. Fine and acceptable based on his first season. Aaron Rodgers may even have an opportunity to shove it to his mentor Brett Favre, this season. It's not what we want, and much based on emotion as much as what we will see and feel that determines awareness. Time will reveal all.

[MJZiggy]

If you had to say which player Howard or Favre played a stronger role in Packer history who would you vote for MJ?

My precise point was that what happened in history has no bearing on the team's future going forward. That's the part you don't get. What happened in that Super Bowl is completly irrelevant to the queation of whether TT should have gone with A-Rod. It's about maximizing your potential for the best outcome and a Super Bowl from a decade past means nothing to that objective.

Can anyone still be unglued over the fact the Packers chose Aaron Rodgers over Favre? Once past the initial shock it's long past time for us all to move forward.

ARod is our QB. Fine and acceptable based on his first season. Aaron Rodgers may even have an opportunity to shove it to his mentor Brett Favre, this season. It's not what we want, and much based on emotion as much as what we will see and feel that determines awareness. Time will reveal all.

I hate to break it to you, Buck, but there are still some who haven't gotten over it--and they believe that it's because of the history that he should have been retained, not the potential. But the fact is that the league doesn't run on history. It runs on potential.

[Scott Campbell]

Aaron Rodgers may even have an opportunity to shove it to his mentor Brett Favre, this season.

Unlike Brett, Aaron hasn't demonstrated even a hint of bitterness.

[GrnBay007]

I hate to break it to you, Buck, but there are still some who haven't gotten over it--and they believe that it's because of the history that he should have been retained, not the potential. But the fact is that the league doesn't run on history. It runs on potential.

There are still some that are angry that Favre was not retained I agree. However, there are many, including myself, that are more so angered that Packer fans are now disrespecting the history that very much DID included Favre.

[Gunakor]

I hate to break it to you, Buck, but there are still some who haven't gotten over it--and they believe that it's because of the history that he should have been retained, not the potential. But the fact is that the league doesn't run on history. It runs on potential.

There are still some that are angry that Favre was not retained I agree. However, there are many, including myself, that are more so angered that Packer fans are now disrespecting the history that very much DID included Favre.

History belongs in a museum. I'd like to be able to visit the Packers HOF and relive the Favre years. The sooner that happens, the happier I'll be.

What angers me is that there are some Packer fans that feel that history has a place on the football field. How are we to relive the Favre years while watching him playing for a rival, wearing the colors of the enemy? I don't see this as Packer fans disrespecting history - I see it as Packer fans anxiously awaiting for it to become history. It isn't history just yet. Once it becomes history, I don't think there will be many people that are disrespectful of it.

I am one of the first to get on Favre while he's playing, but I'll be one of the first to celebrate a great career as soon as it's over. And I think most people feel the same way. Not everyone, but most.

[woodbuck27]

Aaron Rodgers may even have an opportunity to shove it to his mentor Brett Favre, this season.

Unlike Brett, Aaron hasn't demonstrated even a hint of bitterness.

Of course, I mean beat Favre on the field Scott not in the press.

[RashanGary]

I'm kind of with the Favre lovers on this. It's compelling, interesting and not wrong in the slightest. My problems with Favre haven't changed much over the last couple years. He's a selfish, pampered diva who's completely lost his ground.

As far as the excitement he brings, I'm extremely excited to play him. I'd love to see Rodgers knock him in his place by out performing him. I'd love the see Thompson stick it to him on the field by seeing a few of his young guns destroy Favre's enjoyment of life for three hours.

The whole thing brings a new level of excitement to this season.

[woodbuck27]

I'm kind of with the Favre lovers on this. It's compelling, interesting and not wrong in the slightest. My problems with Favre haven't changed much over the last couple years. He's a selfish, pampered diva who's completely lost his ground.

As far as the excitement he brings, I'm extremely excited to play him. I'd love to see Rodgers knock him in his place by out performing him. I'd love the see Thompson stick it to him on the field by seeing a few of his young guns destroy Favre's enjoyment of life for three hours.

The whole thing brings a new level of excitement to this season.

That's an OK or best attitude to take as the typical ' take some pressure off of me somehow ' sports fan JH. The dilemma lies in being a Packer fan and still admiring Brett Favre and the easy out we ' NFL fans as a whole ' enjoy in this bottle of jam.

[cpk1994]

I hate to break it to you, Buck, but there are still some who haven't gotten over it--and they believe that it's because of the history that he should have been retained, not the potential. But the fact is that the league doesn't run on history. It runs on potential.

There are still some that are angry that Favre was not retained I agree. However, there are many, including myself, that are more so angered that Packer fans are now disrespecting the history that very much DID included Favre.

No one is disrepecting history. They are disrecpecting the bitter, selfish, primadonna the man has become. That is the problem Favre fans have, distinguishing between tthe player and the man. That is also why many of those same fans are in denial of what Brett has become. They are so blinded by what happens ON the field, that they refuse to see what is going on OFF the field.