Did TT hang Brett out to dry last season?

[Bretsky]

I believe that expression is "with a ten foot pole"

No. That would be my dick.

Only men with sms discuss size with each other

[mraynrand]

I think TT has a very well-defined philosophy. I think he isn't deviating from it. I think he evaluates FA, including his own and places a price tag on them and he won't budge. This is good because it doesn't allow them to overpay, but it may be bad in that he could let a guy go that they should keep, even at a higher price than the players' value. So far, Wahle appears to be the one guy that fits this category. TT could have possible kept Sharper as well, but I'm betting that long term, it's going to look like he made the right decisions with Sharper, Arrington, etc., etc.

Based on what I've read, TT is a draft guy, and wasn't responsible for pro personnel decisions (input?) in Seattle. So he's a newbie at this aspect of being a GM and whether he will be good long term is an open question. So far he's off to a rocky start in this area.

So my answer is that TT may not have specifically hung Favre out to dry, but possibly, according to his GM 'calculus' he may think Favre is getting into that twilight area and may see Favre the same way he saw Sharper and Rivera last year. Perhaps he thinks it's time for Favre to go. Even if he does think this, I don't think he specifically made the decisions he has to speed up Favre's retirement or request for trade, etc. I just think he's sticking to his plan. BUt that's pretty much just a guess.

[Bretsky]

"I think he isn't deviating from it. I think he evaluates FA, including his own and places a price tag on them and he won't budge. "


This view would validate my view on why players weren't visiting Green Bay during free agency. TT calls agent; give them a ballpark they the agents laugh their ass off and advise their agents to visit greener pastrures.

Green Bay is not the heaven of the NFL; if they want players they need to pay the going rate. And not all of the free agents were overpaid; just anticipating the TT apologist argument that will come at me of we don't need to overpay.

At this pace we this is going to be a long process.

[Chubbyhubby]

Favre is going to be 37 when the 2006 season opens up in Sept. He wants to win a championship. or least a chance for the divsion title next year. Our divsion has improved greatly this off season and the Pack seems this off season to stand pat. We are in a rebuilding phase. We have a brand new coaching staff. Will people who adore Favre be upset when he hangs it up? Sure, He is a Packer Icon... Time to move on...

TT is doing the best he can. He has said that he is not into paying alot for FA's what ever the costs. He knows what he is doing, Next week we will all see how well we did in the draft. Give the guy some slack.....

GEEZ.....

[MJZiggy]

I think that the argument that we absolutely won't pay for people is a bit flawed. If you look at some of the people we've been in the running for, we have been competitive. According to the Arrington article, we were in the fight right 'til the end, which means that we had to have been offering money in the ballpark of the generous deal he signed. We were offering more money for Vinatieri and are still in the thick of it for Woodson. I'm beginning to doubt that the "cheap bastard" label he's been given is warranted.

[Fosco33]

I'd say by TT's actions related to the o-line issues and combine that with a coaching change - yes TT is rebuilding without Brett in consideration. I don't think TT has done anything directly to Favre but by not spending the dough to retain some talent and not being very active in FA - he's helping Brett make a decision. Since Brett is stubborn, he may come back for another year anyways.

[GBRulz]

I think that the argument that we absolutely won't pay for people is a bit flawed. If you look at some of the people we've been in the running for, we have been competitive. According to the Arrington article, we were in the fight right 'til the end, which means that we had to have been offering money in the ballpark of the generous deal he signed. We were offering more money for Vinatieri and are still in the thick of it for Woodson. I'm beginning to doubt that the "cheap bastard" label he's been given is warranted.

Zig, if I read it correctly about Arrington, TT didn't up the ante until the end. Perhaps if the offer was on the table to begin with, we could have landed him.

another thing that worries me about the CHEAP BASTARD is that our first round pick holds out because he won't sign for the 25k signing bonus TT offers him.

[GrnBay007]

I don't really care what kind of label TT has as long as he builds a team. It's just discouraging to see "in the running for" up till the end and the other teams walking away with the player.

[motife]

I'm a tremendous Favre-o-philiac, but it's time to cut the cord and use him as trade bait. Wade into the darkness and see what happens. Why delay it? The Packers will get nothing for Favre in 2007. If they trade Favre, he might be willing to commit to more than one year with his new team.

Ron Wolf says we'll miss Brett Favre when he's gone. I agree wholeheartedly. The guy has been a beast for 14 years, nobody has ever played with his competitiveness at his position, going toe to toe with guys like Antonio Spellman and a couple other DL's. But at this stage in his career he deserves a chance to take a more talented team to the Super Bowl, and if it happened I'd be delighted. Favre deserves to play for a contending team while he's still capable, not the NFL equivalent of the Rhein Fire or the Scottish Claymores.

[Fosco33]

I'm a tremendous Favre-o-philiac, but it's time to cut the cord and use him as trade bait. Wade into the darkness and see what happens. Why delay it? The Packers will get nothing for Favre in 2007. If they trade Favre, he might be willing to commit to more than one year with his new team.

Ron Wolf says we'll miss Brett Favre when he's gone. I agree wholeheartedly. The guy has been a beast for 14 years, nobody has ever played with his competitiveness at his position, going toe to toe with guys like Antonio Spellman and a couple other DL's. But at this stage in his career he deserves a chance to take a more talented team to the Super Bowl, and if it happened I'd be delighted. Favre deserves to play for a contending team while he's still capable, not the NFL equivalent of the Rhein Fire or the Scottish Claymores.

By Favre's comments on the Cowboys and Ravens, who's more likely to trade for him; and what is the offer? If it was Brett for Bledsoe and a #1 or #2 this year and a #3/#4 next year, I'd give Brett the decision. He's always said he only wants to play for the Pack, but he has made some interesting comments about T.O. lately. I'm just speculating here...

[HarveyWallbangers]

I answered no to the question asked. If it was phrased "did Thompson hang Favre out to drive in 2006," I would have answered yes.

[GrnBay007]

I answered no to the question asked. If it was phrased "did Thompson hang Favre out to drive in 2006," I would have answered yes.

lol u boyz are pretty critical of the wording and choices in these polls.

I see what you are saying Harv, but I think his master plan was at work last season already.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Last year, he was over the cap. He gets a free pass. This year, he was $30M under the cap.

[Scott Campbell]

....another thing that worries me about the CHEAP BASTARD is that our first round pick holds out because he won't sign for the 25k signing bonus TT offers him.

Well the cheap bastard got Rodgers in on time last year.

[PackerBlues]

He may be a f*cking Polar Weasel but if he brings me a well-coached team with a mean streak that contends for the SB by 2008 I'll be happy.

:P Is it safe to assume you are happy now Swede?

On a side note........"f*cking Polar Weasel"........HA HA.....Classic!