Where do you stand on Favre being a Viking?

[run pMc]

I agree with Fritz, it will be good drama if it happens. I don't buy the Greek tragedy angle, but good drama non-the-less. I'll be happy if the pack beats a Favre led Vikes team, but at the same time, I won't feel anything if Favre thows 3 td's and the Vikes win.

Good post -- I agree it will be good drama.

Where we differ: it is precisely Favre's reasons for coming back (and how sneaky his machinations look to get "revenge" are) that I find objectionable. Whether he plays for the Jets or Vikings is far less important to me.
It's sad to see anyone -- regardless of how admired they are -- publicly go to such lengths for a private vendetta.

[pbmax]

I don't think that after the Packers released Favre that he should have stayed out of our division just to accomidate our wishes. But I don't think that spite should play a major role in his decision not to stay out of our divison either. There's no rule to regulate that, and I'm not suggesting there should be. But that doesn't change the way I feel about it.

I was using the word "rules" in the loosest possible sense of the word, meaning what acts might cause an uproar among fans. Not to suggest that those opposed to Favre on the Vikes are championing actual player movement rule changes.

I remember no one was happy with Longwell when he went to the Vikes (though his restaurant critique hurt as well) and while some felt the loss of Sharper would hurt (and that T2 had made a mistake) I don't recall too many blaming him for choosing the Vikings. I could be wrong about that.

I understand folks not wanting to have to play the Vikings with Favre at QB. My point was that unlike Longwell or Sharper, people expect Favre to take their feelings into consideration. That, I am at a loss to understand.

[Patler]

Weren't guys like Taylor and Hornung TRADED to other teams? I guess what really gets under my craw is BF WANTS to to go our most hated rival. If indeed his motivation for going to MN is revenge he will crash and burn by November, god willing...

Taylor chose to sign with the Saints because it was close to home.
Hornung was left by Lombardi on a list of players who could be taken by the new Saints franchise (gambling that his injuries would stop the Saints from choosing him).
Hornung WAS chosen - and retired.

Taylor was traded to the Saints. Taylor did want to go there, but Vince got Phil Vandersea and the Saints #1 pick in '68. The Pack then drafted LB Fred Carr with the pick. Taylor was all played out, it was a great trade for the Packers.

I believe you are wrong here.
Taylor was not traded, he signed willingly.

Phil Vandersea was drafted by the Packers as a future pick in 1965. He played for the Packers in 1966 and was lost to the Saints in the expansion draft before 1967, along with Bill Curry and Paul Hornung. Taylor's contract expired and he signed with the Saints, but it wasn't that simple (see below).

Vandersea played one year for the Saints along with Taylor, and then the Packers got him back in a trade before the 1968 season. He played a couple more years in GB.

As I recall Curry was part of a trade almost immediately after the expansion draft between the Saints and Colts, I think for QB Gary Cuozo.

I don't remember all the details of Taylor's situation. His contract was up, but the NFL did not have true free agency then. I think the Packers could have forced him to stay, but there was a little bad blood between Taylor and Lombardi. Taylor expressed an interest in finishing his career "at home". He was from Baton Rouge, and went to LSU. The Packers "accommodated him", and might have gotten the Carr Pick in return. I do remember that the Saints thought of Taylor as a local star who would help validate their franchise. If it was the Carr pick, they gave way too much for Taylor!

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Favre

I've found a huge positive out of this debacle. My obsession with the Packers had a great part of control over my life. I remember always feeling like I had been kicked in the gut everytime they lost. I would plan my life around Packer football. I worshiped Bart Starr as if he were some kind of God-like creature. I remember watching a piece on tv when Bart was coaching. It was a video collection with the song "the way we were". Man, I balled my eyes out.

Living in Chicago, I have a different perspective on Favre. He made football fun again for me. I will forever be thankfull to him for that. He gave me some real great times. I will never forget walking in stores on Mondays with my Packer gear on and Bear fans looking at me and then their eyes would shift to the ground and a look of shame would envelope them. It was pure unadulterated joy! I will not throw all those memories out because of this crap.

What this has all taught me is that their is no loyalty what-so-ever in the NFL. Players play for money plain and simple. It's a job, nothing more, nothing less. It goes the same for teams. They have no loyalty to the players. I could care less what Favre's motives are just like I no longer care what Thompson's motives were.

I agree with Fritz, it will be good drama if it happens. I don't buy the Greek tragedy angle, but good drama non-the-less. I'll be happy if the Pack beats a Favre led Vikes team, but at the same time, I won't feel anything if Favre thows 3 td's and the Vikes win.

Good post Packnut.

A lot of guys wouldn't admit crying to Streisand. I'm looking at you Harlan.

[The Shadow]

Weren't guys like Taylor and Hornung TRADED to other teams? I guess what really gets under my craw is BF WANTS to to go our most hated rival. If indeed his motivation for going to MN is revenge he will crash and burn by November, god willing...

Taylor chose to sign with the Saints because it was close to home.
Hornung was left by Lombardi on a list of players who could be taken by the new Saints franchise (gambling that his injuries would stop the Saints from choosing him).
Hornung WAS chosen - and retired.

Taylor was traded to the Saints. Taylor did want to go there, but Vince got Phil Vandersea and the Saints #1 pick in '68. The Pack then drafted LB Fred Carr with the pick. Taylor was all played out, it was a great trade for the Packers.

I believe you are wrong here.
Taylor was not traded, he signed willingly.

Phil Vandersea was drafted by the Packers as a future pick in 1965. He played for the Packers in 1966 and was lost to the Saints in the expansion draft before 1967, along with Bill Curry and Paul Hornung. Taylor's contract expired and he signed with the Saints, but it wasn't that simple (see below).

Vandersea played one year for the Saints along with Taylor, and then the Packers got him back in a trade before the 1968 season. He played a couple more years in GB.

As I recall Curry was part of a trade almost immediately after the expansion draft between the Saints and Colts, I think for QB Gary Cuozo.

I don't remember all the details of Taylor's situation. His contract was up, but the NFL did not have true free agency then. I think the Packers could have forced him to stay, but there was a little bad blood between Taylor and Lombardi. Taylor expressed an interest in finishing his career "at home". He was from Baton Rouge, and went to LSU. The Packers "accommodated him", and might have gotten the Carr Pick in return. I do remember that the Saints thought of Taylor as a local star who would help validate their franchise. If it was the Carr pick, they gave way too much for Taylor!

Lombardi's comments (paraphrased) at the time offer a clue :"We will miss
Paul Hornung a great deal. The other fellow, we will replace."

[oregonpackfan]

No, I don't like the idea of Brett Favre playing for the Vikings at all. Growing up in Wisconsin, the team I despised was the Vikings. I even felt neutral about the Bears!

As a Packer fan, I am grateful to Favre for all the many accomplishments he brought to the organization. I am also impressed in that he was the type of star player who never held out for a bigger contract. He not once said something to the effect of "The quarterback of X team is making more than me. I deserve more."

Like a few other posters, I have lost respect for Favre in his revenge motive. He also lost respect from me about his continual waffling about retirement the past 2 or 3 years he was with the Packers. The Packers management more than accommodated him in giving him time to make up his mind.

What troubles me as well is that Favre does not know there is a time to retire and retire on a positive note. There is just a time to move on to other things. He could be helping Deanna with her cancer fund. He could be spending more time with his daughters, etc. He just does not seem to be willing to transition to a new phase in his life.

Despite the last two years(and what may happen during this upcoming football season) I do feel Favre belongs in the Packers Hall of Fame as well as the NFL Hall of Fame.

[b bulldog]

Great fit for brett. The Vikes have everything but a qb and it could be a marriage made in heaven but the way Brett plays ball and the way he likes to throw int's, it could also be a disaster. If the Vikings remain AP's team, it could be a great year for the purple but if Childress gets pass happy, doom and gloom is a strong possibility.

[Gunakor]

I don't think that after the Packers released Favre that he should have stayed out of our division just to accomidate our wishes. But I don't think that spite should play a major role in his decision not to stay out of our divison either. There's no rule to regulate that, and I'm not suggesting there should be. But that doesn't change the way I feel about it.

I was using the word "rules" in the loosest possible sense of the word, meaning what acts might cause an uproar among fans. Not to suggest that those opposed to Favre on the Vikes are championing actual player movement rule changes.

I remember no one was happy with Longwell when he went to the Vikes (though his restaurant critique hurt as well) and while some felt the loss of Sharper would hurt (and that T2 had made a mistake) I don't recall too many blaming him for choosing the Vikings. I could be wrong about that.

I understand folks not wanting to have to play the Vikings with Favre at QB. My point was that unlike Longwell or Sharper, people expect Favre to take their feelings into consideration. That, I am at a loss to understand.

Ah, I see what you're getting at.

I'm not surprised at the Longwell and Sharper comparisons, but they are far fetched. First and foremost, neither the fans nor the team had invested nearly as much into both of them combined as they did Favre. They had less reason to feel loyal, and fans had less reason to feel betrayed. Beyond that, neither went public with their vendetta against the Packers or faked 2 retirements to manipulate their way out of lifetime contracts, as far as I can remember.

I can't say this enough. It's not about having to play the Vikings with Favre at QB. It's not about football. It's about spite. It's about what's going on in his head, and what comes out of his mouth. It's about February through August. I'm not worried from September through January.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If he does play for them I hope the Packers never add him to the Packers Hall of Fame.

I support this idea. He no longer measures up to the standards of our HOF. When he's feeling nostalgic in his old age, let him visit the good folks in Canton. He should stay out of Wisconsin.

My first reaction was to say this is lame. I still think it is, since many Packer greats played for others in their waning years, but I can understand how vitriol directed at Favre is deserved, especially since we have evidence from the horse's mouth that playing for the Vikings, specifically, is vengeful. As I've said before, if Favre plays for the Vikings, I will view him like I did Millard, Carter, Doleman, Randall, Moss, Hovan, Fuller, etc. - and hope he gets the shit kicked out of him on Sundays.

Ty fully agrees. I will take delight in watching him get clobbered. I hope they lay him out, and he is taken off on a stretcher. Not a serious injury, just enough to get him outta the game. Maybe a concussion. Maybe turf toe.

Favre...bridging the gap tween liberals and conservatives!!

[pbmax]

I think the spite or vengeance angle is only one part of this. While I think Brett really thinks T2 did him no favors with his approach, that is not enough reason to continue. "To prove Ted wrong I will continue to get my head beat in by his remade offensive line?" Nah. Or "I will learn the Charlie Weis offense from a man who makes Belicheck seem likable?" Not going to waste his time.

Vengeance is not enough. My theory is that this is about records mainly, vengeance and Super Bowl in 2nd and 3rd. Playing streak and TDs and games won. The Vikings offer a shot at pushing all three further away from Peyton and as a bonus he faces Thompson and Rodgers twice and he might get to play in a Super Bowl.

[Gunakor]

I think the spite or vengeance angle is only one part of this.

You're right. But it's still one part of this. I understand the whole "The Vikings are a great fit" angle. But that's just one part of this too. See where I'm coming from?

[th87]

Because Favre was larger than life (inadvertently or not). He made us believe that he was the Green Bay Packers. Would rather retire than play anywhere else. Since I grew up watching him, and he was such a household name, it was almost like he was part of the family. We could lose Longwell, and we could lose Sharper, but at least we'd always have Favre.

I wonder if he was aware of his impact on the kids growing up in Wisconsin. I doubt it, because if he was, he probably wouldn't flippantly play it off like going to the arch-rival isn't a big deal. As we've grown up, we realized that Favre's just a guy - he doesn't feel any allegiance to us, and it appears that we'd misplaced ours. In the end, it really isn't such a big deal, and so in turn, neither was his time as a Packer.

It's one of those things you lose from childhood. Like when you found out there was no Santa Claus. Or like when Ben from "Growing Pains" found out that rock star was a douchebag.

[Rastak]

Which thread is this? #1 or #2 with the exact same title by the exact same poster? With all the replies I'm guessing #1. Perhaps the central scrutinizer (administrator) could combine them.


edit: By the way, it's a good idea for a thread, just curious why we needed two.


edit2: I omitted my take. Obviously my angle is completely different than most everyone here. I couldn't stand the guy when he played for Green Bay, mainly in the 90's....but like many of you were willing to take Moss, I'm cool with it, but I ain;t buying a jersey...LOL

[RashanGary]

edit2: I omitted my take. Obviously my angle is completely different than most everyone here. I couldn't stand the guy when he played for Green Bay, mainly in the 90's....but like many of you were willing to take Moss, I'm cool with it, but I ain;t buying a jersey...LOL

That's how I'd feel. If Moss was a Packer I'd support him even if I didn't think his priorities were straight.

[Rastak]

As we've grown up, we realized that Favre's just a guy - he doesn't feel any allegiance to us, and it appears that we'd misplaced ours.

Yea, you have this right. And it's true of damn near every guy on every roster. I think as they get older and long after they retire they may think back with loyalty on their team, but when they are still playing you will see things like Jerry Rice playing for Seattle and Alan Page playing for Chicago. It's a friggen job.

In addition, Favre got dumped by the team. It's not like his contract was up and he said "screw you Packers, I want to play for Minnesota". Playing for the Packers isn't an option.