Favre a GRAMPS!

[mraynrand]

I simply will return to my position way back at what .....post # 3 this thread.

Favre handled himself with as usual total class.

Like QB, like Fan.

[pbmax]

Favre retired, unretired. Big fucking deal. Folks change their minds all the time.

Favre asked politely for his release. Thompson arrogantly refused. Favre had fly into GB during the lame Family Night scrimmage just to force Thompson's hand. After all Favre did for the Packers, and the fact that the toot-toot train had left the station, the right/just/moral/ethical move would be to just release Favre outright.

The Colts did that with Manning.

Except in January/February, Peyton knew he wasn't getting his $28 million. It was either pay cut or release. Very cut and dried.

Favre waited until May/June to jam the Packers with his return and $10 million cap number. Prior to that the Packers would have taken him back and paid him.

As became usual under Sherman, Favre used his possible retirement as leverage to get the team to adopt his preferences for player acquisition. Sherman fell for it because he obviously feared being the man who lost Favre to premature retirement. Thompson was never moved that way.

Waiting until June, after having a chance to return to the team and then asking for your release is not the same as asking in January.

The Packers should have acquiesced. But that doesn't change Favre's determination to jam the Packers.

[Rodgers12]

Except in January/February, Peyton knew he wasn't getting his $28 million. It was either pay cut or release. Very cut and dried.

Favre waited until May/June to jam the Packers with his return and $10 million cap number. Prior to that the Packers would have taken him back and paid him.

As became usual under Sherman, Favre used his possible retirement as leverage to get the team to adopt his preferences for player acquisition. Sherman fell for it because he obviously feared being the man who lost Favre to premature retirement. Thompson was never moved that way.

Waiting until June, after having a chance to return to the team and then asking for your release is not the same as asking in January.

The Packers should have acquiesced. But that doesn't change Favre's determination to jam the Packers.

Colts likely would not have released Manning if they didn't have the 1st overall pick. They would've restructured his deal.

Favre didn't wait til May/June to force Teddy's hands. I seem to recall Favre flying into GB to announce his "retirement" way fucking earlier than June. Heck, the Packers knew Favre was "retired" in April when they drafted the great Brian Brohm.

Favre gave the Packers a quick decision (I think Feb. or March). The train left the station without Favre on it. Aaron Rodgers became the starter. Favre was simply "retired." The Packers simply moved on. In June, months after he gave the Packers his two weeks notice, Favre changed his mind.

Remember, the train left the station without Favre on it. The Packers moved on. So since the train had left the station and the Packers had moved move on, why not just do the right thing and release Favre outright? The Packers didn't need Favre's service anymore. They had plenty of time to prepare for life after Favre.

Thompson arrogantly and cowardly refused to let Favre go. I mean, for fuck's sake, Favre single-handlily made the Packers relevant again!

[MJZiggy]

Colts likely would not have released Manning if they didn't have the 1st overall pick. They would've restructured his deal.

Favre didn't wait til May/June to force Teddy's hands. I seem to recall Favre flying into GB to announce his "retirement" way fucking earlier than June. Heck, the Packers knew Favre was "retired" in April when they drafted the great Brian Brohm.

Favre gave the Packers a quick decision (I think Feb. or March). The train left the station without Favre on it. Aaron Rodgers became the starter. Favre was simply "retired." The Packers simply moved on. In June, months after he gave the Packers his two weeks notice, Favre changed his mind.

Remember, the train left the station without Favre on it. The Packers moved on. So since the train had left the station and the Packers had moved move on, why not just do the right thing and release Favre outright? The Packers didn't need Favre's service anymore. They had plenty of time to prepare for life after Favre.

Thompson arrogantly and cowardly refused to let Favre go. I mean, for fuck's sake, Favre single-handlily made the Packers relevant again!

I suggest that Reggie White would beg to differ. As would all of the receivers, running backs, linemen, coaches and the rest of the defense. Oh, and Ron Wolf and Mike Holmgren.

[pbmax]

Colts likely would not have released Manning if they didn't have the 1st overall pick. They would've restructured his deal.

Favre didn't wait til May/June to force Teddy's hands. I seem to recall Favre flying into GB to announce his "retirement" way fucking earlier than June. Heck, the Packers knew Favre was "retired" in April when they drafted the great Brian Brohm.

Favre gave the Packers a quick decision (I think Feb. or March). The train left the station without Favre on it. Aaron Rodgers became the starter. Favre was simply "retired." The Packers simply moved on. In June, months after he gave the Packers his two weeks notice, Favre changed his mind.

Remember, the train left the station without Favre on it. The Packers moved on. So since the train had left the station and the Packers had moved move on, why not just do the right thing and release Favre outright? The Packers didn't need for Favre's service anymore. They had plenty of time to prepare for life after Favre.

Thompson arrogantly and cowardly refused to let Favre go. I mean, for fuck's sake, Favre single-handlily made the Packers relevant again!

Well, that's quite a word salad you have tossed together there.

1. I agree with the mundane point that if the Colts were not perfectly positioned to grab the player they clearly decided was Manning's heir, they would not have been as likely to release Manning and would have been open to restructuring his deal.

2. Favre did wait until May/June. Retiring when someone can have both his job and collect his money is not leverage, its a choice. This situation is nothing like the Colts when he retires. The team would welcome him back at his salary. They won't draft and sign FAs as he wishes, but he can keep his job and salary.

3. Favre doesn't gain leverage back until he un-retires in May/June when he jams the Packers on his salary cap and the depth chart. The drafting of Brohm and Flynn add to the leverage he has gained by waiting until after most major personnel decisions are made.

4. The Packers probably should have released him and trusted in their original roster decisions, even when risking Favre playing them twice a year.

5. But Favre should have been upfront about his request well before late May. If he had never engaged in this game of chicken before, I would grant him the benefit of the doubt. But he had been playing that game since Sherman took over as GM. In 2001 he first talked about retiring if the Packers no longer wanted him to Peter King. His possible retirement after 10 years was his leverage and he used it each year. Some years, a little longer than others.

[woodbuck27]

You know, when you don't actually have an answer to the point raised you can simply not post rather than engage in personal attacks that you claim to abhor.

Where is my personal attack pbmax? Are you not seeing it like me? That's OK because you obviously, like too many here. Don't see certain things or if you do...choose to ignore them.

Just as soon as wodbuck27 stands up for the EXACT right thing. Y'all jump right to the rescue of the clearly bad guy. What's with you people?

You allow mraynrand's CRAP to go on here for months and months on end. You conveniently are blind to that and as soon as I stand in for me. I'm "the really bad ass". How do you people live with yourselves? Is selling out a part of the general culture?

Where I come from right is right and wrong is wrong and if you must do right there cannot be any grey areas.


PLEASE Read the thread. Read it with an open mind, please.

My conduct is overall clearly assertive yes, but unmannerly...hardly. .

Do something right for Packerrats. Don't play the "reverse the blame" card.

Stand up for fairness please.

I want mraynrand banned for the reasons I state clearly in this thread that are clearly justified reasons.

Please support "just that" for Packerrats. Don't sell out to that terribly destructive, mean and selfish member.

[woodbuck27]

Like QB, like Fan.

Well Thanks.

Strangely enough.

Your not qualified to give me that compliment so I cannot accept that.

See person that uses the handle mraynrand...your about the most classless human being I've ever encountered.

[Rodgers12]

I suggest that Reggie White would beg to differ. As would all of the receivers, running backs, linemen, coaches and the rest of the defense. Oh, and Ron Wolf and Mike Holmgren.

There's a popular saying about the NFL: it's a QB league.

Sure, once in a blue moon, a Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson wins a Super Bowl. But to be a consistent contender, you need an elite QB. Wolf himself admit that Favre was the reason he's not just another Jerry Angelo.

[Bossman641]

Where is my personal attack pbmax.

You allow myraynrands CRAP to go on here for months and months on end. You conveniently are blind to that and as soon as I stand in for me I'm really bad ass.

Read the thread. Read it with an open mind please.

My conduct is overall clearly assertive yes, but unmannerly...hardly. .

Do something right for Packerrats. Don't play the "reverse the blame" card.

Stand up for fairness please.

I want mraynrand banned for the reasons I state clearly in this thread that are clearly justified reasons.

Please support "just that" for Packerrats. Don't sell out to that terribly destructive, mean and selfish member.

Let's see. You claim you meant no insult but call me foolish, petty, and tell me to grow up. You claim to hate personal attacks but throw them out there all the time. Maybe you should practice what you preach. If multiple posters have issues with your means of communicating the problem is probably with you, not them

[woodbuck27]

Let's see. You claim you meant no insult but call me foolish, petty, and tell me to grow up. You claim to hate personal attacks but throw them out there all the time. Maybe you should practice what you preach. If multiple posters have issues with your means of communicating the problem is probably with you, not them

Check the RECORD. I hardly ever post you.

Count the number of times I've posted you in the last 12 months Bossman641.

Bring that number of times that I post you back to this thread, or forum, and then we'll go from there.


If you can't do that then I do believe I gave you a rather solid response out of respect to you.

Now what else must I do to satisfy your needs of me to be whatever? I cannot grant you more.

[Bossman641]

Check the RECORD. I hardly ever post you.

Count the number of times I've posted you in the last 12 months Bossman641.

Bring that number of times that I post you back to this thread, or forum, and then we'll go from there.


If you can't do that then I do believe I gave you a rather solid response out of respect to you.

Now what else must I do to satisfy your needs of me to be whatever? I cannot grant you more.

I don't even know where to start. Yes, we don't have a long running feud but that has nothing to do with the question. You asked pb when you had resorted to personal attacks so I gave you your answer.

[pbmax]

Where is my personal attack pbmax? Are you not seeing it like me? That's OK because you obviously, like too many here. Don't see certain things or if you do...choose to ignore them.

You say the following about bossman and those that agree with him:

1. He is angry.

2. He needs to calm down.

3. He holds grudges.

4. They (posters who disagree with you) are part of a grudge club

5. Because they share an opinion, they are clones.

6. The grudge is silly.

7. He is being petty

8. They are not truthful.

9. They are not clear.

10. They need to grow up.

11. They can only be laughed at.

You refute none of his contentions. In fact, you specifically avoid commenting on the very valid point he has made to the detriment of your own claim and insist on characterizing him as a person and poster rather than responding to the fact presented.

[Rodgers12]

Well, that's quite a word salad you have tossed together there.

1. I agree with the mundane point that if the Colts were not perfectly positioned to grab the player they clearly decided was Manning's heir, they would not have been as likely to release Manning and would have been open to restructuring his deal.

2. Favre did wait until May/June. Retiring when someone can have both his job and collect his money is not leverage, its a choice. This situation is nothing like the Colts when he retires. The team would welcome him back at his salary. They won't draft and sign FAs as he wishes, but he can keep his job and salary.

3. Favre doesn't gain leverage back until he un-retires in May/June when he jams the Packers on his salary cap and the depth chart. The drafting of Brohm and Flynn add to the leverage he has gained by waiting until after most major personnel decisions are made.

4. The Packers probably should have released him and trusted in their original roster decisions, even when risking Favre playing them twice a year.

5. But Favre should have been upfront about his request well before late May. If he had never engaged in this game of chicken before, I would grant him the benefit of the doubt. But he had been playing that game since Sherman took over as GM. In 2001 he first talked about retiring if the Packers no longer wanted him to Peter King. His possible retirement after 10 years was his leverage and he used it each year. Some years, a little longer than others.

According to wiki, Favre formally retired from the Packers on March 4. That's not waiting til May/June.

Releasing Favre would not have cost the Packers' much, if anything at all, cap-wise. Otherwise, Vandermause would've reported something about the Packers absorbing $20 M or so in dead money.

Teddy didn't want Favre yet he refused to release him. Arrogance and cowardice.

[pbmax]

Do something right for Packerrats. Don't play the "reverse the blame" card.

Stand up for fairness please.

I will.

Stop being a hypocrite and post the way you insist others post. Live by the same standards you hold for others.

[Bossman641]

According to wiki, Favre formally retired from the Packers on March 4. That's not waiting til May/June.

Releasing Favre would not have cost the Packers' much, if anything at all, cap-wise. Otherwise, Vandermause would've reported something about the Packers absorbing $20 M or so in dead money.

Teddy didn't want Favre yet he refused to release him. Arrogance and cowardice.

TT had an asset and obtained value for it, like any competent gm would do.