DOES FAVRE NEED MORE OFFENSIVE PLAYMAKERS?/FAVRE'S REACTIONS

[the_idle_threat]

I'm fine with most of your reasoning, although Jackson and Branch are better than you give them credit for. Jackson is hands down one of our top 3 WR's and Branch is better than Jackson, which is part of the reason he was replaced.

Funny thing is, I agree that Jackson is a good receiver. When you look at his history, you can see he's been very productive for a number of years. I would agree---based upon what I can tell---that he'd be one of our 3 best receivers hands down. But apparently TT does not think so. I suspect he knows something that you and I don't---either about Jackson, or about guys we have on the roster.

I disagree that Branch is better than Jackson. Look at his career production. IMO, Branch is almost as big a fraud as Robert Ferguson. Obviously Branch has done more in his career than Fergie, but he's also hyped a whole lot more. Yet---despite his talent and opportunities as the go-to guy in New England and Seattle---Branch has never had a 1000 yard season and his single-season career high is 5 touchdowns.

It boggles my mind that Seattle gave up a 1st round pick for an undersized, injury-prone guy that has never realized his potential, and then accepted only a 4th-round pick for a guy who is bigger, a lot more productive, and no less injury prone.

[RashanGary]

Well, the Colts won the Superbowl with a rookie RB, so, how big of a deal is it really? I'm telling you, it's about the lines, boys and girls. If Brett has time, and holes open up, we will score often.

I agree.

[RashanGary]

Goodness, Woodbuck!!! Have a valium and wash it down with a quart of kool-aid. It's the spring, time of renewal!!! Anything can happen. I'm standing by my 10-6 prediction. I say a couple of these kids step up and we surprise some people (evidently those people include you) If TT is known for doing one thing well, it's scouting talent. I think his scouting pays off this year.

I'll go 9-7 but it's only because you always lose one or two more games than you should with youth (see San Diego last year.)

[Bretsky]

Pro Bowl ? Wow. I hope you are right; he showed flashes, but he was a guy who was cut by a NFL squad and a late season addition at a time when not many teams wanted the guy.

Our only weakness is TE ?

You'd make it sound like we have a top 5 offense.

We went from Ahman Green to a rookie with limited experience. I like Jackson and wish him the best, but gosh, there's a ton of blind faith going on here.

I agree it will be hard to figure out who to cut; we might have about five #4-#5 calibur WR's. Hopefully one of the five can be an adequate #3.

I completely agree on KROB; it's too bad we don't have him the whole season because he might be able to be the #3 with the training camp.

Well, the Colts won the Superbowl with a rookie RB, so, how big of a deal is it really? I'm telling you, it's about the lines, boys and girls. If Brett has time, and holes open up, we will score often.

Not a fair comparison at all.

The Colts also had

the best QB or next best in the NFL
One of the top if not the top 3 WR combo's in the NFL in Harrison, Wayne, and Stokely. Two Pro Bowl WR's are running routes for the best QB.

An outstanding pass receiving TE in Dallas Clark....one of the top TE's in the game receiving wise.

and a solid OL.

If we had that talent we'd do quite well even with our young OL.

[Bretsky]

I'm fine with most of your reasoning, although Jackson and Branch are better than you give them credit for. Jackson is hands down one of our top 3 WR's and Branch is better than Jackson, which is part of the reason he was replaced.

Funny thing is, I agree that Jackson is a good receiver. When you look at his history, you can see he's been very productive for a number of years. I would agree---based upon what I can tell---that he'd be one of our 3 best receivers hands down. But apparently TT does not think so. I suspect he knows something that you and I don't---either about Jackson, or about guys we have on the roster.

I disagree that Branch is better than Jackson. Look at his career production. IMO, Branch is almost as big a fraud as Robert Ferguson. Obviously Branch has done more in his career than Fergie, but he's also hyped a whole lot more. Yet---despite his talent and opportunities as the go-to guy in New England and Seattle---Branch has never had a 1000 yard season and his single-season career high is 5 touchdowns.

It boggles my mind that Seattle gave up a 1st round pick for an undersized, injury-prone guy that has never realized his potential, and then accepted only a 4th-round pick for a guy who is bigger, a lot more productive, and no less injury prone.

Branch is young; Jackson is not.

Apples to apples I'd take Branch; but if I had to give up a first versus a fourth I agree Jackson is the better choice.

I'm not sure TT had any great insider information; he's just unwilling to part with current or future draft picks for players to win now. Agree or not, that is the concept he's following.

[The Leaper]

Well, the Colts won the Superbowl with a rookie RB, so, how big of a deal is it really? I'm telling you, it's about the lines, boys and girls. If Brett has time, and holes open up, we will score often.

This is naive.

The Colts already had a HOF QB in his prime, a HOF WR just past his prime but still extremely dangerous, and numerous other experienced players on offense who are above average in skill.

Sure...they are able to plug in a rookie RB and be successful. That hardly means Green Bay can...with three inexperienced OL players, below average TEs, a HOF QB who isn't what he used to be.

Thompson has had numerous opportunities to upgrade the talent at the skill positions on offense. He hasn't taken advantage of one of them. I find that to be disturbing...especially as we sit on $9M in cap space and have nothing to spend it on.

[FritzDontBlitz]

Well, the Colts won the Superbowl with a rookie RB, so, how big of a deal is it really? I'm telling you, it's about the lines, boys and girls. If Brett has time, and holes open up, we will score often.

This is naive.

The Colts already had a HOF QB in his prime, a HOF WR just past his prime but still extremely dangerous, and numerous other experienced players on offense who are above average in skill.

Sure...they are able to plug in a rookie RB and be successful. That hardly means Green Bay can...with three inexperienced OL players, below average TEs, a HOF QB who isn't what he used to be.

Thompson has had numerous opportunities to upgrade the talent at the skill positions on offense. He hasn't taken advantage of one of them. I find that to be disturbing...especially as we sit on $9M in cap space and have nothing to spend it on.

well said, leaper. where will the veteran leadership come from on offense? 7 of the 11 projected starters on offense have 3 years experience OR LESS in the league. i hope tt has his eye on a few midlevel vets to add to the roster after june 1st; if he doesn't, then prepare for another season of watching the offense struggle to find its stride through the first 8 games. unless our defense becomes a scoring threat similar to the bears defense we will be looking at 4-4 or worse at midseason.

can you say "on the job training?" i knew that you could, neighbor...

[TopHat]

FAVRE'S VIEW

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070512/PKR01/70512050/1989

Favre: Packers wouldn't pay Moss

Veteran quarterback Brett Favre isn’t happy that the Green Bay Packers didn’t trade for Oakland receiver Randy Moss, and he bluntly said so on Saturday.

“It is disappointing,” Favre told Al Jones of the Biloxi (Miss.) Sun Herald during his annual celebrity golf tournament in Tunica, Miss. “It was a done deal and the stories of how we lost him because he didn’t want to restructure his contract were not true. “He was going to wipe his contract clean and sign for $3 million guaranteed, plus a fourth-round draft pick. That would have been a steal. But we were not willing to guarantee part of that $3 million. I even had (agent) Bus (Cook) call up there and tell them I would give up part of my salary to guarantee that part of the money. Apparently that wasn’t enough, either.”

Favre conceded he knew his comments would raise eyebrows. “This is a first-class organization that wants to win. I want to win now,” he told Jones. “I just want to win; maybe I see things the wrong way. I don’t want to ruffle any feathers and I want people to respect me. Sometimes I think it’s hard for them to let Brett go. They might think that we pay him a lot of money, but he still gives us the best chance to win. I’ve never been told that, but there are times when I wonder if I’m the odd man out here and they just don’t know how to tell me."

Favre, 37, knows time in running out on his NFL career. “Our offense struggled last season. If it were not for our defense, we would not have won eight games. Right now, it’s hard to be optimistic," he told Jones. "I’m not getting any younger and I think everyone knows that. I don’t have five years to rebuild. No one in Green Bay is saying rebuild, but it’s hard to look at where we are going and say, ‘How can they not be rebuilding?"

“I don’t know if I’ve lost faith, and I think everyone in the organization wants to win. I just don’t know if it includes me. If it’s going to be five years from now, I’m not going to be here. This is 17 years for me and I want to win.”

[TopHat]

FAVRE'S VIEW

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/sports/index.php?ntid=134018&ntpid=2\

Packers: Favre sounds off on missing Moss

Brett Favre is convinced the Green Bay Packers could have had controversial wide receiver Randy Moss, and while Favre chose his words somewhat carefully Saturday, the quarterback sounded more than a little unhappy with the club for not making it happen. Moss was traded from the Oakland Raiders to the New England Patriots in exchange for a fourth-round pick April 29, the second day of the NFL draft. The Packers also talked extensively with the Raiders - and with Moss' agent about a restructured contract - but general manager Ted Thompson was unwilling to part with more than a fifth-round pick.
Speaking at his annual charity golf tournament in Tunica, Miss., Favre told WMC-TV, the NBC affiliate in Memphis, Tenn., the Packers could have had Moss for less than the one-year, $3 million deal he signed with the Patriots. Moss can make $2 million more in incentives. When asked by the reporter if he thought it was a good move by the Packers not to trade for Moss, Favre replied, "No." Then Favre, who reportedly tried to recruit Moss to Green Bay during the drawn-out trade talks that began in February at the NFL scouting combine, added:
"I think we could have signed Randy Moss, (and) I know what we could have signed him for. We could have gotten him for less money than New England did. He wanted to play in Green Bay for the amount of money we could have paid him. "It is disappointing. It was a done deal and the stories of how we lost him because he didn't want to restructure his contract were not true. "He was going to wipe his contract clean and sign for $3 million guaranteed, plus a fourth-round draft pick. That would have been a steal. But we were not willing to guarantee part of that $3 million. I even had (agent) Bus (Cook) call up there and tell them I would give up part of my salary to guarantee that part of the money. Apparently that wasn't enough, either.
"You throw Randy Moss, you throw Donald Driver and you throw Greg Jennings on the field at the same time, and go (with a) three-wide receiver set, I think it's pretty intimidating. "We lost out on that, and it's a shame because I know we could have had him."
Packers pro personnel director Reggie McKenzie said the day after the draft reports that Moss chose the Patriots over the Packers were inaccurate, and that it was Raiders owner Al Davis' decision to send Moss to the Patriots. Moss had career lows in receptions (42), yards (553) and touchdowns (three) last season for the 2-14 Raiders last season. "I just want to win; maybe I see things the wrong way," Favre said. "This is a first-class organization that wants to win. I want to win now. "Our offense struggled last season. If it were not for our defense, we would not have won eight games. Right now, it's hard to be optimistic. I'm not getting any younger and I think everyone knows that. I don't have five years to rebuild. No one in Green Bay is saying rebuild but it's hard to look at where we are going and say, 'How can they not be rebuilding?' "It was well worth the risk."

[mmmdk]

i think we will score more than last year. but you can never get enough playmakers. more options is a good thing.

I think Packers offense will struggle a lot 'cos the offense will get "old" pretty fast. The rest of the NFL do watch film and it should be no major task to break down the Packer 2007 offense. The real playmakers of the NFL are the ones you cannot game plan against and expect to be effective. System offenses needs an awesome defense to keep opponents down. Packers might have a defense on the rise and that's what you need to bank on; not offense.

[TopHat]

FAVRE'S VIEW

http://packers.aolsportsblog.com/

Brett Favre Says Randy Moss 'Wanted to Play in Green Bay'

Green Bay quarterback Brett Favre expressed disappointment Saturday that the Packers missed out on acquiring Randy Moss, instead letting the Patriots get him in a trade with the Raiders -- even though Favre says Moss wanted to play for the Packers. "I know what we could have signed him for," Favre told Memphis television station WMC-TV at his annual charity golf tournament Saturday in Tunica, Miss. "We could have gotten him for less money than New England did. He wanted to play in Green Bay for the amount of money we could have paid him. It (was) well worth the risk." Favre added that he thinks Moss would have been a great addition to the Packers. It was the first time Favre has acknowledged publicly what many observers suspected, which is that he was strongly in favor of acquiring Moss to give the Packers one last chance at being a contender during Favre's career. When Favre decided to return for another season in Green Bay, he said he thought the team was on the right track, but his latest comments indicate that he questions the management's commitment to winning.

[TopHat]

FAVRE COMMENTS: REACTIONS

http://packers.scout.com/

Favre sounds off. Quarterback steamed that Packers failed to strike deal Moss.

Brett Favre confirmed Saturday that he indeed was lobbying for the Green Bay Packers to trade for veteran wide receiver Randy Moss. For months, there was widespread speculation that Favre was trying to encourage the Packers to trade for Moss. On Saturday, Favre voiced his disapproval of how Green Bay let Moss slip away to New England during the NFL draft weekend.
“It is disappointing,” Favre told Al Jones of the Biloxi (Miss.) Sun Herald during his annual celebrity golf tournament in Tunica, Miss. “It was a done deal and the stories of how we lost him because he didn’t want to restructure his contract were not true. “He was going to wipe his contract clean and sign for $3 million guaranteed, plus a fourth-round draft pick. That would have been a steal. But we were not willing to guarantee part of that $3 million. I even had (agent) Bus (Cook) call up there and tell them I would give up part of my salary to guarantee that part of the money. Apparently that wasn’t enough, either.” Favre, who is not expected to participate in next weekend’s mandatory minicamp because of off-season ankle surgery, said he knew his comments might irritate the Packers. “This is a first-class organization that wants to win. I want to win now,” he told Jones. “I just want to win...."

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________

http://packers.scout.com/

Offense? What offense?

PackerReport.com's Doug Ritchay explains why the Green Bay Packers will struggle to score points this season after missing the boat early in the NFL draft to add firepower for Brett Favre.

[TopHat]

BOMBSHELL: TRADE STORY BEHIND FAVRE'S PUBLIC COMMENTS STORY

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6805790?MSNHPHMA

TOP HAT: Yesterday and today, sports site, the latest news dealing with the reactions and the story behind of what happend last week leading to Favre's public comments yesterday.

Favre asked to be traded

The man who may have the biggest name in Green Bay sports history has asked to be traded. Several Packers and league sources have told FOXSports.com that Brett Favre has requested a trade. Several Packers and league sources have told FOXSports.com that Brett Favre's agent Bus Cook phoned Green Bay's general manager Ted Thompson within two to three days of the draft and asked for a trade. The sources said that Cook railed off how his client was fed up with the organization and wanted out. The shocking request appeared directly related to the team's inability to trade for WR Randy Moss. The news was then relayed to head coach Mike McCarthy, who immediately phoned the Super Bowl winning quarterback to squash his anger. However, the quarterback ignored all his calls for a week, perhaps showing the team how upset he was this time.
Finally, in the middle of this past week the two finally connected. Sources close to the situation said Favre asked McCarthy if he was aware that Cook asked for a trade but McCarthy immediately insisted that would not happen. McCarthy told others inside the organization it appeared the team's head coach had cooled Favre's anger and by the end of the conversation admitted he didn't want to go elsewhere. However, at the same time he has told friends on other teams as well how frustrated he is with the organization's inability to land the former Pro Bowl wideout and that he, in fact, wanted out. Several calls this morning to McCarthy and Thompson by FOXSports.com have not yet been returned. On Saturday, Favre railed against the team in an interview with his local Biloxi Sun Herald....